Messianism in the Old Greek of Isaiah: An Intertextual Analysis 9783666535444, 9783525535448, 9783647535449

Citation preview

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments edited by Jan Christian Gertz, Dietrich-Alex Koch, Matthias Köckert, Hermut Löhr, Joachim Schaper David Andrew Teeter and Christopher Tuckett

Volume 245

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Abi T. Ngunga

Messianism in the Old Greek of Isaiah An Intertextual Analysis

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data available online: http://dnb.d-nb.de. ISBN 978-3-525-53544-8 ISBN 978-3-647-53544-9 (E-Book) © 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht LLC, Bristol, CT, U. S. A. www.v-r.de All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher. Typesetting, printed and bound in Germany by

Hubert & Co, Göttingen

Printed on non-aging paper.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Table of Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9

Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Chapter 1: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1. Messianism in the LXX-Isaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2. The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 The Translation as the Work of a Single Translator . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 The Translator’s ‘Freedom’ in the Context of Ancient Biblical Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 The Translator’s Linguistic Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 The Issue of Dating the Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21 21

3. Intertextuality as a Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Intertextuality from its Inception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Intertextuality in Biblical Scholarship in General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Intertextuality in Septuagintal Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30 30 37 38

23 28 30

4. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 5. The Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 1. Re-examination of Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 On the Development of Jewish Messianic Expectations in Palestine vs. the Diaspora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 On Philo’s Silence about Messianism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 On the Scarcity of the Literary Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

53 53 59 61 62

2. Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism in Alexandria . . . . . . 2.1 Politico-Administrative Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Socio-economic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Religious-Cultural Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

63 64 68 70 72

3. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

6

Table of Contents

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 1. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7: 10–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75 75 77 82 86

2. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

86 87 89 93 97

3. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 3.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 3.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 101 3.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 3.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 4. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 4.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 4.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 117 4.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 5. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 5.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 5.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 130 5.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 5.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 6. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 6.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 6.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 150 6.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 6.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 7. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 7.1 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 162 7.2 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 7.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Table of Contents

7

8. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 8.1 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 177 8.2 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 8.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 9. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 9.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 9.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions . . . . . . . . . . . 196 9.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 9.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 Selected Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 1. Sources and Reference Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 2. Commentaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 3. Secondary Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 4. Online Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Index of References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Index of Modern Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Preface The present monograph is a revised version of my Ph. D. thesis submitted to the University of Aberdeen in May 2010 and examined by Professors Arie van der Kooij of Leiden University, the Netherlands and William Horbury of Cambridge University, United Kingdom. Many thanks are due to a number of individuals and organisations, who/ which contributed directly and indirectly to the production of this piece of work. First mention goes to my Ph. D. supervisor, Professor Joachim Schaper. The debt I owe to him is immeasurable. Not only did he influence me to think of doing my research in the area of the Septuagint, but he also provided me with an exceptional friendship and extremely helpful guidance and support. These, along with his most impressive possession of academic knowledge in several fields, critical judgement, and meticulous reading of my academic copy that helped me to remove a good number of inaccuracies, were and will continue to be inspiring and aspiring in my scholarly journey. Any typographical or material errors that might still remain are, however, entirely mine, even as I also recall the generosity of Mr John Hutchinson, whom I would like to thank very much for kindly proofreading an earlier version of this study. Warmest thanks to the above-mentioned Professors Arie van der Kooij and William Horbury for offering very constructive comments and suggestions in my Ph. D. oral examination from which this study has profited much. I am also grateful to the former for kindly inviting me to attend an indispensable conference on the Old Greek of Isaiah held in Leiden, the Nertherlands, in April 2008 that gave me the opportunity to learn a great deal of other important aspects of the subject from various interactions I had with a few experts in the field. My sincere thanks too to the latter for offering valuable insights on my work while discussing this with him in his office at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. I also greatly appreciate the help I received from Prof. Philippe Le Moigne of the University of Paul Valéry, France, for sending me a primary resource pertinent to the method of my work, Dr. Rodrigo F. de Sousa of Mackenzie University, Brazil, for allowing me to have access to the manuscript of his valuable book that was then a Ph. D. thesis, and Prof. Ronald L. Troxel of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA, for his helpful feedback while discussing briefly my work with him at the SBL Annual meeting in San Diego, California, in 2007 and making at my disposal his stimulating paper. My heartfelt thanks also to Prof. Robert J. V. Hierbert of Trinity Western University, Canada, for graciously sending me in writing his very constructive feedback on my paper, which was intended to some degree to test my

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

10

Preface

methodology, submitted to the Septuagint Institute of Trinity Western University for an international conference on the Septuagint held in September 2008 as I was unfortunately unable to travel to the conference to present it in person due to visa complications. Many thanks also to other scholars who have been kind enough to discuss a few aspects of this work, whether in personal conversation or in a formal academic setting. Their insights and inputs were extremely enriching. In particular, I would like to mention Professors Robert P. Gordon, Mumo P. Kisau, and Drs Myrto Theocharous, Benjamin A. Foreman, David Morgan, Stephen Herring, Jeffery W. Aernie, David Instone-Brewer, Wolter H. Rose, and Peter J. William. As far as the latter is concerned, I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to him for his unexpected help that unlocked for me the whole process of obtaining the needed documents that allowed me to join the University of Aberdeen for my studies. His recommendation for me to have a desk for a few weeks at Tyndale House Library in Cambridge, whose most exceptional setting for biblical research from which this work has benefited, has also been very much appreciated. I am grateful too to the Librarian, Dr Elizabeth Magba for her helpful assistance. It would not have been possible to complete this work without encouragement, assistance and financial support on countless occasions from numerous friends. In particular, I have in mind all the friends in my home country – the Democratic Republic of Congo –, especially at Eglise Christ Pain de Vie, and in Scotland, mainly at Oldmachar Church, Monkton and Prestwick North Parish Church, and Ferryhill Parish Church. I owe a special debt of gratitude to all of them. Their immeasurable love and sacrificial generosity will never be forgotten. By far my greatest debt and gratitude are due to my wife, Elisée and our three children, Pistis, Elpis, and Isaac, whose tremendous love, sacrifices, and continual support and understanding made it ultimately possible for me to write my Ph. D. dissertation at all and, eventually, to turn it into a book. To them I dedicate this volume. Soli Deo Gloria χάριτι δὲ θεοῦ εἰμι ὅ εἰμι, καὶ ἡ χάρις αὐτοῦ ἡ εἰς ἐμε οῦ κενὴ ἐγενήθη, ἀλλὰ περισσότερον αὐτῶν πάντων ἐκοπίασα, οὐκ ἐγὼ δὲ ἀλλὰ ἡ χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ ἡ σὺν ἐμοί. (1 Cor 15: 10)

12th May, 2012

Abi T. Ngunga

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Abbreviations AB The Anchor Bible ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library ACSFDHL Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum BAT Die Botschaft des Alten Testaments BdA La Bible d’Alexandrie AJBI Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute, Tokyo ATAbh Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen BIOSCS Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies BJS Biblical and Judaic Studies BO Bibliotheca Orientalis BT The Bible Translator BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridium Theologicarum Lovaniensium Bib Biblica BRS The Biblical Resource Series BZAW Beihefte zur ZAW CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary CBET Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly CE Cahiers Évangile CESup Cahiers Evangile, Supplément au Cahier Evangile Ch(s) Chapter(s) CPJUD Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum CRU Centre de Recherche de l’Université Saint-Paul DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert EBAW Essays on the Bible and the Ancient World ed. Edited edn. Edition esp. Especially ET English Translation ETL Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses FAT Forschungen zum Alten Testament FOTL The Forms of the Old Testament Literature B. Aland/K. Aland, et al. (ed.), The Greek New Testament (4th revised GNT4 edn; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1998). HCOT Historical Commentary on the Old Testament HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual HUB The Hebrew University Bible HUC-JIR Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion IOSCS International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies ISBL Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

12 ITC JBL JBLMS JBTh JHS JJS JNSL JSNTSup JSOT JTS NS LCL LD LHBOTS LXX LXX.D

MLN MSU MT NA27

NCB NETS NICOT NIDOT NT OBO OG OLA OS OT OTL 1QIsaa 1QIsab Par Ps.Sol Praem Sib Or RB repr. SB SBL SBL SCS SBLS SCS SVTP

Abbreviations International Theological Commentary Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Jahrbuch für Biblische Theologie Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages Journal of the Society of New Testament: Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal of New Testament Studies: New Series The Loeb Classical Library Lectio Divina Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies Septuagint M. Karrer/W. Kraus (ed.), Septuaginta Deutsch: Das griechische Alte Testament in deutscher Übersetzung (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2009). Modern Language Notes Mitteilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens Masoretic Text B. Aland/K. Aland, et al. (ed.), Novum Testamentum Graece, post Eberhard et Erwin Nestle editione vicesima septima revisa (27th edn; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1996). New Century Bible A. Pietersma/B. G. Wright (ed.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). The New International Commentary on the Old Testament New International Dictionary of Old Testament & Exegesis New Testament Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Old Greek Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta Oudtestamentische Studiën Old Testament Old Testament Library The first, long, Isaiah Scroll from Qumran, cave 1 The second, short, Isaiah Scroll from cave 1 Paragraph Psalms of Solomon De Praemiss et Poenis Sibylline Oracle Revue Biblique Reprinted Sources Bibliques Society of Biblical Literature Society of Biblical Literature, Septuagint and Cognate Studies Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Septuagint and Cognate Studies Series Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Abbreviations STDJ TDNT TDOT Theod Tg Onk Tg. trans. UBW VT VTSup Vulg. WBC WMANT WUNT WUNT 2 ZAW

Studies on the texts of the desert of Judah Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament Theodotion Targum Onqelos Targum translated Understanding the Bible and its World Vetus Testamentum Supplements to Vetus Testamentum Vulgate Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

13

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 1: Introduction This study explores the theme of messianism in the entire corpus of the Old Greek of Isaiah (LXX-Isaiah) as an important piece of Jewish theological literature from (and for) the Jewish community in Alexandria in the Hellenistic period. This is done through the lens of an intertextual hermeneutic employed by the Isaiah translator as a mode of reading this text. It goes without saying that in recent years, interest in scholarship regarding the issue of messianism in the Greek Bible (LXX) in general has significantly increased.1 Scholars have been disagreeing concerning the level to which the LXX as a whole displays a messianic exegesis. In the debate, Coppens, who has been followed by a host of other significant scholars,2 has claimed that, in comparison with the Hebrew Bible, the LXX provides evidence of a trajectory of development of messianism.3 According to them, the

1

2

3

For instance, there are twenty papers presented in the fifty-third Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006). The main question that was dealt with in this Colloquium was “whether an evolution in messianism belief is to be discerned in the Septuagint” (on p. xiv). – In this study, the phrase ‘Greek Bible’ will be used interchangeably with the term ‘Septuagint’ or the standard abbreviation ‘LXX’. It is understood in a wide sense as a vaste and complex corpus of collections of Jewish sacred texts (of all the books of the Hebrew Bible and the so-called deutero-canonical or apocryphal as well pseudepigraphical books) translated into Greek during the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods. Given this typical use of the term ‘Septuagint’ and the fact that, in its inception, it was first and foremenost linked with the initial Greek translation of the Torah, the phrase ‘LXX-Pentateuch’ will also be used to refer to the aforementioned Greek Torah. However, when referring to an individual book within the ‘LXX-Pentateuch’, this will be specified. For instance, the abbreviation ‘LXX-Genesis’ will be used for the Greek version of the Book of Genesis. Similarly, the phrases ‘Old Greek of Isaiah’, ‘LXX-Isaiah’, and ‘Septuagint of Isaiah’ will be used interchangeably to designate the ancient Greek translation of the Book of Isaiah. For more detail on various issues pertinent to the meaning and the content of the term ‘Septuagint’, one may consult, amongst others, J. M. Dines, The Septuagint (ed. M. A. Knibb; UBW; London: T & T Clark, 2004), 1–24, and T. Rajak, Translation and Survival: The Greek Bible of the Ancient Jewish Diaspora (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 14–16. J. Lust, “Messianism and Septuagint”, in J. A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume, Salamanca 1983 (Leiden: Brill, 1985), 174, provides a list of these scholars and the textual evidence for their beliefs; see also Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism: Problems and Issues”, in Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, 4–9, who adds other scholars, e. g. V. der Woude, W. Horbury, J. Schaper, and N. F. Marcos; also M. Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante: Du Judaïsme Hellénistique du Christianisme Ancien (Paris: Cerf, 1988), 219. J. Coppens, Le Messianism royal: Ses origines, Son développement, Son accomplissement, LD 54 (Paris: Cerf, 1968), 119.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

16

Chapter 1: Introduction

LXX paved the path for the messianic reading of the Old Testament in the New. However, other scholars have been critically objecting to this view. Lust, a leading protagonist among them, has cautiously concluded that, at the present stage of the investigation, the LXX as a whole does not exhibit an increased interest in messianic thought.4 He has consistently argued that there are numerous passages in the LXX that should not be overlooked, where a ‘messianising’ translation is not found, where it might have been expected, thus each relevant passage should be studied on its own, and in its own context.5 Many other LXX scholars have shared his view.6 In a recent article, Knibb has discussed some general issues that seem to be central to the present debate.7 One of them is about achieving “clarity over the question of definition of messianism,”8 a term which is not always used in the same way. This implies that the tendency in the modern LXX scholarship has been that of starting an argument by providing a working definition so as to secure a proper treatment of a given topic and/or passage.9 For example, in his objection to the view of scholars in favour of a gradual emergence of messianic belief in the LXX, Lust (after being unsatisfied with Coppens’ view of messianism) starts his argument by saying:

4

5 6

7 8

9

See Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint: Collected Essays (ed. K. Hauspie; BETL 178; Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 26; also his article on “Messianism in LXX-Ezekiel: Towards a Synthesis”, in Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, 417–430; “Messianism in Ezekiel in Hebrew and in Greek, Ezek 21: 15(10) and 20(15)”, in S. M. Paul et al. (ed.), Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (Leiden: Brill: 2003), 619–31, on p. 620 n. 4. Lust, “Messianism in Ezekiel”, 619–20; see also his thirteen papers collected in Messianism and the Septuagint. See e. g. K. H. Jobes/M. Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000), 96–97; 297–300; Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 219–22; see also Knibb, “Introduction”, xiv. Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 9–15; also “Introduction”, in Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, xiv-xv. Knibb, “Introduction”, xiv. For instance, the aforementioned fifty-third Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense (see note 1) was unable, according to Knibb (quoting Martin Karrer), to arrive at a conclusion as to how ‘messianism’ was to be defined (on p. xx). More recently, in his study on messianism (though with a perspective of the Hebrew Bible), Heskett (quoting Schafer, Neusner, and Charlesworth) has argued that “the view of messianism that one brings to the text will influence what will seem to be messianic”; see R. Heskett, Messianism Within the Scriptural Scroll of Isaiah, LHBOTS 456 (New York/London: T & T Clark, 2007), 2. Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 28, also says, “[l]es discussions du messianisme sont souvent entravées par un manque de définitions claires.” For instance, Munnich writes, “Pour étudier ce thème, les auteurs modernes commencent souvent par en donner une définition de travail;” see O. Munnich, “Le messianisme à la lumière des livres prophétiques de la Bible grecque”, in Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, 327. W. Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ (London: SCM Press, 1998), 6, states: “messianism has been an elusive word ‘chargé de vibration et peu définissable,’ […] ‘dont on use et abuse aujourd’hui’. Writers on messianism indeed usually try to clarify the term”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 1: Introduction

17

Before we begin our critical investigation it may be useful to provide a tentative definition of messianism. Messianism is the expectation of an individual human and yet transcendent saviour. He is to come in a final eschatological period and will establish God’s Kingdom on earth. In a more strict sense, messianism is the expectation of a royal Davidic saviour at the end time.10

Lust’s emphasis on the future coming of a saviour figure in the eschatological era has found a significant support in scholarship. For instance, Knibb has argued that this is “important [in order] to distinguish clearly between kingship ideology and messianism.”11 According to him, it is not helpful to use the term ‘messianic’ with reference to historical figures which echo the idea of kingship ideology. In this connection, he criticises G. Bertram, J. Coppens, W. Horbury, and J. Schaper for identifying such figures when discussing the notion of messianism in Israel.12 Unfortunately, Knibb seems to go too far in trying to draw a sharp line of demarcation between these two concepts: kingship ideology and messianism in Israel. One needs to note, as Schaper has correctly said, that “the Israelite concept of messianism did not replace the earlier kingship ideology centring on the Davidic line but was deeply rooted in it.”13 In this way, as Schaper claims, “it does not make sense to postulate an opposition between kingship ideology and messianism.”14 In the current monograph, the latter concept is used with reference to the hope of an individual figure with a substantial mission to launch a new period of redemption. This definition is, to some extent, in line with the one(s) already provided by other scholars.15 Almost all scholars in favour of a gradual emergence of the messianic belief in the LXX have also a tendency to claim that the LXX can have a theology of its own. Schaper, for instance, has declared that “[a] ‘theology of the Septuagint’ – or, strictly speaking, an account of the theological trends of Hellenistic Judaism that shaped the Greek Bible – can, and indeed should be written.”16 However, instead of taking up such a challenge, their opponents

10 Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 142. However, it is not clear whether this definition is his. For, in another article in the same volume, one may curiously observe that he clearly quotes Coppens as the owner of it (on p. 154). 11 Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 10. 12 Ibid., 10–15; also, “Introduction”, xiv-xv. According to him, these scholars use the term ‘messianic’ to refer to historical figures of the past (e. g. Judas Maccabaeus) (on p. xiv). 13 J. Schaper, “The Persian Period”, in M. Bokmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T & T Clark, 2007), 3–14, on p. 5. 14 Ibid. 15 See e. g., Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 142; Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 6–7; Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter (WUNT 2/76; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995), 29; Sollamo, “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’”, in Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, 357–70, on p. 358; and more recently, R. F. de Sousa, Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 1–12, (LHBOTS 516; London/New York: T & T Clark, 2010), 3. 16 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah and Messianic Intertextuality in the Greek Bible”, in Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, 371–80, on p. 380. In a recent article,

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

18

Chapter 1: Introduction

seem to have been more sceptical of the whole idea of speaking of a ‘theology of the LXX’.17 To give one example, Sollamo18 (in support of Hanhart’s opinion19 against Bertram’s20) has claimed that theology was not a primary concern for the LXX translators. After analysing comparatively the Hebrew and Greek texts of one expression referring to God (in 1 Kings 15: 26 and 16: 7), she argued that the minor changes that one can observe in the LXX “do not justify one in speaking of a special septuagintal theology or ideology.”21 However, it seems precarious to make such a statement on the basis of only one example, analysed in isolation. Hence, from the foregoing opposing views, both the issue of whether a gradual emergence of messianism is to be discerned in the LXX and that of a ‘theology of the LXX’ appear to be two of the most pressing tasks of the LXX research. However, as said earlier, the focus of the present study is only on the former. As shall be seen, a survey on the question related to the theme of messianism in the LXX surprisingly reveals that not much effort has been dedicated to investigating meticulously this topic at least in an entire given individual Septuagintal book.22 It is against this background that the present study is

17

18 19

20 21 22

Rösel asks: “Can a book be written on the theology of Septuagint?” The answer is “[y]es, it can be written;” see M. Rösel, “Towards a ‘Theology of the Septuagint’”, in W. Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 239–52. A similar idea is echoed by J. Cook, “‘Theological/ Ideaological’ Tendenz in the Septuagint – LXX Proverbs: A Case Study”, in F. G. Martínez/M. Vervenne (ed.), Interpreting Translation: Studies on the LXX and Ezekiel in Honour of Johan Lust (BETL 192; Leuven: Peeters, 2005), 65–79, on p. 79; also Cook, “Towards the Formulation of a Thology of the Septuagint”, in A. Lemaire (ed.), Congress Volume Ljubljana 2007 (VTSup 133; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2010), 621–37; G. Bertram, “Praeparatio evangelica in der Septuaginta”, VT 7 (1957) 225–49. See Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 96–97; 297–300; Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 219–22; Lust, “Messianism and Septuagint”, 177; see also Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 19. In her article on “The Significance of Septuagint Studies”, in Shalom M. Paul et al., (ed.), Emanuel, 497–512, on pp. 505–08. “that there exists no septuagintal theology as a separate entity, but whenever Old Testament theology is investigated, the theology of the Septuagint should be given a special section or a place of honour,” (Ibid., 506). “that the Septuagint has a theology of its own” (ibid.). Ibid. Cf. also Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 94–95. Moreover, in 1948, Seeligmann has claimed that, “from a methodological point of view, and in view of the present state of our knowledge of this field of research, the study of a given book of the Septuagint is to be preferred to that of any particular concept (e. g. the Law, the Prophecy, Messianism, etc.), since any treatise on any of these notions can only be written on the basis of investigations into the views and individuality of the translators respectively,” see I. L. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah: A Discussion of its Problems, Mededelingen en verhandelingen van het vooraziatisch-egyptisch genootschap “Ex oriente lux”, 9 (Leiden: Brill, 1948); repr. in The Septuagint Version of Isaiah and Cognate Studies (ed. R. Hanhart/H. Spieckermann; FAT 40; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 127. Seeligmann’s argument justifies his focus on a particular Septuagint book, i. e. Isaiah. However, it is worthwhile noting that a few scholars, who came after him, have attempted to study a par-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in the LXX-Isaiah

19

set. In particular, it intends to contribute to a better and more reliable understanding of the issue of the messianism in LXX-Isaiah with a few implications with regard to the LXX as a whole. In this way, this investigation seeks to encourage further discussion on the topic of messianism in the Greek Bible.

1. Messianism in the LXX-Isaiah Focusing more recently on the significance of messianism in the LXX-Isaiah, Schaper has claimed that “[s]ince the Book of Isaiah has been such an important focus for the hopes and fears of the people of Israel, one should expect it to have been a prime candidate for what one may call a ‘messianization’ of its text in the Hellenistic period.”23 However, some passages in this important literature have been at the heart of a scholarly debate. The question has been as to whether the traces of messianic belief can be detected in them (and eventually in the LXX-Isaiah). The discussion was already in existence during the first four centuries C. E. We may recall, for instance, a well-known dispute between Justin Martyr (one of the early Church Fathers) and Trypho (a Jewish exegete) on the subject of messianism in Isaiah 7: 14. The former constructed his argument based on the Greek form of the text. He understood the words in Isaiah 7: 14 as foretelling the virgin birth of Jesus. In contrast, his opponent Trypho responded with an argument from the Hebrew text. According to him, this passage does not refer to the virgin birth of Jesus, but rather to a young woman who was expecting a child;24 thus making the Isaianic text useless for a messianic interpretation. ticular concept; see e. g. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter; Cook, “The Law in the Septuagint Proverbs”, JNSL 23 (1997) 211–23. 23 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371. Heskett, Messianism Within the Scriptural Scroll of Isaiah, 2, has stated that “Jews and Christians traditionally interpreted many passages in the book of Isaiah as containing messianic promise more than any other books,” and that “the book of Isaiah warrants a messianic reading” (on p. 17). The importance of the Book of Isaiah (with references to its impact on the theology of early Judaism and Christianity, as well as the literature of the first Temple, exilic, and second Temple periods) has been highlighted in the preface of an ambitious collection of papers on Isaiah; see C. C. Broyles/C. A. Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (VTSup 70/1; Leiden: Brill, 1997), ix. On the NT’s usage of the LXX of Isaiah, see C. A. Evans, “From Gospel to Gospel: The Function of Isaiah in the New Testament”, in Broyles/Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah, 2.651–91, on pp. 651–53; also B. S. Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 5. Our own inventory of the quotations of the LXXbooks in the NT based on the index of Greek Texts shows that in GNT4 (cf. p. 888) the LXX-Isaiah is quoted 37 times (the remaining prophetic LXX books are quoted in total 10 times) against 18 quotations of the LXX-Psalms. NA27 (cf. pp. 789–93) mentions 144 quotations of the LXX-Isaiah against 107 of LXX-Psalms, 52 times for all the remaining prophetic LXX-books, and 162 times for the LXX-Pentateuch. 24 Cf. Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 214.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

20

Chapter 1: Introduction

In the modern research on the LXX-Isaiah, scholars have been building their investigation on solid foundations laid by the work of Seeligmann.25 Prior to his monograph, R. R. Ottley26 and J. Ziegler27 carried out significant studies on the same book. All three of these works are well known and have greatly contributed to the study of the LXX-Isaiah.28 While the present study shall refer (whenever necessary) to some of the substantial efforts and admirable achievements made by these scholarly figures and those who came subsequently, serious consideration shall be given to tasks left virtually untouched. With regard to the question of messianism in the LXX-Isaiah, the tendency in scholarship has been: (1) to compare one or two passages in their Hebrew and the Greek texts;29 (2) to investigate contextually one or two passages either from a Jewish or Christian exegesis;30 (3) to explore some passages in comparison to the Targum or Peshitta;31 and/or (4) to study the messianic intertextuality of a few passages in this literature in relation to one or two passages from (an)other LXX book(s).32 Besides these trends, de Sousa’s recent monograph on the first twelve chapters of the LXX-Isaiah33 must also be mentioned. As a result, not only some passages that have been advanced for or against the presence of a development of messianism have been questioned, but also each study has held a partial view of the messianic thought and its significance in the LXX-Isaiah, with little implications to the LXX as a whole.

25 See e. g. Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371–80. 26 The Book of Isaiah According to the LXX (Codex Alexandrinus) (2 vol.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd edn; 1909 [1904, 1906]). 27 Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias (ATAbh 12.3; Münster: Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934). 28 See for instance their assessments in L. Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33: Etude de Traduction Textuelle (Ontario: CRU Saint-Paul, 1978), 2–4; A. van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, in Broyles/Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah, 2.513–30, on pp. 513–519; S. E. Porter/B. W. R. Pearson, “Isaiah through Greek Eyes: The Septuagint of Isaiah”, in Broyles/Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah, 531–46; E. R. Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An Exegetical and Theological Study (CBET 23; Leuven: Peeters, 1999), 19–21; D. A. Baer, When We All Go Home: Translation and Theology in LXX Isaiah 56–66 (JSOTSup 318; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 11–13; and Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah, 3–4. 29 See e. g. Lust, “Messianism in the Septuagint Isaiah 8,23b-9,6(9–17)”, 153–69; R. L. Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16 through the Eyes of the Septuagint”, ETL 79 (2003) 1–22; van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25: Translation and Interpretation”, in C. E. Cox (ed.), VI Congress of the IO SCS, Jerusalem 1986 (SBL SCS 23; Atlanta: Scholars Press. 1987), 127– 66; J. J. Collins, “Isaiah 8: 23–9: 6 and its Greek Translation”, in A. Voitila/J. Jokiranta (ed.), Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 205–21. 30 See Lust, “A Septuagint Christ Preceding Jesus Christ?”, 211–26. 31 Munnich, “Le Messianism”, 327–355 (esp. p. 328). 32 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371–80. 33 De Sousa, Eschatology

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation

21

Further, though it has been claimed that there exists a significant number of intertwined messianic passages in the LXX-Isaiah, (which are also linked with other prophetical passages with messianic overtones in the LXX-Pentateuch34), it appears surprisingly enough that no-one so far, to the best of our knowledge, has ever tried within one single exegetical scholarly work to engage in their exploration. This may be sufficient to say that this is an interesting topic for the present study.

2. The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation This section is an attempt to understand the LXX-Isaiah and its translator. To begin with, it is important to keep in mind that there are several issues related to the topic of “the LXX-Isaiah as a translation.”35 An exhaustive consideration of them is beyond the scope of the present study. However, a few of them that are particularly pertinent to our discussion shall be surveyed in the sections that follow.

2.1 The Translation as the Work of a Single Translator One of the most obvious issues that anyone dealing with the LXX-Isaiah encounters is whether or not to consider the translation as the work of a single translator. The issue is directly linked to forming an opinion on whether the LXX-Isaiah “forms a unity in respect of its origin.”36 Before attempting to make any claim, let us gain some insights from Seeligmann who, almost six decades ago, re-examined the question. Seeligmann started his investigation by rejecting the view of B. Gray and F. Baumgärtel, who argued that it is possible to see that there are two different translators of the LXX-Isaiah, i. e. one for chs. 1–39 and another one for chs. 40–66.37 For, according to them, there are certain Hebrew terms in Isa 1–39, which are either preferably or exclusively translated by certain Greek words or expressions, while in Isa 40–66, they are translated, either preferably or exclusively, by different ones.38 Building upon Fisher’s and Ziegler’s objection to these arguments, Seeligmann went on to investigate a few examples among those that offer the most convincing evidence on the data collected by Gray and Baumgärtel. As a result, Seeligmann discovered numerous inconsistencies exhibited everywhere (often, indeed, within one and the same verse) in the rendition of Hebrew words in the entire LXX-Isaiah. He 34 35 36 37 38

See Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 377; Ekblad Isaiah’s Servant, 31. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 179–221, deals with the majority of them. Ibid., 179. Ibid. Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

22

Chapter 1: Introduction

also discovered that in all parts of the translation there is evidence of a reasonably constant choice “for certain special terms, and for certain theological notions.”39 According to Seeligmann, this phenomenon alone is already suggestive of the unity of the LXX-Isaiah.40 Phrased differently, Seeligmann claimed that the translation before us is the work of one translator. His view has become commonly held,41 even though there is still a growing opinion among some scholars to question it.42 Hence, in the present study, we shall approach the LXX-Isaiah as one united product from one single Jewish translator43 who employed various exceptional creative mechanisms. He worked for the Jewish community in Alexandria to which he himself belonged. The use of intertextuality (to be discussed later) is one of those devices.

39 Ibid., 180–85. 40 This unity of the LXX-Isaiah has also been noted by Baer, When We All Go Home, 19. We shall come back to the issue of unity latter and its implication on how the book should be approached. 41 Ibid.; also C. Dogniez, “Le traducteur d’Isaïe connaissait-il le texte grec du Dodekapropheton?” Adamantius 13 (2007) 29–37, on p. 29. 42 Some scholars, for instance, are still sceptical about the translator of LXX-Isaiah 36–39; see e. g. M. S. Hurwitz, “The Septuagint of Isaiah 36–39 in Relation to that of 1–35, 40–66”, HUCA 28 (Philadelphia: HUC-JIR, 1957), 75–83 (esp. p. 82); Troxel, ‘βουλὴ in the Septuagint of Isaiah’ (unpublished paper presented at the SBL Annual Meeting, San-Diego, 2007), 5 n. 3; Baer, When We All Go Home, 19 n. 28, who has claimed “that ch. 66 stands somewhat apart from LXX Isaiah chs. 1–65”. More recently, in his article on “What happens in the end? Evidence for an early Greek recension in LXX Isaiah 66”, in A.van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives (CBET 55; Leuven: Peeters, 2010),1–31, on p. 3, Baer has also argued that LXX-Isaiah ch. 66 “has a provenance distinct from that of chapters 1–65”. 43 It should be noted that there is a debate (and/or sometimes confusion) in LXX scholarship on the terminology used with reference to the person responsible for the text of LXX, i. e. either to view him as a “translator” or an “author”. In the case of the former, according to A. Pietersma, “Exegesis in the Septuagint: Possibilities and Limits (The Psalter as a Case in Point)”, in W. Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 33–45, on p. 35, the Greek translator is viewed “as a mere medium (a conduit) of the source text”. That is he “does not add to nor subtract from the text being transmitted, nor are alterations made to it” (ibid). With reference to the latter, “the Greek translator is […] elevated to the status of an author, whose work becomes a substitute or replacement for the source text” (on p. 36). With reference to the LXX-Isaiah, a glance in a few works on it could reveal that its experts sometimes choose (whether consciously or not) either one term, or both terms, even within one single given piece of work. See, for instance, P. Le Moigne, “οὐχ ὡς dans Ésaïe-LXX”, in J. Joosten/P. Le Moigne (ed.), L’apport de la Septante aux études sur l’Antiquité (Paris: Cerf, 2005), 71– 104, on p. 78, where he speaks of “l’auteur d’Ésaïe-LXX” and not even a page latter, he writes: “[l]e traducteur d’Ésaïe-LXX” (p. 79). Although the terminology of “translator” is adopted in the present study, its meaning refers (to some extent) to that of an author (discussed above) based on his creative skills.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation

23

2.2 The Translator’s ‘Freedom’ in the Context of Ancient Biblical Translation The issue at hand here relates to an investigation of the ‘translation techniques’ used by the translator. As said above, the task before us requires that we limit ourselves to what is essential.44 Given this restriction, we intend to have a particular look at the characteristic of the translation. Since the meticulous works of Ziegler45 and Seeligmann,46 it has been generally accepted, as many scholars have noted,47 that the characteristic style of the translation of the LXX-Isaiah is none other than that of a rather remarkably ‘free’ (as opposed to ‘literal’) translation. However, the meaning of ‘literal’ and ‘free’ in the context of ancient biblical translations, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the qualification of the distinctive ‘freedom’ with regard to the techniques of translation in the LXX-Isaiah need to be clarified in the present study. With reference to the former, while analysing thoroughly the meaning of ‘literal’ and ‘free’ in the ancient translation, Barr states: “‘literal’ and ‘free’ are not clear and simple terms in the world of ancient biblical translation. There are numerous ways in which a version could be both at the same time. It could be literal, by one of the ways in which one may be literal, while by another of the ways it was simultaneously free.”48 According to him, one of those ways in which an ancient translation may be literal is, for instance, “one-for-one representation of elements of the Hebrew by elements of the Greek.”49 Tov, who aimed to contribute to Barr’s typology of literalism, provides five criteria for the analysis of literal renderings: (1) consistency; (2) representation of the constituents of Hebrew words; (3) word-order; (4) 44 Moreover, despite the fact that, as E. Tov, The Text-critical use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research, JBS 8 Revised and Enlarged Second Edition (Jerusalem: Simor, 1997), 17, has rightly pointed out that an “analysis of the techniques used by the Greek translators provides data for a better understanding of the translators’ exegesis,” (cf. Dines, The Septuagint, 117, 121), it has been observed by Baer, When We All Go Home, 14, that even the larger scholarly works on LXX-Isaiah have made less of an attempt “to describe exhaustively matters of translation technique or exegetical practice”. 45 Untersuchungen. 46 The Septuagint Version of Isaiah. 47 See e. g. van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, 513; also The Oracle of Tyre: The Septuagint of Isaiah XXIII as Version and Vision (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 12–13; J. W. Olley “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah and ‘Righteousness’”, BIOSCS 13 (1980) 55–74, on p. 59; Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 114, 215; Baer, When We All Go Home, 15– 16; Dines, The Septuagint, 22. 48 J. Barr, The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations (MSU 15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979), 283 [9]; cf. also B. Lemmelijn, “Two Methodological Trails in Recent Studies on the Translation Technique of the Septuagint”, in R. Sollamo/S. Sipilä (ed.), Helsinki Perspectives on the Translation Technique of the Spetuagint: Proceedings of the IOSCS Congress in Helsinki 1999 (PFES 82; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001), 43–63 (esp. 43–52) 49 Ibid., 280 [6], 324 [50].

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

24

Chapter 1: Introduction

quantitative representation; and (5) linguistic adequacy of lexical choices.50 With regard to ‘free’ translation, according to Barr, one of the most obvious ways in which an ancient translation can be regarded as ‘free’ composition is when large additions or subtractions of elements are made.51 This way of identifying a ‘free’ approach of the translator to its Hebrew parent text has been one of the major topics of interest in van der Kooij’s significant contributions to the understanding of the Greek version of Isaiah. According him, it is this ‘free’ approach which “allowed the translator to add words, to omit words, and to introduce variant readings.”52 From the paragraph above, one can observe not only the complexities in determining whether an ancient translation of the Bible is to be termed as a rather ‘literal’ or ‘free’ translation, but also the emergence of a definition of a ‘literal’ translation, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, that of a ‘free’ translation. Dines provides such a definition: By ‘literal’ is meant a close approximation to the (supposed) source-text, word for word, or phrase for phrase, and including grammatical and syntactical idioms and word order; this is called ‘formal equivalence.’ By ‘free’ is meant a style which is more paraphrastic and idiomatic, and which apparently aims to give the translator’s understanding of the original rather than reproduce it quantitatively; this is called ‘dynamic equivalence’.53

Without undermining Dines’ contribution to the LXX research, it can be observed in her statement above that she does not provide the meaning of her use of the terms ‘formal equivalence’ and ‘dynamic equivalence’ as first understood by the modern theoretician of translation Eugene A. Nida. It is important to note that in his investigation, as Hatim and Mason correctly say, “Nida shifts attention away from the sterile debate of free versus literal towards the effects of different translation strategies.”54 This implies that, in modern analysis of translation, the terms ‘formal equivalence’ and ‘dynamic equivalence’ are used to describe two extremes of varying attitudes of translators towards translating. Nida, in his book Toward a science of Translating,55 defines the term ‘formal equivalence’ as a method of translation that 50 See Tov, The Tex-critical use of the Septuagint, 54–60. A useful analysis of these five criteria and their various failures in the translation studies can be found in R. T. McLay, The Use of the Septuagint in the New Testament Research (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 51–61. 51 Barr, The Typology of Literalism, 303–05 [29–31]; McLay, The Use of the Septuagint, 56– 57. 52 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 128. 53 Dines, The Septuagint, 119–20. 54 B. Hatim/I. Mason, Discourse and the Translator (London: Longman, 1990), 7. A useful survey of the history of translation theory over ‘literal’ and ‘free’ debate, starting with Cicero via St Jerome, Dolet, Luther, Dryden, Tytler, to Schleiermacher can be found in J. Munday, Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications (London: Routledge, 2001), 18–33. 55 Nida, Toward a science of Translating with Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating (Leiden: Brill, 1964).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation

25

“focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content.”56 However, five years later, within his publication (together with Taber) of The Theory and Practice of Translation,57 Nida’s position on ‘formal equivalence’ seemed to change. This discrepancy is not merely to be observed in his use of the expression ‘formal correspondance’ instead of ‘formal equivalence’, but more remarkably in relating it only to form, not to content.58 Without going into too much detail, Nida’s inconsistency in his use of ‘formal equivalence/correspondence’ implies that in translation studies, “closely related to the literal versus free issue is the debate on the primacy of content over form or vice versa.”59 With reference to the term ‘dynamic equivalence’, although Nida also used ‘functional’ in place of ‘dynamic’, he seems to show a consistent understanding of these terms. According to him, ‘dynamic or functional equivalence’ is the “quality of a translation in which the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors.”60 This assumes that the basic meaning of the original text is known to the translator, or is knowable indirectly through the mediation of scholarly means (e. g. dictionaries and reference books), thus implying a favouring, in our modern culture, of a ‘free’ against ‘literal’ translation.61 All this is to say that, in modern biblical translations, a textual-linguistic make-up of a given translation will argue for whether a translation is characterized by either a formal or a dynamic equivalence. On the contrary, in ancient biblical translations, these two poles are entirely too simplistic, thus suggesting to modern scholars, as Dines puts it, “to envisage a continuum running from extremely literal to extremely free renderings, with many intermediate stages and combinations, on which […] even different parts of the same translations, can be located.”62 However, while Barr’s chief argument that “a translation can be literal and free at the same time but in different modes or on different levels”63 is true even for the LXX-Isaiah, it will still be argued that his claim does not conceal the aforementioned scholarly consensus that the LXX-Isaiah has been rendered rather freely. This characteristic will be observed throughout the present investigation. This leads us to the other issue (noted above) concerning the qualification of the translator’s distinctive ‘freedom’ in his translation techniques. 56 57 58 59

60 61 62 63

Ibid., 159 (emphasis mine). Nida/C. R. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden: Brill, 1969). Ibid., 203. Hatim/Mason, Discourse and the Translator, 8. For a similar thought, see also R. P. Roberts, “Translation”, in R. P. Roberts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (Oxford: University Press, 2002), 429–42, on p. 43. Nida/Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation, 24, 200. Barr, The Typology of Literalism, 289 [15]. Dines, The Septuagint, 121. Barr, The Typology of Literalism, 280 [6]. Dines, The Septuagint, 120, has a similar thought, so J. K. Palmer, “‘Not Made With Tracing Paper’: Studies in the Septuagint of Zechariah,” Tyndale Bulletin 57.2 (2006) 317–20, on p. 318.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

26

Chapter 1: Introduction

More recently, Schweitzer has examined a selection of mythological elements in the LXX-Isaiah with the aim to find out whether the translator followed a remarkably free translation technique in some respects. In his argument, he believes that such mythological elements provide the translator with an opportunity to be ‘creative’ in the exegesis of the text. This is because mythology is not explained in the same terms by every culture or even by the same culture in different time periods. Therefore, according to Schweitzer, mythological elements are susceptible to change and are thus fertile ground for understanding the choices the translator has made.64 He concludes, at least in respect to the mythological elements, OG Isaiah may be termed a “rather free translation” insofar as it is not slavishly literal but is faithful to the meaning of the parent text; but it is not “rather free” in the sense that the translator paraphrased or changed what he understood to be the meaning of the parent text.65

Even if we do not completely share Schweitzer’s opinion (for, as shall be shown in the present study, the LXX-Isaiah undeniably contains traces of deliberate changes), it must be observed that his claim goes to some extent along the same lines as Baer. Quoting Seeligmann, Baer says: “the reference to the translator of Isaiah’s freedom […] is certainly not free from ‘commitment to the Vorlage’.”66 In this connection, Baer (as Schweitzer) seems to argue against the majority scholarly appreciation of the obvious liberties often observed in this translation.67 Despite such a scholarly objection, it shall be argued in the present study that, while on the surface a translation unit bears sometimes a certain quantity of literalness with its parent text, it can actually display in various ways a significant shift in meaning when compared to its Hebrew equivalent.68 However, it must be borne in mind that our study acknowledges that there are various factors which might be the raison d’être of our translator’s ‘free’ renderings.69 As shall be pointed out 64 S. J. Schweitzer, “Mythology in the Old Greek of Isaiah: The Technique of Translation”, CBQ 66 (2004) 214–30, on pp. 217–18. 65 Ibid., 230. 66 Baer, When We All Go Home, 17; 159 n. 20. See also Lemmelijn, “Two Methodological Trails in Recent Studies on the Translation Technique of the Septuagint”, 51, who states: “A good free translation can be very faithful in relation to its Vorlage”. 67 Ibid. He repeatedly states this view (see pp. 16, 22, 277–82). A similar opinion is held by R. Hanhart, “The Translation of the Septuagint in Light of Earlier Tradition and Subsequent Influences”, in G. J. Brooke/B. Lindars (ed.), Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings: Papers Presented to the International Symposium on the Septuagint and Its Relations to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings (Manchester: 1990) (SBLSCS 33; Atlanta: Scholars, 1992),339–79, on p. 341 68 A similar view is already echoed in Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 24, who argues pace “Tov’s view that theologically tendentious interpretations ‘occur more frequently in “free” translation sections’”. 69 For more detail on them, see e. g., Ottley, The Book of Isaiah According to the LXX, 1.50; Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 259; Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 202–03; van der Kooij, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches: Ein Beitrag zur Text-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation

27

shortly, these include, for example, issues related to the allegations usually made against the translator’s failures in his reading of the Hebrew underlying his Greek text, and grammatical and stylistic reasons. Others are pertinent to the translator’s aim of enhancing the coherence of his text and his interest in producing a good κοινή Greek. Still other transformations are due to Semitic interferences, the translator’s idea of ‘actualization’ of prophecies, his use of neologisms, and intertextuality (which is dealt with in the present study), etc. This being so, in every given instance, therefore, these possible factors must be examined first before any significant claim pointing to the translator’s ideological or theological outlook can be made. Given the understanding outlined above, in the present study an effort shall be made70 in distinguishing between what van der Louw describes as the “‘free renderings’ [that] result from linguistic demands and [those] which are the result of the translator’s exegesis.”71 In this respect, the Isaiah translator’s ‘freedom’ has more to do, for instance, with his additions, omissions, paraphrases, idioms, and introduction of variant readings. In other words, his liberty serves as a basis for measuring both the manner and places where a translation unit reveals an interpretation lying “on a higher level”, which is concerned with “matters of content, of reference, or of theological exegesis.”72 Accordingly, in the present study, all the translation units of the LXX-Isaiah which are to undergo analysis, are approached at the same time as “a translation and as an interpretation.”73 In connection to this, although the Isaiah translator’s ‘freedom’ (as described above) is considered in the present study as a significant indicator for understanding his own messianic predilections,74 a thorough scrutiny shall be carried out even in those instances

70

71 72 73

74

geschichte des Alten Testaments (OBO 35; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981), 23– 32; J. C. M. das Neves, A Teologia da Tradução Grega Dos Setenta No Livro De Isaías (Cap. 24 de Isaías) (Lisboa: Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1973), 9–45; Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 92; Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 25; Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation: The Strategies of the Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 152–72; J. Joosten, “Reflections on the ‘Interlinear Paradigm’ in Septuagint Studies”, in A. Voitila/J. Jokiranta (ed.), Scripture in Transition, 163–78, on p. 174. Though as more recently Joosten, “Reflections on the ‘Interlinear Paradigm’ in Septuagint Studies,” 177, has correctly said that “it is often exceedingly difficult to decide to which Hebrew elements the Greek words correspond”. T. A. W. van der Louw, Transformations in the Septuagint: Towards an Interaction of Septuagint Studies and Translations (Leuven: Peeters, 2007), 9. Barr, The Typology of Literalism, 291 [17]. See van der Kooij, “The Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 127 (emphasis added). In Le Déaut’s words, “[l]e point de départ [pour une étude du texte de la Septante] n’est pas le texte seul, mais le texte + son interprétation”, see R. Le Déaut, “La Septante, Un Targum?”, in R. Kuntzmann/J. Schlosser (ed.), Etudes sur le Judaïsme Hellenistique: Congres de Strasbourg (1983) (LD 119 (Paris: Cerf, 1984), 147–95, on p. 194. As Olley, “The Translator of the Septuagint”, 59, has claimed: “[t]he oft-noted freedom which the Isaiah translator exercised means that it is easier to see his own theological predilections!”; see also Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), 127; The Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the Septuagint (SVT 72;

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

28

Chapter 1: Introduction

where there seems to be a considerable degree of literalism. For it is our contention (as said above) that even in these cases one may uncover a significant number of the translator’s ‘theological exegeses’.75

2.3 The Translator’s Linguistic Skills In addition to (and as a way to expand some of) his various manoeuvres outlined in the previous section, the Isaiah translator has been seen also as possessing a big vocabulary.76 More recently, despite his aforementioned reluctance towards the characteristic of the translator’s ‘freedom’, Baer seems to have offered some significant elements that enable one to say that there is something more to see in what may appear as mere skills in what is going on in the translator’s attempt to understand his source text. For instance, he sees that our translator “is a preacher, or at least a preacher’s aide. His text has moved him, but not in the direction of literary appreciation. Rather, he is moved by homiletical intentions towards proclamation of the book’s essential message – as he perceives this to be – to his community.”77 This statement implies that the Isaiah translator is familiar with technical terms from the Hellenistic Greek used in his Alexandrian milieu in order to enable his audience to get the message. Moreover, Ziegler has an exposition of the translator’s preference for such technical terms.78 In this way, as Seeligmann has already noted, “the entire tone of the translation breathes the spirit of the Jewish-Hellenistic milieu in which it came into being.”79 Further, Baer also describes the Isaiah translator as “a biblical theologian of sorts,” who not only “knows the book of Isaiah well, often introducing into the verse that lays before him elements of an Isaiah passage from elsewhere in the book,” but also as one who “knows the Greek Pentateuch and alludes to it regularly.”80 This description of our translator clearly reveals that there are various links between the LXX-Isaiah and the LXX-Pentateuch.81 This takes us to the issue advanced by Tov concerning the use of the LXX-Pentateuch as ‘lexicon’ or ‘dictionary’ for the translators of the other

75

76 77 78 79 80 81

Atlanta: SBL, 1999), 257–69; also The Text-critical Use of the Septuagint, 63 n. 40; cf. van der Louw, “Linguistic or Ideological Shifts? The Problem-Oriented Study of Transformations as a Methodological Filter”, in A.Voitila/J. Jokiranta (ed.), Scripture in Transition, 107–25, on p. 123. Cf. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 24, who, after investigating the LXX-Psalms as a literal translation, was “able to point out a considerable number of ‘theological exegeses’”. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 184. Baer, When We All Go Home, 23 (n. 2)-26. See Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 175–212. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 186. Baer, When We All Go Home, 23–26. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 188–193, 224.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

The LXX-Isaiah as a Translation

29

LXX books.82 Via various illustrations, Tov has observed (a) the continuation of vocabulary of the LXX-Pentateuch in the translation of the later books; (b) how the LXX-Pentateuch served as a lexicon for the later translators who often turned to the Pentateuch when they encountered ‘difficult’ Hebrew words which occurred in the Pentateuch; (c) how quotations from and allusions to passages in the Hebrew Pentateuch occurring in the later books of the Bible were often phrased in the Greek in a manner identical with the translation of passages in LXX-Pentateuch; and (d) how the contents of the LXX-Pentateuch often influenced the wording of later translations on an exegetical level.83 More recently, in his objection to Tov’s idea above, Barr has asked in a paper entitled: “Did the Greek Pentateuch really serve as a dictionary for the translation of the later books?”84 Concluding the twenty-three pages of this paper that sought to re-examine Tov’s idea, Barr claims that it is “more difficult to maintain that the Greek Pentateuch served as a model for the translators of the other books.”85 However, he ingeniously adds: “[i]t remains possible, on the other hand, that new arguments or new approaches, working from another angle, may succeed in reconfirming the validity of that approach.”86 Then he goes on to suggest that “[o]ne might, for example, leave aside the rendering of individual Hebrew words, and work from a more general stylistic angle.”87 According to him, “it will be interesting to see if such other approaches emerge.”88 At this point, it is worth noting that Barr’s suggestion for new approaches working from a general stylistic angle, for instance, has been already taken up by Baer in his work that was published in 200189, i. e. two years prior to Barr’s article (2003). In his chs. 2–3, Baer works from the grounds of style of the translation. It should be emphasized here that it is the same Baer who has also noted, as mentioned earlier, the Isaiah translator’s use of the LXX-Pentateuch. Hence, without seeking to know whether or not Barr knew Baer’s study, a relationship between the LXX-Pentateuch and the LXX-Isaiah is assumed in the present study.

82 Tov, “The Impact of the LXX Translation of the Pentateuch on the Translation of the other Books”, in P. Casetti (ed.), Mélanges Dominique Barthélemy: Études Bibliques offertes à l’occasion de son 60e Anniversaire (OBO 38; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981), 577–92, on p. 578. Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, 4, also observes, for instance, the Isaiah translator’s use of LXX-Pentateuch. 83 Ibid. 84 in M. F. J. Baasten/W.Th. van Peursen (ed.), Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (OLA 118; Leuven: Peeters, 2003), 523–43. 85 Ibid., 542. A similar view has been echoed by van der Louw, Transformation in the Septuagint, 236–37. 86 Ibid., 542–43. 87 Ibid. 88 Ibid. 89 Baer, When We All Go Home.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

30

Chapter 1: Introduction

2.4 The Issue of Dating the Translation It has been argued that “more precise dating of […] the Greek texts [is] needed to sort out properly the criteria for detecting messianism.”90 While this issue is relevant to our discussion, it should be noted, however, that with reference to the LXX-Isaiah, the consensus among modern scholars places its birth “somewhere near the middle of the second century B. C. E.”91 Given this agreement and in the absence (until now) of other evidence demanding an amendment, this date will be assumed in the present study.

3. Intertextuality as a Method Before outlining our method of approach that deals with an intertextual analysis of the text, it is important to clarify as much as possible both the meaning and application of the term intertextuality so as to gain, as much as we can, new insights. Basically, in this section therefore, after discussing the origin of the term intertextuality, we intend to survey the way this term is used in biblical scholarship in general, and in LXX research in particular.

3.1 Intertextuality from its Inception It is widely held that the modern literary theory known as ‘intertextuality’ (or intertextualité) was first devised by the French literary theorist Julia Kristeva in the late 1960s.92 First and foremost, it is essential that we recall the historical context of Kristeva’s concept93 for attempting to understand both her intended meaning94 and the significance of the systemic and trans90 Knibb, “Introduction”, xxvii. 91 Baer, When We All Go Home, 19, 26 n. 10. For more discussion on this issue, see also van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, 528; Harl et al., La Bible Greque des Septante, 93, 111. 92 See J. Kristeva, Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art (ed. L. S. Roudiez; trans. T. Gora et al.; New York: Columbia University Press, 1980), esp. her two articles: “The Bounded Text”, 36–63; and “Word, Dialogue, Novel”, 64–91. These articles were first published in French in Σημειωτικὴ[sic]: Recherches Pour une Sémanalyse (Paris: Seuil, 1969); see also Kristeva, La Révolution du Language Poétique: L’Avant-garde à la fin du XIXème siècle, Lautreamont et Mallarme (Paris: Seuil, 1974). In the present study, we shall use the French editions since they are the primary sources. 93 For more details on this historical context of Kristeva’s enterprise; see, for e. g., J. Clayton/ E. Rothstein (ed.), Influence and Intertextuality in Literary History (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1991), 17–20; T. K. Beal, “Ideology and Intertextuality: Surplus of Meaning and Controlling the Means of Production”, in D. N. Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992), 27–39, on pp. 29–32; also his article on “Intertextuality”, in A. K. M. Adam (ed.), Handbook of Postmodern Biblical Interpretation (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2000), 128–30. 94 Hibbard is of a different opinion. He has noted that Kristeva’s intended meaning cannot be

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

31

formative character of intertextuality. According to Allen, the term intertextuality was coined by Kristeva at a time of transition in Paris from the formerly dominant structuralist influence in literary studies to the poststructuralism that in reality still leads in many ways today.95 In addition to Allen’s observation, it should be noted that Kristeva’s concept of intertextuality first derived from her influential paper understood as a presentation of the Russian literary critic Mikhail Bakhtin and his development of the fundamental notion of dialogism.96 Kristeva focused primarily on two major works of Bakhtin.97 Discussing the ideas of Bakhtin, Kristeva states: Écrivain autant que “savant”, Bahktine est l’un des premiers à remplacer le découpage statique des textes par un modèle où la structure littéraire n’est pas, mais où elle s’élabore par rapport à une autre structure. Cette dynamisation du structuralisme n’est possible qu’à partir d’une conception selon laquelle le “mot littéraire” n’est pas un point (un sens fixe), mais un croisement de surfaces textuelles, un dialogue de plusieurs écritures: de l’ecrivain, du destinaitaire (ou du personage), du context culturel actuel ou antérieur.98

Kristeva’s presentation of Bakhtin’s work seems to disclose two major points. Firstly, Kristeva saw Bakhtin as one who remained devoted to the social location of the discourse, and therefore to the historical dimension.99 Desiring to amend Bakhtin’s thought, Kristeva, as Hibbard correctly observes, “sought to take the text out of the historical realm and into a kind of ahistorical textual space.”100 This is more evident in the following words of Kristeva: La diachronie se transforme en synchronie, et dans la lumière de cette transformation l’histoire linéaire apparaît comme une abstraction; la seule manière qu’a l’écrivain de participer à l’histoire devient alors la transgression de cette abstraction par une écridefined with a great deal of precision since her use of the term was not always consistent; see J. T. Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27: The Reuse and Evocation of Earlier Texts and Traditions (FAT II/16; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 10–13. 95 G. Allen, Intertextuality (London/New York: Routledge, 2000), 30–5. 96 “By dialogism, Bakhtin suggests the open-ended, back-and-forth play between the text of the sender (subject), the text of the addressee (object), and the text of the culture. In so doing he introduces a dynamic instability which is unallowable in traditional formalisms and structuralisms. Inherent in language itself, this back-and-forth play between and among texts explodes, or dynamites, the supposedly closed structure and univocal meaning of any particular text, opening it to further reappropraiations, reinscriptions, and redescriptions”; see Beal, “Ideology and Intertextuality,” 29. Any student interested in Bakhtin’s notion of dialogism may think of reading M. Holquist (ed.), The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (trans. C. Emerson/M. Holquist; Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981). 97 Rabelais and his World, (trans.) H. Iswolsky (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984), and Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, (ed.)/(trans.) C. Emerson (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984). 98 Kristeva, Σημειωτικὴ, 83 (emphasis original). 99 Ibid. She says: “[…] Bakhtine situe le texte dans l’histoire et dans la société, envisagées ellesmêmes comme textes que l’écrivain lit et dans lesquels il s’insère en les récrivant” (on p. 83). 100 Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 10.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

32

Chapter 1: Introduction

ture-lecture, c’est-à-dire par une pratique d’une structure signifiante en fonction de ou en opposition avec une autre structure. L’histoire et la morale s’écrivent et se lisent dans l’infrastructure des textes.101

Secondly, with reference to her key phrase ‘croisement de surfaces textuelles’, Kristeva explained that dialogism, against structuralism, contradicts the concept of closure of the text. That is to say, a text contains something ‘already written’ or ‘already said’. This implies that a text-as-dialogue is always referring beyond itself to other texts and contexts. In other words, Kristeva argued for the possibility of multiple meanings in any given discourse. Any text can only be read against a background of other texts any reader has already read or heard about. Consequently, a text is understood as a thinly interwoven network of textual relationships from which a text and its reader cannot escape a certain textual environment. Expanding her explication of Bakhtin’s enterprise, Kristeva declares: Mais dans l’univers discursif du livre, le destinataire est inclus uniquement en tant que discours lui-même. Il fusionne donc avec cet autre discours (cet autre livre) par rapport auquel l’écrivain écrit son propre texte; de sorte que l’axe horizontal (sujet-destinataire) et l’axe vertical (texte-contexte) coïncident pour dévoiler un fait majeur: le mot (le texte) est un croisement des mots (de textes) où on lit au moins un autre mot (texte). Chez Bakhtine d’ailleurs, ces deux axes, qu’il appelle respectivement dialogue et ambivalence, ne sont pas clairement distingués. Mais ce manque de rigueur est plutôt une découverte que Bakhtine est le premier à introduire dans la théorie littéraire: tout texte se construit come mosaïque de citations, tout texte est absorption et transformation d’un autre texte. A la place de la notion d’intersubjectivité s’installe celle d’intertextualité, et le langage poétique se lit, au moins, comme double.102

Kristeva, as it can be seen, clarified the confusion between the idea of dialogue and ambivalence in Bakhtin’s work. According to her, since Bakhtin comes from a revolutionary Russia that was preoccupied with social problems, he did not see dialogue as a language assumed by a subject, rather as a script where one reads the other.103 Consequently, Kristeva challenged to some degree the philosophical hermeneutics that promoted interpretation as an intersubjectivity process. She believed that texts are not simply equivalent to their subjects. Arguing against the idea of intersubjectivity by the means of the notion of dialogue, Kristeva said: “face à ce dialogisme, la notion de ‘personne-suject de l’écriture’ commence à s’estomper pour céder la place à une autre, celle de ‘l’ambivalence de l’écriture’.”104 From the insights gained so far, it seems that the intended meaning of intertextuality in Kristeva can be discovered in her understanding of the literary word as (a) ‘croisement de surfaces textuelles;’ (b) ‘mosaïque de citations;’ and (c) ‘absorption et transformation d’un autre texte.’ If this can be 101 Kristeva, Σημειωτικὴ, 83, 85. 102 Ibid., 85 (emphasis original). 103 Ibid., 88. 104 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

33

accepted, then intertextuality according to Kristeva is a phenomenon that is primarily concerned with possible mutual relationships between texts within a given corpus of literature. It requires that we understand the concept of text not as a self-contained structure, but as differential and historical. Texts are shaped not by an imminent time, but by the participation of divergent temporalities. Any text makes its readers aware of other texts as both Beuken and van Wolde write: “[t]exts refer to each other, chronologically backwards and forwards, semantically inwards and outwards… [They] do not exist without other texts. During the reading of a text the ‘dejà-lu’ of other texts interferes constantly.”105 Frow puts it this way: “[t]exts are therefore not structures of presence but traces and tracings of otherness. They are shaped by the repetition and the transformation of other textual structures.”106 Still on the topic, Carroll sees that “[t]he notions of otherness and repetition are fundamentally important in defining the nature of intertextuality. They point to the codeness of textuality and emphasize the fact that a text reflects a system (or code) of other textual factors (or structures).”107 Hence, the phenomenon of intertextuality, which can be defined basically as the interrelationships between two or more texts,108 insists on an intertextual analysis of these texts.109 However, it has to be pointed out that Kristeva was not consistent in her use of the term intertextuality.110 Almost ten years after first coining her term, she writes: 105 W. Beuken/E. van Wolde, “Introduction”, in S.Draisma (ed.), Intertextuality in Biblical Writings: Essays in Honour of Bas van Iersel (Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1989), 7–8, on p. 7; see also D. Marguerat/A. Curtis, “Préface”, in D. Marguerat/A. Curtis (ed.), Intertextualités. La Bible en échos (Le Monde de la Bible 40; Genève: Labor et Fides, 2000), 5–11, on p. 7, who, while commenting on the phenomenion of interextuality according to Kristeva, correctly observe that “ce qui a déjà été écrit ou dit … constitue l’immense réservoir dans lequel puise l’auteur”. In this way, according to them, “[l]’intertextualité devient ainsi ce mouvement illimité par lequel un texte répercute l’infinité des textes qui l’ont précédé, et se réfère à eux, que ce soit explicitement ou in absentia”. 106 J. Frow, “Intertextuality and Ontology”, in M. Worton/J. Still (ed.), Intertextuality: Theories and Practices (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990), 45–55, on p. 45. 107 R. P. Carroll, “Intertextuality and the Book of Jeremiah: Animadversions on Text and Theory”, in J. C. Exum/D. J. A. Clines (ed.), The New Literary Criticism and the Hebrew Bible (JSOTSup 143; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 55–78, on p. 58. 108 Cf. G. Genette, Palimpsestes: La littérature au second degré (Points. Essais 257; Paris: Seuil, 1982), 8, who defines intertextuality as “une relation de co-présence entre deux ou plusieurs textes, c’est-à-dire, eidétiquement et le plus souvent, par la présence effective d’un texte dans un autre. Sous sa forme la plus explicite et la plus littérale, c’est la pratique traditionnelle de la citation (avec guillemets, avec ou sans référence précise); sous une forme moins explicite et moins canonique, celle du plagiat (…), qui est un emprunt non déclaré, mais encore littéral; sous forme encore moins explicite et moins littérale, celle de l’allusion, c’est-à-dire d’un énoncé dont la pleine intelligence suppose la perception d’un rapport entre lui et un autre auquel renvoie nécessairement telle ou telle de ses inflexions, autrement non recevable”. 109 Carroll, “Intertextuality and the Book of Jeremiah”, 58. 110 Similar observations can be found also in Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 10–11. Culler has more details on Kristeva’s inconsistency in using her concept; see J. Culler, “Pre-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

34

Chapter 1: Introduction

Le terme d’inter-textualité désigne cette transposition d’un (ou de plusieurs) système(s) de signes en un autre; mais puisque ce terme a été souvent entendu dans le sens banal de “critique des sources” d’un texte, nous préférerons celui de transposition, qui a l’avantage de préciser que le passage d’un système signifiant à un autre exige une nouvelle articulation du thétique – de la positionnalité énonciative et dénotative. Si on admet que toute pratique signifiante est un champ de transpositions de divers systèmes signifiants (une inter-textualité), on comprend que son “lieu” d’énonciation et son “objet” dénoté ne sont jamais uniques, pleins et identiques à eux-mêmes, mais toujours pluriels, éclatés, susceptibles de modèles tabulaires. La polysémie apparaît donc aussi comme le résultat d’une polyvalence sémiotique, d’une appartenance à divers systèmes sémiotiques.111

In adopting the term transposition by dropping the one of intertextuality, there are many things that can be said. However, with reference to the above quotation, one must notice firstly that there is a shift in focus. Commenting on the difference to be identified in the two terms, Hibbard rightly observes that: “[t]he former term subtly shifted the focus to the product that resulted from the kind of reading espoused by Kristeva, whereas the latter pertained more strictly to the process that brought about the end result…”112 Hence, after espousing the term transposition in place of intertextuality, as Hibbard correctly points out, in the end Kristeva was more interested in the product than the process.113 Secondly, it is without doubt that Kristeva’s aforementioned decision emerged from the misuse or misunderstanding of the term intertextuality as it received a considerably widespread scholarly interest.114 It is beyond the scope of this study to provide an exhaustive survey of the use of the term intertextuality from the time it started developing and being applied in several diverse directions to date.115 However, an awareness of what has been going on in scholarship is essential. To begin with, already in 1989, i. e. twenty years after the term was introduced in scholarship, compiling more than 2,000 critical studies that deal with this concept, Hebel has described intertextuality as an “astoundingly productive and extremely diversified field of scholarship.”116 In their use of intertextuality as a theory,

supposition and Intertextuality”, Modern Language Notes 91.6 (1976) 1380–97 (esp. pp. 1382–85). 111 Kristeva, Révolution du Language Poétique, 59–60. 112 Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 11. 113 Ibid. 114 Ibid. Hibbard mentions, for instance, Barthes, and Genette and Riffaterre, who picked up the term intertextuality and used it respectively to demolish the idea of the author (while Kristeva was cautious in talking about authors and their intentions) when engaging in textual analysis and in a return to decidedly structuralist approaches. 115 Cf. Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24-27, 3, who writes that intertextuality as a “concept and term have found a home in such diverse areas as structuralist poetics, post-structuralist literary approaches (in their seemingly infinite variety) and New Historicism, among others”. 116 U. J. Hebel, Intertextuality, Allusion, and Quotation: An International Bibliography of Critical Studies (London: Greenwood Press, 1989), ix. The literature on intertextuality is very

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

35

some scholars in the last four decades have provided a wide variety of definitions,117 with the result that the term has been generally misunderstood, and has become almost meaningless to some.118 To others, the different meanings of the term that emerged with its vast usage reflect not only the wish for intellectual clarity and precision in terminology, but they also express implicitly a desire to maintain a fixed meaning for the concept.119 In the wide practice of the theory of intertextuality, terms such as ‘influence,’ ‘allusions,’ ‘borrowing,’ ‘quotations,’ ‘echoes,’ ‘catchwords,’ ‘interpretation,’ and ‘reuse,’ to name but a few, have been used to refer to intertextuality.120 This variety of terms not only shows the confusion121 that often occurs in the use of this term, but it also displays to some degree the current status of the pregnancy of intertextuality recherché.122 It is worth noting that in scholarship there is a tendency to say that none of the aforementioned terms describes Kristeva’s notion of intertextuality. For instance, in reviewing the book entitled Bible and Qur’ān: Essays in Scriptural Intertextuality,123 Mitchell, who describes herself as competent in intertextuality, declares, All of the essays in this collection use the term ‘intertextuality,’ when they really should be using the terms ‘borrowing,’ ‘allusion,’ ‘interpretation,’ or ‘influence.’[…] To re-use, interpret, allude to, or re-write earlier material is not necessarily to be in intertextual relationship with it, and to use the term ‘intertextuality’ in these cases is to use a neologism.124

extensive. However, it must be said that Hebel’s work is the first comprehensive compilation of scholarly achievements in the field of the far-reaching theory of intertextual research and may serve as a significant guide for researchers in this field of intertextual studies. 117 As it has been said, Kristeva herself has provided several definitions of intertextuality; see Clayton/Rothstein, “Figures in the Corpus”, 20. For more definitions and how the term has been used, see e. g., M. Worton/J. Still, Intertextuality: Theories and Practices (Manchester/ New York: Manchester University Press, 1990); B. Godard, “Intertextuality”, in I. R. Makaryk (ed.), Encyclopedia of Contemporary Literary Theory: Approaches, Scholars, Terms (Toronto/London: University of Toronto Press, 1993), 568–72; R. Barthes, Le plaisir du texte (Paris: Seuil, 1973), 59; Genette, Palimpsestes, 8. 118 See Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 3. 119 Quoting Roudiez as Kristeva’s English editor, Friedman has noted the move towards orthodoxy of the meaning of intertextuality as used by Kristeva in her Desire in Language; see S. S. Friedman, “Weavings”, 153–4. 120 For the meaning of some of these terms and the possible relationships of each of them with the theory of intertextuality, one may refer for instance to a helpful glossary provided by Beal, “Glossary”, 21–24 and all the works that he quotes. See also, B. D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998), 10–16. 121 Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 3, has pointed out that, “the confusion in the term’s definition can ultimately be traced to the person who coined it, J. Kristeva. She herself eventually abandoned ‘intertextuality,’ preferring instead the term ‘transposition’”. 122 Expression used by Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 12. 123 (SBLS 24; Atlanta: SBL 2003) by J. C. Reeves, (ed.). 124 See Christine Mitchell (Reviewer), Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 5 (2004–2005), http:// www.arts.ualberta.ca./KHS/reviews/review188.htm, accessed on 3/11/2006.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

36

Chapter 1: Introduction

Mitchell’s statement gives the impression and confirms to some extent the claim that there is confusion among scholars in the use of the term intertextuality. Moreover, quoting the suggestions made by Clayton and Rothstein, Sommer not only displays this perplexity, but he also attempts to clarify the distinction between some terms in relation to intertextuality. He argues that there are two broad distinct categories in approaching intertextuality as a phenomenon that refers to relationships between texts. Firstly, there is an approach that is oriented towards “influence” and “allusion.” Secondly, there is another one that focuses on “intertextuality”. According to him, the discrepancy between the two approaches mentioned above is basic to contemporary theoretical discussion of the relations between texts, despite the fact that many readers continue to confuse them. The former is concerned with the author as well as the text and reader. The latter relates to the reader or the text as a thing independent of its author.125 After discussing them briefly, Sommer states, intertextuality is synchronic in its approach, influence or allusion diachronic or even historicist. Intertextuality is interested in a very wide range of correspondences among texts, influence and allusion with a more narrow set. Intertextuality examines the relations among many texts, while influence and allusion look for specific connections between a limited number of texts.126

Like Mitchell, Sommer’s analysis seems to suggest that scholars should not be using the term intertextuality where in practice they refer to either the theory of influence, which was promoted by Harold Bloom,127 or to the notion of allusion, which is “generally taken as the conscious reference by one text to another in a way that bears on the meaning of the former in some way.”128 Although Sommer’s analysis is impressive and creative, as Hibbard correctly observes, one gets the impression that his conclusions sometime are a bit forced;129 thus pointing to some degree towards the detected confusion. To sum up, Kristeva’s concept of intertextuality opened a new era in scholarship as far as dealing with literary discourses is concerned. Although the aforementioned variety in both the terminology and the meaning seems to describe the current status of intertextuality recherché, it is without doubt, however, that the phenomenon of intertextuality not only offers new insights into textual relations but is also changing the way scholars in various fields think about textual production and interpretation.130 With this note, we now turn to look at the manner in which intertextuality has been appro-

125 Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture, 8. 126 Ibid. 127 The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). 128 Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27, 13. 129 Ibid., 17. 130 Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts, 10.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

37

priated in biblical studies in general before screening in more detail the way it has been applied particularly in Septuagintal scholarship.

3.2 Intertextuality in Biblical Scholarship in General Kristeva’s theory of intertextuality was brought to the attention of biblical scholars by two noteworthy books published in the late 1980s.131 Since then, this theory of intertextuality has become a lively topic of discussion in biblical studies.132 However, due to the fact that the meaning of the term intertextuality is not univocal, biblical scholars have been differing about the way in which this concept should function as a model of inquiry when applied to biblical texts. A brief survey of their opinions seems to reveal that there have been two major ways in which scholars have used the term.133 In their discussions, some scholars have used it diachronically, i. e. seeing the text-text relation as central.134 In this view, the emphasis is on the principle of causality in the sense that the previous text determines the later. In other words, the focus is on the author of the later text, who is regarded as a reproducer of the previous text, as far as his historical purpose of interconnecting the two texts is concerned. Other scholars have preferred its synchronic use, thus taking the relation text-reader as a starting-point of investigation.135 Van 131 The first book is from Hayes. He offers seven criteria as guide to the identification of intertextuality in any given passage under investigation. For more details, see R. B. Hayes, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). The other book contains essays focused both on theoretical discussion of intertextuality and the application of this concept in biblical studies; see Draisma (ed.), Intertextuality in Biblical Writings. However, three years prior to the publication of these two scholarly works, Fishbane published an outstanding work on the matter, even though he did not call it intertextuality; see M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985). 132 To name but a few; see G. Aichele/G. A. Phillips (ed.), Intertextuality and The Bible, Semeia 69/70 (1995); D. Boyarin, Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash (ISBL; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990); A. Lemaire/M. Saebø (ed.), Congress Volume: Oslo 1998 (VTSup 80; Leiden: Brill, 2000); Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts; Sommer, “Exegesis, Allusion and Intertextuality in the Hebrew Bible: A Response to Lyle Eslinger”, VT 46 (1996) 479–89; J. D. Nogalski, “Intertextuality in the Twelve”, in J. W. Watts/P. R. House (ed.), Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 102–24; D. C. Polanski, “Reflections on a Mosaic Covenant: The Eternal Covenant (Isaiah 24.5) and Intertextuality”, JSOT 77 (1998) 55–73. 133 Schultz is of a different opinion. He surveys three primary ways in which the term has been employed, with reference to Peter Miscall, Ellen van Wolde, and Benjamin Sommer respectively. For more details see R. L. Schultz, “The Ties that Bind: Intertextuality, the Identification of Verbal Parallels, and Reading Strategies in the Book of the Twelve”, in P. L. Redditt/ A. Schart (ed.), Thematic Threads in the Book of the Twelve (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003), 25–45, on pp. 28–29. However, when summarising them within the same article, he surprisingly points out only two ways: diachronically and synchronically (see p. 31). 134 Draisma, “Bas van Iersel”, 11. 135 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

38

Chapter 1: Introduction

Wolde as one of the proponents of this view argues that “it is not the chronology of texts that should occupy the centre of attention, but the logical and analogical reasoning of the reader in interacting with the text.”136 In this view, the emphasis is on the role of the reader and the reader’s ideology in the construction of the meaning of the text, thus, intertextuality here explores the effect of the possible interrelations. However, none of the aforementioned uses should be put forward to the detriment of the other. For both applications of the term intertextuality have text as their common characteristic. Moreover, in recent years, Schultz has made an interesting point by saying that “one wonders whether a false dichotomy has been suggested between methods.”137 He went on and argued that, “[a]s a text-based phenomenon, intertextuality demands that the interpreter gives attention both to author-and reader-related issues.”138 Schultz’s statement seems to suggest that the two models are essentially complementary. This point is taken seriously in the present investigation.

3.3 Intertextuality in Septuagintal Research While studies on intertextuality in the Hebrew Bible have been flourishing,139 surprisingly enough, not much effort in scholarship has been dedicated to the models of intertextuality in the Greek Bible. Moreover, more recently, in an article on the search for intertextuality in the last six chapters of the LXX-Zechariah, Dogniez has described the investigation of the phenomenon of intertextuality in the Greek Bible as a question “moins souvent traitée”140 (emphasis mine). Nevertheless, in addition to the Greek Bible section (at the last SBL Annual Conference, Boston 2008) that witnessed (to some extent) to an increase of interest in this issue, there are also a few books (or sections within books), as well as some significant articles found in various collections and/or journals of this field of LXX research that prove to be exceptions to the observation made above. While an exhaustive survey of them falls unfortunately outside the limits of this study, at least an understanding of the scope of material covered and the outcome brought forward 136 Van Wolde “Trendy Intertextuality?” 43. 137 Schultz, “The Ties that Bind”, 31. 138 Ibid. 139 For instance, see Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts; Nogalski, “Intertextuality in the Twelve”, 102–24; Polanski, “Reflections on a Mosaic Covenant”, 55–73; Carroll, “Intertextuality and the Book of Jeremiah”, 55–78; Sommer, “Exegesis, Allusion and Intertextuality in the Hebrew Bible”, 479–89; also A Prophet Reads Scripture; Schultz, The Search for Quotation: Verbal Parallels in the Prophets (JSOTSup 180; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), esp. his ch.8; K. Joachimsen, Identities in Transition. The Pursuit of Isa. 52: 12–53: 12 (VTSup 142; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2011), 220–362 and 367–8. 140 Dogniez, “L’intertextualité dans la LXX de Zacharie 9–14”, in Martínez/Vervenne (ed.) Interpreting Translation, 81–96, on p. 82.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

39

so far in scholarship with reference to the use of this method in various books of the LXX (including Isaiah) is essential in grasping the situation to date. With reference to the use of intertextuality in other LXX books (excluding LXX-Isaiah), in addition to the aforementioned work of Dogniez, LXX scholars may recall the works of three major scholars.141 Rather than investigating all of them, we would like to basically concentrate on Dogniez’s work. For not only does it echo, in one way or another, what has been already said by other scholars prior to its publication142, but it seems also to serve as an important referential piece of work for other subsequent studies in the understanding of the phenomenon of intertextuality in other LXX books to date.143 Our aim is to consider this not only as an important sample in displaying one of the many ways in which such an investigation of intertextuality can be done in the LXX studies in general, but also and more notably as an interesting case of what can be gained in exploring this phenomenon even within any other LXX book. Dogniez starts her investigation by mentioning how intertextuality imposed itself as a privileged approach in literary analysis in a time when historical studies were at the forefront. According to her, when scholars applied the concept in biblical studies they renounced diachronic studies (which they considered to be both imprecise and subjective) and sought to show most rigorously the possible network of formal relations and objectives that exist between two sacred texts, for instance.144 Before setting both the scope of her covered material and methodology of investigation, Dogniez provides briefly the difference between the notion of influence and that of intertextuality. In describing the former, she sees it as having a negative connotation and as being psychological in the sense that it suggests to some degree that a text has taken another text as a model. In contrast, she argues that intertex-

141 G. Dorival, “Les phénomènes d'intertextualité”, in G. Dorival/O. Munnich (ed.), Κατὰ τοὺς ὁ “selon les Septante”: Trente études sur la Bible grecque des Septante en hommage à Marguerite Harl (Paris: Cerf, 1995), 253–85; Cook, “Intertextual Relationships between the Septuagint of Psalms and Proverbs”, in R. J. V. Hiebert et al., (ed.), The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 218–28; also “Intertextual Readings in the Septuagint”, in C. Breytenbach et al., (ed.), The New Testament Interpreted: Essays in Honour of Bernard C. Lategan (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 119–34; and more recently, M. Theocharous, Lexical Depedence and Intertextual Allusion in the Septuagint of the Twelve Prophets. Studies in Hosea, Amos and Micah (Ph. D. diss., University of Cambridge, 2011). 142 For instance, Dogniez’s description of the current state of interest in the study of intertextuality in the Greek Bible was already noted by Dorival, “Les phénomènes d'intertextualité dans le livre grec des Nombres”, 253, as we hear him saying: “[à] ma connaissance, les cas d’intertextualité ont moins été soulignés”. 143 See Theocharous, Lexical Depedence and Intertextual Allusion in the Septuagint of the Twelve Prophets, 8–9, who, more recently for instance, has drawn a few helpful insights from this work, i. e. Dogniez’s. 144 Dogniez, “L’intertextualité dans la LXX de Zacharie 9–14”, 81.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

40

Chapter 1: Introduction

tuality focuses only on relations between texts without considering the issue of hierarchy, dependence, or priority between them. Hence, according to her, the emphasis in intertextuality is not necessarily on the author of the text, rather on the text itself that is viewed not in isolation, but in its belonging to a network of other texts with which the reader enters into dialogue during the reading of the text.145 Moving from the description of intertextuality to its application in her study, Dogniez examines whether the intertextual echoes in the MT have an influence in the LXX of this book. She then attempts to see whether the Greek version restores the intertextual links identified in the MT. She does this by asking if the translator recognises them or not. She finally focuses on the passages that present in the Greek text the original forms of intertextuality (which can be either absent in the MT or emphasised in the Greek text). In seeking to identify these unique forms, whenever she encounters a difficulty in determining with a great deal of precision whether or not she is dealing with deliberate intra-biblical references either from the point of view of the translator or from that of the reader of the Greek text, Dogniez asks if these intertextual reverberations are (a) the results of mere thematic or lexical coincidences, (b) the consequences of misunderstanding, or (c) to be considered as traces of vague reminiscences.146 Concluding her study, Dogniez writes: intertextualité ne correspond pas tant à une pratique du traducteur de Zacharie – ce qui se conçoit parfaitement vu le peu de liberté qui’il s’octroie par rapport a son modèle hébreu – mais consiste plutôt en une propriété qui n’est conférée au texte que par le lecteur. Et en ce sens, l’usage d’un concept inventé à l’origine par une critique littéraire avant tout soucieuse d’évacuer toute référence à l’auteur s’avère particulièrement approprié à la traduction ancienne de la Bible qu’est la Septante, puisqu’il permet de mettre à jour, du seul point de vue du lecteur, la singularité de l’œuvre par rapport à son modèle, mais aussi le développement d’un même thème ou d’une même tradition à travers les traductions des différents texts bibliques.147

Before leaving Dogniez’s work, it can be said that her conclusion seems to imply that intertextuality can be perceived as an important tool employed by the translator/editor of a given LXX-book that is described as a ‘free’ translation in the way in which he read his Vorlage and produced his text. In addition to this, the outcome of her investigation also suggests that an intertextual reading of any given book of the LXX has an important value in causing a change in the understanding of the text. For, as can be seen (from her words), such a way of reading is considered as a useful tool for the reader to see the development of a theme (cf. ‘le développement d’un même thème’). It also appears to be a vehicle in bringing to the surface some of the hidden

145 Ibid. 146 Ibid., 82–95. 147 Ibid., 96 (emphasises mine).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

41

ancient hermeneutic practices (echoing her phrase ‘d’une même tradition à travers les traductions des différents texts bibliques’) in dealing with the sacred texts. Hence, the outcome of Dogniez’s investigation offers significant insights with regard to the aim of the present study. Concerning the LXX-Isaiah, there are a few scholars that have attempted to explore the use of intertextuality within this literature.148 Others have only recognised its presence at work in this text.149 In contrast to the approach used above, which consisted in focusing only on one piece of work while surveying the use of intertextuality in other LXX books, we would like to go into more detail since we are more interested in understanding the current state of its use in the LXX-Isaiah. That is to say that we intend to look at those scholars who have contributed most in this area. It goes without saying that in LXX scholarship, Ziegler is not only well known for establishing the foundation for research on the LXX-Isaiah by producing its critical edition,150 but also for publishing Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta das Buches Isaias, in which, according to Ekblad, he “does pioneering work on intertextuality”151 in the LXX-Isaiah. In reality, it must be borne in mind that it is Zillessen152 who paved the way for Ziegler.153 In his study of Ziegler’s work, Koenig describes it as “l’ouvrage où se trouvent identifiés les emprunts scriptures de G[rec] Is[aïe] dans leur grand nombre, et où le phénomène global est mis en évidence.”154 In other words, Ziegler’s work is crucial in screening a significant number of both the internal and external “scriptural borrowings” that are present in the LXX-Isaiah.155 148 See e. g. A. Zillesen, “Bermerkungen zur alexandrinischen Übersetzung des Jesaja (c. 40– 66),” ZAW 22 (1902) 238–63; Ziegler, Untersuchungen; J. Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique d’après les témoins textuels d’Isaïe (VTSup 33; Leiden: Brill, 1982); van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 127–66; Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems; J.Ch. Bastiaens, Interpretaties van Jesaja 53: Een intertextueel onderzoek naar de lijdende Knecht in Jes 53 (MT/LXX) en in Lk 22: 14–38; Hand 3: 12, Hand 4: 23–31 en Hand 8: 26–40, TFT Studies 22 (Tilburg: Tilburg University, 1993); M. Croughs, “Intertextuality in the Septuagint: The Case of Isaiah 19”, IOSCS 34 (2001) 81–94; Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371–80. 149 For instance, Baer, When We all Go Home, 139; Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 289–90. 150 Ziegler (ed.), Isaias, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum XIV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983). This edition is widely accepted to be the most complete available, see van der Kooij, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches, 22; also Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 195–200. 151 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 20. A similar claim was made by Baer, When We All Go Home, 17, who says that “Ziegler gives careful attention to intertextual influence”. 152 Zillesen, “Bermerkungen zur alexandrinischen Übersetzung des Jesaja (c. 40–66)”, 238–63. 153 As Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 5, has correctly observed that: “Il faut attendre les Untersuchungen de J. Ziegler, en 1934, pour que la voie ouverte par Zillessen soit explorée systématiquement, et pour que soient en relevées la plupart des modifications d’origine scripturaire dans G[rec] Is[aïe]”. 154 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 5 (emphasis mine). 155 Ibid., 6. Koenig sees that Ziegler’s work “est decisif pour le groupement du grand nombre des emprunts scriptures les plus visibles”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

42

Chapter 1: Introduction

However, Ziegler has been criticised for failing to explain the method of interpretation that lies behind these significant “scriptural borrowings.”156 This issue is one of the major concerns in Koenig’s study, as shall be seen in what follows. Building upon Ziegler’s meticulous work, Koenig157 examines the motifs behind the peculiar renderings that abound in the LXX-Isaiah when it is compared to the Hebrew Bible.158 Before giving his view on this issue, it is important to note that from his first chapter, entitled “L’impasse de l’explication empiriste,” Koenig, as Baer correctly observes, “wastes no words in reverence of his scholarly predecessors” who are considered (by him Koenig) as “the ‘empiricist’ fathers (…) who hardly refused to admit theological exegesis.”159 More specifically, Koenig starts his study by noting that the LXX-Isaiah contains in numerous places scriptural influences that come either from passages within the book itself or other biblical books in either their Hebrew or Greek forms.160 While he does acknowledge the contribution of the works of his predecessors (such as H. Middeldorpf, R. R. Ottley, A. Zillessen, and J. Ziegler), Koenig also points out that: (a) they all (except Ziegler) never attempted to go the extra mile in exploring thoroughly those various modifications (that originate from scriptural influences) in the Greek version, and (b) they all (including Ziegler) did not seek to explain why such modifications appear in this LXX book.161 Koenig believes that these 156 Ibid., 6, 8–10. Koenig puts it this way: “l’auteur des Untersuchungen n’a pas approfondi le problème de leur signification historique. Il n’en a pas soupçonné la portée véritable et l’originalité et, dans la mesure où il en a parlé, il a interprété le phénomène d’une manière qui en masque la vraie nature et qui détourne la réflexion historique d’une reconstitution objective des conditions culturelles impliquées”. In this respect, Ziegler, according to Koenig, missed a great opportunity to use a method that could provide a better understanding of the ancient texts ; see his additional criticisms of Ziegler under a subsection entitled “La méconnaissance du problème de la méthode”. On Koenig’s use of this keyword “méconnaissance”; see also Tov, “(Review) Jean KOENIG, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique d’après les témoins textuels d’Isaïe (VTSup 33). Leiden: Brill, 1982”, Biblica 65 (1984) 118–21, on p. 119. For other flaws of Ziegler’s work, see Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 191; Baer, When We All Go Home, 17. 157 L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique. 158 Ibid., 10. 159 Baer, When We All Go Home, 14. The basic empiricist bias with reference to textual analysis has also been criticised by Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 22. 160 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 3. 161 Ibid., 3–5, 9. For instance, surveying the work of Ziegler, he expresses to some degree his disappointment in the following words: “Les justifications que Ziegler a fait valoir concernant le phénomène des emprunts, au lieu d’orienter l’attention vers le problème de méthode impliqué, ont renforcé l’illusion fondamentale antérieure, selon laquelle le texte ne recouvre aucune condition culturelle originale, aucune norme exégétique d’époque, aucun facteur paratextuel saisissable en dehors des incompréhensions et de la subjectivité inintéressante de l’interprète. Malgré l’important bilan relatif aux emprunts, la question de l’exégèse des anciens, comme facteur culturel positif, c’est-à-dire comme méthode et non comme simple subjectivité et contigente individuelles, se trouve de nouveau refoulée. On peut dire qu’au moment de l’élaboration des Untersuchungen et de l’établissement par Ziegler d’une riche

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

43

changes are to be seen as deliberate, i. e. as being the result of ancient methods of interpretation.162 He, as van der Kooij correctly observes, “concentrates on one of these methods, namely what he calls the analogical interpretation (‘herméneutique analogique’).”163 After exploring several examples from both the LXX-Isaiah and 1QIsaa, using the definition of his method that consists of “two types: (a) borrowing of words and phrases from another biblical passage in or outside the Book of Isaiah, and (b) the introduction of alternative forms and meanings through such devices as metathesis and (assumed) homonymy,”164 Koenig concludes: l’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme n’a pas seulement été interprétation, mais aussi transformation textuelle. Elle pouvait engendrer un nouveau texte à partir d’un plus ancien. Elle possédait par conséquent, dans cette limite, un pouvoir littéraire véritablement créateur. . .[Elle] peut conduire le critique moderne à démêler les motifs cachés de certains texts qui ont résisté jusqu’ici, partiellement ou totalement, aux efforts d’élucidation.165

Koenig’s statement above can clearly reveal that, by using a form of intertextuality (even though Koenig does not use this term in his work as such), the Isaiah translator can be identified as an ancient exegete who masters one (or some) of the significant ancient hermeneutical methods in dealing with the biblical witnesses. These, as concludes Koenig’s study, “si elles sont utilisées avec discernement par une critique libérée du préjugé empiriste, offrent peut-être, du moins dans les meilleurs cas, le moyen de desceller les dalles qui recouvrent encore des dépôts insoupçonnés.”166 This present study takes a similar interest in seeking to identify and establish the intertextual hermeneutic employed by the Isaiah translator as an approach used in early Jewish interpretation. Regardless of his flawed approach and method, as shall be seen shortly in some of the criticisms made against him, Koenig’s valuable discoveries have been acknowledged in LXX scholarship.167 Koenig has been criticised as making “general conclusions [that] leave many open questions.”168 In connection to this, according to van der Kooij, topographie textuelle des emprunts scripturaires dans G[rec] Is[aïe], une occasion exceptionnelle s’est présentée à la critique de découvrir, à travers le cas particulier des emprunts de G[rec] Is[aïe] non seulement la nature méthodique de ce phénomène, mais le rôle de la méthode dans d’autres modifications textuelles de la Septante”. 162 Ibid., 10; cf. van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, 516. 163 Van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, 516. 164 Ibid., 516–17. 165 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 425 (emphasis mine). 166 Ibid., 427. 167 See e. g. van der Kooij, “Accident or Method? On ‘Analogical’ Interpretation in the Old Greek of Isaiah and in 1QIsa’”, BO 43 (1986) 366–75, on p. 376 n. 74; also “The Septuagint of Isaiah: Translation and Interpretation”, in J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of Isaiah/Le livre d’Isaïe: Les oracles et leurs relectures: Unité et complexité de l’ouvrage (BETL 131; Leuven: Peeters, 1989), 127–33; Tov, “(Review) J. Koenig”, 121, speaks of Koenig’s discussion as “very inspiring and helpful”. 168 Tov, “(Review) J. Koenig”, 121

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

44

Chapter 1: Introduction

Koenig’s analysis of some sample prophetic passages169 “is too fragmentary to be conclusive. One misses inter alia a detailed discussion of the actual context of the sample cases in LXX Isaiah.”170 This latter criticism seems to suggest that, although Koenig has provided an appropriate working method, he should have explored the passages in the LXX-Isaiah based on a sound exegesis. Before exiting Koenig’s assessment, we should also mention the following important question which he left without an adequate answer. After observing the numerous scriptural borrowings in various cases by the Isaiah translator from either within or outside the LXX-Isaiah (as noted above), Koenig asks: “faut-il penser qu’il [le traducteur] a agi de sa propre initiative ou s’est-il au contraire conformé à des règles reçues dans son milieu et accréditées par la tradition ou par les besoins de ce milieu?”171 According to Munnich, an answer to this important question can only be provided if an investigation on the entire LXX-Isaiah were to be made, by taking also into account the available rabbinic sources.172 This implies that there exist important affinities between the Isaiah translator’s mode of reading his text and rabbinic exegesis, which the translator seems to have known, whether directly or indirectly.173 This is worth exploring. In his exegetical and theological study of Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint, Ekblad, analyses each pericope (42: 1–8; 49: 1–9; 50: 4– 11; 52: 13–53: 12) both in its relation to the Hebrew text and on its own right. He identifies a total of 272 differences between the Greek versions of these four passages and their Hebrew counterparts. He points out that the majority of them “are classified as non-linguistic exegesis.”174 This type of exegesis refers to, according to him, “[a]ncient translation techniques and exegetical practices; midrash, harmonizing, scriptural borrowing, contextual and intertextual exegesis, verbal analogies, etc.”175 In his study, Ekblad observes that there are many significant words and themes from other texts both within the LXX-Isaiah and the LXX-Pentateuch that reappear in each of the four aforementioned passages and their immediate literary context. Given this view, Ekblad is convinced that the Isaiah translator sought to draw together not only the four poems, but also many other passages within the book, thus making the LXX-Isaiah to be considered as a text that offers a distinctive,

169 Which made Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 44–74, claim: “[l]es modifications oraculaires décelables dans G[rec] Is[aïe] livrent donc la prevue cruciale de l’application au livre d’Is[aïe] d’une herméneutique méthodologique”. 170 Van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, 517. For another assessment of Koenig’s work, see Baer, When We All Go Home, 14, 17. 171 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 6. 172 Munnich, “La traduction grecque d’Isaïe 8–9 et ses liens avec l’exégèse rabbinique”, Adamantius 13 (2007), 8–19, on p. 19. 173 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 192; cf. also Munnich, “La traduction grecque d’Isaïe 8–9”, 19. 174 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 267–68. 175 Ibid., 28.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Intertextuality as a Method

45

coherent interpretation of its pericopes (cf. van der Kooij). In his attempt to understand what possibly motivated our translator to bring these pericopes together, Ekblad argues for what he calls a ‘contextual (or intertextual) exegetical move’.176 Besides this, he also observes that there are a few occasions where some additional phrases in the LXX-Isaiah are best explained on stylistic reasons so as to clarify the meaning, and harmonise with other expressions in either the preceding or following lines of a given pericope.177 In concluding his investigation, Ekblad points out that “the translator has linked nearly every verse of the servant poems through intertextual exegesis to texts throughout (and even outside of) Isaiah.”178 In this way, according to him, “[t]he reader is consequently invited by the translation to ponder the servant poems as part(s) of the larger intertextually-integrated whole: the broader context of Isaiah 1–66 and even beyond into the Greek version of the Torah.”179 In finding this, Ekblad supports the claim of his predecessors (noted above) that there are many possible interlinks in the LXX-Isaiah with the LXX-Pentateuch. However, although Ekblad’s work offers us valuable insights to which we shall often refer, his artificial dismemberment of the LXX-Isaiah180 unfortunately follows the way in which some of the modern scholars have approached the Book of Isaiah since the time of Duhm’s commentary on Isaiah. It is our contention that such a division of the LXX-Isaiah is a mistake and indeed should be avoided. For, to the best of our knowledge to this point, no evidence exists so far that the Isaiah translator had at his disposal various sections of Isaiah, including the one labelled as “Servant Poems.” In the absence of this, it is more appropriate, therefore, to think of him as an ancient Jewish reader and translator with the task of rendering the complete Isaiah Scroll.181 When it comes to the issue of messianism within the Greek text of this book, one needs a monograph that is looking at the whole book, instead of dealing with something like “messianism in Isaiah’s Servant Poems

176 This expression is repeatedly found throughout his monograph; see e. g. pp. 53; 91; 96; 110– 11; 119; 138; 147;139–40; 157; 179; 182–83; 200; 203; 206; 209; 217; 218; 221; 228; 231; 242; 246–47. 177 Ibid.; see e. g. pp. 155 and 207. 178 Ibid., 269. 179 Ibid. 180 Ekblad’s approach to the LXX-Isaiah has unfortunately been followed by others. See, e. g. de Sousa, Eschatology; Baer, When We All Go Home, 14, who only deals with LXX-Isa 56– 66 because, according to him, these later chapters “have been left virtually untouched”; also Zillesen, “Bemerkungen zur alexandrinischen Übersetzung des Jesaja (c. 40–66)”, 238–63. This artificial dismemberment of the LXX-Isaiah similar to Dum’s division is also observed in “Esaias das Buch Jesaja”, in W. Kraus/M. Karrer (ed.), Septuaginta Deutsch. Das griechische Alte Testament in deutscher Übersetzung (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2009), 1230–1286. 181 Blenkinsopp, Opening the Sealed Book, 251, rightly says that “the ancient reader obviously knew nothing about Second Isaiah”, for instance.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

46

Chapter 1: Introduction

according the LXX” or (a more tangible example) “messianism in LXX Isaiah 1–12,” as de Sousa has done.182 A final piece of work that needs to be assessed is authored by Schaper. More recently, in his article on “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah and Messianic Intertextuality in the Greek Bible,” Schaper has explored four Isaianic passages (7: 14–25; 9: 1–7; 11: 1–9, and 19: 16–25) with a view to their respective meanings and possible interrelations. He also attempts to see the way in which these texts in turn have been influenced by other texts, mainly from the LXX-Pentateuch and the Greek Psalter. In his investigation, although he unfortunately does not define the term intertextuality,183 he provides a reasonable procedure for identifying a messianic passage. He follows “the lead of some key terms that are elements of what one might call ‘messianic language’ found in the Greek Isaiah and beyond.”184 At the end of his study, he discovers the existence of the scarlet thread running from Isaiah 7 through Isaiah 9 and 11 to Isaiah 19, thus providing the reason to speak of the Septuagintal intertextuality that operates on the level of the individual book. He also claims that this scarlet thread does not end with Isaiah 19; unfortunately he does not have space to tackle Isaiah 56–66, which he believes is a particularly interesting part of Isaiah, not just in the Hebrew Bible.185 Pondering for a while on Schaper’s claim, one can get the impression that perhaps there is no such scarlet thread of ‘messianic language’ running through Isaiah 20–55 since he only mentions chs. 56–66. If this could be the case, then, it would contradict his thesis that: “there is a coherent concept of messianic thought permeating the whole of the Septuagint of Isaiah.”186 It goes without saying that Schaper’s view has attracted criticism from de Sousa.187 However, before objecting to or agreeing with Schaper’s argument, one needs at least to engage in the study of the aforesaid ‘messianic language’ even in those sections he seems to overlook, not in isolation, but together with the others, i. e. studying them not only in one monograph, but also screening each pericope within its context of LXX-Isaiah 1–66. Unfortunately, de Sousa fails to do so. From the brief survey of some of the most important works done in exploring the use of intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah, the following can be

182 See de Sousa, Eschatology, 2. In his introductory chapter, de Sousa argues that “Isaiah 1–12 gives evidence of being a coherent and distinct unit within the larger book, immediately preceding the oracles against foreign nations”. However, one must admit that his decision to focus on such a breadth clearly reduces the potentiality of getting a full picture of what is going on within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. 183 Even if one can possibly argue that he uses the term ‘influence’, which often appears in his explanation of the relationship between two or more Septuagintal books to refer to intertextuality; see Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371–72; 379. 184 Ibid., 372. 185 Ibid., 378. 186 Ibid., 372. 187 De Sousa, Eschatology, 4–5; 108; 142; 155.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Methodology

47

observed. The majority of scholars seem to have discovered and hence insisted to some extent that there is a sort of hermeneutic principle employed by the Isaiah translator. They seem to have also noted that the exploration of intertextuality (far from being used univocally) can play a key role in revealing this principle. It is also worth pointing out that the survey clearly reveals that a thorough investigation of the use of intertextuality with reference to the theme of messianism within the entire Greek version of Isaiah is still lacking.188 Nevertheless, Schaper’s work (discussed above) can be considered, to the best of our knowledge, as the most in-depth attempt of study of the messianic intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah to date. Therefore, in the journey of the present research, though we shall be referring many times to valuable contributions provided by the works of other scholars, we would like basically to build on both the scope of material and method of his work. In this respect, the present study is viewed as a response to his invitation given to LXX scholars in the following words: the study of Septuagintal intertextuality is a most interesting angle from which to explore this amazing monument of Hellenistic Judaism. For future studies, it seems most advisable to concentrate on a given book, […], first to explore intertextuality within that book and then to trace the links with other books.189

Given all the observations noted above, the present study shall primarily focus on the Isaiah translator’s use of intertextuality pertinent to the topic of messianism in the LXX-Isaiah.

4. Methodology In the present research we shall attempt to explore exegetically all potentially messianic texts to be selected within the LXX-Isaiah190 with a view to dis188 See also H.-J. Fabry, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, in W. Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 193–205, on pp. 199–200. 189 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 378–79. 190 It should be borne in mind that our selection of a significant number of messianic texts is not necessarily to be understood as criterion for assessing whether the translation displays a messianic belief in the way Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 19, has suggested. According to him, if one were to speak of whether a particular LXX-book reflects messianism interpretation, “[a]t minimum there needs to be a sufficient number of cases in [that] individual book where the Greek, for whatever reason, provides evidence of a different interpretation of the text from the Hebrew” (ibid). He adds that “the passages need to display a coherent, not a random, pattern of interpretation; and, above all, discussion of such cases needs to be based on sound exegesis and to be rooted in a proper understanding of methods followed by the individual translator” (ibid). Some aspects of Knibb’s view here have been recently critised by W. E. Glenny, Finding Meaning in the Text: Translation Technique and Theology in the Septuagint of Amos, (VTSup; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 235–36. However, while “Knibb’s suggested requirement of a ‘sufficient number of cases’ might work for larger books [such as the one before us (i. e. LXX-Isaiah)]”, as Glenny has cor-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

48

Chapter 1: Introduction

cover both their respective meanings and the pattern(s) of interpretation followed by the Isaiah translator. This also will mainly include tracing their possible interlinks within the corpus of the LXX-Isaiah. Whenever necessary, their connections with other texts (with messianic overtones) in the LXX- Pentateuch and beyond will also be noted.191 In this respect, the study seeks to detect the messianic paradigms displayed in the LXX-Isaiah, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, to find out whether there is abolition, maintenance, increase, or transformation with reference to the level of the messianic belief within this text when compared to its Hebrew counterpart. In this study, we shall therefore operate with a holistic methodological practice of an intertextual reading that attempts to combine both synchronic and diachronic readings of the messianic passages to be selected in the LXXIsaiah. We intend to start with a synchronic idea to arrive at diachronic conclusions. In other words, the present study shall present a diachronic explanation of synchronic relationships. A similar view has been put forward by Wolfgang Kraus. In a recent article, Kraus192 has provided what one might call a summary of the approaches to the LXX taken by three LXX translation projects: NETS, BdA, and LXX. D. In his words, Kraus (quoting Helmut Utzschneider’s view) explains that the first two projects are committed to the amont or upstream perspective (viewed as diachronic and translatororiented) and aval or downstream perspective (described as synchronic and reader-oriented), respectively.193 Kraus believes that the rapport in which the two projects have to be seen (with regard to their methodological approach) is that of “complementarity.”194 When outlining the main aim of the third LXX translation project (i. e. LXX.D), Kraus states: “the primary perspective [of the LXX.D] is to translate […] the text in its present outlook;”195 thus suggesting something of a via media between NETS and BdA approaches. The underlying premise behind this is that Kraus believes that “the original translators of the LXX wanted to mediate between the tradition and the contemporary situation.”196 Consequently, according to him, such a major concern of the ancient translators of the LXX in producing their texts seems to explain the plausible conscious alterations and efforts towards actualization that several texts witness

rectly said (p. 236), the chief goal in investigating all the selected texts, as said in the text, is to get a better picture with regard to signals of messianic belief displayed in the way in which the Isaiah translator read his Vorlage and produced his text. 191 This is without claiming that our translator had in front of him the text of LXX-Pentateuch as M. K. H. Peters, “Septuagint”, in N. D. Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 5 (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1093–1104, on p. 1101, warns. 192 “Contemporary Translations of the Septuagint: Problems and Perspectives”, Septuagint Research, 63–83. 193 Ibid., 68. 194 Ibid., 69–70. 195 Ibid., 70 196 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Methodology

49

to, besides the account of the relation of the text to the Vorlage.197 After considering two major facts: (a) the LXX as the translation of a Hebrew text and (b) the result of the translation affected by the living conditions of the translators and also theological ideas, and analysing a few LXX passages (including three from the LXX-Isaiah), Kraus argues that the use of either synchronic or diachronic alone is not sufficient.198 So, Kraus’ synopsis seems to reveal an interest (in the LXX research in general and the LXX translation projects in particular) in having a method that mingles or combines both synchronic and diachronic approaches to the text. It is important to point out that the ultimate aim of using the aforementioned holistic intertextual reading of the text is to discover (a), as van der Kooij rightly asks, “how did the [Isaiah] translator produce his text, that is to say, how did he read and interpret his Hebrew original,”199 as well as (b) how did he want the reader to read his text, bearing in mind that every intended reader realised that the LXX was a translation. These two enquiries portray what we mean by diachronic and synchronic readings of the LXX-Isaiah, respectively. Accordingly, as said earlier, the Isaiah translator in the present study is viewed as an author who brought into being a text which is a document that not only conveys a meaning, but is also meant to be read in a certain way with reference to his ‘freedom’ in translation manoeuvres (discussed above). At this point, we would like to provide the basic criteria of selecting and referring to a messianic text and intertext, respectively. Recalling our understanding of messianism (noted above) as the hope for an individual figure with a substantial mission to launch a new period of redemption, a messianic text in the LXX-Isaiah in this regard is a text which describes such a figure. In connection to this, in each selected text, like Schaper, we shall seek to identify some key elements pertinent to what one might call ‘messianic language’ that are shared in a network of other related texts within the LXX-Isaiah and beyond.200 The sharing aspect is important. It is considered as one of the basic criteria to be met not only for speaking of a messianic intertext, but also, as Knibb suggests, “for determining whether the Septuagint (compared to the MT) has, or has not, introduced a messianic reference.”201 However, it must be borne in mind that, like Dogniez (discussed above), we are more interested in those elements that are present and/ 197 Ibid. 198 Ibid., 79. Referring to the two translations projects mentioned in the text, Krauss states: “Not exclusiveness in the methodological approach but complementarity is the relation in which they have to be looked upon;” (see 69–70). See also Biddle, who claims that “both diachronic and synchronic methodologies…need not be and are not mutually exclusive”; see M. E. Biddle, “Lay Zion’s Alter Egos: Isaiah 47.1–15 and 57.6–13 as Structural Counterparts”, in R. F. Melugin/M. A. Sweeney (ed.), New Visions of Isaiah (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 124–39, on p. 126. 199 Van der Kooij, “The Septuagint of Isaiah”, 133. 200 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 372. 201 See Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 17.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

50

Chapter 1: Introduction

or more emphasised in the Greek version and absent in the Hebrew text.202 Examples of these elements may be titles, functions/activities/roles, themes (esp. those which are theological), verbal links, words (lexemes), phrases, clauses or sentences, structure, etc. Basically, we intend to view as much as possible the dynamic explanations of each of the selected messianic texts in its Greek form within its own literary context, especially when each text is brought together with another text by means of any of the aforementioned key elements. It is here that our methodology echoes a practical way of what van der Kooij calls “a contextual approach.”203 By approaching the text this way, we shall avoid the basic criticism directed against LXX studies which have used an ‘atomistic’ exegesis of the text.204 However, it should not be forgotten, as Schaper has correctly claimed, that “‘atomistic’ exegesis was made to serve what was thought to be the overall unity of the biblical text.”205 The underlying principle of this sort of exegesis that approaches scripture as a unity is taken into consideration in the present study. In this respect, the context of each pericope to undergo inspection in this study shall be explored. This includes not only the immediate context (within the LXX-Isaiah), but also the larger context which goes beyond the LXX-Isaiah. Phrased differently, our approach to the text echoes an ancient exegetical practice as recorded by Le Déaut, “l’exégèse ancienne est à la fois synthétique (son contexte est toute la Bible!) et ‘atomistique’, exploitant méticuleusement dans le détail toutes les resources des textes.”206

202 Dogniez, “L’intertextualité dans la LXX de Zacharie 9–14”, 82–93; see also her article on “Le traducteur d’Isaïe connaissait-il le texte grec du Dodekapropheton?”, 29. Here she claims: “Lorsque ces rapprochements sont propres à la LXX, c'est-à-dire totalement absents du texte hébreu, on peut avoir la certitude -sauf à faire intervenir une autre source commune aux textes en question – que seul le texte grec est à l’origine de cette intertextualité”. 203 According to van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, 2.520 the basic idea of a contextual approach “is to examine differences between LXX and MT not on word level only, but more in particular on the level of its own context in Greek, first of all the immediate one (pericope, or chapter). The crucial matter is to see whether specific readings in the Greek cohere with each other, that is to say, whether they make sense as part of the Greek text as it stands”. Tov, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research, 45, calls this “‘contextual exegesis’”. The importance of taking into consideration the context in the LXX studies is also pointed out, e. g., by Olley, “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 58. 204 To read this criticism, see e. g. Seeligman, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 182–83; T. Muraoka, “Hosea IV in the Septuagint Version”, AJBI 9 (1983) 24–64, on p. 24; Neves, A Teologia da Tradução Grega Dos Setenta No Livro De Isaías, 44; van der Louw, Transformations in the Septuagint, 7–8; Baer, When We All Go Home, 278. Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 29. 205 Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 136 (esp. note 483). 206 Le Déaut, “La Septante, Un Targum?”, 188. His view is similar to Tov, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research, 17, 45–46, who says that “the translators’ concept of ‘context’ was more comprehensive than ours. They referred not only to the relationship between the words in their immediate context but also to remote contexts. Furthermore, the translator might introduce any idea that the source text called to mind”. See also Cook,

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Methodology

51

Further, even though we shall provide a comparative analysis of the MT and LXX versions of each of the selected messianic texts, we aim to read the LXX-Isaiah not only in its final form (as Le Déaut has correctly suggested207), but also (as van der Kooij’s reading of the Greek text) as a coherent work of its own.208 In connection to this, like Bastiaens, we intend to read the LXX-Isaiah as a separate, independent text with its own unique semantic fields and structure.209 This view goes along with the following suggestion concerning the study of the LXX in general: Il importe de reconnaître [la] personnalité [de la Septante], sa valeur en soi, indépendamment du T[exte] H[ébreu]; de l’apprécier, non comme une version comme les autres […], comme un témoin ancien du texte hébreu, mais comme un tout ayant son unité, son optique propre, son individualité, comme une création en partie originale.210

However, instances of the Isaiah scrolls from Qumran witnessing to a tradition parallel to the LXX-Isaiah shall be mentioned in order to strengthen any given case. By the same token, whenever necessary, we shall also refer to evidence provided by the later Greek translations (Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion) and recensions (Hexaplaric and Lucianic), the secondary version(s) (mainly the Vulgate211), and the early patristic writers (including especially Philo and Josephus). The two texts that are used for the Greek and the Hebrew are those edited by J. Ziegler212 and D. Winton Thomas213, respectively. All the translations (either from the Hebrew or Greek texts) provided in the present study are our own. In this respect, we avoid working from someone else’s translations or conclusions. As a result, the study intends to provide both a sound exegesis and fresh conclusions.

“Intertextual Readings in the Septuagint”, 121–32, who correctly identifies that the context of a given passage, referred to by the translators of the LXX, often includes the smaller context, passages within a given book and from books within the corpus of the Septuagint literature, and external Jewish exegetical traditions. 207 Ibid., 194. 208 See van der Kooij, “Accident or Method?”, 368–69; Olley, “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 58; also Baer, When We All Go Home, 12. 209 Bastiaens, Interpretaties van Jesaja 53, 147–48. 210 Le Déaut, “La Septante, Un Targum?”, 193–94. 211 It should be borne in mind that it is the surviving Mss of the Old Latin translation (which was replaced by the Vulgate) that bears witness to the Greek Vorlage. 212 Isaias, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum, vol. XIV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983). Whenever necessary, despite the reliability and wide acceptance of this edition as recognised by a few scholars (see e. g. Peters, “Septuagint”, 110; van der Kooij, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches, 22; Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 195–200; Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 32 n. 62 and 63; Baer, When We All Go Home, 20. Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 3), we shall also make use of the edition of A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979). For there are a few places where they differ. 213 Liber Jesaiae (Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1968).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

52

Chapter 1: Introduction

5. The Task After the current introduction, which is regarded as chapter 1, the present investigation contains three other chapters. Chapter 2 re-examines the basic arguments pertinent to the debate on whether one can safely speak of a development of Jewish messianic hopes in the Hellenistic period. From a wide range of available primary sources and meticulous secondary literature, this chapter also explores the relationships between the Jewish population and the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandria under Ptolemaic rulers. Chapter 3 is the longest of all. It focuses on the theme of messianism in the entire corpus of the LXX-Isaiah. It contains an analysis of nine selected messianic texts: (1) LXX-Isa 7: 10–17; (2) LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 (8: 23–9: 6); (3) LXX-Isa 11: 1–10; (4) LXX-Isa 16: 1–5; (5) LXX-Isa 19: 16–25; (6) LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8; (7) LXX-Isa 42: 1–4; (8) LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12; and (9) LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a. In each of the analyses of these texts, a short introduction is provided. This is immediately followed by a study of the context of each text (except for LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12).214 After this, a comparative analysis of the Hebrew and Greek version of the pericope is done before attempting to identify any significant possible ‘messianic language’ interlink within the corpus of the LXX-Isaiah, and beyond. Then, a summary is provided at the end. In this way, we shall be able to determine the possible meaning of each text in its own context, as well as get a full, better, and reliable picture of what is going on within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, as far as this theme of messianism in this important piece of Jewish literature is concerned. In connection to this, it shall be possible to see how the intertextual hermeneutic in the hands of the translator turned out to be an established mode of reading his product. This latter goal limits any possibility of breaking this lengthy chapter into two or three chapters, as one may wish to suggest. For such a move could make us fall into the same temptation as those who have approached the LXX-Isaiah in an artificial dismemberment (as noted above). In chapter 4, the study provides a conclusion that highlights the important discoveries made in the journey from chapter 1 to chapter 3.

214 See the reasons provided in the introductory part of “Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4”

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora Besides the question of the definition of key terms such as ‘messianic,’ ‘messianism,’ and/or ‘messiah’ (discussed in the previous chapter), scholars have been arguing over another intriguing issue that is also associated with the discussion about messianism in the LXX. The debate is about whether one can safely speak of the development of Jewish messianic hopes in the Hellenistic period. Focusing on it in the present chapter, the present writer seeks to re-examine the basic arguments pertinent to the common claim that the Hellenistic-Jewish community in the Diaspora (above all Alexandria) has been non-messianic. He also attempts to explore the relationships between the Jewish population and the non-Jewish citizens of the Ptolemaic dynasty under the conditions (polical-administrative, socio-economical, and religiouscultural) in the period under consideration, with the aim to ascertain the legitimacy of investigating the theme of messianism in a piece of Jewish literature such as the LXX-Isaiah authored in the Hellenistic period. In this way, the present chapter also serves as an introduction to the next one where we will analyse the theme of messianism in the LXX-Isaiah.

1. Re-examination of Arguments 1.1 On the Development of Jewish Messianic Expectations in Palestine vs. the Diaspora In the 1930’s, Lagrange, reflecting on the messianic hopes among the Jews in Egypt in comparison to their co-religionists in Palestine, wrote: “l’espérance du Messie les touchait moins directement” (que leurs frères de Judée).1 A similar thought was later echoed in two studies that were published in 1963: Starcky’s article2 and Jaubert’s work.3 Roughly three decades after the publi1 2

3

P. M.-J. Lagrange, Le Judaïsme avant Jésus-Christ (Paris: J. Gabalda et Fils, 1931), 529. J. Starcky, “Les quatres étapes du messianisme à Qumrân”, RB 70 (1963), 481–504, on p. 486 n. 14, obverses that: “le messianisme […] se rédui[t] à rien à l’époque hellénistique”. See also his conclusion where he says that there was “[une] éclipse du messianisme à l’époque hellénistique” (p. 504). A. Jaubert, La Notion d’Alliance dans le judaïsme aux abords de l’ère chrétienne (Paris: Seuil, 1963), 382, stated: “il est clair qu’à Alexandrie, […] on ne songeait guère à se révolter contre la puissance romaine et que les désirs de libération devaient prendre une autre couleur qu’en Palestine”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

54

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

cation of these two monographs, Marguerite Harl used their findings as evidence for her claim that messianic hopes eclipsed among the Jewish community in the Diaspora, but increased during that same period in their homeland.4 Since then, her statement has been repeated by a host of scholars.5 A few reasons have been given by those in favour of this school of thought that messianism was not prominent in the Hellenistic period before the late second century B. C. E. For instance, Jobes and Silva have claimed that the messianic hopes outside Palestine “were muted by the political and social climate in which the Greek-speaking Jews found themselves.”6 However, what is surprising with their statement is that, although they provide us with a snapshot of such a political-social atmosphere, which is displayed by the avoidance of the use of certain terms (which could bear some political connotations) in the translations produced by the Greek-speaking Jews,7 they should perhaps identify the kind of messianic ideas that might have been explicitly inspired by the given political situation at the time. As shall be seen, a thorough investigation of the manner the Hellenistic-Jewish community in Alexandria dealt with the situation in which it found itself might produce different results. In addition to the reason advanced by Jobes and Silva (noted above), one may also recall Collins’ view. Collins has consistently stated that “there is no evidence of messianism at the time of Maccabean revolt (167 B. C. E.) at a 4 5

6 7

See Harl et al., La Bible grecque des Septante, 218–20. For instance, see J. T. Barrera, The Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible:An Introduction to the History of the Bible (Leiden/New York: Brill, 1998), 438, claims that the “messianic movement found less of an echo in the Judaism of the diaspora than in the Palestine metropolois”; also Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 96–7; 297–300; Collins has consistently claimed that “messianism was virtually dormant” from the early fifth to the late second century B. C. E.; see Collins, The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (ed. D. N. Freedman; ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1995), 40. Almost ten years later, he writes: “[m]essianic hope was even more marginal in the Greek speaking Diaspora than it was in the land of Israel”; see Collins, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 80; also in “Messianism and Exegetical Tradition: The Evidence of the LXX Pentateuch”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, 129–49, on p. 149. More recently, Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 16, has stated: “messianic expectation cannot be said to have flourished in Alexandria, and it has to be regarded as a Palestinian rather than an Alexandrian phenomenon”; see also his “Introduction”, xiv-xv); Fabry “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 197 (also 199), states: “we can observe a suppression of messianic expectations in the Hellenistic Diaspora, whereas in Palestine messianism was strongly articulated”; Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 65. Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 297 (emphasis mine). Ibid. They acknowledge that the Hellenistic-Jewish community in Alexandria was living in politically volatile times. In fact, this can be seen in the texts produced by the translators, which reflect sensitivity towards those who ruled them and determined the quality of their lives (pp. 99–101). See also, J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE – 117CE) (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996), 126; T. Rajak et al. (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007), ix.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Re-examination of Arguments

55

time when we might expect it.”8 This is because, according to him, the books of Maccabees fall short of bearing witness to messianic status for their champions, and the book of Daniel as well as the early apocalypse of Enoch do not forecast a restoration of the monarchy.9 His claim also takes into account what he calls the “only one passage [i. e. Sib Or 3: 252–3] in the corpus [of Jewish literature written in Greek] that has been thought by scholars to express the hope for a Jewish messiah.”10 At this point, it must be said that notwithstanding his statement above and seeming proof, Collins does see that there existed some messianic hopes in the Persian Period. This is based on his brief analysis of a few passages, i. e. Jer 23: 5–6 (a prophecy reaffirmed Jer 33: 15–16); Zech 3: 8; 6: 12; Hag 2: 23; and Zech 9–14. However, he thinks that these texts are so scattered and lacking context. Hence, according to him, this fact alone suggests that messianic belief in the Persian period was an insignificant movement.11 However, if one were to look closely at Collins’ view, it could be said that, like Jobes and Silva, Collins gives less attention to the explanation of the plausible reasons (e. g. whether political, social, or historical), which might not only have been behind what he calls the lack of (or the scattered) evidence,12 but also validate messianic expectations present in this Hellenistic period. Given this view, as Condra has correctly said, “one should be careful of overstating the case for a [seeming] dearth of messianism during this [Hellenistic] era.”13 There is another school of thought that believes that messianism was nascent among the Hellenistic-Jewish community in the Diaspora. This view goes back as far as Frankel, who, in 1851, did meticulous research on the influence of Palestinian exegesis on Alexandrian hermeneutics.14 In his investigation, Frankel found that the messianic ideas developed more rapidly 8

9 10 11 12 13 14

Collins, “Jesus, Messianism and the Dead Sea Scrolls”, in J. H. Charlesworth et al. (ed.), Qumran-Messianism: Studies on the Messianic Expectations in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Tübingen: Mohr, 1998), 100–19, on p. 102; also in Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture, 62, where he states: “In the early Hellenistic period […] evidence for messianic expectation is lacking. The absence of messianic expectation is most conspicuous in the Maccabean era, when it might have been expected”. He emphatically repeats his statement (see p. 63). A few pages later, he claims: “there is no evidence that messianic expectation was part of the cultural milieu of Ptolemaic Egypt when the Torah was translated” (p. 79). See also Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 15, who thinks that there is much less substantial evidence for messianic belief in the preceding period of the first century B. C. E. Collins, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture, 62. Ibid., 79. Ibid., 61. As E. Condra, Salvation for the Righteous Revealed: Jesus amid Covenantal and Messianic Expectations in Second Temple Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 202–10, has done it. Ibid., 221. Frankel, Ueber den Einfluss der palästinischen Exegese auf die alexandrinische Hermeneutik (Leipzig, 1851). His work has been interpreted differently among LXX scholars. For instance Seeligmann thinks that Frankel has seen an agreement between Palestine and Alexandrian Exegesis; see Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 77. For Le Déaut, “Frankel voyait [comme l’indique le titre de son livre], entre Alexandrie et Palestine, une

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

56

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

in Alexandria because of the political-social situation of the Jews there as he states: “hingegen möchte in Alexandrien, wo die Lage der Juden schon früh unbehaglich war, die Messiasidee zeitig aufgetaucht sein.”15 Frankel’s claim above, which is grounded in his substantial study of various passages of LXX-Pentateuch (i. e. Gen 49: 10; Num 24: 7; Deut 33: 5), is quite a complete reverse of that of Lagrange, Starcky, Jaubert, Harl, Jobes and Silva, and Collins (all discussed above, who believe that messianism or interest in the restoration of a Davidic kingdom was not very prominent in the post-biblical period until the late second century B. C. E.). His view was both recalled and taken up by Le Déaut in his brief but illuminating analysis of the messianic hopes within the LXX.16 However, one of the main leading figures in the LXX scholarship that has embraced extensively Frankel’s view is Horbury.17 Both Frankel and Horbury have been recently criticised to relation presque à sens unique, dans le sens Palestine-Egypte”; see Le Déaut, “La Septante, Un Targum?”, 170. 15 Frankel, Ueber den Einfluss der palästinischen Exegese, 182. When describing the situation in Palestine vs. that in Alexandria with regard to the development of messianic ideas, Frankel states: “Vergleicht man jedoch aufmerksam die Schriften aus der frühern (Rückkehr aus Babylon) und mittlern Zeit des zweiten Tempels (Maccabaerperiode), so scheint auch der Gedanke: „ein König aus dem Hause Davids“, nicht vorgeherrscht zu haben. Die Messiasidee war von den Propheten(zumeist von Jeremias und Jecheskel) zu einer Zeit angeregt worden, die an sich ganz trostlos war und wo das Auge sich nur auf die Zukunft richten konnte. Den aus dem babyl. Exil Zurückkehrenden ging in dieser Rückkehr selbst ein Hoffnungsstrahl auf; und es bot die Jetztzeit einen Kreis der Thätigkeit dar, vor der messianische Hoffnungen (vielleicht war die Messiasidee in Volke noch gar nich verbreitet) nicht zur Geltung kamen. Die Maccabäerperiode endlich entwickelte die grossartige Thätigkeit; die Begeisterung für Gott entflammte zum Kampfe für Unabhängigkeit: sie beseelte nicht nur mit der Hingebung des Ertragens, sondern auch mit einer Kraft des Ausführens, die nicht erst von der Zukunft erwartet, sondern von einem durch Gott getragenen Selbstgefühl die Gegenwart erfassen, unternehmen und vollenden will: noch war die geistige Macht nicht gebrochen, sie flammte auf in dem grossartigsten Kampfe für den Tempel und das geheiligte Vaterland; in diesen Errungenschaften lag nach vollendetem Siege hohe Befriedigung und es wurde nicht hinsichtlich eines Herrschers von der Zukunft erwartet und passive Hoffnung genährt. Erst als der Druck der Römer kaum einen Schatten von Selbständigkeit übrig liess und das Volk in seinen Königen nur Tyrannen erblickte, die um die Gunst der Römer buhlend um so grausamer gegen ihre eigenen Unterthanen wütheten, erwachte die tiefe Sehnsucht nach dem Messias, und man rief sich gern die frühen prophetischen Verheissungen zurück, die nun mit den lichtvollsten Farben ausgemalt wurden: der erwartete Messias wurde zum Ideal der Frömmigkeit, Weisheit, Gerechtigkeit, Tapferkeit u. s. w. erhoben. Dieses hinsichtlich Palästina's. In Alexandrien, wo schon die Entfernung vom Vaterlande und die Abführung nach Alexandrien durch Ptolemäus Lagi Betrübendes hatte, bildete sich, wie manche Anzeichen sagen, die messianische Idee früher aus” [emphasis mine] (pp. 49– 50). 16 Le Déaut, “La Septante”,182. 17 Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 48; Messianism among Jews and Christians, 8; and more recently in “Monarchy and Messianism in the Greek Pentateuch”, 103, where, reconstructing the history of messianic hope, he says: “for him [i. e. Frankel], messianism was classically expressed in Davidic terms, and was to be correlated historically with the sense of oppression. He found the most important attestation of messianic hope, accordingly, in the exilic books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. In Judaea, he believed, where rebuilding

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Re-examination of Arguments

57

some extent by Carleton Paget when he speaks of Horbury as one who quoted “Frankel’s extravagant judgment.”18 However, it must be said that the issue of the oppressive political atmosphere under which the Jews in Alexandria lived has been given less attention in scholarship with regard to the overall assessment of the problem of the development of Jewish messianism in Alexandria vs. Palestine. Although we shall examine this in more detail later, it is worth already mentioning here that a significant number of scholars have noted the various hostilities felt by the Jewish community in Alexandria on the part of the non-Jewish citizens of Hellenistic Egypt towards the end of the third century B. C. E.19 At this point, we should recall the basic widespread scholarly opinion that messianic hopes have been primarily a product of political circumstances.20 Given this view, it can reasonably be said that if messianic expectations in Palestine increased under the political situation of its time, then it is legitimate to say that there must also have been a rise of messianic hopes in Alexandria. For, as Fabry correctly observes, the Hellenistic-Jewish community in Alexandria underwent turbulent political times in the last two centuries B. C. E.21 If this issue could be understood this way, then one would be inclined to see an existing false dichotomy in speaking of Palestine vs. Alexandria. The issue would not be that of arguing over which Jewish community witnessed to the increase of messianic idea. Rather, the focus would be on the question that seeks to provide an answer to what kind of messianism each community hoped for, under their given specific circumstances. Moreover, such a view was already put forward to some degree by Fabry.22 Further, the aforementioned false dichotomy can also be questioned to some extent based on the argument that a significant number of scholars

18

19

20 21 22

under the Persians was followed by successful resistance to Greek rule, messianism did not revive again before the Roman period; but among the Jews of Egypt in their sometimes oppressive atmosphere of exile it had already emerged long before”. J. Carleton Paget, “Egypt”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T & T Clark, 2007), 183–97, on p. 184 n. 7. For instance, Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 100; H. Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, in W. D. Davies/L. Finkelstein (ed.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 115–56, on p. 142; E. Starobinski-Safran, “La communauté juive d’Alexandrie à l’époque de Philon”, in P. C. Mondésert (ed.), ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΙΝΑ: Hellénisme, Judaïsme et Christianisme à Alexandrie (Paris: Cerf, 1987), 45–75, on p. 63; J. M. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995), 141–51; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 32–34. For this, see, e. g., Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 27; Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 297; Fabry, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 193. See Fabry, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 193. According to him, since “the messianic expectations in Palestine were influenced by the Seleucids and Hasmoneans, they must have developed in different ways under the influence of Hellenistic culture in Alexandria”; see Fabry “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 194.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

58

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

have always recognised the various contacts that existed between the Jewish community in Alexandria and their colleagues in Palestine.23 This could mean that whatever was taking place on one side affected the other as well. However, as shall be seen, even if the messianic idea in Alexandria cannot be seen as articulating discontentment with the political system in which the Hellenistic-Jewish community found itself, as some scholars would argue, it can be viewed at least (to begin with) as the result of an innovative interaction between the traditional Jewish faith and Hellenistic philosophy.24 Moreover, Seeligmann has found that, although certain similarities between Palestinian and Alexandrian exegesis can be pointed out, one must bear in mind that there exists an independent hermeneutics, which developed in Alexandria, not at all or hardly influenced by the Palestinian, but rather expressing the adaptation of the commands of the Torah to the Jewish-Hellenistic thought of the Alexandrian Diaspora.25 Seeligmann’s view is also expressed by Le Déaut, when he says, “[o]n ne peut ignorer les liens traditionnels entre Jérusalem et la Diaspora; mais […] [l]es Juifs d’Égypte réussirent à créer une Bible bien à eux, où un effort original d’actualisation est omniprésent.”26 Given these ideas, it is beyond reasonable doubt that there must have been what can be considered as some specific messianic hopes that

23 For instance, on the level of exegesis, Frankel has found the influence of Palestinian exegesis on Alexandrian hermeneutics; see Frankel, Ueber den Einfluss der palästinischen Exegese. This point was often made in his other monograph published ten years prior to this, see Vorstudien zur der Septuaginta (Leipzig, 1841), 8 ff, 105 ff, 185 ff; see also Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 35; M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (London, SCM Press, 1981), 102, 131. Le Déaut, “La Septante”, 170, says: “On ne peut ignorer les liens traditionnels entre Jérusalem et la Diaspora”; see also F. Blanchetière, “Le Juif et l’autre: La diaspora Asiate”, in R. Kuntzmann/J. Schlosser (ed.), Etudes sur le Judaïsme Hellenistique, 41–59, on p. 45. On the level of close contacts via the temple; see e. g. Lagrange, Le Judaïsme avant Jésus-Christ, 519, who says: “[l]es Juifs d’Égypte ne faisaient qu’un coeur et qu’une âme avec leurs compatriotes de Jérusalem. Ils se serraient les uns contre les autres.” Starobinski-Safran, “La communauté juive d’Alexandrie à l’époque de Philon”, 49, 58, writes: “la solidarité entre les Juifs d’Égypte et leurs coreligionnaires de Palestine est tout a fait remarquable”; cf. Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 141; also Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 78–83, who reflects on the two letters in 2 Maccabbees inviting the Jews of Egypt to join their Judean colleagues in celebrating the purification of the temple by observing the festival of Hanukkah. More recently Dines, The Septuagint, 142, has also claimed that “contacts [between Palestine and Diaspora] were frequent at all times”; also Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 35; Jan Joosten, “Al tiqré as a Hermeneutical device and the Septuagint,” in W. Kraus/M. Karrer/M. Meiser, (ed.), Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse (WUNT 252; Tübingen, Mohr, 2010), 377–390, on p. 389, who states that “[t]he lines of communication between the home country and the Jews of the dispersion were open.” 24 Fabry, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 204. 25 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 77–8. Cf. also Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 11, who seems to provide us with examples of differences that existed between Palestine and the Diaspora. 26 Le Déaut, “La Septante”, 170.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Re-examination of Arguments

59

emerged in this significant period of the history of Judaism. These are worth exploring.

1.2 On Philo’s Silence about Messianism Philo’s lack of references pertaining to messianism is another argument that has been used in support of the seeming eclipse of messianism in the Hellenistic Diaspora27 or interest in this important idea of messianism in Palestine.28 Much has been comprehensively written on Philo with reference to his views on messianism.29 Unfortunately, another thorough investigation of all the plausible instances where Philo might have referred to any messianic expectation lies outside the scope of the present study. However, a brief assessment of the major trends of those who have interacted with him needs to be considered here. This will help us to gain some significant insights. Generally speaking, some scholars are reluctant to see the evidence of Philo as a promising source of information about messianic expectation.30 However, from a more recent analysis by Carleton Paget of Philo, concerning his references to messianism, we hear that those who have attempted to examine his interpretation of biblical texts can be divided into two major groups. Firstly, Carleton Paget sees that there are those who claim that Philo deliberately sought to divest biblical texts of their nationalistic-messianic content. According to Carleton Paget, while they have a point, they can appear on occasion to overplay their card. He finds, for instance, that there are strong messianic statements in Philo (see Praem. 162 f) similar to those found in the Psalms of Solomon (17: 26,32,37). Secondly, there are those who would take the references of Philo to messianic texts and his interests in issues of national redemption to make a significant point in seeking to understand what was going on in Alexandria with regard to the topic of messianic belief.31 One of the most important examples here is a statement on Philo made by Collins. According to Collins, “[t]he fact that he [Philo] still finds some place for national eschatology indicates that messianic beliefs must 27 See for instance Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 220; Knibb, “The Septuagint and Messianism”, 16–17; Collins, “Messianism and Exegetical Tradition”, 148. 28 R. D. Hecht, “Philo and Messiah”, in J. Neusner et al. (ed.), Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 139–68, on p. 140. 29 With regard to the purpose of the current investigation, we would recommend, for instance, both the article from the previous note and the one following the current note. In addition to these, one may also refer to Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 1.111–17 or in 2.135–36. 30 A. Chester, “Jewish Messianic Expectations and Mediatorial Figures and Pauline Christology”, in M. Hengel/U. Heckel (ed.), Paulus und das antike Judentum (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991), 17–89, on p. 44. 31 Carleton Paget, “Egypt”,186–87.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

60

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

have been widespread in his time, even in Egyptian Judaism.”32 Carleton Paget (who quotes Hecht) also adds: “if it is right to see Philo as consciously denuding messianic passages of their nationalist content, and this at a tumultuous time in the history of the Alexandrian community, then this could imply the presence of a number of messianically oriented Jews in Alexandria.”33 From the brief survey of various views among scholars (provided above) with regard to Philo’s alleged lack of interest in messianism, the following can be said. Scholars like Carleton Paget find it difficult to verify such a claim that there must have been some troubles that were messianically oriented in Egypt before the Trajanic revolt of 115–17. Such a view puts on hold the whole idea of whether one can actually speak of the presence of messianic belief in Alexandria in Philo’s time.34 However, as said earlier, one must first of all be careful not to disregard that “the social, economic and political conditions were becoming increasingly difficult for the majority of Jews there [i. e. in Alexandria].”35 This uncomfortable atmosphere in Alexandria needs to be taken seriously into account with regard to the overall evaluation of the issue of messianism in the Hellenistic period. In addition to it, while it is true that messianism is not viewed as a central concept in Philo, the small hints of his use of specific messianic expressions (which have been observed at least in what has been classified as ‘the only one passage of his writings, i. e. Praem. 79–172’36) can be considered as something like a tip of an iceberg. They seem to reveal a specific deep and strong nascent messianic movement that was already in (or seemed about to take) place in his time. Phrased differently, it is to say that, given the alarming political-social situation of the time (as said above, but which shall be analysed in more detail later), it seems reasonably safe to argue as follows. Philo’s relative lack of messianic reference in his writings does not necessarily mean a denial of the validity of expressed (or potential) substantial messianic hopes in the Hellenistic period. This leads us to briefly reassess the next argument put forward in scholarship that the Jewish community in Alexandria has been non-messianic.

32 Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 2.137 or in 1.117; see also Carleton Paget “Egypt”, 187; Condra, Salvation for the Righteousness Revealed, 207. 33 Carleton Paget, “Egypt”, 187. For similar quotation of Hecht’s view, see also Chester, “Jewish Messianic Expectations”, 45. 34 Carleton Paget, “Egypt,” 187–88. 35 Chester, “Jewish Messianic Expectations”, 45. 36 This is the text that has been noted by scholars where Philo refers to messianic ideas; see Hecht, “Philo and Messiah”, 148–58; Condra, Salvation for the Righteous Revealed, 248; Chester, “Jewish Messianic Expectations”, 44.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Re-examination of Arguments

61

1.3 On the Scarcity of the Literary Evidence Seeligmann has admitted that “regarding the internal Jewish life of the Jewry in Alexandria, our sources are scarce and unwieldy.”37 The insufficiency and awkwardness of literary evidence has been used in arguing against a possibility of exploring the messianic ideas permeating the thought of the Greekspeaking Jews in Alexandria in the third or/and second century B. C. E. For instance, Collins, who does not see any piece of evidence that messianic expectation was part of the cultural milieu under the Ptolemaic rulers, has also claimed that one cannot find a possible reference to a messiah in the Jewish literature written in Greek in the period under review, except in the Greek translation of the Bible.38 Even in the Greek Bible, according to him, one should not expect to find much by way of messianic belief in the work of the translators of the LXX-Pentateuch.39 Therefore he concludes that messianism in the Diaspora “would only become attractive after relations with the Gentile rulers had been undermined by pogroms in Alexandria, the failure of the first Jewish revolt and the general deterioration of the situation of the Jews in Egypt in the late first and early second centuries of the [C] ommon [E]ra.”40 His conclusion is also based on the fact that one finds some expression of messianic expectations in the fifth book of the Sibylline Oracles, a document that can be dated roughly to the early second century C. E.41 Collins’ view above (which rejects the possibility of speaking of the development of Jewish messianic expectations in Alexandria in Hellenistic period) will not stand if one takes into account the following issues. In addition to his failure to consider the aforementioned political and social conditions of the Jewish community in Alexandria, Collins also does not attempt either to find out the plausible reasons behind the decline of literature in the second century42 or to discover some of the purposes of the few existing pieces of messianic literature (excluding here the Greek Bible). These elements seem to be vital before making any substantial statement concerning the apparent lack of literary evidence regarding messianic expectations in the period under consideration. With regard to the raison d'être of the few existing messianic literary works, Condra for example notes: “the literature of the whole Sec37 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 96. 38 Collins, “Messianism and Exegetical Tradition”, 148–49. See also Bousset quoted by Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 27. According to Schaper, “He [i. e. Bousset] points out the obvious difficulties in finding any messianic traces at all in many parts of the Jewish literature of later Hellenistic times”. 39 Collins, “Messianism and Exegetical Tradition”, 148–49. 40 Ibid., 149. 41 Ibid. 42 Cf. Fraser, for instance, who speaks of the decline in the number of foreign immigrants, probably of all classes, and certainly of the intelligentsia, see P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 3 vols (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972), 75–92.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

62

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

ond Temple era usually had its origin within a literate group, dominated by a priestly and sagely orientation, who would have had little reason to be looking for a future Davidic king.”43 According to Laato, the idea of the development of the importance of the high priesthood in Israel’s society mitigated royal expectations.44 Given these claims, it seems that there can be some historical-social and political reasons behind the whole issue of the production of messianic literature in the Ptolemaic era. If this can be accepted, then it may not only help one to understand the lack of messianic material and expectations in the literature of this period, but also to motivate one to find out the specific messianic hopes that do appear even in the few accessible messianic texts. Adopting such an approach, Seeligmann for instance did not only admit the problem of the limited documents (as noted above), but also attempted to explore the difference between the biblical and the Jewish-Hellenistic historical consciousness, using the few available sources. As a result, he found various significant changes. They pertain to the nature of the national consciousness, the conceptualization of God, the perception of the Alexandrian Diaspora, and the anticipation of the future.45 Hence, from all the above ideas, it can be fairly said that the lack of literary evidence is not synonymous with non-existence of messianism in the second century B. C. E.

1.4 Summary The aim of this section was to reassess three basic arguments relevant to the general belief that the Jewish community in Alexandria during the Hellenistic period has been non-messianic. With regard to arguments about the development of Jewish messianic hopes in Palestine vs. the Diaspora, it has been discovered that there seems to be a false dichotomy. Rather than referring to one Jewish community over the other that witnessed to the rise of messianism, scholars should speak in terms of the kind of messianism each Jewish community hoped for under their given specific situations. With reference to the argument on Philo’s lack of interest in messianism, it was said that one should not ignore the small signs of this notion in his writings as they can reveal something deep going on underneath. Finally, from the argument related to the lack of literary evidence (especially in the second century B. C. E.) we have noted that one should be careful in rushing to claim that it is equal to the absence of messianism during this period. On the 43 Condra, Salvation for the Righteous Revealed, 221. 44 A. Laato, A Star is Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of Jewish Messianic Expectations (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 241–42, sees that the development of the importance of the high priesthood in Israel’s society really did much to mitigate royal expectations. 45 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 97–105.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism in Alexandria

63

whole, it was observed that any student who wishes to attempt an analysis of any messianic expectation during the period under review should not overlook the political, the socio-economical, and the cultural-religious conditions under which the Jews in Alexandria found themselves. This leads us to the next section.

2. Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism46 in Alexandria What concerns us now is to draw the reader’s attention to some key issues (taken from a significant range of available primary and secondary sources47) which can be perceived as expressions of antagonism against the Jewish population in Alexandria under the Ptolemaic rulers. This is done by looking at the relationships between the Jewish population and the non-Jewish citizens of the Ptolemaic dynasty in three vital spheres of life: the political, the socio-economical, and the religious. However, it must be noted that these 46 One of the major reasons to explore this phenomenon here is due to its connection with the messianic movement witnessed in the first century B. C. E. Historically, it appears anachronistic to speak of “anti-Semitism” in Alexandria as the term “anti-Semitism” was devised in the middle of the nineteenth century. Cf. J. Dan et al., “Anitisemitismus/Antijudaismus”, in H. D. Bertz et al (ed.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 1 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 556–74, esp. under the subtitle ‘Definitionen und Probleme’ (on pp. 556–57). Such a view led some scholars, like Cohen, to dismiss the expression “anti-Semitism” in antiquity in favour of “anti-Judaism”; see S. J. D. Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1987), 46–49. However, there are undeniable elements from a wide range of available sources (primary and secondary) that illunimitate the history of hostility towards the Jewish population in antiquity. This phenomenon has been referred to as an ancient “anti-Semitism”. For instance, Cohen, who after a close scrutiny of a few incidents related to some statements (made by Apion and Hadrian) displaying a ferocious hostility towards the Jewish population of Ptolemaic Egypt, reconsidered his view (provided above) in favour of the expression “anti-Semitism”; see Cohen, “‘AntiSemitism’ in Antiquity: The Problem of Definition”, in D. Berger (ed.), History and Hate: The Dimensions of Anti-Semitism (Philadelphia, New York, and Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Publication Society, 1986), 43–47. In this article Cohen says, “I indicated in the previous paragraphs that the simple application of the term ‘anti-Semitic’ to these incidents is neither justifiable nor helpful; but here, I concede, perhaps we must allow for a certain degree of ‘anti-Semitic’ feelings to account for the scale and severity of the incidents” (pp. 46 ff., emphasis mine). For a helpful analysis of “anti-Semitism” in the Greco-Roman world, one may consult, amongst others, P. Schäfer, Judeophobia: Attitudes toward the Jews in the Ancient World (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997); also in ‘Griechisch-römische Antike’ as a subtitle in Dan et al., “Anitisemitismus/Antijudaismus”, 557–58; J. L. Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, JBL 98 (1979) 45–65. 47 As far as the secondary sources are concerned, in addition to those provided in the previous note, we shall also consult, amongst others, Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria and J. R. Bartlett, Jews in the Hellenistic World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora; Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 115–66. The primary sources will be provided throughout the discussion.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

64

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

areas cannot be considered separately and individually. Rather, as they must be understood as overlapping48, one needs to be prepared to find indications of interaction between them.

2.1 Politico-Administrative Conditions It has been widely believed that many among the Jewish population of Alexandria were involved in politico-administrative affairs. They held influential offices, especially under the friendly reign of Ptolemy Philometor (180–145 B. C. E.). To put the matter very briefly at this point, it can be said that in fulfilling their duties, these Jews, in general, were viewed as loyal to the Ptolemies. Accordingly, they enjoyed some special legal privileges and political protections.49 However, closer scrutiny (in some of the available Jewish and Hellenistic literature) of the conditions under which the Alexandrian Jews lived does also show that there are a few incidents which have been perceived as describing a reality of hostile attitudes towards the Jewish population. For instance, Modrzejewski examines a story which he entitles “the miracle at the Hippodrome.”50 The story tells how a plot to exterminate the Alexandrian Jews was thwarted. Describing it, Modrzejewski says: “[i]n Egypt, a lesser conflict arose between the Jewish community and the Ptolemaic rulers. It was not as grave as the Judean crisis, but it was serious enough to have left its mark in Jewish memory.”51 One of the difficulties of this story is that of establishing its proper historical setting. For, from the account of 3 Maccabees, the story is attributed to the reign of Ptolemy IV Philopator (222–205 B. C. E.). However, in Josephus’ version, the episode is linked to Onias’ military intervention during the civil war that broke out at the end of Philometor’s regime (180–145 B. C. E.) between Physkon (Ptolemy VII Euergetes II) and those loyal to Cleopatra II (Philometor’s widow).52 A critical compara48 Schäfer, Judeophobia, 207, who analysed the similar issues in Alexandria, discovered that these “spheres are inextricably interwoven”. He then went on to correctly advise that “one should not look, therefore, at either component alone”. 49 Esp. in the third century B. C. E. For instance, Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.84, speaks of “the creation of the politeuma, with its own officials, […] the grant of a specific neighbourhood for residence […], the production of large quantities of Jewish literature in Greek dress, in some cases clearly with royal approval”; see also Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 160–61; G. H. Box, Judaism in the Greek Period from the rise of Alexander the Great to the intervention of Rome (333 to 63 B. C.) (The Clarendon Bible. OT 5; Oxford: Clarendon, 1932), 16, 21. 50 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 141–53. There are two versions of this story in the third Book of Maccabees (3 Macc 4: 1–10; 6: 18–29) and in Josephus (Against Apion 2.49–55). 51 Ibid., 141. 52 This apparent discrepancy with regard to the historical setting of the story has raised some concern in scholarship. For instance, Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 68, has argued that this story cannot be taken as evidence. This is because, according to him, “3 Maccabees […] cannot be regarded as an accurate historical account”. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterra-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism in Alexandria

65

tive analysis of the two versions led Modrzejewski to state: “this moving story raises more problems than it solves.”53 Yet, he quickly and rightly notes that “[a]ll efforts of historical criticism notwithstanding, one can not flatly rule out the possibility of the event having occurred during the reign of Ptolemy IV.”54 According to Modrzejewski, political motives were dominant in both versions. With this in mind, he concludes his investigation by pointing out that in this story “something important had happened: the Jews of Egypt had discovered that life in the service of a Ptolemaic king was not always a bed of roses.”55 These uncomfortable feelings felt by the Jewish community in Alexandria according to the aforementioned narrative have also been highlighted by Barclay. Analysing it more extensively in Josephus’ version, Barclay notes that Onias’ action was considered by both the regime in place (i. e. Ptolemy VII) and the non-Jews in Alexandria as inappropriate. He gives a picture of some of the long-term consequences of this act as follows: Onias’ intervention established a precedent for future Jewish involvement in political affairs. But it also poisoned the relationships between Jews and non-Jews in Alexandria. More than two centuries later Apion still cast this episode up against the Alexandrian Jews, using it to fuel his charge that they were disloyal to the city. Although they might claim to have supported the legitimate Ptolemaic line, the Jews could now be maliciously portrayed as an alien element in the country, powerful enough to influence events but suspect in their loyalties. It was a reputation which the Jewish community in Egypt was never able to shake off.56

At this point we are inclined to say that, even though Modrzejewski has concluded that the impression left by the story under scrutiny cannot adequately be considered as portraying “anti-Semitism,”57 it is evident that it seems to have contributed to the widespread propaganda of distrust expressed by the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandra against the Jewish com-

53 54 55 56 57

nean Diaspora, 38, speaks of Joseph’s account as “a variant of the story told in lurid detail in 3 Maccabees [where it is] […] wrongly attributed […] to the reign of Philopator”. However, despite the difficulties that one seems to encounter in establishing its proper historical setting, it can be said that this does not exclude the possibility that the story referred to in the above accounts was current in those days. It is important to recall at least some of the feelings felt by the Alexandrian Jews vis-à-vis the incident. A useful analysis of the story from 3 Maccabees can also be found in a more recent article by P. Alexander/L. Alexander, “The Image of the Oriental Monarch in the Third Book of Maccabees”, in Rajak et al. (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers, 92–99. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 147. Ibid., 147–48. Ibid., 152–53. See also Starobinski-Safran, “La communauté juive d’Alexandrie”, 48. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 38. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 152–53. However, he does consider the Ptolemaic Egypt where this incident took place as the “wellsprings[sic] of pagan anti-Semitism” (pp. 135–57). Schäfer, Judeophobia, also claims that “Hellenistic Egypt around 300 B. C. E. is (…) the ‘mother’ of anti-Semitism – with roots reaching back into Egypt’s pre-Hellenistic history” (p. 11).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

66

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

munity in the city.58 Moreover, there are also other indisputable elements that can attest to the reality of similar attitudes of distrust towards the Jewish community in Alexandria that remained among the non-Jewish citizens of Ptolemaic Alexandria. For example, the Alexandrian Jews were also viewed as worthless and diseased rebels. A well-known Egyptian priest and historian in the third century B. C. E. attached to this propaganda is Manetho. He wrote about the Jewish community in Egypt in an extremely hostile manner. He offered a counter-account of the history of the Jews in Egypt. Drawing on stories already current in Egypt, Manetho described the Jews as people mixed up with a crowd of Egyptian lepers (πλῆθος Αἰγθυπτίων λεπρῶν) and other polluted persons (τῶν ἄλλῶν μιαρῶν ἀνθρώπων) who were expelled by the Egyptians (cf. Josephus, Against Apion 1.228–29,232–33).59 According to Barclay, “Manetho’s work transmitted native cultural hostilities into Greek and thereby made possible their transference into a wider cultural domain.”60 In addition to the unfriendly picture painted of the Alexandrian Jews, the everyday life of the period under consideration furnishes another salient piece of evidence of enmity towards them. The Jews, according to Daniel, “were often seen as a loathsome people.”61 This seems to be obvious in a papyrus (PIFAO 104) from the first century B. C. E. collected by Tcherikover and Fuks.62 It reads: Ἡρακλῆς Πτολεμαίωι ην[..] κητ[.] πλῖστα χαίριν καὶ ἔρρωσται. ἠρωτησα Ἱππ[…] ἐν Μέμφι ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἱερέως τοῦ τῆς Τεβτύνεος κ[.].[.]πε. γράψαι αὐτῶι. ἐπιστόλιδιν .ἵνα ἴδω ὥτι αὐτ[ῶι.] ἐστίν. ἐρωτῶ σε ὥπως οὐ κατασκεθήσεται. χιλαγώγησον […]ον ἐν οἷς ἐὰν χρήιζηι .ζ[…]..[ο]ὕτω ποιῶν λωιποῖς Ἀρτεμίδωρος δ[…]εμο[.] πρός τὸν ἱερέα καὶ σὺν αὐτῶι καταλ .. ατιν. οἷδας γὰρ ὥτι βδελὺσονται Ἰουδαίους. ἀσπάζου .[… .]. τβαν κα[ὶ] Ἑπιμένην καὶ Τρύφωναν [… … .]. κα[… …]επι το[… ..] ἐπιμέλου

58 Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, 47. He believes that this widespread distrust prohibited any real cohesion between the two categories of people in Alexandria. 59 For more detail on Manetho’s account of the Jews, see for instance Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 33–4; Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 136–37; Porten, “The Jews in Egypt”,1.373; Schäfer, Judeophobia, 17–21; also Dan et al., in “Anitisemitismus/Antijudaismus”, 557, under the subtitle ‘Griechisch-römische Antike’; Bartlett, Jews in the Hellenistic World, 7; Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 6–7; 60 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 34; also Starobinski-Safran, “La communauté juive d’Alexandrie”, 63, who says, “[l]es premiers témoignages d’inimitié vis-à-vis des Juifs apparaissent chez plusieurs auteurs de langue grecque à la suite de l’Histoire d’Égypte du prêtre Manéthon”; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.505–10. 61 Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, 51. 62 V. A. Tcherikover/A. Fuks, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957), 1.256.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism in Alexandria

67

Herakles to Ptolemaios (… .) many greetings and wishes of good health. I have asked Hippalos (?) in Memphis about the priest of Tebtynis (…) to write for him a letter in order that I may know what is the matter. I ask you that, so that he (?) will not be held up. Manage (…) in what he may need (…), do for him as you do for Artemidoros (…) the priest (…). For you know that they loathe the Jews. Greet (…) and Epimenen and Tryphona (…).63

While it is clear that the Jewish community in the district of Memphis64 is described as the victims of loathing (οἷδας γὰρ ὥτι βδελύσονται Ἰουδαίους), the identity of the people who are said to loathe them cannot be precisely ascertained due to the state of preservation of the aforementioned script. Despite this difficulty, Tcherikover and Fuks have suggested (on the assumption that Τεβτύνις would most likely not be a Jewish priest but rather an Egyptian one) that it is an Egyptian priest (and his like) who are known to loathe the Jews.65 Modrzejewski, who also analyses this papyrus, discovers that the verb βδελύσσομαι (“to feel a loathing,” or “to make loathsome or abominable”) used to designate the feelings of the people of the district of Memphis towards the Jews is scarcely ever found in Greek papyri but occurs forty times (plus its occurrence of more than 100 times as a noun) in the Greek Bible.66 Interesting for us is that its first occurrence (as a noun) in the LXX is to be found as early as in LXX-Genesis with reference to the Egyptians, who “could not eat bread loaves together with the Hebrews, for it is an abomination (βδέλυγμα) to the Egyptians” (43: 32). Even more noteworthy is its use (as a verb) in LXX-Exodus in a passage relating to how “the Egyptians abhorred (ἐβδελύσσοντο) the sons of Israel” (1: 12).67 Given these significant pieces of evidence, it can be said that one seems to already encounter here (in the Hellenistic period under consideration) the reality of a popular uncomfortable atmosphere towards the Jews in Hellenistic Egypt. From the preceding analysis, one may already see that the Jewish population of Alexandria faced a few dark clouds in the midst of the generally sunny and peaceful political environment under the Ptolemaic rulers.68 A supplementary investigation of its relationships with the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandria under their social-economical and religious-cultural conditions will strengthen the case of the outcome reached so far.

63 Ibid. However, a few changes (including the emphasis) added into the translation are mine. 64 One hears from Box, Judaism in the Greek Period, 56–57, that “there existed a self-contained Jewish colony” in the district of Memphis under the Ptolemaic dynasty. 65 Tcherikover/Fuks, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum, 1.256. 66 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 155. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid., 157.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

68

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

2.2 Socio-economic Conditions Fraser has meticulously investigated the social history of Ptolemaic Alexandria. His study of it is divided into three main periods: (a) the third century down to about 215 B. C.E; (b) about 215 to after 145 B. C.E; and (c) after 145 to 31 B. C. E.69 He describes the first period as “the golden age of Alexandria, the age of its greatest achievements in literature and science.”70 He points out that the full significance of this era can only be appreciated in the light of the last two periods. He also notes that the aforementioned achievements gave place not only to political chaos, but also to intellectual inactivity71 (to be discussed in more detail below). With regard to the last two periods, Fraser discovers that they “are more scantily documented than the first.”72 He goes on to claim that “[t]here is almost no individual evidence, large or small, no collections[sic] of papyri, fewer inscriptions, and almost no contemporary Alexandrian literature evidence.”73 As he attempts to find out the plausible reasons behind this scarcity of intellectual activity, Fraser states: “[t]he lack of documentation no doubt corresponds to a decline in many aspects of life […], and in this respect is not without significance.”74 Despite the difficulties related to the issue of the meagreness of the sources (especially in the period from the second century B. C. E. onwards, as indicated in Fraser’s synopsis of the social history of Ptolemaic Alexandria) that one may encounter, it can be said that it is possible to discern some of the main features of Jewish life. Moreover, without going into too much detail, it has been sufficiently demonstrated75 that many among the Jewish population of Alexandria rose to a higher social level and exercised a considerable influence on the social life of the environment under which they lived.76 At the same time, it has also been clearly observed that there were some who were to be found in the lower social strata.77 A closer scrutiny of this social 69 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.60–92. 70 Ibid., 60. He also reminds us that the relationship between the rulers and the ruled in the third century “seems to have been harmonious and undisturbed by riots and other violent assertions of mob-law, while in the two succeeding centuries the throne is at the disposal of the mob” (pp. 130–31; also p. 82). 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid., 75 73 Ibid. See also Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 163, who acknowledges that “the information about the social circumstances of the Jews in [Alexandria] during the Hellenistic period is meagre”. 74 Ibid. 75 Using either the available sources of the first period or any of the few surviving ones from the later periods, with regard to Fraser’s division (as outlined in the text). 76 For example, analysing the social conditions of the Jews in Alexandria during the Hellenistic period, Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 163, writes: “On the whole, we can conclude that there existed a small upper class of very wealthy and influential Jews”. See also Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.84; Schäfer, Judeophobia, 136; Philo Flacc.76. 77 See, for instance, Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 42–43; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.57; Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, 52.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism in Alexandria

69

structure can reveal some elements that tend to witness to some sort of antipathy among the Greeks and Egyptians towards the Jewish community in Alexandria. For instance, analysing the situation of those among the Jewish population of Egypt who climbed up to the peak of a large social pyramid, Barclay rightly points out that “the social and economic success of the Jews in their Graeco-Egyptian environment […] ha[d] ambiguous effects. Moreover there were important cultural trends in the later Ptolemaic period which acted to their disadvantage.”78 It seems that their position of influence on the social life of the city can be likened to a small quantity of yeast being thrown into dough, provoking the rise of the non-Jewish citizens of the Ptolemaic kingdom against the Alexandrian Jews in due course. With regard to those among the Jewish population of Hellenistic Egypt who were found on the lower social level, the so-called ‘Boule-papyrus’ (No. 150; see CPJUD 2.25–29) preserves evidence of them being perceived as people who were “uncultured and uneducated” (ἄθρεπτοι καὶ ἀνάγωγοι).79 A similar description of them was also made by Apion who charged them with lacking inventors and sages (see Josephus, Against Apion 2. 12,14,20 par. 135,148,182–83). This picture of them does not necessarily mean that they were less literate than the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandria of similar social rank. However, it has been believed that they were perceived to be low on the intellectual ladder, and that this contributed to anti-Semitism.80 Another ingredient which seems to have also fuelled the fires of the aversion towards them was poverty and/or slavery81 in the midst of Alexandria as a centre of trade and commerce.82 Fraser, who explores the Jewish poverty and/or slavery, discovers that this state of being “was a system far less innate in the Egyptian than the Greek life.”83 That is to say that those who were slaves among the Jewish community in Alexandria served in non-Jewish households. Often, they did this at the expense of their Jewish customs; “[t] he social and economic pressures on the Jews to ‘compromise’ their religious exclusiveness must have been great.”84 78 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 44–5. 79 Tcherikover/Fuks, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum, 2.28. In this papyrus, it is said that an Alexandrian spokesman urged his Greek fellow citizens to keep Alexandria undefiled by any foreign influence. Although the Jews are not mentioned in this document, both Tcherikover and Fuks believe that it refers to them (pp. 25–27). 80 Ibid., 25. Cf. also Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, 53. 81 Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 138, points out that there existed “a broad mass of people living in much poorer circumstances. There were relatively few Jewish slaves”. 82 A meticulous and useful analysis of the industry and trade in Alexandria within the Ptolemaic period has been done by Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.132–88. 83 Ibid., 84. 84 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 112; Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, 53.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

70

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

Before surveying the area of the religious life lived by the Jewish population of Alexandria during the period under review, it must be pointed out that, from the various elements that underwent scrutiny so far, the existence of some sort of resentment expressed by the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandria towards the Jewish community in this city is undeniable.

2.3 Religious-Cultural Conditions “While in general Judaean immigrants settled peacefully [under Ptolemaic rulers] and with every prospect of success, it is here, in relation to their religious peculiarity, that the seeds of later conflict were sown”, says Barclay.85 Fraser, who has an extensive analysis of the religious life of the Jewish population of Alexandria, acknowledges that there were some Jews who “adapted themselves in externals to the pattern of religious life around them to a remarkable degree.”86 According to him, this religious conformity or adaptability turned out to be “one factor out of several which protected the community [in the third and second centuries B. C. E.] from the miseries of antiSemitism, which beset them in the Roman period.”87 However, he repeatedly stresses that, by and large, the Jewish community of Ptolemaic Egypt preserved their distinct beliefs and practices as held by their co-religionists in Palestine.88 At this point, we would like to say that, even if “[i]t may be noted that in the earlier [Ptolemaic] period there is no firm trace of antiSemitism”,89 as Fraser has believed, it can be demonstrated that the Jewish uniqueness of beliefs and practices was perceived with an attitude of condescension by the people whom they came in touch with. One of the most tangible pieces of evidence, for instance, comes from Hecataeus’ account of the Jews’ settlement in Alexandria (323–180 B. C.E).90 Barclay observes that in the early reign of the Ptolemies, “Hecataeus of Abdera noted the peculiar aniconic style of Jewish worship and remarked, in a rare negative tone, on their somewhat unsociable and inhospitable style of life”91 (see ἀπάνθρωπόν τινα καὶ μισόξενον βίον εἰσηγήσατο, apud Diodorus 40.3.4). This kind of poisonous description of the Jewish population 85 86 87 88

Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 33. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.286. Ibid. Ibid., 285–86. He notes: “only the almost unadulterated survival of Jewish racial integrity and Jewish customs into the Roman period will explain the rapid growth of anti-Semitism in Roman Alexandria. If Jews, like Egyptians, had largely blended with Greeks in the Ptolemaic period, anti-Semitism would be difficult to explain” (p. 57). 89 Ibid., 58, also 688. 90 For a helpful analysis of this account, see for instance Schäfer, Judeophobia, 15–17. 91 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 33. See also Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.688–89. See also Hegermann, “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, 165, who states that it was “the Torah of Moses [that] led to the religious segregation of the Jews”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Exploration of Plausible Signs of Anti-Semitism in Alexandria

71

of Ptolemaic Egypt was frequent throughout the period under scrutiny. It is worth recalling the work of Manetho and its influence on Greek culture (as discussed above). The aforementioned Jewish exclusiveness has been linked to the confession of monotheistic faith. Jewish monotheism is at the centre of the Jewish self-understanding as the people specially chosen by God. As we hear from Schaper, The concept of the ‘Chosen Nation’, bound to the one unique God by a covenant, never died out in Israel; in spite of all the religious innovations taken over by Judaism in Hellenistic times this notion did not wither away. It was on this soil that messianism could blossom, a messianism which was in turn complemented by an eschatology centred on the individual.92

While Schaper’s claim is understood with regard to the Jews in Palestine, it is equally valid for their co-religionists in Alexandria. If this can be accepted, then it seems to also provide us with significant support for the refutation of the aforementioned false dichotomy in speaking of messianic expectations in Palestine vs. Alexandria. In fact, in both Palestine and Alexandria in the Hellenistic period, the Jewish population often perceived itself as being superior (also on a cultural level) to other people.93 According to Fraser, even in the Diaspora the Jewish population gave a lofty interpretation of the thought of Israel as the “chosen nation”, while referring to other people as sinners.94 One hears from Philo that the Jewish people are “above all the nations beloved of God, ones that have secured the priesthood for the whole human race” (De Abrahamo ii.15). A similar idea of Jewish moral and spiritual superiority over the corrupt pagan world and pagan religions in Hellenistic times has also been pointed out by Daniel: “[i]n Jewish thought of the Hellenistic-Roman period the gentile nations would be at some unspecified time in the future reduced to serving the Jewish God (Ps.Sol. 17: 32), and would receive punishment from the same quarter (Ps.Sol. 17: 27)”.95 Analyzing the Jewish Diaspora, Box discovers that the Alexandrian Jews “were animated by an intense missionary zeal to win over the pagan population to the higher monotheistic religion of which they were the chosen representatives”.96 He also finds that the demands of monotheism let a pious Jew “neither dine at the table of a pagan nor receive him at his own table. He was not permitted to frequent the theatres, the circuses, the gymnasia, nor even to read a secular 92 Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 29. 93 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 57. 94 Ibid., 299. He says: “In the second half of the second century B. C. E.[…] a mood of national and religious confidence developed in Palestine and in the diaspora, particularly in Egypt, which led to a changed attitude towards the contemporary pagan world in extreme orthodox circles. Jewish propagandists, availing themselves of the literary resources of the pagan world, turned on the world and denounced its sin, corruption, and imminent extinction, in a form and language borrowed from the pagan Sibylline verses which were in general circulation”. 95 Daniel, “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, 59. 96 Box, Judaism in the Greek Period, 62, 64.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

72

Chapter 2: Messianic Expectations in the Diaspora

book ‘unless it [is] at twilight’”.97 Reflecting on the practice of monotheism among the Alexandrian Jews, Daniel says that since the “Jews in a polytheistic culture tried to maintain a strong monotheism and a unique law based on monotheism, it was inevitable that they should have trouble dealing with their neighbors.”98 In this respect, some scholars hold the Jewish population of Alexandria responsible for what other people have done to them.99 However, the crucial issue seems to lie in what the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandria made of the belief professed by the Jewish population of this city. It is therefore in their (i. e. the non-Jewish Alexandrian citizens’) attitudes that anti-Semitism is rooted.100 During the Ptolemaic dynasty, the antagonism between the Alexandrian Jews and the non-Jewish citizens of Alexandria unfolded. Looking at various literatures (Greek, Egyptian, and Jewish), Fraser notes that: The oracular Egyptian literature belongs to the early Ptolemaic period, and the tone is one of national hostility to the conqueror. In the second century [B. C. E.], we have duly noted, this hostility vanished as the polarity between Greek and Egyptian disappeared. It is in precisely the same circumstances that the lasting hostility between Jew and Gentile developed: in the third century the Jews were sufficiently isolated to cause little offence to the Greeks who correspondingly were little interested in them; in the second, the fusion between Greek and Egyptian, and the general predominance of the Egyptian, led to the awakening or re-awakening of a hostility between the two races.101

From all that has been said so far with reference to the religious-cultural conditions encountered by the Jewish community in Alexandria, it can only be emphasized that there are significant signs witnessing to a deeply ingrained anti-Semitism throughout the second century B. C. E.

2.4 Summary This section sought to draw the reader’s attention to the phenomenon of anti-Semitism during the Ptolemaic period, by surveying some key elements pertinent to the political, socio-economic, and religious-cultural conditions under which the Jewish population in Alexandria found themselves living. In each of these three settings, it has been discovered that there is a significant number of visible elements witnessing to the unease felt by the Jewish population of Alexandria vis-à-vis the hostile treatment given to them by the 97 Ibid., 61–62. 98 Ibid., 58. He gives more detail with regard to various reactions of the non-Jews to Jewish monotheism (see pp. 59–62); see also Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 7–10. 99 See Schäfer, Judeophobia, 197–210, who provides a synopsis of a few scholars who hold such a view. 100 Ibid. 101 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1.716.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Conclusion

73

non-Jewish citizens of the city. This appears to be of great significance within the overall issue of whether it is legitimate to speak of messianic expectations in the Diaspora during the Hellenistic period.

3. Conclusion Our study has revealed that scholars who argue that messianic expectations were not prominent among the Jewish community in Alexandria in the Hellenistic period have not paid enough attention to insights that can be gained by looking at the various conditions under which this community found itself. If such conditions were to be considered (as we have done), it would be beyond reasonable doubt to see that the messianic movement increasingly witnessed in the first century B. C. E. was also nascent among the Jewish community in Alexandria from (if not even before) the second century B. C. E. For we have discovered that the Alexandrian Jews were left on more than one occasion with uncomfortable feelings as they faced the isolated ugly incidents that were politically motivated. As messianic ideas have here been demonstrated to be primarily a product of political circumstances, scholars should abandon the unhelpful view that points to one Jewish community to the detriment of the other as witnessing to the rise of messianic expectations during the Hellenistic. Rather the focus should be on searching for the kinds of messianic hopes displayed by each community under their specific living circumstances and religious needs. Our next chapter takes up this challenge with reference to the Jewish community in Alexandria, by looking at the LXX-Isaiah.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

To continue the discussion from the concluding lines of the previous chapter, we offer here an intertextual analysis of nine selected messianic texts in the LXX-Isaiah. The aim is to discover any kind of the messianic hopes (emerged among the Jewish community in Alexandria), which can be identified by the way in which the Isaiah translator (who himself belongs to this community) read the parent-text and produced his text. We shall begin with an exploration of the context of each text. This shall be followed by an analysis of the text in its Greek form compared to its Hebrew counterpart. Then, a search for any significant ‘messianic language’ in each text will be carried out. It will include tracing purposeful established links of such a language within the LXX-Isaiah and beyond. Given this framework of the task ahead of us, we now turn to the analysis of the first selected text.

1. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7:10–17 LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 is one of the passages relevant to the discussion on whether one can find some hints indicating a translator’s messianic outlook. Using the outline provided above, we shall examine this passage by investigating first its context within the LXX-Isaiah.

1.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context The Septuagint version of both the first nine and last eight verses of Isaiah 7 provides a reasonably comprehensive immediate literary context of the pericope under analysis. In those verses there are a few elements that can be adduced in connection with the pericope in order to try to discern the translator’s understanding of the oracle of its source. Firstly, one should note that, as in the MT, the translator leaves this oracle in its original historical setting, i. e. during the crisis involving Aram and Ephraim in the days of Isaiah. However, it is also worth pointing out, as Rösel correctly observes, the Isaiah translator’s perception of the prediction of salvation in chapter 7. This is suggested in his rendering (in v. 4b) of ‫בחרי־אף רצין וארם ובן־רמליהו‬ with the promise of a divine healing following days of wrath (ὅταν γὰρ ὀργὴ

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

76

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

τοῦ θυμοῦ μου γένηται, πάλιν ἰάσομαι)1 and the translation of ‫למיום‬ ‫ סור־אפרים מעל יהודה את מלך אשור‬with ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡμέρας ἀφεῖλεν Εφραιμ ἀπὸ Ιουδα τὸν βασιλέα τῶν Ἀσσυρίων (v. 17b). This, together with the phrase ἀλλὰ ἐπάξει ὁ Θεὸς (for ‫ יביא יהוה‬in v.17a), introduces a positive

reading of a series of eschatological oracles (vv. 18–25) that are related to unspecified historical references.2 Without going into too much detail here, it is worth noting that, in the aforementioned awaiting dawn of a new era of hope, Εμμανουηλ (v. 14) is described as an astonishing figure. Within our passage, this figure appears in Isaiah’s speech delivered to the house of David (v. 13 also v. 2) after Ahaz’s refusal of the command of κύριος σαβαωθ (v. 7) to ask for a sign (vv. 10–12). Secondly, a close look at the translator’s treatment of vv. 15–16 suggests that, as Troxel correctly observes, “his attention was, rather, drawn to a statement about the child and that this was the center of gravity for his understanding of [our pericope].”3 The issue of the translator’s understanding of both the manner and timing whereby this figure will be born will be discussed later, especially in the section that scrutinizes the ‘messianic language’ to be found within the pericope. Thirdly, as more recently van der Kooij, who is well known for his significant contributions to the understanding of the LXX-Isaiah, has rightly claimed, “[a]s is often the case in LXX Isaiah,”4 the LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 differs significantly from its Hebrew counterpart. Although it is important to keep in mind our aim of reading the Septuagint text of our pericope as a coherent work of its own, it is equally important to say that a look at the pericope in its Greek and Hebrew texts side-by-side permits a clear overview of the existing differences. These differences are taken as significant markers for uncovering the underlying literary structure of our pericope, as well as throwing some light onto its dynamic meaning. In this connection, one can remember for instance that van der Kooij has consistently argued that “the appropriate way of dealing with such cases is to make a comparison between the Hebrew texts and the LXX and to study both texts in their own right before dealing with the issue of the parent text in Hebrew.”5 Given this view, we shall now provide such a comparison.

1 2 3 4

5

Rösel, “Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel: Jesaja 7 in der Übersetzung der Septuaginta”, JBTh 6 (1991) 135–51, on p. 138. Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 224. Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 1 (emphasis added). Van der Kooij, “Interpretation of the Book of Isaiah in the Septuagint and in other Ancient Versions”, in C. M. McGinnis/P. K. Tull (ed.), “As Those Who Are Thought”: The Interpretation of Isaiah from the LXX to the SBL (Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 49–68, on p. 51. Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7: 10–17

77

1.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫ויוסף יהוה דבר אל־אחז לאמר‬

10

10 Καὶ προσέθετο κύριος λαλῆσαι τῷ

‫שאל־לך אות מעם יהוה אלהיך‬ ‫העמק שאלה או הגבה למעלה‬

11

11 Αἴτησαι σεαυτῷ σημεῖον παρὰ

‫ויאמר אחז לא־אשאל ולא־אנסה‬ ‫את־יהוה‬

12

‫ויאמר שמעו־נא בית דור המעט‬ ‫מכם הלאות אנשים כי תלאו גם‬ ‫את־אלהי‬

13

‫לכן יתן ארני הוא לכם אות הנה‬ ‫העלמה הרה וילדת בן וקראת שמו‬ ‫עמנו אל‬

14

‫חמאה ודבש יאכל לדעתו מאוס‬ ‫ברע ובחור בטוב‬

15

‫כי בטרם ידע הנער מאס ברע‬ ‫ובחר בטוב תעזב האדמה אשר‬ ‫אתה קץ מפני שני מלכיה‬

16

‫יביא יהוה עליך ועל־עמך ועל־‬ ‫בית אביך ימים אשר לא־באו‬ ‫למיום סור־אפרים מעל יהודה את‬ ‫מלך אשור‬

17

6

Αχαζ λέγων

κυρίου Θεοῦ σου εῖς βάθος ἢ εῖς ὕψος

12 καὶ εἶπεν Αχαζ Οὐ μὴ αἰτήσω οὐδ᾽ οὐ μὴ πειράσω κύριον

13 καὶ εἶπεν Ἀκούσατε δή, οἶκος

Δαυιδ μὴ μικρὸν ὑμῖν ἀγῶνα παρέχειν ἀνθρώποις; καὶ πῶς κυρίῳ παρέχετε ἀγῶνα;

14 διὰ τοῦτο δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις6 τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ

15 βούτυρον καὶ μέλι φάγεται πρὶν ἢ

γνῶναι αὐτὸν ἢ προελέσθαι πονηρὰ ἐκλέξεται τὸ ἀγαθόν

16 διότι πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδὶον

ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακὸν ἀπειθεῖ πονηρίᾳ τοῦ ἐκλέξασθαι τὸ ἀγαθὸν, καὶ καταλειφθήσεται ἡ γῆ, ἣν σὺ φοβῇ ἀπὸ προσώπου τῶν δύο βασιλέων.

17 ἀλλὰ ἐπάξει ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ σέ καὶ ἐπὶ

τὸν λαόν σου καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον τοῦ πατρός σου ἡμέρας, αἳ οὔπω ἥκασιν ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἑμέρας ἀφεῖλεν Εφραιμ ἀπὸ Ιουδα, τὸν βασιλέα τῶν Ἀσσυρίων.

In the apparatus provided by Ziegler, Isaias, 147, the textual witnesses are divided. A significant number of them read καλέσετε, thus harmonizing (this v. 14) with the preceding ὑμῖν (v. 13). In reality, any decision to be made should take into account the translator’s style of rendering the person and number of a verb (or pronoun) that precedes a pronoun. However, this task is beyond the scope of the present monograph. Accordingly, we will follow Ziegler’s choice. For we will argue that his reading of καλέσεις refers to Ahaz (a representative of the “house of David” here in this text) as responsible for naming the child, in a similar way that καλέσετε is understood.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

78

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

MT

LXX

10 Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, saying:

10 And the Lord spoke further to Ahaz, saying:

11 Ask for yourself a sign from Yahweh your God, ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.

11 Ask for yourself a sign of the Lord your God, in depth or in height

12 But Ahaz said: “I will not ask, nor will I put Yahweh to the test.”

12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, nor will I put the Lord to the test.

13 Then he [Isaiah] said: “Hear now, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also?

13 Then he [Isaiah] said: “Hear now, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to present men with a struggle? How then do you present a struggle with the Lord?

14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the young woman is pregnant and bears a child and she shall call him the name Immanuel.

14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you (pl) a sign. See, the virgin will conceive and will give birth to a son, and you (sg) shall name him Immanuel.

15 He shall eat curds and honey; until he knows to reject evil and to choose good.

15 He shall eat butter and honey; before he knows or chooses evil, he shall choose what is good

16 For before the child knows to reject evil and to choose good, shall be deserted the land that you despise, because of its two kings.

16 For before the child knows (to distinguish) good or evil, he defies evil in order to choose what is good, and the land that you fear because of the two kings will be abandoned.

17 Yahweh shall bring upon you and your people and upon your father’s house, days which have not yet come, from the day Ephraim turned aside from Judah – the king of Assyria.

17 But God will bring on you and on your people and on your ancestral house such days as have not yet come since the day that he took Ephraim away from Judah7 – the king of the Assyrians

Even if the Isaiah translator appears to have rendered his Vorlage of the pericope (presented above) literally (as it can be argued from what seems to be his desire to convey its meaning accurately), it should be noted that there are a few signs of his ‘free’ translation style. The most important ones are: (a) his

7

There is a problem of translation with regard to the verb ἀφεῖλεν in this verse; see Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.144 According to Ottley, if taken as intransitive, ἀφεῖλεν would mean “‘broke off from’”. In this way, Εφραιμ as a close nominatif to this verb would be the subject. This can be seen in de Sousa’s translation of this verse; see de Sousa, Eschatology, 91. However, if taken as transitive, then the subject of ἀφεῖλεν must be God (ὁ θεὸς) Himself (ibid) and Εφραιμ as the object. This latter view was taken by Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 1.89; and more recently by NETS and LXX. D.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7: 10–17

79

futuristic reading (ἐν γαστρὶ ἓξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν) of a nominal clause (‫הנה‬ ‫ )העלמה הרה וילדת‬in v. 14, and (b) his remarkable insertion of the phrase ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακὸν (v. 16) and the conjunctions καὶ (v. 16) and ἀλλά (v. 17). As will be shown, these differences provide sufficient grounds for taking the pericope not merely as translation, but rather as interpretation. Further, it must be observed that, unlike the MT, the LXX- Isa 7: 10–17 forms a coherent unit. This can be perceived in the following significant elements. Firstly, the occurrence of οἶκος twice (i. e. in v. 13 and v. 17) seems to delimit this unit. Secondly, in the MT, the direct statement ‫( יביא יהוה‬in v. 17) could suggest a beginning of a new pericope that announces another crisis. In contrast, the translator inserts ἀλλά, which lacks a lexical counterpart in the MT. Even if this conjunction (ἀλλά) should be considered to reflect a waw in the Vorlage, it is likely that (in the absence of any other external evidence available so far) it was the translator who construed it.8 Syntactically, the relationship between v. 17 and v. 16 depends on how one determines the function of the conjunctions ἀλλά and καὶ inserted in those verses, respectively. For instance, de Sousa takes the former as a disjunctive conjunction, thus suggesting that there is a radical disconnection between v. 16 and v. 17. In connection to this, he sees the latter as a correlative conjunction, serving to unite the two parts of v. 16.9 Consequently, he believes (as Troxel) that the sign of Εμμανουηλ in vv. 14–16 is detached from v. 17, which he sees as predicting “another divine intervention.”10 However, it must be acknowledged first, as Kaiser has correctly observed, that “v. 16 is one of the main sources of confusion in the interpretation [of this pericope] of the Immanuel prophecy.”11 In our view, de Sousa needs to ask how a Hellenistic Jew would correctly interpret a καὶ like this (in v. 16) in a paratactic construction. According to Gehman, it was mainly the context of a given pericope which sometimes provided a clue.12 Given this view, it is likely that in the case before us, καὶ (in v. 16) is to mean “so”. For in the LXX, as Gehman informs us, besides other different meanings of καὶ, this “conjunction developed [also] the sense of ‘so’.” In this way, the καὶ (in v. 16) “introduces what is a subordinate clause, (…) it shows the relationship of clauses to each other, and (…) it indicates the sequence and dependence of ideas.”13 By the same token, de Sousa (as Troxel) does not see that the context of the statement made (in v. 17) is likely to favour an understanding of ἀλλά as an emphatic 8 Cf. Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 19. 9 De Sousa, Eschatology, 91–93. He echoes the view of Troxel, “Isaiah 7, 14–16”, 19. 10 Ibid. However, Troxel seems to be confused whether or not to consider v. 17 as linked to vv. 14–16. For while he sees ἀλλά in v. 17 as breaking the connection with vv. 14–17 (p. 19), he also states (a page later!) that “in the eyes of the LXX, Isa 7,14–17 fleshes out the promise of divine healing following days of wrath” (p. 20), thus clearly showing a connection between v. 17 and vv. 14–16. 11 O. Kaiser, Isaiah 1–12 (London: SCM Press, 1983), 171. 12 H. S. Gehman, “The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, VT 1 (1951) 81–90, on p. 82. 13 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

80

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

conjunction. Phrased differently, ἀλλά is used here for a strong additional consideration. Given this understanding, ἀλλά should be translated as “certainly”,14 thus making a perfect link or continuation with the subordinate clause introduced (in v. 16b). In this way, the Isaiah translator understands the text (vv. 16b-17) to continue the foregoing message of hope for the house of David found (in vv. 10–16a), which is connected with the promise of divine healing following the days of God’s wrath foretold (in v. 4). This idea is carried into the contents of vv. 18–2515 that speak of an era of restoration after the calamity. If this reconstruction of the translation flow of thought is accepted, then we are on solid ground for viewing a significant messianic reading portrayed in the way the translator read his Vorlage and produced his text. For, as de Sousa correctly argues, if a connection could be established between Immanuel (7: 14–16) and the proclamation of a new era of redemption in verses (17–25), one would have significant support for speaking of a messianic reading of the text.16 Unfortunaly for de Sousa, he dismisses this possibility based on his view noted above that verses 16 and 17 are in disconnection.17 Besides the translator’s insertion of καὶ in v. 16 and ἀλλά in v. 17 (both conjunctions discussed above), we also noted earlier that the Greek sentence in v. 14 is constructed differently from its Hebrew counterpart. The MT successively contains a term (‫ )הרה‬which can be read either as a verb or an adjective, a finite verb (‫)וקראת‬, and a participle (‫)וילדת‬. If ‫ הרה‬is taken as a verb, then it should be translated as “is pregnant”. This meaning will make more sense by taking into account the present aspect provided by the participle (‫)וילדת‬. If one considers ‫ הרה‬as an adjective, then it would still bear a present connotation as it is governed by the meaning of the participle (‫)וילדת‬. In either case, the sentence structure seems to describe the situation of the woman in question: at the moment the statement is made, she is already pregnant and in fact on the point of giving birth. However, in the LXX, three coordinate verbs are used, all of them in the future tense (ἕξει καὶ τέξεται … καὶ καλέσεις), thus constructing the sentence to refer to the near future. Even if “the presence of ‫ הנה‬at the opening of the verse [i. e. v. 14b] would call for a futuristic interpretation of [the copula]”18, as de Sousa has argued, it is worth noting, as Brown has correctly pointed out, that “[w] hile […] the Hebrew is vague about whether the conception had already

14 See Lust et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, vol. 1 (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1992), 19. LXX.D translates it as “doch” in the sense perhaps to mean “yet” or “after all”. 15 The translator’s view of a positive reading of this portion has been analysed and acknowledged by other scholars. See for instance, Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 224; Rösel “Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel,” p. 143; de Sousa, Eschatology, 91–93. 16 De Sousa, Eschatology, 93. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid., 75.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7: 10–17

81

taken place or would take place in the future, the Greek is not vague and the conception is definitely future.”19 Last but not least, let us look at the translator’s addition of ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακὸν in v. 16. This addition has been discussed in some detail by Lust20 and Troxel.21 A reasonable assessment of their views can be found in de Sousa’s monograph.22 All of them (including de Sousa) have seen a possible link between this and the texts of LXX-Deut 1: 39; Num 14: 23; 32: 11. In addition to these texts, de Sousa has also discussed another possible link (i. e. 1QSa 1: 8–11) that was overlooked by his predecessors. He argues (with reference to the latter possible connection) that “there is enough evidence that the choice between ‘good and evil’ is a strong and widespread motif in early Judaism, and it could have made its way into the [Isaiah] translation and contributed to a reading that deviates from the original.”23 Besides this, he agrees with his predecessors (esp. Troxel) that in the LXX the focus is on the child’s unique devotion to τὸ ἀγαθὸν;24 thus showing that the translator’s interest was “in safeguarding the character of the child.”25 Syntactically, this emphasis on the child’s rejection of evil and choice of ‘the good’ is clearly displayed in the translator’s use of the phrase γνῶναι ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακὸν as to offer an “explanation for why the child will select the good without even knowing about evil”26 (as read in πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι αὐτὸν ἢ προελέσθαι πονηρὰ ἐκλέξεται τὸ ἀγαθόν in v. 15). It should be observed that the promise of the desolation of the enemies’ land (in vv. 16b-17) is found after the announcement of the birth of Immanuel and the understanding of his characteristics. As stated earlier, this promise is introduced by καὶ in v. 16b and stressed by the use of ἀλλά in v. 17 (as demonstrated above). In sum, LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 is a coherent unit. It should be read within its literary context of the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. In this pericope, our translator likely “gives the sign of Εμμανουηλ [an important] status, making it the substance of the promise [of the desolation of the enemies of the land of Judah].”27 His focus is on his assertion of the child’s distinctive character. In other words, the passage under inspection looks at the promise of a time of divine healing (added to v. 4) following days of wrath, thus portraying Εμμανουηλ (in vv. 14–16a) as the inaugurator of a new era. One of the most prominent features of that period “will be a child with extraordinary moral 19 R. E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (New York: Image Books, 1977), 149. 20 Messianism and the Septuagint, 222–23. 21 “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 2–9; also, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation: The Strategies of the Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 88–89; 98–99;139–45. 22 De Sousa, Eschatology, 77–82. 23 Ibid., p. 84. 24 Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 19. 25 De Sousa, Eschatology, 84. 26 Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 145. 27 Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 19. Cf. Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

82

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

character.”28 In the translator’s journey of understanding of who this child will be, he brings together a network of related texts.

1.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ As it stands, LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 shows that the child (i. e. Εμμανουηλ) is the υἱος of a παρθένος (as a rendering of ‫)עלמה‬29 read in v. 14 and the παιδίον for ‫ הנער‬of v. 16. Before attempting to provide any significant identity of this promised child, it is important to have an understanding of what is going on with the use of the term παιδίον by the Isaiah translator. Throughout the LXX-Isaiah, the noun παιδίον appears in eight various forms,30 most often translating seven different Hebrew words.31 In terms of meaning, Ekblad points out that παιδίον often refers to a young child (Isa 3: 5; 10: 19; 11: 6,8; 49: 15; 66: 8,12), an animal (Isa 11: 7; 34: 15), the prophet Isaiah’s children who serve as signs (Isa 7: 16; 8: 4,18), or the little child who is awaited as deliverer (Isa 9: 6).32 He also argues that παιδίον can be translated as the “little servant” (Isa 53: 2).33 He finally observes that the translator uses παῖς34 to refer to: (a) important personalities of Israel’s past, i. e. Isaiah (Isa 20: 3), the high priest Eliakim (Isa 22: 20), and David (Isa 37: 35); (b) an ordinary servant in a master-servant relationship (Isa 24: 2; 36: 11; 37: 5); and (c) specifically Israel/Jacob as the servant understood in the sense of the people of Israel as a whole (Isa 40 ff).35 Even if we do not completely share Ekblad’s view that (a) the παιδίον of Isa 7: 16 is designated as the prophet Isaiah’s child36 and the translation of 28 Ibid., 20. 29 There is a plethora of works on issue of the use of παρθένος (instead of νεᾶνις) for ‫עלמה‬. For a thorough and helpful analysis of this term, see for instance G. Brunet, Essai sur l’Isaïe de l’Histoire: Etude de Quelques Textes notamment dans Isa VII, VIII & XXII (Paris: Editions A. & J. Picard, 1975), 35–100; R. G. Bratcher, “A Study of Isaiah 7: 14. Its Meaning and Use in the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint and the Gospel of Matthew”, The Bible Translator 9 (1958) 97–126, on pp. 112–116. 30 As παιδίον (Isa 3: 5; 7: 16; 8: 4; 9: 5; 10: 19; 11: 6,8; 53: 2); παιδία (Isa 8: 18; 11: 17; 34: 15; 38: 19; 66: 8, 12); παιδίου (Isa 46: 3; 49: 15); παῖς (Isa 20: 3; 24: 2; 41: 8,9; 42: 1; 43: 10; 44: 1,2,21; 52: 13); παῖδά (Isa 22: 20; 37: 35; 44: 21; 49: 6); παῖδάς (Isa 36: 11); παῖδες (Isa 37: 5; 42: 19); and παιδὸς (Isa 44: 26; 45: 4; 50: 10). 31 These are: ‫( נער‬Isa 3: 5; 7: 16; 8: 4; 10: 19; 11: 6); ‫( ילד‬Isa 8: 18; 9: 6; 11: 7); ‫( בן‬Isa 38: 19; 66: 8); ‫( יונק‬Isa 11: 8; 53: 2); ‫( עול‬Isa 49: 15); ‫( רחם‬Isa 46: 3); and ‫( עבד‬Isa 20: 3; 22: 20; 24: 2; 37: 5,35; 36: 11; 41: 8,9; 42: 1,19; 43: 10; 44: 1,2,21,26; 45: 4; 49: 6; 50: 10; 52: 13). However, παιδία in both Isa 34: 15 and 66: 12 lacks a lexical counterpart in the MT. It seems to be a translator addition. 32 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 201. 33 Ibid., 202 (esp. note 116). 34 We would prefer to say: “other forms than παιδίον, preceded or not by the article, and followed or not by a personal pronoun.” 35 Ibid., 62. 36 For Ekblad, for instance, does not see that the translator uses ἐν γασρτὶ ἔξει (in Isa 7: 14),

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7: 10–17

83

this term in 53: 2 as “little servant”,37 and that (b) the designation of ‘Israel’/ ‘Jacob’ as a name of the Servant of the Lord is to be understood collectively as the people of Israel as a whole,38 it remains a fact to be reckoned with that, except in its reference to an animal, the fundamental feature of the term παιδίον (or its cognates/synonyms) is referred to or associated with someone (an individual or a ‘corporate personality’) with a substantial mission or role. This seems to be obvious by viewing the term παιδίον (or its cognates/synonyms) in the immediate context where it occurs, as well as the broader context of the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. For instance, one can observe that throughout the LXX-Isaiah the translator describes this παιδίον (or its cognates/synonyms) as one(s) who will: a) stumble against the authority of the elders (Isa 3: 5); b) play an important role as sign(s) in what is to happen in Israel (8: 4,18); c) be an instrumental agent in bringing peace to the rulers (9: 1–6);39 d) be given a task with regard to the remnant (10: 19); e) lead dangerous and/or venomous animals (11: 6,8); or f) become similar to his master (24: 2). The translator associates παιδίον (or its cognates/synonyms) with Isaiah as one who is told to perform a prophetic task (20: 3), Eliakim as a ruler who will be given the glory of David (22: 20), individuals (i. e. Eliakim, Somnan, and the elders of the priests) as important figures that play a significant role in Rabshakeh’s threat (37: 5), and David as one who the Lord remembers for the defense and salvation of the city of Jerusalem (37: 35). In other passages, the mission of the figure(s) associated with παιδίον (or its cognates/ synonyms) is basically oriented towards Israel and/or the ends of the earth. In order to economise on space, more detail on this will be provided later.40 Given this understanding, it is reasonable to assume that, via the use of παιδίον, the translator seems to have anticipated the reading of Isa 7 with a network of texts, which he “saw as linked for the purpose of clarifying meaning.”41 This lends support to describing the παιδίον of Isa 7: 16, for instance, as a descendant of the Davidic dynasty, thus a royal child. In this connection, exploring the identity of Εμμανουηλ in LXX-Isa 7: 14–16, Troxel has correctly observed that:

37

38 39 40 41

but ἐν γασρτὶ ἔλαβεν when referring to either Isaiah’s children (cf. Isa 8: 3) or other people’s children (cf. Isa 26: 8). Given this observation, as shall be seen, it is unlikely that παιδίον (in Isa 7: 14,16) is referred to the prophet Isaiah’s child. Ekblad’s argument is understandably based on his adoption of another reading of the text. However, since a different reading of Isa 53: 2 is taken up in this study (as noted above), it is fair enough that our view also differs from his. For it shall be demonstrated that the identity of the Lord’s Servant (in LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 discussed below) is in connection with the understanding of his mission. For more detail on the mission of παιδίον in this passage, see next chapter of the current study. See esp. the analysis of LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and 52: 13–53: 12 (in the present study). Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 268.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

84

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

While the translator has provided no explicit indication as to the identity of Εμμανουηλ, two features suggest he presumed the child to be royal. First, his rendering of ‫ קראת‬in v. 14 by καλέσετε, addressed to the house of David (N. B. the preceding ὑμῖν), suggests this is royal offspring. Second, the accent on the child’s distinctive character accords with passages anticipating a new, upright Davidic ruler.42

With reference to those passages that anticipate a new, upright Davidic ruler, Troxel has in mind Isa 11: 2–4 and 32: 1, texts where the translator focuses on “an extraordinarily pious ruler” and “the character of the king as upright”, respectively.43 While his view clearly refers to παιδίον (in 7: 14) as a royal child not only if LXX-Isa 7: 14 is read in light of Isa 11: 2–4 and 32: 1 (noted above), but also based on his reading that sees the “house of David” as responsible for the naming (cf. καλέσετε) of this child, de Sousa claims the opposite. De Sousa’s argument is mainly based on the reading of καλέσεις that strongly suggests Ahaz as the one responsible for naming the παιδίον.44 However, he does not see perhaps that Ahaz is also understood in this passage as a representative of the “house of David”. Consequently, his argument cannot stand. Concluding his analysis of the identity of παιδίον (in 7: 14), Troxel sees some plausible links between the figure depicted in LXX-Isa 7: 14–16 and the one in 9: 1–7 and 11: 1–10 (discussed below). While admitting that “we lack clear evidence that the translator identified the child of 7,14–16 with the ruler anticipated in chapters 9 and 11,”45 he (i. e. Troxel) says: The most we can say is that there is nothing that would prevent this identification, while there are correlations that favor it. The extraordinarily upright character attributed to the expected ruler in chapter 11 accords with the child’s singular rejection of evil and choice of “the good” in chapter 7, while the role of divulging the divine plan assigned in chapter 9 would be fitting for the distinctive child of chapter 7, and the royal status assumed in chapter 9 tallies with the hint of 7,14 that the royal household will name the child.46

This statement was taken by Schaper as the beginning for his investigation of the coherence of messianic passages in the LXX-Isaiah and their possible associations with other related ones in other Septuagintal books.47 Using “key terms that are elements of what one might call ‘messianic language’ found in the Greek Isaiah and beyond,”48 Schaper rightly observes that the terms παιδίον and υἱος used in the passage under inspection recur in LXXIsa 9: 5. Given this view, he claims: “it can be demonstrated that 9,5 LXX consciously takes up the scarlet thread first seen in 7,16: (τὸ) παιδίον trans42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 20; Cf. Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 372–73. Ibid. De Sousa, Eschatology, 76–77. Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 21; Cf. Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371. Ibid. Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371–72. Ibid., 372.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 7: 10–17

85

lates ‫ הנער‬in Isa 7,16 but ‫ ילד‬in Isa 9, 5. This indicates the translator’s wish to systematize the use of terms referring to the expected ruler first announced in chapter 7.”49 According to him, the salutary work of the παιδίον perceived by the translator in Isa 7 is “further specified [in 9: 1–7] as being that of μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος who will bring peace and prosperity.”50 As said earlier, Schaper’s idea here regarding the Isaiah translator’s use of a systematic approach in his choice of certain terms with theological imprint(s) has been dismissed by de Sousa.51 However, it is interesting to observe that from a structural point of view,52 in both chapters 7 and 9 it is the “house of David” or its representative that names and recognises παιδίον as Εμμανουηλ (cf. καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ) and Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος, respectively. In other words, it is the Jewish community that sees in the oracles (esp. in chapter 9 as shall be seen) the restoration of power and glory to the house of David. In this way, even if the Isaiah translator’s translation technique can be deemed as unsystematic (with reference to his rendition of terms), his manoeuvre in linking texts with purposeful meaning(s) should not be overlooked. Given this thought, if LXX-Isa 7: 10– 17 is read in conjunction with LXX-Isa 9: 1–7, as Schaper rightly states, “it is beyond reasonable doubt that one encounters here a strong messianic belief, centred on the expectation of an upright Davidic ruler supposed to have Israel restored through the announcement of the μεγάλης βουλῆς of the Lord.”53 As shall be seen, via the connection with LXX-Isa 9: 1–7, the translator implicitly links up the reading of LXX-Isa 7: 14–16 with two other passages within the larger context of LXX-Isaiah as a whole. These are: Isa 42: 1 (Ιακωβ ὁ παῖς μου) and 53: 1–2 (ἀνέτειλε μὲν ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ ὡς παιδίον ὡς ῥίζα ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ). While much detail with regard to these links is provided later in the analysis of these texts, it will be argued that the Isaiah translator’s use of παιδίον as a messianic child and the reappearance of many words and themes from LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 in these passages seem to reflect intertextual exegetical links.54 Given this view, it can be said that if LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 is read in the light of one of these passages, it should display undoubtedly a messianic interpretation. Moreover, Ekblad, for instance, identifies a visible intertextual connection between LXX-Isa 53: 2 and 11: 1– 2, thus linking the Lord’s Servant to the imagery of the Davidic dynasty depicted in these texts, respectively. He therefore argues that the “association

49 Ibid. 50 Ibid. 51 De Sousa, Eschatology, 159–62. According to him “the resurfacing of certain theological ideas at different points [within the LXX-Isaiah] simply reflects the translator’s awareness of them in the course of seeking to communicate the meaning of the Hebrew” (p. 160). 52 The structure of LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 (esp. vv.6–7) is provided below while discussing this text. 53 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 374. 54 Ekblad Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 63, 202.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

86

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

of the servant with the descendant of Jesse, […] lends support to a [m]essianic interpretation of the servant present in the LXX.”55 Both Hengel and Bailey also claim that “the unusual use of ὡς παιδίον in 53: 2 to render ‫כיונק‬ could rather point back to the messianic child in Isa 9: 5 (ET 9: 6) and 7: 14– 16.”56

1.4 Summary The foregoing discussion reveals an important methodological aspect of the translator’s way of producing his text. Through (a contextual and) an intertextual exegesis, the Isaiah translator connects a given text with a network of texts that, in our view, should help the reader to read any passage (in the light of or in conjunction with the other related ones). In other words, the translator’s way of producing his text becomes an approach set by him for the reader to become hermeneutically active. With regard to the text that underwent analysis, the connection of the distinctive character of παιδίον with texts anticipating a new, upright Davidic ruler proves to be a strong evidence for arguing that any reader (among the Jewish community in Alexandria) would have read it either in the light of or in conjunction with those other related texts (discussed above) and would have made purposeful connections. After reading LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 in this way, to assume the absence of messianic beliefs in it is wrong. The translator’s important link between Εμμανουηλ (in vv. 14–16a) and the inauguration of a new era of redemption (vv. 17–25) promised after the short period of God’s wrath (v. 4), as demonstrated in our analysis, should be noted.

2. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9:1–7(8:23–9:6) The following intertextual analysis is an attempt to detect any possible kind of messianic belief in LXX-Isa 9: 6(5)-7(6)57, which lies behind the translator’s refusal to attribute divine or messianic titles to the awaited child in the MT (v. 5). This includes analysing the translator’s word choices, verb tenses, 55 Ibid., 203. 56 M. Hengel/D. P. Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the Pre-Christian Period”, in B. Janowski/P. Stuhlmacher (ed.), The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources, (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004), 75–146, on p. 135. 57 These two verses have been the focus of recent discussion of the pericope (LXX-Isa 9: 1–7). The tendency in scholarship has been to endorse Lust’s view that they do not say anything about a messianic figure; see Lust, “Messianism in the Septuagint: Isaiah 8,23b-9,6(9,1–7)”, 153–69. For instance, see A. Salvesen, “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translation in Greek and Latin”, in Bockmuehl/Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance, 245–61, on p. 253; Fitzmyer, The One Who Is to Come, 74; Fabry, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 201; Munnich, “Le Messianisme”, 342–44.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6)

87

omissions and additions within both the entire pericope (i. e. 9: 1–7) and the larger literary corpus of the LXX-Isaiah 2.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context In its immediate context, the oracle of Isa 9: 1–7 belongs to the Ahaz section (Isa 7–12). In this part, one reads that in the face of a serious threat of the enemies (i. e. Aram and the northern kingdom of Israel) who wanted to march towards the land of Judea with the intention to remove a descendant of David from the throne in Jerusalem, the prophet Isaiah is sent to Ahaz (and ultimately to the house of David) to assure him about the continuation of the Davidic dynasty (7: 6–7). Refusing the call to “trust in the Lord” (7: 9; 8: 5–6), the house of David, addressed in this case as “this people” (8: 6,11),58 demanded a foreign king (8: 6) for deliverance from its oppressors.59 As a consequence of their choice, the Lord intended to bring against them (i. e. God’s people) a foreign army under the Assyrian king (8: 7), who “will take away from Judea any man who can lift his head or who is capable to accomplish anything” (8: 8; cf. 3: 1), thus anticipating the emigration of the Jews from their home land to Egypt (10: 24; cf. Deut 28: 68; Amos 4: 10; Isa 6: 12).60 However, the translator sees a day when the Lord’s judgment shall fall upon the Assyrians. This is obvious, for instance, in LXX-Isa 10: 5–6 where the Lord’s wrath, as Troxel correctly says, “is directed against them and executed by Israel.”61 In this action, the return of the remnant of Israel under suffering from their oppressors (in the country of the Assyrians and in Egypt) to the holy mountain in Jerusalem is foretold (10: 20; cf. 11: 11; 27: 13; 37: 32). In that day, Israel will trust in God instead of depending on those who wronged them (see “ἐν τῇ ἡμέρα ἐκείνη […] οἱ σωθέντες τοῦ Ιακωβ […] ἔσονται πεποιθότες ἐπὶ τὸν θεὸν” in 10: 20; cf. 12: 1–2). The enmity

58 As opposed to the covenant formula “my people”. A thorough examination of the identity of “this people” in 8: 11–22 as unfaithful nation can be found in Wagner’s critics towards van der Kooij; see J. R. Wagner, “Identifying ‘Updated’ Prophecies in the Old Greek (OG) Isaiah: Isaiah 8: 11–16 as a Test Case”, JBL 126 (2007) 251–69 (esp., pp. 259–66). 59 For a thorough and helpful analysis of the oppressors of Israel in the LXX-Isaiah, see for instance, Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 201–46. 60 LXX-Isa 10: 24 has raised a varying understanding among LXX scholars. For instance, both Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 242–43 and van der Kooij, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches, 35–36, see in this verse an identification of the ruler(s) and the era of the translation. A critique of their views is found in Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 188 ff. Neves, A Teologia da Tradução Grega Dos Setenta No Livro De Isaías, 69, sees the verse as forecasting salvation for Israel. No matter how one would view this passage, the Isaiah translator’s interpretative device is obvious. 61 Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 229.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

88

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

between Israel and Judah will cease (see “Εφραιμ οὐ ζηλώσει Ιουδαν καὶ

Ιουδας οὐ θλίψει Εφραιμ” in 11: 12–13).

Thus far, we can observe that the entire pericope (i. e. LXX-Isa 9: 1–7), which must be taken into account in our analysis of vv. 6–7, occurs in a context of an announcement of judgment on “this people”, as well as an anticipation of future hopes for Israel. Also this context goes beyond Isaiah 1–12. More closely, vv. 6–7 are read within an oracle that is applied with greater concreteness (via the translator’s addition of “τὰ μέρη τῆς Ιουδαίας”62 in Isa 9: 1(8: 23)) to the Jews of “the districts of Judea” living in Palestine in the Hellenistic era. This is contrary to the MT’s reading that sees it in a context which, as Blenkinsopp rightly observes, “speaks of the destiny of the northern [kingdom of Israel (Isa 8: 23)].”63 In v. 2(1), these Jews are described as “the people walking in darkness” (ὁ λαὸς ὁ πορευόμενος ἐν σκότει) and “dwelling in [the] land and shadow of death” (οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου). Still in this verse, according to the translator, it is they that are summoned to see the redemptive light (ἴδετε φῶς μέγα) or expect it (φῶς λάμψει ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς).64 This message of their salvation is also observed in vv. 4(3)-5(4) where the translator sees the removal of their socio-economic oppression. He speaks of the Lord dispersing the “rod” (ῥάβδον) of the taxcollectors (τῶν ἀπαιτούντων; cf. 3: 12; 14: 4).65 They “will make compensa62 Exegetically, τὰ μέρη can be understood as a nominative of apposition. If this is correct, then the clauses (χώρα Ζαβουλων ἡ γῆ Νεφθαλιμ ὁδὸν θαλάσσης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ τὴν παραλίαν κατοικοῦντες καὶ πέραν τοῦ Ιορδάνου Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν) refer to the expression “τὰ μέρη τῆς Ιουδαίας”. Therefore, as Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 237, claims, “[w]e are directly and unmistakably transported into the historical atmosphere of Palestine in Hellenistic times”. See also Lust, Messianism and The Septuagint, 161. More recently van der Louw, Transformation in the Septuagint, has studied the Isaiah translator’s use of Ιουδα and Ιουδαία. He has observed that in the LXX-Isaiah, “Ιουδαία […] functions as a geo-political designation for the land of Judah, e. g. in the vicinity of names like Assyria” (pp. 159–60). Last but not least, the phrase τὴν γὰρ ῥάβδον τῶν ἀπαιτούντων (v. 4) more likely refers to Ptolemaic rule in Palestine (301–200 B. C. E.), a period where “taxes were heavy and numerous;” see T. V. Brisco, Holman Bible Atlas: A Complete Guide to the Expansive Geography of Biblical History (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998), 178–80. This lends support to viewing all the geographical names in the translation as a description of the land of Judea. 63 Therefore he is inclined “to assign [the text] to the time of Josiah when hopes for reunification were running high”; see J. Blenkinsopp, A History of Prophecy in Israel, Revised and Enlarged (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996), 109. See also Lust, Messianism and The Septuagint, 159, who sees that “Zebulun and Naphali, the way of the sea, the land beyond the Jordan, all refer to the northern part of Israel. After the Syro-Ephraimite war, Israel was divided into the three parts: the coast lands, Galilee and the land beyond the Jordan, the three parts of Israel addressed in 8,23b”. As shall be seen, the addressees in 8: 23 in MT enter to some degree into conflict with the hymn, especially in the stanza that says “a child has been born to us” (9: 5 MT) and the reference to the house of David (9: 6 MT). 64 Cf. van der Kooij, “LXX-Isaiah 8–9 and the Issue of Fulfilment-Interpretation”, Adamantius 13 (2007) 20–28, on p. 24; also “The Septuagint of Isaiah and the Mode of Reading Prophecies in Early Judaism”, 606. 65 A few scholars have seen that the Isaiah translator’s use of ἀπαιτούντες in 9: 3 points to

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6)

89

tion for” (ἀποτείσουσιν) every profit gained “deceitfully” (δόλῳ) as they demanded an “increase of fee” (μετὰ καταλλαγῆς).66 Upon this invitation to see the dawn of a new era that is guaranteed by their liberation from their heavy fiscal burden, the majority of the aforementioned Jews shall break into a hymn of joy before an unspecified figure (v. 3(2)). It is likely that this hymn reaches the zenith in vv. 6–7 where the people speak of the birth of a royal child as an heir to the throne of David. If this reading is accepted, then it can be said that the focus of the pericope is on a particular task given to the awaited child. In this way, the pericope conveys an expression of hope that the future will be better as it will repair the bad times of the past. 2.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT(Isa 9: 5–6)

LXX(Isa 9: 6–7)

‫כי־ילד ילד־לנו בן נתן־לנו ותהי‬ ‫שרה על־שכמו ויקרא שמו פלא‬ ׂ ‫המ‬ ‫שר־שלום‬ ׂ ‫יועץ אל גבור אביעד‬

5

‫שרה ולשלום אין־קץ‬ ׂ ‫למרבה המ‬ ‫על־כסא דוד ועל־ממלכתו להכין‬ ‫אתה ולסעדה במשפט ובצדקח‬ ‫מעתה ועד־עולם קנאת יהוה‬ ‫שה־זאת‬ ׂ ‫צבאות תע‬

6

6 ὅτι παιδίον ἐγεννήθη ἡμῖν, υἱος καὶ ἐδόθη ἡμῖν, οὗ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἐγενήθη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ, καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Μεγάλης Βουλῆς ἄγγελος ἐγώ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας εἰρήνην καὶ ὑγίειαν αὐτῷ

7 Μεγάλη ἡ ἀρχὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς

εἰρήνης αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν ὅριον ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον Δαυιδ καὶ τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ κατορθῶσαι αὐτὴν καὶ ἀντιλαβέσθαι αὐτῆς ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ κρίματι ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον ὁ ζῆλος κυρίου σαβαωθ ποιήσει ταῦτα.

Seleucid rulers. See for instance, R. Hanhart, “Die Septuaginta als Interpretation und Aktualisierung: Jesaja 9: 1(8: 23)-7(6)”, in A. Rofé/Y. Zakovitch (ed.), Isaac Leo Seeligmann Volume, vol. 3 (Jerusalem: E. Rubinstein's Publishing House, 1983), 331–46, on p. 343; Troxel, “Economic Plunder as a Leitmotif in LXX-Isaiah”, Biblica 83 (2002) 375–91, on pp. 390–91; van der Kooij, “The Septuagint of Isaiah and the Mode of Reading Prophecies in Early Judaism”, 609. 66 More recently, Munnich, “La traduction grecque d’Isaïe 8–9”, 16, has discovered that “l’interprétation ‘opposser fiscalement’ correspond au commentaire que fait Rashi du terme précédent [i. e.‫] נגש‬: ‘le bâton à son épaule: c’était une rude charge que de prélever un impôt pesant’ (‫”)להעלות מס קשה‬, thus indicating (together with other examples) the Isaiah translator’s affinity with the exegetical tradition of Rabbinic Judaism. This, according to Munnich, explains why “cette traduction [du grecque d’Isaïe], si peu littérale, n’a jamais été réprouvée par le judaïsme de langue grecque durant les siècles où le texte a été transmis en milieu juif” (p. 19).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

90

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

MT

LXX

5 For a child has been born to us, a son is given to us and the rule shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be called wonderful counsellor, mighty God, everlasting father, prince of peace.

6 For a child has been born to us and a son has been given to us to whom the rule has been upon his shoulder and his name is called Messenger of Great Counsel; for I will bring peace to the rulers: peace and health to him!

6 To the increase of his rule and of peace there shall be no end upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to establish it and to lay hold of it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth and unto eternity. The zeal of Yahweh of Hosts shall to this.

7 Great is his rule and of his peace there is no border upon the throne of David and his kingdom, to establish it and to lay hold of it with righteousness and with judgement from now and until the eternal age. The zeal of the Lord Sabaoth will do these things.

A close look at the above comparison of versions shows that there are a few significant elements that seem to witness to a different meaning in each text. Firstly, the translator’s choice of ὅριον for ‫( קץ‬v. 6) is undoubtedly a ‘free’ translation. It is worth noting that a glance at Hatch and Redpath’s Concordance shows that it is only here in the LXX-Isaiah, as well as the other LXX books, that ‫ קץ‬as an important term in the apocalyptic texts is rendered by ὅριον, which is used in a spatial sense. This strongly suggests an interpretative work of the Isaiah translator as he shifts from the MT’s expression of belief in an endless Davidic dynasty to an unlimited “geographical regions” understanding of the throne of David and his kingdom.67 Secondly, the translator’s rendering of Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος ἐγὼ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας εἰρήνην καὶ ὑγίειαν αὐτῷ (for ‫פלא יועץ אל גבור‬ ‫שר־של ום‬ ׂ ‫ אביעד‬in v. 6 (5)) is significant. Here, Lust has claimed that “the role of the human leader is reduced to that of a ‘messenger’ of the Lord.”68 However, more recently, in his study of the pericope under inspection and another related text (i. e. LXX-Isa 22: 21), Le Moigne has sufficiently demonstrated that the refusal to attribute divine names to the awaited child in 9: 6(5) is understood in the light of the Isaiah translator’s view that only God possesses the right to be called concomitantly “father” and “king”. He has observed that while the title of “king” was suitable for human figures as well 67 As already noted by other scholars. See e. g., van der Kooij, The Oracle of Tyre, 105; Munnich, “Le Messianisme”, 344; de Sousa, Eschatology, 119–20. According to Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, the Isaiah translator’s interpretative enterprise may possible here be due in relation to the fact that Assyria is viewed in the translation as a world-ruler figure (see Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 234). Similarly, the peace to be brought by an heir to the throne of David must reflect a world-wide hope. 68 Lust, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 168 (emphasis added).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6)

91

as for God69, the one of “father” was only reserved for God, “au prix de modifications plus ou moins importantes, tout en accroissant en même temps la dimension royale des personnages considérés.”70 This reveals (as shall be shown later) that the child depicted in the pericope under scrutiny is a king with a specific role. Moreover, Le Moigne’s important observation joins Troxel’s statement (made against Lust’s view) that “[e]ven if the translation retreats from the lofty epithets ascribed to the child in MT, the mission described for him is substantial.”71 Thirdly, unlike the MT, the tone in the whole pericope in its Greek form is future-oriented. This is displayed in the following Greek verbal phrases: “a light will shine” [φῶς λάμψει ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς] (v. 2); “they shall rejoice” [εὐφρανθήσονται] (v. 3); “the yoke shall be taken away” [ἀφαιρεθήσεται] (v. 4); “they will repay and they will desire” [ἀποτείσουσιν καὶ θελήσουσιν] (v. 4); “I will bring peace” [ἐγὼ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην] (v. 6). This chain of the aforementioned phrases in future tenses strongly suggests that the Isaiah translator anticipates an event still to come.72 If our analysis (of what is going on in the pericope under inspection) so far is accepted, then it could be argued that this text in its Greek form focuses on the expectation of an upright Davidic ruler with a specific mission. This claim takes us to a scholarly debate concerning the identification of the speaker of the words “ἐγὼ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας”. Lust has seen him to be the Lord.73 Schaper understands the speech to be uttered by Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος.74 More recently, Collins has claimed that both views “are not as sharply opposed as they might initially seem, as in either case the ἄγγελος is a proclaimer.”75 Collins adds, “[w]e cannot suppose that the ἄγγελος brings peace by his own power rather than the power of God, nor can we suppose that divine agency excludes the role of the ἄγγελος as instrumental agent.”76 So, according to him, “[t]he reign of the messiah is the

69 As Munnich, “La traduction grecque d’Isaïe 8–9”, 12, has discovered that “l’exégèse rabbinique réfère aussi à Dieu le qualificatif ‘Prince de la paix’”. 70 Le Moigne, ‘Le père ou le roi: Stratégies de traduction en Ésaïe IX,6 et XXII, 21 (Septante),’ (article published by CIER, in http://www.msh-m.fr/article.php3?id_article=542, accessed on 6 August, 2009). 71 Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 21; see also Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 373–74. 72 Fitzmyer, The One Who Is to Come, 74, thinks that these “Greek verbs…could refer to an ideal future Davidic king,…[who] is not called Χριστός, ‘Messiah’,”. 73 Lust, “Messianism in the Septuagint”, 168. His view has been followed by de Sousa, Eschatology, 115; also “Problems and Perspectives on the Study of Messianism in LXX Isaiah”, in A. van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives, 135–52, on pp. 138–47. 74 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 374–75. 75 Collins, “Isaiah 8: 23–9: 6”, 216; also A. Y. Collins/J. J. Collins, King and Messiah As Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 61–62. 76 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

92

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

occasion on which God will bring peace.”77 Collins’ view seems to suggest that, as far as our pericope is concerned, the Lord’s action in the messianic era overlaps with that of his agent. This, actually, may be conceivable, especially if the words “ἐγὼ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας” were to be read in conjunction with the last ones (from our pericope) “ὁ ζῆλος κυρίου σαβαωθ ποιήσει ταῦτα” (cf. the Lord’s action in v. 4(3)); which are two phrases that likely suggest two distinct figures working for a common purpose. Besides this, even the flow of thought within our pericope seems to reveal that the Lord’s action depicted in the words of the latter of the aforementioned two phrases likely refers to that of his role in removing the financial oppression (vv. 4–3), and yet the mission to establish a firm kingdom (v. 7) is carried by a figure different from the Lord. Given the possible view that in vv. 6–7 we are dealing with a kind of hymn performed by the redeemed people, as suggested above, the Jewish community in Alexandria (or wherever the community read τὸ πλεῖστον τοῦ λαοῦ ὃ κατήγαγες ἐν εὐφροσύνῃ σου in v. 2)78, who yearned for a time of redemption, should be viewed as entering (possibly as the process of this redemption begins) into a chorus with the bringer of peace beyond the borders of the kingdom of David. This chorus can be heard in the following direct speeches as suggested to some extent by Schaper:79 Α. ὅτι παιδίον ἐγεννήθη ἡμῖν υἱὸς καὶ ἐδόθη ἡμῖν οὗ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἐγενήθη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος

B. ἐγὼ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας Α′. εἰρήνην καὶ ὑγίειαν αὐτῷ μεγάλη ἡ ἀρχὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς εἰρήνης αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν ὅριον ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον Δαυιδ καὶ τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ κατορθῶσαι αὐτὴν καὶ ἀντιλαβέσθαι αὐτῆς ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἐν κρίματι ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον ὁ ζῆλος κυρίου σαβαωθ ποιήσει ταῦτα

In the above structure, the speeches A and Α′ recognise παιδίον as the Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος. They are to be considered as uttered by the liberated Jewish community (cf. v. 3(2)). However, in B (that stands as the centre of gravity of the text) it is this παιδίον who announces his specific mission. Moreover, the syntactical relationships (in v. 6) indicate, as Troxel has correctly observed, that the statement B is closely associated with παιδίον as the Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος by the conjunction γὰρ, which finds no direct counterpart in the MT or any other textual witness. He sees that the translator’s addition γὰρ (read together with the pronoun ἐγὼ) marks the shift to the divine speech, which promises to bring peace upon the rulers (εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας). This speech, concludes Troxel, “is the effect (and thus 77 Ibid. 78 See Brisco, Holman Bible Atlas, 179, points out that “The Jewish population of Alexandria increased steadily” during the time of the Ptolemaic rule in Palestine. 79 “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 374.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6)

93

the general content) of the Μεγάλη βουλή the messenger brings;”80 thus revealing that the aforementioned speech B is proclaimed by παιδίον. If this reconstruction is accepted, then one witnesses to a shift of focus from the titles of the child (MT) to the reign (of the child ruler) which brings peace in a world-wide kingdom with Jerusalem as its centre. In this way, then, Schaper is correct in saying that, “[t]his reign will be established as a direct result of the announcement [made by] the Μεγάλη[ς] βουλῆ[ς ἄγγελος].”81 2.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ While discussing LXX-Isa 7: 10–17 we have demonstrated that there is a link between this passage and LXX-Isa 9: 6–7 via not only the occurrence of παιδίον and υἱος in both passages, but also through the sharing of a common structural element, i. e. the recognition of this παιδίον as a royal child by the Jewish community. However, while it was said that the Isaiah translator anticipated the reading of Isa 7: 10–17 with the passage at hand in the present discussion, it should make more sense here (as we read Isa 9: 6–7) to point out the translator’s exegetical manoeuvre to associate Isa 9: 6 with Isa 7: 10– 17 as a result of his desire to understand παιδίον (depicted in these passages) as a messianic royal figure. In this case, the intertextual reading of Isa 9: 6–7 with 7: 10–17 is understood as working backwards, while the one with LXX-Isa 53: 2 (as shall be shown, pertinent to the use of παιδίον for ‫יונק‬ here) functions forwards. In addition to the above link, the translator’s use of βουλῆς (from βουλή) as a divine counsel creates also a cluster of intertextual connections between LXX-Isa 9: 6–7 with other passages within his translation. Before attempting to explore them, it is worth noting with Troxel’s recent study that βουλή (and its verbal cognate βουλεύειν) has a noticeably high profile in the LXXIsaiah, as far as its occurrence is concerned, i. e. 51 times against 23 in Ben Sira, 21 in Proverbs and again 21 in 1 Maccabees. According to him, there are 18 times (out of the 51) in the LXX-Isaiah that this term is used with reference to divine plans. The remaining ones involve human schemes. A striking common characteristic among the text passages where βουλή (or its verbal cognate βουλεύειν) occurs is the idea that the plans of the wicked are subject to divine destruction.82 This observation echoes Ekblad’s claim that in the LXX-Isaiah the term βουλή “has a clearer theological and political role

80 Troxel, “βουλή in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 7; see also his article on “ΒΟΥΛΗ and ΒΟΥΛΕΥΕΙΝ in LXX Isaiah”, in A. van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives, 153–71. 81 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 373. 82 Troxel, “βουλή in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 2–8.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

94

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

than its equivalent in the MT.”83 Ekblad’s statement is made while analysing Isaiah 55: 7–8 as a significant text, which is listed by Troxel among those passages where βουλή (or its verbal cognate βουλεύειν) refer to the divine plans. With reference to βουλή in 9: 6, Troxel has correctly suggested that we should not compare other passages that speak of divine plans to define its contents.84 However, it remains a fact to be reckoned with that the existence of echoes of the contents of this βουλή (used for ‫ יועץ‬only here in the LXXIsaiah) in other related passages (that speak of the liberation of the Jewish community or the destruction of foreign powers) cannot be completely ruled out. Ιf this is accepted then, the messenger’s mission in declaring the contents of this βουλή (in 9: 1–7) is, to begin with, at least associated with the prophet’s “task to make God’s plan known to the nations [in 25: 1–7].”85 Moreover, the parallelism between the two texts is also noticeable with reference to the theme of the fall and destruction of the enemies of Israel, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, God being blessed by the redeemed poor people who suffered injustice from the wicked people. By the same token, Schaper has observed that, via the use of βουλή, Isa 9: 6–7 is also in connection with Isa 11: 1–9 and 19: 16–25 (both texts to be discussed below). Regarding the former, according to the Isaiah translator, the royal figure, who will come forth from the root of Jesse (11: 1), will receive the πνεῦμα βουλῆς as a gift (v. 2). Hence, filled by God’s Spirit, he will smite the earth (πατάξει γῆν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ in v.4).86 Similarly, in Isa 19: 16–25, the translator speaks of the destruction of foreign powers (v. 22) as being part of the contents of the divine βουλή (v. 17).87 More recently, de Sousa has correctly observed that the idea of the Lord manifesting his counsel in this passage parallels that of him gloriously shining on the earth with counsel [βουλή] in 4: 2.88 This latter passage has been seen in connection with the βουλή of 25: 1. According to Seeligmann, by reading LXX-Isa 4: 2, one can see that the translator, in line with the idea of an age-old plan (see “βουλὴν ἀρχαίαν” in 25: 1 ff), has given his text a theophanic connotation in a messianic future. Hence, LXX-Isa 4: 2 speaks of “God’s glory [that] will descend upon the earth in those days, in order to honour and exalt the remnant of the people of Israel.”89 Our παιδίον depicted in the pericope under inspection is also named ἄγγελος (Isa 9: 6). According to van der Kooij, this designation envisages the

83 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 40–41. The political overtone particularly present in LXXIsaiah is also recognised by de Sousa, Eschatology, 54(esp. note 42)-56. 84 Troxel, “βουλή in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 8. 85 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 278. 86 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 375. 87 Ibid. 88 See de Sousa, Eschatology, 64, esp. his analysis of “the βουλή of God” in this passage (i. e. Isa 4: 2), on pp. 49–51. 89 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 287; see also de Sousa, Eschatology, 64.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6)

95

idea of a priestly figure. He draws the attention of any student of this passage to note that this “idea of a priest messenger is found in Malachi 2: 7 (LXX: ἄγγελος κυρίου).”90 Besides this evidence, he also points to “a passage written by Hecataeus of Abdera” where “it is said that the high priest (of the Jews) acts as ‘a messenger of God’s commandments’ (ἄγγελον τῶν τοῦ θεοῦ προσταγμάτων)”, and this figure “is the one who ‘expounds’ (ἑρμηνεύοντα) the commandments to them.”91 Given this observation, van der Kooij concludes that even though the designation of “the priestly ruler is not presented [in LXX-Isa 9: 5] as the one who teaches the Law, (…) [he is seen] as the one who knows about the eschatological plan of God for his people and for the nations of the world as well.”92 In the LXX-Isaiah, priests are among those responsible for comforting God’s people in times of distress and great troubles (cf. 40: 2). While the above description of this ἄγγελος as priest-messiah is beyond reasonable doubt, there is however an intriguing issue raised in scholarship. This is about whether actually the title “ἄγγελος”could be appropriately identified as “messianic”. An answer to this question can be found from Horbury, who, as de Sousa correctly puts it, “speaks of the coordination of earthly and angelic figures in a picture of messianic deliverance.”93 There are also a few passages in the Psalms “where angelic activity is presented in the service of the Davidic kingship (2: 4–9; 18: 50; 21: 1–7, 13; 22: 21; 35: 5–6).”94 Given this evidence, plus “the references to angelic beings in Dan 7 and 12: 1,”95 Horbury concludes that “[t]he angelic deliverers, therefore, can be associated with the line of Israelite rulers which is central to messianic expectation.”96 Moreover, Collins has recently observed that in the same way in which “the king could be conceived as a god in pre-exilic Judah, (…) the messianic king could be conceived as an angelic being in the HellenisticRoman period.”97 With reference to the Isaiah translator’s use of ἄγγελος in the passage under analysis, Horbury thinks that the title ‘angel’ here fits well within the breadth of the LXX interpretation of some passages related to David. He sees that the Isaiah translator seems to have been influenced by the angelic and spirit-inspired biblical image of David himself. For according to 2 Reigns 14 (LXX-2 Samuel 14) David was καθὼς ἄγγελος θεοῦ (v. 17, 90 Van der Kooij, “The Greek Bible and Jewish Concepts of Royal Priesthood and Priestly Monarchy”, in Rajak et al. (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers, 255–64, on p. 269. 91 Ibid. This evidence undercuts de Sousa’s argument (against van der Kooij) that “evidence of application of the term ἄγγελος with reference to a priest is scarce”; see de Sousa, Eschatology, 109–10. 92 Ibid. See also “The Septuagint of Isaiah and the Mode of Reading Prophecies in Early Judaism”, 606. 93 See de Sousa, Eschatology, 114; cf. Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 83–84. 94 Ibid. 95 Ibid. 96 Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 86. 97 Collins, “Isaiah 8: 23–9: 6 and its Greek Translation”, 218.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

96

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

also 19: 28) or/and καθὼς σοφία ἀγγέλου τοῦ θεοῦ (v. 20), as far as his insight was concerned. In 23: 2–4 he said that God’s spirit spoke by him (πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐλάλησεν ἐν ἐμοὶ) and God’s word was upon his tongue (ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ γλώσσης μου).98 If read with this in mind, then the awaited child depicted in LXX-Isa 9: 6–7 would be understood to be an heir to the throne of David (Isa 9: 7). Moreover, this cannot be denied if one considers the characteristics of this child that are displayed in the text itself as it stands. Another possible connection that can be seen in the way our translator read his Vorlage and produced his text has been detected by Ekblad. He has observed that Isa 9: 1–7 has much in common with Isa 41: 22–42: 7 (especially with Isa 42: 1–4, to be discussed later).99 Without going into too much detail here, since a more comprehensive treatment of this text lies ahead, it can be borne in mind that one of the common things that is read in these two texts relates to the mission to be accomplished by the figure depicted in each text. This is displayed in the following words or themes. For instance, similar to the child in Isa 9: 7, the Lord’s Servant (in 42: 1–4) shall produce justice through a judicial process to the nations (see κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἐξοίσει in v. 1) or/and justice which is designed for truth100 (see εἰς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν in v. 3). He shall shine forth (see ἀναλάμψει in 42: 4)101 or he is given as [or: to be] a light of nations (see εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν in 42: 6). Horbury also points out that the phrase μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος (Isa 9: 6) “gains pictorial force from the possibility of identifying the child with the ‘great light’ (φῶς μέγα) announced at the beginning of the oracle, to shine on those who sit in darkness and in the land and shadow of death (9: 1[2] LXX).”102 In brief, such a thematic link between them seems to suggest that the translator may have sought to anticipate the reading of Isa 9: 6–7 with 42: 1–4, which refers (as shall be seen) to the Servant as a figure who is dealt with in a manner that makes him appear as a singular individual.103 In both passages, the focus for future hopes for the establishment of righteousness, justice, truth, as well as peace brought by an individual figure as the Messiah, who will sit upon the throne of David, is remarkable.

98 Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 91. 99 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 63–76. Even though we do not totally share with him the treatment of the translator’s use of some words, as it shall be seen, his observation of a clear association that exists between Isa 9: 1–7 with Isa 42: 1–7 in their Greek form is beyond question. 100 In Isa 16: 5 ‘truth is a characteristic of the righteous judge who will sit in the tabernacle of David᾽ (see καθίεται ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ μετὰ ἀληθείας ἐν σκηνῇ Δαυιδ κρίνων καὶ ἐκζητῶν κρίμα καὶ σπεύδων δικαιοσύνην). 101 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 68, has rightly observed that “[w]hile ἀναλάμψει is not λάμψει [in Isa 9: 2], their closeness is striking”. 102 Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 90. 103 Even though, as shall be seen, the identification of the Servant in 42: 1 in its Greek translation refers to the Servant as a collective entity.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 9: 1–7(8: 23–9: 6)

97

From our analysis of the pericope thus far, an important picture that one seems to get is that the awaited child depicted in Isa 9: 6–7 is perceived as a king, priest and an angelic deliverer.104 Moreover, it must also be said that in the biblical tradition “some angelic deliverers are human messianic figures who gained angelic status without losing their association with the line of Israelites rulers.”105 Given this view, and on the basis of this whole chain of arguments, it is undeniable to say that LXX-Isa 9: 6–5 portrays an important messianic hope that focuses on the coming of an upright Davidic ruler.106 2.4 Summary As they read LXX-Isa 9: 6–7 in connection with other related passages mentioned in the discussion and surveyed their immediate situation and past history, the Alexandrian Jews found hope expressed within this text. For this text speaks of the expectation of the coming of an individual figure as a ruler/deliverer (observed above), whose advent will bring peace and establish both justice and righteousness (as distinctive characteristics of an awaited Davidic ruler). This observation alone is enough to argue that when LXXIsa 9: 6–7 is read in its literary context, it also displays a strong Jewish messianic belief (held in Alexandria to which the translator himself belongs) that is deeply rooted in kingship ideology.107 Besides this, some of the various differences of the text (from its Hebrew counterpart that one observes) resonate the translator’s attempt to produce a text which could reflect the situation of his own time, in the second century B. C. E. In doing so, he made use (in some places) of intertextuality. Once the pericope he has produced and that underwent inspection is read in light of (or conjunction with) other related texts within the LXX-Isaiah itself, then the modern reader, like the ancient reader, can see a vivid expression of a longing for a divine messianic figure, who is perceived as an antidote to their various distresses and great troubles. This practice of reading the text has made us identify various facets of this figure, such as king, priest, and angelic deliverer, with a mission to restore Israel by removing every kind of oppression as he breaks the power of their wicked rulers and brings peace to them. This picture differs from what any reader of the Hebrew text of this passage can get.

104 It is worth noting with Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 84, that “in the biblical tradition a monarch is of course at least potentially angelic”. 105 Ibid., 86. 106 Cf. Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 374. 107 Schaper, “The Persian Period”, 5, has correctly said that “the Israelite concept of messianism did not replace the earlier kingship ideology centring on the Davidic line but was deeply rooted in it”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

98

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

3. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11:1–10 More recently, some LXX scholars have discussed the question of whether Isa 11: 1–5 in its Greek form should be called “messianic.”108 In their conclusions, while there is a general consensus among them that this text differs from the MT, some have claimed that “more precise dating of both the Hebrew and the Greek texts [is] needed to sort out properly the criteria for detecting messianism.”109 Others have expressed the opinion that there are only minor differences, which “do not make the LXX more messianic than the MT.”110 Still others have stated that though the future figure depicted in the text “may refer to a postexilic heir, (…) ‘nothing messianic’ is even hinted at.”111 In light of these recent conclusions, we intend to re-examine these verses within LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 as a complete literary unit. This will involve: (a) scrutinizing its literary context, (b) analyzing the differences (to be identified by comparing the text to its Hebrew parent text) pertinent to lexical matters, grammatical and syntactical aspects, as well as historical setting; and (c) attempting to detect the translator’s theological reason that might explain some of those differences.

3.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context In a more recent paper presented at a major colloquium that gathered a few LXX scholars, Sollamo has argued that there is a lack of connection between the end of LXX-Isa 10 and the beginning of LXX-Isa 11.112 Reacting to her view, some scholars thought that perhaps the tree-felling imagery of Isa 10 in its Hebrew form was already absent from the Hebrew Vorlage. Others, however, argued that LXX-Isa 11 reveals “the historical moment in which the translation was made.”113 A close look at the translator’s language in both chapter 10 and 11 may provide evidence in support of the latter view, and hence convincingly support the claim that LXX-Isa 11 is not isolated in 108 Cf. Knibb, “Introduction”, xxvi-xxvii. 109 Ibid., xxvii. 110 Salvesen, “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations”, 253. Sollamo has claimed that the text “does not display any significant deviations from the ‘Messianism’ represented in the Massoretic Text.” After a few lines, she adds: “the Septuagint might have taken one step further in the direction of Messianism, but nothing in the translation bears witness to a special messianic interpretation on the part of the translator”; see Sollamo, “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’”, 366; A similar view is shared by de Sousa, Eschatology, 155–56, and Knibb, “Introduction”, xxvi. 111 Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 75. 112 Sollamo “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’”, 360. Also Knibb, “Introduction”, xxvi. A similar claim is repeatedly read in de Sousa, Eschatology, 143,149,156; also his article on “Problems and Perspectives on the Study of Messianism in LXX Isaiah”, 13. 113 See Knibb, “Introduction”,. xxvi.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

99

context as Sollamo believes. For, as Bauckham has correctly said, “[a]ncient Jewish exegesis […] frequently sought the connexions between adjacent passages of Scripture.”114 To begin with, Sollamo has given less attention to some of the important features that not only occur in the immediate context of chapter 11 in its Greek form, but also in the text of LXX-Isaiah as a whole. It can be demonstrated that there is a coherent flow of thought running from Isa 10 to 11 in their Greek forms [cf. 4Q285 (frgs. 5,7)]. This idea is also linked with various themes within the large literary context of the pericope. Firstly, the end of LXX-Isa 10 (as in 4Q161 [4QpIsaa] frgs. 8–10 col. III) refers to mighty people who will be humbled (see “συνταράσσει τοὺς ἐνδόξους μετὰ ἰσχύος καὶ οἱ ὑψηλοὶ τῇ ὕβρει συντριβήσονται καὶ οἱ ὑψηλοὶ ταπεινωθήσονται” in v. 33). According to v. 34, these arrogant and proud people shall fall by the sword (see “πεσοῦνται οἱ ὑψηλοὶ μαχαίρᾳ [a weapon of war] ὁ δὲ Λίβανος σὺν τοῖς ὑψηλοῖς πεσεῖται” cf. 2: 12–17). In both verses, the language used for the humiliation of these powerful men infers that the conqueror is a warrior. Similarly, as shall be demonstrated, the translator (in LXX-Isa 11: 1 ff.) uses terms (e. g. ῥάβδος) that are associated with power, authority, and/or punishment. That is to say that the beginning of LXX-Isa 11which refers to a person is connected to the aforementioned imagery of the defeat of the proud and mighty men at the end of LXX-Isa 10.115 Secondly, a hint towards viewing the period of the Isaiah translation seems to be revealed in what might appear as the translator’s struggle in seeking to help his audience to recognise some of the place-names in both chapter 10 and 11. As Troxel has rightly observed, it is only in chapter 10 and 11 where the translator (via intertextual associations with texts outside Isaiah, i. e. LXX-Gen 10: 10 and 11: 2), has translated ‫ חמת‬by Ἀραβία (Isa10: 9 and 11: 11; cf. 15: 7,9), inserted τὴν χώραν τὴν ἐπάνω Βαβυλῶνος (Isa10: 9), and intelligibly rendered ‫ ומפתרוס‬with Βαβυλωνίας (Isa 11: 11).116 Troxel’s interesting observation here provides further vital proof of the argument advanced in our study pertinent to the translator’s use of intertextuality in the production of his text, a method that seems to have been set for any reader of his text to read hermeneutically. We shall come back later to this basic element in our attempt to interpret the passage under scrutiny.

114 R. Bauckham, The Jewish World around the New Testament (WUNT 233; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 193. 115 Cf. Ibid., 195–97 (esp. note 16). 116 For more detail on the translator’s work on these terms, see Troxel, “What’s in a Name? Contemporization and Toponyms in LXX-Isaiah”, in Troxel et al. (ed.), Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 327–44, on pp. 333–35. On the influence of the two Genesis passages in their Greek form upon LXX-Isa 10: 9 and 11: 11; see also, Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 99–100.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

100

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

Thirdly, pace de Sousa,117 LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 should be viewed as a complete literary unit. For it should not be forgotten that the phrase “ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης Ιεσσαι”, which occurs in both v. 1 and v. 10, is a significant structural marker. The unit is also connected with the last six verses of this chapter (i. e. vv. 11–16) by means of “καὶ ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἑμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ”118 (see v. 11 and also v. 10). In this way, v. 10 serves as an important hinge for both parts (vv. 1–9 and vv. 11–16).119 It goes without saying that LXX-Isa 11: 11–16 contains the theme of the return of the Jewish people as God’s people from the Diaspora (see καὶ ἔσται δίοδος τῷ καταλειφθέντι μου λαῷ ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ in v. 16). At this point, it is important to see that, via the translator’s use of the term μου λαῷ, the context to which one goes over in attempting to interpret LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 is indirectly expanded to LXX-Isa 1–66. For, as Wagner correctly observes, whenever an announcement of the salvation of God’s people from their foreign oppressors is made within the LXX-Isaiah, the Lord (or the speaker) addresses the people with the covenant formula “my people”.120 Therefore, based on the foregoing observations, it should be stated that chapter 10 and 11 of Isaiah are connected in both the Septuagint and Hebrew texts, each textual form in its own right. Whereas in the MT the metaphor of “God depicted as a forester who lops off the boughs of trees and cuts down the thickets that symbolize Assyria, as the invader coming from the north”121 at the end of chapter 10 is connected with the plant metaphor at the beginning of chapter 11, in the LXX (viewed in its final form) the translator has ingeniously joined the metaphor of strength in chapter 11 so as to explain the “picture of God’s divine judgment of ἐνδόξοι”122 [the mighty ones] at the end of chapter 10. Before moving into analyzing comparatively the passage under inspection and its Hebrew parent text, it is worth saying a few words regarding the dating of the text. While many of those working on the Hebrew text of this passage still wrestle on whether to take it as a pre-exilic or postexilic text,123 the LXX scholars should note on the one hand Troxel’s aforementioned inter-

117 Who views LXX-Isa 11: 10–16 as a coherent unit, see de Sousa, Eschatology, 151. 118 “καὶ ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείῃ” is also seen in Isaiah as a phrase pointing to either an imminent or/and eschatological period of hope of divine intervention (see e.g; Isa 4: 2; 12: 1; 19: 16–24;25: 9; etc), thus putting messianism into relationship with eschatology. 119 J. Coppens, Le Messianisme royal (LD 54; Paris: Cerf, 1968), 98, is right in claiming that Isaiah 11: 10 is not an independent text. 120 See Wagner, “Identifying ‘Updated’ Prophecies in Old Greek (OG) Isaiah”, 261–62. 121 Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 38. 122 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 271. 123 Blenkinsopp states that “the date of this poem has been the subject of a long-standing and inconclusive debate, one with little prospect of closure.” He also gives some examples of how some scholars have read this text. For more details, see J. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1–39: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (vol 19.; AB; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 263–64.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

101

esting observation concerning the translator’s reliance on texts (via intertextual links) dated from the third century B. C.E, and, on the other hand, the reference in LXX-Isa 11: 16 to “a highway that will be made across the Delta and the Egyptian sea, not for the Assyrians, as in the MT, but for ‘my people [μου λαῷ] left in Egypt’.”124 These elements alone strongly suggest that we are dealing here with a text that is made to clearly refer to the Hellenistic Diaspora. 3.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫ויצא חטר מגזע ישי ונצר משרשיו‬ ‫יפרה‬

1

1 Καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ῥάβδος ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης Ιεσσαι, καὶ ἄνθος ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης

‫ונחה עליו רוח יהוה רוח חכמה‬ ‫ובינה רוח עצה וגבורה רוח דעת‬ ‫ויראת יהוה‬

2

2 καὶ ἀναπαύσεται ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ, πνεῦμα σοφίας καὶ συνέσεως, πνεῦμα βουλῆς καὶ ἰσχύος, πνεῦμα γνώσεως καὶ εὐσε-

ἀναβήσεται

βείας

‫והריחו ביראת יהוה ולא־למראה‬ ‫עיניו ישפוט ולא־למשמע אזניו‬ ‫יוכיח‬

3

3 ἐμπλήσει αὐτὸν πνεῦμα φόβου θεοῦ, οὐ κατὰ τὴν δόξαν κρινεῖ οὐδὲ κατὰ τὴν λαλιὰν ἐλέγξει,

‫ושפט בצדק דלים והוכיח במישור‬ ‫לענוי־ארץ והכה־ארץ בשבט פיו‬ ‫וברוח שפתיו ימית רשע‬

4

4 ἀλλὰ κρινεῖ ταπεινῷ κρίσιν καὶ

‫והיה צדק אזור מתניו והאמונה‬ ‫אזור חלציו‬

5

‫ש ונמר עמ־גדי‬ ׂ ‫וגר זאב עמ־כב‬ ‫ירבץ ועגל וכפיר ומריא יחדו‬ ‫ונער קטן נהג בם‬

6

‫ופרה ודב תרעינה יחדו ירבצו‬ ‫ילדיהן ואריה כבקר יאכל־תבן‬

7

ἐλέγξει τοὺς ταπεινοὺς τῆς γῆς καὶ πατάξει γῆν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν πνεύματι διὰ χειλέων ἀνελεῖ ἀσεβῆ

5 καὶ ἔσται δικαιοσύνῃ ἐζωσμένος τὴν ὀσφὺν καὶ ἀληθείᾳ εἰλμένος τὰς πλευρὰς.

6 καὶ συμβοσκηθήσεται λύκος μετὰ ἀρνός, καὶ πάρδαλις συναναπαύσεται ἐρίφῳ, καὶ μοσχάριον καὶ ταῦρος καὶ λέων ἅμα βοσκηθήσονται, καὶ παιδίον μικρὸν ἄξει αὐτούς

7 καὶ βοῦς καὶ ἄρκος ἅμα βοσκηθήσονται, καὶ ἅμα τὰ παιδία αὐτῶν ἔσονται, καὶ λέων καὶ βοῦς ἅμα φάγονται ἄχυρα.

124 Cf. Horbury, “The Beginnings of the Jewish Revolt under Trajan”, in H. Cancik et al. (ed.), Geschichte -Tradition – Reflexion: Festschrift für Martin Hengel zum 70 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996), 1.283–304, on pp. 298–9.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

102

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah ‫ושעשע יונק על־חר פתן ועל‬ ‫מאורת צפעוני גמול ידו הדה‬

8

‫לא־ירעו ולא־ישחיתו בכל־הר‬ ‫קדשי כי־מלאה הארץ דעה את־‬ ‫יהוה כמים לים מכסים‬

9

‫והיה ביום ההוא שרש ישי אשר‬ ‫עמד לנס עמים אליו גוים ידרשו‬ ‫והיתה מנחתו כבוד‬

10

8 καὶ παιδίον νήπιον ἐπὶ τρώγλην

ἀσπίδων καὶ ἐπὶ κοίτην ἐκγὀνων ἀσπίδων τὴν χεῖρα ἐπιβαλεῖ

9 καὶ οὐ μὴ κακοποιήσωσιν οὐδὲ μὴ

δύνωνται ἀπολέσαι οὐδένα ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τὸ ἅγιόν μου, ὅτι ἐνεπλήσθη ἡ σύμπασα τοῦ γνῶναι τὸν κύριον ὡς ὕδωρ πολὺ κατακαλύψαι θαλάσσας.

10 καὶ ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ιεσσαι καὶ ὁ ἀνιστάμενος ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν, ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσι, καὶ ἔσται ἡ ἀνάπαυσις αὐτοῦ τιμή.

MT

LXX

1 And a branch shall come up from the stock of Jesse, and a shoot from his roots shall bear fruit.

1 And a sceptre will come out from the root of Jesse, and a flower from the root will come up

2 A spirit of Yahweh will rest on him, a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of counsel and strength, a spirit of knowledge and the fear of Yahweh

2 The Spirit of God shall rest on him: a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of counsel and strength, a spirit of knowledge and piety,

3 and his delight will be in the fear of Yahweh. He will not judge by the sight of his eyes, and he will not decide by the rumour of his ears

3 a spirit of the fear of God shall fill him. He will not judge in accordance with glory, nor shall he reprove according to the speech;

4 and with righteousness he will judge the poor, and with uprightness he will reprove the afflicted of the earth. He will cause to smite the earth with the rod of his mouth; with the breath of his lips he will cause to kill the wicked.

4 But he shall judge judgment for [the] humble one, also he shall reprove the humble ones of the earth; and he shall smite the earth with the word of his mouth; and by the breath through the lips he shall kill the ungodly one

5 And righteousness will be the belt of his loins and faithfulness a waist cloth of his loins.

5 and he shall be girded with righteousness around his waist and he shall be clothed with truth around the sides.

6 And the wolf will sojourn with the lamb, a leopard will lie down with a goat; a calf and a young lion fatling together; and a small child as a driver among them.

6 And a wolf shall be fed with a lamb, and a leopard shall rest with a young goat; and a calf and bull and lion shall feed together; and a small child shall lead them.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

103

7 A bear and cow will pasture together, their young will lie down side by side, and the lion will eat straw like the ox.

7 And cow and an ox shall be fed together and their young shall be together, and a lion and an ox alike shall eat straw together.

8 The infant will play at the hole of a cobra, and the young child put his hand into the viper’s net.

8 And an infant child shall put the hand on the hole of asps, and on the nest of offspring of asps.

9 They shall neither do evil nor spoil in all my holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of Yahweh as the waters covering the sea.

9 And they shall not at all do evil, nor be able to destroy any one on my holy mountain: because the whole world is filled up with the knowledge concerning the the Lord, as much water to cover the seas.

10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for a signal of the peoples; to it the nations will seek, and his place of rest will be glorious.

10 And in that day there shall be the root of Jesse, and [that is] the one arising to rule the nations; for him nations will hope, and his rest shall be honour.

It should be observed that LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 differs from its Hebrew parent text in many places, ranging from the level of single words or noun phrases (including conjunction usages and verbal phrases) to that of syntactical clauses. Although some of these differences have already been touched upon in our previous section, it will pay us to look at them (all together with the ones here) again more closely. However, instead of going into much detail in each, we shall confine ourselves to the major elements that enable us to ask important questions to which answers will be provided in our next section; it deals with an attempt of identifying any intertextual connections of the ‘messianic language’ that can be found within the passage under scrutiny. To begin with, in v. 1, the translator renders in a unique way ‫ חטר‬and ‫ נצר‬as ῥάβδος and ἄνθος respectively. The statistic of the rendering of these Greek terms shows that in the entire book of Isaiah, the former (ῥάβδος) occurs eight times as a translation of four different Hebrew lexical items,125 and the latter (ἄνθος) is found nine times as a rendering of six various Hebrew words.126 It is also worth noting that each term (i. e. ῥάβδος and ἄνθος) stands with the phrase ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης (gen. fem. sg.) that translates two diverse Hebrew compound words ‫( מגזע‬masc. sg.) and ‫( משרשיו‬masc. pl.). The translator’s choice of rendering these two different Hebrew compound items (placed, it should be noted, almost back to back in two short clauses) by the same Greek phrase is striking. It makes more explicit what is already present in the MT. Thus, the “ῥάβδος ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης Ιεσσαι” (v. 1a) is equal to the 125 I. e. ‫( חטר‬Isa 11: 1); ‫( שבט‬Isa 9: 3; 10: 5, 24); ‫( מטה‬Isa 9: 3; 10: 15; 28: 27); and ‫( משענת‬Isa 36: 6). 126 These are: ‫( ציץ‬Isa 28: 1; 40: 6,8); ‫( פרח‬Isa 5: 24; 18: 5); ‫( נצה‬Isa 18: 5); ‫( ציצת‬Isa 28: 4); ‫צמח‬ (Isa 61: 11); and ‫( נצר‬Isa 11: 1).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

104

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

“ἄνθος ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης [‫( ”]שרש‬v. 1b) or “ἡ ῥίζα [‫ ]שרש‬τοῦ Ιεσσαι” (v. 10a). However, one should note, as Maurer correctly does, that while the noun Ιεσσαι in v. 1 is best understood as a genitive of apposition (i. e. to mean “the root which is called Jesse”), it is construed syntactically in v. 10 as a genitive of origin (thus saying: “the root which brings forth Jesse”).127 Still in this v. 1, the option for translating ἀναβήσεται (from ἀναβαίνειν) for ‫ יפרה‬only here in the entire book of Isaiah (where it translates predominantly ‫ עלה‬in qal128) should encourage students of this text to find out the reasons that might be behind all these choices. Our enquiry is also kept active by observing the Isaiah translator’s use of καὶ εὐσεβείας [cf. Vulg] (for ‫ ויראת יהוה‬in v. 2) and ἐμπλήσει αὐτὸν πνεῦμα φόβου θεοῦ (for ‫ והריחו ביראת יהוה‬in v. 3). In the later verse, it is possible that our translator may have read the hiphil infinitive construct ‫( והריחו‬an hapax legomenon) as ‫רוח‬, as its verbal root (‫ )רוח‬could have possibly suggested, to explain the presence of πνεῦμα.129 Be that as it may, one should note that the verb ἐμπλήσει which introduces this verse is an addition. By the same token, the translation (in v. 2) of the phrase ‫ויראת‬ ‫ יהוה‬as εὐσεβείας (without πρὸς τὸν κύριον as in 33: 6 where one also finds ‫ )יראת יהוה‬instead of φόβου θεοῦ for ‫( ביראת יהוה‬Isa 11: 3) should be considered as deliberate130 (this even by taking into account the observed change from ‫ ו‬to ‫ב‬, both conjunction and preposition respectively that introduce the two Hebrew phrases). There are also major differences in the translation of v. 4. Firstly, the waw consecutive conjoined to the finite verb ‫( ושפט‬qal perfect) is rendered by an adversative conjunction ἀλλὰ (usually καὶ) as if this waw was attached to a noun. Secondly, the two different plural terms (‫ דלים‬and ‫ )ענוים‬are trans-

127 C. Maurer, “ῥίζα”, in G. Friedrich (ed.), TDNT, vol. 6 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968), 985–91, on p. 986. 128 E. g. Isa 2: 3; 5: 6,24; 7: 1,6; 8: 7; 14: 8,13–14; 15: 5; 22: 1; 32: 13; 34: 3,10; 35: 9; 36: 1; 40: 9; 37: 24,29; 55: 13. 129 S. Daniel, Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte dans la Septante (Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1966), 181–82. 130 De Sousa, Eschatology, 145, who rightly observes the widespread use of εὐσεβεία in Hellenistic Judaism (see e. g. 1 Ezra, 2, 3, and 4 Maccabees, Sirach, Philo, Josephus), has suggested concerning the Isaiah translator’s use of it (in Isa 11: 2) that “one should speak of the LXX Isaiah translator as adopting a current term of Hellenistic Judaism, rather than introducing the term”. However, while this may be said, the translator’s device here should be best understood in light of other details (within the LXX-Isaiah) pertinent to the use of ἀσεβεία (as a term with negative connotations when compared to εὐσεβεία). For instance, if read in light of some of the features of the expected redeemer depicted in LXX-Isaiah 59: 20 with a mission to “turn impiety [ἀσεβεία] away from Jacob”, then the translator’s option for εὐσεβείας in Isa 11: 2 as one of other virtues of the figure depicted in this passage should be seen at least as a significant interpretative move that seems to reveal an important thought with reference to the connection between the characteristics of the awaited figure (spoken of in it) and the task ahead of him (see “ἀνελεῖ ἀσεβῆ” in v. 4). This is an important observation that de Sousa fails to make.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

105

lated by one Greek term in two different inflexions as ταπεινῷ (sg.) and ταπεινοὺς (pl.), respectively. While ταπεινός (or its cognates) is an acceptable equivalent of both these Hebrew words ‫ דל‬and ‫( ענו‬or their cognates), a glance at Hatch & Redpath’s Concordance shows that in the entire LXX, ταπεινός (or its cognates), occuring more than 230 times, translates 68 times ‫( ענו‬or its cognates) against seven times for ‫( דל‬or its cognates). In the LXX-Isaiah, out of 43 times of its appearance, ταπεινός (or its cognates) is used 14 times for ‫( ענו‬or its cognates) and three times for ‫( דל‬Isa 11: 4; 25: 4; 26: 6).131 This statistic strongly indicates that ταπεινός is an important term in the LXX-Isaiah. Since ‫( ענו‬or its cognates) as a leading Hebrew equivalent for this Greek term (here in Isaiah) has been seen as carrying with it specific theological connotations,132 it will be helpful to detect whether there is any important point made by the Isaiah translator in translating the two different aforementioned Hebrew terms by two various inflexions of the same Greek term (ταπεινός). While this will be done later, it should be noted at this stage that ταπεινός (in the first clause of this verse) is seen as the recipient of the extent of action of the verb κρίνω (intensified by its cognate object (κρίσιν)), thus making (cf. the contrastive conjunction ἀλλὰ) the overall construction of this clause of the verse more emphatic.133 Also, κρίσιν is an unexpected rendering of ‫צדק‬, an important Hebrew term that is normally rendered by δικαιοσύνη (or its cognate). It is only here in Isa 11: 4 (and in 51: 7) that κρίσιν occurs in the LXX-Isaiah as a translation of ‫ צדק‬against 32 times for ‫( משפט‬e. g. Isa 1: 17, 23, etc.). Given this statistic, a better explanation of the translator’s use of κρίσιν in Isa 11: 4 should be to consider it as conscious. Thirdly, the translator rendered ‫ והוכיח במישור לענוי־ארץ‬by the clause καὶ ἐλέγξει τοὺς ταπεινοὺς τῆς γῆς without a correspondence for ‫במישור‬. This omission would then allow his clause to be understood or interpreted in conjunction with the last clause in v. 3: οὐδὲ κατὰ τὴν λαλιὰν ἐλέγξει.134 Last but not least, there is a striking feature in the rendering of καὶ πατάξει γῆν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ (“and he shall smite the earth by the word of his mouth”) for the phrase ‫“( והכה־ארץ בשבט פיו‬he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth”). With the assumption that the task of the translation of the LXX-Isaiah started with chapter 1, it is strange to encounter at this point of the translation the rendering of ‫ בשבט‬to be τῷ λόγῳ, for one might have expected at least to see ῥάβδος (see e. g. Isa 9: 3(4);

131 With regard to the rest of the occurrences, the highest number is 10 times as translation of ‫( שפל‬e. g. Isa 2: 11). 132 See for instance, W. J. Dumbrell, “‫”ענו‬, in W. A. VanGemeren (ed.), NIDOT, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997), 454–64. 133 See the function of ἀλλα as analyzed in D. B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the NT (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 189. 134 Sollamo, “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’”, 361, rightly observes that these two Greek clauses are synonymous but falls short of noticing the omission that serves as a springboard for it.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

106

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

10: 5,15,24 where ‫ שבט‬occurs too). Moreover, throughout the LXX-Isaiah, the normal and predominant use of λόγος is ‫דבר‬. It is therefore beyond reasonable doubt that we see here another interesting move towards an interpretation of the text from the translator’s viewpoint. In vv. 5–9, the translation can be viewed as being more faithful to its Hebrew parent text, except in the rendering of verbal aspects. Our translator uses the two participles (ἐζωσμένος and εἰλημένος in v. 5) for the same Hebrew noun (‫)אזור‬. In v. 8, the pilpel perfect ‫ ושעשע‬is rendered as a noun παιδίον, and the qal participles (‫ יונק‬and ‫ )גמול‬are translated respectively by Greek terms (νήπιον or ἐκγόνων). In v. 9, he renders the Hebrew verbs by a variety of moods and tenses. For instance, the two hiphil imperfects (‫ ירעו‬and ‫ )ישחיתו‬in this verse are rendered by a subjunctive aorist (κακοποιήσωσιν) and a combination of a subjunctive present and an infinitive aorist (δύνωνται ἀπολέσαι), respectively. The verb in qal perfect (‫ )מלא‬is translated by ἐνεπλήσθη, an indicative aorist passive that is used here as a proleptic (future) aorist.135 And the noun (‫ )דעה‬and the piel participle (‫ )מכסים‬are rendered each by an infinitive aorist (γνῶναι and κατακαλύψαι). Regardless of what can be seen as the translator’s struggle detectable in his renderings of all these verbs, the basic meaning of the entire section in the Greek form is not completely different from its parent text. However, it should be noted that with a strange use of ἡ σύμπασα for ‫הארץ‬, the geographical sphere that will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord seems to be broader in the LXX than in the MT’s reading. The last verse (i. e. v. 10) of the pericope contains three renderings that need to be pointed out. Firstly, the translator uses the coordinate conjunction καὶ for ‫אשר‬, a Hebrew relative particle that occurs abundantly within Isaiah.136 Secondly, he unexpectedly uses the verb ἄρχειν (to rule) for a noun (with a preposition) ‫( לנס‬for/as a signal). According to de Sousa, based on a survey that shows the translation of ‫ נס‬in Isaiah by σημεῖον (in 11: 12, 13: 2, 135 According to Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 564, “[a]n author sometimes uses the aorist for the future to stress the certainty of the event. It involves a ‘rhetorical transfer’ of a future event as though it were past”. This seems to be the case with the Isaiah translator’s use of ἐνεπλήσθη. However, it should be borne in mind that ἐνεπλήσθη seems to be a correct translation of the ‘rhetorical future’ as the semantic category of the perfect state of ‫מלא‬. According to B. T. Arnold/J. H. Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 54, the perfect viewed as a “[r]hetorical future (…) expresses a vivid future action or situation, which is not yet a reality but considered a certainty from the speaker’s rhetorical point of view”. 136 This is striking as even Hatch and Redpath’s Concordance falls short of recording it. A close inspection of the occurrence of this conjunction in the LXX-Isaiah reveals that it is only in Isa 11: 10; 49: 3,23; and 56: 5 where ‫ אשר‬is translated by καὶ. In other passages within the LXX-Isaiah, our readers may refer to some of the Greek terms listed in the aforementioned concordance as various renderings of ‫אשר‬. However, a study of the Isaiah translator’s rendering of this Hebrew relative particle would be welcomed since ἄνθρωπος (like καὶ), for instance, that is used for ‫ אשר‬in Isa 29: 12 is not recorded even in the meticulous work of Hatch and Redpath.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

107

18: 3, and 33: 23), σύσσεμον (in 5: 26, 49: 22, and 62: 10), and σημαία (in 30: 17), the translator “understood the term [‫ ]נס‬here [in 11: 10] metaphorically, to denote power, rule, and authority.”137 While this may be imaginable, de Sousa does not take a step further to detect a reasonable exegetical move that has been established by the way in which the translator read his Vorlage and produced his text. Thirdly, our translator renders ‫“ ידרשו‬they will seek” by ἐλπιοῦσιν “they will hope.”138 Syntactically, one can see that the phrase ‫ שרש ישי‬in the sentence ‫והיה ביום ההוא שרש ישי אשר עמד לנס‬ (v.10a) is to be taken as the subject of two statements: the first having a finite verb ‫והיה‬, and the second, introduced by ‫אשר‬, with the participle ‫עמד‬. By translating the above Hebrew sentence as καὶ ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἑμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ιεσσαι καὶ ὁ ἀνιστάμενος ἄρχειν, the LXX reads ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ιεσσαι as dependent on καὶ ἔσται, and ὁ ἀνιστάμενος as qualifying ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ιεσσαι, who shall be a ruler (cf. ἄρχειν). To the second subject is added the further assertion that the “nations will hope for him” (ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν).139 Hence, LXX makes more explicit the verse in the direction of having two names (connected by καὶ) that describe one person.140 As we come to the end of the analysis, concerning the major differences with the MT, we are left with a desire to search for reasons for the translator’s choices noted above, regarding his addition or omission of word(s), as well as the introduction of a variant reading. 3.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ The way in which our ancient translator read his Vorlage and produced his text reveals that there are a few established links between LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 and a significant number of other related texts (both within the LXX-Isaiah and beyond) that display to some extent a messianic belief. Firstly, given the view (with the context of our passage in mind here) that, in v. 1, ῥάβδος is understood as “a term denoting the royal sceptre,”141 and that ἄνθος as it 137 De Sousa, Eschatology, 151 n. 40. 138 Ibid. De Sousa has correctly observed that it is only in Isa 11: 10 that the translator uses ἐλπίζω (for the Hebrew ‫ש‬ ׁ ‫)דר‬. However, as with the case of the translator’s use of ἄρχειν (noted in the text above), de Sousa fails to identify an important intertextual link (to be discussed later) between this text and other related texts within the LXX-Isaiah (e. g. Isa 42: 4; 51: 5) that has been made possible via the aforementioned unique use of ἐλπίζω (for ‫ש‬ ׁ ‫)דר‬ together with other elements from the syntactical relationships. 139 See Maurer, “ῥίζα”, 986–87. 140 Harl is correct in claiming that “[l]a divergence décisive [entre la LXX et le TM dans Isaïe 11: 10] est la présence de l’article défini masculin devant le participe du verbe ‘se lever’ (ho anistámenos), ‘celui qui se lève’, qui reprend le nom ‘racine de Jessé’ en faisant de celui-ci un nom proprement dit, au masculin”; see Harl et al., La Bible grecque des Septante, 288. 141 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah,” p. 376. Schaper’s view here has been criticized by de Sousa, Eschatology, 142 n. 9, who sees him as making “‘hasty’ conclusions”. Unfortunately, de Sousa does not provide us with any other understanding of this term.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

108

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

stands with “ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης” is more likely to refer also to a royal successor142 (cf. Sir 47: 22), it can be demonstrated that the translator made his text refer to a person, a mighty ruler/king from a royal family. Moreover, within the LXX-Isaiah, this person is (and comes from a genealogy which is), as Sollamo rightly observes, “the exact opposite of persons over whom woe is prophetically pronounced in Isa 5,22–24, where the key terms ῥίζα and ἄνθος also occur: ἡ ῥίζα αὐτῶν ὡς χνοῦς ἔσται καὶ τὸ ἄνθος αὐτῶν ὡς κονιορτὸς ἀναβήσεται.”143 Read in its context, the figures in Isa 5 are described as the wicked strong ones (οἱ ἰσχύοντες) or ruler/court officials (οἱ δυνάσται), who corrupt justice (οἱ δικαιοῦντες τὸν ἀσεβῆ ἕνεκεν δώρων καὶ τὸ δίκαιον τοῦ δικαίου αἴροντες). They shall be punished to the degree that there shall be no successful future for their offspring. Contrary to this, the ῥάβδος (who is also the ἄνθος) depicted in Isa 11: 1–10 shall come from the royal family of David (v. 1 as so in v. 10). He shall be empowered by supernatural gifts (vv. 2–3a), he shall be a just judge (vv. 3b-5), a king who shall rule over the nations (v. 10). As a result, peace to nature itself shall be obvious (vv. 6–9; cf. v. 6 in Tg; Isa 65: 25). This is echoed in Philo as pointed out by Lagrange: “lorsque l’ordre sera rétabli dans les âmes par l’innocence, la paix regnera aussi entre les animaux et l’homme.”144 In sum, the character to whom the translator refers to as ῥάβδος and ἄνθος is certainly a Davidic messiah. With regard to the key terms ῥάβδος and ἄνθος, Munnich draws attention to their occurrence also within the story of the budding of Aaron’s rod (to confirm his priesthood) in LXX-Num 17: 8(23):145 καὶ ἐγένετο τῇ ἐπαύριον καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Μωυσῆς καὶ Ααρων εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐβλάστησεν ἡ ῥάβδος Ααρων εἰς οἶκον Λευι καὶ ἐξήνεγκεν βλαστὸν καὶ ἐξήνθησεν ἄνθη καὶ ἐβλάστησεν κάρυα. ‫ויהי ממחרת ויבא משה אל־אהל העדות והנה פרח מטה־אהרן לבית לוי ויצא פרח‬ ‫ויצץ ציץ ויגמל שקדים‬

Rather he seems to some extent back the view of his opponent by saying that ῥάβδος is associated “with power, rule and kingship” and that “[the Isaiah translator’s] use of the word in this context [i. e. the context of the passage] is particularly suggestive because of the well known designation of the messiah as a ‘sceptre’, derived from Num 24: 17 (‫שבט‬ ׁ ) and shared by various texts from the Second Temple period” (p. 140). 142 For this reading, see e. g. in LXX-Dan 11: 7 (that also has ῥίζης ): καὶ ἀναστήσεται φυτὸν ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης αὐτοῦ καθ᾽ ἑαυτόν “But an offspring shall arise from his root according to himself” [LXX] or in the Theodotion version (where both ἄνθος and ῥίζης also occur) that reads: καὶ στήσεται ἐκ τοῦ ἄνθους τῆς ῥίζης αὐτῆς τῆς ἑτοιμασίας αὐτοῦ “And one from the shoot of her root will rise, of his preparation” [NETS]. 143 See Sollamo, “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’”, 360. 144 See Lagrange, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs (150 av. J.-C. à 200 ap. J. -C.), (Paris: Libraire Victor Lecoffre, 1909), 30. Lagrange also adds that according to Philo, the externals signs of the messianic age are: “vaincre les ennemis, l’emporter dans la guerre, vivre en paix et jouir de l’abondance, richesse, honneurs, [et] gloire” (p. 33). 145 See Munnich, “Le Messianisme”, 345–46.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

109

Munnich thinks that the verb ‫( יפרה‬from ‫ )פרה‬in Isa 11: 1 may have led the translator to reverberate the above-mentioned Pentateuchal passage.146 Even if one would like to question his thought on the basis that ‫“ פרה‬to bear fruit” (Isa 11: 1) slightly differs in both morphology and phonology from ‫“ פרח‬to bud,” or “to blossom” (Num 17: 8), it would be worth noting that the two Hebrew terms (understood in their use in the context of each text) portray basically the same idea. In Num 17: 8, ‫( פרח‬occurring twice) is rendered as βλαστὸν “a bud” and ἐβλάστησεν “to blossom” (as in Isa 27: 6). However, in Isaiah 11: 1, ‫ פרה‬is translated as ἀναβήσεται, “to come up”. While both LXX-Isa 11: 1 and LXX-Num 17: 8 use ῥάβδος for ‫( מטה‬as in Isa 9: 3; 28: 27), they differ concerning the counterpart of ἄνθος. In the latter, ἄνθη is used for ‫ציץ‬ ִ (as Isa 28: 1; 40: 6–7), while in the former it is a translaֵ ‫( ֵנ‬cf. Theod Dan 11: 7). This linguistic difference does not necessation of ‫צר‬ rily reduce the Munnich’s suggestions to see the Isaiah translator as having in his mind this text of Numbers (most likely in both textual forms).147 For, besides the elements noted above, the parallelism between these two passages, as Munnich notes, could even be observed in the rendition of the plural ‫( משרשיו‬Isa 11: 1) by a singular (i. e. ἐκ τῆς ῥίζης) that corresponds to the logic of the clause “καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐβλάστησεν ἡ ῥάβδος Ααρων εἰς οἶκον Λευι” (Num 17: 8).148 If the kind of intertextuality proposed by Munnich is accepted, then in LXX-Isa 11: 1 (read in conjunction with Num 17: 8), as he states, “la dimension d’un messie royal se combine à celle d’un messie sacerdotal.”149 By the same token, if this result is accepted, one then could ask three important questions. Firstly, could it mean that there is more than one messianic figure in the LXX-Isaiah as it is portrayed in the Qumran documents?150 Secondly, could it be an indication that this Greek version of Isaiah intends to underline hopes among its audience to see an emergence of a leader who shall integrate both offices (cf. Jer 33: 14–18), thus expressing a radical change to return to the Jewish theocratic state? Thirdly, could it mean that there was nothing like a generally agreed description of what the awaited messianic figure would be like? While we shall come back to these questions later (i. e. after analysing all the selected messianic texts in this corpus of the LXX-Isaiah), it can be said with confidence at this point that there was, as Horbury rightly said, “already at that time, a developed messianic interpre-

146 Ibid., 346. 147 For a different view, see de Sousa, Eschatology, 144–45. 148 Munnich, “Le Messianisme”, 346. 149 Ibid. 150 Recent and useful discussions on the messianic expectations in the Qumran material can be found in A. Wolters, “The Messiah in the Qumran Documents”, in S. E. Porter (ed.), The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2007), 75– 89; J. W. van Henten, “The Hasmonean Period”, 21–28; also Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 89–115.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

110

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

tation which has given rise to a chain of exegetical interconnections, between […] the Pentateuch and the books of the Prophets.”151 Not only did the presence of the verb ‫( יפרה‬from ‫ )פרה‬in Isa 11: 1 serve the translator to bring into mind the text of Num 17 discussed above, but its striking translation as ἀναβήσεται also bears witness to a strong intertextual connection of the expected messianic figure in Isa 11: 1–10 with the Servant figure depicted in LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 (especially in the phrase “ἀνέτειλε μὲν ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ ὡς παιδίον, ὡς ῥίζα ἐν γῇ διψώση” in Isa 53: 2). More details about this link between the two passages shall be provided in our discussion of the latter text. However, it should already be noted here that besides his use of ἀναβήσεται (11: 1) associated with ἀνέτειλε (53: 2), the Isaiah translator also connects these two texts via συνέσεως (Isa 11: 2), which is echoed in the phrase “ἰδοὺ συνήσει ὁ παῖς μου” (52: 13) and that of “πλάσαι τῇ συνέσει” (53: 11). While Hengel and Bailey put emphasis on the use of ἀνέτειλε and συνέσεως,152 Ekblad recognises this association only through the latter term (συνέσεως), but he also draws attention to the shared idea portrayed by the use of ῥίζα in both texts.153 Beyond the LXX-Isaiah, it is worth noting that the use of ἀναβήσεται in the translation of “a flower from the root shall come up” (ἀναβήσεται for ‫ )יפרה‬in Isa 11: 1 also creates an important link between his text and LXX-Gen 49: 9–10 where one reads: “Judah is a lion’s whelp; from the shoot, my son, you came up (ἀνέβης).” This connection has been substantially demonstrated by Horbury.154 It was said while discussing LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 that, through the use of βουλή, the translator exegetically interconnected Isa 4: 2; 9: 1–7; 11: 1–9; 19: 16–25; 25: 1–8. Here it is important to be reminded that the messianic figure depicted in Isa 11: 2 shall receive a spirit of counsel (πνεῦμα βουλῆς). Besides this, God’s spirit (πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ) shall rest upon him, thus connecting him with the figure speaking in the phrase “πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμέ οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με” (Isa 61: 1, cf. 42: 1).155 After being endowed with all the supernatural gifts (Isa 11: 2–3), “he shall not judge with reference to reputation” (οὐ κατὰ τὴν δόξαν κρινεῖ), “but (emphatically) he shall act as just judge in the interest of [the] humble one” (ἀλλὰ κρινεῖ ταπεινῷ κρίσιν) (v. 4). The translator’s use of κρινεῖ here jointly with κρίσιν (an unexpected rendering for ‫צדק‬, cf. also Isa 51: 7) draws together other texts (within the LXX-Isaiah) involving judgment. Texts that readily come to mind and that

151 Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 51. 152 Hengel with Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53”, 135. 153 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 253–254, 203. 154 Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 50; Messianism among Jews and Christians, 132; also Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 377. 155 This cannot be denied even if the link between LXX-Isa 11: 2 and 61: 1 was established, according to de Sousa, Eschatology, 147, “on the level of general ideas rather than on the literary level”. For, as shall be seen, both texts share a concept of redemption as far as their relevant literary context is concerned.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

111

are relevant to see the exegetical messianic interconnections are: (a) Isa 16: 5, a significant passage (which is less readily thought of as messianic) where we are told that the one who shall sit upon the throne with truth in the tabernacle of David shall be judging (κρίνων) and seeking judgment (ἐκζητῶν κρίμα); (b) Isa 19: 20, a text where the Lord shall send a man who shall save his people, by judging (κρίνων) them; and (c) Isa 42: 1–4 where the Servant, in whom the Lord puts his spirit (ἔδωκα τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν), shall bring forth judgment (κρίσιν) to the nations (v. 1) and to truth (v. 3). All these texts are discussed later in our study. As shall be seen, while in all these texts the Lord is referred to as judging through a messianic figure, the wider literary context of LXX-Isa 1–66 shows that he is also seen as personally judging the nations (e. g. 2: 4) and/or the whole earth, including his people (e. g. 66: 16; 51: 22). By the same token, he is described as “a good judge (κριτὴς ἀγαθὸς) to the house of Israel” (Isa 63: 7).156 Thus far, the picture one seems to get is that, throughout the LXX-Isaiah, God’s action and that of the expected messianic figure are two dynamic functions that frequently overlap. As far as the mission of judging is concerned, the awaited messiah in Isaiah 11: 3b-4, for instance, is understood as a just or right judge, in the sense of assisting those discouraged and lacking in hope. This is further supported by another consequence of him being empowered: “he shall not demonstrate verbally justice in accordance with the report” (οὐδὲ κατὰ τὴν λαλιὰν ἐλέγξει), rather “he shall demonstrate verbally the justice of the humble ones of the earth” (ἐλέγξει τοὺς ταπεινοὺς τῆς γῆς). This picture of a judge at court, guaranteeing a fair hearing of those who have been humbled, is fundamental for it is fully in line with the awaited Davidic ruler (cf. Ps 72: 2–4). Moreover, describing the manifestation of an awaited messiah in Judaism, Lagrange asks: “Comment se manifesterait le Messie [ou la personne destinée à devenir le Messie], sur les nuées, ou sur un âne?”157 He goes on and answers the question by giving what one may call “the key feature” to recognise such a figure: “[l]a principale devait être le don de judger, en vertu d’une lumière divine, sans qu’il ait besoin d’entendre la cause.”158 Our messianic figure, referred to in Isa 11, will not only judge adequately, but he will also “smite (πατάξει) the earth by the word of his mouth” (γῆν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ) (v. 4). The unexpected translation of τῷ λόγῳ (for ‫“ בשבט‬by the rod”) is seen as a possible deliberate exegetical move to stress the messianic figure’s Davidic lineage. For, as noted earlier, according to 2 Reigns (LXX-2 Samuel) 23: 2–4 (as noted above while discussing LXX-Isa 9: 6–7), the spirit of God (πνεῦμα κυρίου) spoke by David, and God’s word (ὁ λόγος) was upon his tongue.159 If this is accepted as intertextually relevant, then we have here a strong messianic belief, centred on the 156 For a similar analysis, see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 151. 157 Lagrange, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs, 228. 158 Ibid. 159 See also Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 91.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

112

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

hope for a Davidic ruler. This will then rule out Sollamo’s claim that the image in LXX reduces the royal personality of the awaited figure in comparison to the Hebrew text.160 In addition to this, the action of smiting by “the word” rather than by “the rod” portrays our expected messianic figure as someone who will have a strong (and broader sphere of) influence. In fact, it is striking to see that the figure depicted in LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 shares several features with the one described in chapter 17 of the book of Psalms of Solomon that is considered as the most messianic book in the Septuagint.161 Without going into too much analytical detail with regard to the differences and the similarities between these two texts,162 it is important to point out a few of the most salient intertextual elements relevant to our discussion. Like in Isaiah, the Psalms of Solomon speak of the expected messianic figure as a descendant of the line of David (ἰδἐ κύριε καὶ ἀνάστησον αὐτοῖς τὸν βασιλέα αὐτῶν υἱὸν Δαυιδ (…) τοῦ βασιλεῦσαι ἐπὶ Ισραηλ παῖδά σου; see Ps.Sol. 17: 21; cf. Isa 11: 1,10). This expected Davidic messiah, like in Isaiah, is being made powerful (by God) “in the holy spirit and wise in counsel of understanding, with strength” (see “ὅτι ὁ θεὸς κατειργάσατο αὐτὸν δυνατὸν ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ σοφὸν ἐν βουλῇ συνέσεως” in Ps.Sol. 17: 37; cf. LXX-Isa 11: 2). As a result, “he shall smite the earth by the word of his mouth” (πατάξει γῆν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ) (Ps.Sol. 17: 35; here see the exact phrase in LXX-Isa 11: 4; cf. Ps.Sol. 17: 24; also 2 Esdras 13; 2 Baruch; and 2 Thes 2: 8, where, in each case, the ‘word from the mouth’ of the messianic figure is described as destructive).163 Analysing the circumstances surrounding these Psalms of Solomon, Lagrange highlights one of the duties of this messiah in the following words: “il purifiera la terre sainte du contact des étrangers et étendra même sa domination sur le reste du monde”164 (cf. Ps.Sol. 17: 30; Isa 11: 9). These close characteristic associations strongly indicate that there was a kind of messianic expectation during the second century B. C. E. (which started even earlier) to which a piece of literature like this (i. e. Ps.Sol.), roughly a century later, referred to. In other words, it is hard to imagine that these obvious references (even in exact wording in some instances) emerged in a vacuum. Last but not least, the LXX speaks of the expected royal figure in terms of “the one arising to rule the nations” (ὁ ἀνιστάμενος [‫ ]עמד‬ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν) (Isa 11: 10). The translator’s description of him as “ὁ ἀνιστάμενος”, a term used mostly for ‫( קום‬e. g. 2: 10,19,21; 14: 21; 21: 5; 24: 20, etc.), is likely reminiscent of the figure described as “ἀναστήσεται [‫ ]קום‬ἄνθρωπος ἐξ Ισραηλ”

160 Sollamo, “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’”, 362. 161 Ibid., 364. 162 For these, one may consult, amongst others, Lagrange, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs, 230– 35; also Stuckenbruck, “Messianic Ideas in the Apocalyptic and Related Literature of Early Judaism”, 93–97. 163 Cf. Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 60. 164 Lagrange, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs, 234.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 11: 1–10

113

(LXX-Num 24: 17). Even if in both verses the use of ἀνίστημι differs in relation to their Hebrew counterparts, it is worth noting that the link between these two texts seems to be more visible in their Greek forms than in the MT. Besides this, both verses share a similar context that points to a defeat of the enemies of Israel. Read in its context, LXX-Num 24: 17 clearly speaks of this ἄνθρωπος as a military leader (who shall crush Moab) with royal status.165 Van der Kooij correctly says that even if this text “do[es] not refer to a kingmessiah, one nevertheless gets the impression that a ‘messianic’ connotation is implied.”166 If read in conjunction with LXX-Num 24: 17, LXX-Isa 11: 10 would designate “ὁ ἀνιστάμενος” as a royal figure. This picture is revealed in the Isaiah translator’s unexpected use of the verb ἄρχειν (for ‫לנס‬, as noted above). This use likely echoes LXX-Gen 49: 10 which speaks of “a ruler [who] shall not fail from Judah” (οὐκ ἐκλείψει ἄρχων [‫ ]שבט‬ἐξ Ιουδα). According to Isaiah, this figure will arise “to rule (ἄρχειν) the nations,” says the translator. In adding the phrase “for him the nations will hope” (ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν [‫)]דרש‬, the Isaiah translator should be viewed as deliberately linking this text with the expression regarding the name (of the Lord’s servant) for which the nations shall hope (ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν [‫( )]יחל‬LXX-Isa 42: 4, discussed below; cf. 51: 5). 3.4 Summary Starting with the analysis of the context of LXX-Isa 11: 1–10, we have sufficiently demonstrated that, contrary to what others have believed, this text is not disconnected from the end of chapter 10, from 11: 11–16, or from the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. The survey of the differences observed between the MT and the LXX of this text served as a springboard for identifying any messianic intertextuality that might have been established by the translator in the way in which he read his Vorlage and produced his text. One of the most important features discovered is the translator’s use of intertextuality, an approach considered to have been as a hermeneutic principle for any reader of the Jewish community in Alexandria to deal with the Scriptures. Along the lines of his own beliefs and hopes, the translator made the text under inspection speak of the awaited Davidic messiah as a military king (an image not present in the MT). This important figure will defeat those who are the oppressors of God’s people. It has to be remembered that in the book of Chronicles as one of the post-exilic theological expositions of the monarchic period, David is described as a king who interweaves the roles of fighting and making arrangement for worship. These tasks contributed to 165 For a similar view, see van der Kooij, “The Greek Bible”, 257. For a different view, see for instance, J. W. Wevers Notes on the Greek Text of Numbers (SCS 46; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998), 413; Dorival, La Bible D’Alexandrie: Les Nombres (Paris, Cerf, 1994), 140. 166 Van der Kooij, “The Greek Bible”, 257.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

114

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

the state’s security and stability (cf. 1 Chron 11–29).167 Given this view, it seems that the picture of this messianic figure as a royal warrior and priest portrayed in Isa 11: 1–10 (once read in conjunction with LXX-Num 17: 8 discussed above) likely attests that Jewish messianism even in its post-exilic manifestations was deeply rooted in the Davidic line (as read in the dynastic oracle of 2 Sam 7). It is in line with this perspective that one hears, for instance, in the Hasmonean period a scenario reported in 1 Macc 14: 25–49 that the Jewish people decided to proclaim Simon both as high priest and political ruler “forever, until a faithful prophet should arise” (14: 41). Hence, it can be said that the kind of messianism seen in our text (i. e. Isa 11: 1–10) developed through an interaction not only with the biblical texts, but also with a response to various political and religious issues during the historical time in which the translation under consideration was made.

4. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16:1–5 LXX scholars have paid less attention to investigating Isa 16: 1–5 as a messianic passage.168 A similar disregard has been noted by Williamson, who while studying vv. 4b-5 in their Hebrew form, stated: “these verses appear to present us with a generally neglected royal or messianic prophecy.”169 Nevertheless, we have also identified a few scholars who, still looking at these verses in their Hebrew form, have claimed that they confer a messianic notion.170 This is also the case with regard to scholars of the Greek Bible. A significant number of them have recognised that LXX-Isa 16: 5 has a few links with some messianic passages that undergo analysis in the present study.171 While a proper investigation of it is still lacking, those aforementioned connections are of significant interest for us with reference to our 167 See J. Goldingay, Old Testament Theology, vol. 1. (Downers Grove: Paternoster Press, 2003), 556–57. 168 For instance, there is no discussion of it in Salvesen, “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations”, 245–73; Fitzmeyer, The One Who is To Come, 65–81, with reference to his chapter 6 where he deals with “The Septuagint’s Interpretation of Some Old Testament Passages”. Moreover, Fitzmeyer argues that this passage is amongst others (e. g. 2: 2–4; 4: 2; and 32: 1– 5) which do not have “a ‘messianic’ connotation, even remotely” (p. 39). 169 Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 56. Besides Wegner, Kaiser, and Roberts, quoted by Williamson as having no discussion of the passages in their monographs, we have also noted that, even in a more recent investigation by Heskett, Messianism Within The Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah, 267–68, this passage has been overlooked even in his section on “Other Isaianic Passages Not Treated”. 170 See, for instance, Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 56–62; Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 44. R. Coggins, “Isaiah”, in J. Barton/J. Muddiman (ed.), The Oxford Bible Commentary (Oxford: University Press, 2001), 433–86, on p. 451, states that Isaiah 16: 4b-5 is “another messianic passage”. 171 For instance, Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians, 149–50; also Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 377.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5

115

given overall purpose of the current investigation. However, it seems that only after a thorough scrutiny of this verse (not in isolation, but within its given immediate unit as well as the LXX-Isaiah as a whole) one can be able to see how the Isaiah translator read his Vorlage and produced his text. Given this view, as with the other three passages dealt with so far and the other five still to be looked at, we shall start with an attempt to discover the context of the pericope, which may cast some light on our search for any kind of messianic belief displayed within this text.

4.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context In the Hebrew text, Isa 16: 1–5 comes in the context of two chapters (Isa 15– 16) that announce the destruction of Moab (15: 1). One of the difficulties that await any student of these two chapters concerns “their literary unity.”172 For instance, Isa 16: 4b-5 is viewed as a later incorporation into the original text.173 Another issue connected to this is whether to consider verse 6 as the immediate reply of the Judeans to the request made by the Moabites or their leader in the opening verses of Isa 16.174 These issues led Motyer to rightly observe that scholars “can become too date-conscious and not sufficiently theme-conscious.”175 Given this view, our focus in dealing with the passage under scrutiny is more on the content rather than on an actual historical event. In fact, we are more interested in seeking to understand how the Isaiah translator rendered the whole pericope (that is to say, including the part which the modern scholars consider as a later addition). As shall be seen later, the Greek text of Isa 16: 1–5 differs significantly from its Hebrew parent text. While this passage is part of Isa 15–16, some of the translator’s renderings that can be observed connect it with a network of other texts within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. For instance, in 15: 9 the translation of Αριηλ for ‫ אריה‬is likely to have been influenced by Isa 29: 1 (or perhaps vice versa) where there is a plus that makes the text speak of Ariel who shall eat with Moab (φάγεσθε γὰρ σὺν Μωαβ).176 Also, the use of Ἄραβας for ‫( ערבה‬15: 7) and the mention of this Greek name in v. 9 without any direct sanction from the Hebrew text seem to make our passage to be read in conjunction with LXX-Isa 10: 9 and LXX-Isa 11: 11–16. Two major things 172 Which is, according to Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 44, “much disputed”. 173 For instance, Baer, When We All Go Home, 73 n. 77, has labelled it as a “difficult passage”. 174 A more detailed analysis of views among scholars on these issues can be found, for instance, in Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 58–59. 175 J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 149. 176 Cf. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 176–77; Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 136, who, despite his failure “to address all differences between LXX and MT in this verse”, has rightly viewed the translator’s use of Αριηλ as “a matter of contextual exegesis” (ibid.).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

116

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

need to be said here. Firstly, in both these texts, the Isaiah translator uses Ἀραβία for ‫חמת‬, i. e. without any real basis in the Hebrew parent text. Analysing the translator’s use of Ἀραβία, Seeligmann rightly observes that “his [i. e. the translator’s] rendering was not […] determined by any tradition, but by his desire to recognize, in the context of a given Hebrew Bible-text, images suggested by his own time.”177 With reference to Isa 11: 11, he claims: “Arabia appears in an enumeration of the countries where the remnants of exiled Israel are living; here, one feels inclined to consider the possibility that the translator wished to shape the description given by the Hebrew text in such a way as to make it conform to the diaspora of his own time.”178 Then when looking at the phrase “ἐπάξω γὰρ ἐπὶ τὴν φάραγγα Ἄραβας” for the Hebrew text that reads “they [i. e. the Moabites] shall carry away their reserve funds over the brook of willows” (Isa 15: 7) and the translation of “ἐπάξω γὰρ ἐπὶ Ρεμμων Ἄραβας” for ‫( על־דימון נוספות‬v. 9), Seeligmann rightly suggests that such renderings seem to reflect the invasion of Transjordan by the Nabateans, an Arab state, in the second century B. C. E.179 Some evidence in support of this view can be found from Josephus who speaks of the Moabites who lost their identity as a nation and who were afterwards confounded with the Arabs (see Josephus, Ant XIII. 18.4,5). Given this thought, the following point can be made. Even if a precise identification of specific historic events to which the Isaiah translator was referring cannot be made with certainty, as de Sousa has argued in a similar case,180 by taking into account what has been said so far, one would undoubtedly express a view that is similar to that of Jobes and Silva who correctly observe that the resultant renderings make passages like those mentioned above meaningful to the Alexandrian Jews of the translator’s own day.181 Secondly, in LXX-Isa 11: 11–16 one reads that in a messianic vision of the future, Moab would be the first to be conquered by God’s people (see “καὶ ἐπὶ Μωαβ πρῶτον τᾶς χεῖρας ἐπιβαλοῦσιν” in v. 14). While de Sousa only considers this to be an enigmatic note without any certainty as to which precise incident the Isaiah translator was referring to182, he needs perhaps to see it, in the way Seeligmann does, as “part of the [m]essianic expectations of the translator.”183 Moreover, what Schaper rightly describes as “the significance of ‘Moab’ in Jewish eschatological thought”184 should not be overlooked by 177 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 234. 178 Ibid. 179 Ibid., 234–35, 248–49; see also, Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 22 n. 6. According to P. C. Hammond, “Nabateans”, in G. W. Bromiley (ed.), ISBE, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 466–68, on p. 467, the Nabateans consolidated into a political body by the second century B. C. E. 180 De Sousa, Eschatology, 154. 181 Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 99. 182 De Sousa, Eschatology, 154. 183 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 245. 184 Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 43.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5

117

any student who seeks to understand a passage like the one undergoing scrutiny. For Moab, as Schaper correctly argues, is “an entity of political and religious importance in Israelite and Jewish history.”185 In fact, it can be testified, based on passages such as Num 24: 17 and Isa 25: 9–12 in both the MT and LXX, that Moab (whether to be taken as a nation as such or as a symbol of those who reject God’s kingdom, especially with reference to the latter passage) will be the first to be subjugated in the time of God’s redemption of Israel.186 Another striking aspect of the translator’s thought of Moab being conquered can be seen implicitly in his rendering of LXX-Isa 11: 16 as a text that expresses “the aspirations for the future of Alexandrian Jewry.”187 In this text, the translator transforms, as Seeligmann correctly puts it, the Hebrew text of “Isaiah’s prediction about a path that in the future shall go up to Zion to lead the rest that will remain of His people out of Assyria, into a path to bring up the remnant of God’s nation living in Egypt.”188 And he [i. e. the Isaiah translator] adds that “it shall be to Israel as the day when he came out of the land of Egypt” (v. 16c). While there is no direct mention of Moab here, however, it should be remembered that during the first Exodus, Moab is named (in the Song sung by Moses and the sons of Israel in Exodus 15) as being seized by trembling (vv. 14–15). From all the above ideas, it can be deduced that the translator’s rendition of the passage under scrutiny (LXX-Isa 16: 1–5) allowed the text to be understood not only within its immediate context of Isa 15–16, but also in its association with a web of other related texts in the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, to begin with. In those texts, the translator reveals (more explicitly than it is in their Hebrew form) a Jewish belief that forecasts the coming of a time when there will be a renewal of the glories of Israel’s Kingdom and its triumph over its sometime oppressors. If this can be accepted, then we can now attempt to analyse the passage itself. 4.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫שלחו־כר משל־ארץ מסלע מדברה‬ ‫אל־הר בת־ציון‬

1

‫והיה כעוף־נודד קן משלח תהיינה‬ ‫בנות מואב מעברת לארנון‬

2

1 Ἀποστελῶ ὡς ἑρπετὰ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν μὴ πέτρα ἔρημός ἐστι τὸ ὄρος Σιων;

2 ἔσῃ γὰρ ὡς πετεινοῦ ἀνιπταμένου νεοσςὸς ἀφῃρημένος, θύγατερ Μωαβ. ἔπειτα δὲ. Αρνων, πλείονα

185 Ibid., 43–44. 186 Ibid., 44. 187 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 101. 188 Ibid. Emphasis added.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

118

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

‫ הביאו עצה עשו פלילה שיתי‬189 ‫כליל צלך בתוך צהרים סתרי‬ ‫נדחים נדד אל־תגלי‬

3

‫יגורו בך נדחי מואב הוי־סתר למו‬ ‫מפני שודד כי־אפס המץ כלה שד‬ ‫תמו רמס מן־הארץ‬

4

4 Παροικήσουσίν σοι οἱ φυγάδες Μωαβ, ἔσονται σκέπη ὑμῖν ἀπὸ προσώπου διώκοντος, ὅτι ἤρθη ἡ συμμαχία σου, καὶ ὁ ἄρχων ἀπώλετο ὁ καταπατῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς.

‫והוכן בחסד כסא וישב עליו באמת‬ ‫באהל דוד שפט ודרש משפט ומהר‬ ‫צדק‬

5

5 καὶ διορθωθήσεται μετὰ ἐλέους θρόνος, καὶ καθίεται ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῦ

3 Βουλεύου, ποίει τε σκέπην πένθους αὐτῇ διὰ παντός ἐν μεσημβρινῇ σκοτίᾳ φεύγουσιν, ἐξέστησαν, μὴ ἀπαχθῇς.

μετὰ ἀληθείας ἐν σκηνῇ Δαυιδ κρίνων καὶ ἐκζητῶν κρίμα καὶ σπεύδων δικαιοσύνην.

MT

LXX

1 Send a lamb to the ruler of the land, from Sela, by the direction of the desert, to the mountain of the daughter of Zion

1 I will send something like reptiles on the land; is the mountain of Zion a desert rock?

2 And it shall be as a flying creature being chased away, a nest being sent off, (so) the daughters of Moab shall be at the fords of Arnon.

2 For you (sg) will be like a nestling taken away from a bird that is flying, O daughter of Moab! And therefore, O Arnon,

3 Bring in (pl) advice, make (pl) decision, put (sg) a shadow like (the) night in (the) midst of noon; hide the outcasts, do not reveal the fugitives;

3 take (sg) more counsel, and make (sg) a shelter from mourning for her continually; they flee in darkness at noon; they are confused, lest you (sg) may be led away.

4 Let my outcasts, Moab, sojourn with you, be a hiding place to them from the face of the oppressor. When the extortioner has ceased, violence has finished, the one trampling underfoot has perished from the land.

4 The refugees of Moab will sojourn with you (sg); they will be a shelter to you (pl) from the presence of a persecutor; when your (sg) alliance is taken away and the ruler, the one trampling over the earth, has perished,

189 While the Qere (supported by a few Mss) suggest ‫הביאי‬, the present writer opts for the reading provided in the text. One of the major reasons of this option is that this reading (‫ )הביאו‬seems to be a difficult one in comparison to ‫ הביאי‬which seems to be in harmony with another imperative feminine singular (‫ )שיתי‬in the same verse.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5 5 Then a throne shall be set up in kindness and on it shall sit with faithfulness in (the) tent of David, one who judges and seeks justice, and is diligent in righteousness.

119

5 then a throne shall be established with mercy, and he shall sit on it with truth in (the) tabernacle of Dauid, judging and seeking judgment and being eager for righteousness.

In his notes on the LXX-Isaiah written roughly a century ago, Ottley claimed: “[t]he divergence of LXX. from Heb. at the opening of this chapter [i. e. Isaiah 16] is curious.”190 While his statement refers only to v. 1, a close reading of the remaining four verses of this pericope would not prevent one from making a similar claim. For the various discrepancies to be observed in them must not be seen only on a word-for-word level, but also with regard to the grammatical, syntactical, as well as semantical perspectives. While the Hebrew verb ‫( שלחו‬v. 1) provides room for a possible double interpretation (i. e. either to be read as a plural imperative “send” or as a 3rd pers. plural perfect “they have sent”), the use of ἀποστελῶ as its equivalence makes the Greek text show clearly a continuity with the threatening words of God in 15: 7–9.191 In these two verses, the Lord promises: (a) to bring Arabs to the ravine (see ἐπάξω γὰρ ἐπὶ τὴν φάραγγα Ἄραβας in v. 7) and upon Remon (see ἐπάξω γὰρ ἐπὶ Ρεμμων Ἄραβας in v. 9), and (b) to remove the offspring of Moab and Ariel as well as the remnant of Adama (see ἀρῶ τὸ σπέρμα Μωαβ καὶ Αριηλ καὶ τὸ κατάλοιπον Αδαμα in v. 9). Given this view, the thought in Isa 16: 1 in its Greek form seems to indicate that the Lord will punish the entire land of Moab (ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν)192 by sending something like reptiles (ἀποστελῶ ὡς ἑρπετὰ). This idea is to some extent contrary to that in the MT which sets the path for either: (a) urging Moab to send (if the verb is taken as imperative) a lamb as a tribute to be paid to the ruler of the land (perhaps the king in Jerusalem), or (b) appealing to Israel, backed up by a present of a lamb, to help Moab in her plight. In the MT, the gift is sent from Sela (‫)מסלע‬193 to the mountain of the daughter of Zion, thus contrasting the panic in Moab with the security of God’s chosen city. However, in the LXX, the assurance of this safety in Zion is expressed in a ques190 Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.186. 191 For textual criticism of this, see J. de Waard, A Handbook on Isaiah (Winona Lake: Indiana, Eisenbraus, 1997), 74–75. 192 This expression “ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ” is likely to refer to Moab that is described as “ἡ Μωαβῖτις” (cf. τῆς Μωαβίτιδος in LXX-Isa 15: 1; also τῇ Μωαβίτιδι in 16: 7),which in its context means “the land of Moab” (cf. also LXX-Jer 31(48): 33). Cf. Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.183–84. 193 This word that is treated as a proper name in many modern translations can also be rendered as “rock” or “cliff” (cf. Jeremiah 48: 28). If taken as a name, then Sela would echoe the fortified capital of Edomites. This would imply that the refugees of Moab are in Edom where they are called to pay tribute to the ruler in Jerusalem. However, G. B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah I-XXXIX (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1912), 287, thinks that such an “assumption that Moabite refugees have fled to Edom is not supported by any clear indication of such a flight in ch.15”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

120

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

tion (see μὴ πέτρα ἔρημός ἐστιν τὸ ὄρος Σιων;). While it is not clear as to whom this question that expects a negative answer was addressed, it should be noted that in light of other related passages in the LXX-Isaiah, “mount Zion” is a place of security where the Lord will fight against his (or Israel’s) enemies (e. g. 9: 11(10); 10: 12; 18: 4,7; 31: 4). In other words, the expected answer to the above question draws together a web of texts in which any reader of the Jewish community in Alexandria is reassured of the coming time when Zion will be restored (LXX-Isa 1: 26–27), perhaps from its previous status (cf. LXX-Isa 1: 21).194 The Lord will make the desert places of Zion like paradise (LXX-Isa 51: 1). He will give dominion to Zion and comfort Jerusalem (see “ἀρχὴν Σιων δώσω καὶ Ιερουσαλημ παρακαλέσω εἰς ὁδόν” in LXX-Isa 41: 27). In LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8 (to be discussed later), one reads: “happy is the one who has a seed in Zion and members of a household in Jerusalem” (v. 31: 9b). Besides the issue of‘literary unity’ (discussed above) to be encountered in interpreting the passage under scrutiny, there is also a difficulty in identifying the refugees to whom both the Hebrew and Greek texts are referring to in vv. 3–4. Ottley has phrased it in the following words: “[i]t is doubtful whether the fugitives, in the following verses, are those of Judah or Israel, forced over the border into Moab, or Moabites, themselves in distress: some phrases are ambiguous, both in Heb. and Greek.”195 This problem has given rise to two basic interpretations, especially with regard to those who study these verses in their Hebrew form. Most of the modern authorities take the view of seeing the passage as a text that expresses the words of Moabite rulers, requesting urgently Israel to protect the troubled Moabites.196 A major argument for this opinion has been that of considering the prophecy as an utterance that is exclusively concerned with the fate of Moab. Contrary to this view, there are those who see in the passage the Lord’s message in which he wants his people to be allowed to have guest rights in Moab, just as Israel allowed foreigners certain status privileges. Their argument is mainly based on the translation of the phrase “‫ ”יגורו בך נדחי מואב‬as “Let my outcasts, Moab, sojourn with you” (v. 4a), thus reading Moab (‫ )מואב‬as a vocative.197 In the face of these alternative modern translations (and hence interpretations), it is worth attempting to find out in which way the Isaiah trans194 For an important analysis of LXX-Isa 1: 21, 26–27, especially with reference to the translator’s emphasis on Zion, see van der Louw, Transformation in the Septuagint, 209–211, 222– 26. 195 Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.186. 196 See, for instance, J. D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1–33 (WBC 24, ed., D. A. Hubbard/G. W. Barker (Waco: Word Books, 1985), 224–32; Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 44; D. L. Petersen, The Prophetic Literature: An Introduction (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 86–87. 197 For example, this is the view of A. Harman, Isaiah (Scotland: Christian Focus, 2005), 135. An analysis of the text problem with regard to this view and its contrary, see de Waard, A Handbook on Isaiah, 75.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5

121

lator understands the text. A reasonable approach to such a search needs to take into account the various syntactic-grammatical relationships. Starting from v. 2, the Isaiah translator designs the text in a manner that makes the Lord address Moab as “ἔσῃ γὰρ […] θύγατερ Μωαβ” (daughter of Moab, i. e. the population of Moab, cf. Isa 10: 30). The Lord describes the situation ahead of Moab with regard to its ruin and the forceful expulsion of its inhabitants. The picture portrayed in the Greek text seems to indicate that the fleeing inhabitants will arrive at Arnon (ἔπειτα δέ Αρνων).198 The translator uses Αρνων (which is commonly known to denote a river, cf. Isa 16: 1 MT)199 to refer to a particular place (a city in the neighbourhood of Moab?) where Moab seems to seek refuge. In a parallel text (noticeably in its Greek form), Arnon is also read as a place where the news that Moab has perished is told (see the phrase “κέκραξον ἀνάγγειλον ἐν Αρνων ὅτι ὤλετο Μωαβ” in LXX-Jer 31 (48): 20). The Isaiah translator (in 16: 2b-3) makes the text to speak of the Lord requesting Arnon (ἔπειτα δέ Αρνων): (a) to think more about what has happened to Moab (πλείονα βουλεύου); (b) to make a shelter for Moab from grief (ποίει τε σκέπην πένθους); (c) to know that the fugitives of Moab are fleeing in the darkness at noon (ἐν μεσημβρινῇ σκοτίᾳ φεύγουσιν) and that they are confused by fear that Arnon may be led away as well (ἐξέστησαν μὴ ἀπαχθῇς). If this reading is accepted, then it can help any reader in an attempt to understand what is going on in vv. 4–5 where there is a change of subject from singular to plural. If one considered Judah (in vv. 4a-b) as the subject addressed in both the singular personal pronoun (σοι) and its plural (ὑμῖν), then one would get the following reading: “The refugees of Moab will sojourn with you (sg) [i. e. Judah]; they [i. e. the refugees of Moab] will be a shelter to you (pl) [i. e. Judah] from a persecutor” (v. 4a-b). In this case, the singular pronoun personal “σου” in the phrase “ἡ συμμαχία σου” (vv. 4c-5) would refer to an unnamed ally of Judah. This reading then would seem to suggest that both Moab and Judah are in distress from enemies. It would also imply that the presence of the fugitives of Moab among the Jews will be for the advantage of the Jews in protecting them from their fate. However, perhaps a more likely reading that can be reconstructed is as follows. It seems that in v. 4a, the phrase “παροικήσουσίν σοι οἱ φυγάδες Μωαβ” is still part of the speech of the Lord to Arnon that has been addressed so far in a second person singular (cf. vv. 2b-3). In other words, the singular “σοι” in the above phrase seems reasonably to refer to Arnon. When it comes to v. 4b, since the subject of the addressee here shifts to the plural (ὑμῖν), it seems more convenient to read the clause in the following 198 Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.186–87, has a helpful critical analysis with regard to whether one should read “ἔπειτα δέ” or “ἐπι τάδέ”. 199 It must also be remembered that Arnon sometimes served as a boundary between the Moabites and the Israelites (cf. Deut 2: 24,36; 3: 8,16; Josh 13: 16). Also, as a river, it originates in the Arabian mountains (cf. Jos. Ant. 4.85).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

122

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

way: “They [i. e. Jews] will be (ἔσονται) a shelter to you (ὑμῖν) [i. e. the refugees of Moab] from the face of a persecutor” (v. 4b). Unlike the previous reading, the unspecified force described as “ἡ συμμαχία σου [sg]” (your alliance) in vv. 4c-5 could be understood as referring to Moab’s ally (without excluding the possibility of seeing this ally as being also Judah’s oppressor200). In this case, Moab is addressed in a singular personal pronoun (σου), thus recalling v. 2 where Moab is also spoken of in singular as a community that is fleeing from the oppressing ruler (perhaps of both the Moabites and the Jews, as mentioned above). The underlying assumption in this reading is that there is a coming time201 when there will be safety among the Jews. Thus, in a (forthcoming?) crisis facing the daughter of Moab (LXX-Isa 15: 1–16: 2), she is seen wandering without finding a place for salvation (LXX-Isa 15: 7),202 except in Mount Zion (LXX-Isa 16: 1,5; cf. “ὅτι οὕτως εἶπέν μοι κύριος ἀσφάλεια ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἐμῇ πόλει” in 18: 4) where she will unfortunately refuse to submit. Her refusal, described also as her arrogance, is seen as what causes her to be removed by the Lord (see “ἠκούσαμεν τὴν ὕβριν Μωαβ ὑβριστὴς σφόδρα τὴν ὑπερηφανίαν ἐξῆρας” in 16: 6). The plural subject “we” of the verb ἠκούσαμεν is likely to refer to the Jews, thus making perhaps more sense with regard to what has been said about them being seen as providing shelter to the fugitives of Moab. Without going into too much detail, it can be said that from whatever angle one may wish to tackle the passage under scrutiny, there is a least one element worth pointing out. Every reading of this text reaches a climax with vv. 4c-5, which point to a time when a throne shall be established, with one sitting on it in the tabernacle of David. At this point, one may still argue that these verses in their Greek form do not seem to say anything that is different from the message of their Hebrew parent text. However, it can be demonstrated that in the LXX there is a significant degree of emphasis on assuring the action of establishing Davidic rule over Moab. This can be discovered if 200 As it was when Moab, according to J. A. Dearman, “Moab”, in B. T. Arnold/H. G. M. Williamson (ed.), Dictionary of the OT Historical Books (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2005), 705–07, on p. 707, joined a coalition from Transjordan that invaded Judah. 201 Note the future aspect of the verb ἔσονται that is lacking in the MT, as well as the two verbs in indicative aorist passive (ἤρθη) and middle (ἀπώλετο) that are likely to be taken as aorist futures that express certainty to an action to take place. 202 Even in a place like Σηγωρ (LXX-Isa 15: 5), which served as a city where Lot escaped when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed (see LXX-Deut 34: 3; LXX-Gen 19: 22–23; and the comment of these passages from Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 558). The Moabites will weep since even Debon, where their altar (βωμὸς) is, will be destroyed (LXX-Isa 15: 2). They will be weary at their altars (ὅτι ἐκοπίασεν Μωαβ ἐπὶ τοῖς βωμοῖς) (LXX-Isa 16: 12). Desperate, Moab will even go to the idols in order to pray, but no deliverance will be expected even from them (see καὶ εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὰ χειροποίητα αὐτῆς ὥστε προσεύξασθαι καὶ οὐ μὴ δύνηται ἐξελέσθαι αὐτόν in LXX-Isa 16: 12). For trust in idolatry will end (see τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ […] καὶ οὐ μὴ πεποιθότες ὦσιν ἐπὶ τοῖς βωμοῖς οὐδὲ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἔργοις τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν ἃ ἐποίησαν οἱ δάκτυλοι αὐτῶν καὶ οὐκ ὄψονται τὰ δένδρα αὐτῶν οὐδὲ τὰ βδελύγματα αὐτῶν in LXX-Isa 17: 7–8).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5

123

the text is read not only in conjunction with other related passages within the LXX-Isaiah, but also in its immediate context (discussed above). Phrased differently, such a reading would reveal the kind of messianic belief that is portrayed within the passage. This is our focus in what follows.

4.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ Already with the MT form of the passage under scrutiny, Williamson has noted a list of: (a) seven major features,203 which show a considerable degree of similarity to some that are mentioned in chs. 9 and 11 of Isaiah, and (b) three minor ones204 that distinguish the text of these two chapters. After analysing the later elements, he discovers that Isaiah 16: 4b-5 seems to point any reader to see the Davidic ruler spoken of in the text in a priestly context.205 Combining all the above characteristics, he concludes “that Isaiah 16: 4b-5 is indeed a ‘maverick’ messianic passage within the book of Isaiah.”206 Given this view, one may ask the following question. Is Isa 16: 4b-5 in its Greek form offering any different picture? Let us find out. To begin with, the translator’s use of “μετ᾽ ἐλέους” for ‫ בחסד‬within the phrase “καὶ διορθωθήσεται μετ᾽ ἐλέους θρόνος” (v. 5) points to God (using his mercy “ἐλεος”) as the subject in action. After his analysis of the Isaiah translator’s use of ἐλεος, Olley discovered that this “translator does not use ἐλεος when referring to man’s ‫”חסד‬207 In Isa 16: 5, according to him, “the Greek connects ἐλεος to the action of establishing or setting right, i. e. to an action of God”208 in the age of salvation (cf. 2 Macc. 2: 7). Olley supports his argument by looking at two related passages (i. e. LXX-Isa 54: 7–8; 63: 7) which emphasise the “mercy” of God and the qualities of the Lord as judge, respectively.209 While Olley’s view is understandable with regard to the translator’s use of ἐλεος within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, it does not take into account (at least with reference to the passage under scrutiny) an important syntactical relationship of this term with other element(s). This concerns the translator’s use of διορθωθήσεται. In the LXX-Isaiah, the choice of this 203 There are the three phrases: (1) “the language of establishing a throne”, (2) “the language of ‘justice’ and ‘righteousness’”; (3) “the reference to David while avoiding explicit use of the title ‘King (melek)’”; (4) “the fact that this will follow liberation from a time of oppression”; (5) “the fact that this figure is the recipient of these blessings, rather than their active initiator”; (6) the use of “‘steadfast love’”, and (7) “‘faithfulness’” ; see Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 56–57. 204 These are the three phrases: (1) “one who ‘seeks justice (dōrēš mišpaṭ)’”; (2) “‘swift to do what is right (mṉ hῑr ṣ edeq)’”; and (3) “‘the tent of David’”; see ibid., 60–61. 205 Ibid., 61. 206 Ibid., 62. 207 Olley, ‘Righteousness’ in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979), 145–46. 208 Ibid., 143. 209 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

124

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

verb for ‫ כון‬occurs twice (i. e. in 16: 5 and 62: 7). Baer has rightly observed that such a choice is curious. In his analysis of the latter passage, he discovers that the result of the translator’s choice of this verb “is a bold elevation of Zion and her children: […] when he [i. e. God] establishes and makes Jerusalem a praise in the earth.”210 By the same token, he correctly sees that the reference of the aforementioned translator’s choice in the former passage (i. e. Isa 16: 5) “is to the restoration of Davidic rule over Moab.”211 Reflecting on the translator’s manoeuvre in 62: 7 (and implicitly, beyond reasonable doubt, in 16: 5), Baer adds, “[o]ne wonders whether a hint of Diaspora pique about the ‘old country’ might just rise to the surface in the use of this uncommon verb. Jerusalem is there, one might surmise, but not quite what she ought to be.”212 Baer’s thoughts seem to fit the context of the passage under scrutiny (discussed above). That is to say, God’s mercy (ἐλεος) is seen by the Isaiah translator as the basis of restoring the Davidic rule over Israel’s enemies.213 Once this assurance in given, the translator moves to the description of the expected messianic figure. Firstly, like in the MT, this figure “will sit on it [i. e. the throne] with truth in the tabernacle of David” (καθίεται ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῦ μετὰ ἀληθείας ἐν σκηνῇ Δαυιδ). However, the use of σκηνη for ‫ אהל‬is of interest. In the MT, according to Tomasino, “the phrase ‘tent of David’ might […] play on the idea that going to the tent was a formulaic phrase for release from military service.”214 In this sense, he adds, “[i]ts use here [i. e. in Isa 16: 5] could be an allusion to the peacefulness of this future reign.”215 For he sees that “a similar allusion may lie behind the promise to restore the ‘tents of Jacob’ in Jer 30: 18.”216 In the LXX as a whole, this idea of the restoration of “the tabernacles of Judah” is also echoed (see, for instance, “καὶ σώσει κύριος τὰ σκηνώματα Ιουδα καθὼς ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς” in LXX-Zech 12: 7). Within the LXX-Isaiah itself, this thought is found implicitly in 11: 12 where the translator speaks of a future time when the Lord will gather the dispersed of Judah (τοὺς διεσπαρμένους τοῦ Ιουδα συνάξει ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων πτερύγων τῆς γῆς). Besides this idea, it is also possible that the term “σκηνη” might have been understood by a Jewish reader of this text in the second century B. C. E. as referring to the temple.217 For another text (i. e. the Hebrew text of Sir 50: 5) from roughly 210 Baer, When We All Go Home, 73. Emphasis is original. 211 Ibid. note 77. 212 Ibid. 213 Cf. W. Horbury/D. Noy, Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt with an Index of the Jewish Inscriptions of Egypt and Cyrenaica (Cambridge: University Press, 1992), 85, who refer to an inscription dated roughly second century B. C.E, where “ἐλεος ‘mercy’ [is used] in the sense of redemption.” 214 A. Tomasino, “‫”אהל‬, in W. A.VanGemeren (ed.), NIDOT, vol. 1 (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1967), 300–02, on p. 302. 215 Ibid. 216 Ibid. 217 Moreover, analysing the meaning of term ‫אהל‬, Koch has discovered that the “terminology accruing to the tent became a part of the language of the temple”. He sees for instance that

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 16: 1–5

125

this period in history speaks of the high priest Simon coming forth “from the Tent,” i. e. from the second Temple.218 Further, if one were to consider the Isaiah translator’s use of σκηνη for ‫אהל‬, it would be observed that this seems to be an appropriate word-forword equivalent. Such a claim would be based on a statistic of its occurrence within the LXX-Isaiah.219 However, by taking into account the contextual idea of Zion as a place of salvation implied in Isa 16: 1, the translator seems to connect v. 5 to LXX-Isa 33: 20 as an important passage with reference to the security that will be found in Zion (see “ἰδοὺ Σιων ἡ πόλις τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν” for ‫) חזה ציון קרית מועדנו‬. Still in Isa 33: 20 it must be noted that both the MT and LXX speak of the stakes of the tabernacle (σκηνη) in Zion that will not be moved forever (see μὴ κινηθῶσιν οἱ πάσσαλοι τῆς σκηνῆς αὐτῆς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον). Secondly, the Isaiah translator describes the expected ruler to sit on “the throne … in (the) tabernacle of David” as a messianic figure, who will be performing three major duties. He will be: (a) “judging” (κρίνων), (b) “seeking judgment” (ἐκζητῶν κρίμα), and (c) “being eager for righteousness” (σπεύδων δικαιοσύνην). It is here that this figure is connected with the awaited Davidic ruler portrayed in the other messianic passages within the LXXIsaiah as a whole. While dealing with the section on “Messianism in LXXIsaiah 11: 1–10” (discussed above), we noted there that via the use of κρινεῖ (jointly with κρίσιν) the translator put together other texts involving judgment. Among them we mentioned the passage that concerns us, as well as LXX-Isa 19: 20 (to be discussed later) where we are told that a man (ἄνθρωπος) will be sent to the oppressed people. He will save them by judging them (see καὶ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτοῖς κύριος ἄνθρωπον ὃς σώσει αὐτούς κρίνων σώσει αὐτούς). In LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8 (as said above, to be discussed later), this ἄνθρωπος will be revealed in Zion (v. 32: 2). To these links, we may add one more element. This is related to the translator’s use of the phrase “σπεύδων δικαιουσύνην” as a third duty of the aforementioned Davidic ruler. If the passage under scrutiny is read in its immediate context of oppression (see “ὁ ἄρχων ἀπώλετο ὁ καταπατῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς” in v. 4) as well as in conjunction with a similar context in LXX-Isa 19: 20, then the messianic figure spoken of in the text would be understood as one who will speed the cause of righteousness, i. e. one who will quickly take up the cause of the oppressed.220 In other words, recalling the features in the messianic figure “[t]he Psalms extol the temple as a tent, especially in connection with the concept of asylum (Ps. 27: 5; 61: 5[4]; cf. 15: 1; 78: 60; and Isa 33: 20 f.)” see K. Koch, “‫”אהל‬, in G. J. Botterweck/H. Ringgren (ed.), TDOT, vol 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 118–30, on p. 127. 218 Tomasino, “‫”אהל‬, 302. 219 The word σκηνη occurs seven times in the LXX-Isaiah. It is used once for ‫( סכה‬1: 8) as well as for ‫( משכן‬22: 16). In the remaining five occurrences it is used for ‫( אהל‬16: 5; 33: 20; 38: 12; 40: 22; 54: 2). 220 Cf. also Tomasino, “‫”מהר‬, in W. A. VanGemeren (ed.), NIDOT, vol. 2 (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1997), 857–59, on p. 859.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

126

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

described in LXX-Isa 9, his throne will be upheld with righteousness (ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ and judgment (ἐν κρίματι) as he shall be judging (κρίνων) (see

v. 7(6)), to the point that “Zion will be filled with judgment/justice and righteousness” (see “ἐνεπλήσθη Σιων κρίσεως καὶ δικαιοσύνης” in LXX-Isa 33: 5). Given this view, the Davidic ruler portrayed in LXX-Isa 16: 1–5 will have the responsibility of bringing a “just and harmonious society”221 about in the community by defeating the forces of destruction in the midst of God’s chosen people (vv. 4b-c) in Zion. For it is in Σιων (see LXX-Isa 25: 1– 5, a text that is described, according to Coste, as “un chant d’action de grâces à horizons messianiques”222) where the ill-treated Jews (ὀλιγόψυχοι)223 will celebrate “la ruine des impies et [leur] délivrance”224 (see v. 5). These Jews are told that God will give them rest on that mountain (see “ὅτι ἀνάπαυσιν δώσει ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τοῦτο” in 25: 10a) and that the Moabites will be trodden down (see “καὶ καταπατηθήσεται ἡ Μωαβῖτις” in 25: 10b). 4.4 Summary If we had to recapitulate what was said in our discussion, we would basically mention two things. Firstly, we have identified the Isaiah translator’s use of both contextual and intertextual exegesis in producing his text. Both categories of exegesis connected the passage that underwent scrutiny with a network of related passages. From some specific renderings or choices, we noted a clear move by the Isaiah translator to rediscover the world of his own day. By the same token, we also discovered that LXX-Isa 16: 1–5 was transformed into a text that provides (more profoundly than is the case in the MT) a clear and firm assurance that Zion will be restored. It is in Zion where the forces of destruction will be defeated. All these ideas combined, the Isaiah translator made his text meaningful and relevant to any of his readers in the Jewish community of Alexandria. Secondly, while Isa 16: 4b-5 in its Hebrew form has been considered as an independent messianic pericope, as Williamson concluded (see discussion above), our study has proved that, in their Greek form, these verses are part of a coherent unit (i. e. 16: 1–5). This unit is an integrated and interrelated messianic passage within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. For from our analysis of the ‘messianic language’ contained in this passage, it has become clear that

221 Olley, “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 66. 222 Coste, “Le texte grec d’Isaïe XXV, 1–5”, 51. A few pages later, Coste speaks of this text as “un cantique très cohérent et suggestif à travers lequel on sent vibrer l’attente et la Foi des Juifs de la diaspora” (p. 61). 223 According to Coste, these ὀλιγόψυχοι (25: 5) are understood as “les humbles, […] les assoiffés et les opprimés” (ibid., 56). He considers them to be the Jews of the Hellenistic Diaspora. 224 Ibid., 51.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

127

there is a significant expansion of the scope of messianic intertextuality compared to the MT. For instance, besides the various connections between Isa 16: 4b-5 with Isa 9 and Isa 11 found in both the MT and LXX, it was noticed that both LXX-Isa 16: 5 and LXX-Isa 19: 20 are linked via the translator’s use of κρίνων. With reference to this association, it was said that if the former passage is read in conjunction with the latter, it will be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the messianic figure depicted in LXX-Isa 16: 1–5 is a saviour-judge for Israel (understood, within the framework of the time of translation, as the oppressed people). Via its association with LXX-Isa 19: 20, it was also noted that LXX-Isa 16: 1–5 was implicitly (and significantly) connected with LXX-Isa 32: 2. As shall be seen, both texts to which Isa 16: 1–5 is joined speak of the awaited messianic figure being ὁ ἄνθρωπος, who will be revealed in Zion (LXX-Isa 32: 2). At this point, it can be said that this figure is expected to be a human figure as well as a warrior (especially with reference to his action to defeat the force of destruction in Zion, as discussed above). Moreover, the announcement of the restoration of Davidic rule over Moab (in LXX-Isa 16: 1–5) is also echoed in LXX-Num 24: 17 which reads that “a man shall rise up out of Israel and he shall crush the chiefs of Moab” (ἀναστήσεται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ Ισραηλ καὶ θραύσει τοὺς ἀρχηγοὺς Μωαβ). It is striking to see that the idea of a Jewish ruler rising up in an attempt to fulfil such a mission was a factor, for instance, in the future expectation of Hasmonean times as a few leaders (e. g. Judas Maccabaeus and John Hyrcanus I) attempted to conquer some important cities (i. e. Jazer and Medaba) related to the land of Moab.225

5. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19:16–25 LXX-Isa 19: 16–25 has been described by Schaper as “a significant passage which is less readily thought of as messianic.”226 This striking observation can be sadly testified, for instance, not only from a glance at the meticulous studies done on this passage in its Greek form,227 but also from the most recent works dealing with the topic of messianism in the LXX-Isaiah.228 Against this background, we intend to build on Schaper’s interesting short analysis of the plausible intertextual connections of the ‘messianic language’

225 For more detail, see J. A. Goldstein, “The Hasmonean Revolt and the Hasmonean Dynasty,” 2.292–351, on pp. 325–26; see also Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, 44. 226 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 371. 227 The studies that readily come to mind are: L. Monsengwo-Pasinya, “Isaïe XIX 16–25 et universalisme dans la LXX”, in J. A. Emerton (ed.) Congress Volume, Salamanca, 192–207, and van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 127–66. 228 For instance, this passage of Isaiah 19: 16–25 is not mentioned in Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 65–81; and Salvesen, “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations”, 245–61.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

128

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

to be found in the aforementioned passage.229 Methodologically, after investigating briefly the context of the passage,230 the next task shall be to reexamine the passage using the literary analysis approach. Here, an attempt shall be made in answering (what van der Kooij describes at the end of his study of this passage as) “some [of the] questions […] left unanswered.”231 Above all, via an intertextual exegesis, we shall argue that the messianic figure depicted in the passage is a deliverer for the Jews (under oppression) in Egypt, an argument that is advanced here against those who see that figure as a saviour first and foremost for the Egyptians. This interpretation is vital for understanding the Jewish messianic expectations in the Diaspora.

5.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context The path to be followed in this section has already been set to some degree by van der Kooij. In his analysis of the passage under scrutiny, he discovers that, in the broader context of the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, 19: 18 is related to 48: 1, and 19: 25 with both 10: 24 and 11: 16, all of them in their Greek form. However, he does acknowledge that more work still needs to be done not only on the immediate contextual level of LXX-Isa 19 itself, but also on paying attention to other related Isaianic Greek texts on Egypt (e. g. chs. 18; 20; 30: 1–5; 31: 1–3).232 Hence, we shall focus on his suggestions. The first fifteen verses of Isa 19 (both in the MT and LXX) tell us about the impending disaster facing Egypt. However, the Greek text of these verses displays significant features that show what Seeligmann calls “a transposition from the ancient biblical into the Hellenistic atmosphere.”233 For instance, the rendering of νομὸς ἐπὶ νομόν for ‫( ממלכה בממלכה‬v. 2) reflects the administrative division into nomenclature territories of Ptolemaic Egypt.234 At this point, it can be said that since these verses (19: 1–15) are connected with the pericope under scrutiny (i. e. vv. 16–25) via the particle δὲ as a plus (in v. 16) (see text below), the reader is expected to see the translator’s contemporaneous interpretation of this pericope. In fact, this expectation also finds support by looking at how the Isaiah translator deals with other related texts on Egypt. To begin with, in their Greek form both the two surrounding chapters (i. e. chs. 18 and 20) of Isa 19 contain signs of a different situation being in view. In 20: 4–5, as Seeligmann has clearly noted, while the Isaiah translator seems to provide a more literal translation (v. 4), he leaves 229 Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 375, 377–78. 230 This has been described by van der Kooij as one of the aspects that remained to be studied in this passage; see van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 158. 231 Ibid. 232 Ibid. 233 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 71. 234 Ibid., 71, 236; see also Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 153.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

129

the reader(s) to detect a different picture in v. 5.235 In the Hebrew, this verse speaks about Judae’s vain hope of aid from Egypt and Ethiopia: ‫וחתו ובשו מכוש מבטם ומן־מצרים תפארתם‬

Then they shall be aggrieved and ashamed on account of Cush their hope and of Egypt their boast.

In the LXX, the translator redirects this text to refer to the Hellenistic times. He speaks “of the hope which the Egyptians had placed on the Ethiopians; and refers very likely to the support which the independent Ethiopian dynasties had given in Hellenistic times to Egyptian rebels against the Ptolemaeans.”236 The text reads as follows: καὶ αἰσχυνθήσονται ἡττηθέντες οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ἐπὶ τοῖς Αἰθίοψιν ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἦσαν πεποιθότες οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ἦσαν γὰρ αὐτοῖς δόξα

And the Egyptians, having being defeated, shall be ashamed because of the Ethiopians, in whom the Egyptians had trusted; for they were their glory.

As far as LXX-Isa 18 is concerned, the translator expresses an interest in the city of Jerusalem to regain its former reputation. This can be noted via his rendering of ἀσφάλεια ἔσται ἐν τῇ ἐμῇ πόλει for ‫אשקטה ואביטה במכוני‬ (v. 4), thus indicating that he “apparently read the assurance that Jerusalem would safely come through an Assyrian siege (or, maybe, remain forever immune against any such disaster?)”237 (cf. LXX-Isa 36: 33–35). He speaks of a coming time when Israel’s enemies (who shall bring presents to the Lord in Zion) will be “crushed and torn” (τεθλιμμένου καὶ τετιλμένου) rather than the MT’s reading “tall and polished” (v. 7). The translator’s longing for the reunification between the Alexandrian Jews and their co-religionist in Jerusalem as the city of God can be detected in his rendition of Isa 31: 1–9. In vv. 1–3 (cf. also 30: 1–5; 36: 6–9), the oracle (both in the MT and LXX) is introduced by a curse: “Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help” (v. 1). How did the Alexandrian Jewish readers (including the translator himself) read and understood this prophetic text as they found themselves living in the Diaspora in Egypt, thus implying precisely that Jerusalem had been destroyed by the Assyrian campaigns as Isaiah had predicted? It will be seen later238 that while Isa 31: 8–9 (MT) continues to stress the chapter’s insistence that Jerusalem shall not be overcome by the Assyrians’ attack because of the burning presence of YHWH in Jerusalem (cf. 18: 4), our translator transforms this into a celebration of the blessings of belonging to Zion (see τάδε λέγει κύριος μακάριος ὃς ἔχει ἐν Σιων σπέρμα καὶ οἰκείους ἐν Ιερουσαλημ in v. 9b). This reveals the existing feelings prevalent among the Jewish

235 Ibid., 250. 236 Ibid. 237 Ibid., 284; also Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 128. 238 See the section on “Messianism in the LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8” (to be discussed below).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

130

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

community in the Diaspora with regard to their solidarity with the remnant in Jerusalem, as well as the yearning for the restoration of their nation.239 In summary, if the analysis above is accepted then this would help one to see what Daniel calls (while discussing briefly a few verses belonging to the pericope under scrutiny) as “l’esprit messianique qui anime tout ce contexte”240 (of LXX-Isa 19: 16–25). Before investigating any possible ‘messianic language’ portrayed within this text, we will have a close look at the Greek text and will make some observations while comparing it to its Hebrew parent text. 5.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫ביום ההוא יהיה מצרים כנשים‬ ‫וחרד ופחר מפני תנופת יד־יחוה‬ ‫צבאות אשר־הוא מניף עליו‬

16

‫והיתה אדמת יהודה למצרים לחנא‬ ‫כל אשר יזכיר אתה אליו יפחד‬ ‫מפני עצת יהוה צבאות אשר־הוא‬ ‫יועץ עליו‬

17

‫ביום ההוא יהיו חמש ערים בארץ‬ ‫מצרים מדברות שפת כנען‬ ‫ונשבעות ליהוה צבאות עיר ההרס‬ ‫יאמר לאחת‬

18

‫ביום ההוא יהיה מזבח ליהוה בתוך‬ ‫ארץ מצרים ומצבה אצל־גבולה‬ ‫ליהוה‬

19

‫והיה לאות ולעד ליהוה צבאות‬ ‫בארץ מצרים כי־יצעקו אל־יהוה‬ ‫מפני לחצים וישלח להם מושיע‬ ‫ורב והצילם‬

20

16 Τῇ δὲ ἑμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἔσονται οἱ

Αἰγύπτιοι ὡς γυναῖκες ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἐν τρόμῳ ἀπὸ προσώπου τῆς χειπὸς κυρίου σαβαωθ, ἣν αὐτὸς ἐπιβαλεῖ αὐτοῖς

17 καὶ ἔσται ἡ χώρα τών Ιουδαίων

τοῖς Αἰγυπτίοις εἰς φόβητρον πᾶς, ὃς ἂν ὀνομάσῃ αὐτὴν αὐτοῖς, φοβηθήσονται διὰ τὴν βουλήν, ἣν βεβούλευται κύπριος ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν.

18 τῇ ἑμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἔσονται πέντε

πόλεις ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ λαλοῦσαι τῇ γλώσςῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι καὶ ὀμνύουσαι τῷ ὀνόματι κυρίου Πόλις-ασεδεκ κληθήσεται ἡ μία πόλις.

19 τῇ ἑμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἔσται

θυσιαστήριον τῷ κυρίῳ ἐν χώρᾳ Αἰγυπτίων καὶ στήλη πρὸς τὸ ὅριον αὐτῆς τῷ κυρίῳ

20 καὶ ἔσται εἰς σημεῖον εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα κυρίῳ ἐν χώρᾳ Αἰγύπτου, ὅτι κεκράξονται πρὸς κύριον διὰ τοὺς θλίβοντας αὐτούς, καὶ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτοῖς κύπριος ἄνθρωπον, ὃς σώσει αὐτούς, κρίνων σώσει αὐτούς.

239 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 284; also Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 292; Baer, When We All Go Home, 217–219. 240 Daniel, Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte dans la Septante, 72 n. 48.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25 ‫ונודע יהוה למצרים וידעו מצרים‬ ‫את־יהוה ביום ההוא ועבדו זבח‬ ‫ומנחה ונדרו־נדר ליהוה ושלמו‬

21

‫ונגף יהוה את־מצרים נגף ורפוא‬ ‫ושבו עד־יהוה ונעתר להם ורפאם‬

22

‫ביום ההוא תהיה מסלה ממצרים‬ ‫אשורה ובא־אשור במצרים‬ ‫ומצרים באשור ועבדו מצרימ את־‬ ‫אשור‬

23

‫ביום ההוא יהיה ישראל שלישיה‬ ‫למצרים ולאשור ברכה בקרב‬ ‫הארץ‬

24

‫אשר ברכו יהוה צבאות לאמר‬ ‫ברוך עמי מצרים ומעשה ידי אשור‬ ‫ונחלתי ישראל‬

25

131

21 καὶ γνωστὸς ἔσται κύριος τοῖς Αἰγυπτίοις, καὶ γνώσονται οἱ

Αἰγυπτίοι τὸν κύριον ἐν τῇ ἑμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ καὶ ποιήσουσιν θυσίας καὶ εὔξονται εὐχὰς τῷ κυρίῳ καὶ ἀποδώσουσι.

22 καὶ πατάξει κύριος τοὺς Αἰγυπ-

τίους πληγῇ μεγάλῃ καὶ ἰάσεται αὐτὺς ἰάσει, καὶ ἐπιστραφήσονται πρὸς κύριον, καὶ εἰσακούσεται αὐτῶν καὶ ἰάσεται αὐτούς

23 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῇ ἔσται ὁδὸς Αἰγύπτου πρὸς Ἀσσυρίους, καὶ

εἰσελεύσονται Ἀσσύριοι εἰς Αἴγυπτον, καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι πορεύσονται πρὸς Ἀσσυρίους, καὶ δουλεύσουσιν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι τοῖς Ἀσσυρίοις.

24 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκεινῃ ἔσται Ισραηλ τρίτος ἐν τοῖς Ἀσσυρίοις καὶ ἐν τοῖς Αἰγυπτίοις εὐλογημένος ἐν τῇ γῇ.

25 ἣν εὐλόγησε κύριος σαβαωθ λέγων Εὐλογημένος ὁ λαός μου ὁ ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ καὶ ὁ ἐν Ἀσσυρίοις καὶ ἡ κληρονομία μου Ισραηλ.

MT

LXX

16 In that day Egypt shall be like women, and shall tremble, and shall be in dread before a waving of the hand of the Lord of Hosts, that he shall wave over it.

16 But in that day the Egyptians shall be (pl) like women in fear and in trembling before the presence of the hand of the Lord Sabaoth, which he shall lay on them.

17 And the land of Judah shall be to Egypt a confusion; everyone to whom it shall be mentioned shall be in terror, because of the counsel of the Lord of Hosts, which he was planning against it.

17 And the countryside of the Judeans shall be a terrifying object to the Egyptians; whoever should name it to them-they shall be afraid, because of the counsel, which the Lord has planned for it.

18 In that day, there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt, speaking the language of Canaan and they shall swear to the Lord of Hosts; one [of them] shall be called city of Destruction.

18 In that day, there shall be five cities in Egypt, speaking the Chananite language and swearing in the name of the Lord; the one city shall be called city of Asedek.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

132

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

19 In that day there shall be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt and a pillar to the Lord beside its border.

19 In that day there shall be an altar to the Lord in the countryside of the Egyptians and a stele to the Lord towards its boundary.

20 And it shall be a sign and a witness to the Lord of hosts in the land of Egypt; when they cry out to the Lord because of the oppressors, and he will send to them a saviour and defender, and he will rescue them.

20 And it shall be a sign for ever for the Lord in the countryside of Egypt, when they shall cry out to the Lord on account of those who are oppressing them, then the Lord shall send them a man who shall save them, judging he shall save them.

21 And the Lord shall be made known to [the] Egypt[ians] and the Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day and shall serve with a sacrifice and oblation, and they shall vow a vow to the Lord and shall repay.

21 And the Lord shall be known to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day and they will make sacrifice, and they will utter vows to the Lord and they will pay [them].

22 And the Lord shall smite [the] Egypt[ians], smiting and healing, and they shall return toward the Lord, and shall plead, and he shall heal them.

22 And the Lord shall smite the Egyptians with great plague and he shall heal them with healing and they shall be turned to the Lord, and he shall listen to them, and he shall heal them

23 In that day there shall be a highway from Egypt to Assyria, and Assyria shall come to Egypt, and Egypt to Assyria, and Egypt shall serve with Assyria.

23 In that day there shall be a way from Egypt to the Assyrians and the Assyrians shall enter Egypt, and the Egyptians shall go to the Assyrians, and the Egyptians shall be subjected to the Assyrians.

24 In that day Israel shall be third with regard to Egypt and with regard to Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the land

24 In that day Israel shall be third with reference to the Assyrians and with reference to the Egyptians, having been blessed in the land

25 which the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, “blessed be Egypt my people and Assyria, a work of my hand, and Israel my property.”

25 which the Lord Sabaoth has blessed saying; blessed be my people which is in Egypt and which is among the Assyrians, i. e. Israel my inheritance.

Both Monsengwo-Pasinya241 and van der Kooij242 have already substantially analysed and discussed the numerous differences that can be gleaned 241 “Isaïe XIX 16–25”, 192–207. The aim of his monograph is “d’analyser les faits littéraires susceptible de révéler l’intention et la pensée du traducteur alexandrine du texte d’Isa. xix 16– 25” (p. 192). He tackles the passage first in its Hebrew form, before examining the treatment

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

133

from the above comparison between the Hebrew and Greek texts of the passage under inspection. Given the fact that much of what can be deduced from this comparison can be found in their discussions,243 it seems reasonable for us to focus only on some of the salient aspects (which our predecessors either touched upon or paid less attention to) that fit the purpose of the current investigation. Firstly, from a close look at these differences, it must be said again that the Isaiah translator, in producing his text, made use (on more than one occasion) of what we call the phenomenon of intertextuality. For instance, while rendering the Hebrew verbal phrase ‫“ וחרד ופחד‬he shall tremble and be in dread” with a noun pair ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἐν τρόμῳ “in fear and in trembling” (v. 16), it is likely that our translator made use of the LXX-Pentateuchal texts (i. e. Exod 15: 16; Deut 2: 25; 11: 25, where φόβος is used not as an equivalence of ‫ חרד‬as in Isa 19: 6, but rather for ‫אימה‬/‫יראה‬/‫)מורא‬.244 It is also important to remember that the context of each one of these passages of the LXX- Pentateuch portrays the state of fear (cf. ἔσονται … ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἐν τρόμῳ in Isa 19: 16) that seizes the enemies that stand in the path of God’s people (Israel) that are being engaged in a process of liberation from oppression. Secondly, with reference to the translator’s failure to render ‫ צבאות‬in v. 17 (cf. also vv. 18, 20) as one of the issues left unanswered in van der Kooij’s work,245 it needs to be stressed that though it is exceedingly difficult to establish the criteria that were decisive for the translator in each case, it seems that some insights may arise if this is examined in light of what comes from

that the Alexandrian version gave to it. After referring his readers to commentaries and studies published on the passage and providing a detailed exegesis, he focuses on what he calls “les faits littéraires qui soulignent de manière particulière l’intégration totale de l’Egypte dans le projet salvifique de Dieu” (p. 193). In his section that analyses the Greek version of the passage, he begins by making a general remark that “dans l’ensemble, […] la Version des LXX suit de très près l’original hébreu” (pp. 198–99). He then goes on to concentrate only on “des écarts de traduction ou à d’autres éléments dignes d’attention” (p. 199). 242 “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 127–66. He studies the passage with regard to three major aspects. Firstly, he makes a word by word comparison between LXX-Isa 19: 16–25 and its parent text, including the evidence of the Qumran-scrolls. Secondly, he studies the aspect of grammar and syntax of each verse of the passage in comparison to its Hebrew text. Thirdly, he deals with the aspect of semantics, i. e. the meaning of the passage (both on the level of each verse and the passage as a whole) in its Greek form in relation to the Hebrew text (see pp. 128–29). 243 We therefore refer our readers to these studies (see note 241 and 242 above). One is also encouraged to look at W. Vogels, “L’Égypte mon peuple – L’universalisme d’Is 19,16–25”, Biblica 57 (1976) 494–514, even though his main focus is on the Hebrew text of the pericope. 244 For other LXX passages where the noun pair “ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἐν τρόμῳ” occurs, see van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 131. Croughs has more detail on the Isaiah translator’s use of LXX-Deut 2: 25 and 11: 25; see M. Croughs, “Intertextuality in the Septuagint: The Case of Isaiah 19”, BIOSCS 34 (2001) 81–94, on pp. 93–4. 245 See van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 158.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

134

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

other related passages, i. e. texts (as in Isa 19: 17) where one finds the idea of God’s plan (τὴν βουλήν ἓν βεβούλευται κύριος) with the formula ἐπὶ + accusative. It appears that when God’s plan is spoken against other nations, the translator renders faithfully ‫( צבאות‬see e. g. “βεβούλευται κύριος σαβαωθ ἐπ᾽ Αἴγυπτον” in 19: 12; also “τίς ταῦτα ἐβούλευσεν ἐπὶ Τύρον …κύριος σαβαωθ ἐβουλεύσατο” in 23: 8–9). In 10: 25, the Lord Sabaoth is against the Assyrians’ plan (θυμός μου [κύριος σαβαωθ] ἐπὶ τὴν βουλὴν αὐτῶν). However, it is striking to see that in 14: 26–27 where the Lord’s plan is directed against the whole earth (presumably including Israel) (see “αὕτη ἡ βουλή ἣν βεβούλευται κύπριος ἐπὶ τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην” in 26), the translator adds the noun κύριος (v. 26) and renders ‫ צבאות‬by ὁ ἅγιος (v. 27)246, thus removing in this case the military idea of the Lord as a conqueror coming against Israel (implicitly). By the same token, in 25: 6–8, all the nations are seen as celebrating a feast on mount Zion after the defeat of the ungodly men (ἀσεβῶν in v. 5) by the Lord Sabaoth (see κύριος σαβαωθ in v. 6), thus declaring God’s plan to be in favour of (instead of being against) the nations including Israel (see ἡ γὰρ βουλὴ αὕτη ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη in v. 7). Based on this chain of aforementioned observations, it is likely that the omission of ‫ צבאות‬in Isa 19: 17 allowed the clause “τὴν βουλήν ἥν βεβούλευται κύριος ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν” (19: 17) as the Lord’s plan for the geo-political territory of the Jews (see ἡ χώρα τῶν Ιουδαίων)247 to be read and understood as a positive plan for the Jewish people.248 This understanding seems to fit well with the current situation within which the LXX-Isaiah originates, where the MT reads that the plan of the Lord (described as a military figure) is against Egypt. Thirdly, it has been rightly pointed out by van der Kooij that Isa 19: 16– 25 in its Greek form displays a strong interest in the Jews in Egypt.249 Via an intertextual reading within the LXX-Isaiah, he argues (for instance) that, read in conjunction with Isa 48: 1 and 45: 23, the phrase “ὀμνύουσαι τῷ ὀνόματι κυρίου” (19: 18) is supposed to be understood as an expression that refers to the Jews (unlike the MT, which suggests a reference to non-Jews) who shall swear in the name of the Lord, thus making the whole verse 18 speak of the Jewish population in Egypt.250 Also, quoting Daniel’s substan246 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 176, thinks that it is difficult to explain the curious rendition of ἅγιος for ‫צבאות‬. 247 For more detail in this Greek phrase “ἡ χώρα τῶν Ιουδαίων”, see van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 133–34. For the Isaiah translator’s use of Ἰουδαῖος, see also van der Louw, Transformation in the Septuagint, 159–60. We also learn from Barclay that many “Jewish soldiers were settled in the chora;” see Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 23. 248 One can think of this as a possible reason why in this verse Monsengwo-Pasinya, “Isaïe XIX 16–25”, 199, has concluded that “[l]a LXX explicite de façon heureuse le texte original” (emphasis added); van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 134–35, 157–58, is of the opinion that this plan suggests some disaster for Judea. 249 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 157. 250 Ibid., 135–36. Arguing against van der Kooij, Baer thinks that “the cultic activity carried out

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

135

tial study on the Greek word θυσιαστήριον (instead of βωμός) as an equivalent of ‫( מזבח‬v. 19) and analysing its use in the LXX-Isaiah, van der Kooij sees that the altar depicted in this verse is not a pagan altar. Rather, the term refers to a “legitimate, i. e. Jewish, altar in Egypt.”251 One might discern here a theological intent of the Isaiah translator.252 Moreover, the translator’s interpretation can also be perceived in his rendition of θυσιαστήριον τῷ κυρίῳ ἐν χώρᾳ Αἰγυπτίων for ‫( מזבח ליהוה בתוך ארץ מצרים‬v.19). It should be observed here that the Isaiah translator consciously avoids the belief of the temple being built “in the middle of” (MT).253 For this expression carries to some degree an idea of Egypt becoming now the central location of Yahwistic worship, equal with Jerusalem/Zion as (according to the translator’s perception) “the mother from which his community derives and the destination to which they hope to return”254 (cf. LXX-Isa 1: 26–27 vs. 19: 18).255 In v. 20, unlike the MT, the aforementioned altar shall be a sign for ever for the Lord (see καὶ ἔσται εἰς σημεῖον εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα κυρίῳ for ‫והיה לאות‬ ‫)ולעד ליהוה צבאות‬. As this Greek clause stands, without overlooking the possibility that the Isaiah translator may have read a differently vocalized Hebrew term (‫עד‬ ַ instead of ‫עד‬ ֵ as an equivalent for αἰῶνα),256 the Jewish

‘in the name of the Lord’ is understood by the translator to be that of Egyptians who approximate to, even if they do not actually achieve, fully Yahwistic worship;” see Baer, When We All Go Home, 215 n. 44. However, Baer fails to observe that, unlike LXX-Isa 19: 18 and 48: 1 (texts where one finds ὄμνυμι + dative), the expression “in the name of the Lord” (in 45: 23 and 65: 16) reads the verb ὄμνυμι + genitive/accusative. For detail on the significance of the use of ὄμνυμι plus any given case, see for instance Monsengwo-Pasinya, “Isaïe XIX 16–25”, 200–01. Outside the LXX-Isaiah, the formula (ὄμνυμι + dative) occurs also in Jer 12: 16 that speaks of swearing in the name of the Lord as the custom of the people of Israel. 251 Ibid., 137–38. 252 Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 291–92. 253 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 138. This could also be seen as evidence of the existence of dialogue between the Jews in Palestine and those in the Diaspora. Moreover, according to J. Frey, “Temple and Rival Temple – The Cases of Elephantine, Mt. Gerizim, and Leontopolis”, in B. Ego et al. (ed.), Gemeinde ohne Tempel/ Community without Temple (WUNT 118; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 171–203, on p. 194, “Jerusalem [could be seen as trying] more offensively to counter the challenge provided by the phenomenon of the diaspora in general”. 254 Baer, When We All Go Home, 214; see also Frey, “Temple and Rival Temple – The Cases of Elephantine, Mt. Gerizim, and Leontopolis,” who, speaking of the temple at Leontopolis built by Onias III by appealing to Isa 19: 19, states (quoting Tcherikover) that “the Alexandrian Jews did not need such a sanctuary. They held Jerusalem in high esteem” (p. 192). A few pages later he claims that “[t]he Jews of Egypt esteemed Jerusalem as a centre of piligrimage … [therefore it is difficult] to see that the presence of a Jewish shrine in Egypt diminished their loyalty in any way” (p. 194). 255 For an analysis of these two texts, see Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 169–72. 256 As noted also by others; see e. g. van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 140; also Monsengwo-Pasinya, “Isaïe XIX 16–25”, 201.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

136

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

reader of the clause seemed to be have been transported to think of it not merely as proof, but also as an expression bearing a connotation of the Lord’s commitment and loyalty (in a sense of being in or making a covenant) towards his people (cf. LXX-Isa 55: 13 καὶ ἔσται κύριος εἰς ὄνομα καὶ εἰς σημεῖον αἰώνιον καὶ οὐκ ἐκλείψει; also LXX-Exod 31: 17). This understanding can become even more obvious by taking into account the analysis of ὅτι (see below) connecting this clause with the second part of the verse. Still in this v. 20, an intriguing and difficult question that demands some serious thoughts is this: to whom does the Isaiah translator refer to in the unspecified verbal phrase “they shall cry out” (κεκράξονται for ‫ )יצעקו‬and in the causal clause “on account of those who are oppressing them” (διὰ τοὺς θλίβοντας αὐτούς for ‫ ?)מפני לחצים‬In answering this, views among scholars differ. For instance, Monsengwo-Pasinya thinks that the “they” as the subject of the verb κεκράξονται could refer either to the “cinq villes juives” (of v. 18) or to the Egyptians. He opts for the latter.257 Van der Kooij not only backs this option, but implicitly also sees the Assyrians as the oppressors (θλίβοντας).258 However, it can be demonstrated that both scholars seem to have paid less attention to some vocabulary, syntactical and semantical elements, as well as some historical contextual hints that could be in favour of seeing the Jews as the subject of the verb κεκράξονται and the Egyptians as the oppressors. To begin with, if we seek to understand that the Alexandrian Jews who read LXX-Isa 19: 20 together with vv. 21–22, “would not merely ramble along reading one καὶ after another,”259 it will be important to attempt an analysis of the paratactic construction seen in these verses. Since the altar (v. 19), as far as an historical contextual viewpoint is concerned, appears likely to be the cause of serious conflict between the Jews in Egypt and the Egyptians, a situation in which those Alexandrian Jews are understood to be under oppression by the Egyptians,260 it seems more appropriate to read v. 20 as referring to the Jews as the ones crying on account of their oppressors. Given this idea, it is logical to see the opening καὶ (in v. 20) functioning as a connective conjunction (i. e. and), thus linking this verse to the previous one (v. 19) that carries the theme of the altar (discussed above). As in the MT, the

257 Monsengwo-Pasinya, “Isaïe XIX 16–25”, 202. 258 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 141. 259 Gehman, “The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, 82. 260 Moreover, we have strong evidence of this from Egyptian sources; cf. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 33–34. Using papyrological and epigraphical sources, Barclay discovers that already in the third century B. C.E, the Egyptians directed various charges or accusations against the Jews in Egypt, because of the style of Jewish worship that “was feared and resented as a threat to Egyptian culture” (p. 34) (cf. the chora of the Judeans as the cause of terror to the Egyptians in v. 17). He correctly claims that “such religious tensions, which had already caused difficulties to the garrison at Elephantine, were a potential source of trouble in the early Ptolemaic period” (p. 34); see also Porten, “The Jews in Egypt”, 372–89; Frey, “Temple and Rival Temple”, 178.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

137

conjunction ὅτι used for ‫( כי‬v. 20) is taken here as introducing a temporal clause (to mean when),261 rather than seeing it as reflecting a causal interpretation as van der Kooij and his predecessor have believed.262 The last καὶ of this verse then is to be read as commencing the apodosis and hence as “then”.263 It is likely that the first of the five καὶ (in v. 21) was read as “so” or “therefore”;264 thus portraying the outcome or consequence of an action (cf. v. 20). Whereas the second καὶ was plausibly used as an explanatory conjunction (that is), the remaining instances of καὶ were read as connective conjunctions (and). When it comes to v. 22, which has also five καὶ, the first of them seemed to have been read as a contrastive conjunction (but), the second one to mean “and yet”,265 and the last three as connective conjunctions (and/also). If the above analysis of both the situation of the Jews in Egypt and the paratactic construction is accepted, then vv. 20–22 were more likely to be read and understood by the Jewish reader (s) as follows: (a) when the Jews (in the chora of Egypt) will cry to the Lord on account of their oppressors (i. e. the Egyptians), and after they have been redeemed by an ἄνθρωπος sent by the Lord to them (v. 20), (b) the Lord will therefore (as a result or thereafter) be known to the Egyptians, that is the Egyptians shall in turn know the Lord, and (like the Jews) their knowledge or religion of the Lord shall manifest itself in ritual (see the idea of offering sacrifices connected to the altar) (v. 21), (c) but (or thenceforth) after the Egyptians have established a proper relationship with the Lord, they shall be treated as the people of Israel, i. e. the Lord shall strike them, and yet he shall restore them (see the idea of healing) (v. 22). The option taken here with regard to the Jews in Egypt (v. 20) as victims of oppression, a painful situation that generates cries, finds also strong support from an analysis of the subject of the verb κράζειν (and its cognates) linked with the cause of this verbal action (διὰ τοὺς θλίβοντας αὐτούς) both within the LXX-Isaiah and beyond. This is also an important point which van der Kooij and his predecessors should have looked at. In the LXX-Isaiah the verb κράζειν is used ten times as an equivalent of three different Hebrew verbs: ‫( קרא‬6: 3,4; 31: 4; 65: 24), ‫( זעק‬14: 31; 15: 4; 26: 17), and ‫( צעק‬19: 20; 42: 2; 65: 14). The Isaiah translator’s use of κράζειν for the last Hebrew verb (v. 20) is of interest. While the subject of κράζειν in 42: 2 is Jacob, with κρά-

261 See also Gehman, “The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, 82–83, who gives some examples in the LXX where ‫ כי‬is rendered by ὅτι (when) without assuming a textual error of ὅτι for ὅτε. However, Gehman’s position is still debated since ὅτι in LXX-Isaiah is usually translated as “because”. 262 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 139. 263 For such use of καὶ; see Gehman, “The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, 82. 264 Ibid. 265 See F. Blass/A. Debrunner, Greek Grammar of the NT and other Early Christian Literature (Cambridge: University Press, 1961), 227.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

138

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

ζειν being described as the servant’s means which he uses in establishing judgment on earth, the Isaiah translator refers to the unbelieving Israel as the subject of this Greek verb in 65: 14. Given this observation, if the Egyptians were the subject of this Greek verb in Isa 19: 20 this would be the only case in the LXX-Isaiah where the subject of κράζειν for ‫ צעק‬is not linked with the Jews, whether directly or indirectly. Even if one argues (on the basis of an assumption that a possible confusion may have occurred in the ears of the Isaiah translator with reference to the assonance of ‫ זעק‬and ‫ )צעק‬that in 15: 4 the subject of κράζειν for ‫ זעק‬refers to Moabitis, it is worth noting that this passage lacks a clear term or verb (e. g. θλίβω) that gives oppression as the cause of their cries (cf. also 14: 31). Still on this assumption, it is striking to see that in 26: 17, when the Jews are implicitly read as the subject of κράζειν for ‫זעק‬, affliction (θλῖψις) is referred to as the cause of the verbal action (v. 16).266 It must be pointed out that in the verse under scrutiny (i. e. Isa 19: 20), the reason for the crying of the Jews in Egypt is none other than the pain of being oppressed (διὰ τοὺς θλίβοντας αὐτούς). Before exploring the rendering of the participle θλίβοντας in this verse 20, it is important to say that the translator’s use of κράζειν for either ‫ זעק‬or ‫ צעק‬is similar to his rendering of κραυγή for both ‫( צעקה‬5: 7) and ‫( זעקה‬30: 19–20; 65: 19). In all these texts, the Jewish people are described not only as the oppressed, but also as the ones crying to God, an act in answer to which they expect (to some degree) redemption. Elsewhere in the LXX as a whole, the verb κράζειν for qal ‫( צעק‬as in Isa 19: 20) occurs four times in the Pentateuch (Gen 41: 55; Exod 5: 8; 22: 23(22); Num 11: 2), twice in Judges (4: 3; 10: 12), once in Job (35: 12), five times in Psalms [33(34): 17; 76(77): 1; 87(88): 1; 106(107): 6, 28)] and twice in Jeremiah [22: 20; 30(49): 3]. It is remarkable to observe that in all these texts (except in Gen 41: 55, Exod 22: 23(22), and Jer 30(49): 3) the dominant subject of κράζειν is described (whether explicitly or not) as the Jews under oppression/ affliction or the Lord’s anger (only in Num 11: 2). While in Jer 30(49) Moab is referred to as the subject of “crying” because of an imminent exile that awaits their priests, we are told in Gen 41: 55 that the Egyptians are viewed as crying, not because of oppression, but rather due to famine (see καὶ ἐπείνασεν πᾶσα ἡ γῆ Αἰγύπτου ἐκέκραξεν). However, in Exodus 22: 23(22), the oppressed Jewish orphan and widow (together with the resident alien) are referred to as the subject of κράζειν. Without going into too much detail, it is worth noting (as in the case of the passages of the LXX-Isaiah (discussed above)) the occurring pattern of the association of the Jews as the subject of κράζειν (for ‫ )צעק‬with oppression/affliction as the major cause of their

266 The term θλίψις occurs13 times in LXX-Isa (8: 22; 10: 3,26; 26: 16; 28: 10,13; 30: 6,20; 33: 2; 37: 3; 57: 13; 63: 9; 65: 16). In all these passages, the Jews are seen as the people in affliction/ distress or under oppression.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

139

action of crying. With this note, we now return to the Isaiah translator’s rendition of θλίβοντας (19: 20). Out of eight times of the verb θλίβειν occurring in LXX-Isa (11: 13; 18: 7; 19: 20; 28: 14; 29: 7; 49: 26; 51: 13), only in 19: 20 is it used for ‫“( לחץ‬to afflict,” “to oppress”). This rendering is exactly the same as that which one can find in LXX-Exod 3: 9 (cf. also LXX-Deut 26: 7; Judg 4: 3; 6: 7–9; 10: 12; IV Kgdms 13: 4; 2 Chron 18: 26) as an important text in the history of redemption of the people of Israel. In this Exodus passage, God is acting after hearing the cry (κραυγή for ‫ )צעקה‬of the sons of Israel and seeing their oppression (θλιμμόν for ‫ )לחץ‬with which the oppressors (Egyptians) oppressed (θλίβουσιν for ‫ )לחצים‬them. At this point, one must not overlook to record another proof of the Isaiah translator’s use of intertextuality. If the above analysis made so far with regard to the syntactical and semantic features as well as the vocabulary and historical context can be accepted, then the pericope under scrutiny (read in light of LXX-Isa 11: 16 as shall be seen further) shows a repeat of the Exodus event, not historically, but theologically, thus reflecting what can be called “messianism among Jews in Egypt”267 (to be discussed below). Thus far we have dealt with the first seven verses of Isa 19: 16–25. A few words now need to be said on the last three verses of this pericope. A close look at the diverse interpretations of v. 23 reveals that Septuagint scholars wrestle with the syntax of the Greek phrase “ἔσται ὁδὸς Αἰγύπτου πρὸς Ἀσσυρίους” for ‫מסלה ממצרים אשורה‬. For instance, Monsengwo-Pasinya translates it as “le chemin de l’Egypte sera vers les Assyriens;”268 thus seeing v. 23 in its Greek form as talking about the deportation of the Egyptians by the Assyrians.269 Van der Kooij gives the following translation: “the way to Egypt shall be near Assyrians” (emphasis added). According to him, the phrase “ὁδὸς Αἰγύπτου” (lit. ‘way of Egypt’) means “way from Palestine to Egypt;”270 thus arriving at the claim that “LXX Isa 19: 23 refers to a military campaign by the Assyrians [from the conquered Palestine] against Egypt, and to subjection of the Egyptians to the Assyrians.”271 In NETS, one reads “there will be a way from Egypt to the Assyrians” (emphasis mine), thus echoing more literally the Hebrew preposition ‫ מן‬which is missing in the Greek form of the phrase. Regardless of the option one would like to take as far as the function of the genitive Αἰγύπτου (as displayed in the three readings of the Greek phrase noted above) attached to ὁδὸς that designates a physical road here272 is concerned, it is likely that, by taking into account the

267 This phrase appears as the subtitle of Carleton Paget, “Egypt”, 184. 268 Monsengwo-Pasinya, “Isaïe XIX 16–25”, 203 (emphasis mine). 269 Ibid. 270 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 146–47. 271 Ibid., 147. 272 For a brief helpful analysis of the use of ὁδός in the LXX-Isaiah; see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint, 224–225.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

140

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

remaining three clauses of the verse (καὶ εἰσελεύσονται Ἀσσύριοι … καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι πορεύσονται … καὶ δουλεύσουσιν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι…), the whole verse echoes the Assyrian invasion of Egypt (cf. Isa 20). Moreover, the translation of ‫ ועבדו‬by δουλεύσουσιν (in Isa 19: 23) and by ποιήσουσιν (in Isa 19: 21) echoes, as Daniel correctly observes, “un sens politique.”273 In vv. 24–25, our translator (as already said by other scholars274) takes Egypt and Assyria as the recipient countries of the Lord’s blessing (as read in MT) and replaces them by the Jewish community in the Diaspora (to which he himself belonged) that is referred to as Israel.275 This is another salient piece of evidence of the translator’s contemporaneous interpretation of this prophecy. In it one can detect some elements of the expectations regarding the future of these Jews in the Diaspora. To give just one example, v. 24 reveals that they were longing to occupy a high position, a desire described by Seeligmann as “the yearning for national deliverance.”276 These aspirations were seen to come through by the help of a deliverer. With this note, we shall now attempt to investigate the translator’s handling of the ‘messianic language’ within the entire pericope. 5.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ The first interesting element to be considered here is the Isaiah translator’s use of the divine plan (βουλή) (v. 17). With regard to LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 (discussed above) it was discovered that the use of this important term (βουλή for ‫ )יועץ‬there creates a cluster of intertextual connections both backwards and forwards with other Isaianic texts in their Greek form. Still there, it was said (recalling van der Kooij’s point quoted by Schaper) that one of the three areas covered by the contents of this divine βουλή deals with the redemption of the Jewish people. This claim was restated while analysing LXX-Isa 11: 1– 10 (discussed above) as a text where it was seen that this project for the redemption of the Jews is to be carried out by a royal messianic figure who will receive the spirit of counsel (βουλῆς for ‫( )עצה‬v. 2). Coming to LXXIsa 19: 16–25, the translator’s language of this divine βουλή is once again echoed. From the analysis made so far with regard to this passage, it was found that this divine plan (expressed in the phrase “τὴν βουλήν [‫ ]עצה‬ἥν βεβούλευται κύριος ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν” in v. 17) for the geo-political territory of the Jews was read and understood as being in favour of the Jewish community in the Diaspora. As an effect, we are told that the foreign powers (under273 Daniel, Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte dans la Septante, 72 n. 48. 274 For instance, see Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 288; Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 293; Baer, When We All Go Home, 216–17; also Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 157–58. 275 The last καὶ in v. 25 functions as an epexegetical conjunction. 276 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 288.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

141

stood in the LXX-Isaiah as the oppressors of the Jews) will be smitten (see πατάξει for ‫ ונגף‬in v. 22; cf. also LXX-Isa 8: 14; LXX-Exod 12: 23,27). One needs to be reminded that the translator’s use of πατάξει here connects this punitive action with that which is performed by the messianic figure spoken of in LXX-Isa 11: 4 (discussed above) who, filled by God’s Spirit, shall smite the earth (πατάξει [‫ ]והכה‬γῆν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ).277 Back to the narrative of the divine punishment of the Egyptians as foreign powers (Isa 19: 22), the translator adds the adjective “μεγάλῃ” after “πληγῇ.”278 While the translator’s motive in adding μεγάλῃ seems to be difficult to detect,279 his use of πληγῇ (for a qal infinitive ‫ )נגף‬as a noun connoting a plague inflicted as divine chastisement reflects intertextual exegesis adducing passages associated with the Lord’s punishment of the oppressors of the Jewish people both within LXX-Isaiah and beyond (e. g. LXX-Isa 10: 26; 30: 31; Exod 12: 13).280 This observation appears to strengthen once more the argument that is being advanced in the current study that the translator made use of intertextuality in producing his text. While the Lord punishes the Jews’ oppressors as part of the contents of his divine βουλή in LXX-Isa 19: 16–25, he gives a promise to the crying Jews that he shall send “a human being (ἄνθρωπος) who shall save them” (v. 20). Firstly, it must be stressed that the long rendering of ἄνθρωπον ὃς σώσει αὐτούς for the participle ‫ מושיע‬is strange not only in the LXX-Isaiah, but also in the LXX as a whole.281 The motive for the translator’s choice needs to be sought within the framework of a debated issue among scholars of whether or not to consider ἄνθρωπος as a “messianic title.”282 Analysing both the views of scholars in favour and against this statement, van der Kooij correctly says: “[t]he meaning of this lexeme as such is, of course, rather general and vague, but the context in which it is used might provide a clue for a specific connotation.”283 In the case of the passage under inspection, it is beyond reasonable doubt that the ἄνθρωπος it mentions is an important person. This becomes even more obvious when this passage is read in conjunction with other related passages both within the LXX-Isaiah and beyond. Beginning with the LXXIsaiah, it is likely that this ἄνθρωπος is associated with “the human being, 277 See Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 375. 278 Judith15: 5 may be added to passages listed by van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 145, where this expression “πληγῇ μεγάλῃ” occurs. 279 See van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 145. 280 For more detail on the use of πληγη in LXX-Isaiah, see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 207–08. 281 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 141; Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians, p. 149; Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 377. 282 Van der Kooij, “The Greek Bible”, 257, has more recently provided a brief but helpful summary of views held by some scholars both in favour (e. g. Vermes and Schaper; he does not mention Horbury) and against (i. e. Lust, Dorival) the idea. 283 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

142

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

man” (ὁ ἄνθρωπος) spoken of in Isa 32: 1–2 (discussed later) as a text that announces, as Koenig rightly puts it, “un règne à caractère messianique.”284 Within the LXX as a whole, it has been sufficiently demonstrated not only that “ἄνθρωπος ” in LXX-Num 24: 7,17 likely refers to an important (military) figure with royal status, thus implying “a ‘messianic’ connotation,”285 but also that the use of ἄνθρωπος in LXX-Isa 19: 20 is strongly linked with this Pentateuchal passage in its Greek form.286 If read in conjunction with the aforementioned passages from the LXX-Isaiah and LXX-Pentateuch, as well as in light of other sources of different provenance (e. g. Jewish apocalypses, rabbinic tradition, Sibylline Oracles from Egyptian Jewry, and some Christian reports of Jewish messianic belief),287 it is beyond reasonable doubt that LXX-Isa 19: 16–25 is one of the texts testifying that the interpretation of “ἄνθρωπος” was associated with the messianic expectations that developed among the Jewish community in the Diaspora. However, as Horbury discovers, this belief does not emerge in a vacuum. It stems from a number of Davidic and messianic texts that speak of a repeated promise that there shall always be “a man” on David’s throne (e. g. 1 Kings 2: 4; 8: 25; 9: 5; 2 Chron 6: 16; 7: 18; Jer 33: 17).288 The main task to be performed by this ἄνθρωπος (in LXX-Isa 19: 20) is to save (σῷζω) God’s people by judging (κρίνων) them. Van der Kooij has correctly observed that the immediate context (vv. 19–20) in which this saving work by judgment is done may lead one to think that this saviour-judge is Jewish.289 This view can be strengthened by emphasizing what was said earlier, that the translator’s use of κρίνων exegetically interconnects this messianic figure in Isa 19: 20 with the one from Jesse (in LXX-Isa 11: 3–4 discussed above) and the one sitting on the throne “in the tabernacle of David” (16: 5) as these two latter figures are also expected to be judging (κρίνων).290 It is worth noting that the translator’s rendering of the second σώσει for the hiphil ‫( נצל‬19: 20) links this deliverer with the Lord of David in LXX-Isa 38: 6 (cf. LXX-Jer 46(39): 17; 49(42): 11) who promises to save Hezekias from 284 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme Antique, 76. 285 For instance, see van der Kooij, “The Greek Bible”, 257; Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 29–50, 92–147; also “Messianic Associations of the Son of Man”, JTS NS 36 (1985) 34–55, on pp. 49–50. This article occurs also in his publication on Messianism among Jews and Christians, 144–49. Here, he responds to Lust’s view that ἄνθρωπος in LXX-Num 24 “does not have a clear messianic overtones” (p.146). 286 For instance, Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 44–45; Messianism among Jews and Christians, 147; Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 377. 287 Horbury has a helpful analysis of exegetical interconnections between such sources with regard to the interpretation of the expression of ‘son of man’ associated with the messianic hope; see Horbury, “Messianic Associations of the Son of Man”, 41–52, also in Messianism among Jews and Christians, 134–51. 288 Ibid., 50. 289 Van der Kooij, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25”, 142. 290 These links have been noted by Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians, 149–50; see also Schaper, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 377.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 19: 16–25

143

the hand of the Assyrians’ king. At this point, it should be remembered that, since the text of Isaiah in its Greek form “breathes the atmosphere of the διασπορά suffering under foreign oppressors,”291 the primary meaning of the translator’s use of the theme of salvation (i. e. σῷζειν, σωτηρία, and/or σωτήριον) is that of “‘liberation from a powerful political enemy’, ‘escape from a great political disaster’; and this could quite naturally evolve into ‘deliverance from exile’.”292 In the process of restoring the scattered Jewish community with a purpose of making them regain their former exalted position (vv. 24–25; cf. LXX-Isa 4: 2; 44: 23), the contents of divine βουλή not only have room for the punishment of the foreign powers (LXX-Isa 19: 22), but also look to a future where the Jewish religion shall be propagated among them (see οἱ Αίγύπτιοι … ποιήσουσιν θυσίας καὶ εὔξονται εὐχὰς τῷ κυρίῳ καὶ ἀποδώσουσιν in v. 21).293 For, as Seeligmann notes, the Isaiah translator “could not imagine Israel being blessed [cf. εὐλογημένος ὁ λαός μου … Ισραηλ in v. 25] in the future without a constant flow of proselytes.”294 In this case, despite Baer’s claim that “[a]ny echo of the notion found in Genesis 12 that Israel was to exist for the blessing of the nations has been suppressed by the LXX [Isa 19: 24–25]” (emphasis added),295 Israel is still viewed in the Isaianic text as playing a significant role, in the sense that she is being used as an executor of God’s plan that looks forward to a future revelation of God to the Gentiles, an experience leading them to worship him.

5.4 Summary Right from the start of the above analysis, it was discovered that the context of the passage that underwent investigation echoes some significant messianic expectations among the Jewish community in Egypt. These hopes became more obvious from an understanding of the translator’s manoeuvre 291 See Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 157. 292 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 285, also 294. Cf. Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 157. 293 It is striking to see that, in this v. 21, θυσίας (for a combination of the two Hebrew words ‫ )זבח ומנחה‬is used here (instead of the expected word δῶρον; cf. LXX-Isa 66: 20) as sacrifices to be offered by the Gentiles (Egyptians). This term is usually used with reference to cultic offerings reserved for the Jewish people. For a thorough analysis of θυσία and δῶρον, see Daniel, Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte de la Septante, 72 n. 48, 203, 212–13. Baer has extensively studied LXX-Isa 66: 20 (with regard to θυσίαι as eschatological gifts to be offered by the returning Israel and δῶρον by the Gentile pilgrims; both Greek terms rendered for the one Hebrew word ‫ ;)מנחה‬see Baer, When We All Go Home, 246–76. 294 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 289. 295 This is because, according to him in When We All Go Home, 216–217, the rendering of εὐλογημένος (vv. 24–25) not only “places Israel at the centre, where she has become blessed – perhaps by Assyria and Egypt – rather than one who blesses them” (p. 216), but also allows any reader to hear “both the nationalism and the voice of Diaspora” (p. 217).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

144

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

of rendering his text, an exercise that involved him not only in the use of intertextuality, but also in actualizing or “contemporizing” his text. The most remarkable feature of this messianism was seen by his use of ἄνθρωπος “a human being, a man” as a Jewish saviour-judge for the Jews. This discovery undercuts Collins’ statement that “the hope of Jews in the Diaspora was typically focused on a benevolent Gentile ruler rather than on a Jewish messiah”296 as one of the arguments he advances against finding messianism in the Hellenistic Diaspora. It was also found that when the text was read in conjunction with other related passages both within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole and the rest of the LXX; it is beyond reasonable doubt that this future ἄνθρωπος was to be a Jewish leader clothed with a royal status.297 This intertextual reading lent support by detecting ἄνθρωπος as a term that already had messianic significance in a number of other texts298 (especially in the LXX-Pentateuch text discussed above) before its use in LXX-Isa 19: 20. Although a clear reference to him (in the text) as a king-messiah is lacking, he is nevertheless understood in this way, given the view that even in Egypt (where the LXX-Isaiah was devised), the king was taken as a saviour. From de Vaux, we hear of a hymn in Egypt about an ancient king saying: “He has come to us, he has brought the people of Egypt to life, [and] he has done away with their afflictions.”299 If it could be agreed that the Egyptian thought in the second century B. C. E. was not entirely emptied of the aforesaid ancient royal ideology, it would seem appropriate to say that this Egyptian belief may have shaped to some extent the Jewish messianic expectations and views of eschatological redemption.300 This perhaps could be seen as

296 Collins, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 79. 297 In a recent article, this ἄνθρωπος has also been understood to refer to a high-priestly figure; see van der Kooij, “The Greek Bible”, 259. 298 Pace de Sousa, Eschatology, 141 n. 5, who claims that “in the light of the explicative tendencies of the Isaiah translator, [he, i. e. the translator rendered ‫שיע‬ ׁ ‫ מו‬in 19: 20] without any special messianic significance attached to ἄνθρωπον”. 299 R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (London: Longman & Todd, 1961), 110–111. While acknowledging that Israel held another view of the royal power, he does see at the same time similar developments of thoughts (with reference to the above hymn) in Israel (cf. Ps 72). 300 See also the kingship ideology in the third book Sibylline Oracles as a literature written in Egypt somewhere between 180 and 116 B. C. E. In lines 286–287, according to A. Rzach (ed.), Χρησμοὶ Σιβυλλιακοί, Oracula Sibyllina (Prague, 1891), one reads καὶ τότε δὴ θεὸς οὐρανόθεν πέμψει βασιλῆα (and then God will send a king from heaven; cf. also lines 652– 656). In announcing the coming of an eschatological king in those lines, as Bartlett, Jews in the Hellenistic World, 38, says, “[t]he Alexandrian Jewish author is drawing on Egyptian royal language to describe a messianic figure whom he seems to identify with a Ptolemaic ruler [cf. lines 608–610]”. A similar view is also held by E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 277– 78. For a different opinion, see, amongst others, R. Buitenwerf, Book III of the Sibylline Oracles and its Social Setting (SVTP 17; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2003), 272–75; also Carleton Paget, “Egypt”, 184–86.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

145

one of the reasons why the saviour-judge in Isa 19: 20 (discussed above) oscillates between him being considered as a messianic figure for either the Egyptians or the Jews. However, an intertextual reading of the passage (as we have done here) can help one to identify him as a deliverer for the latter. At the same time, we also noted the Egyptians’ significance (in its connection with the exodus events) for the bright future of the Jewish people in the Diaspora in Egypt. The Egyptians’ antipathy towards the Jewish people because of their religion (seen as early as in the Elephantine Jewish community; cf. also ch. 2 of the current investigation), producing a situation which gave rise to the cries that eventually produced a messianic figure comes to us as a strong piece of evidence, not only to claim that the messiah in the LXXIsaiah appears here as taking the side of those under oppression (i. e. the Jewish people), but also to allow us to see that Israel even in the Diaspora remained a community yearning for its national reunification.

6. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31:9b-32:8301 According to Horbury, Isaiah 32: 2 “was understood messianically by the translator.”302 This claim implies that this verse as it stands in its Greek final form seems to contain at least one (or perhaps more) messianic concept(s) that is/are either absent or present (but accentuated by the Isaiah translator) in its Hebrew parent text. Given this view, the present writer seeks to analyse not only this one verse, but the whole pericope (i. e. LXX-Isa 31: 9b–32: 8)303 in which it is found. That is to say, we shall identify as well as 301 This pericope has also been recently investigated by van der Kooij with a different focus, see van der Kooij, “The Septuagint Isaiah and the Issue of Coherence. A Twofold Analysis of LXX Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8”, in A. van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives, 33–48. 302 Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians, 140. 303 Analysing this pericope in its Hebrew form, W. A. M. Beuken, Isaiah II (ed. C. Houtman et al.; HCOT; Leuven: Peeters, 2000), 208, states: “Commentators often include this passage among those texts referred to as ‘messianic’”. He refers any reader to P. D. Wegner, An Examination of Kingship and Messianic Expectation in Isaiah 1–35 (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1992), 275, who writes: “There has been little agreement over the issue of whether Isa 32: 1–8 reflects messianic intent or not”. Wegner discovers that this passage portrays ideas and/or patterns very similar to those found in the other so-called messianic passages (i. e. Isa 7: 10–17; 8: 23–9: 6; 11: 1–9) investigated by him (pp. 293, 300), thus suggesting that Isa 32: 1–8 should be understood as messianic text. Wegner’s view has been recently objected to by Heskett, Messianism within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah, who, given his restricted definition of messianism (pp. 3, 264), claims: “Wegner treats Isa 32: 1–8 as a messianic passage but we do not consider this to be messianic because it describes an ideal king but not a Messiah” (p. 264). Cf. Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 39, who claims that this passage does not have “a ‘messianic’ connotation, even remotely”; also B. M. Metzger/ R. E. Murphy (ed), The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 907, who comment that Isa 32: 1–8 is a “non-messianic oracle”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

146

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

examine any significant element of difference between the Greek form of the pericope and its Hebrew parent text. However, before engaging in such a project, we shall start by heightening our awareness of the context of the pericope.

6.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context Wegner has provided a useful analysis of the “setting” of the pericope under scrutiny in its Hebrew parent text304, which can appropriately serve as a starting point of our discussion here. He begins his analysis by backing a general belief in scholarship that Isa 32: 1–8 is located immediately in Isaiah 28–33.305 Given this idea, it would seem convenient to analyse LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8 first within LXX-Isa 28–33.306 Viewed from the perspective of their Hebrew parent texts, Wegner correctly observes that in these six chapters of Isaiah “there is a repeating pattern of judgment followed by a time of hope or salvation.”307 A thorough reading of them in their Greek texts would not deny Wagner’s observation. However, from Laberge’s important study of LXX-Isa 28–33 one can notice that there are some significant nuances of emphasis or focus.308 For instance, in the Hebrew text of Isa 28 the various oracles directed against the political and/or religious leaders of Judah (vv. 1–4; 7–15; 18–22) are each followed by a speech of restoration of a remnant of God’s people (vv. 5–6; 16–17; 23–29).309 In translating these texts (especially those in the latter group), the Isaiah translator (as Troxel’s analysis of them correctly shows) puts emphasis on the salutary goal of the Lord’s practice in executing judgment. He reassures the readers that the Lord will not only forbid full destruction of God’s people (see “κωλύων ἀνελεῖν” in v. 6), but will also transform judgment into hope (see e. g. “ἔσται κύριος σαβαωθ ὁ στέφανος τῆς ἐλπίδος” in v. 5 and “θήσω κρίσιν εἰς ἐλπίδα” in 304 See Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 275–77. 305 Ibid., 275. See also D. Janthial, Le Livre d’Isaïe (CE 142; Paris: Cerf, 2007), 29, who agrees with Wegner in seeing these chapters as one Isaianic section and gives it the following title: “L’habitat de Jerusalem et le Roi du monde”. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1–39: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB; New York: Doubleday, 2000), ix and 380, however, lengthens the section, i. e. Isaiah 28–35, without a title. In a more recent work, Isa 32: 1–8 has been studies within Isa 28–31; see J. Kreuch, Unheild und Heil bei Jesaja. Studien zur Entstehung des Assur-Zyklus Jesaja 28–31 (WMANT 130; Göttingen: Neukirchener Theologie, 2011), 391–96. This is to note that Hebrew scholars are not unanimous with regard to the structure (whether on macro or micro level) of the book of Isaiah. 306 These chapters in their Greek form have been discussed extensively by Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33. While he gives no reason for the choice of them, the focus of his work is on textual criticism. 307 See Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 275 for the details on how this recurring pattern can be exhibited. 308 See Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33. 309 Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 276.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

147

v. 17).310 The translator’s emphasis on this redemptive purpose by the means of divine judgment is also made clear in his rendition of vv. 23–29 as a didactic narration. The MT’s reading of v. 24 of this narration restricts the imagery of farmer’s work to what is necessary to prepare the ground for planting. However, the Isaiah translator, as Troxel rightly observes, highlights the farmer’s prior preparation of the seed for sowing (ἣ σπόρον προετοιμάσει πρὶν ἐργάσασθαι τὴν γῆν).311 Troxel also discovers that the significance of this narrative (left unspecified in the MT) is unveiled in the translator’s statement (vv. 26–28)312 where the readers of the Jewish community in the Diaspora are reassured that God’s people shall rejoice (“εὐφρανθήσῃ” (v. 26) an idea completely lacking in MT)313 after being instructed by the divine judgment (see “παιδευθήσῃ κρίματι θεοῦ σου” in v. 26; cf. also 46: 3).314 The fact of this reassurance in transforming judgment into hope is sealed with the use of the phrase “οὐ γὰρ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ἐγὼ ὑμῖν ὀργισθήσομαι” in v. 28 (likely influenced by 57: 16). Another example of the translator’s interpretation of the model of woesayings followed by a prediction of restoration is found in Isaiah 29. According to Wegner, this chapter contains a section that speaks of a coming day of salvation (vv. 16–24) after a pronouncement of woe against Ariel (vv. 1–10) followed by other prophetic utterances of judgment (vv. 11–16).315 Some of the most significant translator’s nuances in the rendition of this chapter can be noted in vv. 16–24. Here, in addition to what shall be said later with regard to the phrase “αἱ γλώσσαι αἱ ψελλίζουσαι μαθήσονται λαλεῖν εἰρήνην”(v. 24 that enters into intertextuality with 32: 4) as a surplus phrase (in the LXX) portraying a significant sign in the messianic time, the Isaiah translator in v. 16 (as Le Moigne, after a thorough analysis of the translator’s insertion of οὐχ ὡς in this verse, says) “privilégie la relation personnelle existant entre Dieu et [son] peuple.”316 This direct dialogue is significant for the readers as they are reassured of still being viewed as God’s chosen people even within the reality of the Alexandrian Diaspora. This is made clear by the translator in v. 22. In this verse, from what might look like a minor change in his translation of ‫לכן כה־אמר יהוה אל־בית יעקב אשר פדה‬ ‫ את־אברהם‬by διὰ τοῦτο τάδε λέγει κύριος ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον Ιακωβ ὃν ἀφώρισεν ἐξ Αβρααμ, our ancient translator (as Laberge correctly notes) 310 Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 271–83. 311 Ibid., 277. 312 Ibid. 313 Analysing the translator’s use of εὐφρανθήση, Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 279, concludes that “this lexical choice embodies interpretation”. 314 Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, 125, has correctly observed that in this verse “[p]ar souci théologique, la LXX [en mettant les verbes à la 2ème pers.] permet de s’adresser à l’homme qui apprend de Dieu, alors que le texte hébreu parle de Dieu qui enseigne” (see also p. 17). 315 Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 276. 316 Le Moigne, “οὐχ ὡς dans Ésaïe-LXX”, 104.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

148

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

“[déplace] le centre d’intérêt de la personne d’Abraham sur celle de Jacob”317, thus providing what Seeligmann sees as “a striking insight into the Galuth psychology of Alexandrian Jewry.”318 With all this put together, the aforementioned translator’s nuances in Isaiah 29 seem strongly to suggest that the translator (as Le Moigne precisely discovers) “[présente] une image un peu plus ‘optimiste’ de Dieu, et [insiste] sur l’amour indefectible [de ce Dieu] envers son peuple.”319 Given this view, the readers of the Jewish community in the Diaspora are reassured (as they are in reading Isa 28) of an expected redemptive time. A few words must be said with regard to chapter 30 as well as 33 before tackling the two chapters (31and 32) that sandwich more closely the pericope under scrutiny. Looking only at the sections that speak of God’s coming day of salvation (30: 18–33; 33: 2–4)320, the Isaiah translator, for instance in 30: 18–33, stresses that God is the judge of Israel (see “κριτὴς κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἐστιν” in v. 18; cf. 33: 20; 63: 7) where the MT speaks of a God of justice (‫)אלהי משפט‬. Ziegler notes that this Greek phrase occurs in two other Isaianic texts: 33: 22 and 63: 7.321 If read in conjunction with the latter (i. e. with the phrase “κύριος κριτὴς ἀγαθὸς τῷ οἴκῷ Ισραηλ” and the theme of divine mercy found within 63: 7), LXX-Isa 30: 18 would clearly interpret the divine judgment of Israel as positive.322 Upon concluding this verse 18 with a blessing (μακάριοι οἱ ἐμμένοντες ἐν αὐτῷ), the translator in v. 19, as Troxel points out, “finds in ‫ עם בציון ישב‬a forecast of holy people dwelling in Zion [λαὸς ἃγιος ἐν Σιων] – it is their presence that will spur divine mercy”323 (cf. 52: 8–9). An important point to make here with regard to v. 19 is perhaps that which comes from Laberge: L’hébreu parlait tout bonnement d’un retour à Jérusalem, où il n’y aurait plus de pleurs: la perspective en est donc une de fin d’exil […] Par la qualification de “saint”, la LXX nous montre comment on rattachait cela au choix fait par Dieu de son peuple, dans une perspective deutéronomiste [qui relit ce texte prophétique en le] (…) rattachant à l’exode et à la prise de possession de la terre promise.324

In Isa 33, the translator, after his address to those who afflict God’s people (v.1), invites his readers to meditate on a prayer that focuses on Zion to which God’s liberated people will flock (vv. 2–24). Among the elements that convey his message of hope, the translator in v. 9 inserts Galilee as a region (together with Carmel) that shall become visible (φανερὰ ἔσται ἡ Γαλιλαία καὶ ὁ Κάρμηλος). Though Seeligmann’s opinion, viz. that this verse 317 Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, 127 also 34. 318 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 280. 319 Le Moigne, “οὐχ ὡς dans Ésaïe-LXX”, 104. 320 Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 276. 321 Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 147. 322 For a similar point, see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 151. 323 Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 98 (emphasis original). 324 Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, 49–50.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

149

(together with 9: 1 where Γαλιλαία also occurs) seems to witness to the translator’s interpretation of the Palestine of his own days,325 is valid, it is important to note that a thorough analysis of the translator’s use of Γαλιλαία for ‫( בשן‬rendered elsewhere in Isaiah by Βασαν, e. g. 2: 12) in this passage reveals that, as Laberge correctly puts it, la LXX évite de conclure sur une note négative [qu’on trouve dans l’hébreu], et laisse entendre qu’il y aura de nouveau du bonheur […] On peut y voir le souci de respecter ce que pouvait représenter d’espoir le Carmel et sa région, depuis le passage d’Elie le prophète, personnage dont l’importance est grande après l’exil et dans le judaïsme postérieur, comme en font foi les écrits mêmes du Nouveau Testament.326

Besides this message, which expresses to some extent “a real, living desire [among Alexandrian Jewry] for the restoration of Palestine as a national home,”327 there is another element that is worth looking at. In vv. 20–22, the translator (via both contextual and intertextual exegesis) stresses the glorification of Zion/Jerusalem. The most poignant expression of this is in v. 20 where the translator invites his readers to see Zion as a city of their salvation (ἰδοὺ Σιων ἡ πόλις τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν [‫)]מועדנו‬328 and/or Jerusalem as a rich city (Ιερουσαλημ πόλις πλουσία), thus forecasting a time of redemption. Our survey of Isa 28–33 (except chs. 31–32) so far demonstrates that the pericope under inspection is encircled by a significant number of speeches of reassurance of hope for the restoration of Zion/Jerusalem, with God’s people viewed as beneficiaries of the divine redemptive act. Chapter 31 (including 32 as a chapter that was likely part of ch. 31, due to its lack of the term ‫ הוי‬which introduces other chapters in Isa 28–33)329 goes in the same direction. In this chapter, the part that is of interest is vv. 5–9. Here the Hebrew text “speaks of a coming day of protection and the punishment of Assyria.”330 In v. 5, both the MT and LXX insist on God as a fighter coming to Mount Zion to protect and save Jerusalem. However, with ‫ פסח‬translated by καὶ περιποιήσεται (reflecting more likely a deliberate intertextual exegetical connection with 43: 21; see “λαόν μου ὃν περιεποιησάμην [‫)”]יצרתי‬, the translator introduces into the text the idea of a “chosen people” (cf. Exod 19: 5; Deut 7: 6; 14: 2; 26: 18)331, thus transforming the text to speak of the salvation of God’s acquired people. This redemptive action is explained more plainly in the LXX than in the MT of vv. 8–9 that witnesses to a notion of a 325 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 237. 326 Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, 103 (emphasis mine). 327 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 287. 328 Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 116, 126–28, has a useful analysis of the translator’s use of τὸ σωτήριον in this verse. His conclusion is in agreement with Seeligmann that this “expresses the translator’s interest in the theme of salvation”. 329 Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 276. 330 Ibid. 331 All these texts translate ‫ עם סגלה‬by λαὸς περιούσιος.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

150

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

siege leading to a complete defeat of Assur (to be understood here perhaps as a representative of Israel’s enemies). As said earlier (in LXX Isa 19: 16–25, discussed above), instead of continuing to purport the idea of an invincible Jerusalem as found in the Hebrew text of these verses (i. e. Isa 31: 8–9), the translator, bearing in his mind the reality of Alexandrian Jewry, in v. 9b creates a different text that restores hope among readers. As Laberge correctly puts it, LXX Isa 31: 9b “nous transpose brusquement dans un contexte complètement différent: il y est question de béatitude, de bénédiction, de séjour à Sion. Le tout est disposé de telle sorte que 31,9b devient une introduction à 32,1 promettant un roi qu’on peut dire messianique.”332 Hence, the foregoing analysis of Isa 31–32 (together with what was said when exploring chs. 28–30 and 33) indicates that the pericope under scrutiny (LXX-Isa 31: 9b32: 8) is situated in a context with messianic expectations. The use of other texts outside Isa 28–33 takes the pericope beyond its immediate context within the LXX-Isaiah. 6.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫נאם־יהוה אשר־אור לו בציון‬ ‫ותנור לו בירושלם‬

31: 9b

31: 9b Τάδε λέγει κύριος Μακάριος ὃς

‫שר ים‬ ׂ ‫הן לצדק ימלך־מלך ול‬ ‫שרו‬ ׂ ‫למשפט י‬

32: 1

‫איש כמחבא־רוח וסתר‬-‫והיה‬ ‫זרם כפלגי־מים בציון כצל‬ ‫סלע־כבד בארץ עיפה‬

2

‫ולא תשעינה עיני ראים ואזני‬ ‫שמעים תקשבנה‬

3

3 Καὶ οὐκέτι ἔσονται πεποιθότες ἐπ’ ανθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τὰ ὧτα δώσουσιν ἀκούειν.

‫ולבב נמהרים יבין לדעת ולשון‬ ‫עלגים תמהר לדבר צחות‬

4

4 καὶ ἡ καρδία τῶν ἀσθενούντων προσέξει τοῦ ἀκούειν, καὶ αἱ

‫לא־יקרא עוד לנבל נדיב‬ ‫ולכילי לא יאמר שוע‬

5

ἔχει ἐν Σιων σπέρμα καὶ οἰκείους ἐν Ιερουσαλημ.

32: 1 ἰσοὺ ρὰρ βασιλεὺς δίκαιος βασιλεύσει, καὶ ἄρχνοντες μετὰ κρίσεως ἄρξουσιν

2 καὶ ἔσται ὁ ἄνθρωπος κρύπτων

τοὺς λόγους αὐτοῦ καὶ κρυβήσεται ὡς ἀφ’ ὕδατος φερομένου καὶ φανήσεται ἐν Σιων ὡς ποταμὸς φερόμενος ἔνδοξος ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ.

γλῶσσαι αἱ ψελλίζουσαι ταχὺ μαθήσονται λαλεῖν εἰρήνην

5 καὶ οὐκέτι μὴ εἴπωσιν τῷ μωρῷ ἄρχειν, καὶ οὐκέτι μὴ εἴπωσιν οἱ ὑπηρέται σου Σίγα.

332 Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, p. 77.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8 ‫שה‬ ׂ ‫כי נבל נבלה ידבר ולבו יע‬ ‫שות חנף ולדבר אל־‬ ׂ ‫א ו ן לע‬ ‫יהוה תועה להריק נפש רעב‬ ‫ומשקה צמא יחסיר‬

6

‫וכלי כליו רעים הוא זמות יעץ‬ ‫לחבל ענוים באמרי־שקר‬ ‫ובדבר אביון משפט‬

7

‫ונדיב נדיבות יעץ והוא על־‬ ‫נדיבות יקום‬

8

151

6 ὁ γὰρ μωρὸς μωρὰ λαλήσει, καὶ

ἡ καρδία αὐτοῦ μάταια νοήσει τοῦ συντελεῖν ἄνομα καὶ λαλεῖν πρὸς κύριον πλάνησιν, τοῦ διασπεῖραι ψυχὰς πεινώσας καὶ τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας κενὰς ποιῆσαι.

7 ἡ γὰρ βουλὴ τῶν πονηρῶν

ἄνομα βουλεύσεται καταφθεῖραι ταπεινοὺς ἐν λόγοις ἀδίκοις καὶ διασκεδάσαι λόγους ταπεινῶν ἐν κρίσει.

8 οἱ δὲ εὐσεβεῖς συνετὰ ἐβουλεύσαντο, καὶ αὕτη ἡ βουλὴ μενεῖ.

MT

LXX

31: 9b says the Lord, whose fire [or light] is in Zion and whose furnace is in Jerusalem

31: 9b Thus says the Lord: “Happy [is] the one who has a seed in Zion and members of a household in Jerusalem.”

32: 1 Behold, for righteousness shall reign a king, and princes shall rule for justice.

32: 1 For see, a righteous king will reign and [therefore] rulers will rule with judgment.

2 And each man shall be as a hiding place from the wind and a covering place from the rainstorm, as a channel of water in a dry place, as a shadow of a heavy cliff in a dry land.

2 And he will be the man hiding his words and he will be hidden as from rushing water; and he will be revealed in Zion as a rushing river, glorious in a land [that is] thirsting.

3 And the eyes of the ones seeing shall not be closed and [the] ears of the ones hearing shall listen.

3 Then no longer will they rely on men, but they will give ear to hear.

4 And the heart of the hasty shall discern knowledge and [the] tongue of the ones speaking inarticulately shall hasten to speak clearly.

4 And the heart of the weakened will give heed to hear, and the tongues – the one faltering in speech – will be learning quickly to speak peace.

5 A fool shall not be called a senseless noble and a rascal shall not be said to be noble.

5 And no longer will they [choose] to speak to the fool to rule and no longer will your servants [choose] to say: “Be quiet”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

152

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

6 For the fool shall speak senselessness and his heart shall do wickedness, to do godlessness, to make an error against Yahweh, to make empty a hungry soul, and he shall deprive the thirsty of drink.

6 For the fool will speak folly and his heart will think foolish in order to accomplish lawlessness and to speak an error against the Lord, in order to scatter souls – the ones hungry, and to make empty the souls – the ones being thirsty.

7 And [the] scoundrel – his vessels [are] evils, he advised wickedness to destroy the afflicted by speech of deception and to speak to the needy with judgment.

7 For the counsel of the wicked will plan lawless things to ruin [the] humble with unjust words, and to reject [the] words of [the] humble in judgment.

8 But [the] noble shall advise noble things and he shall stand on nobleness.

8 But the godly people resolved wise things and this counsel shall remain.

As can be observed, there are a few major differences between the two forms of the text under scrutiny that need to be pointed out.333 To begin with, as far as the structural viewpoint is concerned, unlike the MT, where Isa 31: 9b seems to be more appropriately linked with the previous verses of its chapter (i. e. 31: 1–9a) than with 32: 1–8, LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8 displays a coherent unit. As shall be said, with reference to the addition of γὰρ in Isa 32: 1 (lacking in the MT), the translator invites any Jewish reader in the Diaspora to see the whole statement of this verse (especially the first clause “ἰδοὺ γὰρ βασιλεὺς δίκαιος βασιλεύσει”) as the reason for the Lord’s oracle in LXX-Isa 31: 9b. As already noted (in LXX-Isa 19: 16–25, discussed above), via this divine oracle, the translator not only demonstrates an existing solidarity between the Jews in the Diaspora and those in their homeland, but also shows that these Jews in the Diaspora were expressing “a yearning for Zion and a longing for return.”334 333 Studying LXX Isa 32: 1–10, Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, rightly observes that “[l]’adaptation de 32,1 s. dans G[rec] contient, à partir de 32,2 de nombreuses divergences par rapport à l’hébreu, tel qu’il est représenté par TM [texte massorétique] et par la confirmation que lui apporte, dans l’ensemble, et mises à part quelques var [iantes] Qa [i. e. 1QIsaa]” (p. 142). He adds that the Greek form of this passage “donne, à première vue, l’impression d’une grande liberté” (Ibid.). According to him, this freedom of choices exercised by the Isaiah translator can be characterised not as “inspiration”, but rather as what he calls “l’application de méthodes analogiques” (p. 143). Besides his analysis of Isa 32: 1–4,6 as a passage that is connected with Isa 29: 22–24 (p. 76), he discusses 13 elements with regard to the differences between the MT and LXX of the whole pericope (i. e. 32: 1–10) (see pp. 143–160). Concluding his investigation, Koenig states: “[d]’après les analyses qui précèdent, l’ensemble de l’adaptation de G[rec] en 32,2–10 se presente comme un véritable nid d’indices qui illustrent le recours à une herméneutique analogique méthodique, scripturaire” (p. 160). Our analysis of the differences to be observed in the pericope under scrutiny reflects some of Koenig’s significant points, while seeking to go beyond him. 334 Cf. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 100; also Baer, When We All Go Home, 217–19.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

153

Another divergence between the two forms of the text under scrutiny is that the stress of 32: 1–2 (MT) seems to be on the task of establishing “righteousness/justice” (see in v. 1 the preposition “for” (‫)ל‬335 preceding both ‫ צדק‬and ‫ )משפט‬as the ultimate aim of the new regime, thus making the statement “each man shall be” (‫)והיה־איש‬336 in v. 2 (a verse that reveals an “image of protection from every threat”337) fit well with the significance of the righteous governance addressed (v. 1). By contrast, the emphasis of the translator in 32: 1–2 is on “the ethical quality”338 of ὁ ἄνθρωπος (v. 2) described as βασιλεὺς δίκαιος (v. 1).339 This ἄνθρωπος shall be “hiding his words” (κρύπτων τοὺς λόγους αὐτοῦ as a translation of ‫)כמחבא־רוח‬. One should note here that by displacing the rendering of ὡς for the Hebrew particle preposition ‫“ כ‬as” (see note 341 below), the translator avoids the idea of a comparison as expressed in the MT. He demonstrates more explicitly (via the use of a participle “κρύπτων” for the noun “‫ )”מחבא‬that this ἄνθρωπος is the one hiding his words. The use of τοὺς λόγους for ‫ רוח‬is interesting. From an observation of both the MT expression “‫( ”ברוח אפיף‬lit. “by the wind of your anger”) in Exodus 15: 8 translated in the Tg Onk as “‫במימר‬ ‫( ”פומך‬by the word of your mouth) and the connection between “the words” as means used by God in creation and “the wind” (both expressions designated by ‫ )רוח‬found in a hymn of Qumran (i. e. Hodayot 35=I,27–29), Koenig correctly discovers that the aforementioned rendering in LXX-Isa 32: 2 seems to be rooted in or bear witness to a tradition of interpretation, based on what he calls “un principe théologique d’inspiration scripturaire.”340 Still on ὁ ἄνθρωπος (v. 2), the translation speaks of him as being hidden as from rushing water (κρυβήσεται [‫ ]סתר‬ὡς ἀφ᾽ ὕδατος φερομένου). There seems to be a change from an image of protection (MT) to that of an action taken for him by a third person (unexpressed in the text) in the LXX.341 Koenig also notices that the use of the comparative clause (ὡς ἀφ᾽ 335 This Hebrew particle is more likely to have been used here in both occurrences as a preposition of purpose, thus showing the goal of the King’s rule and that of the princes. This option has been carefully argued by Olley, “Notes on Isaiah xxxii 1, xlv 19,23 and lxii 1”, VT 33 (1983) 446–49; see also Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 64. For a different view, see Wegner, An Examination of Kingship, 278–79. 336 This Hebrew verbal phrase can be translated either as “and a man shall be” (see e. g. KJV) or “and each [man] shall be” (see e. g. ESV/NAS/NIV). The option taken here is based on the emphasis on the intention of the new regime (v. 1). 337 Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 257. 338 Olley, “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 67; also Troxel, “Isaiah 7,14–16”, 20, who rightly observes that “the LXX [Isa 32: 1] accents the character of the king as upright”. 339 Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 146 n. 14, sees correctly that “Les métaphors de H[ebreu] en 32,2 évoquent la protection (images de l’abri et de l’ombre) et le bienfait (image des courants d’eau) qui résulteront du pouvoir royal et de celui des princes de l’ère promise (32,1). G[rec] a tiré de ‫( איש‬dans H[ebreu], référence à ces gouvernants) une opposition. Il s’agit chez lui de ‘l’homme’ en général, gouverné par ces autorités”. 340 Ibid., 143–44. 341 One should also note the place of the conjunction ὡς that suggests an analogy (i. e. in the

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

154

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

ὕδατος φερομένου) by the translator is likely to reflect a contextual exegesis

(this with reference to its occurrence with few variations in Isa 28: 2 and 30: 30).342 From a state of being hidden, our ἄνθρωπος “shall be revealed in Zion” (φανήσεται ἐν Σιων). Without going into too much detail here, the following should be pointed out. Troxel is correct in observing that there are only two occurrences of ‫ ציון‬in the Tanach (Isa 32: 2 and 25: 5). According to him the rendition of ἐν Σιων for ‫“ בציון‬in a dry place” (in these two texts) hints at a lexical confusion displayed by our translator.343 Be that as it may, Troxel does not take a step further to note that in the two texts (i. e. Isa 32: 2 and 25: 5) the contexts of the Hebrew textual form suggest appropriately the meaning of ‫“ בציון‬in a dry place”, whereas in their Greek forms, the option for Zion (ἐν Σιων) fits well with the flow of thought of the pericope344, thus suggesting that each textual form should be treated in its own right. It is in Zion as “a land that is thirsting” (ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ) that our ἄνθρωπος shall be revealed. The translator’s use of διψώση (expressing a state of being, viewed from the perspective of the time of translation) for ‫ עיפה‬can be considered not only as reflecting a contextual exegesis (with reference to its occurrence in a similar pattern in 28: 9), but more significantly (as shall be demonstrated below) as pointing to the translator’s use of intertextuality. This understanding will come as the result of an attempt to find an underlying reason for his use of διψώση.345 Leaving behind the above description of ὁ ἄνθρωπος, the Isaiah translator in vv. 3–6 invites his reader(s) to focus on the people in Zion. His first clause “καὶ οὐκέτι ἔσονται πεποιθότες ἐπ᾽ ἀνθρώποις”(v. 3) differs significantly from its Hebrew parent text (‫)ולא תשעינה עיני ראים‬. Without denying Troxel’s explanation, based on a likely semantic misinterpretation that the Isaiah “translator identified ‫ ישעה‬as from ‫שען‬, under the assumption that ‫ן‬//‫ ל‬could be lost in conjugation, as happens in inflected forms of ‫”נתן‬346,

same way) between the action of “being hidden” (κρυβήσεται) and that “from the rushing water” (ἀφ’ ὕδατος φερομένου). This is contrary to its Hebrew equivalent “‫כ‬ ִּ ” that governs both ‫ מחבא‬and ‫סתר‬. 342 See Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 144–45.12, where he also states that such rendering by the Isaiah translator was inspired by “la connaissance d’une tradition lexical positive”. We shall come back to this in more detail later. 343 Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 190. It is unclear what he means by “these are the only occurrences.” For if he refers to Isa 25: 5 and 32: 2 then he misses to see that this Hebrew term occurs also abundantly elsewhere (even in Isaiah, e. g. Isa 1: 8, 27; 3: 16,17, etc.). 344 Cf. Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 147. He qualifies this rendering from the Isaiah translator as the use of “un traitement méthodique par homographie”. 345 This is done by considering the 18 times where διψάω occurs in Isaiah (21: 14; 25: 4,5; 29: 8; 32: 2,6; 35: 1,6,7; 40: 28; 41: 18; 43: 20; 48: 21; 49: 10; 53: 2; 55: 1; 65: 13) as well as taking into account its occurrence as a cognate (e. g. δίψαν (Isa 5: 13), δίψει (Isa 44: 3; 50: 2)). 346 See Troxel, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation, 112. Also cf. p. 269 where he sees a supplement of ἐπ᾽ + pronoun by the Isaiah translator, unfortunately without attempting to

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

155

the aforementioned Greek clause (read as it stands in its final form within its immediate context) portrays a picture of what can be called, using Koenig’s expression (which unfortunately Troxel fails to take into account), “l’annonce d’une conversion religieuse généralisée.”347 This radical change in the people is stressed by the use of the adversative conjunction “ἀλλά” that introduces the translator’s emphasis on the theme of “an audience paying attention to what is being said” (v. 3). Practically, this important exercise of listening is translated into their obedience to the Law. There are three elements that appear to lend support to this. Firstly, the clause “ἡ καρδία τῶν ἀσθενούντων προσέξει τοῦ ἀκούειν” (v. 4) seems to imply that the translator’s emphasis is on, as Koenig puts it, “l’instruction relative à la volonté divine exprimée dans la Loi.”348 Secondly, the translator’s use of μαθήσονται for ‫( תמהר‬v. 4) suggests a teaching to be taking place. Thirdly, the choice of ἄνομα for ‫( חנף‬v. 6) implies to some degree the translator’s portrayal of a “nuance plus spécifiquement religieuse.”349 Besides these elements, the Isaiah translator foresees a coming time when the fool shall be denied any possibility to be chosen to rule the people (v. 5).350 This ruler is described in v. 6 as one with a purpose to “scatter souls that are hungry” (τοῦ διασπεῖραι [‫ ]להריק‬ψυχὰς πεινώσας), thus revealing inversely to some degree the gathering of “the thirsty religious community” (cf. τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας in v. 6) that shall be, as said above, submitted to the instruction of the Law. As a result of their devotion to the Law, the Isaiah translator speaks of what can be described, as Koenig sees it, as “[l]a guérison des [leur] langues embarrassées.”351 This is found in v. 4 in his use of “αἱ γλῶσσαι αἱ ψελλίζουσαι ταχὺ μαθήσονται λαλεῖν εἰρήνην” (v. 4) [MT lacks completely the concept of “peace”]. This Greek expression also occurs in Isa 29: 22–24.352 This strengthens the argument concerning the translator’s use of intertextuality advanced in the current investigation. In vv. 7–8 the Isaiah translator seems to provide a summary of the pericope. In these verses, while the purpose of ἡ βουλὴ of the wicked is the repudiation of the words of the humble (διασκεδάσαι λόγους ταπεινῶν), the Jewish readers in the Diaspora (who themselves could also be identified as the ταπεινοι) are given hope by contrasting the situation with another plan

provide any reason for this addition. This can be also said of Laberge, La Septante d’Isaie 28–33, 82–83. However, as stated in the text, Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 148–49, though making to some degree the same observation concerning this possible misreading of the Hebrew text here by the Isaiah translator, sees a different picture provided in the Greek text. 347 Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 149. 348 Ibid., 76. 349 Ibid. 350 Ibid. Koenig provides an instructive discussion of the translator’s use of ἄρχειν and σίγα (see pp. 150–52 with his long note 26). 351 Ibid., 77. 352 As noted already by Koenig (see ibid., 75–76).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

156

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

(ἡ βουλὴ) which describes the triumph of godly people with intelligible resolutions (οἱ δὲ εὐσεβεῖς συνετὰ ἐβουλεύσαντο).353 It is not clear whether the last clause (καὶ αὕτη ἡ βουλὴ μενεῖ) in the pericope under scrutiny refers to the plan decided by these godly people or to the whole oracle of the pericope. However, with the use of αὕτη (for ‫ )הוא‬one may be inclined to consider it as referring to the latter. In sum, on the basis of the above analysis it can be said that, while the text of Isa 31: 9–32: 8 in its Hebrew form speaks of the task or function to be performed by the ruler of a new society (or a messianic era), the emphasis of it in its Greek form is primarily on the character of the messianic figure (vv. 2– 3) and all the benefits that come with his reign (vv. 4–8). These significant nuances portrayed by the translator are to be considered as major reasons for which the Jewish people in the Diaspora are supposed to be happy (LXX-Isa 31: 9b). If this understanding is accepted, then one is invited to find out more about this messianic figure as well as its characteristics. 6.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ The first thing we hear from the text under inspection is that the messianic figure spoken of is described as a “βασιλεὺς δίκαιος” (v. 1). The use of the adjective δίκαιος with reference to him is of interest in our attempt to discover more about him. Read in conjunction with other texts in the LXXIsaiah where δίκαιος354 (or its noun form δικαιοσύνη) occurs, one may observe the following. It appears that this messianic figure not only primarily has this ethical virtue himself (e. g. 32: 1; 11: 5), but that he also has the responsibility to bring it about in the community (see e. g. 9: 6; 16: 5).355 It should also be noted that when δίκαιος is used (still in Isaiah) in reference to God, the translator does so “predominantly in contexts of God’s saving action,”356 which can be seen in the translator’s emphasis on deliverance of Israel from ill-treatment or unjust oppression (e. g. 42: 12 f; 59: 17), punishment of her enemies (e. g. 45: 23 f; 59: 17), and/or removal of evildoers (spoken in 32: 5–8), thus expressing the coming of a messianic age as a time that

353 One must note the difference between “noble” (‫ )נדיב‬singular and “pious” (οἱ εὐσεβεῖς) plural. 354 On the Isaiah translator’s use of this term our readers may refer to Olley, ‘Righteousness’ and Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 254–55. Moreover, in addition to our discovery with reference to the plausible intertextuality that comes with the translator’s use of δίκαιος in Isa 32: 1, Ekblad, who notes that “[n]o one other than the servant is described as ‘righteous one’” in the LXX-Isaiah, invites any reader of this literature “to consider to what extent the servant [in Isa 53: 11] can be identified with this righteous king in Isaiah 32: 1.” (p. 255). We shall come back to this later. 355 As noted already by Olley, “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah”, 66–67. 356 Ibid., 72.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

157

goes beyond “to the total state of order, harmony and prosperity”357 (cf. 32: 16 ff; 9: 6; 11: 1–9; 33: 5 f). In addition to the above observations, it can be said also that there seem(s) to be ongoing tradition(s) of interpretation of the phrase “βασιλεὺς δίκαιος” used by the Isaiah translator (32: 1). For one should not overlook, for instance, to record its occurrence also (roughly a century later) in Ps.Sol. Within Ps.Sol, an important thing to point out is that this “βασιλεὺς δίκαιος” (17: 32) is described as the expected legitimate Davidic messiah (17: 21). Still in this piece of literature (especially, ch. 17), δικαιοσύνη is often associated with this messianic figure (e. g. vv. 23, 26, 29, 37, 40), i. e. with reference to his expected task of both restoring “Jerusalem to the pure and prominent state it enjoyed at the beginning of the (here idealized) Davidic monarchy (v. 30)”358 and exercising power and authority against the enemies of God’s people.359 The Isaiah translator also describes this “βασιλεὺς δίκαιος” as a human figure (see “ὁ ἄνθρωπος” in 32: 2). It is important to restate here that, via the use of ἄνθρωπος, the text under analysis displays a strong messianic intertextuality backwards with 19: 20 (as a text discussed above, which is linked itself with LXX-Num 24: 7,17, referring to an important figure with royal status). Further to this description, the translator understands this royal figure as a “hidden and revealed Messiah”360 (see “κρυβήσεται … καὶ φανήσεται” in Isa 32: 2). A glance in other documents can also help one to see this thread of belief that the messiah was to be concealed first (either on earth or heaven) before being disclosed to God’s people. It is important to say that within the LXX-Isaiah, the translator’s use of φανήσεται (in 32: 2) without any Hebrew counterpart brings this passage in connection with ch. 60 where one reads the idea of the expected dawn for Zion. In this way, the messianic figure depicted in 32: 1–2 is associated, through intertextual exegesis, with the “Lord [who] will appear” (φανήσεται κύριος) upon Jerusalem (60: 2). The topic of a “hidden and revealed messiah” is also echoed in 4 Ezra (11: 1–12: 36). In this text, the lion that spoke to the eagle (11: 36–46) is interpreted as “the Messiah whom the Most High has kept until the end of days, who will arise from the posterity of David, and will come and speak to them” (12: 32; cf. 7: 28; Gen 49: 9–10). The same idea is found in 1 Enoch. Here we are told that the messianic figure, who is designated as the “Son of Man” (48: 2–3; 62: 5–7), has been not only “concealed […] before the creation of the world” (48: 6; cf. 62: 7), but also “revealed […] to the holy and elect ones” (62: 7). Further-more, composed soon after 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch also picks up the thought. From Zion, where its light is darkened (10: 12), the 357 Olley, ‘Righteousness’, 104. 358 Stuckenbruck, “Messianic Ideas”, 94. 359 Ibid., 95. 360 G. Vermes, Jesus the Jew. A Historian’s reading of the Gospels (London: Collins, 1973), 173.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

158

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

author of 2 Baruch utters the following. After claiming that protection will be reserved for the people who are “found in this land [i. e. Zion]” (29: 2) during a period called “an eschatological tribulation” as a time when the inhabitants of the earth shall fall (chs. 25–28), he states that “when all is accomplished that was to come to pass…the Messiah will then begin to be revealed” (29: 2–4). This event of the Messiah’s appearance, according to the author of 2 Baruch, will be associated with another one referred to as the Messiah’s “return with glory” (30: 1).361 Back to the idea of the “hidden and revealed Messiah” (in LXX-Isa 32: 1– 2), we are told by the Isaiah translator that this messianic figure will not only be revealed as a rushing river, but that he will also be glorious in Zion that is seen as a land that is thirsting. This picture of the Messiah’s splendid reign accompanied by a “messianic oasis” is to some extent similar to that of the Messiah’s reign in Baruch’s vision saying: “the dominion of my Messiah … is like the fountain” (2 Baruch 39: 7) that “comes to the forest and [stirs] into great waves”362 (36: 4 f). Within this perspective of the gushing out of “water” as an important element in the appearance of this messianic figure, both “ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ” (Isa 32: 2) and “τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας” (v. 6) are expressions, which, as Coste (analysing διψῶντες in LXX-Isa 25: 1–5) puts it, “étai[ent] susceptible d’évoquer à l’occasion le peuple héritier des promesses messianiques.”363 That is to say, in using them, the translator (like his readers in the Jewish community of the Diaspora) should therefore be understood here as one who, as Coste once again correctly says, “traduisait l’attente passionnée de son désir de salut que Dieu seul pourrait combler.”364 Significantly, the messianic figure described in LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8 is associated with the Lord who brings salvation to the ill-treated people who are “thirsting in Zion” (διψῶντες ἐν Σιων (cf. Isa 25: 1–5)). In this way, the deliverance depicted here is presented by the Isaiah translator, as Coste correctly sees it, “sous la forme d’un rafraîchissement ménagé à des hommes éprouvés par la sécheresse et la chaleur.”365 A final feature to be dealt with is the introduction of the idea of peace by the Isaiah translator into the text under scrutiny (see the clause “καὶ γλῶσσαι αἱ ψελλίζουσαι ταχὺ μαθήσονται λαλεῖν εἰρήνην” in v. 4). With the use of εἰρήνην as a strange rendering for ‫צחות‬366, the translator describes the messianic figure in his text as one to inaugurate “a time of peace”.367 The 361 According to Stuckenbruck, “Messianic Ideas”, 109, this second event “may be a hint that the author [of Baruch] considers him to be a descendant from David (cf. Ps. Sol. 18: 5) and for the author [of Baruch] probably implies that he is pre-existent”. 362 As already noted by Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians, 148. 363 Coste, “Le texte grec d’Isaïe XXV, 1–5”, 55. 364 Ibid. 365 Ibid., 63. 366 The usual basis for the rendering of εἰρήνη is ‫( שלום‬see e. g. Isa 9: 6,7; 26: 3,12; 27: 5; 32: 17– 18; 33: 7; 38: 17; 39: 8; 41: 3; 45: 7; 48: 18; 52: 7; 53: 5; 54: 10,13; 57: 2,19; 59: 8; 60: 17; 66: 12). 367 As one hears from both von Rad and Foerster that the basic idea of the concept of εἰρήνη

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8

159

whole clause (occurring exactly also in 29: 24, as noted above) enters to some extent into messianic intertextuality with the LXX-Isa 9: 6–7 (discussed above), which portrays a strong messianic belief, centred on the hope of an upright Davidic ruler who is to bring peace. That is to say, one of the effects of that time (according to the Isaiah translator), is that, as Koenig correctly observes, “lors du temps messianique annoncé, les moins aptes à la parole se feront éloquents en propos pacifiques: le règne de la paix sera irrésistible, s’imposant même dans la bouche des inaptes.”368 For, as the Isaiah translator emphatically adds, “[God’s people] shall dwell in a city of peace” (κατοικήσει ὁ λαὸς αὐτοῦ ἐν πόλει εἰρήνης) (LXX-Isa 32: 18). All this, echoing once again Koenig’s interesting observation, is “un signe qui indique le changement des temps et des coeurs”369 as, according to vv. 3–6 (discussed above), the thirsty religious community (including rulers) shall not only be taught, but also practise obedience to the Law. Given this view, one may be inclined to think that the Isaiah translator also understood the aforementioned messianic figure as a teacher of the Law.

6.4 Summary As in other selected messianic passages dealt with so far, we may conclude the foregoing lengthy discussion by highlighting a few important elements with regard to the Isaiah translator’s reading of the passage that underwent scrutiny. Firstly, it was demonstrated that our ancient translator produced his text in a manner to be read as a coherent unit. Secondly, he understood his source text as a passage that primarily spoke of the quality or the character of the awaited messianic kingly figure, rather than referring to the purpose or the role of the reign of both the king and the princes as read in that source text. Thirdly, both the translator’s emphasis on the messiah described as a righteous king and the construction of his text have allowed us to detect a sort of development (from the second century B. C. E. onwards) of the expectation of the emergence (from somewhere) of a messiah. This has been done by looking at the translator’s further description of the aforementioned messianic figure as “the man” (ὁ ἄνθρωπος), hiding first his words as he shall be first hidden before being revealed in Zion as a thirsty place to which the ill-treated Jewish community of the Diaspora eagerly longs to return and be submitted to the learning of the Torah. In a similar way, by identifying the translator’s use of intertextuality, we were able to discover that this messianic figure (in LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8) shares some important characteristics with the awaited messianic figure echoed in a few selected messianic passages primarily denotes “a state, i. e. ‘time of peace’ or ‘state of peace’”; see G. von Rad/W. Foerster, “εἰρήνη”, in G. Kittel (ed.), TDNT, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 400–406. 368 Koenig, L’Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 74 (emphasis added). 369 Ibid., 77.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

160

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

under inspection in the present study (e. g. LXX-Isa 9: 6–7;11: 1–10; 19: 20; 16: 4b-5; 53: 11). Therefore, once read in conjunction with or in light of one of these texts (at this point, we think particularly of those texts already discussed), the text that underwent analysis can be seen to have been recreated and/or interpreted from its original with a different emphasis on a strong messianic belief, as said earlier, centred primarily on the person of the awaited messiah.

7. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42:1–4 In its Hebrew form, Isa 42: 1–4 is one of (what has been known since Duhm, a century ago, as) the four ‘Servant Songs’ (the other three are: 49: 1–6; 50: 4– 11; 52: 13–53: 12). Almost a decade ago, the OG versions of these poems have been thoroughly investigated by Ekblad.370 His work is a significant resource371 for our given task here. Hence, before moving any step further, it is important for us to say a few words with regard to it. These will serve as preliminary remarks that introduce both the text under scrutiny and the one to be subsequently looked at. Besides what we have already said about Ekblad’s work (see ch. 1 discussed above, esp. pp. 44–46), it is worth pointing out here that in each of the aforementioned poems, Ekblad has provided us with not only the context of the pericope in its Greek form, but also with a comparative study of the text and its Hebrew Vorlage. This is followed by both a delimitation of the structure of the pericope and an identification of the speakers and/or addressees, before running a comparative commentary of the passage. Except with Isa 42: 1–8, a summary of his analysis of each text is lacking.372 Given this succinct synopsis of his study, we shall opt for a different approach to his as well as to the one we have used so far. Instead of analysing all the four aforementioned texts, we shall only focus on LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and 52: 13–53: 12. For even under the modern umbrella known as the four ‘Servant Songs’, these two texts seem to be the only ones that are more pertinent to the issue of messianic interpretation. We hear from Watts, for instance, that even in the Hebrew text of Isaiah, “of the four socalled Servant Songs, only Isa 53 and 42 appear to have been interpreted messianically.”373 Further, these two passages appear to be the only ones among those ‘four poems’ according to the LXX that have preoccupied the minds 370 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems. 371 To which we owe much of what is being said in various places throughout our analysis of this passage. However, it must be kept in mind that our overall given purpose of the study does, as shall be seen, make us differ from him in our results. 372 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 268. 373 R. E. Watts, “Mark”, in G. K. Beale/D. A. Carson (es.), Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 111–249, on p. 176.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4

161

of the LXX scholars in seeking to ascertain whether there is any development of messianism in the LXX as a whole and in that of Isaiah in particular. For instance, LXX-Isa 42: 1 is cited among those passages where, according to Harl, “l’idée ‘messianique’ semble absente.”374 This text has been (one among the others in the LXX-Isaiah) used consistently by Lust in arguing (unfortunately without a thorough analysis of it) against finding a more developed messianic expectation in an individual figure in the LXX-Isaiah than in its Hebrew parent text.375 With regard to LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12, Fitzmyer has recently concluded (after analysing only vv. 9–12)376 that a messianic interpretation of this passage cannot be attested.377 For, according to him, the contribution of this text (as it stands in its Greek form) to the development of Davidic messianism is really minimal.378 Furthermore, although verse 6 in LXX-Isa 49: 1–9 (known in its Hebrew form as the “Second Song”) is listed by Harl among passages belonging to the LXX-Isaiah that seem to favour a messianic reading of the text379, it should be left out on the following grounds. LXX-Isa 49: 1–9 seems to speak of the identity of the Lord’s servant in a collective sense (i. e. “Jacob/Israel”), as does apparently the “first song” (LXX-Isa 42: 1–4). Similarly, both LXXIsa 50: 4–11 and LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 have been viewed as referring to a singular individual identified as the Lord’s servant figure depicted in them. Moreover, this idea of seeing the “four songs” divided into two categories (with reference to the identity of the Lord’s Servant described within each song) has been noted by van der Kooij. He says (as he quotes others scholars) that “in LXX Isaiah the Servant of the Lord is seen as ‘Israel’ in the first [i. e. 42: 1–8] and second [i. e. 49: 1–9] ‘song’, but as an individual […] in the third [i. e. 50: 4–11] and fourth [i. e. Isa 52: 13–53: 12] ‘song’.”380 With this in mind, it seems appropriate to discuss: (a) LXX-Isa 49: 1–9 (especially vv. 5– 6) when analysing LXX-Isa 42: 1–4, and (b) LXX-Isa 50: 4–11 when dealing with LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12. However, any difference between the two texts in each group must be pointed out. Taking into account the above arguments, we are left, therefore, with only LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and 52: 13–53: 12 that we seek to re-examine, using our given method of intertextual analysis of the text(s), in order to confirm or invalidate the claims of Harl, Fitzmyer and other scholars.

374 Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 220. A similar belief has been echoed in a more recent article by Salvesen “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations”, 245. 375 See Lust, Messianism and the Septuagint, 11, 29, 217. 376 Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 75–77. 377 Ibid., 77 (esp. his note 45). 378 Ibid., 81. 379 Harl et al., La Bible Grecque des Septante, 222. 380 Van der Kooij, “‘The Servant of the Lord’”, 383; see also Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 271.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

162

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

Departing from the way in which we have dealt so far with other passages, we will not here have a section that investigates the context of the pericope. With regard to that which deals with the comparative analysis of the Hebrew and Greek texts of the passage, only a few points shall be made.381 One of the benefits of doing this is to prevent ourselves from running the risk of repeating what one can already find in Ekblad’s work, for instance.382 Having said that, our main focus will be, therefore, on analysing the plausible intertextual links of any ‘messianic language’ contained in each of the two above-mentioned passages. However, throughout the journey, we shall refer (whenever necessary) to issues pertinent to either the context or the differences between the two textual forms. For our discussion from now on until further indication, we shall follow the lead provided for us by the foregoing observations and remarks. It is now time to look at LXX-Isa 42: 1–4. This passage has been viewed as one of the (two complete and complementary) literary sub-units of LXX-Isa 42: 1– 8.383 7.1 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions384 MT

LXX

‫הן עבדי אתמך־בו בחירי רצתה‬ ‫נפשי נתתי רוחי עליו משפט לגוים‬ ‫יוציא‬

1

‫שא ולא־ישמיע‬ ׂ ‫לא יצעק ולא י‬ ‫בחוץ קולו‬

2

‫קנה רצוץ לא ישבור ופשתה כהה‬ ‫לא יכבנה‬385‫לאמת יוציא משפט‬

3

1 Ιακωβ ὁ παῖς μου, ἀντιλήμψομαι αὐτοῦ Ισραηλ ὁ ἐκλεκτὀς μου, προσεδέξατο αὐτὸν ἡ ωυχή μου ἔδωκα τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν, κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἐξοίσει.

2 οὐ κεκράξεται οὐδὲ ἀνήσει, οὐδὲ

ἀκουσθήσεται ἔξω ἡ φωνὴ αύτοῦ.

3 κάλαμον τεθλασμένον οὐ συντρίψει καὶ λίνον καπνιζόμενον οὐ σβέσει, ἀλλὰ εἰς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν.

381 However, with reference to section that deals with a comparison between the MT and LXX of the pericope under discussion, a presentation of the text in both its Hebrew and Greek forms is provided side-by-side in order to facilitate the visualization of the major differences. Relevant issues to the interpretation of the pericope are also highlighted. 382 For, as we have done, in his study, Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 29, takes “into account the larger literary context of the LXX of Isaiah 1–66”. 383 The other sub-unit is LXX-Isa 42: 5–8. For more detail on the delimitation (and the breakdown) of this pericope in its Greek form, see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 57–58. 384 We owe some of our observations here to Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 56–70, and H. Cousin, La Bible grecque: La Septante (CESup 74; Paris: Cerf, 1990), 84–85. 385 The translation of the term “‫ ”לאמת‬is disputed among scholars. Many translations render it as “faithfully”, thus taking it as an adverb. This view is shared also by G. R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, 1991), 57. More recently, however, J. L. Koole, Isaiah III (ed. C. Houtman et al.; HCOT; Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1997), 222, has suggested, on the grounds of

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4 ‫שים בארץ‬ ׂ ‫לא יכהה ולא ירוץ עד־י‬ ‫משפט ולתורתו איים ייחילו‬

4

163

4 ἀναλάμψει καὶ οὐ θραυσθήσεται,

ἕως ἂν θῇ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς κρίσιν καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ [ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ]386 ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν.

MT

LXX

1 Behold, my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [in whom] my soul delights; I have put my spirit upon him, he will bring out judgment to the nations

1 Jacob my servant, I will lay hold of him; Israel [is] my chosen, my soul has received him; I have put my spirit upon him; he will bring forth judgment to the nations.

2 He will not cry out and he will not lift [it] up and he will not cause his voice to be heard in the street.

2 He will not cry out, nor will he loosen [it], nor will his voice be heard outside.

3 He will not break a crushed reed and he will not extinguish a smoking lamp-wick. “In reality” he will bring forth judgment

3 He will not crush a bruised reed and he will not extinguish a smoking lamp-wick, but he shall bring forth judgment to truth.

4 He will not grow dim nor be crushed until he has put judgment in the earth; and for his law the islands will wait.

4 He will shine up and he will not be shattered until he has placed judgment upon the earth; and for his name (the) nations will hope.

From the above translation, it is without reasonable doubt that there is a significant degree of divergence between the Hebrew and Greek texts of the pericope under discussion. As said earlier, without going into too much detail, we would like here to highlight only two important points before moving into the core of our given task of investigating the possible connections of the messianic theme(s) to be found in this passage. Firstly, there is a problem of interpretation regarding the identity of the Servant. This can be simply termed as the corporate vs. individual identity of the Servant figure depicted in the texts above. A straightforward reading of LXX-Isa 42: 1 shows that the Servant described in it is clearly interpreted collectively (i. e. Jacob/Israel). It is more likely that this rendering reflects a contextual exegesis with Isa 41: 8–9 that speaks of (in both the MT and LXX) Israel/Jacob as both the context of and flow of thought in the passage, that it should be translated as “in reality”. His view has been adopted here as it seems to show that the emphasis in v. 3 is on this word as it is also revealed in the LXX with the additional preposition “ἀλλὰ” that seems to be, as Gzella rightly puts it, “a conscious effort by the translator to make the contrast with what follows more explicit;” see H. Gzella, “New Ways in Textual Criticism: Isa 42,1–4 as a Paradigm Case”, ETL 81/4 (2005) 387–423, on p. 405. 386 This is a reading from Rahlfs’ edition. It is opted for here instead of “νόμῳ αὐτοῦ” as read in Ziegler’s edition that is used throughout in this study. A discussion of his reading is provided later in our analysis of this verse

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

164

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

the Lord’s Servant (cf. also Isa 43: 1).387 However, this issue of the identity of Israel/Jacob has been a matter of concern in LXX scholarship. For instance, van der Kooij wrote an article with the aim “to try to give a more specific answer to the question to whom the designation Jacob/Israel as name of the Servant of the Lord might refer according to the LXXIsaiah.”388 In dealing with this issue, he not only analyses the LXX-Isa 49: 1– 6 as, according to him, “a most important passage in this regard,”389 but also other, related passages (i. e. LXX-Isa 10: 24; 11: 11–16; 19: 18–19, 24–25).390 He believes that the Lord’s Servant Jacob/Israel depicted in LXX-Isa 42: 1 is “not to be understood as referring to the people of Israel, but […] to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people.”391 Leaving for a while the issue of the identity of this Servant in the passage under scrutiny in its Greek form, one needs to note that the MT of Isa 42: 1, by contrast, leaves its reader to navigate between two possible interpretations, i. e. to see the Servant either as a corporate or an individual figure (whether a prophetic Servant, royal Servant, or priestly Servant).392 A survey of this possible double reading concerning the identification of the Servant according to the Hebrew text of the verse has been provided more recently by Hugenberger.393 Hugenberger believes that, if the aforementioned “four Songs” are read together, “an identification of the servant with a second Moses figure provides […] a way forward out of the current interpretative impasse regarding the servant’s identity.”394 Hence, both versions of the passage that concerns us present some interpretative difficulties with reference to the identity of the servant figure depicted in each. Secondly, it has been sufficiently demonstrated by Ekblad in his analysis of the “literary structure of the LXX-Isa 42: 1–4”395 that the centre of this text is to be found in the last clause in v. 3 that says “ἀλλὰ εἰς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν”396 This midpoint with emphasis on the theme of “judgment”

387 See also van der Kooij, “‘The Servant of the Lord’”, 382–83, who correctly says, “[t]he Greek text is easily understood as an interpretation of the verse in light of other passages where ‘Jacob’ and ‘Israel’ are called the servant of God (cf. Isa 44,1,21; 45,4)”. 388 Ibid., 384. 389 Ibid. 390 Ibid., 390–94. 391 Ibid., 394. 392 Moreover, U. Lindblad, “A Note on the Nameless Servant in Isaiah XLII 1–4”, VT 43/1 (1993) 115–19, on p. 115, observes that “neither is the servant named in these verses nor do the surrounding verses allow us to deduce his identity with certainty”. 393 G. P. Hugenberger, “The Servant of the Lord in the ‘Servant Songs’ of Isaiah: A Second Moses Figure”, in P. E. Satterthwaite et al. (ed.), The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of the Old Testament Messianic Texts (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1995), 106–39; see also Lindblad, “A Note on the Nameless Servant in Isaiah XLII 1–4”, 116. 394 Hugenberger, “The Servant of the Lord”, 130–38. In the background of his argument, Hugenberger has Deut 18: 14 ff and 34: 10 ff. 395 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 59. 396 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4

165

(κρίσιν) is seen, according to him, more clearly in the Greek text of this pericope than in its Hebrew parent text.397 For, as can be observed, this clause is sandwiched between two verses. In v. 1 the text speaks of the Servant upon whom the spirit shall be put and who will bring “judgment to the nations” (κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν for ‫)משפט לגוים‬. In v. 4 the same Servant is depicted as a figure who shall place “judgment upon the earth” (ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς κρίσιν) and for whom (i. e. for his name “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” for “‫ )”לתורהו‬the nations (ἔθνη for ‫ )איים‬will hope.398 Hence, this dominant theme of “judgment” that shall be brought to the nations is viewed also as the mission of the Servant figure depicted in both the LXX and MT texts of this pericope. Even though this figure is highly pertinent in any discussion with regard to the topic of messianism in the Old Testament,399 it is worth noting with Williamson that “[i]t is this role [i. e. of bringing judgment to the nations], rather than the discussion of the identity of the servant, which ought to be at the centre of exegesis of this passage.”400 Williamson’s observation, which was made while analysing the passage under inspection in its Hebrew form, is equally valid with reference to the exegesis of this passage in its Greek version. Given this idea, we shall, therefore, seek to identify the plausible links of this theme (as well as some of its accompanying terms) within the LXXIsaiah. We aim to see whether these connections could shed more light on the issue regarding the Servant’s identity depicted in the pericope under scrutiny.

7.2 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ After surveying the variety of ways in which the term “‫ ”משפט‬has been understood in scholarship with reference to the passage with which we are concerned, Williamson correctly sees that the most appropriate meaning here is “a rather wider conception of ‘justice’ than legal administration alone.”401 This is true too for its translation, κρίσις, as one hears from Ekblad that “the dominant meaning of κρίσις [in Isa 42: 1–4] is justice, right, and even righteousness.”402 This κρίσις “is tied to the very existence and 397 Ibid. It must also be pointed out that, even in the Hebrew text of Isa 42: 1–4 (as a significant number of scholars of the Hebrew text, who have dealt with this passage, have correctly said), “‫ ”משפט‬is the central notion. See for instance, Koole, Isaiah III, 210; Beuken, “The First Servant Song and Its Context”, VT 22 (1972) 1–30, on pp. 2–3; Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 135; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 319. Also Watts, “Mark”, 126. 398 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 59, speaks of v.1 and v.4 being more defined in their Greek form. 399 W. D. Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come (JBLMS 7; Philadelphia: SBL, 1952), 29. 400 Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 135. 401 Ibid., 137. 402 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 39.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

166

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

mission of Jacob/Israel as the Lord’s servant”403 (vv. 1, 3–4). For he shall (a) bring it to the nations (v.1), (b) place it upon the earth (v. 4), and (c) bring it for the purpose of truth (v. 3). In v. 3, with the presence of ἀλλὰ (as an additional adversative conjunction), the Isaiah translator, as Ekblad correctly puts it, “wanted the following phrase [i. e. ‘ἀλλὰ είς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν’] emphasized even more strongly than it is in the MT.”404 It must be remembered that this phrase is located at the centre of our pericope. While “εἰς ἀλήθειαν” seems to be the equivalent of “‫”לאמת‬, its most possible meaning can be discovered by taking into account not only the immediate context, but also some of the related passages. For instance, in LXX-Isa 48: 1, Jacob/Israel is seen as making mention of the name of the Lord “not with truth” (οὐ μετὰ ἀληθείας). In LXX-Isa 59: 14–15, the translator speaks of Israel as a people who “stood aloof behind justice, and righteousness stood at a distance” (v. 14a) “because truth was consumed in their ways” (see “ὅτι καταναλώθη ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν ἡ ἀλήθεια” in v. 14b) or “taken away” (see “ἡ ἀλήθεια ἦρται” in v. 15a). Given this view, the phrase “ἀλλὰ είς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν” (in LXX-Isa 42: 3) seems to suggest that ἀλήθεια (truth) will be established as the outcome of the judgment to be brought about by the Servant’s work. While the Lord is seen in LXX-Isa 45: 19, for instance, as the one proclaiming the truth (ἀναγγέλλων ἀλήθειαν), in LXX-Isa 42: 3 this responsibility is assigned to his Servant (Jacob/Israel). In another related passage that also speaks of a figure different from the Lord, one reads that the righteous judge from the root of Jesse depicted in LXX-Isa 11: 1–5 “will be clothed with truth” (ἀληθείᾳ εἰλημένος τᾶς πλευράς). It goes without saying that this special descendant from Jesse (as discussed above in LXX-Isa 11: 1–10) is viewed as performing the duty of “judgment” (see “κρινεῖ ταπεινῷ κρίσιν” in v. 4) in a manner similar to that executed by Jacob/Israel in LXX-Isa 42: 1–4. In LXX-Isa 16: 5, “truth” (ἀληθεία) is a feature associated with the one who shall sit on a throne in the tabernacle of David (see “καθίεται ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ μετὰ ἀληθείας ἐν σκηνῇ Δαυιδ”). As we saw while discussing this text, “judgment” is the primary duty of this Davidic ruler (see the phrase “κρίνων καὶ ἐκζητῶν κρίμα”). This same main responsibility is given to the saviour-judge to be sent by the Lord according to LXX-Isa 19: 20 (discussed above). Thus far, if the LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 were to be read in conjunction with all of the above messianic texts (LXX-Isa 11: 1–5; 16: 5; 19: 20) with which it is associated via the translator’s use of ἀληθεία and κρίσις (as discovered above), then it is striking to see that the expected individual messianic figure depicted in all those messianic texts is read into LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 in spite of its reference to a collective interpretation (i. e. Jacob/Israel) of the Lord’s Servant. We shall come back soon to this issue of the identity of the Servant described in the

403 Ibid., 66. 404 Ibid., 67.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4

167

text. However, it must be said that, in view of all the above connections, we may at the outset deduce that the Servant in LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 is a royal figure. The above conclusion becomes even more evident with the links that can be observed between LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and LXX-Isa 9: 1–7. As Ekblad correctly says, “[w]hile this connection may appear forced, many words and themes from Isaiah 9: 6–7 reappear in Isaiah 42: 1 and its immediate literary context (41: 22–42: 7).”405 Ekblad has identified five elements that are common to both texts. Firstly, he sees that even though the term παιδίον found in Isa 9: 6(5) is never used for ‫עבר‬, one must not deny seeing it as a synonym of παῖς. Secondly, he thinks that if the readers of the Jewish community in Alexandria were meant to interpret LXX-Isa 42: 1 in light of 9: 6–7(5–6), then the negative βουλὴ of the nations (41: 21) is sharply contrasted to the Davidic royal child/servant (in 9: 5) who is the messenger of the ‘great council’ (μεγάλης βουλῆς) entrusted to bring peace to the rulers (ἄρχοντας). Thirdly, he rightly says that by using ἀντιλαμβάνω for ‫( תמך‬in 42: 1) and ‫( סעד‬in 9: 6), the Isaiah translator may have sought to create a clear association with the Lord’s action via the child figure depicted in 9: 6–7(5–6) and the child/servant of 42: 1 than it is present in the MT. Fourthly, Ekblad draws the reader’s attention to the translator’s use of κρίματι in 9: 7 (6) that is viewed there as a means to support the throne of David and his kingdom that will be established. Last but not least, he also highlights the expression “τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ” (that refers to the described child in 9: 5), which reappears also in 42: 4 (see “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” for ‫ )ולתורתו‬with reference to the Lord’s Servant spoken of in it.406 Concentrating for a while on the use of the Greek prepositional phrase “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” (noted above), it must be pointed out that in the LXX as a whole, “ὄνομα occurs in over 1000 verses, of which some 100 are ֵ (Aram. ‫שם‬ ֻ ).”407 in the Apocrypha. It is used almost always for the Heb. ‫שם‬ According to Bietenhard, the LXX adds ὄνομα (sometimes for stylistic reasons) before mentioning the name of a person or place. Besides this, he also sees that in many cases ὄνομα is due to a false reading or interpretation of a given Hebrew term. A few examples pertinent to the latter case have been suggested. For instance, LXX-Isa 33: 21 reads τὸ ὄνομα (for ‫שם‬ ָ as if it was ‫שם‬ ֵ ).408 In LXX-Ps 129 (MT (130), ‫ תורא‬in “‫( ”למען תורא‬vv. 4–5) is under-

405 Ibid., 63. 406 Ibid. 407 H. Bietenhard, “ὄνομα”, in G. Friedrich (ed.), TDNT, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967), 242–83, on p. 261. 408 For this observation, see also Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.274, who correctly sees that “the sense consequently differs”. Analyzing the Isaiah translator’s use of ὄνομα in 33: 21, Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33, 126, for instance, discovers that “par sa traduction, la LXX [d’Isaïe 33: 21] insiste davantage que le texte hébreu sur la grandeur de Dieu et de son nom”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

168

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

stood as νόμος (in the Codex Washingtoniensis), which becomes ὄνομα (in the Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Alexandrinus; cf. LXX-Ps 118(119): 165). This, according to Bietenhard, is also perhaps the understanding with regard to LXX-Isa 42 where ὄνομα has been used for ‫( תורה‬v. 4).409 However, there is another way of explaining the Isaiah translator’s use of the phrase “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” (for ‫)לתורתו‬.410 This is revealed in Koenig’s view (after analysing the various arguments provided by both Ottley and Ziegler) that the translator’s use of this phrase indicates une lecture légitimée par l’herméneutique transformante qui avait cours dans le Judaïsme, et à laquelle les correcteurs chrétiens [par exemple dans Matthieu 12: 21 là où ils ont remplacé la mention de la Loi (juive) “νόμος” par une allusion au “Nom” (ὄνομα) (du messie)] se sont simplement conformés.411

According to Koenig, the shift from ‫ תורה‬to ὀνόματι in LXX-Isa 42: 4 echoes the expression “ἠλπίσαμεν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί σου” (in 26: 8). This verse eight of Isa 26 is a passage where one can interestingly observe that 1QIsaa 26: 8 “invite à admettre la possibilité d’une tradition exégétique qui autorisait la substitution de la Loi au Nom (ou équivalent, comme en 26,8) et inversement.”412 Though we shall come back later to 1QIsaa 26: 8, it is worth noting at this point that Koenig’s observation comes to strengthen the argument advanced in this study that the Isaiah translator made use of an ancient Jewish exegetical practice in producing his text. This device, termed in our study as an intertextual reading of the text, can be considered as a hermeneutic principle for any reader of the Jewish community in the Diaspora to deal with the Scriptures.

409 Bietenhard, “ὄνομα”, 261–62. 410 It is worth noting that Hatch and Redpath’s Concordance shows that ὄνομα occurs 64 times (mostly used for ‫ )שם‬in LXX-Isaiah. However, in some places, the translator adds it. As a result, “the name of the Lord” becomes a mighty agent (see e. g. 12: 5; 42: 10) that “comes after a long time” (διὰ χρόνου πολλοῦ for ‫( )ממרחק‬30: 27; cf. 49: 1), thus, according to Laberge, La Septante d’Isaïe 28-33, 126, LXX reveals “une réflexion théologique plus avancée” (see also pp. 55, 111). 411 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 233 n. 40 (emphasis mine). This view was correctly accepted by Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 68–69. Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.307, thought that the translator’s use of ὀνόματι αὐτου may be just a corruption of an original literal “νόμῳ αὐτοῦ” or more likely a paraphrase in the light of Isa 26: 8 and 63: 16,19. Similarly, Ziegler Untersuchungen, 141, saw ὀνόματι αὐτου as a correction of a reading of a Greek Mss that is echoed in Mt 12: 21. However, Koenig, as said in the text above, considered ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ as indeed an example of the translator’s theological exegesis that echoes a Jewish tradition substituting the “ὀνόμα” of God for his “νόμος”. A similar view has been considered by Gzella, “New Ways in Textual Criticism”, 405–406, who (after surveying various plausible explanations of the Isaiah translator’s use of “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ”) conclusively said: “[t]herefore the reading of the Septuagint could theorically be a conscious application of this exegetical tradition, especially since a substitution of God’s ‘name’ for νόμος does occur in the textual tradition of the Septuagint” (emphasis mine). 412 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4

169

Before leaving behind the thought concerning the Isaiah translator’s use of “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ”, it is also important to have a look at this phrase from a syntactical perspective. As in its Hebrew parent text, “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” is a phrase in the apodosis introduced by the conjunction “καὶ” (here to mean “so” or “then”413). That is to say, “καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” is found after the phrase “ἕως ἂν θῇ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς κρίσιν” where the temporal conjunction “ἕως” takes the whole phrase to express the bringing to completion of the activity of the Servant in v. 4a. The Servant’s action is articulated in a more positive formulation by the translator’s rendition of the phrase “he will shine out and will not be shattered” (ἀναλάμψει καὶ οὐ θραυσθήσεται) for the MT’s phrase “‫( ”לא יכהה ולא ירוץ‬he will not grow dim nor be crushed). In this v. 4, according to the MT, in addition to his task of bringing “judgment” (‫( )משפט‬v. 4a, also v. 1), the Servant is also to impart the “Torah” (‫)תורה‬.414 There has been a significant effort in scholarship to try to explain the meaning of ‫ משפט‬from its parallel Servant’s function of giving his ‫( תורה‬v. 4). This attempt has also produced different results with regard to the identity of the Servant. For instance, Williamson uses the prophecy of Isa 2: 2–4 (cf. Mic 4: 1–5) where one finds also the word pair “judgment” and “instruction” (cf. Hab 1: 4) as two parts of the function of the divine king in messianic times415 to support his view (based on his meaning of ‫ משפט‬given above) that the Servant described in Isa 42: 1–4 is a royal figure.416 A similar approach (and hence a comparable result) is also proposed by Davies.417 However, Koole (after backing Beuken, who sees ‫ משפט‬as “the content of a new situation of justice which the Servant will realize”418) thinks that “the ‫ תורה‬proclaimed and realized by the Servant is closely linked to the restoration of justice which he brings about.”419 In this respect, according to him, the Servant restores justice by validating God’s will, a function that calls to mind the announcement of the new covenant (cf. Jer 31: 31 ff).420 As a result, he concludes, that “[w]hen the Servant gives ‘his’ ‫תורה‬, this is not a specifically royal function […] [rather he] thus acts as a new Moses. But whereas Moses imposed the law on Israel, the Servant cre-

413 For this meaning with reference to the use of “καὶ” (for ‫ )ו‬in the LXX to introduce the apodosis, see Gehman, “The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, 82; also A. Aejmelaeus, Parataxis in the Septuagint: A Study of the Renderings of the Hebrew Coordinate Clauses in the Greek Pentateuch (ACSFDHL 31; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1982), 126– 27. 414 Cf. Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age, 34–38 where he notes this double function of the servant figure in this passage in its Hebrew form. 415 Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 139. 416 Ibid., 135, 139–40. Isaiah 2: 1–4 has been described by Davies (quoting Skinner) as “the best commentary on Isa 42: 1–4” (see Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age, 34). 417 Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age, 34–38. 418 Koole, Isaiah III, 223. 419 Ibid., 224. 420 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

170

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

ates inner obedience to the law in the world. In doing so, the Servant therefore rises above Moses.”421 Whatever option one may take, either in line with that of Williamson’s view (discussed above) or the one held by Koole (who also states that Isa 42: 4 in its Hebrew form “does not say that the world is waiting for a personal Saviour; it hopes for instruction, law, and justice”422), the Greek translation of v. 4, as said earlier, shows a clear transition from “his Torah” (‫)תורתו‬ to “his name” (τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ), in whom “the nations will hope” (ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν). Like Bietenhard (discussed above, who considers the translation of Isa 42: 4 in its Greek form as a possible misreading of the text by the translator), Ekblad also sees the translator’s rendition of ὄνομα for ‫( תורה‬in this verse) as a way “to avoid the possible misunderstanding of the Lord’s law being identified as that of the servant Jacob/Israel (that is, that the nations wait on servant Israel’s law).”423 However, according to Grelot, the Isaiah translator here personalise l’espérance universelle qui s’attachera à Israël, grâce â l’accomplissement de sa tâche missionnaire: établir partout le Droit de Dieu révélé dans sa Tôrah (dont le nom a disparu du texte).424

Grelot’s view contains an element of significant interest. He seems to observe more correctly than Bietenhard and Ekblad, for instance, the shift of emphasis from the “Torah” to be borne by the Servant to “his name” (i. e. the personification of the Torah) as object of the nations’ hope. Assuming with Koenig that such a move echoes an existing exegetical tradition, it is worth noting this again here, however, with a different outlook. In his study of the complete Qumran Isaiah Scroll (i. e. 1QIsaa), Chamberlain425 observes that in various instances of this text (e. g. 1QIsaa 1: 21 ff; 42: 1–4; 46: 10; 51: 1– 10; 62: 11) the pronominal suffixes in the MT-Isaiah have been changed so as to cause the texts that originally spoke of the attributes and emanations of God to refer to descriptive names for the Messiah (i. e. reading “the name of the Lord” as a messianic title).426 In other words, those passages portray the Messiah as the personified qualities of God. Among them, there are a few texts where one observes “the personification of the Torah with messianic

421 Ibid. His view in referring the Servant in Isa 42: 1–4 to a new Moses based on the argument of the parallelism between ‫ משפט‬and ‫ תורה‬, was also advanced two years before his publication by Hugenberger, “The Servant of the Lord”, 132. 422 Ibid. Emphasis added. 423 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 70. His argument is based upon the observation that in the MT-Isaiah, the ‫ תורה‬is always referred to as belonging to the Lord, with two exceptions: Isa 8: 16 and 42: 4 where it refers to the teaching of Isaiah and the Servant’s law respectively. 424 P. Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur: De la lecture critique à l’herméneutique (LD 130; Paris: Cerf, 1981), 88 (emphasis added); cf. Cousin, La Bible grecque, 85. 425 See J. V. Chamberlain, “The Functions of God as Messianic Titles in the Complete Qumran Isaiah Scroll”, VT 5 (1955) 366–72. 426 Ibid., 367.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4

171

attributes”.427 One of the striking examples among those texts that must be mentioned is Isaiah 26: 8 (briefly discussed above). It comparatively reads in the MT and in 1QIsaa as MT

1QIsaa

O Lord, we await you; the desire of our soul is for your name and your memorial (‫)ולזכרך‬

O Lord, we await your name, and the desire of our soul is for your Torah (‫)ולתורתך‬

Upon his observation of the above versions of Isa 26: 8, Chamberlain not only sees that in 1QIsaa the attribute “your name” stands in close parallelism with “your Torah”, but also claims that the “TORAH appears to make the transition from attribute of the Messiah to name of the Messiah;”428 thus suggesting that “the Name” was understood by the community at Qumran as a messianic title. If this is accepted, then, the move by the Isaiah translator (in LXX-Isa 42: 4) from “his Torah” (‫ )תורתו‬to “his name” (τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ)429 can be understood as an important hint revealing a messianic belief in “the name” found among the Jewish community in Alexandria (as it was also in the community at Qumran). In addition to the foregoing observations concerning the Isaiah translator’s use of “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” for ‫( לתורתו‬42: 4) that echoes an ancient exegetical tradition witnessed in the substitution of ‫ תורה‬for ὀνόματί, it is more likely also that such a rendering reflects an intertextual exegesis move with reference to “the nations hoping for the name [of the Servant]” (see “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν [‫ ”]יחל‬in 42: 4) as read in the phrase “ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν [‫( ”]דרש‬in LXX-Isa 11: 10; cf. also 427 Ibid. 428 Ibid., 369 (capitals original). This point is missed by both Ekblad and Koenig. Chamberlain’s discovery has been used also by Davis in his search for evidence for viewing “the name of the Lord” as a messianic title (see C. J. Davis, The Name and Way of the Lord: Old Testament Themes, New Testament Christology (JSNTSup 129; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 114–15). “Torah” is another term that is seen by Chamberlain, “The Functions of God as Messianic Titles in the Complete Qumran Isaiah Scroll”, 369, as a messianic title. He refers his readers to chapter 7 of Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology (London: SPCK, 1948). In this chapter, Davies demonstrates a messianic function for Torah in rabbinic Judaism, and shows that Paul regarded Christ as performing this function for Christianity (see pp. 170–173). Davies’ view has been assessed recently by Chester, Messiah and Exaltation: Jewish Messianic and Visionary Traditions and New Testament Christology (WUNT 207; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), esp. chs 4,8, and 9. The text of Isa 26: 8 (1QIsaa) is lacking in Chester’s analysis of a number of Qumran texts pertinent to the theme of the messianic Torah (pp. 525–29). 429 This view takes into account the possibility that, in the light of 1QIsaa, it could be that LXX-Isa 42: 4 reflects an older Hebrew text and that its MT form represents an interpretative re-reading. In fact, such an idea was already thought to some extent by Hatch (quoted by Ottley) while stating that the “agreement of early recensions of the LXX [which have either νόμος or a form of νῆσος] ‘seems to point to a lost variant in the Hebrew text’”; see Ottley, The Book of Isaiah According to the Septuagint, 2.307.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

172

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

LXX-Isa 51: 5).430 While αὐτοῦ in the former text (i. e. 42: 4) refers to Jacob/ Israel, in the latter (i. e. 11: 10) it (i. e. αὐτῷ) stands for an individual figure (as a descendant of Jesse). This important link (i. e. about the hope of the nations for the “name” of the Servant described in LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and for the “messianic figure” depicted in LXX-Isa 11: 1–10)431 takes us back to Ekblad’s observation concerning the connection of LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 with LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 via various words and themes (discussed above), which led him to conclude: While the servant in 42: 1 is interpreted collectively, the association with 9: 6–7 brings 42: 1 into tension with an individual figure. This individual interpretation of the servant is certainly not foreign to 42: 1–7, which refers to the servant in ways that make him appear as a singular individual.432

With this, we now turn to the issue of the Servant’s identity that we kept suspended. In order to clarify what we have discovered so far, it must be emphasised that the Servant depicted in the pericope under discussion as it stands (i. e. LXX-Isa 42: 1–4) is identified with Jacob/Israel, which appears to designate the whole people. However, when the text is read in conjunction with other related texts (especially with regard to the Servant’s expected responsibility as discussed above), it is beyond reasonable doubt that the text displays a significant messianic belief in a Davidic royal messiah. While our analysis has revealed a struggle present in this text whether to consider the Lord’s Servant referred to as a corporate or singular individual figure, van der Kooij (as noted earlier) believes the Lord’s Servant cannot refer either to the people of Israel (i. e. Jacob/Israel) as a whole or to an individual figure (if read in conjunction with other texts as we have done so far), but rather to “a particular group of the Jewish people.”433 His argument is based on his analysis of LXX-Isa 49: 1–6, especially in v. 5 that reads: καὶ νῦν οὕτως λέγει

κύριος ὁ πλάσας με ἐκ κοιλίας δοῦλον ἑαυτῷ τοῦ συναγαγεῖν τὸν Ιακωβ καὶ Ισραηλ πρὸς αὐτόν συναχθήσομαι καὶ δοξασθήσομαι ἐναντίον κυρίου, καὶ ὁ θεός μου ἔσται μου ίσχύς (“And now thus says the Lord who

formed me from the womb [to be] a slave for himself to gather together Jacob and Israel to him; I will be gathered and I will be glorified before the 430 In LXX-Isa 51: 5 we are told that “the nations will hope” (ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν [‫ )]קוה‬for the Lord’s arm (εἰς τὸν βραχίονά μου). This intertextual link between LXX-Isa 42: 4 and Isa 11: 10; 51: 5 via the translator’s use of ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν was noted by Zillessen, “Bemerkungen zur alexandrinischen Übersetzung des Jesaja (c. 40–66)”, 256, when he wrote: “Warum hier ἔθνη? Zwei Stellen können durch Parallele einen Einfluss ausgeübt haben. Jes 11,10 […] und 51,5”. More recently, Gzella, in his article on “New Ways in Textual Criticism”, 405, has also identified such a link by saying that “[t]he formulation may be indebted to Isa 11,10; it recurs in 51: 5”. 431 Missed by Ekblad. However, this link, as said above, is correctly pointed out by Gzella, “New Ways in Textual Criticism”, 405, unfortunately without teasing out any theological significance that can be detected from the Isaiah translator’s manoeuvre. 432 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 63 (emphasis added). 433 Van der Kooij, “‘The Servant of the Lord’”, 384, 394.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 42: 1–4

173

Lord, and my God will be my strength”). In this verse, according to van der Kooij, the Servant (who has been formed in order to ‘gather’ the people of Israel) in the phrase “συναχθήσομαι καὶ δοξασθήσομαι ἐναντίον κυρίου” “is supposed to be someone who will be ‘gathered’ too.”434 He therefore claims that the Servant spoken of is seen as a group, because it makes sense of a group, not of an individual, to say, that one shall “be gathered”. With other words, the Servant is to be understood collectively, be it not in the sense of the people of Israel as a whole, but of a group within the people.435

While van der Kooij’s statement above seems to be fairly convincing, one may still question it. We hear, for instance, from Williamson (in his analysis of Isa 49: 1–9 in its Hebrew form) that there is “no way of telling […] whether the servant of 49: 1–9 is an individual or a group.”436 As far as the Greek text of this passage is concerned, van der Kooij could perhaps have balanced his view (provided above) in the way Ekblad does. For, according to Ekblad, the phrase “συναχθήσομαι καὶ δοξασθήσομαι ἐναντίον κυρίου” (LXX-Isa 49: 5) seems to put emphasis on “the servant’s solidarity and total identification, (as well as difference) with Jacob in being gathered before the Lord.”437 As far as we are concerned, while it is difficult to say with certainty to whom the Lord’s Servant mentioned in v. 5 refers, it is perhaps helpful to see the speaker identified himself as “I” in the verbs συναχθήσομαι and δοξασθήσομαι (v. 5b) as Jacob/Israel. Moreover, a few Mss such as Q* (an original reading preserved in the second important witness of the Alexandrian text group)438 and 534 may be provided as possible evidence for this view. For they read “συναχθήσονται” (they shall be gathered) and “δοξασθήσονται” (they shall be glorified) (especially Q*). In this way, the “I” is clearly distinct from the “me” (με) as the Servant speaking in v. 5a with a mission “to gather together Jacob/Israel” or “to establish the tribes of Jacob” (v. 6). This “me” (με) describes him as one who was formed from the womb as a slave (δοῦλός) for the Lord himself, thus seeing him as the same Servant addressed by the Lord in 49: 3. In this verse (i. e. Isa 49: 3), he is not only δοῦλός μου (my slave), but also Israel (Ισραηλ). While the use of the expression “ἐκ κοιλίας” in 49: 5 (see also 44: 1–2; 24; 46: 6) seems to indicate that this “δοῦλός” is identified with Israel,439 the aforementioned task (“to gather together Israel” or “to establish the tribes of Jacob”) assigned to him allows 434 Ibid., 388. 435 Ibid. He is thinking of “the Jewish people in Egypt”, based on other passages (i. e. LXX-Isa 10: 24; 11: 16; 19: 18 f.24 f), for according to him, all these passages speak of the return (of those Jews) to Zion. 436 Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 152. 437 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 106. 438 According to Ziegler, Isaias, 29, “[i]m Gegensatz zu A hat Q den ursprünglichen Text viel getreuer bewahrt”. 439 More detail, see ibid., 93.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

174

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

the reader to see him at the same time not only as distinct from Israel, but also more mysteriously as an individual figure (v. 6) taking the role given to Israel (in 42: 6) serving as “a covenant of people” (see “ἔδωκά σε εἰς διαθήκην γένους [‫ ”]עם‬as in 49: 6) or “a covenant of nations” (see “ἔδωκά σε εἰς διαθήκην ἐθνῶν [‫ ”]עם‬in 49: 8) as well as “a light of nations” (see “εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν” in Isa 42: 6 and 49: 6). In this way, he is seen as a channel through which God’s redemption is accomplished to the people or nations. Moreover, there seems to be a linkage between this Servant with a mission of being “a light of nations” and the individual messianic figure (described in LXX-Isa 9: 1–7) whose coming will allow the people walking in darkness to see a great light as it shall shine upon them (see “ὁ λαὸς ὁ πορευόμενος ἐν

σκότει ἴδετε φῶς μέγα οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου φῶς λάμψει ἐφ᾽ ὑμας” in LXX-Isa 9: 2). If this can be accepted, then the link

between LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 (discussed above) is strengthened even more. Even though the primary mission “to bring judgment to the nations” (as discussed above with reference to the Servant in 42: 1–4) is lacking in LXXIsa 49: 1–6, his duty of gathering Israel is seen to be “a great thing” (v. 1a) instead of a “small thing” (as said in the MT). He shall be “for salvation to the extremities of the earth” (εἶναί σε εἰς σωτηρίαν [‫ ]ישועתי‬ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς) (v. 6b), thus identifying him, as Ekblad correctly puts it, “as the embodiment, almost the incarnation of the Lord’s salvation.”440 It can be said that, despite any reservation one may have regarding the above attempt to unlock the enigmatic reference to the Lord’s Servant in LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and (especially) in 49: 1–6, one should, as Ekblad correctly says, “consider the possibility that the collective and individual interpretation may in fact be inextricably interwoven throughout [the LXX-Isaiah]”.441 Given all the thoughts provided above, it is easier to see that any reader of the Jewish community in Alexandria was perhaps capable of the following: (a) of identifying (if LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 was read in light of 49: 1–6 as well as other texts discussed above) the role assigned to the Jews (as the Lord’s Servant) while sojourning among the Gentiles or nations442; and (b) of detecting features that were perceived to forecast the time when their (i. e. the Jews’) gathering together would take place as a task to be performed by an individual figure (i. e., not the people of Israel).

440 Ibid., 112. 441 Ibid., 130. 442 Ekblad (ibid., 88) speaks of them “as having a missionary and priestly role among the nations”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

175

7.3 Summary Without claiming that the above analysis is exhaustive, a few important discoveries from it must be pointed out. To begin with, it was observed that a better way of solving the problem regarding the Servant’s identity depicted in Isa 42: 1–4 is that of trying to understand first the mission of this figure. Given this view, it was discovered that the various facets of the awaited messianic figure described in a significant number of messianic texts (e. g. LXXIsa 9: 6–7; 11: 1–10; 16: 1–5; 19: 20, discussed above) were read into LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and made this pericope speak of an individual figure (i. e. a Davidic royal figure), even though its reading on the surface, as the text stands, seems to favour a collective interpretation. The interconnections between Isa 42: 1– 4 and those aforementioned texts are more obvious in the LXX than in the MT. However, the breadth of such important links (informing the theology of the pericope displayed by the Isaiah translator in his production of it) can only be detected by approaching this pericope within the corpus of the LXX-Isaiah as a whole (as we have done), rather than singling out a particular section of the Old Greek version of Isaiah. In addition to the above discovery, it was noted that LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 witnesses to a conscious application of a certain exegetical method that is identified throughout our study as the use of an “intertextual reading” of a given text. In various places, we discerned that the LXX-Isaiah and some Qumran fragments (in 1QIsaa) share a common methodological background. A striking example is the Isaiah translator’s use of “τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ” (his name) for ‫( תורתו‬his Torah) where he was seen as hinting at a messianic belief (in “the name” as a messianic title) that developed among the Jewish community in Alexandria. If the points given above are accepted, then it is wrong to claim that there is no messianic notion in LXX-Isa 42: 1–4. This leads us to examine LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 as another pericope which (as said earlier) has been viewed as not attesting to a messianic interpretation.

8. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52:13–53:12 In recent years, Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12 has been described as “one of the leading Old Testament theological texts that have had, and will continue to have, an extraordinary influence or ‘effective history’ (German: Wirkungsgeschichte) in Judaism and Christianity.”443 Barr speaks of it as a “more highly prestigious passage”444, while Schaper reminds any student of it that it is a “diffi443 B. Janowski/P. Stuhlmacher (ed.), The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (trans. D. P. Bailey; Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004), vii. 444 Barr, The Concept of Biblical Theology: An Old Testament Perspective (London: SCM Press, 1999), 256.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

176

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

cult and beautiful text.”445 In line with the latter description of it, Brueggemann, for example, has claimed that neither Christians nor Jews know how to decode this poetry.446 However, a significant number of scholars have endeavoured to understand it. As Heskett has beautifully said recently, any attempt to recall the enormous scholarly work in and around Isa 52: 13– 53: 12 “would fill a large house from basement to attic.”447 In the aforementioned attempt to understand the passage before us, views among scholars differ concerning a host of various issues.448 These include the problem of whether or not warrants for messianic interpretation can be identified within it.449 A more recent and important survey, which shows a range of perspectives from those who study the text in its Hebrew form (with reference to the topic of messianism within it) can be found in Heskett’s thorough analysis of Isa 52: 13–53: 12.450 Regarding the study of the text’s Greek form, as said earlier in our analysis of the previous passage (i. e. LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 discussed above), Fitzmyer is the only scholar (to our knowledge so far) to have attempted an analysis of a few verses (i. e. vv. 9– 12) with the aim to find out whether a messianic interpretation in the entire pericope can be attested.451 His conclusion is in conformity with F. Hahn, who claimed that “‘[a] messianic interpretation cannot be recognized even in the Septuagint version of Isaiah 53’.”452 However, besides Fitzmyer’s brief investigation, there are other LXX experts who have attempted a comparative analysis of the Hebrew and Greek versions of this passage.453 Though 445 Schaper, “(Book Review). B. Janowski and P.Stuhlmacher (eds.,), Der leidende Gottesknecht Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte, FAT 14 (Tübingen: Mohr, 1998)”, JTS 49 (1998) 709–13, on p. 713; see also Olley, ‘Righteousness’, 48, who speaks of the whole passage as being “notorious for its difficulties”. Joachimsen, Identities in Transition, 370, concludes the study of this passage by saying: “Isa. 53 is neither a unit nor a work that can be held in the hand!” 446 W. Brueggemann, Isaiah 40–66 (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), 149. 447 Heskett, Messianism within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah, 134. 448 See, for instance, H. M. Orlinsky, Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah. The Socalled “Servant of the Lord” and “Suffering Servant” in Second Isaiah (Leiden: Brill, 1967). He tackles the issue of whether or not Isa 52: 13–53: 12 should be treated as a single unit (pp.17–23) as well as the problem of whether the subject of this pericope is an individual or a collective figure (pp. 23–51). 449 This is the major issue dealt with by Heskett, Messianism within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah, 134–34, in his meticulous analysis of Isa 52: 13–53: 12 where he not only asks: “Are there warrants to interpret Isa 52: 13–53: 12 messianically?”, but also investigates “whether or not the testimony of the text warrants messianic promise”. 450 Ibid., 134–224. 451 Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 75–77. An analysis (or even a mention) of this passage of LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 is notably lacking in Salvesen, “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations”, 245–61. 452 Ibid., 77 n. 45. 453 For instance, see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 167–266; Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 215–27; Cousin, La Bible grecque, 85–89; Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 100– 109; D. A. Sapp, “The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53 and the Christian Doctrine of Atonement”, in W. H. Bellinger/W. R. Farmer (ed.), Jesus and the Suffering Servant:

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

177

their studies lack a particular outlook on the issue of messianism, they are important resources (like Fitzmyer’s) in our attempt to re-examine the passage under scrutiny with the aim to see whether a portrayal of any kind of messianic belief can be ascertained in it. Before proceeding further, it is important to recall that we shall follow the same approach we used in our analysis of LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 (see introductory remarks provided above). With this in mind, let us now observe some important differences between the Hebrew and Greek texts of the pericope before us. 8.1 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫שא‬ ׂ ‫שכיל עבדי ירום ונ‬ ׂ ‫הנה י‬ ‫וגבה מאד‬

52: 13

‫כאשר שממו עליך רבים‬ ‫כן־משחת משחת מאיש מראהו‬ ‫ותארו מבני אדם‬

14

‫כן יזה גוים רבימ עליו קפצו‬ ‫מלכים פיהם כי אשר לא־ספר‬ ‫להם ראו ואשר לא־שמעו‬ ‫התבוננו‬

15

‫מי האמין לשמעתנו וזרוע יהוה‬ ‫על־מי נגלתה‬

53: 1

‫ויעל כיונק לפניו וכשרש מארץ‬ ‫ציה לא־תאר לו ולא הדר‬ ‫ונראהו ולא־מראה ונחמדהו‬

2

52: 13 Ἰδοὺ συνήσει ὁ παῖς μου κὰι

ὑψωθήσεται καὶ δοξασθήσεται σφόδρα.

14 ὃν τρόπον ἐκστήσονται ἐπὶ σὲ πολλοὶ, οὕτως ἀδοξήσει ἀπὸ

ἀνθρώπων τὸ εἶδος σου καὶ ἡ δόξα σου ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων,

15 οὕτως θαυμάσονται ἔθνη πολλὰ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ καὶ συνέξουσιν βασιλεῖς τὸ στόμα αὐτῶν ὅτι οἶς οὐκ ἀνηγγέλη περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὄψονται, καὶ οἳ οὐκ ἀκηκόασι, συνήσουσι.

53: 1 Κύριε, τὶς ἐπίστευσεν τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; καὶ ὁ βραχίων κυρίου τίνι ἀπεκαλύφθη; 2 [ἀνέτειλε μὲν]454 ἐναμτίον αὐτοῦ ὡς παιδίον. ὡς ῥίζα ἐν γῃ διψώσῃ, οὐκ ἔστιν εἶδος

αὐτῳ οὐδὲ δόξα καὶ εἴδομεν αὐτόν, καὶ οὐκ εἶχεν εἶδος οὐδὲ κάλλος

Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998), 170–92, esp. vv. 10–11 (p. 171); U. Mittman, “Jes 53 LXX – ein umstrittener urchristlicher Referenztext. Zum traditions – und rezeptionsgeschichtlichen Hintergrund der Einsetzungsworte”, in T. S. Caulley/H. Lichtenberger (ed.), Die Septuaginta und das frühe Christentum. The Septuagint and Christian Origins (WUNT 277; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 217–32. 454 This variant is read here (as in Ziegler’s critical edition) pace Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 198–200, who opted for ἀνηγγείλαμεν “we announced”. For a solid argument that reveals some weakness in Ekblad’s view against Ziegler’s reading, see Hengel and Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53”, 135 n. 199. In opting for ἀνέτειλε, Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 136, for instance claim that the “reading of [ἀνηγγείλαμεν] not only makes poor sense, but it is also unexplainable as a translation of the Hebrew: ‫פָניו‬ ָ ‫ל‬ ִ ‫כּיֹוֵנק‬ ַּ ‫על‬ ַ ‫”ַוַּי‬.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

178

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

‫נבזה וחדל אישים איש מכאבות‬ ‫וידוע חלי וכמסתר פנים ממנו‬ ‫נבזה ולא חשבנהו‬

3

‫שא ומכאבינו‬ ׂ ‫אכן חלינו הוא נ‬ ‫סבלם ואנחנו חשבנהו נגוע מכה‬ ‫אלהים ומענה‬

4

‫והוא מחלל מפשענו מדכא‬ ‫מעונתינו מוסר שלומנו עליו‬ ‫ובחברתו נרפא־לנו‬

5

‫כלנו כצאן תעינו איש לדרכו‬ ‫פנינו ויהוה הפגיע בו את עון‬ ‫כלנ ו‬

6

‫ש והוא נענה ולא יפתח־פיו‬ ׂ ‫נג‬ ‫שה לטבח יובל וכרחל לפני‬ ׂ ‫כ‬ ‫גזזיה נאלמה ולא יפתח פיו‬

7

‫מעצר וממשפט לקח ואת־דורו‬ ‫שוחח כי נגזר מארץ חיים‬ ׂ ‫מי י‬ ‫מפשע עמ נגע למו‬

8

‫ויתן את־רשעים קברו קברו‬ ‫ואת־עשיר במתיו על לא־חמס‬ ‫שה ולא מרמה בפיו‬ ׂ ‫ע‬

9

3 ἀλλὰ τὸ εἶδος αὐτοῦ ἄτιμον

ἐκλεῖπον παρὰ πάντας ἀνθρώπους, ἄνθρωπος ἐν πληγῇ ὢν καὶ εἰδώς φέρειν μαλακίαν, ὅτι ἀπέστραπται τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ, ἠτιμάσθη καὶ οὐκ ἐλογίσθη.

4 οὗτος τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν ὀδυνᾶται, καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐλογισάμεθα αὐτὸν εἶναι ἐν πόνῳ καὶ ἐν πληγῇ καὶ ἐν κακώσει.

5 αὐτὸς δὲ ἐτραυματίσθη διὰ τὰς

ἀνομίας ἡμῶν καὶ μεμαλάκισται διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν παιδεία εἰρήνης ἡμῶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν.

6 πάντες ὡς πρόβατα ἐπλανήθημεν, ἄνθρωπος τῇ ὁδῷ αὐτοῦ

ἐπλανήθη καὶ κύριος παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἡμῶν.

7 καὶ αὐτὸς διὰ τὸ κεκακῶσθαι

οὐκ ἀνοίγει τὸ στόμα ὡς πρόβατον ἐπὶ σφαγὴν ἤχθη καὶ ὡς ἀμνὸς ἐναντίον τοῦ κείροντος αὐτὸν ἄφωνος οὕτως οὐκ ἀνοίγει τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ

8 ἐν τῇ ταπεινώσει ἡ κρίσις αὐτοῦ ἤρθη τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται; ὅτι αἴρεται ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἡ ζωὴ αὐτοῦ, ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνομιῶν τοῦ λαοῦ μου ἤχθη εἰς θάνατον.

9 καὶ δώσω τοὺς πονηροὺς ἀντὶ

τῆς ταφῆς αὐτῦ καὶ τοὺς πλουσίους ἀντὶ τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ ὅτι ἀνομίαν οὐκ ἐποίησεν, οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ.

They also see that, originally, ‫על‬ ַ ‫ ַוַּי‬was translated as ἀνέτειλε μὲν, but there is a possibility of a confusion (between ΑΝΕΤΕΙΛΕΜΕΝ and ΑΝΗΓΓΕΙΛΑΜΕΝ) that not only occurred at a very early stage through a scribe (who may have been influenced by the thought of ἀκοή in v. 1 (ibid)). According to them, this perplexity was passed over into the whole textual tradition (ibid).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12 ‫ויהוה חפץ דכאו החלי אמ־‬ ‫שים אשמ נפשו יראה זרע‬ ׂ ‫ת‬ ‫יאריך ימים וחפץ יהוה בידו‬ ‫יצלח‬

10

‫שבע בדעתו‬ ׂ ‫מעמל נפשו יראה י‬ ‫יצדיק צדיק עבדי לרבים‬ ‫ועונתם הוא יסבל‬

11

‫לכן אחלק־לו ברבים ואת־‬ ‫עצומים יחלק שלל תחת אשר‬ ‫הערה למות נפשו ואת־פשעים‬ ‫שא‬ ׂ ‫נמנה והוא חטא־רבים נ‬ ‫ולפשעים יפגיע‬

12

179

10 καὶ κύριος βούλεται καθαρίσαι

αὐτὸν τῆς πληγῆς ἐὰν δῶτε περὶ ἁμαρτίας, ἡ ψυχὴ ὑμῶν ὄψεται σπέρμα μακρόβιον καὶ βούλεται κύριος ἀφελεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ πόνου τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ,

11 δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς καὶ πλάσαι τῆ συνέσει, δικαιῶσαι δίκαιον εὖ δουλεύονατι πολλοῖς καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν αὐτὸς ἀνοίσει.

12 διὰ τοῦτο αὐτὸς κληρονομήσει

πολλοὺς καὶ τῶν ἰσχυρῶν μεριεῖ σκύλα, ἀνθ᾽ ὧν παρεδόθη εἰς θάνατον ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀνόμοις ἐλογίσθη καὶ αὐτὸς ἁμαρτίας πολλῶν ἀνήνεγκε καὶ διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν παρεδόθη.

MT

LXX

52: 13 See my servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and be very high.

52: 13 See my servant will understand and he will be exalted and glorified exceedingly.

14 As many were appalled at you, – so marred inhumanly disfigured [was] his appearance from [that of] a man, and his form from [that of] the sons of Adam -

14 As many will be astonished at you, so your appearance will be held in no esteem from men and your glory from men.

15 so shall he cause many nations to leap up, because of him kings will shut their mouths for that which has not been recounted to them, they have seen [it], and [that] which they had not heard shall consider.

15 Thus many nations will marvel at him, and [i. e. because] kings will shut their mouth; because those to whom nothing was announced about him will see, and [i. e.] the ones who have not heard will understand.

53: 1 Who has believed our report? And upon whom has [the] arm of the Lord been revealed?

53: 1 O Lord, who has believed in our report? And to/for whom was the arm of the Lord revealed?

2 He grew up before him like a young plant and like a root out of a dry ground; there was no form to him and no splendor that we should look at him, and he had no appearance that we should desire him.

2 He rose/sprang up before him like a child, […] like a root in a land [that is] thirsting, there was no appearance to him nor glory, when we saw him, and he had no appearance or beauty.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

180

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

3 He was despised and forsaken by men, a man of sorrows and knowing disease, and as one from whom [there is] hiding of faces from him; he was despised, and we did not consider him.

3 But his appearance [was] despised, failing by all men, a man being in bruise and having known [how] to bear sickness, because his face was turned away, he was dishonored and not esteemed.

4 Yet he himself bore our sicknesses, and our sorrows, he has borne them, and we ourselves considered him stricken, smitten by God and afflicted.

4 This one bears our sins and he is in agony for us, and we ourselves considered him to be in pain and in plague and in maltreatment.

5 But he himself was pierced because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities, the punishment [that resulted] in our peace [was] upon him, and by his stripes we were healed.

5 But he himself was wounded because of our lawlessness and he has been weakened because of our sins; the chastisement [for] our peace [was] upon him, [and] by his wound we were healed.

6 All of us, like sheep have erred, [each] man turned to his way, but the Lord has caused the iniquities of us all to fall upon him.

6 All as sheep we were led astray, [each] man was led astray to his way and the Lord has handed him over for our sins.

7 Oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like an ewe before its shearers is silent, he did not open his mouth.

7 And he, because he was mistreated, does not open the mouth; like a sheep led for slaughter and as a lamb before the one shearing him, so he does not open his mouth.

8 By coercion/restraint and by judgment he was taken away, [the people of] his generation, who will consider? that he was cut off out the land of the living, because of the iniquity of my people, a plague [is] to him.

8 In the humiliation [that] his justice was taken away; who will describe his generation? For his life is taken up from the earth, because of the lawless deeds of my people he was led to death.

9 And he455gave the wicked (pl) his grave and a rich (sg) man in his death, [although or because] he had done no violence and there was no deceit in his mouth.

9 And I will give the wicked (pl) for his burial and the rich (pl) for his death; because he did not do lawlessness, nor was deceit found in his mouth.

455 1QIsaa reads “they”

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

181

10 Yet the Lord was delighted to crush him, causing to suffer to feel pain, if he makes his life a guilt offering, he will see a seed [which] will prolong its days, and [the] Lord’s delight will prosper by his hand.

10 And the Lord wishes to cleanse him from the plague. If you (pl) give [a sacrifice] for sin, your (pl) soul will see a long-lived seed; and the Lord wishes to take [him] away from the pain of his life

11 Because of the sorrow of his soul he will see, [and] he will be sated with his knowledge, my servant, the righteous one, will justify the many; and he himself will bear their guilt(s).

11 to show/reveal light [by or through] him and to form [him] with the understanding, to justify a righteous one, the one who serves many well; and he himself will bear their sins.

12 Therefore, I will give him a portion among the many and he will divide the plunder with the mighty, because he has poured out his soul to death and he was numbered with rebels. And he himself has carried up the sin of many and he made intercession for the transgressors.

12 Therefore, he himself will inherit many and he will divide the plunder of the strong because his soul was given over to death, and with the lawless he was accounted; and he himself bore [the] sins of many and he was handed over because of their sins.

In his introduction to an exegetical analysis of the passage given above in its Greek form, Ekblad rightly says that it differs considerably in various places from the MT. To mention but a few, the differences, according to him, are noticeable with reference to speakers and addressees, grammar, syntax relations, vocabulary or word choice, literary structure(s), verbal phrases or tenses.456 We need not here go through all of them in detail. For, as said earlier, much of what can be said about them can be found in the works of some of our predecessors (including Ekblad) who have dealt with this passage both extensively and meticulously too.457 It seems appropriate for us to focus only on those divergences that are relevant to our discussion. Before proceeding, it must be borne in mind that these important distinctions will only be pointed out, without going into too much detail concerning exegetical matters as these will be dealt with later. Our main aim at this stage is to get a basic grasp of what is going on in this text, chiefly with reference to its Greek form. Given the above scope of our enquiry, a better place to start is perhaps to detect the flow of thought in the course of the passage. In its MT form, one can see that the text is made up of two divine speeches: (a) 52: 13–15 as a pro456 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 167. 457 See, for instance, the studies carried out by scholars cited above in note 11. Also, cf. Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 76–77, who only draws one’s attention to a few differences found in vv. 9, 10bc, 11 and a lack of references to the Servant as χριστός.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

182

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

logue, and (b) 53: 11–12 as an epilogue. Between them, there is a major section (53: 1–10) with a speaker referred to initially as “we” (v. 1).458 By contrast, the Isaiah translator provides us with a structure containing a variation of utterances. For instance, though the speaker in 52: 13–15 is the Lord (as in the MT), one notes that our translator departs completely from the MT in the last sentences (beginning from 53: 9 on)459 of the pericope under analysis. The Greek translation reveals (more clearly than can be seen in the MT) that it is the Lord again who is the speaker (vv. 9–12). In these verses, the Lord speaks of the future retribution of his Servant. This speech comes after describing the life of his Servant being taken away from the earth and his (i. e. the Servant) being led to death (v. 8). In 53: 1–7 one hears an utterance from the “we” (see “ἡμῶν” in v. 1). Taking into account the immediate literary context of the pericope, these speakers (i. e. the “we”) are, as Ekblad rightly observes, “best understood as expressing the voice of those who bear the vessels of the Lord”460 (see “οἱ φέροντες τὰ σκεύη κυρίου” in 52: 11– 12). Besides the perception of the running idea in each of the four sections (as outlined above), it is worth noting also that the Lord’s Servant, who is central to the majority of the events of Isa 52: 13–53: 12, is described in a very different way throughout the Greek version of this passage, compared to the account given in the MT. We shall come back to this major discrepancy as we aim to see whether there are some hints provided by the Isaiah translator that can allow one to speak of the aforementioned Servant as a messianic figure. Meanwhile, there is a need at this stage to pinpoint some of the important elements of difference. For instance, in LXX-Isa 52: 13–15 the Lord’s Servant is presented as one who “will understand” (συνήσει for ‫שכיל‬ ׂ ‫“ י‬shall prosper,” or “shall be successful”) and “be glorified” (δοξασθήσεται for ‫שא‬ ׂ ‫“ ונ‬be lifted up”) (v. 13). One also reads in v. 15 that the nations (as the subject of the verb θαυμάσονται) will be amazed at the Servant rather than the MT’s reading which portrays the Servant as the subject of the verb hiphil imperfect ‫“( יזה‬he will cause to leap up”).461 Within 53: 1–7, the Isaiah trans-

458 Scholars disagree with regard to whether the second divine speech (i. e. 53: 11–12) should begin at v. 11a or v. 11b. Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 98, attempts to solve the problem by seeing a connection via the phrase “my servant” between 52: 13–15 and 53: 11c. Koole, Isaiah III, 327–28, has a brief but helpful survey of various views held by scholars. 459 According to Seeligmann, “δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς”, Textus 21 (2002) 107–27, on p. 113, these last sentences of the pericope demonstrate “a very free paraphrase” in the Greek. Sapp claims: “[t]he biggest differences between the LXX and MT [of Isa 52: 13–53: 12] begin at v. 9a” (see Sapp, “The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53”, 178). 460 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 195, pace Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 99, who considers the words of this section (i. e. 53: 1–7) as “un monologue des nations et des rois qui ont été mentionnés en 52, 15”. 461 One needs to note that both 1QIsaa and 1QIsab support the MT’s reading, while other ancient versions offer different interpretations. For instance, Peshitta reads “purify”, Tg has “scatter”, and Vulg goes for “asperget”.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

183

lator speaks of the Servant (in v. 1) as “the arm of the Lord” (ὁ βραχίων κυρίου) who, in v. 2, “rose/sprang up” (ἀνέτειλε for ‫עלה‬462) before, most likely, the Lord like a child (παιδίον for ‫“ יֹוֵנק‬young plant”). He puts

emphasis on him as one who bears the sins of the “we” speakers (v. 4) where the MT speaks of him as having carried their diseases. In effect he (i. e. the Servant) bears sickness (v. 3). One notes that the imagery of “sin-bearing” by the Servant as read in the LXX is absent in MT (vv. 3–4). In presenting the Servant as one in solidarity with the speakers to the point that he was delivered up by the Lord to their sins (v. 6), the Isaiah translator brings this Servant figure more clearly in association with v. 5 and 12 (also 64: 7(6)) than it can be seen in the MT. In addition to the above description of the Lord’s Servant, the Isaiah translator shows that “humiliation” (ταπείνωσις)463 as a state of being (absent in the MT) is with the Servant (v. 8). He also emphasises that the Lord will eventually exercise divine justice. This will be done, according to v. 9, by giving “the wicked as a substitute for his burial” (δώσω τοὺς πονηροὺς ἀντὶ τῆς ταφῆς αὐτοῦ) and “the rich men for his death” (τοὺς πλουσίους ἀντὶ τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ).464 The Servant will be cleansed (καθαρίσαι) (v. 10), light shall be shown through him (δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς), he shall be formed with understanding (πλάσαι τῇ συνέσει), and (as a righteous one) be justified (δικαιῶσαι δίκαιον) (v. 11). As a result “he will inherit many” (διὰ τοῦτο αὐτὸς κληρονομήσει πολλοὺς) (v. 12). The pericope ends with a clause showing that the Servant was delivered because of the sins of the speakers (καὶ διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν παρεδόθη) for the MT’s reading of him as one who “will make intercession for the transgressors” (‫ולפשעים‬ ‫)יפגיע‬. As Grelot correctly observes, this reflects “une traduction libre […] et une modification du verbe [‫]יפגיע‬.”465 That clause, according to Grelot, “combine des indications provenant des vv. 5b, 6c, 12c, sous une forme qui résume la doctrine centrale du discours.”466 By “doctrine centrale du discours”, Grelot has in his mind that the core issue of the pericope under 462 This verb is never used for human beings. Though used sometimes for animals (e. g. Gen 49: 9?; Ezek 19: 3?), it is often for plants (Gen 40: 10; 41: 22). So, in Isa 53: 2 it functions in the imagery of the growing plant, thus linking the verbal phrase “he grew up” with the prepositional clause “like a young plant”. 463 According to Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 231, the Isaiah translator “appears to have selected ταπείνωσις more for contextual and intertextual exegetical reasons than because it represents an accurate linguistic equivalent”. Ekblad identifies the following passages (i. e. LXX-Deut 26: 6–8; Isa 40: 1–2) as the strongest intertextual links with LXX-Isa 53: 8 (see ibid.). Similar observations already appeared in Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 123. Their points strengthen the argument advanced in this study that the Isaiah translator used the phenomenon of intertextuality in the way he read his Vorlage and produced his text. 464 In the MT the syntax of the phrase “‫ ”ויתן את־רשעים קברו ואת־עשיר במתיו‬is difficult, thus giving room for a significant range of possible interpretations. A helpful survey of a few of them can be found, for instance, in Koole, Isaiah III, 312–15. 465 Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 109; cf. also Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 266. 466 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

184

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

inspection is about the dealing of the Lord with human sin through his Servant. In the words of Ekblad, one hears the following: Through the servant’s death and voluntary taking of people’s sins upon himself victory is achieved over sins that both separate humans from God and are directly responsible for the servant’s death. By delivering the sin-bearing servant the Lord also delivers the speakers (53: 1–7) who he gives as an inheritance to the victorious servant. In this way the servant [of] the Lord fulfils the servant’s mission to save both Israel and the ends of the earth (49: 5–6).467

From the foregoing overview of the basic differences between the LXX and MT versions of the pericope under analysis, it becomes obvious that the LXX reveals a number of different theological presuppositions468 and consequently a different picture of the Lord’s Servant compared to its Hebrew parent text. At this point, before embracing any further enquiry with regard to the aforementioned picture, one should be reminded that from the MT’s perspective, as Isa 52: 13–53: 12 stands in its context, it has been argued that “there is no room for an expected Messiah as the ruler of the age of salvation.”469 To put this differently, the picture of the Servant figure portrayed in the Hebrew text does not seem to bear a messianic royal connotation. This view is echoed in Fitzmyer’s statement saying: “[i]n fact, the passage [i. e. the MT of Isa 52: 13–53: 12] does not envisage the Servant even as a royal figure, or as a scion of David, or associate with him any political role.”470 A similar conclusion (but with a few nuances) has been reached by Heskett (in his work described above as a more recent extensive exegesis of this passage in its Hebrew form). He believes that the passage before us was not initially messianic. However, he adds, due to the idea of a suffering messiah that it envisages, this (i. e. suffering) became a core element of some messianic and eschatological understandings (e. g. in early Christianity). It is the suffering element that allows for Israel’s messiah to be considered no longer as “merely a Davidic king who fulfils the promises to David after the monarchy has ended”, but as “one who suffers and atones for the sins of the people.”471 Nevertheless, he concludes that “[i]n light of the book as a whole, it is understandable that once the role of the Servant is applied to the Messiah, the Servant himself would then be ipso facto a king.”472 If this is the case for the MT’s reading of the passage under analysis, it would be interesting to find out what the Isaiah translator offered to his readers in the Jewish community in Alexandria. 467 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 266. 468 For instance, in v. 10, the Isaiah translator, as Ekblad correctly observes, “[r]ather than reinforcing an image of God as one who delights in crushing his servant and people, even if it were a means to some greater end, […avoids] implicating God in the oppression” (ibid., 242). He “shows the same tendency visible in Isaiah 53: 4,6” (ibid.). 469 H.- J. Hermisson, “The Fourth Servant Song”, 16–47, esp. 45; Cf. also Fitzmyer, The One Who is To Come, 42. 470 Fitzmyer, The One Who is To Come, 42. 471 Heskett, Messianism within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah, 224. 472 Ibid.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

185

8.2 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ Our enquiry begins with the Isaiah translator’s use of both συνίημι473 (“to ׂ as a verb that can be understand” or “to be intelligent” for the hiphil of ‫שכל‬ translated either “to be prudent/act prudently” or “to be successful/prosper”) in 52: 13 and its cognate σύνεσις as a rendering of ‫ דעת‬only in 53: 11 and in 47: 10 within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole.474 While the meaning of this hiphil in 52: 13 is disputed in Hebrew scholarship,475 it is likely that the Isaiah translator’s choice for συνίημι (when, for instance, ἐπίσταμαι476 or νοέω used in 41: 20 and 44: 18 respectively could have been used for the same ׂ ) is to be considered, as Ekblad righty observes, as “deliberate hiphil of ‫שכל‬ and highly theological.”477 A similar remark was also made by Grelot.478 Though both Ekblad and Grelot saw some links between LXX-Isa 52: 13 and other passages (as indicated in the footnotes), it was only the former who was able to identify an important intertextual connection that is established by the Isaiah translator (via his use of συνίημι (52: 13) and σύνεσις (53: 11)) between the Servant figure depicted in LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 and the messianic royal figure upon whom shall rest the Spirit of understanding (συνέσεως) in LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 (as already noted above).479 The link between these two texts (i. e. LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 and 11: 1–10) is also strengthened through his use of ἀνέτειλε (53: 2; cf. LXX-Num 24: 17 and LXX-Zech 6: 12).480 While in LXX-Isa 11: 1–10 the idea of “springing up” is expressed by the verb ἀναβήσεται (v. 1 as used in 53: 2 by Aquila, Theodo-

473 Which is most often used for ‫ בין‬in the LXX-Isaiah (e. g. 1: 3; 6: 9,10; 43: 10; 52: 15) 474 As with συνίημι, the noun σύνεσις in the LXX-Isaiah is used mostly for a form deriving from ‫( בין‬see e. g. Isa 11: 2; 27: 11; 29: 14,24; 33: 19; 40: 14; 56: 11). 475 A summary of this debate can be read in the following words by Koenen,“‫”שכל‬, TDOT, 14.123, who says: “[i]f one translates it in the sense of ‘be prudent/act prudently,’” then v. 13a focuses on the prudent way in which the Servant currently executes his office, and only in v. 13b on the resulting reward. If by contrast one translates the verb as ‘be successful, prosper,’ [e. g. Koole] then it refers to the future and means either that the Servant’s mission will succeed (cf. 53: 10b) or that after his suffering he himself will succeed and see light (cf. 53: 11). 476 Or a cognate like ἐπίστημονισθήσεται (from ἐπίστημονιζω) used by Aquila in 52: 13. 477 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 179. According to him, the use of συνίημι by the Isaiah translator in 52: 13 “likely reflects intertextual exegesis, permitting a linkage and contrast between the servant [in Isa 52: 13] and the people who do not understand [in Isa 6: 9–10]”. 478 See Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 103, where he says: “le traducteur grec choisit entre les deux interprétations possibles du verbe au hip[hil] yaśkîl: ‘comprendre’ ou ‘être intelligent’, plutôt que ‘réussir’”. Grelot went for the meaning “être intelligent” because, according to him, the same meaning was used in Daniel (esp. 12: 3) (ibid., 103, 120–23). In this way he considers the Servant in 52: 13–15 as referring to a collective figure, i. e. Israel (see p. 123), a view that we do not share, as shall be shown below. 479 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 202–203 (where he also sees the link on the basis of the translator’s use of ῥίζα in 53: 2) and 253–54. 480 This strong intertextual linkage made possible by means of ἀνέτειλε is missed by Ekblad due to his option for ἀνηγγείλαμεν (as discussed above).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

186

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

tion, and Symmachus (who has ἀνέβη; cf. LXX-Gen 49: 9–10)) instead of ἀνέτειλε (53: 2), it should not be forgotten that both verbs are synonymous. At this point, before proceeding further, one should note also the occurrence of both συνίημι and a noun cognate to ἀνατέλλω in a messianic passage from Jeremiah that says, Behold, the days come, said the Lord, when I will raise up to David a righteous ַ ‫צ‬ ֶ ; cf. Zech 3: 8;6: 12) and a king shall reign and understand branch (ἀνατολὴν for ‫מח‬ ִּ ‫ש‬ ְׂ ‫ה‬ ִ ), and shall execute judgment and righteousness on the (συνήσει for the hiphil ‫כיל‬ earth (LXX-Jer 23: 5).

In addition to the use of συνίημι and ἀνέτειλε, there is also another striking element that appears to suggest that the Isaiah translator created an intertextual link between LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 and 11: 1–10. This is about his use of the phrase “ὡς ῥίζα ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ” for “‫( ”וכשרש מארץ ציה‬53: 2). Two things are of interest here: (a) the use of ὡς ῥίζα (for ‫ )וכשרש‬and (b) the rendering of ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ (for ‫)מארץ ציה‬. With regard to the former, it is worth noting that the omission of καὶ for the MT’s waw enables any modern reader to see that the kind of lyrical parallelism semantically present in the MT between ‫ כיונק‬and ‫ וכשרש‬has been removed and replaced by ὡς παιδίον and ὡς ῥίζα. This is obvious even if one argued that it possibly reflects a stylistic reason. In other words, the LXX shifts the emphasis of the language from the MT’s agricultural picture of the Servant (as a figure growing up like a young plant) to a portrait of a person, who is described both as a child (παιδίον) and a root (ῥίζα). Given this observation, two points can be made. Firstly, it can be argued, as others have correctly observed, that the use of ὡς παιδίον (for a literal rather than metaphorical understanding of ‫)כיונק‬481 seems to suggest the translator’s use of an intertextual exegesis that connects this text with the awaited messianic child described in LXX-Isa 9: 5 and 7: 14–16 (both passages discussed above).482 Secondly, it is likely that any reader of the Jewish community in Alexandria would understand ὡς ῥίζα ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ as a phrase that portrays the Servant figure spoken of as “a root” (ῥίζα) in a similar way to the messianic figure depicted in 11: 1 (τῆς ῥίζης Ιεσσαι, i. e. “the root which is called Jesse”) and 10 (ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ιεσσαι, i. e. “the root which originates from Jesse”). While in LXX-Isa 11: 1–10, the messianic figure as “the root” (ἡ ῥίζα) is related to Jesse, in 53: 2 however, the Lord’s Servant is linked with the prepositional phrase “ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ”. In the above phrase (i. e. ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ), it should be noted that the Isaiah translator not only uses an unexpected conjunction (i. e. ἐν instead of ἐκ, for instance, for ‫)מן‬, but he also, as Bertram rightly observes, “intentionally […]

481 As correctly pointed out by Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 104, that “le mot yôneq [‫]יֹוֵנק‬ est entendu [ici dans la Septante] au sens propre et non au sens métaphorique (‘bouture’, hapax leg. en ce sens-là)”. 482 See, for instance, Hengel/Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53”, 135; also Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 201–202.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

187

substitutes the thought of thirst [i. e. διψώσῃ] for dryness [i. e. ‫ ]ציה‬as the presupposition of the publication of salvation.”483 Hence, via the use of ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ, Isa 53: 2 echoes a network of other texts within the LXX-Isaiah where the verb διψάω carries a thought of yearning for salvation (see e. g. Isa 25: 4–5; 32: 2; 35: 1,6). Among them, LXX-Isa 32: 2 as a messianic text (discussed above) is of interest. Whereas in this text ὁ ἄνθρωπος as the messianic figure who will appear in Zion will be “glorious in a thirsty land” (ἔνδοξος ἐν γῇ διψώσῃ), in 53: 2 this splendid appearance (of the Lord’s Servant) is despised by men (53: 2c-3a), thus putting emphasis here (i. e. in 53: 2) perhaps on the insignificant impression the Servant made outwardly when growing up and the unglamorous milieu from which he will come that seem to prevent people from being attracted to him (53: 2c). The Servant’s bearing of sickness (53: 3b,6b) and sins (53: 4a,5b,6b,11c,12c), his mistreatment or state of humiliation (53: 7–8), the chastisement that was laid upon him (53: 5b), and his ministry to heal by means of his bruises (53: 5c) are all portrayed more emphatically in the LXX than in its parent text. These passages also reflect (in some places) a rewritten text (which brings other texts in) that can enable one to see the translator’s theological perspective. Without going into too much detail here,484 given our task to focus mainly on any messianic element that can be detected within the pericope before us, it would be, however, vital to make an attempt to grasp even a glimpse of the translator’s theological view. In v. 4, for instance, the translation displays a clear shift from the MT’s reading of God as responsible for the Servant’s affliction/pain/suffering to a picture that shows the speakers’ mere contemplation of the Servant’s pain (πόνος), plague (πληγή), and mistreatment or oppression (κάκωσις). This move is facilitated by leaving ‫ אלהים‬untranslated. However, they (i. e. the speakers) see the Servant as a man who bears their sins (οὗτος τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει); hence the Servant’s bearing of sickness in v. 3 (εἰδὼς φέρειν μαλακίαν) is, as Ekblad correctly observes, attributed to the sins of the people.485 The aforementioned healing (ἰάομαι) ministry accomplished by the Servant (v. 5) echoes an intertextual link with a part of the mission of the figure spoken of in LXX-Isa 61: 1 (to be discussed below). Via his use of παιδεία (v. 5) that also brings together a host of other texts within the LXX-Isaiah (see e. g. 26: 16; 28: 26; 46: 3), any reader among the Jewish community in Alexandria is invited to consider the Servant not only as one achieving peace for them, but also, especially if read in conjunction with 50: 4–5, as a figure endowed with words of instruction. In the last sentences (vv. 9–12) of the pericope before us, there are also other elements that may strengthen the case for the translator’s use of an 483 Bertram, “διψάω”, 2.228 n. 11. 484 This can be found, for instance, in Ekblad’s analysis of these verses; see his Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 218–36, to which we owe some of the points made here. 485 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 212.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

188

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

intertextual exegesis. Before exploring this further, it is important to go back for a while to v. 1 with reference to the revelation of “the arm of the Lord” (ὁ βραχίων κυρίου) to an unspecified audience more remotely concerned (see τίνι).486 Although the expression “the arm of the Lord” is present in both the MT and the LXX of Isaiah 53: 1, it may have had a different meaning in the latter text.487 While in the MT it is used metaphorically to allude to God’s “power and strength (…) in the liberation of his people”488, it seems that any reader (in the Jewish community of Alexandria) of the LXX-Isaiah may have understood it as an important instrumental figure for the redemption of God’s people (cf. Ps 135: 10–12). This becomes clear if Isa 53: 1 was read in conjunction with other texts within the LXX-Isaiah. For instance, see the prepositional phrases “καὶ ἠμύνατο αὐτοὺς τῷ βραχίονι αὐτοῦ”(59: 16)489 and “καὶ ἐρρύσατο αὐτοὺς ὁ βραχίων μου” (63: 5).490 In both these texts, as Baer has correctly discovered, one witnesses the removal of divine self-reference as the recipient of salvation or victory present in their Hebrew forms.491 The Isaiah translator shifted from the MT’s awkward reading (of the Lord as saving or bringing victory to himself) to portraying “the arm of the Lord” as an agent of God in the process of redeeming his people. In 52: 10, this instrument, set apart by the Lord (τὸν βραχίονα αὐτοῦ τὸν ἅγιον), will be revealed in the sight of all the nations, who in turn shall put their trust in it (51: 5).492 Still in 52: 10, its construction allows “βραχίονα αὐτοῦ” to be parallel with “τὴν σωτηρίαν”, thus portraying “the arm of the Lord” as an important figure with a mission of bringing redemption. Perhaps the idea of the Isaiah translator’s view of “the arm of Lord” as a significant agent who personifies God’s saving power came from within its Hebrew parent text itself with which he was, of course, familiar with. A text that readily comes to mind is the one which reads the expression “the Lord’s arm” (in “‫ )”עורי עורי לבשי־עז זרוע יהוה‬being addressed as God’s agent

486 Ibid., 196–97. Ekblad sees the speakers in 53: 1 as the beneficiary of this arm of the Lord. His view is based upon his option for ἀνηγγείλαμεν instead of ἀνέτειλε (discussed above). 487 Exegetically, both the immediate context and the flow of thought within LXX-Isa 52: 13– 53: 12 allow the expression “the arm of the Lord” to be identified as the Servant himself. 488 Koole, Isaiah III, 278. According to him, “God’s arm (…) refers to both the humiliation and the elevation of the Servant” (ibid), thus suggesting that ‘the arm of the Lord’, as Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 427, has said, “is not someone/something apart from the Lord but is the Lord himself”. 489 The expression “his arm” (βραχίων αὐτοῦ) is viewed in the verse as a reference to an instrument. 490 As in LXX-Isa 59: 16, the phrase “ὁ βραχίων μου” (in LXX-Isa 63: 5) is understood to be the saving instrument used by the Lord for the redemption of his people. 491 See Baer, When We All Go Home, 126–32. 492 It is interesting to note that, in 1QIsaa, the expression ‘the arm of the Lord’ which is in direct parallelism with ‘God’s deliverance’ (Isa 51: 5) was understood, according to Chamberlain, “to mean the Messiah”, see Chamberlain, “The Functions of God as Messianic Titles in the Complete Qumran Isaiah Scroll”, 366, 370.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

189

(Isa 51: 9). The LXX rendering of this phrase is different.493 Given this idea, our translator should also be viewed as having a fair understanding of his Hebrew text and as making changes (whenever necessary) to suit his audience. In a few words, we would say, using Le Moigne’s statement: “accordons à l’auteur d’Ésaïe-LXX la conscience de ce qu’il faisait: ce n’est pas un traducteur myope.”494 Back to vv. 9–12, one of the phrases that has given rise to controversial opinions in scholarship is: “καὶ δώσω τοὺς πονηροὺς ἀντὶ τῆς ταφῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς πλουσίους ἀντὶ τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ (for ‫ויתן את־רשעים‬ ‫( ”)קברו ואת־עשיר במתיו‬v. 9a).495 Any attempt to uncover its meaning should at least note that there are two shifts. There is a shift of the subject from the third person, i. e. “he” (i. e. the Servant; see ‫ ויתן‬in MT) or “they” (i. e. Servant’s opponents (?); see ‫ ויתנן‬in 1QIsaa) to the first person, i. e. “I” (i. e. the Lord, see δώσω in LXX). The LXX here is in harmony with v. 8c. There is also a change from the MT’s perfective aspect (describing a past situation) to a future one [LXX, cf. Vulg.]. In this respect, via his use of δώσω, the Isaiah translator clearly underlines the divine promise absent in the MT. While Jobes and Silva only encourage students of the aforementioned phrase “to examine the Hebrew carefully, identify the various exegetical options, and then evaluate the Greek translator’s approach,”496 Sapp, who did just that, believes that the definitive language of the translation here casts considerable doubt on the Servant’s death.497 However, in his analysis, Sapp does not to take into consideration a few elements. For instance, he gives less attention to the identification of the divine promise (mentioned above) as the Lord pledges victory to his Servant and judgment to the Servant’s opponents (referred to in v. 9 as “the wicked” and “the rich”), as he (i. e. the Lord) does via the speaker in the statement in v. 12 where the cham-

493 For a thorough analysis of LXX-Isa 51: 9, see for instance Baer, When We All Go Home, 170–71, where he correctly sees that in the eyes of Isaiah translator, the commands (as far as the Hebrew reading of this verse is concerned) “to God’s arm to wake up and put on strength […] are both anthropomorphic and suggestive of divine sleep and temporary weakness”. Such a view may have led the translator to “direct such imperatives to Zion” by inserting the “interpolated vocative, Ιερουσαλημ”, thus making “[t]he passage [to speak of] an exaltation of Jerusalem”. However, Baer also observes that “[t]he Zion-directed context of those [aforementioned] commands [which] is brought forward from 51.17 and 52.1 [in their Hebrew forms]” played a significant role in diverging from the MT’s reading. 494 Le Moigne, “οὐχ ὡς dans Ésaïe-LXX”, 78. 495 To give here only one example, as other views will be indicated in our analysis, Baer, When We All Go Home, 154, 240 n. 26, holds the view that ‫את‬, which occurs twice in this passage (both translated as ἀντὶ), is a particle that the Isaiah translator struggles to recognise. However, as shall be shown in the text, the translator’s rearrangement of the syntax of this verse produces a statement that bears witness to a development of an exegetical Jewish tradition that expresses the idea of the final retribution by God. 496 Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 226. 497 Sapp, “The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53”, 178–79.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

190

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

pion takes possession of and divides the plunder of the strong.498 According to Hengel and Bailey, the LXX-Isaiah not only joins, but also explains a development of a major idea that forecasts the final judgment by God. This is evident from a Jewish interpretative tradition of this v. 9a (see Tg. Isa 53: 9 “and he will hand over the wicked to Gehenna”; Peshitta; Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus: “δώσει τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς ἀντὶ τῆς ταφῆς αὐτοῦ”; cf. 1 Enoch 62–63 and Wisdom 5).499 In v. 9b, via his use of ὅτι (for ‫)על‬, as well as ἀνομίαν (for ‫)חמס‬, the Isaiah translator shows (more obviously than in the MT) the motif of the innocence of the Servant, who is to be vindicated by the Lord. Besides the portrayal of the thought of victory to be granted to the innocent Servant and judgment of his opponents highlighted by the Isaiah translator via his syntactical construction of the verse, one should note that this notion perhaps also reflects a Davidic interpretation already present in other texts outside Isaiah. Texts that readily come to mind are from the Book of Psalms (in both their Greek and Hebrew forms) where one hears of David as an innocent beseeching God to get rid of his opponents by causing them to fall into the grave which they had dug for him (see e. g. Ps 7: 16; 9: 15). If this link can be accepted, then it should be beyond reasonable doubt that LXX-Isa 53: 9 (read within its pericope that is also linked, according to our analysis, with texts, such as Isa 7: 14–16; 9: 5; 11: 1–10; and 32: 2, discussed above) reverberates with some messianic connotations pointing back to the Davidic royal figure. Last but not least, within 53: 11–12 (where the LXX looks at the Lord as the one who works through the Servant,500 who is described as δίκαιος, a term that recalls the righteous king in LXX-Isa 32: 1), the translator’s insertion of φῶς in 53: 11 (present also in an extant parallel tradition, i. e. the occurrence of ‫ אור‬in 1QIsaa and 1QIsab) has attracted a significant amount of scholarly attention.501 Focusing on this particular case, Olley offered a piece of helpful advice to its students. According to him, “it is better to interpret the thought of the Isaiah translator in the light of Isaiah LXX”.502 It is in line with this view that Koenig, for instance, argued that the use of this 498 A similar view has been put forward by Hengel and Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53”, 123–24, 133. 499 Ibid., 123–24. 500 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 249–66. 501 For instance, Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 277, 292, believes that the Isaiah translator’s use of this term seems to reflect Hellenistic influences; see also his “δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς”, 107–27 (esp. 107–09), which he wrote after the discovery of Qumran documents. Tov, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research, 101–02, who holds a different view, thinks that “no intentional gnostic terminology should be posited [here]”. Waard, A Handbook on Isaiah, 197, proposes that the lack of ‫“ אור‬had either been subject to an incident or to a correction of theological nature”. More recently, while Fitzmyer, The One Who is To Come, 77, only mentions it without any analysis, Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 251, thinks that the presence of φῶς plausibly reflects “a later scribe’s attempt to clarify the shorter more difficult Hebrew verb without object attested by the MT”. 502 Olley, ‘Righteousness’, 50.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 52: 13–53: 12

191

term φῶς should be best understood in line with what he calls the Isaiah translator’s “application de la méthode des analogies scripturaires” (or “emprunt scripturaire”) that is referred to in our study as the phenomenon of intertextuality. Koenig has sufficiently demonstrated that in using φῶς (in 53: 11) the translator echoes Isa 9: 1 via 50: 10. He rightly observes that 53: 11 and 9: 1 display a few similarities as well as differences. For instance, he claims that “l’épreuve du Serviteur d’Is 53 est assimilable à une ‘marche dans les ténèbres’”503, thus recalling the statement “ὁ λαὸς ὁ πορευόμενος ἐν

σκότει ἴδετε φῶς μέγα οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου φῶς λάμψει ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς” (Isa 9: 1). Besides the occurrence of the theme of light in

these two passages, Koenig also draws the attention to their difference with reference to the subject spoken of in each. While 9: 1 echoes a collective subject (see ὁ λαὸς as the one to see light), in 53: 11 it is the Servant as an individual figure through whom light will be shown (see “δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς” discussed below). However, according to Koenig, one should note that the Servant in Isa 53 was in relation to the situation of the people (cf. v. 8b) described in 9: 1 as “ὁ πορευόμενος ἐν σκότει” (the one walking in darkness). In this way, Koenig sees that the statement “οἱ πορευόμενοι ἐν σκότει οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτοῖς φῶς” (Isa 50: 10b) functions as a link between Isa 9: 1 and 53: 11.504 In addition to the above links between Isa 53: 11 and 9: 1 via 50: 10, the translator’s choice of δεῖξαι (for ‫ )יראה‬and his insertion of αὐτῷ are worthy of note. These were overlooked in Koenig’s analysis. Though it is possible ֶ ‫ר‬ ְ ‫ ִי‬as a hiphil ‫אה‬ ֶ ‫ר‬ ְ ‫ ַי‬and inserted the that our translator may have “read ‫אה‬ third singular pronoun [αὐτῷ]”, as Ekblad has thought505, it is equally reasonable to argue, as he has rightly observed, that the translator’s “use of δείκνυμι here most likely reflects intertextual exegesis through bringing 53: 11 into relationship with scriptures where the Lord reveals.”506 However, if an analysis of the verb δείκνυμι (which appears abundantly throughout the LXX) were to be done, it would reveal that Isa 53: 11 is the only place where it says that the Lord reveals light to the Servant.507 Perhaps the difficulty lies in a proper exegesis of the phrase δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς. Syntactically, φῶς is a clear direct object of the infinitive aorist of δείκνυμι. The majority of scholars have correctly viewed αὐτῷ as an “indirect object” (to him)508 or simply 503 Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique, 275–76. 504 Ibid., 274–77. Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 157–58, also identifies the link between Isa 50: 10 and 9: 1. 505 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 251–52. For a similar view, see also Hengel/Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the Pre-Christian Period”, 127 and Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 227. 506 Ibid., 253. 507 Cf. Ekblad (ibid.) for similar claim made with regard to the LXX-Isaiah and LXX-Pentateuch. 508 See .e. g. LXX.D; Sapp, “The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53”, 181 n. 16; also Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 227; Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 1.279.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

192

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

(him).509 This view may still commend itself if one envisions “light” as pointing to the idea of the Lord being willing to bring back his Servant from suffering to life (Isa 53: 10c; cf. 42: 16–19). In this respect, the connection between Isa 53: 11 with Isa 9: 1, as pointed out by Koenig (discussed above), is strengthened.510 However, another possibility that is less readily thought of is perhaps to see αὐτῷ (53: 11) as a dative of means/agency since there is already a clear direct object (i. e. φῶς, as indicated above). If this is accepted, then δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς (Isa 53: 11) could be translated as “to reveal light by or through him [i. e. the Servant]”, thus showing the Servant figure depicted in 53: 11 as an instrument/agency through whom the Lord will reveal light to the people. In this case, the Lord’s Servant would then be seen as a bearer or embodiment of light. This reading seems more likely to fit the wider context of the pericope under inspection within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, where, as Ekblad has correctly argued, one of the missions of the Servant figure depicted in it throughout is to bear/be light to/of the nations (e. g. 42: 6; 49: 6,8; cf. also 58: 8–10).511 If this view is accepted, then this explains and supports what others have claimed, i. e., that the insertion of φῶς in Isa 53: 11 shows that “the translator had a theological preoccupation with the notion of light”512 (as discussed above with reference to the links between Isa 53: 1 with 9: 1 via 50: 10 as well as 42: 6; 49: 6,8).

8.3 Summary The aim of our foregoing analysis was to re-examine the passage that underwent scrutiny in its Greek form to see whether it is characterised by a messianic interpretation. After detecting numerous links of the Servant figure (depicted in this passage) with other passages describing the awaited messianic child (LXX-Isa 9: 5 and 7: 14–16), the root of Jesse (LXX-Is 11: 1–10), the righteous King (LXX-Isa 32: 2), and the anointed figure (in LXX-Isa 61: 1– 3), a messianic interpretation of the Servant portrayed in this text for the Jews in Alexandria has been demonstrated to exist.513 In other words, if our passage is read in conjunction with those texts within the LXX-Isaiah, then 509 As read in NETS; Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 177, 249; and Hengel/Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53”, 126–27. 510 In another way, φῶς in both LXX-Isa 53: 11 and 9: 1 refers to the coming of redemption or vindication (cf. 30: 26; 42: 16); see Olley, ‘Righteousness’ in the Septuagint of Isaiah, 50. 511 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 74–75, 252. 512 Jobes/Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 227. 513 In this way, Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 203, is right in observing that the “association of the servant with the descendant of Jesse […] lends support to a Messianic interpretation of the servant present in the LXX”; see also Hengel/Bailey, “The Effective History of Isaiah 53”, 136, who claim that “the possibility of a messianic interpretation [of LXX-Isa 53] must be kept open”. As with the Targum of this passage, this is a clear indication that early Jewish interpretation considered this passage as portraying messianic belief.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

193

the aforementioned Servant figure is viewed as bearing the functions and/or attributes of the messianic figures occurring in those texts (discussed above). Besides these, one of the identified distinctive features (among others) of this Servant figure present in Isa 52: 13–53: 12 in its Greek form is that he is a bearer or incarnation of light. It is worth noting that this picture is completely lacking in the MT. The Servant is also portrayed as the bearer of the sins of the people, a priestly function that is more emphasized in the LXX than in the MT of this passage. Above all, the numerous observations made throughout our analysis with reference to the reminiscence of other texts in the passage that underwent scrutiny strengthen the argument for the Isaiah translator’s use of intertextual exegesis in the way in which he read his Vorlage and produced his text.

9. Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61:1–3a While much has been written about the passage before us, chiefly about its Hebrew form or its quotation in the New Testament, surprisingly enough, less effort has been dedicated to the study of its Greek form, especially with reference to works that deal with the theme of messianism in the LXX.514 It is against this background that we seek to examine it. We aim not only to provide a thorough analysis of it, but also, and more importantly, to detect whether or not a messianic reading of it in its Greek form can be attested. The aforementioned goal demands that we now return to the procedure we have used in discussing all the texts that underwent scrutiny. It should not be forgotten that this practice was abandoned for a while and a new one was adopted in our analysis of both LXX-Isa 42: 1–4 and 52: 13–53: 12 for various reasons provided there. With this in mind, we shall therefore not only attempt to investigate the contexts of the pericope, but also analyse the various differences to be found in it when compared to its Hebrew parent

514 For instance, Fitzmyer, The One Who Is To Come, 65–81, does not attempt to study it in his section on “The Septuagint’s Interpretation of Some Old Testament Passages”. However, he provides a whole paragraph about it (pp. 144–45) when studying “The Use of Messiah in the New Testament” (pp.134–45). Salvesen, “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations”, 254, mentions it by pointing out its (i. e. LXX-Isa 61: 1–2) messianic reading in the NT, without any attempt to find out, as she says, “whether the [Isaiah] translator did or not” regard it as messianic. A similar approach to this text is also echoed in Harl et al., La Bible grecque des Septante, 222, 283. J. A. Sanders, “From Isaiah 61 to Luke 4”, in J. Neusner (ed.), Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults (Leiden: Brill, 1975), 75– 106, on pp. 82–84, contains a comparative analysis of a few terms between the MT and Greek versions of this pericope. Heskett, Messianism within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah, 225–63, has a helpful comprehensive study of how scholars (including himself) have attempted to understand this passage in its Hebrew form with reference to the issue of messianism within.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

194

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

text, before examining whether there are some elements that betray a ‘messianic language’ pointing to texts pertinent to messianic belief.

9.1 The Pericope in its Literary Context As shall be shown below, a thorough reading of LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a as a syntactic coherent unit515 reveals that this pericope is linked to various passages (that forecast salvation/redemption) within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. Beginning with both LXX-Isa 60 and 62 that surround more closely ch. 61, it is worth noting that, in 60: 1–3, Jerusalem is commended to shine (φωτίζου φωτίζου, Ιερουσαλημ), because her light has come (ἥκει γάρ σου τὸ φῶς) and the Lord’s glory has risen upon her (ἡ δόξα κυρίου ἐπὶ σὲ ἀνατέταλκεν). God’s people are invited to see a new dawn as darkness shall disappear and kings (of the nations) shall walk in the aforementioned light and glory (Isa 60: 2–3, 19–20; also 62: 1–2). Salvation is promised to them by the Lord (Isa 60: 16,18; 61: 10; 62: 11). Among many other blessings of that era of redemption, the Greek translation in 60: 16 speaks of God’s people eating the wealth of kings (πλοῦτον βασιλέων φάγεσαι for ‫)ושד מלכים‬. A few chapters before this, one notes that, in LXX-Isa 32: 14–18, a passage also foreseeing a time of salvation, the translator has already introduced the theme of God’s people resting with wealth (ἀναπαύσονται μετὰ πλούτου for ‫)ובמנוחת שאננות‬, thus stressing that Zion/Jerusalem shall be a “wealthy city” (see “πόλις πλουσία” in 33: 20; cf. 32: 13,9) where the MT sees it as “a quiet habitation” (‫)נוה שאנן‬. This shall be so as the Lord will bring the wealth of nations to it (see “οἴσω σοι χρυσίον … ἀργύριον … χαλκόν” in 60: 17). God’s people will be amazed “because the wealth of the sea and of nations and of peoples shall change over [μεταβαλεῖ] to them” (60: 5–6). According to our translator, the status of Zion/Jerusalem will be elevated as he speaks (in 60: 21) of “Zion’s people […] as the guardians of God’s vineyard” (ὁ λαός σου … φυλάσσων τὸ φύτευμα ἔργα χειρῶν αὐτοῦ) instead of the MT’s reading that sees them as “the product of divine viticulture”516 (see “‫שה ידי להתפאר‬ ׂ ‫[ מע‬Qere ‫)”לעולם יירשו ארץ נצר מטעו ]מטעי‬. The picture of God’s people coming from darkness to light used in both LXX-Isa 60 and 62 (mentioned above) to portray the coming redemption is similar to that found in LXX-Isa 9: 1–6 (discussed above) where light will shine on the people walking in darkness. This will happen when an awaited child is born (v. 6). Similarly, the Lord’s action (of gathering his people) 515 LXX-Isa 61: 1–3 displays, as Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 174 n. 14, correctly says (with reference to the Hebrew text of this passage), “a convenient syntactic break in the middle of verse 3 which seems to join 3b at least to verse 4”. Therefore, our focus shall be on the first syntactic unit (i. e. 1–3a),which, in both the Hebrew and Greek texts, deals with “the self-presentation of the speaker”. 516 Baer, When We All Go Home, 224 (emphasis original).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

195

mentioned at the end of LXX-Isa 60, which precedes the pericope under discussion (see “συνάξω αὐτούς” for “‫ ”אחישנה‬in v. 22; also v. 4; cf. 56: 8), reflects a thought already present in LXX-Isa 11: 11–16. It should be remembered that this latter passage focuses not on a return from exile in Assyria (as read in the MT), but on a longing for a return (hence deliverance) of the Jewish community of the Alexandrian Diaspora (ἔσται δίοδος τῷ καταλειφθέντι μου λαῷ ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ) to Zion/Jerusalem (v. 16). There it is also read that the Lord shall gather (συνάξει) his dispersed people (v. 12; cf. LXX-Isa 65: 9). According to LXX-Isa 60: 22, the Lord’s action of gathering them will take place in due time (ἐγὼ κύριος κατὰ καιρὸν συνάξω αὐτούς). The translation presents this return to Zion/Jerusalem as a new Exodus (see “ἔσται τῷ Ισραηλ ὡς ἡ ἡμέρα ὅτε ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου” in 11: 16). In LXX-Isa 59: 20, any reader in the Jewish community of Alexandria is also given hope when reading that “the one who redeems will come for Zion’s sake” (ἥξει ἕνεκεν Σιων ὁ ῥυόμενος).517 Still in this verse, this salvific figure will cleanse Zion/Jacob from impiety/ungodliness (ἀσεβείας)518 and will call it a holy people (see “καλέσει αὐτὸν [i. e. Σιών] λαὸν ἅγιον” in LXXIsa 62: 11–12; cf. Ps. Sol. 17: 21–35 where it is said that the expected son of David, who is to be raised up (v. 21), will “purify Jerusalem, making it holy as of old” (v. 30)). Besides the blessing of enjoying the wealth of kings (mentioned above), a privilege reserved to God’s people in the time of redemption, the end of chapter 60 also foretells a time when the days of mourning will come to an end (see “ἀναπληρωθήσονται αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ πένθους σου” v. 20). As “they shall inherit the land a second time” (οὕτως ἐκ δευτέρας κληρονομήσουσιν τὴν γῆν), they are also promised an “everlasting joy [that] shall be upon their head” (εὐφροσύνη αἰώνιος ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς αὐτῶν) (LXX-Isa 61: 7). It is worth noting that all this will happen via the mission of the important individual figure depicted in Isa 61: 1–3a.

517 For an analysis of this verse with reference to the translator’s use of ὁ ῥυόμενος, see for instance, Le Moigne, “‘C’est moi qui établis la lumière et fis l’obscurité, qui fais la paix et fonde les malheurs’: théologie du choix des thèmes verbaux des participes (présent vs aorite) se rapportant à Dieu, dans la Septnate d’Ésaïe”, in van der Kooij/ van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah, 71–106, on pp. 98–105. 518 In his analysis of this verse (i. e. LXX-Isa 59: 20), Baer, When We All Go Home, 206 n. 18, has correctly observed that the use of ἀσεβεία here is likely to “indicate that the redeemer acts ‘on Zion’s behalf’ by removing a particularly Gentile kind of irreligion” in the midst of Jacob, thus making “Zion/Jacob the virtuous benefactor of the Lord’s military” action (p. 227). According to him, this seems to be a nationalistic subversion of the MT’s reading that speaks of this figure as coming to Zion, to those in Jacob who turn from transgression (p. 206 n. 18). The LXX’s reading of this passage, he adds, gives “a glimpse of Diaspora hope not only of return to Zion, but also of the Warrior/Redeemer’s cleansing of the mother city itself, perhaps from foreign occupation or influence” (p. 227). Seeligmann, The Septuagint of Isaiah, 282, sees the term ἀσεβείας (via its cognate ἀσεβής) as connected to the oppressors (of God’s people) who shall be destroyed in the Last Judgment.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

196

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

In sum, the passage before us is immediately surrounded by oracles (Isa 60 and 62) that forecast a coming time of the Lord’s action of gathering his scattered people to return to Zion. This theme is also found in various passages belonging to the LXX-Isaiah, thus broadening the context of our pericope. Whilst the Lord is seen as taking responsibility for both the scene of the wealth of nations described as making their way to Zion (LXX-Isa 60; cf. LXX-Isa 61: 8 with reference to the reward given to his people), LXX-Isa 59: 20 seems already to anticipate the coming of a “redeemer” (ὁ ῥυόμενος; cf. also “ὁ σωτὴρ” in LXX-Isa 62: 11–12) as an important divine individual, an instrumental figure for Zion’s sake (cf. LXX-Isa 63: 5).519 So far, if this reading is accepted, then LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a should be considered as already revealing in more concrete terms the mission of the aforementioned and predicted individual salvific figure. This leads us to attempt a close inspection of this pericope in comparison with its Hebrew parent text. 9.2 Comparative Analysis of the MT and LXX Versions MT

LXX

‫רוח אדני יהוה עלי יען משח יהוה‬ ‫שר ענוים שלחני לחבש‬ ׂ ‫אתי לב‬ ‫לנשברי־לב לקרא לשבוים דרור‬ ‫ולאסורים פקח־קוח‬

1

1 Πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ, οὗ εἵνεκεν

‫לקרא שנת־רצון ליהוה ויום נקם‬ ‫לאלהינו לנחם כל־אבלים‬

2

2 καλέσαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτὸν καὶ ἡμέραν ἀνταποδόσεως, παρακαλέσαι πάντας τοὺς πενθοῦντας,

‫שום לאבליציון לתת להם פאר‬ ׂ ‫ל‬ ‫שון תחת אבל‬ ׂ ‫ש‬ ׂ ‫תחת אפר שמן‬ ‫מעטה תהלה תחת רוח כהה‬

3a

3a δοθῆναι τοῖς πενθοῦσιν Σιων δόξαν ἀντὶ σποδοῦ, ἄλειμμα εὐφροσύηνς ἀντὶ πένθους, καταστολὴν δόξης ἀντὶ πνεύματος ἀκηδίας.

ἔχρισέ με εὐαγγελίσααθαι πτωχοῖς ἀπέσταλκέν με, ἰάσααθαι τοὺς συντετριμμένους τῇ καρδίᾳ, κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν.

519 For the immediate (and/or the broader) context of LXX-Isa 59: 20, ὁ ῥυόμενος is likely to refer to “the Lord’s arm” (see “ἠμύνατο αὐτοὺς τῷ βραχίονι αὐτοῦ”) as a saving instrument used by the Lord upon his observation of having nobody to help his people (v. 16; see also “ἐρρύσατο αὐτοὺς ὁ βραχίων μου” in LXX-Isa 63: 1–5, discussed above in our section on LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12 with reference to the translator’s use of ὁ βραχίων κυρίου in 53: 2). As Le Moigne correctly observes, this figure seems to be the answer to the absence of a liberator referred to at the beginning of the LXX-Isa where one reads “οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ῥυόμενος αὐτοὺς” (LXX-Isa 5: 29); see Le Moigne, “‘C’est moi qui établis la lumière et fis l’obscurité, qui fais la paix et fonde les malheurs’”, 98–99.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

197

MT

LXX

1 The spirit of the Lord God [is] upon me, because the Lord has anointed me; to bring good news to the poor, he has sent me, to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and (the) opening “of the eyes” to (them that are) bound,

1 The spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he has anointed me; to bring good news to the poor, he has sent me, to heal the broken in the heart, to proclaim a release to/for (the) captives and a recovery of sight to the blind,

2 to proclaim an acceptable year of [for] the Lord and a day of vengeance of [for] our God, to comfort all who mourn,

2 to call an acceptable year of the Lord and a day of recompense, to comfort all who mourn,

3 to put unto the mourners [of] Zion, to give [to] them a turban instead of ashes, oil of rejoicing instead of mourning, a mantle of song of praise instead of a fainting spirit.

3 [so that] to the mourners of [for] Zion be given glory instead of ashes, oil of joy instead of mourning, a garment of glory instead of a spirit of apathy.

A quick reading of the above texts gives an impression that there are only a few minor differences.520 However, a thorough analysis of various compositional elements (such as the syntax relation, the structure, the grammar, the choice of words, to name but a few), viewed within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, seems to indicate that those discrepancies are significant. In v. 1, besides his omission of ‫( יהוה‬as the subject of the verb ‫ משח‬that is translated as ἔχρισέν), the Isaiah translator renders the particle ‫ יען‬by οὗ εἵνεκεν instead of an expected διὰ (7: 5 for ‫ )יען כי‬or ὅτι (30: 12; 65: 12; 65: 4). While this does not seem to alter the meaning of this verse, it is worth noting his use of the infinitive ἰάσασθαι (to heal) for ‫( חבש‬to bind up) as well as καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν (and a recovery of sight to the blind) for ‫( ולאסורים פקח־קוח‬and an opening “of eyesight” to them that are bound).521 Even if the rendition of ἀνάβλεψιν (cf. also Aquila) might be explained as a possible reading of a single word ‫( פקחקוח‬cf. 1QIsaa and 1QIsab) understood in an intensive sense of eye-opening, the Isaiah translator’s interpretative intention here should not be denied. This becomes 520 As others have claimed, see e. g. D. W. Pao/E. J. Schnabel, “Luke”, in Baele/Carson (ed.), Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 251–414, who claim that the LXX-Isa 61: 1–2 “accurately reflects the sense of the MT except for the infinitive clause[s]” (p. 288); Evans, “From Gospel to Gospel”, 664. 521 All ancient translations (except the Tg which has ‫“ אתגל לניהור‬come out to the light”) understood the term ‫ פקח־קוח‬as a noun form; e. g. Vulg has apertionem “opening”; Aquila rendered it as διαβλεψιν, and Symmachus chose απολυσιν and διανοιξιν.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

198

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

obvious from his use of the noun τυφλός (for the verb ‫)אסר‬. For ‫( אסר‬or a form deriving from it) is mostly rendered in the LXX-Isaiah by δεσμός or its cognates, whether a verb or a noun (see e. g. 22: 3; 24: 22; 28: 22; 42: 7; 52: 2). Phrased differently, assuming that our translator started his translation at the beginning of the Book of Isaiah, an expected translation for ‫ אסר‬in 61: 1 then would be a plural of δεσμός or perhaps a participle of its cognate, such as δέω (cf. e. g. “καὶ τοῖς δεδεμένοῖς” in Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion). At this point, it can be said that, in using not only καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν (for ‫)ולאסורים פקח־קוח‬, but also ἰάσασθαι (for ‫)חבש‬, our translator, as Sanders has correctly pointed out, “understood quite well what he was doing.”522 We shall come back to this later when seeking to detect traces of the translator’s use of intertextuality. Before leaving behind v. 1, it is also worth observing the translator’s use of ἄφεσις (for ‫)דרור‬. Even if this seems to be its accurate rendition (cf. LXX-Jer 41(34): 8,15,17; Ezek 46: 17), it is important to note that it is likely here to reflect a deliberate exegetical move. For a glance at Muraoka’s Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint would reveal that the meaning conveyed by our translator in using ἄφεσις is broadened to include not only a release from captivity/bondage, but also from sin (cf. the Vulgate’s use of indulgentia here in 61: 1) as well as debt.523 This is obvious if one takes into account not only the immediate context of the pericope under scrutiny, but also the other occurrence of ἄφεσις in LXX-Isa 58: 6 [‫ ]חפשי‬as well as its cognates ἀφίημι (see e. g. Isa 22: 4,14; 32: 14; 33: 24; 55: 7). We should also record that ἄφεσις, which is commonly used in LXX-Lev 25 for ‫( יובל‬vv. 11–13, 28,30–31,33, 40, 50, 52, 54; cf. Lev 27: 17–18,21,23–24; Num 36: 4), is only seen as a rendition of ‫ דרור‬in LXX-Lev 25: 10, thus revealing a linkage with LXX-Isa 61: 1. However, while this connection is also observable between these two texts in their Hebrew forms, it should not be forgotten that, by the time of the Isaiah translation into Greek, ἄφεσις was already found in the sense of remission.524 This lends support to the view that the translator’s use of ἄφεσις (in 61: 1) echoes his practice of intertextuality. In other words, the aforementioned link between Isa 61: 1 and Lev 25: 10 should be viewed in each textual form in its own right. While translating v. 2, the Isaiah translator omits the lamed in ‫( ליהוה‬for/ of the Lord) and that of the prepositional phrase ‫“ לאלהינו‬for/of our God”,

522 Sanders, “From Isaiah 61 to Luke 4”, 83. Unfortunately, Sanders does not attempt to find out any purposeful link between Isa 61: 1 and other passages within the LXX-Isaiah established by the translator in the way in which he read his Vorlage and produced his text. 523 A similar observation was made by Evans, “From Gospel to Gospel”, 664. 524 See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Leviticus (SCS 44; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 406; also P. Harlé/D. Pralon, La Bible d’Alexandrie: Le Lévitique (Paris: Cerf, 1988), 198 (note on Lev 25: 10). R. Bultmann, “ἄφεσις”, in G. Kittel (ed.), TDNT, vol 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 509–12, on p. 509, has found this sense in inscriptions and papyri dated to the 3rd century B. C. E.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

199

thus transforming, as Baer has correctly observed, “the parallel occurrences of ‫ ליהוה‬and ‫ לאלהינו‬into a single impersonal expression, κυρίου.”525 It is not easy to ascertain any possible reason which might have been behind the translator’s way of dealing with his text here. Baer, for instance, speaks of it as an indication of “a fairly pronounced tendency [of the Isaiah translator] to depersonalize such references to God.”526 While this may be true, we are more inclined to embrace Sanders’ view (after noting that, in this verse 2, the Vulgate includes Deo nostro where LXX leaves out ‫ )לאלהינו‬that the translator’s manoeuvre here may be explained by studying, in particular, matters related to midrash rather than those of textual criticism.527 For instance, according to the Qumran texts, the “day of vengeance for our God” (mentioned in Isa 61: 2 MT) will be executed by Melchizedek (11Q Melch 2: 13). This implies a removal of a potential misunderstanding (with reference to the MT’s reading) of God himself as the executor of “a day of vengeance for him.” It seems also to reveal a significant clue that the passage was already read as pointing to a messianic figure who will carry out God’s judgment. Strikingly, an analysis of the Isaiah translator’s use of ἀνταποδόσεως (qualifying ἡμέραν in 61: 2) seems to point to a similar observation. To begin with, it is important to say that the phrase “ἡμέραν ἀνταποδόσεως” (61: 2) is likely to reflect LXX-Isa 63: 4 where it also occurs. In this latter text, it is also interesting to note the removal of a reference to God, i. e. God’s heart (‫)בלבי‬, and its replacement by ἐπῆλθεν αὐτοῖς, thus clarifying what is implicit in the MT, i. e. that “a day of recompense” (ἀνταποδόσεως) will be executed by a figure other than God himself. This day shall be directed against the nations.528 It is also worth recording that it is only in these two passages (i. e. LXX-Isa 61: 2 and 63: 4) that ἀνταποδόσεως529 is used for ‫נקם‬.530 Without going into too much detail, it can be said that in light of both the aforementioned interpretative reading of Isa 61: 2 in 11Q Melch 2: 13 and the point clearly made in Isa 63: 4 (read in a context of God’s retributive justice), the translator’s manoeuvre in LXX-Isa 61: 2 with reference to his omission of ‫ לאלהינו‬can be best explained as driven by both a contextual move and an exegetical tradition. While the term ἀνταπόδοσις (or its verbal cognate ἀνταποδίδωμι) more likely carries a negative connotation, its use in a positive sense should not be left out. However, it must be borne in mind that only the context can be a determining factor for any decision that can be 525 Baer, When We All Go Home, 65 n. 46. 526 Ibid. 527 Sanders, “From Isaiah 61 to Luke 4”, 83. 528 An observation also made by Baer, When We All Go Home, 117. 529 A glance in Hatch and Redpath’s Concordance shows that, in LXX-Isa, the noun ἀνταπόδοσις occurs five times: 34: 8 (‫ ;)שלום‬59: 18 (‫ ;)גמולה‬61: 2 and 63: 4 (‫ ;)נקם‬66: 6 (‫ )גמול‬and that its cognate verb ἀνταποδίδωμι is used for terms deriving from ‫( בוא‬35: 4; 66: 4); ‫שלם‬ (65: 6; 66: 6); ‫( גמל‬59: 18;63: 7). 530 A term which is also translated in LXX-Isa as δίκαιος (47: 3), ἐκδίκησις (59: 17), and κρίσις (34: 8; 35: 4).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

200

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

made here. In the case of the passage before us (i. e. LXX-Isa 61: 2), it is more probable that both sides (i. e. retribution against the nations and redemption for God’s people) are in view, especially when reading it via a parallelism contained in it between “ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτὸν” and “ἡμέραν ἀνταποδόσεως” (cf. also the one between “ἡμέρα […] ἀνταποδόσεως ἐπῆλθεν αὐτοῖς” and “ἐνιαυτὸς λυτρώσεως πάρεστιν” in 63: 4). In his comparative reading of the Hebrew and Greek texts of LXX-Isa 61: 3a, Ottley notes: (a) the translator’s use of the infinitive passive δοθῆναι (to be given) for the active ‫( לשום‬to appoint), a manoeuvre which made him (i. e. the Isaiah translator) omit ‫ לתת‬which repeats ‫שום‬ ׂ ‫ ל‬in an expanded sense; and (b) the rendition of δόξαν (glory) for ‫( פאר‬garland).531 Even if these changes appear to be minor,532 it can be demonstrated that both the syntax and the meaning of the verse as it now stands in its Greek final form reveal the emphasized soteriological point made by the translator. With reference to the former alteration, i. e. the rendering of δοθῆναι τοῖς ׂ ‫ל‬, our translator makes that τοῖς πενθοῦσιν Σιων for ‫שום לאבלי ציון‬ πενθοῦσιν (those who mourn) refers to the recipients of the objects stated in the remaining part of the verse. While this thought is also present in the Hebrew text, one however needs to wait until the reading of the second verbal phrase (‫ )לתת להם‬to perceive it. The translator’s use of the favourite δόξα twice (for ‫ פאר‬and ‫ )תהלה‬within this first part of the verse is also of interest. It is only in this verse and Exodus 15: 11 that δόξα is used for the latter Hebrew word, i. e. ‫( תהלה‬which is translated literally as αἰνέσεις in LXX-Psa 77: 4; 105: 2), thus revealing to some extent an established intertextual link between LXX-Isa 61: 3 and Exod 15: 11. In this latter passage, δόξα appears in the plural (δόξαις) to denote, as Le Boulluec and Sandevoir correctly observe, “des oeuvres de Dieu qui font sa gloire.”533 By taking into account the immediate context of this passage, God’s glory here is manifested in his redemptive acts. A similar thought is also echoed in the immediate context of LXX-Isa 61 which reveals that the glory of the Lord will be displayed as Zion/Jerusalem will be redeemed (60: 1,19,21; 62: 2). Our translator’s concern for the glory of Zion is also noticeable in his use of δόξα for ‫פאר‬. While δόξα is commonly used to translate this Hebrew noun or its cognate (whether verbal or noun form) in the LXX-Isaiah (e. g. 3: 18, 20: 5; 28: 1,4,5; 46: 13; 60: 19, 21; except in 61: 10 where ‫ פאר‬is translated as μίτραν), it echoes Brockington’s observation that the translator made use of δόξα for “words which were used to describe splendor, beauty and majesty.”534 According to Brockington, the translator’s interest in the

531 Ottley, The Book of Isaiah, 2.369. 532 An observation which perhaps led Ottley to not even provide any plausible reason that might have been behind these alterations. 533 A. Le Boulluec/P. Sandevoir, La Bible d’Alexandrie: L’Exode (Paris: Cerf, 2004), 174. 534 L. H. Brockington, “The Greek Translator of Isaiah and his Interest in ΔΟΞΑ”, VT 1 (1951) 23–32, on p. 31.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

201

redemption of Zion is displayed in his use of the noun δόξα or the verb δοξάζω (as much as in σωτήρια and σωτήριον).535 This seems to be likely the case in the passage before us (i. e. LXX-Isa 61: 3) where Zion is referred to. The translator’s thought (in stressing the glorious status in store for Zion) displayed here is actually carried from various preceding chapters within the LXX-Isaiah that also speak of the awaited glory of Zion/Jerusalem (e. g. 44: 23; 60: 19–21). In LXX-Isa 44: 23, for instance, it is striking to note a ׂ ‫( כי־גאל יהוה יעקב ובי‬for Yahweh has deliberate move from ‫שראל יתפאר‬ redeemed Jacob, and shall be glorified in Israel) to ὅτι ἐλυτρώσατο ὁ θεὸς τὸν Ιακωβ καὶ Ισραηλ δοξασθήσεται (for God has redeemed Jacob and Israel will be glorified), thus shifting from God as self-beneficiary to Zion as the recipient of glory. A similar focus on Zion is also given in 60: 19–21 (as discussed above) where, as Olley correctly says, “glory will eventuate” (cf. 11: 10).536 Both the context (discussed above) and the foregoing comparative analysis of the passage under inspection have provided a sort of monitor that now allows us to screen in more concrete terms both the mission as well as the identity of the figure depicted in the aforementioned passage. That is to say, we turn now to detect any possible ‘messianic language’ contained within the pericope and the plausible links that might have been established by the way in which our translator read his Vorlage and produced his text. 9.3 Intertextual Analysis of the ‘Messianic Language’ Beginning with what we observed as the first interpretative device of our translator in his production of the pericope under inspection, it can be pointed out here that his mention of the proclamation of a “recovery of sight to the blind” (τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν) as part of the mission of the figure described in this text clearly connects LXX-Isa 61: 1 with LXX-Isa 29: 18–19 and 35: 5–6. In these two latter texts, the “recovery of sight to the blind” (see “ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν βλέψονται” in 29: 18 and “ἀνοιχθήσονται ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν” in 35: 5) is seen as one of the blessings of the messianic time, even if there is no mention of a figure who is properly referred to as a messiah. It is in 42: 7 that one first encounters an individual figure (the Lord’s Servant) with a task to restore sight to the blind. In this way, LXX-Isa 61: 1 notably reflects 42: 7. If read in light of the thought displayed in those texts (i. e. LXX-Isa 29: 18–19; 35: 5–6; 42: 7), then the pericope before us should be seen as bearing a significant messianic connotation within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole.

535 Ibid., 30–32. 536 Olley, ‘Righteousness’, 82.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

202

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

We read that our figure in LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a refers to himself as having a healing mission to the broken-hearted (ἰάσασθαι τοὺς συντετριμμένους τῇ καρδίᾳ). It is worth noting that the translator’s use of ἰάσασθαι (to heal) for ‫( חבש‬to bind up) as “a terminus technicus for the restoring and well-being actions of God in the LXX-Isaiah”537 brings LXX-Isa 61: 1 into a significant intertextual semantic rapport with 53: 5 (where ἰάθημεν is used for ‫ )רפא‬in a way distinct from the MT. In other words, there seems to be a purposeful link established between the anointed one in LXX-Isa 61: 1 and “the Lord’s Servant” in LXX-Isa 53: 5 (discussed above). For these two texts are the only ones (within the LXX-Isaiah) with a figure other than the Lord as the one who heals (cp. e. g. 6: 10; 7: 4; 19: 22; 30: 26; 57: 18–19). In the fragment of 4Q521 (called Messianic Apocalypse and written in the first quarter of the first century B. C. E.), one can read that the expected figure described in this Qumran scroll as an “anointed one” (line 10) will have (like in LXX-Isa 61: 1) a mission to “heal the badly wounded” (line 12), thus revealing to some extent that Isa 61: 1 was already interpreted messianically,538 probably even before the first century B. C. E. The translator describes the figure in 61: 1–3a as one “to call […] a day of recompense” (καλέσαι … ἡμέραν ἀνταποδόσεως). Besides LXX-Isa 63: 4, which was identified as having a significant link with LXX-Isa 61: 2 with reference to the use of “ἡμέραν ἀνταποδόσεως” (discussed above), it is important to note with Horbury that there are a few texts outside the LXXIsaiah with a language that witnesses to a coming of a messianic kingly figure who will avenge the Israelites (e. g. 11Q Melch 2: 13 (discussed above); 1 Enoch 48: 7; cf. Ps.Sol. 17: 23–27; 2 Esd 12: 32–33, 13: 37–38; 2 Baruch 72: 2–6; 11).539 If a reading of all these texts were to be done, it would reveal some messianic characteristics, including the theme of “calling out a day of recompense” pertinent to LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a. In that “day of recompense” (v. 3), not only oil of joy (ἄλειμμα εὐφροσύνης; cf. 66: 10), but also glory (δόξα) will be given to the “mourners of [for] Zion” (τοῖς πενθοῦσιν Σιων). In addition to our observation concerning the soteriological point made by the translator through his use of δόξα (in LXX-Isa 61: 3) that stresses another figure’s task of giving a glorious status to Zion/Jerusalem in the time of her redemption (discussed above), it is worth saying that, in a prayer recorded in the Psalms of Solomon (a text about a century younger than the LXX-Isaiah), the mission of glorifying Zion/Jerusalem (17: 30–35) was expected to be performed by a royal Messiah

537 “In der Jesaja-Septuaginta wird ἰάομαι (als Übersetzung von ‫ רפא‬und ‫ )חבש‬beinahe zum terminus technicus für das wiederherstellende Handeln Gottes zum Heil (19,22; 30,26; 61,1 u. ö.); dies schließt auch die Umkehr der Verstockten (6,10) oder von Fremdvölkern (19,22) mit ein,” says Rösel, “Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel”, 138. 538 G. Stanton, “Messianic and Christology: Mark, Matthew, Luke and Acts”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance, 78–96, on p. 81. 539 Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians, 58–59.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

203

of the house of David (17: 21). This messianic figure will gather the holy people, lead it back from the dispersion, and assign to Zion/Jerusalem the central place in the world. If LXX-Isa 61: 3 were to be read in light of (a) this messianic expectation (as presented in Psalms of Solomon) that seems to witness to a sort of an ongoing tradition, and (b) the other related texts (within the LXX-Isaiah) that speak of Zion/Jerusalem as the beneficiary of glory (discussed above), then the figure depicted in our text (i. e. LXX-Isa 61: 1–3) should be understood as bearing Davidic messianic connotations. Not only will he give glory and joy (cf. LXX-Isa 9: 3) to the “mourners of [for] Zion”540 (τοῖς πενθοῦσιν Σιων), but they will also be comforted (παρακαλέω). A survey of the use of παρακαλέω in the LXX-Isaiah541 reveals that the task of comforting Zion/Jerusalem is to be carried out by: (a) an unspecified group among God’s people (10: 32); (b) the Lord himself (41: 27; 51: 3,12; 66: 12–13); (c) priests (40: 1–2); (d) the Lord’s arm as a divine instrument (40: 11); (e) the Lord [or God] through the Servant (49: 10,13), and (f) a figure sent by the Spirit of the Lord (61: 1–3). If one reads the LXXIsaiah from the beginning, it should be noted that the figure described in 61: 1–3 comes after a fruitless search by the Lord to find one to comfort Zion/Jerusalem (51: 18–19; 54: 11; cf. 41: 28). This task led the Lord to promise his spirit (see “πνεῦμα γὰρ παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐξελεύσεται” in LXX-Isa 57: 16) as “a celestial being who goes out from God’s presence.”542 Given this tableau, there seems to be a significant relationship between LXX-Isa 61: 1–3 and those other texts that similarly point to a figure other than the Lord. In other words, those texts could provide some hints for another way of identifying the figure depicted in the text under scrutiny. For instance, if this text were to be read in light of LXX-Isa 40: 1–2 (mentioned above), then our figure would be regarded as a priest-messiah, perhaps with royal status as reflected in the Wisdom of Ben Sira (contemporary to the LXX-Isaiah) where the “mourners in Zion” are comforted by Hezekias as a descendant of David (Sir 48: 22–24). Besides all the above-mentioned elements (discussed thus far with a view to detecting any ‘messianic language’ contained in LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a), it is important at last to mention the expression (in v. 1) referring to an anointed one (ἔχρισέν με) in connection with the endowment of the “Spirit of the Lord” (πνεῦμα κυρίου). Without going into too much detail, it must be said that, while ‫ משח‬relates to a figure with a messianic role (cf. ‫ משיח‬in 45: 1)543, 540 This group of people among the Jewish community, according to Alexander, kept “alive messianic longings in the Talmudic era”; see P. S. Alexander, “The Rabbis and Messianism”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance, 227–43, on p. 231. 541 In which παρακαλέω occurs 28 times, translating twelve different Hebrew verbs (10: 32, 13: 2; 21: 2; 22: 4; 33: 37; 35: 4; 38: 16; 40: 1–2, 11; 41: 27; 49: 10;13; 51: 3,12,18,19; 54: 11; 57: 5,18; 61: 2; 66: 12,13). 542 Baer, When We All Go Home, 103. 543 For a thorough analysis of this text (Isa 45: 1 MT), see Heskett, Messianism within the Scrolls of Isaiah, 15–37.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

204

Chapter 3: Messianic Intertextuality in the LXX-Isaiah

its Greek counterpart (ἔχρισέν) needs to be understood in light of the Isaiah translator’s reading and production of 61: 1 and 45: 1 (where τῷ χριστῷ μου is used for ‫)למשיחו‬.544 According to Le Moigne, who has a helpful analysis of verses that speak of Cyrus in the LXX-Isaiah, the role of Cyrus as “the Lord’s Messiah” (45: 1 MT), who is called by his name and given a title (45: 4 MT), “est complètement effacé dans la LXX.”545 To begin with, the translator’s interpretative device concerning Cyrus’ role is also present in 44: 28. In this verse, the MT’s reading of Cyrus as the shepherd of the Lord (‫ )רעי‬is replaced in the Greek text by “the Lord telling him [i. e. Cyrus] to think” (ὁ λέγων Κύρῳ φρονεῖν546). In this connection, in 45: 1, Cyrus is not a figure to whom the Lord speaks as “his [i. e. the Lord] anointed” (‫)למשיחֹו‬, but as one whose name is “my anointed” (τῷ χριστῷ μου Κύρῳ). Κύρῳ here is syntactically best read as a dative of apposition or explication of τῷ χριστῷ μου. Further, according to the translator, it is the Lord who created Cyrus (see “ἐγώ εἰμι κύριος ὁ κτίσας σε” in 45: 8), thus suggesting an understanding that, as Le Moigne correctly says, “Dieu n’a pas utilisé un étranger pour mener à bien son dessein: il l’a créé à cette fin. Il a créé un homme en vue du salut d’Israël.”547 Furthermore, in LXX-Isa 48: 14, God’s love for Cyrus as read in the MT (‫ )יהוה אהבו‬is transferred to Israel (ἀγαπῶν σε548), and this becomes the reason for his redemptive action. In short, if this reconstruction of the translator’s understanding of Cyrus is accepted, then we may suggest that Cyrus was not regarded by him as a messianic figure549 for the new Exodus as recorded in the LXX-Isaiah. Given this view, we are now left with LXX-Isa 61: 1 as the only text within the LXX-Isaiah with a clear account of an unspecified figure as the anointed of the Lord (ἔχρισέν με) for the redemption of Israel. He shares similar characteristics with the aforementioned messianic figure from the house of David (LXX-Isa 11: 2) and the Lord’s Servant (LXX-Isa 42: 1) with reference to the endowment with the Spirit of the Lord (as discussed above in each text). In addition to the other aspects of his mission (discussed above), the figure depicted in LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a also speaks of himself as being sent (ἀπέσταλκέν) to bring good

544 There are only three occurrences of the verb χρίω (and its cognate noun form χριστός) within the LXX-Isaiah (25: 6–7; 45: 1; 61: 1). 545 Le Moigne, “‘C’est moi qui établis la lumière et fis l’obscurité, qui fais la paix et fonde les malheurs’”, 76. 546 Even if the use of φρονεῖν (for ‫ ) רעי‬in Isa 44: 28 seems to reflect the verbal Aramaic reading ‫רעא‬/‫“( רעה‬to think”); see A. Léonas, L’Aube des traducteurs. De l’hébreu au grec: traducteurs et lecteurs de la Bible des Septante (IIIe S. av. J.-C.-IVe S. apr. J.-C) (Paris: Cerf, 2007), 87. 547 Le Moigne, “‘C’est moi qui établis la lumière et fis l’obscurité, qui fais la paix et fonde les malheurs’”, 84. 548 Le Moigne correctly reads that the σε refers to Israel, see ibid.; 76. 549 For a different opinion, see Munnich, “Le messianisme”, 342. His argument for placing a pause after κύριος ὁ θεὸς in interpreting LXX-Isa 45: 1 fails to take into account the grammatical and syntactical relationships found within, as we have done in the text.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Messianism in LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a

205

news to the poor (πτωχοῖς) who are seen as recipients of the messianic promises (cf. LXX-Isa 25: 1–4).550 9.4 Summary After all that has been discovered while analyzing LXX-Isaiah 61: 1–3a, it is beyond reasonable doubt that this text contains significant messianic elements. These include its various connections (both with regard to its context and in comparison with its Hebrew parent text) with a range of salvation oracles (within the LXX-Isaiah) that anticipate a coming of a “redeemer” for the restoration of Israel. An important point that should be highlighted is that some of these links are best seen in line with the translator’s use of intertextuality. Other consulted texts outside the LXX-Isaiah (witnessing to an existing tradition of a messianic interpretation of Isa 61: 1–3) appeared to strengthen the case. It was suggested that if our text was read in conjunction with some of the related passages to which it is linked, then the figure depicted in it would display some characteristics that make it a priest-messiah with royal status. Additionally, as the text stands in its Greek form, some of the figure’s features are comparable to the figures described in LXX-Isa 9: 1–6; 11: 1–10; 42: 1–7; 52: 13–53: 12 (all discussed above). However, a major difference between them and it is that the way our translator read his Vorlage and produced his text makes the protagonist of Isa 61: 1–3a the only individual messianic figure within the LXX-Isaiah with the “anointing” upon him. This description, read against the translator’s way of ignoring king Cyrus (the “Lord’s anointed” according to the MT) as a messianic figure, strongly suggests that the figure depicted in LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a was understood (by any reader among the Jews living in the Diaspora during the Hellenistic period) as a Jewish messiah (cf. LXX-Isa 19: 16–25 discussed above).

550 Coste, “Le texte Grec d’Isaïe xxv, 1–5”, 52, 62.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

This study looked at the theme of messianism within the entire corpus of the LXX-Isaiah, following the intertextual hermeneutic employed by the translator as a mode of reading this important Jewish theological text. It should be pointed out at once that the focus on this text as a whole made this study different from all other previous works (noted in ch. 1) done on this topic of messianism in the LXX-Isaiah. While they all singled out a particular section (being influenced most likely by the modern artificial division of Isaiah), it was argued that it is more legitimate to examine this subject in the LXXIsaiah as a whole. For in the absence of any piece of evidence, to our knowledge so far, that the Isaiah translator knew something about or had at his disposal various distinct entities within the Book, it was suggested that the person responsible for the LXX-Isaiah should be viewed as an ancient Jewish translator with an assignment of translating the complete Scroll of Isaiah for the Hellenistic-Jewish community in Alexandria to which he himself belonged. As shall be mentioned later, the Isaiah translator dealt with this Scroll as a sacred piece of work in which the undeniable historical perspectival diversities, which are observed in different parts of it, blur in view of the unity of the various basic religious themes contained in it. Given the distinctive focus above, the study then stood on a solid ground for arguing that its aim was to contribute to a better and reliable understanding of the messianic thought displayed in this version of Isaiah and to further the debate on whether a gradual emergence of messianic hopes is to be discerned in the LXX, on the one hand, and in the Hellenistic period on the other. Before looking at the messianic features exhibited by the way the translator read his source text and produced the texts that underwent inspection, the study concentrated first (in ch. 2) on the latter aspect of the scholarly debate noted above. After re-examining the basic arguments pertinent to the widely held view that the messianic hopes were less prominent among the Hellenistic-Jewish community in the Diaspora in comparison to their coreligionists in Palestine, we challenged this view. We discovered that it displays a false dichotomy. Consequently, it was argued that scholars should shift their attention from an unhelpful view that points to one Jewish community, over against the other, that witnessed to the rise of messianic hopes in order to speak in terms of what kinds of messianic expectations each community exhibited under their specific living conditions and religious needs. A point to be noted in this connection is that we found pieces of evidence

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

208

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

witnessing to various uncomfortable feelings held by the Jewish community in Alexandria vis-à-vis the hostile treatment it received from the non-Jews. This state of living was found as an indicator of their hopes for redemption or at least for return to their homeland. Taking up the challenge in exploring a few expressions of those particular hopes, the study (in ch. 3) focused on the LXX-Isaiah as a Jewish document authored in Alexandria, roughly in the mid-second century B. C. E. Using an intertextual analysis of nine selected messianic texts within the LXX-Isaiah as a whole, the study here aimed at exploring a reasonable meaning depicted in each text in its final form. Particular attention was given to identifying any purposeful messianic intertextual links in each text, while noting also those possible associations coming from the Hebrew level of the text. A range of possible linguistic factors (including issues pertinent to the translator’s awareness of the context of the text) was critically considered before referring any given case to the Isaiah translator’s reminiscences of other texts (from either within the LXX-Isaiah or elsewhere). The same care was applied in deciding whether the case was related to his ideological or theological outlook. In connection with the thought above, we observed, in a number of cases, that even the Greek terms which can be considered by a modern reader as apparent “misreadings” of the Hebrew text by the Isaiah translator (especially in relation to his categorization of the translator’s “freedom”) fitted perfectly well with the idea expressed in his particular text. One example of ָ ְּ‫“ ב‬in a dry place” by ἐν Σιων them worth recalling is the translation of ‫ציֹון‬ “in Zion” (in Isa 32: 2 also 25: 5). It was discovered that, instead of simply ִ (instead of ‫ציֺון‬ ָ ), the rushing to claim that the translator may have read ‫צּיון‬ rendition of Σιων (for ‫ )ציון‬in each pericope makes a perfect flow of thought (read in their literary context) pertinent to the translator’s theological inclination with regard to Zion as an important place in connection with the appearance of the expected messianic figure and the subsequent redemption of God’s people. Another case is the use of φρονεῖν (for ‫ ) רעי‬in Isa 44: 28. It was noted that while it is possible that the term echoes the Aramaic reading ‫רעא‬/‫“( רעה‬to think”), the translator’s use of φρονεῖν should be understood within the parameters of his rendition of other related texts that disclose his view concerning the characteristics and mission of Cyrus (e. g. Isa 44: 28; 45: 1; 48: 14). Given the outcome of the samples given above, it was observed that the Isaiah translator was not myopic. Rather, he knew what he was doing. In this respect, the various allegations against him (as well as other translators) pertinent to his/their (inadequate) knowledge of the Hebrew language1 should be reconsidered. Nothing should be ignored or neglected in approaching this

1

“On accuse trop légèrement les traducteurs d’erreur et d’ignorance”, correctly says Le Déaut, “La Septante, Un Targum?”, 195 n. 252.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

209

text (and implicitly any text of the LXX). Instead, a minimum effort at least is required to move beyond the exclusive use of philological considerations to find any purposeful reason that might be behind any given case. In this connection, it was also discovered that the Isaiah translator’s “freedom” needs to be understood as a result of various influences. Besides the aforementioned possible linguistic factors, intertextual and ideological or exegetical motifs, the translation exhibits a significant number of hints pointing to the translator’s (and generally the Jewish) religious life, his awareness of the Hellenistic culture, environment, literatures, historical events, political and socio-economic situation, etc., that surrounded the Jewish community in Alexandria. It is only by taking these into consideration that one will be able to see the dynamic relationship that existed between the text of the LXXIsaiah and the community which it served. To flesh this out, any student who approaches the text with this in view will not only be able to gain a reliable picture of some aspects of the history, expectation, the life and the belief of Judaism contained in this literature, but also to get a better understanding of how an ancient exegete dealt with biblical texts according to the problems of his time. With reference to the results of our attempt to detect whether there is any particular messianic imprint left on the LXX-Isaiah, it can be said that this text displays various facets of the messianic beliefs either absent or present in the Hebrew text. In cases related to the latter, the translation shows the tendency towards either transforming or making them more explicit. Recalling our definition of messianism noted above (see pp. 17, 49) and the questions (raised at p. 109) related to the profile of messiah in the LXX-Isaiah, we discovered that this translation displays a coherent picture of a royal messiah when each selected messianic text is read in conjunction with one (or more) related text(s) within the LXX-Isaiah. At the same time, the analysis of each of the nine texts revealed that the LXX-Isaiah presents this messianic figure as an insightful portrait of a collection of different elements. As far as the description of this latter image is concerned, we identified expectations of a few offices (royal as well as priestly, etc.) that either existed side by side or were expected to be integrated in the messianic figure depicted in each given text. Beginning with LXX-Isa 7: 10–17, it was discovered, pace de Sousa, that the Isaiah translator rendered his text in a manner allowing his readers among the Jewish community in Alexandria to see the messianic hopes displayed via his link between Εμμανουηλ (in vv. 14–16a) and the inauguration of a new era of redemption (vv. 17–25), which was promised after the short period of God’s wrath (v. 4). This understanding was possible by asking different questions (that our predecessor(s) seem to have overlooked), such as how the ancient reader understood the conjunctions καὶ and ἀλλά inserted by the translator in v. 16 and v.17, respectively. Our analysis of the text also has revealed that the expected messianic figure depicted in it is to be understood as an upright Davidic ruler. Through his various manoeuvres, the

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

210

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

Isaiah translator linked the text with other related messianic texts in the LXX-Isaiah that underwent scrutiny. While analyzing LXX-Isa 9: 1–7 (8: 23–9: 6), it was discovered that the translation reflects the socio-economic oppression under which the Jewish community in Alexandria lived during the Hellenistic period in the second century B. C. E. In the light of its living conditions, it was not a surprise to find some hints of the messianic expectations expressed by this community to which, as said above, the translator himself belonged. A major distinction with reference to the messianic figure presented in the Hebrew and Greek versions of this text is that, via his use of intertextuality (and other devices), the Isaiah translator composed his text in such a way that the awaited messianic figure is understood as having a geographically unlimited realm. He is also viewed as a king, priest, and angelic figure with a significant mission to restore the Davidic kingdom by establishing justice and righteousness, as well as bringing peace. In this respect, it was also noted that the text displays a significant number of interlinks with texts in and outside the LXX-Isaiah, illustrating the task of re-establishing Israel by removing every kind of their oppression as he breaks the power of their wicked rulers and brings peace to them. It should be emphasized that this picture with its various facets is lacking in the source text. In our analysis of LXX-Isa 11: 1–10, particular attention was given first to re-examining a recent claim that this text is dissociated from the end of Isa 10. The contrary was found to be the case. We discovered that the translation shows a shift of language from the MT’s reading, thus suggesting that each form of text should be studied in its own right as each form reveals a perfect link between the ending of Isa 10 and the beginning of Isa 11. In this respect, one of the images of the messianic figure displayed in the Greek text is that of both a king and warrior who will defeat kings and their military leaders who oppress God’s people. Besides this, the Isaiah translator describes him as a judge. We also discovered that other features of this messianic figure were in correlation with the description of the figures in other messianic texts within the LXX-Isaiah (e. g. 9: 1–7; 16: 5; 19: 20; 42: 1–4; 53: 13–52: 12; 61: 1). A few connections were also identified with other texts in the LXX with messianic nuances (e. g. Gen 49: 9–10; Num 24: 17; 2 Reigns 23: 2–4; Ps.Sol. 17). With reference to the links with the latter text (i. e. Ps.Sol. 17), it was argued that it is hard to imagine that the visible references (even in exact wording in some places), which we noted, emerged in a vacuum. Given this thought, we arrived at the conclusion that these close distinctive marks suggest that there was a kind of messianic expectation during the second century B. C. E. (which started even before this period, if we recall the aforementioned texts of the LXX-Pentateuch) to which Ps.Sol., for instance, referred to roughly a century later. Despite the difficulty in identifying with precision the specific historical events to which the Isaiah translator was referring in LXX-Isa 16: 1–5, an important messianic text to which scholars have paid less attention, we saw

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

211

that his renderings of terms (sometimes without any direct sanction from his source text) made the passage meaningful to the Jewish community in Alexandria. The messianic figure portrayed in this passage is understood to be a human, Jewish ruler as a saviour-judge for Israel, who shall triumph over the forces of destruction within and around God’s chosen people in Zion. This was clearly identified via its various links with other related texts (e. g. LXXIsa 19: 20; 32: 2; LXX-Num 24: 17). Besides this, it was also discovered that the immediate context of the pericope, which speaks of the coming of a time of renewal of the glories of Israel’s kingdom and its triumph over its sometime oppressors, provides its readers with a significant indicator for identifying the expected messianic figure described in the text. As far as our analysis of LXX-Isa 19: 16–25 is concerned, we observed that the deliverer depicted in it oscillates between him being seen as a messianic figure for either the Egyptians or the Jews. However, in using an intertextual analysis of the text, we were able to identify him as a saviour-judge for the Jewish community under oppression in Alexandria. Their expected redemption from the afflictions suffered under the Egyptians was identified to be a repetition of the Exodus event, not historically, but theologically. This view is in line with a recent claim made by van der Kooij that “[t]he hermeneutical mode […], which underlines LXX Isaiah, is based on the idea that a major event […] will take place twice in history, implying an analogy between past and present.”2 Besides this, we also noted that the translation of this passage displays (as with other messianic texts) important links of messianic elements with other texts in and outside the LXX-Isaiah. In LXX-Isa 31: 9b-32: 8, besides the translator’s aim of enhancing the coherence of this text, we also noted that he transformed the text to speak of the restoration of the hopes to his readers in the Jewish community in the Diaspora. Situated in a context with messianic expectations, this text not only provides some hints of the longing of this community to return to Zion, but it also shows solidarity between them and their co-religionists in their homeland. We noted that the text displays a shift from speaking of the task to be performed by the ruler of the new society (as read in its source text) to focusing on the character of the messianic figure. According to the Isaiah translator, this figure is not only a righteous king, but also “the man” (ὁ ἄνθρωπος), who shall first be hidden before being revealed in Zion, a thought that is lacking in his source text, but present in other books of the LXX. While analyzing LXX-Isa 42: 1–4, we encountered various problems. One of them is the scholarly opinion that speaks against any attempt of seeing a messianic interpretation of this text. An important point that is connected to this is the issue of the identity of the Servant described in this text. We dis-

2

Van der Kooij, “The Septuagint of Isaiah and the Mode of Reading Prophecies in Early Judaism”, 610.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

212

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

covered that, while a straightforward reading of the text points to a collective interpretation of this figure, an intertextual analysis of it reveals different results. That is to say, if read in conjunction with other related texts in their Greek form (e. g. Isa 9: 6–7; 16: 1–5; 19: 20), it is beyond reasonable doubt that this passage will speak of an individual figure. It is not in “his Torah”, but rather in “his name” (as a concept that expresses an important messianic belief that developed among the Jewish community in Alexandria) that the nations will hope. We discovered that with this shift from “his Torah” (as read in his source text) to “his name”, the translation of this text shows a conscious application of a certain tradition of a biblical exegetical method which was also used at Qumran. In LXX-Isa 52: 13–53: 12, we detected numerous important links with other passages within and outside the LXX-Isaiah. Some of them were seen as echoing the translator’s different theological presuppositions in comparison to his source text. As a result, the passage in its Greek form presents a different image of the Lord’s Servant. One of the striking facets of this portrait is that, via his manoeuvres, the translator presented to his readers a messianic figure seen as a bearer or an incarnation of light. We discovered that this feature is completely lacking in the translator’s source text. In addition to this, we also noted that the priestly task of this figure offered by the translator is more emphasised in his translation than it is in his source text. Last but not least, our close inspection of LXX-Isa 61: 1–3a has revealed that this text is both located within and connected with a significant number of oracles that foretell the Lord’s action of gathering his scattered people to return to Zion and the subsequent glorious status of this city. We argued that the figure depicted in this text takes up in concrete terms the mission and the identity of the expected “redeemer” (ὁ ῥυόμενος) predicted in 59: 20 as an agent for the fulfilment of the Lord’s action for Zion’s sake. We identified purposeful links with other texts in and outside the LXX-Isaiah that the translator established in his rendition of expressions related to the aforementioned mission of the awaited figure. In this respect, the translator depicted this figure as a Jewish priest-messiah with royal status. A feature that is connected to this identity, as well as distinct from the messianic figures with priestly functions depicted in other texts that underwent scrutiny in this study, is that he is the only individual messianic figure within the LXXIsaiah with the “anointing” upon him. This was noted by finding that Cyrus (the “Lord’s anointed” figure according to the MT), a pagan king, was not perceived by the Isaiah translator as a messianic figure. One of the important points which needs to be made regarding the outcome of this study is that any doubt concerning the contention that there is a dynamic messianic thought running through the whole of the Greek Isaiah should be abandoned. This applies also to the contention that a gradual emergence, increase and transformation in messianic beliefs can be discerned in the LXX as a whole, as well as in the minds of members of Jewish communities in the Hellenistic period.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Chapter 4: Summary and Conclusions

213

Besides this, the intertextual hermeneutic used by the Isaiah translator in producing his document by means of purposefully interconnected messianic elements, which were identified in this study, not only permits, once it is understood, a satisfactory explanation of his presentation of the messianic theme throughout this text in a methodical manner, but it also allowed him to link his texts with others (within and outside the LXX-Isaiah) regardless of their differences in context, position, and/or meaning. This, however, raises the question whether the translator’s use of intertextuality is to be considered as working either backward or forward. Based on the translator’s outlook in interpreting this text (and the whole of ‘scripture’) as a unity, which is also displayed in the use of this device, we tended to incline to the view that it seems to have worked both ways. In this connection, we repeatedly noted that, once a given messianic text is read in light of or in conjunction with other related ones, it displays various important and insightful facets of messianic beliefs that developed among the Jewish community in Alexandria as noted above. In approaching the LXX-Isaiah in the way described here, the author of this study has been able to arrive at a more precise explanation of what is going on within this literature, as well as shed some light on the understanding of some of the messianic beliefs later echoed in early Christianity. In this respect, he hopes to have offered a fresh reading of this important Jewish document, which echoes an established hermeneutic principle used in early Jewish interpretation in dealing with sacred texts. However, there remains so much to be done with regard to this literature, especially in exploring in more detail the affinities between the devices in the hands of the Isaiah translator and the use of biblical exegesis at Qumran and in rabbinic Judaism. This particular aspect is important for deepening our knowledge of the various ways in which this biblical text was read and understood. The same could also be applied to other books of the LXX. In this connection, more studies are also needed on specific terms and topics throughout the LXX-Isaiah as a whole. This could further, for instance, the understanding of the issue of coherence in the corpus of the Greek Isaiah, an area of research that is associated with the name of van der Kooij. Other avenues for further study were suggested in the course of our investigation, while still others could be thought of as one reads this monograph.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Selected Bibliography 1. Sources and Reference Works Aland, B/Aland, K., et al. (ed.), Novum Testamentum Graece, post Eberhard et Erwin Nestle editione vicesima septima revisa (27th edn; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1996). –, The Greek New Testament (4th revised edn; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1998). Allegro, J. M./Anderson, A. A., Qumrân Cave 4 I (4Q158–4Q186) (DJD V; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968). Arnold, B. T./Choi, J. H., A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). Balz, H./Scheider, G. (ed.), Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (3 vol.; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978–1993). Barthélemy, D./Milik, J. T., Qumrân Cave I (DJD I; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955). Blass, F./Debrunner, A., Greek Grammar of the NT and other Early Christian Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961). Breton, L. C. L., The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament according to the Vatican text translated into English with the principal various readings of the Alexandrine copy, and a table of comparative chronology (London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1844). –, The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1851; repr. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1992). Brisco, T. V., Holman Bible Atlas: A Complete Guide to the Expansive Geography of Biblical History (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998). Brown, F. … [et al.], The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon with an appendix containing the Biblical Aramaic (Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 2005). Bruce, M. M./Murphy, R. E. (ed.), The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). Cazelles, H. … [et al.], (ed.), Supplément au Dictionnaire de la Bible (13 vol.; Paris: Letouzey and Ané, 1928s). Charles, R. H. (ed.), The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English with Introductions and Critical and Explanatory Notes to the Several Books (2 vol.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913). –, The Book of Enoch (Translations of Early Documents. Series 1: Palestinian Jewish texts (pre-Rabbinic); London: SPCK, 1929). –, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, translated from the Editor’s Ethiopic Text and edited with the Introduction, Notes, and Indexes of the First Edition, wholly recast, enlarged and rewritten together with a Reprint from the Editor’s Text of the Greek Fragments (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1912). Chilton, B. D., The Isaiah Targum: Introduction, Apparatus and Notes (The Aramaic Bible 11; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1987). Colson, F. H., Philo, with an English Transltaion, vol. 6 (LCL, 9 vol.; Cambridge/ Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: Heinemann, 1935).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

216

Selected Bibliography

–, Philo, with an English Transltaion, vol. 8 (LCL, 10 vol.; Cambridge/Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: Heinemann, 1939). Danker, F. W. (ed.), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (3rd edn; Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press, 2000). Davidson, A. B., Hebrew Syntax. (2nd edn; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1896). Dogniez, C./Harl, M. (ed.), Le Pentateuque d’Alexandrie: Texte Grec et Traduction (Paris: Cerf, 2001). Dogniez, C., Bibliography of the Septuagint 1970–1993 (VTSup 60; Leiden/New York: Brill, 1995). Elliger, K./Rudolph, W., Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990). Ernest, J. D., Theological Lexicon of the New Testament (3 vol.; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994). Greffcken, J. (ed.), Die Oracula Sibyllina (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte 8; Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1902). Grossfeld, B., The Targum Onqelos to Exodus: Translated with Apparatus and Notes (The Aramaic Bible 7; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988). Gryson, R. (ed.), Esaias, Vetus Latina. Die Reste Der Altlateinischen Bibel; (Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 1987–1997). Harl, M., La Bible d’Alexandrie: La Genèse (Paris: Cerf, 1994). Harl, M. … [et al.], La Bible Grecque des Septante: Du Judaïsme Hellénistique du Christianisme Ancien (Paris: Cerf, 1988). Harlé, P./Pralon, D., La Bible d’Alexandrie: Le Lévitique (Paris: Cerf, 1988). Hatch, E./Redpath, H. A., A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (Including the Apocryphal Books) (2nd edn; Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998). Horbury, W./Noy, D., Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt with an Index of the Jewish Inscriptions of Egypt and Cyrenaica (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Joüon, P./Muraoka, T., A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Subbi 27; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 2006). Kittel, R. (ed.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (3rd edn; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1987). Kraft, R. A. (ed.), Septuagintal Lexicography (Montana: SBL, 1972). Kraus, W./Karrer, M. (ed.), Septuaginta Deutsch (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2009). Le Boulluec, A./Sandevoir, P., La Bible d’Alexandrie: L’Exode (Paris: Cerf, 2004). Liddell, H. G. … [et al.], (ed.), A Greek English Lexicon. 9th edn; with Revised Supplement (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996). Lisowsky, G., Konkordanz zum Hebräischen Alten Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1958). Lust, J. … [et al.], A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (2 vol.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1992 [1996]). Lütkemann, L./Rahlfs, A., Hexaplarische Randnoten zu Isaias 1–16, aus einer SinaiHandschrift (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1915). Marcus, R. Josephus, with an English Translation. Jewish Antiquities, Books 12–14, vol. 7 (LCL 9 vol.; Cambridge/Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: Heinemann, 1961).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Sources and Reference Works

217

Martínez, F. G., The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, W. G. E. Watson (trans.) (Leiden: Brill, 21996). Martínez, F. G. … [et al.], Qumran Cave 11: Part II (DJD XXIII; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997). Metzger, B. M./Murphy, R. E. (ed.), The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). Muraoka, T., A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Leuven: Peeters, 2009). Ottley, R. R., A Handbook to the Septuagint (London: Methuen, 1920). –, The Book of Isaiah According to the LXX (Codex Alexandrinus) (2 vol.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 21909 [1904, 1906]). Parry, D. W./Qimron, E., The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa): A New Edition (STDJ 32; Leiden: Brill, 1999). Pietersma, A./Wright, B. G. (ed.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). Rahlfs, A., Septuaginta (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979). Ryle, H. E./James, M. R., The Psalms of Solomon: The Text Newly Revised from all the Mss., Edited, with Introduction, English Translation, Notes, Appendix, and Inidices (Cambridge: The University Press, 1891). Rzach, A. (ed.), Χρησμοὶ Σιβυλλιακοί, Oracula Sibyllina (Prague, 1891). Sollamo, R., Renderings of Hebrew Semiprepositions in the Septuagint, Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae (Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1979). –, Repetition of the Possessive Pronouns in the Septuagint (SCS 40; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995). Steck, O. H., Die Erste Jesajarolle von Qumran (1QIsa): Schreibweise als Leseanleitung für ein Prophetenbuch (2 vol. SBS 173; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1998). Stenning, J. F., The Targum of Isaiah (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1953). Tcherikover, V. A./Fuks, A., Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (2 vol.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957 [1960]). Thackeray, H. St. J., A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909). –, Josephus, with an English Translation, vol. 1, Life Against Apion (LCL 8 vol.; London/New York: Heinemann/G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1926). –, Josephus, with an English Translation, vol. 4, Jewish Antiquities, Books 1–4 (LCL 8 vol.; London/New York: Heinemann/G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1930). Thomas, D. W. (ed.), Liber Jesaiae (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 7, ed. K. Elliger/ W. Rudolph; Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1968). Ulrich, E. … [et al.], Qumran Cave 4, X: The Prophets (DJD XV; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997). Viteau, J./Martin, F., Les Psaumes de Salomon: Introduction, Texte Grec et Traduction (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1911). Waard, J., A Handbook on Isaiah (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1997). Wallace, D. B., Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the NT (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996). Waltke, B. K./O’Connor, M., An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1990). Walton, F. R., Diodorus of Sicily, with an English Translation, Fragments of Books 33–40, vol. 7 (LCL, 12 vol.; Cambridge/Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: Heinemann, 1967).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

218

Selected Bibliography

Weber, R. … [et al.], Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994). Wevers, J. W. Genesis, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum I (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974). –, Exodus, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum II: 1 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991). –, Leviticus, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum II: 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). - Numeri, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum III: 1 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982). –, Deuteronomium, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum III: 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982). Ziegler, J., Isaias, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum XIV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983). –, Ieremias Baruch Threni Epistula Ieremiae, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Societatis Litterarum Gottingensis editum XV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1957).

2. Commentaries Alexander, J. A., Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1953). Archer, G., “Isaiah”, in C. Pfeiffer/E. Harrison (ed.), The Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1962) 605–54. Auvray, A., Isaïe 1–39 (SB; Paris: Gabalda, 1972). Barnes, A., Notes on the Old Testament: Critical, Explanatory, and Practical; The Book of the Prophet Isaiah (London: Blackie and Son, 1845). Bartelt, A. H., The Book around Immanuel: Style and Structure in Isaiah 2–12 (BJS 4; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996). Barton, J., Isaiah 1–39 (Old Testament Guides 19; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995). Beuken, W. A. M., Isaiah II: Volume 2/Isaiah 28–29 (HCOT, ed. C. Houtman … [et al.]; Leuven: Peeters, 2000). –, Jesaja (3 vol. in 5; A Nijkerk: Uitgeverij GF Callenbach, 1989). Blenkinsopp, J., Isaiah 1–39: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 19; New York: Doubleday, 2000). –, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 20; New York: Doubleday, 2002). Bonnard, P.-E., Le Second Isaïe, son disciple et leurs éditeurs: Isaïe 40–46 (Études Bibliques; Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1972). Briks, T. R., Commentary on the Book of Isaiah: Critical, Historical, and Prophetical (London: Rivingtons, 1871).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Commentaries

219

Brown, R. E. … [et al.], (ed.), The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (London: Geoffry Chapman, 1990). Brueggemann, W., Isaiah 1–39 (The Westminster Bible Companion, ed. P. D. Miller/ D. L. Bartlett; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998). –, Isaiah 40–66 (The Westminster Bible Companion, ed. P. D. Miller/D. L. Bartlett; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998). Calvin, J., Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, trans. W. Pringle (4 vol.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948). Cheyne, T. K., The Prophecies of Isaiah: A New Translation with Commentary and Appendices (2 vol.; London: Kegan Paul, rev. 5th edn; 1889). Clements, R., Isaiah 1–39 (NCB. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980). Coggins, R., “Isaiah”, in J. Barton/J. Muddiman (ed.), The Oxford Bible Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 433–86. Delitzsch, F., Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Clark’s Foreign Biblical Library, trans. J. Martin; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1894). Duhm, B., Das Buch Jesaia (Göttinger Handkommentar zum Alten Testament; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1922). Eichrodt, W., Der Heilige in Israel: Jesaja 1–12 (BAT; Stuttgart: Calwer, 1960). Feldmann, F., Das Buch Isaias Übersetzt und Erklärt: Exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten (Münster: Aschendorf, 1925). Fohrer, G., Das Buch Jesaja. 1. Band, Kapitel 1–23 (Zürcher Bibelkommentare; Zürich/Stuggart: Zwingli Verlag, 1960 [1966]). –, Das Buch Jesaja. 2. Band, Kapitel 24–39 (Zürcher Bibelkommentare; Zürich/Stuggart: Zwingli Verlag, 1962 [1967]). –, Das Buch Jesaja. 3. Band, Kapitel 40–66 (Zürcher Bibelkommentare; Zürich/Stuggart: Zwingli Verlag, 1964). Gray, G. B., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah I-XXXIX (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1912). Goshen-Gottstein, M. H., The Book of Isaiah (HUB; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1995). Gryson, R. … [et al.], (ed.), Commentaires de Jérome sur le prophète Isaïe: Introduction, Livres 5–7 (Vetus Latina: Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel 27; Freiberg: Verlag Herder, 1994). –, Commentaries de Jérome sur le prophete Isaïe: Introduction, Livres 8–11 (Vetus Latina: Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel 27; Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 1996). Grogan, G. W., “Isaiah”, in F. E. Gaebelein (ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 6 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986) 1–354 Harman, A., Isaiah (Fearn: Christian Focus, 2005). Hanson, P. D., Isaiah 40–66 (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, ed. P. D. Miller; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1995). Hebert, A. S., The Book of the Prophet Isaiah 1–39 (CBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973). Jacob, E., Esaïe 1–12 (Commentaire de l’Ancien Testament 8a; Genève: Labor et Fides, 1987). Janthial, D., Le Livre d’Isaïe (CE 142; Paris: Cerf, 2007). Jensen, J., Isaiah 1–39 (OT Message 8; Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1984). Kaiser, O., Isaiah 1–12 (London: SCM Press, 1983). –, Isaiah 13–39. A Commentary (OTL; London: SCM Press, 1974).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

220

Selected Bibliography

Kay, W., “Isaiah”, in F. C. Cook (ed.), The Speaker’s Commentary, vol. 5 (London: John Murray, 1875) 1–310. Kissane, E. J., The Book of Isaiah: Translation from a Critically Revised Hebrew Text With Commentary (2 vol.; Dublin: Browne & Nolan, 1960). Koole, J. L., Isaiah III: Volume 1/Isaiah 40–48 (HCOT, ed. C. Houtman … [et al.]; Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1997). –, Isaiah III: Volume 2/Isaiah 49-55 (HCOT, ed. C. Houtman … [et al.]; Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1998). –, Isaiah III: Volume 3/Isaiah 56–66 (HCOT, ed. C. Houtman … [et al.]; Kampen: Kok Pharos, 2001). Knight, G. A. F., The New Israel: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 56–66 (ITC; Edinburgh: Handsel, 1985). McKenzie, J. L., Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1968). Motyer, J. A., The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993). Oswalt, J. N., The Book of Isaiah 1–39 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986). –, The Book of Isaiah 40–39 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998). Seitz, C., Isaiah 1–39 (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1993). Sweeney, M. A., Isaiah 1–39, with an Introduction to Prophetic Literature (FOTL 16; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996). Wade, G. W., The Book of the Prophet Isaiah: With Introduction and Notes (Westminster Commentaries; London: Methuen, 21929). Whybray, R. N., Isaiah 40–66 (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1975). Wildberger, H., Isaiah 1–12: A Commentary, trans. T. H. Trapp (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991). –, Isaiah Chapters 28–39: A Continental Commentary, trans. T. H. Trapp (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002). Wilken, R. L. (ed./trans.), Isaiah: Interpreted by Early Christian and Medieval Commentators (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2007). Williamson, H. G. M., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1–27Volume 1: Isaiah 1–5 (ICC; London/New York: T & T Clark, 2006). Watts, J. D. W., Isaiah 1–33 (WBC 24, ed. D. A. Hubbard/G. W. Barker; Waco: Word Books, 1985). –, Isaiah 34–66 (WBC 25, ed. D. A. Hubba/G. W. Barker; Waco: Word Books, 1987). Westermann, C., Isaiah 40–66: A Commentary (OTL, trans. D. M. G. Stalker; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969).

3. Secondary Literature Aejmelaeus, A., Parataxis in the Septuagint: A Study of the Renderings of the Hebrew Coordinate Clauses in the Greek Pentateuch (ACSFDHL 31; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1982). Aichele, G./Phillips, G. A. (ed.), Intertextuality and The Bible, Semeia 69/70 (1995). Alexander, P./Alexander, L., “The Image of the Oriental Monarch in the Third Book

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Secondary Literature

221

of Maccabees”, in T. Rajak … [et al.], (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007) 92–99. Alexander, P. S., “The Rabbis and Messianism”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianicc Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 227–43. Allen, G., Intertextuality (London/New York: Routledge, 2000). Baer, D. A., When We All Go Home: Translation and Theology in LXX Isaiah 56–66 (JSOTSup 318; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001). –, “What happens in the end? Evidence for an early Greek recension in LXX Isaiah 66”, in A.van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives (CBET 55; Leuven: Peeters, 2010) 1–32. Bakhtin, M., Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, ed./trans. C. Emerson (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984). –, Rabeleais and his World, trans. H. Iswolsky (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984). Barclay, J. M. G., Against Apion, Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary, vol. 10, ed. S. Mason (Leiden: Brill, 2007). –, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-117CE) (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996). Barr, J., “Did the Greek Pentateuch Really Serve as a Dictionary for the Translation of the Later Books?”, in M. F. J. Baasten/Th. W. van Peursen (ed.), Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (OLA 118; Leuven: Peeters, 2003) 523–43. –, The Concept of Biblical Theology: An Old Testament Perspective (London: SCM Press, 1999). –, The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations (MSU 15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979). Barrera, J. T., The Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible: An Introduction to the History of the Bible (Leiden/New York: Brill, 1998). Bartlett, J. R., Jews in the Hellenistic World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). Barthes, R., Le plaisir du texte (Paris: Seuil, 1973). Bastiaens, J.Ch., Interpretaties van Jesaja 53: Een intertextueel onderzoek naar de lijdende Knecht in Jes 53 (MT/LXX) en in Lk 22: 14–38; Hand 3: 12, Hand 4: 23–31 en Hand 8: 26–40 (TFTS 22; Tilburg: Tilburg University, 1993). Bauckham, R., The Jewish World around the New Testament (WUNT 233; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008). Beal, T. K., “Glossary”, in Donna N. Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992) 21–24. –, “Ideology and Intertextuality: Surplus of Meaning and Controlling the Means of Production”, in Donna N. Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992) 27–39. –, “Intertextuality”, in A. K. M. Adam (ed.), Handbook of Postmodern Biblical Interpretation (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2000) 128–30. Becker, J., Messianic Expectation in the Old Testament, trans. D. E. Green (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980). Beek, M. A., “Relations entre Jerusalemen et la diaspora egyptienne au deuxieme siecle avant J. C.”, OS II (1943) 119–43.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

222

Selected Bibliography

Bertram, G., “Additional Note: διψάω and Cognates in the LXX”, in G. Kittel (ed.), TDNT, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) 227–29. –, “Praeparatio evangelica in der Septuaginta”, VT 7 (1957) 225–49. Beuken, W. A. M., “The First Servant Song and Its Context”, VT 22 (1972) 1–30. Beuken, W./van Wolde, E., “Introduction”, in S. Draisma (ed.), Intertextuality in Biblical Writings: Essays in Honour of Bas van Iersel (Kampen: J Uitgeversmaatschappij J. H. Kok, 1989) 7–8 Biddle, M. E., “Lay Zion’s Alter Egos: Isaiah 47.1–15 and 57.6–13 as Structural Counterparts”, in R. F. Melugin/M. A. Sweeney (ed.), New Visions of Isaiah (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996) 124–39. Bietenhard, H., “ὄνομα”, in G. Friedrich (ed.), TDNT, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967) 242–83. Blanchetière, F., “Le Juif et l’autre: La diaspora Asiate”, in R. Kuntzmann/J. Schlosser (ed.), Etudes sur le Judaïsme Hellenistique: Congres de Strasbourg (1983) (LD 119; Paris: Cerf, 1984) 41–59. Blenkinsopp, J., A History of Prophecy in Israel: Revised and Enlarged (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996). –, Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006). Bloom, H., The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). Box, G. H., Judaism in the Greek Period from the rise of Alexander the Great to the intervention of Rome (333 to 63 B. C.) (The Clarendon Bible, OT 5; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1932). Boyarin, D., Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash (ISBL; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990). Bratcher, R. G., “A Study of Isaiah 7: 14. Its Meaning and Use in the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint and the Gospel of Matthew”, BT 9 (1958) 97–126. Brockington, L. H., “The Greek Translator of Isaiah and his Interest in ΔΟΞΑ”, VT 1 (1951) 23–32. Brown, R. E., The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (New York: Image Books, 1977). Broyles, C. C./Evans, C. A. (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (VTSup 70/1; Leiden: Brill, 1997). Brunet, G., Essai sur l’Isaïe de l’Histoire: Etude de Quelques Textes notamment dans Isa VII, VIII & XXII (Paris: A. & J. Picard, 1975). Buitenwerf, R., Book III of the Sibylline Oracles and its Social Setting. (SVTP 17; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2003). Bultmann, R., “ἄφεσις”, in G. Kittel (ed.), TDNT, vol 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) 509–12. Carleton Paget, J., “Egypt”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 183–97. Carroll, R. P., “Intertextuality and the Book of Jeremiah: Animadversions on Text and Theory”, in J. C. Exum/D. J.A Clines (ed.), The New Literary Criticism and the Hebrew Bible (JSOTSup 143; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993) 55– 78. Chamberlain, J. V., “The Functions of God as Messianic Titles in the Complete Qumran Isaiah Scroll”, VT 5 (1955) 366–72.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Secondary Literature

223

Chester, A., “Jewish Messianic Expectations and Mediatorial Figures and Pauline Christology”, in M. Hengel/U. Heckel (ed.), Paulus und das antike Judentum (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991) 17–89. –, Messiah and Exaltation: Jewish Messianic and Visionary Traditions and New Testament Christology (WUNT 207; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007). Childs, B. S., The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eeerdmans, 2004). Clayton, J./Rothstein, E. (ed.), Influence and Intertextuality in Literary History (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1991). Cohen, S. J. D., “‘Anti-Semitism’ in Antiquity: The Problem of Definition”, in D. Berger (ed.), History and Hate: The Dimensions of Anti-Semitism (Philadelphia/ New York/Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Publication Society, 1986) 43–47. –, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987). Collins, A. Y./Collins, J. J., King and Messiah As Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008). Collins, J. J., Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (2nd edn; BRS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000). –, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 2005). –, “Isaiah 8: 23–9: 6 and its Greek Translation”, in A. Voitila/J. Jokiranta (ed.), Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo (Leiden: Brill, 2008) 205–21. –, “Jesus, Messianism and the Dead Sea Scrolls”, in J. H. Charlesworth … [et al.], (ed.), Qumran-Messianism: Studies on the Messianic Expectations in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998) 100–19. –, “Messianism and Exegetical Tradition: The Evidence of the LXX Pentateuch”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 129–49. –, The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (ABRL, ed. D. N. Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1995). Condra, E., Salvation for the Righteous Revealed: Jesus amid Covenantal and Messianic Expectations in Second Temple Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 2002). Cook, J., “Intertextual Relationships between the Septuagint of Psalms and Proverbs”, in R. J. V. Hiebert … [et al.], (ed.), The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001) 218–28. –, “Intertextual Readings in the Septuagint”, in C. Breytenbach … [et al.], (ed.), The New Testament Interpreted: Essays in Honour of Bernard C. Lategan (Leiden: Brill, 2006) 119–34. –, “‘Theological/Ideological’ Tendenz in the SeptuagintLXX Proverbs: A Case Study”, in F. G. Martínez/M. Vervenne (ed.), Interpreting Translation: Studies on the LXX and Ezekiel in Honour of Johan Lust (BETL 192; Leuven: University Press, 2005) 65–79 –, “The Law in the Septuagint Proverbs”, JNSL 23/1 (1997) 211–23. –, “Towards the Formulation of a Thology of the Septuagint”, in A. Lemaire (ed.), Congress Volume Ljubljana 2007 (VTSup 133; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2010) 621– 37. Coppens, J., Le Messianism royal: Ses origines, Son développement, Son accomplissement (LD 54; Paris: Cerf, 1968).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

224

Selected Bibliography

Coste, J., “Le texte Grec d’Isaïe xxv, 1–5”, RB 61 (1954) 36–66. Cousin, H., La Bible grecque: La Septante (CESup 74; Paris: Cerf, 1990). Croughs, M., “Intertextuality in the Septuagint: The Case of Isaiah 19”, IOSCS 34 (2001) 81–94. Culler, J., “Presupposition and Intertextuality”, MLN 91.6 (1976) 1380–97. Dan, J. … [et al.], “Anitisemitismus/Antijudaismus”, in H. D. Bertz … [et al.], (ed.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 1 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998) 556–74. Daniel, J. L., “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman Period”, JBL 98 (1979) 45– 65. Daniel, S., Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte dans la Septante (Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1966). Davies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology (London: SPCK, 1948). –, Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come (JBLMS 7; Philadelphia: SBL, 1952). Davis, C. J., The Name and Way of the Lord: Old Testament Themes, New Testament Christology (JSNTSup 129; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). De Sousa, Rodrigo F., Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 1–12 (LHBOTS 516; London/New York: T & T Clark, 2010). –, “Problems and Perspectives on the Study of Messianism in LXX Isaiah”, in A. van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives (CBET 55; Leuven: Peeters, 2010) 135–52. De Vaux, R., Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (London: Longman & Todd, 1961). Dearman, J. A., “Moab”, in B. T. Arnold/H. G. M. Williamson (ed.), Dictionary of the OT Historical Books (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2005) 705–707. Dines, J. M., The Septuagint (UBW, ed. M. A. Knibb; London: T & T Clark, 2004). Dogniez, C., “L’intertextualité dans la LXX de Zacharie 9–14”, in F. G. Martínez/M. Vervenne (ed.), Interpreting Translation: Studies on the LXX and Ezekiel in Honour of Johan Lust (Leuven: University Press, 2005) 81–96. –, “Le traducteur d’Isaïe connaissait-il le texte grec du Dodekapropheton?”, Adamantius 13 (2007) 29–37. Dorival, G., “Les phénomènes d'intertextualité dans le livre grec des Nombres”, in G. Dorival/O. Munnich (ed.), Κατὰ τοὺς ὁ “selon les Septante”: Trente études sur la Bible grecque des Septante en hommage à Marguerite Harl (Paris: Cerf, 1995) 253–85. Draisma, S., “Bas van Iersel: From Minister of the Word to Minister of the Reader,” in S. Draisma (ed.), Intertextuality in Biblical Writings: Essays in Honour of Bas van Iersel (Kampen: Uitgeversmaatschappij J. H. Kok, 1989) 9–12. ָ ”, in W. A. VanGemeren (ed.), NIDOT, vol 3 (Carlisle: Dumbrell, W. J., “‫עָנו‬ Paternoster Press, 1967) 454–64. Ekblad, E. R., Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An Exegetical and Theological Study (CBET 23; Leuven: Peeters, 1999). Evans, C. A., “From Gospel to Gospel: The Function of Isaiah in the New Testament”, in C. C. Broyles/C. A. Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah, vol. 2 (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 651–91. Fabry, H.-J., “Messianism in the Septuagint”, in W.Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Sep-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Secondary Literature

225

tuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006) 193–205. Fewell, D. N. (ed.), Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992). Fishbane, M., Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford/New York: Clarendon Press, 1985). Fischer, J., In welcher Schrift lag das Buch Isaias den LXX vor? Eine Textkritische Studie (BZAW 56; Giessen: Alfred Töpelmann, 1930). Fitzmyer, J. A., The One Who Is to Come (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2007). Frankel, Z., Ueber den Einfluss der palästinischen Exegese auf die alexandrinische Hermeneutik (Leipzig: Verlag von Joh. Ambr. Barth, 1851). –, Vorstudien zur der Septuaginta (Leipzig: Bei Fr. Chr. Wilh. Vogel, 1841). Fraser, P. M., Ptolemaic Alexandria (3 vol.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972). Frey, J., “Temple and Rival Temple – The Cases of Elephantine, Mt. Gerizim, and Leontopolis”, in Beate Ego … [et al.], (ed.), Gemeinde ohne Tempel/ Community without Temple (WUNT 118; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999) 171–203. Friedman, S. S., “Weavings: Intertextuality and the (Re)Birth of the Author”, in J. Clayton/E. Rothstein (ed.), Influence and Intertextuality in Literary History (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1991) 146–80. Frow, J., “Intertextuality and Ontology”, in M. Worton/J. Still (ed.), Intertextuality: Theories and Practices (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990) 45–55. Gehman, H. S., “The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek”, VT 1 (1951) 81–90. Genette, G., Palimpsestes: La littérature au second degré (Points. Essais 257; Paris: Seuil, 1982). Glenny, W. E., Finding Meaning in the Text: Translation Technique and Theology in the Septuagint of Amos (VTSup; Leiden: Brill, 2009). Godard, B., “Intertextuality”, in I. R. Makaryk (ed.), Encyclopedia of Contemporary Literary Theory: Approaches, Scholars, Terms (Toronto/London: University of Toronto Press, 1993) 568–72. Goldingay, J., Old Testament Theology, vol 1. (Downers Grove: Paternoster Press, 2003). Goldstein, J. A., “The Hasmonean Revolt and the Hasmonean Dynasty”, in W. D. Davies/L. Finkelstein (ed.), The Cambridge History of Judaism vol. 2 (London: Cambridge University Press, 1984) 292–351. Grelot, P., Les Poèmes du Serviteur: De la lecture critique à l’herméneutique (LD 130; Paris: Cerf, 1981). Gruen, E., Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998). Gzella, H., “New Ways in Textual Criticism: Isa 42,1–4 as a Paradigm Case”, ETL 81/4 (2005) 387–423. Hammond, P. C., “Nabateans,” in G. W. Bromiley (ed.), ISBE, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986) 466–68. Hanhart, R., “Die Septuaginta als Interpretation und Aktualisierung: Jesaja 9: 1(8: 23)-7(6)”, in A.Rofé/Y. Zakovitch (ed.), Isaac Leo Seeligmann Volume (EBAW 3; Jerusalem: E. Rubinstein, 1983) 331–46. –, “The Translation of the Septuagint in Light of Earlier Tradition and Subsequent Influences”, in G. J. Brooke/B. Lindars (ed.), Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings: Papers Presented to the International Symposium on the Septuagint and Its

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

226

Selected Bibliography

Relations to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings (Manchester: 1990) (SBLSCS 33; Atlanta: Scholars, 1992) 339–79. Hatim, B./Mason, I., Discourse and the Translator (London: Longman, 1990). Hayes, R. B., Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). Hebel, U. J., Intertextuality, Allusion, and Quotation: An International Bibliography of Critical Studies (London: Greenwood Press, 1989). Hecht, R. D., “Philo and Messiah”, in J. Neusner … [et al.], (ed.), Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 139–68. Hegermann, H., “The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age”, in W. D. Davies/L. Finkelstein (ed.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 115–66. Hengel, M./Bailey, D. P., “The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the Pre-Christian Period”, in B. Janowski/P. Stuhlmacher (ed.), The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004) 75– 146. Hengel, M., Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (London: SCM Press, 1968). Henten, J. W. van, “The Hasmonean Period”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 15–28. Hermisson, H.-J., “The Fourth Servant Song in the Context of Second Isaiah”, in B. Janowski/P. Stuhlmacher (ed.), The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004) 16–47. Heskett, R., Messianism Within the Scriptural Scroll of Isaiah (LHBOTS 456; New York/London: T & T Clark, 2007). Hibbard, J. T., Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27: The Reuse and Evocation of Earlier Texts and Traditions (FAT II/16; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006). Holquist, M. (ed.), The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, trans. C. Emerson/M. Holquist (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981). Horbury, W., “Messianic Associations of the Son of Man”, JTS NS 36 (1985) 34–55. –, “Monarchy and Messianism in the Greek Pentateuch”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 79–128. –, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ (London: SCM Press, 1998). –, Messianism among Jews and Christians: Twelve Biblical and Historical Studies (London: T & T Clark, 2003). –, “The Beginnings of the Jewish Revolt under Trajan”, in H. Cancik … [et al.], (ed.), Geschichte – Tradition – Reflexion: Festschrift für Martin Hengel zum 70., vol. 1 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996) 283–304 Hugenberger, G. P., “The Servant of the Lord in the ‘Servant Songs’ of Isaiah: A Second Moses Figure”, in E. Philip … [et al.], (ed.), The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of the Old Testament Messianic Texts (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1995) 106– 39. Hurwitz, M. S., “The Septuagint of Isaiah 36–39 in Relation to that of 1–35, 40–66”, HUCA 28 (1957) 75–83. Janowski, B./Stuhlmacher, P. (ed.), The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources, ET. D. P. Bailey (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Secondary Literature

227

Jaubert, A., La Notion d’Alliance dans le judaïsme aux abords de l’ère chrétienne (Paris: Seuil, 1963). Joachimsen, K., Identities in Transition. The Pursuit of Isa. 52: 12–53: 12 (VTSup 142; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2011). Jobes, K. H./Silva, M., Invitation to the Septuagint (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000). Joosten, J., “Al tiqré as a Hermeneutical device and the Septuagint,” in W. Kraus/M. Karrer/M. Meiser, (ed.), Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse (WUNT 252; Tübingen, Mohr, 2010) 377–390. –, “Reflections on the ‘Interlinear Paradigm’ in Septuagint Studies”, in A. Voitila/J. Jokiranta (ed.), Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo (Leiden: Brill, 2008) 163–78. Knibb, M. A. (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006). –, “Introduction”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism, (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) XIII-XXXI. –, “The Septuagint and Messianism: Problems and Issues”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 3–19. Koch, K., “‫”אהל‬, in G. J. Botterweck/H. Ringgren (ed.), TDOT, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) 118–30. ַ ָׂ‫”ש‬, in G. J. Botterweck … [et al.], (ed.), TDOT, vol. 14 (Grand Koenen, K., “‫כל‬ Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004) 112–28. Koenig, J., L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique d’après les témoins textuels d’Isaïe (VTSup 33; Leiden: Brill, 1982). Kooij, A. van der, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches: Ein Beitrag zur Textgeschichte des Alten Testaments (OBO 35; Freiburg/Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981). –, The Oracle of Tyre: The Septuagint of Isaiah XXIII as Version and Vision (Leiden: Brill, 1998). –, “The Septuagint of Isaiah and the Mode of Reading Prophecies in Early Judaism: Some Comments on LXX Isaiah 8–9”, in M. Karrer … [et al.], (ed.), Die Septuaginta – Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten: Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 20–23. Juli 2006 (WUNT; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008) 597–611. –, “The Old Greek of Isaiah 19: 16–25: Translation and Interpretation”, in C. E. Cox (ed.), VI Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies: Jerusalem 1986 (SBL SCS 23; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987) 127–66. –, “Accident or Method? On ‘Analogical’ Interpretation in the Old Greek of Isaiah and in 1QIsa”, BO 43 (1986) 366–75. –, “Interpretation of the Book of Isaiah in the Septuagint and in other Ancient Versions”, in C. M. McGinnis/P.K Tull (ed.), “As Those Who Are Thought”: The Interpretation of Isaiah from the LXX to the SBL (Atlanta: SBL, 2006) 49–68. –, “Isaiah in the Septuagint”, in C. G. Broyles/C. A. Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, vol. 2 (VTSup 70/2; Leiden: Brill, 1997) 513–30. –, “LXX-Isaiah 8–9 and the Issue of Fulfilment-Interpretation”, Adamantius 13 (2007) 20–28. –, “The Greek Bible and Jewish Concepts of Royal Priesthood and Priestly Monar-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

228

Selected Bibliography

chy”, in T. Rajak … [et al.], (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 2007) 255–64. –, “The Septuagint Isaiah and the Issue of Coherence. A Twofold Analysis of LXX Isaiah 31: 9b-32: 8”, in A. van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives (CBET 55; Leuven: Peeters, 2010) 33–48. –, “The Septuagint of Isaiah: Translation and Interpretation”, in J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of Isaiah/Le livre d’Isaïe. Les oracles et leurs relectures: Unité et complexité de l’ouvrage (BETL 131; Leuven: Peeters, 1989) 127–133. Kraus, W., “Contemporary Translations of the Septuagint: Problems and Perspectives”, in W. Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006) 63–83. Kreuch, J. Unheild und Heil bei Jesaja. Studien zur Entstehung des Assur-Zyklus Jesaja 28–31 (WMANT 130; Göttingen: Neukirchener Theologie, 2011). Kristeva, J., Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art, ed. L. Roudiez, trans. T. Gora … [et al.] (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980). –, La Révolution du Language Poétique: L’Avant-garde à la fin du XIXème siècle, Lautreamont et Mallarme (Paris: Seuil, 1974). –, Σημειωτικὴ: Recherches pour une sémanalyse (Paris: Seuil, 1969). Laato, A., A Star is Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of Jewish Messianic Expectations (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997). Laberge, L., La Septante d’Isaïe 28–33: Etude de Traduction Textuelle (Ottawa: Centre de Recherche de l’Université Saint-Paul, 1978). Lagrange, P. M.-J., Le Judaïsme avant Jésus-Christ (Paris: J. Gabalda et Fils, 1931). –, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs (150 av. J.-C. à 200 ap. J.-C.) (Paris: Libraire Victor Lecoffre, 1909). Le Déaut, R., “La Septante, Un Targum?,” in R. Kuntzmann/J. Schlosser (ed.), Etudes sur le Judaïsme Hellenistique: Congres de Strasbourg (1983) (LD 119; Paris: Cerf, 1984) 147–95. Le Moigne, P., “‘C’est moi qui établis la lumière et fis l’obscurité, qui fais la paix et fonde les malheurs’: théologie du choix des thèmes verbaux des participes (présent vs aoriste) se rapportant à Dieu, dans la Septnate d’Ésaïe”, in A. van der Kooij/ M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives (CBET 55; Leuven: Peeters, 2010) 71–106. –, “οὐχ ὡς dans Ésaïe-LXX”, in J. Joosten/P. Le Moigne (ed.), L’Apport de la Septante aux etudes sur l’Antiquité (Paris: Cerf, 2005) 71–104. Lemaire, A./Saebø, M. (ed.), Congress Volume, Oslo 1998 (VTSup 80; Leiden: Brill, 2000). Lemmelijn, B., “Two Methodological Trails in Recent Studies on the Translation Technique of the Septuagint”, in R. Sollamo/S. Sipilä (ed.), Helsinki Perspectives on the Translation Technique of the Spetuagint: Proceedings of the IOSCS Congress in Helsinki 1999, (PFES 82; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001) 43– 63. Léonas, A., L’Aube des traducteurs. De l’hébreu au grec: traducteurs et lecteurs de la Bible des Septante (IIIe S. av. J.-C. – IVe S. apr. J.-C.) (Paris: Cerf, 2007). –, Recherches sur le langage de la Septante (OBO 211; Fribourg/Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005). Lindblad, U., “A Note on the Nameless Servant in Isaiah XLII 1–4”, VT 43/1 (1993) 115–19.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Secondary Literature

229

Louw, T. A. W. van der, “Linguistic or Ideological Shifts? The Problem-Oriented Study of Transformations as a Methodological Filter”, in A. Voitila/J. Jokiranta (ed.), Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo (Leiden: Brill, 2008) 107–25. –, Transformation in the Septuagint: Towards an Interaction of Septuagint Studies and Translations (Leuven: Peeters, 2007). Lust, J., “A Septuagint Christ Preceding Jesus Christ? Messianism in the Septuagint Exemplified in Isa 7,10–17”, in K. Hauspie (ed.), Messianism and the Septuagint: Collected Essays (BETL 178; Leuven: Peeters, 2004) 211–26. –, “Le Messianism et la Septante d’Ézékiel”, in K. Hauspie (ed.), Messianism and the Septuagint: Collected Essays (BETL 178; Leuven: Peeters, 2004) 27–40. –, “Messianism and Septuagint”, in J. A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume, Salamanca 1983 (Leiden: Brill, 1985) 174–91. –, “Messianism in Ezekiel in Hebrew and in Greek, Ezek 21: 15(10) and 20(15)”, in S. M. Paul … [et al.], (ed.), Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (Leiden: Brill, 2003) 619–31. –, “Messianism in LXX-Ezekiel: Towards a Synthesis”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 417–30. –, Messianism and the Septuagint: Collected Essays, ed. K. Hauspie (BETL 178; Leuven: Peeters, 2004). Marguerat, D/ Curtis, A., “Préface”, in D. Marguerat/A. Curtis (ed.), Intertextualités. La Bible en échos (Le Monde de la Bible 40; Genève: Labor et Fides, 2000) 5– 11. Maurer, C., “ῥίζα”, in G. Friedrich (ed.), TDNT, vol. 6 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968) 985–91. McLay, R. T., The Use of the Septuagint in the New Testament Research (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2003). Modrzejewski, J. M., The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995). Monsengwo-Pasinya, L., “Isaïe XIX 16–25 et universalisme dans la LXX”, in J. A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume, Salamanca 1983 (Leiden: Brill, 1985) 192–207. Munday, J., Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications (London: Routledge, 2001). Munnich, O., “La traduction grecque d’Isaïe 8–9 et ses liens avec l’exégèse rabbinique”, Adamantius 13 (2007) 8–19. –, “Le Messianisme à la lumière des livres prophétiques de la Bible grecque”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 327–55. Muraoka, T., “Hosea IV in the Septuagint Version”, AJBI 9 (1983) 24–64. Mittman, U. “Jes 53 LXX- ein umstrittener urchristlicher Referenztext. Zum traditions – und rezeptionsgeschichtlichen Hintergrund der Einsetzungsworte”, in T. S. Caulley/H. Lichtenberger (ed.), Die Septuaginta und das frühe Christentum. The Septuagint and Christian Origins (WUNT 277; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011) 217–32. Neves, J. C. M. das, A Teologia da Tradução Grega Dos Setenta No Livro De Isaías (Cap. 24 de Isaías) (Lisboa: Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1973). Nida, E. A., Toward a science of Translating with Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating (Leiden: Brill, 1964).

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

230

Selected Bibliography

Nida, E. A./Taber, C. R., The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden: Brill, 1969). Nogalski, J. D., “Intertextuality in the Twelve”, in J. W. Watts/P. R. House (ed.), Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996) 102–24. Olley, J. W., ‘Righteousness’ in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979). –, “Notes on Isaiah xxxii 1, xlv 19,23 and lxii 1”, VT 33 (1983) 446–49. –, “The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah and ‘Righteousness’”, BIOSCS 13 (1980) 55–74. Orlinsky, H. M., Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah: The So-called “Servant of the Lord” and “Suffering Servant” in Second Isaiah (Leiden: Brill, 1967). Osborne, G. R., The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1991). Palmer, J. K., “‘Not Made With Tracing Paper’: Studies in the Septuagint of Zechariah”, Tyndale Bulletin 57.2 (2006) 317–20. Pao, D. W./Schnabel, E. J., “Luke”, in G. K. Baele/D. A. Carson (ed.), Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007) 251–414. Peters, M. K. H., “Septuagint”, in N. D. Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 5 (New York: Doubley, 1992) 1093–1104. Petersen, D. L., The Prophetic Literature: An Introduction (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002). Pietersma, A.,“Exegesis in the Septuagint: Possibilities and Limits (The Psalter as a Case in Point)”, in W. Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006) 33–45. Polanski, D. C., “Reflections on a Mosaic Covenant: The Eternal Covenant (Isaiah 24.5) and Intertextuality”, JSOT 77 (1998) 55–73. Porten, B., “The Jews in Egypt”, in W. D. Davies/L. Finkelstein (ed.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984) 372–400. Porter, S. E./Pearson, B. W. R., “Isaiah through Greek Eyes: The Septuagint of Isaiah”, in C. C. Broyles/C. A. Evans (ed.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (VTSup 70/1; Leiden: Brill, 1997) 531– 46. Rad, G. von/Foerster, W., “εἰρήνη”, in G. Kittel (ed.), TDNT, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) 400–06. Rajak, T., Translation and Survival: The Greek Bible of the Ancient Jewish Diaspora (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). Rajak, T. … [et al.], (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 2007). Reeves, J. C. (ed.), Bible and Qur’ān: Essays in Scriptural Intertextuality (SBLS 24; Atlanta: SBL 2003). Roberts, R. P., “Translation”, in R. P. Roberts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) 429–42. Rösel, M., “Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel: Jesaja 7 in der Übersetzung der Septuaginta”, JBTh 6 (1991) 135–51. –, “Towards a ‘Theology of the Septuagint’”, in W. Kraus/R. G. Wooden (ed.), Sep-

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Secondary Literature

231

tuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures (Atlanta: SBL, 2006) 239–52. Salvesen, A., “Messianism in Ancient Bible Translation in Greek and Latin”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T & T Clark, 2007) 245–61. Sanders, J. A., “From Isaiah 61 to Luke 4”, in J. Neusner (ed.), Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults, vol. 1 (Leiden: Brill, 1975) 75–106. Sapp, D. A., “The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53 and the Christian Doctrine of Atonement”, in W. H. Bellinger/W. R. Farmer (ed.), Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998) 170–92. Schaper, J., “Review of Der leidende Gottesknecht. Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte, ed. B. Janowski/P. Stuhlmacher, FAT 14; Tübingen: Mohr, 1998”, JTS 49 (1998) 709–13. –, “Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah and Messianic Intertextuality in the Greek Bible”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 371–80. –, “The Persian Period”, in M. Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 3–14. –, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter (WUNT 2/76; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995). Schäfer, P., Judeophobia: Attitudes toward the Jews in the Ancient World (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997). Schrenk, G., “βούλομαι, βουλή, βούλημα”, in G. Kittel (ed.), TDNT, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) 629–37. Schultz, R. L., “The Ties that Bind: Intertextuality, the Identification of Verbal Parallels, and Reading Strategies in the Book of the Twelve”, in P. L. Redditt/A. Schart (ed.), Thematic Threads in the Book of the Twelve (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003) 27–45. –, The Search for Quotation: Verbal Parallels in the Prophets (JSOTSup 180; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999). Schweitzer, S. J., “Mythology in the Old Greek of Isaiah: The Technique of Translation”, CBQ 66 (2004) 214–230. Seeligmann, I. L. “δεῖξαι αὐτῷ φῶς”, Textus 21 (2002) 107–127. –, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah: A Discussion of its Problems. (Mededelingen en verhandelingen van het vooraziatisch-egyptisch genootschap “Ex oriente lux”, 9; Leiden: Brill, 1948, repr. The Septuagint Version of Isaiah and Cognate Studies, ed. R. Hanhart/H. Spieckermann, (FAT 40); Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004). Sollamo, R., “Messianism and the ‘Branch of David’: Isaiah 11,1–5 and Genesis 49,8– 12”, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters, 2006) 357–70. –, “The Significance of Septuagint Studies”, in S. M. Paul … [et al.] (ed.), Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (Leiden: Brill, 2003) 497–512. Sommer, B. D., “Exegesis, Allusion and Intertextuality in the Hebrew Bible: A Response to Lyle Eslinger”, VT 46 (1996) 479–89. –, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998). Stanton, G., “Messianic and Christology: Mark, Matthew, Luke and Acts”, in M.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

232

Selected Bibliography

Bockmuehl/J. Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 78–96. Starcky, J., “Les quatres étapes du messianisme à Qumrân”, RB 70 (1963) 481–504. Starobinski-Safran, E., “La communauté juive d’Alexandrie à l’époque de Philon”, in P. C. Mondésert (ed.) ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΙΝΑ: Hellénisme, Judaïsme et Christianisme à Alexandrie (Paris: Cerf, 1987) 45–75. Stuckenbruck, L. T., “Messianic Ideas in the Apocalyptic and Related Literature of Early Judaism the Apocalyptic and Related Literature of Early Judaism”, in S. E. Porter (ed.), The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2007) 90–113. Theocharous, M., Lexical Depedence and Intertextual Allusion in the Septuagint of the Twelve Prophets. Studies in Hosea, Amos and Micah (Ph. D. diss., University of Cambridge, 2011). ֶ ‫א‬ ֹ ”, in W. A. VanGemeren (ed.), NIDOT, vol. 1 (Carlisle: Tomasino, A., “‫הל‬ Paternoster Press, 1967) 300–02. –, “‫”מהר‬, in W. A. VanGemeren (ed.), NIDOT, vol 2 (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1967) 857–59. Tov, E., “Review of J. Koenig, L’herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique d’après les témoins textuels d’Isaïe, VTSup 33; Leiden: Brill, 1982”, Biblica 65 (1984) 118–21. –, “The Impact of the LXX Translation of the Pentateuch on the Translation of the other Books”, in P. C. Othmar/A. Schenker (ed.), Mélanges Dominique Barthélemy: Études Bibliques offertes à l’occasion de son 60e Anniversaire (OBO38; Götingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981) 577–92. –, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992). –, The Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the Septuagint (SVT 72; Atlanta: SBL, 1999). –, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research, Revised and Enlarged Second Edition (JBS 8; Jerusalem: Simor, 1997). Troxel, R. L., ‘βουλή in the Septuagint of Isaiah’. Unpublished paper presented at the SBL Annual Meeting, San-Diego, 2007. –, “ΒΟΥΛΗ and ΒΟΥΛΕΥΕΙΝ in LXX Isaiah”, in A. van der Kooij/M. N. van der Meer (ed.), The Old Greek of Isaiah: Issues and Perspectives (CBET 55; Leuven: Peeters, 2010) 135–74. –, “Economic Plunder as a Leitmotif in LXX-Isaiah”, Biblica 83 (2002) 375–91. –, “Isaiah 7,14–16 through the Eyes of the Septuagint”, ETL 79 (2003)1–22. –, LXX-Isaiah as Translation and Interpretation: The Strategies of the Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008). - “What’s in a Name? Contemporization and Toponyms in LXX-Isaiah”, in R. L. Troxel … [et al.], (ed.), Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2005) 327–44. Vermes, G., Jesus the Jew: A Historian’s reading of the Gospels (London: Collins, 1973). Vermes, G./Gordon, R., “The Oxford Forum from Qumran Research on the Rule of War from Cave 4 (4Q285)”, JJS 43 (1992) 85–94. Vogels, W., “L’Égypte mon peuple – L’universalisme d’Is 19,16–25”, Biblica 57 (1976) 494–514.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Online Sources

233

Wagner, J. R., “Identifying ‘Updated’ Prophecies in the Old Greek (OG) Isaiah: Isaiah 8: 11–16 as a Test Case”, JBL 126 (2007) 251–69. Watts, R. E., “Mark”, in G. K. Baele/D. A. Carson (ed.), Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007) 111– 249. Wegner, P. D., An Examination of Kingship and Messianic Expectation in Isaiah 1–35 (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1992). Wevers, J. W., Notes on the Greek Text of Leviticus (SCS 44; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997). –, Notes on the Greek Text of Numbers (SCS 46; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998). Williamson, H. G. M., The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiah’s Role in Composition and Redaction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994). –, Variations on a Theme: King, Messiah and Servant in the Book of Isaiah (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1998). Wolde, E. van, “Trendy Intertextuality?”, in S. Draisma (ed.), Intertextuality in Biblical Writings: Essays in Honour of Bas van Iersel (Kampen: Uitgeversmaatschappij J. H. Kok, 1989) 43–49. Wolters, A., “The Messiah in the Qumran Documents”, in S. E. Porter (ed.), The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2007) 75–89. Worton, M./Still, J., Intertextuality: Theories and Practices (Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press, 1990). Ziegler, J., Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias (ATAbh 12.3; Münster: Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934). Zillessen, A., “Bemerkungen zur alexandrinischen Übersetzung des Jesaja (c. 40– 66)”, ZAW 22 (1902) 238–63.

4. Online Sources Le Moigne, P., ‘Le père ou le roi: Stratégies de traduction en Ésaïe IX,6 et XXII, 21 (Septante),’ (article published by CIER, in http://www.msh-m.fr/article.php3? id_article=542. Accessed on August 6, 2009. Mitchell, C. (Reviewer), Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 5 (2004–2005), http:// www.arts.ualberta.ca./KHS/reviews/review188.htm. Accessed on March 11, 2006.

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Indexes

Index of References Hebrew Bible Genesis 10: 10 11: 2 12 19: 22–23 40: 10 41: 22 41: 55 43: 32 49: 9 49: 10 49: 9–10

99 99 143 122 n. 202 183 n. 462 183 n. 462 138 67 183 n. 462 56, 113 110, 157, 186, 210

Exodus 1: 12 3: 9 5: 8 12: 13 12: 23(22) 12: 27 15 15: 11 15: 14–15 15: 16 19: 5 22: 23(22) 31: 17

67 139 138 141 138 141 117 200 117 133 149 138 136

Leviticus 25: 10 25: 11–13 25: 28 25: 30–31 25: 33 25: 40 25: 50 25: 52 25: 54

198 n. 524 198 198 198 198 198 198 198 198

27: 17–18 27: 21 27: 23–24 Numbers 11: 2 14: 23 17: 8(23) 24 24: 7 24: 17

32: 11 36: 4

198 198 198 138 81 109, 114 142 n. 285 56, 142, 157 108 n. 141, 113, 117, 127, 142, 157, 185, 211 81 198

Deuteronomy 1: 39 2: 24 2: 25 3: 8 3: 16 7: 6 11: 25 14: 2 18: 14 ff. 26: 6–8 26: 7 26: 18 28: 68 33: 5 34: 3 34: 10

81 121 n. 199 133 121 n. 199 121 n. 199 149 133 149 164 n. 394 183 n. 463 139 149 87 56 122 n. 202 164 n. 394

Joshua 13: 16

121 n. 199

Judges 4: 3 6: 7–9 10: 12

139 139 139

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

236

Indexes

2 Samuel (2 Reigns) 7 114 14 95 14: 17 95 14: 20 95–96 19: 20 95–96 19: 28 95 23: 2–4 96, 111, 210 1 Kings 2: 4 8: 25 9: 5 15: 26 16: 7

142 142 142 18 18

2 Kings (4 Kingdoms) 13: 4 139 1 Chronicles 11–29

114

2 Chronicles 6: 16 7: 18 18: 26

142 142 139

Job 35: 12

138

Psalms 2: 4–9 7: 16 9: 15 15: 1 18: 50 21: 1–7 21: 13 22: 21 27: 5 33(34): 17 35: 5–6 61: 5(4) 72 72: 2–4 76(77): 1 78: 60 77: 4 87(88): 1 105: 2 106(107): 6 106(107): 28

95 192 192 125 n. 217 95 95 95 95 125 n. 217 138 95 125 n. 217 144 n. 299 111 138 125 n. 217 200 138 200 138 138

118(119): 165 168 129 (130): 4–5 167 135: 10–12 188 Isaiah 1: 3 1: 8 1: 17 1: 21 1: 23 1: 26–27 1: 27 2: 1–4 2: 2–4 2: 3 2: 4 2: 10 2: 11 2: 12 2: 12–17 2: 19 2: 21 3: 1 3: 5 3: 12 3: 16 3: 17 3: 18 4: 2 5: 6 5: 7 5: 13 5: 22–24 5: 24 5: 26 5: 29 6: 3 6: 4 6: 9 6: 9–10 6: 10 6: 12 7 7: 1 7: 4 7: 5 7: 6 7: 6–7

185 n. 473 125 n. 219, 154 n. 343 105 120 also n. 194 105 120 n. 194, 135 154 n. 342 169 n. 416 114 n. 168, 169 104 n. 128 111 112 105 n. 131 149 99 112 112 87 83 88 154 n. 343 154 n. 343 200 94, 100 n. 118, 110, 114 n. 168, 143 104 n. 128 138 154 n. 345 108 103 n. 126, 104 n. 128 107 196 n. 519 137 137 185 n. 473 185 n. 473 185 n. 473, 202 87 46 104 n. 128 75, 202, 209 197 104 n. 128 87

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

237

Indexes 7: 9 7: 10–16 7: 10–17

87 80 52, 75–86, 209, 145 n. 303 7: 14 19, 76, 78–79, 80, 82 n. 36, 84 7: 14–16 79, 80, 81, 83–85, 186, 190, 192, 209 7: 14–25 46 7: 15–16 76 7: 16 78–79, 82, 83, 84–85 7: 16b–17 80 7: 17 75–76 7: 17–25 86, 209 7: 18–25 75–76, 80 8: 3 83 n. 36 8: 4 82 8: 5–6 87 8: 6 87 8: 7 87, 104 n. 128 8: 8 87 8: 11–22 87 n. 58 8: 14 141 8: 16 170 n. 423 8: 18 82 also n. 31, 83 9 46, 126 9: 1 96, 149, 191 also n. 504, 192 9: 1(8: 23) 88, 89 n. 65 9: 11 120 9: 1–6 88, 194, 205 9: 1–7 (8: 23–9: 6) 46, 52, 84, 85–89, 94, 96 also n. 99, 110, 140, 145 n. 303, 167 172, 174, 210 9: 2 88–89, 91, 174 9: 3(4) 88 n. 62, 91, 103 n. 125, 105, 109, 203 9: 3–4 91–92 9: 4 88 n. 62, 91 9: 4(3)–5(4) 88 9: 5 82 n. 30, 85–86, 88 n. 63, 95, 167, 186, 190, 192 9: 5–6 90, 97 9: 6(5) 82, 88 n. 63, 90, 93, 94, 96, 156, 158 n. 366, 167 9: 6(5)–7(6) 86

9: 6–7 9: 7(6) 9: 11(10) 10 10: 5 10: 5–6 10: 9 10: 12 10: 15 10: 19 10: 20 10: 24 10: 25 10: 26 10: 30 10: 32 10: 33 10: 34 11 11: 1 11: 1–2 11: 1–5 11: 1–9 11: 1–10

11: 2 11: 2–3 11: 2–4 11: 3 11: 3–4 11: 4 11: 5 11: 6 11: 7 11: 8 11: 5–9 11: 9 11: 10

11: 11 11: 11–16

88, 89–97, 111, 159, 160, 172, 175, 212 126, 158 n. 366 120 89, 98, 210 103 n. 125, 106 87 99, 115 120 103 n. 125, 106 82, 83 87 87, 103 n. 125, 128, 164, 173 n. 435 134 141 121 203 99 99 46, 98, 100, 127, 210 94, 99, 103 n. 125, 104, 109, 110, 112, 186 85 98, 166 46, 94, 100, 110, 145 n. 303, 157 52, 84, 98, 100, 102– 114, 125, 160, 175, 185–86, 190, 192, 205 94, 104, 110, 112, 185 n. 474, 204 110 84 104, 105 111, 142 94, 104 n. 130, 105, 110, 111, 112, 141 156 82, 82 n. 30 82, 82 n. 31 82, 82 n. 30–31 106 112 106–107, 107 n. 138, 112, 171, 172 n. 430, 201 87, 99, 116 100, 113, 115, 164, 195

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

238 11: 12 11: 12–13 11: 13 11: 14 11: 16 1–12 12: 1 12: 1–2 12: 5 13: 2 14: 4 14: 8 14: 13–14 14: 21 14: 26–27 14: 31 15: 1 15: 1–16: 2 15: 2 15: 4 15: 5 15: 7 15: 7–9 15: 9 15–16 16 16: 1 16: 1–5 16: 2 16: 3–4 16: 4 16: 4–5 16: 5

16: 6 16: 7 16: 12 17: 7–8 18 18: 3 18: 4 18: 7 19 19: 1–15

Indexes 106, 124 88 139 116 101, 117, 128, 139, 173 n. 435, 195 46, 88 100 n. 118 87 168 n. 410 106, 203 n. 5418 88 104 n. 128 104 n. 128 112 134 138 115, 119 n. 192 122 122 n. 202 138 104 n. 128, 122 n. 202 99, 116, 122 119 99, 115, 119 115, 117 119 119, 122 52, 104–127, 175, 210– 211, 212 121 121 121 115, 121, 122, 126, 160 96 n. 100, 111, 114, 122, 125 n. 219, 127, 142, 156, 166, 210 122 119 n. 192 122 n. 202 122 n. 202 128, 129 107 120, 122, 129 120, 129, 139 46, 128 128

19: 2 19: 6 19: 12 19: 16 19: 16–25

19: 17 19: 18 19: 19 19: 18–19 19: 19–20 19: 20

19: 21 19: 21–22 19: 22 19: 23 19: 24–25 19: 24 ff 19: 25 20 20: 3 20: 4–5 20: 5 20–55 21: 2 21: 5 21: 14 22: 1 22: 3 22: 4 22: 16 22: 14 22: 20 22: 21 23: 8–9 24: 2 24: 20 24: 22 25: 1 ff 25: 1–4 25: 1–5 25: 1–7 25: 1–8 25: 4 25: 4–5 25: 5

128 133 134 133 46, 52, 94, 100 n. 118, 110, 127–45, 150, 152, 205, 211 134, 136 n. 260, 140 128, 134, 135 135, 135 n. 254 164 142 111, 125–27, 133, 135– 38, 144–45, 157, 160, 166, 175, 210, 212 140, 143 137 141, 143, 202 139, 140 140, 143 n. 295, 164 173 n. 435 128 128, 140 82, 83 128 200 46 203 n. 541 112 154 n. 345 104 n. 128 198 198, 203 n. 541 125 n. 219 198 82, 83 90 134 82, 83 112 198 94 205 126, 158 94 110 105, 154 n. 345 187 154, 154 n. 345, 208

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

239

Indexes 25: 6–7 25: 6–8 25: 9 25: 9–12 25: 10 26: 3 26: 6 26: 8 26: 12 26: 16 26: 17 27: 5 27: 6 27: 11 27: 13 28–30 28–31 28–35 28: 1 28: 1–4 28: 2 28: 4 28: 5 28: 5–6 28: 6 28: 7–15 28: 9 28: 10 28: 13 28: 14 28: 16–17 28: 17 28: 18–22 28: 22 28: 23–29 28: 26 28: 26–28 28: 27 28–33 29 29: 1 29: 1–10 29: 7 29: 8 29: 11–16 29: 14 29: 16 29: 16–24 29: 18–19

204 n. 544 134 100 n. 118 117 126 158 n. 366 105 83 n. 36, 168, 171 158 n. 366 138 n. 266, 187 138 158 n. 366 109 185 n. 474 87 150 146 n. 305 146 n. 350 103 n. 126, 109, 200 146 154 200 148, 200 146 146 146 154 138 n. 266 138 n. 266 139 146 146–47 146 198 146 187 147 103 n. 125, 109 146, 149 147 115 147 139 154 n. 345 147 185 n. 474 147 147 201

29: 22 29: 22–24 29: 24 30 30: 1–5 30: 6 30: 12 30: 17 30: 18 30: 18–33 30: 19–20 30: 20 30: 26 30: 27 30: 30 30: 31 31 31: 1–3 31: 1–9 31: 4 31: 5–9 31: 8–9 31: 9 31: 9b–32: 8 31–32 32 32: 1 32: 1–2 32: 1–4 32: 1–5 32: 1–8 32: 1–10 32: 2

32: 2–10 32: 3–6 32: 4 32: 5–8 32: 6 32: 7–8 32: 9 32: 13 32: 14 32: 14–18

147 152 n. 333, 155 147, 159, 185 n. 474 148 188, 129 138 n. 266 197 107 148 148 138 138 n. 266 202, 192 n. 510 168 n. 410 154 141 148 128 129, 152 120, 137 149 129, 150 120, 150, 152, 156 52, 120–21, 145–60, 211 149–50 148 150, 152, 153 n. 338, 156, 156 n. 354 142, 153, 157 152 n. 333 114 n. 168 145 n. 303, 146 n. 305, 152 152 n. 333 125, 145, 154–55, 154 n. 345, 157, 158, 187, 190, 192, 208, 211 152 n. 333 154–55 147, 158 156 152 n. 333, 154 n. 345, 158 155–56 194 104 n. 128, 194 198 194

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

240 32: 16 32: 17–18 32: 18 32: 19 33 33: 2 33: 2–4 33: 5 33: 6 33: 7 33: 19 33: 20 33: 20–22 33: 21 33: 22 33: 23 33: 24 33: 37 34: 3 34: 8 34: 10 34: 15 35: 1 35: 4 35: 5 35: 5–6 35: 6 35: 7 35: 9 36–39 36: 1 36: 6 36: 6–9 36: 11 36: 33–35 37: 3 37: 5 37: 24 37: 29 37: 32 37: 35 38: 6 38: 12 38: 16 38: 17 38: 19 1–39 39: 8 40–66

Indexes 157 158 n. 366 159 194 148, 150 138 n. 266 148 126, 157 104 158 n. 366 185 n. 474 125, 148, 194 148–49 167 n. 408 148 107 198 203 n. 541 104 n. 128 199 n. 529–30 104 n. 128 82 154 n. 345, 187 199 n. 530, 203 n. 541 201 201 154 n. 345, 187 154 n. 345 104 n. 128 22 n. 42 104 n. 128 103 n. 125 129 82 129 138 n. 266 82, 83 104 n. 128 104 n. 128 87 82, 83 142 125 n. 219 203 n. 541 158 n. 366 82 n. 30–31 21 158 n. 366 21

40: 1–2 40: 2 40: 6 40: 6–7 40: 8 40: 9 40: 11 40: 14 40: 22 40: 28 41: 3 41: 8 41: 8–9 41: 9 41: 18 41: 20 41: 21 41: 22–42: 7 41: 27 41: 28 42 42: 1

42: 1–4

42: 1–7 42: 1–8 42: 2 42: 3 42: 4

42: 5–8 42: 6 42: 7 42: 10 42: 12 ff. 42: 16 42: 16–19 42: 19 43: 1 43: 10 43: 20 43: 21 44: 1 44: 1–2

203 95 103 n. 126 109 103 n. 126 104 n. 128 203 185 n. 474 125 n. 219 154 n. 345 158 n. 366 82 n. 31 163 82 n. 31 154 n. 345 185 167 96, 167 120, 203 203 160 82 n. 30–31, 85, 96 n. 103, 110, 161, 164, 172, 204 52, 96, 111, 160–74, 170 n. 421, 193, 210, 211 96 n. 99, 172, 205 44, 161, 162 137 166 96, 107 n. 138, 113, 168, 169, 170, 170 n. 423, 170–72, 172 n. 430 162 n. 383 96, 174, 192 198, 201 168 n. 410 156 192 n. 510 192 82 n. 30, n. 31 164 82 n. 31, 185 n. 473 154 n. 345 149 82 n. 30–31, 164 n. 387 173

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

241

Indexes 44: 2 44: 3 44: 18 44: 21 44: 23 44: 24 44: 26 44: 28 45: 1 45: 4 45: 7 45: 8 45: 19 45: 23 46: 3 46: 6 46: 13 47: 3 47: 10 48: 1 48: 14 48: 18 48: 21 49: 1 49: 1–6 49: 1–9 49: 3 49: 5 49: 6 49: 8 49: 10 49: 13 49: 15 49: 22 49: 23 49: 26 50: 2 50: 4–5 50: 4–11 50: 10 51: 1 51: 3 51: 5 51: 7 51: 9 51: 12 51: 13

82 n. 30–31 154 n. 345 185 82 n. 30–31, 164 n. 387 143, 201 173 82 n. 30–31 204, 208 204, 208 82 n. 30–31, 164 n. 387, 204 158 n. 366 204 166 134, 156 82 n. 30–31, 147, 187 173–74 200 199 n. 530 185 128, 134, 166 204, 208 158 n. 366 154 n. 345 168 n. 410 160, 164, 172 44, 161, 173 106 n. 136, 173 173 82 n. 30–31, 173, 192 154 n. 345, 174, 192 203 203 82 107 106 n. 136 139 154 n. 345 187 44, 160, 161 82 n. 30–31, 191, 192 120 203 107 n. 138, 113, 172, 188, 188 n. 492 105, 110 189 203 139

51: 17 51: 18 51: 18–19 51: 19 51: 22 52: 1 52: 2 52: 7 52: 8–9 52: 10 52: 13 52: 13–15 52: 13–53: 12 52: 15 53 53: 1 53: 1–2 53: 1–7 53: 1–10 53: 2

53: 4 53: 5 53: 7–8 53: 8 53: 8–12 53: 9 53: 9–12 53: 10 53: 11

53: 11–12 53: 12 54: 2 54: 7–8 54: 10 54: 11 54: 13 55: 1 55: 7 55: 7–8 55: 13 56–66 56: 5 56: 8

189 n. 493 203 203 203 111 189 n. 493 198 158 n. 366 148 188–89 82 n. 30–31, 110, 185 n. 477 181, 185 n. 478 44, 52, 110, 160–61, 175–93, 205, 210, 212 185 n. 473, 182 n. 460 160, 176, 192 n. 513 188, 192 85 182–83 182 82 n. 37, 85, 93, 110, 154 n. 345, 185–86, 183 n. 462, 187, 196 n. 519 184 n. 468 158 n. 366, 202, 187 187 183 n. 463 183 183, 190 187–88 183, 185 n. 475, 192 110, 156 n. 354, 160, 182 n. 458, 183, 185 n. 475, 190–92 182, 190 183 125 n. 219 123 158 n. 366 203 158 n. 366 154 n. 345 198 94 104 n. 128, 136 45 n. 180, 46 106 n. 136 195

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

242 56: 11 57: 2 57: 5 57: 13 57: 16 57: 18 57: 18–19 57: 19 58: 6 58: 8–10 59: 8 59: 14–15 59: 16 59: 17 59: 18 59: 20 60 60: 1 60: 1–3 60: 2 60: 2–3 60: 5–6 60: 16 60: 17 60: 18 60: 19 60: 19–20 60: 19–21 60: 21 60: 22 61 61: 1

61: 1–2 61: 1–3 61: 2 61: 3 61: 7 61: 8 61: 10 61: 11 62 62: 1–2 62: 2 62: 7 62: 10 62: 11

Indexes 185 n. 474 158 n. 366 203 138 n. 66 146, 203 203 202 158 n. 366 198 192 158 n. 366 166 188 156, 199 n. 530 199 n. 529 104 n. 130, 195–96, 196 n. 519, 212 194–96 200 194 157 194 194 194 158 n. 366, 194 194 200 194 201 194, 200 195 194 110, 187, 197–98, 201– 202, 203–204, 204 n. 544, 210 193 n. 574 52, 193–205, 212 199, 203 200, 202 195 196 194, 200 103 n. 126 194–96 194 200 124 107 194

62: 11–12 63: 1–5 63: 4 63: 5 63: 7 63: 9 63: 16 63: 19 64: 7(6) 1–65 65: 4 65: 6 65: 9 65: 12 65: 13 65: 14 65: 16 65: 19 65: 24 1–66 66 66: 4 66: 6 66: 8 66: 10 66: 12 66: 12–13 66: 13 66: 16 66: 20 Jeremiah 12: 16 22: 20 23: 5 23: 5–6 30: 18 30 (49): 3 31 (48): 20 31 (48): 33 31: 31 ff. 33: 14–18 33: 15–16 33: 17 41 (34): 8 41 (34): 15

196 196 n. 519 199 n. 529, 200, 202 188, 196 111, 123, 148, 199 n. 529 138 n. 266 168 n. 411 168 n. 411 183 22 n. 42 197 199 n. 529 195 197 154 n. 345 137, 138 135 n. 250, 138 n. 266 138 137 44, 46, 111, 162 n. 382 22 n. 42 199 n. 529 199 n. 529 82 n. 30–31 202 82 n. 30, 158 n. 366, 203 203 203 111 143 n. 293 135 n. 250 138 186 55 124 138 121 119 n. 192 169 109 55 142 198 198

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

243

Indexes 41 (34): 17 46 (39): 17 48: 28 49 (42): 11

198 142 119 n. 193 142

Ezekiel 19: 3 21: 15 (10) 21: 20 (15) 46: 17

183 n. 462 16 n. 4 16 n. 4 198

Daniel 7 11: 7 12: 1 12: 3

95 108 n. 142 95 185 n. 478

Amos 4: 10

87

Theodotion Daniel 11: 7

108

Isaiah 53: 2 53: 9 61: 1

185–86 190 198

Symmachus Isaiah 53: 2 53: 9 61: 1

185–86 190 197 n. 521, 198

Vulgate

Micah 4: 1–5

169

Habakkuk 1: 4

169

Haggai 2: 23

55

Isaiah 11: 2 53: 15 61: 1 61: 2

104 182 n. 461 197 n. 521, 198 198–99

Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia 1 Enoch 48: 2–3 48: 6 48: 7 48: 6 62: 5–7 62: 7 62–63

157 157 202 157 157 157 190

Later Greek Translations and Secondary Versions

1 Maccabees 14: 25–49 14: 41

114 114

Aquila

2 Maccabees 2: 7

123

3 Maccabees 4: 1–10 6: 18–29

64 n. 50 64 n. 50

2 Baruch 10: 12 25–28 29: 2–4 30: 1 36: 4 ff. 39: 7

157 157–58 157–58 157–58 157–58 157–58

Zechariah 3: 8 6: 12 12: 7 9–14

55, 186 55, 185–86 124 55

Malachi 2: 7

95

Isaiah 52: 13 53: 2 53: 9 61: 1

185 n. 476 185–86 190 197–98

Peshita Isaiah 53: 9 53: 15

190 182 n. 461

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

244

Indexes

39: 7 72: 2–6 72: 11

157–58 202 202

4 Ezra (2 Esdras) 7: 28 157 11: 1–12: 36 157 11: 36–46 157 12: 32 157 12: 32–33 202 13: 37–38 202 Ben Sira (Sirach) 47: 22 108 48: 22–24 203 50: 5 (MT) 124 Psalms of Solomon 17 157, 210 17: 21 112, 157, 195 17: 21–35 195 17: 23 157 17: 23–27 202 17: 24 112 17: 26 59, 157 17: 27 71 17: 30 112, 157, 195 17: 30–35 202 17: 32 59, 71, 157 17: 35 112 17: 37 59, 112, 157 18: 5 158 n. 361 32: 37 59 Sibylline Oracles 3: 252–53 55 Wisdom of Solomon 5 190 New Testament Matthew 12: 21

168, also n. 411

2 Thessalonians 2: 8 112 Greek and Jewish Sources Hecataeus of Abdera apud Diodorus 40.3 70 40.4 70

Flavious Josephus Against Apion 1.228–29 66 1.232–33 66 2.12 69 2.14 69 2.20 57 2.49–55 64 n. 50 2.135 69 2.148 69 2.182–83 69 Jewish Antiquities 4.85 121 n. 199 18.4 116 18.5 116 Philo De Abrahamo 2.15 Flacc. 76 Praem. 79–172 162

71 68 n. 76 60 59

Papyri CPJUD 2.25–29 69 PIFAO 104 66–67 Qumran and Related Documents 1QSa 1: 8–11 a

1QIsa /1QIsa 1: 21 26: 8 42: 1–4 46: 10 51: 5 51: 1–10 53: 9 61: 1 62: 11

81 b

170 168, 171 170 170 188 n. 492 170 182 n. 459 198 170

4Q161 [4QpIsaa] frgs. 8–10 99 4Q285 frg. 5 frg. 7

99 99

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Indexes 4Q521 11Q Melch 2: 13

202 199, 202

Hodayot (hymn) 35=I,27–29 153

Isaiah (Jonathan ) 11: 6 108 53: 9 182 61: 1 197 n. 521 65: 25 108

Targum Exodus (Onqelos) 15: 8 153

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

245

246

Indexes

Index of Modern Authors Aejmelaeus, A. 169 Aichele, G. 37 Alexander, P. 65, 203 Alexander, L. 65 Alexander, P. S. 203 Allen, G. 31 Arnold, B. T. 106, 122 Baer, D. A. 20, 22–23, 26, 28–30, 41– 42, 44–45, 50–51, 115, 124, 130, 134– 135, 140, 143, 152, 188–189, 194–195, 199, 203 Bailey, D. P. 86, 110, 175, 177, 186, 190–192 Bakhtin, M. 31–32 Barclay, J. M. G. 54, 57–58, 63–66, 68– 70, 134, 136 Barr, J. 23–25, 27, 175 Barrera, J. T. 54 Barthes, R. 34–35 Bartlett, J. R. 63, 66, 144 Bastiaens, J.Ch. 41, 51 Bauckham, R. 99 Beal, T. K. 30–31, 35 Bertram, G. 17–18, 186–187 Beuken, W. A. M. 33, 145, 165, 169 Biddle, M. E. 49 Bietenhard, H. 167–168, 170 Blanchetière, F. 58 Blass, F. 137 Blenkinsopp, J. 45, 88, 100, 146 Bloom, H. 36 Box, G. H. 64, 67, 71 Boyarin, D. 37 Bratcher, R. G. 82 Brisco, T. V. 88, 92 Brockington, L. H. 200 Brown, R. E. 80–81 Broyles, C. C. 19–20 Brueggemann, W. 176 Brunet, G. 82 Buitenwerf, R. 144 Bultmann, R. 198 Carleton Paget, J. 17, 57, 59–60, 86, 139, 144, 202–203

Carroll, R. P. 33, 38 Chamberlain, J. V. 170–171, 188 Chester. A. 59–60, 171 Childs, B. S. 19–20 Choi, J. H. 106 Clayton, J. 30, 35–36 Coggins, R. 114 Cohen, S. J. D. 63 Collins, J. J. 20, 54–56, 58–61, 64, 66, 72, 91–92, 95, 144 Collins, A. Y. 91 Condra, E. 55, 60–62 Cook, J. 18–19, 39, 50 Coppens, J. 15–17, 100 Coste, J. 126, 158, 205 Cousin, H. 162, 170, 176 Croughs, M. 41, 133 Culler, J. 33 Curtis, A. 33 Dan, J. 63, 66 Daniel, J. L. 63, 66, 68–69, 71–72, 104, 130, 140, 143 Daniel, S. 104, 130, 140, 143 Davies, W. D. 57, 127, 165, 169, 171 Davis, C. J. 171 Dearman, J. A. 122 Debrunner, A. 137 Dines, J. M. 15, 23–25, 58 Dogniez, C. 22, 38–41, 49–50 Dorival, G. 39, 113, 141 Draisma, S. 33, 37 Dumbrell, W. J. 105 Ekblad, E. R. 20–21, 27, 41, 44–45, 50– 51, 82–83, 85, 93–94, 96, 110–111, 139, 141, 148, 156, 160–162, 164–168, 170–174, 176–177, 181–188, 190–192 Evans, C. A. 19–20, 197–198 Fabry, H.-J. 47, 54, 57–58, 86 Fewell, D. N. 30, 36–38 Fishbane, M. 37 Fitzmyer, J. A. 54, 86, 91, 98, 100, 109, 127, 145, 161, 176–177, 181, 184, 190, 193

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

Indexes Foerster, W. 158–159 Frankel, Z. 55–58 Fraser, P. M. 61, 63–64, 66, 68–72 Frey, J. 135–136 Friedman, S. S. 35 Frow, J. 33 Fuks, A. 66–67, 69 Gehman, H. S. 79, 136–137, 169 Genette, G. 33–35 Glenny, W. E. 47 Godard, B. 35 Goldingay, J. 114 Goldstein, J. A. 127 Gray, G. B. 21, 119 Grelot, P. 170, 176, 182–183, 185–186 Gruen, E. 144 Gzella, H. 163, 168, 172 Hammond, P. C. 116 Hanhart, R. 18, 26, 89 Harl, M. 15–16, 18, 26, 30, 39, 41, 51, 54, 56, 59, 107, 161, 193 Harlé, P. 198 Hatch, E. 90, 105–106, 168, 171, 199 Hatim, B. 24–25 Hayes, R. B. 37 Hebel, U. J. 34–35 Hecht, R. D. 59–60 Hegermann, H. 57–58, 63–64, 66, 68– 70 Hengel, M. 58–59, 86, 101, 110, 177, 186, 190–192 Henten, J. W. van 109 Hermisson, H.-J. 184 Heskett, R. 16, 19, 114, 145, 176, 184, 193, 203 Hibbard, J. T. 30–31, 33–36 Holquist, M. 31 Horbury, W. 15–17, 56–57, 95–97, 101, 109–112, 114, 124, 141–142, 145, 158, 202 Hugenberger, G. P. 164, 170 Hurwitz, M. S. 22 Janowski, B. 86, 175–176 Janthial, D. 146 Jaubert, A. 53, 56 Joachimsen, K. 38, 176

247

Jobes, K. H. 16, 18, 23, 27, 54–57, 116, 130, 135, 140, 176–177, 189, 191–192 Joosten, J. 22, 27, 58 Kaiser, O. 79, 114 Knibb, M. A. 15–18, 30, 47, 49, 54–55, 59, 98 Koch, K. 124–125 Koenen, K. 185 Koenig, J. 41–44, 99, 142, 152–155, 159, 168, 170–171, 190–192 Kooij, A. van der 20, 22–24, 26–27, 30, 41, 43–45, 49–51, 76, 87–91, 93–95, 113, 127–128, 132–137, 139–142, 144– 145, 161, 164, 172–173, 195, 211, 213 Koole, J. L. 162, 165, 169–170, 182– 183, 185, 188 Kraus, W. 12, 18, 22, 45, 47–49, 58 Kreuch, J. 146 Kristeva, J. 30–37 Léonas, A. 204 Laato, A. 62 Laberge, L. 20, 29, 146–150, 155, 167– 168 Lagrange, P. M.-J. 53, 56, 58, 108, 111– 112 Le Boulluec, A. 200 Le Déaut, R. 27, 50–51, 55–56, 58, 208 Le Moigne, P. 22, 90–91, 147–148, 189, 195–196, 204 Lemaire, A. 18, 37 Lemmelijn, B. 23, 26 Lindblad, U. 164 Louw, T. A. W. van der 27–29, 50, 88, 120, 134 Lust, J. 15–20, 76, 80–81, 86, 88, 90– 91, 141–142, 161 Marguerat, D. 33 Mason, I. 24–25 Maurer, C. 104, 107 McLay, R. T. 24 Mitchell, C. 35–36 Mittman, U. 177 Modrzejewski, J. M. 57, 63–65, 67 Monsengwo-Pasinya, L. 127, 132, 134–136, 139 Motyer, J. A. 115, 153, 165, 188

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449

248

Indexes

Munday, J. 24 Munnich, O. 16, 20, 39, 44, 86, 89–91, 108–109, 204 Muraoka, T. 29, 50, 198 Neves, J. C. M. das 27, 50, 87 Nida, E. A. 24–25 Nogalski, J. D. 37–38 Noy, D. 124 Olley, J. W. 23, 27, 50–51, 123, 126, 153, 156–157, 176, 190, 192, 201 Orlinsky, H. M. 176 Osborne, G. R. 162 Ottley, R. R. 20, 26, 42, 78, 119–121, 167–168, 171, 191, 200 Palmer, J. K. 25 Pao, D. W. 197 Pearson, B. W. R. 20 Peters, M. K. H. 48, 51 Petersen, D. L. 120 Phillips, G. A. 37 Pietersma, A. 12, 22, 39 Polanski, D. C. 37–38 Porten, B. 66, 136 Porter, S. E. 20, 109 Pralon, D. 198 Rad, G. van 158–159 Rahlfs, A. 51, 163 Rajak, T. 15, 54, 65, 95 Redpath, H. A. 90, 105–106, 168, 199 Reeves, J. C. 35 Roberts, R. P. 25, 114 Rösel, M. 18, 75–76, 80, 202 Rothstein, E. 30, 35–36 Rzach, A. 144 Saebø, M. 37 Salvesen, A. 86, 98, 114, 127, 161, 176, 193 Sanders, J. A. 193, 198–199 Sandevoir, P. 200 Sapp, D. A. 176, 182, 189, 191 Schäfer, P. 63–66, 68, 70, 72 Schaper, J. 15, 17, 19–21, 26, 28, 41–42, 46–47, 49–50, 57–58, 61, 71, 81, 84– 85, 91–94, 97, 107, 110, 114–117, 120, 127–128, 140–142, 175–176 Schnabel, E. J. 197 Schultz, R. L. 37–38

Schweitzer, S. J. 26 Seeligmann, I. L. 18, 20–23, 26, 28, 42, 55, 57–58, 61–62, 87–90, 94, 100, 115– 117, 128, 130, 134, 140, 143, 148–149, 152, 182, 190, 195 Silva, M. 16, 18, 23, 27, 54–57, 116, 130, 135, 140, 176–177, 189, 191–192 Sollamo, R. 17–18, 20, 23, 98–99, 105, 108, 112 Sommer, B. D. 35–38 Sousa, R. F. de 17, 20, 45–46, 78–81, 84–85, 90–91, 94–95, 98, 100, 104, 106–107, 109–110, 116, 144, 209 Stanton, G. 202 Starcky, J. 53, 56 Starobinski-Safran, E. 57–58, 65–66 Still, J. 35 Stuckenbruck, L. T. 112, 157–158 Stuhlmacher, P. 86, 175–176 Taber, C. R. 25 Tcherikover, V. A. 66–67, 69, 135 Theocharous, M. 39 Thomas, D. W. 51 Tomasino, A. 124–125 Tov, E. 16, 23–24, 26–29, 42–43, 50, 190 Troxel, R. L. 20, 22, 27, 41, 76, 79, 81, 83–84, 87, 89, 91–94, 99–100, 115, 128–129, 135, 140, 143, 146–149, 153– 155 Vaux, R. de 144 Vermes, G. 141, 157 Vogels, W. 133 Waard, J. 119–120, 190 Wagner, J. R. 87, 100, 146 Wallace, D. B. 105–106 Watts, J. D. W. 37, 120, 160, 165 Wegner, P. D. 114, 145–149, 153 Wevers, J. W. 113, 122, 198 Williamson, H. G. M. 114–115, 122– 123, 126, 153, 165, 169–170, 173, 194 Wolde, E. van 33, 37–38 Wolters, A. 109 Worton, M. 33, 35 Ziegler, J. 20–21, 23, 28, 41–42, 51, 77, 148, 163, 168, 173, 177, 183 Zillessen, A. 41–42, 172

© 2013, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535448 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535449