The Theme of Hardening in the Book of Isaiah: An Analysis of Communicative Action (Forschungen Zum Alten Testament 2.Reihe) 9783161501432, 3161501438

Citation preview

Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2. Reihe Edited by Bernd Janowski (Tübingen) · Mark S. Smith (New York) Hermann Spieckermann (Göttingen)

39

Torsten Uhlig

The Theme of Hardening in the Book of Isaiah An Analysis of Communicative Action

Mohr Siebeck

Torsten Uhlig, born 1975; 2001 Dipl.-Theol. (University of Leipzig); 2005 PhD (University of Gloucestershire); currently working as a pastor in the Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Saxony, Germany.

e-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-151137-0 ISBN 978-3-16-150143-2 ISSN 1611-4914 (Forschungen zum Alten Testament, 2. Reihe) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. © 2009 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Laupp & Göbel in Nehren on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren. Printed in Germany.

For Beate

Acknowledgements This book is a revision of my doctoral thesis accepted by the University of Gloucestershire in November 2005. I wish to thank Prof. Dr. Bernd Janowski, Prof. Dr. Hermann Spieckermann and Prof. Mark S. Smith for accepting this work for publication in the series Forschungen zum Alten Testament and for the latter’s suggestions which have improved the manuscript. I would also like to thank Dr. Henning Ziebritzki and Tanja Mix of Mohr Siebeck for their help in formatting the manuscript for publication. Before I express my gratitude to various other people, the date of this publication deserves mention. I grew up in East Germany, and currently reside near Plauen, where a crucial demonstration against the communist regime took place on 7 October 1989. I am reminded of the courage, prayers and faith of those who stood up for freedom against the tyranny in East Germany. In the following, I thank various people who accompanied me in my studies and helped me in different ways, but it was the events 20 years ago, that made it possible for me to meet them in the first place. I am particularly indebted to Professor Gordon J. Wenham (Cheltenham) and Professor Hugh G. M. Williamson (Oxford) who supervised this work. Through their critical, but ever-encouraging guidance, they strengthened both my argument and my articulation of it. It has been a great privilege to undertake this study with them. Thanks are due to the examiners Professor Christopher R. Seitz and Professor Gordon J. McConville for their critical comments. I am also grateful to Dr. Karl Möller (Lancaster) and his family who helped my wife and me in so many ways. The numerous discussions with him meant a lot to me. I also wish to thank my friends and fellow PhD students in Biblical studies in Cheltenham for the community that we had, for the intense studies in hermeneutics, their patience in listening to earlier parts of this work, and the mutual support that we enjoyed. Thanks are also due to the AfeT (Arbeitskreis für evangelikale Theologie), who gave substantial financial support in the form of a two-year scholarship. Furthermore, I am grateful to my parents for their immense and selfless support, as well as to my parents-in-law and my friends who have helped my wife and me during my postgraduate studies in various

VIII

Acknowledgements

ways. Additionally, I thank Brian Howell who has proof-read parts of this work. Most of all, however, I would like to thank my wife, Beate. Her courage at the beginning, her support, kindness, and even sacrifices throughout, and her patient encouragements at the end of my studies all made this work possible. This book is dedicated to her. It has been a great privilege to undertake this study, to be acquainted with the people mentioned above and to publish finally this work. But the greatest thing in my life is to know you, Beate, and to live with you and our Helen and Joshua.

Torsten Uhlig Altensalz (near Plauen, Germany), 9 November 2009

Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................... VII Abbreviations ....................................................................................... XV

Chapter 1: Encountering Hardening in the Present Situation: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations ..................... 1 1. 2. 3. 4.

Encountering Hardening ...................................................................... 1 Situating the Present Study in the History of Research ......................... 3 Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions .................................................. 9 The Genre of a Prophetic Book and the Method of Communicative Analysis ................................................................... 15

Chapter 2: Encountering Hardening in the Past: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah ................. 29 1. 2. 3. 4.

The Historical Setting of Isaiah and the Problems it Faces ................. 29 The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah ........... 45 The Addressees of the Book of Isaiah ................................................ 52 The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah: The Restoration of the People’s Righteousness .................................. 56 4.1 The Concept of ‘Connective Righteousness’ ............................... 56 4.2 The Restoration of ‘Connective Righteousness’ in Isaiah 40–66 .. 61 5. Notes on the Structure of the Book of Isaiah ...................................... 66

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6 and the Effect of Isaiah’s Proclamation ........................................ 73 1. Introduction ....................................................................................... 73 2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6 ........................................ 78 3. Leading to Isaiah’s Commission: Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7 .......... 82

X

Contents

3.1 The Descriptive Framework of Isaiah 6 ....................................... 82 3.2 A Few Remarks on the Form of Isaiah 6 and Its Position in the Literary Context ................................................................ 83 3.3 Main Aspects of Isaiah 6:1–7 ...................................................... 84 4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10 ................ 96 4.1 Individual Aspects and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 6:9–10 ..... 96 4.2 Why Isaiah 6:9–10 Is not Ironic ................................................ 104 4.3 A Complex Unity of Isaiah 6:9–10 against a Simple Distinction 106 4.4 The Communicative Interaction between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10 ........................................................................ 108 4.5 Summary ................................................................................... 113 5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6 .................... 116 5.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 6 ............................................. 116 5.2 The Perlocutionary Role of Isaiah 6 .......................................... 120 5.2.1 Isaiah 6 as the ‘Speech of Isaiah’ and the Consequences for Its Perlocutionary Role .............................................. 120 5.2.2 The Interpretation of Isaiah 8:16 and the Identity of the ʭʩʣʮʬ ...................................................................... 121 5.2.3 Isaiah 6:11–13, Its Relationship to Isaiah 7–39 and the Duration of Isaiah’s Hardening Ministry .................... 131 6. Conclusions and Summary ............................................................... 140

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23 .......................................................................... 144 1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25 .......................................................... 144 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................. 144 1.2 Structure and Poetics ................................................................. 145 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 42:18–25 ............................. 149 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 42:18–25 ....................... 149 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 42:18–25 ........................................................... 150 1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25 ............................. 159 2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 ..................................................... 163 2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 40:12–42:13 ................................ 163 2.2 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 43:8–13 ....................................... 165 2.2.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 43:8–13 165 2.2.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 43:8–13 ..................... 168 2.3 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 44:6–20 ....................................... 171 2.3.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 44:6–20 171 2.3.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 44:6–20 ..................... 174

Contents

XI

2.4 Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 ............................................... 176 2.4.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 42:14–44:23 ....................................................... 176 2.4.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 .............. 185 3. Summary ......................................................................................... 187

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened before the Return: Isaiah 44:24–49:13 .......................................................................... 189 1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11 ............................................................ 189 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................. 189 1.2 Structure and Poetics ................................................................. 190 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 48:1–11 .............................. 194 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 48:1–11 ......................... 194 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 48:1–11 ............................................................. 197 1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11 ............................... 201 2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13 ..................................................... 208 2.1 Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13 ............................................... 208 2.1.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 44:24–49:13 ...................................................... 208 2.1.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13 .............. 216 3. Summary ......................................................................................... 217

Chapter 6: The Individual Servant and the Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13 .................. 219 1. Hardening in Isaiah 50 ..................................................................... 219 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................. 219 1.2 Structure and Poetics ................................................................. 220 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 50 ....................................... 223 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 50 ................................. 223 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 50 ..................................................................... 224 1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 50 ....................................... 234 2. Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10 ..................................................... 237 2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 51:1–8 ......................................... 237 2.2 Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10 ............................................... 239 2.2.1 Notes on the Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 49:14–52:10 ...................................................... 239

XII

Contents

2.2.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10 .............. 241 3. Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13 ..................................................... 242 3.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 52:13–53:12 ................................ 242 3.2 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13 ................................ 245 4. Summary ......................................................................................... 247

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland – Characterization and Reversal: Isaiah 56:9–59:21 .................... 249 1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2 ......................................................... 249 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................. 249 1.2 Structure and Poetics ................................................................. 250 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 56:9–57:2 ........................... 251 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 56:9–57:2 ...................... 251 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 56:9–57:2 .......................................................... 254 1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2 ............................ 260 2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21 ....................................................... 261 2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 58–59 .......................................... 261 2.1.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 58–59 ... 261 2.1.2 Communication and Hardness – The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 58–59 ................................................................ 268 2.2 Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21 ................................................ 271 2.2.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 56:9–59:21 ........................................................ 271 2.2.2 Isaiah 57:14–21, a Prophetic Voice and the Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21 ................................... 275 3. Summary ......................................................................................... 285

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11 . 287 1. Introduction ..................................................................................... 287 2. Structure and Poetics ....................................................................... 288 3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11 .......................... 292 3.1 The Communicative Strategy within Isaiah 63:7–64:11 ............. 292 3.2 The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11 within the Book of Isaiah .......................................................... 296 3.2.1 Literary Parallels between Isaiah 63:9–64:11 and the Book of Isaiah ........................................................... 296

Contents

XIII

3.2.2 The Communal Lament Isaiah 63:7–64:11 as a Complaint about the Delay of Salvation ............................................ 299 3.2.3 The Communal Lament Isaiah 63:7–64:11 as a Disclosure of the Hardened ............................................................... 299 4. The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 63:9–64:11 ................................ 311 5. Summary ......................................................................................... 314

Chapter 9: Summary and Conclusion .......................................... 316 1. Summary ......................................................................................... 316 2. Conclusion ...................................................................................... 320

Appendix 1 Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25 .................... 323 Appendix 2 On the Interpretation of the Term ʺʥʲʬ in Isaiah 50:4 and the Different Interpretations of Isaiah 50:10 ......................................... 338 Appendix 3 Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 ............................................ 343 Bibliography ........................................................................................ 349 Source Index ........................................................................................ 383 Author Index ........................................................................................ 406 Subject Index ....................................................................................... 414

Abbreviations The abbreviations follow SCHWERTNER, S. M., Internationales Abkürzungsverzeichnis für Theologie und Grenzgebiete (IATG), 2th edition, Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1992. In addition the following abbreviations are used: ABD ABG AOTC BI BWM CurBS DDD

DUL

ESV GK GKC HCOT HThK.AT HBS JM

LHB/OTS NIBC NIDOTTE

NSK-AT OBT SHS TLOT ZAB WBC

Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. D. N. Freedman, New York et. al.: Doubleday, 1992 Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte Apollos Old Testament Commentary Biblical Interpretation Bibelwissenschaftliche Monographien Currents in Research: Biblical Studies Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd edition, ed. K. van der Toorn, P. W. van der Horst & B. Becking, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1998 A Dictionary of Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition, G. del Olmo Lete & J. Sanmartin, ed. and trans. W. G. E. Watson, Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003 The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, HarperCollins, 2001 Wilhelm Gesenius’ Hebräische Grammatik, ed. E. Kautzsch, 27th edition, Leipzig, 1902 Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch, trans. A. E. Cowley, 2nd edition, Oxford, 1910 Historical Commentary on the Old Testament Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament Herder’s Biblische Studien A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew: Volumes I+II, P. Joüon, trans. and rev. T. Muraoka (subsidia biblica, 14/1+2), Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1996 Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies New International Biblical Commentary New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. W. A. VanGemeren, Grand Rapids: Zondervan; Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1996 Neuer Stuttgarter Kommentar: Altes Testament Overtures to Biblical Theology Scripture and Hermeneutics Series Theological Lexicon of Old Testament, ed. E. Jenni & C. Westermann, trans. M. E. Biddle, Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 1997 Zeitschrift für Althebraistik Word Biblical Commentary

Chapter 1

Encountering Hardening in the Present Situation: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations 1. Encountering Hardening 1. Encountering ‘Hardening’

And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.” And he said, “Go, and say to this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” (Isa 6:8–10, ESV)

Reading the commission of the prophet Isaiah is and always will be confusing, perplexing and even shocking, whether one reads it for the first or the hundred-and-first time, either as a professional exegete or as a layperson. It has come to be known as the call to “harden” the people and has attracted a flood of comments and interpretations,1 not least because of what it could say about God, who commissions the prophet in the first place. Is it just the deserved judgement for the sins of the people so that we encounter God in his commission to “harden” them as the apparent judge in an understandably reactive judgement against sinners?2 Or, do we encounter God in his commission to harden the people as obscure, whose actions remain incomprehensible; are we confronted here with a ‘dark side’ of God, with the deus absconditus?3 When we read further in the 1

For a survey of the main proposals see below “1. Introduction” in chapter 3. Thus, e.g., ROBINSON, Motif. 3 See, for instance, VON RAD, Theology II, 151–155 (especially 152; on the significance of the hiddenness of YHWH in von Rad’s concept of an OT [and Biblical] theology, cf. IDEM, Theology II, 374–378, 415 and especially S ÆBØ, Yahweh). U. BECKER, Jesaja, 84–87, 159–160 argues that both elements are present in Isa 6 through its context, depending on which editorial layer one looks at. The perception of God as the deus absconditus played an important part in Luther’s distinction between the understandable wrath of God and the incomprehensible wrath of God so that it is helpful to remind ourselves of these differences. B AYER, Luthers Theologie, 178 (italics mine) says in respect to the former: “Es findet immer noch eine Kommunikation zwischen Gott und Mensch statt. Jona und mit ihm jeder Sünder kann deuten, was ihm widerfährt; er hört darin Got2

2

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

Book of Isaiah (Isa), however, we soon become aware that other passages take up aspects of Isaiah’s commission. They state the addressees’ inability to see and hear (cf. Isa 42:18–20; 43:8), speak of the future overcoming of this condition (cf. Isa 29:18; 30:30; 32:3–4), or predict their healing (cf. Isa 35:5); we find a group lamenting the hardness of their hearts (Isa 63:17), some passages state the addressees’ ignorance (cf. Isa 1:2–3; 56:9– 57:2), while others announce the gaining of knowledge and understanding (cf. Isa 11:9; 29:23–24) etc. Thus within the whole Book of Isaiah the commission of Isaiah is not the only (or the last) word about “hardening” in this broader sense that is interrelated with and includes various aspects. This study presents an investigation into the theme of hardening in Isa not only in Isa 6, but also in other texts, especially in Isa 40–66. It will shed new light on the interpretation of this challenging theme by approaching these texts from the perspective of an analysis of communicative action. This approach will be based on the determination of the genre of prophetic books. Accordingly, prophetic books serve to mediate communication between a deity and specific addressees. It will be argued that Isa as a prophetic book serves to mediate communicative acts of YHWH to the people of Judah and Jerusalem in a specific situation and that the theme of hardening is part of, and indeed plays a crucial role in, this dynamic communicative process. The study seeks to show that “hardening” (and its reversal) are presented as communicative acts in Isa and are performed as such as part of this communicative process. Taking up recent suggestions to understand righteousness as “connective righteousness”, the present study will demonstrate that “hardening” is related to the communicative aspect of “connective righteousness”. A brief survey of studies will show that the frequent occurrence of the theme of hardening in Isa has been increasingly noticed. But it will also indicate, first, that a more comprehensive discussion especially of the related texts in Isa 40–66 is necessary; secondly, that the significance of hardening in Isa and its contribution to the book as a whole are rather underrated; and, thirdly, that the recognition of the multiple dimensions of communicative action is also underdeveloped in respect to the discussion of hardening in Isa. tes verständliche Stimme – wenn auch nicht die seiner Gnade”. Bayer associates this understandable wrath of God with the ‘deed consequences connection’ in the OT. In respect to the latter, however, B AYER, Luthers Theologie, 179 (original italics deleted, present italics mine) notes that it is “Gottes verzehrend schreckliche[…] Verborgenheit, in der sein unverständlicher Zorn wirkt, in dem ich ihn nicht mehr hören, jedenfalls nicht mehr ‘verstehen’ kann, sondern nur noch als Schrecken ‘höre’, ihn als erdrückend, furchtbar, unheimlich erfahre.”

2. Situating the Present Study in the History of Research

3

2. Situating the Present Study in the History of Research 2. Situating the Present Study in the History of Research

While the scholarly interest in the interpretation of Isaiah’s call to harden his people in Isa 6 and its place in the proclamation of Isaiah ben Amoz has always been immense, the recognition of this theme in the second part of Isa is relatively recent and the interpretations of its significance for the final form of Isa are still quite restricted.4 In 1955 Franz Hesse published a comprehensive study on the “problem of hardening in the Old Testament”.5 He identifyed and discussed all phrases that are related to hardening in the OT and thereby surveyed the semantic field of hardening and its related aspects of perception and understanding.6 He also recognized its presence in the writings of Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah.7 But his main interest was in the history of the motif of hardening,8 and so he confined his analysis to a discussion of its place in the salvation history9 with no further comment on possible implications for the whole Book of Isaiah. It was the groundbreaking essay of Ronald Clements about “The Unity of the Book of Isaiah” from 1982 that pointed to the significance of the theme of “blindness and deafness” for the perception of Isa as a unified whole.10 In further essays he substantiated these observations, although he confined his comments to occurrences in Isa 1–55.11 With the increased interest in final form readings of Isa, other studies joined Clements in identifying hardening as an important unifying theme in Isa and those passages that relate to it.12 And for those who studied the redactional development 4

For surveys of the research on the Book of Isaiah in general, see, e.g., SWEENEY, Recent Research; T ATE, Book of Isaiah; U. BECKER, Jesajaforschung; HÖFFKEN, Stand and now W ILLIAMSON, Recent issues. 5 Cf. HESSE, Verstockungsproblem. 6 Cf. HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 7–30. 7 He notes Isa 42:18–25; 43:8; 44:18; 48:4, 8; 56:10–57:2; 59:10; 63:17; cf. H ESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 24–25, 36–37, 61–62, 74–77, 93–94. 8 Cf. the subtitle of his study: “Eine Frömmigkeitsgeschichtliche Untersuchung”, which one could roughly translate as “a religio-historical investigation”. 9 Cf. HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 79–95 (on the different parts of Isa see especially HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 82–91, 93–94). 10 Cf. CLEMENTS, Unity, 100. 11 Cf. C LEMENTS, Beyond Tradition History, 101–104 and IDEM, Patterns, in which he comments on Isa 6:9–10; 28:7; 29:9–10, 18; 30:20–21; 32:3; 35:5–6 and 42:7, 16; 42:18– 21; 43:8 and 44:18. 12 Cf. RENDTORFF, Jesaja 6, 76–78; W ATTS, Isaiah 1–33, 75; MATHEUS, Singt, 165– 169; SHEPPARD, Scope, 270–271; STANSELL, Isaiah 28–33, 75–77, 85–86, 97–98; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 113; BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 167; cf. also the occasional comments on this aspect in GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 22, 244–245, 319–320 and SEITZ, Isaiah 40– 66, 369, 376, 388, 418, 437, 490, 529. Schultz commented on a particular aspect; he just

4

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

of Isa, these passages were at the heart of their arguments.13 But these works rarely did more than cite the passages related to the theme of hardening, blindness and deafness. Moreover, with few exceptions the theme of hardening in Isa 56–66 remained unnoticed. In his study of early Jewish and Christian interpretations of Isa 6:9–10, Craig Evans also commented briefly on other texts in Isa that deal with the “obduracy motif” and “in what ways the Isaianic obduracy motif functions in the canonical form of the book of Isaiah.”14 Discussing Isa 42:18–20; 43:8 and 44:18, he notes that while Isa 6:9–10 and 29:9–10 proclaim that God causes hardening, Second Isaiah says only that the people are in an obdurate condition. Moreover, these passages are part of the message of Second Isaiah, which announces that as part of their restoration they will be perceptive again (referring to Isa 40:5–28). Unlike other studies, Evans also notices Isa 59:9–10 and Isa 63:17, although he does not comment on how these parts are integrated in the wider literary context. Overall, these “obduracy and restoration texts are an important part of the dialectic of ruin and future blessedness to which the book of Isaiah as a whole gives expression.”15 Evans has included a number of important passages among the “obduracy texts” and has rightly emphasized that they play a crucial part in the whole book. But not only would a communicative analysis go beyond a mere description of ‘statements’, there are also further passages that need to be considered. Most importantly, however, a more detailed discussion of the integration of these texts within the immediate literary context is necessary to further clarify their role in Isa. Although discussing specific hardening texts even less, Edgar Conrad’s monograph Reading Isaiah nevertheless presented a distinctive proposal on the function of hardening in Isa. He suggested that this theme contributes to the book’s presentation of the earlier vision of Isaiah. According to notes that the messianic king in Isa 1–39 and the Servant in Isa 40–55 have the task in common to overcome hardness (cf. SCHULTZ, King, 156). 13 W ILLIAMSON, Book, 46–51 noted the various passages in Isa 40–55 that relate to Isa 6:9–10 (he mentions Isa 40:21; 41:20; 42:16, 18–19; 43:8, 10; 44:18; 52:15; and also recognizes 56:10–11; 57:1 outside of Isa 40–55) and takes this among his evidence that Isa 40–55 has been composed as a continuation of the message of Isa (Isa *1–35) by Deutero-Isaiah (taking up and substantiating the same suggestion of CLEMENTS, Beyond Tradition History). Others ascribe several of these passages in Isa 40–55 to later editions (this applies especially to Isa 42:18–25 and 44:9–20; for some also Isa 43:8 is part of a later edition; cf. the summaries in HERMISSON, Einheit, 311; KRATZ, Kyros, 217; VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 207–213) so that the editorial layer(s) that deal with the theme of ‘blindness and deafness’ in Isa 40–55 could be related to the combination of the formerly independent compositions Isa *1–39 and Isa *40–55(60–62); cf. the reflections in KRATZ, Kyros, 208; U. BECKER, Jesaja, 284–286. 14 Cf. EVANS, To See, 42–46 (quotation from p.42). 15 Cf. EVANS, To See, 42.

2. Situating the Present Study in the History of Research

5

him Isa 1–5 and 40–66 speak to the “implied audience” of Isa. But within this “book” is contained the “vision of Isaiah” (Isa 6–39), framed and marked by the “royal narratives”.16 Conrad argues that the vision of Isaiah is regarded as YHWH’s teaching, which is sealed, however, because the community of Isaiah has not received it favourably and became blind and deaf instead. Together with the sealing of YHWH’s instruction it contains an announcement that “in that day” the book will be opened, read and be understood. He understands the imperative ʠʸʷ qƟrƗ’ in Isa 40:6 as a call to “read!”17 the vision of Isaiah, contained in Isa 6–39, and argues that the implied community of the whole book lives “in that day”. 18 While Conrad’s study is full of interesting observations and suggestions and his attempt to include reflections on the problem of blindness and deafness in the interpretation of Isa tries to do justice to its significance, there are a number of shortcomings. Although Conrad mentions that Isaiah is called to make fat the heart of his audience, he usually refers to Isa 6 as speaking of the audience’s inability to see and hear.19 Furthermore, he develops his interpretation without discussing in any detail passages like Isa 42:18–25; 43:8–13 and 48:1–11 or Isa 56:9–57:2; 63:17. Hence, his comments remain rather superficial. In his explanation of the role of Deutero-Isaiah in the composition of Isa *1–55 from 1994, Hugh Williamson noted the theme of blindness and deafness as an important theme demonstrating the influence of Isaiah on Deutero-Isaiah.20 But it is also briefly recognized when Williamson presents his view on the precise nature of the relationship between First Isaiah and Deutero-Isaiah. Interpreting Isa 50:4–9 as the speech of DeuteroIsaiah, Williamson argues that Deutero-Isaiah expresses his confidence to be “qualified” to unseal the document of First Isaiah. In this respect Williamson concentrates on the various scrolls and writings mentioned in Isa 8:1–4; 8:16; 30:8, but he also briefly notes that Deutero-Isaiah is unlike the

16

Cf. CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 34–51, 117–143. Cf. CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 137. 18 CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 150–151 notes: “Chapters 40–66 represent ‘in that day’ about which Isaiah’s vision speaks. It is that day when his vision will be read to the blind and deaf, who now can see and hear. It is that day when the vision will provide the testimony of and a witness to the LORD’s work in the world. It is that day when the LORD will have witnesses to his plan announced long ago in Isaiah’s vision. It is that day that is about to occur and that constitutes the present experience of the implied community.” On the whole argument, cf. CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 117–153. 19 Cf. CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 131, 132, 137. 20 See the remarks above on those who incorporated the theme of hardening within hypotheses of the growth of Isa. 17

6

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

generation of First Isaiah because his ears are open daily (Isa 50:4b–5a).21 Williamson’s study is, of course, not an extensive discussion of the theme of hardening; but apart from the various passages that he notes as related to it, he has recognized Isa 50:4–5 as a crucial text in respect to the reversal of hardening, which requires more detailed discussion.22 Also in 1994, John McLaughlin devoted an essay to the theme of hardening in Isa.23 After having discussed Isa 6:9–10, he divides his further discussion on other hardening texts into two parts. He deals with Isa 29:9– 10; 44:18 and 63:17 as texts that also speak of hardening as an act of God, while Isa 32:3–4a and 42:6–7 speak of the reversal of hardening. McLaughlin concludes that the location of these texts indicate a programmatic function within the whole book. Isa 6:9–10 and Isa 29:9–10 serve to ensure in their contexts that YHWH will punish his people. Isa 32:3–4a and Isa 42:6–7 show that the divine hardening is not the last word. Once the punishment has been completed, the people’s condition will be reversed. Isa 44:18 and esp. 63:17 then limit this scope of reversal in postexilic times. While Isa 44:18 explains the hardening of some parts of the community as a limit to Isa 42:7 by appeal to Isa 6:9–10, Isa 63:17 may have occurred again in a different situation, when large parts of the community are described as hardened. While McLaughlin can show by his study that hardening is a “foundationally significant concept”24 in the final form of Isa, he has difficulties determining what this concept actually looks like. His change into diachronic explanations of the differences between Isa 44:18 and 63:17 on the one hand and Isa 42:7 on the other cannot offer any help as far as the interpretation of the final form of Isa is concerned. Moreover, as his discussion of Isa 32:3–4a and 42:7 departs from the initial interest in those texts that contain the “divine causative aspect of the motif”25 of hardening, further texts would have to be included to present a fuller picture. In another essay, Geoffrey Robinson boiled down all the texts he discusses in relation to the “motif of deafness and blindness” in Isa (i.e. Isa 21 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 107–108. In a later book, Williamson also notes that in Isa 55:2–3 the same formulation of the call to listen like in Isa 6:9 and the same reference to “ears” can be found (cf. W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 121) and interprets it as a hint that “Deutero-Isaiah’s audience is being given a chance to undo (or at least not to repeat) the fateful inability of Isaiah’s generation to listen” (WILLIAMSON, Variations, 122). 22 V INCENT, Auge, 90 argues that Isa 53 exemplifies the (partly) overcoming of hardness and, thereby, points at another potentially significant passage about the overcoming of hardening in Isa 40–55. He does, however, not specify, why it is a “partly” overcoming, or why he puts “partly” in brackets and what this statement means. 23 Cf. MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts. 24 Cf. MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 25. 25 MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 2.

2. Situating the Present Study in the History of Research

7

1:2–9, 10–15; 5:12, 19; 6:9–10; 29:9–24; 35; 42:18–20; 43:8–13; 44:18) to the simple theological perspective that on the one hand “deafness and blindness represent a divine response of judgment to the people’s choice to be deaf and blind to the presence and claims of God”26 and that on the other hand Isa also expresses hope in the reversal of blindness in some future eschatological time. As these themes “are remarkably well harmonized between so-called First and Second Isaiah”27, this could even serve to amplify the notion of a single Isaianic authorship of the whole book.28 This treatment of the theme of hardening is unsatisfying in many ways. In his insistence that God confirms the people in their chosen state of blindness and deafness through hardening,29 Robinson fails to recognize the difference between passages like Isa 5:12, 19 and Isa 6:9–10. In fact, the former do not speak of the state of the people but of their actions (or lack of actions), while Isa 6:9–10 does indeed change the state of the addressees. Hence Robinson fails to do justice to the severity of Isaiah’s commission. By not discussing Isa 48:1–11, he furthermore misses the different time structures that are crucial for Isa 1–39 on the one hand, and Isa 40–66 on the other, which may have made him more cautious in his claims of Isaianic authorship. Moreover, the claim of “spiritual blindness” of the people does not do justice to the various aspects that are present in Isa 5 and inform the perception of Isa 6. Finally, there are more texts that are related to the theme in Isa, which, had they been included, could have led to a far more nuanced view on the motif of blindness and deafness in Isa. Finally, in his reading of the “ideology” of Isa in 1998, Antti Laato treated the motif of hardening. Adopting the traditional division of Isa, Laato finds that the motif of hardening is linked to the remnant theology in Isa 1–39. Accordingly, Isa 1–39 presents the Assyrian invasion as a purifying judgement. The majority of the people will be hardened until only a remnant remains (referring to Isa 6:11–12).30 Various passages within Isa 1–39 look forward to a future of salvation for the remnant, which seems to be “temporarily fulfilled” when the Assyrians are defeated and Hezekiah’s summons of the prophet to pray for the remnant even indicates “that the process of hardening is coming to an end”31. But Isa 1 and Isa 39 demonstrate that “the destruction of Zion is possible even after its miraculous salvation” and suggest to potential readers to regard Isa 36–39 “not only as the great salvation of Jerusalem but as offering the people of Judah two 26

ROBINSON, Motif, 180. ROBINSON, Motif, 183n.45. 28 Cf. ROBINSON, Motif, 173–174, 183n.45. 29 Cf. ROBINSON, Motif, 177–179. 30 Cf. LAATO, Zion, 76, 96–97. 31 LAATO, Zion, 76. 27

8

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

alternatives: to obey and prosper or to rebel and be destroyed (1:18–20).”32 In this perspective Isa 36–37 describes the period when the heart of the remnant will understand the message of the sealed book (Isa 6:1–9:6); but at the same time the theme of hardening of the people continues and leads finally to the Babylonian exile.33 Isa 40–55 presents then the period of hardening as belonging to the past and the new period begins when the eyes and ears of the people will be opened.34 It is part of the salvation of the exodus in Isa 40–55 that the blind and deaf can see and hear again; and Laato argues that “the censure of the blind and the deaf in 42:18–19; 43:8; 56:10; 59:10 implies that the possibility is open for them to see and hear again.”35 And what has been predicted in Isa 35 will be received by the “loyal servant” in the coming age of salvation, as Isa 50:5 shows.36 But then Isa 56–66 takes up the motif of hardening among other themes to explain why the programme of salvation did not come to pass after the return from the Babylonian exile.37 It even serves to define the “ideologicalhistorical context” of Isa, when one looks at Isa 63:7–64:11. Containing the question why YHWH has hardened them, the lament can be understood as “a response to the dilemma that Yhwh has not fulfilled his plan of salvation but still hides his face.”38 Laato has recognized the significance of the theme of hardening for the reading of Isa as a unity and has tried to incorporate it in his interpretation. But his dispersed treatment of it is not extensive; many passages are only briefly mentioned. It also seems that Laato has difficulties in relating the already announced overcoming of hardening in Isa 40–55 with the continuing hardness in Isa 56–66. In the present study, a different determination of the relationship between Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 and the approach of an analysis of communicative action will shed new light on these issues. This survey of studies that have traced the theme of hardening through the whole Book of Isaiah shows that there are a number of texts that relate to this theme.39 Several studies are primarily concerned with the identification of these texts, which often takes place as part of the wider issue of how the unity of Isa is to be conceived. Only a few works were found to attempting to relate them to the overall message of the book. But, to do 32

LAATO, Zion, 80. Cf. LAATO, Zion, 102. 34 Cf. LAATO, Zion, 85, 186–187. 35 LAATO, Zion, 140. 36 LAATO, Zion, 140. 37 Cf. LAATO, Zion, 85, 200. 38 LAATO, Zion, 54. 39 SONNET, motif and AITKEN, Hearing have also discussed the motif of hardening on the level of the final form of Isa but confined their discussions to Isa 1–39. 33

3. Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions

9

justice to the complexity of the theme, a far more comprehensive study is necessary. What all the surveyed studies have in common, however, is their common starting point in Isa 6:9–10. In this context, the present study seeks to investigate more comprehensively the passages related to the theme of hardening. As even this extensive work cannot deal with all the relevant passages at equal length, it focuses primarily on Isa 6 as the starting point and then on Isa 40–66 to illumine the role of “hardening” in the canonical form of Isa. Moreover, according to the approach to be clarified below, this interpretation attends to the hardening texts not only as theological concepts, but also as part of a dynamic communicative process. The next paragraph briefly makes transparent some hermeneutical presuppositions of the present study (3), before I clarify the methodology based on the genre of a prophetic book (4).

3. Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions 3. Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions

The possibility and indeed necessity of a critical explanation of the text by applying certain methods, as it is pursued in the present study, presupposes Paul Ricœur’s model of interpretation as a “hermeneutical arc”.40 According to Ricœur, every process of interpretation consists of the dialectic of critical explanation and understanding (as appropriation). With this concept of a general hermeneutics, Ricœur takes seriously the fact that every process of interpretation and understanding takes place with, and necessarily incurs, presuppositions. He also secures the need for criticism in the process of understanding a text, which can and has to be investigated, discussed and evaluated by critical methods.41 Ricœur’s hermeneutical arc (‘understanding – explanation – understanding’), which he developed in view of texts,42 starts with the first reading. 40

Cf. RICŒUR, Interpretation theory and various essays in IDEM, Hermeneutics. What Thiselton writes in respect to Ricœur’s philosophy in general also applies to his concept of a general hermeneutics; T HISELTON, Biblical Studies, 101 notes that Ricœur shares “with Gadamer the task of dethroning the self as the centre of the stage from Descartes to later modernity, while resisting the postmodern reduction of so decentring the self that it becomes a mere amalgam of imposed role-performances rather than an active, responsible, accountable agent whose life has purpose, continuity and destiny.” 42 For Ricœur it is the text that has a leading role in uncovering constitutive aspects of the discourse, because in the text only discourse is fully manifested; cf. RICŒUR, Model of the Text, 202: “Only writing, in freeing itself, not only from its author, but from the narrowness of the dialogical situation, reveals this destination of discourse as projecting a world.” (italics mine). It is worth noting, here, that by this concept Ricœur does not fall to prey to “phonocentrism” and the consequent accusation of Derrida. Yet by developing a different model of text he can contribute to the present discussion an alternative to 41

10

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

This leads to an initial grasping of a text’s meaning, a first understanding, or “guess”, as Ricœur calls it.43 As a text can be constructed in more than one way but not in every way, a process of validation (and falsification) of different interpretations of a text is necessary. 44 In turn, this step of a critical explanation has to lead ultimately to a critically informed understanding, or a (post-)critical understanding, of the text. It is not possible in the course of this study to describe in detail the various aspects and implications of Ricœur’s model of hermeneutics, nor to engage in a discussion with other (competing) proposals.45 It can only serve here to make transparent the hermeneutical presuppositions for the chosen approach that is clarified below (see 4). But there is one further aspect that should be highlighted, because of its implications for the choice of methodology. Ricœur employs the methodology of structuralism for the critical pole of the process of interpretation of texts. Stiver argues that other critical methodologies could fit in here as well and suggests that in, “the religious field, this would be the place for traditional historical methods – for example, textual criticism, tradition criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism, and social criticism.”46 In my opinion, however, Stiver fails to recognize and to apply the methodological-critical potential implied in Ricœur’s hermeneutic to “other critical methodologies”. In contrast, Laughery shows with respect to biblical hermeneutics and to the methods of historical criticism and structuralism in particular that for Ricœur methods are not autonomous but have to be open for criticism from the perspective of the overall hermeneutics.47 Hermeneutics and the related broader concerns enable and necessitate the continuous test and review of methodology, changes in specific methods, complementing by other methods, etc.

post-structural proposals; cf. in this respect the remarks in MATTERN, Ricœur, 77, 80–92 (especially 89–90); VANHOOZER, Meaning, 204; LAUGHERY, Hermeneutics, 37–39. 43 Cf. R ICŒUR, Model of the Text, 211–213. On p.212 he notes that a text “is more than a linear succession of sentences. It is a cumulative, holistic process.” 44 Thus, e.g., RICŒUR, Model of the Text, 210–215; IDEM, Central Problem, 174–176. 45 For a comprehensive discussion of contemporary hermeneutical problems in relation to Biblical interpretation, cf. especially T HISELTON, New Horizons. For a brief orientation, cf. also BARTON (ed.), Biblical Interpretation; OEMING, Biblische Hermeneutik and in respect to the interpretation of the OT, cf. BARTON, Reading. 46 STIVER, Theology, 63. 47 Cf. LAUGHERY, Hermeneutics, 158: “Ricoeur seeks to link them, in acknowledging that each has a place, when and if there is a methodological aperture that accepts a critique of its hubris. A hermeneutic method then, is capable of englobing the other methods and their concerns, while being differentiated from them and offering more, in that it seeks to recognize the place of a reader who is related to and affected by such investigative efforts.”

3. Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions

11

When each of these methods are understood as needing to be critiqued and complemented, the one by the other, they are now open to the new possibility of working together. In turn, when each is integrated within broader concerns: a theory of language, a discourse definition of the text, the dialectic of event and meaning, explanation and understanding, sense and reference, there can be the creation of a new level of concern, a hermeneutical method.48

Necessary is the continuous reflection upon methodology especially from the perspective of ideology critique.49 The latter has shown the illusion of the “tradition of the cogito” to know itself by immediate intuition. So as we can understand ourselves only by the “detour of the signs of humanity deposited in cultural works” and can receive “an enlarged self” through reading, those methods have to be identified that endanger such a capacity by imposing categories that are familiar to “the limited self” upon the understanding of a text. Thus such a method must be called into question, which restricts textual interpretation to categories of logical consistence which are measured against the reader’s restricted concept of a text as a

48

LAUGHERY, Hermeneutics, 158. Ricœur argues that critique of ideology is a constitutive element of understanding because a distanciation of the reader from himself takes place in understanding; thus, e.g., IDEM, Appropriation, 192–193; IDEM, Critique of Ideology (especially 94–95); IDEM, Hermeneutical Function, 142–144. What is involved in understanding is “appropriation”, “the process by which one makes one’s own (eigen) what was initially other or alien (fremd)” (IDEM, Central Problem, 178). What the reader is to appropriate, according to Ricœur, is not a hidden intention but the world proposed in front of the text. But this necessitates a transformation of the reader: “For the work itself has constructed the reader in his role” (IDEM, Appropriation, 189). Hence, as “reader, I find myself only by losing myself. Reading introduces me into the imaginative variations of the ego. The metamorphosis of the world in play is also the playful metamorphosis of the ego” (IDEM, Hermeneutical Function, 144). Consequently, for Ricœur it is part of the critical explanation for the sake of understanding to make sure that every reader exposes himself to the text instead of imposing his conceptions upon the text: “Thus appropriation ceases to appear as a kind of possession, as a way of taking hold of … It implies instead a moment of dispossession of the narcissistic ego. This process of dispossession is the work of the sort of universality and atemporality implied by the explanatory procedures. Only the interpretation which satisfies the injunction of the text, which follows the ‘arrow’ of meaning and endeavours to ‘think in accordance with’ it, engenders a new selfunderstanding. By the expression ‘self-understanding’, I should like to contrast the self which emerges from the understanding of the text to the ego which claims to precede this understanding. It is the text, with its universal power of unveiling, which gives a self to the ego” (IDEM, Appropriation, 192–193 [italics original]; cf. also IDEM, Critique of Ideology, 94–95; later the confrontation of the Self with literary works, especially narratives, becomes a crucial aspect of his analysis of “selfhood”; cf. RICŒUR, Oneself). Many see in this a significant contribution to the Gadamer-Habermas debate; cf. in particular KAPLAN, Theory, 37–45. 49

12

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

sequence of non-contradictory statements.50 So these concerns have to be considered in methodological reflections, if one takes up Ricœur’s notion of the interpretative process as a “hermeneutical arc” of ‘understanding – explanation – understanding’ and the dialectic complementation of the hermeneutically conditioned understanding and analytical explanation: Above all, the vis-à-vis of appropriation is what Gadamer calls ‘the matter of the text’ and what I call here ‘the world of the work’. Ultimately, what I appropriate is a proposed world. The latter is not behind the text, as a hidden intention would be, but in front of it, as that which the work unfolds, discovers, reveals. Henceforth, to understand is to understand oneself in front of the text. It is not a question of imposing upon the text our finite capacity of understanding, but of exposing ourselves to the text and receiving from it an enlarged self, which would be the proposed existence corresponding in the most suitable way to the world proposed.51

Having referred to Ricœur’s hermeneutical arc as the presupposition that the present study applies a critical, methodological approach to the understanding of Isa and the texts dealing with the theme of hardening, we now must sketch some of the traits of speech-act theory as another presupposition for what kind of approach is chosen.52 50 The literary criticism of the 19th century is a clear example of such a method that has to be criticized from the hermeneutical perspective, and critique of ideology in particular. The self-confident literary critic, or the literary critic confident of knowing himself by the immediate intuition of his reason, approaches the biblical texts by cutting everything off that does not fit into his understanding of a ‘proper text’. What the literary critic of the 19th century can only understand to be a contradiction is excluded from the text he is able and willing to understand. From the perspective of ideology critique and hermeneutics this process of interpretation, however, is a shortcut. It does not take the detour of the text to expose oneself to the world the text proposes; such an approach cannot lead to an understanding of the world of the text, in which ideas can be associated that for the literary critic, his self and his world are only contradictory, because it does impose the own self and world upon the text. In the light of these reflections one can only remain hesitant about a redaction criticism that bases itself explicitly on the foundation of 19th century literary criticism and the related concepts of language and hermeneutics; so KRATZ, Redaktionsgeschichte/Redaktionskritik, 371: “Gleichwohl gingen von den Alten wichtige Impulse für die redaktionsgeschichtliche Betrachtungsweise aus. Mit dem Aufweis literarischer Zusätze zu bestehenden Texten im Sinne der Ergänzungshypothese hat die Literarkritik des 19. und frühen 20.Jh. (repräsentativ J. Wellhausen, B. Duhm) das einschlägige, nur nicht hinreichend gewürdigte Material geliefert.” 51 R ICŒUR, Hermeneutical Function, 143 (italics original). 52 For the time being I prefer to differentiate between the general hermeneutics of Ricœur and the specific approach (or methodology) of an analysis of communicative action in and by a text on the basis of its specific genre, as it is described below. Other scholars advocate speech-act theory not only for certain genres of texts but also for general hermeneutics; cf. already the way Searle applies speech-act theory to narratives in IDEM , Fictional Discourse; then e.g. W OLTERSDORFF, Divine Discourse; IDEM , Promise; F. W ATSON, Text, 98–103; VANHOOZER, Meaning (for instance 214–219, 225–229), IDEM , Speech Acts. See especially the cautious remarks of Thiselton in respect to speech-

3. Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions

13

Speech-act theory arose as a transformation and development of the initial distinction between “constatives” and “performatives”, by which Austin tried to overcome what he called “‘descriptive’ fallacies”53: It was for too long the assumption of philosophers that the business of a ‘statement’ can only be to ‘describe’ some state of affairs, or to ‘state some fact’, which it must do either truly or falsely.54

Instead Austin turned his attention to utterances where uttering a sentence is doing an action, e.g. “I name this ship the Queen Elizabeth”55, and called this kind of utterance “performative sentence” indicating “that the issuing of the utterance is the performing of an action”56. Austin furthermore distinguished these performative sentences in “explicit performative” and “primary utterance/performative”. In the former case the action is made explicit in the used verb, while it is lacking in the latter case. The exemplary utterances are, for the former “I promise that I shall be there” and for the latter “I shall be there”57. Realizing that these differentiations do not suffice, Austin introduces another distinction: It is time to make a fresh start on the problem. We want to reconsider more generally the senses in which to say something may be to do something, or in saying something we do something (and also perhaps to consider the different case in which by saying something we do something).58

He distinguishes three senses in “doing something”: First, there is the act of saying something, when saying something is to do something. Austin calls this the “locutionary act”. Secondly, there is the act of doing something in saying something, an “illocutionary act”. Thirdly, one can speak of a “perlocutionary act” when an act is performed by saying something:59 We can similarly distinguish the locutionary act ‘he said that …’ from the illocutionary act ‘he argued that …’ and the perlocutionary act ‘he convinced me that …’60

act theory and hermeneutics; thus, e.g., T HISELTON, New Horizons, 32–35; IDEM, Communicative Action, 172–182, 202; IDEM, Behind, 103–106. 53 AUSTIN, How to Do, 3. 54 AUSTIN, How to Do, 1. 55 Cf. AUSTIN, How to Do, 5. 56 AUSTIN, How to Do, 6. 57 Cf. AUSTIN, How to Do, 69; for the general distinction see his sixth lecture (AUSTIN, How to Do, 67–82). 58 AUSTIN, How to Do, 91. 59 Cf. AUSTIN, How to Do, 94–103. To quote one of the examples that he uses to illustrate this differentiation, the sentence “He said to me ‘Shoot her!’.” indicates a locutionary act, the sentence “He urged (or advised, ordered, &c.) me to shoot her.” indicates an illocutionary act, and “He persuaded me to shoot her” or “He got me to (or made me, &c.) shoot her.” a perlocutionary act (AUSTIN, How to Do, 101–102). 60 AUSTIN, How to Do, 102.

14

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

Finally, Austin sees the necessity to give up entirely the distinction between “constatives” and “performatives” and to develop instead a classification of different illocutionary acts.61 In this respect Austin notes that the differentiation between primary and explicit performatives survives the transition from the performative/constative distinction to the theory of speech-acts insofar as the verbs formerly regarded as explicit performative verbs can be seen as those that make explicit the illocutionary act.62 Searle has then developed speech-act theory significantly, especially in regard to the rules that apply to the use of any illocutionary act, 63 the significance of “institutions” as “systems of constitutive rules” that presuppose the performance of illocutionary acts,64 and the development of a “taxonomy of illocutionary acts” on the basis of clearer categories.65 According to this taxonomy, there are only five types or classes of illocutionary speech-acts, which Searle (and Vanderveken) describe briefly as follows: We have claimed that as far as illocutionary forces are concerned there are five and only five fundamental types and thus five and only five illocutionary ways of using language. One can say how things are (assertives), one can try to get other people to do things (directives), one can commit oneself to doing things (commissives), one can bring about changes in the world through one’s utterances (declarations), and one can express one’s feelings and attitudes (expressives). 66

There are now, of course, far more contributions to philosophy of language and the problem of speech-acts in particular.67 The present study, however, takes up the investigation of A. Wagner about speech-acts in the Hebrew language,68 who has based his analysis primarily on Austin’s and Searle’s works. Having indicated some of the hermeneutical presuppositions of this study, we shall now clarify the methodology that is applied to the discussion of ‘Hardening’ in Isa.

61

So in his twelfth lecture (AUSTIN, How to Do, 148–164). Cf. AUSTIN, How to Do, 149–150. 63 Cf. SEARLE, Speech Acts, 62–64. 64 Cf. SEARLE, Speech Acts, 50–53. 65 Cf. SEARLE, Taxonomy. 66 SEARLE & VANDERVEKEN, Foundations, 52. On the development of this taxonomy of five illocutionary types (or classes), cf. also S EARLE, Taxonomy (especially 1–8, 12– 20). 67 Cf. the discussion in T HISELTON, New Horizons, 283–312, 385–393, 597–604 and the bibliographies in W HITE (ed.), Speech Act Theory, 163–178. 68 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte. 62

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

15

4. The Genre of a Prophetic Book and the Method of Communicative Analysis 4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

Ricœur elucidates three main features of written discourse perceived as “work”. First, a work is a sequence longer than a sentence, it is a whole; secondly, the work is submitted to a form of codification, which is known as a literary genre; thirdly, a work is given a unique configuration, which can be called its style.69 The interpretation of a text as a work starts with a first reading and a “guess” of how the text has to be constructed as a whole by the reading process.70 Part of this first process of “guessing”, involves narrowing the scope of generic concepts concerning the literary genre, and the class of text to which this text belongs, the various structures in the text to individualise the unique text.71 Applied to the interpretation of the Book of Isaiah, this means that the determination of the genre of this book is crucial for the way one understands it (as much as a deeper understanding of Isa will affect the perception of its genre), and more specifically, for the methodology one applies to its interpretation.72 For that purpose one may distinguish three different approaches to the construction of a prophetic writing as a whole that are currently discussed.73 First, there are those that regard the prophetic book as a more or less well-organized collection of the original prophetic units, 69

Cf. RICŒUR, Hermeneutical Function, 136–138. Cf. R ICŒUR, Model of the Text, 211–213. In this respect his remarks are noteworthy that a text “is more than a linear succession of sentences. It is a cumulative, holistic process.” (RICŒUR, Model of the Text, 212) 71 Cf. RICŒUR, Model of the Text, 211. 72 R ICŒUR, Model of the Text, 211 emphasizes the circularity of this process: “The reconstruction of the text as a whole necessarily has a circular character, in the sense that the presupposition of a certain kind of whole is implied in the recognition of the parts. Reciprocally, it is in construing the details that we construe the whole.” This is what he calls “guess”. It is then the task of “explanation” to validate or falsify this guess, therefore, also the notion of the genre of a text. 73 Although this is of course related, it is not possible here to engage in the debate about the relationship of the actual prophets to the literature ascribed to them. Several scholars have argued that the ‘writing prophets’ are basically a late construction of scribes, cf. (though with different nuances) AULD, Prophets: Between (as well as his responses to some critiques: IDEM, Prophets: A Response; IDEM, Prophecy in Books); CARROLL, Poets; IDEM, Whose Prophet; P. R. DAVIES, Audiences; IDEM, Pen of Iron and the critical responses to Auld and Carroll by W ILLIAMSON, Response and OVERHOLT, Prophecy in History; IDEM, It is Difficult. For further discussions cf. B ARSTAD, No Prophets; J ARICK, Prophets; ODELL, Prophets. New perspectives in this respect might be gained by comparisons with Ancient Near Eastern prophecy; cf. especially the studies in B EN ZVI & F LOYD (eds.), Writing, (especially VAN SETERS, Prophetic Orality and N ISSINEN, Spoken) and N ISSINEN (ed.), Prophecy, (especially B ARSTAD, Comparare; PETERSEN, Defining Prophecy). 70

16

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

either regarded in the classical form-critical paradigm as small units,74 or as longer speeches,75 or more recently as different forms of prophetic literature.76 While some of them recognize that the original units may have been integrated into a considerably consistent composition,77 the main perception is that within prophetic books the original prophetic units can be discerned,78 hence it is seen as a kind of archive, or composition of collected original units. Secondly, other scholars view prophetic books as literature. Accordingly, their focus of interest is not on the original units, but on the final form with its distinctive features. This approach is based either

74

Cf. the paradigmatic statement of WESTERMANN: “Wie […] gezeigt wurde, enthalten die Prophetenbücher drei Hauptteile des Redens: A Berichte, B Prophetenworte, C von Menschen an Gott gerichtete Worte (Gebet).” (IDEM, Grundformen, 64). 75 In respect to the interpretation of Isa (or parts of it) the studies of Gitay are of particular importance here (cf. especially IDEM, Prophecy; IDEM, Isaiah). 76 P ETERSEN, Basic Forms seeks to overcome the limits of Westermann’s form-critical study of prophetic speech (see above) by associating the activities of Israel’s prophets to the formation of literary forms. The movement, however, is the same: what can be discerned first are “basic forms”, which relate to other texts in a prophetic book only on a secondary level; cf. also the ‘strategy’ in his introduction (IDEM, Prophetic Literature, 18–19): he identifies three levels of prophetic literature: (1) the individual saying or report; (2) intermediate collections of such units; (3) the prophetic book itself. He concludes: “Only after these individual entities have been identified is it then possible to approach a larger collection or even a book in its entirety.” ( IDEM, Prophetic Literature, 19). 77 Westermann is again a good example for such an integration of form-critical study and analysis of the (secondary) composition, especially in respect to his studies on Deutero-Isaiah; cf. IDEM, Sprache; IDEM, Jesaja 40–66. It is worth noting that some redaction-critical analyses follow still this movement from the original form-critical units to larger editorial layers (cf. paradigmatically T. COLLINS, Mantle, 26–34), while others start with the final form of the text and work backwards from there (so the programmatic study of STECK, Prophetic Books, 17–114). Cf., e.g., the study of KOENEN, Ethik for the former movement in contrast to the studies of Steck (apart from the other studies in IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja see especially IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 60–62; IDEM , Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,9–59,21; 63:1–6; IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,1–8; 63,7–66,24 in explicit contrast to KOENEN; then also IDEM , Autor) regarding the editorial history of Isa 56–66, or of VAN O ORSCHOT, Babel in contrast to Steck (his studies in IDEM, Gottesknecht und Zion) and KRATZ, Kyros in respect to the editorial history of Isa 40–55. 78 Cf. recently KOCH, Profetenbuchüberschriften, 182 for the priority of comparable surface structures; similarly the vote of REVENTLOW, Ezechiel 18,1–20, 157 against the priority of the text. Like Koch (referring to parallels in Egyptian wisdom literature; cf. IDEM , Profetenbuchüberschriften, 172–175), PETERSEN, Basic Forms and RÖSEL, Inscriptional Evidence point to material of the ANE and inscriptions found in Palestine for a renewed (and justified) interest in original forms that have been later included in larger collections and compositions.

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

17

on the aesthetic perspective on prophetic books as literature79 or on the theological perspective on prophetic books as canonical (=authoritative) writings.80 Thirdly, in a few studies the question of how we construe the text of prophetic books as a whole is related to the question of their setting, the social conditions of their writing and reading. P. R. Davies argues that prophetic books were primarily the product of scribes who imitated the traditional style of intermediaries and wrote for their own interest. So the copyists of the material produced by previous scribes were the primary readership.81 Steck equally sees the professional guild of scribes and scribal interpreters as the primary setting of prophetic texts, whom he calls “tradent prophets”. The wider public might be affected only subsequently.82 In contrast to Davies, he elucidates this context by the subtle interrelationships and structures in the text83 and in particular the “high cultures of reading and learning presupposed by the continuation process (Fortschreibungsprozesse)”84. Ben Zvi (and following him Floyd) asks for the specific recognition of genre and setting of a ‘prophetic book’, explicitly extending the form-critical question to the whole book.85 Being a “subset within the genre of ‘authoritative Israelite book’”, the ‘prophetic book’ shares its common features. It has (1) a clear beginning, (2) conclusion and (3) a substantial level of textual coherence, which Ben Zvi calls the “body 79

Cf. in respect to Isa only the monographs (and commentaries) of LACK, Symbolique (although he also integrated redaction-critical reflections; cf. ibid. 142–145); WATTS, Isaiah 1–33; IDEM, Isaiah 34–66; CONRAD, Reading Isaiah; IDEM, Reading the Latter Prophets; (QUINN-)M ISCALL, Isaiah; IDEM, Reading; DARR, Isaiah’s Vision; A. DAVIES, Double Standards; various studies in V ERMEYLEN (ed.), Book; MELUGIN & S WEENEY (eds.), New Visions; VAN RUITEN & VERVENNE (eds.), Studies; BROYLES & EVANS (eds.), Writing I. 80 As regards studies on Isa, see, e.g., CHILDS, Introduction, 311–338; IDEM, Isaiah; IDEM , Struggle (especially 299–324); ACKROYD, Isaiah I–XII; IDEM, Isaiah 36–39; RENDTORFF, Komposition; IDEM, Jesaja 6; IDEM, Jesaja 56,1; IDEM, Book; IDEM, Theologie I, 155–186; SEITZ, Making Sense (speaking of a “Canonical Critical approach”, 105); IDEM , (First Isaiah); IDEM, (Third Isaiah); IDEM, Zion’s Final Destiny; IDEM , Isaiah 1–39; IDEM , Isaiah and the Search; IDEM , Isaiah 40–66; BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 1–39; IDEM , Isaiah 40–66. 81 Cf. P. R. DAVIES, Audiences; similarly IDEM, Pen of iron. 82 Cf. STECK, Heimkehr, 83–84, 102 and especially in his programmatic monograph IDEM , Prophetic Books, 153–156. Steck notes that these specialists had of course sought the public in order to serve them with their knowledge, but it is not clear in which manner this “external contact took place” (ibid. 154). 83 Cf. in contrast P. R. DAVIES, Audiences, 60: “Had they been creating literature for such study, they would presumably have provided more of a shape, by which I do not mean the kind of shape that ingenious modern literary and canonical critics and theologians can invent post factum.” (italics original). 84 STECK, Prophetic Books, 153. 85 Cf. B EN ZVI, Prophetic Book; FLOYD, Basic Trends.

18

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

of the book”. The latter consists of a series of “prophetic readings”, the only genre present in the body of a prophetic book, a cohesive subunit within the book as a whole.86 It is prophetic as it claims an association with a prophetic personage of the past, is presented as YHWH’s word and claims to convey legitimate and authoritative knowledge about YHWH.87 As a written work, the primary setting of a prophetic book is reading. But as only a rather small number of people were able to write and read, the question of the social realities of reading emerges. Ben Zvi concludes that writing, transmission and reading of prophetic books were limited to the scribes. They were the primary readership.88 He also notes, however, that at least parts of the prophetic books or some “prophetic readings” were read aloud by the scribes to the wider public and perhaps interpreted (in stark contrast to Davies’ proposals, and also more explicitly than Steck’s).89 In this respect he also notes that features of orality (and aurality) are integral to prophetic books, even though this does not change anything in respect to their primary setting.90 Others, however, have stressed the oral features in Hebrew literature even further. According to them He-

86

BEN ZVI, Prophetic Book, 286–287 defines the prophetic readings as “literary units within a prophetic book that show textually inscribed, discursive markers that were likely to suggest to its intended and primary readership that they were supposed – or at least invited – to read and reread these sections as cohesive subunits within the frame of the prophetic book as a whole.” See also IDEM, Micah, 7–8. Note also that Ben Zvi sees “a clear tendency to dehistoricize the prophetic texts” in the prophetic readings ( IDEM, Prophetic Book, 292–293 [quotation from p.292]), which according to him has significant consequences in respect to a redactional history. See on this also his comments under the headings “Setting” in each section of his commentary on Micah (IDEM, Micah). 87 Cf. B EN ZVI, Prophetic Book, 281–283; similarly IDEM, Micah, 187–188. FLOYD, Basic Trends, 307–308 seeks to refine Ben Zvi’s approach by including the notion of different types of prophetic books. 88 Cf. B EN ZVI, Prophetic Book, 294: “the primary social location for the production and primary reception of prophetic books – and of the ‘prophetic readings’ they are composed of – cannot be found anywhere but within a narrow group of elite literati.” (italics original); cf. also IDEM, Micah, 187–188. In respect to the nature of the prophetic scribal power play, FLOYD, Basic Trends, 310–311 introduces two particular questions: (1) how were the scribes related to the Persian imperial administration; and (2) how was the relationship of the Yehudite literati to the Jewish communities of the Diaspora. 89 Only briefly in BEN ZVI, Prophetic Book, 295; more extensively in IDEM, Introduction, 16–24. 90 B EN ZVI, Introduction, 23 emphasizes: “To be sure, none of these considerations leads to the conclusion that the prophetic books are not the product of the high literacy of the literati themselves. Rather they show that literacy in general, and the work and world of the literati, should be considered as integral parts of a larger social system. […] It is worth noting that the present discussion clearly leads to an image of ‘restricted, high literacy’ and ‘general orality’ as two deeply interwoven social phenomena.”

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

19

brew literature was composed in “oral style” in order to match the needs of them being read aloud to the common public.91 In the light of these discussions the following reflections contribute to the “construction of the text of the prophetic book” as it will be presupposed in the present study. In respect to the first position, which views the prophetic book as a collection of original prophetic units, it must be said that the starting point can only be the prophetic book in its final form, i.e. the form of what LXX and MT basically share by the first century B.C., for which Steck has made a strong argument. He starts his ‘treatise’ on the interpretation of prophetic books by recognizing the present uncertainties.92 The lack of consensus is felt particularly strongly in respect to the various reconstructions of the prophets, their lives and messages. So one is forced to ask whether our knowledge of the tradition-process in the prophetic books is so precise and so certain that one may simply proceed “on the basis of this postulation about original prophetic logia in order to analyze, to arrange, and to separate the traces of editorial work”93. Instead Steck points to the limited knowledge that we have of the transmission process.94 He insists that the 91 See especially the study of N IDITCH, Oral Word. In respect to the interpretation of Isa, the studies of Gitay are of particular interest. He emphasizes that the material we find in Isa (he presents studies of Isa 1–12 and Isa 40–48 respectively) was composed as speeches for oral delivery; cf. IDEM, Deutero-Isaiah. The interest in the “oral style” of written texts goes back to the studies of Milman Parry and Albert Lord in the parallels between Homer and the South Slavic guslar (singer of tales), which inspired further studies (and debates) in respect to the composition of Homeric (and other classic) literature according to oral performances; cf. on the state of this discussion FOLEY, Sign. See furthermore CRENSHAW, Transmitting; CULLEY, Orality; and VAN SETERS, Prophetic Orality, who discuss various aspects of the relationship between prophetic literature in the OT and “orality”; and REDFORD, Scribe; VAN DER TOORN, From the Oral; NISSINEN, Spoken in respect to “literacy” and “orality” in the ANE. BAKKER, Composition, 30 introduces a differentiation as regards “oral style” in Homeric scholarship that could also be fruitful for the discussion of prophetic books: he distinguishes between “medial” and “conceptional” sense of “oral”. He also notes that while as a medium “oral” excludes “written”, in “the conceptional sense” the relation between “oral” and its opposite (“literate”) can be seen as two poles of a continuum. 92 Cf. STECK, Prophetic Books, 6: “However, all of the traditional certainty has broken down in Old Testament research, including the area of the prophets. The return trip to the final text of the prophetic books as we have it stands alongside the still dominant search for the original prophet.” 93 STECK, Prophetic Books, 9. 94 Cf. STECK, Prophetic Books, 9: “to this point we have no satisfactory insight. By moving directly to the search for logia, we bypass the literary transmission process and the inquiry into its own productive elements. The customary opinion is anything but selfevident that small units of proclamation can be isolated from the prophetic books without

20

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

notion of the prophet as speaker in form criticism cannot be the starting point because this is just the image of the prophet that the book presents.95 Hence, “We only possess the book, and only the book is the ground upon which we can pose our question.”96 Consequently, Steck opts for the necessary reversal of the paths of inquiry and even challenges prophetic research at last to begin with that which we have before us (and as we have it before us). 97 It must be the path of investigating the given form of the book as a whole and its literary stages back to indicators for reconstructing the work of a plausible prophetic figure (in most cases). […] One may thus conclude the following: Today, if the guiding criteria are not the subjective assessment and the personal outlook of the exegete, then determinations about the original prophetic figure can no longer be the presupposition. Instead, only at the end can they be the result of investigations into the book’s shape.98

Regarding the second position, that emphasizes the literary dimension of prophetic books, the brief remarks of Ricœur need to be kept in mind, according to which any preconception of the genre of literature affects the actual reading and understanding of it. So one cannot avoid reflections on the genre of literature.99 Thus I agree with those mentioned under the third position that the way one constructs a text has to be clarified. For the present study two main presuppositions are of particular importance in this respect. First, the prophetic books were composed partly (if not predominantly) for oral delivery. The view that they were read only (so, P. R. Davies; similarly, e.g., Steck) by scribes for their own education is too narrow.100 The Old Testament depicts several times an oral setting for the scrolls containing YHWH’s word101 and therefore commends such a view. Furthermore, the difficulty. Also, one stops too infrequently to question whether the use of a genre and formulaic work leads directly to the prophet or to question where one finds indicators of later literary shaping.” 95 STECK, Prophetic Books, 9. In this respect Steck takes up the concerns as they have been expressed by Auld, Carroll and P. R. Davies (see above). As the further discussion in Steck shows, however, he regards the task as possible to trace back to the original prophet. 96 STECK, Prophetic Books, 9. 97 STECK, Prophetic Books, 10. 98 STECK, Prophetic Books, 11. For such a procedure in more detail see STECK, Prophetic Books, 68–69, 72–114. 99 Cf., e.g., BEN ZVI, Obadiah, 4 for a similar notion in respect to an analysis of an OT prophetic book. 100 The recent study of SCHAMS, Jewish Scribes does not shed much light on the question, how the composition and reading of prophetic scrolls and the sociology of scribes are related, but does not exclude the possibility advocated here, either. 101 Cf. Exod 24:3–7; Deut 31:9–11; Josh 8:30–35; 2 Kgs 23:2–3 (par. 2 Chr 34:30– 31); Jer 36:6–10; Neh 8 (and the reaction in Neh 9); note also the comments in W ATTS, Public Reading, 540–542; IDEM, Rhetorical Strategy, 3; MÖLLER, Prophet, 50–57. B EN

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

21

great number of summons to listen in prophetic books indicates an orientation towards oral/aural perception.102 Additionally, comparable material in the ANE strengthens the view that written material may be composed for an oral setting primarily. Evidence shows that material of intermediation could be written down for two different purposes. On the one hand, when the addressee was not reachable by oral communication, the written material would fulfil a kind of substitutionary role; on the other hand, it served to preserve them for later generations.103 Particularly in the first case, it would be clearly oriented towards orality (and aurality). A big difference between other oracles from the ANE and the prophetic books of the OT is the extent of the latter. But the inscription found at Tell Deir ‘Allah104 at least indicates that more complex prophetic texts were composed for a ZVI, Prophetic Book, 295n.67 also notes with reference to Deut 4:5–10; 31:10–13 that the prophetic books were not meant to remain among the literati only. He adds, however, that the performances of such readings were likely to be controlled by the centre of power in Jerusalem (referring to 2 Chr 17:7–9; Neh 8; Deut 31:10–13). While Steck seems not to discuss this issue, P. R. Davies refers to Sir 38:24; 39:1; Dan 9 and Hos 14:10 (ET 14:9) in order to argue that only scribes read prophetic scrolls for themselves and from time to time added things to them; in respect to Jer 36 he argues that it does not reflect actual practice; at best it could describe an exception to the rule and as such cannot explain how the other prophetic writings came into being (cf. IDEM, Audience, 53). But his objections to prophetic books as means of intermediation seem rather artificial and there is enough evidence from the ANE that it was apparently common practice to write prophetic oracles down not the least when the prophet was not able to be present; see especially the discussion of N ISSINEN, Spoken. Unfortunately, the recent study of VENEMA, Reading on Deut 9–10; 31; 2 Kgs 22–23; Jer 36 and Neh 8 does not provide further insight into the questions of public reading in Ancient Israel. He takes for granted, though, that these books were intended to be read aloud in public (cf. VENEMA, Reading, 224). 102 See, e.g., Isa 28:14; 42:18; 46:3, 12; 48:1; 55:3; Jer 2:4; 10:1; 13:15; Hos 4:1; 5:1; Joel 1:2; Amos 3:1; 4:1; 5:1; Mic 3:1, 9; 6:1, 9. KOCH, Profetenbuchüberschriften, 182 remarks in respect to the summons to hear that they suggest a composition for public recital rather than individual reading. (It follows for him that the catchword relations are of less significance than supposed by some redaction-critical studies, but this can be left aside here). One may of course say with P.R. Davies that this feature is due to an imitation of the “style of intermediation”. But this would presuppose we knew that this was part of the style of intermediation. If we take instead the starting point with the final form seriously, then these summons to listen remain valid for the perception of the whole. 103 Cf. VAN SETERS, Response and especially N ISSINEN, Spoken. 104 For a transliteration, translation as well as further literature on transliteration, translation, discussion of this important inscription see NISSINEN, Prophets, 207–212 (no. 138); cf. additionally RÖSEL, Inscriptional Evidence, 117–118 (and further literature noted there). In the meantime, Matthijs de Jong has compared Isaianic material in Isa 1– 39 with Assyrian prophecies; cf. J ONG, Isaiah. It seems, however, that his restriction of comparative material to Assyrian prophecies predetermines the shape of the material of the earliest stages of the Isaiah tradition too much.

22

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

wider public, not only for archival purposes. Thus the mere presence of written material cannot support the view that its use was restricted to a few scribes only. At least parts of the prophetic books played an important role in the public area.105 Secondly, if the main feature of prophetic material is its status of intermediation as an act or process of communication between a deity and an addressee by words of an intermediary,106 then such material must be investigated according to the various dimensions of communicative action. This does not only apply to individual passages, but to the prophetic book as a whole. It is in its entirety the communicative act of YHWH through an individual.107 This recognition, however, renders the notions of prophetic books as conveying “a voice of social and political philosophy” (P. R. Davies),108 or “theological concepts” (Steck),109 or “legitimate and authoritative knowledge about YHWH” (Ben Zvi)110 as insufficient because they are limited in their scope to ‘ASSERTIVE’ illocutionary acts. If the notion of the whole prophetic book as a communication of YHWH (= word of YHWH) is appropriate then the prophetic book cannot be viewed as con105

Cf. similarly SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 16–18 who says more specifically that prophetic books were read as part of the temple liturgy; for a similar hint, cf. BERGES, Personifications, 77. 106 Cf. the definition in N ISSINEN, Prophets, 1: “Prophecy [...] is human transmission of allegedly divine messages.” All other aspects “are subordinate to the basic understanding of prophecy as a process of transmission.” Accordingly, the “prophetic process of transmission consists of the divine sender of the message, the message itself, the human transmitter of the message and the recipient(s) of the message.” (ibid. 2). For a typology of the various characterizations of prophets held in scholarly discussion, their evaluation and a vote for the concept of “intermediation”, see also OVERHOLT, Prophecy; P ETERSEN, Defining Prophecy (especially 33–41 and further literature there). 107 So most of the superscriptions of the prophetic books; cf. TUCKER, Superscriptions; IDEM, Isaiah 1–39, 47–48; BEN ZVI, Obadiah, 10–19; IDEM, Micah, 13; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 175; B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 57–58; MÖLLER , Prophet, 166. Note, however, that some scholars ascribe only a limited role to the superscriptions: GOLDINGAY regards the superscription in Isa as referring only to the first chapter (cf. IDEM, Isaiah, 33; IDEM , Isaiah I 1). Carroll argues in respect to Jer that the beginning (Jer 1:1–3) leads to a misreading of the entire corpus; cf. CARROLL, Arguing, 230. 108 P. R. DAVIES, Audiences, 61. 109 STECK, Prophetic Books, 82–84; note also the repetitive reference to “statements” (ibid. 79–80) under the same heading “Initial Delimitations of Text Boundaries and Relative Diachronic Arrangements”. This shows that the primary question in his concept of texts of the same editorial layer is that of ‘assertive’ speech-acts, like ‘statements’. This limitation of the prophetic books to a kind of ‘theological treatise’ is also apparent in Steck’s characterization of the tradents of them: “They treat the books as theological confirmation literature among specialists” (IDEM, Prophetic Books, 154; On clarification and significance of the “theological concept” for redaction-critical studies cf. also HERMISSON, Einheit.) 110 BEN ZVI, Prophetic Books, 282; similarly IDEM, Micah, 4, 188.

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

23

veying certain statements and ideas as if only realizing ASSERTIVE illocutionary acts. It then must also be analysed in respect to other communicative acts like DIRECTIVES (e.g. summons to do something) or DECLARATIVES (e.g. investment with a certain task). With this construction of the text of ‘prophetic books’ as means of communication that could have been (at least partly) delivered to the wider public,111 the present study can take up and develop in its specific way several current contributions to the communicative analysis of prophetic books and the different communicative dimensions of Classical Hebrew. In respect to the latter I presuppose the recent monograph by A. Wagner.112 He develops a method to analyse the connections between the system of Hebrew language and the system of speech acts. Surveying various proposals of communicative action he finally takes up the works of Austin and Searle and bases his further studies on their results.113 He elucidates how the Hebrew language system (i.e. its syntactic and semantic features) is related to Austin’s distinction between “primary performative announcements”, “explicit performative announcements” and “indirect speech acts” and to Searle’s classification of different illocutionary acts (ASSERTIVE, DIRECTIVE, EXPRESSIVE, COMMISSIVE, DECLARATIVE). 114 His analyses of the realization of communicative action in Hebrew on the level of sentences are one crucial element taken up in this study.115 But as Wag111 The previous paragraph has shown, how this concept of a ‘prophetic book’ takes up and develops recent studies and reflections on the importance of the final form of a text as the starting point of any study, on sociological aspects of composing literary works, on the nature of prophetic works and on the sociology of reading in early Judaism. Future research especially on the sociology of composing and reading scrolls will have to show whether the hesitations of B ARTON, What Is a Book, which he illustrates with narrative texts, are more appropriate. He doubts that a scroll was composed with a high degree of closure and unity and was meant to be read as a unified work (cf. in contrast Ben Zvi [see above] who says that we can perceive a degree of unity and distinctiveness in prophetic books that is fundamentally connected with its association with a prophetic persona). 112 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte. 113 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 7–51. See A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 22–24 for a brief discussion of other proposals of classification apart from Searle. 114 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 93–98 (especially 98). For these five classes of illocutionary acts see the remarks on Searle above (“3. Some Hermeneutical Presuppositions”). I follow the common practice to write the communicative acts in capitals (cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 6) where the emphasis is on the aspect of communicative action in this study. 115 There have been other studies on the OT including speech-act theory in their analyses; see, e.g., HARDMEIER, Texttheorie; CARROLL, Prophecy, 69–75 (on his treatment of speech act theory, see the critique in HOUSTON, Prophets, 141–144); SCHWEIZER, Metaphorische Grammatik; several essays in WHITE (ed.), Speech Act Theory; HOUSTON,

24

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

ner himself notes, the difficulty in applying speech-act theory to texts is that it has been developed in respect to sentences. Thus the question is, how this relates to the more complex texts.116 This leads us to some current studies in rhetorical analysis of prophetic books. Rhetorical criticism in the sense of an analysis of a text’s (or speech’s) features/strategy to persuade an audience,117 has flourished in New Testament studies and in particular in analyses of Paul’s letters for a considerable time. Its application to OT texts and to prophetic literature in particular has been advanced especially by various studies of Gitay.118 But while Gitay identifies the rhetorical units with actual speeches of the prophets, recent studies concentrate more on the book’s role in the communicative process. Hence, in taking into account the distinguished category of a text as a work, these studies can provide a methodological programme for the analysis of communicative action in and through the whole (prophetic) book, on which the present study will build. Of particular interest is the analysis of the “rhetorical strategy” of a prophetic book. In this “step”, particular units and rhetorical techniques are investigated in their relationship to the arrangement of the whole text and how this together forms the argument of the book.119 However, I will go beyond the ‘programme’ of rhetorical criticism in respect to its relationship to speech-act theory. Although these studies have significantly improved the interpretation of prophetic books by their integration of insights in the multiple functions of language – and I want to express my indebtedness to these studies – they are still limited in some respects. One limitation regards the variety of illocutionary acts that rhetorical analysis takes into account. At least insofar as it follows Aristotle, rhetorical analysis is concerned with three different classes of speech, which depend on the presupposed listener: judicial/forensic speech is used, when the listener is supposed to make a judgement on a past event; delibProphets etc. and now see also ADAMS, Performative Nature; but Wagner is taken up here because of his systematic analysis of the Hebrew language system and how it mediates communicative action. 116 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 72–74. Some hermeneutical aspects have been briefly noted above. If one acknowledges the text to be the primary starting point, it is the structure of the text that influences the way one perceives different speech-acts within the text. See in this respect also the following application of other rhetorical-critical studies. 117 There is a certain difference between this specific understanding of Rhetorical criticism and the earlier approach of Rhetorical criticism rather as an analysis of a text’s stylistic features, proposed by and in aftermath of Muilenburg (especially IDEM, Form Criticism). See for this differentiation DOZEMAN, Rhetorical Criticism, 714–715; TRIBLE, Rhetorical Criticism; RENZ, Rhetorical Function, 4–6; MÖLLER, Prophet, 23–25. 118 Cf. especially GITAY, Prophecy; IDEM, Isaiah. 119 Cf. RENZ, Rhetorical Function, 23–25; MÖLLER, Prophet, 41–43, 120.

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

25

erative/political speech occurs, when the listener is to decide about future actions; epideictic speech mainly describes something or someone and the listener is merely present.120 While in these classes of speech communicative acts of ASSERTIVE, DIRECTIVE and EXPRESSIVE illocutionary classes are integrated,121 other are missing. What rhetorical analysis, when following Aristotle, cannot sufficiently accommodate are acts of COMMISSIVE and 122 DECLARATIVE illocutionary classes. Because of the overall ‘programme’ of rhetorical criticism communicative acts like PROMISES (COMMISSIVE illocution) or DESIGNATIONS (DECLARATIVE illocution) are at least in danger of becoming subjected to the other illocutions. But refinements are due not only in respect to the illocutionary dimensions of the prophetic texts. Rhetorical Analysis focuses primarily on one perlocutionary dimension: PERSUASION. a rhetorical analysis considers the arrangement of the material and its literary artistry, but with the overall aim of exploring the persuasive effect of the work.123

Instead, the possibility should be left open that (prophetic) texts can perform other perlocutionary actions.124 The present study, therefore, seeks to combine speech-act theory including the various illocutionary classes and the insights of Wagner in the syntactic and semantic realization of them in the Hebrew language with the recognition of rhetorical criticism that communicative action can be organized in larger texts according to spe120 Cf. ARISTOTLE, Rhetoric, Book I, iii.3–4 for the distinction into three rhetorical speeches; then also, e.g., GITAY, Prophecy, 38; IDEM, Isaiah, 7; RENZ, Rhetorical Function, 23–24; MÖLLER, Prophet, 39. 121 The political speech corresponds to the DIRECTIVE illocutionary class. In the juridical speech the conjecture of two illocutionary acts – of the ASSERTIVE and of the DIRECTIVE classes – is recognized. The same applies to the “epideictic speech”, although the specific act of the ASSERTIVE class differs from the one in the “juridical speech”, and it may also contain an element of an EXPRESSIVE illocutionary act. On the “conjecture of different illocutionary acts” in “complex illocutionary acts”, cf. SEARLE & V ANDERVEKEN, Foundations, 3–5. 122 That the present study has refined its methodology by adding to questions of ‘rhetorical criticism’ also the aspects of COMMISSIVE and DECLARATIVE acts in the expanded communicative analysis is a testimony to the procedure mentioned in the beginning, according to which a continuous process of validation and falsification takes place “in the construction of the text”. Having started on the basis of ‘rhetorical criticism’ as well, I realized in my analyses of Isa 40–55 that the communicative acts there exploded the scope of ‘rhetorical criticism’. These findings resonated with Leene’s judgement on Gitay’s ‘rhetorical analyses’ of Isa 40–48: “Mijn bezwaar tegen het idée van een retorische voortgang is voraal, dat dit he performatieve karakter van DJ’s tekst niet voldoende tot zijn recht laat komen” (cf. LEENE, De vroegere, 183). 123 RENZ, Rhetorical Function, 24 (italics mine). 124 Cf. also the concerns of Thiselton in respect to biblical hermeneutics; e.g. IDEM, Communicative Action, 236–239.

26

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

cific ‘strategies’. For the methodology applied in this investigation it means that the main “Steps of Rhetorical-Critical Analysis” can be adopted, while differentiating some of its aspects.125 This refinement is finally indicated through the change in the designation of some “steps” and especially the change from an analysis of the “rhetorical strategy” to the wider designation “communicative strategy”. A rhetorical-critical analysis consists of (1) the identification of the rhetorical unit(s); (2) a determination of the rhetorical situation and problem that occasioned the communicative interaction; (3) an investigation into the kind of rhetorical speech (judicial, political or epideictic) together with (4) the analysis of its arrangement (which includes the recognition of its “issue”) and employed rhetorical techniques, which leads to the determination of the “rhetorical strategy” of individual units and, in their interrelationship and arrangement, of larger sections; finally (5) the evaluation of the rhetorical effectiveness of the discourse.126 Hence, an analytical explanation of a prophetic book from the broader perspective of communicative action comprises generally (1) the determination of communicative units and the “surface structure” of the text as a whole; (2) an elucidation of the communicative situation; (3) the analysis of communicative action of the individual units; the (4) determination of their interrelationship in the larger arrangement of the book/units that together with particular techniques and features of style form the “communicative strategy”; and (5) notions of the effectiveness of the communication. The present study, however, is primarily concerned with a specific ‘theme’ within the prophetic book of Isa. Thus, while these steps have governed the analysis, the presentation of the argument follows this specific concern. This applies in particular to the various aspects that are related to the determination of the “communicative strategy” (steps 3 and 4). Concentrating on the communicative strategy of the individual ‘hardening passages’, the present study seeks to illumine their relationship and contribution to the “communicative strategy” of the whole book. But due to this specific focus the latter can only be sketched without a detailed analysis of all the techniques used to contribute to the overall strategy.

125

Note, however, that M ÖLLER, Words has presented a different suggestion for the relationship between rhetorical analysis and speech-act theory. In that study he argues that the differentiation of communication into locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary action in speech-act theory can serve as a rhetorical means. Thus he integrates some aspects of speech-act theory in the programme of rhetorical analysis. 126 Cf. MÖLLER, Prophet, 37–43; similarly RENZ, Rhetorical Function, 22–26; for further literature see, e.g., MÖLLER, Prophet, 37n.154.

4. The Method of Communicative Analysis

27

These hermeneutical and methodological considerations have led to the following outline of the argument presented in the present study: In the next chapter I shall sketch the main aspects of the communicative analysis of Isa as a whole, which then provides the general background for the specific issue of ‘hardening’ in Isa. First, I will sketch the communicative situation (cf. step 2). In this respect I discuss the historical setting and the problems that occasioned Isa. In elucidating the “constituents” of the communicative situation, namely the communicative agent and the addressees of Isa, and in sketching the communicative aim (one aspect of the “communicative strategy”; cf. step 4) I will show, how Isa as a means of communication responds to the challenges given in the communicative situation. This chapter will be concluded by a few notes on the structure of Isa (cf. step 1). Most of this study, however, is dedicated to the analysis of the ‘main’ passages dealing with the theme of hardening. Chapter 3 discusses “hardening” in Isa 6. Given the various questions and problems in this text, this chapter slightly deviates from the common pattern of the discussion applied to the other chapters. It not only presents a communicative analysis of Isa 6, it also indicates how the theme of hardening is related to the communicative strategy of Isa 1–39. Subsequent chapters discuss those passages that deal with hardening in Isa 40–66. As there are so many related texts, it is only possible here to discuss one passage in each main discourse in detail; further texts are recognized in relation to the discussion of hardening in the main discourse. Each chapter is arranged according to the following pattern: In a first part we look at a sub-unit in detail that is related to the theme of hardening. For that purpose the introductory paragraph indicates its significance by identifying the terminology associated with the topic of our investigation. The second paragraph illuminates the structure of the unit (cf. step 1); the next paragraph presents the analysis of the communicative action. It discusses the illocutionary role that is mediated through the unit on the basis of its syntactic and semantic features (cf. step 3) and looks at various features that support the communicative strategy through which the communicative action is achieved in the unit (cf. step 4). Having elucidated the communicative strategy of the passage, we can concentrate in a fourth paragraph on the theme of hardening in particular. This is followed by a second part, which discusses the place that the unit analysed before, has within the wider literary context and communicative strategy. Looking also at other passages containing aspects of the theme of hardening, this part of each chapter illumines, which role the analysed unit and the theme of hardening as such play within the main unit. Chapter by chapter (chapters 4–8) we will cover almost all main units within Isa 40–66. Summarizing

28

Chapter 1: Hermeneutical and Methodological Considerations

finally these results, we will so be able to present a more comprehensive discussion of “hardening” in Isa including dimensions of communicative action and will also see, what role the texts containing aspects of hardening play within Isa as a whole. This will show us that the theme of hardening is a central aspect of the communicative process mediated through the Book of Isaiah. Unfortunately, the limits of the present study do not allow me to include some reflections on the last “step” of a communicative analysis, the “effectiveness” of the communicative strategy, so this will have to be addressed at a later time. In order to clarify the background of the theme of hardening in Isa we now turn our attention to main aspects of Isa as a means of communication in a specific historical situation.

Chapter 2

Encountering Hardening in the Past: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah When we read the Book of Isaiah we encounter it not only in the present, we are also forced to acknowledge that it has been transmitted to us from the past. It is written in Classical Hebrew,1 but, as a prophetic book it also aims to mediate a communicative process in a particular situation in the past. Hence, in our critical explanation of the theme of hardening we (seek to) encounter Isa in the past. In discussing various important aspects of the communicative analysis of Isa in this chapter, we become familiar with the context of the theme of hardening at the same time, which prepares us for the interpretation of the particular texts dealing with hardening in Isa. As the notes on the communicative structure of Isa (cf. step 1 of the communicative analysis) presuppose the discussion of the communicative situation (cf. step 2), they are presented in the final paragraph of this chapter. The first section tries to establish the situation, which gave rise to the Book of Isaiah, including the challenges and problems of that situation. This is followed by the identification of the communicative agent(s) and the addressees of Isa. The subsequent clarification of the communicative aim of Isa is not only an important aspect of its communicative strategy (cf. step 4), it also prepares us for the discussion of the place of the theme of hardening within the whole Book of Isaiah.

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah and the Problems it Faces 1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

It is important in our attempt to elucidate the historical setting of Isa that we are aware of its limits,2 particularly in respect to possible references in 1

The formation of the OT writings in Classical Hebrew marks the limit to synchronic reading strategies. As much as ‘final form readings’ are justified (cf. those studies that concentrate on the prophetic book as literature, mentioned above), they inevitably have to be historically informed in terms of a knowledge of the language of the past. 2 I am quite aware though, that the supposed historical situation of the text can only be a (re-)construction. It has elements of a narrative structure, which itself is subject to hermeneutical processes. But as such the re-constructed historical situation can be investigated according to the hermeneutical arc ‘understanding – explanation – understanding’, as Ricœur has emphasized especially in IDEM, Time and Narrative, in respect to

30

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

the book to its setting. Hermeneutical and methodological considerations raise concerns. Inferences about the historical setting from indications in the prophetic book are not neutral, objective procedures. They are heavily influenced by the way one determines the genre of a prophetic book and views the language used in it. Of particular significance is the degree of referentiality one ascribes to poetic language (and presupposes respectively). Many conventional historical-critical studies simply take it for granted that the utterances in prophetic books reflect their historical context. Hence they presuppose a high degree of referentiality of poetry to the specific situation. Others, however, have raised concerns in this respect. Accordingly, one cannot simply presuppose that the references in the texts are “mimetic” of a certain historical situation,3 instead they might rather “portray a ‘fictive’ picture of reality, a picture that cannot be directly correlated with historical reality.”4 The present study is closer to the latter position as regards the creative aspect of poetry. A poetic depiction of a situation does not simply copy it. In its distanciation from everyday language, poetic discourse transcends the specific situation and creates a world of the text.5 Yet despite this “recreation” of a specific situation, it does not cease to refer to it. Thus explicit references can help clarifying the communicative situation of a prophetic book, while the poetic shape of the references demands caution in direct “fictive” and “historical narratives”. Cf. also the remarks in STIVER, Speach-act Theory; LAUGHERY, Ricœur; IDEM, Hermeneutics, 114–120. 3 See the critical remarks in B EN ZVI, Micah, 25; for Ben Zvi this poses particularly the question whether redaction-critical reconstruction of the growth of a prophetic book can be successful when the figurative language deprives one of the possibility to relate a text to a specific situation. Note, however, that Ben Zvi (and others like Melugin, see next note) uses the term “mimetic” differently from the way Ricœur uses it in his various studies (e.g. RICŒUR, Central Problem, 179–181: With reference to the concept of mimesis in Aristotle’s Poetics he notes: “On the one hand, it expresses a world of human actions which is already there; tragedy is destined to express human reality, to express the tragedy of life. But on the other hand, mimesis does not mean the duplication of reality; mimesis is not a copy: mimesis is poiesis, that is, construction, creation.” (RICŒUR, Central Problem, 179–180); see furthermore especially IDEM, Time and Narrative I–III, especially vol. II). 4 MELUGIN, Recent, 54. Melugin briefly discusses some problems of a “mimetic interpretation of poetic language” that characterizes redaction-critical studies in respect to the specific example of Sweeney’s reconstruction (cf. SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 51–60) of the redactional growth of Isa (MELUGIN, Recent, 55–57). On this whole problem cf. furthermore MELUGIN, Books, 70–74; CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 3–27; IDEM, Prophet. Note also the remarks in UTZSCHNEIDER, Situation. For further aspects of poetry and related theories in particular, cf. the survey in W EBER, Psalm 77, 3–16. 5 This takes up some of the discussion in R ICŒUR, Function of Distanciation, 142 and IDEM , Model of the Text, 201–202; especially in respect to the “distanciating” function of poetic language from ordinary language and its hermeneutical consequences.

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

31

deductions from the world of the poetic text. Prophetic books respond to a situation, but they do not correspond to it. While proceeding to discuss the historical setting of Isa, we shall bear these limits in mind and acknowledge them. The question of the historical setting of Isa is interrelated with the determination of the book’s date. Recent studies that address the date of the final form of Isa opt roughly for one of three possible dates: (1) some conservative scholars ascribe the whole book to Isaiah ben Amoz or at least to those close to him in the 8th century B.C.;6 (2) others reckon with the Persian era, presumably close to the time of Nehemiah;7 (3) a third group of scholars assumes that the early Hellenistic era, during Ptolemy I’s reign over Palestine, is the most likely date for the final form of Isa.8 In defining our own conclusions about the possible date of Isa, we have to assess the main considerations and arguments that led to these proposals in the light of what has been said above. The main argument for a dating in the 8th century B.C. is to read the heading of Isa as referring to the whole book. All other arguments raised in favour of such a date flow from this notion.9 Paradigmatically discussing the main arguments of Oswalt for the date in the 8th century B.C., we shall clarify why this is rendered unlikely here. Oswalt takes for granted the “theological and ideological unity of the book” and argues that the hypothesis of a redactional process can hardly explain this unity so that the “essential content of the book” can be most likely ascribed to Isaiah ben Amoz.10 Moreover, the denial of Isaianic authorship of Isa 40–66 because prediction of events in the long distance are not possible, devalues “the 6 Cf. YOUNG, Isaiah 1–19, 3–9; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66, 17–18, 538–549; ALLIS, Unity; OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 23–29; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66, 3–6; MOTYER, Prophecy, 25–30; IDEM, Isaiah, 29–33; YOUNGBLOOD, 15–17; ROBINSON, Motif; CHISHOLM , JR., Handbook, 14; LANZ, Jesaja. 7 Cf. W ATTS, Isaiah 1–33, xxix–xxx; (QUINN-)M ISCALL, Isaiah, 12–13; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–4, 99, 185–201 (especially 187, 194); IDEM, Isaiah 1–39, 51–55; IDEM, Prophetic Torah, 50–58, 65–66; similarly apparently also A. DAVIES, Double Standards, 8; a little later at 400 B.C. DARR, Vision, 30, 229n.15 8 So the various studies of STECK (e.g. IDEM, Heimkehr, 65–80; IDEM, Abschluß, 91– 99; IDEM, Tritojesaja im Jesajabuch, 39–40), presupposed in the study of BOSSHARDNEPUSTIL, Rezeptionen, 266–267n.4; then also B ERGES, Buch, 546; SCHOLL, Elenden, 256–265, 284–287; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 86 (he suggests less specifically that Isa reached its final form during the period between the conquests of Alexander in 332 B.C. and the persecution launched by Antiochus IV in 167 B.C.). 9 Cf. the ‘rhetorical strategy’ of OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 23–28: He starts his chapter about “Date and Authorship” with a reference to Isa 1:1 and states that as there are no other sources named in Isa “the burden of proof is upon those who propose other sources” (ibid. 23). He then goes on to note further arguments (ibid. 23–28). 10 Cf. OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 25.

32

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

religious message of the book” as it reduces the very religious argument of the book according to which God is to be preferred to idols because he has foretold the exile.11 As regards Oswalt’s swift dismissal of redaction-critical explanations, one has to acknowledge that after the initial cautious remarks of Clements12 the studies of Williamson,13 Steck and his pupils14 and Berges15 have shown that one can perceive the unity of Isa as a redactional process that also pays particularly close attention to the theological thought.16 Moreover, I perceive the “religious argument” of Isa about the proof of prediction differently from Oswalt. Isa 13 in particular presents a prediction of Isaiah ben Amoz (cf. Isa 13:1) about the downfall of Babylon brought by YHWH stirring up (ʸʩʲʮ ʩʰʰʤ) the Medes (Isa 13:17). But the related passages in Isa 40–48 are not predictions but are about the fulfilment of these predictions. Isa 41:2 challenges the nations about who is the one who has “stirred up” (ʸʩʲʤ ʩʮ) Cyrus, i.e. YHWH’s ability to do so. Isa 41:21–29 does not predict the rise of Cyrus but asks, who has predicted it “from the beginning” which is now recognizable.17 Hence, the argument is 11

Cf. OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 24–25, referring to Isa 41:21–24. Oswalt also responds to further objections against Isaianic authorship of Isa 40–66. Noting the argument of the different style in Isa 40–66, he notes that observations on style are not precise and then adds that different periods in a person’s life may produce different styles; cf. O SWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 26. He does not clarify, however, when Isaiah would have written these chapters and how this would relate to the restriction of Isaiah’s ministry as it is given in Isa 1:1. That Oswalt tries to strengthen his case with reference to the different styles of the supposed same author in John and Rev (ibid. 26) is rather awkward given the debate about the authorship of the latter. On this see more recently especially J. FREY, Erwägungen. As regards the different historical context, Oswalt admits that chs. 40–66 are presented as though the prophet addresses people at a time other than his own. And even though he finds similar cases in Ezek 37–48; Dan 7–11 and Zech 8–13, he recognizes the admittedly extensive material in Isa 40–66. His solution is that the questions raised in Isa 7-39 “require the issue of the Exile to be addressed in advance.” (OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 27; for the whole argument cf. ibid. 26–27). 12 Cf. especially CLEMENTS, Unity; IDEM, Beyond Tradition History. 13 Cf. especially W ILLIAMSON, Book; then also e.g. IDEM, Redaction; idem, Synchronic; IDEM, Isaiah 1,2–9; IDEM, Isaiah 6,13; IDEM, Variations; IDEM, Biblical Criticism. 14 Cf. the various studies in STECK, Abschluß; IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja; IDEM, Gottesknecht und Zion; IDEM, Prophetic Books; the studies of his pupils KRATZ, Kyros; IDEM , Prophetenbücher; B OSSHARD-N EPUSTIL, Rezeptionen; one may also note the pioneering work in redaction criticism in prophetic books of Steck’s pupil B ARTH, JesajaWorte. 15 Cf. B ERGES, Buch. 16 See especially the criterion of a “consistent theological concept” for redactioncritical procedures in the programmatic study of STECK, Prophetic Books noted above. 17 In Isa 41:22 YHWH challenges the idols: “Tell us what the ‘former things’ (ʺʥʰˇʠʸʤ) were”; in 41:25 YHWH claims: “I have stirred up one (ʩʺʥʸʩʲʤ) from the

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

33

rather that in Isa 1–39 Isaiah ben Amoz has predicted the stirring up (¥ʸʥʲ, 13:17) the Medes against Babylon, while in Isa 40–66 the addressees, nations and their idols can see these predictions fulfilled and realized in YHWH’s stirring up (¥ʸʥʲ, 41:2, 25; cf. also 45:13) of Cyrus.18 Read in this way, the “religious argument” would instead support a distinction between Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66.19 This is supported by further observations: It is part of the “religious argument” of Isa 40–48 that the “former things” had to be predicted long before the time of the addressees, while once they have been fulfilled, now YHWH not only can proclaim something new that he could not predict earlier, he creates it now (see Isa 48:3–8 and the interpretation in chapter 5). I simply cannot see how this time structure, which plays such a crucial part in the communicative strategy of Isa 48:1–11 and the wider context (see below chapter 5), could in any way function or make sense in the 8th century.20 Additionally, we will argue in more detail below that Isa 40:1– 11 indicates indeed a commissioning of another prophetic voice apart from and after Isaiah.21 Finally, as much as the present study is a contribution to the question of how one can read and understand Isa as a unity, our discussion of hardening in Isa will show that the whole book does not perform a single communicative strategy. On the contrary, as our discussion especially of Isa 6 will indicate, those who insist on an Isaianic authorship (or communicative act) of the whole book may spoil its restorative potential in the latter part. Any claim of a unified theological structure would have at least to take into account this differentiation instead of levelling it. north…”; he asks then referring to this: “Who told of this ‘from the beginning’” (ˇʠʸʮ, 41:26) and concludes: “I was the first to tell Zion: see, there they are” (on the text-critical problems of Isa 41:27, see the commentaries). Note also that in Isa 42:9 YHWH states that the “former things” (ʺʥʰˇʠʸʤ, which he had announced beforehand) have taken place, so that he can now declare new things. 18 Cf. also VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 155; CHILDS, Introduction, 330; IDEM, Isaiah, 322; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 356; LAATO, About Zion, 144–146. 19 Cf. similarly especially LAATO, About Zion, 141–146. 20 In this respect, the considerable difficulties of OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 270–272 in respect to Isa 48:6–8 are quite telling. Note that the “new things” do not refer to Cyrus according to the interpretation in this study. 21 It is not possible in this study to engage in the problem of the anonymity in detail. It must suffice to say here that the prophetic voice commissioned in Isa 40 is related to the ministry of the Servant (see especially some remarks below on Isa 61:1–3). In order not to overshadow the elusiveness of the Servant or to distract from the prophet’s dependence upon the Servant, it contributes better to the communicative strategy that the commissioned prophetic voice remains anonymous as well. Additionally, this may prevent a separation of Isa 40–66 from Isa 1–39, which a new name could have caused. Isa 40–66 is clearly dependent on Isa 1–39 and designed to continue and complement the earlier part, as we will see in our discussion of the theme of hardening in particular.

34

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

The suggestions for a date of Isa in the time of Nehemiah (2) or the early Hellenistic period (3) have their starting point, like the present study, with the appearance of Cyrus around 539 B.C. How much later than 539 B.C. scholars date Isa is mainly determined by the number and date of the editorial layers they elucidate and their possible references to actual situations. Sweeney, e.g., recognizes close correspondences with the time of Ezra/Nehemiah,22 and furthermore finds only two substantial editions after 539 B.C., one in the late sixth century B.C., and the final redaction in the fifth century B.C.23 Kratz and Steck on the other hand, e.g., determine eight editorial stages from the first primary layer shortly after 539 B.C.24 to the final edition.25 As the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is an issue in the last edition (64:9–10 to which Isa 66:1–2 responds) Steck suggests that the campaign of Ptolemy I (302/1 B.C.) may be its historical background. As is argued above, the present study does not clarify possible stages of the growth of Isa. This may limit the determination of the date of the final form of Isa, as findings about a larger number of editorial stages would suggest a longer period of its growth, hence a later date. On the other hand, if some features of the final form of a prophetic book point to a specific date, then any redaction-critical reconstruction should also be subject to criticism from such a perspective. Moreover, although I do not exclude the possibility of several stages of editorial growth in Isa 40–66, I suspect that their number is rather limited, not least because our analysis of the communicative strategy of Isa will cast doubt on some of the criteria and presuppositions of redactional distinction in Isa.26 In order to restrict the period, in which the final form of Isa may have originated, we therefore should now evaluate frequently suggested references in Isa to historical circumstances. The main indication of the date of 22

Cf. SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 51–53; IDEM, Prophetic Torah. Cf. SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 51–57. 24 The primary layer comprises only parts of Isa *40–52 and was not related to what formed the book of First Isaiah (Isa *1–39) at this time. 25 Cf. the figures in KRATZ, Kyros, 217 together with STECK, Anschlußprobleme, 278–279; furthermore e.g. STECK, Gottesknechts-Texte and his earlier study IDEM, Heimkehr. Note that the last editorial stage itself consists of two subsequent stages: first the lament Isa 63:7–64:11 is composed as a preliminary conclusion, shortly later the ‘answer of YHWH’ in Isa 65–66 is added. 26 Cf. also on the similar issue of the effects of synchronic analyses on the diachronic analysis of narratives the remarks of LOHFINK, Narrative Analyse, 176 (italics mine): “Allerdings könnten angesichts der hier vorgelegten narrativen Analyse diachrone Untersuchungen wohl oft anders laufen und zu anderen Resultaten führen als bisher. Manche altgewohnten Kohärenzprobleme könnten uns zwischen den Fingern zerrinnen, und vielleicht träte der hypothetische Charakter des Unternehmens deutlicher hervor.” Note also Lohfink’s awareness that this procedure may be “judged” by some as a “transgression” (ibid. 122n.7). 23

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

35

Isa for Steck is that the final layer in Isa 65–66 reacts to the lament in Isa 63:7–64:11, which refers to a destruction of the cities, Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Isa 64:9–10). According to Steck, it is the destruction of Jerusalem under Ptolemy I in 302/1 B.C. to which the complaint refers.27 But the studies of Tcherikover on the Ptolemaic era do not support this conclusion. According to him, Ptolemy conquered Palestine four times (320, 312, 302, 301 B.C.); and the so-called “destruction” of Jerusalem (302/301) concerned only the razing of the city walls so that Antigonus could not make Jerusalem his stronghold.28 We must conclude with Laato that there is no possibility of regarding the events in Jerusalem at the beginning of the Ptolemaic era as corresponding to the expressions in 63:7–64:11 where it is reported that ‘Zion has become a desert, Jerusalem a wasteland’ and that ‘our holy and glorious Temple … has been burnt to the ground’ (64:9–10).29

As there is no indication for a connection between Isa 63:7–64:11 and the events in 302/1 B.C. in Jerusalem, we have to discuss further possible indications of the date of Isa. One aspect that is taken almost universally as an indication of the historical setting is the separation among the people in Isa 65–66, which is taken as a reflection of actual circumstances.30 In my opinion this is a clear example of a procedure that has been put into question above. We cannot take for granted that these chapters copy/reflect directly the historical setting.31 Indeed, it will be argued in respect to the communicative strategy of Isa 56–66 that the separation among the people is the perlocutionary act of the communicative process between YHWH and his people, which the reading of Isa mediates. The separation among the people is not one of the presuppositions of the final form of Isa but one of its effects. Such an understanding necessitates a comment on Isa 66:5, which, according to most interpretations, addresses the audience as those who have 27 Cf. e.g. STECK, Heimkehr, 76–80; IDEM, Tritojesaja im Jesajabuch, 39–40, IDEM, Abschluß, 91–97. 28 Taken here from LAATO, About Zion, 52. 29 LAATO, About Zion, 52. In his study “Tritojesaja im Jesajabuch”, 40, Steck admits that there is no evidence of a destruction of the temple through Ptolemy I. But for Steck, this is not a decisive argument against his date because, “das mag an unseren überaus spärlichen Quellen liegen.” It is remarkable (to say the least) that Steck ascribes the lack of evidence for his highly speculative hypothesis to the scarce sources and that so many are following him uncritically. In this case the most basic procedures of historical criticism are ignored by some of its fiercest advocates. 30 For a survey of the various (often contrasting) proposals of who the rivalling groups could have been, see e.g. P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 189–198. 31 Among a few B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 106 raised doubts about the possibility of identifying the groups and the precise historical situation: “Maar men zal er verder in moeten berusten dat the contouren van de historische situatie niet scherp worden”.

36

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

already been excommunicated. The main question in this respect is, how we understand the Piel participle ʭʩʣʰʮ. Those who interpret the Piel of ¥ʤʣʰ as “to excommunicate” refer to such a meaning in Postbiblical Hebrew (and Jewish Aramaic).32 The question is, however, whether such a meaning was already present in Biblical times.33 The only other occurrence of ¥ʤʣʰ can be found in Amos 6:3, again in the form of a Piel participle. The participle is used there in contrast to ¥ˇʢʰ in order to describe the antithetic behaviour of the addressees: While they push away the “evil day”, they bring near the “reign of violence”.34 In this context ¥ʤʣʰ belongs to the semantic field of “spatial distance” and could have been used to express distance or “to set in far distance” in contrast to “nearness” like ¥ˇʢʰ. Bearing this in mind we should reconsider the interpretation of Isa 66:5 in the light of the preceding passages. The opponents of those addressed in Isa 66:5 are introduced like the addressees in Isa 65:5: they “say” (ʭʩʸʮʠʤ, 65:5 and ʥʸʮʠ, 66:5). Moreover, the content of what they say is similar. They refuse interaction with the “servants”, and this is expressed with verbs of the semantic field of “spatial distance”: “keep your distance!” (ʡʸʷ) and “do not approach!” (ʩʡʚˇʢʺʚʬʠ) in Isa 65:5; in Isa 66:5 the opponents “hate you” (ʭʫʩʠʰˈ) and “push you away” (ʭʫʩʣʰʮ). If we read Isa 65:5 and Isa 66:5 together, it is apparent that both passages that speak of the refusal of interaction between two groups employing the same antonymic expression as in Amos 6:3: ¥ʤʣʰ in contrast to ¥ˇʢʰ. In the light of the Biblical use of ¥ʤʣʰ, this is all one can say in respect to Isa 66:5. Also interesting in this respect is the motivation of the opponents for their refusal to interact with the “servants”. The motivation for their attitude is religious (ʪʩʺˇʣʷ ʩʫ, 65:5; ʩʮˇ ʯʲʮʬ, 66:5). But as terminological correspondences suggest, in this respect they are like those who lament in Isa 63:7–64:11: references and appeals to YHWH’s name (ʭˇ) occur with high frequency in this lament (cf. 63:12, 14, 16, 19; 64:1, 6); equally, “holiness” and related terms play an important role in Isa 63:7–64:11 (cf. 63:10, 11, 15, 18; 64:9, 10). Therefore, I interpret the opponents of the servants in Isa 65–66 as those who regard themselves as “servants” in 63:7–64:11; the separation between the opponents and the true “servants” in Isa 65–66 is the result of YHWH’s answer to this lament (see the chap32

Cf. e.g. B ONNARD, Second, 478, 486n.9; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 299–300; cf. also KBL and already DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 627. 33 Note also that some of the older commentators rejected the specific meaning “to excommunicate”; cf. e.g. DUHM, Jesaia, 483; SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 225; KESSLER, Gott, 95–97. 34 On the paradoxical and antithetical construction, cf. especially PAUL, Amos, 204; similarly also ANDERSEN & FREEDMAN, Amos, 561. The exact meaning of the phrase ʱʮʧ ʺʡˇ is disputed, cf. the commentaries ad loc.; but the antithetical nature of the verbs ¥ʤʣʰ and ¥ˇʢʰ is clear enough.

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

37

ter on Isa 63:7–64:11 for more details). The statement in Isa 66:5 is not about excommunication but is an expression of a distinction that is based on a false conception of YHWH. Another issue that affects the determination of the date of Isa is the origin of Isa 24–27. These chapters are widely regarded as those of the latest stages of the growth of Isa. But while older scholars treated them often as independent from the Isaiah tradition and dated them among other apocalyptic writings near the 2nd century B.C.,35 recent studies assume an earlier date emphasizing the differences from apocalyptic,36 and/or argue that these chapters were an integral part in the redactional development of Isa. In one of the most recent studies, Scholl characterizes Isa 24–27 as part of the final edition of Isa, and he suggests a date around 302/1 B.C. on the basis of the following reasons: it betrays general characteristics of a late writing, which includes a tendency both to universalise and to individualise (the fate of the individual pious is the main focus), the clear eschatologization and the “Musivstil”.37 Moreover, the date is based on relative chronology of the editorial layers and the absolute dating of Isa 63–64 in 302/1.38 Additionally, he notes some further “Fingerzeige” for a late date. He regards the critique in Isa 27:7–11; 65–66 as an opposition to Hellenistic cult practices, and the mention of Egypt and Assur are considered as dominions after the empires of Persia and Alexander.39 But in contrast to the claims of Steck (followed by Scholl), announcements of the regathering of the people from Egypt and Assyria function differently in the various writings and could have occurred at different times.40 Regarding 35

Cf. e.g. DUHM, Jesaia, 21, 172 (suggesting 128 B.C. and further additions even later); PROCKSCH, Jesaia, 342–346 (identifying two different cycles in Isa 24–27 dated in the third century B.C. and after 142 B.C.); WILDBERGER, Jesaja 13–27, 905–911 (ET, 460–467) reckons with different phases in the growth of the material between 500 and 300 B.C. (perhaps only 500–400 B.C.). 36 Cf. MILLAR, Isaiah 24–27; D. G. J OHNSON, Chaos; SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 172–179; B. DOYLE, Apocalypse. 37 Cf. SCHOLL, Elenden, 256–258. 38 He takes up the studies of Steck in this respect. 39 Scholl refers to a claim of STECK, Abschluß, 23 in this regard. 40 In Hos 11:11 for instance the juxtaposition of Egypt and Assyria follows the train of thought of the whole passage, in which the re-gathering from Egypt and Assyria is the outcome of the extraordinary change of the will of God (Hos 11:7–11), which presupposes the announcement of the reversal of Israel’s salvation history in Hos 11:1–6 (see e.g. J EREMIAS, Reue Gottes, 52–59; IDEM, Hosea, 138–147 on this interpretation; acc. to JEREMIAS, Hosea, 147 only Hos 11:10 is a later interpolation; on the date, cf. especially IDEM , Reue Gottes, 137–140). After YHWH has led Israel out of Egypt (Hos 11:1) he will now reverse the salvation history, Israel has to go back to Egypt (Hos 11:5). Hence the juxtaposition of Egypt and Assyria in Hos 11:5 serves an important rhetorical purpose: in calling the actual power of Hosea’s time, Assyria, the “new Egypt” the an-

38

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

the critiques of the cult practices, they are too unspecific to indicate particularly a Hellenistic background. Moreover, features that characterize the “Musivstil” and especially the date of its appearance can be determined only roughly. Certainly, the passages that according to Scholl are taken up in Isa 24–27 may have been available/known in pre-exilic and exilic times.41 Furthermore, given the variety of definitions about what “eschatological” actually means and the consequent problems of dates,42 the indicative value of “eschatologising elements” is rather limited. Finally, as we will see below, the complementary aspects of universalising and individualising are related to the way in which the concept of “connective righteousness” is taken up and developed in the Book of Isaiah. Thus what we are left with is the relative chronology of editorial layers. But in this respect, the study of Scholl as well as a number of other works suggests that nouncement of the reversal of Israel’s salvation history is only made possible. The announcement of the return from Egypt and Assyria in Hos 11:7–11 does then not indicate the return of the Diaspora from two different dominions in the era after Alexander, it just takes up the identification of Assyria with Egypt from Hos 11:5 to emphasize that beyond and after the judgement the history of the people of God can begin anew because of the change in YHWH (Hos 11:8–9). W ILLIAMSON, Book, 127–128 notes in respect to the occurrence of Egypt and Assyria in Isa 11:11–16 that it does not by itself demand a late date, as similar references can be found in DI (Isa 52:4), and the LXX had apparently reread some place names in Isa 11:11, 14 that approximate closer to conditions of the second century B.C. Note also that W ILLIAMSON, Book, 129–130 argues for a dependence of Zech 10:10–11 on material from Isa so that the latter may not necessarily belong to the same time as STECK, Abschluß, 23, 196 suggests. Finally, SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 350–352 argues that the references to Egypt and Assyria would fit best in the time of Josiah and his “program of national and religious restoration”, which provides “a fitting context for the return of exiles from Egypt and Assyria, especially since these countries proved to be Josiah’s major enemies at the time.” (ibid. 350). I do not want to suggest that this is the actual date or setting of Isa 27:12–13. It suffices to show however that the mere reference to a return from Egypt and Assyria cannot bear the burden of proof of a date in the 3rd century either. 41 Cf. SCHOLL, Elenden, 224–231: Jer 48:43–44 is quoted in Isa 24:17–18 (ibid. 224– 225); Hos 2; 4 are used in Isa 24:1–8 and, taking up Day’s argument (cf. D AY, Case, later revised in IDEM, Dependence), Hos 13:4–14:10 is being reinterpreted in 26:13–27:11 (SCHOLL, Elenden, 226–229); there are correspondences with Amos 5 (ibid. 229); Isa 26:21 has a parallel in Mic 1:3; Isa 24:1, 3 takes up a wordplay from Nah 2:11 (ibid. 230–231); Isa 24:18 alludes to Gen 7:11 and Isa 26:20 to Gen 7:16 (ibid. 231); in an excursus he deals with Exod 24:9–11 in Isa 24–27 (ibid. 104–115). On the huge number of references in Isa 24–27 to other passages in Isa (contra Day’s argument that the references to Hos indicate an independent origin of Isa 24–27) and their implications for the redaction history of Isa, see especially SWEENEY, Textual Citations. 42 Cf. on this aspect, e.g., the studies in PREUSS (ed.), Eschatologie; the critique of HARDMEIER, Jesajaforschung, 13–14 on Werner’s determination of “eschatology” in IDEM , Texte, 13–16; then, e.g., the discussions in W. H. S CHMIDT, Aspekte der Eschatologie; SÆBØ, Verhältnis; LEENE, History.

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

39

Isa 24–27 is to be related to the final edition of Isa and Isa 65–66 in particular. Consequently, there is no conclusive date of Isa 24–27 that could provide a basis for the date of Isa (or substantially contradict it). The primary question remains the date of Isa 40–66, and of chs. 65–66 in particular. A final feature that is often discussed in relation to proposals of dates, regards references to the temple or sanctuary of YHWH in Isa 40–66. Discussions primarily focus on Isa 60:7, 13; 64:9–10 and 66:1–2, 6.43 Koenen argues in respect to Isa 66:1–2 that v.1b addresses a concrete group, therefore it must mean the building of a concrete temple, therefore, it refers to the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem before 515 B.C.44 But how do we know that it is a concrete group that is addressed, and particularly, that it is the opponents that are addressed?45 If we follow the final form of arrangement, it is far more likely that Isa 66:1–4 addresses the “servants” of YHWH.46 And the question in v.1b could be understood simply as a rhetorical question “Where is the house that you could build for me, and where is the place of my resting?”, which affirms that YHWH is not confined in his watch over the weak and those who tremble at his word (v.2b).47 It is of course possible to wonder why the question has been 43 GRABBE, Judaic Religion, 19 e.g. assumes on the basis of Isa 60:7, 13 (and 62:6–9) that the temple has been already rebuilt. Both KOENEN, Ethik and P. SMITH, Rhetoric refer to Isa 66:1–2 as an important clue to the terminus ad quem of a specific editorial layer; for KOENEN, Ethik, 216 the (alleged) reference to an actual situation helps dating the primary layer (i.e. the actual prophet Trito-Isaiah) between 520 and 515 B.C.; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 187–188 regards these verses as parts of the second editorial layer, so this date applies to the whole corpus of Isa 56–66:17 (with a few exceptions). As Isa 60:7, 13 refer to the sanctuary like Isa 66:6, KOENEN, Ethik, 146–152, 235–236 identifies Isa 60:7b, 13b as interpolations in the course of the second editorial layer that he dates in the mid fifth century B.C. B ERGES, Buch, 522 considers in respect to the relationship between Isa 66:1–2 on the one hand and the presupposed presence of a temple in Isa 66:3 (according to Berges, Isa 66:3 show that sacrifices and cultic activities are already flourishing) and 66:6 that the imperfect of “to build” (ʥʰʡʺ) may indicate continuation of further work on the temple, which could have happened during most of the 5 th century. 44 Cf. KOENEN, Ethik, 184–185; he also adds that only by relating Isa 66:1–2 to this specific event one does justice to the fundamental argumentation in Isa 66:1a, 2a (ibid. 185). 45 Thus KOENEN, Ethik, 184, 192; similarly also P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 187–188, 195. 46 See the discussion of Isa 65–66 below in chapter 8 for more details. 47 Isa 66:1–2 as well as the whole unit Isa 66:1–4 contains indeed complex theological issues, and with KOENEN, Ethik, 185 I share the enthusiasm to do justice to the argumentation in these verses. But how does the argumentation go (or to put it in other words: what is the communicative strategy)? It seems to me that many commentators construe the logical relationship between v.1aȕȖ and v.1b as though the former was a causal clause, subordinated to the latter (paraphrasing: “for my throne is the heaven and the earth is my footstool, where could you build a house for me…?”), when they interpret

40

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

phrased in this way, and which circumstances may have influenced it, but as the question stands in the present context, it cannot serve as unequivocal evidence for a date during the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem between 520 and 515 B.C. As we cannot draw clear conclusions from Isa 66:1–2, we shall discuss Isa 60:7, 13 and paradigmatically the arguments of Steck.48 He argues that the primary layer of Isa 6049 already presupposes the existence of the rebuilt temple under Zerubbabel and only speaks of a more splendid equipment of the temple and of a procession of nations that bring wood for the equipment of the temple garden later than 515 B.C.50 Steck notes the following reasons, why the temple is presupposed in Isa 60 as already rebuilt: (1) if v.13 were to speak of the rebuilding of the temple, v.7 would come too early in the flow of text;51 (2) the idea of the eschatological procession of the nations to Zion in Isa 60 combines elements from Isa 49:14ff with vv.1–2 as a critique of the concept of a temple as such, which were unnecessary and impossible given that for YHWH his whole creation is his temple; cf., e.g., METZGER, Wohnstatt, 27–32; STECK, Tritojesaja im Jesajabuch, 35; KOENEN, Ethik, 185–186; JANOWSKI, Heilige Wohnung, 61–62. If we compare Isa 66:1 with Isa 66:2, another interpretation is more likely. Both verses (without v.1aĮ) are arranged in parallel. In v.1 the statement about YHWH’s all encompassing residence (v.1aȕȖ) is followed by the consequences for the actions of the addressees (v.1b). Similarly, the statement about YHWH’s creational activity and declaration of ownership of “this all” (v.2a), is followed by the consequences for his activities (v.2b): As much as the declaration of ownership says that the whole creation is the realm of YHWH’s dominion and activities, it also expresses YHWH’s responsibility for its continuation (cf. METZGER, Eigentumsdeklaration, 92 [sadly, Metzger does not discuss Isa 66:1–2 nor the other close parallel Ps 50:7–15 (especially vv.10, 12) in this respect]; SPIECKERMANN, Heilsgegenwart, 80–83, 200–201), v.2b says, YHWH fulfils this responsibility by watching over the weak, those who are afflicted in spirit and tremble on his word. In the light of these considerations, the question in Isa 66:1b has two functions: as a rhetorical question it amplifies the statement in v.1aȕȖ; in its parallel arrangement with v.2b it supports an important aspect of the latter. As there is no temple that the addressees could build to accommodate YHWH, it is granted that he would help the weak everywhere. This “omnipresence” and allencompassing responsibility of the ruling YHWH guarantees (and necessitates) the judgement of those who go their own ways in vv.3–4. 48 This is justified not only by the particularly detailed analysis of Steck in IDEM, Bauholz but also in respect to the paradigmatic status his proposal of the editorial growth of Isa has; cf. e.g. B OSSHARD-NEPUSTIL, Rezeptionen; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet; KUSTÁR, Wunden, who presuppose the model of Steck for their studies; cf. furthermore the comments of MCCANN, Book of Isaiah, 89–91; even the independent proposal of BERGES, Buch interacts in many respects with the model of Steck or formulates its position in distanciation from Steck. 49 For the determination of the primary layer of Isa 60 see especially STECK, Grundtext; IDEM, Lumen gentium. 50 Cf. STECK, Bauholz, 101–102. 51 Cf. STECK, Bauholz, 102.

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

41

Hag 2:6–9; but while Hag 2:6, 20–23 presupposes a situation of destabilization in the Persian empire, Isa 60:1–3 in particular speaks to a situation of a stable empire so that only an eschatological radiance from Zion to all the nations can overcome the stable power of Persia that would attract the nations to come to Zion. This situation, however, would point to a time after 515 B.C.52 The second argument not only presupposes an interpretation of Isa 60:1–3 that is rather questionable,53 it also takes for granted the possibility of a “mimetic” reading of poetic prophecy, questioned by the hermeneutical and methodological considerations noted above. Finally, the argument about the early placement of v.7 could only apply, if one insisted upon a strict linear reading of Isa 60. An approach that takes into account strophic structures and the possibility of parallel lines in different strophes etc. leads to a different conclusion about the relationship between v.7 and v.13. Hence, the references in Isa 60:7, 13 remain too vague to justify any conclusive proposal. In the proclamation to city Zion in Isa 60, YHWH announces the dawn of his rule in justice and righteousness (Isa 60:1–2; see below) that attracts the nations to come to Zion. In the course of this they will bring sacrificial animals (60:7) as well as the building material for YHWH’s sanctuary (60:13), all of which is part of the rehabilitation and restoration of Zion. The precise schedule for that, however, is missing, and so is any clear evidence of a present or yet-to-berebuilt temple.54 This leaves us with Isa 64:9–10 and the lament it contains about the destroyed cities (of Judah), deserted Zion/Jerusalem and the burned temple. It seems to me that the communicative act of the whole lament in Isa 63:7–64:11 renders a reference to the situation of the addressees likely. In order to function as a prayer of a group of people directed towards YHWH 52 Cf. STECK, Bauholz, 102; on this interpretation of Isa 60:1–3 see in particular IDEM, Lumen gentium. 53 See instead the remarks on Isa 60:1–3 below in chapter 7. 54 For a discussion of various aspects related to the rebuilding of the temple in the early post-exilic time, cf. BEDFORD, Temple Restoration. He objects especially to two common conceptions about the rebuilding of the temple: one that argues that the temple served to manifest the concept of restoration brought by the Babylonian exiles in opposition to those in Judah; and one that argues that the temple was part of Achaemenid Persian administrative policy. Instead the rebuilding of the temple was initiated by those in the homeland when the Davidide Zerubbabel has been sent to Judah as governor under Darius I. (see for a summary BEDFORD, Temple Restoration, 301–304). The development of the Jerusalem temple as an administrative and economic centre should be understood within the context of the administrative (re)organization of later Achaemenid Persian kings, not as part of the early Achaemenid’s granting of permission to rebuild the temple (cf. ibid. 303). On the significance of the interrelationship between administration under the Achaemenid and religious life especially under Ezra and Nehemiah, cf. especially HØGLUND, Administration.

42

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

with which the addressees can identify, it has to resemble aspects of their situation. Given that elsewhere in the OT “burning by fire” means total consumption, Isa 64:1055 are words of people who at the very least regard their situation as one in which the temple has not been rebuilt. In this cautious manner, I tend to see the terminus ad quem of Isa in 515 B.C. Thus the survey of possible indicators of the date of Isa, 56 which had to include already aspects of its communicative strategy, suggests that Isa responds to the situation in which the people of YHWH found themselves after the appearance of Cyrus and possibly before the Second Temple was rebuilt. Having identified the possible historical setting of Isa, we can now briefly sketch the main problems that arose at that time for the people of YHWH and to which the Book of Isaiah may contribute some answers. Political and Social Aspects. Obviously, the change of power from the Babylonians to the Persians initiated intellectual and ideological/ theological reflections (see below). But it also had some concrete implications in both the political or administrative as well as in the social realms. For those in the Babylonian exile the decree of Cyrus meant a total change in their status, they could return to Palestine. So the question for them was, whether they should stay or leave for their homeland. As regards the administration in the homeland, not much changed on the lower levels of the family and community.57 But it seems that Cyrus had appointed Sheshbaz55 The formulation in Isa 64:10 is that the temple of YHWH “has become a consumption of fire” (ˇʠ ʺʴʸˈʬ ʤʩʤ). 56 Two minor features that some commentators have regarded as an indication of the historical setting of certain editorial layers can be excluded as well: VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 61 and BERGES, Buch, 348 wonder whether Isa 43:3b may allude to the campaign of Cambyses in 525 B.C., but Herodotus III.17–25 (especially 25) tells that Cambyses could only take Egypt while he terribly failed to conquer Ethiopia. According to some commentators, the deportation of the statue of Marduk and the destruction of the central Babylonian sanctuary under Xerxes I. in 482 B.C. is the background of Isa 46:1–4 (cf. e.g. SIMON, Salvation, 141–142; KRATZ, Kyros, 215n.684; BERGES, Buch, 364–365; hesitatingly also HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 107–108) but HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 98– 101 and especially IDEM, Aufstände has shown that there is no evidence for a destruction of Borsippa (the home of the god Nebo, which in Isa 46:1 is mentioned in parallel to Bel/Marduk) and that the “deportation of a statue” does not necessarily refer to a statue of Marduk (on the latter see especially IDEM, Aufstände, 88–90); rather sceptical about this is also BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 268. 57 It is now widely acknowledged that the majority of people stayed in Judah after 587/6 B.C. and that life continued in many areas, especially in northern parts of Judah and Benjamin, almost without any difference; cf. (with restrictions though) already J ANSSEN, Juda, 24–56; then, e.g., K REISSIG, Situation, 23–33; W ILLI, Juda, 22–26; B ERQUIST, Judaism, 14–15; B ARSTAD, Myth; IDEM, Challenges; ALBERTZ, Israel, 90–96. For views maintaining a far more radical discontinuity after 587/6 B.C. cf. VANDERHOOFT, Neo-Babylonian Empire, 61–114, 205–206; IDEM, Babylonian Strategies; ODED, History.

1. The Historical Setting of Isaiah

43

zar as the governor of the newly created province Yehud (cf. Ezra 5:14)58 so on this higher level then, the status of the people in Palestine had changed. Moreover, with Mizpah probably still being the capital of Yehud until the walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt under Nehemiah59 on the one hand, and with the vessels of the First Temple of Jerusalem being returned under Sheshbazzar on the other (cf. Ezra 1:7–8; 5:14–15), the status of Jerusalem was another question posed by the new circumstances. Furthermore, the repatriation of those who were coming back from Babylon in Yehud would have raised a whole set of challenges. People who had lived for two generations in rather different worlds had to find a way to form a coherent society again. This process may have been complicated in some parts of the country, where those left behind in the homeland had accessed to properties which had belonged to those who had been brought to Babylon and were now coming back.60 Furthermore, the social status between the exiles (upper class) and those in the homeland tended to differ.61 On the form of administration and jurisdiction on the level of family and community, cf. in particular KREISSIG, Situation, 32–33 and W ILLI, Juda, 26. Note also that W ILLI, Juda, 22–24 argues that even 2 Chr 36:20–21 does not present a picture of tabula rasa or the “myth of the empty land” for the exilic period. 58 ALT, Rolle, 316–337 had argued that only with the appointment of Nehemiah as governor Yehud became an independent province. This view has been further defended by MCEVENUE, Political Structure, 353–364 and is held more recently, e.g., by W ILLI, Juda, 26–30 and SCHUNCK, Amt, 94–95. But as other studies show, it is more likely that already Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel were governors in the province Yehud; cf. W ILLIAMSON, Ezra/Nehemiah, 243 (see there also for further literature before 1983 on both positions); especially IDEM, Governors, then also the summary of his argument in IDEM, Judah, 33–35; GRABBE, Judaism, Vol. One, 80–83, 127; LEMAIRE, Histoire, 16–17 (cf. especially LEMAIRE, Histoire, 18–19 for an attempt to reconstruct the list of governors and high priests); CARTER, Emergence, 52; LEMAIRE, Nabonidus, 291 (see there also for further literature). 59 Cf. especially LEMAIRE, Nabonidus, 291–292, 294. 60 Cf. e.g. B LENKINSOPP, Temple, 53: “The immigrants had to win back the land redistributed to the peasantry (dallat hƗ’Ɨres̛) after the deportations.” On the redistribution of properties after 587/6 B.C., cf., e.g., KREISSIG, Situation, 25–26, 32; GRABBE, Judaism, Vol. One, 117, 121–122; A LBERTZ, Israel, 90–96. HØGLUND, Achaemenid Context, however, explains the notable increase in the total number of settlements at the start of the Persian period as part of an imperial domain policy of ruralisation (ibid. 57–59) and concludes: “There would have been no land claims by any group rooted in the notion of familial or tribal possession. The presumption of a class struggle between exiles and “remainees” over land rights does not fit the evidence of the pattern of these Persian period villages.” (ibid. 59–60; italics original). 61 Cf. KREISSIG, Situation, 23–24; GRABBE, Judaism, Vol. One, 117; B ARSTAD, Myth, 68 on exiles mainly consisting of the upper class and A LBERTZ, Israel, 74–90 on the main aspects of the various deportations. BERQUIST, Judaism, 15–17, however, points to the differentiations that took place among the exiles. Hence, it was not only differences be-

44

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

Economic situation. As far as the economic situation is concerned, there seems to have been no significant changes. The largely agrarian economy continued unabated with its related crafts and trade economy.62 Cosmological and Religious Aspects. The new situation posed the most challenges undoubtedly in respect to their religious implications. How had all this to be seen within and from the perspective of the Yahwistic faith? What needed to be clarified was the role of YHWH in the massive political changes. All the more as in this respect especially those in Babylon experienced a ‘competition of religions’: Cyrus allowed the return of the statues of various deities to their native cities and combined this with selfpropaganda as he had himself proclaimed as the choice of the particular god.63 This friendly policy to various religions was then continued especially under Darius I. 64 Thus on the one hand, the relative freedom in religious matters opened up the opportunity to worship YHWH and develop the Yahwistic faith.65 On the other hand, however, it raised the question of the status of YHWH in the context of the variety of religious claims. The change of power and the edict of Cyrus, finally, also raised anew the question of the relationship between YHWH and his people. Had the Babylonian rule over them meant judgement of YHWH,66 so the new situation also demanded new reflections in this respect. In this situation, the Book of Isaiah is composed to address some of the issues. As a prophetic book, however, it not simply develops a theological treatise, it mediates a communicative process. In the following, I try to tween the exiles and those in the homeland that posed possible challenges, but among these groups as well. Many studies now assume considerable tensions and even separations among the people in the early post-exilic times in Palestine. The evidence, however, is rather scant, with many depending mainly on Isa 65–66. As regards the relationship between the two communities of Babylon and Judah, Williamson and others argue that there was actually far less friction between them at the start of the exilic period and the first returns than is usually stated; cf. WILLIAMSON, Concept (see there also for further literature). For an orientation, further literature and cautious judgement of this problem cf. GRABBE, Judaism, Vol. One, 104–112; on the alleged separation presupposed in Isa 65–66 (especially Isa 66:5) see below the discussion under 2.1. 62 Cf. for more details the study of KREISSIG, Situation; GRABBE, Judaism, Vol. One, 115-118; CARTER, Emergence, 297–307, 323–324 (see ibid. 323–324 for the still remaining difficulties in determining the social-economic setting in Yehud). 63 Cf., e.g., Cyrus Cylinder (Cyrus as the choice of Marduk; ANET 315–316); tablet of Nippur (Cyrus as the choice of Sin); cf. GRABBE, Judaism, Vol. One, 126; B ERQUIST, Judaism, 24–25 (referring to DANDAMAEV, A Political History of the Achaemenid Empire, Leiden 1989, 54–57). 64 Cf. e.g. BERQUIST, Judaism, 53. 65 On the relative religious freedom, cf. also the discussion of iconographic evidence in UEHLINGER, Persianisms. 66 Cf. e.g. DtrH; Lam; Ps 89; the collection Pss 50; 73–83 (on the possible exilic setting of the Asaph psalms, cf. WEBER, Psalm 77, 283–284).

2. The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah

45

identify the speaker as well as the addressees of this process. I then look at the central concern of Isa and how it could have met some of the challenges in (early) post-exilic times.

2. The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah 2. The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah

Speech-act theorists have elucidated the importance of the speaker for the success of an illocutionary act in a communicative situation. It is therefore crucial to identify the ‘speaker’ when a book like Isa is perceived as a means of communication.67 Among those who discuss the final form of Isa, the number of supposed speakers varies considerably. Some scholars argue that Isa is presented as the message of the 8th century prophet Isaiah ben Amoz.68 But because of several features in Isa 1–39 and the way Isa 40:1–11 is related to Isa 6, a differentiation of communicative agents is preferable. We are confronted with at least two agents: the proclamation of Isaiah ben Amoz is presented to the audience by another agent. This relationship is apparent in the headings to the three major parts of Isa 1–39. Someone other than Isaiah introduces the “vision of Isaiah ben Amoz that he saw …” (ʵʥʮʠʚʯʡ ʥʤʩʲˇʩ ʯʥʦʧ ʤʦʧ ʸˇʠ, Isa 1:1), the “word that Isaiah ben Amoz saw …” (ʤʦʧ ʸˇʠ ʸʡʣʤ ʵʥʮʠʚʯʡ ʥʤʩʲˇʩ, Isa 2:1) and the “pronouncement concerning Babylon that Isaiah ben Amoz saw” (ʵʥʮʠʚʯʡ ʥʤʩʲˇʩ ʤʦʧ ʸˇʠ ʬʡʡ ʠˈʮ, Isa 13:1). It can be further amplified by the various narratives, in which Isaiah occurs in 3.sg., in Isa 7; 20; 36–39. As it is not otherwise indicated, one can deduce that the same speaker who introduces the larger sections of Isaiah’s proclamation also presents these narratives about Isaiah. By this means he situates the speeches of Isaiah in a particular historical context and relates them to the timeframe created by the overall heading (“in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah”, Isa 1:1). In contrast to other prophetic books, however, the agent of the communicative process in Isa not only presents the proclamation of the prophet in whose activity the

67

There are of course various speakers in Isa due to the different communicative levels. What concerns us here is the speaker who mediates the whole of Isa as a communicative process, in which further communicative levels like speeches of YHWH, the dialogue between Isaiah and Ahaz etc. are included. 68 Apart from those who maintain actual Isaianic authorship for the whole of Isa, cf. e.g. DARR, Literary Perspectives; STECK, Heimkehr, 87–93; IDEM, Prophetic Books, 37– 41; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 16; HÖFFKEN, Stand, 84, 89–90; similarly also the claim of Ben Zvi that every prophetic book is associated only with one prophetic persona; cf. IDEM , Micah, 4, 14, 187–188; IDEM , Prophetic Book, 281–283.

46

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

book is rooted,69 he comes to the fore as another prophetic voice, commissioned by YHWH to complement the activity of Isaiah ben Amoz. This interpretation is based on the observation of a close relationship between Isa 40:1–11 and Isa 6, which has also been suggested on various grounds by other exegetes.70 While the alleged form-critical correspondence of a setting in the ‘heavenly court’ remains vague and disputed,71 the most striking parallel is the recurrence of the elsewhere unattested constructions ʠʸʥʷ ʬʥʷ (Isa 6:4 and Isa 40:3) and ʸʮʠ (ʩʰʣʠ) ʬʥʷ (Isa 6:8 and Isa 40:5) even in the same order. Further terminological correspondences highlight the relationship with Isa 672 and indicate the structurally significant position of this unit.73 The correspondences between Isa 6 and Isa 40:1–11, however, are not exhausted with mere terminological parallels; there are even interrelationships in the sequence of interactions. As in Isa 6:3–4, the ʠʸʥʷ ʬʥʷ speaks about YHWH and particularly his “glory” (ʣʥʡʫ) in Isa 40:3–5. What to my knowledge has not been recognized so far is another reference in Isa 40:1– 11 back to Isa 6: the sequence of communicative actions is chiastically inverting the sequence of the dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isa 6:8. In Isa 6:8 YHWH (ʸʮʠ ʬʥʷ) poses the question “Whom shall I send?”, which is followed by the imperative of Isaiah (introduced by ʸʮʠʥ wƗ’ǀmar “And I said:”), “Send me!” In Isa 40:6 in turn, the ʸʮʠ ʬʥʷ first commands with the imperative “Proclaim!”, which is now followed by the question of the unidentified speaker (again introduced by ʸʮʠʥ wƗ’ǀmar “And I

69

On this differentiation of communicative levels cf. RENZ, Rhetorical Function, 19– 22 in respect to Ezek and MÖLLER, Prophet, 120–122 as regards Amos. 70 Cf. e.g. MELUGIN, Formation, 83–84; KIESOW, Exodustexte, 6; RENDTORFF, Jesaja 6, 79–81; SAWYER, Isaiah 2, 44–45; ACKROYD, Isaiah 36–39, 5–6; ALBERTZ, Fortschreibung, 244–245; SEITZ, Divine Council, 238–240; IDEM, How, 225–232; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66, 334–336; VAN W IERINGEN, Jesaja 40,1–11; W ILLIAMSON, Book, 37–38; SHEPPARD, Scope, 269–270; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 114; LAATO, About Zion, 130– 131; BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 40–66, 19–20; CHILDS, Isaiah, 295–297. 71 For setting in heavenly court see e.g. CROSS, Council, 275–276; SEITZ, Divine Council; IDEM, How; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66, 319–320, 334; WILLIAMSON, Book, 37. According to LORETZ, Gattung, 217, 220 this setting was created secondarily (taking up K IESOW, Exodustexte, 66). Against such a setting in the heavenly court argue e.g. VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 114–115; KRATZ, Jes 40,1f. und seine literarischen Horizonte, 402n.7. 72 Cf. the contrast between ʤʦʤ ʭʲʤ (Isa 6:9–10) and ʩʮʲ (Isa 40:1; cf. also Isa 40:7); the terms ʺʠʨʧ + ʯʥʲ (Isa 6:7 and Isa 40:2); ʣʥʡʫ (Isa 6:3 and Isa 40:5), which in both passages has universal implications (ʵʸʠʤʚʬʫ ʠʬʮ, Isa 6:3; ʸˈʡʚʬʫ ʥʠʸʥ, Isa 40:5). 73 Cf. the terms ʩʮʲ and ʯʥʲ at the beginning of Isa (Isa 1:4 and Isa 40:1–2) and ¥ʭʧʰ that at the conclusion of the first block in Isa 1–39 points towards a future (Isa 12:1), which Isa 40:1 claims to start in the present. Cf. also RENDTORFF, Komposition, 298– 299.

2. The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah

47

said”):74 “What shall I proclaim?”. Additionally, the passage starts with a quotation of what YHWH has said to an unidentified multitude that sets the scene: “comfort my people and say to (the city) Jerusalem that her sins have been taken away!” (paraphrase of Isa 40:1–2). When the unidentified speaker is called in v.6, he is commissioned to fulfil precisely this general intention,75 just like the commission of Isaiah (and its effects) was part of the general intention of YHWH as it is presented at the beginning of his call (Isa 6:1–4; cf. the discussion on Isa 6 below). Furthermore, both passages use the imagery of destroyed or fading plants (cf. Isa 6:12, 13bȕ and Isa 40:7–8), which is related to the power of YHWH’s word. Though in Isa 6 the destruction of plants follows the devastating effects of Isaiah’s proclamation, in Isa 40:8 (–9) the word of YHWH can launch a new beginning. Finally, the messenger of good tidings is to announce to the cities of Judah the return of “your God” (40:9), the same cities that were said to become deserted in Isa 6:11. In the light of these observations, Benjamin Sommer’s swift rejection of the influence of Isa 6 on Isa 4076 and also the objections raised by Joseph Blenkinsopp77 against a close relationship between Isa 6 and Isa 40:1–11 are unconvincing. Although the position held here does not necessitate the view of Isa 40:1–11 envisioning a heavenly court, Ps 29 and especially Ps 82 show that in such scenes, though not always, “Yahweh engages in discussion and solicits opinions” instead of giving orders.78 The clear identification of the ʸʮʠ ʬʥʷ with YHWH (ʩʰʣʠ) in Isa 6:8 does exclude an interchange of heavenly voices, but it does not invalidate the observation that the ʸʮʠ ʬʥʷ introduces the same kind of dialogue in Isa 6:8 and Isa 40:6–8. Finally, in his attempt to dissociate Isa 40:1–11 from Isa 6 as much as possible, Blenkinsopp fails to see that in the light of what precedes it, the hesitant response of the prophetic voice (“What shall I proclaim?”) is inevitable because the desolate state of the people is the result of Isaiah’s (= a prophet’s) proclamation (see the discussion on Hardening in Isa 6 below). To put the confident statement about the 74 Given one changes the vocalization of MT (wČ’Ɨmar) with the support of 1QIsaa (ʤʸʮʥʠʥ), LXX (țĮȚ İȚʌĮ) and Vulgate (et dixi) and the majority of exegetes. SEITZ, Divine Council, 238, 243–245; IDEM, How, 225; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66, 336 and also SHEPPARD, Isaiah, 516; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 64 (see there for others as well) maintain the reading of MT. 75 The individual in v.6 is called to “proclaim” (ʠʸʷ) like the voice of v.3 (ʠʸʥʷ ʬʥʷ). Or to put it in other words, he is called to join the voice of v.3. Note also that Isa 40:9– 11, which could be perceived as what the prophetic voice is supposed to say, reflects a similar distinction as Isa 40:1–2: in the address to (the city) Zion-Jerusalem in v.9, YHWH’s relationship to her is expressed: YHWH is present again in Zion and thereby elevates her to a “messenger of good tidings”; in v.10 the issue is YHWH’s relationship to his flock = his people: he will come (to Zion) with them. Hence, the ‘programme’ of the commissioned prophet (vv.9–10) is to participate in or even fulfil what is said at the beginning (Isa 40:1–2) corresponding to Isa 6:9–10 fulfilling Isa 6:1–4 (see below). 76 Cf. SOMMER, Allusions, 183. 77 Cf. B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 88–89; IDEM, Isaiah 40–55, 179–180. 78 Contra B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 179.

48

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

power and permanence of the prophetic word, which contrasts the state of the flowers and grass (= the people), in the mouth of a prophet (Isa 40:8)79 is inconceivable. Hence, there is a strong element of hesitation, even though I would associate the reaction of the prophetic voice in Isa 40:6–7 to the initial readiness of Isaiah (Isa 6:8, see above) rather than to the latter’s despair (Isa 6:5).80 Reinhard Kratz questions a close relationship between Isa 40:1–11 and Isa 6 (and Isa 1–39) on the basis of redaction-critical considerations. He argues that there is only a vague connection to Isa 6 via the insertion of Isa 40:6–8 at the latest stage of the growth of Isa 40:1–11.81 According to Kratz, the literary growth is likely because of conceptual differences between Isa 40:1–5; 40:9–11 and 40:6–8. Isa 40:1–5 was originally composed for the primary layer of DI, which continued an earlier version of Jer + Lam. 82 As the present study does not primarily discuss diachronic questions, I confine myself to some comments on the synchronic level: Kratz mentions seven indications for the original relation to Jer: (1) the double that Jerusalem has received (ʭʩʬʴʫ) has its closest parallel in Jer 16:18; (2) the pair ʯʥʲ/ʺʠʨʧ is more common in Jer than in Isa (and apart from Isa 4:4 it is not related to Jerusalem in Isa); (3) the “completed” (¥ʠʬʮ) service corresponds to the “filling” (¥ʠʬʮ) of the inheritance with detestable idols, for which “they” receive double in Jer 16:18; (4) the term ʠʡʶ occurs with a 3.sg.fem. suffix only in Jer 51:3 elsewhere in the OT; (5) ʯʥʲ occurs with a 3.sg.fem. suffix for a city only in Jer 51:6 elsewhere in the OT; (6) the parallelism between “my people” and Jerusalem is most prominent in Jer; (7) the only proper parallel to the phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʣʩʮ ¥ʧʷʬ can be found in Jer 25:17; the similar phrase in Isa 51:17, 22–23 depends on Isa 40:2 and Jer 25:17. Of these cases, I only consider (4) and (7) as possible correspondences, and yet even these are not unequivocal: ʠʡʶ is not only rare with a 3.sg.fem.suffix but with any singular suffix; but, together with Job 14:14, such an occurrence may indicate particularly personal hardship. The phrase ʣʩʮ ¥ʧʷʬ is very common in OT, so that it is not clear whether the specification with ʤʥʤʩ is as clear a marker as Kratz supposes. In respect to the other supposed parallels with Jer: (1) the “double” suffering of Zion has a particular content in Isa 40–66, that is parallel to the double suffering of Babylon in Isa 47; as we will see, the composition of the whole of Isa 40–66 as well as the communicative strategy are related to the meaning of “double”, which simply cannot be deduced from Jer 16:18 (on this whole issue see below the discussion on Isa 63:7–64:11); (2) as the pair ʯʥʲ/ʺʠʨʧ is particularly present in the crucial chapters Isa 1 (1:4) and Isa 6 (6:7), it cannot be a question of frequency; for the association of ʯʥʲ/ʺʠʨʧ with Jerusalem the mediation of Lamentations (cf. Lam 4:6, 22) suffices, which is not denied here; (3) the use of ¥ʠʬʮ in Jer 16:18 is clearly not closer to Isa 40:2 than the antonymic relationship between the keyword ¥ʠʬʮ (6:1, 3, 4) and ʤʮʮˇ/ʤʠˇ (6:11) in Isa 6 (see below the discussion of Isa 6); (5) although not constructed with a 3.sg.fem. suffix, the term ʯʥʲ is associated with the sins of the city Jerusalem in Lam 4:6, 22; (6) the double address to “my people” and to Jerusalem in Isa 40:2 will characterize the composition and communicative strategy of the whole of Isa 40–55 (and 56–63:6) that has its sufficient presupposition in Isa 1:21–

79

Thus B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 180. Contra MELUGIN, Formation, 82–84; W ILLIAMSON, Book, 38; BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 40–66, 19. 81 Cf. especially KRATZ, Jes 40,1f und seine literarischen Horizonte, 404–406; IDEM, Jes 40,1f und das Jeremiabuch, 244n.6; IDEM, Kyros, 138n.528, 217. 82 Thus especially KRATZ, Jes 40,1f und das Jeremiabuch. 80

2. The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah

49

27. I also see the synchronic reading different than Kratz.83 Crucial for that is my understanding of the “double” that Jerusalem has suffered. As I will argue later, it consists of her “widowhood” – she has been left by YHWH – and her childlessness – her children have been sent away. The first section, Isa 40:1–2, announces that this state will change now. The second section, Isa 40:3–5 concentrates on YHWH, i.e. the husband of Zion: soon the whole earth will recognize his universal reign. This is appropriately announced by the voice of the unidentified multitude, presumably beings in the presence of YHWH. The third section, Isa 40:6–8 describes the commissioning of the prophetic voice that is related to the people (v.7). All these aspects, however, find their solution in the fourth section, Isa 40:9–11: the double she has suffered is over when she can announce the presence of (her husband, the universal king) YHWH (v.9) and with him his booty (her children, vv.10–11).

The interpretations of those who have recognized these interrelationships vary to some degree. Childs and Seitz discuss the references in Isa 40:1–11 back to Isa 6 primarily in respect to what this means for aspects of continuity and discontinuity in the Book of Isaiah. Stressing the continuity beyond the ministry of the persona of Isaiah, Childs argues that while Isaiah’s proclamation of judgement has been fulfilled, the prologue states that Isaiah’s proclamation of salvation is now about to be accomplished.84 But this is not bound to a specific prophet: “No new prophet is called in chapter 40, but rather the word of God through Isaiah continues to work in order to fulfil the promise.”85 Seitz argues against Childs that the continuing power of God’s word (Isa 40:8) is not rooted in the ministry of Isaiah as such, but in that both originate in the “divine council”. Yet while in Isa 6 the specific prophet Isaiah is commissioned, Isa 40:1–11 shows no interest in the prophet, rather it “is content to let God and the heavenly assembly speak.”86 Seitz maintains his interpretation by retaining the reading of MT (“and one said”) in Isa 40:6.87 The lack of any specifics of a prophetic persona, most notably the lack of any name of a prophet, supports Seitz’s refusal to see a call of a prophet in Isa 40:1–11. However, there are some indications of a distinctive speaker who mediates the word of YHWH in Isa 40–66. The evidence of 1QIsaa, LXX and Vulgate supports the reading “and I said” in Isa 40:6. The same speaker in 1.sg., apart from the Servant, occurs in Isa 61:1–3; 62:1; 63:7, 15). In Isa 58:1; 59:21, YHWH addresses a distinctive speaker 83

Cf. IDEM, Jes 40,1f und seine literarischen Horizonte, 402–405. Cf. CHILDS, Isaiah, 296–297, and with reference to the intertextual relationship with Isa 28:1–4 (judgement) followed by 28:5–6 see C HILDS, Isaiah, 300. 85 CHILDS, Isaiah, 302. There, he also notes: the point of Isa 40 is that “Isaiah’s word continues to work in fulfilling God’s purpose, but apart from the historical persona of the prophet.” 86 SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 338. 87 Cf. SEITZ, Divine Council, 238, 243–245; IDEM, How, 225; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66, 336. 84

50

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

who is to proclaim to YHWH’s people. Accordingly, we cannot speak of an unequivocal call of another prophet in Isa 40:1–11, but an additional speaker comes to the fore who is urged by the ʸʮʠ ʬʥʷ to proclaim. This scene alludes to Isaiah’s call in Isa 6 and, thereby, indicates that it needs to be understood in relation to this call and – as we will see – in particular in relation to the theme of hardening. Hence another agent, which is called in the following a “prophetic voice”, introduces and mediates the word of YHWH (see the frequent messenger formula in Isa 40–66) after Isaiah’s message in Isa 1–39.88 A few scholars argue, however, that on the synchronic level Isa 40–66 should be distributed to two different speakers. Hence their identification of speakers corresponds to the traditional division of Isa into Isa 1–39, 40– 55, 56–66. According to Laato the implied author of Isa has included three different speakers to communicate his message. In Isa 1 the implied readers are instructed how to read the book; in Isa 2–39 the message of the prophet (Isaiah) is presented; in Isa 40–55 the implied readers follow the message of “the voice” (40:6); in Isa 56–66 the “Servant” (indicated through Isa 61:1–3) delivers his message.89 Interestingly, however, both 88 Cf. also BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 40–66, 17–19 (on p.17, Brueggemann speaks of a “second verdict of God” in respect to Isa 40:1–11); cf. also WILLIAMSON, Book, 113 more generally on the basis of all his accumulated evidence of interrelationships between Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–55 but presupposing a prophet: Deutero-Isaiah “bound the version of Isaiah’s book into his own as the necessary precursor to what he was now announcing to his compatriots in exile.” One may also mention the study of Conrad ( IDEM, Reading Isaiah) as regards the relationship of Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66. He argues that the Book of Isaiah addresses the present situation of the implied readers in Isa 1–5 and 40–66. But within this book, the “vision of Isaiah”, bracketed by royal narratives (Isa 6–8; 36–39), is contained. The “vision of Isaiah” (chs.6–39) anticipated the present of the implied readers and serves as the basis for the argument addressed to them in Isa 1–5; 40–66 (cf. CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, 117–153). However, it seems impossible to dissociate chs.1–5 from the “vision of Isaiah”. Isa 1:1 and Isa 2:1 introduce passages by claiming they are the “vision” (ʯʥʦʧ) and “word” (ʸʡʣʤ) respectively of what Isaiah “saw” (ʤʦʧ). Moreover, already Isa 5:1, 9 introduces a speaker in 1.sg., which given the literary context (Isa 2:1; 6–8) is most likely supposed to be Isaiah ben Amoz; cf. also the criticisms in D ARR, Vision, 19–20; HÖFFKEN, Stand, 89. One must note, however, that in his more recent work IDEM , Reading the Latter Prophets, 182–242, Conrad has given up this distinction and instead regards the whole book as the “vision of Isaiah” in three parts: Isa 1–6 (vision during the time when king Uzziah died); Isa 7–35 (vision during Ahaz’s reign); Isa 36–66 (vision at the time of Sennacherib’s invasion during Hezekiah’s reign; cf. IDEM, Reading the Latter Prophets, 196). 89 See for a summary, LAATO, About Zion, 170–174; on the identification of the “voice”, cf. then also LAATO, About Zion, 186–187, 195 on its identity with the “loyal servant” of Isa 42:1–9; on the “Servant” speaking in Isa 56–66 see LAATO, About Zion, 204.

2. The Agent(s) of Communicative Action in the Book of Isaiah

51

speakers are identified with the “loyal servant” of Isa 42:1–9.90 Laato’s differentiation of the speakers depends not on differences of their presentation, but entirely on how he relates Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 to each other.91 But even two different addressees do not necessitate two speakers. Williamson also interprets Isa 61:1–3 as evidence for another speaker. For him, however, this becomes apparent especially in the way that this figure gathers up the announcers of salvation in the preceding material, like the prophet Deutero-Isaiah, Cyrus and the Servant.92 As this implies a progression from Isa 40–55, the figure of Isa 61 must be seen as another speaker:93 he (note: Trito-Isaiah) takes to himself the task of proclaiming the future fulfilment of all the as yet unrealised tasks entrusted to a variety of figures in Deutero-Isaiah: Cyrus, the servant, the herald of good news, God’s ministers in the heavenly court and the prophet himself.94

But the relationships between Isa 40:1–11, the Servant passages (especially Isa 42:1–9) and the speaker of Isa 61:1–3 are interpreted below as indications that the prophetic voice speaking in Isa 40–66 is one of the servants, the offspring of the Servant.95 And the reference to Cyrus should be seen together with the parallels between Cyrus and the Servant (cf. especially Isa 42:5–9 and Isa 45:1–7). An important indication that the “I” figure of Isa 61 is presented as the same as the one of Isa 40:6–8 is the observation that this figure gives testimony of an ‘extension’ of the appeal in Isa 40:3, 6 in Isa 57:14+58:1.96 On this basis, I see a differentiation into Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66 that corresponds to two different speakers and communicative strategies, 90

Cf. LAATO, About Zion, 195, 204. Cf. especially chapter 4 in his study. The same applies to the differentiation that GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 2–5 presents. According to him YHWH’s revelation comes through at least four voices: the “ambassador” (Isaiah) who speaks in Isa 1–39; the “disciple” who presents the words of Isaiah (acc. to Goldingay, he/they are responsible for the headings and 3.sg. accounts in Isa 1–39); the “poet” who speaks in Isa 40–55 (and belongs to the disciples as well, with respect to Isa 50:4); finally the “preacher” who speaks in Isa 56–66. 92 W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 174–186 notes references in Isa 61:1–3 to passages like Isa 40:9 (relating to the commissioning of Deutero-Isaiah); 45:1–7 (relating to the anointed Cyrus); 42:1–4 (relating to the Servant); cf. also IDEM, One Degree. 93 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 186–187. 94 W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 187. 95 See on this chapter 7. 96 See again the discussion in chapter 7 below. While Seitz excludes Isa 40:6 from the passages in which the ‘I’-figure speaks, he wonders “to what extent is the first-person (nondivine) voice in SI distinct from that found in TI, and what would prevent one from seeing essentially the same prophetic voice at work in both sections (e.g. 48:16c; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; 61:1–4)?”; SEITZ, (Third Isaiah), 506; cf. also IDEM, Isaiah 40–66 ad loc. 91

52

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

whereby the communicative process of the first speaker – Isaiah ben Amoz (Isa 1–39) – is included in the communicative action of the second speaker who comes to the fore unnamed in Isa 40:6 (Isa 40–66 and cf. Isa 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; also Isa 7; 20; 36–39).97

3. The Addressees of the Book of Isaiah 3. The Addressees of the Book of Isaiah

The question of who is addressed by the agent(s) through Isa in its specific communicative situation98 involves several further questions. Since the communicative situation and the speaker commissioned in that context (Isa 40–66) are considerably later than the presented message of Isaiah (Isa 1– 39), the question stands, how are the addressed related to the (earlier) message of Isaiah? As this question forms an important part of the communicative strategy of Isa 6–39, it will be discussed in the course of the analysis of Isa 6. So it suffices here to comment on the addressees of Isa 40–66, who are also the addressees of the whole book. The ‘overall programme’, which the prophetic voice is commissioned to join in through the ʸʮʠ ʬʥʷ (40:6), is to “comfort my people (ʩʮʲ) and to declare to Jerusalem that her sins have been paid double” (paraphrase of Isa 40:1–2). It seems that the phrases “my people” and “Jerusalem” should not be regarded as simple parallel expressions, in which one stands for the other.99 Indeed, when we read through Isa 40–66 we encounter a remark97 Thus, what W ILLIAMSON, Book, 113 suggests is the case on the level of the integration and edition of the words of First Isaiah (Isa *1–35) in the work of Deutero-Isaiah, applies also to Isa as a whole in its final form. Only it is not restricted to the exiles only. Williamson himself maintains “that he [note: Deutero-Isaiah] regarded his own work as an integral continuation of the work of Isaiah, or, which comes to the same thing, that he bound the version of Isaiah’s book into his own as the necessary precursor to what he was now announcing to his compatriots in exile.” 98 In discussing these issues, the present study differs considerably from the work of VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, who also seeks to pursue a communicative analysis of parts of Isa. Applying categories of narrative analysis to Isa, he intends to “search for the text-implied reader, as ‘finishing-point’ of the communication of Isa 6–12: where is he located in the text? How is he addressed, and manipulated to get involved in the content of the text?” (VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 1–2; on the implied author and implied reader, cf. VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 22–26). The procedure of this study is developed instead on the basis of the determination of the particular genre of a prophetic book (see above chapter 1). 99 Thus also SNAITH, Isaiah 40–66, 177–179, although I do not share his view that the people are to speak to Jerusalem. The phrase ʭʫʩʤʬʠ ʸʮʠʩ “says your God” (Isa 40:1) dissociates the imperatives ʩʮʲ ʥʮʧʰ ʥʮʧʰ “comfort, comfort my people” (Isa 40:1) from the subsequent connection of three lines that speak about Jerusalem. This differentiation comes to the fore more clearly in Isa 40:9–11, where Zion-Jerusalem is to speak to the

3. The Addressees of the Book of Isaiah

53

able distinction between texts addressing the people as a multitude (addressed in 2.masc.pl.) or as a whole (addressed in 2.masc.sing.) on the one hand (cf. most of the texts in Isa 40:12–49:15; 56–59; 65–66), and texts that speak to Zion-Jerusalem (cf. Isa 49:14–26; at least parts of 51:9–52:9; 54; 60; 62:2–9) on the other. As I shall argue in respect to the communicative strategy of Isa 40–66, the ‘Zion texts’ do not directly speak to the addressees. Zion is not to be equated with the people in most of the texts.100 Rather, it is the city Jerusalem personified similar to comparable phenomena in other ANE texts, counting as an entity on her own.101 This differentiation between city Zion and the addressees comes to the fore particularly when the latter are addressed as the children of Zion who shall come to Jerusalem again (cf. Isa 50:1–2 in the context of Isa 49:22), when they are addressed in 2.masc.pl. within the context of speeches to Zion (2.fem.sing.; cf. the complex passages in Isa 51:1–52:10) or those who have remained in Judah are prepared to join the salvation that will be established in Jerusalem (thus Isa 56–62; see below). As we will see, this differentiation serves an important communicative function in the address to YHWH’s people. So this leaves us to consider the remaining texts apart from the addresses to Zion-Jerusalem. At least since the commentary of Duhm,102 the majority of interpreters have divided Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 into two main parts that originated in different times. Isa 40–55 is associated primarily with an audience in the Babylonian captivity at around 540 B.C., while Isa 56–66 is associated with a situation when at least some of those from Babylon have come back to Palestine; hence it was written after 539 B.C. Even in some analyses of the final form, these differences are maintained. Steck, e.g., argues that the whole Book of Isaiah presents the message of Isaiah ben Amoz as one that has covered the 8th century (Isa 1–39), the Babylonian period (Isa 40–55)

cities of Judah and to announce that YHWH brings back his “flock”, which in the context is most likely the “fading” people (Isa 40:7) to whom the commissioned prophetic voice is called to speak (Isa 40:6–8). 100 On Isa 51:16 see the remarks of STECK, Zions Tröstung, 71 and W ISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion, 213. 101 The literature on Zion/Jerusalem is immense; for a survey of the Zion tradition, see, e.g., RENZ, Zion Tradition and for a bibliography on Zion/Jerusalem, see especially E. OTTO, ʯʥʩʶ s̜îyôn’, 333–365 (especially 333–341). On the specific issue of the personification of cities as women in the ANE and in the OT (or Isa), see, e.g., J. J. Schmitt, Motherhood; IDEM, City; HERMISSON, Jakob und Zion, 120–123; IDEM, Frau; STECK, Zion (and further literature noted there, 128n.5); B. DOYLE, Metaphor, 224–229 (and further literature noted there, 224–229nn.11–15); BERGES, Personifications; WISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion (on the ANE background and for further literature, see ibid. 13–45). 102 Note, however, that already before Duhm’s commentary exegetes questioned the unity of Isa 40–66; cf. KOENEN, Ethik, 1n.1.

54

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

and the Persian era (Isa 56–66).103 Similarly Laato and Goldingay argue for different voices in Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 that address different audiences at different times.104 There are two main aspects that determine all treatments of the relationship between Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66. The first regards the way both parts ‘proclaim salvation’, or more precisely, how they relate ‘righteousness’ and ‘salvation’. On the one hand, one can find almost identical announcements about what ‘salvation’ will look like for the addressees (cf., e.g., Isa 52:12 and 58:8b). On the other hand, Isa 56–66 ‘conditions’ the salvation (cf. the ‘if-then-clauses’ in e.g. Isa 58:9b–11), while Isa 40–55 announces unconditional salvation. Duhm based his separation of Isa 56–66 from Isa 40–55 on his most drastically negative interpretation of the “legalism” in the last eleven chapters of Isa, in which salvation comes through “doing righteousness”, i.e. Werkgerechtigkeit.105 This notion also demanded a rather late date of Isa 56–66. Later commentators generally did not share Duhm’s harsh judgement, but they still emphasized the difference in the concept of righteousness and salvation between both parts while they tried to accommodate the apparent similarities as well. Zimmerli, e.g., suggests that Isa 56–66 reapplies some of the announcements of the earlier prophecy, Isa 40–55, in a new situation.106 Other scholars elaborated this proposal further in the sense that the original announcements of Isa 40–55 about the salvation have been disappointed once the people came back to Palestine, so that they had to be reinterpreted.107 But there seems to be a second aspect that leads most scholars to assume that Isa 56–66 speaks in a time later than Isa 40–55. Often without further discussion, many scholars deduce that as the people are addressed in the homeland, they must have come back from exile. I wonder whether in this respect the long-held view of an extensive desolation of Judah and its marginal population after 587/6 B.C. influenced this train of thought.108 The present study shares the general view that the addressees of Isa 40– 66 can be differentiated into those of Isa 40–55 and those of Isa 56–66. It 103

Cf. STECK, Prophetic Books, 37–41; similarly also OSWALT, Isaiah: Theology,

726. 104

Cf. LAATO, About Zion, 45–50, 126–131; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 2–5, 315. Cf. DUHM, Jesaia, 418–419. 106 Cf. ZIMMERLI, Sprache Tritojesajas. 107 Cf. KRAUS, Endtheophanie and especially the study of CARROLL, Prophecy, 152– 156 who applied the “cognitive-dissonance-theory” to this aspect (on the theory and its application to prophecy, cf. ibid. 86-128). This train of thought is now taken up by most studies on Isa 56–66, hence the “delay” of the salvation proclaimed in Isa 40–55 is “explained” in Isa 56–66 by the lack of social justice among the people. 108 Some use to call this view the “myth of the empty land”; cf. CARROLL, Myth; B ARSTAD, Myth; IDEM, Babylonian Captivity. 105

3. The Addressees of the Book of Isaiah

55

does not exclude either, that Isa 40–66 has developed gradually over a period of time. However, what is seen here as the primary issue at stake regarding the differentiation of the addressees is their spatial distance, not the temporal differences when they are addressed. With the majority of commentators, the Babylonian exiles are seen as the audience of Isa 40–55 (cf., e.g., Isa 43:14–15; 48:20–21; 52:10–12).109 Isa 56–66 clearly presupposes an audience that lives in the homeland (cf., e.g., Isa 56:9–57:2; Isa 57:3–13). But in contrast to many interpreters, I do not see them as former Babylonian exiles who were disappointed because the promises of Isa 40– 55 have not been fulfilled yet. While there might be returnees among the addressees, they are primarily addressed as those who live in the homeland, where the majority of the people stayed in exilic times. This differentiation of addressees in each section reflects the hostilities they face. Babylon is dealt with in Isa 47, while Edom, the enemy of those who live in the homeland, is mentioned in Isa 63:1–6.110 Read in this way, one contribution of Isa 40–66 would be to communicate with both major groups of the people of YHWH when restoration was possible, in order to meet the challenges they faced where they lived. Moreover, in contrast to (or refinement of) other concepts (cf. Ezek), it regards both groups as the people of YHWH, and therefore presents a distinctive contribution to the question of the identity of YHWH’s people after 539 B.C. So far we have identified the communicative agents and the addressees of the Book of Isaiah. We also discussed its historical setting and pointed at several challenges that this situation posed for the addressees of Isa. Thereby we have elucidated several important aspects of the communicative situation. We now turn our attention to the communicative aim of Isa, and the means by which it addresses some of these challenges.

109

Despite studies like B ARSTAD, Myth; IDEM, Babylonian Captivity and now T IEGeography. The interpretation of Isa 40–55 below will show that the way the appeals to leave Babel (especially Isa 48:20) are integrated in the overall communicative strategy, the exiles are the most likely addressees of these chapters. 110 The idea of Babylon and Edom as a kind of a ‘dyarchy of evil’ can also be found in Ps 137. Other texts that presumably originated in Judah after 587/6 B.C. also picture Edom as the enemy, cf. Obad, Lam 4:21–22. This is also another aspect, in which Isa 40– 66 takes up predictions made in Isa 1–39: In the section Isa 13–35(37–39) Judah is addressed (chs. 28–33) within the proclamation of YHWH’s judgement of the nations (chs. 13–34). Within this section Babylon (Isa 13:1–14:23) and Edom (Isa 34) frame and epitomize as Judah’s archenemies this judgement, from which the people of YHWH will finally exit (Isa 35).

MEYER,

56

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah: The Restoration of the People’s Righteousness 4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah

The aim of Isa is to proclaim the restoration of what has been recently called “connective righteousness” as the universal order through YHWH, the only God, in Isa 40–66 (after the addressees have been confronted with the message of Isaiah in Isa 1–39). Even more, it not only proclaims this restoration of righteousness, it also serves to perform this restoration. The main part of this study will show that in some passages the theme of hardening is fundamentally connected to the issue of righteousness understood as “connective righteousness”. It is therefore necessary to clarify first, what the concept of “connective righteousness” means, and secondly, to outline the primary features of the proclamation of righteousness in Isa. In this respect we will also note how this communicative aim responds to the problems that gave rise to Isa. 4.1 The Concept of ‘Connective Righteousness’ In a 1990 study the Egyptologist Jan Assmann refined the understanding of ma`at (“righteousness”), which has also influenced some OT studies. According to him ma`at is the principle that binds together/connects a deed and its consequences. By this means it establishes a sphere, in which norms apply that connect men with each other and consequences with actions. Ma`at bedeutet, nach der einzigen Definition, die wir in einem ägyptischen Text gefunden haben, das Prinzip, das bewirkt, daß das Gute sich lohnt und das Böse sich rächt: ‘Der Lohn eines, der handelt, besteht darin, daß für ihn gehandelt wird. Das hält Gott für Ma`at.’111

Assmann develops his understanding of ma`at as the principle that connects actions with their consequences on the basis of the “Protests of the Eloquent Peasant”112 and other texts of the wisdom literature of the Middle Kingdom that are concerned with the realm of interaction among the people in a society. He also shows that three aspects are involved in maintaining ma`at, i.e., in maintaining the action-consequences connection. 111

ASSMANN, Ma`at, 293; the quotation is from the inscription of Neferhotep (cf. also ASSMANN, Ma`at, 65). 112 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 58–60. As regards recent translations Assmann refers to LICHTHEIM , M., Ancient Egyptian Literature I, Berkeley 1973, 169–183 and HORNUNG, E., Meisterwerke altägyptischer Dichtung, Zurich 1979, 9–22 (ASSMANN, Ma`at, 58n.1; but see also ANET 407–410). The verses, from which Assmann develops the main aspects of ma`at, read as follows: “Es gibt kein Gestern für den Trägen, es gibt keinen Freund für den, der für die Ma`at taub ist, es gibt kein Fest für den Habgierigen.” (ASSMANN, Ma`at, 60).

4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah

57

a) Action. As regards (social) action, ma`at is “acting-for-each-other”. The motivation for such actions of solidarity is gratefulness for previous actions.113 In this context the “deed-consequences connection” is a social function of solidarity, not something that happens automatically:114 Nur die Solidarität der Gruppe vermag den Nexus von Tun und Ergehen zu garantieren. Dieses Prinzip möchte ich die „konnektive Gerechtigkeit“ nennen. 115

b) Communication. The connection of action and consequences that is the foundation for all order is not only maintained by reciprocal action but also by communication. The one who disturbs the process of communication breaks the solidarity within society and is responsible for tearing apart the bond between deed and consequence.116 Words are the medium of the integration of the individual in the community.117 The “art of listening” is therefore a crucial aspect of social competence and contributes significantly to the order of society. But the one who is “deaf” has “no friend”; the one who disturbs the principle of communication, destroys the social tie and therefore sins against ma`at.118 Equally, proper speech is integral to a righteous life.119 And when communication is infected in the whole society, violence gets the upper hand.120 c) Intention/Will. The final aspect of ma`at regards the will of man and thus concentrates on the “inner man”. The antonym to ma`at is “greed”. According to Assmann, however, “greed” is not only the third sin against ma`at apart from “inactivity” (against the reciprocity of action) and “hard-

113

Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 63: “Verantwortliches Handeln heißt ägyptisch ‘Handeln für den der handelt’, also ‘Füreinander-Handeln’.” This necessitates a social memory of earlier actions, from which one has benefited, and points at their nature as communicatively connected actions; cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 61: “Alles Handeln ist kommunikativ verzahnt, ist entweder Antwort oder erfordert Antwort. [...] Die kommunikative Verfugung des Handelns erfordert Gedächtnis“. He refers to a specific text in this respect: in the teaching for Merikare P 123: “Ein Schlag wird mit seinesgleichen vergolten – das ist die Verfugung von allem, was getan wird” (ASSMANN, Ma`at, 61; then also JANOWSKI, Tat, 179). 114 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 66–67 who objects to the thesis of Koch about the “deedconsequences connection” as a “schicksalswirkende Tatsphäre” (cf. KOCH, Vergeltungsdogma). 115 ASSMANN, Ma`at, 67. 116 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 69–70. 117 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 79. 118 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 73–79. 119 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 79–82: “Daher ist, wer zu guter Rede und Einbindung nicht fähig ist, ‘lebendig tot’. Ma`at ist der Inbegriff solcher ‘guten’, d.h. Einklang stiftenden, integrierenden Rede.” (ASSMANN, Ma`at, 80). 120 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 82–85.

58

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

ness/deafness” (against communication), it could be regarded as a higher term that summarizes all sins against ma`at.121 Having developed the main aspects of ma`at, Assmann then looks at its integration in other texts.122 He shows that the connection of deed and consequences is also of importance as regards the remembrance of a person in a society after his death,123 and in the realm of religion. In this context, ma`at is a principle explicated both in ethical norms,124 in respect to the cosmic rule of the sun god,125 and in the political rule of the Pharaoh.126 Moreover, the “deed-consequences connection” also applies to the connection of actions between different realms.127 In his synthesis, Assmann distinguishes between two “stages” in the “history of righteousness”. First there is the simple idea about the connection of deed and consequences, according to which good behaviour does pay while one has to suffer for bad behaviour. In this context, “righteousness” is a function of solidarity in a group.128 At the second stage, however, it is a higher authority that guarantees the connection between deed and consequences. This is exemplified in two respects. Political righteousness asks the state to care for the proper function of “connective righteousness”. In Egypt, this applies particularly to the pharaoh.129 When this connection is delegated to the deity, one speaks of religious righteousness. 121

ASSMANN, Ma`at, 87 says: “Wenn Ma`at eine positive ‘soziogene’ Energie darstellt, die Kohärenz und Einklang stiftet auf den drei Ebenen der Zeit (Tun-ErgehenZusammenhang), der Gesellschaft und der Person, dann ist Habgier das destruktive Prinzip, das auf denselben drei Ebenen (und nicht nur auf der ebene der Person) zerstörerisch wirkt. Habgier zerstört die sozialen Bindungen [...], und sie zerstört – in der Zeitdimension – die Dauer, die Einbindung des einzelnen in die Fortdauer der Gruppe und ihrer Erinnerung.” 122 ASSMANN, Ma`at, 92–236 looks at the use of ma`at in the autobiographic tomb inscriptions of the Old Kingdom, in the literature of the dead from the Middle and New Kingdom, in the cosmographic and liturgical texts of the sun cult and in the royal inscriptions of the New Kingdom 123 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 92–121 (especially 92–113). 124 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 126–159, 285. 125 Cf. in detail ASSMANN, Ma`at, 160–199. 126 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 200–236. 127 Thus, e.g., the connection of actions between the cosmic and political realms: The god grants ma`at in maintaining the cosmic order, in particular in giving light, and the pharaoh returns ma`at as sacrifice. In man’s commitment to offer sacrifices he binds the deities to himself and integrates the welfare of the society into the paradigmatic ‘success’ of the cosmic process. At the same time the procedure of cultic activities and sacrifices are part of the deed-consequence-relationship as well. The right procedures will grant the pharaoh the blessings in respect to warfare and obedience from his people; cf. the summary, ASSMANN, Ma`at, 285–286. 128 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 237–242, 286–287. 129 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 244–252, 287.

4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah

59

Reward or punishment are seen in this context as the consequences of divine intervention to maintain the connection between deed and consequences.130 According to some recent studies, this principle of “connective righteousness” is also present in the OT.131 In early wisdom literature, for instance, some texts speak of the relationship between deed and consequences as a reciprocal action in the social realm.132 The deed returns to its agent not automatically, 133 but by others doing to him what he has done (evil or good) to them; cf. e.g.: The people curse him who holds back grain, but a blessing is on the head of him who sells it (Prov 11:26). Whoever says to the wicked, ‘You are in the right’, will be cursed by peoples, abhorred by nations, but those who rebuke the wicked will have delight, and a good blessing will come upon them (Prov 24:24–25). From the fruit of a man’s mouth one is satisfied with good, and the work of a man comes back134 to him (Prov 12:14).

Sometimes this reciprocal action is explicitly referred to as “retribution” (especially by ¥ʭʬˇ Hifil/Piel; then also ¥ʣʷʴ; ¥ʡʥˇ Hifil): If the righteous is repaid (¥ʭʬˇ Pual) on earth, how much more the wicked and the sinner (Prov 11:31)! Whoever despises the word becomes pledged to it, but he who reveres the commandment will be rewarded (¥ʭʬˇ Pual; Prov 13:13). Evil pursues sinners, but good is the reward (¥ʭʬˇ Piel) of the righteous (Prov 13:21).

Hence, the righteous is the one who does not disturb this principle of reciprocity in the social realm. But the “deed-consequences connection” and “retribution” as reciprocal action are not restricted to the social realm; they are also important when it comes to YHWH’s interventions in reality, hence, in the religious realm. When it is said that “HE will repay (¥ʡʥˇ Hifil) man according to his deed” (Prov 24:12), YHWH acts according to the principle of reciprocity and, 130

Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 252–272, 287–288. Apart from the studies noted in the following, cf. O TTO, Ethik; IDEM, Woher; SCHWIENHORST-SCHÖNBERGER, Buch, 334–335. 132 Cf. for the following especially JANOWSKI, Tat, 175–186. 133 This has been suggested in the influential study of KOCH, Vergeltungsdogma, in which he interprets the “deed-consequence-relationship” as a “schicksalswirkende Tatsphäre”. Koch remains critical about the proposal of the concept of “connective righteousness”, cf. IDEM, Konnektive Gerechtigkeit. 134 On the text-critical problems see the commentaries. 131

60

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

therefore, maintains the “deed-consequences connection”.135 He is therefore introduced as a ‘third instance’ besides the immediate parties in the interactive relationship of deed and consequence.136 In this process one may recognize a transfer of trust in the “deed-consequences connection” from the social (human) sphere to the divine.137 Janowski exemplifies this transformation of the “deed-consequences connection” through the idea of YHWH’s intervention, for instance, in respect to Ps 7. In a situation, where the righteous suffers from the wicked and the “deed-consequences connection” is about to dissolve, the psalmist pleads to YHWH as the ultimate authority to save him as the righteous and to judge the wicked (Ps 7:7–12 [especially 9–10]). The righteousness of YHWH comes to the fore when he saves the oppressed righteous one from the wicked by judging the latter, so that his deeds fall upon him (cf. Ps 7:9–12, 15–17).138 By judging the wicked, the saving righteousness of YHWH realizes and maintains the “deed-consequences connection” through which justice happens to the oppressed.139 These observations also raise doubts about the contrast between a judicial (to judge) and a soteriological meaning (to save) of righteousness, as it was held in the past. Instead, Janowski opts for an integration of both aspects in the concept of a “saving righteousness” (“rettende Gerechtigkeit”).140 Thus the righteousness of YHWH is the power that connects deed and consequence and thereby causes peace and salvation. For our interpretation of Isaiah it is of great importance that this principle of reciprocity governs indeed all realms of life, cosmic, religious, political and social. In Ps 82, e.g., three aspects are joined. The social aspect is present in vv.3–4, where YHWH is the social instance that judges the wicked and thereby saves the righteous and grants them justice. V.5 points to the cosmic dimension of the divine office of judgement in its negative form; the blindness of the gods makes the foundations of the earth tremble and threatens the coherence of reality. Finally, the divinity of God is defined on the basis of righteousness. While the other gods judge unjustly (Ps 82:2), YHWH judges in righteousness (Ps 82:3–4, 8) and proves to be the true God. The former two dimensions are joined with this religious aspect, but in its emphasis on 135

Cf. J ANOWSKI, Tat, 186–190. Cf. J ANOWSKI, JHWH der Richter, 116. 137 Thus ASSMANN, Ma`at, 259, taken up in J ANOWSKI, JHWH der Richter, 118. 138 Cf. in detail J ANOWSKI, JHWH der Richter; IDEM, Der barmherzige Richter, 107– 109; IDEM, Konfliktgespräche, 141–154, 163–165. 139 J ANOWSKI, Der barmherzige Richter, 108–109 says: the (righteousness and) wrath of YHWH in Ps 7:9–10, 12 stands “für die Durchsetzung und Wahrung eines Wirkzusammenhangs, kraft dessen dem Bedrängten Gerechtigkeit widerfährt, und zwar gegen alle Infragestellung durch die Frevler.” 140 Cf. Janowski in: ASSMANN, J ANOWSKI & W ELKER, Richten, 232. 136

4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah

61

the correlation of God and righteousness, the latter is clearly the main theme of Ps 82.141 A similar accumulation of different aspects related to (connective) righteousness can be found in Ps 72. The king is responsible for the endurance of justice and righteousness in society by his judgements that save the oppressed (Ps 72:2–4, 12–14; social-political righteousness).142 At the same time, he is the mediator of salvation whose rule brings blessings to nature (Ps 72:5–7, 16–17;143 cosmic righteousness).144 However, Ps 72 is not confined in its presentation of righteousness to the human king. The source of righteousness and blessing that the human king mediates is the divine king (Ps 72:1).145 Hence, all righteousness in its social-political and cosmic dimensions has a religious foundation. These interpretations of ‘righteousness’ as the principle that connects deed and consequences in every realm of life is applied in the present study to Isa and its communicative aim to proclaim the restoration of ‘connective righteousness’ as the universal order. This is exemplified in general in the following paragraph. Most of the studies that illumine the concept of ‘connective righteousness’ in the OT are confined to the aspect of action. The discussion of the theme of hardening in the main part of this study will then show that the aspects of communication and intention are also of fundamental importance in the proclamation of the restoration of (connective) righteousness in Isa. 4.2 The Restoration of ‘Connective Righteousness’ in Isaiah 40–66 It is undisputed that ‘justice’, ‘righteousness’ and ‘salvation’ are central issues of Isa.146 The present study, however, argues that their correlation in Isa is due to the main issue that is communicated through chs. 40–66 in the specific communicative situation that was described above. Isa 40–66 pro141 Cf. on this interpretation of Ps 82 J ANOWSKI, Der barmherzige Richter, 102–106; then also IDEM, Konfliktgespräche, 137, 139; IDEM in: ASSMANN, J ANOWSKI & W ELKER, Richten, 232–234. 142 Central terms that are used in this respect in Ps 72 include ¥ʯʩʣ (v.2), ¥ʨʴˇ (v.4), ¥ʲˇʩ (vv.4, 13), ¥ʬʶʰ (v.12), ¥ʬʠʢ (v.14), ʷʣʶ (v.2), ʨʴˇʮ (v.2), ʤʷʣʶ (v.3). 143 It is said that the righteous (ʷʩʣʶ) and salvation (ʭʥʬˇ) will flourish (¥ʧʸʴ, v.7); the reign of the king in righteousness is compared to the live giving rain (v.6) and the flourishing of corn (v.16). 144 Cf. J ANOWSKI, Frucht, 167–172, 183–185. 145 Cf. J ANOWSKI, Frucht, 182–183. 146 Cf., e.g., RENDTORFF, Komposition, 312–314; IDEM, Jesaja 56,1; W ILLIAMSON, Variations (discussing the topic of ‘messianism’ in Isa, this study is inevitably an extensive study of ‘justice, righteousness and salvation’ in Isa at the same time); LECLERC, Yahweh; SPIECKERMANN, Gerechtigkeit (concentrating on diachronic differentiations in Isa 40–66).

62

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

claims that YHWH as the only God and universal king brings ‘salvation’ to his people and the nations by re-establishing them within the connection of deed and consequences. In the course of this communicative process in Isa 40–66, further individual aspects are integrated so that it provides a significant contribution to face the challenges after 539 B.C. With the process of theologising the concept of reciprocal action, in which the deity guarantees the connection of deed and consequences, the relationships on the social level become interconnected with the relationship of the individual/community to the deity (religious realm).147 In fact, one of the main concerns of Isa 40–66 in respect to the people of YHWH is to repair both of their relationships. It even seems that the differentiation of the addressees into those in the Babylonian exile and those in the homeland serves at the same time as a typology of these two aspects: in Isa 40– 55 YHWH seeks to re-establish the relationship of the addressees to him (religious relationship). YHWH commits himself in various DECLARATIVE speech-acts to be present with his people: Do not be afraid, for (hereby) I am with you; do not be afraid, for (hereby) I am your God. (Isa 41:10; cf. also, e.g., Isa 43:1, 5)

In turn Jacob-Israel is asked to return to YHWH. This interconnection is particularly explicit in Isa 44:22b: Return to me, for (hereby) I redeem you!” 148

But the people of YHWH do not respond with reciprocal actions. Instead they are still “far from righteousness” (Isa 46:12), and idol worshippers from their youth (cf. Isa 43:27; 48:8). This struggle for a healed relationship between YHWH and his people, however, does not take place in an isolated sphere. It is dealt with amidst the other nations and their gods (cf. Isa 43:8–13; also Isa 41:1–4, 21–29). In this context, YHWH proves that he alone is God not only on the basis of his acts of creation (cf. Isa 40:12, 22, 26, 28; 44:24; 45:12, 18; cosmic dimension) and his ability to have foretold and realized the rise of Cyrus (cf. Isa 41:1–4, 21–29; 44:26–28; 45:1–7, 13, 20–21; 46:9–11; 48:14–15; political dimension), but also in his commitment to his people (cf. 43:8–13; religious dimension). All these aspects, however, are rooted in and interconnected through YHWH’s righteousness: I have made the earth / and I created man upon it; I, my hands stretched out the heavens / and I commanded all their host [cosmic dimension]. 147 Cf. again paradigmatically Ps 7. On the basis of the psalmist’s relationship to YHWH (individual piety) he pleads to YHWH for his intervention in the social sphere. 148 For a more detailed discussion of these speech-acts see below chapter 4.

4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah

63

I have stirred him up in righteousness (ʷʣʶ) / and I will make all his ways level [political dimension] He will build my city / and set my exiles free [YHWH’s commitment to his people] (Isa 45:12–13).

YHWH’s intervention in all realms to create salvation and righteousness (cf. Isa 45:8bȕ) in turn has cosmic affects, as it is by this means heaven and earth will be renewed (cf. Isa 41:17–20; 45:8; 65:17–25; 66:22). Thus we find in Isa 40–55 a similar accumulation and interrelationship of different dimensions of righteousness as recognized in other parts of the OT, notably the psalms, above. When in these chapters salvation and righteousness also include judgement(s), this is best understood within the concept of ‘connective righteousness’ as well. It is an aspect of salvation that YHWH judges those individuals and nations (cf. e.g. Isa 41:2–4; 41:11; 47; 48:22; 50:11; 51:5, 7–8; then also Isa 57:20–21; 59:15b–20; 63:1–6; 65:6–16; 66:14–18) that disturb the universal connection of deed and consequences that is created by him (Isa 45:8bȕ).149 However, that YHWH’s care for ‘connective righteousness’ can mean salvation for his people who are “far from righteousness” (ʤʷʣʶʮ ʭʩʷʥʧʸʤ; Isa 46:12) is possible only through a particular act of YHWH. He makes150 the Servant a guilt compensation (offering? 151; Isa 53:10) so that his people are saved from the consequences of their guilt.152 In his fate, it is not his deeds that fall upon him, but the deeds of “the many”. Hence ‘connective righteousness’ becomes salvation for the people of YHWH, because they are re-established in the ‘deed-consequences connection’ through the vicarious suffering of the Servant who bore the consequences of the people’s guilt: “the righteous one, my servant, will justify the many; and he will carry their sins” (Isa 53:11). Janowski comments:

149

Cf. in this respect the concept of ‘saving righteousness’ as it is expressed in Ps 7, discussed above. Compare Ps 7:11–12 (God is the saviour [ʲʩˇʥʮ] and the righteous judge [ʷʩʣʶ ʨʴʥˇ]) with Isa 51:5: “My righteousness (ʩʷʣʶ) is near, my salvation (ʩʲˇʩ) goes forth and my arms will judge (¥ʨʴˇ) the nations.” 150 Following HERMISSON, Das vierte Gottesknechtslied, 8, 10, 16–17 (ET, 27, 30, 38– 39), I emend the MT reading ʭʩˈʺʚʭʠ to ʭˈ ʺʮʠ ’emet ĞƗm. In this case YHWH is the subject of the qatal form ʭˈ parallel to ʵʴʧ in the first colon (v.10aĮ; instead of ʥˇʴʰ as the subject of ʭʩˈʺʚʭʠ in MT?). This also corresponds to the train of thought expressed in Isa 53:6; for an overview of further interpretations and suggested emendations, see, e.g., H. HAAG, Gottesknecht, 179–180; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 320–323. 151 Whether one should exclude connotations of the compensation offering (cf. Lev 5:14–26), as J ANOWSKI, Er trug unsere Sünden, 42–43 (ET, 67–69) argues is not entirely clear in the light of Isa 53:7. 152 Cf. J ANOWSKI, Er trug unsere Sünden, 40–41 (ET, 66); cf. similarly STECK, Aspekte Jes 52,13–53,12, 41–43; HERMISSON, Das vierte Gottesknechtslied, 16–17 (ET, 38– 39).

64

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

He [note: YHWH] allows an alien ‘action-consequences connection’ to come back full circle upon the Servant so that the truly guilty – namely, Israel – find themselves in the position of the saved, while the same connection breaks the Servant.153

Although the aspect of the religious relationship is not absent in Isa 56–66 either (cf. especially Isa 57:3–13), they concentrate more on the social relationship among the people of YHWH. Chapters 58–59 proclaim that salvation happens when the connection of deed and consequences functions (cf. e.g. Isa 58:9b–10), while the lack of reciprocal actions in the social realm convicts the addressees of their sins (cf. Isa 59:1–8). Isa 40–66 presents the cosmological, political, social and religious dimensions of YHWH’s righteousness, which is the power that connects the deed with its consequences, and these chapters proclaim, even perform, the salvation of his people as their re-establishment within this ‘deedconsequences connection’. This applies specifically to their ‘religious righteousness’ (their relationship to YHWH) and to their ‘social righteousness’ (their relationship to each other). In this aim, Isa 40–66 fulfils announcements that have been presented as part of the message of Isaiah ben Amoz in Isa 1–39.154 Some of these aspects will be discussed some more in the detailed presentation of the communicative strategy of individual units. There it will also become apparent that Isa 40–66 not only proclaims the reestablishment of the people of YHWH in the ‘deed-consequences connection’, but indeed realizes this aim by the communicative acts performed in the course of its communicative strategy. Here it must suffice to briefly 153

Thus the English translation of J ANOWSKI, Er trug unsere Sünden (ET, 70; italics original). For the nuance of the contrast between the fate of the guilty and the fate of the innocent Servant, cf. also the original sentence, Janowski, Er trug unsere Sünden, 44 (italics original): “Er [note: YHWH] läßt einen fremden Tun-Ergehen-Zusammenhang so am Gottesknecht zur Auswirkung kommen, daß der eigentlich Schuldige, nämlich Israel, in die Position des Erretteten gelangt – während der Unschuldige daran zerbricht.” 154 See, e.g., Isa 24–27: The interconnection between social/religious righteousness and cosmic righteousness is expressed in Isa 24:4–23; the guilt of the people (Isa 24:5, 16) has affected the whole earth (Isa 24:4, 18b–20; compare this, e.g., with Ps 82:5 and the comments above) and so YHWH is going to judge the whole earth (Isa 24:1–3, 17– 18a, 21–23) as the “Righteous One” (Isa 24:16) who re-establishes the relationship of deed and consequence (cf. Isa 24:17–18a). On a universal scale, YHWH is the shelter for the poor and needy (Isa 25:4–5), and in his judgement he saves his people (Isa 25:9). That is why Isa 26 can look forward to a “day” when the righteous will sing a song of salvation that celebrates YHWH’s judgement as “saving righteousness” (Isa 26:9). Hence, I do not regard Isa 24–27 as apocalyptic. The references to the whole earth, sun and moon are due to the cosmic dimensions of the disturbance and re-creation of ‘connective righteousness’. The universal righteousness and salvation is achieved through YHWH maintaining the deed-consequence-relationship (cf. Isa 24:17–18a) and judging those who are not righteous, i.e. who disturb the deed-consequence-relationship.

4. The Communicative Aim of the Book of Isaiah

65

indicate what righteousness and salvation mean in Isa and in what sense the addressees are made ‘righteous’. In communicating this ‘programme’, the Book of Isaiah can address several of the pressing issues of the early Achaemenid era, as they were indicated above. In many ways the different aspects are interconnected in the process of communication in Isa. Amidst the plurality of divine claims and the competition of gods, it proves YHWH to be the only God and the other deities to be mere idols (cf. e.g. Isa 43:8–13; 44:6–20). Part of this argument is to show that YHWH alone brought the political changes about (cf. e.g. Isa 41:1–4, 21–29). Thus political and religious aspects are interrelated. In showing that YHWH has initiated and realized the decline of the Babylonian empire and Cyrus’s rise to power, it interprets these events in a way that they encourage the faith of YHWH’s people in him and even gives orientation towards the claims of other “gods”. Moreover, the appeal to YHWH’s predictions is integrated in the book’s particular stance on the problem of continuity and discontinuity with the time before the rise of Cyrus. The latter is presented as a prediction delivered by Isaiah ben Amoz (cf. Isa 13:1, 17); thus the argument about YHWH’s predictions of Cyrus comes with a confrontation of the addressees with their past.155 This confrontation is therefore crucial to the relationship between the addressees in exile and those in Judah, i.e. for the most important social aspect after 539 B.C. According to the interpretation given above, Isa 40–66 speaks to the Babylonian exiles in chs. 40–55 and to those in Judah in chs. 56–66. In both parts the addressees are called the ʭʲ of YHWH (cf. Isa 40:1; 57:14). In this respect there is no difference in the status of the groups. But what forms the basis of this equal treatment is their common past. Being confronted with the whole Book of Isaiah, they perceive their present situation as the outcome of the former message of Isaiah ben Amoz to the ʭʲ of YHWH (Isa 1–39), to which they belong.156 Further issues that are addressed in the course of Isa 40–66 include the urge to leave Babylon (cf. 48:20–21; 52:11–12), which gives a specific instruction in the new circumstances, the announcement that with the new political realities YHWH initiates salvation for his people after his judgement, and the insistence upon the total rehabilitation and restoration of Zion-Jerusalem (cf. Isa 49:14–26; 54; 60). Read against the background of early post-exilic times, Isa opens up perspectives on various problems in this situation through the way they are related to the ‘connective righteousness’ that YHWH maintains universally 155 Many of these aspects fuse together in Isa 48:1–11, which will be discussed in chapter 5 below. 156 This relationship of the present addressees to the audience of Isaiah is discussed in more detail in respect to Isa 6 below (chapter 3).

66

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

and into which he integrates his people so that his universal rule becomes salvation for them. When we turn to the main part of this study we will also have to be aware of how hardening is related to and contributes to this main issue of Isa. This will give us the opportunity to expand some of the observations that could be noted here only briefly. But first, we must look at the structure of Isa.

5. Notes on the Structure of the Book of Isaiah 5. Notes on the Structure of the Book of Isaiah

Discussing the structure of Isa as one central step of a communicative analysis, we can only concentrate on a few aspects that are of particular interest for the present study. First, as I have argued for a differentiation of the communicative process between Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66, I shall add a few more observations on this. Secondly, with the main discussion revolving around Isa 40–66, I will clarify some structural features of these chapters. As regards the differentiation of Isa into the two main parts Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66, we noted already that Isa 40:1–11 introduces a new speaker. Additionally, it has been frequently recognized that Isaiah is not mentioned after Isa 39. Moreover, one of the most striking features is the way Isa 39 creates a conclusion by referring back to Isa 1:1 and Isa 13:1. With a headline similar to Isa 1:1 and Isa 2:1, Isa 13:1 introduces another sub-part of Isa 1–39. It presents the ʠˈʮ of Babylon that Isaiah saw (¥ʤʦʧ), which puts all the subsequent proclamation into the wider context of the ultimate defeat of Babylon in the future (Isa 13:1–14:23). The “breaking of Assyria” is only a preliminary incident (Isa 14:24–27) within the broader plan of YHWH (see on this in more detail below chapter 3). After the “breaking of Assyria” (Isa 36–37), Isaiah refers again to Babylon and the role it plays in the future (Isa 39), forming a fitting conclusion to the subpart Isa 13–39. But Isaiah’s mentioning of Babylon in Isa 39 takes place in the context of his meeting with Hezekiah. The superscription in Isa 1:1 explicitly restricts the time of Isaiah’s ministry to the time from the days of king Uzziah to the days of king Hezekiah. So when one reads of a meeting of Isaiah with Hezekiah in Isa 39, one is aware that this is presented as taking place near the end of Isaiah’s ministry. Reading then of another commission of an unidentified prophetic voice immediately after Isa 39 indicates with Isa 39 that the vision of Isaiah ben Amoz which he saw in the days between Uzziah and Hezekiah (Isa 1:1) has now come to a conclusion. Isa 40:1–11 starts a new part in Isa, and the way the structures of

5. Notes on the Structure of the Book of Isaiah

67

Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 set these chapters apart from Isa 1–39 may further support this conclusion.157 In respect to the structure of Isa 40–66, we shall first note a few terminological correspondences between Isa 40 and Isa 66. These terms taken on their own are quite common in the OT, but this accumulation of the same words within a few verses, especially when regarded together with the observations on the differentiation between Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66, strengthens the impression that Isa 66 forms a conclusion by referring back to Isa 40, which sets these chapters apart from Isa 1–39. Noteworthy are the phrases “word of our God/of YHWH” (ʥʰʩʤʬʠʚʸʡʣ, 40:8; ʤʥʤʩʚʸʡʣ, 66:5); terms of the stem ʭʧʰ “to comfort” (¥ʭʧʰ, 40:1; 66:13; cf. also ʤʩʮʧʰʺ ʣˇʮ, 66:11); the phrase “all flesh” (ʸˈʡʚʬʫ, 40:5; 66:16, 23, 24); the “glory” (ʣʥʡʫ) of YHWH (cf. Isa 40:5; Isa 66:18, 19); and finally the contrast between “withering like grass” and “flourishing like grass” applied to the addressees (cf. Isa 40:6–8; Isa 66:14). Correspondences between Isa 40 and Isa 55 on the one hand, and between Isa 56 and Isa 66 on the other, further strengthen the conclusion that Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 form distinctive units within the second part of Isa. The speech about the efficacy of the word (ʸʡʣ) of YHWH, which we could call a “meditation on the word of YHWH” (cf. Isa 40:6–8 and Isa 55:10–11), together with the term “mouth” (ʤʴ) of YHWH and “my mouth” respectively (cf. Isa 40:5; 55:11) frame Isa 40–55. In Isa 56–66, this is achieved by various corresponding phrases; cf. “my holy mountain” (ʩˇʣʷ ʸʤ, 56:7; 66:20; also 65:11, 25); “my house” and “house of YHWH” 157

Several scholars have argued for a different segmentation on the basis of the clear break after Isa 33 in 1QIsaa; thus, e.g., BROWNLEE, The Meaning of the Qumran Scrolls for the Bible, New York 1964, 247–259 (noted in EVANS, Unity, 132n.12); EVANS, To See, 41–42; IDEM, Unity; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 39–48 (correcting slightly his earlier view from IDEM, Isaiah 1–4, 95–99) argue for two main parts: Isa 1–33; 34–66 (for Brownlee and Evans both parts are shaped parallel to each other). Other attempted segmentations include the following: W ATTS, Isaiah 1–33; IDEM, Isaiah 34–66 arranges Isa according to twelve acts that depict twelve subsequent generations. M OTYER, Prophecy differentiates the book of Isaiah into the “book of the king” (Isa 1–37); the “book of the servant” (Isa 38–55) and the “book of the anointed conquerer” (Isa 56–66). O’CONNELL, Structure tried to present a detailed structure of Isa, however he mainly shows that the search for a chiastic arrangement does not work. In contrast to these studies, I would reemphasize the role that the heading in Isa 1:1 plays: it restricts the ministry of Isaiah to the time of the kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah. Several narratives relate the message of Isaiah to this timeframe (most of all Isa 6–8; 20; 36–39). The fact that the commission in Isa 40 comes right after the last mention of Hezekiah and Isaiah sends a strong signal about what has to be regarded as essentially Isaianic material in comparison to what is said in Isa 1:1. As the discussion of Isa 6 and the communicative strategy of Isa 1–39 in relation to the theme of hardening will add further aspects (see below), I maintain that the break comes between Isa 39 and Isa 40.

68

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

(ʩʺʩʡ, 56:5, 7; ʤʥʤʩ ʺʩʡ, 66:20); the term “Sabbath” (cf. 56:2, 4, 6; 66:23); perhaps also the question concerned with the foreigner (cf. 56:3–7; 66:21[?]). The perception of Isa 40–55 as a distinctive and coherent unit is further amplified by the way hymns are used in these chapters: With other commentators, I regard the hymns in Isa 40–55 as structural markers that conclude a main unit. What marks a structural hymn there is the clear and explicit summons to sing and rejoice, containing one or more of the following phrases: ¥ʧʶʴ, ¥ʯʰʸ, ʤʰʸ (cf. Isa 42:11; 44:23; 49:13; 52:9; 54:1), followed by an explanation, often introduced by ʩʫ (cf. Isa 42:13; 44:23; 49:13; 52:9–10; 54:1). As they lack several of these elements, Isa 45:8 and Isa 51:3 are not regarded here as hymns.158 A special case is Isa 48:20–21. These verses contain the summons to speak and even the term ʤʰʸ is mentioned in this respect. But while the other hymns each form an independent unit that quite abruptly follows the previous passages, the summons to declare in Isa 48:20 is not an abrupt call; it accompanies the call to go out from Babylon (cf. Isa 48:20a). Moreover, Isa 48:20–21 is followed immediately by the statement in Isa 48:22, which plays a structural role itself within Isa 44:24–49:13.159 Thus I do not regard Isa 48:20–21 as a hymn that marks the end of a main unit. The hymn in Isa 48:20–21 is part of the summons to leave Babel. The fact that this specific hymn is so much like the structural hymns could indicate, however, that the implied Sitz im Leben of all the hymns is the exodus; but we cannot pursue this further here. What needs to be emphasized is that Isa 54:1, too, starts like a hymn, summoning Zion to sing and rejoice (note also the phrases ¥ʧʶʴ, ¥ʯʰʸ, ʤʰʸ) followed by an explanation (ʩʫ). But then the proclamation to city Zion continues and the purpose of the hymn-like introduction remains obscure until the parallel proclamation to the exiles (Isa 55) concludes again in a hymn-like manner. Shaped like an explanation (ʩʫ) the final lines (Isa 55:12–13) take up even the typical phraseology of the structural hymns (cf. ¥ʧʶʴ, ʤʰʸ). This creates the impression that Isa 54:1 and Isa 55:12–13 form a hymn-like inclusion; or to put it in different words, the final hymn has been split up, and mediating the comforting message to Zion (Isa 54) and the call to the exiles to come and return (Isa 55), the final split-up hymn (Isa 54:1 + Isa 55:12–13) contains the basic message of Isa 40–55 in a nutshell: the rehabilitation of city Zion and the call of YHWH’s people, the exiles, to return to Zion (cf. also Isa 40:2). These observations lead to the following structure of Isa 40–55: 158

Contra W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 19, 132–133, 192 (ET, 19, 163, 237); METFarewell and MATHEUS, Singt. For a survey on the debate about the form and number of hymns in Isa 40–55, see WERLITZ, Redaktion, 251–269. 159 Cf. the discussion in chapter 5 below. TINGER ,

69

5. Notes on the Structure of the Book of Isaiah

Isa 40:1–11 40:12

42:14

44:24

49:14

52:11 –

–

–

–

–

42:9

44:22

49:12

52:8

Hymn

Hymn

Hymn

Hymn

Extension: Address to Zion 54:1–17

42:10–13

44:23

49:13

52:9–10

Address to the Exiles 55:1–13

53:12 extended Hymn 54:1

55:12–13 Figure 1: The Structure of Isa 40–55

As regards the structure of Isa 56–66, many have adopted the view of a concentric arrangement.160 But Isa 56:9–57:21 should not be divided, as it forms a consistent discourse of three sub-sections, each introduced by an 160

Cf. GOTTWALD, Hebrew Bible, 508 (similarly EMMERSON, Isaiah 56–66, 20): 56:1–8 A Proclamation of salvation for foreigners 56:9–57:13 B Indictment of wicked leaders 57:14–21 C Proclamation of salvation for the people 58:1–4 D Indictment of corrupt worship 59:1–15a E Lament and confession over sins of the people 59:15b–20 F Theophany of judgment/redemption 60–62 G Proclamation of fully redeemed people 63:1–6 F’ Theophany of judgment/redemption 63:7–64:12 E’ Lament and confession over sins of the people 65:1–16 D’ Indictment of corrupt worship + Promise of transfer of leadership to the faithful 65:17–25 C’ Proclamation of salvation for the people + New heavens and earth 66:1–6 B’ Indictment of wicked leaders + Exclusion of faithful from the cult 66:7–24 A’ Proclamation of salvation including foreigners + Mission of foreigners to foreigners

70

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

imperative (cf. Isa 56:9; 57:3; 57:14; see chapter 7 for more details). Equally, Isa 58:1–59:21 is one unit of several sub-sections, framed and held together by the speech to the prophet in Isa 58:1 and Isa 59:21. Moreover, Isa 62:10–12(63:1–6) refers to Isa 40:1–11 and forms a ‘preliminary’ conclusion that disturbs the supposedly concentric structure. Furthermore, the alleged parallel communal prayers Isa 59:9–15a and Isa 63:7–64:11 have different functions, and the way they are included within the wider structure supports this: Isa 59:9–15a is part of the prophetic speech Isa 58:1–59:21, while Isa 63:7–64:11 stands outside the reference back to Isa 40:1-11. Finally, Isa 58–59 and Isa 65–66 are rather different in content and also serve different communicative aims; Isa 58–59 addresses the whole people while Isa 65–66 confirms a separation among the people. I, therefore, do not agree with those who see a concentric structure in Isa 56– 66.161 Instead I propose the following arrangement, which will be further substantiated in chapters 7 and 8. 56:1–8

56:9 – 57:21

58:1 – 59:21

60:1 – 62:9

Transition

Speech with Imperatives

Prophetic Proclamation

The Prophetic Voice (61) Addresses Zion (60; 62)

62:10–12 (63:1–6) Preliminary Conclusion (referring back to Isa 40:1–11)

63:7 – 64:11 (ET 64:12) Communal Lament 65–66 The Response of YHWH (Conclusion, referring back to Isa 56:1–8; 40:1–11; 1:1–31 Figure 2: The Structure of Isa 56–66

161

Cf. also KOENEN, Ethik, 224 who equally doubts a concentric structure. What K. Möller has put forwards as one criticism against a chiastic structure of the Book of Amos can be applied also to Isa 56–66: “superficial relations between supposedly parallel parts are sometimes exaggerated by endowing them with quite ingenious descriptions or headings.” (M ÖLLER, Prophet, 70)

5. Notes on the Structure of the Book of Isaiah

71

A final note is due to a proposal that was widely held before Duhm’s dissociation of Isa 56–66 from Isa 40–55 and is again finding some advocates. According to this view, the very similar lines in Isa 48:22 and Isa 57:21 are regarded as structural markers dividing Isa 40–66 into three parts: Isa 40:1–48:22; Isa 49:1–57:21; Isa 58:1–66:24.162 But the clear structure of Isa 40–55 marked by hymns and the further structural features noted as indicators of the differentiation between Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 together with the notion of the different groups of addressees in these two parts render it rather unlikely that the two lines Isa 48:22 and Isa 57:21 would have this structural function. It will also be shown in the discussion of the units Isa 44:24–49:13 (cf. chapter 5) and Isa 56:9–57:21 (cf. chapter 7) that these two lines are integrated within these lower levels of units as structural markers.163 The recurrence of the similar line in Isa 57:21 does of course raise the attention of the readers/hearers. Rather, it emphasizes that to both groups of addressees, in Isa 40–55 and in Isa 56–66, the prophetic proclamation happens against the same background: YHWH wants to make them righteous again, but for those who remain rebellious he will act in judgement, which is finally emphasized in Isa 66:24. So, perhaps one could speak of this warning of the transgressors as a deep structure in Isa 40–66 like a watermark against which the proclamation of salvation takes place in these chapters. With these remarks on the structure of Isa we may conclude the introductory part that sketches the contexts of the present interpretation of the theme of hardening in Isa. Following previous studies, this investigation further develops the insight that this theme occurs in different parts of Isa and illumes how it contributes to the whole book. Isa as a prophetic book mediates different communicative acts in a particular situation. On this basis, the present study investigates the passages that contain aspects of the theme of hardening and the whole Book of Isaiah from the perspective of an analysis of communicative action. The situation that gave rise to Isa is the early Achaemenid era with its related problems and challenges. In this situation, Isa occurs as the proc162 Cf. HITZIG, Jesaja, 457–458; DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 399–400; VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 143–144; more recently, cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 210–211; OLLEY, No Peace (who both emphasize the connection with Isa 39:8 and Isa 66:24); J. B ECKER, Beurteilung. 163 That Isa 48:22 and Isa 57:21 might divide Isa 40–66 into three equal parts is often concluded from the perception that Isa 48:22 seems to have been only loosely added at the end of Isa 48, while Isa 57:21 is clearly anchored in its context so that Isa 48:22 must be a late addition taken from Isa 57:21 for the sake of this division; see, e.g.; WILLIAMSON, Book, 210–211. Our investigation argues, however that the loose integration of Isa 48:22 has a structural and material function within Isa 44:24–49:13; see below in chapter 5.

72

Chapter 2: The Communicative Situation of the Book of Isaiah

lamation of a new prophetic voice (Isa 40–66), into which the older prophecy of Isaiah ben Amoz (Isa 1–39) is integrated. It addresses those in Babylon (Isa 40–55) and those who live in Judah (Isa 56–66). The main communicative aim is to proclaim to them YHWH’s universal reign of righteousness, through which he maintains the connection between deeds and consequences, and to restore them within this connection so that they can live in righteousness again. The following chapters will show that the theme of hardening is a fundamental aspect of the people’s restoration in Isa 40–66. In the next part of this study, we will investigate the disposition of the theme of hardening in Isa 6, which also contains reflections on how Isa 1–39 functions within the Book of Isaiah as a whole.

Chapter 3

The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6 and the Effect of Isaiah’s Proclamation 1. Introduction 1. Introduction

The previous part has not only clarified some hermeneutical and methodological presuppositions, it also sketched the context of the theme of hardening – the situation of Isa and the main communicative aim to which the theme of hardening has to be related. This chapter presents an analysis of communicative action in Isa 6 and seeks to shed new light on the interpretation of Isaiah’s commission to harden his people from this perspective. As this necessitates reflections on the role that Isa 6 plays within the communicative strategy of Isa 1–39, it will also help in clarifying their function within the whole Book of Isaiah. Isa 6 and the prophet’s commission to harden his people in particular have perplexed interpreters for ages. The immense literature on Isa 6:9–10 gives testimony to the importance of these verses as well as to the difficulties they pose. In the following I can only briefly mention those interpretations that have been suggested in recent discussion. According to the view that still attracts most of the commentators, Isaiah did not receive the commission to harden the people at the beginning of his ministry. The commission is rather the product of reflections a posteriori, after the experience of the people’s rejection of Isaiah’s proclamation. This experience is retrojected into the call of Isaiah as YHWH’s intention from the beginning, hence this view’s designation as a ‘retrojection hypothesis’ (or according to the German term ‘RückprojizierungsThese’). Though this interpretation was already suggested earlier, it was significantly supported through the study of Hesse on the problem of hardening in the Old Testament in 1955.1 Today one can find this hypothesis applied in three different ways. First, mainly those who see in Isa 6:1–8:16 (sometimes Isa 6:1–9:6) an ‘Isaiah memoir’ written by the prophet shortly after the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis2 think the retrojection of hardening into 1 Cf. HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 59–60, 82–86. See already the reflections in SMITH, Isaiah I, 56–57, 77 and GRAY, Isaiah I–XXVII, 101; for further commentators holding this view prior to Hesse, see also HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 85n.3. 2 On the thesis of an ‘Isaiah memoir’ see below (5.2.2).

74

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

the commission of the prophet took place early in his ministry,3 although for some it is only a specific commission in the context of the SyroEphraimite Crisis and restricted to it. Secondly, other scholars tend to ascribe the retrojection to the end of Isaiah’s ministry. 4 Thirdly, some commentators see in the commission to harden the people an exilic/post-exilic reflection on the events of 587/6 and their prehistory.5 Carroll has inte3 Cf., e.g., STECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6, 166–167; MÜLLER, Glauben, 53–54; C LEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 77; HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 238; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 79–82, 88–96, 106–111, 115–117; BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 224. Hardmeier has added the argument about the nature of an autobiographic narrative as a “retrospective digestion of experience” (“retroperspektive[…] Erfahrungsverarbeitung”; IDEM, Verkündigung, 126) that is further amplified by the distance between the time of the described events and the time of the writing of the description as it is indicated through the explicit date (thus IDEM, Verkündigungsabsicht, 238, 238–239n.22; IDEM, Verkündigung, 120, 126–127; IDEM, Jesajaforschung, 22–24). There are several distinctive forms of this train of thought: WILLIAMSON, Book, 106n.34 wonders whether Isaiah might have first related this call only to the events of the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis and then only later “under the impact of the events of 705–701 BC, did he come to appreciate that the hardening was applicable in an even more radical sense than had at first appeared.” HOFFMANN, Intention, 23–24, 78 also associates Isa 6 with the end of the SyroEphraimite Crisis but assumes that Isaiah already preached before, thus it is the product of the end of his second period (of four periods altogether); similarly already F OHRER, Jesaja 1, 21. By showing traits of a coronation of a king in Isa 6, CAZELLES, Vocation, 102–103, 107–108 argues that Isaiah probably played an important part in the coronation of Jotham 740 B.C.; but after he experienced the rejection of his people, Isaiah used this coronation motifs to form his account of commission to harden “this people”; cf. similarly also SCHOORS, Minister. 4 Thus, e.g., HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 59–60, 82–86; NIEHR, Intention, 60; B LUM , Testament II, 23–24. D IETRICH, Politik, 176–180 also reckons with the development of the idea of the commission to harden the people at the later stage of Isaiah’s proclamation but before the events of 701 B.C. He tries to strengthen his conclusion by a literary-critical argument: accordingly the original account of Isaiah’s call encompassed Isa 6:1–9a, 12–13bĮ, 11 (ibid. 178–179), which was regrouped when Isaiah included the commission to harden before 701 B.C. (ibid. 179). JOOSTEN, La prosopopée adds another aspect to the ‘retrojection hypothesis’: surveying the different ways quotations are used in Biblical Hebrew (ibid. 233–239) he states that Isaiah has used the common means of a “pseudo-citation” in Isa 6:9–10 (ibid. 241). Thus the retrojection theory can be described as in accordance with rules of style in Biblical Hebrew (ibid. 242–243). As particular developments of this view one may include here the studies of J. M. SCHMIDT, Gedanken, who suggests that the commission to harden might have been part of the original call but that Isaiah became aware of it/understood it through his ministry (ibid. 74–75) and that he then realized the commission to harden through his proclamation of that narrative of his call (ibid. 75, 82–83), and of H ØGENHAVEN, Volk, 94–95, 205, who reads Isa 6 as a publicly delivered accusation of “this people” (cf. ibid. 95, 205) because they have refused to listen to him. 5 Cf. with different nuances W HITLEY, Call; KAISER, Isaiah 1–12, 118–121, 132; U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 83, 85–87; B ERGES, Buch, 98–101; COGGINS, Isaiah, 444.

1. Introduction

75

grated the retrojection hypothesis in his hypothesis of prophetic reinterpretation as a means of resolving dissonance between prophetic prediction and actual experience, and thereby amplified it. Accordingly, Isaiah reinterpreted his commission, i.e. his original cognition, in this way so that it coincided with his actual experiences and to resolve the consequent dissonances.6 A second group of scholars rejects the proposal of retrojection but agree with the former group in that they too reckon with a considerable period of ministry prior to the formulation of the commission to harden. They often see in chapters 1–5 the early period of Isaiah’s proclamation. Isa 6 is then a vision of YHWH in which the latter commissions Isaiah to harden the people because they have refused his proclamation.7 Another group has strictly opposed the view of a retrojection. According to these exegetes, the commission to harden must be seen in the context of YHWH’s intention to bring judgement upon the people, which the prophet has to secure by making the people unperceptive.8 A fourth group of interpreters suggested that the means of hardening the people was the prophet’s proclamation of salvation.9 Yet other scholars argued that the function of Isa 6:9–10 is to give the addressees a last chance to change their course and avoid judgement.10 Two further groups of exegetes tried to engage in the struggle to understand the commission to harden from a communicative-functional perspective. Some of them treated it as irony, although they differ in respect to the 6

Cf. CARROLL, Prophecy, 137. Cf., e.g., KAPLAN, Isaiah 6 1 –11, 252–255, 257; M ILGROM, Isaiah, 172–173; TSEVAT, Throne Vision, 155–156n.5; H UROWITZ, Impure Lips, 41n.1, 83–84n.118; G ITAY, Isaiah, 120–121, 127 (although he argues against a ‘literal’ understanding; see further below). 8 Cf., e.g., PROCKSCH, Jesaja, 57; ELLIGER, Prophet und Politik, 9n.1; YOUNG, Isaiah 1–18, 255–261; KNIERIM , Vocation; SCHOORS, Jesaja I, 62 (but for his later deviation from this interpretation see above); KILIAN, Verstockungsauftrag; IDEM, JESAJA 1–39, 112–130 (especially 128–130); HUNTER, Seek, 200–204; N IELSEN, Dramatic Writing; R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 207–208; SAWYER, Isaiah 1, 74; EVANS, To See, 18–19; HUBMANN, Bote, 336–337; BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 1–39, 58, 63; CHILDS, Isaiah, 56–57. It must be said, however, that more recent studies that argue for the retrojection hypothesis recognized at the same time that this does not suffice to interpret the text; cf. especially STECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6, 166–167; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 88–96, 115–117; U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 70–74, 81–87; BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 166–167. 9 Thus BUBER, Prophetic Faith, 131–132; TSEVAT, Throne Vision, 166, 170–171; KELLENBERGER, Heil, 272–273. 10 Thus, e.g., KISSANE, Isaiah I, 75; ENGNELL, Call, 44; VERMEYLEN, Isaïe I, 193– 194; T SEVAT, Throne Vision, 173; SCHENKER, Gerichtsverkündigung, 229–232; LAATO, Immanuel, 110–112; J. J. SCHMITT, Isaiah, 66; VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 48–49; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 61. 7

76

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

function of such a use.11 Others looked at it from the perspective of communicative action. Key argued that the commission to harden has to be understood against the “magical background” of much of the OT material, which ascribes bringing about future acts to the magical power of acts12 or words.13 Sonnet suggested that the narrative of Isa 6 could harden its readers because “this people” has also a deictic element referring to the reader in front of the text,14 and McLaughlin stated that the prophet’s “words will bring about the very effect they proclaim”15. Liss16 presented an analysis most recently in which she argues that Isaiah describes in Isa 6, how

11 KEEL, Rechttun sees in the irony a last resort to exhort the addressees to do what they ought not to do according to the commission; thus in this reading it provides a last chance for the addressees to return. According to CHISHOLM , JR., Divine Hardening, 431–433 the imperatives in vv.9–10 ironically anticipate the response of the people. It is a genuinely divine act of hardening though in the sense that YHWH has commissioned Isaiah (ibid. 432; cf. also IDEM, Handbook, 25–27). ROBINSON, Deafness, 188 only briefly refers to the aspect of inherent irony in order to refuse the claim of EVANS, To See, 18–19, according to whom YHWH hardens his people in order to prevent their repentance. Robinson treats Isa 6:9–10 as if it simply focused on “the fact that the people suffer deafness and blindness” (ROBINSON, Deafness, 177); it only states the finality of the existing condition of the people (ibid. 176). For HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 38–39 the commission is entirely ironic in the sense that it functions as a kind of commentary on the behaviour of Isaiah’s addressees. Thus according to him, it has an accusatory function. BEALE, Isaiah VI 9–13 treats Isa 6:9–10 as an “ironic taunt” (ibid. 272) that announces the judgement upon the people for their sin of idolatry (ibid. 257). He tries to take seriously the hardening effect of Isaiah’s message and claims that it is a lex talionis judgement: “Because Israel worshipped idols, God pronounced a strict lex talionis judgement upon them: they were to be punished by means of their own sin by being made to resemble the lifeless character of their idols and to suffer the same destructive destiny.” (ibid. 274). Accordingly, the irony is in the accusatory tone of the announcement of judgement. One may also include the study of G ITAY , Isaiah here. Although he does not speak of ‘irony’ in Isa 6:9–10, Gitay renders this passage as “irrational language” that should “not be read literally” but according to its “function and rhetorical impact” (ibid. 121), i.e. to use the technique of provocatio to dwell emotionally on the issue of decisive judgement, expressed already earlier (in Isa 1–5). This is to ensure the readers that the death of Uzziah will not bring any amnesty (ibid. 121–127). An element of irony has also been recognized by other commentators, mostly in respect to the utterance in Isa 6:9b; but for these commentators this is only a subordinate element in the overall function of Isa 6:9–10; thus, e.g., HUNTER, Seek, 120; CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 200; EVANS, To See, 18 (calling it “sarcasm”). 12 Cf. KEY, Magical Background, 200 (referring to various [sign-]acts, e.g., of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel). 13 Cf. KEY, Magical Background, 201–203. 14 Cf. SONNET, motif, 233. 15 MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 5n.13 referring to KEY, Magical Background (see above) and for a “discussion of ‘performative language’ in general” to AUSTIN, How to Do. 16 Cf. LISS, Unerhörte Prophetie.

1. Introduction

77

YHWH has commissioned him to engage in a relationship of ‘communicative disagreement’17 with his people. Finally, some commentators have shifted the focus of attention even further to the role of the reader in Isa 6:9–10. In a later study Carroll takes up the suggestion that the text itself could have “areas of blindness”18 that leads one to the affirmation that interpretation depends on the text and the text depends on interpretation.19 Relating this to the theme of ‘blindness and insight’ in the Book of Isaiah, Carroll wonders whether this theme should be regarded as such a blindness in the text that blinds the reader in order to invite him/her to “profoundly imaginative acts of interpretation” that the book of Isaiah calls for.20 Landy concludes his discussion of Isa 6 similarly. For him the narrative of Isaiah’s commission is a “model of reading and understanding”.21 It is through its diverse strategies that the “more closely one listens, the less one understands, the more indefatigably one looks, the more complexity and unfathomability one finds.”22 For the final reader “the message is that all reading is incomplete.”23 In his “reading against the grain”, A. Davies confronts the dominant ideology of ethical teaching in Isa with the presentation of the conduct of YHWH in order to “overthrow the dominant ideology” and to “find a foothold from which we can produce the leverage to topple it.”24 Accordingly, the commission to harden the people is an important element25 in the presentation of YHWH that creates a “double standard” for the ethical code in Isa – “one rule for the human, another for the divine”.26 This “double standard also serves to undermine and deconstruct the Isaianic ethical system by sending out a double message.”27 There are, of course, further individual interpretations of Isa 6:9–10,28 not to speak of various suggestions for specific exegetical problems in cer17

Liss speaks of “Kommunikative Nicht-Entsprechung”. CARROLL, Blindsight, 92 refers to P. DE MAN, The Rhetoric of Blindness: Jacques Derrida’s Reading of Rousseau, in: IDEM, Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism, New York 1971, 102–141. 19 CARROLL, Blindsight, 93 quoting DE MAN, Rhetoric, 141. 20 CARROLL, Blindsight, 93. 21 LANDY, Strategies, 81. 22 LANDY, Strategies, 81 23 LANDY, Strategies, 82 taking up SONNET, motif, 234–235. 24 A. DAVIES, Double Standards, 14. 25 Cf. A. DAVIES, Double Standards, 141–144. 26 A. D AVIES, Double Standards, 121; cf. also the conclusion to his chapter six, A. DAVIES, Double Standards, 154–155. 27 A. DAVIES, Double Standards, 155. 28 YOUNGBLOOD, Isaiah, 27, 30 for instance states that Isa 6:9–10 is not about the purpose but about the result of Isaiah’s ministry (thus also BRIGHT, Isaiah, 495). For him it is a simple statement that “A prophet’s audience is often stubborn and corrupt.” 18

78

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

tain passages of these verses. In the following discussion, I will reopen the issue of the interpretation of Isaiah’s commission by applying an analysis of communicative action. As there are so many issues involved in the interpretation of Isa 6:9–10, the present chapter slightly deviates from the pattern of subsequent chapters. After the structure of Isa 6 and some of its stylistic features are sketched (section 2), we have to note the basic aspects of Isa 6:1–7 (section 3) before we can discuss the actual commission of Isaiah (Isa 6:9–10) because their recognition affects the interpretation of the latter. The communicative analysis of the theme of hardening in Isaiah’s commission is divided into an investigation into the dialogue between YHWH and the prophet Isaiah (section 4) and a discussion of the communicative roles of the whole narrative of Isa 6 (section 5). The final summary highlights the results in respect to the interpretation of hardening in Isa 6 (section 6).

2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6 2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6

The various wayyiqtol forms together with a change of agent in Isa 6 can be regarded as structural markers. If one adds the use of certain verbal roots and of the designation ʩʰʣʠ, two parallel scenes emerge (see Figure 3): a wayyiqtol form of a verb of perception introduces each scene (¥ʤʠʸ, v.1; ¥ʲʮˇ, v.8), associated with the term ʩʰʣʠ each time; in both cases the form ʸʮʠʥ introduces Isaiah’s reaction to what he has perceived (v.5; v.8b), which is then followed by a response of one participant of the scene – in the first case it is a non-communicative act accompanied by a communicative act, all by the same agent (ʸʮʠʩʥ ǜǜǜʲʢʩʥǜǜǜʳʲʩʥ, vv.6–7), in the second case it is only a communicative response (ʸʮʠʩʥ, v.9). The second scene reports an additional reaction of Isaiah with the reply of YHWH (v.11, the recurrence of ʩʰʣʠ indicates the supplementary nature of this exchange). Within this overall parallel arrangement it is verse 4 that stands out (ʥʲʰʩʥ). But as we will see below, this marks the shifting moment within the first scene, while its absence in the second scene may say something about the conversation between YHWH and Isaiah as well. In both scenes the part describing what Isaiah perceives and the part that reports his reaction are closely related – in the more extended first case through the inclusio ʤʠʸʠʥ (YOUNGBLOOD, Isaiah, 30). SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 56 notes similarly in respect to v.10 that it is “pastoral”: God lets Isaiah know at a critical moment in his career that his ministry will lead to hardness. But he is to know that it is not his failure nor an “indication of divine malfeasance”. W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 256 (ET, 273) proposes a similar interpretation in respect to v.10b. He treats the utterance in v.9b then as a statement that functions to characterize the people in their lack of readiness to listen (ibid. 254 [ET, 271]).

79

2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6

(v.1) and ʥʠʸ (v.5),29 in the second case through the repetition of ¥ʧʬˇ (v.8). Verses 12–13 form an additional comment that even on the synchronic level stands out as such: it switches from a speech of YHWH (v.11) to a comment about what YHWH will do (especially v.12); and as the different nuances between v.11 and vv.12–13 show, the latter verses explain how the land will become empty and deserted. The comment specifies what the response of YHWH to Isaiah means.30 YHWH will lead the people away; and if there is a tenth left it will burn again. But as we will see, this comment serves a very important purpose for the strategy of the whole book. vv.1–7 ʤʠʸʠʥ ʥʲʰʩʥ ʸʮʠʥ ʸʮʠʩʥǜǜǜʳʲʩʥ

vv.8–11 v.1 (+ ʩʰʣʠ) v.4 v.5 vv.6–7

Isaiah’s Perception ʲʮˇʠʥ Different Element ø Isaiah’s Reaction ʸʮʠʥ Response to Isaiah ʸʮʠʩʥ Isaiah’s Reaction Response to Isaiah + Additional Comment

v.8 (+ ʩʰʣʠ) v.8b v.9–10 ʸʮʠʥ v.11a (+ ʩʰʣʠ) ʸʮʠʩʥ v.11b vv.12–13

Figure 3: wayyiqtol forms as Structuring Means in Isa 6:1–13

Additionally, both scenes flow together in Isaiah’s commission, creating a funnel-like structure in Isa 6:1–10.31 The verb that introduces the first scene (¥ʤʠʸ, v.1) and the one with which the second scene begins (¥ʲʮˇ, v.8) both occur together in the utterance Isaiah is to deliver: “Hear (ʥʲʮˇ ʲʥʮˇ) and you will not realize; see (ʥʠʸ ʥʠʸ) and you will not understand!” (v.9b) as well as in the conclusion of his commission: “… so that it will not see (ʤʠʸʩʚʯʴ) with its eyes, and hear (ʲʮˇʩ) with its ears …” (v.10b).32

29

See, e.g., LIND, Implications, 318; HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 40; IRSIGLER, Gott, 130, 133, 135; J ANOWSKI, Wohnung, 37. 30 Cf. especially MÜLLER, Glauben, 31 and SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 134 referring to the syntax of vv.11–13. Sweeney states: “Vv.12–13 therefore constitute the prophet’s elaboration of YHWH’s statement in v.11b” (SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 134). 31 For a funnel-like structure see also Ps 1; cf. W EBER, Werkbuch Psalmen I, 49. 32 Both observations about the parallel structure of two scenes beginning with v.1 and v.8 and the funnel-like shape through which vv.1–7 and v.8 lead into the commission in vv.9–10 raise serious doubts about the basis on which several scholars argue that the original form of the call narrative was only Isa 6:1–8; thus SCHOORS, Minister, 92n.27; U. BECKER, Jesaja, 81–89, B ERGES, Buch, 97–101, now also JONG, Isaiah, 73–76. Considering the same solution, cf. also ACKROYD, Isaiah I–XII, 41n.72; DECK, Gerichtsbotschaft, 168, 273–285.

80

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6 ʤʠʸʠʥ

v.1

(+ ʩʰʣʠ)

ʥʲʰʩʥ v.4 ʸʮʠʥ v.5 ʸʮʠʩʥǜǜǜʳʲʩʥ vv.6–7

ʲʮˇʠʥ

v.8

ø ʸʮʠʥ ʸʮʠʩʥ

v.8b v.9

(+ ʩʰʣʠ)

ʥʲʣʺʚʬʠʥ ʥʠʸ ʥʠʸʥ ʥʰʩʡʺʚʬʠʥ ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ (ʸʮʠʩʥ) v.9 (ʯʩʡʩ ʥʡʡʬʥ ʲʮˇʩ ʥʩʰʦʠʡʥ ʥʩʰʩʲʡ ʤʠʸʩʚʯʴ v.10b) ŋ Figure 4: Funnel-like Structure of Isa 6:1–10

One of the striking stylistic features in Isa 6 is the threefold occurrence of several features/terms: apart from the Trishagion (v.3),33 there are the three pairs of wings of the Seraphim (v.1); and the terms ʩʰʣʠ (vv.1, 8, 11), ʤʥʤʩ (vv.3, 5, 12), ʭʲ (vv.5, 9, 10), ¥ʠʬʮ (vv.1, 3, 4), the participle ʡˇʩ (vv.1, 5, 11), three clauses introduced by ʩʫ in v.5 and three clauses in the speech of the Seraph in v.7. There is furthermore a threefold description of devastation in v.11: the cities are empty, the houses are not inhabited and the land is totally desolate.34 And it is expressed in v.11 through the antonyms ¥ʤʠˇ and ʤʮʮˇ of ¥ʠʬʮ (vv.1, 3, 4).35 These features and terms form a net of correspondences and opposites that lends a very strong coherence to vv.1– 11. They also guide the readers/hearers to recognize certain relationships and to reflect upon them. The devastation of the land (¥ʤʠˇ and ʤʮʮˇ, v.11) is to be related to the radical change that comes with the filling (¥ʠʬʮ) of the temple with smoke (v.4) in comparison with/contrast to the hems, which fill (¥ʠʬʮ) the temple (v.1), and the glory of YHWH, which consists in the fullness (¥ʠʬʮ) of the whole earth (v.3).36 The cry of Isaiah 33

LIEBREICH, Position, 38–39 and LACK, Symbolique, 46 note that the threefold occurrence of the “Holy One of Israel” in Isa 5:16, 19, 24 is taken together in the trishagion in Isa 6:3 (Note, however, that Isa 5:16 differs slightly reading ʬʠʤ ˇʥʣʷʤ). 34 The various threefold occurrences of several features in Isa 6 has been first (and so far almost exclusively, but see KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 112n.220 and IRSIGLER, Gott, 144n.42) described by ALONSO-SCHÖKEL, Stilistische Analyse, 158. He noted the following cases: “drei Flügelpaare, drei qadoš, dreimal ki in der ersten Rede des Propheten, drei Aktionen des Seraphs, drei Sätze in seiner Rede, drei Glieder in der Rede Jahwes (Augen, Ohren, Herz), dreifache Verwüstung (Städte, Häuser, Felder).” Two of these characterizations do not hold closer investigation: The Seraph performs four actions – he flies, takes the coal, touches the lips and speaks. The three parts in the speech of YHWH are mainly confined to v.10a, but they are part of an increasing line: two parts in v.9b – three parts in v.10a – five parts in v.10b. 35 These features further contribute to the concluding function of vv.9–11 within the narrative. This shows once more that there is absolutely no evidence in Isa 6 that could justify the procedures of U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 81–89; BERGES, Buch, 97–101 and others to exclude vv.9–11, which by this appears even clearer as an attempt to get rid of those parts in the text that do not fit the hypothesis. 36 For the latter interpretation of ʥʣʡʫ ʵʸʠʤʚʬʫ ʠʬʮ see especially IRSIGLER, Gott, 134n.15; for the train of thought that is expressed through the ‘motif of fullness’ (¥ʠʬʮ)

2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6

81

not only reacts to the trembling and smoke (v.4) but is equally related to the confrontation with the threefold holy YHWH (v.3), as the three ʩʫclauses indicate.37 The Seraph in turn again reacts to the cry of Isaiah by three sentences (v.7). As the following observations show, further stylistic features in Isa 6 include a chiasm in v.10 and an ambiguity in segmentation (‘amphiboly’) in v.13. It is widely recognized that apart from the final phrase ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇʥ, v.10 is arranged in chiasm. The organs of perception and understanding recur in the second half of the verse in inverted order (see Figure 5). Moreover, these organs are connected with verbs that are repeated from v.9b (see Figure 6), by which means v.10 and v.9 are closely related. – v.10a

– v.10b

ʯʩʲ ǜǜǜ ǜǜǜ ʯʩʲ –

ǜǜǜ ʯʦʠ ǜǜǜ ǜǜǜ ʯʦʠ ǜǜǜ

ǜǜǜ ʡʬ –

ʡʬ ǜǜǜ

Figure 5: Chiasm in Isa 6:10 ʥʲʣʺʚʬʠʥ ʥʠʸ ʥʠʸʥ ʥʰʩʡʺʚʬʠʥ ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ –

– v.9b – v.10a ǜǜǜ ʯʦʠ ǜǜǜ

– v.10b

ʯʩʲ ǜǜǜ ǜǜǜ ʥʩʰʩʲʡ ʤʠʸʩʚʯʴ – ǜǜǜ ʲʮˇʩ ʥʩʰʦʠʡʥ ǜǜǜ

ǜǜǜ ʡʬ –

ʯʩʡʩ ʥʡʡʬʥ ǜǜǜ

Figure 6: Interrelationships in Isa 6:9–10

As it now stands, v.13 can be segmented in two different ways.38 Either one can read v.13aȕ as the apodosis and v.13bĮ as the comparative clause: and the antonymic “devastation” (¥ʤʠˇ and ʤʮʮˇ) see especially HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 78–82, 99–101, 107–109, 164–169, 175–182; less extensive also VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 46. And already LACK, Symbolique, 46 similarly noted a contrast between ¥ʠʬʮ and ʤʡʥʦʲ (v.12). 37 The three ʩʫ-clauses and the way they are shaped are met with suspicion by B UDDE, Erleben, 14–15, who deletes both occurrences of ʭʩʺʴˈ and the last ʩʫ in v.5, and U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 88–89, who deletes v.5aȕ, 5b as gradual later additions, because as the verse now stands it is illogical. But if one recognizes the correspondence with the trishagion and sees the ʩʫ-clauses in asyndetic formation (see, e.g., the remarks of J ANOWSKI, Sühne, 126), the arguments of Becker dissolve. On the significance of these clauses and their relationship to vv.1–4 see also with different nuances HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 39–40, 197–198n.677 and IRSIGLER, Review of Hartenstein, 496. 38 For a more comprehensive treatment of the difficult issues related to v.13 see especially EMERTON, Translation; and NIELSEN, Hope, 150–152.

82

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

“And though a tenth remains there it will be devastated/burned again like a terebinth and like an oak, in which are stumps when they have been felled; holy seed is their stump”. Or, one can read v.13a as an individual sentence and v.13bĮ as the comparative clause with v.13bȕ as the apodosis: “And though a tenth remains there, it will be devastated/burned again. Like a terebinth and like an oak, in which are stumps when they have been felled, (so) the holy seed is their stump.” The equivocal meaning of ʸʲʡʬ amplifies this ambiguity. ¥ʸʲʡ can mean “to burn” or “to plunder, pillage”39. The latter meaning does not fit together well with the imagery of the trees but would support the latter proposal of segmentation,40 the meaning “to burn” on the other hand would fit well with the former segmentation.41 The meaning is in both cases very similar. It seems to presuppose two stages of destruction and in the end there will be a “holy seed”. But it makes the role of the “stump” less clear and therefore the degree of devastation. Consequently, the end of the judgement remains ambiguous, not unequivocally identifiable.42

3. Leading to Isaiah’s Commission: Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7 3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

3.1 The Descriptive Framework of Isaiah 6 Several wayyiqtol forms relate the various events, actions and scenes in Isa 6 to each other and thereby create a DESCRIPTION of sequential events in the past, specifically in the year when the king Uzziah died. This sequence starts with v.1 and ends in v.11. Verses 12–13 are a comment outside of this framework (see above). Introduced by ʸʮʠʩʥ, the commission of Isaiah to harden his people (vv.9–10) is part of this described sequence. Accordingly, this descriptive framework has to be taken into account when analysing Isaiah’s commission.

For the meaning “to pillage” of ¥ʸʲʡ see FENSHAM, Root on the basis of such a putative meaning in Ugaritic; cf. also DUL 1:235. 40 Consequently FENSHAM, Root, 69 translates: “Though a tenth is in it, it will again be pillaged. But as the terebinth and oak leave stumps when they are cut, the holy seed will be the stump.” 41 At least on this final level of the text one should therefore not prefer one solution against the other to make the text unambiguous against its own claim; so one should also maintain the ambiguity of meaning of ¥ʸʲʡ because of the context of the trees. 42 VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 46 says similarly that the comparison of the trees is applicable twofold: to show the emptiness as well as it can fill in a new beginning for the ‘until’ of v.11. 39

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

83

3.2 A Few Remarks on the Form of Isaiah 6 and Its Position in the Literary Context The determination of the form of Isa 6 has been of immense interest among scholars, not the least because they hoped this could help interpreting the prophet’s commission to harden the people (Isa 6:9–10). Is it meant to be the inaugural call of the prophet so that the commission to harden would apply to his whole career, or was it ‘just’ the commission for a specific task and for the limited time, e.g., of the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis? Similar features with Jer 1 and Ezek 3 would point to the first interpretation of an inaugural call, while the numerous correspondences with 1 Kgs 22 caused other scholars to think of the latter solution of a limited commission. In either case, Isa 6 shows distinctive features so that a conclusion cannot be reached on formal aspects alone.43 Our discussion of Isa 6:1–7, however, will strongly point to the former. Additionally, as regards the duration of the commission to harden, we will see that on the level of the final form of the text the conclusion of Isa 6 (vv.11–13) develops its distinctive perspective on its timeframe in relationship with the subsequent chapters. The uncertainties about the form of Isa 6 is partially due to its surprising position, especially if it is conceived as an inaugural call, which one would expect at the beginning of the book. While it is not possible here to present any substantial discussion of the structure and communicative strategy of Isa 1–12, I want to highlight two aspects. First, we will see that one crucial feature of the arrangement of all the subsequent material after Isa 6 is how it fits into or relates to the time frame that Isa 6:11–13 develops (and consequently to the call to harden the people [Isa 6:9–10]). Being put before Isa 6, the material of chapters 2–5 is not part of this overall temporal perspective. Instead, in these chapters an eschatological ‘programme’ of Zion and the nations can be developed (Isa 2:2–4) in the light of which the prophet criticises the whole society and announces a comprehensive judgement on it (cf. Isa 3 and especially Isa 5). Chapters 2–5 are not limited to a specific period in the ministry of Isaiah44 and they lack references to a restricted and specific event. By this means, the readers/hearers recognize the critique of Isaiah’s society as a general one, or better, as a fundamental characterization and critique of the society of Judah in its political (cf. Isa 3:12, 13–15), social (cf. Isa 3:13–15; 5:7, 8, 23) and religious (cf., e.g., Isa 3:8; 5:12, 18–19, 24) dimensions. The chapters addressing Judah 43 For a fair and comprehensive survey of the various positions see especially B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 82–88. 44 By the designation “the prophet Isaiah” and related statements I refer to the presentation of the prophet Isaiah in the final form of the book. The content and amount of the proclamation (and ministry) of the 8th century prophet Isaiah ben Amoz (as well as the form and extend of his possible writings) are not in view here.

84

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

after Isa 6 specify then, how this society reacts in specific situations and under the critical company of the prophet Isaiah. The second aspect of the position of Isa 6 after chapters 2–5 is partly related. The reaction of Isaiah to the encounter of YHWH and the Seraphim presupposes a situation or condition which the prophet shares with his people (Isa 6:5).45 It is part of the communicative strategy of Isa 2–5 to address this fundamental condition of the people of Judah (and Isaiah), and thereby, clarify the reaction of Isaiah when being confronted with the “King, the LORD of hosts” (Isa 6:5, ESV). We will see below, however, that on the basis of this arrangement the call to harden the people is not simply a reaction to their rejection of YHWH’s word (Isa 5:24).46 3.3 Main Aspects of Isaiah 6:1–7 The imagery in particular of vv.1–7 has been widely and diversely assessed. Due to the limited space, I cannot deal with all suggestions in detail here; I rather confine myself to a presentation of the main traits, following the segmentation indicated by the wayyiqtol forms. Isaiah starts by saying that he has seen (ʤʠʸʠʥ) “the Lord” (ʩʰʣʠ). This is then substantiated by further descriptions:47 the Lord is sitting on a throne; his hems48 (ʥʩʬʥˇ; neither the formerly suggested “trains”49 nor “genitals”50 45

See below for a more detailed discussion. It is not possible here to engage in the discussion of an alleged concentric structure of Isa 2–12 (thus B ARTELT, Book and B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 30–33) or of the primary layer of the ‘legacy of Isaiah’ in Isa *1:21–11:5 (thus BLUM , Testament I; IDEM, Testament II). However one decides this question, it is important to keep in mind the different function of the material in Isa 2–5 through its preceding Isa 6. I myself remain rather suspicious about a concentric arrangement of Isa 2–12, especially in the light of the ‘disturbance’ of the concentric arrangement through the alleged correspondence between Isa 5:1–7 and Isa 8:23b–9:6 (a difficulty that BARTELT, Book, 137–139 and BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 31–32 concede. B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 31 says that the “concentric extension” [5:8–30; 9:7–10:4] of the Immanuel Denkschrift [Isa 6:1–8:18] is subordinated to the “linear extension” [5:1–7; 8:19–9:6] and therefore older. But what are the indications that the one “concentric extension” is subordinated to the competing “linear extension” in the present text?), of the too less specified (especially in the case of Blum and Beuken) integration of the particular design of Isa 6:1–8:18(8:19–9:6) in the alleged concentric structure and of the appearance of a 1.sg. speaker already in Isa 5:1, 9. 47 The participles (ʡˇʩ, ʭʩʠʬʮ, ʭʩʣʮʲ), yiqtol forms (2x ʤʱʫʩ, ʳʴʥʲʩ) and the w-qatal forms (ʠʸʷʥ, ʸʮʠʥ, taking up the aspects of the preceding yiqtol forms) all express simultaneous and continuing actions. Cf., e.g., HARTENSTEIN , Unzugänglichkeit, 31–35; J ANOWSKI, Wohnung, 36–37. 48 On the basis of iconographic material of the ANE picturing kings with “hems”. See in this regard already J. HEHN, BZ 14 (1917), 15–24 (taken from KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 64n.72; cf. also W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 232 [ET, 249]); then in particular G.R. DRIVER, Isaiah 6:1, 88 and KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 62–67 (with figures 25–27). 46

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

85

or “minor assistants”51) are filling the temple; Seraphim are standing above him,52 covering their face and their feet; and they declare to each other the holiness of YHWH Zebaoth (vv.1–3). At the outset this description is rather ambivalent. On the one hand, Isaiah is confronted with YHWH as the universal king who dwells in Zion. He is the “Lord” (ʩʰʣʠ, v.1), the “YHWH of hosts” (ʺʥʠʡʶ ʤʥʤʩ, v.3), he is the “king” (ʪʬʮ, v.5).53 In Zion is his royal residence (ʬʫʩʤ “palace, temple”); here he sits on his throne. The throne’s attributes as high and lifted up54 connote that it is impregnable and superior (cf. simi49

Cf., e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 123; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 55; GRAY, Isaiah, 103; YOUNG, Isaiah 1–18, 238; R. B. Y. SCOTT, Isaiah 1–39, 207; E ICHRODT, Heilige, 13n.1; more recently taken up again by MÜLLER, Beobachtungen, 164, 168 and B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 224–225 with no discussion of the studies that argue against this interpretation. 50 ESLINGER, Infinite takes up the study of Driver (IDEM, Isaiah 6:1) and drives the observations a little further, arguing on the basis of some other occurrences (cf. Jer 13:22, 26; Nah 3:5; Lam 1:9) that ʬʥˇ means “genitals” here. The question is, however, what the hearers are likely to have understood. Regardless what the percentage is, Exod 28:33–34; 39:24–26 show that the meaning “hems” was present. This taken together with the fact that Isaiah describes the deity sitting on a throne and calls him a king evokes the images of sitting kings that were well known in the ANE (see especially the studies mentioned above and in particular the figures provided by Keel). HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 65 has provided another image of the sun god Šamaš, in which the “hems” covering the lower parts of the deity fill the temple gates that serve as his throne (see HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 65 and the interpretations and applications to Isa 6, ibid. 64, 76; for further material and interpretation cf. HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 64nn.132–134). Moreover, the dynamic of the whole scene derives from Isaiah having seen YHWH as the king, not so much that he has seen the genitals of the deity (see vv.1, 5 that clearly resist the claim of ESLINGER, Infinite, 159: “The vision of the holy unadorned private leads on to the next state”), and it is more likely that the shaking (not only the smoke) and the smoke (v.4) are a reaction to the voice of the seraphim (see further). 51 HUROWITZ, Impure Lips, 42n.3 suggests that ʭʩʬʥˇ might have been derived from the Akkadian word šamallû “minor assistant”, which has been borrowed into Babylonian Aramaic and Mandaic. 52 The exact meaning of the phrase ʥʬ ʬʲʮʮ remains uncertain; for an orientation see the commentaries and most recently the comments in JANOWSKI, Wohnung, 36. 53 IRSIGLER, Gott, 139 speaks of an ascending line of designations, taken up by J ANOWSKI, Wohnung, 38. This climax of designations coincides with the line v.5b’s effect of an inclusio with v.1 (¥ʤʠʸ; see above “2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6”). These are just further features that speak against Becker’s insensitive handling of v.5 (IDEM, Jesaja, 88–89; for the threefold occurrence of ʩʫ in Isa 6 as a crucial stylistic and communicative feature [not only contributes to predominance of three but also relates it to “holy”] see above “2. Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6”; for other cases of a chain of three ʩʫ in Isa, cf. Isa 9:3, 4, 5; 15:5, 6; 21:15, 16, 17). 54 The Masoretic accentuation suggests a different reading: It places the disjunctive accent T̡iph̢Ɨ after ʠʱʫʚʬʲ making the phrase ʠˈʰʥ ʭʸ refer to ʩʰʣʠ like similarly Isa 52:13

86

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

larly Jer 17:12; Ps 93:4).55 This (cosmologically) superior position of YHWH’s dwelling place on the vertical axis grounds the centre position of Zion on the horizontal axis of the whole world.56 The latter is expressed in the doxology of the Seraphim, according to which the whole world (“the fullness of the earth”) reflects YHWH’s glory/majesty. Further features amplify this relationship between vertical superiority and horizontal radiance of YHWH’s rule: just the hems of YHWH fill (¥ʠʬʮ) the temple, adding to the distances in the dimensional relationships; to this corresponds that his glory/majesty is the fullness (ʠʬʮ) of the earth.57 Thus Isaiah is confronted with YHWH who dwells as the universal king in Zion.58 Here is YHWH’s superior throne and the centre of the world. To the presence of YHWH on his throne corresponds the radiance of the salvational effects of his kingdom in the world.59 On the other hand, there is the intrusion of the Seraphim into the realm of YHWH’s court. This poses, of course, the question of the identification of the Seraphim.60 As far as their form is concerned, it seems likely that (referring to the Servant here). But their position and especially the background of the “high and lifted throne” in Zion theology and (ANE) Royal ideology speak for the common understanding against the accents of MT; cf. HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 33n.11, 41–56; METZGER, Wohnstatt Jahwes, 10–13, 32–33; IDEM, Thron, 128–133. 55 Cf. H ARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 42–56 (especially 47). For the throne as an insignia of royal authority and reign, cf. especially METZGER, Thron. 56 Cf. HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 55–56, 107–108: “Die Eigenart dieser Zentrumssymbolik besteht darin, daß aus der überlegenen Position der vertikalen Achse des Kosmos heraus (verkörpert durch den riesenhaften Gottesthron) die konzentrisch umliegenden Bereiche in der Horizontalen (Menschenwelt) bis an den fernen Horizont kontrollierbar sind (vgl. Ps 46; 48; 93).” (ibid. 56, italics original); similarly J ANOWSKI, Wohnung, 40. The traditio-historical background of the Jerusalemite temple theology provides a more convincing explanation of these features than the supposed “strategy of diffusion” that LANDY, Strategies, 60–65 (especially 64) suggests. 57 Cf. HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 76–78. 58 It has been variously noted that this depiction of YHWH implies also a contrast to the human kingship of the Davidic dynasty with the death of Uzziah; cf., e.g., AURET, Jesaja 6:1aĮ, 376. 59 Cf. for the detailed (traditio-historical) analyses of these elements in particular HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 41–109; then also IRSIGLER, Gott, 135–147; J ANOWSKI, Wohnung, 36–41. 60 Against the identification of the Seraphim with the Cherubim (thus, e.g., JENSEN & IRWIN, Isaiah 1–39, 234 [though hesitating]; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 139; B ARKER, Isaiah, 504 and in particular LACHEMAN, Seraphim, who explains the differences by the “vivid imagination of the prophet-poet who sees things not as static but as dynamic.” [ibid. 71], and the appearance of moving by the sunlight striking the Cherubim made of gold [which makes it appear in movement; ibid. 71-72]) scholars pointed to the differences in form (two versus six wings) and action/movability (the Cherubim carry the throne of YHWH; the Seraphim hover above him; cf., e.g., W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 247 [ET, 264]; similarly G ÖRG, Funktion, 33) and to the fact that they appear as different

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

87

the Egyptian Uraeus lies in the background, which was often placed at the forehead or on the head of a deity/goddess or king, and served to protect them.61 That a serpentine figure is the most likely understanding of the Seraphim can be based on the meaning of ʳʸˈ ĞƗrƗp in the rest of the OT62 and the amount of seals showing Uraei in Judah/South Canaan in the 8th century B.C.63 Although the seals indicate an apotropaic connotation for the winged serpent,64 the occurrences in the OT mostly portray them as angel classes in later literature (Thus, HIRTH, Überlegungen, 17n.4 referring to 1 Enoch 61:10; 71:6. See also the parallel depiction of a cherub and two Uraei on a Phoenician seal of the 8th century B.C. in KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 102 [figure 84].). Some commentators deny the possibility to identify the Seraphim at all (cf. OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 178– 179; MOTYER, Prophecy, 76n.3; CHILDS, Isaiah, 55; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 58.), but they often fail to discuss the differing studies and iconographic material (see further). A few scholars reckon with the influence of the cult object Nehushtan (cf. Num 21:4–9; 2 Kgs 18:4; e.g. GRAY, Isaiah, 105; HERBERT, Isaiah 1–39, 58; MÜLLER, Beobachtungen, 176n.63; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 225; SKINNER, Isaiah I–XXXIX, 46–47 reckons with a combination of several aspects [the Nehushtan, the Egyptian winged griffin Sefr or Seref, and the winged composite figures at the entrance of Assyrian temples and palaces] but denies a serpentine form). One need not deny such an influence (cf. also B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 100n.55; KEEL, Jahweh-Visionen, 81–83 and in particular G ÖRG, Funktion, 35–37 and GLAZOV, Bridling, 133–134.), but given the differences – the Seraphim are in plural, they move, they act – this cannot explain main traits of the scene. 61 The proposals of J OINES, Winged Serpents and DE SAVIGNAC, Les “Seraphim” about the significance of the Egyptian Uraeus for the understanding of the Seraphim, taken up by SCHOORS, Jesaja I, 60, have been substantiated by KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 70–115 and his detailed discussion of iconographic material from Palestine. His conclusions about the Seraphim’s form (not so much their function; on this see below) have been adopted, for instance, by GÖRG, Funktion, 32, 34; DAY, Echoes, 150–151; KAISER, Isaiah 1–12, 125–126; I RSIGLER, Gott, 140; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 100n.155; HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 190–191; L ISS, Unerhörte Prophetie, 47. G LAZOV, Bridling, 120–121 also takes up the notion of the serpentine Seraphim, but apparently with no knowledge of the study of Keel. 62 See first and foremost Num 21:6, the only other occurrence of ʳʸˈ in plural; then Isa 14:29; 30:6, both speaking of winged serpents; apart from these also Num 21:8; Deut 8:15. In all these cases ʳʸˈ means “serpent”. See also KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 71–74; HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 192–194; METTINGER, Seraphim, 742–743. 63 Cf. in particular the discussion and presentation of iconographic material in KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 92–110 and now also B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 170. 64 This aspect is taken up and elaborated especially by K EEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 112– 114. According to him the Uraei occupy the position above the deity common to the iconographic material, but in Isa 6 they do not protect YHWH (their usual function) but themselves (they cover themselves with their wings). So they are marginalized (“depotenziert”) and serve to amplify the holiness of YHWH. This is followed by HUBMANN, Bote, 333; W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 248 (ET, 265); IRSIGLER, Gott, 143–144 (especially 144n.42); B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 100; VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 43; LISS, Unerhörte Prophetie, 47. Those who reject the identification of the Seraphim with a serpent (or do not discuss it), reach a similar though less substantiated conclusion; they

88

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

threatening, inhabiting mainly the deserted areas. Thus Seraphim are of an at least ambivalent character. Moreover, it seems that their protective function is confined to single figures of Uraei (thus the seals and amulets and Num 21:8–9). As the only other occurrence of several Seraphim in Num 21:6 shows, they pose danger.65 The Seraphim as dangerous serpents common in the desert are included in the sphere of the universal king. Or to put it in other words: the Seraphim protect the dwelling place of YHWH. The next event within the whole vision is introduced in v.4 by the wayyiqtol ʥʲʰʩʥ. Two actions happen: the voice of the Seraphim causes the trembling of the pivots66 of the thresholds and the whole building begins to fill67 with smoke. The interpretation of this verse remains difficult. Several scholars regard these elements as traits of an epiphany.68 Another interpremainly emphasize their status as divine council (cf., e.g., W ATTS, Isaiah 1–33, 74; SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 54) or their function to underline the holiness and majesty of the king YHWH (cf., e.g., OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 179; BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 1–39, 58; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 58). For M OTYER , Prophecy, 76 the Seraphim are the Heavenly Council who are named burning ones after the experience of Isaiah (vv.6–7); thus also HIRTH, Überlegungen, 18–19 (Hirth does not exclude the possibility that the Seraphim looked like the Uraei, according to him this depends on the date of Isa 6; cf. ibid. 19). 65 Cf. also HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 195. GLAZOV, Bridling, 133–134, 159 also regards the Seraphim analogous to the Egyptian Uraei and even explains the rite of mouth purification/opening by it (see below). More than Hartenstein, however, he sees the ambivalent meaning of the Seraphim justified by the narrative of Num 21:4–9. The occurrence of the Seraphim immediately evokes (through their relationship with the Nehustan) that story and the deadly and healing power of the serpents. But with Hartenstein I see the occurrence of several (at least of two) Seraphim as a hint of threat, in correspondence with the several serpents in Num 21, without necessarily having that particular story in mind. How one interprets then the action of one of the Seraphim in vv.6–7 is addressed below. In a private conversation Hugh Williamson pointed to Mesopotamian iconography, where one finds representations of six-winged guardians of kings, thrones etc. So, perhaps this has also contributed a trait to the composite figure of the Seraphim. The general threatening perception of the scene, however, is not changed significantly. It might even be further amplified: the guardians of YHWH/YHWH’s throne appear as dangerous desert creatures. 66 The meaning of ʺʥʮʠ remains difficult to decide. It is either a form of ʤʮʠ I “cubit, forearm” and has an architectural special meaning “pivot of a door”, or one has to assume a Hebrew word similar to Akk. ammatu II, meaning “foundation”. See, e.g., the discussion in HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 124–125. 67 The wƟ-x-yiqtol construction introduces not a subsequent (a wayyiqtol form) but a parallel event to the shaking of the pivots. The ingressive yiqtol of ¥ʠʬʮ expresses a progressive duration that aims to reach the state of “being filled”; cf. the discussion in HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 36–37. 68 Cf., e.g., KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen, 121–123; D AY, Echoes, 149–151; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 102–103; P ODELLA, Lichtkleid, 189; for objections against this interpretation see HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 130–132, 137–139. BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12,

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

89

tation has been proposed by Friedhelm Hartenstein. Surveying comparable biblical and ANE parallels,69 he concludes that Isa 6:4 connotes the hiding of YHWH.70 As impressive as the comparative material is that Hartenstein discusses,71 the vision itself as well as its integration in the broader literary context raise some questions about his conclusion.72 It is not clear how the Seraphim’s covering their eyes fits into Hartenstein’s suggestion that the vision connotes the hiding of YHWH. The dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah (Isa 6:8–11) does not suggest hiding as such. Moreover, the further development of the Isaiah tradition combined this vision with considerable activities of YHWH in Jerusalem, Judah and among other nations (cf. Isa 10:1–4; 10:5–19; 14:28–32). However, what Hartenstein is able to show with reference to comparative material is that the shaking of the pivots and the filling with smoke are threatening; in the context of Isa 6, threatening to Isaiah and his people.73 Accordingly, one may see in Isa 6:1–4 Isaiah’s vision of YHWH in his judging presence (“Gerichtspräsenz”).74 The divine judgement inherent in vv.9–10 points to the distance between YHWH and the people. In these terms, YHWH can

172 objects to Hartenstein that in v.5 the theophany has positive results, but I cannot see how the fearful cry of Isaiah indicates any positive reaction: Isaiah fears for his life. 69 In respect to the interpretation of the shaking pivots of the thresholds (v.4a), Hartenstein includes an interpretation of Amos 9:1–4 (HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 110– 115), discusses the significance of the symbolism of the gate and the threshold in Mesopotamia (ibid. 116–122) and of the doors and pivots in Hittite thought (ibid. 128–130), and investigates the tradition history of the verbs ¥ʲʥʰ and ¥ˇʲʸ (ibid. 125–128); for the interpretation of the filling of the building with smoke he discusses Ezek 10:4; 1 Kgs 8:10–13 and religio-historical analogies (the desolated sanctuary in Hittite texts; the abandoned dwelling-place of Marduk in the Erra Epos; ibid. 136–166). 70 That v.4 depicts the hiding of the divine presence is also briefly mentioned in L IND , Implications, 320. 71 At another place I have still followed Hartenstein; cf. UHLIG, Too hard, 65. It was the contact and exchange with Prof. Mark S. Smith in the course of this publication that led me to rethink Hartenstein’s important contribution. 72 It is important to differentiate between the comparative material that points to the threatening tones of that vision and imply “Jahwes gerichtstheophane(...) Präsenz” (thus already STECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja, 157n.22 without the comparative material that Hartenstein has now provided) and Hartenstein’s distinctive conclusion that this connotes YHWH’s hiding and the end of any contact between YHWH and his people. In fact, Hartenstein puts forward this conclusion as a question: “Wenn nämlich die oben für den Torbereich und die Schwellen eines Tempels herausgearbeitete symbolische Signifikanz zutrifft, ist zu fragen, ob nicht das ‘Beben der Schwellen’ in Jes 6,4a (...) das Ende des Gotteskontakts anzeigt.” (H ARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 135; italics mine). 73 Cf. also STECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6, 157n.22; JEREMIAS, Theophanie, 71–72, 173–174. 74 Cf. the conclusions in HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 134–136, 164–166.

90

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

be understood as hidden from his people (cf. Isa 8:17). At the same time, Isa 6:4 is not restricted to this specific aspect of YHWH’s judgement. The reader is then informed about Isaiah’s reaction to this vision; he was in sheer terror (v.5). The interpretations of v.5 vary considerably. Several commentators interpret the cry of Isaiah as the recognition of the difference and deficiency of the human Isaiah against the holy YHWH.75 But this cannot satisfactorily explain why Isaiah refers to his and his people’s lips in particular.76 Supposing an obligatory rite of mouth purification for prophets who address the gods in order to pose a query, parallel to those in Mesopotamia, Hurowitz suggests that Isaiah’s cry simply means that his lips have not yet been purified because of the surprise induced by the judgemental vision.77 But there is no evidence that such rites were common for prophets in Israel/Judah; the subsequent purification by a burning coal instead of the usual water in Mesopotamia is rather different; the question, whether the unclean lips can be confined to cultic aspects is also rather doubtful.78 For my interpretation of v.5, I want to emphasize two aspects in relation to the “impure lips”. First, the term ʠʮʨ “unclean, impure”, although mostly related to cultic aspects, is in some cases related to unjust behaviour in society (cf. Hos 5:1, 3; 6:10; Mic 2:10).79 Once this is realized the striking correspondences with Ps 15 and in particular with Ps 2480 suggest a combination of ethical

75 Thus, e.g., P ROCKSCH, Jesaia, 56; E NGNELL, Call, 40–41; R. B. Y. SCOTT, Isaiah 1– 39, 209; J ANOWSKI, Sühne, 126; HUBMANN, Bote, 334; LISS, Unerhörte Prophetie, 50– 53. 76 Some of those who stress the difference between Isaiah and the holy YHWH take the mentioning of the lips as an indication of the difference to the Seraphim who are able to serve the holiness of YHWH with their declaration; thus, e.g., PROCKSCH, Jesaia, 55– 56; J ANOWSKI, Sühne, 126; B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 173. 77 Cf. HUROWITZ, Impure Lips, 76–79 (especially 78); followed by B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 226. On the question of possible parallel ANE rites of mouth purification or mouth opening see below. 78 Cf. also the remarks in GLAZOV, Bridling, 120–121, 122–125, 156. 79 For more detailed discussions of the ethical implications of “unclean” in some passages in the OT, cf., e.g., D. P. WRIGHT, Unclean; KLAWANS, Impurity; W ENHAM, Purity, 380–381, 391–392. 80 In both psalms only those are allowed access to the mountain of YHWH (ʤʥʤʩ ʸʤ, Ps 24:3), his holy place (ʥˇʣʷ ʭʥʷʮ, Ps 24:3), your holy mountain (ʪˇʣʷ ʸʤ, Ps 15:1), and consequently to the presence of YHWH, who do proper communicative interaction (Pss 15:2–3; 24:4). For the correspondences between Isa 6 and Ps 24 in particular see furthermore: ʵʸʠʤʚʬʫ ʠʬʮ (Isa 6:3) and ʤʠʥʬʮʥ ʵʸʠʤ (Ps 24:1) related to YHWH; importance of YHWH’s ʣʥʡʫ (Isa 6:3; Ps 24:7–10); designation of YHWH as ʪʬʮ “king” (Isa 6:5; Ps 24:7–10); designation ʺʥʠʡʶ ʤʥʤʩ (Isa 6:5; Ps 24:10) and the discussions in W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 251 (ET, 268) and especially SPIECKERMANN, Heilsgegenwart, 200–201, 207–208, 224; IDEM, Pantheismus, 67–68.

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

91

issues with being present in the sanctuary in Isa 6.81 Secondly, insofar as “lips” are crucially related to communication and speech per se, several passages in the literary context of Isa have to be considered. Lind refers to the lips of Sennacherib that through his mocking of YHWH “violate the sphere of the Holy One”.82 The people and Isaiah have similarly “unclean lips” because they also transgress the rule of the Holy.83 On the one hand, they join in the same “Near Eastern arrogance against the Holy one of Israel” by not trusting in YHWH and breaching his sphere but participating in “Near Eastern military politics” (Isa 7:1–8:18).84 On the other hand, they violate his rule in their domestic relationships (Isa 2:1–5:30).85 Hartenstein suggests that the impurity of the lips is a short summary of the transgressions mentioned in Isa 29:13 and Isa 1:15: the praise of the people is mere superficial lip-service against which their everyday behaviour stands in stark contrast.86 Even more specific, however, are two passages in the immediate context, which have hardly been considered in this respect:87 in Isa 3:8–10, v.8b reads “their tongue (here: ʯʥˇʬ) and deeds are against YHWH, to defy (the eyes of)88 his glory”. Thus the aspect of communication and YHWH’s glory (ʣʥʡʫ) occur together here as in Isa 6:3, 5. Then, according to v.9 the people communicate (¥ʣʢʰ) their sins like Sodom, which ends in the same “Alas” cry (ʩʥʠ, v.9b) as in Isa 6:5. Additionally, the lines in Isa 5:18–20 are noteworthy. Here the “Woe” (ʩʥʤ) of a dirge applies to those who mock YHWH and his plan (v.19), by which means they increase their sins – a communicative act figuratively described as “ropes of deceit” (v.18). This culminates in the depiction of total per-

81 W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 251 (ET, 268) and GLAZOV, Bridling, 122–123 also argue for an inclusion of ethical matters in v.5. But they go the other way around: Noting the parallels in Pss 15:2–3; 24:4, Isa 33:14–16 they assume that the same combination of cultic and ethical issues is present in Isa 6:5 as well, without discussing, whether the term ʠʮʨ does allow such a conclusion. SAWYER, Isaiah 1, 70–72 similarly insists that holiness in Isa 6 is related to ethical issues. 82 LIND, Implications, 322. 83 Cf. LIND, Implications, 337. 84 LIND, Implications, 322–328; quotations taken from LIND, Implications, 328. 85 Cf. LIND, Implications, 329–337. 86 Cf. HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 199–201 (especially 201). CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 75 sees here a reference to “the prevalence of sins of speech among the people generally”, mentioning Exod 20:7, 16; Ps 15:3; Prov 10:18ff. 87 U. BECKER, Jesaja, 140–141 has noted some parallels between Isa 5:18–19 and Isa 6 but has not recognized the aspect of communication. SAWYER, Isaiah 1, 66 however refers to Isa 3:8 as a possible background (in the present form) and most recently G OLDINGAY, Isaiah, 59 hints at Isa 1:15, 23; 2:6; 3:8; 5:19, 20, 24. 88 For a discussion of the awkward reading ʩʰʲ here see, e.g., W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1– 12, 117 (ET, 125).

92

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

version of communication: when evil is said to be good and good is turned into evil (5:20).89 In this context, Isaiah confronted with the holy YHWH fears for his life because he is aware of being part of a society where perversion of communication plays an important part in the disturbed (religious, social and political) order. Even more, Isaiah states that his “unclean lips” have become a characteristic of his (and his people’s) being and nature: He does not say “because I have unclean lips” but “because I am a man of unclean lips”. The ʭʩʺʴˈʚʠʮʨ “unclean lips” qualify his nature (ˇʩʠ)90 and so Isaiah fears for his life as his whole being cannot stand the confrontation with the holy YHWH. In my opinion the assertion “for my eyes have seen the king YHWH Zebaoth” fits into this whole train of thought. Although there are passages in the OT that speak about the danger or impossibility of seeing YHWH and living, this does not necessarily form the background for Isaiah’s cry.91 There is another strand of passages, which refer to the wish to see YHWH (cf. Pss 11:7; 17:15; 27:4, 13; 42:2–3; 63:3; 84:11–13).92 And they are often related to the image of YHWH as king who is to implement righteousness. In these contexts, where the righteous seeks help from YHWH against the unjust, seeing YHWH means being in the sphere of his justice.93 But if seeing the king YHWH includes the connotations of the righteous king who saves the righteous by overcoming the unjust,94 Isaiah – being aware of his “unclean lips” – sees the king YHWH as the one who is going to judge him.95 In the light of these considerations, it seems then also 89

To me these relationships are stronger than the supposed allusions to Exod 15–17; Num 11–21 that GLAZOV, Bridling, 133–134, 145–148 proposes and according to which the”impure lips” mainly refer to “murmuring” on the basis of Isa 29:14 and the Targum (ibid. 145–148). 90 Cf. similarly J ANOWSKI, Sühne, 126 with reference to the highlighted ʩʫʰʠ “I”. 91 Contra B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 173. U. BECKER, Jesaja, 88 notes that those passages are usually late but then concludes that this may strengthen the possibility that v.5b has been added later. 92 Cf. VINCENT, Auge, 21–24; then J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 94 (see there n.173 for further literature). Janowski also points to names like ʩʰʩʲʥʤʩʬʠ “my eyes (are pointed at) YHWH” (cf. Ezra 8:4; 1 Chr 26:3), or with the same meaning ʩʰʩʲʥʩʬʠ (cf. Ezra 10:22, 27; Neh 12:41; 1 Chr 2:23–24; 4:36; 7:8). 93 For a brief overview see J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 90–97; and the literature he notes there; then also IDEM, JHWH und der Sonnengott, 205–206. 94 For this concept of a ‘saving righteousness’ see the various studies of Janowski; e.g. IDEM, JHWH der Richter; IDEM, JHWH und der Sonnengott, 206–212, 218–219; IDEM , Der barmherzige Richter; IDEM , Konfliktgespräche, 147–151; ASSMANN, J ANOWSKI & W ELKER , Richten, 231–239; 95 It is noteworthy in this respect that P ODELLA, Lichtkleid, 187–196 (especially 194– 196) in his discussion of Isa 6:1–5 relates the glory (ʣʥʡʫ) of YHWH to his righteousness.

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

93

most probable to interpret ʩʺʩʮʣʰʚʩʫ as “for I am lost”96. In sum, Isaiah expresses his fear of being lost because as one participating in the injustice of his people he is confronted with the holy king YHWH who is to implement justice and righteousness by judgement (cf. Isa 5:1–7).97 The next stage of the vision describes how one of the Seraphim approaches Isaiah and touches his lips with a burning coal (vv.6–7). While some commentators tried to further elucidate the meaning of this passage

It is very probable that Ni. ¥ʤʮʣ “to be destroyed” belongs to the root ¥ʤʮʣ “to be silent” and does not form a different root; cf., e.g., LEVINE, Silence. However, passages like Hos 4:5–6; Jer 25:36–37; 48:2 show that the semantic range of ¥ʭʮʣ I and ¥ʤʮʣ II “to be silent” extend to desolation and ruin; cf. LEVINE, Silence, 105–106. This meaning is to be preferred in Isa 6:5 because of the context of the threatening vision, which LEVINE, Silence, 105 does not consider sufficiently in his discussion of Isa 6:5. For the translation “For I am lost/destroyed”; cf. also, e.g., CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 75; OSWALT, Isaiah 1– 39, 171n.5; CHILDS, Isaiah, 50; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 223; BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 161, 173. Several studies opt for an ambiguity in Isa 6:5; thus, e.g., HUBMANN, Bote, 334; ROBERTS, Double Entendre, 44–46. Others maintain the meaning “to be silent, must be silent”: e.g. JENNI, Jesajas Berufung, 322; KAISER, Isaiah 1–12, 117, 128n.60; B ALTZER, Biographie, 110n.375; J ANOWSKI, Sühne, 126. GLAZOV, Bridling, 134–149 states that the silence of Isaiah is a kind of katanuxis, the “understanding-bestowing ‘pricking’ or ‘stinging’ of the heart” (ibid. 138) that involves metanoia, which he bases mainly on the reading of the LXX (ibid. 136–138) and the parallelism between Isaiah and the people (ibid. 142–149). I regard the immediate literary context and the traits of the Jerusalemite temple theology as more plausible. LISS, Prophetie, 51 states that Isaiah must be silent in the confrontation with the holy YHWH. In the immediate confrontation of the holy with the impure sphere there is no communication possible. She concludes that the “Visionsbericht qualifiziert das Moment der kommunikativen Nicht-Entsprechung zwischen Yesha’yahu und YHWH als notwendig mit der Erfahrung der Erscheinung YHWHs mitgesetzt.” (ibid. 51). Against all these proposals one must admit that Isaiah does speak in v.5. That this is only a soliloquy (LISS, Prophetie, 51) is hardly possible, given that one of the Seraphim reacts to the cry of Isaiah: he touches the lips that Isaiah mentioned. ZERON, Anmassung, 67 wonders whether ʩʺʩʮʣʰ means originally “to make oneself equal with”’ as an act of hubris with reference to Isa 14:14; Ezek 32:2. 97 Cf. similarly HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 196: “Wenn das so ist, erklärt sich der Ausruf des Propheten in V. 5 als ein Gewahrwerden dieses Gerichtsgeschehens als von JHWH bereits in Gang gebrachte Wirklichkeit”. With IRSIGLER, Review of Hartenstein, 496 one may not only refer to the launch of this process in v.4 but also to the fact of being confronted with the “holy” YHWH (relationship to v.3; see above “2. Structure and Stylistic Features of Isaiah 6”). FICHTNER, Jesaja has made an interesting suggestion for the background and main controversy of Isaiah in emphasizing the significant correspondences with Wisdom literature and the collection of “the men of Hezekiah” (Prov 25–29) in particular. See in this respect also the comments in WHEDBEE, Isaiah; J ENSEN, Use and W ILLIAMSON, Isaiah and the wise. But I cannot see any indication that Isaiah refers to this background specifically in Isa 6:5; contra F ICHTNER, Jesaja, 79–80 (falsely referring to Isa 6:4). 96

94

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

by parallels from the ANE,98 most scholars emphasize on the basis of v.7 the purificatory function of it, either in order to enable Isaiah to stand in the presence of the holy YHWH99 or to be able to receive the message of doom.100 One aspect has hardly been noticed so far, however. As the announcement of the Seraph shows, the touching with the glowing coal is essential. Too often, commentators overlook the fact that this means Isaiah’s lips are burnt.101 Given the connotations of fire and burning (cf., e.g., Isa 1:31; 4:4; 10:17; 30:27, 33; 33:12), this means that his sins have been purified by and through judgement.102 He is the first to experience the 98

After ENGNELL, Call, 40–41, B ÉGUERIE, La vocation, 27–30 and LINDBLOM, Prophecy, 186 had already pointed at possible Egyptian and Mesopotamian parallels for rites of mouth washing or/and mouth purification, these parallels have been recently subjected to further investigation. HUROWITZ, Impure Lips and parallel MÜLLER, Beobachtungen, 171–172 refer to Mesopotamia for a possible rite of purification (thus Hurowitz) or of initiation (thus Müller). Against this background see the comments on Hurowitz on v.5 above and the comment of Glazov: GLAZOV, Bridling, 121–122, 135, 159–162 recently substantiated a possible influence of Egyptian mouth opening rites. According to him the touching with the glowing coal cannot be reconciled with the evidence of Mesopotamia but may have a parallel in the mouth opening rite in Egypt when the subject’s mouth is touched by the wrt-h̡k’w, a fiery serpent-rod related to the Uraeus (for a brief survey of the rite, cf. ibid. 361–376). But the reaction of the Seraph in Isa 6 is a very specific one, responding to Isaiah’s cry that hardly fits the regular and patterned rites of the Egyptian rite. The glowing coal is taken from an altar, not a closely related item to the Seraph as this is the case in the Egyptian material. Finally, the serpent-rod in Egypt symbolizes fire, in Isa 6 the coal actually burns Isaiah’s lips. The supposed parallels from the ANE cannot really explain the peculiar features of Isa 6:6–7, because the decisive features are still different so that an interpretation must try to understand them from the given indications in Isa 6 and the immediate literary context. Against the attempt of SCHOORS, Minister (similarly also CAZELLES, Vocation) to compare Isa 6 with purification rites of priests who were to anoint the king in Mesopotamia speak the function of the Seraphim, that it cannot explain why Isaiah’s mouth is touched and the fact that Isaiah is sent to “this people” not only to the king. For a critical assessment of supposed ritual parallels see also J ANOWSKI, Sühne, 128n.112. 99 Cf., e.g., LISS, Prophetie, 52–53. 100 Cf., e.g., KNIERIM , Vocation, 59. 101 But see, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 129: “Die sündige Unreinheit wird dem Proph[eten] vom Mund weggebrannt.” M ISCALL, Isaiah, 34 and IDEM, Isaiah 5–6, 113 further notes the semantic correspondences with the Seraphim (“fiery ones”), the same root in Isa 1:7 and phonetic correspondences between “to refine” (s̜Ɨ rap; 1:25) and the burning coal (ris̛pâ) in v.6. 102 Thus explicitly METZGER, Horizont, 282 who speaks of “Begnadigung – durchs Feuergericht hindurch”; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 75, 104 speaks briefly of an “Akt symbolischer Vernichtung”. Only later (on Isa 8:16–18) does Childs speak of Isaiah’s “death from sin (6:7)” in which he “personifies […] the birth of a new people” (CHILDS, Isaiah, 76). Note also that in the comparable passages Ezek 10:6 and Rev 8:5 (see for these references B ARKER, Isaiah, 504) coals from the cherubim/altar are of destructive function.

3. Main Aspects in Isaiah 6:1–7

95

burning judgement of YHWH (cf. Isa 5:18). But at the same time he has survived it as a purifying judgement: the Seraph announces that his iniquity has been removed, his sin purged away (v.7).103 In Isa 6:1–7 Isaiah describes how he has been confronted with YHWH, who dwells in Zion as the universal king. While YHWH’s presence in Zion normally guarantees the well-being of the city and the whole earth, this confrontation becomes increasingly threatening. Dangerous serpents (Seraphim) protect the court of YHWH; their declaration of YHWH’s holiness and glory causes the thresholds to shake and the temple to fill with smoke. YHWH’s presence becomes a presence of judgement, and Isaiah expresses fear for his life because of his and his people’s improper communicative actions. He experiences judgement by the burning of his communication organs; but through the judgement his sins have been purged.104 We will see below that our understanding of the commission to harden and the way it is employed in the narrative of Isa 6 cannot be isolated from these observations about what precedes it (vv.1–7). So as we now turn our attention to the communicative actions that take place in and through Isa 6:9–10, we will bear in mind all that is described before in vv.1–7. When we analyse the theme of hardening in the communicative action of Isa 6, we face the challenge that it is related to different communicative levels. In the following, I shall discuss the theme of hardening in the dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isa 6:9–10. We will see that this raises primarily two questions for the determination of the communicative role of Isa 6 and the theme of hardening on the level of the whole Book of Isaiah, which we will discuss according to these questions. But first we have to look at several exegetical questions in Isa 6:9–10 before we can turn our attention to the dialogue that these verses convey. 105 103 MÜLLER, Beobachtungen, 172 regards the announcement of the Seraph as a performative announcement. But it is difficult to see how a passive form (Pual of ¥ʸʴʫ) could serve this purpose. Thus, I regard v.7 as a DESCRIPTIVE announcement: it states what has happened through the touching by the glowing coal. See similarly, e.g., BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 174 who speaks of a performative meaning of the rite that is explained by the following sentence. 104 It becomes obvious in the light of Isaiah’s experience, in which a new future opens up, that statements like those of VOLLMER, Rückblicke, 129–130 are insufficient. He argues, mainly on the basis of the total destruction he finds in v.11, that Isa 6 declares the total elimination of Israel (apparently Vollmer uses the term “Israel” for the addressees of Isaiah, i.e. mainly the Judahites). This meant a total break in and with the history of YHWH and his people. Although there is undoubtedly a break, the new future in Isaiah shows that this does not mean an end of the history of the people nor an end for Zion. 105 As C. A. Evans discusses the various differences in the ancient versions in depth, this needs not to be repeated here. Cf. EVANS, Text; IDEM, To See, 53–80.

96

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10 4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

4.1 Individual Aspects and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 6:9–10 What needs to be considered in v.9b is especially the way the verbs of perception and understanding are used. It has led to various attempts to interpret the verbs as volitive forms without objects, expressing an impracticable demand, “not to understand”.106 Some scholars argue that in this way the summons of v.9b was not communicable to the audience of Isaiah; this means, it was never publicly delivered in this way. 107 A subsidiary form of this interpretation equally regards v.9b as incommunicable, but takes this as evidence to understand it non-literally, i.e. to regard v.9b as an ironic statement.108 The interpretation of Liss goes in a different direction. She 106

This has been worked out especially by SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 181–182. See also the comments in R. WAGNER, Textexegese, 163n.48; BERGES, Buch, 99 and LISS, Prophetie, 37 (with n.15), 39 (with n.26). But earlier or simultaneous studies also refer to the absolute use of these verbs; thus, e.g., HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 243. 107 This view has been substantiated in different ways. JENNI, Berufung, 336–337; KNIERIM, Vocation, 60; STECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6, 158n.24 argue more on the basis of the genre of v.9b that this utterance is a word “against or about” that people; it is a powerful word (“Machtwort”) that is effective even if not heard by the people (thus especially JENNI, Berufung, 337). According to HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 244–246; IDEM, Jesajaforschung, 28n.21, v.9b is a fictive commission that together with v.10 illustrates what the effect of Isaiah’s proclamation is; he denies that one has to speak of a powerful word in v.9b. For J OOSTEN, La prosopopée, 240 it is also a fictive commission, which forms the basis for him to argue that Isaiah used the common figure of a “pseudo-quotation” here. B ERGES, Buch, 99 claims that v.9b and hardening as such are incommunicable; vv.9–10 are, therefore, most probably a post-exilic reflection on the effect of Isaiah’s commission. But there are of course several studies, which are confined to simply claiming that this utterance was never delivered that way; cf., e.g., CHISHOLM , JR., Divine Hardening, 431. 108 This basic understanding of v.9b as ironic is, of course, substantiated in quite different ways. Some commentators confine themselves to claim that v.9b is somehow ironic or sarcastic, without clarifying, for whom this is ironic and what this actually means; thus, e.g., CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 77; SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 182; ROBINSON, Deafness, 188. HUNTER, Seek, 200–201 and BEALE, Isaiah VI 9–13, 257–274 (especially 272) perceive in v.9b an ironic accusation against the people, whereby Beale associates this specifically to idol-worshipping (cf. Ps 135:16–17). But referring to v.10 both regard the task of Isaiah as to really harden the people as part of YHWH’s judgement (HUNTER, Seek, 203–205) and YHWH’s lex talionis judgement respectively (B EALE, Isaiah VI 9– 13, 274). Similarly E VANS, To See, 18 takes this “sarcasm” as to “underscore the total refusal of the people to listen to the prophet’s message.” CHISHOLM, JR., Divine Hardening, 431–432 interprets v.9b (and v.10) as an ironic anticipation of the people’s reactions, which does not however exclude a “genuine act of divine hardening” insofar as it is indirect hardening through the prophet, whom YHWH had sent to the people. By sending Isaiah, he further desensitised the people. HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 38–40 takes vv.9–10 (he does not sufficiently distinguish both verses) as a kind of ironic comment on the behav-

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

97

suggests that the verbs used absolutely in v.9b have no propositional content but function only on a communicative level. According to her the imperatives of ¥ʤʠʸ and ¥ʲʮˇ create the beginning of a communicative interaction, which, however, is then disturbed by the negative jussives of ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ, contrary to actual communicative conventions. By this means the prophet creates a relationship with his audience that has to be characterized as a “communicative disagreement” (“Kommunikative Nicht-Entsprechung”).109 In the following discussion, I will look first at the meaning of the absolute use of the verbs of perception and understanding. Then I shall discuss the syntactic relationship of the negative jussives to the preceding imperatives. Finally, we will consider the relationship of v.9b to the wider context. Imperatives of ¥ʤʠʸ and ¥ʲʮˇ, used absolutely, i.e. with no objects, often serve as constituents of an introduction of communication or specifically as an appeal for attention.110 They point beyond themselves to what is to follow and thereby create the expectancy in the addressee to hear and see more. The specific formulations in Isa 6:9b, however, do more than just introduce an act of communication. They put an emphasis on the very process of the addressees’ perception of the communication that is to follow. Both imperatives appear in constructions in the form of a figura etymologica: ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ and ʥʠʸ ʥʠʸ respectively. 111 Already the form of an inf.abs. expresses the idea of verbal action.112 But the postpositive inf.abs., as the figura etymologica is shaped here in both cases, amplifies this aspect with its connotation of “perfection or intensity of action”.113 Thus both iour of the people of Isaiah’s time as if saying their behaviour was as bad as if God himself had made them obstinate (ibid. 38–39; for a critique of Hurley’s interpretation see further below). GITAY, Isaiah, 120–121, 127 does not explicitly speak of irony in v.9b but regards it similarly as non-literal language; the “irrational language” must be seen in the light of its rhetorical impact to dwell emotionally on the issue of decisive judgement by this technique of provocatio, in order to exclude the possible reception that with the death of Uzziah a royal amnesty might lay ahead. 109 Cf. LISS, Prophetie, 36–37. 110 For the plural imperative of ¥ʲʮˇ (often with the actual addressee) cf., e.g., Num 16:8; 20:10; Judg 5:3; 1 Sam 22:7; 1 Kgs 22:28; Ps 66:16; Prov 8:6; Isa 1:2; 7:13; Jer 13:15; Mic 1:2; 3:2; for the plural imperative of ¥ʤʠʸ as an appeal for attention cf., e.g., Exod 16:29; 35:30; Deut 32:39; Josh 8:4, 8; on the whole cf. LISS, Prophetie, 36. 111 LISS, Prophetie, 36 speaks of paranomasia; for the difference between paranomasia and figura etymologica (or “turn”) see W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 238 (paranomasia is based on similar-sounding words of different meaning, while figura etymologica is based on identical roots) 112 Cf. JM §123 u. 113 JM §123 l. The formerly often supposed aspect of duration is rather doubtful, acc. to JM §123 l. This has been presupposed, however, e.g., by W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12,

98

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

imperatives being shaped in the form of a figura etymologica not only create a communicative interaction, but also lay an emphasis on the action/process of perceiving this communication.114 The absolute use of the verbs of understanding (¥ʯʩʡ; ¥ʲʣʩ) in v.9b115 particularly emphasizes the process of understanding and realizing. A review of other passages in the OT, where ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ are constructed without an object, betrays a flexible use. ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ used absolutely occur in elliptic phrases, where the actual object can be deduced easily from context.116 Sometimes they are used to express the fact of having or not having knowledge/insight in general.117 In other passages the absolute use connotes the process of understanding/realizing.118 There are even a few cases, where ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ are used absolutely in a volitive mood.119 Thus it depends on the context, whether these verbs, when used absolutely, are elliptic phrases whose reference can be deduced from context, or refer to knowledge as such, or mainly indicate the process of “understanding/realizing”.120 The correlation with the imperatives to hear and see, 231, 233 (ET, 248, 250); GITAY, Isaiah, 124 and ROBINSON, Deafness, 175; cf. also RSV, NRSV, NIV, ESV. 114 This is confirmed by the similar constructions in Job 13:17 and 21:2, where Job does not simply start a conversation, but pleads to his friends to listen to his words. If they listened indeed, this would be a comfort (Job 21:2). 115 As already mentioned, some scholars point at the unusual absolute use of verbs of understanding and at the impossible task of demanding from someone actively not to understand – an actually passive process; cf., e.g., R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 163 with SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 181. LISS, Prophetie, 37 specifies this: a volitive form of a verb of understanding needs an object and the passive process of understanding cannot occur in a negative jussive, which leads her to the interpretation that with the negative jussives of understanding the prophet disturbs the communicative interaction he initiated at first. On the interpretation of the negative jussives see further below. 116 For ¥ʯʩʡ see Dan 12:8, 10; for the much more frequent ¥ʲʣʩ most of the examples quoted in DCH 4:100, e.g. Gen 4:9; 18:21; Lev 5:1, 3, 4; 1 Kgs 1:18; Jer 14:18; Hos 8:4 and in Prov 24:12 ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ in parallel. 117 For ¥ʯʩʡ see Hos 4:14; Ps 49:21; for ¥ʲʣʩ see Isa 45:20; Ps 73:22; and in Isa 44:18 ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ in parallel. 118 For ¥ʯʩʡ see Prov 29:19 and for ¥ʲʣʩ see Deut 29:3. In contrast to R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 163 (who takes up SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 181) it must be stated that ¥ʯʩʡ and ¥ʲʣʩ do not only have the connotation of the static aspect of knowing something, but also the processual aspect of understanding and realizing respectively. This is noted in several articles on ¥ʯʩʡ (cf. R INGGREN, ʯʩʡ bîn, 99–107 [escpecially 100]) and ¥ʲʣʩ (cf. B OTTERWECK & B ERGMAN, ʲʣʩ yƗda‘, 448–481 [especially 462]; FRETHEIM , ʲʣʩ, 409– 414 [especially 410]) that emphasize the wide range of meaning. 119 Cf. Job 18:2 (¥ʯʩʡ in jussive); Josh 22:22 (¥ʲʣʩ in jussive; in this case it is an elliptic phrase). 120 In the light of this, I cannot see that it is justified to regard the use of the verbs in v.9b as not in their original epistemological function, as SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 182 claims; similarly R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 164. The point of v.9b is not so much about

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

99

which according to the above observations emphasise the action of perception, and the train of thought in the subsequent verse (Isa 6:10)121 strongly suggest that in the negative jussives in v.9b the processual aspects of understanding are in view, too. Thus the function of the absolute use of verbs of perception and understanding in Isa 6:9b (and v.10) is to shift the attention from the object of perception and understanding to the actions of perception and understanding as such. This brings us to a closer look at how exactly the negative jussives ʥʰʩʡʺʚʬʠ “do not realize” and ʥʲʣʺʚʬʠ “do not understand” are related to the preceding imperatives. Many commentators regard them as juxtaposed to the imperatives,122 hence the critique that one cannot actually demand “not to understand”. But if a jussive is associated to a previous imperative or cohortative by ʥ (waw), it often expresses a purpose or consequence.123 The condition for such an understanding is a logical connection between both volitive forms.124 Given the common relationship between ¥ʲʮˇ and ¥ʯʩʡ (cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 3:9; Isa 40:21; Job 13:1; Dan 12:8) and ¥ʤʠʸ and ¥ʲʣʩ (cf., e.g., Gen 18:21; Exod 3:7; 1 Sam 6:9; Isa 5:19; 41:20; 66:14; Ezek 10:20; Ps 31:8),125 it is very probable that ʥʰʩʡʺʚʬʠ “do not realize” and ʥʲʣʺʚʬʠ “do not understand” express the consequences from “hearing” and “seeing”.126 The fact that the jussives in v.9b are negated does not exclude this interpretation.127 It rather amplifies the unexpected negative consequence from listening and seeing. The positive reversal of Isa 6:9b in Isa 55:2–3 may be seen even in the contrast of construction in this respect and, consequently, strengthen this perception.128 Thus with ʥʰʩʡʺʚʬʠ “do not realize” the content of perception and understanding but about the very actions of perception and understanding. 121 There the negative purpose “so that they do not understand with their hearts” is in line with the processes of (not) seeing and (not) hearing and it is through the malicious effects on the organs of perception and understanding (cf. Isa 6:10a) that not even the very processes are possible. 122 Cf. R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 163: “durch Zʞ=1 gleichgestellt”; similarly LISS, Prophetie, 37 and many more simply presupposing such a juxtaposition. 123 Cf. GK §109 f; JM §116 f (3). 124 Thus GK §109 f n.1 (p.322). 125 Cf. also B OTTERWECK & BERGMAN, ʲʣʩ yƗda‘, 462. 126 Thus also W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 233 (ET, 250; even though he does not base his comments on this, ibid. 254–255 [ET, 271–272]) and B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 176, who speaks of the “Folge: ‘Kommt nicht zur Einsicht/erkennt nicht’ (V 9)”. 127 In Jer 29:6 (ʥʨʲʮʺʚʬʠʥ ʭˇʚʥʡʸʥ “and multiply there so that you do not decrease”) one may find a similar construction for a negative purpose or consequence from a previous imperative. 128 W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 121–122 in particular points to the recurrence of the imperative ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ in Isa 55:2 and its contrasting effect there in comparison with Isa 6:9b. Additionally, the purpose or consequence of “listening” to YHWH in Isa 55:2 and

100

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

and ʥʲʣʺʚʬʠ “do not understand” the prophet says to his audience that their perception of what is to follow will result in their inability to realize and understand.129 As these observations show, the direct speech in Isa 6:9b is a very dense formulation that combines imperatives to listen and to see the following communication with the statement about the consequences of the actions it demands. This complexity has to be taken into account when we put it in the wider context and consider its relationship to the latter. The utterance can be perceived as an independent speech that Isaiah is asked to proclaim (cf. Isa 6:9a: “go and say …”). In this case one would not have to search for the fulfilment of this summons to Isaiah elsewhere in the book because the mediation of the whole narrative is the fulfilment of it: when the narrative of Isa 6 is read, the specific summons to say to the people “Hear and you will not realize; see and you will not understand!” is mediated and thereby fulfilled. But it lies in the nature of the imperatives as introductions to a communicative act that they point beyond the immediate utterance to the communicative process that is to follow (see above). So whatever prophetic proclamation follows, it is seen as introduced through Isa 6:9b and the perception of it will inevitably have the same consequences of which Isa 6:9b speaks at the same time. In v.10a YHWH continues to tell Isaiah what he has to do in a series of three collocations consisting each of an imperative of an intransitive verb in Hifil with an organ of perception or understanding as its object. The Hifil indicates that Isaiah has to cause the change of state of the organs that the verbs express; thus he has to “make fat its heart”, to “make heavy its ears” and to “blind/smear over its eyes”.130 But are these positive/ pleasant131 or negative effects?132 55:3 is expressed positively with a subsequent volitive form related to the previous imperative by a waw (cf. Isa 55:2: ǜǜǜʢʰʲʺʺʥ ʡʥʨʚʥʬʫʠʥ ʩʬʠ ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ “listen to me so that you might eat the good and (your soul) may have delight in…”; for the interpretation of ʢʰʲʺʺʥ ʡʥʨʚʥʬʫʠʥ as two consequences cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 409; Isa 55:3: ʩʧʺʥ ʥʲʮˇ ʭʫˇʴʰ “listen so that your soul may live”, cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 411). Thus, even in this respect these verses reverse the summons in Isa 6:9b, which in turn can amplify the notion of the negative consequence of the negated jussives there. 129 It follows from this analysis that one cannot say the utterance of v.9b is “a statement intended to keep the options open yet a little longer”; contra T SEVAT, Throne Vision, 173; and the similar proposals of KISSANE, Isaiah I, 75; VERMEYLEN, Isaïe 1, 193– 194; J. J. SCHMITT, Isaiah, 66; LAATO, Immanuel, 110–112; VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 48–49; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 61. 130 The meaning of a Hifil form of a transitive Qal is to make an object being the agent of another action, while the meaning of a Hifil form of an intransitive Qal is just to make an object being in the state expressed through the Qal; cf. the comments and figure in JENNI, Lehrbuch, 148 and the example in JM §54 d (ʸʮʤ hƝmar “to make bitter”). 131 Thus KELLENBERGER, Heil who argues on the basis of positive connotations of the stem ʯʮˇ and its synonyms and of ʣʡʫ that also ¥ʲʲˇ will have positive connotations

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

101

The collocation of the Hifil imperative of the verb ¥ʯʮˇ133 with the object ʡʬ “heart” means that Isaiah as the agent has to cause the heart to become fat so that fatness becomes a predicate or quality of the heart. ʯʮˇ “oil” has a predominantly positive connotation,134 and in the only other passage where a form of the stem ʯʮˇ and ʡʬ/ʡʡʬ “heart” are directly related (Prov 27:9) the fat pleases the heart. According to Isa 1:6 ʯʮˇ “oil” would be the appropriate means to treat wounds (cf. also the conclusion in Isa 6:10: ¥ʠʴʸ). But here fatness is to become a quality of the heart, and the closest parallel to this is Ps 119:70, where the tertium comparationis between the heart and fat (here ʡʬʧ) is their insensitivity. 135 Thus there is a certain degree of ambiguity in the collocation “to make fat the heart” in v.10a. But there is clearly an element of a negative effect of Isaiah’s actions on the heart. The case becomes less ambiguous in the next collocation ʣʡʫʤ ʥʩʰʦʠʥ “and make heavy its ears”. While the term ʣʥʡʫ of the same stem of ¥ʣʡʫ in Isa 6 has a positive connotation, there are several passages, where a form of ʣʡʫ together with a body part expresses the latter’s malfunction or hindering of its proper function.136 The collocation with “ears” is rather spe(ibid. 272) and that these positively understood imperatives indicate that Isaiah has to harden his people by proclamation of salvation (ibid. 268, 272–274). LANDY, Strategies, 71–72 also refers to positive connotations in these verbs that contribute to the ambiguity of the passage in order to obscure and intensify the focus of it. 132 Thus most of the commentators. 133 The verb ¥ʯʮˇ occurs three times in Qal elsewhere in the OT, where it has the intransitive meaning of the state “to be fat, wealthy” (cf. Deut 32:15 [2x]; Jer 5:28), and one other time in Hifil with an ingressive meaning “to become fat” (Neh 9:25; on this occasional meaning of Hifil, cf. JM §54 d). 134 Cf. KELLENBERGER, Heil, 269. 135 Thus against KELLENBERGER, Heil, 270 it must be maintained that there is a passage where the meaning “making/being unperceptive” is given for a substance of fat. He overlooks Ps 119:70, which, however, is regularly mentioned by earlier commentators in relation to Isa 6:10; thus, e.g., HITZIG, Jesaja, 66; DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 130; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 59. Although ʯʮˇ as a substance means most often “oil”, it could probably be used also for “fat” interchangeable with ʡʬʧ; cf. especially Isa 10:27; 25:6 and the comments in DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 295 and DUHM, Jesaia, 181 on Isa 25:6. In the light of this, one may also wonder, whether the meaning of ¥ʯʮˇ might be more ambivalent in Deut 32:15; Jer 5:28 and Neh 9:25 than Kellenberger allows, because in all these instances “becoming fat” occurs in a negative context. 136 ʣʡʫ as adj. with mouth and tongue: Exod 4:10; adj. with tongue: Ezek 3:5–6; ¥ʣʡʫ + ʯʩʲ: Gen 48:10; ʣʡʫ together with ʡʬ/ʡʡʬ: especially in the hardening tradition of the exodus (e.g. Exod 7:14; 8:11, 28; 9:7, 34; 10:1; 1 Sam 6:6). Note also that the Hifil of ¥ʣʡʫ is predominantly used for something negative (“to make heavy, make weigh heavily”; cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 12:10, 14; Isa 47:6; Lam 3:7). Cf. also the discussion in W ILSON, Hardening, 22 and now KELLENBERGER, Verstockung, 38–41 with slightly different conclusions (ibid. 41).

102

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

cifically Isaianic,137 but the meaning is clear in the light of the other evidence: Isaiah is to make the ears work improperly. While the former two collocations in Isa 6:10a use figurative language, the ‘strategy of disambiguating’ the negative effects, which Isaiah has to cause, culminates in a hyperbolic literal summons to “smear over its (the people’s) eyes”.138 In all three collocations the object of the causative action is a body part related to the complex of ‘perception and understanding’. In all three cases Hifil forms indicate that Isaiah has to make these organs malfunction, which becomes entirely clear, however, only gradually. What is clear, too, is that these imperatives are formulated figuratively so that not only the effects Isaiah is to cause are expressed in a nonliteral way (the heart becomes fat, the ears become heavy, the eyes become smeared over), but also they lack the specific order what Isaiah is actually to do. The imperatives summon Isaiah to cause certain effects, but they do not clarify how. Another question is the understanding of the final part of v.10b ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇʥ ʥʬ. Although many regard the fact that this phrase stands outside the concentric structure of v.10 as evidence that it has been placed there later,139 one could equally say that this feature marks this phrase as the climax of the whole verse.140 However, the more important question is how the present passage is to be understood,141 in particular, how the phrase ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ is to be interpreted. Does the final part of v.10b ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇʥ continue the negative purpose of Isaiah’s commission142 or does it add a proclamation of salvation – conditional143 or unconditional?144

137 The only other occurrences of the collocation ʰʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ are Isa 59:1 and Zech 7:11, which very probably depends on Isa. I would therefore hesitate to speak of a phrase influenced by dtr theology, as B ERGES, Buch, 100–101 does. 138 The verb within the third collocation, ¥ʲʲˇ means “to blind, smear over” (cf. KBL, HAL, B EUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 92–93. This meaning is widely affirmed by the ancient versions). This verb as well as the collocation with ʯʩʲ occurs only in Isa (cf. elsewhere Isa 29:9; 32:3; both passages contain some difficulties; see, e.g., the discussion in B EUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 72–73, 191). As in the previous cases, it is a Hifil of a verb with an intransitive meaning in Qal (cf. Isa 29:9), thus Isaiah has to make his people unable to see. 139 Thus, e.g., HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 243n.43; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 69; KUSTÁR, Durch seine Wunden, 60. 140 Thus LANDY, Strategies, 73. 141 For surveys of different proposals, cf. SAUER, Umkehrforderung, 279–284 and UEMURA, Isaiah 6:9–10, 24–25. 142 According to this view ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇʥ is part of the sequence of verbs that are governed by ʯʴ so that the subject of ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇʥ is most likely the people; cf., e.g., SAWYER, Isaiah 1, 72: “…lest they … understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” 143 B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 66, 69 interprets ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇ as a conditional clause and the conjunction in ʡˇʥ as waw adversativum: “Wenn es (aber) umkehrt, heilt er es”. U E-

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

103

Those who opt for the second interpretation argue that ¥ʠʴʸ in Qal always has transitive meaning, and when constructed with ʬ the latter points to who or what is healed. Accordingly, the subject of ʠʴʸʥ cannot be the same as the 3.sg. p. ʥʬ refers to. Moreover, in the OT YHWH is the one who heals. There is thus a change in subject and YHWH is the most likely subject. This leads to an interruption of the connection with the ʯʴ-clause so that the final part must be (a later) addition announcing future healing by YHWH. Those who maintain that the phrase in question continues the negative final clause often refer to the reflexive meaning of ʬ.145 But most of the examples that GK §119 s quote for this so-called dativus commodi are verbs with intransitive meaning146 so that this interpretation is rather unlikely. The evidence for the interpretation of ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ as an announcement of future healing by YHWH, however, is not unequivocal either. At least in Isa 53:5 we have a derivation from the common use of ¥ʠʴʸ, for there those who are healed occur not as the grammatical subject of the Nifalform but are added to an impersonal form by the preposition ʬ; thus the insistence upon the transitive meaning of ¥ʠʴʸ is not beyond doubt. Moreover, the OT writers knew of doctors apart from YHWH (cf. Gen 50:2; Jer 8:22). That they occurred sometimes in rather negative contexts (cf. Jer 8:22; Lam 2:13; 2 Chr 16:12)147 may also fit in the negative final clause here. Finally, the use of a 3.sg.masc. to express the vague subject one was quite common and the readers could have easily recognized it.148 These observations indicate that for the readers/hearers of Isa 6:10b it would have not been difficult to become aware of a shift to the general “one” as the subject of ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ. Turning to the present form of Isa 6:10b, this is indeed the most likely reading. As the phrase ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ is part of the speech of YHWH (cf. Isa 6:9) the 3.sg.masc. refers to someone else. If the idea of YHWH as the subject MURA,

Isaiah 6:9–10, 27 regards this the most likely reading of the consonantal text without the Masoretic punctuation and accentuation. 144 SAUER, Umkehrforderung, 283–284 and U. BECKER, Jesaja, 65 also reckon with YHWH as the changed subject but regard ʡˇʥ as an adverb, which leads to a translation like “and he will heal them again”. UEMURA, Isaiah 6:9–10, 25–27 reckons with a slightly different announcement of salvation according to the Masoretic accentuation and punctuation. The break comes after ʡˇʥ (see below). 145 Cf., e.g., W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 233 (ET, 250); KUSTÁR, Durch seine Wunden, 61n.47; BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 161–162; see GK §119 s. 146 Cf. similarly JM §133 d, who state that one finds this “mainly with intransitive verbs”. 147 Cf. the discussion in KUSTÁR, Durch seine Wunden, 41 on doctors and healing in the OT. 148 Cf. JM §155 d.

104

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

of ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ were to be conveyed, one would either expect a 1.sg.-form149 or a clearer break of the speech of YHWH.150 Thus the whole final line is governed by ʯʴ so that the prophet is to prevent “this people” also from “returning”151 and from being healed by whomever. The impersonal use of the verb ¥ʠʴʸ together with the ʬ of the dativus commodi shifts the attention from the agent of healing to the person to whose (dis-) advantage this is.152 This might be the aspect that this unusual construction shares with Isa 53:5.153 It maintains the emphasis on the people. The impersonal construction of the verb underlines that, as YHWH does not intend to heal his people, it would be “whoever”. Having discussed individual problems in vv.9–10, we can now turn our attention to the whole communicative interaction between YHWH and Isaiah as it is described there. Such a procedure faces two challenges that I will now address. 4.2 Why Isaiah 6:9–10 Is not Ironic First I must discuss, why I remain “insensitive to the irony in the passage”154 against those who argue that vv.9–10 cannot be understood literally, but have to be taken as ironic speech. In a fairly recent study Hurley has defended such a reading more extensively. Hurley develops the ironic interpretation155 based on the works of Quintillian, D.C. Muecke and espe-

149

The LXX reads so. This is the difference between this alleged comment and vv.12–13 where the change of speech is clearer indicated by the inclusion of ʤʥʤʩ. These considerations do not exclude the possibility that the phrase ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ʡˇʥ might have been added later. But even if this was the case, one cannot deny that this has been done in a way that it appears as a continuation of the speech of YHWH. 151 That ʡˇʥ is not only used adverbially (in the sense of “again”) but as a proper verb is clear at least in the Masoretic accentuation and punctuation: The strong vocalization not only is different from the adverbial use in v.13a but also indicates a close association with ʯʩʡ ʥʡʡʬʥ (cf. JM §104 d). This is further strengthened by the disjunctiv accent T̡iph̢Ɨ after ʡˇʥ. It is further supported by those passages that correlate “to return” and “to heal” in the OT; cf., e.g., Hos 6:1; 6:11b–7:1; 14:2–4; Jer 3:22. 152 Cf. JM §133d for this meaning of the dativus commodi. 153 KOOLE, Isaiah 49–55, 295–296 notes in respect to this construction in Isa 53:5 that the “attention is fully focused on ‘us’.” 154 After his argumentation for an ironic reading of Isa 6:9–10, Hurley expresses his awareness near the end of his article that his conclusions may not be shared by all and adds: “Avoir de son côté des auteurs tel que la Septante, le targum, Matthieu, Marc et Luc ne suffira sans doute pas non plus à ceux qui sont insensibles à l’ironie de la péricope!” (HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 42). 155 For further different proposals of irony in v.9b(–10) see above “1. Introduction”. 150

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

105

cially W. Booth.156 Referring to the catalogue of indications that Booth has noted as signs of ironic intention,157 Hurley states that Isa 6:9–10 contains all the crucial elements:158 (1) a radical change of style between vv.1–7 and vv.8–10;159 (2) an illogical element;160 (3) a contradiction between this passage and the ideas expressed by the author elsewhere in the book;161 (4) the fact that the image that is given of God here differs from the image as it is presented elsewhere in the OT.162 In view of his discussion, it is clear that identifying irony is a very difficult task. This applies especially to the differences one realizes between a text under investigation and the assumed values of its addressees, i.e. the last of Hurley’s “signs of ironic intention”: Is it not at the heart of the OT’s prophetic proclamation and of proclamation of judgement in particular that the common ideas, traditions and securities are shattered? The Book of Amos, for instance, has to come up with all kinds of rhetorical means to convince its audience that one cannot take for granted that God acts always and only in favour of his people, that the common traditions and securities do not apply any more etc. The criterion of the difference of God’s image in other passages as evidence for irony does not work, because otherwise Job or Qohelet would become simple ironic puppets, a number of prophets become ineffective quarrellers and the challenge of new and even contrary ideas would dissolve in mere ironic games. In respect to Hurley’s third argument, I refer to the discussion below about the relationship between v.9 and v.10 and how this invalidates the common assumption that the commission to harden the people has somehow to reflect in the content of the message of Isaiah. The second argument does not apply if one takes up the interpretation on v.9b given above about the negative jussive functioning as the consequence of the preceding 156 W. C. B OOTH, A Rhetoric of Irony, Chicago 1974; D. C. MUECKE, The Compass of Irony, London 1980; QUINTILLIAN, Institutio oratoria, which Hurley quotes from B OOTH, Rhetoric; see HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 31nn.34–36. 157 Cf. HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 33–34. 158 They are summarized in HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 39. 159 Cf. HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 35–38. He notes the change from a fantastic vision with deafening noise to a simple conversation; and from fear to an almost friendly chat. 160 Cf. HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 38. Hurley refers to the allegedly illogic task of Isaiah. He states that the people could never obey the order of YHWH: if they obeyed, they would understand. If they understood, they had not obeyed the commission that is given to them, namely not to understand. It seems that Hurley only has v.9b in mind here. 161 Cf. HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 29–30, 38 stating that Isaiah does not fulfil his task anywhere else in the book; on the contrary, there one can find that it is the people who do not want him to speak, referring to Isa 30:9–13. 162 Cf. HURLEY, Le Seigneur, 38–39 arguing that accepting a literal meaning of Isa 6:9–10 would mean rejecting an enormous proportion of the representation of God as it is given elsewhere in the OT.

106

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

imperative. Thus one cannot speak any more of an order not to understand. The first argument finally does not take into account at all that vv.8–10 presuppose vv.1–7, i.e. the radical change is a crucial element that is the result of what happened in vv.1–7 (see also below). Finally, Hurley can make his claim mainly by avoiding any discussion of v.10. Even if one recognized irony in v.9b, the summons in v.10 make it plain clear what the intention of YHWH is in the form of a DIRECTIVE speech-act.163 On the basis of these observations, I remain “insensitive” to an alleged irony in Isa 6:9–10 and address the challenges that the passage poses. 4.3 A Complex Unity of Isaiah 6:9–10 against a Simple Distinction This leads to the second discussion. Although it is not the concern of the present study to trace individual stages of literary growth, I want to substantiate the relationship between verses 9 and 10 against the background of some claims of their inconsistency, because it affects the understanding of these verses, whether they can only be understood together or relate to each other just on a secondary level. In a study on the primary extent of Isa 6, Schreiner states basically three reasons, why v.10 is a later interpretation of v.9b. First, a grammatical reason: the proper form to continue the summons “go and say” of v.9b would be a w-qatal form; the use of imperatives instead indicates an additional action. Secondly, a literary-critical reason: v.9b and v.10 contradict each other in the main aspect – v.9b says the audience should hear/see but not understand, while according to v.10 they should not even be able to hear and see.164 Thirdly, a form-critical argument: v.9 is a “sending of a messenger”, which in all other occurrences in the OT concludes with the utterance with no further commission.165 Some scholars have adopted the view of Schreiner, partly with further arguments.166 163 J OOSTEN, La prosopopée, 240 similarly notes that an ironic interpretation fails because of v.10 and he furthermore adds that v.10 addresses the prophet and that it is not understandable why YHWH should speak ironically to the prophet. 164 Apart from those mentioned further below this argument about a contradiction is also raised by JOOSTEN, La prosopopée, 232. 165 Cf. SCHREINER, Textgestalt, 93 on these arguments. For the “Botensendung” as such he notices (ibd. 93n.3): Exod 7:15–16; 2 Sam 7:5; Isa 7:3–4; Amos 7:15; Ezek 3:4; Jonah 1:2; 3:2; for its restriction to utterance (ibid. 93n.4): 2 Sam 7:5; Isa 7:3–4; Ezek 3:4; Jonah 1:2; 3:2; Amos 7:15. 166 N IEHR, Intention, 59n.5 adds that only ¥ʲʲˇ occurs once elsewhere in Isa 1–39 (29:9), none of the other verbs; while the verbs of v.9 are central to the message of Isaiah. But the collocations in v.10a do not occur in other than a few texts dependent on Isa 6 (cf. above) either; thus they are generally rare phraseology. But rare phraseology or hapax legomena cannot serve for such kind of differentiations, in this case DeuteroIsaiah would come out badly. D ECK, Gerichtsbotschaft, 165–166; IDEM, Exodus, 37 adds

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

107

The form-critical argument runs counter to the purpose of form criticism. If the purpose of elucidating common forms is to appreciate more the particular appearance of a speech,167 this argument should be dismissed because it presupposes that there must be no deviation from the common form. The grammatical argument needs to be reconsidered as well. There are not many instances when ʺʸʮʠʥ wƟ’ƗmartƗ, used as an imperative, is followed by another volitive form. But when in these cases the latter is constructed in w-qatal form, it expresses always a subsequent action (cf. Deut 26:3–4, 5–10; 1 Sam 16:2–3; 2 Kgs 9:3).168 Thus contrary to Schreiner, it is another w-qatal form that would introduce an additional action. So, how should we understand the imperatives in v.10a? The second (ʥʩʰʦʠʥ ʣʡʫʤ) and third (ʲˇʤ ʥʩʰʩʲʥ) collocation is inverted so that any meaning of consequence, sequence or the like can be excluded. They are simply juxtaposed to the first imperative so that everything depends on the determination of the syntax of ʡʬ ʯʮˇʤ. This imperative forms an asyndetic construction with ʺʸʮʠʥ (v.9a). As in those constructions the first verb often expresses an adverbial note,169 the imperatives relate to each other in a different way from that Schreiner proposes. Finally, I shall counter the main argument, the supposed contradiction between v.9b and v.10. For that issue we have to recognize in what way vv.9, 10 speak about “seeing” and “hearing”. In v.10b it is stated as the (negative) purpose (ʯʴ) that the people shall not see and hear. As a purpose of action, their inability to see and hear lies in the future. According to v.10a this inability has to be caused by Isaiah. But as the discussion above showed, the imperatives in v.10a cannot serve as actual instructions of action. They only express the effect of Isaiah’s actions. As figurative language they say nothing about the kind of action Isaiah is to execute. The literal imperative necessary for that is ʺʸʮʠʥ ʪʬ. The utterance of v.9b is part of that literal instruction. Within this utterance the people are called to hear and see, which is related to the present – in the very moment the prophet speaks they hear (see above). In the light of these considerations, a stylistic argument: in v.9 we find a pair of two, in v.10 a group of three, which speaks for itself. U. BECKER, Jesaja, 81–82 also takes up the differentiation of Schreiner and takes the difference of the addressees in v.9b (the people) and v.10 (Isaiah) as further evidence. B ERGES, Buch, 100 notes the difference but ascribes it to the editors’ preference of the stylistic design over the logical flow. It must be said, however, that a certain discrepancy was already noted by H ITZIG, Jesaja, 66, who then distinguishes between the literal meaning of ‘hearing’ and ‘seeing’ in v.9 and the figurative meaning in v.10. 167 Cf. the pioneers of form criticism, Gunkel and Begrich, who argue that only by elucidating the common form(s) the individual aspect can be recognized; thus GUNKEL & B EGRICH, Einleitung, 11 (§1.4), 28–29 (§1.8). 168 Cf. also JM §119 l for the successive meaning of w-qatal after imperative. 169 Cf. JM §177 g.

108

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

v.9b and v.10 are not contradictory but complementary. They have to be complementary in order to express a complex issue that literary-critical procedures are in danger of overlooking because of oversimplified criteria of consistency: v.9 gives the actual instruction to Isaiah that includes an utterance, which summons the audience to listen and see and states at the same time that this will lead to their inability to realize and understand. This instruction is further complemented by figurative imperatives that express the effects of Isaiah’s actions. If vv.9, 10a are read together, it becomes clear that these actions mean the speech(es) of Isaiah. V.10b finally states that all this serves a certain purpose: the people are not to be able to see, hear, understand, return and be healed. Thus the point of vv.9–10 is the paradox that some scholars wanted to delete. It is through the proclamation of Isaiah that he hardens his people170 so that they are not able to perceive and understand any more and do not repent. This conclusion corresponds with the grammatical observations clarified above. An observation on the structure of vv.9–10 further strengthens this understanding: As noted already above, v.10b repeats the organs mentioned in v.10a in chiastic order by including the related verbs of v.9b at the same time.171 4.4 The Communicative Interaction between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10 These findings about the call to speak and its effects can now be further extended from a perspective of communicative interaction and speech-act theory. In YHWH’s interaction with Isaiah we find all the main aspects of language as action as well as its inclusiveness in the common system of social interaction that speech-act theorists also emphasize.172 YHWH commands Isaiah to perform communicative actions himself: “Go and say to this people!” It is important to recognize the purpose of Isaiah’s communicative actions towards his people. He is summoned to speak to his people “so that it may not (ʯʴ) see with its eyes, and hear with its ears, and understand with its heart and return, and someone would heal it” (v.10b). While the first three actions are crucially related to communicative interaction, the latter two belong to the broader field of interactions. For a better understanding of the relationship between communicative and social interaction in Isa 6:9–10, we have to look at the theme of illness and healing. Kustár has surveyed the theme of ‘healing’ in the prophets most recently. But in my opinion he has related it too one-sidedly to chas170

Similarly also B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 78, 107. While the chiastic arrangement in v.10 is widely recognized this is the case less often for the inclusion of the verbs from v.9b; but see HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 243; LISS, Prophetie, 40. 172 See A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 19 for a preliminary orientation. 171

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

109

tisement. According to him, the metaphor of illness of the people of Israel is mainly used for economic and military disasters inflicted upon them by YHWH as a means of chastisement. Passages that do not fit into this train of thought are not regarded as passages that suggest a broader application of the metaphor of illness (and healing) but simply as later texts, thus especially in regard to Hos 14:5–9 and Jer 3:22.173 Both texts are of particular interest for the present passage: both times YHWH claims that “I will heal their waywardness” (ʭʺʡʥˇʮ ʠʴʸʠ; Hos 14:5).174 In Hos 14:5 this promise of YHWH enables his people to turn from their sins that qualify various interactions (cf. especially Hos 7:1; 12:7–9). YHWH will heal them from their turning in the wrong direction (Hos 14:5: ʭʺʡʥˇʮ) so that the Israelites can turn to YHWH again (Hos 14:2: ʪʩʤʬʠ ʤʥʤʩ ʣʲ ʬʠʸˈʩ ʤʡʥˇ “Return, O Israel to YHWH your God”).175 A similar idea is present also in Jer 3:22. The ‘waywardness’ is associated there with forgetting YHWH, but he will as well heal them from their ‘waywardness’ so that they can turn to him. Thus in both passages illness is associated with the state of perverted interrelationships (and -actions). Apart from these passages, however, illness seems to be crucially related to a disturbance of the psalmist’s relationships to his fellows and to YHWH.176 One can become aware of this when attending to the ‘actual distress’ in the psalms of lament. In most cases several issues are intertwined, associated not rarely with the actions of an enemy.177 Interpreting Ps 41 paradigmatically, Janowski exemplifies the correspondence between illness, hostility and ‘social death’178 in which “die erstaunliche Sensi173

For the survey see KUSTÁR, Wunden, 37–41. For the argument of a later development, cf. KUSTÁR, Wunden, 38 on Hos 14:5–9: “Gegen die Echtheit der Stelle spricht auch der Wechsel, der hier im bezug auf die Krankheitsmetapher zu beobachten ist.” Similarly also J EREMIAS, Hosea, 172n.9. 174 Jer 3:22 reads “I will heal your waywardness” (ʭʫʩʺʡʥˇʮ ʤʴʸʠ). 175 For this interpretation of Hos 14:5–9 as the presupposition of the summons in Hos 14:2–4 see especially J EREMIAS, Hosea, 169, 172. 176 Cf., e.g., J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 180: “Die Krankheit besteht danach nicht nur in körperlichem, sondern auch in sozialem Leiden: [...] in der Zerstörung der Lebenswelt des Beters.” (italics original) 177 Cf. J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 178–179 noting the juxtaposition of the enemy with illness (e.g. Pss 6; 13; 22; 42/43; 69; 102; 109), accusations (e.g. Pss 3; 4; 5; 7; 17; 26; 27; 57; 63; 69), own guilt (e.g. Pss 6; 38; 51; 69; 88; 143), poverty (e.g. Pss 22; 31; 38; 69; 88), social disintegration (e.g. Pss 22; 35; 69; 88; 102; 109); Janowski refers furthermore to F. CRÜSEMANN, Im Netz. Zur Frage nach der “eigentlichen” Not in den Klagen des einzelnen, in: R. ALBERTZ et al. (eds.), Schöpfung und Befreiung, Stuttgart 1989, 139–148. 178 Cf. J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 180–196 (e.g. ibid. 190, where Janowski calls the description of the enemy in Ps 41:5–11 a “kleine Phänomenologie des ‘sozialen Todes’”.)

110

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

bilität des Alten Testaments für die Belange des Sozialen”179 becomes evident. The correlation of illness and social disintegration, hostility and interruption of the two basic relationships of humanity, the ethical/social and the religious, are therefore very prominent in the Psalms and cannot be excluded from the present passage either. In the literary context of Isa 6, the disturbed relationships and interactions among the people and between the people and YHWH as well as their results are the most likely background and reference of “to return” and “to heal”. One situation that is stated in Isa 6:5 from which the people are apparently not to return is the people’s “uncleanness of lips”, which we found to refer to the perverted communication among the people and between the people and YHWH (cf. Isa 3:8–9; 5:18–20; then also, e.g., Isa 28:15[, 17]; 29:20–21; 30:12; 32:5–6). Taking into account the preceding chapters 1–5, especially Isa 5, it becomes clear that in Isaiah’s situation, the principle of ‘connective righteousness’ is abandoned in every respect, socially and religiously. 180 The aspect of illness as an individual phenomenon of social disintegration in psalms of individual lament is here applied to the disturbance of relationships in the whole society, parallel to texts like Hos 14:2–9 and Jer 3:22. The point here, however, is that Isaiah is commissioned to prevent the people from returning to proper relationships among themselves and with YHWH so that they will not be healed – from the wounds which they inflicted upon themselves (5:7), and those, which YHWH will do to them (5:5–6). The communicative actions that Isaiah is summoned to perform are part of this ‘programme’ of Isaiah in respect to the people’s actions. Having clarified Isaiah’s communication is related to the broader field of the people’s actions, it is now possible to concentrate on the more specific aspects of communicative action in the dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah. For that purpose it is crucial to recognize the different communicative levels. On the level of the dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah we find a number of imperatives spoken by YHWH and directed towards Isaiah (“go”, “say”, “make fat”, “make heavy”, “make blind”) with a concluding statement about the (negative) purpose of these actions. On this level YHWH performs the communicative acts of SUMMONING Isaiah to do certain action, hence YHWH performs acts of the class of DIRECTIVE illocutionary acts. But part of these DIRECTIVE acts is to open up another communicative level (or interaction), the one between Isaiah and “this 179

J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 196 (italics original). To note just one example for each aspect from Isa 5: the improper interaction among the people is noted in Isa 5:8; the wrong attitude towards YHWH is a theme in Isa 5:11–16. 180

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

111

people” (cf. v.9a).181 It is on this level that the identification of different classes of speech-acts is particularly important. First, YHWH calls Isaiah to say to this people (ʤʦʤ ʭʲʬ ʺʸʮʠʥ, v.9a) the utterance that follows (v.9b). Thus YHWH calls Isaiah to speak. He is commissioned to perform a locutionary act. Secondly, this quotation discloses through its semantic and stylistic features the illocutionary act that Isaiah is to perform. It is quite a complex utterance, but as we saw above, it is not senseless. In a compact way, it combines a summons to Isaiah’s audience to listen and see and states at the same time the consequences of these actions. This utterance is one of what Searle and Vanderveken call “complex illocutionary acts”182. What we find here is a “conjunction of two illocutionary acts”183. The prophet APPEALS to the people to hear and listen, a speech-act that belongs to the class of DIRECTIVE illocutionary acts. He states at the same time that this will result in their inability to comprehend and understand, an ASSERTIVE illocution. Thirdly, what serve as imperatives on the level of the dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in v.10a (“Make fat their heart, heavy their ears and blind their eyes!”) are perlocutionary acts on the level of Isaiah’s communicative interaction with “this people”. Central for this is the above discussion of the figurative imperatives in v.10a and their relationship to v.9. The actions demanded in v.10a are not literal actions; they ask Isaiah to cause certain effects on the perception organs by this figurative language. However, as figurative language it does not serve as a proper summons. These figurative imperatives are followed by literal instructions to serve as orders or calls. The literal instructions can be found in the imperatives in v.9a: “Go and say!”. So, the imperatives in v.10a speak of effects of Isaiah’s speech, and through their dependence upon the imperative “Say!” it becomes clear that the effects are to be achieved through Isaiah’s actions of 181

It is this feature of different communicative levels within vv.9–10 that renders the proposal of J OOSTEN, prosopopée unlikely. Joosten surveys the use of direct speech in the OT (cf. ibid. 233–239) and argues that it is an accepted figure to be used metaphorically in order to characterize a person, one’s behaviour or a situation (ibid. 239). As for Joosten vv.9–10 convey a fictive commission, one can suggest that the figure of ‘pseudocitation’ was used here. This means they are not a report of what YHWH had said but they reflect what the prophet has discerned about the divine intention during his fruitless mission (cf. ibid. 241) and vv.9–10 mean “as if the Lord had said…”. But Joosten does not reflect on how the difference of communicative levels – it is not only YHWH who speaks but he also mentions what the prophet is to say to the people – affects his claim of a “pseudo-citation”. Moreover, the speech of YHWH is just one speech among many within the narrative of Isa 6. Joosten does not show in what way this speech is different from those of the Seraphim (v.3), of the prophet (v.5), of the single Seraph (vv.6–7) or the interaction between YHWH and Isaiah in v.8. 182 Cf. SEARLE & VANDERVEKEN, Foundations, 3–5 (especially 3). 183 Cf. SEARLE & VANDERVEKEN, Foundations, 4.

112

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

speech. Therefore, the imperatives of v.10a concern speech effects, or with the technical term, they are about the perlocutionary actions of Isaiah. The differences between v.9b and v.10 are not contradictions but different speech-acts. As Searle emphasizes, often illocutionary acts are not definitely related to a certain perlocutionary aim.184 The point of vv.9–10 is exactly that, to ascribe one perlocutionary aim to Isaiah’s illocutionary acts without confusing both dimensions. Level ‘YHWH – Isaiah’

Level ‘Isaiah – people’

ʤʦʤ ʭʲʬ ʺʸʮʠʥ ʪʬ Illocutionary act: DIRECTIVE (imperative)

Introducing the new communicative interaction (ʺʸʮʠʥ)

ʥʲʣʺʚʬʠʥ ʥʠʸ ʥʠʸʥ ʥʰʩʡʺʚʬʠʥ ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ Quotation as part of imperative (propositional content)

Locutionary act that Isaiah is supposed to say Complex illocutionary acts: - DIRECTIVE (imperatives) - ASSERTIVE (consequences)

ʲˇʤ ʥʩʰʩʲʥ ʣʡʫʤ ʥʩʰʦʠʥ ʤʦʤ ʭʲʤʚʡʬ ʯʮˇʤ Illocutionary act: DIRECTIVE (imperative)

Perlocutionary act: HARDENING

Figure 7: Communicative Acts on Different Communicative Levels in Isa 6:9–10

Thus Isaiah’s concern is to call his audience to listen and see (DIRECTIVE illocution) and to inform them about the consequences that they will not be able to understand (ASSERTIVE illocution). This is YHWH’s commission to him (v.9b). The aim, however, is to cause hardness by this speech (perlocution) and the audience’s inability to change its course of actions. Two further notes are due to the use of figurative use in v.10a and its contribution to the communicative interaction. First, the use of figurative language enables YHWH to express the uncommon idea of causing hardness of the heart, ears and eyes. It has been increasingly appreciated that figurative language and metaphors not only illustrate thoughts but also offer the only means available to express ideas that exceed conventional thinking. As there was no literal verb for the perlocution of hardening, the use of the non-literal collocations in v.10a makes it possible to express this aspect. Secondly, the figurative language guarantees that Isaiah is the cause of the intended effects only in the non-direct way of his communicative actions. This accentuates the fact that the hardening effects are not in his control and at his disposal. Isaiah is not represented as wanting to harden or refusing to harden; it is just the effect of his prophetic ministry. 184

Cf. SEARLE, Taxonomy, 3. For the distinction between illocutionary and perlocutionary acts, see also the 8th and 9 th lecture in AUSTIN, How to Do (94–120).

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

113

4.5 Summary Isa 6:9–10 depicts a complex communicative interaction between YHWH and his prophet Isaiah ben Amoz that includes communicative interaction between Isaiah and his audience. It is through the speech of YHWH to Isaiah that the latter receives the commission to perform speech-acts in respect to the people. Within and through the communication with Isaiah, YHWH uses all three main dimensions of communicative action: YHWH summons Isaiah to speak, i.e. to perform a locutionary act; by means of a direct speech (v.9b) YHWH clarifies in which way Isaiah is to perform speech-acts, i.e. the illocutionary dimension of speech; and thirdly, YHWH includes in these summons the effects that Isaiah has to achieve, i.e. the perlocutionary role of his communicative interaction with the people. In his communicative acts, Isaiah is to achieve the hardening of the people through his locutionary acts. In addition, the hardening effects are not at Isaiah’s disposal. The figurative language used for the hardening effect of Isaiah’s communicative acts (v.10a) deprives Isaiah of any opportunity to want or not to want these effects. By this means YHWH disconnects the perlocutionary acts of Isaiah, i.e. the effects of his speech, from the specific way and intention in which Isaiah speaks, i.e. from the illocutionary acts of Isaiah as they are paradigmatically expressed in the direct speech of v.9b. Moreover, YHWH binds them to the locutionary acts of Isaiah, i.e. to his communicative interaction with the people as such.185 We found finally, that Isaiah’s communicative actions belong to a broader field of interactions. The negative final clause in Isa 6:10b states the purpose of Isaiah’s communicative acts: his audience are not to perceive (specifically, by sight or by words), not to understand and not to return so that it should not be healed. Through the prevention of perception and understanding, the audience is to be prevented from returning to proper behaviour and interactions. This is worth comparing with a ‘conception’ that is particularly common in wisdom literature. There we find the well established connection between ‘perception – understanding – proper action – well-being’.186 The purpose of Isaiah’s ministry points to this relationship between epistemology, (inter-)action and fate. Through the ministry of Isaiah perception and understanding are to be affected. Insofar as perception and understanding are the presuppositions of any ac-

185 Apart from the figurative use in v.10a this is most clearly indicated through the adverbial meaning of the asyndetic construction ʯʮˇʤ ǜǜǜ ʺʸʮʠʥ (“and by saying … make fat …”; see above). 186 Similarly S TECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6, 158–159; cf. then, e.g., VON RAD, Wisdom, 30–33, 74–95; M. V. FOX, Qohelet, 79–120; IDEM, Innerstructure; IDEM, Time, 71–75; CRENSHAW, Education, 239–253; IDEM, Qohelet’s Understanding.

114

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

tion, the ministry of Isaiah has also consequences for any action of the people and their fate.187 These findings challenge various proposals of interpretation. First, it clarifies that the commission to harden the people is to be understood from the crucial relationship between v.9 and v.10.188 Secondly, the commission of Isaiah not simply summons him to harden the people without clarifying how he is to achieve this;189 Isaiah is to harden his people through his communicative action(s). Thirdly, a crucial element of this context is the difference of communicative levels, which shows that the designation of the speech of YHWH in vv.9–10 as a “pseudo-citation” is insufficient.190 Fourthly, the commission in its entirety and with the negative purpose in v.10b in particular, leaves no room for an ironic reading191 or for an inter-

187

It is clear that one cannot simply deny any significance of the process of perception and restrict v.10 to the problem of acknowledging YHWH’s claim of a proper relationship as, e.g., HOFFMANN, Intention, 79 does. But against the sketched background the suggestive and harsh conclusion of SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 182 is equally unreasonable who states: “Dumpfes Dahinvegetieren scheint Jesaja dem Volk allenfalls noch zuzubilligen.” Isaiah does not exclude any action of perception (nor understanding). What Isaiah’s message does affect, however, is the attentive perception that seeks to understand, which is inherent in this connection of ‘perception – understanding – action – well-being’. For the differentiation into mere sensory perception and attentive perception in respect to both terms ¥ʤʠʸ and ¥ʲʮˇ, see, e.g., VETTER, ʤʠʸ r’h, 1178: “A distinction should be made between (1) simple ‘seeing […]’” and “(2) seeing and hearing […] in the meaning ‘to become aware of’”. Cf. also, e.g., Schult, ʲʮˇ šm‘, 1376; BDB 906–907; KRAUS, Hören, 85. This background suggests at the same time that the effects of Isaiah’s ministry are not restricted to the relationship of his audience to his ministry but exceed it to the interrelationship among the people, which strengthens such an interpretation of the absolutely used verbs in v.10b; contra LISS, Prophetie, 39–40 who claims that an understanding of v.10b as a destruction of communication among the people is absurd. Finally, one must wonder whether the characterization of v.10b as an intensely reflected understanding of prophetic ministry turned into its opposite (cf., e.g., J. M. SCHMIDT, Gedanken, 76; HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 247; B LUM , Testament II, 25), does justice to these findings. 188 Contra those who argue against the coherence of vv.9–10; see the discussion above: “4.3 A Complex Unity of Isaiah 6:9–10 against a Simple Distinction”. 189 Contra R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 206–207, who says that there is no indication about how the prophet can harden them, Isa 6 only states that he has to harden them (ibid. 207n.84). 190 Contra J OOSTEN, prosopopée. As noted already above, there are further elements that render the hypothesis of Joosten unlikely: the speech of YHWH in vv.9–10 is part of a series of communicative acts and parallels the announcement of the Seraphim about the forgiveness of Isaiah’s sins (vv.6–7; see Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6, above) that is hardly merely a “pseudo-citation”. 191 Contra HOLLENBACH, Lest They Should Turn; HURLEY, Le Seigneur. B EALE, Isaiah VI 9–13 and CHISHOLM, JR., Divine Hardening, 431–432 also regard the whole of

4. The Dialogue between YHWH and Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9–10

115

pretation of v.10 as “pastoral” to let Isaiah know that the resultant hardness is not a “sign of his failure” nor an “indication of divine malfeasance”.192 Hardness of the people and their prevention from repentance are clearly stated as the intention of YHWH and the purpose of Isaiah’s mission. This also undermines the proposal that through the revelation of this intention the people get a final chance to prevent it by their repentance.193 The differentiation and clarification of the different dimensions of speech-acts further speaks against this interpretation. As any locutionary and illocutionary act of Isaiah has the effect of hardening the people they are not able to react differently.194 Fifthly, this outcome is shaped as a communicable utterance of Isaiah to his people in v.9b. Thus the communicative action of Isaiah is not a merely fictive utterance,195 nor ironic/sarcastic196 nor an illogical utterance to evoke emotions197 nor in any other way incommunicable.198 Neither does it enact communicative disagreement between the prophet and his audience.199 Finally, the commission to harden within a wider context of interactions, as it comes to the fore in v.10b, shows that “hardening” is not simply a category of theological reflection. What we find in Isa 6:9–10 is HARDENING as the perlocutionary speech-act of the vv.9–10 as ironic. But for them it corresponds at the same time with the genuine intention of YHWH. 192 Thus SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 56. It seems that W RIGHT, Isaiah I, 495 and YOUNGBLOOD, Isaiah, 30 interpret similarly. But v.10b clearly states the (negative) purpose of the mission, not simply the result [contrary Wright and Youngblood who say: “Isaiah 6:9–10 does not portray the purpose of Isaiah’s message but its results.”], and the effects in v.10a are formed as imperatives. 193 Thus especially SCHENKER, Gerichtsverkündigung, 229–232; then also, e.g., ENGNELL, Call, 44 (at least considering this option); KISSANE , Isaiah I, 75; V ERMEYLEN, Isaïe 1, 193–194; T SEVAT, Throne Vision, 173; J. J. SCHMITT, Isaiah, 66; LAATO, Immanuel, 110–112; VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 48–49; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 61. 194 This differentiation would have huge implications for the reconstruction of the message of the 8th century prophet Isaiah ben Amoz. V.10 is exclusively about the effect of Isaiah’s message; this does not provide direct conclusions for the content of his message. Thus one can neither say the prophet had to harden his people through a message of salvation nor would his message be necessarily exclusively about judgement. But those concerns would have to establish, how Isa 6 was related to this prophet at all. 195 Contra HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht, 244–246; BLUM , Testament II, 22–23; J OOSTEN, prosopopée, 232. 196 Contra SCHWEIZER, Grammatik, 182 and then those who apart from those who regard the whole of vv.9–10 as ironic, see the utterance in v.9b as ironic, even though the whole might be still an actual commission to harden the people – thus, e.g., HUNTER, Seek, 200; EVANS, To See, 18, or a retrospective reading – thus, e.g., CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 76–77. 197 Contra GITAY, Isaiah, 120–121. 198 Contra JENNI, Jesajas Berufung, 336–337; BERGES, Buch, 99. 199 Contra LISS, Prophetie, 36–37.

116

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

prophet Isaiah that he is to perform by his locutionary and illocutionary acts amidst the perverted communicative and general interactions of his people, for which the prophet has been atoned and from which he has been excluded (Isa 6:5–7). Having clarified the way the hardening occurs in the communicative interaction between YHWH and Isaiah in vv.9–10, we may now turn our attention to an analysis of the communicative action in the narrative of Isa 6 as a whole. Taking into account particularly the differentiation between illocutionary and perlocutionary role, we will see whether Isa 6 could actually serve as a legitimisation of the prophet and YHWH respectively or reflects a “model of reading and understanding” that emphasizes the interrelationship of “‘text” and “imaginative interpretation”200 or another explanation would be more appropriate.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6 5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

5.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 6 The commission to harden “this people” is not an isolated summons. Verses 9–10 are part of the larger literary unit Isa 6 and consequently, part of its communicative role. As is common in historical narratives, Isa 6 employs verbs in the wayyiqtol-form to TELL about what had happened when Isaiah encountered YHWH. The impression of a historical account is further amplified by the precise date at the beginning (v.1aĮ). YHWH’s commissioning of Isaiah to harden his people, introduced by ʸʮʠʩʥ, is one aspect of that narrative. Isaiah TELLS, among other things, about the effect, that YHWH gives to his ministry. Thus, what is a DIRECTIVE act on the level of the discourse between Isaiah and YHWH plays the role of INFORMATION on the level of the whole literary unit: Isaiah INFORMS his audience about the effect, which YHWH is going to achieve through his ministry. The way Isaiah shapes his account shows certain emphasises and adds several specific aspects to this narrative. I have discussed the main traits of Isa 6 above. Here I shall comment on their relationship to the commission to harden the people. First, Isaiah’s commission is the climax and goal of the whole encounter, as two observations indicate. With YHWH’s response to Isaiah, the second scene comes to an end parallel to the first one, and is extended then by the initiative of Isaiah (“How long, O YHWH?”).201 More importantly, 200 Cf. the studies of CARROLL, Blindsight, LANDY, Strategies and A. DAVIES, Double Standards. 201 See above the discussion on Structure and Stylistic Features in Isaiah 6.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

117

in the commission to say “Hear (¥ʲʮˇ) and you will not realize, see (¥ʤʠʸ) and you will not understand” (v.9b) those two verbs are brought together that each introduces one major scene (¥ʤʠʸ, v.1; ¥ʲʮˇ, v.8), creating a funnel-like structure (see above). The interrelationships within this account are part of this movement from the successive events to the one commission of Isaiah. Secondly, the commission comes out of Isaiah’s vision of YHWH (vv.1– 4). He witnesses YHWH’s governance in and from Zion as judgement against his people. As one continually present, YHWH is going on to act now in judgement and punishment respectively. This vision of YHWH, who is going to judge, not only forms the background for the commission of Isaiah; the latter has its origin in it. Isaiah’s commission is one specific form of YHWH’s judgement and it shares the two main traits with the vision of YHWH. In the ministry and persona of Isaiah, YHWH remains present among his people – Isaiah is the one “who will go for us (ʩʮ ʥʰʬʚʪʬʩ)” (v.8) – and the purpose of Isaiah’s mission is to prevent the people from repentance so that they might not be healed until the land is desolated (vv.10b–11). In the desolation of the land, the change in YHWH’s reign from Zion is manifested (see the contrast to v.3) and the consequence of YHWH’s judging presence (v.4) is disclosed.202 In this respect the narrative of Isa 6 shows that the commissioning of Isaiah and its effects are a consequence and manifestation of the change in YHWH’s governance as it is envisioned in vv.1–4. Thirdly, the commissioning proceeds from the reaction and subsequent purification of Isaiah (vv.5–7). Isaiah names the impure lips, i.e. improper communication (see above), as the main problem of him and his people, and he is confirmed in that perception by the subsequent judgement and purification of his lips in particular (see above). Hearing and even sometimes seeing are crucially related to communicative interaction. So, when Isaiah is commissioned to harden his people and to prevent them from seeing and hearing, he has to affect them in the processes of communication. His commission is a judgement specifically upon their communicative interactions. So another interrelationship within the narrative elucidates the connection between the condition of the people (v.5: impure lips) and the specific form of judgement as hardening. Hardening is the judgement of perverted communicative interaction. 202 See in this respect the threefold occurrence of ¥ʠʬʮ and the antonymic “devastation” (¥ʤʠˇ and ʤʮʮˇ). As mentioned already, this train of thought is presented in detail by HARTENSTEIN, Unzugänglichkeit, 78–82, 99–101, 107–109, 164–169, 175–182 with the distinctive interpretation that v.4 implies YHWH’s hiding, though; VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 46 also briefly comments on these interrelationships and LACK, La symbolique, 46 noted a contrast between ¥ʠʬʮ and ʤʡʥʦʲ (v.12).

118

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

Finally, the commission results from Isaiah’s experiences of being confronted with the judging YHWH, purified by a burning coal and entering into conversation with YHWH (vv.1–8). The commission to harden the people could not have been conferred on anybody at any time. Isaiah encountered YHWH, who was ready to judge; Isaiah feared for his life and experienced the purifying judgement carried out by one of the Seraphim. These experiences resulted in a change of Isaiah’s relationships in the second part or scene of the account. On the one hand, this applies to his relationship with YHWH. In the first scene Isaiah had feared to encounter YHWH and to relate to him at all; his encounter makes him fear for his life (v.5). But after his purification Isaiah is able to communicate freely and in accordance with YHWH; to YHWH’s question “whom shall I send (ʧʬˇʠ)”, Isaiah replies “send me (ʩʰʧʬˇ)!”203 And because of this change, the element that indicates the judging presence of YHWH in the first scene (v.4) finds no correspondence in the second scene. On the other hand, his relationship with his people is regarded as changed as well. While Isaiah expresses his belonging to his people in v.5 – he has unclean lips like his people whom he lives with (ʩʫʰʠ ʭʩʺʴˈ ʠʮʨʚʭʲ ʪʥʺʡʥ ʩʫʰʠ ʭʩʺʴˈʚʠʮʨ ˇʩʠ ʡˇʥʩ), YHWH separates Isaiah from the people, who are now “this people” (ʤʦʤ ʭʲʤ, vv.9, 10)204 for Isaiah, after the latter’s purification. Only through 203

Cf. similarly LANDY, Strategies, 68. Thus also already GRAY, Isaiah, 110, then, e.g., NIELSEN, Dramatic Writing, 3; B. C. JONES, Isaiah 8.11, 155; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 86–87; RECHENMACHER, Jes 8,16–18, 46. HOFFMANN, Intention, 14–24 tried to identify different periods of Isaiah’s preaching on the basis of the distinction between “my people” and “this people” but has not found wide support. Some argue that “this people” (ʤʦʤ ʭʲʤ) is a particular party among the people, primarily on the basis of Isa 8:6; cf., e.g., IRVINE, Isaianic Denkschrift, 227–228, 230; HAYES & IRVINE, Isaiah, 112, 145–158; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 108 (despite his observation of the separation of Isaiah from the people he maintains that in Isa 8 it only refers to a certain part of the people and consequently that the commission to harden only applies to this part at the level of the original memoir). This proposal mainly depends on the question whether one can elucidate an ‘Isaiah memoir’ whose date is close to the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis. Thus it seems that much depends on where one starts to read (= to which passage one gives priority). Is it Isa 6 (suggesting the whole people) or Isa 8 (suggesting a particular party that supported Rezin and Pekah). It seems to me though that at least on the level of the final form Ahaz (and perhaps the royal court), on the one hand, and “this people” on the other are presented as two ‘types’ of contrasting attitudes in the particular situation of the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis, none of which, however, shows the appropriate behaviour: Ahaz turns to the Assyrian king while “this people” turn to Rezin and Pekah. Only Isaiah waits for YHWH and puts his trust in him (Isa 8:17). It is interesting to note in this respect that Isa 8:6 and Isa 8:11 speak of “this people” in contrast to Isaiah (Isa 8:5–6: “And YHWH spoke to me again: ‘Because this people have refused …’”). Additionally, the phrase “this people” appears in Isa 28:11, 14 in a context of the confrontation with the prophet and in Isa 29:1, 14 in the context of hardening. 204

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

119

this sequence of experiences Isaiah could and inevitably had to respond to the call for an emissary (v.8). Thus Isa 6 also tells why it was Isaiah who had to carry out that task and finally could not do other than accept that commission.205 He was the one who already experienced the judgement and was commissioned to speak to his people in, amidst and through the judgement from beyond it. With Hubmann one can say daß das Volk, wann immer es mit dem Reden und Handeln des Propheten in Berührung kommt, im letzten immer mit Gott selbst konfrontiert wird.206

The role of the narrative of Isa 6 is to DESCRIBE the whole commission of Isaiah in general and specific aspects of that commission. It tells its audience that Isaiah’s commission is the consequence and climax of his encounter with YHWH, that YHWH ascribes a hardening effect to Isaiah’s ministry, that the negative purpose to prevent them from repentance is one realization of YHWH’s readiness for judgement, that the negative effect of Isaiah’s ministry is related to the sins of the people in their communicative actions and that the commission of Isaiah as the actual emissary cannot be separated from his experiences in the encounter with YHWH (at the specific time mentioned at the beginning). It is important to note this primary illocutionary role of INFORMING about what has happened when Isaiah saw YHWH at the particular time mentioned at the beginning. There is no specific argumentative style. The narrative of Isa 6 is shaped in a way “daß sie darstellend wirkt, Fakten berichtet”.207 One may call this legitimating the prophet – although this is often narrowed down to an explanation of the commission to harden instead of the commission as such. In terms of speech-act theory, Isaiah INFORMS his audience about the specific context in which his communicative actions take place. Commissioned by YHWH, his ministry is a distinguished institution, in which special rules apply for the performance and validity of speech acts208 that exceed conventional communicative interaction. These observations on the illocutionary role of Isa 6 do not cover all dimensions of its communicative actions. I shall argue in the following section that we can detect several hints at how Isa 6 is expected to affect its audience. The next paragraph notes hints that we can find in Isa 6 itself. 205 These observations render the perception of Isa 6 as a mere limited commission or even secondary commission after previous ministry highly unlikely. The fundamental change in the existence of Isaiah in Isa 6 strongly suggests that this is Isaiah’s inauguration as a prophet. 206 HUBMANN, Bote, 336; similarly BARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 105. 207 R. W AGNER, Textexegese, 208. 208 On this dependence of speech-acts on the conventional context (= institution), in which they take place, see A. WAGNER, Sprechakte, 15 and SEARLE, Speech-acts, 50–53.

120

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

This will necessitate a clarification of the ‘implied readers’ of Isa 6 afterwards. 5.2 The Perlocutionary Role of Isaiah 6 5.2.1 Isaiah 6 as the ‘Speech of Isaiah’ and the Consequences for Its Perlocutionary Role A perlocution cannot be realized by a convention. Thus we cannot detect from the way that a communicative act is shaped what its effect will be. Some conventional perlocutionary acts, however, are related to certain illocutionary roles so that in these cases one can conclude what effect might be intended from the way the illocutionary role is shaped.209 This applies for communicative acts that serve a certain rhetorical purpose. The intention to realize the perlocutionary act of persuading an audience to adopt a certain view or carry out a certain action can be recognized from a communicative act that through various means betrays its illocutionary role of ARGUING FOR an assertion or ENCOURAGING an appeal. A narrative like Isa 6, however, can serve all sorts of illocutionary roles and consequently a variety of perlocutionary aims. I would argue however that the peculiarity of Isa 6 consists in the feature that it tells about its effect itself. On this account we have to return to the commission of Isaiah in his dialogue with YHWH. According to the analysis of v.9b above, the summons formed as figurae etymologicae emphasise the audience’s actions of “hearing” and “seeing”, implying at the same time that they will get to see and hear more, and by this the utterance refers beyond itself to Isaiah’s message and ministry in general. YHWH states that Isaiah is to harden his people by his ministry. The hardening of his people will be the effect Isaiah has to cause (v.10). We also saw that one can identify the hardening of Isaiah’s audience as the perlocutionary role of his communicative acts. The narrative of Isa 6, however, is the closest to what one could imagine being a message of Isaiah. It is composed as a speech in 1.sg.210 It therefore cannot be separated from the rest of his message. On the contrary, it owns a very prominent place in the context as Isaiah’s message. It follows that the perlocutionary role that Isa 6 tells about applies to the very narrative itself. The potential perlocutionary role of Isa 6 is to HARDEN its audience.

209

See the comments in A. WAGNER, Sprechakte, 12nn.19, 20. Note also the remarks of VAN W IERINGEN, Implied Reader, 41–42, 48 who argues on the basis of the “implied reader’s” access to what is described through the ‘I-figure’ and the “subjectivity, caused by the high degree of embedding” (of the communicative actions) that “the narrative distance is reduced to a minimum” (ibid. 48). 210

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

121

This interpretation differs hugely from most previous studies. But it has to be substantiated in one respect. The HARDENING role of Isaiah’s message is ascribed to his communicative interaction with “this people”. As we saw above, the designation “this people” does not refer to a specific group among the people (of Judah and Jerusalem). They become “this people” because of Isaiah’s distinction from his people, with which he identified before he was purified (6:5). Thus whoever of the people hears/reads the message of Isaiah (chapter 6 as well as his other proclamation), can potentially be hardened. But if someone does not regard himself/herself as “this people”, this might be different.211 Thus the question in respect to the perlocutionary role of Isa 6 is: what does the context of Isa 6 betray about its implied readers? If the context indicates that the addressees of Isa 6 coincide with “this people”, it is hardening. If they have to be distinguished from them, then the way Isa 6 is incorporated in its context may shed light on its perlocutionary role. As the main concern of the present study is the function of Isa 6 within the whole book, we shall now turn our attention to the question of what indications we can discern from the broader literary context about the “implied readers” and their relationship to “this people”. This issue has consequences for understanding the perlocutionary role of Isa 6 and the proclamation of Isaiah as a whole, to which Isa 6:9b refers as well. Two problems are of particular importance in this respect. First, the question to whom Isaiah actually speaks about his commission, is often answered with reference to the ʭʩʣʮʬ in Isa 8:16, which many translate as “disciples”. An interpretation of this verse will clarify whether this is justified. Secondly, I shall show how the answer to Isaiah’s question “How long, o YHWH?” contributes to the clarification of the relationship between “this people” and the implied audience. 5.2.2 The Interpretation of Isaiah 8:16 and the Identity of the ʭʩʣʮʬ Even when Isa 8:16 is taken as a speech of YHWH, the ʭʩʣʮʬ have been widely regarded as pupils of Isaiah.212 But it was with the appearance of the hypothesis of the ‘Isaiah memoir’213 that this text became even more 211

SONNET, Le motif, 233 also reckons with the possibility that Isa 6 has a hardening effect on the reader and bases this primarily on the deictic nature of “this people”. 212 Cf. already HITZIG, Jesaja, 103; DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 158–159. 213 The thesis of an ‘Isaiah memoir’ that the prophet wrote for his disciples as a kind of legacy was popularised by B UDDE, Jesajas Erleben, 1–5, 128 (especially 2). But one can find the same hypothesis mentioned already in earlier publications of his, cf., e.g., in IDEM , Schranken, 165–190 (especially 173); IDEM, Zwei Beobachtungen, 58. That this hypothesis provided the exegete with the ‘oldest kernel’ of the Isaianic collection (cf. IDEM , Zwei Beobachtungen, 58), certainly helped its attraction.

122

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

crucial also for the perception of Isa 6. Accordingly, directed only towards a few pupils of Isaiah, chapter 6 functions as a proof that the disbelief of the king and the people was part of the intention of YHWH to harden them.214 While the extent and date of the ‘Isaiah memoir’ has become a matter of intense debate,215 this pattern of interpretation has hardly changed. It even prevails where the focus of attention has shifted from a supposed original ‘Isaiah memoir’ to the whole Book of Isaiah in its final form: According to Beuken, the description of Isaiah’s commission in Isa 6 richtet sich eher an den Kreis der Anhänger, der seine Botschaft sehr wohl angenommen hat und zu dem sich auch die Redaktion des Buches zählt.216

Thus if one wants to understand how the ‘implied readers’ of Isa are related to “this people” and Isaiah’s commission to harden, one has to take into account Isa 8:16. Two main interpretations are held with respect to Isa 8:16. On the one hand, scholars read Isa 8:16 ‘metaphorically’ in the sense that the teaching of Isaiah is sealed inaccessibly in the hearts of his disciples.217 On the 214

Cf. B UDDE, Schranken, 173. For Budde the ‘Isaiah memoir’ consisted of Isa 6:1–9:6 with just minor later additions (see especially IDEM, Schranken). Most scholars however regarded Isa 6:1–8:18 as the primary unit; cf. among numerous other scholars the most influential studies of STECK, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6; IDEM, Rettung; IDEM, Beiträge and HARDMEIER, Verkündigungsabsicht; IDEM, Verkündigung. It is an (at least equally) debated question what of Isa 7 was part of this memoir and how it further developed; for a survey cf. especially HÖFFKEN, Grundfragen. A few scholars saw only a loose connection between Isa 6 and Isa 7–8(9:6): cf. LINDBLOM, Study, 1; LESCOW, Denkschrift; D IETRICH, Politik, 62. More often, however, scholars began to question the origin of Isa 7 as it disturbed the ‘Iaccounts’ in Isa 6; 8; cf. especially REVENTLOW, Ende; IRVINE, Isaianic Denkschrift and W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 79–101 who criticize the hypothesis of an ‘Isaiah memoir’ as such; maintaining an original ‘Isaiah memoir’, though differing hugely in respect to its date, B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 37–242 (especially 60–65, 153–158), U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 24–31, 61–64, 121–124, LISS, Prophetie, 60–71, 72–92 exclude Isa 7 as a later insertion. See then also WERLITZ, Studien, 104–122 for a survey of studies on the memoir hypothesis up to the beginning of the 1990s. CLEMENTS, Prophet however has recently tried to re-establish the ‘Isaiah memoir’. B LUM , Testament I, IDEM, Testament II, argues for Isa *1:21–11:6 as a legacy of Isaiah around 701 B.C. The suggestions for a date of the ‘Isaiah memoir’ vary from shortly after the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis (cf. the studies of Steck and Hardmeier) to the exile (thus, e.g., KAISER, Isaiah 1–12, 118–121, 132; and with a more detailed redaction-critical differentiation U. BECKER, Jesaja, 61–123 [especially 121–123]); cf. now also T. W AGNER, Gottes Herrschaft. 216 B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 166–167, 215 and then F ISCHER, Tora, 47–50. With the presupposition that the whole book was written by Isaiah ben Amoz, similarly also MOTYER, Prophecy, 31, 95–96. 217 For this position, cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 84–85; MARTI, Jesaja, 87; GRAY, Isaiah, 156; PROCKSCH, Jesaia, 140; W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 344–345 (ET, 366); SAWYER, Isaiah 1, 94; WATTS, Isaiah 1–33, 123. Some regard v.16 as a speech of YHWH so that 215

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

123

other hand, those who defend the view that Isa 8:16 speaks of a sealing of a document in the presence of Isaiah’s disciples218 object to the former interpretation: the verbs ¥ʸʸʶ/ʸʥʶ “to tie”219 and ¥ʭʺʧ “to seal” are too material or concrete to be used metaphorically and the preposition ʡ means “among” and “in presence and in witnessing”220. Williamson adds that, if a metaphorical understanding was implied, one would expect a less ambiguous preposition than ʡ and that in Isa 8:20 the terms ʤʸʥʺ and ʤʣʥʲʺ are used for documents so that the same meaning is likely in 8:16 and a metaphorical understanding can be excluded.221 Thus both positions share the conviction that Isaiah had disciples. The difference is only whether he metaphorically sealed his message in their hearts, or in a kind of a legal procedure sealed his message in documents in their presence. But both positions are unsatisfying.222 A review of the meaning of the words used in the “disciples” are those of YHWH; cf., e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 158–159; VON ORELLI, Jesaia, 42; YOUNG, Isaiah I, 313n.35; FISCHER, Tora, 44–45, but they also share the idea that there is a group of people who understood Isaiah (see the comments of DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 158–159 and of LINDBLOM, Study, 50 about the disciples as a group regarded by the prophet as “an embryo of ‘the remnant’”; and on the level of the final form F ISCHER, Tora, 47–50). RECHENMACHER, Jes 8,16–18, 26–31 (especially 31) excludes the literal understanding and prefers the figurative meaning, but he does not specify it as “in the hearts”. The figurative meaning should be understood “im Sinne einer Traditionsübergabe” (ibid. 31). It seems that the specific meaning “in the hearts” is also avoided in LINDBLOM, Study, 48 and FISCHER, Tora, 44–45. 218 Cf., e.g., HITZIG, Jesaja, 103; D. JONES, Traditio, 232–236, SCHOORS, Jesaja I, 79 (but taking up Rignell, he regards the two witnesses of v.2 as the “disciples”); B ARTH, Jesaja-Worte, 278–279; KAISER, Isaiah 1–12, 196; WERNER, Prophetenwort, 7; SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 82; MOTYER, Prophecy, 95–96; W ILLIAMSON, Book, 97–103; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 243, BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 230–231. 219 As scholars have derived the form ʸʥʶ from ¥ʸʸʶ and ¥ʸʥʶ, which have the same meaning, both roots are considered in the following. I will argue for the more probable one further below. RECHENMACHER, Jes 8,16–18, 27 doubts a subsidiary form ¥ʸʥʶ. 220 Thus DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 84 who according to WILLIAMSON, Book, 98 have sufficiently objected to the metaphorical understanding. Similarly B ARTH, JesajaWorte, 278 who also insists upon the “konkreten Vorgänge des ‘Einwickelns’ und ‘Versiegelns’”. 221 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 98–99. 222 There are of course other proposals that, nevertheless, can be ascribed more or less to this typology as well. FOHRER, Jesaja 1, 119–120 and IDEM, Entstehung, 140–142 takes up the figurative understanding but says ʩʣʮʬʡ does not fit in and is a later gloss. But most of the differing proposals can be ascribed to the latter position of a literal understanding of the sealing differing mainly in respect to what is sealed or what ʩʣʮʬʡ means in this context: MÜLLER, Glauben, 53 takes up Fohrer’s suggestion but prefer’s the ‘literal‘ understanding. HAYES & IRVINE, Isaiah, 163–164 and IRVINE, Syro-Ephraimite Crisis, 208 discuss the possibility of two emendations: either it is a misreading of ʣʮʬʫ kelimmud “in accordance with what is customary” or a corruption of ʤʩʣʥʮʩʬʡ “upon its ties” [ʭʩʣʥʮʩʬ “ties, ropes” with suffix of 3.sg. referring to ʤʸʥʺ]. The former is taken up

124

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

Isa 8:16 will show that this passage does not support the hypothesis of a circle of disciples, who Isaiah addresses in Isa 6 speaking about the hardening effect of his message to “this people”. The basic question of the given positions is how the collocation of the verbs ¥ʸʸʶ/ʸʥʶ and ¥ʭʺʧ together with the preposition ʡ is to be understood. Indeed, in a few cases the preposition ʡ can mean “in presence of, among” (e.g. Exod 24:7; 25:8; 34:10).223 But when it occurs together with the verbs ¥ʸʸʶ (Exod 12:34; 1 Sam 25:29; Job 26:8; Prov 26:8; Prov 30:4; Hos 4:19), ¥ʸʥʶ (Deut 14:25; 2 Kgs 5:23; Ezek 5:3) or ¥ʭʺʧ (Deut 32:34; 1 Kgs 21:8; Job 14:17; 37:7; Esth 3:12; 8:8, 10), the preposition predominantly denotes the place, where something is wrapped up in or sealed in.224 In respect to the meaning of the verbs used, it must be generally said against Dillmann and Kittel that a very material meaning does not exclude metaphorical use. On the contrary, one speaks of metaphorical use when different semantic concepts are used and related in an unexpected way. So their material meaning might prove all the more effective for the metaphorical use. However, despite the frequency and insistence of such claims, the verbs in question do not always refer literally to concrete procedures. So it is untrue that they can only express the quasi-legal procedure and defended also by LISS, Unerhörte Prophetie, 235 but presupposes several different misreadings simultaneously (ʡ misreading ʫ and the suffix ʩ coming from a dittography and change of the following ʥ [v.17]); the latter reckons only with minor changes but as the present reading makes sense and the root ¥ʣʮʬ is presupposed by most of the ancient versions, I object to this emendation. Nor is there sufficient evidence for the suggested emendations to ʭʩʣʬʩʡ “in the children” (Ginsberg) or ʣʮʬʚʬʡ “not to learn” (G. R. Driver; both taken from I RVINE, Syro-Ephraimite Crisis, 208n.105). EICHRODT, Heilige, 93–95 places vv.16–17 after vv.1–2 followed by vv.3–4, 18, identifies the writing of vv.1–2 with the “instruction” and “attestation”, but regards the “disciples” as an additional group besides the two witnesses. C LEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 100–101, taken up by ROBERTS, Children, 202, similarly associates vv.16–18 with vv.1–4 as their original continuation but also identifies those “who are taught by me” (v.16) with the two witnesses of v.2 (the latter also in SCHOORS, Jesaja I, 79). For objections to that position see especially W ILLIAMSON, Book, 101–102. Finally, O SWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 235–236 takes up the understanding of binding and sealing as an act of affirmation and attestation among his disciples, but not only to his own words, but to “the revealed word of God” (ibid. 235), “reaffirming his dependence upon God as revealed in Scripture” (ibid. 236). 223 The closest parallel however would be 1QH 2:39 reading ʤʫʩʣʥʮʬʡ, translated in MARTÍNEZ & T IGCHELAAR, DSS Study Edition I, 164, 165 as “among your disciples”. 224 This is exclusively the case for all occurrences of ¥ʸʸʶ/ʸʥʶ + ʡ. For the collocation ¥ʭʺʧ + ʡ this applies for Deut 32:34; Job 14:17, while it means “to seal with” in 1 Kgs 21:8; Esth 3:12; 8:8, 10 and “to make a seal at” in Job 37:7. In the light of this, the suggestion of W HITLEY, Language, 29 is also unlikely. He translates: “Seal the message, bind the oracle from the learned”, because ʡ can also have the meaning “from”, taking up N. M. SARNA, The Interchange of the Preposition BETH and MIN in Biblical Hebrew, JBL 78 (1959) 310–316.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

125

of sealing documents. When ¥ʭʺʧ refers to ‘sealing a document’ this always occurs together with the term ʸʴʱ and/or the verb ¥ʡʺʫ.225 Apart from that, various things can be sealed, materially or metaphorically. 226 As the similar verb ¥ʸʸʶ occasionally is used metaphorically (1 Sam 25:29), it cannot be excluded for ¥ʸʥʶ either. Both verbs could be used literally and metaphorically so that their meaning must be deduced from the way they are employed in context. Together with the preposition ʡ, the most probable meaning is that certain objects are sealed/wrapped up in a place/ object.227 Accordingly, if the named place does not actually function as a container of these objects, the sealing/wrapping up is to be understood metaphorically. The meanings of the terms ʤʸʥʺ and ʤʣʥʲʺ do not exclude this understanding either. ʤʸʥʺ means basically the “prophetic instruction/

225

Cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 21:8; Isa 29:11; Jer 32:10–14, 44; Esth 3:12; 8:8, 10; Neh 10:1–2. Apart from Isa 29:11, which occurs in the same book, it is of particular interest that in Dan 12:4, 9, which speaks clearly of the sealing of a prophetic document, the term ʸʴʱ occurs. 226 Cf., e.g., Ezek 28:12 (to be a seal of right proportion/completeness); Job 9:7 (to seal the stars); Job 14:17 (to make sins inaccessible in a wrap [ʸʥʸʶʡ ¥ʭʺʧ]); Job 24:16 (to hide oneself); Job 37:7 (to press a seal upon); Cant 4:12 (a sealed spring); Dan 9:24 (to seal a vision and prophecy that is not regarded here as a written document). The last occurrence is particularly interesting. But while D. JONES, Traditio, 235n.48 refers to Dan 12:4 to prove his case of a literal understanding, he as others fails to recognize the invalidating force of Dan 9:24. 227 Thus also with reference to the valence of both verbs RECHENMACHER, Jes 8,16– 18, 28, 31. Arguments about what the more likely used preposition would be, had the author(s) had in mind a certain understanding, remain of very limited value. But as a minor aspect I still object to Williamson’s argument about the use of ʡ in Isa 8:16. Given the author wanted to express the idea that the prophetic instruction is sealed in the ʭʩʣʮʬ, with the latter as a place, what other possibility is there than the preposition ʡ? The suggestion of Williamson that one could expect a construction like ʭʡʬʚʬʲʥ ʭʡʸʷʡ presupposes an understanding of ʩʣʮʬʡ that might not be intended (see below). Moreover, the preposition ʡ might be neutral, but if the collocations ¥ʸʸʶ/ʸʥʶ and ¥ʭʺʧ together with the preposition ʡ are as common as the above survey has shown, then the preposition is not neutral in these collocations. It means predominantly “in”. The idea that the prophetic instruction was sealed “in the presence” of the ʭʩʣʮʬ then had to be expressed in a different way from the common expression “to seal in/wrap up in” in order to avoid that meaning. Despite Williamson’s refusal, the term ʩʰʴʬ had been an appropriate term for that idea: this is the term that is most prominently used in the context of all sorts of actions that take place in the presence of someone, e.g., in the presence of YHWH (to name only one instance, cf. the idea of YHWH’s presence in the Book of Leviticus: Lev 1:3; 3:1; 4:4; 10:1–2; 16:7 etc.; cf. W ENHAM, Leviticus, 16–18). More importantly, however, descriptions of procedures that are similar to those presupposed for Isa 8:16 and that take place in the presence of someone often contain the phrase ʩʰʴʬ: cf. Josh 8:32 (“writing before = in presence of”); 1 Sam 23:18; 2 Sam 5:3; 2 Kgs 23:3 (“to make a covenant before YHWH/God”); in other legal contexts, e.g., Deut 19:17; 22:17; 25:2.

126

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

proclamation”.228 As such, it does not clarify whether this refers to a written document or the oral deliverance. ʤʣʥʲʺ means “attestation”. The only other occurrence of that term in Ruth 4:7 shows that various things could serve as an “attestation”. There it is a custom.229 Here it seems to complement the “prophetic instruction” so that both terms ʤʸʥʺ and ʤʣʥʲʺ together refer to the message of the prophet, substantiating it as instruction and attestation.230 As a result, conclusive indications for documents cannot be gained from this context.231 These observations undermine the view that Isa 8:16 speaks of the legal procedure of sealing Isaiah’s written proclamation in the presence of his disciples. At the same time, the ‘metaphorical’ interpretation, according to 228 Cf., e.g., D. J ONES, Traditio, 234; W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 345–346 (ET, 366– 367); W ILLIAMSON, Book, 88–89; SWEENEY, Prophetic Torah, 60–61; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 234–236, 409. 229 The very suggestive paraphrases of ʤʣʥʲʺ as “an external, independent witness” (D. J ONES, Traditio, 235; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 234) or even more its meaning as an “objektive Dokumentation” (B ARTH, Jesaja-Worte, 278; note the semantic correspondence in German between “Dokumentation” and “Dokument”) cannot or must not detract our eyes from the fact that in Ruth 4:7 the juridical sense of the term is restricted only to the function of “attesting”. It leaves the form or means of attestation open. 230 It seems to me that the interpretation of ʤʣʥʲʺ as an attestation to Isaiah’s proclamation and ministry that was meant to vindicate him (and YHWH) later, which leads to the conclusion that this could only function as a written document (thus, e.g., D. J ONES, Traditio, 234–235; JENSEN, Use, 110–112; B ARTH, Jesaja-Worte, 279), is hugely influenced by Isa 30:8. Some scholars explicitly admit or argue for this connection; cf., e.g., KAISER, Isaiah 1–12, 196; BARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 234. But the parallel construction in 8:16 rather implies that “instruction” and “attestation” are complementary (though this does not imply they have the same meaning; contra WHITLEY, Language, 28). Thus if ʤʸʥʺ refers to the prophetic proclamation of Isaiah, Isa 8:16 is not about the attestation to Isaiah’s ministry (and the plan of YHWH) but speaks about Isaiah’s message as attestation. Isaiah’s proclamation attests to the wrongdoings, previous chapters speak about. This attestation to the misbehaviour of the king and the people directed towards the audience of Isaiah is now about to be sealed and wrapped up. In this respect Isa 8:16 is quite different from Isa 30:8. These different nuances should not be levelled. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 95–106 (especially 100–103) and B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 234 refer additionally to the similarity between Isa 8:1–4 and Isa 8:16: As the writing in the presence of witnesses in Isa 8:1–4 served to testify to Isaiah’s message so the procedure in Isa 8:16 may also serve as a witness or attestation to Isaiah’s message. Following the above remarks, however, I would suggest a different interpretation of the relationship between Isa 8:1–4 and Isa 8:16. Isaiah’s “instruction” (ʤʸʥʺ, 8:16) can be called an “attestation” (ʤʣʥʲʺ, 8:16) at the same time because its quality of evidence (against the people who do not trust it, 8:1–10) has already been testified by witnesses (ʭʩʣʲ, 8:2). 231 W ILLIAMSON, Book, 99 adds that ʤʸʥʺ and ʤʣʥʲʺ are most probably understood as written documents in Isa 8:20. Unfortunately, it is not possible to discuss the difficult verses Isa 8:19–21 here, but I hesitate to regard the phrase ʤʣʥʲʺʬʥ ʤʸʥʺʬ as an actual summons to the people.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

127

which Isaiah has sealed his message in the hearts of his disciples, is insufficient as well. As Williamson suggests, the expression “to seal in my disciples” does not clarify that it means to be written upon their hearts, as some conclude.232 Two considerations seem most important for another proposal. First, the congruence of the semantic concepts between the verbs ¥ʸʸʶ/ʸʥʶ and ¥ʭʺʧ leads to the syntactic congruence with both verbs constructed with the preposition ʡ, suggesting the meaning “to shut”. The proclamation of Isaiah is sealed and wrapped up in his ʭʩʣʮʬ just as Job hoped that his sins were sealed in a bag (Job 14:17)233 or “as someone puts something particularly valuable into a tied up or sealed purse for safekeeping”234. Thus the ʭʩʣʮʬ are merely the container, in which the message of Isaiah is secured. That this means at the same time the ʭʩʣʮʬ are the disciples of Isaiah with the latter’s message written on their hearts stems solely from a certain understanding of the term ʭʩʣʮʬ, the issue of the second consideration now. Almost exclusively the conviction is shared that because the ʭʩʣʮʬ are the “disciples” of Isaiah, they must be those who have understood his proclamation. They are the ‘support group’ of Isaiah that are not affected by the hardening message of Isaiah.235 It is this presupposition that leads those who prefer a ‘metaphorical understanding’ to the conclusion that “in the disciples” means at the same time that Isaiah’s message is written on their hearts. However, a closer look at the meaning of ʣʥʮʬ does not support this interpretation. The term ʣʥʮʬ is a noun of the root ʣʮʬ formed in the pattern qittûl. This pattern based on a D stem is commonly used as an action noun.236 According to J. Fox, the “meaning of limmûd ‘learned, disciple’ probably developed from this action noun usage, although limmûd is used as an actant noun.”237 If we survey the occurrences of ʣʥʮʬ, we can see that is is used as an actant noun, either for someone who is taught something, or for some232

W ILLIAMSON, Book, 98 referring to an interpretation of PROCKSCH, Jesaia. Once again I refer specifically to Job 14:17 as an especially close passage to Isa 8:16. While the verb ¥ʭʺʧ may have often legal connotations, this is not always the case as Job 14:17 shows. The construction together with ʸʥʸʶ “bag” emphasizes the aspect of “hiding, making inaccessible”, which I regard as the main issue in Isa 8:16 as well. 234 W ILDBERGER, Isaiah 1–12, 366 (original W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 345). 235 For CARROLL, Prophecy, 140–141 the group of social support that he reads in Isa 8:16 is an important indication of a “dissonance response”: “What we have in Isaiah’s retirement from public activity is essentially the implementation of such a defence mechanism against dissonance.” 236 Cf. the discussion in J. FOX, Noun Patterns, 250–251; similarly GK § 84a m and JM §88E c. BROCKELMANN, Grundriß I, § 157 (note) argues that the gemination of the second radical in ʣʥʮʬ is secondary and that it is an adjective of the form qutnjl. However, W ERNER, Wortbildung has not included ʣʥʮʬ among the adjectives. 237 J. FOX, Noun Patterns, 251. 233

128

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

thing itself, which is taught. The latter use can be found in some Qumran writings,238 but is also applied to Isa 8:16 by Sweeney. 239 In this case ʣʥʮʬ means “instruction”. When the term ʣʥʮʬ refers to someone who is taught, it seems to have always the specific meaning “disciple” in the Qumran writings.240 In the OT the term ʣʥʮʬ always refers to someone who is taught or has learned/got used to something. But most of its occurrences do not speak specifically of a teacher-pupil-relationship either. This applies certainly for its occurrences in Jer. If one preserves ʣʮʬ in Jer 2:24, it means “being taught/got used to the desert”.241 Jer 13:23 does not envisage a teacher-pupil-relationship, but focuses on the evil that they have been taught.242 This leaves only Isa 50:4 and Isa 54:13 as the other occurrences of the term in the OT. But as long as the specific meaning “disciple” is secured there only by reference to Isa 8:16243 (or vice versa),244 we cannot take for granted such a meaning.245 Thus there are no clear indications that the term ʣʥʮʬ refers specifically to a teacher-pupil-relationship. We have to assume the primary meaning “one who is taught”.246 When we look at further occurrences of ¥ʣʮʬ in the Book of Isaiah, it is not possible to deduce a more specific reference in Isa 8:16. Mostly, ¥ʣʮʬ is used in reference to a broad audience or a multitude of people.247 The 238

Cf. 1QH 8:36 [16:36]; 7:14 [15:14]). SWEENEY, Prophetic Torah, 60; IDEM, Isaiah 1–39, 177. 240 Cf. CD 20:4; 1QH 2:39 [10:39]; 7:10 [15:10]. In some cases the precise meaning seems disputed: 1QH 8:36 is translated as “instruction” in MARTÍNEZ & T IGCHELAAR, DSS Study Edition I, 183 and M ARTÍNEZ, DSS Translated, 347 while VERMES, Complete Translation, 281 reads “my disciples”; and in contrast to the others MARTÍNEZ, DSS Translated, 343 reads “with your disciples” in 1QH 7:14. But the parallel with ʤʫʺʮʠʡ “in your truth” suggests rather the meaning “instruction”. 241 Cf. HOLLADAY, Jeremiah 1, 53, 101; CRAIGIE et al., Jeremiah 1–25, 35; but see MCKANE, Jeremiah I, 40 about the text-critical problems. 242 HOLLADAY, Jeremiah 1, 412 refers specifically to the correspondences with Jer 13:21 and Jer 2:33 (ibid. 415). CRAIGIE et al., Jeremiah 1–25, 193 say “they have taught themselves”. 243 Cf., e.g., OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 323–324; KOOLE, Isaiah 49–55, 105–106. 244 Cf. F ISCHER, Tora, 45. All the more, as Isa 50:4 might take up the term ʣʥʮʬ in a distinctive way. 245 See also ACKROYD, Isaiah I–XII, 28 who reckons that “the usages of limmnjd in l 4 and liv 13 point to the meaning ‘instructed’” and generally notes the uncertainties about the alleged withdrawal of Isaiah in a small group of supporters. 246 With CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1–39, 100; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 229. 247 In Isa 2:4 and 26:9, ¥ʣʮʬ is used for the people of the whole world. Isa 26:10 speaks of the ʲˇʸ generally, who will not learn righteousness. In Isa 29:13, ¥ʣʮʬ is used in connection with “this people”. Isa 29:24 speaks of a future change, when those who murmur will accept “instruction”. Finally, the statement that YHWH “teaches you” (Isa 48:17) is directed towards the whole people. In Isa 40:14, ¥ʣʮʬ is used to argue for the uniqueness of YHWH. 239

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

129

appeal to “learn to do right (ʡʨʩʤ ʥʣʮʬ) …” (Isa 1:17) is of particular interest in this respect. Anybody who heard the message of Isaiah could be one “who is taught by me” according to this appeal at the beginning of Isa. In the immediate literary context, there is no indication that Isaiah addresses a particular group apart from the people (Isa 8:1–15) after he had spoken to Ahaz and the royal court (Isa 7). Thus there is no evidence that the term ʣʥʮʬ refers to disciples of Isaiah in Isa 8:16. This point is further amplified through the different renderings of this verse in the ancient versions. The most we can say is that it refers to those who heard the message of Isaiah. A final note regarding Isa 8:16 is due to the mood of the verbs. Against the punctuation of the Masoretes the plene writing ʭʥʺʧ together with the subsequent w-qatalti-forms indicates an inf.abs. The determination of ʸʥʶ is more ambiguous, but given the parallel arrangement, it is most likely a form of an inf.abs. as well, not of ¥ʸʸʶ but its subsidiary form ¥ʸʥʶ.248 There might be a specific reason for the choice of ¥ʸʥʶ here. By assonance this relates the proposition of Isa 8:16 to the statement in Isa 8:14, according to which YHWH will become a stumbling block (ʬʥˇʫʮ ʸʥʶʬ). This phonetic association underlines a material connection: as a stumbling block YHWH is still present in Jerusalem (see also Isa 8:18). This takes up the idea introduced in Isa 6; YHWH is present in judgement.249 According to Isa 6, the presence of YHWH is felt in the hardening message of Isaiah. Isa 8:11–18 substantiates this: YHWH becomes a stumbling block (ʬʥˇʫʮ ʸʥʶ) by binding up (ʸʥʶ) the prophetic message. Securing the prophetic message in this way, YHWH remains present. But as this securing coincides with the hardening effect of Isaiah’s message, it becomes a stumbling block.250

Accordingly, the prophet Isaiah states what happens in the present:251 “What is taking place is binding up the attestation and sealing the instruction in those that are instructed by me” (8:16). The subsequent w-qatalforms express, what Isaiah does in the light of that: “And I do hope in YHWH …” (8:17).252.253 Thus what Isaiah says is that his proclamation is 248 As a verb ʲʿʲ the inf.abs. of ¥ʸʸʶ would be ʸʥʸʶ s̛Ɨ rôr; cf. JM §82 b and already DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 159; thus also WILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 342–343 (ET, 364); B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 228n.1. 249 It is not possible to engage in the discussion on Isa 7 here, but it seems that the ambiguity of the Immanuel passage in Isa 7 is due to the same idea of YHWH being present, but in judgement. 250 For the relationship between Isa 6 and Isa 8:11–18 see also NIELSEN, Dramatic Writing, 2–5; SONNET, Le motif, 211n.9; LIND, Implications, 327–328; B. C. J ONES, Isaiah 8.11, although I cannot see that one can press Isa 8:11 that far to deduce that Isa 6 and Isa 8:11 cannot refer to an initial call (thus B.C. JONES, Isaiah 8.11, 156–159). In the light of these correspondences one can hardly speak of a “starke Spannung zwischen 6 9– 11 und 8 16–18 ” as LESCOW, Jesajas Denkschrift, 315 does. 251 On the use of an inf.abs. as equivalent of a present, cf. JM §123 w. 252 For a w-qatal continuing an inf.abs with present meaning, cf. JM §119 s. Less likely is the assumption Isaiah expresses his intention to seal (thus, e.g., RECHEN-

130

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

secured in those he has taught. This does not mean it is written on their hearts. What is secured in them is the hardening instruction of Isaiah. Nothing indicates that they understand it. Isaiah realizes the first effects of his hardening ministry. The bipartite section Isa 8:11–9:6254 is about what the attitude of Isaiah is to be, facing his confrontation with the people he addresses, from whom he is distinguished and still is to live with: he is separated from the way of this people (8:11) and yet at the same time is together with his children a token among his people (8:18).255 In this situation the command to fear YHWH (8:12–13) is followed by Isaiah waiting and hoping in YHWH alone (8:17).256 This is possible for Isaiah, because he has experienced the judgement already (Isa 6:6–7), knows the limit of judgement (Isa 6:11) and what lies beyond the judgement (9:1–6). Isaiah is aware of the change of times from “former times” to the “latter times” MACHER , Jes 8,16–18, 32 who deduces a COMMISSIVE aspect from v.17), as there seem to be no cases for an inf.abs. being equivalent to a cohortative; cf. on this JM §123 w.n.(1). That it is Isaiah who speaks in v.16 is likely because of the connection with v.17 (waw) and the consistent speech in 1.sg., which in vv.17–18 can only be Isaiah. Against REVENTLOW, Ende, 66–67 one must say that the fragmentary character of vv.16–17 only exists when one insists upon the claim that v.16 is a summons of YHWH directed towards Isaiah to perform a sign-act. His claim that prophetic words have to be understood on their own, i.e. as very short units, invalidates itself by the way it is applied to vv.16– 17. 253 The statement in Isa 8:17 invalidates any interpretation that overrates the significance of an alleged ‘support group’ as a “shelter from hostile criticism” and “supplying mutual support” (thus, e.g., CARROLL, Prophecy, 140). Isaiah speaks only of YHWH as his refuge. 254 Many see in Isa 8:18 the conclusion of the Isaiah memoir. But at least on the synchronic level I see a dipartite conclusion to the discourse starting with Isa 6 because of some similarities between Isa 8:11–18 and Isa 8:19–9:6. (Apart from the introduction in Isa 8:11) both start with what the people might say (¥ʸʮʠ) and the last line contains the designation ʺʥʠʡʶ ʤʥʤʩ. There are similarities in the sequence: both parts deal first with how Isaiah and his children have to act differently from the people (Isa 8:12–13 and Isa 8:19–20), then sketches what will happen to the people (Isa 8:14–15 and Isa 8:21–23aĮI). After that they differ, but if the parallel arrangement is sound, these differences may interpret each other: in Isa 8:16–18a Isaiah expresses his hope in YHWH in the present, while in Isa 9:1–6 he substantiates the content of that hope; and in both cases children (ʣʬʩ) play a significant role (Isa 8:17 and Isa 9:5). 255 While Isa 8:16 refers to the message of Isaiah, i.e. its oral dimension, Isa 8:18a may allude to the visual dimension of it by the reference to the “token/sign” (ʺʥʠ) so that both aspects of Isa 6:9–10 – hearing and seeing – are repeated. Here they occur in those lines that frame Isa 8:17; thus Isaiah fulfils his commission while entrusting himself totally to YHWH; this lies at the centre between Isa 8:16 and Isa 8:18a (Isa 8:18b does conclude the first part and therefore, plays another structural role) and is the centre of Isaiah’s ability to cope with his ministry. 256 It makes thus very little sense to read an Isaianic “confession” into 8:22–23 as JEPPESEN, Call, 149-155 does.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

131

(8:23)257 that lies ahead, through the judgement (9:1 – it is the people who walk in darkness that will see the light). So we have no clear evidence that there are disciples in the sense that they are a group different from “this people”. There is no other party than “this people” apart from Isaiah (and his children).258 The ʭʩʣʮʬ of Isaiah are the implied readers of the commission to harden, but not as a group that is informed of it but as those who are affected by it. In contrast to many other proposals, Isa 8:16 does not offer a group the ‘implied readers’ can identify with apart from all the people. So we can now turn our attention to the way Isa 6:11–13 contributes to the clarification of the relationship between “this people”, whom Isaiah is commissioned to harden, and the ‘implied audience’ of the narrative of Isaiah’s commission and his further proclamation. 5.2.3 Isaiah 6:11–13, Its Relationship to Isaiah 7–39 and the Duration of Isaiah’s Hardening Ministry In order to understand the place of the commission to harden in the book of Isaiah, we now have to turn our attention to the conclusion of Isa 6, verses 11–13. As I noted above (see structure), vv.11–13 are peculiarly shaped. V.11 is still part of the whole narrative of Isa 6:1–11, but introduces a new question in the dialogue between Isaiah and YHWH. Verses 12–13 are indicated as an additional comment that is not part of the initial conversation (as discussed above). In respect to the huge problems of interpretation particularly in vv.12– 13, I presuppose the detailed study of Emerton259 and confine myself to some comments on aspects that are most important to the argument of this study. From v.11 the readers/hearers can learn that the commission to harden is restricted in time. But this is disclosed only by the initiative of 257

On the interpretation of Isa 8:23 as a reference to different dispensations, see W ILFirst and Last, 97–98, 102–104 and IDEM, Book, 69, 72–77. 258 The plural address in Isa 8:12–13 is often taken as evidence that YHWH speaks to a group of people together with Isaiah, i.e. the “disciples”. Thus, e.g., SAWYER, Isaiah 1, 93; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 229; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 70; BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 218. It is striking that the whole passage starts with “Indeed, thus says YHWH to me…” but the actual saying addresses a plural audience. So this poses the question how the addressed audience is related to Isaiah that he himself can say that YHWH spoke to him. Apart from the supposed “disciples” there are some other potential addressees, Isaiah’s children (v.18). Accordingly, this tension is not solved in v.16 but right at the end of this unit. They are the closest to Isaiah so that he can include them as “to me”. Moreover, it is Isaiah and his children who are tokens and signs among the people (v.18, not the supposed disciples) so that it makes most sense to encourage them not to walk in the way of this people. 259 Cf. EMERTON, Translation. LIAMSON,

132

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

Isaiah. From this call onwards the prophet incorporates in his persona a tension between his new relationship with the Holy One of Israel and his changed relationship with “this people”. He continues his participation in the fate of his people as the prophet for and against “Judah and Jerusalem” (Isa 1:1; 2:1).260 Two aspects are worth noting in respect to the answer of YHWH. First, the described devastation of the land and lack of people forms a contrast to vv.1–3 and is the manifestation of YHWH’s judging presence in the sanctuary (Isa 6:4; see above). Secondly, there seems to be no time, when this announcement was fulfilled entirely. At the same time, there were several huge devastations in the land and decimations of people. Thus for the reader/hearer of v.11 the temporary restriction of the call to harden, and therefore of its validation, remains ambiguous. Vv.12–13 specify the nature of the land’s devastation and the loss of its population,261 but they do not resolve the ambiguity in time. On the contrary, one crucial effect of vv.12–13 is to prolong the endurance of hardening and judgement.262 By adding the notion about the tenth that will be destroyed, every experience of devastation and deportation might be only a preliminary episode with the final one still to come (cf. also the perspective in Isa 1:5). The variety of attempts of scholars to identify to which event v.12 and v.13 refer to illustrates this ‘effect of prolongation’ in vv.12–13.263 Two further aspects should be briefly noted in respect to the function of vv.12–13 within the larger context. First, some scholars argued that the 260 According to the above interpretation, it is Isa 8:11–9:6 that in particular shows how Isaiah lives in this tension. 261 This is amplified specifically by two allusions in v.12 to v.11: the emptiness of every house of any man (ʭʩʺʡʥ ʭʣʠ ʯʩʠʮ) is specified in v.12a as YHWH leading man away (ʭʣʠʤʚʺʠ ʤʥʤʩ ʷʧʸʥ); and the forsakenness in the land (ʵʸʠʤ ʡʸʷʡ ʤʡʥʦʲʤ ʤʡʸʥ, v.12b) corresponds to the devastation of the field (ʤʮʮˇ ʤʠˇʺ ʤʮʣʠʤʥ) in v.11bȕ. 262 Similarly, SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 58: “a notion of graded judgment”; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 138 speaks of the “continued punishment” and BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 164 calls this effect the “Teleskopie der Katastrophen”. 263 Some examples include: For v.12 referring to the destruction of the Northern kingdom and v.13a to Judah’s judgement (as the tenth) in 701 B.C. see, e.g., NIELSEN, Hope, 147–148; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 138–139; for v.12 recording the destruction of the Northern kingdom and v.13a pointing to the destruction of Judah and Jerusalem in 587/6 see, e.g., B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 76–77; WILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 257–258 (ET, 378–379) sees in v.13a a warning of destruction also of Judah and Jerusalem in general after the fall of Northern Israel (v.12); B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 226 sees in v.12 the destruction in 701 B.C. with ʺʡʶʮ in v.13a referring to the remaining city Jerusalem. Others argue that the destruction and deportation mentioned in vv.11–12 refer to the events of 587/6 and that the destruction mentioned in v.13a lies still ahead; cf., e.g., B ARTH, Jesaja-Worte, 195–196; HAUSMANN, Israels Rest, 160; P FAFF, Entwicklung, 58– 59, 125, 147, 151.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

133

reference to the oaks and terebinths is not merely an illustration but alludes to idol-worshipping as mentioned in Isa 1:29–31.264 The meaning of ʺʡʶʮ is then a cultic pillar as in other places in the OT. But ʺʡʶʮ is elsewhere always a stone pillar, which does not fit in here so that one should seek another explanation for ʺʡʶʮ.265 Furthermore, at least on the synchronic level, the outcome of this punishment is “the holy seed”. Thus the imagery of plants is not entirely negative, which raises doubts about the negative connotation of the trees as referring to idol-worship. It seems to stand for the people, not for their activities.266 In this respect Isa 6:13 stands closer to the other occurrences of vegetation imagery in Isa 6–12 than to Isa 1:29–31. The latter concerns actions in literal gardens with literal trees. Isa 6:12–13, like other texts in Isa 6–12,267 introduces vegetation in a comparison, i.e. as a simile or even as a metaphor.268 Related to this is the second point. In contrast to other studies, I would argue that the mentioning of the “holy seed” is far more integral to further parts of the Book of Isaiah than being just added rather incidentally from 264 Cf. HVIDBERG, Masseba, 99; BEALE, Isaiah VI 9–13, 258–272 taken up by MÜLLER, Glauben, 32 and IDEM, Beobachtungen slightly different: “in Israel wird es also zugehen wie bei der Desakralisierung eines heiligen Hains” (IDEM, Glauben, 32); W ILLIAMSON, Isaiah 6,13, 119–122 also notes several interrelationships between Isa 1:29–31 and Isa 6:13 but states on the basis of the (right) observation about Isa 1:29–31 expressing explicitly cultic malpractice while those allusions are “allusive at best” in Isa 6:13 (ibid. 124) that the former is a later specification of Isa 6:13 (ibid. 123–125). 265 Once again I refer to the study of EMERTON, Translation. 266 It is therefore no surprise that Hvidberg, Müller and Beale (though by different means) have to object to the last phrases in v.13bȕ. HVIDBERG, Masseba, 98 argues that the “holy seed” refers to the dead god buried in the gardens of Adonis. But “holy” is related in the very chapter to YHWH and “seed” is related to the people elsewhere in the Book of Isaiah. MÜLLER, Glauben, 30–31; IDEM, Beobachtungen, 178–184 must exclude v.13bȕ as an inappropriate later addition that wants to juxtapose a positive outlook to the announcement of judgement and wants to delete the connotation of ʺʡʶʮ ( IDEM, Beobachtungen, 183). However one decides the stages of growth in vv.12–13, it shows that at the level of v.13bȕ the notion of the idol-worship was not present or at the forefront. B EALE, Isaiah VI 9–13, 261–271 (especially 270) interprets v.13bȕ as if ʺʡʶʮ was the predicate of “holy seed”. But in this case one had to presuppose that “holy seed” was common for the people or the remnant, for which we have no evidence. “Holy seed” can only be the predicate of ʺʡʶʮ (see also MÜLLER, Beobachtungen, 183). It also seems that Williamson presupposes the origin of Isa 1:29–31 for the stage when Isa 6:13bȕ has not been added yet, when he notes in respect to the editor responsible for Isa 1:29–31 that he is “focussing on its [i.e. Isa 6] last and most severe word of judgment” (W ILLIAMSON, Isaiah 6,13, 128), which further shows that at least on the present level there are more differences than similarities between Isa 1:29–31 and Isa 6:12–13. 267 See in this respect VAN W IERINGEN, Jesaja 6–12 (even though I do not agree with all his suggestions specifically). 268 One may finally note that Isa 6 shares another feature with Hos 14:2–9, the association of illness and sin with a felled but resprouting tree.

134

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

Ezra 9:2.269 The “holy seed” (ˇʣʷ ʲʸʦ) is the antonym to the “seed of rebellion” (ʭʩʲʸʮ ʲʸʦ; Isa 1:4; also 14:20); the “seed” is an important theme in Isa 40–66 and particularly related to the Servant and the children of Zion (cf. Isa 53:10 with Isa 54:17).270 Finally, that this seed is called “holy” is most suitable for the context it appears in, where YHWH Zebaoth is called “holy” three times.271 In its present form, Isa 6:11–13 restricts the hardening effect of Isaiah’s message to the time when the land is devastated and the people are led away into captivity, when even a tenth has been destroyed so that finally the “holy seed” emerges. All subsequent chapters and speeches become important then not only for what they say, but also for how they relate to this specific perspective on time. With every further message the question is posed simultaneously: does it still cause hardness or is it delivered in the time when the judgement has been accomplished and the “holy seed” can emerge? We will see, however, that Isa 7–39 gradually disclose that the restriction expressed in Isa 6:11–13 is de facto an announcement about the validity of Isaiah’s message and the endurance of its hardening effect beyond Isaiah and his ministry during the time of the kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah.272

269 W ILLIAMSON, Ezra, 131–132 explains the phrase ˇʣʷʤ ʲʸʦ in Ezra 9:2 by a complex (mental) combination of several biblical passages: the terms “seed of Abraham”, “holy people” (from Deut) and the verb “to sow” (from Lev 19:19) are combined to “holy people” to contribute to the application of the law of holiness (Lev 19:19) to the issues of mixed marriage (Deut 7:3) in Ezra 9:2 (and the whole context). Thus as the term “holy people” seems to be in agreement with the general strategy of combining several passages of the Pentateuch in Ezra 9:2, Williamson concludes that the term is original in Ezra 9:2 and has then been taken over in the gloss in Isa 6:13bȕ. Thus also IDEM, Book, 35. Others just confine themselves to linguistic similarities that suffice to ascribe v.13bȕ to a post-exilic gloss; e.g. HAUSMANN, Israels Rest, 160. 270 For the “seed” and its relation to the theme of the “servants” as the descendants of the Servant, see in particular BEUKEN, prophetie en schriftgeleerdheid, 78–83; IDEM, Main theme, 67–68. 271 It is clear from these observations that the term “holy seed” is used quite differently in Isa 6:13 and the whole Book of Isaiah than in Ezra 9:2. I do not doubt the way this term is used in the latter passage as Williamson has shown, although I could not find the term “seed of Abraham” frequently (cf. Isa 41:8; Jer 33:26; Ps 105:6; 2 Chr 20:7). But the notable differences between both passages provoke a different way of explaining their origin. In respect to the differences it seems not accidental that “holy seed” is undetermined in Isa 6:13 in contrast to Ezra 9:2. In the train of thought of Isa, the “holy seed” is introduced as a new aspect in Isa 6:13, which is (far) later further elaborated (thus especially in relation to the Servant; see above). 272 Without taking into account the way Isa 7–39 relates to this, J. BECKER, Isaias, 53 concludes similarly in respect to the present form that “auf die in V. 11a gestellte Frage

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

135

The events and announcements related to the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis presented in Isa 7:1–9:6 illustrate the effectiveness of hardening, but also indicate that beyond and through the judgement (“the people walking in darkness”), there is a new beginning ahead (“… see a great light”), when a newly born child will execute a governance in justice and righteousness. These chapters, therefore, pose all the more the question, when the ultimate judgement has been completed and the “holy seed” will come to the fore. As the destruction and decimation caused by the campaigns of 734–732 B.C. have not brought the ultimate judgement273 but saw the manifestation of hardness in Judah (7:1–9:6),274 Isa 9:7–10:4 emphasises that the destruction of the Northern kingdom Ephraim, announced in Isa 7:3–9 and Isa 8:1–4, cannot mean the end of judgement either. This is actually the climax and point of the whole section Isa 9:7–10:4: in a speech about the Northern kingdom Jacob/Israel/Ephraim (thus 9:7–20), the prophet stresses that YHWH’s anger has not turned away (9:11, 16, 20). The final stanza then addresses directly an audience that because of the recurrence of “woe” and the similar issues from Isa 5:8ff, is most likely Judah.275 Thus the judge‘Bis wann?’ gleichsam eine neue, über den Horizont der Zeit des Isaias hinausgehende Antwort gegeben wird.” 273 That there was considerable devastation and even deportation among the Judahites is first of all suggested by 2 Chr 28 (see also 2 Kgs 16:6). The historical value of this passage is of course debated. W ILLIAMSON, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 345, 348 reckons with reliable historical information for v.6, 17, 18; J APHET, I & II Chronicles, 905–906 sees historical references in vv.7, 15 and in respect to the account of the Edomite attacks. She does not exclude possibility for the references to the Philistine campaigns but raises the question how Isa 14:28–29 is related to this. The widely held reconstruction of the events as a war led by Rezin and Pekah against Judah to replace Ahaz by Tabeel to force Judah into joining the coalition in Syro-Palestine against Assyria, formulated by J. BEGRICH, Der syrisch-ephraimitische Krieg und seine welt-politischen Zusammenhänge, ZDMG 83 (1929) 213–237 (taken from B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 183) has been increasingly criticized (thus, e.g., B ICKERT, Köng Ahas on the simple basis of literary-critical judgements in 2 Kgs 16:5, 7–9 and Isa 7:1–9) or refined. For a careful analysis of the Assyrian inscriptions and the Biblical accounts see especially IRVINE, Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis, 23–109. His conclusions however still reckon with considerable military conflicts in the land of Judah, imposed upon her from several sides (cf. ibid. 109). For an overview and further literature see also BEUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 183, 192–193. 274 This aspect is widely recognized for Isa 7:1–9:6 or the supposed Isaiah memoir (Isa 6:1–8:18 or similar extends); cf., e.g., HUBMANN, Bote, 337–338. 275 With B ARTELT, Book, 135; B LUM , Testament II, 13n.4, 17; CHILDS, Isaiah, 86–87. Consequently, the function of the ‘Woe oracle’ in Isa 10:4 is, in contrast to some recent studies, not so much to form a concentric structure around the ‘Book of Immanuel’ but to make this rhetorical impact to confront the Judahites with the enduring judgement into their territory and time. It is not possible to engage in the debate about possible original collections and subsequent changes, interpretations mainly based on the supposed inter-

136

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

ment will also meet Judah. It is not over with the events of 722 B.C. in Samaria. That Israel and Judah must go through judgement and, in fact, only a remnant of Israel and Judah will return is also one aspect of Isa 10:5–32. Assyria will be judged because of its pride and arrogance, but only after “the Lord has finished all his work against Mount Zion and Jerusalem” (10:12). This carries forward the theme that judgement for Judah is still to come. The passage concludes with another allusion to an Assyrian campaign (10:28–32),276 presenting it as if it was about to come.277 Again, as in Isa 8:11–9:6, the prophet then looks beyond judgement (10:32) to the time when a new king will reign in righteousness (11:1–9). Then the limitation of understanding and knowledge of YHWH will be overcome as well. Through the reign of a man from the shoot of Jesse, who has a “spirit of knowledge” (11:3), the whole earth will be full of “the knowledge of YHWH” (11:9). In the time of the reign of Ahaz several campaigns took place against Judah that could have been understood as the judgement that would leave almost nothing and from which the “holy seed” emerges. The notice of the death of Ahaz (14:28), therefore, raises the question whether that is the polation of Isa 6:1–8:18(8:19–9:6). For the common reconstruction of Isa 5:8–24; 10:1–4 forming originally a collection of ‘Woe oracles’ and Isa 9:7–20 + 5:25–30 as an original poem, see W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 180–183, 207–210 (ET, 194–197, 223–226) and most recently B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39, 211–212, 217 with slight variations. For further discussions of the poetics of Isa 5; 9:7–10:4 and their editorial history, cf. L’HEREUX, Redaction; KORPEL, Structural Analysis; then for the editorial history of Isa 5:25–30 in the larger context, see WILLIAMSON, Isaiah XI 11–16; IDEM, Book, 132–147, 153–155. For critical assessments of some of these proposals see, e.g., BROWN, Refrain; IRVINE, Isaianic Denkschrift, 218–222; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 128–129, 192–195; CHILDS, Isaiah, 43–44; and for interpretations of the final form, cf. B. W. ANDERSON, Editorial Structure; SEITZ, Isaiah 1–39, 46–47, 49–52, 88–95; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 128–129, 192–195; B LUM, Testament I, 551–552, 555–557; IDEM, Testament II, 12–17; B ARTELT, Book, 96–139; CHILDS, Isaiah, 43–49, 83–87; B EUKEN, Jesaja 1–12, 261–271. 276 According to SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 205–206, Isa 10:28–32 most likely allude to the campaign of Sargon II in 720 B.C. after he had put down the Syrian and Israelite coalition. Some argue that because Carchemisch fell to Sargon II only 717 B.C., the described campaign could have taken place only after 717 B.C. (cf., e.g., B LUM, Testament II, 20). SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 205–207 argues on the other hand that Carchemisch was subjugated by Tiglat-pileser already in 742. For the sake of the argument here, it suffices to show that Isa 10:27–31 presents the threat as immediate, but as the following chapters indicate the ultimate judgement is postponed so that the extent of Isaiah’s hardening message becomes more and more obvious. 277 Cf. B LUM , Testament II, 20 who emphasizes the “bedrängende Konkretion der Bedrohung in 10,27*ff” that for him forms the aim of a time line that starts with Isa 5:25 (ibid. 16). Blum however discusses this in relation to the extent of Isaiah’s original writings; on extent and structure of this ‘legacy’ see IDEM, Testament I.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

137

case. Could the new king Hezekiah even be the one predicted in Isa 9 and 11? And so Isaiah is presented as continuing his proclamation. Even in the time of Hezekiah, Isaiah has to speak against false political alliances (30; 31), complacency (32:9–11), idol-worshipping (30:22) etc. The ultimate judgement, which in Isa 10:27–31 seemed so near, still lies ahead. Once more the hardening effects of Isaiah’s mission become manifest and are explicitly addressed in the present of Isaiah (Isa 28:9–13; 29:9–12). So Isaiah has to write down his message for a time in the further future that it might be a witness then (30:8–9). Only then, through, after and out of judgement the people will engage in a new relationship with YHWH (and vice versa). Out of “his strange work” (28:21), they will see “their children, the work of my hands” (29:23); and then the deaf will hear and the eyes of the blind will see (29:18). Then they will act like Isaiah, sanctifying the Holy One and stand in awe of him (29:23; cf. 8:13); and they will gain understanding (29:24). This is what YHWH actually wants to do, but he is in an intermediate position. In the present, he has to act against his people. Thus he “longs/waits” (¥ʤʫʧ, 30:18; like Isaiah, cf. 8:17) until he can answer his people, and they will be able to see and hear again (30:19– 21, 30). For the reader/hearers it becomes clear though that the time of the reign of Hezekiah is still a time of hardening with the ultimate judgement still ahead. Several further features contribute to this train of thought of a gradual postponement of the ultimate judgement beyond the reign of Hezekiah, and thereby the enduring validity of the hardening message of Isaiah. A first clue is the structuring of Isa 28–33 by various ʩʥʤ (Isa 28:1; 29:1; 29:15; 30:1; 31:1; 33:1). They resemble the same sequence as in Isa 10:1, 5 – the addresses that are introduced by ʩʥʤ but directed towards Judah (Isa 10:1–4 and Isa 28:1–32:20) are followed by those directed towards the foreign oppressor, which contain elements of the future of the people of Judah beyond the judgement (Isa 10:5–19 and Isa 33). The function of the ʩʥʤpassage in Isa 10:1–4 is to argue that the judgement of YHWH will also include Judah, after it met Northern Israel, and that only in this way will the judgement announced in Isa 5 by various ʩʥʤ-passages come. This is amplified there by the way the “anger of YHWH that is not turned away” (Isa 5:25 within Isa 5:24–30) goes beyond Northern Israel (Isa 9:7–20) to finally meet Judah (Isa 10:1–4). It is striking that the whole of Isa 28–33 takes up this train of thought and applies it to the time of the reign of Hezekiah. It does so particularly by matching the six ʩʥʤ-passages in Isa 5:8–23 (cf. Isa 5:8, 11, 18, 20, 21, 22) with Isa 10:1–4. In other words, the announcements of judgement that according to the six “woes” of Isa 5 falls upon whole Israel, i.e. also on Judah, are applied to different times in the ministry of Isaiah, to the aftermath of the fall of Northern Israel in the time

138

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

of Ahaz (Isa 10:1–4), and to the judgement still due in the reign of Hezekiah (Isa 28–32). These announcements correspond to the six “woes” in Isa 5 so that only when the former are fulfilled the ultimate judgement has been accomplished. That the same train of thought of Isa 5; 9:7–10:4 is taken up is further strengthened by the same movement from Ephraim to Judah that we can find in Isa 28. A further clue may lie in the presentation of the oracles against the nations, of which I can only sketch in a preliminary fashion.278 Babylon is placed at the beginning of the collection as the incorporation of all human complacency (cf. Isa 13:6–16 with Isa 2:12–16) and total tyranny (Isa 14:3–21). As much as Assyria is like Babylon, in the light of the announcement of the latter’s defeat the overcoming of Assyria (Isa 14:24–27) is only part of the larger story: only YHWH will make an end to human complacency and oppression of others as it manifests itself ultimately in Babylon (Isa 13:1–14:23) and of which the empire of Assyria and its campaigns is just one particular form at a specific time.279 This perspective governs the subsequent proclamations by the distinction of Isa 13:1–14:27 from the rest of the OAN by the note of the death of king Ahaz in Isa 14:28. With all due caution, I would then identify three main blocks that each lead ultimately to Judah (speaking of Judah: Isa 17:[7–8,] 9–11; 20; 22). Most of the nations that are mentioned in this respect are the ones that elsewhere in the Book of Isaiah, Judah had to deal with in respect to the predominance of Assyria. In fact, they occur in the same order in Isa 14– 22 as in the rest of Isa 1–12; 28–39: Philistia, Moab (?), Damascus and Northern Israel in Isa 14:28–17:6 evoke the coalition during the SyroEphraimite crisis (cf. Isa 7–10); Egypt and Cush (Isa 18–19) point forward to the intense negotiations between Hezekiah and Egypt that are severely criticized by Isaiah in Isa 28–32; and “the wasteland by the sea” Babylon, Dumah and Arabia (Isa 21) hint at a coalition (led by Merodach-Baladan), which Hezekiah could perhaps join according to Isa 39. As already noted, each block of these nations leads to a reference to Judah. Thus the structure of Isa 13–27 may picture the subsequent struggles that Judah had during the ministry of Isaiah with other nations in confrontation with the Babylon-like tyrant Assyria. But the introduction (Isa 13:1–14:27) had made clear that the only solution is that YHWH ultimately overcomes the ‘incorporation of evil’ in Babylon, of which Assyria is only a part. But this 278

The problems of interpretation in Isa 13–23 (and further Isa 24–27; 34) are huge. But it is not possible in the course of this study to address them sufficiently. I am aware and acknowledge that in the light of that these preliminary thoughts need far more substantiation. 279 See the correspondences between Babylon and Assyria noted above.

5. The Communicative Roles of the Narrative of Isaiah 6

139

will be accomplished (thus Isa 24–27) only beyond the destruction of Jerusalem (Isa 22). Thus Isa 13–27 contributes in this particular way to the ‘telescopic’ presentation in Isa 1–39. Finally, the narratives in Isa 36–39 provide a further case for the extended validity of Isaiah’s hardening message. When Sennacherib led his attack, the circumstances of Isa 6:11–13 seem to have been fulfilled with nothing more left than Jerusalem. Hezekiah refers indeed to the “remnant” (37:4). Even more, had YHWH refused in Isa 1:15 to listen to the prayers, Hezekiah pleads to YHWH to hear and see now (37:17), and it seems that YHWH has heard the prayer (37:21). When the Assyrians have been defeated in the land of Israel (37:36; cf. 14:25), the story of Hezekiah’s illness and healing (38) seems to illustrate the change:280 may YHWH now not struck his people with illness any more? Does he continue to hear their prayers like Hezekiah’s (38:4)? However one interprets the presentation of the king Hezekiah in Isa 36–39,281 the conclusion makes clear that the events announced in Isa 6:11–13 still lay ahead, as the Babylonians will take everything, and even descendants of Hezekiah will be lead away by them (39:6–7). By the end of Isa 39 the ultimate judgement is still due to come and hardness still continues. For the argument of this study the survey of Isa 7–39 is noteworthy in two respects. First, it represents Isaiah’s commission to harden “this people” as unrestricted to a short span of time but governing his proclamation throughout his ministry. 282 This sheds further light on the understanding of 280

However one tries to date Isa 38–39, as they now stand they are related to the events of Sennacherib’s campaign (38:1 “In those days”); cf. BEUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 387. 281 Several studies propose a contrast between Ahaz in Isa 7 and Hezekiah in Isa 36– 38; thus, e.g., ACKROYD,, Isaiah 36–39; CONRAD, Reading Isaiah, U. BECKER, Jesaja. LISS, Prophetie, 72–93 argues against the interpretation of a negative presentation of Ahaz but without discussing the supposed (contrasting) parallels in Isa 36–38. BEUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 412–414, 419 argues that also in Isa 39 Hezekiah re-assumes his exemplary role. But is not the statement in 39:8 a derivation from 38:19 (cf. also GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 221), all the more as the verse immediately before 39:8 stresses with far more words than necessary that it is your descendants, your flesh and blood, who will be born to you who will be taken away? Additionally, the ambiguity in showing the Babylonians all the treasures has also been recognized in BEUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 415. The connotation of negotiations about alliances may be further indicated by the use of a Babylonian loanword for “treasure house” (ʤʺʫʰ ʺʩʡ from Akk. bît nakamti; cf. DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 396; OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 692n.2; BEUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 415n.21) in v.2; ironically suggesting that (part of) it is about to become Babylonian? 282 So it is presented on the late stages of the book’s development. As it was noted above, scholars differ on the question whether the motif of hardening was already part of the prophet Isaiah’s material. However, the above analysis of the perlocutionary role of Isa 6 raises doubts about the assumption of an insertion of Isa 6:9–10 in exilic or postexilic times. When Isa 6:9–10 and Isa 30:8–9 are seen as material of the earliest stage of the Isaiah tradition in the 8th century B.C., Isa 30:8–9 forms the basis for the later devel-

140

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

“this people” in Isa 6:9–10. It is not a specific group within the people, nor is it a specific generation. It refers to the whole people that Isaiah addressed – the people of Judah and Jerusalem (cf. Isa 1:1) in their entity as the people of YHWH. Secondly, the gradual progression in time in Isa 7– 39 and its impression of ambiguity of when the time of judgement has come finally reveals that the answer of YHWH to Isaiah’s question ‘How long, o YHWH?’ (Isa 6:11) did not restrict the duration of Isaiah’s ministry and its effects but extended it. Through the command in Isa 30:8–9 it is assured that Isaiah’s message addresses the people even beyond the prophet’s own lifetime. These two elements, the openness of reference of “this people” to all Judah and Jerusalem and the extended duration and validity of Isaiah’s ministry and its hardening effect, contribute to a linking of communicative levels. The proclamation of Isaiah to his audience becomes an address to the implied readers. They, too, belong to the people of Judah and Jerusalem and Isa 40–66 leave no doubt that this is the case. Through the gradual progression in Isa 7–39, the readers realize how the validity of Isaiah’s proclamation continues until they learn through the narrative of Isa 39 that this applies even until the Babylonians will have taken away many people, and therefore until their very present. This gradual progression in time prepares the implied readers to recognize that they, as the people of YHWH, are addressed and affected by the message of Isaiah as well. Thus the editors responsible for combining Isa 1–39 and Isa 40–66 see the hardening message of the prophet Isaiah as still effective (see Isa 42:18–25; 43:8; 48:8; 56:9–57:2; 59:10; 63:17). That is why they have included it before they address the actual audience, point to the effects of their hardness and present a way out of it.

6. Conclusions and Summary 6. Conclusions and Summary

According to these observations, the implied audience of the whole Book of Isaiah is constructed and addressed as the one people of YHWH, separated into those who are in Babylon (addressed in Isa 40–55) and those who are in the homeland (addressed in Isa 56–66). It is confronted with the message of Isaiah ben Amoz (Isa 1–39). There is no other recipient of Isaiah’s message than “this people”; an additional group of “disciples” is not in view. The message of Isaiah is directed to “this people” throughout opment in the formation of the whole book of prolonging Isaiah’s hardening message to the exilic or post-exilic time. On the function of Isa 30:8–9 in Isaiah’s ministry presupposed here, see W ILLIAMSON, Book, 104–105 (“it looks as though Isaiah no longer expected himself to be personally involved in that future day [...]. The text’s function as a witness is cast into the indefinite future”; ibid. 105).

6. Conclusions and Summary

141

a considerable span of time, until YHWH’s judgement of his people will finally lead to the emergence of the “holy seed”. Isa 6 cannot be separated from the rest of Isaiah’s proclamation. Like the latter and as part of it, chapter 6 addresses “this people”. But this means reading/hearing the narrative of Isa 6 has the very effect it talks about: the perlocutionary role of Isa 6 and the whole of the message of Isaiah is to harden “this people” – the readers/hearers of it. However, if Isa 6 hardens its recipients like the rest of Isaiah’s message, it cannot serve as a legitimisation of the prophet or YHWH, whether shortly after the SyroEphraimite Crisis, at the end of Isaiah’s ministry or in the exilic time. Until the time perspective of Isa 6:11–13 is fulfilled, Isa 6 does not explain the failure of the prophet or YHWH to whoever reads or hears it, it includes its audience among those who become hardened. Hence, the retrojection hypothesis does not work. Isa 6 does not EXPLAIN, it continues to HARDEN. Finally, the perspective developed here also raises doubts about the use of Isa 6 as a “model of reading and understanding” that emphasizes the interrelationship of “text” and “imaginative interpretation”. In being hardened by Isaiah’s message, their perverted communicative acts fall back upon Isaiah’s addressees. The misuse of their epistemological capacities results in their malfunctioning (‘deed-consequences connection’). Hence, the understanding of Isaiah’s message is not at their disposal or even rooted in their “imaginative interpretation”. It is made impossible. Isa 6 deprives its readers/hearers of their disposal of their own epistemological conditions. Having discussed the various issues of Isa 6:9–10 in interaction with the recent discussion of their interpretation, I shall conclude this part by summarizing the main results in respect to the ‘theme of hardening’ in Isa 6. Isaiah’s description of his encounter with YHWH shows that YHWH is about to bring judgement upon his people, and Isaiah’s commission to harden them is presented as a part of this judgement (Isa 6:1–7). Hardening in particular is a communicative act; it is the perlocutionary effect of Isaiah’s message, which is expressed in v.10. But it has to be distinguished from Isaiah’s illocutionary act that is introduced through the quotation in Isa 6:9b. What guarantees the rules for performing communicative acts is in the case of Isaiah’s proclamation YHWH himself, who commissioned Isaiah. The commission, however, is formulated in a way that the perlocutionary effect to HARDEN the people is not at the disposal of Isaiah. Moreover, the integration of Isa 6:9–10 within Isa 6 and its relationship to Isaiah’s outcry (Isa 6:5) show that in hardening YHWH maintains the connection of deed and consequences in respect to the aspect of communication. In commissioning Isaiah to harden the people, YHWH ensures that their perverted acts of communication (“impure lips”; cf. Isa 6:5 and Isa

142

Chapter 3: The Disposition of Hardening in Isaiah 6

3:8–10; 5:18–20) fall back upon them. Hardening makes impossible their communication; they are to be affected in a way so that they do not see, hear and understand. It is the consequence of the people’s false communication – with YHWH and among themselves. But although hardening occurs here as a consequence of the sins of Isaiah’s audience, this does not take away its perplexing effects. In commissioning Isaiah to harden his people, YHWH lets their sins come upon them in a way that they cannot understand their fate as judgement. They are not to understand and return when Isaiah is preaching (Isa 6:10). The disturbing severity of that condition, however, can only be perceived by the one who has already gone through judgement and speaks to the people beyond judgement – Isaiah himself. He has to lament the fact that his preaching is sealed and can only take refuge in putting his trust in the hidden God (Isa 8:16–18). All those who hear/read Isa 6 and the whole message of Isaiah, however, will be hardened until YHWH’s judgement of his people is ultimately accomplished. Reading chapters 6–39 in the light of Isa 6:11–13, one can recognize a ‘strategy of prolongation’ of Isaiah’s proclamation that goes beyond Isaiah’s own lifetime and applies finally even to the addressees of Isa in Babylon and Judah. The analysis of Isa 6 elucidates what is involved in discussing the theme of hardening and, thereby, helps to determine further passages related to it. It shows that the main aspects are ‘perception’ (i.e. seeing and hearing) and ‘understanding’. So, when related terms are accumulated in a passage, it has to be considered as contributing to the theme of hardening in Isa. Further passages in Isa 1–39 could not be discussed here in detail. They either look forward to the time when the imperceptiveness and ignorance of YHWH’s people will be overcome (e.g. Isa 29:17–24; 35:5), some of which associate this with a future king (cf. Isa 11:2, 9; 32:1–4?), or they state the present condition of ignorance (cf. Isa 1:2–3) or continue to announce YHWH’s intention to harden them (cf. Isa 29:9–10). Thus in Isa 1– 39 hardness as the inability to perceive and understand is initiated and realized through the ministry of Isaiah until in the future the ultimate judgement is accomplished. Then YHWH will bring salvation to the remnant, which includes the overcoming of their hardness. Then the eyes of the blind and the ears of the deaf will be opened and their heart will understand (cf., e.g., Isa 32:2–3). Until then, however, the readers and hearers of Isa 1–39 are hardened as part of YHWH’s judgement on those who do not act according to righteousness.283 283 This connection of hardness and the problem of righteousness can best be seen in Isa 1–39 in the counter-images of the future, when a righteous king will bring knowledge to the earth (cf. Isa 11:1–9) and when in the time when a king reigns in righteousness, the

6. Conclusions and Summary

143

Isa 6 does not simply introduce hardening as a theological theme in Isa. The chapter also contributes to the perception of Isa as a unified whole. It states and realizes the HARDENING perlocutionary action of Isaiah’s message in Isa 1–39. When the addressees in Babylon (Isa 40–55) and in the homeland (Isa 56–66) are addressed as blind, deaf and ignorant, this is because they are affected by the message of Isaiah that is directed to them through Isa 1–39. Isa 40–66 is often called a ‘message of salvation’. But the addressees of the book only get to this message after they have first received the hardening message of Isaiah. The subsequent chapters will show how the theme of hardening develops further in Isa. From Isa 6 we see that ‘perception’ and ‘knowledge, understanding’ are the central issues of the theme of hardening in Isa. When we now turn to Isa 40–66, we shall introduce each chapter by recognizing terminology belonging to the semantic fields of ‘perception’ and ‘understanding’, like verbs of seeing, listening, understanding, recognizing, organs of perception or adjectives.

eyes of the blind and the ears of the deaf will not be closed any more and instead the heart can understand again (cf. Isa 32:1–4).

Chapter 4

Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23 The previous chapter argued in respect to Isa 6 that hardening is the perlocutionary effect of the (presented) message of Isaiah through which YHWH brings judgement upon his people in consequence of their false communication. It also showed that through a ‘strategy of prolongation’ of Isaiah’s proclamation in Isa 6–39 this even applies to the addressees of Isa. This chapter tries to show that the single passage Isa 42:18–25 confirms and clarifies this in respect to the addressees in Babylon (cf. 1.). In looking at how this passage together with further units that contain aspects of the theme of hardening (Isa 43:8–13; 44:6–20) is integrated within the communicative strategy of the main discourse (Isa 42:14–44:23), we will then illumine the role that hardening plays there (cf. 2.).

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25 1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

1.1 Introduction The notoriously difficult passage Isa 42:18–251 contains a number of terms and phrases that belong to the semantic fields of perception and understanding: ˇʸʧ “deaf” (vv.18, 19), ʸʥʲ “blind” (vv.18, 19), ¥ʲʮˇ “to hear” (vv.18, 20, 23, 24), ¥ʨʡʰ “to look, to regard” (v.18), ¥ʤʠʸ “to see, to look at, to consider” (v.18, 20), ʭʩʰʦʠ ʧʥʷʴ “opening the ears” (v.20), ¥ʯʦʠ “to hear, to listen” (v.23), ¥ʡˇʷ “to hear, to pay attention to” (v.23), ¥ʲʣʩ “to know, to understand” (v.25), ʡʬʚʬʲ ¥ʭʩˈ “to take to heart, to notice” (v.25). It is, therefore, necessary to establish, what this passage contributes to the theme of hardening in Isa. For that purpose we will look at its structure and its communicative strategy before we concentrate on the theme of hardening. 1

Well-known is Begrich’s statement of resignation, according to which he had to exclude a discussion of Isa 42:18–25 (as well as of Isa 45:8) “weil es dem Verfasser nicht gelungen ist, in ihr Verständnis einzudringen.” ( IDEM, Deuterojesaja, 13). For a detailed discussion of the various text-critical and exetegical problems see the “Appendix 1. TextCritical and Exegetical Problems in Isa 42:18–25” below.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

145

1.2 Structure and Poetics For many interpreters the difficulties in Isa 42:18–25 can only be solved by assuming various glosses and interpolations2 so that one finds rarely a discussion of the present unit’s structure.3 Those who do discuss the structure of Isa 42:18–25 apply different methodologies and regard various features as important for the determination of its structure.4 The most exten2 V.19b is deleted as a later gloss, e.g., by KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 16; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 32–33; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 91 (ET, 110); SCHOORS, Saviour, 203 and IDEM, Jesaja II, 269; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 79; GITAY, Prophecy, 137; H.-C. SCHMITT, Erlösung, 122–125; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 216–217; W ERLITZ, Redaktion, 247; ascribing the primary layer of Isa 42:18–25* to a time later than DI, VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 208, 210 and LABAHN, Schuld, 210–212 regard v.19b as an even later gloss. Among the few who actually try to find a motivation for such a later insertion, cf. ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 271–272 (a text-critical attempt, on an evaluation see “Appendix 1”); B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 154–155 (see “Appendix 1”); B ALDAUF, Knecht, 22, 29 (“zustimmende Äußerung eines späteren Lesers”, 29); W ILLIAMSON, Book, 257–258 (see “Appendix 1”). The term ʤʸʥʺ in vv.21b, 24bȕȖ and its possible reference to the “Mosaic Torah” is for some exegetes the reason to regard them as later glosses or editorial insertions as well; cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 319–321; MARTI, Jesaja, 291–294; G. A. SMITH, Isaiah II, 148– 149; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 32–33; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 89–94 (ET, 108–114); ELLIGER , Deuterojesaja, 278–281; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 154–158; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40– 66, 79; H.-C. SCHMITT, Erlösung, 122–125; B ALDAUF, Knecht, 22–24, 31, 32–35; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 70; WERLITZ, Redaktion, 247; even those, who sketched a different picture of the origin of vv.18–25 treated vv.21, 24bȕȖ similarly; cf. MOWINCKEL, Komposition, 96n.3 (here these lines belong to the several additions of the original unit 42:18, 24a, 25–43:7); MERENDINO, Der Erste, 275–290 (especially 279–283; the appearance and meaning of “Torah” are one of the main reasons for ascribing the independent unit vv.18, 19b, 21v, 22[only ʩʥʱˇʥ ʦʥʦʡʚʭʲ ʠʥʤʥ], 23, 24bȕȖ, 25 to a later origin than the one of DI); according to VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 207–210 vv.21b, 24bȕȖ have been influenced by post-exilic Torah piety and were inserted into the gradually grown unit (vv.18–23* R 1; vv.24a*–25 R3); LABAHN, Schuld, 210–222 (especially 210–212) even distinguishes between vv.24*–25 (belonging to the “schuldorientierte Überarbeitungsschicht”, influenced by dtr. theology, 222) and v.21 as derived from circles of post-exilic Torah piety. Finally, v.24aĮIII, 24bĮ (“was it not YHWH against whom we have sinned?”) is seen as a later insertion, cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 320; M ARTI, Jesaja, 293; SCHOORS, Saviour, 207; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 93 (ET, 113; still cautiously though), then ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 279, 290; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 152, 158; MERENDINO, Der Erste, 280; H.-C. SCHMITT, Erlösung, 124; VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 208; LABAHN, Schuld, 211, 212–214; W ERLITZ, Redaktion, 247. 3 A few scholars were less concerned with the literary structure and used Isa 42:18–25 as one of the main witnesses to their hypothesis of an increasing hostility between the prophet and his audience; thus, e.g., J. W. MILLER, Prophetic Conflict, 78; STUHLMUELLER , Transitions, 15. 4 According to MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 475 the present passage is the first part of the whole poem Isa 42:18–43:7 and contributes the proem/appeal (v.18) and four strophes (vv.19–21, 22, 23–24, 25) to it. SIMON, Salvation, 95–96 tries to cope with the text by assuming “an imaginary dialogue between God and the idolators” (ibid. 95) similar to

146

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

sive study of that kind has been published by Goldingay rather recently. In his view, several different structures are interwoven in vv.18–25 depending on which aspect one looks at.5 In interaction with these different approaches, the present study seeks to clarify the structure of Isa 42:18–25 on the basis of repetitions, synonyms, semantic equivalences and changes in person and number as possible structural markers. Several indications suggest the segmentation of vv.18–25 into two strophes of different length: vv.18–20 comprise strophe I, vv.21–25 form strophe II. 6 First, the most likely speaker of vv.18–20 is YHWH, in vv.21–25 the one commissioned in Isa 40:3–8 is speaking. Secondly, the change of speaker is highlighted by the inversion of YHWH in v.21. Thirdly, correspondences between v.18 and v.20 on the one hand and vv.21–22a and v.25 on the other (see below) indicate that these lines function as inclusios to their strophes. Fourthly, v.20 and v.25b are constructed almost in parallel and may thereby serve well as parallel conclusions to each strophe.

the techniques in Isa 45:14–15; 53 and others. H. F REY, Buch, 85–90 divides the passage into vv.18–21 and vv.22–25 according to his interpretation of vv.18–21 referring to the individual Servant and vv.22–25 concerned with the people. Some exegetes segment the passage into vv.18–20 and vv.21–25 according to the different speakers in these verses; thus SMART, History, 91–95; similarly also B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 152–153 for the present text, who gives a more detailed presentation; this is taken up by CHILDS, Isaiah, 333; similarly also B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 149 (he is uncertain, however, about vv.24–25: these lines could be spoken either by the prophet, speaking in vv.21–22, or by the crowd); KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 264. LAATO, Servant, 89–90 does not give a full presentation of how he sees the structure of the passage; he only notes a chiasm in vv.21–22 and v.24 in order to defend the integrity of vv.21, 24 as part of the passage. Attending to the questions in Isa 42:18–25 as possible structural markers, Motyer and Fischer reach similar conclusions: FISCHER, Tora, 92 divides into vv.18–22 and vv.23–25 while M OTYER, Prophecy, 326–327 identifies five parts (A: v.18; B 1: v.19; C1: vv.20–22; B 2: vv.23–24a [without answer]; C2: vv.24 [answer], 25) and notes various interrelationships between the parts. It should be noted, that some redaction critics have also attended especially to the questions as possible structural hints on previous stages of edition, thus especially MERENDINO, Der Erste, 275–276, 282 and LABAHN, Schuld, 211. A totally different though interesting way has been pursued by K RATZ, Kyros, 139–140 who explains the difficulties of the passage by its various intertwinings and relationships to the literary context (and theological concept of the particular editorial layer). 5 Cf. GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 48–49; there he presents five different figures of possible structures. 6 Apart from Smart, Beuken, Childs, Baltzer and Koole (see above) cf. also KORPEL & DE M OOR , Hebrew Poetry, 155–156.

147

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25 Line v.20 v.25b

No Appropriate Reaction

Given Fact/Situation

No Appropriate Reaction

ʲʮˇʩ ʠʬʥ

ʭʩʰʦʠ ʧʥʷʴ

ʡʬʚʬʲ ʭʩˈʩʚʠʬʥ

ʥʡʚʸʲʡʺʥ

†

ʸʮˇʩ ʠʬʥ ʲʣʩ ʠʬʥ

Figure 8: Parallel lines in Isa 42:20 and Isa 42:25b

Given Fact/Situation †

ʺʥʡʸ ʺʥʠʸ

ʡʩʡʱʮ ʥʤʨʤʬʺʥ

7

Further observations on the inner structure of each strophe equally support their segmentation. Strophe I consists of four bicola arranged concentrically (see Figure 9). The two lines in v.19 are almost parallel in structure. They are bracketed by vv.18, 20, which show some signs of chiastic arrangement that highlight the concentric structure of the whole strophe: ¥ʤʠʸ8 and ¥ʲʮˇ recur in inverted order in v.20; the phrase ʭʩʰʦʠ ʧʥʷʴ (v.20b), which can be seen as an expression of antonym to ˇʸʧ (v.18a), may strengthen this position. A

v.18 B B’

A’

v.19a v.19b v.20

ʺʥʠʸʬ ʥʨʩʡʤ ʭʩʸʥʲʤʥ ʥʲʮˇ ʭʩˇʸʧʤ ʧʬˇʠ ʩʫʠʬʮʫ ˇʸʧʥ ʩʣʡʲʚʭʠ ʩʫ ʸʥʲ ʩʮ ʤʥʤʩ ʣʡʲʫ ʸʥʲʥ ʭʬˇʮʫ ʸʥʲ ʩʮ ʲʮˇʩ ʠʬʥ ʭʩʰʦʠ ʧʥʷʴ †ʸʮˇʩ ʠʬʥ ʺʥʡʸ †ʺʥʠʸ

Figure 9: The Structure of Strophe I – Isa 42:18–20

The structure of strophe II is not one that comes to the fore instantly. Apart from the problems raised by the frequent changes in person and number, the many different interrelationships, connections and semantic equivalences make it hard to reach a conclusive determination of its structure and often lead to differing possible solutions.9 Several features indicate a concentric structure in strophe II beginning at the centre and moving outwards. The bicolon in v.24aĮIIIbĮ is inversely related to the preceding two questions in vv.23–24aĮI.II in respect to the presupposed kind of communicative interaction.10 7

For a detailed discussion of v.20 and the proposed emendations (indicated through †) as well as the parallelism between v.20 and v.25b see below “Appendix 1”. 8 If one adopts the QƟre, the verb occurs even in the same form as in v.18. 9 The occurrence of ʤʸʥʺ in v.21, 24b as well as the “plunder” terminology in vv.22– 24a have forced LAATO, Servant, 89 to argue for a chiastic arrangement of vv.21–24. Similarly the fourth figure in GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 49. But how do the changes in person fit into that pattern and how should one deal with v.25 and its various relationships to vv.18, 19, 20? Moreover, the two “Who” questions seem to disturb this chiasm as well. The different structures supposed by GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25 are one attempt to deal with these diversities. 10 There are a number of problems surrounding the interpretation of the line v.24aĮIII, 24bĮ (ʥʬ ʥʰʠʨʧ ʥʦ ʤʥʤʩ ʠʥʬʤ) that are dealt with in detail in the “Appendix 1”. For the sake of the argument, it suffices here to clarify how this line inverses the communicative process of the two preceding lines: while v.24aĮIII is closely related to the second ‘Who’

148

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23 Cola

v.23a, 23b

Kind of Communicative Interaction

ʸʥʧʠʬ ʲʮˇʩʥ ʡˇʷʩ ʺʠʦ ʯʩʦʠʩ ʭʫʡ ʩʮ - direct speech to 2.pl.masc.

I.II

ʡʷʲʩ †ʤʱʩˇʮʬ ʯʺʰʚʩʮ ʭʩʦʦʡʬ ʬʠʸˈʩʥ

v.24aĮIII

ʤʥʤʩ ʠʥʬʤ

v.24aĮ

v.24bĮ

- speech to unspecified addressee about someone outside the communicative interaction - speech to unspecified addressee about someone outside the communicative interaction

ʥʬ ʥʰʠʨʧ ʥʦ - direct speech to 2.pl.masc. Figure 10: The Pattern of Communication in Isa 42:23–24bĮ

These three lines form the centre of strophe II (C) and are bracketed by two bicola (B: v.22b; B’: v.24bȕȖ), which both refer to the Servant in 3.pl.masc. (the lines’ corresponding beginning with ʥʩʤ and ʥʡʠʚʠʬʥ indicates the change of person). The parallelism of both lines is further supported by the negations that occur twice in each of them (v.22b: ʯʩʠʥ; v.24bȕȖ: ʠʬʥ). Moreover, they are enveloped with a corresponding pair of lines again. As vv.21–22aĮI (A) deal with a juxtaposition of YHWH and the people in singular,11 so in v.25 (A’) again the people in singular (v.25b) and YHWH are juxtaposed. Finally, as the statement about YHWH’s intentions is followed by the remark of the state of the (singular) people in vv. 21–22aĮI, so the reaction of the (singular) people follows the actions of YHWH in v.25.

question (v.24aĮI.II) as its answer, the second colon of this line (v.24bĮ) returns to the implied communicative situation of the first “Who” question in v.23. There the speaker directly addresses an audience in 2.pl.masc. (ʭʫʡ). The second “Who” question does not continue the direct address but emphasizes another agent outside the communicative situation presupposed in v.23 who is identified in the answer ʤʥʤʩ ʠʥʬʤ (v.24aĮIII). Once he has dealt with this question and answer, the speaker refers again to the communicative situation presupposed in the first question: between him and his audience. Only does he now include himself with his addressees. 11 This juxtaposition is highlighted by the inversion of ʤʥʤʩ (v.21) and ʠʥʤʥ (v.22a). Cf. also ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 280, 287; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 155; B ALDAUF, Knecht, 23, 30; VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 211; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 55, 58. For the meaning of the occurrence of the people in plural from v.22aĮII see below.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

149

ʸʩʣʠʩʥ ʤʸʥʺ ʬʩʣʢʩ ʥʷʣʶ ʯʲʮʬ ʵʴʧ ʤʥʤʩ ʥʠʡʧʤ ʭʩʠʬʫ ʩʺʡʡʥ ʭʬʫ ʭʩʸʥʧʡ ʧʴʤ ʩʥʱˇʥ ʦʥʦʡʚʭʲ ʠʥʤʥ

A

a: v.21 b: v.22a

B

v.22b

C

a: v.23 b: v.24aĮ I.II b’+a’: v.24aĮIII, 24bĮ

B’

v.24bȕȖ

ʥʺʸʥʺʡ ʥʲʮˇ ʠʬʥ ʪʥʬʤ ʥʩʫʸʣʡ ʥʡʠʚʠʬʥ

A’

a’: v.25a b’: v.25b

ʤʮʧʬʮ ʦʥʦʲʥ ʥʴʠ †ʯʥʸʧ ʥʩʬʲ ʪʴˇʩʥ ʡʬʚʬʲ ʭʩˈʩʚʠʬʥ ʥʡʚʸʲʡʺʥ ʲʣʩ ʠʬʥ ʡʩʡʱʮ ʥʤʨʤʬʺʥ

ʡˇʤ ʸʮʠʚʯʩʠʥ ʤʱˇʮ ʬʩʶʮ ʯʩʠʥ ʦʡʬ ʥʩʤ ʸʥʧʠʬ ʲʮˇʩʥ ʡˇʷʩ ʺʠʦ ʯʩʦʠʩ ʭʫʡ ʩʮ ʭʩʦʦʡʬ ʬʠʸˈʩʥ ʡʷʲʩ †ʤʱʩˇʮʬ ʯʺʰʚʩʮ ʥʬ ʥʰʠʨʧ ʥʦ ʤʥʤʩ ʠʥʬʤ

Figure 11: Structure of Strophe II – Isa 42:21–25

Additionally, there are some interrelationships between both strophes that should be mentioned here. Vv.19b, 23 have a remarkable feature in common. Both contain only one aspect of the ‘deafness/blindness-imagery’ that is introduced in v.18 (see also vv.19a, 20). While v.19b concentrates on the aspect of (not) seeing (ʸʥʲ 2 times), v.23 exclusively rests on the aspect of hearing (¥ʯʦʠ, ¥ʡˇʷ, ¥ʲʮˇ). Since both lines appear quite in the centre of each strophe, it is appropriate to say that the ‘deafness/blindnessimagery’ has been split-up into the centres of both strophes, which lends them a close relationship. Furthermore, the occurrence of two ‘who’ questions in the middle of each strophe (v.19a, 19b; vv.23, 24aĮ) associates them as well. Finally, the concluding lines (v.20; v.25b) are parallel in structure and terminology (see above). Further poetic devices will be identified in the course of the discussion of the communicative strategy of the passage that we will address now. 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 42:18–25 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 42:18–25 The communicative unit Isa 42:18–25 mediates ‘complex illocutionary acts’. We find here a ‘conjunction of two illocutionary acts’, an APPEAL to the addressees to do something (DIRECTIVE illocution), and at the same time a CHARACTERIZATION of them that one could even call a diagnosis (ASSERTIVE illocution). The most obvious APPEAL stands at the beginning of the passage, where the speaker directs the imperatives “listen!” and “see!” to his audience (v.18). It is complemented in the second strophe (vv.21–25) by the question in v.23 that demands12 of the addressees to listen “to this” (ʺʠʦ), i.e.

12

For some brief comments on the difficulties of determining the illocutionary class of QUESTIONS and their ascription to the class of DIRECTIVES, see A. W AGNER, Spre-

150

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

the communicative action of the whole unit,13 for the sake of the time to come (ʸʥʧʠʬ “for a later time”). The content of both appeals is the same: the addressees are demanded to perceive, to see and listen to what the speaker has to communicate. The CHARACTERIZATION of the addressees and the state they are in is communicated by various means. They are addressed as “blind” and “deaf” (v.18), rhetorical questions amplify these notions (v.19) and further statements (vv.21–22, 24bȕ–25) contribute also to the comprehensive picture that the unit gives of the audience’s situation and state. This CHARACTERIZATION revolves around three central issues. First, this passage presents the addressees in stark contrast to the Servant in Isa 42:1–9. Secondly, it likens them to the audience of Isaiah ben Amoz as it is presented in Isa 1–39. Thirdly, Isa 42:18–25 introduces the differentiation between singular and plural as an important aspect of the people’s characterization. In order to substantiate this analysis, the following discussion shall concentrate on some of the specific features that indicate the communicative strategy by which the present passage mediates its illocutionary role. 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 42:18–25 First, we shall look at those features that support the strategy by which the speaker mediates the CHARACTERIZATION of his audience. Secondly, it will be noted how he gets his audience to follow the APPEAL with which he confronts them. Finally, we look at those means by which both illocutionary actions are correlated to perform these ‘complex illocutionary acts’ through the present passage.

chakte, 239. V.23 is widely regarded as an explicit demand, cf., e.g., B ALTZER, DeuteroIsaiah, 153 (“explicit demand to the listeners”); contra GITAY, Prophecy, 148. 13 Since ʺʠʦ can refer to previous as well as following passages, as it does also in Isa 40–55 (See the examples for both possibilities noted in KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 276 though falsely including Isa 50:11 among those instances, where ʺʠʦ refers backwards. But this mistake is avoided in KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 131 ad loc.), there are exegetes who reckon with vv.18–22 (or some parts of them) as its referent (cf., e.g., E LLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 281, 289; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 157 also regards it as pointing backwards) as well as those who take it as a deixis to the following verses (cf., e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 276). Its reference is easier to discern when it appears at clear boundaries, thus at the end of a unit in Isa 41:20 and 54:17 referring backwards, and at the outset of a unit, e.g., in Isa 47:8; 48:1, 16 etc. referring forwards. Here we find ʺʠʦ right at the centre of a strophe. Since there are no clear indications, it seems preferable to me to relate it to the whole unit. The addressees should attend to the whole passage of vv.18–25.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

151

a. The CHARACTERIZATION of the Addressees Structural Signals That the description of the addressees is an important aspect of the present passage is amplified through the way certain lines are constructed and positioned. The inversions of ʭʩˇʸʧʤ “deaf” and ʭʩʸʥʲʤ “blind”14 in v.18 at the beginning of this unit highlight these designations. Similarly, each strophe concludes with a line that makes a statement about the people’s lack of perception (v.20) or understanding (v.25). Intertextual Relationships Two central aspects of the CHARACTERIZATION of the audience are to stress the contrast of their actual condition with the commission of the Servant (Isa 42:1–9)15 on the one hand, and to highlight how much they are like the audience of Isaiah as it is presented in Isa 1–39. These traits of the people are not just stated, they are revealed through various intertextual correspondences. A Note on the Servant in Isaiah 42:1–9 Given the previous designation of the people Jacob-Israel as YHWH’s Servant in Isa 41:8, 9, the parallel arrangement of Isa 41:8–20 and Isa 42:1–916 and the fact that one can find no other explicit identification in Isa 42:1–9, the most probable identity of the Servant in Isa 42:1–9 is the people Jacob-Israel. The contrast between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 42:18–25 should not be taken as an argument against this identification but forms an important motivation for the communicative strategy of Isa 42:14–44:23 (see below). This view, however, does not necessitate an identification of the Servant figure in Isa 49:1–12; 50:1–11 and 52:13–53:12 with the people Jacob-Israel.17 The people JacobIsrael as YHWH’s Servant are given royal and prophetic traits in the context of the trial scenes (Isa 41:21–42:9). Both traits have been recognized long before, though often they have been treated as either – or interpretations. The dominant trait seems to be the royal presentation of the Servant.18 The phrase ʩʣʡʲ ʯʤ is known for designations of a king (cf. 1

14

Cf. B ALDAUF, Knecht, 21; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 265. This contrast has often been taken as evidence against an identification of the figure in Isa 42:1–4(5–9) as the people Israel. Thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 311; ORLINSKY, Servant, 76. 16 See below “2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 40:12–42:13”. 17 On this differentiation, see WILCOX & P ATON-W ILLIAMS, Servant Songs, 85–93, 98–99; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 139–155 and the interpretation in chapters 5 and 6 below. 18 This has been maintained in former times especially by Scandinavian scholars; thus, e.g., KAPELRUD, Identity; RINGGREN, Komposition and see especially the surveys in NORTH, Suffering Servant, 220–239 (especially 225–233) and H. HAAG, Gottesknecht, 156–167 (especially 159–164); see also KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 18–44 (for Isa 42:1– 9); BEUKEN, MIŠPƖT̢, 4, 24–26; JEREMIAS, ʨʴˇʮ, 34–35, 39–42; DIJKSTRA, Knecht, 41– 49 and more recently LAATO, Servant, 76–87 and W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 130–139. 15

152

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

Sam 9:17; 12:13; Zech 9:9–10); the phrases ʥʡʚʪʮʺʠ (v.1) and ʪʣʩʡ ʷʦʧʠʥ (v.6) have been regarded as belonging to royal ideology in the OT as well as in ANE texts;19 some terms and ideas in vv.6–7 have parallels in the presentation of Cyrus in Isa 45:11–13 and Akkadian royal inscriptions;20 finally, the task is mainly a royal one, namely to establish justice. Those who maintain the Servant to be a prophetic figure mainly argue from the evidence of Isa 49:1–6 and Isa 50:4–9.21 But if one reckons with a distinction between the Servant figure in Isa 42:1–9 and the one in Isa 49:1–12; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12, at least the exclusive designation as a prophet in Isa 42:1–9 is not justified any more. But there are also ambiguous indications that may include aspects of a prophetic ministry. The term ʣʡʲ is applied in the Book of Isaiah to the royal house (Isa 37:35) as well as to the prophet Isaiah (Isa 20:3; in both cases YHWH calls them ʩʣʡʲ); the pouring out of the spirit is related to prophecy (cf. Num 11:25, 29 and similarly Num 24:2; 1 Sam 10:10; Joel 3:1; see also 1 Kgs 22:23 and 2 Chr 18:22) and less to kingship (cf., e.g., 1 Sam 10:6 [but see 1 Sam 10:10]; 16:13; 2 Sam 23:2; Ps 51:12–13; Isa 11:2); v.6b shows remarkable correspondences to the call of Jeremiah in Jer 1:5.22 Thus it seems most likely that Isa 42:1–9 presents the people Israel as the Servant with predominantly royal and minor prophetic traits.

Several elements in v.19 contribute to the contrast with the Servant in Isa 42:1–9. First, while v.18 only hints at such a contrast by characterizing the audience as “blind” in contrast to the commission of the Servant in Isa 42:7, v.19 explicitly states that it is ʩʣʡʲ “my servant”, who is unperceptive. Secondly, this is highlighted by the fact that in v.19 ʣʡʲ is only combined with ʸʥʲ and not with ˇʸʧ. Thirdly, in contrast to the previous lines, v.l9b singles out and concentrates exclusively on ʸʥʲ as the state of the Servant, and thereby, further amplifies the contrast to Isa 42:7. Finally, referring to the Servant as a blind and deaf “messenger I wish to send”, he also fails to match the prophetic traits of the figure in Isa 42:1–9. Furthermore, the second strophe begins with a sharp contrast between the intention of YHWH (v.21) and the actual state of the addressed Servant The dominant royal trait of the Servant’s task is also recognized in HERMISSON, Lohn, 282 for Isa 42:1–4. 19 Cf. KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 20; LAATO, Servant, 70–71, 78, 85; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 133. 20 Cf. LAATO, Servant, 84–85. 21 Thus almost paradigmatically HERMISSON, Lohn, 282: “[The fact that in Isa 42:1–4 mainly the royal dimension comes to the fore, while in Isa 49:1–6 and Isa 50:4–9 the prophetic aspect is emphasized...] ist kein Mangel, da doch die Texte zusammengehören, und bedeutet auch nicht, daß der Knecht des ersten Gottesknechtslieds ein König wäre.” (italics mine) 22 Both figures have been formed (¥ʸʶʩ, yet in both cases there are text-critical problems) and appointed (¥ʯʺʰ) to be a prophet of the nations (ʭʩʥʢʬ ʠʩʡʰ; thus Jeremiah) and light to the nations (ʭʩʥʢ ʸʥʠʬ; thus the Servant) respectively; cf. LAATO, Servant, 85. Laato also notes the correspondence between Isa 42:7 and Isa 61:1. But the latter depends on the Servant passages and other material of Isa 40–55 and cannot serve for any conclusion. On this aspect, see especially B EUKEN, Isaiah 61; HERMISSON, Deutung, 62–66; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 174–186; IDEM, Degree.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

153

(v.22a), which is highlighted through the parallel inversion of ʤʥʤʩ (v.21) and ʠʥʤʥ (v.22a). The statement that YHWH was pleased to make great his “instruction” for the sake of his righteousness23 (v.21) serves primarily to create another contrast between the Servant’s commission (42:1–9) and the condition of the addressees who are, nevertheless, still called Servant (cf. Isa 42:19). It revokes the programme of the Servant who should bring forth justice to the nations by the means of “his instruction” (cf. Isa 42:4). But the addressees who are called the Servant in Isa 42:18–25, did not listen to “his (i.e. YHWH’s) instruction” (42:24). One particular aspect of this mission is to free the captives from prison and to open the eyes of the blind (Isa 42:7). The latter point has been contrasted in the previous strophe, now the speaker emphasizes the addressees’ inability to free the captives, because they are in prison themselves. Instead of leading ʠʬʫ ʺʩʡʮ “out of the dungeon” those who sit in the darkness (v.7), the Servant of Isa 42:18– 25 himself is hidden ʭʩʠʬʫ ʩʺʡʡ “in dungeons”. On the other hand, there are several intertextual correspondences showing that in his present condition the Servant is like the audience of Isaiah. This is clearly the case for the characterizations in vv.18–19 as “blind” and “deaf”. Being blind and deaf are part of the effects that Isaiah had to cause (Isa 6:10). That this does not mean literal physical blindness and deafness is evident from the paradox in v.18 and from the final line of the first strophe (v.20). Moreover, the predominating imagery for the addressees as “spoiled and plundered” in the second strophe (vv.21–25) is noteworthy. This predominance is not only visible in the manifold occurrence of the imagery of “spoil and plunder” (cf. vv.22a, 22b, 24a), but also comes to the fore by the syntax of v.22a. Here the metaphors of “being hidden in dungeons” and “being trapped in holes”24 are a modal adverb to the preceding phrase;25 they clarify in which way one can speak of the people as spoiled and plunSome interpret ʷʣʶ as a counsel for salvation (“Heilsratschluss”); cf. REITERER, Gerechtigkeit, 92–93 and already DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 440. But following our reflections in chapter 2, this verse highlights the function of ʤʸʥʺ for the purpose (ʯʲʮʬ) of YHWH’s connective righteousness, i.e. the righteousness that connects the deed with its consequence. 24 For the meaning of ʸʥʧ as “hole” see especially ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 288 and KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 274. 25 With Goldingay I regard the inf.abs. (ʧʴʤ) as an adverbial accusative from the preceding participles; cf. GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 58 referring to GKC §113h, z. While the inf. abs. as a continuation of a preceding finite verb mostly is attached by a waw (for this use of inf. abs., cf. GK §113z, JM §123x and after a participle, e.g., Jer 7:18), it is remarkable that this is not the case for its use as an adverbial accusative (see, e.g., Gen 21:16; Isa 57:17; Jer 22:19). The finite verb ʥʠʡʧʤ continues the inf. abs.; see JM §124q and GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 58. 23

154

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

dered and are therefore subordinated. This characterization of the people as spoiled and plundered, however, discloses their present state as to be in accordance with the experienced (cf. Isa 17:14) and announced (cf. Isa 10:6, 13) sufferings of the audience of Isaiah ben Amoz. Their present condition is the fulfilment of the presented message of Isaiah. This may be further substantiated by another possible equation: as it had been said to First Isaiah’s audience that there is no rescuer (cf. Isa 5:29 ʬʩʶʮ ʯʩʠ),26 so now the people are described as those who face this very situation (v.22b). Finally, parallel to the corresponding line v.22b,27 v.24bȕȖ presents the characterization of the addressees as realizations of some of First Isaiah’s announcements. This is achieved in v.24bȕȖ by a particular means. As it has been recognized recently, there are remarkable correspondences between Isa 30:9 and the present line.28 I would go even further; not only has the phrase of Isa 30:9 been split-up in Isa 42:24bȕȖ, but this line alludes to the whole argument of Isa 30:9–11 by combining two specific propositions (see Figure 12).

Since the phrase ʬʩʶʮ ʯʩʠ also appears in other parts of the OT (cf. Judg 18:28; 2 Sam 14:6; Pss 7:3; 50:22; 71:11; Job 5:4 etc.) it is not clear, whether Isa 5:29 instantly had been associated with the present passage. But the similar metaphors there (ʬʬˇ; cf. also the name in Isa 8:1) as well as the close relationship between Isa 5 and Isa 10 and their importance for the rhetoric of Isa 1–12 lend some probability to this assumption. 27 Both v.24bȕȖ and v.22b speak about the people in 3.masc.pl. The correspondence is further underlined by the occurrence of two negations in each line (2x ʯʩʠ in v.22b; 2x ʠʬ in v.24bȕȖ). 28 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 89–91; FISCHER, Tora, 74, 97; U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 266; SOMMER, Allusions, 161–162 and again IDEM, Prophet, 97–99; LABAHN, Schuld, 115, 217–219. However, the assessments of these correspondences differ significantly: For Williamson they are evidence of the influence of pre-exilic Isaianic material on DeuteroIsaiah. Sommer argues similarly when he interprets the phraseology of Isa 42:24 as a typical Deutero-Isaianic technique, a “split-up pattern and sound play”, which splits the one clause of Isaiah (30:9) into two clauses in DI. U. Becker and Labahn take the correspondences as evidence for editorial processes that are close in time and theological concept. Both reckon with an influence of a late development of dtr. theology to the editors responsible for both passages. According to LABAHN, Schuld, 215–216 the phraseology of Isa 30:9 and 42:24bȕȖ has been influenced by the Isaiah school as well as the late dtr. theology; U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 252–253 characterizes Isa 30:9–11 as “post-dtr” and cautiously asks whether Isa 30:9–11 and 42:24 might belong to the same edition (ibid. 199, 266–267). 26

155

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25 Passage

Unrelated Lines

Corresponding Lines

Isa 30:9–11 v.9a ʭʩˇʧʫ ʭʩʰʡ ʠʥʤ ʩʸʮ ʭʲ ʩʫ v.9b ʤʥʤʩ ʺʸʥʺ ʲʥʮˇ ʥʡʠʚʠʬ ʭʩʰʡ v.10aĮ ʥʠʸʺ ʠʬ ʭʩʠʸʬ ʥʸʮʠ ʸˇʠ v.10aȕ ʺʥʧʫʰ ʥʰʬʚʥʦʧʺ ʠʬ ʭʩʦʧʬʥ v.10b ʺʥʬʺʤʮ ʥʦʧ ʺʥʷʬʧ ʥʰʬʚʥʸʡʣ v.11a ʧʸʠʚʩʰʮ ʥʨʤ ʪʸʣʚʩʰʮ ʥʸʥʱ v.11b ʬʠʸˈʩ ˇʥʣʷʚʺʠ ʥʰʩʰʴʮ ʥʺʩʡˇʤ Isa 42:24bȕȖ v.24bȕ, 24bȖ

ʥʺʸʥʺʡ ʥʲʮˇ ʠʬʥ

ʪʥʬʤ ʥʩʫʸʣʡ ʥʡʠʚʠʬʥ

Figure 12: The Adoption of Isa 30:9–11 by Isa 42:24b

Change of Number There is a striking and frequent change of number from plural to singular (and vice versa) in Isa 42:18–25. A few scholars argue that the plural address underlines the individual responsibility while the singular address points to the people’s oneness.29 Indeed, the APPEAL that demands individual response is directed towards the addressees in plural both times in this passage (vv.18, 23). For the present argument that points to the attempt to characterize the addressees, it is important to note that the singular enables or amplifies the people’s comparison with the singular figure of the Servant (42:1–9).30 Rhetorical Questions In each strophe two “Who-questions” are placed at the centre. In the first strophe they serve to underline the people’s designations as “blind” and “deaf”. The rhetorical questions in v.19 suppose an agreeing answer.31 And that is the point of their use; by their employment the speaker seeks the audience’s agreement with what he says about them. Thus he presents the

29 For this meaning cf. GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 58 in respect to this passage. McConville argues for a similar meaning of the shift of address for Deuteronomy (cf. IDEM , Deuteronomy, 38 and in more detail IDEM , Singular Address, 26–29; see the latter for further literature for and against such an interpretation in Deuteronomy; see also quite recently against it DE T ILLESSE, TU & VOUS and some of the other papers in KRATZ & SPIECKERMANN (eds.), Liebe). 30 See above on the intertextual relationships. As regards the wider context, we should be aware that we find the same correlation of singular and plural in Isaiah’s call to harden the people (Isa 6:9–10). Additionally, the seemingly unmotivated switch from singular to plural (or vice versa) occurs also in a few other passages that deal with aspects of the theme of hardening (cf. Isa 43:8–13; 48:1–11 and the discussions below). 31 Cf. similarly G ITAY, Prophecy, 148.

156

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

CHARACTERIZATION

of his audience in a way that they adopt this view for

themselves. Distanciation Another feature further strengthens this strategy. Most of the lines that substantiate one aspect of the present condition of the audience do not address it directly; they speak about them (3.masc. singular and plural), not directly to them (2.masc.plural). We can see this strategy of distanciation in vv.18–19. The rhetorical questions (v.19) qualify the previous statement (v.18) about the audience’s inability to perceive as unparalleled, so that one must conclude “there is no one as blind as this Servant.”32 By these hyperbolic questions YHWH amplifies the dramatic condition of the addressees. But he does so by switching from direct address to indirect speech about the Servant. This ‘strategy of distanciation’ gives the addressees the opportunity to look at ‘themselves as another’ so that the negative ‘diagnosis’ does not offend them and risk a break in communication. It allows them to distance themselves from the assertions to some degree and reflect on them.33 And given the preferable emendation of ʸʮˇʺ to ʸʮˇʩ,34 v.20 maintains the indirect speech. Thus the change of person, which has perplexed many commentators, is actually an important aspect of the communicative strategy. That it is about the addressees, after all, however, is made clear at the beginning. A chiasm, which is formed through the terms ʸʥʲ and ˇʸʧ in vv.18, 19a, binds closely together both lines,35 the direct address and the indirect speech about the addressees. Fusion of Tenses – Fusion of Audiences Through various intertextual correspondences, the passage evokes in the characterization of the present addressees the condition of Isaiah’s audience as it is presented in Isa 1–39. The nature of this correspondence is illuminated by a remarkable variation in the use of tenses in Isa 42:18–25. In vv.24b–25 we have a sequence of verbal forms that seems to speak about the past (qatal- and wayyiqtol-forms). This seems to be confirmed by 32

OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 131; cf. also GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 52. Cf. GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 48. 34 Cf. the detailed discussion in “Appendix 1”. If one preferred the reading of MT, the whole line would mirror the sequence of the preceding lines as regards the kinds of speeches: the direct address (though in v.20 in singular) is followed by the indirect speech about the Servant, cf. GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 54; see also B ALDAUF, Knecht, 22. 35 Cf. B ALDAUF, Knecht, 21; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 266. This chiastic arrangement should cause some hesitations to make too much of the sequence in v.18 as GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 50 does, who argues for a parallel to vv.14, 16 in the order of appearance. 33

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

157

the recurrence of central statements of Isa 30:9–11 in v.24bȕȖ (see above) as if these lines were speaking of the past audience of Isaiah. But this sequence begins with the confession “against whom we have sinned” (qatal, v.24bĮ). Thus the past these lines talk about is actually their past, i.e. part of the audience’s identity. Moreover, the very last phrase of the passage shows that the past has been recalled, for it continued into the present: as much as “he did not understand” (ʲʣʩ ʠʬʥ), he still “does not take to heart” (ʡʬʚʬʲ ʭʩˈʩʚʠʬʥ, v.25b). Parallel to the last line of strophe I,36 the second strophe concludes with a statement about the present. By this ‘fusion’ of the past with the present of the addressees, Isa 42:18–25 confirms explicitly the ‘strategy of prolongation’ of Isaiah’s ministry/message that we identified in Isa 6–39. Through this prolongation every reader/hearer was to recognize that Isaiah’s message affects the audience even beyond the lifetime of Isaiah, it affects “this people” until the ultimate judgement has been fulfilled (6:11–13). Through the ‘fusion of tenses’ this passage explicitly claims that the present audience has become part of “this people”, the audience of Isaiah. The seemingly different audiences of Isaiah (Isa 1– 39) and of the present speaker have been fused, they are all part of the one people. To underscore that point, each strophe concludes with a statement about the present lack of perception (v.20) and understanding (v.25) of the people, referred to in both cases in the 3.masc. singular. Assonances The complaining tone of the CHARACTERIZATION of the audience is amplified by the sound pattern of assonance created through the accumulation of o-sounds in many lines, cf. v.2037 (especially v.20a emend.), vv.23–25, amplified through the parallel appearance of ʠʬ in the concluding lines of each strophe (vv.20, 25b).

36

Cf. the yiqtol-forms in v.20. Cf. similarly B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 154. According to W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 224, assonance is used in order to link component parts together and for emphasis. WEBER, Werkbuch Psalmen I notes assonances and sound patterns in his psalm commentary and reflects on its functions several times. So, on the triumphant o/iassonance in Ps 27,1–3 (ibid. 141), on i-assonance as sounds of lament in Ps 38 (ibid. 185), on the association of ʺ with destruction in Ps 51:10 (ibid. 236), on an a-uassonance imitating horror in Ps 48:6 (ibid. 221), on an a-i-assonance imitating lament in Ps 55 (ibid. 249), on the clusters of ʧ and ˇ/ʶ revoking the roar of lions and the noice of weapons in Ps 57:5 (ibid. 256). He notes o-assonances in Ps 31:16 (ibid. 156); Ps 46:2 (ibid. 214) and Ps 49:20 (ibid. 226). In the context of the present passage, the oassonances revoke terms like ʩʥʤ and ʩʥʠ. 37

158

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

b. The APPEAL to the Addressees After we have noted those elements that contribute to the characterization of the addressees, we shall now turn our attention to features that support the second illocutionary act of Isa 42:18–25 to APPEAL to the audience to see and hear. Two elements are of particular importance in this respect. First, both explicit appeals in v.18 and v.23 contain a reference to the future. V.18 states that hearing and looking would lead them to see (ʺʥʠʸʬ). V.23 says more clearly that this appeal is “for the time to come” (ʸʥʧʠʬ). To listen and see to the present proclamation has implications for the future of the addressees. This should encourage them to follow the appeal. The other element that supports the demand to see and hear is the speaker’s identification with his audience that we find in v.24bĮ. There the speaker includes himself in the confession of sin.38 The purpose of this identification is to gain the addressee’s trust that the speaker acts and speaks for their good because he is part of them. Rhetorical analysts have called this procedure the “ethical appeal”.39 The speaker seeks to convince his audience through his integrity, when he gives ‘the right impression of himself’. In the present passage, the speaker has to confront his audience with some harsh realities, but by putting himself on the side of his audience, he tries to show that he is favourably ‘disposed towards them’. c. Keeping the Complex Illocutionary Acts in Balance The goal of Isa 42:18–25 is to achieve both, CHARACTERIZING the condition of the present audience and URGING them to pay heed to its message at the same time. How important this balance is for the communicative strategy of this passage can be seen in those interpretations of v.18 that have emphasized one aspect over the other. Noticing the emphasis that the inversions of ʭʩˇʸʧʤ and ʭʩʸʥʲʤ put on the addressees’ designations as “deaf” and “blind”, some interpret them as harsh rebukes that hint at an increasing hostility between the prophet and

38

Thus some earlier commentators, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 441; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 386; more recently also, e.g., GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 47, 61; I. F ISCHER, Tora, 97; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 278; DE REGT, Person Shift, 227. WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 93 (ET, 113) and B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 149 think about this possibility but reject it in the end. Maintaining the line’s character as a later addition, ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 290 also says about it that “der Verfasser sich selbst in das Sündenbekenntnis einschließt”. 39 Following Aristotle’s Rhetoric, three modes of persuasion are identified: the rational appeal (“logos”), the emotional appeal (“pathos”) and the ethical appeal (“ethos”); cf. ARISTOTLE, Rhetoric, I, 2, 1356a; then, e.g., G ITAY, Prophecy, 37–38; RENZ, Function, 25; MÖLLER, Prophet, 41–42.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

159

his audience.40 Westermann instead argues that such a view fails to take notice of the paradox. According to him, it is not reproach that dominates the tone of the passage but a “secret promise”, which stands behind the text.41 This in turn, however, is in danger of downplaying the (inverted) designations. The passage of Isa 42:18–25 seeks to achieve this balance by two means. First, the paradoxical beginning in v.18, in which the designations “blind” and “deaf” are juxtaposed with the imperatives to hear and look, creates suspense. It raises the question how this could be possible, and thereby supports the demands to perceive. At the same time, the appeals yet to listen and see strengthen the strategy of characterization as their paradoxical nature helps to minimize the risk that the audience might break the communication because of the harsh designations. All that follows is an expansion and exemplification of this paradoxical line. The beginning holds everything together, and it is only through this paradoxical statement, that both actions can be communicated to the audience directly. Secondly, what is held together in v.18 is then evenly broken-up to the centres of each strophe and creates thereby a structural balance. The rhetorical questions in v.19 contribute to the CHARACTERIZATION of the addressees, while the question in v.23 demands the audience again to listen to the speaker’s proclamation. This equal distribution of both illocutionary acts contributes to the perception of their equal correlation. Having thus sketched the communicative strategy of the whole passage, we can now turn our attention to the theme of hardening in particular. 1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25 The sheer number of terms related to the various aspects of hardening, their distribution in the passage and their contribution to the communicative strategy of Isa 42:18–25 show that hardening plays an important role in this unit. We have identified the terms and phrases in the first paragraph. What we note is that most of them oscillate around the aspect of ‘perception’. The importance of the theme of hardening is further amplified not only through the number of terms related to it, but also through their distribution to structurally significant places of the unit. Every single word of the introductory line belongs to the semantic field of ‘perception’. By the occurrence of perception terminology, vv.18, 20 are related to each other chiastically and form an inclusio of strophe I. Furthermore, we find right in the centres of each strophe one line that deals exclusively with one 40

Cf. J. W. MILLER, Prophetic Conflict, 78; STUHLMUELLER, Transitions, 15. Cf. W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 90 (ET, 109) and similarly SPYKERBOER, DeuteroIsaiah, 98–99; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 283; see already DUHM, Jesaia, 318. 41

160

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

of the aspects of perception that are combined in the introductory line (v.18) – either seeing/being blind (v.19b) or hearing/being deaf (v.23) –, hence the content of v.18 is equally broken-up to the centres of each strophe. Finally, terminology related to hardening appears also in each strophe’s concluding line (see especially the negated forms of ¥ʸʮˇ, ¥ʲʮˇ in v.20 parallel to ¥ʲʣʩ and the phrase ʡʬʚʬʲ ¥ʭʩˈ in v.25).42 Therefore, this terminology lends coherence to the whole passage and contributes significantly to its characteristic structure. Given these observations it is not surprising that hardening plays a crucial role in the communicative strategy of this passage. The APPEAL to the audience as well as the people’s CHARACTERIZATION refer to it. The first strophe repeatedly designates the Servant/the people as “blind” and “deaf” (vv.18–19) and thereby claims that he is unable to perceive. These statements are exemplified by the final line (v.20), which points at the dissonance between using his aural and visual senses (“seeing many things”, “opening the ears”) and yet not perceiving through them (“he does not recognize”, “he does not hear”; v.20). This concentration on the perception of the addressees is a less prominent part of their CHARACTERIZATION in the second strophe. The specific failure to listen to “his instruction” (v.24) is mentioned, however, and when the different temporal horizons of the past and the present are fused, this happens via terminology of “understanding, realization”: when YHWH scorched him (i.e. the people/Servant) the latter “did not understand” (ʲʣʩ ʠʬʥ), and when YHWH burnt him, he “does not take to heart” (ʡʬʚʬʲ ʭʩˈʩʚʠʬʥ, v.25). Thus aspects of hardening are important features of the diagnosis of this passage’s audience. What has to be noticed in particular is that their lack of perception and understanding applies to the actions and processes of seeing/hearing (v.20) and understanding (v.25b) in general, because the verbs are used here, as in Isa 6:9–10, absolutely. They are not blind and deaf and ignorant in respect to a specific reference; being blind, deaf and ignorant is their condition in general. Excursus: An Editorial Layer Appealing to Obedience? – The Use of ¥ʤʡʠ in Isa We saw above that the line Isa 42:24bȕȖ takes up Isa 30:9–11. The latter passage seems to refer to the “willingness” (¥ʤʡʠ) of the people to listen to the prophetic message and has caused a few scholars to reflect on this and similar passage’s relationship to hardening since the prophet is called to prevent from listening, seeing and understanding. For some this passage and similar passages like Isa 1:18–20; 5:19; 28:9–12; 30:9, 15,43 show the engagement of the prophet in leading his audience to new insight and repentance, which manifests in the appeal to the people’s willingness (¥ʤʡʠ, thus only Isa 1:19; 42

On the parallel construction of v.20 and v.25b see above the discussion on Struc-

ture. 43

Cf. N IEHR, Intention, 61–63; B LUM, Testament II, 23n.48 and already the remarks in HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 82–83.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 42:18–25

161

28:12; 30:9, 15; 42:24 in Isa). They conclude that the commission to harden the people could only have been a late reflection of the prophet after he realized that the people have indeed rejected his message. One could say these scholars ascribe those passages to a ‘layer’ in the sense of a stage in the ministry of Isaiah. U. Becker, however, recently argued that those passages are part of a post-exilic editorial layer. Its purpose is to explain the exile by the disobedience, i.e. “unwillingness” of the people to listen to the “instruction” of YHWH and to give at the same time the opportunity for the post-exilic community to be obedient now. 44 Barthel relates these texts differently. He argues that Isa 6:9–10 on the one hand and those texts that refer to the “will” of the people on the other, taken together show that hardness is not a fatum but an issue of will that includes conscious rejection.45 While diachronic reflections cannot be pursued here, these passages that refer to the “will” of the people still pose the question how they are related to the prophet’s call to prevent them from any seeing, hearing and understanding. Hence, how are the statements about the “will” of the people related to hardening in Isa? What these texts do is to introduce the third aspect of ‘connective righteousness’. It is not only action and communication that play a part in the relationship among the people and with YHWH according to Isa; what should be governed by the principle of reciprocity is also the intention or will of the people. It is worth looking at Isa 1 in this respect. Apart from summarizing some of the important themes of the message of Isaiah (as it is presented here), this chapter also integrates all these aspects. The passage starts with the realization that YHWH’s acts of care for his people/children has not led to the culmination of interaction as communion (¥ʲʣʩ,46 Isa 1:2–3). Instead, YHWH and the people act against each other, following the deed-consequences connection (Isa 1:4–9). In a second parallel unit (Isa 1:10–19), the prophet turns his attention to various aspects of reciprocal behaviour. He shows, how religious and social interactions are interwoven (Isa 1:11–17), that the perverted social actions affect the communicative interaction with YHWH (Isa 1:15) and yet it is through communication (Isa 1:10, 19) that the issue of conventional action is mediated. Therefore, as the communicative mediation of conventional action is so crucial, the prophet finally appeals to the “will” of the people to listen (ʭʺʲʮˇʥ ʥʡʠʺʚʭʠ), i.e. to engage in the communicative interaction by their own intention and will, that they could “eat the good of the land”. The further presentation of Isaiah’s ministry then shows that this ‘programme’ could not be fulfilled immediately. His audience had to go through the ‘detour’ of hardening. In the light of the commission of the prophet (Isa 6), it seems most likely to me that the later passages that refer to the “(un)willingness” of the people to hear (Isa 28:12; 30:9, 15) regard this as the effect of Isaiah’s ministry. Read in this way, the passages that say the leader and people respectively did not want (¥ʤʡʠ ʠʬ) to hear, do not refer to this attitude as “disobedience”, nor do they indicate the prophet’s engagement to appeal to his audience’s will to understand and repent, nor can we say that hardness includes a con-

44

For a summary of the theological programme of this layer, cf. U. BECKER, Jesaja, 266–268, 284–285. 45 Cf. B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 107, 417. 46 On the “fundamentally relational character of knowing” and the meaning of “knowing God as a right relationship”, see FRETHEIM , ʲʣʩ, 410, 413.

162

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

scious rejection of an alternative.47 These passages clarify that the hardening effect of Isaiah’s message did not only affect their ability to perceive and understand, and therefore, their communicative interaction, it even affected their will. That hardness can indeed affect the will of man’s heart is expressed also in other passages in the OT48 and may further strengthen this interpretation. Isa 42:18–25, however, makes clear that in the present an appeal to this audience’s will does not suffice. The ‘fusion of tenses’ clarifies that they are as unperceptive, ignorant and unwilling to perceive as Isaiah’s addressees were. The further communicative process will reveal (and realize) that this can now be changed. This unit, however, serves to show what the present conditions of the audience are. It states that they are the audience of Isaiah in every respect, as regards their conventional interactions, their communicative interactions and their intentions. According to these observations the concept of ‘connective righteousness’ is present in Isa not only as regards conventional actions that have also been discussed in a few other OT studies, in Isa we become aware also of the aspects of ‘communication’ and ‘intention’ that should be governed according to ‘connective righteousness’. Both aspects are related to the theme of hardening. In respect to communication we have seen this already in Isa 6 and will pursue this further in other texts. In respect to the present passage, however, we can see that also the aspect of ‘intention’ is present in Isa. It was the hardening message of Isaiah that was to ensure that not only the perverted communication falls back on the people but also their wrong intentions (cf. Isa 5:24) so that the people could want nothing else than the wrong (cf., e.g., Isa 8:6; 30:12).

As regards the passage’s APPEAL to the hearers/readers, its concern is exclusively ‘perception’, hence the issue of hardening. What this passage tries to achieve is to get its addressees to listen to and see its proclamation (vv.18, 23). What is noteworthy in this respect is that here the verbs of perception have an object, hence a specific reference, in contrast to the verbs of ‘perception’ and ‘understanding’ that are used to describe the present condition of the addressees. The imperatives in v.18 introduce the prophetic proclamation (similar to the imperatives in Isa 6:949), and the question in v.23 explicitly refers to “this”, i.e. this very proclamation. The paradox that we find between the APPEAL to and CHARACTERIZATION of this passage’s audience, and which we encounter in v.18, is the paradox of hardening. On the one hand, the speaker insists upon the imperceptiveness of his audience, and on the other hand, he urges them to use their perception organs and listen and see. What becomes obvious is that this passage takes up and further develops some aspects of Isa 6:9–10. We encounter again the paradoxical correlation of the summons to perceive specifically the prophet’s communication and the general condition of im47 Thus one could say these passages do not appeal to the free will of Isaiah’s audience but show that even their will has been taken captive by the hardening effect of Isaiah’s proclamation. 48 Cf. Exod 10:27; Deut 2:30; Ezek 3:7, where “unwillingness” (¥ʤʡʠ ʠʬ) is explicitly formulated as a purpose or consequence of the hardness of the “heart” (ʡʬ/ʡʡʬ). 49 See the remarks on this verse in chapter 3.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

163

perceptiveness. However, the nature of that paradox is different now. While Isa 6:9–10 demanded the audience to listen and see so that the outcome would be their condition of not seeing, hearing and understanding, the present passage has its starting point with the fact of this condition and summons the addressees still to listen and see. How this is possible the passage does not reveal. It ‘only’ shows that the present audience is in the very state the prophet Isaiah was commissioned to cause, they are blind and deaf and do not understand. Further passages must show, how in that context and in this condition, the audience can yet be summoned to listen and see. In anticipation of the later solution we should also notice that while the ASSERTIVE acts, in which aspects of hardening are part of the present condition of the addressees, speak about the latter in singular and plural, the DIRECTIVE acts are always mediated to a plural audience. Having looked at this particular passage, its communicative strategy and how the theme of hardening occurs in it, we shall turn our attention to how this passage fits into the broader context of the main unit, of which Isa 42:18–25 is one part.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 40:12–42:13 Before we discuss further sections of Isa 42:14–44:23 that contain aspects of hardening and at the unit as a whole, we shall briefly look at the previous main unit (Isa 40:12–42:13), for two reasons. First, subsequent passages are related to this unit and build on it50 so that it is necessary to clarify its main communicative aims. Second, there are a few verses that evoke the theme of hardening by the terminology they use. The unit consists of three panels of speech (40:12–31; 41:1–20; 41:21– 42:9; and concluding hymn 42:10–13), with the latter two arranged in parallel. Isa 40:12–31 presents YHWH as the creator of all who rules everything. This can also form the basis for the objection against the worry of Jacob-Israel that his way is hidden from YHWH (cf. Isa 40:27); it is only YHWH as the creator who can give strength to the weary (Isa 40:28–29). The next two panels of speech highlight the special status that Jacob-Israel has with YHWH. Both sections are set in the context of a courtroom scene in which it is to be decided who the real God is. In each case YHWH refers to his foretelling and realization of the rise of “him” (i.e. Cyrus; cf. Isa 50

See, e.g., the observations on the contrast between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 42:18–25 noticed above.

164

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

41:1–4; 41:21–29), followed by a passage about his Servant and what YHWH is going to do (in the latter passage through the Servant) for the needy, poor and captives (Isa 41:8–20; Isa 42:1–9). These passages referring to the Servant are not just speeches about him. They are explicit performative announcements in which YHWH is present with his Servant and grasps his hand (Isa 41:10–14), calls him by his name and takes his hand (42:5–7).51 A number of verses containing terminology of ‘perception’ and ‘understanding, knowing’ are related to YHWH’s affirmation that he is the only Creator and therefore the only one who will take care of Jacob-Israel in the first sub-unit Isa 40:12–31. In each case they occur in utterances that demand a response of the audience; in Isa 40:21, 28 by the means of questions,52 in Isa 40:26 by the explicit imperatives “lift up your eyes (ʭʥʸʮʚʥʠˈ ʭʫʩʰʩʲ) on high and see (¥ʤʠʸ)!”, which is then again followed by another question, expecting a response. Thus the theme of hardening is already involved in the first main unit. What these verses indicate is that when it comes to Jacob-Israel’s relationship with YHWH, the aspects of ‘perception’ and ‘understanding’ are crucial elements. This seems to be the case also on a wider scale, as Isa 41:20 suggests. The result of YHWH’s deeds of salvation for the needy and poor (41:17– 19) will be “that they may see (¥ʤʠʸ) and know (¥ʲʣʩ), may consider (¥ʭʩˈ)53 and understand (¥ʬʫˈ Hi.) together, that the hand of the LORD has done this…” (Isa 41:20),54 which reads almost like a reversal of Isa 6:10. Hence the perception (“may see”) and understanding of YHWH is an important issue for the whole world. Subsequent passages expand on these issues. At this point, we shall look into more detail how the theme of hardening contributes to the communicative strategy of Isa 42:14–44:23. Apart from Isa 42:18–25 there are two further sections of the main unit Isa 42:18–44:23 that contain aspects of the theme of hardening. While it is not possible here to discuss them in depth, we will nevertheless note important features of this passage before we turn our attention to the whole main unit, its communicative structure and strategy and what role hardening plays in it. 51 In fact in Isa 41:10–14 and Isa 42:5–7 we have DECLARATIVE acts that achieve what they say. 52 Cf. Isa 40:21: “Do you not know (¥ʲʣʩ)? Do you not hear (¥ʲʮˇ)? Has it not been told to you (¥ʣʢʰ) from the beginning? Have you not understood (ʯʩʡ) …?”; 40:28: “Have you not known (¥ʲʣʩ)? Have you not heard (¥ʲʮˇ)?” 53 Probably an elliptic expression for ʡʬ ¥ʭʩˈ, cf. the remarks in E LLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 168 and additionally KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 183 (he says the verb ¥ʭʩˈ could have the same meaning even without the addition of ʡʬ). 54 Note also the parallel commission of the Servant “to open the eyes of the blind”, Isa 42:7.

165

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

2.2 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 43:8–13 2.2.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 43:8–13 The feature that is regarded here as an indication of this passage’s structure and arrangement is the change of persons introduced and referred to in this unit. When they are put at the beginning of a line, these changes should have been easily recognized by a listening audience.55 After the two introductory lines (vv.8, 9aĮ), this alternation of persons does actually depict two ‘encounters’ (see Figure 13), of which in each case the addressees of this unit (2.masc.plural) are one party (cf. vv.10a, 12b). First they encounter the gods (3.mas.pl., v.9aȕȖ, 9b), then they face YHWH (vv.10bȕȖ, 11, 13). – Introduction: Setting the Scene – A Lawsuit A

Strophe I

v.8 v.9aĮ

(ǜǜǜʸʥʲʚʭʲ ʠʩʶʥʤ) (ǜǜǜʥʶʡʷʰ ʭʩʥʢʤʚʬʫ)

Israel The nations

(ǜǜǜʭʤʡ ʩʮ)

The Gods

(ǜǜǜʭʺʠ)

The Addressees

(ǜǜǜʩʰʴʬ)

YHWH

(ǜǜǜʭʺʠ)

The Addressees (YHWH again)

– The First Encounter: The Gods – “You” B

Strophe II C

Strophe III

v.9aȕȖ v.9b v.10a v.10bĮ

– The Second Encounter: YHWH – “You” B’

Strophe IV

C’

Strophe V

v.10bȕȖ v.11 v.12a v.12b v.13

Figure 13: The Structure of Isa 43:8–13

The illocutionary role of this passage is to APPOINT the addressees as the witnesses of YHWH. This APPOINTMENT is mediated through the nominal clause ʤʥʤʩʚʭʠʰ ʩʣʲ ʭʺʠ and highlighted through its twofold identical occur-

55 In v.9aȕȖ the person involved is indicated by 3.pl.masc., which most probably refers to the gods of the nations (Thus most of the commentaries; for some arguments see, e.g., NORTH, Second Isaiah, 122; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 316; K OOLE, Isaiah III/1, 305– 306 and especially BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 171–172, who says that there is a reduction of references to the gods in the context. One effect of this is an emphasis on the nations, and by this, on Israel [cf. B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 172]; similarly also B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 163.). The emphatic “you” in v.10a points to the change in person. In v.10bȕȖ again a change in person emerges. As in v.9aȕȖ it is introduced by a preposition with personal suffix, yet it now refers to 1.sg. This person reappears through the emphatic “I” in the two consecutive lines in vv.11, 12a. Then the same person as in v.10a appears in v.12b.

166

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

rence (vv.10a, 12b).56 A nominal clause like ʩʣʲ ʭʺʠ is an especially appropriate means for achieving an APPOINTMENT, which is a change of a condition through a DECLARATIVE speech-act.57 And the oracle formula ʤʥʤʩʚʭʠʰ might serve as an indicator of the explicit performative announcement58 and further highlights the significance of these lines within the whole unit. Other features of Isa 43:8–13 contribute variously to its communicative strategy to APPOINT the readers/hearers as the witnesses of YHWH. The introduction (strophe I, vv.8–9aĮ)59 prepares the context in which the audience is appointed to testify for YHWH, depicting the reader’s/hearer’s relationship to the other nations and their gods as a trial. In the present form of the text, this is not a new procedure. The people of YHWH had been already placed in the judicial contest (cf. Isa 41:1–42:9). The problem that needs to be addressed, however, is how the people of YHWH could fulfil their role as Servant when their condition speaks against them (cf. Isa 42:18–25). So YHWH summons his people as those who are blind and deaf (43:8). In the encounter with the other gods (strophes II–III, vv.9aȕ– 56

Among earlier studies, NIELSEN, Erwägungen, 204 (calling it an “Installationsorakel”) and especially SCHOORS, Saviour, 227 noted the importance of the appointment as witnesses. For a more recent study that also recognizes its significance, see E. HAAG, Zeugen Jahwes, 158–166. 57 See the discussion in A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 140–154. 58 Unfortunately, I have not found a discussion of the value of the oracle formula with respect to marking and achieving speech-acts in the study of A. Wagner. Yet he deals with the speech of YHWH as a quasi institution that as such can qualify sayings as speech-acts that are not indicated as such as far as the semantic value of the contained verbs is concerned. Though, he mainly attends to the messenger formula (see A. W AGNER , Sprechakte, 157–160). Moreover, apart from these reflections there are a lot of instances, where the oracle formula occurs in relation with explicit performative announcements, sometimes standing together with speech-act indicators as ʯʤ (in the following I have recorded the pages in brackets, where A. Wagner discusses the performative character of each passage, even though he does not attend to the role of the oracle formula): Gen 22:16 (ibid. 116–117); 2 Sam 2:30 (ibid. 238); Isa 30:1 (?, ibid. 195); Isa 41:14 (ibid. 247–249, 296–297); Jer 1:8 (ibid. 247–249); Jer 22:5 (ibid. 117); Jer 23:1 (ibid. 195, 202); Jer 25:9; 29:14; 39:17 (all ibid. 159); Jer 49:13 (ibid. 117); Hag 2:4 (ibid. 238). It seems to me that in some places the oracle formula serves as a speech-act indicator, which then is the case in Isa 43:10, 12 as well. 59 A few scholars exclude v.8 from this passage and regard it as the conclusion of the unit Isa 42:18–43:8; cf. SMART, History, 98 and B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 135. But given the imperative function of ʠʩʶʥʤ, v.8 shares this introductory feature with many other units in Isa 40–55. Moreover, if v.8 is included in the previous section because it contains the phrases “blind” and “deaf” then one has to admit that v.10 shares terminology of “understanding, realizing” like Isa 42:25. Finally, v.8 read with the subsequent lines, summons YHWH’s people to the trial parallel to the summons of the nations (v.9aĮ), which corresponds to the confrontation of both of these parties being “witnesses” in v.9b (the nations) and v.10a (YHWH’s witnesses).

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

167

10bĮ), the purpose of the appointment is stated, which is twofold. First, the addressees are to testify for YHWH; they are “my witnesses” against “their witnesses”. Secondly, this appointment happens “so that (ʯʲʮʬ) you may know and believe me and realize that I am he” (v.10bĮ). The subsequent encounter with YHWH (strophes IV–V, vv.10bȕ–13) gives the explanation for, why the addressees can be YHWH’s witnesses, given that they are blind and deaf (v.8). It is not their quality but the characteristics of YHWH. Consequently, their APPOINTMENT as witnesses springs here from YHWH’s self-predications, amidst which the DECLARATION of the appointment is found. YHWH is the one who has “announced”, who has “made known” and “who has saved” (v.12aĮ) and therefore can face the challenge “who among them has announced this and made known the former things” (v.9aȕȖ).60 But they can testify to this because the qualities of YHWH are part of their experience: they can act as witnesses to his gracious acts towards them (cf. Isa 43:1–7);61 he is their saviour (ʲʩˇʥʮ; cf. especially Isa 43:3 and Isa 43:11). This unit, however, does not record the outcome of this trial. And although the addressees are appointed to give testimony to the uniqueness of YHWH, they have not done so yet. Hence, the verdict is not revealed. The actual testimony and its impact on the trial have to be found beyond this passage.62 A final note is due to the relationship between their commission as Servant and their appointment as witnesses of YHWH. It is important to recognize that Isa 43:8–13 does not substitute the appointment as witnesses 60

Thus the suggested reconstruction of WILLIAMSON, Word Order, 501 (ʩʺʣʢʤ followed by ʩʺʲʮˇʤʥ followed by ʩʺʲˇʥʤʥ in v.12aĮ) seems to me still preferable despite the recent objections of LEENE, De vroegere, 119–120, for it reflects perfectly the previous order of occurrence of ¥ʣʢʰ (v.9aȕ); ¥ʲʮˇ (v.9aȖ) and ʲʩˇʥʮ (v.11). 61 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 111–112; HANSON, Isaiah 40–66, 67–68; E. HAAG, Zeugen Jahwes, 162. 62 In this respect, earlier form-critical studies have been too quickly to deduce the intention of this unit quite easily from their determination of the unit’s genre as a trial speech; thus, e.g., B EGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 27, 46–48; VON W ALDOW, Anlass, 44; STUHLMUELLER, Redemption, 31 and similarly already G RESSMANN, literarische Analyse, 277–278; KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 110–111, 114; M OWINCKEL, Komposition, 98 (the latter two speaking of a “Streitgespräch”). Some of the later form-critical studies have been more hesitant, noting significant deviations in Isa 43:8–13 from the conventional trial speech; cf., e.g., SCHOORS, Saviour, 227 and MELUGIN, Formation, 110; then ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 312–313 speaks of a “Mischstil”, which points to the encouragement of the addressees in believing in YHWH. According to Elliger the concluding promise in v.13 indicates the actual aim of the unit (ibid. 329). Similarly W ILDBERGER, Monotheismus, 254 stresses v.13 as the actual topic. The form-critical determination of Elliger is adopted by K OOLE, Isaiah III/1, 302. VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 34–37 also emphasizes that the trial speech is used here for a distinctive purpose. It is a proclamation exclusively directed to Israel, who should acknowledge the universal reign of YHWH (cf. ibid. 37).

168

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

for their commission as Servant. On the contrary, it is through their appointment as witnesses that they will accomplish their commission to be the Servant and the light to the nations (Isa 42:1–9) in the light of their present shortcomings (Isa 42:18–25; 43:8).63 Having briefly sketched the communicative strategy of this passage, we can turn our attention to the theme of hardening in particular. 2.2.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 43:8–13 Terminology related to the theme of hardening occurs in v.8 (ʸʥʲʚʭʲ, ʭʩˇʸʧ) and v.10 (¥ʲʣʩ, ¥ʯʩʡ). V.8. This verse deals with the theme of hardening in terms of ‘perception’. This is the point of a DESCRIPTION or STATEMENT about the condition of the addressees. ‘Blindness’ and ‘deafness’ are the attributes of the people. At the same time, however, this introductory line states, even emphasizes, that they have the physical abilities to see and hear. We noted above that v.8 is part of the introduction to the communicative unit Isa 43:8–13 that clarifies its context. It does, however, not simply create the ‘world’ in which the subsequent communicative acts of the unit take place; it associates it also with the overall communicative strategy. The summons to the It is, therefore, central to this passage to keep the change between plural in ʩʣʲ ‘Ɲday and the singular in ʩʣʡʲ ‘abdî against those who try to ease this complex relationship by a simple emendation of the latter to a plural (ʩʣʡʲ ‘abƗday) as well, thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 324; MARTI, Jesaja, 296; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 62–64; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 307, 320. Already DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 389 called this emendation “willkürlich”. Another way of dealing with the difference between the plural in ʩʣʲ ‘Ɲday and the singular in ʩʣʡʲ ‘abdî is to assume they refer to different figures. This view has been recently advocated by Hermisson; see especially IDEM, Israel und Gottesknecht (His view has been adopted by HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 174n.58 and KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 308–309 with slight variations.) According to DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 443 and DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 389 this interpretation has been the common one in their times, against which they argue (for some references see especially the latter). See finally also H. FREY, Buch, 95 for a distinction between the witnesses and the Servant.). According to Hermisson, the witnesses and the Servant must refer to different figures because of the change from plural to singular. Since Isa 42:18–19 are of a later date than the material of DI, there is no other instance in the Ebed-Israel/Jacob passages in DI of such a change (cf. IDEM , Israel und Gottesknecht, 4). But at least on the level of the final form, this argument does not apply. On the contrary, together with Isa 42:18–25 the present verse is another instance where in relation to the theme of hardening the addressees are spoken of in singular and plural. As this feature will also reappear in Isa 48:1–11, one has to assume that this change is a central aspect when the addressees are confronted with the theme of hardening. Moreover, v.8 contains a change between singular and plural as well. There the “blind people” (singular) are to be brought forward as well as the “deaf ones” (plural). In sum, the APPOINTMENT of the addressees as YHWH’s witnesses has to be seen in correlation with their election as his Servant. 63

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

169

trial64 and the elements of the judicial confrontation take up what was an issue in previous passages (see Isa 41:1–42:9). The inclusion of the addressee’s attributes of being blind and deaf show that the present unit develops this further but bearing the shortcomings of the Servant (Isa 42:18– 25) in mind. The condition of the people as blind and deaf has been argued for in Isa 42:18–25; here it forms the starting point of further communication. However, it will not remain the final word about them. It is complemented by the insistence upon their physical abilities to hear and see – yet they have ears and eyes.65 This complementary STATEMENT about the hearers/ listen64 The form of MT (ʠʩʶʥʤ) is normally either 3.masc.sg.perfect or inf.cs. But many regard an inf.abs. as the preferable reading and emend it to ʠʶʥʤ hôs̢Ɲ’; thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 323; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, 388; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 306; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 171; MERENDINO, Der Erste, 317; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 303. SKINNER, Isaiah XL– LXVI, 37 (imperativ or inf.abs.) and NORTH, Second Isaiah, 121 (either adopting 1QIsa a or inf.abs.) are hesitating. The ancient versions give no conclusive clue, what reading they might have had in their Vorlage. Targum (3.sg.perfect), Peshitta (its reading can be either perfect or imperative) and Vulgate (2.sg.imperative) could serve as support for the present reading of MT. But it cannot be excluded that they interpreted an inf.abs.-form differently. The readings of 1QIsab (ʠʩʶʥʠ) and LXX (țĮȚ İȟȘȖĮȖȠȞ) seem to cope with the difficulties that ¥ʠʶʩ often is used as a terminus technicus for the exodus event with YHWH as the subject (also Targum has YHWH as the subject). Since neither an inf.abs nor a possible imperative (see below) indicates any specific addressee in v.8, the reading of 1QIsaa (ʥʠʩʶʥʤ; this reading is preferred, e.g., by W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 98n.1 (ET, 119n.a); B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 135; B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 161) might be a clarification that harmonizes with the usual plural imperative common in the trial speeches (see also v.9). But the reading of MT could also be regarded as a rare form of an imperative 2.masc.sing.; according to some grammars the original long Ư is preserved instead of the usual vowel Sere before a guttural sometimes, and Isa 43:8 is quoted as one such instance, e.g., in GK § 74 l; JM §78 i; see also OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 142n.21. However, its function is in any case one of an imperative meaning “bring forward!” For the meaning of ¥ʠʶʩ as “to come forward, Hifil: to bring forward”, see also Deut 13:14; 1 Kgs 22:21 and the discussion in KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 303–304. The function as an imperative is also recognized in K ORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 160n.1, who regard ʠʩʶʥʤ as a “precative perfect”. But a precative perfect usually appears alternating with the imperfect or the imperative (see the discussion in DEMPSEY, Note, 213–214). Therefore, while in v.9 it is quite likely to read a precative perfect, there is not enough evidence to assume it in v.8 as well. E. HAAG, Zeugen Jahwes, 159, 162 takes ʠʩʶʥʤ as a perfect with YHWH as the subject referring to the Exodus from Babel (and similarly already R IGNELL, Study, 37). But there is no indication that the speech of YHWH has been interrupted: v.7 clearly presupposes YHWH as the speaker. In vv.10–13 he is the speaker as well. Accordingly, I take v.8 as a summons by YHWH to bring forward his people. 65 Not all commentators interpret the contrasting statements – being blind and deaf on the one hand, having ears and eyes on the other – in that way. Some read it the other way around, arguing that the verse insists on the blindness and deafness of the people though they have eyes and ears; cf., e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 443; VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 161, 163;

170

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

ers prepares (and enables) their APPOINTMENT as witnesses of YHWH (they can only witness what they see and hear) and forms also the precondition for one of its purposes, namely that they will know and believe in YHWH (v.10; for the close relationship between perception and understanding, cf., e.g., Deut 4:35; Isa 5:19; Job 13:1 and the discussion on Isa 6:9–10 above). To achieve all this, the aspect of perception is integrated in the introduction to the whole communicative unit, right at its beginning. V.10. With the occurrence of the verbs ¥ʲʣʩ and ¥ʯʩʡ, we encounter the aspect of ‘knowing, understanding’ in v.10. They seem to complement each other, because of the different dimensions they bring into play. “To know YHWH” includes here the dimension of close relationship (the phrase ʥʲʣʺ ʩʬ ǜǜǜ “that you may know me” is constructed together with the relational verb ¥ʯʮʠ “to trust, believe in”), as well as the rather intellectual dimension of recognizing YHWH (ʠʥʤ ʩʰʠʚʩʫ ʥʰʩʡʺ “that you may realize that I am he”). To gain this understanding of YHWH is one purpose of the addressees’ appointment as witnesses.66 What is particularly noteworthy is that this formulates the reversal of Isa 6:10b. While the prophet Isaiah was commissioned to harden his people “so that they may not see … hear and OETTLI, Jesaja, 29; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 39 (though he regards v.8 as a gloss; thus ibid. 38– 39); BEGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 107; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 99 (ET, 121); GITAY, Prophecy, 144, 150; MOTYER, Prophecy, 334. Other scholars interpret the emphasis on the people having ears and eyes as a statement about the past; while they are now blind and deaf, they once were witnesses of what YHWH had done for them; thus, e.g., SKINNER , Isaiah XL–LXVI, 38; SCHOORS, Saviour, 223–224; K OOLE , Isaiah III/1, 303; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 145; B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 161, 163. Among those who read v.8 as an insistence upon the physical abilities of the addressees in the present – though being blind and deaf, they still have eyes and ears –, cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 323; MARTI, Jesaja, 295; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 486; RIGNELL, Study, 37; SMART, History, 98; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 314; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 171, 318n.43; E. HAAG, Zeugen Jahwes, 162; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 247; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 223; similarly VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 34. Arguments in favour of this interpretation include: BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 318n.43 notes the two waw adversativum that introduce modal clauses here (quoting BDB cl. 252: “in such cases prominence is usually given to the contrasted idea by its being placed immediately after the conjunction.”). The use of ˇʩ indicates some emphasis that stresses the existence of eyes and ears (cf. HARMAN, Particles, 1035 and see also the discussion in M URAOKA, Emphatic, 99–111). Given the relationship between perception and understanding, the positive purpose that the audience will know YHWH would be served by the fact that they can hear and see. 66 A few scholars emend the verbs to forms of 3.masc. plural so that not the addressees but the other nations were to understand and believe in YHWH and realize that YHWH is he; cf. DUHM, Jesaia, 324; MARTI, Jesaja, 295 and BEGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 48. There is no justification for that. This procedure is just one illustration how preconceptions about what one would normally expect prevent from understanding the specific text in its distinction from the normal to communicate something new/unexpected.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

171

understand”, the appointment now happens “so that you may know me”. Thus the theme of hardening in v.10 aims toward overcoming ignorance. The present condition of the addressees (v.8) will be overcome as they act as witnesses for YHWH (v.10). 2.3 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 44:6–20 2.3.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 44:6–20 However one decides about the literary history of Isa 44:9–20,67 it is now placed alongside Isa 44:6–8. As a result, the sections form one communicative unit. There are a number of contrasting correspondences between vv.6–8 and especially vv.9–11. While normally sub-units within a panel of speech are introduced either through the messenger formula or through imperative(s), there is no such introduction in Isa 44:9. The whole unit Isa 44:6–20 consists of four sub-sections that are of unequal length: stanza A: vv.6–8; stanza B: vv.9–11; stanza C: vv.12–17; stanza D: vv.18–20.68 Isa 44:6–20 mediates an AFFIRMATION of the ad67 Since the studies of Duhm many exegetes regarded Isa 44:9–20 as a later addition, fitting not very well into the context; cf. DUHM, Jesaia, 333, then, e.g., MARTI, Jesaja, 301; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 505; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 77; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 96, 98; HERMISSON, Einheit, 292–294. Others have maintained the authenticity of Isa 44:9–20; cf. some commentaries like T ORREY, Second Isaiah, 345; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 52– 53 (the latter still with some quite curious arguments); NORTH, Second Isaiah, 139–140; SMART, History, 114; BONNARD, Second Isaïe, 155–162 (especially 159); B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 208–214 (cautiously); KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 379–401 (especially 380); then also, e.g., PREUSS, Verspottung, 208–215; IDEM, Einführung, 61–63; SPYKERBOER, DeuteroIsaiah, 116–126; CLIFFORD, Idol Passages, 460–463; MATHEUS, Jesaja XLIV 9–20. In the course of these discussions it has come to the fore that Isa 44:9–20 is not as unfitting as often claimed; cf. MATHEUS, Jesaja XLIV 9–20, 318–326 (maintaining authenticity); HOLTER, Idol-Fabrication Passages, 190–203 (remaining undecided); but also ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 414–417 and KRATZ, Kyros, 193, 195, who regard vv.9–20* as later additions, note relationships to vv.6–8, since vv.9–20 are planned as continuations of vv.6–8. See similarly HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 85 and also B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 240. When Isa 44:9–20 (and other idol passages) is regarded to be a later insertion or editorial layer respectively, this happens now mainly on the basis of an assumed difference in the theological concept between the primary layer of DI and the idol-polemics layer: In the studies of KRATZ, Kyros, 192–206 (especially 206) and VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 312–318 (especially 316), the difference can be summarized in the formula: “Proof of YHWH’s uniqueness through the historical-theological argument of the proof of prediction in the primary layer vs. proof of YHWH’s uniqueness through the rationalistic argument of the idol parodies in the idol-polemics layer”; see especially the thorough discussion in KRATZ, Kyros, 197–206. For a similar argument see already WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40– 66, 119–120 (ET, 146–148). 68 The determination of Isa 44:6–20 as one unit does not affect the common segmentation of vv.9–20 into three sections, i.e. vv.9–11, vv.12–17, vv.18–20. For this see, e.g.,

172

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

dressees’ appointment as YHWH’s witnesses (“and you are my witnesses”, Isa 44:8). This affirmation is developed in the present unit primarily by two arguments. First, vv.6–8 emphasize once again the uniqueness and divinity of YHWH. Since they are the witnesses of the true and only God, they do not have to be afraid when they are to testify for his claims to be the only God, manifested in his ability to predict and because he is the redeemer of Israel (v.8). Secondly, they do not have to be afraid because the witnesses of the other party have nothing to testify (vv.9–11). The latter neither see nor know so that, when they are all summoned to assemble and testify, they will be put to shame (v.11). The force of both arguments is amplified through the juxtaposition of both stanzas in which they are communicated (vv.6–8; vv.9–11). Both stanzas presuppose a judicial setting.69 The parties are summoned to “let them declare” [v.7] and “let them all assemble, let them stand forth” [v.11] respectively. After this summons the addressees are assured “do not be afraid” (ʥʣʧʴʺʚʬʠ; v.8), while the outcome of the summons for the idol-makers will be that they are terrified (ʥʣʧʴʩ; v.11).70 The ‘key word’ of both stanzas is ʭʩʣʲ “witnesses” (v.8 and v.9),71 which applies to the readers/hearers as well as to the idol-makers. The ultimate scope of both stanzas is the soteriological importance of YHWH and the lack of help from idols, respectively. 72 The two subsequent stanzas, vv.12–17 and vv.18–20, exemplify the statements that had to be said in respect to the idols and their witnesses (vv.9–11) in contrast to YHWH and his witnesses. An important feature in vv.9–20 is the switch between singular and plural. As we saw above, the plural forms in vv.9–11 retain the imagery of a trial parallel to vv.6–8.73 V.18 returns to this context. But the satirical description of idol-making and idol-worshipping in vv.12–17 illustrates its foolishness and useless-

B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 209; MATHEUS, Jesaja XLIV 9–20, 315–316; HOLTER, IdolFabrication Passages, 129–130; CHILDS, Isaiah, 343–344. 69 Cf. MELUGIN, Formation, 118–119; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 416; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 209; KRATZ, Kyros, 195. 70 Cf. also ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 416; MATHEUS, Jesaja XLIV 9–20, 322. 71 Thus ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 415–416; HOLTER, Idol-Fabrication Passages, 197. See also B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 159; ROTH, For Life, 23; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 211; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 383. 72 According to vv.6–8, YHWH is the Redeemer of Israel; while the idols are for no profit and their witnesses will be ashamed (For ¥ˇʥʡ as the contrary to salvation or being rescued, cf. especially Isa 45:16–17 and Isa 45:22, 24.). The latter point is then further exemplified in the subsequent stanzas, when it is said that they will ask the idols for rescue (v.17), but they will not be able to save their lives (v.20); cf. similarly B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 158. 73 See especially ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 416.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

173

ness, which were stated in vv.9–11,74 in the singular. This vivid example plays also a part in vv.9–11 and vv.18–20. Amidst YHWH’s claims of the uselessness of the idols, the switch into singular in v.10 anticipates the illustration of vv.12–17. Later, when vv.18–20 exemplify the statements about the blindness and ignorance of the idols’ witnesses of v.9b, the initial plural statements (v.18) change into singular (vv.19–20) in order to invoke the example of vv.12–17 as an illustration.75 Holter notes: Second Isaiah manages to exemplify his general understanding of idol-fabricators on the single idol-fabricator he has described in detail in vv. 12–17. Or, in other words, the idolfabricator (in singular) in vv. 12–17 and 19(–20), serves as an example of the idolfabricators (in the plural) in vv.9–11 and 18.76

In sum, vv.12–17 and vv.18–20 are used to support the claims of vv.9–11. In the judicial context (see especially v.11b), YHWH claims that the idols are for no profit (vv.9a, 10a) and that their witnesses neither see nor have knowledge (v.9b) and will be ashamed (vv.9b, 11b). Expanding v.10a, the next stanza (vv.12–17) indicates their uselessness through the parody of idol-making. Vv.18–20 exemplify the blindness and hardness of the idolmakers and idol-worshippers stated in v.9b by including elements of vv.12–17 as well.77 74

Cf. B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 209: “Het middenstuk (vs. 12–17) bevat de eigenlijke satire die als argument bij het voorafgaande vonnis dient.” 75 This strategy is amplified by another correspondence between vv.12–17 and vv.18– 20: V.19aĮIII.IV almost verbally repeats v.16a, and both lines continue similarly. With vv.16–17a the satire reaches its climax indicating most clearly the foolishness of idolmaking. The repetition of these ideas in v.19 in a direct speech says: noting the foolishness would be insight, but the idol-maker has no knowledge. Together with v.18 this strengthens the judgement about the lack of understanding in v.9b. Thus the last stanza (vv.18–20) contributes to and explains the statement of v.9b in stanza B (vv.9–11) through the inclusion of the main idea of stanza C (vv.12–17) as it manifests in vv.16– 17a (Given this function of the recurrence of v.16a in v.19, it is hard to see any justification for the judgements of ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 417–419 and H ÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 85 who regard vv.19–20 as later additions.). This movement of vv.18–20, reasoning the claims in vv.9–11through incorporating the ideas of vv.12–17, is further supported by the repetition of the problem of (not) being rescued by the idol (vv.17, 20: ¥ʬʶʰ). 76 HOLTER, Idol-Fabrication Passages, 187–188. 77 HUTTER, Asche, 11, 13 regards v.20 as a later addition created in correspondence with the ending of v.17 as a polemic against Persia and her religious foundations. But it fits in very well into the communicative strategy. Moreover, both terms “ashes” and “deception” can be explained better from context than by the complicated deductions of Hutter. Vv.12–17 spoke of wood as fuel and material of the idols. “Ashes” as the remainings of wooden fuel is the comprised polemic of this connection. In contrast, in Zoroastrianism it is not “ashes” that is central, but “fire” (cf. ibid. 11–12). The term “deception” could be related to the assertions about the blindness and lack of knowledge of the idolfabricators (vv.18–19); thus one has not to assume a contrast to the important concept of

174

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

2.3.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 44:6–20 V.9. In v.9b YHWH claims that the idol-makers and idol-worshippers as the witnesses of the idols78 are blind and have no knowledge in general (absolute use), which will lead to their shame.79 This simple STATEMENT will be justified later in vv.18–19. But it is important to note here that the status as witnesses is associated with the assertion that they are blind and dull. V.18. This verse expands and clarifies the assertions in v.9b. The idolators’ lack of understanding is explained (ʩʫ) by the fact that they are absolutely dull and blindfolded: their ears and hearts are smeared (ʧʨ)80 so that they cannot hear (ʺʥʠʸʮ) nor have insight (ʬʩʫˈʤʮ). Thus these statements form a comprehensive description of the malfunctioning of the idolmakers’ epistemological capacities. Neither perception nor understanding is possible. The next line (v.19) further explains and illustrates respectively what is said in v.18,81 which is also indicated through the termino“truth” (again it is another term than that of v.20 that is important in Zoroastrian religion). 78 Thus most of the commentaries. Recently, HOLTER, Idol-Fabrication Passages, 135 argues for the idols being the witnesses for the idol-fabricators. According to him, the intended contrast is between YHWH and the idol-makers. His interpretation of v.9 presupposes ʤʮʤ and the suffix of ʭʤʩʣʲ to refer to the subject of v.9a (as the suffix in ʭʤʩʣʥʮʧ; thus ibid. 135–136) and a different subject in ʥˇʡʩ ʯʲʮʬ from ʥʠʸʩʚʬʡ and ʥʲʣʩʚʬʡ (ibid. 137). But this means, assuming a change of the grammatical subject, where absolutely no indication appears and avoids a change of the subject, where it could be hinted at: ʥˇʡʩ ʯʲʮʬ records the consequence of the preceding verbs and makes a succession of the latter’s subjects very likely; in contrast ʤʮʤ creates some emphasis hinting at a change of subject (contra Holter’s remarks on p.136n.19 this is noted in ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 416, 423 who interprets ʤʮʤ as a means for creating a contrast with v.8). It is striking that these are exactly those features, that Holter notes as preventing the sentences in v.9b from being absolute identical (thus ibid. 134). Moreover, Holter rightly observes that neither ¥ʤʠʸ nor ¥ʲʣʩ are used elsewhere in DI about idols (ibid. 137) but several times for the idol-fabricators. 79 For the consecutive meaning of ʯʲʮʬ, cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 384. 80 ʧʨ is a hapax legomenon, deriving from ¥ʧʧʨ. Most probably it is used as intransitive and means “to be smeared, to be plastered”; cf. the discussions in ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 413, 435 and KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 398. Former commentators reckoned rather with a transitive meaning; thus, e.g., MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 514–515; thus still OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 183n.60 who regards the verb as transitive with God as its subject; but by this, Oswalt includes a reading, which the passage itself avoids. Or to put it in other words: while the passage avoids indicating the reason for the hardness, Oswalt simply assumes it is God. The verb ʧʨ is the predicate to both subjects ʭʤʩʰʩʲ and ʭʺʡʬ; for the difference of the singular predicate and plural subject, see GK §145o. 81 Since v.18 fits very well into the argument of Isa 44:6–20 (see above), it has not to be a later gloss; contra VOLZ, Jesaia II, 51; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 123 (ET, 151); ROTH, For Life, 23n.12.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

175

logical links (the verbs ¥ʲʣʩ and ¥ʯʩʡ reappear in the nouns ʺʲʣ and ʤʰʥʡʺ in v.19).82 V.19. V.19 returns to the example described in vv.12–17 (singular). The total lack of understanding (ʥʡʬʚʬʠ ʡʩˇʩʚʠʬ, ʺʲʣ ʠʬ, ʤʰʥʡʺʚʠʬ) is obvious, when the idol-maker does not reach the conclusion that should be so obvious from the illustration in vv.12–17,83 formulated here as a quotation. Thus the condition of the idol-makers as hard and blind (vv.9, 18) becomes clear as one looks at a particular example: every idol-maker lacks understanding because he does not reach the conclusion that actually is most obvious and rational. V.20. The last verse boils down the whole dilemma of the idol-maker to his “deluded heart” (ʬʺʥʤ ʡʬ). With the centre of his knowledge and will being entirely perverted, he “cannot deliver himself” or recognize the “lie” in his “right hand”. Isa 44:6–20 deals with hardening not in connection with the people of YHWH. Here the theme of hardening occurs in STATEMENTS about the condition of idol-makers that are apparently the other party’s witnesses in the trial which has to establish “who is like me?” (44:7) and whether there is “a God besides me” (44:8). In the context of the present passage, the statements about the blindness and ignorance of the witnesses for the idols contribute to the contrast between YHWH and the idols, and between the addressees as YHWH’s witnesses and the witnesses of the idols. In the wider literary context, however, this contrast seems to be invalidated as YHWH’s witnesses, the Servant Israel, are blind and ignorant themselves (Isa 42:18–25 and especially the parallel passage Isa 43:8–13). Only one difference strikes the eye when comparing the parallel units Isa 43:8–13 and Isa 44:6–20. The Servant of YHWH is appointed as his witness(es) “so that you may know and believe me and realize that I am he” (Isa 43:10). Therefore, it is not the present condition that sets YHWH’s witnesses apart from the witnesses of the other gods/idols, it is their future. The conditions of YHWH’s witnesses can change. Their testimony for YHWH should lead (ʯʲʮʬ) to their knowledge of YHWH (43:10), while nothing can change for the idols’ witnesses. Their blindness and ignorance prevents them from recognizing that their 82

Cf. also ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 436; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 399. The assertion of Elliger about the wisdom provenance of ʺʲʣ and ʤʰʥʡʺ overlooks that they also appear in other places in Isa 40–55 (ʺʲʣ also in Isa 40:14; 44:25; 47:10; 53:10; ʤʰʥʡʺ also in Isa 40:14; 40:28) and appear here because of the hardening theme (see also CLEMENTS, Beyond Tradition-History, 102 with respect only to Isa 44:18). 83 For this interpretation of the almost identical lines v.16a and v.19aĮIII.IV and their similar continuations, see the sketch of the communicative strategy above.

176

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

idols cannot rescue them (44:18–20) and therefore will lead (ʯʲʮʬ) to their shame (44:9).84 2.4 Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 2.4.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 42:14–44:23 The extent of this unit is debatable even if one agrees with the assumption that hymns conclude a main unit in Isa 40–55.85 This uncertainty is caused 84 In the light of this association of idol-worship with hardening, one may have to reconsider the strong dichotomy between the “argument from history in the trial speeches” and the “rationalistic argument in the idol parodies” that especially von Rad has constructed and which forms the primary argument in recent redaction-critical judgements; cf. VON RAD, Wisdom, 177–185 (cf. ibid. 179 on the problem of authenticity of the idol parodies in DI); KRATZ, Kyros, 194–206 (especially 206); VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 312– 317. To regard all idol polemics in Isa 40–55 as appeals to reason that are far from the arguments in the trial speeches (which depend on revelation), does not pay sufficient attention, at least to the communicative role of Isa 44:9–20: While other idol polemics indicate that it is actually quite reasonable to avoid idolatry, Isa 44:9–20 makes clear that, in fact, the idolators are hardened and a simple appeal to reason is insufficient to convince them. The appeal to reason does not change anything for the idol-makers, because their reason is dulled, their hearts are deluded (Isa 44:20). In such a condition, they will not be rescued. Therefore, through the incorporation of the theme of hardening even the elsewhere rationalistic argument is included in and subordinated to the proof of YHWH’s uniqueness, which is manifested in his ability to save alone (cf. Isa 43:13 vs. Isa 44:20). This provides for the later appeal, that anyone who longs for salvation must turn to YHWH the only saviour (cf. Isa 45:14–25). On the importance of this passage in respect to biblical monotheism and idols, cf. M. S. SMITH, Origins, 180–193 (especially 189). 85 For other proposals of the extent, structure and shape of the (main) units that include Isa 42:18–25; 43:8–13 and Isa 44:6–20, depending on the choice of different criteria for the segmentation of Isa 40–55, cf., e.g., M UILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 467–510, who elucidates five poems (Isa 42:5–17; 42:18–43:7; 43:8–13; 43:14–44:5; 44:6–8, 21– 23) plus the satire on making idols (Isa 44:9–20), because he looks for consistent poems; HARAN, Structure, 132–136 reckons with four large prophecies (Isa 41:21–42:17; 42:18– 43:10; 43:11–44:5; 44:6–28) that all contain the same typical components; GOLDINGAY, Arrangement, 290, 294 finds a parallel arrangement of Isa 42:18–43:21 and Isa 43:22– 45:8 (and with only slight variations IDEM, Isaiah, 244, 251); GITAY, Prophecy, 126–128, 135–137, 157 determines three units (Isa 42:1–13; 42:14–43:13; 43:14–44:23), all consisting of the essential components of rhetorical speech of Classical Rhetoric; CLIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 97, 103–105, 110–111 speaks of speeches that comprise Isa 42:10–43:8 (fourth speech); Isa 43:9–44:5 (fifth speech); Isa 44:6–23 (sixth speech); WATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 68, 128–129, 143–144 calls Isa 42:13–43:21 the fourth scene and Isa 43:22–44:23 the fifth scene of Act VII (Isa 40:1–44:23), each scene arranged chiastically; LAATO, Composition, 212, 215–217 regards Isa 42:14–44:8 as the second cycle, consisting of two parallel courses with Isa 43:14–15 as its peak, in the chiastically composed section Isa 40–53:12; Isa 42:14–17 is also part of the first cycle (with Isa 40:3–8 as the corresponding section), while Isa 44:9–20 (corresponding to 45:14–46:2), Isa 44:21–22 (corr. to

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

177

by Isa 42:10–17; whether it forms a consistent unit and how its various parts are related to the preceding and subsequent sections.86 The features of Isa 42:10–12(13) and its correspondences with Isa 44:23 and Isa 49:13 point to the verses’ character as a hymn.87 Vv.14–17 do not seem to me to fit into the praise for YHWH (ʤʥʤʩʬ), which applies especially to the speech delivered in 1.sg. Thus I regard Isa 42:10–12(13)88 as the conclusion of the former discourse. Vv.14–17 introduce the new discourse extending to Isa 44:23.89 The correspondences between vv.14–17 and former units are due to its function as a bridge.90 The various sub-sections that form the whole unit can be recognized, when we notice the messenger formula and the imperatives as markers of new sections.

45:9–13) and Isa 44:23 (corr. to 45:8) belong to the third cycle; though O’CONNELL, Concentricity, 152–153 attends also to hymns and songs, the governing criteria for his study are others, which lead to a complex structure impossible to reproduce here; J OHNSTON, Community, 37 also finds a chiastic structure in Isa 40–55 and regards Isa 42:10– 44:8 as one unit, followed by Isa 44:9–20 and the centre piece Isa 44:21–45:19. 86 Those who take Isa 42:10–17 as one unit, often regard it as the closure of the former discourse and assume Isa 42:18 as the start of Isa 42:18–44:23. Thus, e.g., LACK, Symbolique, 93–95; LEENE, De vroegere, 92–95, 138–147, 152–162. SPYKERBOER, Deutero-Isaiah, 93–97 also determines Isa 42:10–17 as one unit but regards it as a connecting piece. According to him Isa 42:10–13 simply cannot be an end-piece (ibid. 129). He, therefore, gains Isa 41–44:22 as one large unit (see ibid. 112). Apart from the earlier studies of MOWINCKEL, Komposition, 96n.2 or VOLZ, Jesaia II, 29, the unity of Isa 42:10–17 has been defended, e.g., by DARR, Like a Warrior and DION, Structure. In contrast to most of the other studies E LLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 245, 370 and HERMISSON, Einheit, 309 take the hymn in Isa 42:10–13 together with Isa 44:23 as the frame of the whole discourse. 87 See in particular the study of PRINSLOO, Isaiah 42,10–12, 291–295. 88 In his study P RINSLOO, Isaiah 42,10–12 has made a strong case for excluding v.13 from the unit vv.10–12. Similarly also DE B OER, Message, 46; SMART, History, 88–89; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 128–129 and obviously also O’CONNELL, Concentricity, 152–153, 161. Thus it is quite possible that the new discourse starts not in v.14 but in v.13. But at the moment, I still tend to regard v.13 as belonging to vv.10–12: while Isa 44:23 and Isa 49:13 report the content of praise, Isa 42:10–12 does not. V.13 would fit it quite well as the content of praise, even though not introduced by ʩʫ and containing yiqtol-forms; but see also BERGES, Buch, 347 arguing for the unit Isa 42:13–16. 89 With MELUGIN, Formation, 90; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 143; HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 167 (Hardmeier deletes Isa 42:17 and Isa 44:9–20 as later insertions); MATHEUS, Singt, 67–73; B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 206. Similarly WESTERMANN, Sprache, 81–82, according to whom Isa 44:23 concludes Isa 40–44:23. The Servant Song Isa 42:1–4 has been inserted later and expanded (vv.5–9) with the hymn Isa 42:10–13 concluding it. 90 Cf. HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 168–170.

178

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23 Isa 42:18 Isa 43:1 Isa 43:8 Isa 43:14 Isa 43:16 Isa 44:1 Isa 44:6 Isa 44:21

Imperatives Messenger formula Imperative Messenger formula Messenger formula Imperative (+messenger formula) Messenger formula Imperative

Figure 14: Distribution and Order of Unit Introductions in Isa 42:14–44:23

The regular change between the messenger formula and the imperative(s) is interrupted by only one exception. The short unit Isa 43:14–15, which is introduced by the messenger formula, is followed immediately by another unit introduced by the messenger formula as well, Isa 43:16–28.91 This coincides with the proposals of several commentators, who assume a parallel arrangement of some sub-sections on the basis of some correspondences.92 This leads me to the suggestion of a parallel arrangement of two panels of speeches, apart from the introduction (Isa 42:14–17) and the concluding hymn (Isa 44:23): Isa 42:18–43:15 and Isa 43:16–44:22. 91

Most commentators reckon with two rather separate units in Isa 43:16–28, namely Isa 43:16–21 and Isa 43:22–28. Unfortunately, it is not possible to develop my understanding of the coherent communicative strategy of Isa 43:16–28 here. 92 It seems that the core element for the suggestion of a parallel arrangement is the obvious parallelism between Isa 42:18–25 + Isa 43:1–7 and Isa 43:22–28 + Isa 44:1–5, which has been frequently recognized; cf., e.g., MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 501; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 132; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 370. The question then is, which other sub-units belong to the whole discourse and which of them stand in parallelism. Advocates of a larger parallel discourse are: GOLDINGAY, Arrangement, 294 and IDEM, Isaiah, 244, 251: – Isa 42:18–25 + 43:1–7 + 43:8–13 + 43:14–21 parallel to – Isa 43:22–28 + 44:1–5 + 44:6–22(23) + 44:24–45:7(8); HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 171–175; followed by WERLITZ, Redaktion, 239–243: – Isa 42:(14)15–16 + 42:18–25 + 43:1–7 + 43:8–13 parallel to – Isa 43:14–21 + 43:22–28 + 44:1–5 + 44:6–8; – Isa 43:14–15 is the centre of the whole discourse and Isa 44:21–22 forms a conclusion as well as the hymn Isa 44:23; Hardmeier excludes the idol-polemics Isa 42:17; 44:9–20 as secondary; LAATO, Composition, 212, 215–217: – Isa 42:14–17 + 42:18–25 + 43:1–7 + 43:8–13 parallel to – Isa 43:16–21 + 43:22–28 + 44:1–5 + 44:6–8; – Isa 43:14–15 is the centre of this “cycle” here as well; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 68: – Isa 42:14–17 + 42:18–25 + 43:1–7 + 43:8–13 + 43:14–15 parallel to – Isa 43:16–21 + 43:22–28 + 44:1–5 + 44:6–8 + 44:21–22 concluded by the hymn in 44:23; acc. to Höffken, Isa 44:9–20 does not fit into this arrangement.

179

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 Isa 42:14–17 Introduction Isa 42:18–25

APPEAL

+ DESCRIPTION

APPEAL Explained DESCRIPTION

by

Isa 43:16–28

- summons not to attend to the “former things”

- summons to attend to the present message (hear!, see!) - description of the blind and deaf Servant (ʣʡʲ) Jacob-Israel, who is in captivity

- description of Jacob-Israel making YHWH the “Servant” (¥ʣʡʲ) of his sins (v.24)

Isa 43:1–7

Salvation ASSURANCE - ʠʸʩʺʚʬʠ

Salvation ASSURANCE - ʠʸʩʺʚʬʠ

Isa 43:8–13

APPOINTMENT

as Witnesses - ʭʩʣʲ (vv.9, 10) - terms of prediction related to YHWH and the gods: ¥ʣʢʰ and ¥ʲʮˇ Hi. (vv.9, 12) - terms of perception and knowledge related to one party of witnesses: ʸʥʲ, ˇʸʧ, ʯʩʲ, ʯʦʠ (v.8); ¥ʲʣʩ, ¥ʯʩʡ (v.10)

CONFIRMATION

Isa 43:14–15

CONFIRMATION

of YHWH’s Intentions - through 1.sg. qatal-form (v.14b), pointing back to the problem of captivity posed by Isa 42:18–25

CONFIRMATION

Isa 44:1–5

of the Isa 44:6–20 Appointment as Witnesses - ʭʩʣʲ (vv.8, 9) - terms of prediction related to YHWH and the gods: ¥ʣʢʰ (vv.7, 8), ¥ʲʮˇ Hi. (v.8) - terms of perception and knowledge related to one party of witnesses: ¥ʤʠʸ (vv.9, 18), ¥ʲʣʩ (v.9, 18); ʡʬ (vv.18–20), ʯʩʲ (v.18), ¥ʯʩʡ (v.19), ¥ʧʧʨ (v.18), ¥ʬʫˈ (v.18), ʺʲʣ, ʤʰʥʡʺ (both v.19) of YHWH’s Isa 44:21–22 Intentions - through 1.sg. qatal-form (v.22a) pointing back to the problem of Jacob-Israel’s sin posed by Isa 43:16–28

Isa 44:23 Concluding Hymn Figure 15: The Structure of Isa 42:14–44:2393

In the main unit Isa 42:14–44:23 we encounter ‘complex illocutionary acts’. In the following we can only sketch, how the different units mediate different communicative actions and how they are connected to each other and thereby form a consistent communicative strategy. With a few other commentators we will also recognize the central role that the designation

93

The figure contains the predominating COMMUNICATIVE ACTS of each sub-section followed by key words or key concepts that contribute to the parallel arrangement.

180

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

of Jacob-Israel as the witnesses of YHWH (Isa 43:10, 12; 44:8) plays in the whole unit.94 Isa 42:14–17. The introduction prepares for some themes of the discourse (see below) with its contained contrasts between judgement (v.15) and salvation (v.16)95 as well as between the shouting YHWH (v.14) and the hand-made idols (v.17). Isa 42:18–25. We have discussed the communicative strategy of this sub-section in detail above. For the communicative strategy of the whole unit we must look especially at two features of the CHARACTERIZATION that Isa 42:18–25 mediates apart from its APPEAL to listen and see. The contrast to the commission of the Servant (Isa 42:1–9) manifested in the blindness (and deafness) of the Servant (42:18–20, contrast Isa 42:7). At the same time, the Servant is himself in captivity (42:23, contrast Isa 42:7). It is these two shortcomings of the Servant, that the subsequent sections of this panel of speech deal with. Isa 43:1–7. Isa 43:1–7 does not simply speak of the problem of captivity, but brings about the redemption from it. Through the DECLARATIVE illocutionary act “I redeem you” (v.1), YHWH redeems Jacob-Israel from captivity. 96 This is further substantiated by the second explicit performative announcement “I call you by your name”.97 YHWH calls his people from all four corners of the earth. The latter are addressed directly by 94 See especially HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 170–177, who interprets Isa 42:14–44:23 (without Isa 42:17; 44:9–20) as a large rhetorical discourse that aims to persuade the audience for adopting their role as witnesses, and E. HAAG, Zeugen Jahwes, 161, who regards Isa 43:10–13 as the conclusion and climax of Isa 42:18–43:13, a composition formed by an editor, in order to express Israel’s appointment as witnesses. 95 Cf. ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 264; HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 168–169; DARR, Like a Warrior, 567–568 KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 253, 256–259; CHILDS, Isaiah, 333; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 214. HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 69 interprets the destructive force in v.15 as removing the obstacles in order to lead the blind on a passable way. But given the meaning of ʡˈʲ as grass, green plants often regarded as food for animals (see ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 262; also FUTATO, ʡˈʲ, 546) drying up this grass hardly means the removal of obstacles, since grass is none, to name only one objection. 96 The Hebrew construction ʪʩʺʬʠʢ is an explicit performative announcement that performs a DECLARATIVE speech-act, i.e. it realizes what it says. For that purpose it conforms to the most common syntactic construction of a 1.sg. qatal, by which an explicit performative announcement is mediated. The meaning of ¥ʬʠʢ enables also such a speech-act; cf. especially the study of A. WAGNER, Sprechakte in this respect. 97 Cf. similarly LEENE, De vroegere, 164: “in dit reopen ligt heel de inlossing feitelijk al besloten.” The realising effect of the call “Fear not” and the qatal-forms in the verbal reasoning of the so-called “salvation(-assurance) oracles” has been already seen by W ESTERMANN, Sprache, 35–36; similarly PREUSS, Einführung, 74 and has now been further substantiated and confirmed by studies including speech-act theory; apart from LEENE, De vroegere, 33–34, 95-97, 163–165; and IDEM, History and Eschatology, 234– 235 see especially A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 298–299.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

181

YHWH simultaneously so that they should not restrain YHWH’s people (v.6).98 Additionally, YHWH gives a ransom for the sake of Jacob-Israel (Isa 43:3b–4). Through the means of this unit YHWH overcomes one of the problems stated in the previous unit: Jacob-Israel is redeemed from prison, i.e. from the power of the nations, to which he had been forced into submission.99 Isa 43:8–13. After the performance of redemption, Isa 43:8–13 APPOINTS the addressees as witnesses for YHWH. As witnesses they have to testify for YHWH against the other gods and their witnesses (the nations) and should gain insight in the uniqueness of YHWH. Though being still deaf and blind (v.8) this is possible, because YHWH is their saviour (Isa 43:3 and 43:11). In the course of their witness, they will overcome the other main problem raised in Isa 42:18–25 as well: their blindness and deafness will change into knowledge of YHWH (43:10). Finally, it is as witnesses that the addressees are designated “Servant” of YHWH again (Isa 43:10). They are still the Servant of YHWH, but this commission is complemented by their appointment as witnesses.100 Isa 43:14–15. This sub-section has puzzled many commentators because of its briefness and yet being introduced by the messenger formula.101 But when regarded as part of the larger discourse it fits very well into the context as the conclusion of the first panel of speech (Isa 42:18– 43:15). It returns to the problem of captivity and redemption. After Isa 43:1–7 has effected the redemption of the listeners from captivity, Isa 43:14–15 exemplifies this effect further. YHWH makes an ANNOUNCE102 MENT about what he is doing, he sends to Babel and brings down the 98

See especially LEENE, De vroegere, 163–164. Thus two important elements of Isa 43:1–7 indicate the relationship to the problem of captivity: ¥ʬʠʢ presupposes a state of oppression and captivity, from which one has to be redeemed (cf. R INGGREN, ʬʠʢ gƗ’al, 350–355); the summons ʩʠʬʫʺʚʬʠ in Isa 43:6 recalls the situation described in Isa 42:22 by the means of repeating the stem ʠʬʫ (for the meaning see also HAUSMANN, ʠʬʫ kƗlƗ, 143–145 [especially 144–145]). 100 Cf. also E. HAAG, Zeugen Jahwes, 162–163 and G OLDINGAY, Isaiah, 247, 254, 256. 101 WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 102–103 (ET, 125–126) discusses the possibility that vv.14–15 are a fragment (between v.14 and v.15 something got lost) or have originally belonged to another unit without the messenger formula in v.14a, i.e. perhaps together with vv.8–13; but with respect to the content vv.14b–15 fit better in Isa 43:1–7 and might have been part of them. ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 332 assumes that substantial parts of the oracles have been lost; similarly WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 86; BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40– 55, 226–227. 102 The interpretation of the qatal-forms is not easy. A preterite interpretation has been widely rejected now, exceptions are, e.g., W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 124 and, B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 161, 169 (the latter translates the first verb as preterite but the second as future); B EUKEN, Isaiah II/A, 180 seems to remain undecided. The same form as in Isa 99

182

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

bars103 (v.14b). By doing this he proves to be the redeemer of Israel (v.14a). The redemption is possible (Isa 43:1–7) because YHWH is going to defeat Babel and to destroy the bars that closed the dungeons. Isa 43:16–28. This section introduces two topics to the second panel of speech parallel to Isa 42:18–25 in the first one. But there are differences in the way the themes are incorporated into the communicative strategy of each passage, which to some degree could be explained by the changes that emerged in Isa 43:1–7. Isa 43:16–28 pursues two communicative aims. It APPEALS to the audience that they should not attend to the “former things” any more (cf. v.18; DIRECTIVE illocutionary act), and it provides further aspects of the CHARACTERIZATION of the readers/hearers: up to the present the addressees’ relationship to YHWH is deeply affected by their sins and transgressions (cf. vv.22–27; ASSERTIVE illocutionary act). But unlike Isa 42:18–25, the CHARACTERIZATION is subordinated to the APPEAL. Here the characterization of the addressees’ condition is used to argue for the demanded action: because Jacob-Israel has made YHWH a servant of his transgressions (v.24b)104 and even his “first (or former)” father (ʯʥˇʠʸʤ ʪʩʡʠ; v.27) did so, he is supposed not to attend to the “former things” (ʺʥʰˇʠʸ) any more. Apart from the argument of this negative condition, the APPEAL to the audience is supported by an announcement of YHWH’s ac43:1, 3 is striking and LEENE, De vroegere, 166 interprets it as a performative perfect. The verb ¥ʧʬˇ can be used as a performative verb (see the list in A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 100, 118–119), but obviously not in the Piel stem (cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 118n.23). In any case, a performative use of ¥ʣʸʩ is not likely. NORTH, Second Isaiah, 123 interprets it as a perfect “of divine resolve”. It would then, as in Isa 42:16bȕȖ, express the finality of YHWH’s decision. I agree with that interpretation but assume that because of the material and formal correspondences with Isa 43:1–7 the actions of v.14b take place while YHWH announces them. Thus the perfect is not used for a performative speech-act here, but indicates the immediate realization of YHWH’s intention. 103 If one adopts this reading, which results from an emendation of MT bƗrîh̡îm “fugitives” to b erƯh̡Ưm “bars”, the continuation of the problem of captivity becomes even clearer. The emendation is supported by Vulgate; thus, e.g., M UILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 493; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 65; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 331; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 128; CHILDS, Isaiah, 336; BALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 169. Keeping MT, this emendation is refused, e.g., by BONNARD, Second Isaïe, 143; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 181; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 319–321; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 226. For other suggestions and emendations see the discussions in E LLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 331 and W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 128. Yet as attractive as the other suggested emendation of ʭʬʫ to ʭʩʠʬʫ “prison” would be for this interpretation, there is no textual justification for it, contra KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 20; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 65. 104 The reversal of roles from Jacob-Israel as the Servant of YHWH to YHWH as the servant of Jacob-Israel’s sins is especially emphasized by Goldingay, who also highlights the parallelism between Isa 42:18–25 and 43:22–28 on the basis of the problem of “servanthood”; see IDEM, Arrangement, 294, 297; IDEM, Isaiah 43,22–28, 173–174, 183 and IDEM , Isaiah, 251–252.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

183

tion in the immediate future. He is going to do a “new thing” (v.19a). This will be accompanied by the establishment of the way through the wilderness, which will provide for the needs of Jacob-Israel (vv.19b–20). By the “way through the wilderness”, the second predominating theme is introduced, which is alluded to in the next sub-section.105 In sum, Isa 43:16–28 tries to win the audience away from the “former things” to the new thing that YHWH is going to do (vv.18–21). Conversely, the former time is characterized by the problematic relationship between YHWH and JacobIsrael (vv.22–28). And the two themes that Isa 43:16–28 introduces to be taken up by the subsequent sections, are on the one hand the characterization of the addressees as sinners and on the other hand YHWH’s promise of a new way in the wilderness. Isa 44:1–5. Isa 44:1–5 ASSURES the audience that YHWH stands by them (again “Fear not oracle”) and, therefore, produces a similarly surprising outcome in the light of the preceding (negative) evaluation of the addressees’ condition just as Isa 43:1–7 does. Additionally, just as Isa 43:1–7 takes up one theme of its preceding passage in its assurance (referring to the captivity of the addressees), so the present passage alludes to the PROMISE of YHWH’s guidance of the addressees through the wilderness in Isa 43:19b–20 by the means of the imagery of watering and spreading (vv.3– 4). Thus Isa 44:1–5 provides the addressees with an ASSURANCE (“Fear not!”, v.2) of YHWH’s support106 through the allusion to his PROMISES (vv.3–4).107 Isa 44:6–20. After another problem of the addressees’ present state (the sin in Isa 43:18–28) has been addressed by the ASSURANCE of YHWH’s commitment to his people (Isa 44:1–5), another trial passage can deal with the addressees’ appointment as witnesses of YHWH. Presenting the idol105 This feature may be prepared by the promises in Isa 43:2, according to which YHWH will be with “you” on the journey that obviously follows the redemption from captivity. Once the redemption has been achieved, it does not suffice any more to attend (only) to the present condition as part of the “former things”. Opening a new future, now it must be one focus what YHWH is going to do. This also explains the slight differences in the communicative strategy between Isa 42:18–43:15 and Isa 43:16–44:22. 106 For “Fear not!” as an indirect speech act, cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 246–249, 298–299. 107 Thus I regard the absence of qatal-forms as a consequence of the change of communicative strategy in Isa 43:16–28 in contrast to 42:18–25. While the latter gave no single glimpse to the future but had to focus upon the present condition, the former passage both included a description of the present condition as well as an announcement of the immediate future, due to the changed circumstances introduced in Isa 43:1–7. The stated problem of “sin” is only mentioned in Isa 44:21–22 again, where it stands parallel to the announcement of Babel’s defeat. Isa 44:1–5 then is content with the other posed theme: the future guidance of YHWH’s people. Introduced as a future act, it cannot occur in an explicit performative announcement but only as a PROMISE again (v.3).

184

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

fabrication and its worship in such detail, the present passage not only indicates the superiority of the witnesses of YHWH against the idol-makers, and encourages them by this means. It also shows what the testimonies are about: the deities’ ability to rescue108 and the knowledge and understanding of their worshippers. Isa 44:21–22. Isa 44:21–22 concludes the second panel of speech similarly to Isa 43:14–15. The disproportionately lengthy address (v.21) summons the audience to attend to “these things”, i.e. the message in this section.109 It stresses the status of Jacob-Israel as the Servant of YHWH. A line with a verb in 1.sg.qatal-form follows. Though this has been interpreted often as preterite, the parallel position to Isa 43:14–15 and the correspondence to Isa 42:16bȕȖ, which anticipates the confirmatory concluding character of both units, suggest the same meaning here. The qatal-form indicates the finality of YHWH’s intention that leaves open the time of its realization. This passage confirms YHWH’s intention to wipe out the addressees’ sin, and thereby, takes up the other theme posed by Isa 43:16–28, which has not been dealt with so far in the second panel of speech. By this means, the problematic characteristics of the present condition of JacobIsrael, noted in the opening units of each panel of speech, have been addressed. They either have been already overcome (redemption from captivity) or will be resolved in due course (imperceptiveness will be overcome in the course of their appointment as witnesses; and it is confirmed that their sin will be wiped out). Thus despite Jacob-Israel’s present condition its commission as the Servant of YHWH still stands. But it does so through the incorporation of the concept of “witness”. As the witnesses of YHWH, they are his Servant (Isa 43:8–13; 44:1, 2, 21). This concept, however, depends on the response of the audience. They can only witness for the power and efficacy of YHWH’s word (Isa 43:9, 12), which is also shown in causing their redemption from captivity (Isa 43:2, 6, 14), when they accept his offer of redemption. So the last line of the discourse is to ensure the success of its communicative effort: “Return to me, because herewith I redeem you!” (Isa 44:22b). Isa 42:14–17. Many of the main issues in the whole discourse are already anticipated in the introduction Isa 42:14–17. The contrast between 108

Cf. also, e.g., W ILDBERGER, Monotheismus, 254 and H ERMISSON, Götter bei Deuterojesaja, 122 who emphasize that the claim of YHWH’s uniqueness is not simply a theoretical one but is carried out for the sake of soteriology. 109 There is no indication that the deixis ʤʬʠ should have another reference than the actual message as it unfolds for the audience. This fits quite well together with the several summons to attend to the actual message in this discourse; cf. Isa 42:18; 44:1 and the insistence upon the physical ability to perceive in Isa 43:8.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23

185

judgement (v.15) and salvation (v.16) points forward to the juxtaposition of the defeat of Babel (Isa 43:14–15) and the wiping out of sins (Isa 44:21–22). Both conclude a speech. As qatal-forms confirm the future intentions of YHWH, this passage (v.16bȕȖ concluding vv.15–16bĮ) also anticipates the confirmations in Isa 43:15 and Isa 44:22a. Put in the centre of the passage, these assertions are framed by the contrast between YHWH, who raises his voice as powerfully as the gasping of a woman in labour (42:14)110 resulting in judgement and salvation (42:15–16), and the useless idols, who cannot prevent the shame of their makers and devotees (42:17). This overall argument then will become a central issue in the lawsuit scenes (Isa 43:8–13; 44:6–20). 2.4.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 42:14–44:23 Within the main unit Isa 42:14–44:23, the theme of hardening occurs in the sub-sections, Isa 42:14–17; 42:18–25; 43:8–13 and 44:6–20. What is fairly exceptional in this discourse is that the unit deals with the theme of hardening not only in respect to the people of YHWH (42:18–25; 43:8, 10), but also in connection with the other nations/idol-worshippers (44:9–20).111 The different sub-sections communicate different aspects related to hardening in various ways. Isa 42:18–25 concentrates primarily on the issue of ‘perception’. The correlation of the APPEAL to perceive (“see!”, “listen!”) and the audience’s CHARACTERIZATION as unperceptive (being blind and deaf) are primary aspects of its communicative strategy. What we found additionally is that the lack of will to listen is also one trait of the hearers’/listeners’ present condition (Isa 42:24). Isa 43:8 takes up the CHARACTERIZATION of the people of YHWH as unperceptive (blind and deaf). It also adds the issue of ‘understanding, realization’. V.10 assigns to the audience’s appointment as YHWH’s witnesses the purpose that they may understand and believe in YHWH and realize that he “is he”. Thus the future prospect for the people as regards the theme of hardening is that they may gain “knowledge of YHWH”, in its relational and intellectual dimension. Finally, Isa 44:6–20 includes various aspects of hardening in 110 See especially the study of DARR, Like a Warrior. Her insistence upon the unity of Isa 42:10–17 does not affect this interpretation too much. It must also be said that this verse heavily resists the assumption of B ARSTAD, Way, 37–53 (especially 53), who tries to elucidate the motif of guidance and of YHWH as the warrior and relates this to an assumed metaphor of holy war/theophany in order to avoid the exodus theme. The imagery of the woman in travail simply does not fit in his presentation. 111 Among the other cases might be Isa 47:7, 10, in which Babylon is accused of not having laid “these things to heart” (v.7) and that “your wisdom and knowledge led you astray” (v.10), and Isa 42:7, which may speak of the task of the Servant to open the eyes of the blind in respect to all nations.

186

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

about the condition of idol-worshippers and idol-makers. It is therefore, an important trait of their CHARACTERIZATION. They too are unperceptive (blind, v.9) and lack any understanding (vv.9, 18–20), but this condition is traced back here to a manipulation of their organs of understanding (heart) and perception (eyes), which are “smeared” (v.18). This is particularly close to Isa 6:10.112 In both passages the inability to perceive and understand are caused by their manipulated organs of perception and understanding. But unlike Isa 6:10, the present passage does not indicate any cause of this manipulation.113 While according to Isa 6:10, the manipulation of the organs is the perlocutionary effect of the prophet Isaiah’s ministry, the present passage just notes the condition of manipulated organs of perception and understanding. When, how and by whom this was caused is not indicated. The distribution of these sub-sections indicates their importance for the communicative strategy of the whole main unit. The theme of hardening occurs in the introduction to the unit (42:16), and thereby, hints at its significance. It is a central aspect of the first section (42:18–25) of the first panel of speech (42:18–43:15). It is also an integral part of both parallel passages in which the addressees are appointed as witnesses of YHWH (43:8–13) and confirmed in this role (44:6–20) respectively. Thus the theme of hardening is an important aspect of the content of Isa 42:14– 44:23 and plays a crucial role in the communicative strategy of this discourse.114 It is to the latter point that we shall finally draw our attention. We saw above that the whole unit consists of two parallel panels of speech. They move from an APPEAL that is complemented (Isa 42:18–25) or reasoned (Isa 43:16–28) by a CHARACTERIZATION of the present condition of the addressees to an ASSURANCE of YHWH’s commitment to his people (Isa 43:1–7; Isa 44:1–5). Both ASSURANCES are followed by the APPOINTMENT of this people as witnesses of YHWH (43:8–13) and of the APPOINTMENT’S CONFIRMATION (44:6–20) respectively, despite their present state. This APPOINTMENT and CONFIRMATION takes place in the context of the trial about the status of YHWH and the other gods/idols. Both panels are concluded by an ANNOUNCEMENT of what YHWH is going to do, which refers back to one of the issues of the people’s present condition (Isa STATEMENTS

112

Cf. also MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 14–15. Contra MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 15 according to whom v.18 “attributes this incomprehension to divine agency” and similarly OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 183n.60 who also regards the verbal form ʧʨ as transitive; see the notes above. 114 See similarly especially HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 164–165. But this study shows that the theme of blindness and lack of knowledge does not only appear in this discourse in Isa 40–55 (contra H ARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 165n.35). 113

3. Summary

187

43:14–15, addressing the issue of captivity; Isa 44:21–22, speaking about the sins of the people). Within this strategy, hardening appears as a crucial issue of the present condition of the addressees (Isa 42:18–25). They cannot see nor hear (42:18–20), they do not know (42:25), they do not even want to listen (42:24). Astonishingly, the theme of hardening reappears even in the context of the addressees’ APPOINTMENT as witnesses for YHWH (43:8–10). First of all, they are summoned to court despite being blind and deaf (43:8). By the juxtaposition of the parallel passage Isa 44:6–20, which CHARACTERIZES the witnesses for the other gods, the idol-worshippers and idol-makers as blind, ignorant and hardened as well, this unit shows that the people of YHWH, his Servant, is like the other witnesses for the other gods. By including various aspects of the theme of hardening, the likeness of YHWH’s people and the other nations comes to the fore. Consequently, it is not their present condition that qualifies the people of YHWH to act as his witnesses. What is different, however, is the future. This is communicated through the inclusion of aspects of the theme of hardening. While nothing will change for the idol-worshipper, the Servant of YHWH is appointed as his witnesses “so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he” (43:10). This prospect for the future makes all the difference; and it is a difference in respect to the “knowledge of YHWH”. It is finally this future that fuels the present APPEALS to hear and see, to perceive the present message (cf. 42:18 and in particular the appeal in 42:23 motivated by “for the days to come”).

3. Summary 3. Summary

The analysis of Isa 42:18–25 has shown that the theme of hardening is at the heart of its complex communicative strategy. It occurs as part of the CHARACTERIZATION of the addressees, who are said to be imperceptive and ignorant, and the aspect of perception is the only issue of the APPEAL in Isa 42:18–25. This passage elaborates on the ‘strategy of prolongation’ of Isaiah’s message already indicated in Isa 6–39; the addressees of Isa are hardened through the presented proclamation of Isaiah, they are made imperceptive (i.e. blind and deaf) and unable to understand. At the same time Isa 42:18–25 opens up a new future in urging them to listen to and see the present new proclamation. We will see in subsequent chapters how this paradox is solved. Additionally, the discussion of Isa 42:18–25 shows that apart from the issues of reciprocal actions and communication, even the addressees’ intentions (¥ʤʡʠ) are affected and have to be governed by ‘connective right-

188

Chapter 4: Appointing the Hardened as Witnesses: Isaiah 42:14–44:23

eousness’. Accordingly, the misguided intentions of the people were affected by the hardening message of Isaiah, too, so that they were bound to follow their false intentions and could not desire the right thing. The significance of the theme of hardening in Isa becomes apparent when we view it in terms of the wider context’s communicative strategy, of which Isa 42:18–25 is a part. Aspects of hardening are among the important features of the contrast between the addressees’ call as YHWH’s Servant (Isa 42:1–9) and their actual condition (Isa 42:18–25), which necessitates a refinement that leads to their appointment as witnesses of YHWH (Isa 43:8–13; 44:6–9). Hardening is a central issue of the addressees’ relationship to the other nations. In this respect, they and the nations are alike in the present. What distinguishes them is their future. When the addressees of Isa fulfil their appointment as the witnesses of YHWH before the other nations, they will overcome hardening and know YHWH (Isa 43:10). From the discussion of Isa 42:18–25 and the whole discourse of Isa 42:14–44:23, the theme of hardening emerges as a central issue of the characterization of the addressees’ present state and as one crucial point that will be addressed and needs to be resolved in the further communicative strategy of Isa 40–55. In the next chapter, we will see how the theme of hardening is interwoven with other central themes of Isa 40–55, especially in Isa 48:1–11, to make a fundamental statement about the nature of the addressees. In discussing the wider context (Isa 44:24–49:13), we will see that Isa 48:1–11 forms the crucial conclusion of an argument, which presupposes the proper understanding of the call to leave Babylon (Isa 48:20–21).

Chapter 5

Characterizing the Hardened before the Return: Isaiah 44:24–49:13 In chapter 4, we saw how the theme of hardening is an important issue of the communicative strategy of Isa 42:14–44:23. The addressees are said to be in a state of failing to see or hear or understand. Still as those who are redeemed by YHWH who is with them, they are appointed as his witnesses before the other nations, who are hardened too. As a result, the addressees will receive knowledge of YHWH. Together with the problem of the addressees’ sins (cf. Isa 43:16–28), hardening is the central issue that needs to be addressed again, according to Isa 42:14–44:23. The present chapter elucidates how both issues are correlated in Isa 48:1–11 (cf. 1.). It clarifies how the theme of hardening is combined with other arguments of Isa 48:1– 11 and, thereby, emerges even clearer as a central concern. We will see that it is the theme of hardening that demands a differentiation of the temporal perspectives in Isa. The second part (cf. 2.) clarifies the place of Isa 48:1–11 in the communicative strategy of the larger discourse of Isa 44:24–49:13. This will pursue the question of how the theme of hardening is continued in Isa 40–55, and it will also highlight its significance.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11 1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

1.1 Introduction Isa 48:1–11 manifests terminology potentially related to the theme of hardening in v.4 and vv.7–8. V.4 explicitly says to the addressees that “you are hard” (ʤʺʠ ʤˇʷ). We need to ascertain whether or how this statement contributes to the present discussion. In vv.7–8 the central verbs ¥ʲʣʩ and ¥ʲʮˇ appear. In v.7 they have a specific object (suffixes), while in v.8a they are constructed without objects. Moreover, v.8a contains the phrase ʪʰʦʠ ʤʧʺʴʚʠʬ “your ear is not opened”.1 Despite this limited occurrence of

1

On this emendation of the reading in MT, see the discussion below.

190

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

terminology related to aspects of hardening,2 we will see that this passage is important for understanding it in Isa.3 In particular, it plays a crucial role in the communicative strategy of the main unit of Isa 44:24–49:13, of which Isa 48:1–11 is one sub-section. 1.2 Structure and Poetics The beginning of the unit Isa 48:1–11 is marked by the change of addressee from Babylon to Jacob-Israel and the imperative ʺʠʦʚʥʲʮˇ (v.1) that introduces this section. Parallel to Isa 47:1–7, two subsequent subsections are introduced in a very similar manner. As in Isa 47:1, 5, an imperative of the same verb (¥ʡˇʩ) occurs together with a designation of the addressee (“virgin daughter of Babylon”, Isa 47:1; “daughter of the Chaldeans”, Isa 47:5). So, too, in Isa 48:1, 12, the imperative of ¥ʲʮˇ occurs together with the addressee “Jacob”. In addition, a form of ¥ʠʸʷ is related to ʬʠʸˈʩ in Isa 48:1 and Isa 48:12. Hence, Isa 48:12 starts a new subsection. Many scholars assume a gradual growth of Isa 48:1–11 because of contradictions that they perceive in this passage. Consequently, they do not discuss the structure of the present text but seek to establish the original words of Deutero-Isaiah and later additions.4 Among those who regard Isa The verbs ¥ʣʢʰ and ¥ʲʮˇ that play a crucial role in vv.3–6a are used in the Hifil for the argument that YHWH has announced the “former things” long ago. Hence, they are not specifically related to the aspect of ‘perception’. 3 Usually, Isa 48:1–11 is not included in the discussions of the theme of hardening in Isa (see the survey in the introduction). W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 177 and SEITZ, Isaiah 40– 66, 418 note a connection between Isa 48:8 and Isa 6:9–10, but do not expand this further. 4 In the following the counts of verses, half-verses etc. are according to BHS. They differ sometimes from the counts presented in the individual works. DUHM, Jesaia, 360 regards the following verses and phrases as original DI: in v.1 only ʡʷʲʩʚʺʩʡ ʺʠʦʚʥʲʮˇ, v.3, v.5a, vv.6–7a, v.8a, v.11 (without ʬʧʩ ʪʩʠ ʩʫ). The other parts of vv.1–11 have been excluded for their contradictions to the message of DI (vv.1–2 are postexilic; v.4 contain correspondences to Deut and Ezek; v.5b stems from the same glossator as in Isa 46:8; v.7b is an unfortunate gloss, that contradicts the thought of DI, vv.8b–10 are from one glossator of the postexilic time, since in v.8b there are correspondences to Ezek and in v.9 one can find similarities to the states of the time of Trito-Isaiah, Malachi and Deutero-Zechariah; the phrase excluded from v.11 has no relationship to the train of thought of DI). Most of the later studies that distinguish between DI’s words and later glosses have built upon Duhm. The analysis of Duhm is taken over unchanged by MARTI, Jesaja, 321. DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 416 mainly take up the argument of the harshness of some verses that would hardly agree with the message of DI. They roughly agree with the analysis of Duhm and Cheyne, but maintain a DI-authorship of most of vv.1–2 (without v.1bȕ) and v.10–11. G. A. SMITH, Isaiah II, 222–225 regards vv.1–2 (except ʺʠʦʚʥʲʮˇ ʡʷʲʩʚʺʩʡ), v.4, vv.8b–10 and the phrase ʬʧʩ ʪʩʠ ʩʫ of v.11 as glosses. According to KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 34–35 the following phrases and verses should be deleted: 2

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

191

48:1–11 as coherent, the proposals of its arrangement vary, with many considering the theme of the “former things” and the “new things” as a structuring feature.5 The most plausible proposal is to segment Isa 48:1–11 vv.1aȕ, 1bȕ–2aĮ, 4, 5b, 6aĮ, 7b, 8b–10 and v.5a should be removed before v.6b. VOLZ, Jesaia II, 86n.1 mentions only v.2 as an addition. ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 188-198 regards as interpolations of the later editor Trito-Isaiah: vv.1bȕ–2, 4, 5b, 8b–10; v.7b and the phrase ʬʧʩ ʪʩʠ ʩʫ in v.11 are glosses. This distinction has been taken over unchanged by H.-C. SCHMITT, Schultheologie, 51–52. WESTERMANN, Sprache, 71 calls vv.1bȕ, 4–5, 8b–10 later additions. The resulting corpus of DI is parallel to Isa 46 and Isa 48:12–16 (ibid. 72). In his later commentary he has changed his view slightly: there vv.1bȕ, 4, 5b, 7b, 8b–10 are later additions; cf. W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 157–162 (ET, 194–199). SCHOORS, Saviour, 283–292 deletes: vv.1aȕ, 1bȕ–2, 4, 7b, 8b–10 and ʬʧʩ ʪʩʠ ʩʫ in v.11. B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 283–284, 287–288 is more cautious about the extent of additions, he regards vv.4b, 9b–11a as the work of a later redactor. MERENDINO, Der Erste, 499– 508 deletes as later additions: vv.1b–2 (though v.1bȕ is added by another “hand” then the others), vv.4–6aĮ, 8–10. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 207–215 mainly regards vv.1–11 as a unit. Of some probability is a later addition of vv.5b, 7b (ibid. 211, 214–215), he refuses to delete v.1bȕ (ibid. 215–216) and is very cautious in regarding the phrase ʪʩʠ ʩʫ ʬʧʩ of v.11 a gloss (cf. ibid. 207, 211). VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 303–306 maintains, that Isa 48:1–11* cannot belong to the Grundschrift, but belongs to R3. Nevertheless, even at this late stage of editorial work he finds some additions: v.1bȕ and vv.9–10 are later additions of the same redactor, vv.2 and 7 are additions, which can be characterized as “zionskritische Erweiterung(en)” (ibid. 305) but cannot be related to any other editorial layer, finally v.11aĮ is a gloss. LABAHN, Schuld, 190–209 speaks as well of a Grundbestand, that originated after DI, which then has been added by a second edition. She does not exactly determine the Grundbestand (vv.3, 5a, 6b, 7a obviously belong to it; besides the later additions in v.1, I have not found any treatment of vv.1–2 and vv.10– 11), the editorial work comprises vv.1bȕ, 4, 5b, 7b, 8–9. According to W ERLITZ, Redaktion, 353, the primary layer consists of vv.1abĮ, 2aȕb, 3, 6, 7a, 8a(?), 11aĮb, the remainder was added by a “schultheologische” edition. Another suggestion has been made by B EGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 169–170. Starting with the “unverkennbaren Dubletten” in v.3 par. v.5a and v.9 par. v.11 he supposes two texts of DI, that have been interwoven. Text 1 comprises vv.4–6b, 7–10, the second more fragmentary one consists of vv.3, 6aȕ, 11. Verses 1–2 are mainly the product of the compiler. 5 There are also some form critics, who determine the present text: According to GRESSMANN, literarische Analyse, 271, vv.1–11 are an invective (“Scheltwort”); VON W ALDOW, Deuterojesaja, 32–35 calls it a disputation. This is also supposed by MELUGIN, Formation, 39–41, 137, though he rejects the simple form of von Waldow and speaks rather of a “disputation speech” that is freely created by DI himself and included elements from other genres. Other scholars, who hold a unity of vv.1–11, include other observations to prove their case. NORTH, Second Isaiah, 173–174 agrees with Muilenburg about the unity of chapter 48, though he rejects searching for a certain strophic arrangement (“a gathering together of related themes rather than an artistic unity”). SPYKERBOER , Deutero-Isaiah, 156–157 mainly attends to the relationship of vv.1–11 to vv.12ff and argues for their unity. Applying categories of classical rhetoric, GITAY, Prophecy, 216–217 gets five parts in Isa 48: vv.1–2 (introduction), vv.3–11 (thesis), vv.12–15 (refutation), vv.16–19 (confirmation), vv.20–22 (epilogue). CLIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 40, 139– 145 does not fully clarify segmentation. He also is mainly interested in the parallel struc-

192

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

into four strophes: vv.1–2 (strophe I); vv.3–6a (strophe II); vv.6b–8 (strophe III); vv.9–11 (strophe IV). Verses 1–2 stand out as they introduce a speech delivered from v.3 onwards, indicated by the change of speaker (explicitly YHWH speaking in 1.sg.). Strophes II and III can be determined on the basis of their parallel arrangement. Both strophes are introduced by similar lines (vv.3a, 6b): the ʺʥˇʣʧ of v.6b correspond to the ʺʥʰˇʠʸʤ of v.3a; each phrase is followed by a statement of time (ʦʠʮ in v.3a and ʤʺʲʮ in v.6b), while the verb (both times in 1.sg. qatal-form) occurs in inverted order in v.6b. Moreover, they contain statements about the temporal realization of the predictions (v.3a: ʭʠʺʴ; v.7a: ʤʺʲ); they give positively (v.4: ʩʺʲʣʮ; v.8b: ʩʺʲʣʩ ʩʫ) and negatively expressed reasons (v.5; v.7: ʸʮʠʺ ʯʴ) for the predictions; and there is a correspondence regarding the concluding phraseology (v.6a: ʺʲʮˇ; v.8a: ʺʲʮˇ ʠʬ).6 Observations on the internal structure of each strophe further support this segmentation. The first strophe consists of probably three tricola (v.1a; v.1b;7 v.2). The most important feature of vv.1–2 is that the colon in v.1bȕ

ture of vv.1–11 and vv.12–21 (ibid. 40, 142). Once he segments into vv.1–2, 3–8, 9–11 (ibid. 142), but when concerned with content he speaks of “the next section (vv.3–5)” (thus ibid. 143) or distinguishes between vv.5–6a and vv.6b–8 (ibid. 143). LEENE, De vroegere, 210–211 supposes a parallel arrangement between vv.1–11 and vv.12–22 as well and deals with vv.1–5 (par vv.12–15) and vv.6–11 (par. vv.16–22), but allows also another possible division between v.6a and v.6b (cf. ibid. 202–203, 211). MOTYER, Prophecy, 376 divides into vv.1–2, vv.3–6a, vv.6b–7, vv.8–11 according to his supposed parallel structure between vv.1–11 and vv.12–22. OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 259 simply looks at the content and determines two paragraphs: vv.1–5 and vv.6–11. BALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 282–287 makes his assumptions about the dramatic setting the rule of segmentation: vv.1–3, vv.4–7, vv.8–11. 6 Cf. also HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 208–209 and KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 554–555. The latter also mentions ʭʲʩʮˇʠʥ in v.3a and ʪʩʺʲʮˇʤ in v.6b as evidence. Nevertheless, it should be noted, that in vv.3–6a the positively expressed reason for the prediction precedes the negatively expressed one, while in vv.6b–8 this order is inverted. According to HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 208–209 this is caused by its function in vv.6b–8 to lead up to vv.9–11. Koole calls it “chiastic placement” (ibid. 555). Muilenburg and Franke note similarly that the whole verse 6 is related to vv.3–5 as well as to vv.7–8 as it “acts as a bridge” (FRANKE, Isaiah, 252) and can be called “a superb transition” respectively (MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 555). Nevertheless, they decided to segment vv.3–8 into vv.1–5 and vv.6–8 (in order to achieve equally sized strophes?). But this overlooks the fact, that v.6a serves well as the conclusion of strophe II: two of the roots of the introducing line recur in v.6a: ¥ʣʢʰ and ¥ʲʮˇ. Moreover, while ¥ʣʢʰ of v.6a does not occur elsewhere in vv.6–8, the two verbs ¥ʲʮˇ and ¥ʲʣʩ appearing in v.6b play important roles in strophe III and are to be found also in the concluding verse (¥ʲʣʩ even in the last line, possibly creating an inclusio). 7 The segmentation of v.1 into two tricola seems to be supported by the accentuation of MT, which has the same order of disjunctive accents at the end of each colon in v.1: v.1a: RƟbîă‘– ZƗqƝp parvum – ’AtnƗh̢; v.1b: RƟbîă‘– ZƗqƝp parvum – ’AtnƗh.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

193

stands out from the net of interrelationships between the other cola in this strophe (see Figure 16).8 v.1a

ʥʠʶʩ ʤʣʥʤʩ †ʩʲʮʮʥ

ʬʠʸˈʩ ʭˇʡ ʭʩʠʸʷʰʤ

ʡʷʲʩʚʺʩʡ ʺʠʦʚʥʲʮˇ

v.1b

ʤʷʣʶʡ ʠʬʥ ʺʮʠʡ ʠʬ

ʥʸʩʫʦʩ ʬʠʸˈʩ ʩʤʬʠʡʥ

ʤʥʤʩ ʭˇʡ ʭʩʲʡˇʰʤ

ʥʮˇ ʺʥʠʡʶ ʤʥʤʩ

ʥʫʮʱʰ ʬʠʸˈʩ ʩʤʬʠʚʬʲʥ

ʥʠʸʷʰ ˇʣʷʤ ʸʩʲʮʚʩʫ

v.2

Figure 16: Interrelationships in Isa 48:1–2

Strophe II consists of five lines (v.3, v.4, v.5a, v.5b, v.6a). Noteworthy is the distribution of two key words in this strophe; ¥ʣʢʰ and ¥ʲʮˇ appear in the first, the centre and the last line. In v.3 and v.5a they are part of YHWH’s claim that he has made known the “former things” long ago. These lines alternate with statements about the condition of the addressees that form the reasons for YHWH’s predictions (vv.4, 5b). Finally, the last line brings these aspects together when it includes ¥ʣʢʰ and ¥ʲʮˇ in the utterance to the addressees. The next strophe (vv.6b–8) is made of four lines (v.6b, v.7, v.8a, v.8b). The first two lines are closely related by semantic correspondences: the two verbs of v.6b (¥ʲʮˇ; ¥ʲʣʩ) recur in the same order in v.7; and ʤʺʲʮ (v.6bĮ) has three corresponding temporal phrases in the following line (ʤʺʲ and ʦʠʮ ʠʬʥ in v.7aĮ, ʭʥʩʚʩʰʴʬʥ in v.7aȕ). Noteworthy in both lines is the accumulation of temporal terms and negations, which emphasizes that it is now that YHWH makes known the new things; they have not been heard of and known before. The final two lines are formed as an explanatory sentence; what is said in v.8a is explained by the last line in v.8b. The final lines form a concentric strophe (vv.9–11). The beginning ʰʲʮʬ in v.9 corresponds to ʩʰʲʮʬ in v.11. The phrases ʩʮˇ and ʩʺʬʤʺʥ of v.9 might be taken up in the phrase ʩʣʥʡʫʥ of v.11.9 By this means vv.9, 11 frame v.10.10 This reading could be also supported by the correspondence of unusual length of the two tricola in vv.9, 11.11 8

Straight lines indicate semantic or verbal correspondences and are highlighted through straight underlining of the corresponding words; dotted lines mark the same grammatical structure; the line alternating minus and dots hints at a possible semantic correspondence between the phrases ʤʣʥʤʩ †ʩʲʮʮʥ and ˇʣʷʤ ʸʩʲʮ that are also underlined accordingly. Cf. also BERLIN , Dynamics, 104–106 on “sonant parallelism”. 9 This has been suggested by K OOLE, Isaiah III/1, 555. 10 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 555. FRANKE, Isaiah, 255 makes a similar statement on the grounds of the change of “tenses”: “The section begins and ends with a pair of imperfect verbs; in between these is a line-pair composed of perfect verbs.” 11 Another segmentation has been suggested by FRANKE, Isaiah, 254: v.9: a line-pair followed by a single line; v.10: a line-pair; v.11: a line-pair divided by a single line.

194

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 48:1–11 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 48:1–11 The primary illocutionary role of Isa 48:1–11 is to CHARACTERIZE the addressees, thereby illuminating them about their actual condition. The individual strophes contribute in different ways to addressing this problem. Strophe I makes the STATEMENT that the addressees are wrong in the way they see themselves and relate to YHWH. All they do – calling themselves “of the holy city” (ˇʣʷʤ ʸʩʲʮ, v.2), swearing by the name of YHWH (ʤʥʤʩ ʭˇʡ ʭʩʲʡˇʰʤ) and confessing the God of Israel (ʥʸʩʫʦʩ ʬʠʸˈʩ ʩʤʬʠʡʥ, v.1b)12, leaning on the God of Israel (ʥʫʮʱʰ ʬʠʸˈʩ ʩʤʬʠʚʬʲ, v.2)13 – all this happens “not in truth and not in righteousness” (ʤʷʣʶʡ ʠʬʥ ʺʮʠʡ ʠʬ, v.1). The next two strophes substantiate these claims by associating STATEMENTS about the condition of the addressees with YHWH’s actions of having predicted and realized the “former things” (vv.3–6a) and being about to announce and create “new things” (vv.6b–8). The audience’s condition of stubborness (v.4) and the prospect that they would have ascribed the “former things” to their idols (v.5b) are the reasons why YHWH has announced them long ago. The creation and announcement of the “new things” now and not long ago (vv.6b–7a) happens so that the hearers/ readers could not claim them as known to them. And the statement that they have not heard and known from long ago is explained (ʩʫ) by their state as sinners (v.8; see in more detail below). The whole passage concludes with a complementary statement that reveals a dialectics in the illumination of the audience’s present condition. 12 Both communicative acts are seen by many commentators as CONFESSIONS; cf., e.g., CHILDS, Isaiah, 374 (“Israel’s traditional confessional language”); on the phrase “to swear in the name of YHWH” as an act of confession, cf. Deut 6:13; 10:20 and the comments in MCCONVILLE, Deuteronomy, 143, 201; then also Josh 23:7; Jer 4:1–2; 12:16; cf. also the comments in HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 219, KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 557 and similarly LABAHN, Schuld, 195. 13 The most likely interpretation of ʩʫ, by which v.2 is related to the previous statements, is that it continues the previous thought in a concessive sense; cf., e.g., HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 203, 221–222; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 417–418. For SIMON, Theology, 156, v.1bȕ begins a new sentence and ʩʫ introduces the subject clause v.2 (“It is neither true nor just that they call themselves after the holy city …”). LEENE, Juda, 84, 85, 89 argues that the particle ʩʫ means an intensification of the negation in v.1bȕ (one would translate it with “let alone that…”), similar to its use in Isa 43:22. Accordingly, v.2 expresses what the addressee’s behaviour actually should be like, but which has not been realized. Leene translates: “… niet in waarheid en niet in gerechtigheid; laat staan dat zij zich noemen ‘uit de heilige stad’ en steunen op de God van Israël”, (LEENE, Juda, 85; capitals and underlining deleted). This interpretation has been adopted by B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 281–282 and KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 559. For a more detailed discussion of various proposals, cf. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 203, 221–222.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

195

Despite their condition as clarified in vv.1–8, YHWH announces that he restrains himself from eliminating the addressees. This happens for the sake of his name, praise and glory (vv.9, 11).14 YHWH’s restraint is a continuous attitude (cf. yiqtol-forms in vv.9, 11). At the same time, YHWH has started to refine and test15 the addressees (v.10). The interpretations of this statement vary significantly. The interpretation advocated here reckons that the addressees’ captivity is seen as the refining process, which could ultimately change their condition of ‘unrighteousness’ in respect to their relationship to YHWH and to their self-perception. A Note on the Interpretation of Isa 48:10 The main problems in Isa 48:1016 involve the interpretation of the phrase ʳʱʫʡ ʠʬʥ and the meaning of ʪʩʺʸʧʡ. According to the most common interpretation, ʳʱʫʡ ʠʬʥ should be understood in a similar manner to the described process in Jer 6:29–30: Israel has been melted, but the result was not silver, i.e. the procedure was in vain.17 Another interpretation suggests, that here in view is a refinement of Israel that is different from refining silver, i.e. Israel is or will be refined but not as silver is.18 Or, with a slight difference, a few scholars interpret v.10a as a refinement that was not intended to result in silver.19 As Hermisson has shown, the determination of the various grammatical categories for the preposition ʡ is not decisive as any probable category (ʡ essentiae or ʡ pretii) can and has been used to support these interpretations.20 All of these views depend on the way the 14 LABAHN, Schuld, 204-205 is very quick in assuming the influence of the dtr. concept of the name of YHWH in Isa 48:9 just because of the occurrence of ʭˇ. Granted that vv.9, 11 correspond to each other in the concentric strophe, the most important parallel is Isa 42:8 where the terms ʭˇ, ʣʥʡʫ and ʤʬʤʺ appear together in one verse. Thus the point in Isa 48:9 is not to evoke the dtr. concept, but to point out that what is at stake is the ultimate goal of YHWH’s glorification. For the sake of the eschatological doxology and praise of YHWH (Isa 42:8) he restraints himself not to cut off his people but to refine them. 15 It is difficult to decide, what the precise meaning of the qatal is here. The most likely to me is to see here expressed an action in the past that is assumed to continue up to the present moment; cf. GK §106g–l; JM §112e. This decision, however, is closely related to how one interprets the phrase ʳʱʫʡ ʠʬʥ ʪʩʺʴʸʶ ʤʰʤ; on this see the “Note on the Interpretation of Isa 48:10”. 16 Some scholars would see no point in trying to make sense of a phrase, which they think is simply unintelligible; cf. the harsh judgement of TORREY, Second Isaiah, 376. 17 Cf., e.g., DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 419; DUHM, Jesaia, 363; MARTI, Jesaja, 323; VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 176; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 557; VAN O ORSCHOT, Babel, 305; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 573; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 118; B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 286; HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 245–248. 18 Cf., e.g., HITZIG, Jesaja, 534–535; DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 478–479; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 269–270; FRANKE, Isaiah, 200–203. 19 Regarding the preposition as a ʡ pretii, cf. VOLZ, Jesaia II, 87; LEENE, De vroegere, 214. 20 Cf. the discussion in HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 247–248. Hermisson also notes another interpretation that has been held by earlier commentators (e.g. Rashi; Qimchi; Vitringa); they interpreted the phrase “not as silver” as a gradual difference of refine-

196

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

phrase ʳʱʫʡ ʠʬʥ is used within the whole line. In this respect the interpretation of an already failed refining process is not able to accommodate the contrast between ʳʱʫʡ ʠʬʥ and ʩʰʲ ʸʥʫʡ in the parallel cola of v.10. The objection of Hermisson that it was obvious that the refinement of the people was not a literal refinement of silver and consequently, need not to be mentioned extra, may apply to a prose statement but not to this poetic passage. The phrase ʳʱʫʡ ʠʬʥ prepares in its contrast for the assertion ʩʰʲ ʸʥʫʡ and thereby highlights that the refining process of the audience is uncommon as it takes place in the “furnace of affliction”.21 As regards the term ʪʩʺʸʧʡ, some scholars maintain the common meaning of ¥ʸʧʡ “to elect, choose” in Isa 40–55 (cf. Isa 40:20; 41:8, 9; 43:10 etc.),22 while the majority interprets it as “to test”, either emending it to ¥ʯʧʡ, which usually occurs in parallel to ¥ʳʸʶ (cf. Jer 9:6; Zech 13:9; Ps 17:3 etc.),23 or reckoning with the Aramaic sense “to test” here.24 The immediate context of melting metal clearly favours the related term “to test”,25 but it cannot be excluded that with ¥ʸʧʡ we encounter a “double entendre”.26 A final note is due to a recent proposal by Leene. He argues for a performative act in v.10, according to which the addressees are refined and elected by hearing this statement. 27 The syntactic form corresponds indeed to what Wagner has shown to be the common form of an ‘explicit performative announcement’28 in Hebrew, and the particle ʤʰʤ may emphasize this perception as a possible speech-act indicator. But in my opinion the semantics of the utterance does not support this. The use of ¥ʳʸʶ in the above sketched performative sense would require that its meaning includes a successful process of refinement. But as Jer 6:29–30 makes clear, this is not the case. Thus as the meaning of the verb ¥ʳʸʶ does not include the result that the interpretation of Leene would de-

ment, i.e. not as strongly or severely as silver; cf. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 245–246 (with a quotation of Vitringa). 21 HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 246 states as the main arguments for an already failed refinement the literary context and the prophetic tradition. But the context allows for both interpretations. Equally, the prophetic tradition is only able to show an ambiguity. It is interesting in this respect to not Hermisson’s reluctance to discuss Isa 1:25. It does not make a difference that the refining process applies to the city of Jerusalem (only); it is meant as a future successful refinement. 22 Cf. W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 173, 175; LEENE, De vroegere, 214; OSWALT, Isaiah 40– 66, 270; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 573–574; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 118–119; B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 287; HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 248, though for different reasons and resulting into very diverging interpretations. 23 Thus already 1QIsa a; cf. VOLZ, Jesaia II, 87; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 158n.5 (ET, 195n.b). 24 Cf. H ITZIG, Jesaja, 474, 535; DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 478; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 419; DUHM, Jesaia, 363 up to FRANKE, Isaiah, 203–204. 25 A. Fitzgerald pointed to a possibly intended alliteration as a potential reason for the substitution of ¥ʸʧʡ for ¥ʯʧʡ; cf. A. FITZGERALD, JBL 97 (1978) 481ff (quoted from KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 573). I tend to regard v.10a to be even more an onomatopoeia, evoking the sounds of the melting process, which would further support this context. 26 On the term “double entendre” and some possible cases in Isa, cf. ROBERTS, Double entendre. 27 Cf. LEENE, De vroegere, 214; he speaks of a perfectum performativum in respect to ʪʩʺʴʸʶ and ʪʩʺʸʧʡ. 28 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 98.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

197

mand, the interpretation of an ‘explicit performative’ refinement of the audience is less likely.29

In sum, the passage presents an ambiguous picture of the state of its addressees. YHWH refines them from their condition. The question that arises from this passage is, therefore, whether or on what basis this refining process is successful. As we will see, by this dialectic the present passage forms an important bridge in Isa 40–55. On the one hand, it combines several previous arguments and thereby is an important goal to which earlier passages lead up to. On the other hand, it shifts the attention to how the refining process will finally be realized. It is not accidental then, that this bridging function is associated with the prominence of the theme of “former and new things” in Isa 48:1–11. But before we will clarify the position of the present passage in the wider literary context, we shall look at those features that contribute to the communicative strategy of this unit followed by a discussion of the theme of hardening in Isa 48:1–11. 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 48:1–11 Isa 48:1–11 paints a comprehensive picture of the negative present state of its audience. The various aspects of that condition are expressed through STATEMENTS. The present paragraph notes further features that contribute to and amplify the CHARACTERIZATION of the addressees’ condition. Rhetorical Means Isa 48:1–11 communicates the various traits of the hearers/readers in an argumentative or persuasive way so that they adopt this view for themselves. First, it urges them to listen to this message (ʺʠʦʚʥʲʮˇ, v.1) and to envision it (ʤʬʫ ʤʦʧ, v.6).30 Secondly, the use of particles like ʯʮ (cf. ʩʺʲʣʮ, v.4), ʩʫ (v.8), also (ʩ)ʯʲʮʬ (vv.9, 11) and similarly ʯʴ (vv.5, 7) contribute to the argumentative style that dominates the whole passage. Finally, the first strophe starts with a contradictory claim to previous passages that demands the audience’s attention: the statement that they do call themselves in the name of Israel,31 after the holy city and confess for YHWH not in truth nor 29 Thus one can translate Isa 48:10 like ESV: “Behold, I have refined you, but not as silver; I have tried you in the furnace of affliction”, which in a note mentions the possible other translation “I have chosen” for “I have tried”. 30 The fem. suffix in ʤʬʫ may refer back to the deictic pronoun ʺʠʦ (v.1); but it is also possible that it refers to “before it comes” (ʠʥʡʺ ʭʸʨʡ, v.5). 31 It is a question, whether the addressees call themselves according to the patriarch(s) or are called accordingly. But the immediate literary context suggests that they call themselves “house of Jacob” and “after the holy city”. In the parallel line we find a reflexive use of a Nifal form (ʭʩʲʡˇʰʤ, v.1b; cf. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 216). Moreover, the unequivocal verbs of this strophe speak of actions of the addressees.

198

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

righteousness stands in stark contrast to what they could expect to hear after earlier passages: YHWH himself calls the addressees his Servant Jacob-Israel (cf. Isa 41:8–9, probably a DECLARATIVE speech-act); and part of his assurance of his people is to “call you by your name, you are mine” (cf. Isa 43:2: ʤʺʠʚʩʬ ʪʮˇʡ ʩʺʠʸʷ ǜǜǜ ʠʸʩʺʚʬʠ), a name by which YHWH has addressed the people immediately beforehand in Isa 43:1 as Jacob and Israel. Moreover, the announcement of the future restoration of Zion (cf. Isa 40:2, 9–11; 44:26, 28; 45:14–17; 46:13) that already in Isa 1–39 is contrasted with the downfall of Babel (cf. Isa 2:2–4; 13:1–14:23), would support the audience’s appeal to their origin from the holy city after the announcement of the decline of Babylon in Isa 47. Finally, the phrases that indicate the addressees’ actions of confession could be understood as realizations of their commission to act as witnesses for YHWH (cf. Isa 43:8– 13; 44:6–8). Thus all these designations could be justified in the context of the previous proclamation. The present passage, however, opens with a counter-claim: if they were doing so, this would happen not in truth and righteousness given their present state. This demands to be read further and see how this counter-claim is explained or substantiated. Indeed, strophes II (vv.3–6a) and III (vv.6b–8) note various features of the addressees that justify the statement of v.1bȕ. Loose Integration of Isaiah 48:1bȕ The colon Isa 48:1bȕ is only loosely integrated in strophe I. While all the other cola relate to each other by various semantic and structural correspondences (see above Figure 16), v.1bȕ is not even syntactically connected to previous or subsequent lines. By this means it stands out and its statement is highlighted. Turning an Earlier Argument against the Addressees In earlier passages YHWH used the argument of his predictions of the “former things” to prove that he is the only God. This happened mainly in courtroom scenes where other nations and their gods or idols were summoned (cf., e.g., Isa 41:1–4, 21–28; 43:8–13; 44:6–20; 45:20–25). From YHWH’s prediction of Cyrus and the realization of his campaign, his divinity is established against other claims. But this argument is now explicitly turned against the addressees. Once it is established that YHWH has predicted and realized the “former things”, he now confronts the addressees with the reason for this situation, namely their own condition. The argument that was meant to support YHWH’s claim to be the only God, culminates in an argument about the condition of the audience. Their stubbornness is actually the reason why YHWH has announced and accomplished the “former things”: “because I knew (ʩʺʲʣʮ) that you are hard”

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

199

(v.4). Thus one argument that the addressees would have to agree with because of the previous proclamation is used to illumine them about their own state. Comparable Traits with Babylon Through a few correspondences between Isa 48:1–11 and Isa 47, the impression is created that the characterization of the addressees is similar to Babylon’s. Both are summoned in the same words “to listen to this” (imp. of ¥ʲʮˇ + ʺʠʦ + designation of the addressee; Isa 47:8 and Isa 48:1). The designations they give themselves are negated in both cases (constructed with ¥ʠʸʷ; Isa 47:1, 5 and Isa 48:1–2). YHWH confronts them with the argument of the coming of his sudden actions (ʤʠʥˇ ʭʠʺʴ ʪʩʬʲ ʠʡʺʥ “and disaster will come upon you suddenly”, Isa 47:11; ʤʰʠʡʺʥ ʩʺʩˈʲ ʭʠʺʴ “suddenly I acted and they came”, Isa 48:3).32 Moreover, both trust in their knowledge (Isa 47:10 and Isa 48:7): while for Babel this includes here reliance on magicians and sorcerers (Isa 47:12–15), Jacob-Israel has his own idols (Isa 48:5). Structural Signals and Semantic Correspondences We noted that Isa 48:1–11 pictures an ambivalent state of the addressees. It juxtaposes the negative characterization in vv.1–8 with YHWH’s announcement that he has started to refine them in vv.9–11. This perception is amplified by a few structural markers. Most notably, v.8 creates a preliminary conclusion to the passage by references back to v.1 that form two contrasting statements. According to v.1, the addressees refer to their origin as one “who came forth from the womb of Judah” (ʥʠʶʩ ʤʣʥʤʩ †ʩʲʮʮʥ33, 32

Cf. also HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 213–214, 223. Thus it does not suffice to speak of a contrast between Babel and Zion, as, e.g., LEENE, Juda, 86–87 does. He argues that the phrase “holy city” together with “Judah” in Isa 46:13 frames the taunt over Babel in ch.47 in order to form a contrast between them that he finds also (rightly here) between 47:1 and 52:1–2 as well as between 47:9 and 51:19. We will see also that the communicative strategy does not support his notion of an AB/A’B’ pattern in Isa 46–48 (A: Isa 46:1–2; B: Isa 46:3–13; A’: Isa 47; B’: Isa 48; Leene takes up Delitzsch in this respect). One would rather say with HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 223 that the correspondences between Isa 47 and Isa 48:1–11 show “…daß er [note: the author] hier der Babel-Kritik eine Israel-Kritik an die Seite stellen will”. 33 HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 202, 217–218 discusses in detail the various proposals that have tried to keep the reading ʤʣʥʤʩ ʩʮʮʥ “from the waters of Judah” in MT (cf. also LXX; 1QIsaa; Vulgate and several medieval manuscripts) to show that it does not make sense here. Therefore, he adopts the emendation to ʩʲʮʮʥ proposed in BHS and others; thus also, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 360; SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 80 (though he does not exclude entirely the reading of MT); MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 93; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 282; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 175 and many more. In support of this one may note that the laryngeal ʲ has often been disregarded by copyists; cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 556 quoting

200

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

v.1a), but instead they are a “sinner from the womb” (ʯʺʡʮ ʲˇʴ, v.8). Furthermore, instead of “calling themselves” (¥ʠʸʷ) by the name of Israel and after the holy city (vv.1a, 2a), they have to be “called” (¥ʠʸʷ) a sinner from the womb (v.8). Thus the statements of YHWH in vv.9–11 stand ‘outside’ of the previous characterization of the audience in vv.1–8. Notably, v.10 does indeed introduce a different aspect as regards the condition of the addressees. While vv.1–8 state what the condition is like, YHWH announces actions that could change their condition in v.10. Two observations substantiate this situation. First, Isa 1:21, 25–26, 28 announce that after a process of refining Zion (¥ʳʸʶ, Isa 1:25) she “will be called a righteous and faithful city” (ʤʰʮʠʰ ʤʩʸʷ ʷʣʶ ʸʩʲ ʪʬ ʠʸʷʩ ʯʫʚʩʸʧʠ, Isa 1:26); but rebels (ʭʩʲˇʴ) and sinners will be broken (Isa 1:28). In the light of this important programmatic passage in Isa, it is justified to assume that the announcement of the refinement (¥ʳʸʶ) and testing of the hearers/ readers (v.10) is related to their present condition, in which they have to “be called a rebel from the womb” (ʪʬ ʠʸʷ ʯʺʡʮ ʲˇʴ) and (therefore) them calling themselves “after the holy city” (ʥʠʸʷʰ ˇʣʷʤ ʸʩʲʮ) is not in truth nor in righteousness (ʤʷʣʶʡ ʠʬʥ ʺʮʠʡ ʠʬ). Thus the change that the refinement and testing could bring in the condition of the audience is related specifically to its condition of being a sinner whose appeal to his origin from the “holy city” is unjustified. Secondly, it is possible that v.10 relates to yet another aspect of the addressees’ condition. Since ¥ʳʸʶ is also used simply for “melting”, it could refer to a change of their state that in v.4 is expressed by words of metal: “your neck is an iron (ʬʦʸʡ) sinew”; “your forehead is of copper” (ʤˇʥʧʰ).34 Hence, the announcement of refinement could melt away the metal-hard stubbornness of the audience. Thus vv.9–11 stand out from vv.1–8 and yet are related to them. Plural and Singular Address Finally, we just have to note that again a mix of singular and plural addresses occur in a passage that contains aspects of the theme of hardening (cf. vv.1–2, 6aȕ for plural address; vv.3–11 [except v.6aȕ] for singular address).35 KUTSCHER, The Language and Linguistic Background of the Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa), Leiden 1974, 507. Koole himself maintains the reading of MT, following S NAITH, Isaiah 40– 66, 174n.2 and especially the more detailed discussion in LEENE, Judah, 86–88. The term ʭʩʲʮ can refer to either “bowels” (cf. Isa 49:1) or “loins” (cf. Isa 48:19); cf. also BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 285. 34 This relation has been seen only by B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 288, who takes it as a supporting evidence for his judgement about v.10 to be a later editorial addition, and LEENE, Judah, 86–88, who takes it as an argument for rendering ʡ as a ʡ pretii. 35 A problem on its own is the apparent incongruence between the gender of some suffixes and the gender of the word they actually refer to: all suffixes referring to the “for-

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

201

1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11 In discussing hardening in Isa 48:1–11, we have to take various aspects into account. First, we shall clarify how v.4 and its statement about the ‘hardness’ of the audience are related to the issue of our study. Secondly, we will discuss in more detail how the theme of hardening is dealt with in vv.6b–8. Finally, we shall see what role this theme plays in the communicative strategy of Isa 48:1–11. At first glance, v.4 seems to contribute to the discussion of hardening as it explicitly states that “you are hard” (ʤʺʠ ʤˇʷ). In some passages in the OT, the term ʤˇʷ occurs in a collocation with ʡʬ/ʡʡʬ, expressing a fierce resistance against God as an action or state of the heart as the centre of human will and reason (cf. Exod 7:3; Ezek 3:7 and similarly Ezek 2:4; Ps 95:8; Prov 28:14); this is very similar especially to Isaiah’s task (Isa 6:10). But in v.4, the phrases ʤʺʠ ʤˇʷ and ʪʴʸʲ ʬʦʸʡ ʣʩʢʥ break up a stereotyped phrase.36 The terms ʤˇʷ and ʳʸʲ can be found together as ʳʸʲʚʤˇʷ qƟšê‘ǀrep (mainly together with ʭʲ ‘am, thus cf. Exod 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Deut 9:6, 13). More often the verb ¥ʤˇʷ occurs with the noun ʳʸʲ ‘ǀrep (cf. Deut 10:16; 2 Kgs 17:14; Jer 7:26; 17:23; Prov 29:1; Neh 9:16–17; 2 Chr 30:8 etc.), which should be borne in mind here.37 Some have mentioned a fractious animal as a possible origin of the metaphorical phrase “hard neck”.38 This view is rejected by Couroyer, who instead maintains that it means a refusal to incline the ear to listen.39 Her-

mer things” (fem.) in vv.3–5 are incongruent, reading masculine suffixes. The same applies for the suffixes in vv.6–7 referring to the “new things”, except the last one in v.7 (the actually right female reading). While the incongruence between female nouns and masculine suffixes referring to these nouns is not unusual, the sudden congruence in v.7b surprises. VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 304 argues for a later addition in v.7b on this basis. But since there is an equal shift between incongruence and congruence in v.3b (the female verb is in congruence with “the former things”, while the suffix in v.3a is masculine), this verdict is not justified. The curious shift between congruence and incongruence may remain unexplainable, but according to HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 203 it cannot serve for literary-critical procedures; cf. also IDEM, Literatur, 252. One may wonder, whether the incongruence illustrates the confusion of the addressees. But this can only remain a guess. 36 Cf. FRANKE, Isaiah, 182. W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 328–332 calls it also “Break-up of a Composite Phrase”; similarly HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 213, 229 and B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 285. 37 According to Watson, it is one function of this poetic device to “evoke the original phrase and its associations” (W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 330). 38 Cf., e.g., VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 175. Thus still OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 262. 39 Cf. B. COUROYER, »Avoir la nuque raide«: Ne pas incliner l’oreille, RB 88 (1981) 216–225, here quoted according to KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 561 and HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 229. This interpretation has also been adopted by W EINFELD, Deuteronomy, 407 on

202

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

misson, however, notes, that in most cases, there is no specific relation to ‘hearing’.40 This can be further specified. Of the two different collocations, it is exclusively the connection of the verb ¥ʤˇʷ with the noun ʳʸʲ ‘ǀrep that occurs in relation to ‘hearing’. In this usage, it expresses a reaction towards a preceding communicative act of YHWH (often the Torah is meant): Israel ʳʸʲ ¥ʤˇʷ “make hard the forehead” in order not to listen to it (thus especially Jer 17:23 and 19:15 with ʩʺʬʡʬ; similar 2 Kgs 17:14; Jer 7:26; Neh 9:16, 17, 29). Even in these cases, this relation is made clear only by the appearance and collocation of ¥ʲʮˇ.41 When we turn to the phrase ʳʸʲʚʤˇʷ qƟšê-‘ǀrep, such a relation is totally absent. In these cases a state is described, specifically the condition of Israel: it is stubborn, i.e. in a state of resistance, an unwillingness to change or even to humble oneself.42 Such an attitude can also be expressed as a continuing behaviour by the collocation ʳʸʲ ¥ʤˇʷ (thus Deut 10:16; 2 Chr 30:8; 36:18). The breaking up of the phrase ʳʸʲ ʤˇʷ in v.4 does not only evoke the stubbornness, that is ascribed here to the “house of Jacob”. It also functions as a merismus,43 underlining the totality of Jacob’s stubbornness. This is what characterizes the addressees in their whole being.44 Thus v.4 speaks about hardness as a condition of resistance that is a common characterization of Israel. But it shows no clear association with the aspects of communication, perception or understanding crucial to the other passages that deal with the theme of hardening in Isa. Moreover, apart from the term

Deut 9:6. The suggestion of J APHET, Chronicles, 945 on 2 Chr 30:8, according to whom the opposite of “stiffening the neck” is “raising the hand” is not convincing. 40 Cf. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 229. 41 A similar meaning seems to apply also to Prov 29:1, which in regard to its construction differs from the other examples slightly (participle of ʤˇʷ). But again it expresses an inappropriate reaction to a communicative act, the “rebukes” (ʺʥʧʫʥʺ). 42 Cf. similarly for the meaning of the original metaphor also HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 229: “Vielleicht ist der Kontrast auch allgemeiner ‘sich beugen, das Haupt neigen’ als Gestus der Unterwerfung oder Demut.” See additionally also the diachronic reflections in LABAHN, Schuld, 196–199. 43 Cf. W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 330. 44 The phrase “an iron sinew (ʬʦʸʡ ʣʩʢ) is your neck” adds to this refusal to change or be humble before YHWH. As part of a moving limb (cf. Job 10:11; Ezek 37:6, 8) the ʣʩʢ is concerned for its strength and flexibility (cf. Job 40:17), which can be handicapped, when it is injured (cf. Gen 32:33). An “iron sinew”, therefore, is an effective expression for inflexibility. Also the last colon associates a metal (ʤˇʥʧʰ means “copper, bronze”) with a part of the body (ʧʶʮ “forehead”). Taking for granted, that the metal connotes strength and inflexibility again, we find the closest parallel in Ezek 3:7, but may also add Ezek 2:4; Jer 5:3. One more time the addressees’ persistence is highlighted and their refusal of any change of mind; for the element of hardness in Ezek 3:7 and Ezek 2:4, cf. ZIMMERLI, Ezekiel, 132–133, 138 and B LOCK, Ezekiel 1–24, 119–120, 128–129.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

203

ʤˇʷ, no other word in v.4 belongs to the semantic fields related to the theme of hardening. We saw above that vv.6b–8, in contrast, contain various phrases related to the theme of hardening and its communicative dimension. In the first two lines of this strophe (vv.6b–7), YHWH announces that “from now on” (ʤʺʲʮ) he makes known the new things and insists that the addressees have not known nor heard them before.45 The verbs ¥ʲʣʩ and ¥ʲʮˇ said of the addressees have specific objects in vv.6b–7: what they have not known and heard before are “they”, i.e. the new things (see the suffixes). The purpose of that was that they could not say: “see, I knew them” (v.7).46 The latter two lines continue the issues of ‘listening’ and ‘knowing’.47 In v.8a the verbs are constructed absolutely; they have no specific object. The emphasis shifts; the point there is not what the addressees have not heard and known, but that they have not done so. Of particular interest is the final colon of v.8a: ʪʰʦʠ ʤʧʺʴʚʠʬ ʦʠʮ ʭʢ “also, your ear has not opened/was not open from of old” (MT). The reading of MT seems to have caused difficulties already for the ancient versions.48 It is hard to establish an intransitive meaning for ʧʺʴ Piel,49 and there is no other instance of ¥ʧʺʴ in Pual50 or 45 Note also the accumulation of temporal specifications in v.7: ʤʺʲ “now”; ʦʠʮ ʠʬʥ “and not formerly”; ʠʬʥ ʭʥʩʚʩʰʴʬʥ “and before today (you have) not …” 46 I cannot agree with the judgement of VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 304 that this statement is “begrifflich und inhaltlich blasser” than v.5b (a reason for him to regard v.7b as a later addition). I cannot see that it is a weak theological reflection to oppose a human attitude that in god-like style and egocentric self-pride relates all happening to his/her own knowledge and capacities. Note in this respect that the construction “ʤʰʤ + 1.sg. qatalform of a verb” is related to YHWH elsewhere in Isa 40–55 (cf. Isa 41:15; 48:10; 51:22; 54:16), which may create here a competitive position of the addressees against YHWH. S IMON, Theology, 157 compares the phrase with the Babylonian claim in Isa 47:5. 47 Many commentators conclude that the statement in v.8a serves to intensify the effect of unexpectancy and suddenness of the announcement of the “new things” (v.6b); cf., e.g., CHILDS, Isaiah, 375: “The note of complete unexpectancy is even repeated in v.8.” Similarly already DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 478; FREY, Buch, 182; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 569. 48 LXX reads 1.sg.; Peshitta, Vulgate, one Geniza fragment in Babylonian vocalization and another manuscript (Oxf d 64, 1–2) read a passive form; the Targum and one Kennicott manuscript reads 2.sg.masc. The reading of 1QIsaa (ʺʧʺʴ) is not unequivocal. It can mean either 1.sg. or 2.sg.masc. Since the usual reading of the 2.sg.masc. in 1QIsa a would be ʤʺʧʺʴ here, Elliger suggested, that perhaps the writer did not decide between them (This suggestion of Elliger is recorded in HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 205. It is taken from the unpublished text-critical manuscript of Elliger, which has been available to Hermisson. That the present reading of 1QIsa a differs from the usual record of 2.sg.masc. has also been noticed by OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 264). 49 Sometimes Isa 60:11 and Cant 7:13 are noted as evidence; thus, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 478 against an emendation to a Pual; more recently also KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 569.

204

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

Qal Passive51 in the OT. Some scholars prefer a Nifal form.52 Therefore, it remains difficult to reach a decisive conclusion. But it is important to note that the collocation ʯʦʠ ¥ʧʺʴ occurs elsewhere in the OT only in Isa 35:5 and Isa 50:5. The closest opposite expressions are ʯʦʠ ¥ʭʨʠ (Isa 33:15; Ps 58:5; Prov 21:13) and ʯʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ (Isa 6:10; Isa 59:1; Zech 7:11). Interestingly, both the latter phrase and the collocation ʯʦʠ ¥ʧʺʴ occur in the Book of Isaiah unnegated53 as well as negated,54 creating contrasts between Israel’s present state and predicted future, and between Israel and YHWH (and the Servant; see below) as regards perception. If we recognize this integration of Isa 48:8 into Isa’s dealing with the theme of hardening, it seems best to read a passive form of ¥ʧʺʴ: “from of old your ear has not been opened”. The second important feature of this statement is the temporal specification “from of old” (ʦʠʮ). In v.7, the term ʦʠʮ is negated. It also specifies and corresponds to ʤʺʲʮ in v.6b together with two other temporal phrases. The function in v.7 is to highlight the difference between the “former things”, which have been announced ʦʠʮ (vv.3, 5), and the “new things” that have been announced ʦʠʮ ʠʬ but ʤʺʲʮ. Hermisson, in making similar observations, seems to regard the expression ʠʬ ʦʠʮ in v.8aȕ on the same level as the inverted phrase in v.7, when he states, that both take up the ʦʠʮ of vv.3, 5 in order to indicate the contrast between “former” and “new things”.55 I would suggest a slightly different use of ʦʠʮ in v.8aȕ. V.8aȕ does not stand in opposition to the past (ʦʠʮ) as v.7 (and v.6b) does, but on the contrary again relates itself to the past. The negating ʠʬ does not qualify ʦʠʮ but the following proposition. Accordingly, what is said in v.8aȕ applies for the span of time “from of old” up to the very present. This observation is of enormous importance for the understanding of the theme of hardening within Isa, and especially its integration and use in the communicative strategy. The recognition of the ignorance and deafness of the addressees (v.8a) presupposes, indeed necessitates, a certain span of time during which their ears have not been opened. It is the span of time that starts when YHWH has announced the former things: “from of old (ʦʠʮ) I have announced the former things” (v.3), but “even from of old (ʦʠʮ) your ear has not been opened” (v.8). Thus the establishment of what the “former HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 205 objects to that view, that in Isa 60:11 and Cant 7:13 also a transitive meaning might be possible. 50 Thus, e.g., V OLZ, Jesaia II, 86. 51 Thus HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 205–206. B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 285 notes these options but does not argue for anyone specific. 52 Cf. NORTH, Second Isaiah, 174; also KBL. 53 Thus ʰʦʠ ¥ʧʺʴ in Isa 35:5; 50:5 and ʰʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ in Isa 6:10. 54 Thus ʰʦʠ ¥ʧʺʴ ʠʬ in Isa 48:8 and ʰʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ ʠʬ in Isa 59:1. 55 Cf. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 239–240.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

205

things” consist of, helps in clarifying that the readers’/hearers’ ears had not been opened and they did not understand. A Note on the “Former”, the “Latter” and the “New Things” in Isaiah 40–48 The present study takes up two positions held in respect to the theme of the “former, latter and new things”.56 On the one hand, it has been noted that the argument of the proclamation of the ‘former things’ refers to the prophecies of Isaiah ben Amoz or Isa 1– 39.57 On the other hand, it is worth noting with other scholars that there is a distinction between the pairs ʺʥʰˇʠʸ – ʺʩʸʧʠ/ʭʩʰʸʧʠ, ʺʥʰˇʠʸ – ʺʥʩʺʠ/ʺʥʠʡ and ʺʥʰˇʠʸ – ʤˇʣʧ/ʺʥˇʣʧ that has been elucidated by Leene and others.58 Combining these observations59 the present 56

STECK, Deuterojesaja als theologischer Denker, 215–220 highlights that it is one of the most important and characteristic features of the message of DI. 57 A possible relation between Isa 13:17 and Isa 41:26 has been suggested already in earlier times, thus, e.g., VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 155. That the term ʺʥʰˇʠʸ as such refers to the preaching of First Isaiah has been suggested by D. J ONES, Traditio, 245–246, who argues for an Isaiah tradition. J. BECKER, Isaias, 37–38 adopts this view in his work about the redaction of the Book of Isaiah. This position is now advocated especially by those who assume that the second part of Isaiah never existed on its own, but was composed with an eye on Isa 1–39 (or its earlier stages); cf. CHILDS, Introduction, 328–330; IDEM , Isaiah; ALBERTZ, Fortschreibung, 251–253; SEITZ, Destiny, 199–202; IDEM, Isaiah 40–66. For the thesis of a possible inspiration of DI’s designation of YHWH as the “former” and the “latter one” by Isa 8:23 see WILLIAMSON, Former and IDEM: Book, 67–77. 58 Cf. LEENE, De vroegere, 12, 184–187, 323; cf. also, e.g., S TECK, Deuterojesaja als theologischer Denker, 218n.20; HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 130–131, 234–236. The discussion in Leene is different from other proposals, however, as he advocates a dramatic progress in Isa 40–55. But this allows him to work out the distinctive features in most detail: While the pair ʺʥʰˇʠʸ – ʺʩʸʧʠ/ʭʩʰʸʧʠ is situated in the trial speeches and is used there to prove YHWH to be the only God, the contrasting pair ʺʥʰˇʠʸ – ʤˇʣʧ/ʺʥˇʣʧ deals with the question, how the knowledge of YHWH as the only God will have an effect (cf. LEENE, De vroegere, 186–187); it is situated in the proclamation of salvation. According to Leene, this new thing is bound to the dramatic progress of the text and aims at the change of Israel (ibid. 188, 329–330). This is literarily anticipated by the Servant, but becomes reality by the performative act in Isa 48:10. According to Leene it is mainly the remaining word pair ʺʥʰˇʠʸ – ʺʥʩʺʠ/ʺʥʠʡ, that deals with Cyrus. Isa 41–44 pictures some deeds of Cyrus for the audience, but it becomes clear, that the actions of Cyrus have not come to an end yet, there remain “things to come”. It is especially in this respect, that the dramatic nature of the text comes to the fore. But as such, the “coming things” do not belong to the “new things” (ibid. 184–185). 59 There are of course various other positions on the meaning of the “former, latter and new things”; for surveys see SCHOORS, Les choses, 19–47 and recently LEENE, De vroegere, 1–11. Additionally, one may note two further studies. Willey concentrates on DI’s relationship to earlier texts in respect to the “former” and the “new things”; hence it is a kind of a hermeneutical programme for DI: In the situation after the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Exile there is a necessity of continuity and discontinuity with earlier works, a relation to the “former things” as well as a proclamation of “new things”. Accordingly, Willey discusses alleged allusions to other previous works, among which Jeremiah and Lamentations are the most prominent. Of importance are also Nahum, some Psalms and Pentateuchal texts, though the way DI takes them up shows a greater degree

206

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

study presupposes that when the pair “former things – latter things” occurs, the “former things” refer to the announcements that one can read in Isa 1–39, which culminate in the prediction of the defeat of Babylon through the Medes (Isa 13:17) that is about to be realized (cf. Isa 41:21–28). When the “former things” and the “new things” are juxtaposed, the former things also include the “latter things” against the proclamation of the new in the present.

Adopting this view on the “former – latter – new things” in Isa 40–48 and what it says about their relationship to Isa 1–39, we can recognize that the temporal specification in v.8a (ʦʠʮ, “from of old”) gives a particular perspective on the whole statement. If the ear of the audience has not been opened “from of old” while YHWH has announced the “former things” from of old, and if the “former things” are (or at least include) the proclamation of Isa 1–39, then the ear of the audience has not been opened since Isa 1–39 has been proclaimed. By this means, the present passage takes up the ‘strategy of prolongation’ that we have found in Isa 6–39 and that was confirmed in the ‘fusion of tenses’ in Isa 42:18–25. As one people (address in 2.sg.masc.) they are under the influence of the ‘elongated’ message of Isaiah, as it is presented in Isa 1–39. But it emphasizes that for the present audience it is also recognizable that this took actually a long time, this has been going on “from of old”. Hence, the statement about the present condition of the audience includes and necessitates a considerable time since Isaiah ben Amoz has proclaimed and started to harden the people. The validity of the statement in v.8a can be recognized by its addressees only when for them there has been indeed this long time since the proclamation of Isaiah.60 of continuity than the way Jeremiah and Lamentations are used in Isa 40–55 (cf. WILLEY, Remember, 268). Weippert reckons with a “Prophetic Self-Quotation” in the “former things”. Against the background of possible self-quotations in Assyrian prophetic oracles, he assumes that in Isa 48:12–16; 42:5–9; 41:21–29 we find a reference to such selfquotations as well (cf. W EIPPERT, Das Frühere, 160–168). Accordingly, in these passages Deutero-Isaiah quotes a former oracle of himself, which in the present is going to be proven by reality, in order to prove the “Geschichtsmächtigkeit” of YHWH (cf. WEIPPERT, Das Frühere, 163, 167–168). But even on the level of an alleged original proclamation of Deutero-Isaiah it is hard to substantiate the suggestions of Weippert. Especially the argument that the “former things” have been delivered “long ago” (cf. Isa 41:26; 48:5) hardly fits in the described argument. Despite its problems also an argumentum e silentio may be added here: one wonders, why the alleged former oracles of DeuteroIsaiah have not been preserved and included in the collection of his speeches/oracles. Certainly on the level of the final form, there are no indications that those responsible of the present text, were not interested in marking the alleged self-quotations, but allowed for other possible relationships of the “former things”. 60 Hence, the theme of hardening does indeed show a crucial unity of the Book of Isaiah. But its centrality in the argument of Isa 48:8 also suggests that it is one of the strongest arguments against an Isaianic authorship of the whole book; contra ROBINSON, Deafness.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 48:1–11

207

The ignorance and deafness of the audience is finally explained (ʩʫ) by their fundamental nature as treacherous and a “sinner from the womb”. Ultimately, two central issues of the character of the audience are interrelated. A dominant feature of the main unit Isa 42:14–44:23 was to address the hardness (Isa 42:18–25) and the sinfulness (Isa 43:16–28) of the hearers/readers. Both features of their condition recur independently in Isa 46:8–11 and Isa 46:12–13. But here they are brought into a relationship: because the addressees are sinners by nature (“from the womb”) their ears have not been opened, they have not heard nor understood. They are hardened because of their sinful condition. We shall see further below how central Isa 48:1–11 and the theme of hardening are to the communicative strategy of the whole main unit of Isa 44:24–49:13. But having discussed its individual aspects in vv.6b–8, we must now turn our attention to their contribution to the communicative strategy of Isa 48:1–11. As STATEMENTS about the condition of the addressees, the theme of hardening contributes to their CHARACTERIZATION, which was identified as the predominant illocutionary role of Isa 48:1–11 and is achieved by various STATEMENTS. Vv.6b–8 also take up and combine earlier passages of Isa and thereby amplify the notion that the whole passage applies former arguments to the hearers/readers of Isa. Moreover, the characterization of the audience as hardened and sinners specifies the initial claim that they do not relate to YHWH in truth and righteousness (v.1). This aspect of the communicative strategy is also important for understanding the theme of hardening as it relates the specific aspects of ignorance and imperceptiveness (v.8) to ‘(un)righteousness’. In v.1, the use of the theme mainly refers to the reciprocal interaction of the audience with YHWH (i.e. religious righteousness). Finally, the theme of hardening is an integral constituent of the argumentative style. The specific aspect that the addressees have not heard nor known the “new things” is explained by the prospect that they had ascribed them to their own knowledge (v.7). The lack of perception and knowledge is then generalized; they have not heard and understood in general “from of old”, which is explained by their nature as sinners. In sum, aspects of the theme of hardening occur in Isa 48:1–11 in STATEMENTS that describe the present condition of the addressees as failing to perceive or to understand in general. These statements contribute to the overall communicative strategy of the passage to CHARACTERIZE the addressees. Moreover, we found that hardening is among various themes of previous passages combined in Isa 48:1–11 and applied to this characterization of the readers/hearers. Finally, Isa 48:1–11 highlights the significance of a temporal perspective for understanding the theme of hardening. The audience is addressed as the people of YHWH who “from of old” have

208

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

been imperceptive and ignorant, which we found referring to the message of Isaiah (Isa 1–39). Having noted that various themes are combined in Isa 48:1–11, we shall now turn our attention to the place of Isa 48:1–11 in its wider literary context and its contribution to the communicative strategy of Isa 44:24–49:13. We will also look at the importance of the theme of hardening in the wider discourse.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13 2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13

2.1 Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13 2.1.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 44:24–49:13 The extent of the present main unit is marked by the hymns in Isa 44:23 (concluding the previous discourse) and in Isa 49:13. As with other main units of Isa 40–55, the structure of Isa 44:24–49:13 and the arrangement of its sub-units come to the fore, especially when we note the occurrence and distribution of the messenger formula (extended as well as unextended) and imperatives as introductions to sub-sections. There are three strophes in Isa 44:24–49:13 that stand out because, although they form sub-units, they are not introduced by either the messenger formula or an imperative, namely Isa 45:9–10; 46:1–2; 48:22. Interestingly, Isa 45:9–10 and Isa 48:22 separate to a certain degree the first three (Isa 44:24–28; 45:1–7; 45:8) and the last three sub-units (Isa 49:1–6; 49:7; 49:8–12) from the rest of the whole corpus. These show remarkable correspondences between their introductory lines (the kind of the introduction in Isa 44:24; 45:1; 45:8 recurs in inverted order in Isa 49:1, 7, 8; see Figure 17): a. Isa 44:24 Messenger Formula

ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠʚʤʫ

ʭʩʮʠʬ ʥʡʩˇʷʤʥ ʩʬʠ ʭʩʩʠ ʥʲʮˇ

c.’ Isa 49:1 Imperative

ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠʚʤʫ ˇʸʥʫʬ ʥʧʩˇʮʬ Messenger Formula + ʬ + Addressee

(ǜǜǜ) ʤʥʤʩʚʸʮʠ ʤʫ b.’ Isa 49:7 ʣʡʲʬ ʩʥʢ ʡʲʺʮʬ ˇʴʰʚʤʦʡʬ Messenger Formula + ʬ + Addressee

ǜǜǜ ʬʲʮʮ ʭʩʮˇ ʥʴʩʲʸʤ

ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠ ʤʫ a.’ Isa 49:8 Messenger Formula

b. Isa 45:1

c. Isa 45:8 Imperative

Figure 17: Chiastic Correspondences between Isa 44:24–45:8 and Isa 49:1–12

Within this twofold ‘bracket’ (see Figure 19), the sub-units are arranged in various panels of speech according to their introductions (imperatives or messenger formula). These panels form two sequences leading to an address to Jacob-Israel. Isa 48:17–21 forms the conclusion (see Figure 18)

209

2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13

and the goal of the whole argument developed in the two preceding sequences (see below). Sequence I: The Nations and Jacob-Israel General Address

Address to the Nations

Address to JacobIsrael

A ‘Hinge’ Isa 45:11–13 (v.11: ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠʚʤʫ)

Isa 45:20 (v.20: ǜǜǜ ʥʶʡʷʤ)

Isa 45:14–17 (v.14: ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠ ʤʫ)

Isa 45:21 (v.21: ǜǜǜ ʥʣʩʢʤ)

Isa 45:18–19 (v.18: ʤʥʤʩʚʸʮʠ ʤʫ ʩʫ)

Isa 45:22–25 (v.22: ǜǜǜ ʩʬʠʚʥʰʴ)

Isa 46:3–7 (v.3: ǜǜǜ ʩʬʠ ʥʲʮˇ) Isa 46:1–2 (¥ʲʸʫ, cf. 45:23) Isa 46:8–11 (¥ʠˈʰ, ¥ʱʮʲ, (v.8: ǜǜǜ ʺʠʦʚʥʫʸʦ) ¥ʨʬʮ, cf. 46:3–7) Isa 46:12–13 (v.12: ǜǜǜ ʩʬʠ ʥʲʮˇ)

Sequence II: Babel and Jacob-Israel Address to Babel

Address to Jacob-Israel

Isa 47:1–4 (v.1: ʬʡʡʚʺʡ ǜǜǜ ʩʡˇʥ ʩʣʸ)

Isa 48:1–11 (v.1: ʡʷʲʩʚʺʩʡ ʺʥʦʚʥʲʮˇ)

Isa 47:5–7 (v.5: ʭʩʣˈʫʚʺʡ ǜǜǜ ʩʡˇ)

Isa 48:12–13 (v.12: ʡʷʲʩ ʩʬʠ ʲʮˇ)

Isa 47:8–11 (v.8: ʺʠʦʚʩʲʮˇ ʤʺʲʥ)

Isa 48:14–15 (v.14: ǜǜǜʥʲʮˇʥ ʭʫʬʫ ʥʶʡʷʤ)

Isa 47:12–15 (v.12: ǜǜǜʠʰʚʩʣʮʲ)

Isa 48:16 (v.16: ʺʠʦʚʥʲʮˇ ʩʬʠ ʥʡʸʷ)

Conclusion: SUMMONS of Jacob-Israel to leave Babel Isa 48:17–19 (v.17: ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠʚʤʫ)

Isa 48:20–21 (v.20: ʭʩʣˈʫʮ ʥʧʸʡ ʬʡʡʮ ʥʠʶ)

Figure 18: The Arrangement of Isa 45:11–48:21

These observations result in the following (simplified) structure: A. Isa 44:24–45:8 Cyrus – “Former Things” B. Isa 45:9–10 “Woe to him who quarrels with his maker” i. Isa 45:11–46:13 Sequence I: The Nations and Jacob-Israel ii. Isa 47:1–48:16 Sequence II: Babel and Jacob-Israel iii. Isa 48:17–21 Conclusion: Summons of Jacob-Israel to leave Babel B.’ Isa 48:22 “There is no peace for the wicked” A.’ Isa 49:1–12 The Servant – “New Things” Isa 49:13 Concluding Hymn Figure 19: Simplified Structure of Isa 44:24–49:13

210

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

In the long discourse of Isa 44:24–49:13, we find a complex communicative strategy. It can be roughly summarized as a CHARACTERIZATION of Jacob-Israel (= the addressees; cf. Isa 46:3–13; 48:1–11) that happens in confrontation with the announcements and realization of the “former things” and their implications for the nations (cf., e.g., Isa 45:20–25; 47) as well as with the REVELATION of the “new things” (48:16b). This description and clarification of the present condition of the hearers/readers ultimately aims at the SUMMONS to them to leave Babel (Isa 48:20–21). In looking at the individual panels of speech and their interrelationships, we shall now substantiate the communicative strategy of Isa 44:24–49:13. Isa 44:24–45:8. This first panel of speech, consisting of three sub-units (Isa 44:24–28; 45:1–7; 45:8), sets the agenda for the whole discourse. Isa 44:24–28 affirms the uniqueness of YHWH through his general actions (Isa 44:24–26a) and his speech-acts in the present (Isa 44:26b–28)61 that culminate in YHWH’s appointment of Cyrus as his “shepherd”62 through whom Jerusalem shall be rebuilt (v.28b). The next sub-unit (Isa 45:1–7) expands YHWH’s calling and leading Cyrus, which should lead him and the nations to acknowledge (cf. Isa 45:3, 6) that YHWH is the only God (cf. Isa 45:5–7). The final sub-section (Isa 45:8) combines the universal perspective opened up through YHWH’s universal creation (cf. ʥʴʩʲʸʤ ʵʸʠʚʧʺʴʺ ǜǜǜ ʭʩʮˇ, 45:8 with ʩʺʠ ʩʮ ʵʸʠʤ ʲʷʸ ʩʣʡʬ ʭʩʮˇ ʤʨʰ, Isa 44:24) with YHWH’s claim (ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʠ, 45:8; cf. 45:3, 5, 6, 7) in order to reveal the ultimate goal of YHWH’s actions, i.e. to establish righteousness and salvation in the whole creation. The argument that YHWH has foretold and accomplished the “former things” that culminate in the campaign of Cyrus has been put forward already before in Isa 40–55 (see especially Isa 41:1–4, 21–28) in order to establish that YHWH is the only God. These units together emphasize that YHWH’s actions serve to establish universal righteousness and salvation. The uniqueness of YHWH is not simply a theoretical argument. It has a soteriological dimension not only for Jacob-Israel, but for the whole creation. Isa 45:9–10. If we read this independent strophe in the light of the previous ones, it becomes obvious that everybody could be addressed by this accusation, as everybody is a creature of YHWH. As such, it could be re61

On these different aspects between vv.24–26a and vv.26b–28, cf. HERMISSON, Diskussionsworte, 675. In respect to v.27, Hermisson notes that the reference to the primordial chaos floods is not restricted to a primordial event but regarded as a continuous action of the creator. It is placed among the actual statements, “weil damit deutlich gemacht werden soll, daß im aktuellen Geschehen derselbe Schöpfergott am Werk ist” (HERMISSON, Diskussionsworte, 675). 62 Some read ʩʲʸ as rƝ’î “my friend”; cf., e.g., DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 401; MARTI, Jesaja, 307; but see ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 455; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 425; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 244.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13

211

garded as a ‘headline’ over the subsequent passages, which then clarify who might be addressed by it.63 Isa 45:11–19. Each sub-unit in this unit is introduced through the messenger formula (Isa 45:11, 14, 18), but it is not clear to whom these speeches are directed. In Isa 45:11–13 YHWH challenges everybody who asks YHWH (= quarrels with YHWH?) to put this in the context that YHWH is the creator of everything and everybody (v.12a). His raising up Cyrus is part of his universal rule that aims at rebuilding Jerusalem and the return of his exiles (v.13).64 The next sub-section (Isa 45:14–17) could still be an illustration, directed towards the addressees that are not further identified as in Isa 45:9–10.65 The people of Egypt, Cush and the Sabeans are presented as a paradigm of how the other nations can participate in the salvation that YHWH establishes in Jerusalem by acknowledging the presence of YHWH, the only God, in Jerusalem (Isa 45:14–17).66 The final

63

Most commentators, however, try to find a specific addressee and often seek the answer in Isa 45:11–13, which they regard as being part of the whole unit Isa 45:9–13. Many scholars think of the exiles as the addressees, who offended against the idea of a pagan Messiah that is meant to rescue the people of YHWH; thus, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 462–463; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 66; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 526–527; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 154; FOHRER, Jesaja 40–66, 88–90; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 107–109; G ITAY, Prophecy, 178–187; CLIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 120–121; HANSON, Isaiah 40–66, 106– 107; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 208–211; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 400; B ALTZER, DeuteroIsaiah, 232, 237. Similarly M ERENDINO, Der Erste, 426–442, who but deals with Isa 45:9–17 as one unit, developed by different editorial procedures. A few other scholars reckon that the nations are addressed; thus, e.g., LEENE, Universalism, 320–323 followed by B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 241; CHILDS, Isaiah, 351. Yet it has been already H ITZIG, Jesaja, 518–519 who suggested the nations as the addressees of vv.9–13. KRATZ, Kyros, 92–102 partly takes over the interpretation of Leene and applies it to his redaction-critical analysis of the passage. 64 Some see a contradiction between the proposition “for neither a price nor for a bribe” in v.13 and the utterance in Isa 43:3–4; cf., e.g., D UHM, Jesaia, 344–345; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 155; MERENDINO, Der Erste, 429. But it is also possible to read v.13 as dealing with the question, whether there is something necessary for the city and exiles to pay for their revival, rather than the question, whether Cyrus gets something for his actions; cf. for this interpretation FREY, Buch, 147; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 461. 65 It seems that the direction of speech as well as the speakers are constantly changing in Isa 45:14–17: The first lines (v.14) address a female figure (fem. suffixes), very likely Zion-Jerusalem, although v.14a.bĮ are spoken by YHWH and v.14bȕ by the three nations; they also address God in 2.sg.masc. in v.15 and then speak about others in the 3.pl.masc.; this changes again in v.17, where they first speak about Israel in the singular (v.17a) and then address Israel directly in v.17b in 2.pl.masc. One could even understand the last line as a crossing of communicative levels, when the reported speech becomes a speech to the actual addressees. 66 Unfortunately, it is not possible here to engage in a detailed discussion of this difficult and complex passage; on this see especially HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 29–50 (es-

212

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

sub-section (Isa 45:18–19) takes up elements of the previous sub-units,67 and brings the argument to a preliminary end. The whole panel of speech invalidates the arguments of those who quarrel with YHWH the creator. It shows that everybody is created by YHWH. As such, all humanity is part of his universal rule just as Cyrus is. YHWH’s raising up Cyrus aims at rebuilding Jerusalem and the return of the exiles, but the paradigm of Egypt, Cush and the Sabeans shows that Jerusalem can be actually a place where nations participate in the salvation that YHWH grants. It also emphasizes that YHWH’s dealings with his creatures are benevolent as he created them to inhabit the earth, and that he could have been recognized in the words he has spoken openly to Jacob-Israel. Isa 45:20–25. The next three sub-sections (Isa 45:20; 45:21; 45:22–25) seem to validate the notion seen already in the previous panel of speech. That the nations were envisaged as the addressees. Not only are they explicitly addressed now,68 but they are also challenged to share the view expressed previously: in the first sub-section (v.20) they are directly addressed to acknowledge, what was already presented as the insight of Egypt, Cush and the Sabeans, i.e. those who make and worship idols have no insight and no help (cf. 45:16: they are ashamed). The second subsection (v.21) urges them to share the view of Isa 45:18–19 that YHWH is the only one, who predicted the rise of Cyrus. By this means, he had revealed to Jacob and proved to be the only God. The final sub-section (vv.22–25) draws the conclusions from this: the SUMMONS to turn to YHWH to be saved (Isa 45:22–25). Isa 46:1–2. The continuation shows that with the summons of the nations to turn to YHWH the argument has not yet come to a conclusion. Isa 46:1–2 forms a hinge between the speech to the nations (Isa 45:20–25) and the address to Jacob-Israel (Isa 46:3–13). This individual strophe starts with ¥ʲʸʫ, which is also repeated in v.2aĮ. By this means, it is related to the preceding sub-section (vv.22–25), where YHWH said that all knees pecially 31–39), advocating a literary-critical solution, and K OOLE, Isaiah III/1, 463–472 (especially 464–467), maintaining the present text. 67 Cf. the theme of creation in v.18 and Isa 45:12; the announcement that God has not spoken in secret (ʸʺʱʡ, v.19) alludes to the statement before that the God of Israel is a “hidden God” (ʸʺʺʱʮ ʬʠ, Isa 45:15). 68 A few scholars argue that “those who escaped of the nations” actually refer to the exiles; thus KNIGHT, Deutero-Isaiah, 144; and with more detailed reasons, cf. DE BOER, Message, 89–90 and SNAITH, Isaiah 40–66, 160, 185–186; shared by W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 111–112 and further developed by MERENDINO, Der Erste, 447. But at least v.22 shows that the nations are the most likely addressee; for this position, cf. also, e.g., MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 532–534; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 95; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40– 66, 142 (ET, 174–175); SCHOORS, Saviour, 234; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 482; CHILDS, Isaiah, 352; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 401 etc.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13

213

shall bow (¥ʲʸʫ) before him (cf. Isa 45:23). This assertion is applied here to the Babylonian gods Bel (=Marduk) and Nebo (= Nabu).69 There is also a relationship to the following speech: the verbal roots ʠˈʰ, ʱʮʲ and ʨʬʮ reappear in v.3b (ʱʮʲ, ʠˈʰ), v.4b (ʠˈʰ, ʨʬʮ) and v.7a (ʠˈʰ). Isa 46:3–13. The speech that is directed to Jacob-Israel combines arguments especially of the speech to the nations (Isa 45:20–25) with brief characterizations of the addressees. They are spoken to as the “remnant of the house of Israel” (Isa 46:3), which is further expanded by statements that emphasize the difference of YHWH’s relationship to his people from the way idols are treated in Isa 46:1–2 (see the correspondences between Isa 46:1–2 and 46:3–7 noted above). There they are confronted with the same argument in the first sub-section (46:3–7) as the nations in the parallel section in 45:20: the idols are useless, because they cannot save. The second sub-section (Isa 46:8–11) takes up from Isa 45:21 the proof of YHWH’s uniqueness from his predictions of the “former things” and introduces this claim with the designation of the hearers/readers as “transgressors” (ʭʩʲˇʴ, 46:8). Finally, the last sub-section (46:12–13) deals with the issue of ‘salvation and righteousness’ promised to the nations in the corresponding unit in 45:22–25. Again it is introduced with a negative description of the addressees who are called “stubborn of heart” (ʡʬ ʩʸʩʡʠ, 46:12). But although they are stubborn and “far from righteousness”, YHWH assures the hearers/readers at the same time, that his righteousness and salvation are near; he gives salvation in Zion (46:13). Thus the general programme of YHWH that involves prominently the campaign of Cyrus leads ultimately to salvation and righteousness in the whole creation (44:24–45:8). In the light of this divine plan, YHWH challenges all who “quarrel with their maker” (45:9–11), and opens up for an opportunity for the nations to turn to YHWH and find salvation (45:20–25). Against this ‘positive foil’, the addressees of Isa 40–55 face characterizations of themselves in light of the same issues that were communicated to the nations (45:20–25; 46:3– 13). Thus with this implicit comparison with the nations, the addressees are forced to look at their own state. The designations “transgressors” (46:8) and “stubborn of heart” (46:12) take up the two crucial issues that the previous main unit of Isa 42:14–44:23 identified as the two central problems as regards the Servant Jacob-Israel (see the parallel units Isa 42:18–25 and Isa 43:16–28 and the discussion above). It is the hardening of the addressees who do not perceive nor understand. This condition is alluded to in Isa 46:12 as the stubbornness of their hearts, and their life as sinners (cf. forms of ʲˇʴ in Isa 43:25, 27 and here in 46:8). 69

See the commentaries ad loc., esp. HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 103–104 with detailed discussion and further literature.

214

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

Isa 47–48. With Isa 47 a new run-up is introduced. What the readers/hearers encounter now could be called the ‘negative foil’, the fall of Babylon, which in v.4 is called “a redemption for us”. In Isa 48:17 and especially Isa 48:20–21, the redemption of the Servant Jacob is related to his leaving Babel. But as already the communicative strategy of Isa 42:18– 43:15 has shown, the redemption from captivity (cf. the remarks on Isa 43:2 above) does not solve all the problems of the Servant Jacob-Israel (cf. Isa 42:18–25 and additionally Isa 43:16–28). Accordingly, the announcement of the fall of Babel is not followed immediately by the SUMMONS to leave Babel. The contrast to the addressees is not straightforward.70 On the contrary, the first sub-section addressing Jacob-Israel (Isa 48:1–11) pictures remarkable similarities with Babel (see the discussion above on Isa 48:1–11). As in Isa 46:3–13, the assessment of the audience set against the foil of the fate of the nations (here the ‘negative foil’ of the fall of Babel) is combined with the ASSERTION that it is hardened (Isa 48:8a) and a “sinner from the womb” (Isa 48:8b). In Isa 42:14–44:23 these two issues of the addressees’, hardening and their sins, are addressed in two parallel panels of speech, and in Isa 46:3–13 they are still addressed in two subsequent sub-sections. By contrast, they are now brought into immediate connection: because they are sinners, they were hardened (Isa 48:8). Finally, this assessment of the addressees is combined with two crucial arguments of previous passages, the announcement of the “former things” and of the “new things”. Thus various arguments come to a climax in Isa 48:1–11. This climax is a disastrous revelation of the present nature of Jacob-Israel. The final strophe of this unit, however, states that their “furnace of affliction” was meant to refine them as an act of YHWH’s restraint from anger to secure his eschatological praise (Isa 48:9–11). Thus when they go out from Babel, it will become obvious whether this refining process has been successful. The speech to Jacob-Israel is completed by three further subsections (Isa 48:12–13; 48:14–15; 48:16). After recalling the content of the “former things” (vv.12–14), they culminate in the REVELATION of the “new

70

It is widely acknowledged that there is a clear contrast between Babel (Isa 47) and Zion (51–52; 54); cf., e.g., LEENE, Juda, 86–87; SPYKERBOER, Deutero-Isaiah, 153–157; C LIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 135–136, 138; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 410–411 and in particular FRANKE, Function, who suggests that Isa 47 is a pivot on which the dispersed JacobIsrael turns into vindicated Zion-Jerusalem, who is presented in contrast to virgin daughter Babel. For her reading of Isa 46–48 as a literary unit of three poems, cf. FRANKE, Isaiah; cf. then also, e.g., HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 166 and IDEM, Einheit, 304–306; VAN O ORSCHOT, Babel, 155–157 for redaction-critical differentiations. On the role of Babylon in the whole Book of Isaiah, cf., e.g., BEGG, Babylon and FRANKE, Reversals.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13

215

things” in Isa 48:16b,71 introduced by the ʤʺʲ that already in Isa 48:6b designated the time of their announcement. The “new things” are in fact the presentation of an individual figure that is not further specified here.72 After all this has been communicated, the addressees can be finally SUMMONED to leave Babel and to sing words of praise that allude to the first exodus (Isa 48:20–21). Isa 48:22. Between Isa 45:9–10 and Isa 48:22 we have recognized two arguments. In the light of the opportunity for the nations to turn to YHWH and of the fall of Babylon, the addressees were forced to face their true condition. YHWH wants to bring righteousness and salvation for the nations and for Jacob-Israel (Isa 45:8, 20–25; 46:13; 48:9–11, 20–21), but for those who oppose YHWH, his righteousness brings judgement. This is emphasized by the frame around these two traits of arguments, Isa 45:9–10 and Isa 48:22. Isa 49:1–12. The final panel of speech specifies the identity of the individual figure, announced as the “new things” (Isa 48:16b). As the “former” and the “new things” are juxtaposed in Isa 48:1–11, so are related the panels of speech at the beginning and the end of this long unit. The first panel concentrates on Cyrus as the culmination of the “former things” (Isa 44:24–45:8), the last panel juxtaposes the individual Servant as the “new things” (Isa 49:1–12).73 This presentation of the individual Servant shows 71 This culmination is highlighted by the decrease of the length of each sub-unit. Even in the last sub-unit, the “former things” are alluded to first as an element of slowing down before in v.16b finally the “new things” are revealed. 72 Some propose, that it is the prophet (DI) himself – thus, e.g., HITZIG, Jesaja, 536; DUHM, Jesaia, 365 (but he regards it as a gloss; similarly, e.g., M UILENBURG, Isaiah 40– 66, 561; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 182); DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 421; SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 85; SIMON, Theology, 160; K NIGHT, Deutero-Isaiah, 172; G ITAY, Prophecy, 220; CLIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 144–145; FRANKE, Isaiah, 225; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 278. Others suggest that the Servant of Isa 49:1 is speaking here, often with vv.17ff as the content of his speech. But this view is again to be divided: into those, who hold the Servant to be an individual, distinguished from Israel – thus, e.g., FREY, Buch, 186; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 292–293 (here the Servant is the prophet); KOOLE , Isaiah III/1, 592– 593; CHILDS, Isaiah, 377–378; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 419–420 and those who hold the Servant to be Israel – thus, e.g., SPYKERBOER, Deutero-Isaiah, 156–163 (he regards vv.17–21 to be an interruption of Isa 48:12–16 and 49:1–6); LEENE, De vroegere, 215– 218, taken up for the “Ebed-Israel-Schicht” by KRATZ, Kyros, 116. Some regard only v.16b as the speech of the individual Servant, thus, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 480; MOTYER, Prophecy, 381; similarly also VAN O ORSCHOT, Babel, 227n.162, 277–279, according to whom v.16b is a later addition in company with the insertion of the “theology of the prophet and the word of YHWH” and the prophetic figure as the Servant. As it becomes clear, there are certain overlaps that mainly depend on how one interprets the Servant figure in Isa 49:1–6. 73 As regards the identity of the Servant in Isa 49:1–12 and his relationship to Isa 42:1–9, I adopt the position of W ILCOX & P ATON-W ILLIAMS, Servant Songs, 91–93 and

216

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

that the exodus of the addressees from Babel (Isa 48:20–21) has to happen under the leadership of the Servant (Isa 48:16b; 49:8–12). 2.1.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 44:24–49:13 Within this section the theme of hardening occurs only in a few verses. Isa 46:12 speaks to the hearers/readers as those who are “hard of heart”. The parallel to Isa 6:10 (“make fat their hearts”) is clear. The epistemological centre is in such a state that understanding is not possible any more. This hardness is associated in Isa 46:12 with unrighteousness; the addressees are “hard of hearts” and “far from righteousness”. But YHWH states at the same time that he brings near his righteousness and that he establishes salvation in Zion (Isa 46:13). It is through the further chapters that it becomes clear how YHWH’s care for the ‘deed-consequence connection’ (“my righteousness”) can become salvation for those who are “far from righteousness”. Perhaps one has to include Isa 48:4 in this discussion as well, but we found that it rather describes the behaviour of Jacob-Israel in general. The stubbornness is a resistance against YHWH commonly found in the OT, but it lacks the specific relationship to communication and understanding that Isa 6:9–10 highlight as the central issues surrounding the theme of hardening in Isa. These recur, however, in Isa 48:7–8a. The announcement of the “new things” in the present, which Jacob-Israel has neither heard nor known before, is motivated by the intention that the people could not say “I have known them” (Isa 48:7). The specific assertion that they have not heard them and known them before is then generalized as an inability to hear and know as such in Isa 48:8a. According to this verse, YHWH has made known the “former things” “from of old”, but their ears have not been opened “from of old” (Isa 48:8a). Thus they are unable to communicate and understand. We saw above that by this verse the addressees are characterized as people who have been affected by the hardening message of Isaiah. The temporal specification “from of old” takes up the ‘strategy of prolongation’ of Isaiah’s message for the people of YHWH. As the one people (address in 2.sg.masc.) they are hardened “from of old”, since the time of Isaiah ben Amoz until “now” when the “new things” are revealed. It must be noted here also that this is again associated with the statement that Jacob-Israel does not relate to YHWH in “truth and righteousness”. Hence, the hardness of the addressees is one specific problem of their wrong relationship to YHWH (Isa 48:1–2). W ILLIAMSON, Concept, 146; IDEM, Variations, 151, according to which in Isa 49:3 the individual figure is designated as Servant and Israel. This interpretation allows to maintain the people Israel as the Servant in Isa 42:1–9.

3. Summary

217

Although these are only a very few verses, they play a crucial part in the communicative strategy of the whole unit. A main feature of Isa 44:24– 49:13 is the argumentation in two sequences of speeches (Isa 45:20–46:13; Isa 47:1–48:11) that aims at the CHARACTERIZATION of Jacob-Israel before the “new things” can be REVEALED (Isa 48:16b) and the ultimate goal of the SUMMONS of the addressees to leave Babel can be delivered (Isa 48:20– 21). The CHARACTERIZATION of the hearers/readers, however, leads to the acknowledgement of their sins and hardness. This goal becomes apparent in two features. First, central themes of previous chapters are combined with this statement in Isa 46:8–13 and Isa 48:1–11. Now the superiority and uniqueness of YHWH comes to the fore through his prediction and realization of the “former things”, and the worthlessness of the idols are now turned against the addressees and combined with the issues of their sins and hardness. Secondly, both problems are initially treated separately in Isa 42:18–25 and Isa 43:16–28. Their connectedness is hinted at there only through the parallel arrangement (see above). In Isa 46:3–13 they are narrowed as they occur in two subsequent units. This process of narrowing culminates in the explicit interrelationship in Isa 48:8, which states that they are hardened because they are sinners from the womb. Hence, it is the theme of hardening in its interrelationship with the addressees’ nature as sinners that forms the culmination of the argument in Isa 44:24–49:13. It is expressed as a present condition of the hearers/readers. More specifically, they do not hear and they do not understand. They are in the state that Isaiah was commissioned to achieve (Isa 6:9–10). This CHARACTERIZATION of the audience of Isa 44:24–49:13 helps to clarify and suggests that, when they flee from Babel (Isa 48:20–21), they not only have to leave the geographical place but also their Babel-likeness. Isa 46:8, 12 and especially Isa 48:8 identify this condition as hardness and sinfulness.

3. Summary 3. Summary

The previous chapter showed how the discourse Isa 42:14–44:23 highlights the hardness (Isa 42:18–25; 43:8) and the sins (Isa 43:16–28) of the addressees as the two central problems of their present condition. This chapter has discussed Isa 48:1–11, where both problems are correlated in Isa 48:1–11. The hardness of the addressees, who do not perceive and understand in general, is explained by them being sinners “from the womb” (Isa 48:8). This CHARACTERIZATION of the readers/hearers is combined with a specific temporal perspective. For them it must become clear that their ear has not been opened “from of old”, which we interpreted as a reference to

218

Chapter 5: Characterizing the Hardened: Isaiah 44:24–49:13

the message of Isaiah (Isa 1–39). The CHARACTERIZATION of the addressees as hardened for a long time puts a certain temporal distance between them and Isaiah so that the use of the theme of hardening in the communicative strategy of Isa is a central argument against the reading of it as a unified message of Isaiah. The analysis of Isa 48:1–11 in particular supports the view that with Isa 40:1 a distinctive communicative process is introduced after the message of Isaiah (Isa 1–39) has been presented. Finally, the analysis of Isa 48:1–11 has noted the close connection between the theme of hardening and the issue of righteousness. The discussion of the larger discourse Isa 44:24–49:13 has supported and substantiated the observation that Isa 48:1–11 is a central focal point. Up to Isa 48:1–11, the whole discourse is shaped to lead to the CHARACTERIZATION of the addressees as those who are hardened because of their sins. Only after this has been achieved, the discourse continues to REVEAL the “new things” (Isa 48:16b) and to SUMMON the addressees to leave Babylon (Isa 48:20–21). This showed that the theme of hardening drives the communicative strategy of Isa 40:1–49:13. In the next chapter we will see that it also lies at the heart of the communicative process of Isa 49:14– 55:13.

Chapter 6

The Individual Servant and the Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13 So far the passages in Isa 40–49:13, which contain the theme of hardening, were primarily concerned with hardness as the present condition of the addressees. It will be argued in this chapter, however, that through the Servant the reversal of hardening is inaugurated in the remaining part of Isa 40–55. For that purpose we will look at Isa 50 in detail, which shows that in the ministry and person of the Servant, YHWH has overcome imperceptiveness and hardness. In the second section, we will see how the ministry of the ‘de-hardened Servant’ of Isa 50 transforms the addressees within the main unit of Isa 49:14–52:10. The final section will clarify how the testimony of the addressees about the Servant confirms the overcoming of their hardness and the communicative strategy of Isa 40–55 comes to a conclusion.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50 1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

1.1 Introduction The terminology of hardening in Isa 50 is rather limited. The collocations ʯʦʠ (ʬ) ¥ʧʺʴ and ʯʦʠ ¥ʸʥʲ (vv.4–5) refer to the ears as organs of perception. The latter phrase is unique in the OT, but the former has been already recognized in the discussion of Isa 48:8. Additionally, Isa 35:5 is the only other place in the OT where it occurs. It is stated in Isa 50:4 that the opening and awakening respectively of the ears is for the purpose of “listening like one who is instructed” (ʭʩʣʥʮʬʫ ʲʮˇʬ). Finally, v.10 includes the aspect of ‘perception’ with one word (¥ʲʮˇ). But we will see that the content of Isa 50 and its position in the wider context make this a very important unit for our study. It is this significance that justifies a detailed discussion of Isa 50 here. When we look at the position of this chapter in the wider context, we will recognize two other passages also dealing with hardening, Isa 51:1–8 and Isa 52:13–53:12. In the course of this study, it will not be possible to comment on them in detail. Yet what they contribute to the issue of hard-

220

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

ening is only possible to understand through what is said in Isa 50, which is therefore the focus of our attention in the following discussion. 1.2 Structure and Poetics The new sub-section of Isa 50 is marked through the messenger formula. This also creates a close relationship with the previous speech (cf. Isa 49:22, 25), but the change of the addressees helps to identify it as a new section. Those scholars who hold to a certain degree of coherency in Isa 50 are in a minority. 1 Since Duhm’s isolation of the Servant poems, especially vv.1–3, have been thought to be not connected with vv.4–9(10–11) significantly. Mostly, Isa 50:1–3 is recognized as part of the three part section, Isa 49:22–50:3,2 or as a unit on its own.3 Even among those scholars who recognize more extensive compositions, Isa 50:3 is sometimes regarded as the conclusion.4 It seems that the abrupt and unmotivated change in the

1

Cf. DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 496–497; VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 182; T ORREY, Second Isaiah, 389; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 578–580, 587–588; RIGNELL, Study, 71; SMART, History, 163–164; LEENE, stem; and arguing for larger consistent compositions, e.g., SPYKERBOER, Deutero-Isaiah, 166–167 (Isa 50:1–51:8); M ATHEUS, Singt, 89–90 (Isa 49:14–51:3); KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 447–451, 484–489 (Isa 50:1–51:8); CHILDS, Isaiah, 387–391 (Isa 49:14–50:11). SIMON, Theology, 163, 174–176 differs from the former in determining v.10 as the beginning of a new section (resulting in Isa 49:1– 50:9 and Isa 50:10–51:20 as larger sections). KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 86, 102, 122–123 emphasizes that Isa 50 is a unity to some degree but also highlights the importance of treating vv.1–3, vv.4–9 and vv.10–11 separately as well. 2 Thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 375, 377–379; MARTI, Jesaja, 332; also SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 97, 99; FREY, Buch, 210; MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 110–114; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 316–317; similarly W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 190–192 who regards Isa 49:22– 50:3 as one “scene”. B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 313–317 treats the two short passages Isa 44:24–26 and Isa 50:1–3 together; similarly already K ISSANE, Isaiah II, 135–141 who regards Isa 49:24–50:3 + 49:8–13 as one poem. B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 329–337 presents another distinctive segmentation; according to him the larger section Isa 49:22– 50:1 is followed by the short unit Isa 50:2–3. 3 Cf., e.g., GRESSMANN, literarische Analyse, 272; KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 106; MOWINCKEL, Komposition, 108; ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 129; BEGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 49, 51–52; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 198–201; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 181 (ET, 223– 224); SCHOORS, Saviour, 197; M ELUGIN, Formation, 53, 153 (he tends to this view though he admits that a definitive answer seems impossible); W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 148; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 70. LINDSEY, Commitment, 217 sees in Isa 50:1–3 a “transition” from Isa 49:1–23 to Isa 50:4–52:12. 4 Thus especially GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 280 who reckons with Isa 49:1–50:3 as a larger composition; similarly LAATO, Composition, 212–213, 218–219 who elucidates Isa 50:1– 3 as one unit that is part of the “fifth cycle” comprising Isa 48:20–52:12 but draws a sharp line to Isa 50:4–11.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

221

speech of the Servant is the main reason for this majority view.5 Furthermore, there are diverse opinions about the association of vv.10–11 with the previous ones, especially among those who isolate the Servant poems. Apart from some distinctive suggestions,6 a minority includes vv.10–11,7 some even only v.10.8 Mostly vv.10–11 are regarded as a later addition to the third Servant poem, sometimes divided further into different additions. The change of speaker and further features help to segment this subsection into further units. Vv.1–3, in which YHWH is the speaker, are made up of two strophes that are arranged in parallelism (v.1; vv.2–3). In both strophes, questions (v.1: ʩʠ, ʩʮ; v.2: ʲʥʣʮ, ʤ interrogativum, ʭʠʥ) are followed by a statement that begins with the particle ʯʤ (v.1b; v.2b).9 Additional poetic devices in vv.1–3 include the character of the questions in v.1 as hyperbolic rhetorical questions and the figura etymologica in v.2 (ʸʥʶʷ ʤʸʶʷ). They underline the incomprehensive lack of response to YHWH’s call and coming. Finally, instead of attempting various emendations or reorderings,10 the last line in v.2 is best understood as a Hysteron proteron.11 The speaker changes in vv.4–9. With a few other commentators I regard the phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ as an important indication for the segmentation of vv.4–9.12 And there are even more correspondences beyond the repetition 5 Cf., e.g., the judgement of GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 289: “In Isa 50:4 the subject suddenly changes again – in two senses.” (i.e. the change of grammatical subject and thematic subject); similarly ABMA, Bonds, 64. 6 W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 188–190 (ET, 232–235) takes vv.10–11 as part of Isa 51:1–2, 4–8 inserted after Isa 51:1a. The question in v.10 presupposes a previous address, which Westermann founds in Isa 51:1 (ibid. 189). MERENDINO, prophetisches Wort, 359–361: regards v.10aĮ*, 10b as originally belonging to Isa 51:6–8. Later it has been added to Isa 50:4–9a*. In MERENDINO, Jes 50,1–3, 236–244 he argues that v.11 was originally part of the unit Isa 50:1aĮ, 2aĮȕ, 2bĮȕ, 3, 9b, 11. 7 Thus, e.g., KISSANE, Isaiah II, 146–147; KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 67–69, 77–82; B ALTZER, Biographie, 175–176 and IDEM, Deutero-Isaiah, 342 (with slight variations); MELUGIN, Formation, 72–73; LAATO, Servant, 125; MOTYER, Prophecy, 392–393.401. 8 Cf. GRESSMANN, literarische Analyse, 274, 296. 9 Cf. also LEENE, stem, 9; ABMA, Bonds, 69–70. BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 70–71 identifies v.2aĮI.II (in his counting v.2a’) as the “kern van het betoog”. KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 447, 484–485 regard v.2aĮI.II and v.3 as the concluding lines of each strophe. 10 See the survey in KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 97–98. V.2bȕ is deleted as a later gloss still quite recently by WISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion, 187. 11 For this device see B ÜHLMANN & SCHERER, Stilfiguren, 50–51. Thus rightly B EUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 75, taken up also by ABMA, Bonds, 65. 12 KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 104 recognizes it as the beginning of each new strophe. According to STECK, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in den EJL, 15–16 the third poem song consists of three parts, indicated through the changes of subjects of which the phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ form an inclusio in the first (vv.4–5aĮ) and in the last one (vv.7–9); thus also VAN DER LUGT, structuur, 115. Yet it is not clear, how v.9b could fit into this determination.

222

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

of this phrase: The sequence of the beginnings of v.4 and v.5 is parallel: ‘ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ + a verb in 3.sg.masc. qatal + ʩʬ + object’. Vv.7, 9 begin verbally identically: ʩʬʚʸʦʲʩ ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ.13 If one regards these features as indicators of inclusios that frame strophes, an interesting sequence of strophes emerges with respect to their content: vv.4–5 – the relationship between YHWH and the Servant; v.6 – the fate of the Servant; vv.7–9a – the relationship between YHWH and the Servant; v.9b – the fate of the Servant’s oppressors. The various strophes have some problems, especially as regards segmentation. The solutions offered here derive from the recognition of possible poetic devices. Thus the problematic task of delimiting v.4, which has led to various proposals,14 was governed by taking the sequence ʸʷʡʡ ʸʩʲʩ ʯʦʠ ʩʬ ʸʩʲʩ ʸʷʡʡ as a “climactic parallelism”,15 agreeing with MT. The question, with which line the phrase ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ is to be associated,16 finds its

13 The only exception is the preceding particle ʯʤ in v.9a that is due to the (inverted) pattern ‘ʯʤ – question particle (ʩʮ)’. 14 Some simply delete ʸʩʲʩ with ʸʡʣ belonging to the former line as an adverbial accussative; thus SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 102; KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 42; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 151 (with further substantial changes and regroupings); NORTH, Second Isaiah, 201; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 182n.2 (ET, 225n.b); WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 151; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 318. DUHM, Jesaia, 380, MARTI, Jesaja, 334 and ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 28 delete ʸʷʡʡ ʸʩʲʩ. BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 80–81 regards ʸʩʲʩ ʸʡʣ as a later addition explaining the former stich. As an extra stich ʸʩʲʩ ʸʡʣ belongs to the first line for B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 229, 233. 15 Thus STECK, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in den EJL, 14 refering to DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 494–495 (“Parallelismus der Aufsparung”); similarly VAN DER LUGT, structuur, 110–111 (speaking of an “expanded colon” referring to a study of Loewenstamm); W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 194, 196. For the same segmentation, though with different arguments, cf. MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 583; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 108; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 321n.22; LAATO, Servant, 123 quotes this possibility, yet seems to be undecided (in the translation he has deleted it); see also ORLINSKY, Servant, 89 (acc. to his translation); O’CONNELL, Concentricity, 197; BALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 338 (according to his translation). 16 Most of the interpreters take simply for granted that ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ is the beginning of the whole line v.8a; thus, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 496; DUHM, Jesaia, 381; MARTI, Jesaja, 335; (NORTH, Second Isaiah, 203–204 notes that vv.8–9 contain the language of the law-court; thus he obviously takes for granted the same segmentation as well); W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 183, 187 (ET, 226, 231); B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 230, 235; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 152; STECK, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in den EJL, 18 (dividing vv.7–9 into two sections: v.7; vv.8–9); W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 204; OSWALT, Isaiah 40– 66, 326–327; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 321–322. But there have been some who combined it with v.7b, like MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 585–586; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 79– 80, 82–83, 89–91; KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 468 or recognized the twofold possibility, thus KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 117 (who in the end decides to follow the majority).

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

223

answer in a possible ‘Janus’ parallelism17 in vv.7b–8a, with ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ being combined with both lines, v.7b and v.8aȕ, and forming the centre of the whole strophe. It seems to me that this conviction of the Servant is the structural centre and material basis of the whole strophe. At this point, a final feature attracts our attention – the inversion of the pattern ‘itinerary word (mostly ʩʮ) – ʯʤ’ (cf. vv.1, 10–11) in vv.8–9a. It is most obvious in v.9a, but a similar structure emerges in v.8, when the phrase ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ is included. The firm conviction of the Servant that his vindicator is near enables him to make his statement before the rhetorical question. The whole section is concluded by two equally sized strophes (vv.10, 11). The speaker change(s) again, though their identity is variously determined (see further below). Both strophes consist of three bicola. They express sharp contrasts reflected also in some formal features like the similar first line18 and contrasting expressions in the middle line.19 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 50 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 50 The function of Isa 50 is to APPEAL to the audience to fear YHWH, to listen to the voice of his Servant20 and to trust in YHWH (v.10). For that purpose the speaker includes different speeches from YHWH (vv.1–3, 11) and the Servant (vv.4–9) in order to support his APPEAL. YHWH raises the issue of the addressees’ response to his presence (“why have I come and there is nobody?”, v.2); and his call (“[why] have I called and there is nobody answering?”, v.2) and puts these communicative acts into the context of his actions (vv.2b–3), which ultimately emphasizes his judgement (v.11). In juxtaposition to this prospect, the Servant gives TESTIMONY to his ministry and EXPRESSES his trust in the saving righteousness of YHWH (ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ “near is he who justifies me”, v.8). The interventions of YHWH save the Servant but bring judgement upon those who oppose him. 17

Cf. W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 159. W EBER, Werkbuch Psalmen I, 61 (on Ps 4:9) calls this phenomenon an “Amphibolie”, when a phrase can be related to the preceding as well as to the following line. Thus also B ÜHLMANN & SCHERER, Stilfiguren, 93. 18 The introducing particle, which depends on the characteristic shift of the particles ʩʮ/ʯʤ is followed by a preposition + 2.masc.pl. suffix, continued by a participle and an apposition consisting of a participle as well. See also K OENEN, Heil, 208 who argues for the same origin of vv.10–11bĮ on the grounds of their antithetical relationship and the combining light/darkness-imagery. 19 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 129 for whom the contrast between v.10 and v.11 manifests itself especially in the counterpart phrases ʭʩʫˇʧ ʪʬʤ (v.10bĮ) and ʭʫˇʠ ʸʥʠʡ ʥʫʬ (v.11bĮ) in the middle of each verse; see also BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 99. 20 On this DIRECTIVE illocution of the question in v.10a, see below.

224

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

In the light of these juxtaposed speeches that present two different prospects, the speaker APPEALS to the audience to take notice of the voice of the Servant and to trust in YHWH. This APPEAL is finally contrasted by the concluding words of YHWH, which picture a terrible end for all those who choose their own way (v.11). This interpretation must now be substantiated in the following paragraph. 1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 50 The employment of different speeches by different speakers is a crucial feature of the communicative strategy of Isa 50. It is, therefore, necessary to clarify the identity of the speakers. Then a more detailed analysis of the individual speeches will help to substantiate the communicative strategy of the whole. Finally, we shall summarize a few additional features, in particular those that interrelate the speeches to each other. a. Identification of the Different Speakers There is a wide agreement that YHWH is the speaker in vv.1–3 and that the person who talks about himself in vv.4–9 is identified as the (individual) Servant of YHWH of 49:1–6 and 52:13–53:12,21 even though in most cases v.10, the only explicit identification, is regarded as a much later addition. Given the limitation of the present study to the final form of Isa, the identification of the speaker in vv.4–9 as the Servant of YHWH is suggested by v.10.22 The opinions differ regarding the speaker of v.10 and 21

There is of course less agreement on whether the Servant is an individual or Israel. Among those who hold to an individual Servant beside the Servant Israel, many regard Isa 42:1–4(–9) as referring to the individual Servant as well; but see the remarks in the two previous chapters on the relationship between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 49:1–12. Some scholars, however, reject the identification of the speaker in Isa 50:4–9(10–11) with the Servant of YHWH in Isa 42:1–4(–9); 49:1–6(–12); 52:13–53:12. Apart from the exceptions that H. HAAG, Gottesknecht, 5 notes, KISSANE, Isaiah II, 147–148 regards Isa 50:4– 11 as a speech of the prophet himself (like Isa 61:1ff) instead of the Servant of YHWH (like Isa 49:1ff) and therefore does not include it into the passages about the Servant of YHWH; similarly KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 68. KIDA, Prophet, 3–4, 24–26 regards Isa 50:4–11 together with Isa 40:1–11 and Isa 49:1–6 as referring to the prophet, while Isa 41:27–42:9; 49:7–13 and 52:13–53:12 speak of the Servant (Sheshbazzar). WILLIAMSON, Book, 107–109 and IDEM, Variations, 131, 159 argues that the identification of the person speaking in vv.4–9 as the Servant is only imposed through the later interpretation in v.10 (cf. IDEM, Book, 107; IDEM, Variations, 131). Originally, DI described himself here as the one who “meets the conditions necessary to open the long-sealed book which bespeaks the end of God’s judgement, and that he has deliberately portrayed himself in that role” (IDEM, Book, 109). 22 K IDA, Prophet, 24–25 interprets v.10 differently. According to him, the prophet speaks in Isa 50:4–11 who expresses his confidence in YHWH despite all oppressions

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

225

v.11. Four possibilities have been suggested: 1) both verses contain a speech of YHWH;23 2) both verses contain a speech of a prophet/ glossator;24 3) v.10 is the speech of a prophet/glossator and v.11 is a speech of YHWH;25 4) vv.10–11bĮ contain the speech of a prophet/glossator and only v.11bȕ are a word of YHWH.26 Some defend the notion of v.10 as part of the speech of YHWH with respect to other instances where in a speech of YHWH he referred to himself in 3.sg.27 Instead, I hold that v.10 is delivered by a speaker other than YHWH. The mention of YHWH in 3.sg. in Isa 41:16, 20 may serve to emphasize the conclusion of a sub-section.28 Moreover, passages like Isa 42:19 and Isa 54:17 refer to YHWH in 3.sg. In these contexts, it is clear that YHWH is the speaker. It is therefore of particular interest that the present verse speaks of ʥʣʡʲ “his servant”, while in Isa 42:19 the ʤʥʤʩ ʣʡʲ corresponds to ʩʣʡʲ “my servant” in a speech that is mainly in 1.sg., an observation that applies also to Isa 54:17. Therefore, contrary to the other passages the present verse lacks any indication that despite the reference to YHWH in the 3.sg., he himself is the speaker. With respect to v.11, there is no doubt that YHWH is the speaker in v.11bȕ. The question is where his speech starts. I prefer to read the whole verse as a speech of YHWH because of the occurrence of the particle ʯʤ. Given there is a change of speaker it serves well as an indicator of such a change, because ʯʤ often is used as an attention marker.29 Moreover, read in the context of the whole chapter, it is striking that ʯʤ always introduces (vv.4–9) and then calls his audience to attend to the Servant (Sheshbazzar). See already D ILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 436 who argue for v.10 identifying the previous speaker objecting to CHEYNE, the prophecies of Is. 3 rd edition, London. W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 153 suggests that in v.10 the prophet who is the Servant at the same time refers to himself in the third person “out of humility”. 23 Cf., e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 496; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 587; M ELUGIN, Formation, 72; LINDSEY, Commitment, 217, 225; K OOLE, Isaiah III/2, 122, 132. 24 This position is close to the following one because those who hold the prophet/ glossator as the speaker claim that he imitates the speech of YHWH here; cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 382; SCHARBERT, Deuterojesaja, 43. 25 Cf., e.g., ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 35–36; KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 82; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 202; HERMISSON, Einheit, 294n.25. 26 Cf., e.g., BEUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 180–181 and IDEM, Jesaja II/B, 96 followed by SCHOORS, Jesaja II, 310; KOENEN, Heil, 208; shared obviously also by W ERLITZ, Knecht, 41. 27 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 122 who quotes Isa 41:16, 20; 42:19. One might also add Isa 54:17. 28 Cf. WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 65–66 (ET, 78); ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 148, 160; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 173, who also relate the occurrence of the 3.sg. with the close relationship of the passages with Psalms. 29 Cf. JM § 105d.

226

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

the actions of YHWH.30 It is then reasonable to assume that the same particle also introduces the speech of YHWH here. The final question concerns the speaker of v.10. When Jacob-Israel (Isa 40:27) or Zion (Isa 49:14) had been the speaker, this was always the case in a quotation that then had been objected to. It is also very likely that the same addressees of vv.1–3 (and vv.4–9) are addressed by the question ʩʮ ʭʫʡ here, who accordingly can be excluded as probable speaker. Apart from them there have been two or three different speakers so far: YHWH, whom we have excluded above; and the prophetic voice commissioned in Isa 40:3–8 who is supposed to introduce the YHWH speeches through the messenger formula. Up to now it has not been revealed, whether the Servant, speaking in Isa 48:16b and Isa 49:1–6, is the same speaker as the one in Isa 40:3–8 or a different one. Bearing this in mind, it seems most probable to me that on the level of the editor responsible for this verse, the Servant is presented as someone different from the prophetic voice commissioned in Isa 40:3–8. The speaker of v.10 clearly refers to the one talking in vv.4–9 as the Servant, and by this means, he differentiates himself from the Servant.31 This perception of the prophetic voice as the speaker of v.10 might be indicated by his parallel APPEAL to listen in Isa 42:23, which is communicated also through the question ʭʫʡ ʩʮ.32

30 This is especially the case in v.2b, where it introduces the manifestations of YHWH’s power and long arm, and in v.9, in which the Servant expresses his hope that YHWH will help him and how this will look like. But also v.1b implies the actions of YHWH: he is the one who sold them and sent Zion away. 31 Cf. similarly especially SMART, History, 174. W ERLITZ, Knecht, 41 points to the same direction when he claims that the addition intends to identify the Servant as the prophet Isaiah; similarly also BERGES, Buch, 391. Yet it needs to be emphasized that this applies to the passage in its final form. Recent studies have emphasized that vv.10–11 form an important bridge between the Servant passages of Isa 40–55 and those texts in Isa 56–66 that speak of the “servants” (Cf. especially B LENKINSOPP, Jewish Sect, 13 and IDEM , Isaiah 40–55, 323; MATHEUS, Singt, 131–132; H ANSON, Isaiah 40–66, 141–142; B ERGES, Buch, 393; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 147; SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 423–424, 438– 439). Accordingly, it heavily depends on the determination of the relationship between Isa 40–55 and 56–66 and their compositional history, whether the differentiation between the prophetic voice of Isa 40:3–8 and the Servant of Isa 49:1–6(–12); 50:4–9 is original or has emerged in the course of the expansion of Isa 40–55 by chs.56–66, which then might have changed the original identity of a commissioned prophet with the figure of Isa 50:4–9 (For the latter position see, e.g., WILLIAMSON, Book, 106–109). 32 We saw above that in Isa 42:18–25 the speech of YHWH (vv.18–20) is followed by the speech of the prophetic voice (vv.21–25), too. Note also that the phrase ʭʫʡ ʩʮ occurs only in these two passages in Isa and elsewhere in the OT only three more times (cf. Hag 2:3; Ezra 1:3; 2 Chr 36:23; the latter two parallel passages use the phrase even in a similar context, in which Cyrus allows everybody “who among you belongs to his people” to leave Babel and go back to Jerusalem).

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

227

These reflections suggest a dynamic alternation of speakers in Isa 50. It starts with the introduction of the speech of YHWH through the prophetic voice by the messenger formula (v.1aĮI). The same prophetic voice then reappears in v.10. Sayings of YHWH occur in vv.1–3 and again in v.11. After YHWH has finished his first speech, the Servant expresses his thoughts, seemingly unmotivated and surprising. b. Main Issues in the Individual Speeches The Speech of YHWH In the speech of YHWH in Isa 50:1–3, questions and statements alternate in each strophe. In strophe I (v.1), the questions seek a negative answer on the whereabouts of a bill of divorce of their mother (city Zion-Jerusalem) and the creditor to whom YHWH has sold them; there are none.33 This prepares for the juxtaposed announcement. The separation between YHWH and his people and between YHWH and their mother Zion respectively is due to their sins and transgressions.34 Previous passages clarified that the sins of the addressees are a crucial feature of their present condition (cf. 43:16–28; 48:8), but it was also emphasized that YHWH himself deals with their sins and transgressions to overcome their separation (cf. Isa 44:21–22) and that the “furnace of affliction” of the audience’s captivity serves to melt away their sins (Isa 48:10). Hence, if the only issue of separation is the addressees’ sins, and if YHWH himself deals with this, YHWH has to confront them with the question of why they do not respond to his initiative to overcome their separation. He has come and has called, but there is nobody answering.35 And he challenges them to a response by a further question about his ability to redeem and rescue (v.2). 33

There are only a few exceptions to this understanding of the rhetorical questions. S IMON, Theology, 170–171 argues that Zion has indeed received a bill of divorce (referring to the “prophetic tradition”, especially Hos and Jer 3; the problem in his interpretation is that Simon too much reads Jer 3 into the present text). KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 89–91 argues that the point of the first (rhetorical) question is not to deny the divorce bill but that YHWH gave it to Zion for arbitrary reasons. The second line, according to him, denies that YHWH had to pay for his debts; the last line says: it is for your own sins. Thus the first two lines agree with the devastating state of the addressees, but they are not caused by some strange actions of YHWH but by the transgressions of the addressees. For a similar discussion see also OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 317–318. 34 The particle ʯʤ highlights the juxtaposition of this assertion in v.1b to the previous (rhetorical) questions. The recurrence of ¥ʸʫʮ and ¥ʧʬˇ as expressions of the separation highlights the connection between the questions and the subsequent statement of YHWH. For the usual meaning of the preposition ʡ as “on account of” in ʭʫʩʺʰʲʡ and ʭʫʩʲˇʴʡʥ see in particular the discussion in KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 91. 35 STECK, Israel und Zion, 182–183 argues that the term “divorce bill” reflects a more serious accusation of YHWH than Isa 49:14 (which itself sketches a problem in the relationship with YHWH in contrast to Isa 40:2; 52:7–10, hence a later editorial stage) that

228

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

The exact illocutionary force of these questions remains ambiguous. The fact that YHWH combines the first question with the proposition that “there was nobody” and “there is nobody answering”, points to a REBUKE for the addressees’ lack of response.36 However, as any question contains an element of DIRECTIVE illocution that seeks a response from the addressees, v.2a can also serve as an APPEAL to respond now to YHWH’s presence and call and to confirm that his hand can rescue.37 This ambiguity of YHWH’s speech-act and the response it provokes is not resolved through the subsequent ANNOUNCEMENT (v.2b). Yet confronted with the ANNOUNCEMENTS in vv.2b–3, the severity of the questions comes to the fore. These ANNOUNCEMENTS allude to several different actions of YHWH in

hints at a changed situation in which the returned exiles in Judah experience further delay of the announced salvation. The reaction of Isa 50:1–3 to this accusation is, therefore, part of a later editorial layer. But this puts too much emphasis on v.1 alone and disregards its place within the argument of the whole speech of YHWH in vv.1–3. Moreover, the addressed children of Zion are most likely those (still) in exile in Babylon and the lack of their response to YHWH’s coming and call is their (for rhetorical reasons hyperbolically worsened) hesitation to follow his call for return (cf. Isa 48:20–21); cf. on the latter also ABMA, Travelling, 8, 13–14. LEENE, stem, 10 raises a similar critique against some form-critical interpretations of v.1 as an objection against an accusation of YHWH: “Maar is deze uitleg plausibel? Kunnen wij ons de beelden van 1 werkelijk voorstellen als aan een door Israël geuite aanklacht ontleend? M.i. passen deze beelden toch enkel in de mond van JHWH. Ten hoogste speelt Hij dus rhetorisch de rol van aangeklaagde.“ (italics original). 36 And many relate this rebuke to the lack of response to DI’s message in general. Those concerned (additionally) with the whole composition refer to specific passages as calls that have been widely refused; thus B EUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 73 (e.g. Isa 49:22); CHILDS, Isaiah, 393 (Isa 48:20–21); similarly ABMA, Travelling, 6 who calls Isa 48:20– 21 “programmatic” for the following chapters; in ABMA, Bonds, 81 she also notes Isa 49:9; 52:11; W ISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion, 189–190 refers to Isa 40:1–2, 3 and Isa 48:20–21 as parts of the “Deuterojesajagrundschrift”. But others offer different interpretations of v.2aĮI.II. Still similarly is DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 494 who describes the Servant as the one in whom YHWH has come but has been refused; similarly also S IMON, Theology, 169. For some form-critics, who regard Isa 50:1–3 as an independent trial speech, the question in v.2aĮI.II records that the accusatory has ceased, similar to Isa 43:26; cf. B EGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 38–39; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 181 (ET, 223–224) and IDEM, Sprache, 60; SCHOORS, Saviour, 198; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 150. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 92–93 takes v.2 as an explanation of v.1b, i.e. “explaining the nature of the ‘debts’ and ‘sins’ mentioned in v. 1b.” (ibid. 93; similarly apparently already FREY, Buch, 211). Finally, B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 335 explains v.2aĮȕ in the context of his hypothesis of Isa 40–55 as a liturgical drama. Accordingly, either the Servant or YHWH appears on stage and asks, whether someone listens to him. 37 ABMA, Bonds, 81 expresses a similar interpretation: “…the focus on the response of the people leaves an opening in the text: the invitation to listen to Yhwh remains open.”

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

229

the past,38 and as such they could support the notion of his ability to redeem and rescue; hence, that YHWH’s hand is not too short can be seen in his deeds in the past. The statements in vv.2b–3 are expressed through verbs in yiqtol; thus the reminiscences of the mighty past actions of YHWH are turned into announcements of the future, possibly even into announcements of the future judgement of the addressees.39 Moreover, several of the actions alluded to are ambivalent, since they mean salvation for some but judgement for others.40 Finally, the announcement that YHWH dries up the sea and makes the rivers deserts (v.2bĮ) not only alludes to his creative power as such (Isa 44:27), but also recalls Isa 42:15,41 which has been related to the defeat of Babel (Isa 43:14–15). In sum, the ANNOUNCEMENTS of YHWH’s deeds indicate that they can bring judgement for some and salvation for others (cf. also Isa 42:14–17). The ambivalence in YHWH’s statement about what he will do in vv.2b– 3 turns into an unequivocal ANNOUNCEMENT, when YHWH resumes speaking in v.11. After the implicit threat in vv.2b–3, he explicitly announces judgement to those who “kindle a fire and set torches alight”42, i.e. those who try to overcome darkness by themselves.43 Between the announcement 38

Showing similarities with Ps 106:9 and Isa 44:27, v.2bĮ alludes to creation as well as to the crossing of the Red Sea; cf. SCHOORS, Saviour, 199–200; GUNN, Flood, 501). Close to Exod 7:18, 21; Ps 105:29, v.2bȕ reminds of one plague of Egypt; cf. B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 233; SCHOORS, Saviour, 199; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 97), and v.3 may allude to the darkening of the sky in the exodus; cf. Exod 10:21–23; Ps 105:28 and B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 233; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 74–75; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 98; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 320. Accordingly, it is not preferable to restrict the allusions only to either creation (thus, e.g., MARTI, Jesaja, 333, taking up GUNKEL, Schöpfung und Chaos, 98–99, he mainly sees allusions to the Babylonian creation myth; M CKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 114; SPYKERBOER, Deutero-Isaiah, 166–167.) or the Exodus (thus, e.g., R IGNELL, Study, 67; LEENE, stem, 13–14; W ISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion, 190–191). For a combination of motifs from creation and exodus, cf. also, e.g., MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 581; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 199; STUHLMUELLER , Creative Redemption, 91–92; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 150; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 320. Finally, G UNN, Flood, 497–501 finds allusions also to the Flood story in Gen 6–8, and BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 74 follows him. 39 Thus E LLIGER, Verhältnis, 133; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 74; CHILDS, Isaiah, 393–394. 40 This applies, for instance, to the allusions in vv.2bȕ, 3 to the plague and the darkening of the sky in the Exodus traditions. 41 For these correspondences, see in particular GUNN, Flood, 500n.28. 42 I adopt the emendation ʩʸʩʠʮ me’îrê for MT’s ʩʸʦʠʮ with others; see especially the discussion in HOLTER, Parallelismen. 43 For this interpretation, cf. also, e.g., BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 98–100; LANDY, Construction, 68; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 129–130; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 322. However, the way in which v.11 has been understood is quite diverse. According to Rignell, it is an announcement of the punishment of those who decided to stay with their idols and refused to follow the Servant; cf. RIGNELL, Study, 72 (He prefers reading ʤʡʶʲʮ as the “place of idols”). Others identify the addressees of v.11 with the same group that opposes

230

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

of the possible twofold outcome of YHWH’s actions (vv.2b–3) and the final emphasis on judgement (v.11) are the speech of the Servant (vv.4–9) and the APPEAL of the prophetic voice (v.10). The Speech of the Servant The train of thought of the Servant’s speech, which at a first glance seems rather unmotivated at this point, comes to the fore most effectively when attending to its structure.44 Two strophes (vv.4–5; vv.7–9a) address the relationship between YHWH and the Servant. They are followed by smaller strophes (v.6, v.9b) that express the result of that relationship in the following manner: In vv.4–5 the Servant tells how YHWH has equipped him in order to pursue his commission. We will see that hardening plays an important part in this section so that a more detailed discussion on vv.4–5 follows later. In v.6 the Servant ascertains that he has withstood the hostilities that come with his task (vv.4–5). Substantiating the obstacles mentioned earlier (Isa

the Servant (vv.8–9), namely the Babylonians, who are the enemies and mockers of the Servant and of Israel; cf. KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 81–82; similarly M ERENDINO, Jes 50,1–3, 244; LAATO, Servant, 126 and already K ISSANE, Isaiah II, 146–147. Other scholars think of the enemies of the Servant as well but reckon with a group within Judah who is addressed in v.11; thus, e.g., B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 235–236; SCHARBERT, Deuterojesaja, 46–47. Or taking up the similarities with v.9b and v.10, it has been suggested that v.11 is directed to the enemies of those who fear YHWH (v.10), parallel to the confrontation between the Servant and his opponents in vv.7–9, reflecting post-exilic separation within Judah; cf., e.g., KOENEN, Heil, 209; WERLITZ, Knecht, 41; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40– 66, 147. In these cases the phrase “to kindle a fire” is understood as a hostile act against the god-fearers (see in particular KOENEN, Heil, 208: “Sie sollen in dem Feuer, das sie gegen die Frommen entfacht haben, selber umkommen.”). But the fire imagery in v.11 is not always seen as direct hostilities against the Servant or the god-fearers of v.10 and so some take the addressees of v.11 as those who refuse to listen to the Servant and to rely upon YHWH and who oppose the god-fearers in this respect; cf., e.g., BEUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 180, 182; IDEM, Jesaja II/B, 98–100; KOOLE , Isaiah III/2, 128–130; similarly also LEENE, stem, 27–28, 45–46n.89. Another problem regards the interpretation of the last line of v.11. Noting similarities with Isa 66:24, both passages have been attributed by some scholars to the latest parts in the OT because of their proximity to the idea of hell; cf., e.g., ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 38; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 206; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 190 (ET, 235); HERMISSON, Einheit, 294; WERLITZ, Knecht, 41; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 146–147. But the comparative material does not allow for a clear determination; thus with the majority of scholars, it must be admitted that there is still some distance between; cf., e.g., GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 291: “The imagery will later develop into the notion of Gehenna, but it has not done so yet.” 44 For a detailed treatment of its structure, see above.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

231

49:4),45 struggles are part of the prophetic task and have already become integral to the prophetic experience in the prophetic traditions, especially with Jeremiah.46 Both strophes can be further substantiated as regards the illocutionary acts they mediate. In a 1.sg. speech addressed to others, the Servant gives TESTIMONY, not in a judicial sense but in a religious one, about what he has experienced with YHWH. It is against this background that in the third strophe (vv.7–9a) the Servant EXPRESSES trust in YHWH, who will help him (vv.7, 9a).47 And if the above suggestion of the ambiguous segmentation of vv.7b–8a is sound, it results in the central position of ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ. In this reading, this very nearness of his vindicator is not only the material foundation and centre of the Servant’s confidence, but also the structural centre of that strophe. The last strophe of the Servant’s speech (v.9b) exemplifies what his trust in YHWH and his vindication will mean for the oppressors. They will perish. This speech of the Servant exemplifies the ambiguous statements of YHWH in vv.2b–3. In his expression of trust in YHWH, the Servant applies the actions of YHWH to his own fate. He will experience YHWH’s actions as saving justification (ʩʷʩʣʶʮ ʡʥʸʷ), while his oppressors will be judged (v.9b).48 This train of thought is amplified by the same tense structure in vv.1–3 and vv.4–9: in both sections we find the parallel movement of verbal forms from qatal to yiqtol in vv.1–3 and vv.4–9. The Speech of the Prophetic Voice As regards the syntax of v.10, I reckon that the question consists of v.10a. The relative pronoun ʸˇʠ begins a new sentence, introducing the subordinate clause (v.10bĮ) before the main clause (v.10bȕȖ)49. Hence, a possible translation of v.10: “Who among you fears Yahweh, and hearkens to the voice of his servant? He who walks in darkness with no brightness upon him, Let him trust in the name of Yahweh, and lean upon his God.”50

45

There is a wide agreement about vv.(5–)6 substantiating Isa 49:4; see, e.g., MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 117; HERMISSON, Lohn des Knechts, 278; STECK, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in den EJL, 16; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 111. 46 Cf. HERMISSON, Lohn des Knechts, 278. 47 For a relationship between elements of a psalm of confidence and giving TESTIMONY, see, e.g., K AISER , Königliche Knecht, 68. 48 Here we have the concept of ‘saving righteousness’ in nuce, applied to the Servant. 49 For a discussion and evaluation of other solutions and the clarification of the one chosen here, see “Appendix 2”. 50 MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 115–116. For a systematized discussion of other proposals and substantiating of this interpretation of Isa 50:10, see “Appendix 2”.

232

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

For our understanding of v.10 as an APPEAL to the addressees, we refer to a study of Beuken. Comparing this line with Hag 2:3 and quoting further instances of determined participles, Beuken shows that the undetermined participles indicate that no specific group is addressed in v.10a.51 Rather, the question implies a call to fear YHWH and to listen to his Servant: “Weil die Determination fehlt, enthält die Frage eigentlich eine Aufforderung, zu fürchten und zu hören, nicht die Bitte, sich zu melden.”52 And as the suffix in ʭʫʡ refers back to the 2.pl.masc. addressee of vv.1–3, we can say that the prophetic voice APPEALS to the audience of YHWH, which has not responded to his call so far (v.2: ʤʰʥʲ ʯʩʠʥ ʩʺʠʸʷ), to fear YHWH now and to listen to his Servant.53 The next line (v.10bĮ) addresses the present condition rather than a possible situation with a conditional clause.54 “Walking in darkness” is a reality. However, YHWH intends to overcome it (Isa 42:16). So the prophetic voice calls the audience to rely upon their God.55 The most likely reading of the verbs in yiqtol in v.10b as jussives further strengthens this perception. Thus the whole verse aims at the APPEAL to the audience to rely upon YHWH, which could be realized, obviously, through fearing him and listening to the voice of his Servant. Against the background of this substantiation of the individual speeches, we can turn now our attention to further features, especially interrelationships between the speeches, that support and contribute to the communicative strategy through which the APPEAL to the audience is mediated and achieved.

51

Cf. B EUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 170–174. BEUKEN, Jes 50 10 –11, 174. 53 Note also the parallel APPEAL in Isa 42:23. 54 For a discussion of this interpretation, see “Appendix 2”. 55 KOENEN, Heil, 208n.11 argues that, since the addressed ones are fearing YHWH, they need not to be admonished to rely upon him. Accordingly, he interprets the last line as a promise: “Diesen Frommen wird die heilvolle Zusage gemacht, daß sie auf Jahwe vertrauen dürfen.” (ibid. 207–208). Also WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 190 (ET, 234– 235) and W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 153 have regarded v.10bȕȖ as a promise. But if one recognizes the above given syntactic reflections and adopts the reasonable interpretation that the question in v.10a does not presuppose a certain group, i.e. does not reckon with an already existing group of “fearers of YHWH”, then the argument of Koenen does not apply. I therefore regard the last line as an admonition with the majority of interpreters. 52

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

233

c. Interrelationships between the Speeches Supporting the Communicative Strategy Coherence of Isaiah 50 One specific feature in Isa 50 lends coherence to this chapter and indicates the interrelationship of the various speeches. This is the recurring pattern of a QUESTION introduced by ʩʮ, followed by an ANNOUNCEMENT introduced through ʯʤ. This structure can be found in the speech of YHWH (v.1), in the part of the speech of the Servant that applies the actions of YHWH to his own fate (vv.8–9), and in the final juxtaposition of the prophetic voice’s APPEAL to the audience (v.10) with YHWH’s statement of fate of the others (v.11). Further interrelationships between the speeches noted below also strengthen the coherence of this chapter. Creation of a Prospect of Two Clear-cut Alternatives Various means contribute to the presentation of two different outcomes that creates the need to respond on the side of the addressees. We saw above that the initial speech of YHWH (vv.1–3) gives an ambiguous impression of what YHWH’s future actions will be like. Yet if one reads this with the final statement in v.11, then the speech of YHWH clearly points to judgement. That there is an alternative to judgement implied in YHWH’s actions is clarified through the speech of the Servant (vv.4–9). He is sure that YHWH’s actions will justify him and save him (v.8), while his opponents will face judgement. Thus it is with the Servant that the alternative to judgement comes to the fore. It is highlighted through the seemingly unmotivated abrupt beginning of the speech of the Servant in v.4. The alternative of salvation in the fate of the Servant is set against the prospect of judgement, emphasized in the speech of YHWH. The presentation of two alternatives culminates in the contrasting speeches at the end (vv.10–11), which share a number of features:56 both strophes consist of three bicola; the structure of each introductory line is similar;57 the centre lines include contrasting expressions.58 Confronted with the alternative of judgement or salvation, the addressees are called to

56

Cf. also the discussion above in “1.2 Structure and Poetics”. The introducing particle, which depends on the characteristic shift of the particles ʩʮ/ʯʤ is followed by a preposition + 2.masc.pl. suffix, continued by a participle and an apposition consisting of a participle as well. See also K OENEN, Heil, 208 who argues for the same origin of vv.10–11bĮ on the grounds of their antithetical relationship and the combining light/darkness-imagery. 58 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 129 for whom the contrast between v.10 and v.11 manifests itself especially in the counterpart phrases ʭʩʫˇʧ ʪʬʤ (v.10bĮ) and ʭʫˇʠ ʸʥʠʡ ʥʫʬ (v.11bĮ) in the middle of each verse; see also BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 99. 57

234

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

respond in a way that they could participate in salvation, by listening to the Servant and trusting in YHWH. The Coincidence of Judgement(s) It has been already highlighted above that the Servant applies the future actions of YHWH to his own fate, as the sequence of verbal forms (qatal – yiqtol) in his expression of confidence in YHWH coincides with the sequence of verbal forms in the speech of YHWH (equally starting with verbs in qatal and concluding with verbs in yiqtol; see above). It is thus not surprising that the perishing of the Servant’s oppressors (v.9b) is related to YHWH’s announcement to those who choose their own ways (v.11): ʭʫʬʫ ʯʤ (v.11) refers back to ʭʬʫ ʯʤ (v.9b).59 These groups are related to each other insofar as their fate is sealed in the same judgement of YHWH.60 This amplifies the notion that only in relation to the Servant, the addressees of Isa 50 can escape the judgement of YHWH and instead participate in his salvation, and thereby, strengthens the APPEAL of the prophetic voice. Now that we have examined the communicative action achieved through Isa 50, we can turn our attention to its handling of the theme of hardening. 1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 50 Terminology related to the theme of hardening occurs in vv.4–5 and in v.10, and it deals exclusively with the aspect of ‘perception’ (see above introduction). But we will see that we have to take into account further issues with these verses to understand better how hardening is addressed in the present passage. Most of the commentators interpret Isa 50:4–5 in the context of the “third Servant Song” (vv.4–9). Often these verses are regarded as the description of the equipment of the Servant for his prophetic task.61 Yet considerably more is involved. As the one whose ears have been opened by YHWH (ʯʦʠ ʩʬʚʧʺʴ ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ, v.5), the Servant contrasts the state of the ad-

59

Cf. also ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 36; LAATO, Servant, 125; KOENEN, Heil, 209. Cf. similarly KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 123: “And the threat of the end of chap. 50 links up both with vv. 2b–3 and with v. 9b.” 61 Cf., e.g., HERMISSON, Lohn des Knechts, 277; STECK, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in den EJL, 16–17; BERGES, Buch, 391–392 and many commentaries. When H ÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 144–145 notes that vv.4–5 are “Ausdruck von prophetischer Existenz” but recognizes that this differs remarkably from common patterns, he senses the issue. The difference is due to the incorporation of the hardening motif. 60

1. Hardening in Isaiah 50

235

dressees (Isa 48:8).62 Moreover, these phrases appear as exact antonyms to the phrase ʯʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ (Isa 6:10;63 cf. also ʯʦʠ ¥ʭʶʲ, Isa 29:10). Thus the Servant gives TESTIMONY in his speech that in his person YHWH has started to overcome the restrictions of perception, which had been inaugurated by Isaiah (Isa 6:9–10). The phrase, “he wakens my ear” (ʯʦʠ ʩʬ ʸʩʲʩ, v.4), further emphasises this change. What YHWH has done with the Servant goes beyond the general equipment of a prophet. In the person and ministry of the Servant, he has started to overcome hardening. A few other correspondences to texts in Isa 1–39 further amplify this notion, which we shall discuss together with the APPEAL to listen to the voice of the Servant in v.10. Both the speech of the Servant (especially vv.4–6) and the APPEAL of the prophetic voice (v.10) take up the same passages from Isa 1–39: First, with Isa 8:11–9:6, Isa 50:10 shares the central request to “fear YHWH” (ʤʥʤʩ ʠʸʩ ʭʫʡ ʩʮ; cf. Isa 8:12–13, ¥ʠʸʩ)64 and the light/darkness imagery (cf. Isa 8:22; 9:1).65 In comparing his experience with the ʭʩʣʥʮʬ (cf. v.4, two times), the Servant refers to the same passage (cf. ʭʩʣʮʬ in Isa 8:16).66 Interpreting Isa 8:16 as the sealing of Isaiah’s message among his disciples,67 Williamson comments that at “50:4, Deutero-Isaiah [whom Williamson identifies with the speaker of Isa 50:4–9] consciously includes himself among the group of those who witnessed the sealing of the prophetic teaching” and that his emphasis on the word ʭʩʣʥʮʬ “implies that he is one of those who is ‘qualified’ to unseal the document.”68 Hence, if the ʭʩʣʮʬ were to be interpreted as a group of people who had not been affected by the hardening message of Isaiah, the speaker of Isa 50:4–6 would emphasise that he, too, has not been hardened. If we follow, however, the interpretation of Isa 8:16, suggested above, according to which all “who have been instructed” by Isaiah (cf. Isa 1:17) are not able to understand it although his message is sealed within them, then the reference in Isa 50:4 functions in a slightly different way. The purpose of the “instruction of Isaiah” was to “teach” (¥ʣʮʬ) his audience to do what is 62

Cf. also HERMISSON, Deuterojesaja, 240. Yet Hermisson concludes that on the level of the “Naherwartungsschicht” the Servant in Isa 50:4–9 is understood as collective Israel. 63 Cf. similarly W ILLIAMSON, Book, 108 and SEITZ, Isaiah 40–66, 437. 64 Cf. also MOTYER, Prophecy, 401. 65 Cf. similarly C LIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 162; LAATO, Servant, 125; W ILLIAMSON, Book, 73; CLEMENTS, Light, 64–65. In this respect it is noteworthy that ʭʩʫˇʧ (v.10) is the plural form of ʤʫˇʧ, which occurs in Isa 8:22, but apart from that only in Gen 15:12; Pss 18:12; 82:5; 139:12. Note also the stem ʤʢʰ in Isa 9:1. 66 Cf. C LIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 161; WILLIAMSON, Book, 106–109; SEITZ, Isaiah 40– 66, 437. 67 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 98–103. 68 W ILLIAMSON, Book, 108.

236

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

good (cf. Isa 1:17). For the time being (cf. Isa 6:11–13) this was to affect the hardening of his audience, i.e. “this people” (Isa 6:8–10) so that all Isaiah could recognize was that among “those instructed by me” his message was “sealed” (Isa 8:16). When the Servant includes himself among those “instructed” (ʭʩʣʥʮʬ), it is quite probable to regard this as a statement that he has absorbed the “instruction” of Isaiah as well. But the contrasting effect on him is due to the intervention of YHWH. The Servant has been “instructed” by Isaiah’s message. But as YHWH has opened his ear, this enables the Servant to hear like one who is truly instructed and to “sustain” the weary (vv.4–5). The second passage that is taken up in both vv.4–6 and v.10 is Isa 30:8– 14. In this passage, the hardening message of Isaiah even affected the will of his people. They are not willing to listen (ʲʥʮˇ ʥʡʠʚʠʬ) to the “instruction of YHWH” (Isa 30:9), indeed, they have rejected it. Moreover, they have relied (¥ʧʨʡ) upon oppression and have depended (¥ʯʲˇ) on deceit (Isa 30:12). But now the present audience is able to reverse that; they are asked to listen (¥ʲʮˇ) to the voice of the Servant, to rely (¥ʧʨʡ) upon YHWH and to depend (¥ʯʲˇ) on their god (Isa 50:10). Again, this is rooted in the overcoming of hardening in the person and ministry of the Servant. As YHWH has opened the ear of the Servant, he does not rebel (¥ʤʸʮ, v.5); and in this respect he also reverses the state of Isaiah’s audience (ʭʲ ʩʸʮ; cf. Isa 30:9).69 There are a few further points that need to be highlighted. First, the overcoming of imperceptiveness is specified timewise: the enabling of hearing is continuous, as “morning by morning he wakens (yiqtol of continuous action) my ear”. But this has already begun happen, the “Lord YHWH has opened (qatal) my ear”.70 Secondly, the equipment of the Servant does not only involve the overcoming of imperceptiveness; it also includes giving him a ʭʩʣʥʮʬ ʯʥˇʬ “a tongue of those who have been instructed” in order “to know how to sustain the weary with a word” (v.4).71 Here the overcoming of hardening in the person and ministry of the Servant is closely associated with his acts of communication that are meant to be good for his audience. He is to “sustain the weary”, to build them up, to encourage them through communication (ʸʡʣ). Even in respect to communication, therefore, the Servant achieves a total reversal. In Isa 6 we found that Isaiah’s commission to harden the people was presented as YHWH’s 69 For the reference of v.5 to Isa 30:9, see also W ILLIAMSON, Book, 109, taken up by B ERGES, Buch, 392. 70 V.5aĮ contributes significantly to the overall passage and should not be disregarded as a mere variant as DUHM, Jesaia, 380 and others have done. Nor can I see that the proposals of SCHWARTZ, Jesaja 504–5a enhance the understanding of this passage. 71 On the meaning of the term ʺʥʲʬ, see “Appendix 2” below.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10

237

reciprocal judgement in consequence of the perverted communication of his people (ʭʩʺʴˈ ʠʮʨʚʭʲ, Isa 6:5), whose “tongue (ʯʥˇʬ) and deeds are against YHWH” (Isa 3:8).72 With the Servant not only the overcoming of hardening has begun, he also makes communication right. Finally, it has to be stressed that as in former passages as well, and in particular those that dealt with aspects of the theme of hardening, Isa 50 points at individual responses (cf. also e.g. Isa 42:18–25; 43:8–13). This is most clearly indicated by the question “who among you” and continued in the singular participles as well as in the appeal in v.10b.73 Everybody is called individually to listen to the Servant and trust in YHWH. This response creates a separation – into those who listen to the Servant (v.10) and those who light the way on their own (v.11). In sum, the theme of hardening is touched upon in the central communicative act of Isa 50 since part of its APPEAL is to “listen” to the voice of the Servant. Only this opens up an alternative outcome to the judgement proclaimed by YHWH. Moreover, an important issue of the condition of the Servant is that in him hardening is reversed for YHWH has opened his ear. In overcoming hardening, YHWH has also made right the communication of the Servant who has a tongue to sustain the weary. Thus the theme of hardening is a crucial issue of Isa 50. Previous passages had to declare to the addressees that they are blind, deaf and ignorant, that they have become what Isaiah was called to achieve. In Isa 50, the Servant embodies the beginning of a change, which is mediated through his communication. The next two paragraphs, which briefly discuss aspects of hardening in the main units Isa 49:14–52:10 and Isa 52:11–55:13, will show how the overcoming of hardening is achieved for the addressees.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10 2. Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10

2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 51:1–8 Numerous terms of the semantic fields related to the theme of hardening occur in Isa 51:1–8. Among the verbs or phrases of ‘perception’ that can be found in this passage are ¥ʲʮˇ “to listen” (vv.1, 7), ¥ʨʡʰ Hi. “to look, see, glance” (vv.1–2, 6), ¥ʡˇʷ Hi. “to give attention” (v.4), ¥ʯʦʠ Hi. “to listen” (v.4), the collocation ʯʩʲ ¥ʠˈʰ (v.6); related to ‘understanding’ is the verb ¥ʲʣʩ (v.7); finally the occurrence of ʡʬ “heart” (v.7) is noteworthy. 72

See the interpretation of Isa 6:5 in Chapter 3 for more details. Cf. B EUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 174: “Die Einzahl der Partizipia ist nicht ohne Bedeutung; sie greift der Fortsetzung vor, denn etwaige Gottesfürchtige werden nachher nicht als Gruppe ohne weiteres angeredet, sondern als einzelne”. Though, Beuken relates this focus on the individual one to his interpretation of v.10b as a conditional clause. 73

238

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

Isa 51:1–8 consists of three sections (vv.1–3, 4–6, 7–8). They are introduced by imperatives, of which the first and the third are identical and the second is a closely related formulation (see also below). A crucial feature of Isa 51:1–8 is the difficulty with identifying the speaker. Lines that speak about YHWH in the 3.sg. (cf. vv.1b, 3) alternate with statements that one would expect of YHWH to speak in 1.sg. (cf. vv.2b, 4–6, 8b). This ‘confusion’ of speaker may take up central aspects of the previous section. Isa 50:10 appeals to the addressees to listen (¥ʲʮˇ) to the voice of the Servant. This seems to be taken up in Isa 51:1 that immediately begins with the summons “listen to me” (ʩʬʠ ʥʲʮˇ). The mentioning of the name YHWH in the same line indicates that it is not necessarily YHWH who speaks here. Accordingly, I would suggest that the Servant not only speaks in Isa 50:4– 9, but also in Isa 51:1–8. YHWH speaks through the Servant. The apparent confusion of speakers, in fact, shows the close relationship between YHWH and the Servant, as YHWH wakens the Servant’s ear every morning to talk to the weary (Isa 50:4) and is near the Servant to vindicate him against his opponents (v.8). Regarding hardening in Isa 51:1–8, I want to highlight a development within the passage. Right at the beginning, the addressees are called as those “who pursue righteousness” (ʷʣʶ ʩʴʣʸ, v.1). The introduction of the final part, however, designates them as “those who know righteousness (ʷʣʶ ʩʲʣʩ), the people who have my instruction (ʩʺʸʥʺ) in your hearts” (v.7). Williamson characterizes this development as “a process of ‘internalisation’.”74 A closer look at vv.4–6 helps to substantiate this perception. The change from “pursuing righteousness” to “knowing righteousness” and having the “instruction in your heart” is not unmediated. In the middle section (vv.4–6) the speaker SUMMONS the addressees to listen to him (v.4a). In the course of that speech, he ANNOUNCES (or even PROMISES)75 that “instruction (ʤʸʥʺ) goes out from me”, that “my justice (I will establish it as/is?76) a light to the nations”, that “my righteousness (ʩʷʣʶ) is near” (vv.4b–5a). The new designations of the addressees reflect the speech they are called to listen to. We have to situate this in the wider context of Isa, and especially the commission of Isaiah. We saw in respect to Isa 6:9 that the repeated summonses to listen and see were said to result in ignorance. In contrast to Isa 50, the addressees know (Isa 51:7) what they are called to 74

W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 157. The emphasis on the 1.sg. and the possible future implications in the yiqtol-forms support the notion that the speaker commits himself to these announcements, hence the COMMISSIVE illocutionary act of PROMISE . 76 The question, whether the ʲʩʢʸʠ is part of the previous or subsequent line and what this means for its understanding cannot be solved here. 75

2. Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10

239

listen to immediately before (Isa 51:4–6). There are enough indications to conclude that their knowledge is the result and, indeed, the effect of the speech they have listened to. Hence, the designations of the addressees in Isa 51:7 announce or claim that the speech of the Servant/YHWH (Isa 51:1–8) has the perlocutionary effect to DE-HARDEN them for they “know righteousness”. The characterizations of the addressees showed that in their state of hardness they were “far from righteousness” (cf. Isa 46:12) and did not relate to YHWH in “truth or righteousness” (cf. Isa 48:1, 8). But in listening to the Servant, this is overcome; they finally “know righteousness”. With this overcoming of the addressees’ hardness comes also a new relationship to the “instruction” (ʤʸʥʺ) that had been communicated through Isaiah (cf. e.g. Isa 1:10; 8:16; 30:9). What has been sealed through the hardening process in them (Isa 8:16) is finally open to them, written on their heart (Isa 51:7). However one imagines this development, it shows that the overcoming of hardening, inaugurated with the Servant (Isa 50:4–5) is possible also for the addressees. They are called to perceive, to listen and see (vv.1–2, 4, 6, 7), and this leads to knowledge and a change of their heart (v.7).77 The contrast with Isa 6:9–10 could not be starker. 2.2 Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10 2.2.1 Notes on the Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 49:14–52:10 The main unit Isa 49:14–52:10 consists of four panels of speech, which are closely related. Isa 49:14–26 is a speech to (city) Zion-Jerusalem.78 Isa 50 77 Note also that in consistence with former passages related to the theme of hardening, Isa 51:1–8 addresses the audience in plural and yet at the same time is aware of them being the (one) people of YHWH (see especially v.4). There is a number of scholars who propose that the figure in Isa 50:4–9(10–11) is the people of God because of the similarities with Isa 51:1–8; thus, e.g., STECK, Gottesknechts-Texte und ihre redaktionelle Rezeption, 166 (on the level of the “Heimkehrredaktion”); LAATO, Servant, 124–126. The present interpretation differs from them in seeing a dynamic communicative action between Isa 50 and Isa 51 through which the people of YHWH (= addressees) are transformed (Isa 51:1–8) through the ministry of the Servant on the basis of YHWH’s interventions in the person and ministry of the Servant, presented before (Isa 50:4–9). 78 Thus I do not regard Zion simply as another designation for the addressees in general (thus most of the commentators). Zion-Jerusalem is addressed in Isa 40–66 as the city and is an entity on its own. Thus in Isa 49:14–52:10 (also in Isa 54–55) the prophetic voice switches between the addressees who are still in Babel (Isa 50; 51:1–8) and city Zion who will receive them ultimately (interpreting the Zion texts differently, ABMA, Travelling has highlighted similarly that there is a permanent switch between those still in Babylon and those in Jerusalem in Isa 49–55). This communicative means is possible

240

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

addresses her children. The close connection to the previous speech is indicated through the recurring messenger formula (Isa 50:1; cf. Isa 49:22, 25). The latter two panels, Isa 51:1–8 and Isa 51:9–52:10, have a parallel structure. They consist of three sub-sections that begin with imperatives. In both panels, the imperatives that introduce the first and the third sections are identical, while the imperative at the beginning of the second section is a slight variation on the other ones.79 Isa 51:1 Isa 51:4 Isa 51:7

ʩʬʠ ʥʲʮˇ ʩʬʠ ʥʡˇʷʤ ʩʬʠ ʥʲʮˇ

(ʤʥʤʩ ʲʥʸʦ) ʦʲʚʩˇʡʬ ʩʸʥʲ ʩʸʥʲ ʭʩʬˇʸʩ ʩʮʥʷ ʩʸʸʥʲʺʤ ʩʸʸʥʲʺʤ (ʯʥʩʶ) ˂ʦʲ ʩˇʡʬ ʩʸʥʲ ʩʸʥʲ

Isa 51:9 Isa 51:17 Isa 52:1

Figure 20: Parallel Pattern of Introductory Imperatives in Isa 51:1–52:10

In this second pair of panels, the addressees are in inverse order compared with Isa 49:14–50:11. Isa 51:1–8 continues the address to the children of Zion from Isa 50:1–11, while the final panel ultimately addresses ZionJerusalem, at least clearly from Isa 51:17 onwards. According to Isa 40:1–11, the goal of the whole ‘programme’ is to announce the rehabilitation of Zion and the return of her children who are currently in the Babylonian exile. There they are told that YHWH establishes his salvation in Zion (Isa 46:13) and are finally called to leave Babel (Isa 48:20–21). The present main unit exemplifies this in a crucial interrelationship between the speech to Zion (Isa 49:14–26; Isa 51:12–52:10) and the speech to her children (Isa 50; 51:1–8). The inverted order of the speeches highlights this interrelationship. Isa 49:14–26 assures the city Zion-Jerusalem of her rehabilitation. YHWH has engraved her on the palms of his hands (49:16) and he takes care that her children will also be brought back (49:18–22, 25). In the light of Zion’s prospects, her children are confronted in Isa 50 with the lack of their response to YHWH’s initiative to restore his relationship to them (50:1–2). Finally, they are called to listen to the voice of the Servant and trust in YHWH (50:10). The next panel of speech continues the address to the children of Zion and indicates a change among them (Isa 51:1–8). Having overcome hardening with the Servant’s help, they can see and hear and are transformed into those “who know righteousness” and in whose hearts is instruction because in the ANE it has apparently been common to personify cities as women. The literature on this aspect is now increasing; cf., e.g., J. J. SCHMITT, Motherhood; IDEM, City; HERMISSON, Jakob und Zion, 120–123; IDEM, Frau; STECK, Zion (and further literature noted there, 128n.5); B. DOYLE, Metaphor, 224–229 (and further literature noted there, 224–229nn.11–15); BERGES, Personifications; W ISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion (on the ANE background and for further literature, cf. WISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion, 13–45). 79 Cf. also W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 156–157. He includes Isa 52:11–12 within the latter panel of speech. See W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 157n.67 also for objections against other proposals.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10

241

(51:7). This time, it is in the light of the transformation of her children that city Zion is addressed and encouraged to receive them in strength (Isa 51:9–52:10). The announcement of her rehabilitation culminates in the anticipation of YHWH’s return (Isa 52:7–10). The speech to Zion and the speech to her children are interdependent. The rehabilitation of Zion that YHWH declares consists of his and her children’s return. It is only achieved when her children do indeed come back. So, YHWH has to ensure for the sake of his assurance to Zion that her children in fact leave Babel and return to Jerusalem. At the same time, YHWH does redeem his people, the children of Zion, from the Babylonian captivity (cf. Isa 43:1–7). He calls them to leave Babel in anticipation of his salvation in Zion (cf. Isa 46:13; similarly Isa 45:14–17). So YHWH has also to prepare Zion for the sake of his speech to his people. 2.2.2 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 49:14–52:10 In the juxtaposition of speeches to Zion and to her children, the theme of hardening occurs in relation to the latter. The aspect of ‘perception’ is a central part of the APPEAL to the children of Zion (= the actual addressees of Isa 40–55) in Isa 50. They are called to “listen to the voice of the Servant” (Isa 50:10). This is explained by a speech of the Servant (Isa 50:4–9) that also discusses the issue of ‘perception’. Here the Servant gives TESTIMONY that YHWH has opened his ear and awakens it morning by morning (Isa 50:4–5). As an expression of the intimate relationship between YHWH and the Servant, the next panel of speech (Isa 51:1–8) mediates their joined communicative action, in which ‘perception’ and ‘understanding’ play a crucial part. The addressees are frequently SUMMONED to perceive; they are asked to listen to this message (Isa 51:1, 4, 7) and to look at their origin (Isa 51:1–2) and the whole creation (Isa 51:6). The final designation of the addressees indicates that in listening to this speech, their entire epistemological condition has changed. They finally “know (¥ʲʣʩ) righteousness”, and “my instruction” (ʩʺʸʥʺ) is in their hearts (ʡʬ, Isa 51:7). In Isa 49:14–52:10, the rehabilitation of city Zion and the restoration of YHWH’s people are interconnected. The speeches directed to the latter show that the overcoming of their hardness is at the heart of their restoration. By listening to the Servant, they find the right relationship to YHWH in trusting in him (Isa 50:10). In former passages, disturbances in their relationship, expressed as unrighteousness, were associated with the addressees’ hardness (cf. Isa 46:12; 48:1, 8). Now, the overcoming of their hardness coincides with their religious righteousness: they know righteousness (ʷʣʶ ʩʲʣʩ, Isa 51:7). Consequently, YHWH can assure them of salvation when in his saving righteousness (Isa 51:8) he judges those who commit hostile communicative acts against them (Isa 51:7b).

242

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

If YHWH establishes universal righteousness (Isa 45:8), but his people do not relate to YHWH in righteousness because they are “sinners from the womb” and hardened (Isa 48:1, 8; similarly Isa 42:18–25; 43:16–28; 46:8– 13), how can this be salvation for them? Isa 49:14–52:10 supplies the first answer to this: in the individual Servant (cf. Isa 48:16b; 49:1–12) hardening is overcome (Isa 50). In listening to the Servant, the hardness of the addressees is overcome, too (Isa 51:1–8). However, with the announcement of the overcoming of hardness for the addressees in Babylon, the communicative process has not come to an end.

3. Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13 3. Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13

3.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 52:13–53:12 This passage plays a crucial role for re-integrating the addressees into the ‘deed-consequences connection’ so that YHWH’s universal righteousness can become salvation for them (see above chapter 2). But what demands our interest in respect to the theme of hardening is the passage’s relationship to the claim in Isa 51:7 that hardening is overcome for the addressees. For that purpose we have to look again at the designations in Isa 51:7. The way these designations are formulated (apart from the SUMMONS, of which they are a part), they communicate ASSERTIVE illocutionary acts that make an ANNOUNCEMENT or CLAIM about the addressees. They announce or claim that the addressees know righteousness and have the instruction written on their hearts. One important rule for the ASSERTIVE illocution is that it has to be true. The designations indicate that the new state of the addressees is due to the speech of the Servant/YHWH (see above). But is it true that the addressees are in a changed condition after their former state of hardness? Given that the “we” in Isa 53:1–10 are the addressees of Isa 51:7 (and Isa 40–55 as a whole; on this identification see below), we shall now explore how the speech of the “we” in Isa 53:1–10 serves to validate the CLAIM of Isa 51:7. Comparing the speech of the “we” with the final word of YHWH (Isa 53:11–12), it is evident that the “we” express the right insight they have found in the significance of the Servant. They agree with YHWH in their view on the Servant.80 This is formulated as TESTIMONY: it is spoken in 1.pl.; and it is directed towards others (Isa 53:1). Part of this TESTIMONY is the admission that they had not esteemed the Servant and had regarded him as stricken by God. This change of view parallels the change from those who are hardened and far from righteousness to those who know right80

Cf. Isa 53:11b (YHWH) and 53:4a (“we”); 53:12b (YHWH) and 53:6b (“we”).

3. Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13

243

eousness (Isa 51:7). There is, however, one difference. The imperceptiveness and hardness of the addressees is always expressed as a general condition,81 while the former thoughts of the speaker in Isa 53:1–10 specifically concerned the Servant. Perhaps it is in the change of their view of the Servant that their general condition from hardness to knowledge takes place.82 What is decisive in the end is the speaker’s TESTIMONY in Isa 53:1–10 that they are now in conformity with YHWH in their understanding of the Servant. Their present view is right, and thereby, confirms the claim of Isa 51:7 that they have overcome hardening in listening to the voice of the Servant. Perhaps, one could develop this interpretation further by reference to Isa 53:11aȕ, when we translate this speech of YHWH with the Masoretic accentuation as “through knowledge in him, the righteous one, my Servant, makes righteous the many”. However, the problems around Isa 53:11a are not entirely soluble, so that this view is at most only a possibility. 83 81

See the constructions without an object in Isa 42:18–25; 43:8–13; 48:8; additionally also Isa 6:9–10. 82 Janowski and Vincent have paid close attention to the change of the speaker’s perception of the Servant (cf. VINCENT, Auge, 66, 68) and the “far-reaching process of recognition” (JANOWSKI, Er trug unsere Sünden, 38 [ET, 63]) respectively, and both identify the speech of YHWH in Isa 52:13–15 as the cause of that change, although Janowski speaks of an oracle (cf. J ANOWSKI, Er trug unsere Sünden, 38–39 [ET, 63–64]), while Vincent describes it as a vision that has revelatory quality. Vincent combines this even with the motif of hardening and argues that with this vision, hardening is abolished (cf. V INCENT, Auge, 88–90 [especially 90]). But in my view, this restriction is not justified when we look at the passage in its wider context. That his suffering is part of the Servant’s mission but will ultimately even win kings was already declared by YHWH in Isa 49:7 (cf. also ˇʴʰʚʤʦʡ [49:7] and ʤʦʡʰ [53:3]; “kings will see” [ʥʠʸʩ ʭʩʫʬʮ, 49:7] and “kings [ʭʩʫʬʮ] will shut their mouth about him … what was not told to them, they will see [ʥʠʸ, 52:15]”). The Servant also already expressed his conviction that despite his maltreatment, YHWH is on his side (Isa 50:7–9), which was confirmed through the APPEAL to fear YHWH and to listen to the Servant (Isa 50:10 in contrast to 50:11). Thus the declaration of YHWH about the rehabilitation of the Servant before the speech of the “we” just continues what has been said before so that the change in their view could be due to the presentation and proclamation of/about the Servant as such. 83 So, if we read Isa 53:11 in the Masoretic accentuation together with Isa 51:7, one could say that the former substantiates what it means that the addressees “know righteousness” (ʷʣʶ ʩʲʣʩ, Isa 51:7): It is through the addressees’ knowledge about the Servant – that he suffered the consequences of their actions – that he makes them righteous, i.e. re-integrates them in the ‘connective righteousness’: “through the knowledge of him, my Servant makes righteous the many” (ʭʩʡʸ ʩʣʡʲ ʷʩʣʶʩ ʥʺʲʣʡ, Isa 53:11). But there are several problems in Isa 53:11 that make this reading appear problematic if not unlikely. First, there is the problem of segmentation: does the first colon end with ʲʡˈʩ (hence the collocation ʷʩʣʶʩ ʥʺʲʣʡ “in his knowledge/knowledge of him he makes righteous …”) or does a new colon begin with ʲʡˈʩ (hence the collocation ʥʺʲʣʡ ʲʡˈʩ, meaning perhaps: “he will be satisfied with his knowledge”)? As it is very likely that we have to include

244

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

In any case, it is through a TESTIMONY, that the claim of the overcoming of hardening is confirmed or validated. In the joined communicative act of the Servant and YHWH in Isa 51:1–8 the readers/hearers have heard the claim that they finally know righteousness. Now their hardness is overcome. But the truth of this claim can be confirmed only by themselves. Only those who join in the TESTIMONY of Isa 53:1–10 have their hardness finally overcome. They know the Servant and that he died in place of them and has made them righteous. Two notes of clarification arise from these observations. First, the “many” (ʭʩʡʸ) in the speech of YHWH (cf. Isa 52:14; 53:11–12) are the same as the “we” in the middle part (Isa 53:1–10). This identity is indicated through the repetition of the words “appearance” (ʤʠʸʮ) and “form” (ʸʠʺ) from Isa 52:14 in the speech of the “we” (Isa 53:2). Secondly, we will see in the next paragraph that various aspects of the communicative strategy of Isa 40–55 culminate in this TESTIMONY of the “many” that support the notion that they are not identical with the “many nations” and kings (Isa 52:15), but that they are the addressees of Isa 40–55. Additionally, we may note that the change from their having “turned everyone to ʸʥʠ before ʲʡˈʩ (see 1QIsaa+b; 4QIsad; LXX; among the few who do not draw this conclusion, cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 328–329), many seem to feel compelled to read ʥʺʲʣʡ ʲʡˈʩ as an individual colon (cf., e.g., WILLIAMSON, Da‘at, 119–120; HERMISSON, Das vierte Gottesknechtslied, 8n.38 [ET, 28n.38]). The different accentuation in MT is often ascribed to the lack of ʸʥʠ (cf., e.g., HERMISSON, Das vierte Gottesknechtslied, 8n.38 [ET, 28n.38]), but 1QIsaa clearly dissociates ʥʺʲʣʡ from the previous (through waw), despite having ʸʥʠ included (cf., e.g., the edition of P ARRY & QIMRON (eds.), Isaiah Scroll, 89; then also B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 424n.217). Thus the problem of segmentation cannot be solved entirely. The second main problem is the meaning of ʺʲʣ. D. Winton Thomas had suggested that (as in other places, too), in Isa 53:3, 11 one has to reckon with a second root of ʲʣʩ, cognate with Arabic wadu‘a, with the meaning “to become still, quiet, at ease; to be submissive, humiliated” in the Qal and “to make quiet, submissive, to humiliate, to punish” in the Hifil, which leads him to suggest the meaning “humiliation” for ʺʲʣ in Isa 53:11. But W. Johnstone in particular has raised doubts especially about the Arabic basis of this suggestion (on the whole discussion and further studies on the issue, cf. the survey in GELSTON, Knowledge). GELSTON, Knowledge, 128–134 argues that at least Isa 53:3 can be interpreted “within the parameters of the ordinary meaning of the root ʲʣʩ” (cf. GELSTON, Knowledge, 133]). He then goes on to argue, however, that in Isa 53:11 the normal translation “knowledge” makes no sense and proposes an emendation (reading ʥʺʲʸʡ “by his sufferings” [translating ʤʲʸ as “suffering”]; cf. GELSTON, Knowledge, 134– 141 [especially 139–140]). Thus the normal meaning “knowledge” is not impossible, and the interpretation highlighting the connection to Isa 51:7 shows that it does make some sense when it refers to the knowledge of the addressees in the meaning of the Servant’s fate. But it remains open whether this interpretation of the suffix as referring to the object (“in [their] knowledge of him”) is the most likely; it may rather refer to the 3.sg.masc. as the subject (“in his knowledge”). In sum, as it stands now Isa 53:11 may substantiate Isa 51:7, but the interpretation remains laden with difficulties.

3. Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13

245

his own way” (Isa 53:6) to their present view presupposes that they follow now together the call to depart (Isa 52:11). The reversal of Isaiah’s commission for them is complete when they TESTIFY that “in his stripes we are healed” (Isa 53:5; cf. in contrast ʥʬ ʠʴʸʥ ǜǜǜ ʯʴ, 6:10; also Isa 1:5–6).84 A final look at the place of Isa 52:13–53:12 within the main unit Isa 52:11– 55:13, will indicate the importance of this chapter within the communicative strategy of Isa 40–55. 3.2 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 52:11–55:13 According to our segmentation, the unit starts with the SUMMONSES to depart “from there” and ASSURES the addressees of YHWH’s presence (Isa 52:12b). This is followed by speeches concerning the Servant (Isa 52:13– 53:12). The main unit is concluded by an extended hymn. Isa 54:1 and Isa 55:12–13 read together are very similar to the previous hymns that conclude each main unit, as suggested by the correspondences in the terminology and structure.85 But this final hymn is extended to include the main message of Isa 40–55: it announces to city Zion (Isa 54) that she will be fully restored, with her husband coming back to her (cf. vv.4–10) and her children filling her walls (cf. vv.1–3, 13, 17). It also summons the exiles one more time to come and return to YHWH (Isa 55). I connect the so-called fourth Servant song (Isa 52:13–53:12) in relation to the preceding imperative to leave Babel (Isa 52:11–12). In his presence with those who return, YHWH clarifies what the vindication of the Servant (Isa 50:8) is: he will have success and will be high and lifted up (Isa 52:13) in that just as the many were horrified about him, he will also cause many nations to leap up86 and kings will shut their mouth about him (Isa 52:14– 15). This will happen, because what has not been told to them they see (¥ʤʠʸ) and what they have not heard (¥ʲʮˇ), they understand (¥ʯʩʡ, Isa 52:15b). This statement is followed immediately by the question of the “we”: “Who has believed what is said to/from us and to whom has the arm of YHWH been revealed?” (Isa 53:1). This juxtaposition is in my opinion central to understanding how this passage deals with the theme of hardening. For that purpose we have to bear in mind two other previous passages. First, there is a conceptual parallelism between Isa 52:11–53:1(–10) and Isa 48:20–21: both times the call to depart from/leave Babel is followed by the proclamation of the returnees on their way back home. However, what is formulated as an imperative in Isa 48:20–21 becomes an actual TESTIMONY in Isa 53:1–10. Secondly, we have to be aware of the whole unit Isa 84

Cf. also the detailed discussion in KUSTÁR, Wunden, 160–196. See the remarks on the structure of Isa in chapter 2. 86 On this interpretation of ʤʦʩ as a sign of reverence, cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 272–273 (see there also for other proposals and further literature). 85

246

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

42:14–44:23 when reading Isa 52:15b–53:1; while the assertions “what has not been told to them” and “what they have not heard” do not betray a clear connection to the theme of hardening as such (not the least because the verbs are constructed with an object), the announcements “they will have seen” and “they will have understood” could be read as reversals of what has been said of the idol-worshipping nations in Isa 44:9–20 (see above). This reversal of the nations is possible because of the TESTIMONY of the “we” that follows immediately (Isa 53:1).87 In this juxtaposition of the “many nations” and the addressees, the latter fulfil their APPOINTMENT as witnesses of YHWH (Isa 43:8–13; 44:6–8). They give a TESTIMONY to what they have recognized. If we read Isa 52:13–53:12 in this manner, it becomes evident why their overcoming of hardening can only be confirmed by the addressees themselves in their TESTIMONY. In Isa 43:8–13 they were APPOINTED as witnesses of YHWH “so that you will understand and believe in me and realize that I am He” (Isa 43:10). In Isa 50:1–51:8 and in Isa 53:1–10 the addressees have taken on both roles of a witness: they have experienced/perceived something (Isa 50:1–51:8) and they give evidence/testimony of that fact (Isa 53:1–10). By this means, they have finally realized their APPOINTMENT as witnesses of YHWH, and their hardness is overcome. This fulfilment of their appointment also coincides with the solution to the second main problem that was highlighted in Isa 42:14–44:23 besides the ongoing hardness of the addressees. Isa 52:13–53:12 finally shows that in the Servant their sins are forgiven. Together with their confirmation of the reversal of hardening, this is formulated in a way that the addressees have to identify with these statements: they themselves must testify to the forgiveness of their sins. Isa 52:13–53:12 also shows that hardening and righteousness are fundamentally interwoven. Overcoming the addressees’ hardening and enabling their re-integration belong together with the connection of deed and consequence. As those whose communicative capacities have been restored, they can also relate to YHWH and their fellow Israelites in righteousness. Now they “know righteousness” (Isa 51:7).88 Finally, once the overcoming of hardening is confirmed in the TESTIMONY of the addressees they can again be SUMMONED like Isaiah’s audience: ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ (Isa 55:2b; cf. Isa 6:9). But when they are now on their way back home, this call does not result in their hardness but in their dePerhaps the ambiguous phrase ʥʰʲʮˇ “what is heard from us = what we heard” or “what is heard of us = what we make heard” maintains the connection: they make others hear what they heard themselves. 88 And perhaps one can add from Isa 53:11: “through knowledge in him, my Servant makes them righteous”; but on the problems of this line see above. 87

4. Summary

247

light (Isa 55:2b–3a). While Isaiah “made fat the heart” (ʡʬ ʯʮˇʤ, Isa 6:10) of his audience in these summonses to listen (and see), the final call of the addressees to listen will result in their soul having “delight in fat” (ʢʰʲʺʺʥ ʭʫˇʴʰ ʯˇʣʡ, Isa 55:2b) and their “soul will live” (ʭʫˇʴʰ ʩʧʺʥ ʥʲʮˇ, Isa 55:3a). Now they can open wide their ear (ʭʫʰʦʠ ʥʨʤ, Isa 55:3a). Once again, this is associated with their role as witnesses of YHWH, as the transference of the covenant of David particularly includes their witness before the nations (Isa 55:3b–5).89

4. Summary 4. Summary

Previous sections identified two main problems of the addressees in the Babylonian exile: they are hardened (Isa 42:18–25) and they are sinners (Isa 43:16–28), which led into the statement that because they are sinners from the womb they are hardened from of old (Isa 48:8). The last two main units of Isa 40–55 present a solution to both problems. In the ministry and person of the individual Servant, YHWH has initiated the overcoming of hardening (Isa 50:4–9), and through his suffering and death their sins are forgiven and they are made righteous (Isa 52:13–53:12). As a result, in the Servant the communicative interaction between the people and YHWH and their interrelationship (religious righteousness) are restored. That is why the call to depart from Babel (Isa 48:20–21) can only be successful after the disclosure of the individual Servant (Isa 48:16b) who will lead them home (Isa 49:8–12). The overcoming of hardening, however, is not simply stated as a ‘theological concept’ (= ASSERTIVE illocutionary act); it is enacted through the communicative process that is mediated in Isa 49:14–55:13. Hesitant to follow YHWH’s call to leave Babel (Isa 50:1–3), the audience receive the APPEAL to trust in YHWH and listen to the voice of the Servant because only then will they escape judgement and participate in salvation (Isa 50:10). In listening to the Servant who mediates the speech of YHWH (Isa 51:1–8), they are told that they know righteousness and have the instruction written on their hearts (Isa 51:7). In this line the Servant/YHWH states the perlocutionary effect of the very speech they deliver. Thus the communicative action in Isa 51:1–8 goes beyond presenting a theological concept about hardening and righteousness; it also realizes the overcoming of hardening. The truth of this reality, however, has to be confirmed by the addressees themselves. Only when they join in the TESTIMONY about the Servant (Isa 53:1–10) on their return (Isa 52:11–12; cf. also 55:2b–5) can they 89

See on this in more detail, e.g., CLIFFORD, Isaiah 55, 27–35; IDEM, Fair Spoken, 188–194; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 118–120.

248

Chapter 6: The Overcoming of Hardening: Isaiah 49:14–55:13

emerge as those whose hardness has been overcome and whose sins have been forgiven. Then they fulfil their APPOINTMENT as YHWH’s witnesses before the nations and kings (cf. Isa 52:15–53:1) so that they themselves do know indeed and believe in YHWH and know that he is He (cf. Isa 43:10). When they “come” (Isa 55:1) in this manner they will listen and live (cf. Isa 55:2b–3) and take on the role of David as witnesses before the nations (Isa 55:3–5). Then their return is a real transformation, which accompanies the transformation of creation as well (Isa 55:12–13). Through the communicative process of Isa 40–55, the addressees in the Babylonian captivity are finally transformed. They can live again in righteousness before YHWH because their sins have been forgiven. They will communicate freely with YHWH and live because their hardness has been overcome. They can participate in salvation when they finally arrive in Zion. When YHWH arrives with them there and establishes his universal righteousness, he saves those who suffer from injustice and judges those who disturb the connection of actions and consequences (cf. e.g. Isa 51:7– 8). As a result, they live in accordance with righteousness, being taught by YHWH as his servants (cf. Isa 54:17). But the question arises: what is the situation with those who have not been in the Babylonian captivity but were left behind in the homeland? How are they related to the previous message of Isaiah (Isa 1–39)? What is their condition in the present and how can they participate in the salvation YHWH is about to accomplish? In the next chapter we will discuss how the condition of those in the homeland (Isa 56–66) is characterized and how this relates to the message of Isaiah (Isa 1–39) that has been told to them from of old, too. We will see that they are also in a condition of hardness, and we shall clarify how they can be transformed even though they cannot exit the furnace of Babel nor listen to the voice of the Servant.

Chapter 7

The Hardened in the Homeland – Characterization and Reversal: Isaiah 56:9–59:21 Chapters 4–6 of our study investigated the theme of hardening in the proclamation to the exiles (Isa 40–55). They showed that hardening is a central issue of the CHARACTERIZATION of the exiles who in this condition do not relate to YHWH in righteousness (cf. Isa 46:12; 48:1). But they are not left with this diagnosis only; mediating the ministry of the Servant, the proclamation to the exiles also serves to ‘DE-HARDEN’ them and to DECLARE them as righteous (Isa 51:1–8), which they have to confirm in their TESTIMONY of the Servant (Isa 53:1–10) on their way back from Babylon to Zion (cf. Isa 52:11–15). The next chapters seek to illuminate the role that the theme of hardening plays in the message to those in Judah (Isa 56–66). Chapter 7 will show that, like the exiles, they are also addressed as hardened and it will clarify how their hardness can be overcome by the prophetic proclamation that mediates the saving ministry of the Servant of Isa 40–55 also for them. Chapter 8 will discuss how the passage in which people lament the continuing hardness of their hearts relates to the previous passages that perform the overcoming of the addressees’ hardness.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2 1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2

1.1 Introduction The passage Isa 56:9–57:2, which forms a sub-section of Isa 56:9–57:21 (see below), contains several terms and phrases that belong to the semantic fields of ‘perception’ or ‘understanding’ and have frequently occurred in previous texts dealing with the theme of hardening; thus ʸʥʲ (56:10; cf. Isa 42:18, 19; 43:8); ¥ʲʣʩ (56:10, 11; cf. Isa 6:9, 10); ¥ʯʩʡ (56:11; 57:1; cf. Isa 6:9, 10). It, therefore, needs to be included in our investigation.

250

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

1.2 Structure and Poetics Isa 56:9–57:2 is a sub-section of the larger passage Isa 56:9–57:21. Each section is introduced by an imperative in 2.pl.masc. (Isa 56:9; 57:3; 57:14).1 After the initial line’s address to the beasts of the field and the thicket (Isa 56:9), this unit falls into three strophes. Each one of them speaks about a group of persons named in the first line. They are the watchmen (56:10a), the shepherds (56:11aȕ) and the righteous one (57:1). Interestingly, one can find a term or phrase related to the semantic fields of the theme of hardening in each of these lines as well.2 Moreover, the first two strophes are constructed in quite parallel ways (vv.10–11aĮ and vv.11aȕ–12b): apart from the similarities noted above, the initial lines (vv.10a, 11aȕ) record the persons they spoke about in the form of a participle; the second line is introduced by the same phrase ʭʬʫ;3 and both contain two more lines making each strophe consist of four lines. The most striking feature of the last strophe (57:1–2)4 is the change between singular and plural. If the whole v.2 forms the final line5 then this 1

See the discussion below in “2.2.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 56:9–59:21”. 2 Note, however, that some exegetes read in v.10aĮ ʯʩʡʤ ʥʲʣʩ ʠʬ to match v.11aȕ, pointing to the reading of the LXX; thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 424; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 207– 208; HANSON, Dawn of Apocalyptic, 187, 189, 192. But the reading ʥʲʣʩ ʠʬ is to be preferred (with B RONGERS, Jes LVI 10a; KOENEN, Ethik, 34n.137; LAU, Prophetie, 232; KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 34). As a general statement of the lack of knowledge and understanding it also appears elsewhere, most prominently in other passages dealing with aspects of the theme of hardening (cf. Isa 6:9–10; 44:18; 45:20; also Isa 1:3; 42:25). Perhaps one should also note the sequence ¥ʲʣʩ ʠʬ (strophe I, 56:10aĮ) – ʯʩʡʤ ¥ʲʣʩ ʠʬ (strophe II, 56:11aȕ) – ʯʩʡʮ ʯʩʠʡ (strophe III, 57:1b) as it appears now in the introductory lines of each strophe; KOENEN, Ethik, 35 makes the same observation, but for him it is rather a hint at the secondary character of v.11b that combines the originally independent units Isa 56:9–12* and Isa 57:1–2. The phrase ʤʲʡˈ ʥʲʣʩ ʠʬ in v.11 does not necessarily disturb this sequence in the introductory lines but forms a fitting conclusion to v.10a in strophe I by the recurrence of ¥ʲʣʩ. 3 Cf. similarly KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 31–32. In contrast to Koole, however, I rather doubt a parallel arrangement of the third strophe with the preceding ones. 4 Some commentators argue that Isa 56:9–12 and Isa 57:1–2 have originally formed/form independent units; thus, e.g., W ESTERMANN, Jesaja, 253–254 (ET, 316–319; 56:9–12 is a pre-exilic announcement of judgement); PAURITSCH, Gemeinde, 51–53 (takes 56:9–12 and 57:1–13 as literary units; similarly also MOTYER, Prophecy, 476 differentiating into 56:9–12 and 57:1–21); K OENEN, Ethik, 20–22, 32-37 (the independent text 56:9–12 has been incorporated and added by 57:1–2 by the editor of the book of TI); LAU, Prophetie, 229. But the observations on the structural and semantic integration of Isa 57:1–2 within Isa 56:9–57:2, noted here, speak against a separation. 5 Against the suggestion of BHS and also MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 663–664. The outcome of this question seems to depend mainly on how one regards v.1bȕ. BHS and Muilenburg seem to suppose a monocolon there. But I would prefer reading it as a bico-

1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2

251

tricolon would reflect the sequence of the preceding three lines in respect to recording singular or plural. The sequence ‘singular (57:1a) – plural (57:1bĮ) – singular (57:1bȕ)’ recurs in the cola in v.2.6 The latter also would create a formal frame with Isa 56:9, the only other tricolon in this unit. Finally, given that strophes I and II are constructed in parallel, it is striking that the first two lines of the final strophe (Isa 57:1) are arranged in parallel as well and are related through the semantic fields of ‘perception’ and ‘understanding’, especially in the introductory lines of those strophes. Some other poetic features can be noted only briefly. The summons to the beasts ʬʫʠʬ ʥʩʺʠ “come to devour” echoes in the two subsequent strophes. First, the comparison of the watchmen with dogs who do not know satisfaction (56:11aĮ) plays with the semantic relationship between ¥ʬʫʠ “to eat” and ʤʲʡˈ “satisfaction”. Secondly, the summons ʥʩʺʠ recurs in v.12 combined there with the related term ‘drinking’. Moreover, the comparison of the watchmen with dogs is expressed through alliteration (ʭʬʫ ʭʩʡʬʫ; Isa 56:11). 1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 56:9–57:2 1.3.1 The Illocutionary Role of Isaiah 56:9–57:2 Isa 56:9–57:2 DESCRIBE three different groups of people, the watchmen (Isa 56:10–11aĮ),7 the shepherds (Isa 56:11aȕ–12)8 and the righteous (Isa lon forming a chiasm with v.1bĮ (and the second colon also pointing back to v.1aĮ); cf. also the segmentations in WATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 252; K OOLE, Isaiah III/3, 28, 44–45. 6 Cf. also KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 45; similarly L AU, Prophetie, 238, though he regards the second colon in v.2 as a later gloss that intended to include the faithful men of v.1 and at the same time confined the hope of v.2 to the peace in death. 7 Because many versions support the QƟre ʥʩʴʶ “his watchmen” (cf. 1QIsaa; Vulgate, Symmachus et al.), it has to be preferred against the KƟthib ʥʴʶ in 56:10aĮ, which seems to be read by the LXX as an imperative; BONNARD, Second Isaïe, 349, 352 maintains the KƟthib and reads it as a verb in 3.pf.pl. The QƟre, however, still poses the problem that it does not make clear to whom the 3.sg.masc. suffix refers. Accordingly, some scholars propose emendations, but neither the reading ʩʭʲ ʩʴʶ “the watchmen of my people” (thus ELLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 8.) nor ʩʴʶ “my watchmen” (e.g. DUHM, Jesaia, 424; KOENEN, Ethik, 33–34n.136) are supported by any version. The most satisfying solution is to see in the suffix a reference back to “Israel” in Isa 56:8, thus, e.g., P AURITSCH, Gemeinde, 54; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 253; KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 34; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 144. 8 The line 56:11aȕȖ has caused some uneasiness among commentators. The phrase ʭʩʲʸ ʤʮʤʥ is said to identify the watchmen or dogs with shepherds and having stood as a gloss with v.10 together with the now following colon ʯʩʡʤ ʥʲʣʩ ʠʬ. The whole phrase together had been later inserted into the text; thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 424–425; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 663; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 201; KOENEN, Ethik, 34– 35n.142 (the latter also ascribing v.11b to a later addition); B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66,

252

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

57:1–2).9 The watchmen and the shepherds are characterized as ignorant groups who fail to fulfil their basic duties. The arrangement of the last section about the righteous shows that their suffering is due to the misbehaviour of the previously described people. But in DESCRIBING the present condition and/or behaviour of these people, this passage also CHARACTERIZES the present situation as unsatisfying in the light of YHWH’s immediate initiation of salvation. By alluding to previous passages in Isa 40–55, this unit indicates a difference between the immediate salvation announced there and the present situation. The present passage thus contrasts between what the exiles are told will happen when they will arrive home and the actual state in the homeland, as it can be seen in the DESCRIPTION of its people. It also indicates that this is a contrast between present and future. Hence, Isa 56:9–57:2 does not simply continue the proclamation of Isa 40– 55. It has to start for its addressees, who are in the homeland, a similar communicative process to that directed to the exiles by clarifying the present situation and then announcing and mediating salvation.

144. However, structurally this line fits in very well (see the discussion on the structure and poetics of Isa 56:9–57:2; contra MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 663, who claims that this line causes irregularity in the arrangement of lines and of meter). The main problem is the syntactic function of ʭʩʲʸ ʤʮʤʥ; see especially the discussion of KOENEN, Ethik, 34–35n.142 in this respect (other emendations like reading ʭʩʲʸ ʤʮʤʥ wƟhƝmmƗh rƗ‘îm [thus with LXX, Symmachus and Targum, e.g., W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 252, 254] or ʭʢʥ ʭʩʲʸʤ [thus, e.g., WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 252n.1 (ET, 316n.a)] have not improved the understanding of this verse). Admittedly, ʤʮʤʥ continues to speak about things mentioned before in most of the cases. But given the fact that the “watchmen” nowhere else in the OT refer to the secular leaders of the people (thus KOENEN, Ethik, 35n.143, who uses this argument against a possible original identification of the watchmen with the shepherds), one should be hesitant to suppose such an understanding for the one responsible for this alleged gloss. If there was this clear distinction, then in v.11aȕ a second group of persons might be introduced with the pronoun ʤʮʤʥ used here not in its usual way but proleptically like in Ps 63:10; cf. similarly LAU, Prophetie, 233, who reckons with a “demonstrativen Nebensinn” in the pronoun. But he regards v.11aĮ and v.11aȕ as two parallel lines. POLAN, Ways, 112–114 (followed by P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 75n.34) regards the phrase as a “delayed identification” of the dogs in v.11aĮ. Accordingly, the speaker changes the direction of address but intends to identify them with the former dogs. But the structure that I propose rather suggests regarding only the subsequent lines as related to the ‘shepherds’. 9 It seems that the function of the switch between singular and plural in 57:1–2 is to indicate that these lines do not speak of a particular person but of the group of righteous. But through the singular they are presented in the stereotyped form, common in Wisdom literature. However, given the importance of influences and challenges of the Wisdom literature throughout the Book of Isaiah, this can hardly be an argument for 57:1–2 having been an independent unit, contra KOENEN, Ethik, 15–16n.2. See also P. SMITH , Rhetoric, 73 in this respect.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2

253

Many scholars, however, see in Isa 56:9–57:2 (or only Isa 56:9–12) an announcement of judgement, either on the basis mainly of form-critical determinations10 and/or because of its affinities with Jer 12:7–13.11 But the call to the beasts to come and to devour in Isa 56:9 is too ambiguous to support this interpretation. It remains open, as to what or whom the beasts are supposed to devour, and consequently, who would be threatened by it. No direct object is given in Isa 56:9 and the clues that might be derived from the following lines are too vague to allow any particular and unequivocal identification.12 In this respect the present passage also differs from Jer 12:7–13, where the call of the beasts is preceded by the clear intention of YHWH to bring judgement on his people. Finally, in the light of the many allusions to passages in Isa 40–55 that include all the noted affinities with Jer 12:7–13 except the call to the beasts,13 one may wonder whether the two passages should be seen in close proximity at all. Instead, the call to the beasts at the beginning contributes to the CHARACTERIZA-

10

Isa 56:9 is seen as the ‘prophetic threat’, which is explained by the ‘invective’ in Isa 56:10–12, in the supposed unit Isa 56:9–12 by E LLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 9; KOENEN, Ethik, 32–34; similarly also W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 253 (ET, 317; using a different terminology, though). 11 Cf., e.g., SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 151; KOENEN, Ethik, 33; STECK, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,9–59,21; 63,1–6, 197–198. Among the affinities are: “all beasts of the field” are called “to come”, though a different word is used there: ¥ʪʬʤ (Jer 12:9); they are asked “to devour” (¥ʬʫʠ, Jer 12:9; Isa 56:9); both passages speak about the “shepherds” and their failures; the term ¥ʳʱʠ (Jer 12:9; Isa 57:1), though used very differently; and the phrase ʬʡʚʬʲ ¥ʭʩˈ (Jer 12:11; Isa 57:1). 12 The recurrence of the call ʥʩʺʠ in v.12 creates a sarcastic contrast between the behaviour of the leaders and the invitation of the beasts. This might hint at a possible judgement of the leaders by the means of the beasts. Thus, e.g., KOENEN, Ethik, 33; LAU, Prophetie, 231. The semantic correspondence between ʬʫʠʬ (v.9) and ʤʲʡˈ ʥʲʣʩ ʠʬ (v.11aĮ) might support this contrast. But it could also indicate that the beasts are invited to join the greedy dogs, because the latter do not recognize them anyway. In this case they might only devour the goods of the land, thus BEUKEN, Example, 57–58; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 48–49. One may even conclude that the beasts are invited to devour the righteous, because they are those who are abandoned. Others argue that it is the whole “flock Israel” that will be devoured by them; thus, e.g., DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 478; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 200; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 74. 13 For the call to “devour” (¥ʬʫʠ, Jer 12:9), cf. Isa 55:1, 2; “shepherds” (ʭʩʲʸ, Jer 12:10) occur together here with “watchmen” (ʭʩʴʶ), terms that both occur at structurally significant places in Isa 40–55 (cf. ʤʲʸ, Isa 40:11; ʭʩʴʶ , 52:8); the phrase ʬʡʚʬʲ ¥ʭʩˈ (Jer 12:11) is constructed with a preceding ʠʬ like in Isa 42:25 (see differently Jer 12:11: ʬʡʚʬʲ ¥ʭʩˈ ˇʩʠ ʯʩʠ) and the occurrence of this rare phrase could be due to the fact that the present passage deals with the theme of hardening just like Isa 42:25. As the term ¥ʳʱʠ is used differently anyway, it needs not to be considered. On the meaning of the allusions in Isa 56:9–57:2 to previous passages in Isa 40–55, see below.

254

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

of the watchmen and shepherds as unready to fulfil their duties.14 This interpretation of Isa 56:9–57:2 as a DESCRIPTION of three different groups, their condition and behaviour, will now be further substantiated by looking at specific features in the passage that support its communicative strategy. TION

1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 56:9–57:2 The DESCRIPTION of the different groups in Isa 56:9–57:2 is fairly straightforward, thanks to the ASSERTIVE announcements that state what they are like. There are some features employed that support and amplify this illocutionary action. We can also recognize means that interrelate the descriptions of the different groups in order to present this as part of a larger picture. Then we will see especially through allusions to passages from Isa 40–55 that this larger picture contrasts with the (immediate) future that is anticipated in Isa 40–55. a. Features Contributing to the DESCRIPTION of the Various Groups of People Distanciation As the first passage that presents a critical view on the present condition of the addressees in Isa 56–66, Isa 56:9–57:2 employs a ‘strategy of distanciation’ (cf. similarly Isa 42:18–25 in Isa 40–55). In avoiding a direct address and speaking instead about (parts of) the addressees as if it was about someone else, the present passage allows the readers/hearers to distance themselves from the descriptions and to reflect on them. The use of common imagery of “watchmen” and “shepherds” for religious and secular leaders of the people also contributes to this element of distanciation. Prophets are sometimes spoken of as watchmen (cf. Jer 6:17; Ezek 3:17; 33:2, 6, 7), and the shepherds are used figuratively for secular leaders (cf., e.g., Jer 23; Ezek 34). Hence, they are identifiable in the present passage, yet the general imagery used gives room to the audience to distance themselves from the people described. The “watchmen” and “shepherds” remain within the realm of the depicted narrative world.

14

Both the “watchman” and the “shepherd” had to protect those who were entrusted to them, by raising the alarm about approaching danger or protecting the “flock” in general. In their present state, however, they are not able to raise the alarm about the approaching beasts or to protect from them. Some identify the beasts with the nations; thus, e.g., K ISSANE, Isaiah II, 221; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 192. This might go together with the image of the “watchmen” who had to raise the alarm when nations were approaching in battle, but the image of the “shepherd” goes beyond this restricted application.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2

255

The Ironic CALL of the Wild Beasts It has been argued regarding the illocutionary role of Isa 56:9–57:2 that the call to the beasts to come and to devour is not primarily an announcement of judgement. It rather contributes to the description of the leaders as unfit to fulfil their duties. Placed at the beginning of the passage, it heightens the alert and creates suspense that forces the audience to pay attention. Interrelationships between the DESCRIPTIONS We saw above that the description of the watchmen and the description of the shepherds are arranged in parallel, which relates both strophes closely together and amplifies the similarity between the two groups of people. Moreover, with the image of the “watchmen” standing for prophets as religious leaders and the “shepherds” indicating secular leaders, both strophes create a merismus for the leadership in general. Ultimately, however, the passage points to the negative results of the described behaviour: the righteous person perishes. This train of thought is supported by the structure of the passage and semantic correspondences. The behaviour of the watchmen and the shepherds is introduced generally as a lack of ‘understanding’ (no object; cf. Isa 56:10aĮ; 56:11aȕȖ). This notion recurs in the description of the righteous perishing (Isa 57:1a, 1bĮ). The result is a close connection. The parallel arrangement of strophes I and II is reflected in the parallel arrangement of lines 1 and 2 in the third strophe. Hence, through this funnel-like structure the train of thought leads to, and focuses on, the description of the fate of the righteous and in the general point: “for/truly on account of the evil the righteous is taken away” (Isa 57:1bȕ). b. The Contrast between Anticipated Future and Present Reality The present passage actually contrasts the present situation with the anticipated future in two ways; implicitly by contrasting allusions to passages in Isa 40–55, and explicitly in juxtaposing the present fate of the righteous and his future well being in Isa 57:1–2. Both features will now be specified. Intertextual Relationships A number of allusions to previous texts in Isa 40–55 show that what is anticipated as the immediate future in the homeland there is actually not yet reality. Beuken points to a number of significant correspondences between Isa 56:9–57:2 and Isa 55:1–3:15 the invitation “to come” (in Isa 55:1, 3 by the different ¥ʪʬʤ); the call “to eat” (¥ʬʫʠ; cf. Isa 56:9; 55:1, 2); the con15

Cf. B EUKEN, Example, 59; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 49.

256

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

trast between “mighty of appetite” (ˇʴʰʚʩʦʲ; 56:11) and “delight yourselves” (ʭʫˇʴʰ ǜǜǜ ʢʰʲʺʺʥ; 55:2);16 the phrases “they know no satisfaction” (ʤʲʡˈ ʥʲʣʩ ʠʬ; 56:11) and “that which does not satisfy” (ʤʲʡˈʬ ʠʥʬʡ ; 55:2); and the term “wine” (ʯʩʩ; 56:12; 55:2). Additionally, the expression “each to his own gain” (ʥʲʶʡʬ ˇʩʠ; 56:11) perhaps forms a thematic contrast with “for non-silver and at no-price” (ʸʩʧʮ ʠʥʬʡʥ ʳʱʷʚʠʥʬʡ; 55:1).17 What is announced as a free banquet for the hungry and weary in Isa 55 has not come true yet in Isa 56:9–57:2. The only creatures that can come and devour are wild beasts because the watchmen and shepherds are either sleepy (cf. Isa 56:10) or insatiable (cf. Isa 56:11aĮ, 11b18). A few scholars have also noted a deliberate or at least possible allusion to the watchmen in Isa 52:8.19 The juxtaposition of the “watchmen” and the “shepherds” seems due, however, to a contrasting allusion to Isa 40– 55. In Isa 40:11, YHWH is compared to a shepherd (ʤʲʸʫ) who will bring back the exiles to Zion and Isa 52:7 anticipates the watchmen (ʭʩʴʶ) announcing YHWH’s arrival in Zion. Hence, while “shepherd” and “watchmen” were crucially related to the accomplishment of salvation for the exiles in Isa 40–55, those who were to act as “shepherds” and “watchmen” in Isa 56:9–57:2 fail to do their duties and show that salvation has not yet come. Finally, the leaders are unlike those who have gone through a transformation, as they are still running after their own ways (cf. Isa 56:11 with Isa 53:6).20 They are not changed; like Isaiah’s audience they are running after wine and strong drink (cf. Isa 56:12 with 5:11).21 Hence, in describing the leaders and the fate of the righteous in contrast to the future prospect in Isa 40–55, the present passage shows that the situation of the addressees in the homeland is in need of transformation so that it will ultimately match the Beyond the list of Beuken see also the phrase ʭʫˇʴʰ ʩʧʺʥ in Isa 55:3. Note in particular that in Isa 55:1 the addressees are invited to buy wine for nonprice, while in Isa 56:11b–12 seeking the own gain is related with drinking wine. 18 For the semantic correspondence between “come to devour” (56:9) and “they know no satisfaction” (56:11) see above “1.2 Structure and Poetics”; hence, the leaders are just as dangerous as the beasts, from which they are supposed to protect their people. 19 It is noted in BEUKEN, Example, 60 as an example for the use of words derived from Second Isaiah; according to P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 76 the editor of Isa 56:9–57:2 “combines the figure of the herald of good tidings from DI and TI (52:7–8; 61:1) with the figure of the prophetic watchman in Ezek 3:16–21; 33:1–9.” KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 35 notes that “the watchmen referred to here probably form a deliberate contrast with those of 52:8.” 20 For this allusion see already ZILLESSEN, Tritojesaja, 237; then, e.g., B EUKEN, Example, 60, IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 51; KOENEN, Ethik, 36; LAU, Prophetie, 234, though differently interpreted. 21 For this correspondence see B EUKEN, Example, 61–62; W ALLIS, Tritojesaja-buch, 74. 16 17

1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2

257

announcements of salvation given to the exiles in Isa 40–55. That this contrast between the present condition and the announcements of Isa 40–55 is indeed one between present and future, is finally made explicit in Isa 57:1– 2. The Twofold Fate of the Righteous The notion of a juxtaposition of the present (Isa 57:1) and the future fate (Isa 57:2) of the righteous may be shown despite various difficulties in the interpretation of these two verses. They especially concern the interpretation of and syntactic relationship in vv.1bȕ–2. As regards the interpretation of ʷʩʣʶʤ ʳʱʠʰ ʤʲʸʤ ʩʰʴʮʚʩʫ (v.1bȕ), nearly every word is in need of clarification. Some regard the particle ʩʫ as the introduction of an object clause depending on ʯʩʡʮ ʯʩʠʡ.22 But the structure of v.1 is a problem for this interpretation: v.1a, 1bĮ are arranged in parallel, v.1bȕ is a short bicolon related chiastically to the previous line. Other commentators take it as an emphatic particle “truly”.23 We shall clarify the meaning of it in connection with the phrase ʩʰʴʮ, which is disputed as well. The most frequent alternatives are to regard it either in a temporal sense: “the righteous is taken away from the evil to come”.24 Or, it may have a causal sense: “the righteous is taken away on account of the evil”.25 As the discussion of Koenen shows, the interpretation depends on 1) the notion of the structure; 2) on the agent of ʳʱʠʰ; and 3) possible similar passages.26 However, from a structural perspective, even if v.1bȕ introduced a second strophe, the fact that v.2 is most likely a tricolon disturbs Koenen’s regular design. Moreover, the highlighted position of ʤʲʸʤ ʩʰʴʮ serves well to help round up and generalize what has been said before. So I hold rather to an asymmetric structure of vv.1–2 that also corresponds to the ‘asym22 Cf., e.g., SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 153; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 663–664; MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 153; BONNARD, Second Isaïe, 349, 356–357; O SWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 466–467, 470; CHILDS, Isaiah, 460. 23 Cf., e.g., KESSLER, Gott, 27; BEUKEN, Jesaja III/A, 54; KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 45. It is not clear to me what justifies the judgement of B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 149 who regards the particle ʩʫ as secondary. 24 MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 663–664; thus already D ELITZSCH, Jesaia, 549–550 and also, e.g., KOENEN, Ethik, 16–17. 25 Thus, e.g., KESSLER, Gott, 27; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 255 (ET, 319–320; though re-ordering vv.1bȕ, 2); LAU, Prophetie, 237; similarly SCHOORS, Jesaja II, 341. 26 KOENEN, Ethik, 16–17 opts for a temporal understanding because 1) he takes vv.1– 2 as two strophes consisting of two lines each. The highlighted position of ʤʲʸʤ ʩʰʴʮ suggests that this line says something different from the previous two lines and therefore is to take together with v.2. 2) ʳʱʠʰ is a passivum divinum meaning that YHWH spares the righteous from calamity. 3) The closest parallel is the oracle of the prophetess Huldah in 2 Kgs 22:16–20, in which she announces to Josiah that he will be spared from the coming judgement and assembled to his fathers.

258

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

metric circumstances’ that the speaker addresses. Regarding the agent of ʳʱʠʰ, it is mainly the immediate context that can give a clue whether a passive form is a passivum divinum or not. Since in the chiastically related colon in v.1bĮ the same Nifal form of ¥ʳʱʠ (there a participle) hardly refers to YHWH as the agent, one may doubt such a reference in v.1bȕ as well. Finally, frequent claims of 2 Kgs 22:20 being a close passage rest upon the following possible correspondences: ʤʲʸ means the judgement of YHWH; v.2 would refer to peace in death (cf. ʭʥʬˇ in 2 Kgs 22:20); the Nifal form of ¥ʳʱʠ as an action of YHWH. All this is possible, and once the correspondences with 2 Kgs 22:20 have been realized, it is tempting to interpret vv.1b–2 in this light. Yet none of these correspondences are compelling. As we saw above the context rather suggests excluding YHWH as the agent of ʳʱʠʰ.27 The meaning of ʤʲʸ is what is at stake here. Although the introductory line 56:9 might give a hint at a coming judgement, there is an assonance with ʭʩʲʸ (56:11aȕ) that associates the ‘evil’ with the shepherds. Moreover, as Lau points out, the construction ʩʰʴʮ together with ʤʲʸ always refers to the evil of somebody as the reason or cause for YHWH’s intervention in judgement.28 Finally, v.2 does not seem to speak about a state of peace for the dead (righteous), as in 2 Kgs 22:20 (see below). The phrase ʤʲʸʤ ʩʰʴʮ gives the cause of the disappearance of the righteous, which is highlighted through the causative meaning of ʩʫ. Hence, our interpretation: “For because of the evil the righteous is taken away.”29 Just as the suffering of the righteous is explained previously by the lack of understanding and discernment, which is expressed in impersonal Nifal forms, so here again the agent of their disappearance is not specified. The emphasis falls on the general situation in which evil happens, not on specific agents. I interpret v.2 as an announcement of what will be in the future; the one who walks in uprightness will come in peace. By this means, the present fate of the righteous is juxtaposed to the prospect of his future. Koenen suggests taking ʭʥʬˇ as the subject of the first colon reading “peace will come”.30 But the other cola of this verse indicate another subject.31 Moreover, the change between singular and plural that corresponds to v.1 (see below) also speaks against this interpretation. Looking for the syntactic relationship between ʠʥʡ and ʭʥʬˇ, perhaps the closest parallel is the ques27 For this reason, I also hesitate to adopt the ‘local interpretation’ (“is gathered away from…”) as proposed, e.g., by B EUKEN, Jesaja III/A, 54–55 and KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 44. 28 Cf. LAU, Prophetie, 237, mentioning Hos 10:15; Jer 7:12; 44:3; 51:64. 29 For the same meaning of ʯʮ ʩʫ followed by a qatal in the main sentence, cf. Deut 7:8; Josh 11:20. 30 Cf. KOENEN, Ethik, 19; see also B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 352; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 76n.37. 31 Thus KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 46.

1. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2

259

tion ʪʠʥʡ ʭʥʬˇ(ʤ) (cf. 1 Sam 16:4; 1 Kgs 2:13), where ʭʥʬˇ is an adverbial accusative. Thus there is no clear indication that ʭʥʬˇ ʠʥʡʩ means “he comes into peace” when he dies. The subject is either the righteous as the general term, about which vv.1–2 speak, or it is “he who walks in his uprightness” (v.2b).32 The most obvious allusion to the state of death has been seen in the phrase “they will rest in their beds”. But in those few cases that are always quoted for evidence of ʡʫˇʮ meaning grave,33 it is never constructed with the preposition ʬʲ. To the contrary, the phrase ʡʫˇʮ ʬʲ is always used for “upon the bed”. Thus it seems to me not unjustified to regard the contrast between the people who will “rest upon their bed” (ʡʫˇʮ; 57:2) and the “dogs lying raving/dreaming” (ʭʩʡʫˇ ʭʩʦʧ; 56:10) not as one between the attitude of the watchmen and the state of the righteous in death, but as a contrast between the present attitude of the watchmen and the future state when everyone “walking in his uprightness” will come in peace.34 In order to understand, what this might refer to, we shall look at the immediate literary context. In Isa 56:7, YHWH announces that “I will lead them (ʭʩʺʥʠʩʡʤ; i.e. those who keep the Sabbath and hold fast the covenant, cf. Isa 56:6) to my holy mountain (ʩˇʣʷ ʸʤ)”. In contrast, the addressee in Isa 57:7–8 is accused of having set her bed (ʪʡʫˇʮ) on a high and lofty mountain (ʠˈʰʥ ʤʡʢʚʸʤ ʬʲ) in order to pursue her idolatrous practices. In the light of this larger context, I interpret the line “And he who walks in his uprightness, will come (ʠʥʡʩ) in peace and they will rest on their beds (ʭʺʥʡʫˇʮʚʬʲ)” (Isa 57:2) as an announcement about the future; YHWH will bring those who keep the Sabbath and hold fast his covenant to his holy mountain (Isa 56:6–7) that they can come in peace there and find rest on their beds (Isa 57:2) in contrast to the present situation (Isa 57:7–8), when YHWH’s holy mountain is misused as an adulterous bed. So with Isa 57:2 it becomes apparent that a different future lies ahead. As for the exiles (Isa 40–55) so for those in the homeland, YHWH’s salvation lies ahead for them. The task of the subsequent communicative process is to transform the addressees and their situation so that they will participate in YHWH’s righteousness, which will dawn with his appearance in Zion together with the exiles. Then the ‘salvation’ of both groups, of those in the homeland and of the returned exiles, will coincide (Isa 60; 62:10– 63:6).

32

Cf. LAU, Prophetie, 237–238. Cf. P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 77n.39 pointing to SCULLION, Some difficult texts in Is. cc.56-66 in the light of modern scholarship, UF 4 (1973) 109. 34 Perhaps the “coming in peace” creates another contrast with an attitude of the “shepherds” who only “turn to their own way” (56:11b). 33

260

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

1.4 The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–57:2 In the first two strophes, terminology of ‘perception’ and ‘knowledge’ appears always in the introductory line (v.10aĮ, v.11aȕ).35 They are part of descriptions that can be further specified as CHARACTERIZATIONS of the watchmen and the shepherds. In both cases, their position suggests that they are meant as general statements about those groups, which are illustrated by the subsequent lines. In the first strophe this is particularly clear through the comparison with dumb and greedy dogs. Or, in other words, the specific problems that glimmer through the comparison with the dogs in strophe I and through the notions of vv.11b–12 are generalized as the lack of perception and as ignorance in each introductory line. As it was argued above, the first two parallel lines in strophe III reflect the parallel arrangement of the first and second strophe, which is further supported by the recurring terminology of ‘perception’ and ‘knowledge’. Before turning into a surprising announcement of a better future for the upright person, this strophe points to the ignorance of the leaders as the reason for the perishing of the righteous in the present, which is not less than a society about to dissolve. However, it does so gradually. V.1a simply states that nobody takes it to heart that the righteous perishes. But the second line (v.1bĮ) states that this ignorance is the reason36 for righteous people being taken away. It has been shown above that this passage strongly contrasts with Isa 55:1–3 in particular. This also applies to the theme of hardening. While in Isa 55:1–3 this problem is finally resolved – the addressees there can open their ears and the repeated summons ʲʥʮˇ ʥʲʮˇ (cf. Isa 6:9) does not harden them any more – it is still a huge problem for the audience of this section. Lines including aspects of ‘perception’ and ‘knowledge’ contribute significantly to the coherence of Isa 56:9–57:2 and appear at important positions. Both aspects are used as general statements in order to reveal the incompetence and failures of the leaders of the people in the homeland. Together with other traits, these elements suggest that those leaders are like those of Isaiah’s time (cf. Isa 29:9–10). The ‘hinge’ Isa 56:1–8 introduces our unit by correlating both communicative processes to the exiles (Isa 40–55) and to those in the homeland (Isa 56:9–66). Then Isa 56:9–57:2 begins by emphasizing the significance of the theme of hardening. Imperceptiveness and ignorance is just as much a reality for the leaders in the homeland as it is for the exiles. Up to now, 35

In v.11aĮ “to know” is only an auxiliary verb. This contributes to this line’s arrangement parallel with v.10aȕ. 36 For this understanding of the phrase ʯʩʡʮ ʯʩʠʡ see above under “1.3.2 Supportive Features of the Communicative Strategy”, discussing “The Twofold Fate of the Righteous”.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

261

they have been under the influence of the hardening message of Isaiah. However, the whole unit Isa 56:9–59:21 shows that this applies to the whole people. The present communicative process is enacted to overcome their hardness, too. So, an important function of Isa 56:9–59:21 is to indicate how those in the homeland, who have not been in the refining furnace of Babel (cf. Isa 48:10), can share in the reversal of hardness.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21 2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

2.1 Notes on Hardening in Isaiah 58–59 References to ‘knowledge’ and ‘perception’ are found in different communicative acts in Isa 58–59. According to Isa 58:3 the people complain about YHWH that he does not see (ʺʩʠʸ ʠʬʥ) nor know (ʲʣʺ ʠʬʥ), and Isa 59:1b emphasizes that YHWH’s ear is not heavy (ʯʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ)37 so as not to hear (ʲʥʮˇʮ). In Isa 59:8, the people are said not to know (¥ʲʣʩ ʠʬ) (the way of) peace, and then they admit that they grope along the wall “like blind” (ʭʩʸʥʲʫ) and grope “like those who have no eyes” (ʭʩʰʩʲ ʯʩʠʫ; Isa 59:10). But what they know (¥ʲʣʩ) is the heavy burden of their sins and iniquities (cf. Isa 59:12). In order to understand how these references to the theme of hardening function within the wider context, we shall first clarify the structure and sketch the communicative strategy of this large context, before we pay attention to the theme of hardening more specifically. 2.1.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 58–59 Discussions about the structure of Isa 58–59 largely deal with their consistency or identify several components or editorial layers.38 I confine my 37

Apart from this instance this collocation occurs only in Isa 6:10 and Zech 7:11 elsewhere in the OT (the latter clearly dependent on the Book of Isaiah). 38 In respect to Isa 58, often only vv.13–14 have been excluded as later additions, thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 440; MARTI, Jesaja, 373, 376; ELLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 14–15, 125; ODEBERG, Trito-Isaiah, 10, 162; KESSLER, Gott, 43; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 213; SMART, History, 251–252; MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 165, 167; WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 271 (ET, 340–341); HERBERT, Isaiah 40–66, 144, 147; LAU, Prophetie, 240. Both Steck (IDEM, Beobachtungen zu Jes 56–59, 177–183; IDEM: Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56–59; 63,1–6, 204–208) and Berges ( IDEM, Buch, 476–477) argue for Isa 58:1– 59:21 as a large discourse but omit 58:13–14 as later additions. Isa 58:13–14 have been defended as an integral part, e.g., by VOLZ, Jesaia II, 228–229; M UILENBURG, Isaiah 40– 66, 676–677; BONNARD, Second Isaïe, 378–380; SCHRAMM, Opponents, 137 as well as SEKINE, Sammlung, 128–130, who, however, argued for editorial additions in vv.1–2 (pp.122–124). KOENEN, Ethik, 88–103 ascribes vv.1–2 and vv.13–14 to the editor of the book of TI, vv.3–12 are from the prophet TI. Other proposals have been made by KOSMALA, Form (vv.*1–2, *3–12, 13–14 were originally independent poems; later v.2bĮ has

262

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

remarks to features germane to determining the surface structure of the present discourse.39 Although Isa 59:21 is widely regarded as a later addition, it is worth recognizing that it is composed as a speech towards a prophetic figure and as such forms a frame around the whole discourse with Isa 58:1.40 The first sub-section introduces the main issues discussed further in the whole discourse (see below). It is followed by 58:5–6, consisting of two strophes41 that both pursue the aspect of ‘fasting’.42 Three ‘if – then – passages’ (58:7–9a; 58:9b–12; 58:13–1443) specify the issues posed been inserted in order to combine the first with the second poem; originally v.10a stood after v.7; when vv.13–14 were added, the editor inserted vv.9b, 10b and the last two words of v.11a and v.11b to match vv.13–14); PAURITSCH, Gemeinde, 73–80 (v.8b is interpolation, vv.9b–12 are an interruption by the audience; vv.13–14 have been added later), W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 211–212 and B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 176–177 who follow M ICHEL, Eigenart, 226–229 (vv.1–3a, 5–9a are the original unit; vv.3b–4 are interpolation that misses the point; vv.9b–12 are another addition; vv.13–14 are a further expansion); and HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 198–203 (primary layer are vv.3–6; next layer: vv.1–2, 7–9a; another layer in vv.9b–12 in order to create relationship with context; again later: vv.13–14). With respect to Isa 59 often vv.5–8 and v.21 have been regarded as later insertions, thus, e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 441; MARTI, Jesaja, 377; ELLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 15– 17, 125, 126n.1; ODEBERG, Trito-Isaiah, 12, 181, 197; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 233, 238–239 (also excluding v.4); P AURITSCH, Gemeinde, 87–95. Others also ascribed vv.15b–20 to another addition, although many recognized that it has been placed there appropriately by the editor of the earlier part vv.1–4, 9–15a, cf., e.g., SCHOORS, Jesaja II, 350, 352–353; SEKINE, Sammlung, 132–139 (adopting the reading of LXX, he regards vv.5–8 as belonging to vv.1–15a); KOENEN, Ethik, 61–68 (also excluding vv.13a.18b as later additions). Among those who regarded only v.21 as later addition: e.g. FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 223n.32; MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 171; BONNARD; Second Isaïe, 384–385; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 274–277, 280 (ET, 344–348, 352); HERBERT, Isaiah 40–66, 150. LAU, Prophetie, 204, 209–210, 222, 225–227 regards vv.5–8, 18b, 20–21 as later additions in Isa 59*. 39 For detailed analyses of the consistency of Isa 58–59 see P OLAN, Ways, 175–185, 245–251; STECK, Beobachtungen zu Jes 56–59, 177–183; IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56–59; 63,1–6, 204–208 (excluding only 58:13-14); P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 99–101 and also KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 118–120, 166–168. 40 Cf. STECK, Beobachtungen zu Jes 56–59, 182; IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56–59; 63,1–6, 208; KELLERMANN, Tritojesaja, 49–54; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56– 66, 176, 199–203. See also SMART, History, 252 and HERBERT, Isaiah 40–66, 153 who both, however, seem to relate it to the beginning of ch.56. GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 337 also regards 59:21 as a speech towards the prophet but interprets it as the introduction to Isa 59:21–60:22 parallel to 61:1–62:12. 41 See the equal introduction ʥʤʸʧʡʠ ʭʥʶ and the demonstrative pronoun ʤʦ. 42 V.5 describes what fasting should not be like (indicated through ʤ at the beginning of each line); v.6 describes what fasting should be (indicated through ʠʥʬʤ). 43 As the survey above showed, the last strophe is highly disputed. Apart from the same structure, there are further indications that vv.13–14 fit well into the context, although with a notable ‘twist’: In my opinion, vv.13–14 make explicit what is implied in vv.5–12, namely, the substitution of the cultic fasting. The strophe vv.7–9a factually

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

263

in Isa 58:1–4. That Isa 59:1–15a continue the discussion started with Isa 58:2–3 is indicated by the particle ʯʤ, juxtaposing this section to Isa 58:3b– 14. The addressees vary several times in these verses: 2.pl.masc. (59:1–3), 3.pl.masc. (59:5–8), speech of a 1.pl.audience (59:9–13[14–15a]). But v.4 as well as vv.14–15a stand out formally, as they are formulated impersonally, addressing no-one specifically. They are also marked for their shared content, dealing with the problems of ‘justice and righteousness’. This highlighted position of Isa 59:4 and Isa 59:14–15a coincides with transitions from one speech to another. Therefore, I regard these verses as the focus and as the concluding lines of a sub-section. The result of these ob-

demands the abolition of fasting: “breaking the bread for the hungry” is the exact contrast to what lies at the heart of fasting, namely to eat. There may also be a contrast between “sackcloth” in v.5bĮ and the demand to clothe the naked in v.7b. This opposition to fasting is further supported in vv.9b–12: the demands to “pour out your soul for the hungry” (ʪˇʴʰ ʡʲʸʬ ʷʴʺʥ) and especially to “satisfy the afflicted soul” (ʲʩʡˈʺ ʤʰʲʰ ˇʴʰʥ) in v.10a could be no starker contrasts to vv.3a, 5a (ˇʴʰ ¥ʤʰʲ). The appropriate substitution for the cultic fasting is keeping the Sabbath, as several interrelationships hint: If the people want to approach YHWH “day after day” (ʭʥʩ ʭʥʩ, v.2; see also 3b, 4b), this should happen on “my holy day” (ʩˇʣʷ ʭʥʩ, v.13). Further correspondences with vv.1–4 include: they should not wish to find their own pleasure (ʵʴʧ ¥ʠʶʮ; cf. v.3; v.13bȖ); they desire “my ways” (ʩʫʸʣ, v.2) but actually do “your ways” (ʪʩʫʸʣ, v.13bȕ); they should “do righteousness” (ʤʷʣʶ ¥ʤˈʲ, v.2) but should not “do your pleasures” (ʪʩʶʴʧ ¥ʤˈʲ; ʪʩʶʴʧ is often translated “business activities” here; see, e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 155–156. But given the correspondences with vv.1–4 [especially with respect to the phrase ʵʴʧ ¥ʠʶʮ] I am not totally convinced.) nor “do your ways” (ʪʩʫʸʣ ¥ʤˈʲ, both phrases v.13); finally there is again the contrast between “fasting” (vv.3–4) and the promise “I will let you eat” (¥ʬʫʠ, v.14). V.5 stated that a cultic approach of YHWH should be “a day of YHWH’s pleasure”. According to vv.13–14, it is the Sabbath that fulfils this. Perhaps this is the case because it prevents the people from doing some unjust things: calling (¥ʠʸʷ) the Sabbath “delight” will prevent them from “speaking useless words” (ʸʡʣ ʸʡʣ; v.13bȖ) or even from words of deceit (cf. 58:9b; 59:4 etc.); the ambiguous meaning of “doing pleasures/business activities” (ʵʴʧ ¥ʠʶʮ; v.13 bȖ; similarly v.13aȕ) may allude to the pleasure of fasting while forcing workmen (for the sake of their own business, 58:4), implying that keeping the Sabbath would prevent them from such business activities. These improper acts of communication and solidarity are the main issues in Isa 58–59. But it must be stated that vv.13–14 clearly create a twist to that: while the rest of Isa 58–59 concentrate on doing righteousness, these verses emphasize that keeping the Sabbath could prevent them from doing injustices. It goes beyond this study to determine, whether this could be ascribed to one or several editorial agendas. BARRÉ, Fasting, 95–96 also attended to these correspondences but reached a different interpretation in respect to “fasting”. However, given these correspondences it seems to me that the exclusive relation to business activities, as it is proposed in BRONGERS, Bemerkungen is too narrow and misses the effect of multiple references of poetic language. For a helpful reading of both aspects ‘practice of ethics’ and ‘ceremony’ together see W ILLIAMSON, Promises, 158–159. For a defense of reading vv.13–14 with the rest of Isa 58 see also D IEBNER, Hände, 150–151, but the aggressive and hostile polemic tone makes his comments hard to read (and appreciate).

264

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

servations is that we have two sub-sections: Isa 59:1–4 and 59:5–15a.44 The last panel of speech (59:15b–20) reveals a distinctive design: each strophe consists of three lines. The first two lines in strophe I (vv.15b–16) and strophe II (vv.17–18) start with the same verb (vv.15b, 16a: ʠʸʩʥ; v.17a, 17b: ˇʡʬʩʥ). In the last strophe (vv.19–20) this also is the case in the last two lines (vv.19b, 20: ¥ʠʥʡ). The whole discourse Isa 58:1–59:21 consists of several different subunits that perform various communicative acts, but are closely related and realize a complex communicative strategy. In order to grasp this communicative strategy, we shall look first at Isa 58:2–4, which introduces the main ‘issue’ of the whole discourse. This sub-unit consists of two strophes (v.2, vv.3–4). YHWH first identifies in general terms what the people do (v.2a, 2bȕȖ) and indicates what the standard of their actions should be (v.2bĮ). According to the outward lines in the first strophe (v.2a, 2bȕȖ), the people seek the salvational presence of YHWH.45 This is specified as a desire to know the right way to live (v.2aȕ) and to ask YHWH for establishing righteousness (v.2bȕ).46 Thus they seek YHWH and his salvation by asking 44

KENDALL, Use, 393–402 (especially 401) reaches a different segmentation of Isa 59, depending exclusively on the use of ʨʴˇʮ: vv.1–8, 9–15a, 15b–21. 45 The statement “they seek me (¥ˇʸʣ) day after day” (v.2aĮ) read together with “they desire the nearness of God” (ʭʩʤʬʠ ʺʡʸʷ, v.2bȖ) evokes a correspondence to Isa 55:6 (“Seek YHWH [ʤʥʤʩ ʥˇʸʣ] while he could be found, call on him while he is near [ʡʥʸʷ]”.), which indicates the people’s search for YHWH’s salvational presence. 46 The people’s search for YHWH’s salvational presence does not exclude that they are equally looking for instruction to live. Contra KOENEN, Ethik, 92n.189, who interprets the phrase “they desire knowledge of my ways” as wanting to know the salvational future, I would maintain that the people desire instruction in the way of life that conforms to YHWH. Smith rightly argues that the passages quoted by Koenen for the same understanding are not convincing and that in Isa 42:24 and 55:8–9 ʪʸʣ is used ethically (cf. P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 106). I would also add Isa 2:3, but the reference to Isa 55:8–9 is of special importance here. It seems to me that there the difference between YHWH’s ways (and thoughts) and the ways of the exiles is the reason why they have to seek YHWH. The rebel should abandon his way (cf. Isa 55:7). Thus, in Isa 58:2 the people seek instruction in the way of life that conforms to YHWH. At the same time, they ask from YHWH “that he, too, will act righteously” (KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 127) in v.2bȕ. The exact meaning of the phrase ʷʣʶʚʩʨʴˇʮ is not easy to determine. Those who advocate the ‘ethical interpretation’ of v.2 often refer to Ps 119:7, 62, 106, 164, the only places where this phrase occurs, and similarly Deut 16:18, concluding that “it is likely that what is being referred to here is primarily priestly and legal instruction or decision making.” (P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 106). But KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 127 rightly points to ʤʷʣʶ and ʨʴˇʮ in the previous line. Since the similar terms appear in the context of a comparison in v.2bĮ, what is at stake here is corresponding righteousness and justice. Therefore, I suggest regarding the phrase ʷʣʶʚʩʨʴˇʮ stylistically as a pleonasm (for the device of pleonasm, cf. BÜHLMANN & SCHERER, Stilfiguren, 36) that expresses a superlative nuance “the justices of righteousness” (for a genitival group of two synonyms as superlative, see JM §142 m).

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

265

him to establish justice.47 Through the comparison in the centre line (v.2bĮ) YHWH states the standard for the behaviour that comes to the fore in the framing lines. Accordingly, the actions and intentions of the people are only appropriate, if they do what is said in the centre line of v.2. They have to “do righteousness” and “not to leave justice”. So far, v.2 has not revealed by what means, the people “seek” and “ask” YHWH. It is the quotation of the people’s words by YHWH in v.3a that makes clear that they fast.48 According to this quotation, they complain about YHWH, which reflects the accusations of the “watchmen” in Isa 56:9: he does not see, he does not know. YHWH reacts in a direct response to this (vv.3b–4), addressing them in 2.pl.masc., which corresponds to the 1.pl. His answer is a twofold: (1) Two lines, introduced by the attention marker ʯʤ (vv.3b, 4a), describe what they do wrong while fasting; (2) one line states what is missing from their fasting (v.4b).49 They fast for their own pleasure,50 but force workers to carry on their hard work.51 Moreover, 47

In this sense, both bicola correspond to each other chiastically. But the parallel correspondences, which were established formally, also find a material counterpart. The parallel actions of the people recorded in the first colon of each line (v.2aĮ, v.2bȕ) support this relationship between seeking salvation and justice by their parallel juxtaposition (ʯʥˇʸʣʩ ǜǜǜ ʩʺʠ; ʷʣʶʚʩʨʴˇʮ ʩʰʥʬʠˇʩ). It is tempting to regard them as a peculiar way of trying to realize the appeal “seek justice” (ʨʴˇʮ ʥˇʸʣ) of Isa 1:17 (apart from Isa 1:17 this collocation occurs only in Isa 16:5 elsewhere in the OT). Recognising the skilful arrangement of the outward lines (v.2a, v.2bȕȖ), the often held contrasting interpretation in respect to what the people are looking for – either ethical advice or plea for salvation – dissolves, because both aspects are present, which is further amplified through the way, v.2 takes up especially Isa 55 (see above). This also resists to simple identifications of those approaching YHWH through fasting as this is proposed by H OPPE, Isaiah 58:1–2 (for an appropriate response to his simple notion of cult and idolatry in particular, see B ARRÉ, Fasting and furthermore the study of P ODELLA, Fasten, 15–23, 215–223). 48 The phrase ˇʴʰ ¥ʤʰʲ also means “to fast”. Thus the discussion in KOENEN, Ethik, 100n.244 who calls it a priestly phrase. But note also K OOLE, Isaiah III/3, 129 who mentions Ps 35:13 apart from the occurrences in the priestly material in Lev and Num. It might be possible to relate the use of the phrase ˇʴʰ ¥ʤʰʲ to the statements in 57:15, according to which YHWH is with the “crushed and low in spirit”; thus ¥ʤʰʲ and ¥ʠʫʣ appear in a parallelism in Ps 94:5. But it is more appropriate to regard the phrase ˇʴʰ ¥ʤʰʲ in the context of contrasting statements in what follows, cf., e.g., 57:10, 11. 49 P ODELLA, Fasten, 215 suggests a parallel arrangement of v.2a–2bĮ and vv.2bȕ–3a. But ¥ʭʥʶ occurs in every bicolon of vv.3–4 and by this means lends coherence to it. Moreover, the quotation introduced by ʤʮʬ creates a too sharp caesura. 50 ʵʴʧ is often regarded as “business transaction” (cf. Ps 107:30; similarly Qoh 3:1, 17; 5:17; 8:6). Thus, e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 130 with many other commentators (see there). But LAU, Prophetie, 244 rightly points at the correspondence with v.2. It, therefore, must mean “pleasure” here. Then also the unsocial attitude towards the workers comes to the fore most clearly. 51 That these issues relate to each other is also indicated by the assonances of ʶ, ʮ, ʠ, ʲ in this line.

266

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

there are legal battles and strife, even fierce violence.52 In contrast, they miss what fasting could actually be for:53 to raise their voice to be heard on high by God. The whole section is dominated by a discussion of interactions. On the one hand, we have the interactions between the people and YHWH. The people “seek” YHWH, “ask” him to establish righteousness and approach him by “fasting” but fail to raise their voice. YHWH seems not to respond (at least, according to the people’s quotation in v.3a). On the other hand, there is the interaction among the people themselves, which YHWH brings into play in his actual reply. Seeking interaction with YHWH is only appropriate when the interaction among the people follows the principles of justice and righteousness (v.2). Yet as the turn to the actual situation of the addressees shows (vv.3b–4),54 this is hardly the case. We have argued above that the primary issue of Isa 40–66 is to reestablish the people of YHWH, both in the Babylonian exile (Isa 40–55) and in the homeland (Isa 56–66), and to express the connection between action and consequences. The result is to be YHWH’s universal rule in righteousness and the people’s salvation. The principle of ‘connective righteousness’ includes various different spheres, cosmic, social-political and religious dimensions. All spheres depend on the reciprocity of actions, i.e. the one, who experienced people’s actions, acts for others accordingly. When this principle of reciprocity or solidarity is maintained then there is order in the world. Isa 58:2–4 develops this idea for the audience in the homeland to indicate the interconnection of the social-political and religious realm.55 All that follows in Isa 58:5–59:20 revolves around this ‘issue’ of interactive relationships that have to be governed by the principle of righteousness. It also reflects the two parts of Isa 58:2–4: Isa 58:5–14 expand the principle of righteousness as the criterion of proper interactive relationships among the people and between the people and YHWH (corresponding to Isa 58:2), while Isa 59:1–15a turns again to the actual situation (corresponding to Isa 58:3–4). Now that we have identified the main ‘issue’ of Isa 58–59, we can sketch how it is communicated. The whole discourse is introduced as a For the meaning of ʲˇʸ ʳʸʢʠʡ, cf., e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 132: ʲˇʸ is meant adjectivally here; the meaning of ʳʸʢʠ is not like ʳʸʢʮ “hoe, spade” (thus, e.g., KBL), but “fist”. 53 The preposition ʬ indicates the intention of the fasting; cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 132 54 Cf. similarly P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 107. 55 Cf. also P ODELLA, Fasten, 215 who reaches a similar conclusion, speaking of fasting as “gemeinschaftstreues Verhalten”. SCHOTTROFF, Jesaja 58,1–2, 275–277 also emphasizes the aspect of solidarity. However, I am not convinced that the main conflict in Isa 58 is between an upper class and the impoverished main population, as he suggests. 52

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

267

to the prophetic voice to declare to the “house of Jacob” their sin (Isa 58:1) and consequently leads to the communal CONFESSION of sin in 59:10–15a. The motivation for this strategy is revealed at the end by the 56 ANNOUNCEMENT that YHWH will come as the redeemer for Zion and also 57 for those in Jacob who repent from their sin (Isa 59:20). In the course of this section, the sins of Jacob turned out to be the disturbed socio-political and religious interactions, mentioned in Isa 58:1–4. The sequence of ‘if-then passages’ in Isa 58:7b–14 seems to stand out to some degree. They are INSTRUCTIONS of actions combined with PROMISES of their consequences.58 But as part of the communicative process introduced in Isa 58:1, they contribute to this overall illocutionary role to DECLARE the sins to the house of Jacob. It is against this ‘positive foil’ of proper interactions that the actual situation and sins come to the fore more clearly in Isa 59:1–15a. Indeed, in most respects the actual sins go far beyond what is expected in 58:3–12. Instead of giving bread to the hungry, (58:7) one dies when eating from the people addressed (59:5). Instead of clothing the naked (58:7), what the people produce cannot be used for clothing (59:6). Instead of not pointing the finger (ʲʡʶʠ, 58:9), their hands are covered with blood and their fingers (ʲʡʶʠ) with guilt (59:3).59 Instead of avoiding speaking mischief (58:9), their lips speak lies and their tongues utter injustice (59:3, 13). And instead of removing the yoke of oppression, there is even fiercer violence and bloodshed (59:3, 7).60 These contrasts highlight the righteous interactions expected from the addressees (Isa 58:3–12). In this light, their actual behaviour is revealed, which leads into a CONFESSION of their sins (Isa 59:1–15a). CALL

56

Isa 59:20 clearly says that YHWH comes as the redeemer for (the city) Zion and to those of the house of Jacob who repent from their sins. Thus salvation is not restricted in respect to the city Zion, but only in respect to her inhabitants. Against KOENEN, Ethik, 72 (who says the salvation does not apply for Zion any more but only for the pious in Zion) and P AURITSCH, Gemeinde, 92 (who states that YHWH comes as the helper for the repented Zion). 57 It seems that the use of the term ʲˇʴ served to underline this train of thought: It appears in Isa 58:1 and 59:20 (see especially P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 99; BERGES, Buch, 473 in this respect) and two times in the CONFESSION of sins at the beginning of a line (v.12a, v.12b) and a third time as the verb ¥ʲˇʴ (v.13a), i.e. in structurally significant places. 58 For instance, if they “satisfy the afflicted soul” (ʲʩʡˈʺ ʤʰʲʰ ˇʴʰ, v.10aȕ), YHWH will “satisfy your soul” (ʪˇʴʰ ǜǜǜ ʲʩʡˈʤ, v.11aĮ); if they do not “speak wickedness” (ʯʥʠʚʸʡʣ, v.9bȕ), they will become like a source of water “whose water will not deceive” (ʥʩʮʩʮ ʥʡʦʫʩʚʠʬ, v.11bȖ). See also the remarks on Isa 58:7a–14 further below. 59 This even applies if the “pointing of the finger” means concretely “to accuse a guilty”, thus, e.g., SCHOTTROFF, Jesaja 58,1–2, 272. 60 This also shows that Isa 59:5–8 take up the crucial concerns of Isa 58:1–12 and, therefore, are not as alien to the context as often claimed.

268

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

With respect to Isa 58:7a–14, however, I agree with those who see its function as more than indicating the addressee’s sins. It also serves as IN61 STRUCTIONS of actions, providing the agenda for the right way to live. We will see below, however, that this illocutionary role of Isa 58:7b–14 to INSTRUCT the addressees is not erased by the illocutionary role of Isa 58– 59 to DECLARE their sins, because of the way the whole discourse Isa 58– 59 relates to Isa 57:14. The final section (Isa 59:15b–20) confirms that YHWH is monitoring his ‘connective righteousness’ by judging those who disturb it. As such it provides the motivation for the addressees to return from their present behaviour.62 Having noted the importance of the interconnection of social-political and religious righteousness in Isa 58–59 and sketched the communicative strategy of this discourse, we can now look more closely at how the theme of hardening is integrated within this communicative process. 2.1.2 Communication and Hardness – The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 58–59 Since all action is connected through communication,63 Assmann identifies the disturbance of communication as a breach of public solidarity that destroys the tie between deed (“Tun”) and consequence (“Ergehen”). It is, therefore, a “sin against Ma`at”.64 The concept of ‘connective righteousness’ governs the relationships among the people themselves (‘sociopolitical level’) as well as between the people and YHWH (‘religious level’). So it comes hardly as a surprise that ‘communication’ is an important topic in the whole passage Isa 58:1–59:15a. This discourse addresses ‘communication’ especially in respect to the people’s misuse of it and clearly points to their failures to live according to ‘connective righteousness’. They speak useless words; they deceive, with evil and wickedness

61

Cf. similarly, e.g., STECK, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,9–59,21; 63,1–6, 206: “…so wird hier der Prophet von Jahwe angewiesen, Israel dessen Vergehen zu künden (58,1; 59,1–15a), sowie komplementär dazu von Jahwe in Kenntnis gesetzt, unter welchen (negativen und positiven) ethischen Voraussetzungen das fastende, frevlerische Volk gleichwohl zu Heilsteilhabern werden kann (58,3b–5, 6–12).”; similarly P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 111. For my hesitation to call this way of life the conditions for participation in salvation see further. However, to say that Isa 58 de-eschatologizes the promises of Isa 60–62 by making them achievable through certain conditions as RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 44– 45 suggests clearly cannot do justice to the complex discourse. 62 For the confession of sins (Isa 59:10–15a) as the preparation for the coming judge, cf. the same terminology with Isa 59:15b–20: ʨʴˇ/ʨʴˇʮ (59:11, 14), ʲˇʩ (as ʤʲʥˇʩ 59:11); ʷʣʶ (as ʤʷʣʶ 59:14). 63 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 61: “Alles Handeln ist kommunikativ verzahnt…” 64 Cf. ASSMANN, Ma`at, 69.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

269

coming from their mouth (cf. Isa 58:9b, 13b; 59:3b, 4b, 13b).65 The lack of proper communication and its misuse instead have breached the solidarity among the people. There is also another aspect of communication present in this passage, namely the communication between YHWH and his people. This is where the theme of hardening is addressed explicitly. Two times the understanding of YHWH is at stake: Isa 58:3. In 58:3 we have a quotation of the people COMPLAINING why YHWH does not see (¥ʤʠʸ) nor understand (¥ʲʣʩ), although they approach him by fasting.66 When YHWH “knows”, this also implies his benevolence and care, and when his people are in trouble, then it is the knowledge of YHWH they seek for this is the “occasion of divine intervention”.67 “To see” carries a similar connotation.68 It is, therefore, not an uncommon question for the people who do not experience any intervention from YHWH. Set in the context of Isa, this problem cannot be addressed without recourse to the theme of hardening. This is clear from the immediate allusion to the conditions of the elders (56:10; see above 1.). The prophetic voice, however, addresses it even more explicitly in 59:1. Isa 59:1. In order to understand the function of this line, we have to recognize its place within the whole discourse. The introduction through ʯʤ indicates that this is an objection to the complaint of the people in 58:3a and juxtaposed to the immediate response of YHWH in 58:3b–4, which equally begins with ʯʤ.69 Read in this way, it is not the people who accuse YHWH of a hand too short to save and of a hard ear. It is the prophetic voice that objects to the people’s complaint, which it has reformulated. One effect of this reformulation is that the prophetic voice makes explicit what the complaint implied: it is not only about YHWH’s perception, but 65 The aspect of (misleading) communication plays an important part in the second ‘if-then-passage’ (9b–12), while the theme of communication between YHWH and the people appears in a quite different way in the first ‘if-then-passage’ (vv.7–9a). Given the importance of communication in a community and its contribution to ‘connective righteousness’, this raises doubts about the remarks of M ICHEL, Eigenart, 226–229 followed by W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 211–212 and B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 176–177, who thought vv.9b–12 would not contribute anything significantly new to Isa 58. It is especially interesting in this respect that the formally and structurally outstanding line Isa 59:4 contains the main aspects as almost in a nutshell: lack of justice (v.4a), misleading speech (v.4bĮ) and bringing forth of evil (v.4bȕ). 66 For the interrogative mainly related to the second clause, see GK §150m. 67 B OTTERWECK & B ERGMAN, ʲʣʩ yƗda‘, 469; cf. also B OTTERWECK, Gott erkennen, 22. 68 Cf., e.g., Gen 29:32; 2 Sam 16:12; Lam 1:9, 11, 20. 69 Cf. similarly STECK, Beobachtungen zu Jesaja 56–59, 180, although in contrast to Steck I do not regard only 59:1–20 as the actual proclamation of the prophet/prophetic voice.

270

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

also about his saving intervention; it is about hearing and saving. By using characteristic phraseology, the complaint is situated in the context of the whole Book of Isaiah: YHWH’s saving intervention is specified as part of his return by gathering the exiles70 and his ability to perceive is unequivocally related to the theme of hardening.71 Thus the prophetic voice not only objects to the complaint of the people; it also specifies it and situates it within the broader context. By this means, the audience is to acknowledge that there is no other framework within which the relationship between YHWH and his people can be addressed than YHWH’s return and the theme of hardening. The prophetic voice then continues to explain his objections. It is the sins of the people that rupture their relationship with YHWH (59:2; ¥ʬʣʡ). Although the prophetic voice denies that the inabilities exist on YHWH’s side, it affirms that their relationship is interrupted. It therefore affirms implicitly the perception of the audience of the interrupted communication. The direct communication between YHWH and his people will only be possible in the context of solidarity and righteousness (58:7, 9a).72 However, it must be said that the communication is not interrupted totally. YHWH continues to speak through the prophetic voice (Isa 58:1; 59:21). But it is an uneven communication. He does not directly respond to the interaction sought by the people. The similar pattern to Isa 1:15 has been widely acknowledged. In both cases, YHWH refuses to respond to the approaches of the people (1:15; 58:2, 9a) and, yet continues to speak through a prophet. But, as we will see in respect to Isa 57:14–21, the goal of the continuing speech of YHWH is totally different now. Isa 59:8, 10, 12. The theme of hardening also appears in a confession of sin (Isa 59:9–15a) and in the sub-section that runs-up to this confession (Isa 59:5–8).73 These passages are central to the communicative strategy of the discourse of Isa 58:1–59:15a. Within these verses we may recognize a certain development in respect to the ‘epistemological conditions’ of the audience: Isa 59:5–8 concludes with the STATEMENT that the audience 70

The correspondences to Isa 50:2 have been variously noted. As already noted above, the collocation ʯʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ occurs elsewhere only in Isa 6:10, where this is the task of the prophet regarding his people, and in Zech 7:11, which clearly depends on the Book of Isaiah. The scandalous expression here, said of YHWH, cannot be overestimated. 72 Given the importance of communication as one of the crucial parameters of solidarity and ‘connective righteousness’, it is not surprising that the re-established communication (58:9a) is one consequence in the re-established society of solidarity (58:7) in Isa 58:7–9a. 73 DE REGT, Person Shift, 227, speaks of a “rhetorical entrapment” as regards person shifts from an address in 3. person to an address in 2. person and mentions also Isa 59:4– 15a in this respect. 71

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

271

(“they”) do not know (¥ʲʣʩ) the way of peace (59:8). In their subsequent confession, the people ACKNOWLEDGE their epistemological restrictions saying that they grope along the wall “like blind” and feel their way “like those who have no eyes” (59:10). In this context, what had to be said of the leaders (56:10) now applies also to the whole people.74 At the same time, the people withdraw their complaint about YHWH (58:3) and recognize their inability as their own problem. This beginning of realization corresponds to the end of Isa 59:9–12, where those who pray and confess, know at least their sins and transgressions (59:12). This means, not only that the strategy of making known their sins (Isa 58:1) has been successful;75 it also seems to mark a starting point of overcoming their hardness and ignorance. In order to understand fully this development we now have to turn to the whole of Isa 56:9–59:21. 2.2 Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21 2.2.1 Structure and Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 56:9–59:21 Two large passages can be identified within Isa 56:9–59:21. The first passage runs from Isa 56:9 to 57:21. It consists of three sub-sections, each introduced by an imperative (2.pl.masc.), though not at the first place of the line (56:9; 57:3; 57:14). The extent of this larger discourse is not undisputed. Apart from those who concentrated on determining and interpreting small units, a number of scholars prefer to see Isa 56:9–57:13 and 57:14–21 as two units.76 But the following observations suggest the inclusion of Isa 57:14–21. First, the introduction in v.14 follows the same pattern as in Isa 56:9 and Isa 57:3. It contains a plural masc. imperative not put at the head of the line. Secondly, v.19b together with vv.20–21 conclude vv.14–21 and at the same time create a similar conclusion to Isa 57:1–2, which lends coherence to the whole.77 The conclusion is marked in v.19b by the repetition ʭʥʬˇ ʭʥʬˇ that corresponds to ʥʬʱʚʥʬʱ in v.1478 as well as by the recurrence of ¥ʸʮʠ. Since both the term ʭʥʬˇ and ¥ʸʮʠ recur

74

Cf. similarly P AURITSCH, Gemeinde, 90. It seems to me that the fact that the confessors realize that they do indeed stumble (¥ʬˇʫ, 59:10) also contributes to this (successful) strategy of making known their sins, because this is the content of removing the stumbling-block (ʬʥˇʫʮ, 57:14), as we will see below. 76 See in particular BEUKEN, Example, 48–52; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 45, 79; similarly already MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 670; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 262 (treating it as an individual ‘scene’); LAATO, Zion, 201; CHILDS, Isaiah, 469. For those who ascribe Isa 56:9– 57:13 and Isa 57:14–21 to different editorial layers see below. 77 Cf. also POLAN, Ways, 94–109 (especially 108–109); P. S MITH, Rhetoric, 69. 78 Cf. also POLAN, Ways, 108; KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 91. 75

272

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

in the last line, the whole of vv.19b–21 is obviously meant as the conclusion. These lines show some affinities with Isa 57:1–2 in their design. The latter speaks about a group of persons, which is named as “the righteous”. This phrase frames a sequence of lines (three bicola; v.1). The subsequent line says that the future of this group will become totally different: he who walks upright will go “in peace”. In Isa 57:19b–21 we first read one line about the “peace” far and near (v.19b). Then follow two lines79 that speak about the fate of a group of people. They are named as “the wicked”. Again this designation frames these lines. Finally, as I will discuss below, there are some correspondences between Isa 57:3–13 and Isa 57:14–21 that contribute to the coherence of the whole unit as well. The second unit, indicated by its frame as a prophetic speech (Isa 58:1–59:21; see above),80 is also divided into three panels of speech. The second speech is related to the first one81 appearing as an expansion and clarification of the former. The first sub-section points to some failures of the leaders in the homeland and contrasts the present situation and the supposed future (see above on Isa 56:9–57:2). The second sub-section addresses people not clearly identified82 and calls them “sons of a soothsayer, offspring of an adulterer and whore”83 (v.3). These designations are specified in two ways. They mock (v.4) and they are devoted to other cults. These accusations culmi79 The segmentation of vv.20–21 is not totally clear, but it seems justified to me to regard them as two parallel bicola. 80 There are, of course, other proposals for a synchronic structure of Isa 56:9–59:21; cf., e.g., LACK, Symbolique, 125 (Isa 56–58 and 65–66 frame Isa 59–64); MOTYER, Prophecy, 463, 467, 478, 489 segments into 56:9–57:12 (consisting of 56:9–12; 57:1– 12), 58:1–59:13 (58:1–14; 59:1–13) and 59:14–60:22 (59:14–20; 59:21; 60:1–22). Given his concentric structure of Isa 56–66, GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 14, 318, 331, 334, 337 segments into: 56:9–59:8; 59:9–15a; 59:15b–20; 59:21–62:12; cf. also the comments on the structure of Isa 56–66 in general in chapter 2 above. 81 Cf. in particular STECK, Beobachtungen zu Jes 56–59, 178–182; IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,9–59,21; 63,1–6, 206–207; similarly O SWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 493, although he compares Isa 58:1–14 with Isa 56:1–8, which is less likely. 82 Because of the similar change of addressee like in Isa 1:21–23, S TECK, Beobachtungen zu Jes 56–59, 172 argues that it is only the leaders who are addressed; thus also FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 196–197; HANSON, Dawn, 197–202; SCHRAMM, Opponents, 128. Others argue for a group within the people; e.g. P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 82 by pointing at the differences between them and the addressed leadership in 56:9–57:2. However, the content of Isa 57:3–13 seems to indicate that what formerly might have been confined to the leadership has burst and spread among the people. KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 51 states that “the idolatry of the people is also due to the lack of responsible ‘watchmen’ and ‘shepherds’.” Cf. similarly P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 82. 83 See for this reading in particular LAU, Prophetie, 152. Perhaps one should also recognize a dimension of gender-matched parallelism as a form of merism; cf. W. G. E. W ATSON, Hebrew Poetry, 321–323.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

273

nate in the allusion to the cult of Molech, the most abhorrent one, at the end (v.5).84 With v.6 the addressee changes to an unnamed female figure. In a first paragraph (vv.6–8a) this address expands the problem of pursuing other cults from v.5,85 indicating a widespread apostasy through three different locales (ʬʧʰʚʩʷʬʧʡ “in the parts of the wadi”,86 v.6; ʸʤ ʬʲ “on the mountain”, v.7; ʺʬʣʤ ʸʧʠ “behind the door”, v.8a). The next paragraph (vv.8a–10) accuses the female figure for having sought help from other deities and people in YHWH’s place.87 The last paragraph (vv.11–13) concentrates on the disturbed relationship with YHWH in particular.88 This will lead to an ignominious end of the unnamed addressee, but those who take refuge in YHWH will inherit the land and his holy mountain (v.13). Since Isa 57:3–13 is addressed in part to a female figure, this subsection has been related to other ‘Zion passages’, with support from some correspondences.89 But the stark contrast to texts like Isa 49; 54; 60; 66 raises questions about this approach.90 Moreover, there are a number of 84

There is much dispute about whether these accusations reflect real shortcomings or are metaphorical language in order to accuse the audience in the most effective way. For the latter, cf., e.g., FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 196; HANSON, Dawn, 197–198, evidently also RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 98. Others reckon with a more literal meaning; cf., e.g., WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 202; HERBERT, Isaiah 40–66, 138; see in particular the detailed discussions in DAY, Molech, 30, 36, 50–51; HEIDER, Cult of Molek, 379–382; LEWIS, Cults of the Death, 143–158; ACKERMANN, Tree, 101–117, 126–159. For the discussion of mlk as molek or mulk and related problems, cf., e.g., ACKERMANN, Tree, 107–108, 126–138 (arguing for mulk as the term for child sacrifice, taking up an earlier work of Eissfeldt); DAY, Molech (objecting against the view of Eissfeldt, maintaining the meaning molek as referring to a deity) and the survey of R. DOYLE, Molek. 85 Cf. also BEUKEN, Jesaja III/A, 60. 86 The understanding of this phrase is highly disputed. LAU, Prophetie, 155–156 has argued for reading the wordplay from one single root ʷʬʧ (II) “share, part” meaning “in the parts of the valley is your share”. It seems that the meaning also depends on the determination of the cultic activities, cf. in this respect ACKERMANN, Tree, 141–142. 87 This aspect is clearly present in the people’s confession of sin in Isa 59:12–13, which lends strength to the consistency of the whole of Isa 56:9–59:21. Contra those who deny any correspondences like LAU, Prophetie, 151 or RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 99. 88 Both paragraphs show an interesting design: vv.8–10 starts with a remark about the relationship between YHWH and her (“truly, away from me…”) but then proceeds with her actions looking for other help; vv.11–13a start with the indirect question (“of whom are you afraid…”) and then intensely speaks about “you and me” in the subsequent lines. 89 Cf. in particular B EUKEN, Example, 53–54, noting especially Isa 40:9 (ʤʡʢʚʸʤ) and Isa 2:2 (collocation of ʸʤ and ʠˈʰ) in respect to 57:7: ʠˈʰʥ ʤʡʢʚʸʤ. See also IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 62–63. In the light of these correspondences I regard it less likely that Isa 57:5–7 depends upon Jer 2:20b as HOLLADAY, Trito-Isaiah, 197 proposes. 90 SAWYER, Daughter, 100 argues that one could read the servant story and Zion’s story in parallel. Then the rebuke of Zion in Isa 57:6–13 corresponds to the rebuke of the servant in 43:22–24 that both interrupt the overall stories by sarcastic rebuke. B IDDLE, Lady, 139 identifies two series of four ‘Zion texts’ which mostly contrast the picture of

274

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

correspondences between Isa 57:3–13 and Isa 47.91 Yet neither of these identifications is made explicit. With respect to the “daughter of Babylon” it is obvious that most of the transgressions are different.92 At the same time, the text avoids calling the mother “Zion”. All we can suggest is that it is the mother of those addressed in v.3 to whom vv.6–13 speak. Thus within the speech to the “sons”, the address to the mother is included, revealing her final outcome. As the final line indicates (v.13b), the only way her children can avoid her fate is to trust in YHWH. Many scholars have noted the change of tone in Isa 57:14–21, and for many this provides the reason for ascribing Isa 56:9–57:13 and Isa 57:14– 21* to different authors or editorial layers.93 The CALL in v.14 is explained by two passages (v.15, vv.16–19a) that are mainly SELF-COMMITMENTS of YHWH who will revive (v.15) and heal, guide and comfort (v.18) his people. The last strophe (vv.19b–21) ANNOUNCES peace and YHWH’s intention to heal his people, but excludes the “wicked” from that peace. As some parallels to Isa 57:3–13 show, the aim of the commitment of YHWH is to change the present state of the people and their wrong-headedness into a new relationship with them, leading to healing, guidance and comfort (vv.17–18). The phrase ʠˈʰʥ ʭʸ in v.15 is similar to ʠˈʰʥ ʤʡʢ (57:7), and in both cases this is related to the similar roots ʯʫˇ or ʡʫˇ. In v.15 the intention of YHWH is to revive the humbled and crushed (ʺʥʩʧʤʬ; 2x), while the woman in 57:10b finds new life herself: ʪʣʩ ʺʩʧ. Both passages criticize pursuing “their own ways” (ʥʡʬ ʪʸʣʡ, v.17; ʪʫʸʣ, 57:10). Apart from the correspondences between Isa 57:19b–21 and 57:1–2 (see above) the first and third colon of v.17 have the association of “gain” (ʲʶʡ) and “own way” (ʪʸʣ) in common with Isa 56:11b. The juxtaposition of the present condition and the supposed future, which is central in the opening section of Isa 56:9–57:2, reappears in the subsequent sections. In 57:3–13 the future of the mother is described in order to motivate her children to leave her way and seek refuge in YHWH. With Isa 57:14–21 YHWH COMMITS himself to change the lowly of spirit and reBabylon (Isa 47). Within this series Isa 57 serves to show: the new Jerusalem cannot emerge without the old one being replaced. 91 Cf. 57:10 with 47:9, 12, 13, 15; 57:11 with 47:7; 57:12 with 47:12; 57:13 with 47:13, 14, 15; thus B EUKEN, Example, 55–56; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 63–64; cf. also B IDDLE, Lady, 133–134. 92 Cf. also BEUKEN, Example, 56, IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 64 (stating that it is only sorcery that both female figures have in common). 93 Cf. already the remarks of MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 670, then, e.g., SEKINE, Sammlung, 112–120; KOENEN, Ethik, 46–58 (excluding vv.17–18aĮ, 19bȕ–21); LAU, Prophetie, 118–126 (excluding vv.20–21); RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 28–34; KUSTÁR, Wunden, 205–219.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

275

vive his people, to heal the beaten and guide the one who walked his own way. We will see below that the function of Isa 57:14–21 is not exhausted by these observations, when read in a broader context. But as part of Isa 56:9–57:21, it contributes to the strategy of this passage to confront the audience with an ASSESSMENT of their present condition and an ANNOUNCEMENT of the future. The communicative strategy of Isa 58:1–59:21 has been discussed above. It leads the people to recognition, acknowledgement and confession of their sins. As in the previous discourse, it does so in the light of a perspective on the future: YHWH’s coming as the saving judge (59:15b–20), which also forms the goal of the issues of Isa 57:1–2 and 57:20–21. But we also recognized that there is an additional illocutionary action mediated through Isa 58:7a–14 that extends the declaration and revelation of sins. The illocutionary role of this passage to INSTRUCT the addressees about how to live is not be erased by the overall strategy to announce their sins. Both this ‘surplus’ of communicative action in Isa 58:7a–14 and the success of the illocutionary role of the whole discourse of Isa 58:1–59:21 concern hardening and its reversal. This will now be shown in our next paragraph. 2.2.2 Isaiah 57:14–21, a Prophetic Voice and the Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21 Noting affinities with Isa 6 on the one hand, and the perspective of salvation on the other hand, Steck argues, followed by Kustár, that Isa 57:14–19 changes the perspective on hardening and healing, introduced in Isa 6.94 Like Isa 6 “berichtet auch 57,14ff von einem thronenden Jahwe, der aber den Verstockungsauftrag selbst aufhebt und sich bereit erklärt, sein Volk zu heilen.”95 The terminological correspondences with Isa 6 are striking: the phrase ʠˈʰʥ ʭʸ occuring identically (Isa 6:1 and 57:15); ¥ʠʴʸ (6:10 and 57:18); the term ʭʩʺʴˈ (6:5 and 57:19a); and ˇʥʣʷ in relation with YHWH (6:1, 3 and 57:15).96 But does the simple equation of ‘affinities with Isa 6 with an announcement of salvation tallying to an abolition of the commis94

Cf. STECK, Der sich selbst aktualisierende “Jesaja”, 219, 221; K USTÁR, Wunden,

214. 95 KUSTÁR, Wunden, 214. Already HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 76–77, 77n.1 hinted at the possibility that Isa 57:14–19 deals with the issue of hardening when he, however, assumes that this passage answers the complaint of Isa 63:17. 96 These correspondences have been noted frequently; cf., e.g., WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 262 (ET, 328); STECK, Der sich selbst aktualisierende “Jesaja”, 219 (and in other studies of him); W ILLIAMSON, Book, 12, 39, 227, 233; LAU, Prophetie, 120–121; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 490–491; SOMMER, Allusions, 177n.43–44; BERGES, Buch, 471; RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 30n.13; KUSTÁR, Wunden, 214.

276

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

sion to harden’, apply to Isa 57:14–19? Indeed, there is no direct linkage to the hardening terminology of Isa 6:9–10. The present passage announces healing, but knowledge or perception is not mentioned here. Isa 56:9–57:2, on the other hand, indicates that the addressees are still under the influence of the hardening ministry of Isaiah. In this respect, it is worth looking at some other correspondences noted by Steck and Kustár: both recognize catchword associations between the present passage and Isa 8:13–18: ʬʥˇʫʮ (8:14 and 57:14); ¥ˇʣʷ (8:13) and ˇʥʣʷ (57:15); ¥ʯʫˇ with YHWH as subject (8:18 and 57:15); ¥ʸʺʱ said of YHWH (8:17 and 57:17).97 I would further add the connection of ʬʥˇʫʮ with the way of YHWH’s people: Isa 8:11 exhorts the prophet not to walk “in the way of this people” (ʪʸʣʡ ʤʦʤʚʭʲʤ) and continues in this context to announce the “stumbling block” for the people in 8:14; Isa 57:14 reverses this demand to remove “the stumbling block from the way of my people” (ʩʮʲ ʪʸʣʮ ʬʥˇʫʮ).98 It is particularly interesting in this respect that the same contrast between “this people” (ʤʦʤʚʭʲʤ) and “my people” (ʩʮʲ) occurs here as in Isa 6:9; 40:1. Given that Isa 8:11–18 offers a significant horizon for understanding the present passage, it is important to recognize the connection between this “stumbling block” in Isa 8:14, the sealing of the prophetic declaration in Isa 8:16 and the theme of hardening. The sealing of the prophetic declaration (Isa 8:16) is the realization of the “stumbling block” of Isa 8:14. The choice of the verb ¥ʸʥʶ in Isa 8:16 creates an assonance with the statement in Isa 8:14, according to which YHWH will become a stumbling block (ʬʥˇʫʮ ʸʥʶʬ). This phonetic association underlines a material connection: as a stumbling block, YHWH is still present in Jerusalem (see also Isa 8:18). It was argued above in chapter 3 that by this means, Isa 8:11–18 is related to the call to harden the people in Isa 6. According to Isa 6, the presence of YHWH is felt in the hardening message of Isaiah. Isa 8:11–18 substantiates this: YHWH becomes a stumbling block (ʬʥˇʫʮ ʸʥʶ) by binding up (ʸʥʶ) the prophetic message.99 According to these correspondences, the removal of the “stumbling block” means the reversal of the people’s hardness. In order to understand how the “stumbling block” could now be removed “from the way of my people”, we have to include another corre97

Cf. STECK, Der sich selbst aktualisierende “Jesaja”, 222–223; K USTÁR, Wunden,

207. 98

In my opinion this correspondence has a significant impact on how one perceives those passages in Isa 56–66 that speak of the “way of the people”. In this light I would reject the interpretation according to which in Isa 56–66 the way back from Babel (cf. 48:20–21 et al.) is spiritualised. It just continues how it is used in Isa 1–39. 99 For the relationship between Isa 6 and Isa 8:11–18 see also N IELSEN, Dramatic Writing, 2–5; SONNET, Le motif, 211n.9; LIND, Implications, 327–328; B.C. J ONES, Isaiah 8.11.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

277

spondence that has been variously noted, namely with Isa 40:1–3: the call ʪʸʣ ʥʰʴ is identical (57:14 and 40:3); the repetitive imperative ʥʬʱʚʥʬʱ (57:14) may recall ʥʮʧʰ ʥʮʧʰ (40:1), which also corresponds to the term ʭʩʮʧʰ (57:18), as well as the noun ʤʬʱʮ (40:3). In both passages the term ʯʥʲ appears (57:17 and 40:2); and both times the suffixed form ʩʮʲ occurs in the first line (57:14 and 40:1). In this context, the parallel sequence in the two passages is interesting: Both passages start with an appeal to an unspecified multitude (Isa 40:1 and 57:14).100 This appeal is followed by the call of a prophetic voice (Isa 40:6 and 58:1); the recurrence of ¥ʠʸʷ and ʬʥʷ in the context of affinities with Isa 40:1–8 clearly allude to this commission in Isa 58:1.101 Thus this correspondence between Isa 40:1–8 and Isa 57:14–19; 58:1 indicates that the removal of the “stumbling block” of Isa 57:14 is to be accomplished specifically by the prophetic voice, called in Isa 58:1. In other words, by the means of correspondences with Isa 6 and 40, YHWH explicitly extends the commission of Isa 40 to the proclamation to those in the homeland in Isa 57:14; 58:1. This proclamation does indeed include a reversal of hardening. But refining the proposals of Steck and Kustár, this happens not simply by the allusions to Isa 6. The reversal of hardening comes to the fore by specific elements, as we will see below. One of these is the prophetic voice, because it is through this proclamation that the ‘stumbling block’ is to be removed. So, what qualifies the prophetic voice to do that? It seems that the ability of the commissioned prophetic voice to remove the stumbling block is not only rooted in the fact of his commission by YHWH. In Isa 59:21 YHWH underlines and affirms his commitment to bring salvation to his people through his commitment to the addressed person.102 This person, however, betrays traits of the Servant of Isa 40–55 as well as his offspring. He has got the “spirit” (ʧʥʸ) of YHWH (cf. 42:1; 48:16b), which is also promised to the offspring of the Servant Israel 100 However, this does not mean that the multitude in Isa 57:14 is appointed to carry out this task. Contra KOENEN, Ethik, 54–55; KUSTÁR, Wunden, p.206. Others regard the leaders as the addressees of v.14, thus, e.g., STECK, Beobachtungen zu Jes 56–59, 172; IDEM , Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,9–59,21; 63,1–6, 199–200; KOOLE , Isaiah III/3, 95. RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 28 regards the people as the addressee of the summons in v.14. 101 There is not necessarily a contradiction between Isa 40; 61 on the one hand and Isa 58:1 on the other, if one notices that in Isa 40:2 the people and Zion-Jerusalem are not identical. “My people” is Jacob-Israel or the children of Zion, while Zion-Jerusalem is the city. Thus it is the city who is forgiven in Isa 40:2. 102 The content of “my covenant with them” is that the spirit and the word YHWH gave to ‘thou’ will not depart from “thy mouth…”, i.e. an individual addressee. Cf. also, e.g., STECK, Tritojesaja, 28–29n.70; KELLERMANN, Tritojesaja, 50; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 201; contra B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 395; B EUKEN, Main Theme, 70; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 150–151; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 531–532.

278

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

(44:3). As the Servant he is equipped with a “word” (ʸʡʣ, 50:4) that benefits the people. In this respect, he is similar to the addressee of Isa 51:16;103 both are said to have “offspring” (ʲʸʦ; 53:10).104 Moreover, in the light of Isa 58:1 and 59:21, this commissioned prophetic figure seems to be the one speaking in 1.sg. in Isa 61105 and 62 and introducing the communal lament in Isa 63:7, 15. Especially in Isa 61:1–3, this prophetic voice reflects further traits of the Servant, as it is variously noted.106 These correspondences have to be related further to correspondences between the speaker of Isa 61:1–3 and another ‘figure’ in Isa 40–55: Beuken and Williamson point to the correspondences with the prologue of Deutero-Isaiah;107 they comprise ¥ʧʬˇ, ¥ʸˈʡ,108 ¥ʠʸʷ, ¥ʭʧʰ.109 At the synchronic level of the text there is no indication of another figure commissioned other than the one in Isa 40. This suggests that the prophetic voice commissioned in Isa 40:1–8 continues to speak here. The ‘transformation’ of the prophet into a Servantlike figure is the consequence of him including himself among the followers of the Servant (52:13–53:12) who are the “offspring” of the Servant Cf. Isa 51:16 (ʪʩʴʡ ʩʸʡʣ ʭʩˈʠʥ) and Isa 59:21aȖ (ʪʩʴʡ ʩʺʮˈʚʸˇʠ ʩʸʡʣʥ). Cf. also GOSSE, L’alliance; BEUKEN, Trito-Jesaja, 78–83; IDEM, Servant and Herald, 416; KELLERMANN, Tritojesaja, 53–54; B LENKINSOPP, Servant and Servants, 171– 173; IDEM, Isaiah 56–66, 201–202. Given these strong reminiscences I cannot see that “the word of the LORD” means Torah here, as proposed by ROFÉ, Piety, 83. He especially fails to recognize that the “eternal covenant” is also part of the Isaiah tradition (cf. Isa 55:3; 61:9) and that the “seed” indicates the relationship with the Servant here. How this should be related to dtr. concepts of prophecy and servant is another question; see, e.g., B ALTZER, Biographie, 38–53, 113–128, 171–177; B LENKINSOPP, Servant and Servants, 158–160, 162–163 in this respect. For the relationship between “word” and “spirit” see in particular MA, Spirit, 132–136. 105 DE M OOR , Structure argues that Isa 61:1–9 has been added later to the original poem 61:10–62:9. It is not possible here to engage in this discussion mainly based on poetic observations and the difference of perspective in 61:5–6 and 62:8–9. On the latter, however, see especially B EUKEN, Servant and Herald, 420. 106 Cf. in particular KOENEN, Ethik, 105–108 (and p.105n.277 for further literature): He notes a) speech in 1.sg.; b) equipped with the spirit of YHWH like the Servant in Isa 42:1; c) ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ takes up Isa 50:4–9; d) repeating the roots ʤʤʫ and ʸʡˇ (42:3) the speaker continues the work of the Servant of 42:1–4; e) as in Isa 42:5–8 so here the royal task is the presupposition for releasing captives (including the catchword ʧʥʷʴ). Beyond vv.1–3, B EUKEN, Servant and Herald, 425, 431 points at 49:4/61:4 and 49:4/61:8. 107 Cf. BEUKEN, Servant and Herald, 417–418; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 199; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 178–184; IDEM, One Degree, 180–183. 108 Of course, both are aware of the fact that in 40:9 Zion/Jerusalem is the agent of bringing good news. But Williamson points at the reading of the LXX as an indication that TI might have understood it in a similar way (B EUKEN, Servant and Herald, 417– 418; W ILLIAMSON, One Degree, 182). 109 B EUKEN, Servant and Herald, 431 furthermore notes that Isa 61:8b might refer to Isa 40:10 and Isa 55:3 evoking the beginning and the end of Isa 40–55. 103 104

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

279

and by this means, the servants.110 Accordingly, the ability of the prophetic voice to remove the stumbling block by its message is rooted in the commission by YHWH (40:1–11, reaffirmed 58:1) and the transformation through the service of the Servant (50:1–11; 52:13–53:12), which is reflected in Isa 59:21; 61:1–3.111 It is this transformation of the prophetic voice that might explain the extension of the commission from Isa 40 to those in the homeland in Isa 57:14; 58:1: The overcoming of hardening for those in the exile is related there to the exodus announced by the voice of the Servant (Isa 48:16; 50:10). It was declared in Isa 51:7 and the overcoming of hardening finally manifested in the TESTIMONY of the “we” in Isa 53:1–10. We may see the stumbling block in Isa 57 as addressing the problem of hardening intro110

Cf. also B LENKINSOPP, Servant and Servants, 171–173; IDEM, Isaiah 56–66, 201– 203, 221. For the relationship between the “offspring” of the Servant (53:10) and the “servants” (54:17) see also B EUKEN, Main Theme, 67–68. With Beuken I see the “Herald of good Tidings” and the “Servant” fused together in “the prophet” and the prophetic voice, respectively, speaking in Isa 61 (and contra Beuken also in 59:21). But in contrast to his studies, I see this fusion as a consequence of the prophetic voice being among the Servant’s ‘offspring’. Williamson argues for yet another figure contributing to the “composite character” of Isa 61: Cyrus, on the basis of ¥ʧˇʮ; cf. IDEM, Variations, 176–178; IDEM , One Degree, 179–180. In addition, I would suggest that, transformed through the ministry of the Servant, the prophetic voice, like all servants, also starts to fulfil the actual commission of the Servant Israel, as the correspondences with 42 might indicate. In this context, the use of ¥ʧˇʮ might be due to the similarities between Isa 42:1–9 and the figure of Cyrus in Isa 45:1–7, which cannot be pursued here further. 111 Because of correspondences between Isa 53 and 57:14–19, some exegetes claim that the people see themselves as the Servant, and in contrast to Isa 53, with no specific mediator of forgiveness of sin and healing: “Das Volk trägt seine eigene Krankheit, die ihm keiner abnimmt. Die Heilung ist hier, ohne einen Mittler, allein der Heilsinitiative Gottes zu verdanken.” KUSTÁR, Wunden, 215; similarly STECK, Die Gottesknecht-Texte und ihre redaktionelle Rezeption, 167–168; G OLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 218. For the correspondences see, e.g., BEUKEN, Trito-Jesaja, 79–82; IDEM, Jesaja III/A, 85–86; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 77–78, 92–93; KUSTÁR, Wunden, 214. First of all, it must be said that Isa 57:14–21 is a speech of YHWH. What the people think is not expressed here; thus one could equally claim that YHWH states that they have to regard themselves as the Servant. But even this interpretation does not do justice to the flow of argument (the prophetic voice is clearly one of the descendants of the Servant; see above) nor to the commission of the Servant in Isa 49 nor to what is said in Isa 57:14–19: Through the commission in Isa 49 the Servant is Israel. Thus one would expect him to bear traits of Israel, even of the oppressed and smitten Israel. In Isa 57:15 the change between singular and plural is worth noting. I would rather suggest relating v.15bĮ (singular) to YHWH’s commitment to and vindication of the Servant (Isa 53) through which his care for his people becomes transparent and effective (v.15bȕȖ; now in plural). In my opinion this passage does not neglect the individual figure of the Servant but plays on the interwovenness of both ‘figures’, the people Jacob-Israel and the individual Servant, which is characteristic for Isa 40–55.

280

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

duced in Isa 6. If the stumbling block is related to the sealing of Isaiah’s message, its removal would be a sort of unsealing. If the commissioned prophetic voice in Isa 57 is one of those who through listening to the Servant have their hardening overcome and Isaiah’s message written on their heart, then its commission in Isa 57:14 + 58:1 provides the means to overcome the hardening of the addressees in the homeland. With these observations it is now possible to summarize and clarify the aspects of the theme of hardening in the whole of Isa 56:9–59:21. The theme of hardening occurs in a number of verses and in different kinds in Isa 56:9–59:21. It very much dominates the issues of Isa 56:9–57:2. It appears there in STATEMENTS about the leadership and lies at the heart of reasons, why the righteous suffer: because the leaders are blind, dull and lack any knowledge. As suggested by various correspondences between 57:3–13 and 57:14– 21, YHWH commits himself to changing the people’s situation, which he intends to achieve by ordering the removal of the “stumbling block” (57:14). This is to be realized specifically through the proclamation of the commissioned prophetic voice (58:1). To be sure, there is no explicit terminology related to hardening in these verses. However, the sizable number of correspondences between this passage and Isa 6; Isa 8:11–18 and Isa 40 enable the reader/hearer, to perceive this intention of YHWH within the broader context of the people’s (in-)ability to perceive the prophetic message (Isa 8) and the commissioning of prophecy (Isa 6; 40). By contrast, the prophetic speech (58:1–59:21) addresses the theme of hardening explicitly. The prophetic voice brings the theme of hardening into play by reformulating (59:1) the people’s complaint (58:3). They lament about YHWH not seeing (ʺʩʠʸ ʠʬʥ) and understanding (ʲʣʺ ʠʬʥ), Isa 58:3. The prophetic response in Isa 59:1 takes up these issues of perception and understanding but reformulates them: the issue of perception is formulated here by the collocation ʯʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ that is known from Isa 6:10. This explicit reference to the call to harden in Isa 6:10 relates the people’s lament (Isa 58:3) to the theme of hardening. Denying the shocking collocation of ʯʦʠ ¥ʣʡʫ with YHWH, the prophetic voice indicates that the communication between YHWH and his people cannot be properly addressed without reference to the theme of hardening. Juxtaposing it to YHWH’s ability to save (Isa 59:1a), this makes hardening one of the main issues related to salvation. Through the CONFESSION of sins, the people are finally guided also to acknowledge their epistemological restrictions. They realize that they grope along like blind (59:10) and do indeed stumble.112 Finally, they do “know” their sins and transgressions (59:12). This indicates that they have 112

Cf. ¥ʬˇʫ (59:10) with ʬʥˇʫʮ (57:14).

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

281

understood the proclamation of the prophetic voice that was to declare to them their sins (58:1). What has been hinted at through the realization of Isa 57:14 by the proclamation of the prophetic voice (58:1), becomes obvious in this confession: the effect of this prophet’s preaching is not ‘hardening’ but gaining knowledge, i.e. hardening is overcome by the prophetic speech. Therefore, hardness has not simply stopped with Isa 57:14–19;113 it also needs to be overcome by the ministry of the prophetic voice (58–59). In order to accomplish this ‘strategy’, it is a material necessity that the theme of hardening is only alluded to in Isa 57:14–19 but explicitly addressed in the prophetic speech. This speech is to overcome the hardness of the people; therefore, this is the appropriate place to address it. Two observations must be made. First, the overcoming of hardening is the effect of the prophetic speech. The prophetic voice’s CALL to perform the illocutionary action of DECLARING and MAKING KNOWN the addressees’ sins (Isa 58:1) has the perlocutionary effect of ‘removing the stumbling block’ so that the addressees are finally able to know their iniquities (Isa 59:12). The prophetic voice is called to perform the perlocutionary act of overcoming the hardness of the addressees by performing the illocutionary act of making known to them their sins. Secondly, the overcoming of hardness becomes manifest again in an EXPRESSIVE speech-act of the addressees themselves, like in Isa 53:1–10. Here it is a CONFESSION of their sins. Thus the theme of hardening lies at the heart of the communicative process of Isa 56:9–59:21. It is also indicated by the way it is placed within the section. It introduces the whole in Isa 56:9–57:2 and appears then at structurally significant places, specifically Isa 58:3 (the people’s lament about YHWH not “seeing” and “understanding”); 59:1 (the prophetic reply, according to which YHWH’s “ear is not too heavy to hear”) and in the ‘confession of sins’ in 59:9–15a (where the people confess their blindness [v.10] and that they ‘know’ their sins [v.12]). Moreover, the theme of hardening is fundamentally connected to the unit’s central issue of the interrelationship of religious and social-political righteousness. The failure of the leaders to care for righteousness is put down to their blindness and ignorance (Isa 56:9–57:2),114 a condition that reflects the effects which the hardening message of Isaiah was to achieve. What applies to them is the case for the whole people, too. They do not 113

Contra STECK, Der sich selbst aktualisierende “Jesaja”, 219, 221; KUSTÁR, Wunden, 214. 114 As in other passages dealing with the theme of hardening, the verbs of perception and understanding are formulated without an object indicating the general state in Isa 56:9–57:2.

282

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

“know the way of peace” (Isa 59:8) so that all their doing and speaking is perversion of righteousness. This behaviour is associated in their CONFESSION with their blindness (Isa 59:10). Ultimately they come to realize their sins (Isa 59:12). Hence, hardening and righteousness are fundamentally linked in this discourse. Unrighteous behaviour coincides with the addressees’ state of hardening. Only in overcoming hardening are they able to change their way and start interacting with each other and YHWH in righteousness. This understanding sheds also new light on the so-called proclamation of ‘conditional salvation’ in Isa 58 (and vv.7a–14 in particular). Turning briefly to this section again, we will realize the importance of the theme of hardening and its communicative mediation for the issue of righteousness. That connective righteousness is the issue of Isa 58:7a–14 can be seen in two respects. First, the so-called ‘if-then passages’ do not simply introduce conditions for participation in salvation. YHWH connects the instructions for the addressees’ actions of solidarity with reciprocal consequences. 115 Secondly, recognizing the association of light imagery with the issue of righteousness in other passages in Isa 58–62 and its background in ANE traditions of the ‘solar functions’ to provide ‘righteousness’ and ‘life’ shows that Isa 58 is not simply about salvation in general. It is about maintaining or re-establishing righteousness for the people. Excursus on the Relationship between the Light Imagery, Justice and Righteousness in Isaiah 58–62 That the light imagery, which many subsume under the general category of salvation, is crucially related to ‘justice’ and ‘righteousness’, comes to the fore very clearly in Isa 59:9–15b. Before the reasons for the absence of justice and righteousness are given in the 115

Actions like “breaking the bread” with those who are hungry (v.7aĮ), sharing the house with one who has none (v.7aȕ), satisfying the soul of the hungry (v.10a), would lead to a reciprocal consequence again, which is also indicated by a few terminological correspondences between the ‘if-lines’ and the ‘then-lines’: if they “satisfy the afflicted soul” (ʲʩʡˈʺ ʤʰʲʰ ˇʴʰ, v.10aȕ), YHWH will “satisfy your soul” (ʪˇʴʰ ǜǜǜ ʲʩʡˈʤ, v.11aĮ); if they do not “speak wickedness” (ʯʥʠʚʸʡʣ, v.9bȕ), they will become like a source of water “whose water will not deceive” (ʥʩʮʩʮ ʥʡʦʫʩʚʠʬ, v.11bȖ). However one treats 58:13–14, this relationship is clearly continued there: If the people approach YHWH through his “holy day”, calling the Sabbath their delight (ʢʰʲ ʺʡˇʬ ¥ʠʸʷ, 58:13bĮ), they will delight in YHWH (ʤʥʤʩʚʬʲ ʢʰʲʺʺ, 58:14aĮ). If they refuse their “own ways” (ʪʩʫʸʣ, 58:13bȕ), he will let them “ride on the heights of the land” (ʪʩʺʡʫʸʤ, 58:14aȕ). This is clearly the ‘religious level’. But that vv.13–14 do also include the social-political level, has been argued above. What we encounter here is the ‘deed-consequences connection’ that is crucially related to the concept of ‘connective righteousness’ (note that the ‘deedconsequences connection’ has been recognized as a crucial concept in Isa 58 and Isa 59 also by KOENEN, Ethik, 60–61 and LAU, Prophetie, 221–222). The INSTRUCTIONS for the addressees are complemented by YHWH’s PROMISES that he himself assures the connection between action and consequences, i.e. he guarantees ‘connective righteousness’.

2. Hardening in Isaiah 56:9–59:21

283

actual confessions (vv.12–15a) the first line states that fact (v.9a) and the first strophe of the whole expands this state (vv.9b–11b). Through the concentric arrangement of this strophe116 the term “light” (ʸʥʠ) corresponds to “justice” (ʨʴˇʮ) and “brightness” (ʤʢʰ) to “salvation” (ʤʲʥˇʩ).117 Thus light and righteousness interpret each other and are crucially related to each other.118 Introduction: v.9a

ʤʷʣʶ ʥʰʢʩˈʺ ʠʬʥ / ʥʰʮʮ ʨʴˇʮ ʷʧʸ ʯʫʚʬʲ

Expansion of v.9a: v.9b v.10a v.10b v.11a v.11b

ʪʬʤʰ ʺʥʬʴʠʡ ʺʥʤʢʰʬ / ʪˇʧʚʤʰʤ ʸʥʠʬ ʤʥʷʰ ʤˇˇʢʰ ʭʩʰʩʲ ʯʩʠʫʥ / ʸʩʷ ʭʩʸʥʲʫ ʤˇˇʢʰ ʭʩʺʮʫ ʭʩʰʮˇʠʡ / ʳˇʰʫ ʭʩʸʤʶʡ ʥʰʬˇʫ ʤʢʤʰ ʤʢʤ ʭʩʰʥʩʫʥ / ʥʰʬʫ ʭʩʡʣʫ ʤʮʤʰ ʥʰʮʮ ʤʷʧʸ ʤʲʥˇʩʬ / ʯʩʠʥ ʨʴˇʮʬ ʤʥʷʰ

Figure 21: Concentric Structure of Isa 59:9b–11b This connection is also evident in Isa 62:1, where the prophet claims to speak until Zion’s “righteousness” (ʷʣʶ) comes forth like “brightness” (ʤʢʰ) and her “salvation” (ʤʲʥˇʩ) like a “torch” (ʣʩʴʬ). In the light of these passages, YHWH’s shining forth upon Zion in Isa 60:1–3 is not simply his eschatological radiance, as Steck argues.119 YHWH’s shining forth upon Zion in Isa 60:1–3 is the epiphany of YHWH as the saving judge in Zion.120 This is also indicated by the use of ¥ʧʸʦ, which is a technical term for sunrise (together with ¥ʠʶʩ, which is important in respect to Isa 62:1).121 According to Janowski, the epiphany of a deity at sunrise has been associated to the help for the persecuted and the establishment of justice and righteousness through judgement of those doing injustices throughout the ANE. Some of these elements have been included in Yahwism, which was especially related to the theology of Zion as the city of YHWH and his dwell-

116 Cf. the figure and also the remarks in P OLAN, Ways, 276–283; contra KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 169 but also contra MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 690 and BEUKEN, Jesaja III/A, 135, who only note an inclusio of v.9 and v.11. 117 Cf. also LANGER, Gott, 60, who concentrates, however, on the parallel terms ʨʴˇʮ and ʤʷʣʶ on the one hand and ʸʥʠ and ʤʢʰ on the other in v.9, only. 118 Cf. also the more general statement of WEINFELD, ʣʥʡʫ kƗbôd, 35: “In fact, Isa. 40– 66 and the Psalms treat kƗbôd, God’s righteousness, and salvation as synonyms”. 119 Cf. STECK, Lumen gentium, 86, 93. This also raises doubts about the arguments of STECK, Grundtext, 51–52, who deletes vv.17–22 from the “Grundtext in Jes 60”. Steck defends his position in an added note in IDEM, Lumen gentium, 94n.37a against LANGER, Gott. But Steck does not recognize that ¥ʧʸʦ has to be included in the discussion of light imagery and justice; see in this respect the comments below. It is hard to deny that Isa 60:1 presents YHWH as the saving judge, equipped with solar traits and simultaneously indicating his pursue of the (formerly) solar functions of ascertaining ‘life’ and ‘righteousness’ through the means of judgement. In the light of these remarks one should also specify, in which sense the “metaphor of light (occurs) as a sign of salvation” throughout Isa (thus CLEMENTS, Light, 68). 120 Cf. J ANOWSKI, JHWH und der Sonnengott, 217. 121 Cf. J ANOWSKI, JHWH und der Sonnengott, 210–212.

284

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

ing place, in particular the “solar functions of ‘righteousness’ and ‘life’”.122 The salvation that is to come is the re-establishment of ‘connective righteousness’ that also includes the judgement of those who do injustices. Or to put it in other words, salvation is the appearance of justice and righteousness, which is accompanied (and secured) by YHWH’s judgement of the wicked. What happens in Isa 58:7–11 is not just “participation in salvation”. When they act in solidarity/reciprocity – like “breaking the bread” with those who are hungry (v.7aĮ); sharing the house with one who has none (v.7aȕ); satisfying the soul of the hungry (v.10a) – they perform the originally royal duty to mediate YHWH’s righteousness. What are in other cultures of the ANE “solar functions”, namely “righteousness” and “life”, and what in pre-exilic theology is applied to YHWH and mediated through the king, becomes the task of each individual addressee of Isa 58.123 Then like at a sunset, the light (ʸʥʠ) breaks forth, righteousness (ʷʣʶ) goes before the people and YHWH’s glory (ʣʥʡʫ) gathers124 them. Thus what is at stake in Isa 58–62 is not simply ‘salvation’, it is ‘salvation’ as YHWH’s maintenance of ‘connective righteousness’, where action and consequences remain connected and govern each aspect of interaction. This also includes the relationship between YHWH and his people (‘religious righteousness’; cf. Isa 58:9a, 11, 13–14). Those who disturb this connection will be judged by YHWH. This is finally emphasized in Isa 59:15b–20. It is part of YHWH’s governance to maintain the connection between actions and consequences when he judges those who disturb this connection by their actions. For those who suffer from this disturbance, YHWH’s judgement is a ‘saving righteousness’. That the pre-exilic concept of YHWH as the king who guarantees and, if necessary re-establishes, ‘connective righteousness’, as it is expressed, e.g., in Ps 7125 is applied here to indicate YHWH’s intention to establish universal righteousness, is obvious from the same crucial terminology: ʲˇʩ/ʤʲʥˇʩ (Ps 7:2, 11; Isa 59:16, 17); ʷʣʶ (Ps 7:9, 18) / ʤʷʣʶ (59:16, 17); ʨʴˇ/ʨʴˇʮ (Ps 7:7, 9, 12; Isa 59:15); ¥ʬʮʢ (Ps 7:5) / ¥ʭʬˇ (Ps 7:5[?]; Isa 59:18 [2x]). Even the speech of YHWH’s vengeance fits into this train of thought, since it belongs to YHWH’s concern for justice and righteousness, as recent studies have shown. 126

Thus Isa 58 is not simply about introducing conditions for YHWH’s salvation to come or for the addressees to participate in YHWH’s salvation. The addressees are also instructed to play their role in maintaining ‘connective 122 For the motif of the epiphany of the sun god in the ANE see especially J ANOWSKI, Rettungsgewißheit; for the inclusion into Yahwism, cf. IDEM, JHWH und der Sonnengott and the literature noted IDEM, JHWH und der Sonnengott 195–196nn.18–39. For a preliminary orientation see also LANGER, Gott, 33–36, 195–204. 123 Cf. in this respect, JANOWSKI, JHWH und der Sonnengott, 214–215, 217–218; see there also for further literature on the religious-historical background. 124 For preserving MT (reading Qal) against the frequently proposed emendation to a form of Piel, see KOENEN, Aktualisierung. 125 See in this respect JANOWSKI, JHWH der Richter. 126 Cf. ZENGER, God, 69–73 and in particular PEELS, Vengeance, 118–123, 170–176, 290–292. It is not possible here to engage in a discussion about a possible religiohistorical development, as proposed by SPIECKERMANN, Schöpfung, 404–409, who differentiates between a pre-exilic concept of righteousness as a numinous divine being and a post-exilic idea of righteousness as part of God’s nature. See also IDEM, Heilsgegenwart, 165–225.

3. Summary

285

righteousness’. What makes this a proclamation of salvation for the addressees is its integration into the communicative strategy of the whole discourse of Isa 56:9–59:21.127 As a unit in Isa 58:1–59:21, the ‘if-then passages’ serve as the positive foil against which the sins of the addressees can be identified. This leads not to an announcement of judgement but to the addressees’ CONFESSION of their sins (Isa 59:9–15a). However, in this confession, it is not only the illocutionary role of Isa 58:1–59:21 to DECLARE the sins of the addressees (Isa 58:1) that has been achieved. This confession also manifests the perlocutionary action to remove the stumbling block from their way (Isa 57:14), which we interpreted as the overcoming of hardening in noting correspondences with Isa 6 and Isa 8:11–18. The instructions in Isa 58 are part of the ‘de-hardening communication’ initiated by YHWH. Hence, the condition for the possibility to do righteousness (Isa 58) is YHWH’s call of the prophetic voice to overcome the blindness and ignorance of the addressees.

3. Summary 3. Summary

This chapter has shown that in respect to the theme of hardening the communicative strategy of the proclamation to those in Judah is similar to the address directed to the exiles. The addressees are first CHARACTERIZED as those who are blind and do not understand and emerge as those who are affected by the hardening message of Isaiah. The purpose of the new proclamation of the prophetic voice, which is extended to them, is to reverse their hardness, to remove the “stumbling block” (cf. Isa 57:14; 58:1). Again the process of ‘DE-HARDENING’ the addressees is the effect of the prophetic proclamation, a communicative act. Furthermore, the discussion of Isa 56:9–59:21 has shown a close connection between the theme of hardening and the issue of righteousness. In this respect, one can also recognize differences to Isa 40–55. In the latter, the hardness of the addressees comes to the fore primarily in that they do not relate to YHWH in righteousness (cf. Isa 48:1–11), which is then restored together with the overcoming of their hardness. For those who live in communities in Judah, it is not only their relationship to YHWH (religious righteousness), but also the relationship among each other (social righteousness) that needs to be addressed and in which respect their hardness is mentioned (Isa 56:9–57:2). Yet while the specific aspect of righteousness is different, the chapter has argued that it is the communicative act of ‘DE-HARDENING’ the addressees that also enables them to relate to 127

This complex communicative strategy exceeds the limits of the theological labels ‘conditional’ and ‘unconditional salvation’.

286

Chapter 7: The Hardened in the Homeland: Isaiah 56:9–59:21

each other and to YHWH in righteousness. For them the process of ‘DEHARDENING’ is confirmed when they join the EXPRESSIVE act of the CONFESSION of their sins (Isa 59:9–15a) like those who give their TESTIMONY (“we”) about their insight in the significance of the Servant (Isa 53:1-10). If in these speeches of “we” the reversal of hardening is manifest for the addressees both in the exile (Isa 40–55) and in the homeland (Isa 56–63:6), it poses the question of how the longest communal prayer (63:7–64:11) fits into this process of communication, since it explicitly laments the still lasting ‘hardness’ of a group of “we” (63:17). This will be addressed in the next chapter.

Chapter 8

Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11 Previous chapters have shown how the presentation of the hardening message of Isaiah in Isa 1–39 addresses and characterizes those in Babylon and in Judah as hardened. In this context, the communicative processes in Isa 40–55 and Isa 56:9–59:21 serve also to reverse the hardness of the people of YHWH. The communicative process that is mediated through Isa 1:1– 63:6 leads ultimately to the overcoming of hardening for the addressees. This communicative aim is connected with the restoration of righteousness; with the overcoming of hardening the people can communicate again, which is one central aspect of the maintenance of ‘connective righteousness’. The restoration of righteousness and the overcoming of hardening are interrelated in Isa 40–63:6. If this is achieved through communicative action that is mediated in Isa, we must address the question: how does the one final passage that deals explicitly with hardening in Isa relate to this? In Isa 63:17 a multitude asks YHWH: “Why […] do you harden our hearts so that we do not fear you?” This chapter seeks to illumine how this question and the unit, in which it occurs, is related to the communicative strategy as it has been unfolded in the Book of Isaiah.

1. Introduction 1. Introduction

Apart from the question of Isa 63:17, the section of Isa 63:19b–64:3 contains various terms related to the theme of hardening (cf. ¥ʲʣʩ, Isa 64:1; ¥ʲʮˇ, ¥ʯʦʠ, ʤʺʠʸʚʠʬ ʯʩʲ; Isa 64:3). So that our study need to take into account this whole passage as well. Following the pattern of previous chapters, we shall look at the structure and some poetic devices of this passage, its communicative strategy and finally the theme of hardening within it. The analysis of the communicative action, however, deviates from previous procedures because of the lament’s twofold illocutionary role.

288

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

2. Structure and Poetics 2. Structure and Poetics

The prayer of Isa 63:7–64:111 consists of the introductory strophe 63:7 and two large parts, Isa 63:8–14 and 63:15–64:11.2 Both sections are marked by some possible inclusios,3 the main indicators for the new section, however, are the recurrence of a speaker in 1.sg. in 63:15 together with the uses of ʭʧʸ, as well as the change from the historical account (63:8–14) to the petition under the present circumstances (63:15–64:11). A striking feature in the first part is the use of verbal forms in wayyiqtol, which seem to serve as structural markers. I suggest two sub-sections in Isa 63:8–14, with the latter (63:11–14) logically subordinated to the former (63:8–10).4 Each is introduced by a bicolon with a verb in wayyiqtol at the beginning and containing the term ʭʲ “people” (v.8a, v.11a). In the first sub-section, further verbal forms in wayyiqtol determine the structure (as well as the flow of argument). At first, they introduce two further sub-units, the first (v.8b, v.9aĮȕ) consisting of two bicola, the second one (v.9b) being a bicolon. V.10a disrupts the pattern of wayyiqtol forms that is continued in the last line (v.10b), thereby creating an attention marker. This line indeed marks a significant change. It refers back to the introductory line of this sub-section (v.8a) by the means of ʤʮʤ, although creating now a totally contrasting picture of the ʭʲ of YHWH. The following line alludes back to the sub-unit following v.8a, fusing key phrases of the beginning and end of those two lines into one bicolon. By this means, again a contrasting picture is created: ʲʩˇʥʮʬ ʭʤʬ ʩʤʩʥ becomes

1

The extent of this passage is almost universally accepted. Hardly convincing exceptions are TORREY, Second Isaiah, 461–462, who takes Isa 63:1–64:11 as one poem that is in many respects parallel to Isa 42:1–43:7, SMART, History, 266–267 takes Isa 63–64 as a unit, and KISSANE, Isaiah II, 289–290, who regards Isa 63:7–65:7 as one poem. 2 So far most studies agree, but as regards the further segmentation, proposals have been hugely diverse. 3 ʭʲ occurs in Isa 63:8 and 63:14; then also at other structurally significant places: 63:11 and 64:8 (its appearance in 63:18 is due to the correspondences between 63:17–18 and 64:8–11; on this see below). The verbal root ¥ʷʴʠ (63:15; 64:11) frames the second part. 4 With others who mostly take v.7 together with vv.8–10; cf., e.g., MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 729; FISCHER, Jahwe, 27, 32–47; WEBSTER, Isaiah 63–65, 91–92; EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 265, 269; G OLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 47, 65; others segment into vv.(7)8– 11a, 11b–14: e.g. B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 10–12 (suggesting a less likely concentric structure of vv.8–11a); KOENEN, Ethik, 157. KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 348–349 suggests that v.11a is the centre on which the diptych vv.8–14 hinges. C LIFFORD, Narrative, 96, 98–99 sees vv.8–14 as a unity with v.10 at its centre. AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 38–41 segments into vv.7–9, 10–14, thus also HARRELSON, Why, 167.

289

2. Structure and Poetics

ʡʩʥʠʬ ʭʤʬ ʪʴʤʩʥ,5 and YHWH has changed from ʭʬʠʢ ʠʥʤ into ʭʡʚʭʧʬʰ ʠʥʤ (see Figure 22).6 v.8a / v.10a vv.8b, 9aĮ/ v.10bĮ v.9aȕ v.9b

/ v.10bȕ / v.11a

vv.8–9

v.10 + v.11a

ʥʸʷˇʩ ʠʬ ʭʩʰʡ / ʤʮʤ ʩʮʲʚʪʠ ʸʮʠʩʥ / ʸʶ ʠʬ ʭʺʸʶʚʬʫʡ / ʲʩˇʥʮʬ ʭʤʬ ʩʤʩʥ ʭʲʩˇʥʤ ʥʩʰʴ ʪʠʬʮʥ ʭʬʠʢ ʠʥʤ / ʥʺʬʮʧʡʥ ʥʺʡʤʠʡ ʭʬʥʲ ʩʮʩʚʬʫ / ʭʠˈʰʩʥ ʭʬʨʰʩʥ

ʥˇʣʷ ʧʥʸʚʺʠ / ʥʡʶʲʥ ʥʸʮ ʤʮʤʥ ǜǜǜ / ʡʩʥʠʬ ʭʤʬ ʪʴʤʩʥ ʭʡʚʭʧʬʰ ʠʥʤ / ǜǜǜ ʥʮʲ ʤˇʮ ʭʬʥʲʚʩʮʩ ʸʫʦʩʥ

Figure 22: Structure and Correspondences in Isa 63:8–10 and the Relationship of Isa 63:11a to It

It seems that the contrasting parallel of vv.8–9 does not stop in v.10. The introductory line of the second sub-section (v.11a) refers back to the final sub-unit (v.9bȕ) by the repetition of ʭʬʥʲ ʩʮʩ. By this means, the second sub-section is sub-ordinated to the first part. It does break the negative contrasting picture by ‘remembering’ the days of old, which are then expanded in the small strophes that follow this introductory line, each with a distinctive design. The first strophe (v.11b) consists of two parallel bicola,7 the second (v.12) and third strophe (vv.13–14) have the same ‘frame’.8 v.11a

ʥʮʲ ʤˇʮ ʭʬʥʲʚʩʮʩ ʸʫʦʩʥ

v.11b

ʥʰʠʶ ʩʲʸ ʺʠ / ʭʩʮ ʭʬʲʮʤ ʤʩʠ ʥˇʣʷ ʧʥʸʚʺʠ / ʥʡʸʷʡ ʭˈʤ ʤʩʠ

v.12 vv.13–14

ʥʺʸʠʴʺ ʲʥʸʦ / ʤˇʮ ʯʩʮʩʬ ʪʩʬʥʮ ʭʬʥʲ ʭˇ ʥʬ ʺʥˈʲʬ / ʭʤʩʰʴʮ ʭʩʮ ʲʷʥʡ ʥʬˇʫʩ ʠʬ / ʸʡʣʮʡ ʱʥʱʫ / ʺʥʮʤʺʡ ʭʫʩʬʥʮ ʥʰʧʩʰʺ ʤʥʤʩ ʧʥʸ / ʣʸʺ ʤʲʷʡʡ ʤʮʤʡʫ ʺʸʠʴʺ ʭˇ ˃ʬ ʺʥˈʲʬ / ʪʮʲ ʺʢʤʰ ʯʫ

Figure 23: The Structure of Isa 63:11–149

The second part (63:15–64:11) consists of several sub-sections of different length. The first sub-section (63:15–17) stands out by its concentric struc-

This line also alludes to v.9aĮ in respect to ʤʸʶ, which oscillates between “affliction” and “enmity” by the semantically related ʡʩʥʠ. This even amplifies the contrast between v.8b–9aĮȕ and v.10b: in the former YHWH has become the saviour by helping them in their enmities/afflictions, now he has become their enemy. 6 For similar observations see also KUNTZMANN, Relecture, 27; CLIFFORD, Narrative, 99n.17; EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 273–274. 7 Each first colon starts: ʤʩʠ + determined ptc.; each second colon is introduced by ʺʠ. 8 Both start with a ptc. of ¥ʪʬʤ and conclude with the phrase “ǜǜǜ ʭˇ ǜǜǜʬ ʺʥˈʲʬ”. 9 Thus also, e.g., EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 276. 5

290

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

ture, which is expressed through the communicative acts that mark each line by specific phrases at their beginning:10 v.15a v.15b v.16a v.16b v.17a v.17b

ǜǜǜ ʤʠʸʥ ǜǜǜ ʨʡʤ –

– Look … and see …!

ǜǜǜ ʤʩʠ –

– Where …? – For you are our father …. – You, YHWH, are our father

ǜǜǜ ʥʰʩʡʠ ʤʺʠʚʩʫ – ǜǜǜʥʰʩʡʠ ʤʥʤʩ ʤʺʠ –

– Why …? – Return …!

ǜǜǜ ʤʮʬ – ǜǜǜ ʡʥˇ –

Figure 24: The Structure of Isa 63:15–17

I will discuss Isa 63:18–19a further below (with Isa 64:7). The next subsection I would identify is Isa 63:19b–64:3. The optative particle ʠʥʬ serves as an attention marker for the new sub-section, followed by a verbal form in qatal. Isa 64:4 is the next line with a qatal form at the first place, which indicates a new sub-section. The present sub-section consists of two strophes that are roughly parallel. The second strophe begins similarly to the first strophe in repeating the colon ʥʬʦʰ ʭʩʸʤ ʪʩʰʴʮ ʺʣʸʩ (63:19b; 64:2). It has combined this line with the similar beginning of the second line of the first strophe with an inf.cs. with preposition (ʧʥʣʷʫ, 64:1a; ʪʺʥˈʲʡ, 64:2a) and by this means is subordinated to the first strophe. Both strophes conclude with the outcome of YHWH’s actions: the enemies and nations might “recognize your name” (64:1b) or never before has one11 perceived “a God except you” (64:3).12 The next sub-section (64:4–6) starts and closes with another qatal form (ʺʲʢʴ, v.4a; ʺʸʺʱʤʚʩʫ, v.6b) juxtaposing the reality of this section to the wish expressed in the prior section (ʺʲʸʷʚʠʥʬ, 63:19b). The opening line not only alludes to the opening line of the former section by the qatal form. It also takes up ¥ʤˈˆ from the former’s last line (64:3b). Note also that the parallel centre lines of this sub-section (vv.5a, 5b) relate to the opening and concluding line.

10 Thus also B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 20. In contrast to Beuken, however, I do not regard vv.18–19a as part of a second pattern of structure of vv.15–19a. For their distinguished function see below. 11 The 3.pl. of the verbs in v.3 may refer to the enemies and nations of v.1b. 12 The relationships are established especially by the verbs of the same semantic field ¥ʲʣʩ, ¥ʲʮˇ, ¥ʯʦʠ, ʯʩʲ ¥ʤʠʸ and the phrases ʪʮˇ and ʪʺʬʥʦ ʭʩʤʬʠ.

2. Structure and Poetics v.4a v.5a v.5b v.6b

291

ʪʥʸʫʦʩ ʪʩʫʸʣʡ / ʷʣʶ ʤˈʲʥ ˈˈʚʺʠ ʺʲʢʴ ʥʰʩʺʷʣʶʚʬʫ ʭʩʣʲ ʣʢʡʫʥ / ʥʰʬʫ ʠʮʨʫ ʩʤʰʥ ʥʰʠˈʩ ʧʥʸʫ ʥʰʰʥʲʥ / ʥʰʬʫ ʤʬʲʫ ʬʡʰʥ ʥʰʰʥʲʚʣʩʡ ʥʰʢʥʮʺʥ / ʥʰʮʮ ʪʩʰʴ ʺʸʺʱʤʚʩʫ

Figure 25: The Parallelism of Isa 64:5a and 64:5b and their Relationship to Isa 64:4a, 6b

The two lines of Isa 64:7 stand on their own, like the two lines of Isa 63:18–19a. Both frame the contrasting sections Isa 63:19b–64:3 and Isa 64:4–6. Moreover, they inversely correspond to the centres of the sections that stand outside that frame: the framing lines Isa 63:18–19a and the last section (Isa 64:8–11) have in common: ʪˇʣʷʚʭʲ, 63:18a corresponds to ʭʲ, 64:8 and ʪˇʣʷ ʩʸʲ, 64:9a; ʪˇʣʷʮ, 63:18b corresponds to ʥʰˇʣʷ ʺʩʡ, 64:10; ¥ʤʩʤ for the description of the present state.13 The centre of the first section (v.16 of 63:15–17) and the framing lines 64:7 correspond to each other by the statement ʤʺʠ ʥʰʩʡʠ ʤʥʤʩ. The last sub-section (64:8–11) echoes in its composition the first section of this part, by starting with imperatives in the first line (v.8), concluding with a question (v.11) and with a long descriptive part in the middle. The framing lines refer back to Isa 63:15 (¥ʨʡʰ: 64:8 and 63:15a; ¥ʷʴʠ: 64:11 and 63:15b). In respect to further poetic features, the frequency of various terms has proven significant for clarifying the understanding of this prayer.14 Moreover, since poetry is mainly characterized by the juxtaposition of similar or contrasting semantic concepts, synonyms and antonyms have to be taken into account as well.15 One of these recurring terms is ¥ʸʫʦ. It occurs at structurally significant points and the different agents of ‘remembering’ as well as the objects that are ‘remembered’ are remarkable.16 Also noteworthy is ʬʫ; despite its frequent use elsewhere, it appears 9 times,17 strongly influencing the character of the whole passage. In this context, this ‘completeness’ and ‘wholeness’, expressed through ʬʫ, appears to be tied to the 13 ¥ʤʩʤ occurs four times in the descriptive part in Isa 64:8–11 and plays a central role there. Apart from Isa 63:19 it appears in 63:8 and 64:5, i.e. at structurally significant places. 14 See in particular FISCHER, Jahwe, 76–130. In a private conversation, Hugh Williamson pointed out that because of the number of these terms it does not make much sense to call them ‘keywords’ so that in the following I will avoid this term even though recognizing that the various repetitions contribute to the overall argument. 15 Cf. in particular WEBER, Psalm 77, 8–11. 16 Cf. Isa 63:7, 11; 64:4, 8; see also the discussion below. 17 Cf. 63:7, 9(2x); 64:5(3x), 7, 8, 10.

292

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

frequent references to ‘eternity’. Apart from the term ʭʬʥʲ,18 one has also to consider the phrase ʣʠʮʚʣʲ19 as well as the antonym ʸʲʶʮʬ (63:18). The term ʭʲ “people”. Isa 63:8 and 63:11 display contrasting pictures of the “people” of YHWH who do not deceive (v.8) and then have become rebellious (v.11). The first part concludes with the positive notion “so did you lead your people” directed towards YHWH. Isa 63:18 describes the negative conditions of the “people” and Isa 64:8 finally summons YHWH to look again to see that it is his people who are speaking. Additional repeated words, some of which will be discussed in respect to the communicative strategy of this prayer below, include ¥ʤʩʤ;20 verbs and terms of the stem ʤˈʲ;21 ʪʸʣ and further verbs belonging to the semantic field of ‘guidance’;22 the verbs and nouns of the stem ˇʣʷ;23 the term ʺʸʠʴʺ24 and ʭˇ.25

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11 3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

It will be argued in the following discussion that a remarkable shift marks the communicative strategy of the prayer when read independently on the one hand and in the context of Isa on the other. In order to substantiate this reading, I shall deviate slightly from the pattern of discussion of previous chapters and will first sketch the main lines of the communicative strategy within Isa 63:7–64:11 and then turn our attention to the role that this communal prayer plays within Isa. 3.1 The Communicative Strategy within Isaiah 63:7–64:11 The communicative strategy of the whole prayer is determined by its twofold structure. The first part (63:8–14) recounts the “mercies of YHWH” that the speaker wants to remember (v.7). These memories are structured by the verbal forms in wayyiqtol. Their sequence is as follows: YHWH declared “them” as his people (v.8a), became their saviour and redeemer (vv.8b, 9a) and he bore and carried them all the days of old (v.9b). But suddenly this harmonious communion is disturbed, indicated also by the 18

Cf. 63:9, 11, 12, 16, 19; 64:3, 4. It frames the final section with 64:8, 11. 20 Cf. Isa 63:8, 19; 64:5, 7, 8, 10. 21 Cf. 63:12, 14; 64:2, 3, 4, 7; note also the synonym ¥ʬʮʢ, 63:7. 22 ʪʸʣ occurs in Isa 63:17; 64:4; note further ¥ʬʨʰ and ¥ʠˈʰ in 63:9; ¥ʤʬʲ Hi. in 63:11; ¥ʪʬʤ Hi. in 63:12–13; ¥ʢʤʰ in 63:14; and the contrary ¥ʤʲʺ Hi. in 63:17 all with YHWH as subject. 23 Cf. 63:10, 11, 15, 18; 64:9, 10. 24 Cf. 63:12, 14, 15; 64:10. 25 Cf. 63:12, 14, 16, 19; 64:1, 6. 19

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

293

disruption of wayyiqtol forms: “and they, they rebelled” (v.10a). As argued above, this introduces a sequence parallel to the preceding one that contrasts with it at the same time. So the next wayyiqtol form records the total opposite of the corresponding part of the previous sequence: YHWH turned into an enemy and warrior (v.10b). The next line beginning by a wayyiqtol is still part of the parallel sequence, as it introduces a new subsection (vv.11–14). But this wayyiqtol form causes the turn in the contrasting sequence. His people remembered the “days of old” (v.11a), followed by the content of their remembrance. Within this pattern of two parallel sequences, the whole second subsection (vv.11–14) is actually the third element of that sequence. This is not only indicated by the repetition of ʭʬʥʲ ʩʮʩ (v.9b, v.11a), but also by the recurrence to YHWH’s guidance at the end of that sub-section (v.14b), referring to the concluding line in the first sequence (v.9). These features create an important asymmetry within the first part of the whole prayer. The first sequence (vv.8–10) presents three elements of the harmonious communion of YHWH and his people. The parallel sequence records the total contrast: his people have become rebels and YHWH their enemy. The logic of this parallel sequence would finally necessitate YHWH leading them astray or into disaster in contrast to his guidance in v.9b. Instead, it is the people remembering that prevents them from this final outcome. Thus within this account of the people’s former history with YHWH, the act of remembering (¥ʸʫʦ, 63:11) is very important. In the light of this account, the intention of the whole prayer emerges as an act of remembrance (¥ʸʫʦ, 63:7) as well as it reflects a hope that it can launch a similar turn as in its former history. 26 Isa 63:15 then introduces the second part and the actual petition, which is dominated by the alternation of REPRESENTATIVE and DIRECTIVE speechacts. There are two (interrelated) tensions in those lines, which DESCRIBE or STATE certain things, i.e. those, which represent what is. First, there is the tension between what YHWH is for the speakers (he is their father, their redeemer and their potter), and their actual condition (they are in a terrible state, a desolate place, maltreated by their enemies). These descriptions form the centre of the outer sub-sections (63:16 in 63:15–17: what YHWH is; 64:9–10b in 64:8–11: how the speakers are) and inversely 26

Differently, F ISCHER, Jahwe, 77, who states that v.11 is the concrete execution of the hymnic summons of 63:7. This disregards that v.11 is part of the whole historical recital in vv.8–14, as it is indicated by the chain of yiqtol forms. Additionally, although the language of vv.8–14 is chosen to fit the needs of the lament (see below), the point in the first part is not that YHWH is present because of the praise, but it is an attempt to motivate YHWH to act as in those former days by remembering him as in those days; contra KUNTZMANN, Relecture, 35–39(especially 39).

294

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

frame the inner sub-sections (63:18–19b: how the speakers are; 64:7: what YHWH is), which highlights that contrast. This tension is rooted in a second one. What YHWH is for the speakers is also in tension with what he has actually done. This tension is manifest in particular in the inner subsections: In contrast to what he should do (63:19b–64:3), he is the actual cause (64:4, 6b) of their present state (64:5). In other words, the present state of the petitioners, which is in tension with what YHWH is for them, is the result of the tension between what YHWH is (or what they know about YHWH) and what YHWH has done (or what they experienced of YHWH).27 This contrast is reflected in Isa 63:7–14. As noted above, the petitioner hopes to change YHWH by ‘remembering’ his deeds from former times. In his brief survey of communal laments, Clifford notes that the psalmists “carefully tailored the historical recital to fit the aim of the lament.”28 Several parallels between Isa 63:8–14 and the petition for YHWH’s theophany (63:19b–64:3) highlight this: YHWH is asked to rend the heavens, come down so that mountains would shake before his presence (63:19b; 64:2–3), just as he was present in former times through his holy spirit and glorious arm (63:11, 12).29 This concern for YHWH’s presence comes also to the fore in the question “where is…?” (ʤʩʠ; 63:15 and 63:11), which is provoked by his absence.30 Moreover, in former times YHWH has revealed his eternal and glorious “name” (ʭˇ šƝm; 63:12, 14); now the people can plead that YHWH may make known his “name” (ʭˇ šƝm; 64:1) to his enemies. Furthermore, the utterance “when you would do awesome things” (64:2) almost summarizes the whole of 63:11–14.31 Finally, the insistent statements “you are our father” (63:16; 64:7) take YHWH at his word, that he declared the Israelites to be his sons (63:8).32 At the same time, there are elements in that petition that show that the relationship between YHWH and his people is disturbed in a way unlike any earlier situation. As a result, enormous doubt is cast on the possibility 27

EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 278 speaks similarly of the “Gegensatz zwischen dem Einst, der Heilszeit (Exodus), und dem Jetzt”. 28 CLIFFORD, Narrative, 94. 29 Cf. CLIFFORD, Narrative, 99–100; F ISCHER, Jahweh, 42. 30 Cf. EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 276, 278. 31 The noun ʺʥʠʸʥʰ is used specifically for the deeds of YHWH during the Exodus several times; cf. the comments in FUHS, ʠʸʩ yƗrƝ’, 290–315 (especially 302); VAN P ELT & KAISER JR., ʠʸʩ, 527–533 (especially 532); GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 110–111. 32 Cf. similarly EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 278–279 and GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 90–91. F ISCHER, Jahweh, 52, 111–112 also notes the relationship between the people’s insistence that YHWH is “our father” and 63:8, but does not fully clarify that the latter actually forms the basis for the insistence of the people in this prayer (cf. FISCHER, Jahweh, 52).

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

295

that YHWH might answer this communal lament. Formerly, YHWH became the enemy of his people because of their sins (cf. 63:10); this time the people claim that their sins are the consequence of YHWH’s anger (64:4b).33 The alienating actions of YHWH are not caused by the alienation of the people from him; they go back to YHWH himself, to an alienation of YHWH. He has hidden his face – that is why nobody calls on his name (64:6); He even has attacked the one who does righteousness (64:4); He hardens their hearts (63:17). Thus the only thing the petitioners can do is to plead to YHWH that he might “return” (63:17),34 that he might not be angry forever but will look at his people (64:8). Their paradoxical situation comes through in the last strophe of their petition for YHWH’s theophany: they “do not hope in fearful things” (ʤʥʷʰ ʠʬ ʺʥʠʸʥʰ ʪʺʥˈʲʡ, 64:2),35 and yet they “wait for” YHWH and hope he will act for them (ʥʬʚʤʫʧʮʬ ʤˈʲʩ, 64:3). Thus their relationship with YHWH is totally disturbed, but they try to hope in YHWH against YHWH. This disturbance in the relationship is further indicated by the way several words are used contrastingly. Some of them have been already noted in respect to the foundation for the petition for YHWH’s theophany in the former history of salvation. Their contrasting use elsewhere shows how much their petition is undermined. As in former times, the speakers “remember” (¥ʸʫʦ) in order to express their repentance (63:11; 63:7). But in the present, YHWH has “attacked those who ‘remembered’ him” (64:4) and the final plea is not to “remember” sin forever (64:8). Thus as long as YHWH remembers against them, their remembrance is ineffective. In their account of 33

The syntax of 64:4 (also 64:6) is quite clear: the people say they have sinned in consequence of YHWH’s anger. Thus already E LLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 32 and HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 75–76. Yet most commentators interpret Isa 64:4–6 as a confession of sin; cf., e.g., W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 255–256, 264–265; VEIJOLA, Klagegebet, 305; W ILLIAMSON, Isaiah 63,7–64,11, 55–58; AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 41, 44, 46; WERLINE, Prayer, 41–44. Similarly, also MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 16 stresses that “divine hardening occurs in response to human sin” and says that the hardening was the response of their father’s sins (63:10). But he fails to recognize the importance of the different time levels of their fathers and their present. Of course, in Isa 64:4–6 the people do indeed speak about their sins, and so in a sense confess their sins. They acknowledge the reality of their sinning. But this must not conceal the fact that the common sequence of cause and effect, namely ‘sins of the people – anger of YHWH’, is reversed here and that the people do not seek repentance but ask YHWH to repent. Those who pray here see the anger of YHWH and his absence as the cause of their sins and this is what makes their situation that terrible: because YHWH has turned against them in the first place (in contrast to former incidents as reported in 63:8–14) their repentance could mean nothing as long as YHWH does not repent (63:17b); on the distinctive character of this passage against the “harmonizing attempts” of most of the commentators, cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 117 and GROSS, Jes 64,4. 34 Cf. also the remarks in HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 76. 35 ʤʥʷʰ ʠʬ is most probably a relative clause; cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 388; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 111.

296

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

their former history, YHWH has acted for his people for the sake of his “name” (ʭˇ, 63:12, 14), which justifies his eternal name “redeemer” (63:16). His theophany would have the effect of making known his “name” even to his enemies (64:1). Instead his people have become like those over whom his “name” was never called (63:19) and who do not call upon his “name” (64:6). The metaphor of ‘guidance’ shows the same disturbance of relationship: in former times, YHWH has led Moses and his people safely (63:9, 12– 14), now he leads them astray (63:17) and attacks those who remember him in his “ways” (64:4). Moreover, while formerly YHWH “has become (¥ʤʩʤ) for them a saviour” (63:8), now “we have become (¥ʤʩʤ) like those over whom you never ruled” (63:19), “we have become (¥ʤʩʤ) like one unclean” (64:5), the holy cities and Zion “have become (¥ʤʩʤ) a desert” etc. (64:9–10).

Isa 63:7–64:11 is a PLEA to YHWH to restore his relationship with his people. The several DIRECTIVE speech acts serve that purpose: explicit imperatives and questions (63:15, 17; 64:8, 11; to some extent also 63:19b– 64:3) are efforts to move YHWH. The basis for that petition is what the people know and believe about YHWH (63:16; 64:7), which agrees with what he has done in former times for them (63:8–14) but stands in sharp contrast to their present condition. At the heart of the problem, however, lies the disturbed relationship between YHWH and them. As far as they are concerned, this time it is YHWH who caused it. The frequency of the terms ʬʫ and ʭʬʥʲ creates the impression that all is at stake here: if YHWH does not answer, everything is over forever. Thus this communal lament provides words for those who see their situation as the result of YHWH’s alienation from them. But how does this fit into the broader communicative strategy of the whole Book of Isaiah? 3.2 The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11 within the Book of Isaiah 3.2.1 Literary Parallels between Isaiah 63:7–64:11 and the Book of Isaiah Recently, the question of the relationship of Isa 63:7–64:11 to the rest of Isa, and to Isa 40–55(–66) in particular, has received increased attention. The scholarly views on the matter are quite diverse. On the one hand, scholars emphasize its relatively independent origin, independent in particular from Isa 40–55.36 On the other hand, others argue for its depend-

36

Cf., e.g., FISCHER, Jahweh, 257–280 (especially 278); KOENEN, Ethik, 158–159; W ILLIAMSON, Isaiah 63,7–64,11, 57–58 and those he mentions ibid. 49n.4; LAU, Prophetie, 286–315 (especially 286–287, 314–315); SCHRAMM, Opponents, 150; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 44–47 (although he notes several connections to Isa 60:1–63:6; he interprets them as responses in 60–63:6 to the earlier communal lament); EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 266–269; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 231, 236; cautiously also G OLDINGAY, Isaiah, 355.

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

297

ence upon Isa 40–55 or Isa 40–63:6.37 However one determines the prehistory of the prayer (see also below), the number of parallels between Isa 63:7–64:11 and the rest of the Book of Isaiah, as it appears in the present literary context, are most striking, especially the number of contrasting or even contradictory propositions in comparison with Isa 40–63:6. First, while YHWH emphasizes the positive function of the patriarchs in Isa 41:8–9; 51:2, the petitioners point to the negative relationship to their forefathers who do not know or acknowledge them.38 Secondly, the speakers ask: “why do you make us err from your ways?” (63:17). This question stands in contrast to the way YHWH has already provided for the exiles from Babel to Zion (cf. Isa 48:20; 50:10; 55:1–5) and to the way YHWH has prepared for those in the homeland by removing the obstacles through the prophetic ministry (cf. Isa 57:14; 58:1–59:15). Thirdly, they ask: “why do you harden our hearts away from the fear of you?” (63:17). This denies the opportunity of overcoming hardness given to the exiles by listening to the Servant (cf. 48:6b–8, 16b; 50) and to those in the homeland by the proclamation of the prophetic voice (cf. 57:14; 58:1–59:15). Indeed, YHWH has already addressed the problem of hardness in the present (cf. 42:18–25; 48:1–11; 56:9–57:2). Fourthly, the people lament they have become like those “upon whom your name was never called” (63:19), although YHWH declared the return of all in the diaspora, who “are called by my name” (43:7).39 Fifthly, they plead that YHWH should not “remember sin forever” (64:8) as if they had not recognized that YHWH will not remember their sins (cf. 43:14), which is manifested in the vicarious death of the Servant for the sins (cf. 53:6b, 11b) and the offer of the confession of sins (58:1; 59:[5–8]9–14). Finally, the people ask anxiously “will you restrain yourself and be silent for ever” (64:11), despite the prior announcement of YHWH that he will not be silent and in fact will shout (cf.

37

Cf. E LLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 55–56, 94–99, 115, 123; O DEBERG, TritoIsaiah, 277–281; HANSON, Dawn, 86–99 (especially 99); B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 9–10. STECK, Tritojesaja, 35–40 (especially 37n.111); IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,1–8; 63,7–66,24, 233–242 (especially 238–241); IDEM, Autor, 245–249; TOMASINO, Isaiah, 85–86, 95–96; AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 36–37n.22, 37–38, 46–49; B ERGES, Buch, 485–497 (especially 494–497); GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 149, 155–169, 189–190; RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 56–59; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 259 seems to tend to a “purely literary work” as well, noting the structural and metrical irregularity and its close connection to the following passage. 38 Cf. similarly EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 279. 39 GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 105 notes 43:1 as a parallel.

298

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

42:14–17).40 Moreover, the prophetic voice is the means of YHWH’s word and, consequently, will not be silent (cf. 40:6–8 and especially 62:1). At the same time, there are also some correspondences with Isa 1–39. The ‘father – sons’ imagery is reminiscent of Isa 1:2, 4. Moreover, the equation of ʭʩʰʡ and ʭʲ and their characterization as ¥ʤʸʮ recalls the verdict of YHWH in Isa 30:9. The assertion that YHWH has hidden his face corresponds to Isa 8:17.41 To a certain extent it corresponds more broadly to Isa 1–39, when further correspondences to the same literary context reveal contrasts between the speakers of this prayer and what is expected of Isaiah ben Amoz there. Isaiah is not to walk in the “way of this people” (8:11) while they lament that YHWH makes them err from “his ways” (63:17). Isaiah is to “fear” YHWH (8:12, 13) while they are hardened so that they do not “fear” YHWH (63:17). Further literary correspondences between both passages comprise: the concept of ‘holiness’ (ˇʣʷ; cf. 8:13 and 63:10, 11); YHWH’s sanctuary (ˇʣʷʮ, in 8:13 YHWH is the sanctuary while in 63:18 the sanctuary is burned); and ¥ʤʥʷ and ¥ʤʫʧ (8:17 and 64:2, 3). Furthermore, in accordance with Isa 29:16, 23, they acknowledge their status as “clay” (ʸʮʧ) in relation to YHWH the “potter” (ʸʶʩ) and as the “work of his hand” (ʣʩ ʤˈʲʮ).42 Additionally, the crowd laments the total “desolation” (ʤʮʮˇ) of the cities (64:9), which has been announced in Isa 6:11 and which now includes Jerusalem as well.43 The most obvious and strongest correspondence with Isa 1–39, however, is to be found in respect to the theme of hardening. What is recorded there as the task to be achieved by the proclamation of Isaiah ben Amoz (6:9–10; 29:9–10), is reality in Isa 63:17: YHWH hardens their hearts (ʡʬ ¥ʧˇʷ). The promises of overcoming hardness in Isa 1–39 (cf. Isa 11:3; 29:18–19, 24; 32:2–3) seem far off, indeed they seem not to be valid any more. What is striking in particular is the use of ¥ʧˇʷ in yiqtol, which indicates a continuing action that is not yet completed. It is clear from these observations that the prayer Isa 63:7–64:11 variously interrelates with other parts of the Book of Isaiah. This raises the question about its function in the present context, which we will now address. 40

This has been frequently noted; cf., e.g., BEUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 14, 21–22, 25, 48, 50; STECK, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,1–8; 63,7–66,24, 240; LAU, Prophetie, 308–313; B ERGES, Buch, 496; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 41–42 (also 41n.50), 156, 194. 41 GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 125 notes also Isa 54:8; 57:17; 59:2 as other correspondences. In terms of grammatical construction Isa 8:17 and 54:8 are closer to Isa 64:6 than Isa 57:17; 59:2. 42 Cf. also Isa 45:9–11 and the discussion of G OLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 130–132. Whether Isa 63:7–64:11 refers mainly to Isa 45:9–11 (thus GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 130–132) or independently of Isa 45:9–11 to 29:16, 23 cannot be discussed here. 43 In Isa 6:11 (see also Isa 1:7) the desolation ʤʮʮˇ is said of the cities ʩʸʲ. In Isa 64:9 the cities have become a desert ʸʡʣʮ and Jerusalem itself is a ʤʮʮˇ.

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

299

3.2.2 The Communal Lament Isaiah 63:7–64:11 as a Complaint about the Delay of Salvation Scholars who attend to this question generally regard the prayer as a petition towards YHWH to realize his promises that are delayed so much: “Wat YHWH toen heft beloofd, moet Hij nu verwerkelijken.”44 Most of these studies, however, deal with this issue in terms of theological concepts. In the context of the present study’s emphasis on communicative acts in Isa, I want to move in a different direction closely related to the theme of hardening. 3.2.3 The Communal Lament Isaiah 63:7–64:11 as a Disclosure of the Hardened This prayer almost entirely contradicts the proclamation of Isa 40:1–63:6 on the one hand and accepts some of the assertions of Isa 1–39 on the other. It emerges that for those praying here all that has been said before in Isa 40:1–63:6 does not apply. Their situation is still that after Isa 1–39 yet before Isa 40:1. They appear as if they have not heard the proclamation of Isa 40ff but have been heavily affected by Isa 1–39: they are hardened (63:17; cf. Isa 6:9–10); they suffer the consequences of YHWH having hidden his face (64:6; cf. 8:17); and now they find themselves in total desolation (64:9–10; cf. 6:11). What I want to argue is that this prayer discloses those who are still hardened. Those who would still join in that prayer after the previous proclamation, express that they feel unaffected by it. By this means, they manifest their enduring hardness. Despite what has been said (and done) before, they keep asking: “Why, YHWH, do you make us err from your ways, and harden our hearts, away from the fear of you?” (63:17). By means of the numerous contrasts with Isa 40:1–63:6, this prayer, and especially this question, DISCLOSES the hardness of the speakers. This reading can be supported by paying further attention to the literary context. a. Isaiah 40:1–63:6 as a Means of Multiple Communicative Acts In identifying the multiple possibilities of action expressed through communication in Isaiah, I have argued for a range of communicative acts in Isa 40ff, including explicit performative speech-acts. In some cases ‘salvific acts’ are realized through proclamation. In the logic of the communicative strategy of Isa 40–63:6, it is not possible to say that the announce44 B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 50; similarly the proposals in STECK, Autor, 247–248; MCLAUGHLIN, Hearts, 23–24; BERGES, Buch, 496–497; LAATO, Zion, 54, 85, 200; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 189; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 160, 190–191.

300

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

ments of salvation have not been fulfilled yet. They are fulfilled in the process of the ongoing proclamation by this book. The claim of Isa 40– 63:6 is to realize what it says. The question is consequently, whether this proclamation is effective or not. In other words, is the communicative process of Isa 40:1–63:6 able to do what it claims or does it fall short of the goal? A comment on a metalevel above the communicative process would be needed to mark the previous proclamation as invalid and inefficient. There are indicators that this prayer stands apart from the previous proclamation, but as we will see, these features are not intended to mark this prayer as a metacommunicative comment. In the end, the prayer highlights those for whom the previous proclamation was ineffective. Yet the further outcome shows that this does not call in question the success of the communicative strategy of Isa 40:1–63:6. b. Isaiah 62:10–63:6 as a Preliminary Conclusion The unit of Isa 62:10–63:6 marks the end of the consoling proclamation of the prophetic voice commissioned in Isa 40:1–11 with two features that refer back to Isa 40. First, as noted by many scholars, the summons to prepare the way (62:10) and the assertion that YHWH comes with his recompense (62:11) refer back to Isa 40:3, 10b.45 Thus as the proclamation to the exiles concludes with Isa 55 by reference back to Isa 40, so the proclamation to those in the homeland concludes with the reference in Isa 62:10ff back to Isa 40. Secondly, this section contains another allusion to Isa 40:2. There, YHWH says that Zion has suffered “double” for her sins. The debate is endless about what this “double” could mean. It is suggested here that the word refers to her widowhood, left by YHWH, and also to the loss of her children.46 It seems that both aspects are taken up in the new names

45 Cf. in particular STECK, Heimkehr, 65–71; IDEM, Jes 62,10–12 als Abschluß, 145– 148; although I leave his redaction-critical conclusions uncommented here. 46 Several features lead to this conclusion: First, the structure of Isa 40:1–11: after the general assertion in vv.1–2 the following strophe (vv.3–5) is concerned with the coming (back) of YHWH; then vv.6–8 deal with the people (= the children of Zion); both aspects are combined in vv.9–11, when YHWH comes together with the recompense (= the children of Zion). Secondly, perhaps the clearest indication is the contrasting fate of Babylon in ch.47 where it is said that two things will happen to her (cf. Isa 47:8–9): she will become a widow (= without husband), and she will be bereaved of her children (= without children). Thirdly, the positive address towards Zion in 52:1–2 is based on the proclamation of the return of the people of YHWH (= the children of Zion, 52:3–6) and on the assertion that YHWH will come back as well (52:7–8). Fourthly, the same applies in Isa 54 (vv.1–4: new children; vv.5–10: YHWH will be her husband again). Fifthly, these aspects can also be found together in Isa 60 (presence of YHWH in Zion, vv.1–3; return of her children, vv.4, 8–9) and expanded in Isa 61:4–7 (proclamation to the people – the

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

301

in 62:12. The children of Zion are called “redeemed of YHWH” (v.12a) because they are brought back by him (62:11); and Zion has not to be called “left one” anymore (62:12b). As in Isa 40–55, the proclamation in Isa 56–63:6 to the addressees in the homeland takes place in the horizon of the rehabilitation of city Zion (Isa 60). Both groups are invited to participate ultimately in the same salvation given in Zion, as the many correspondences between Isa 49:14–26 and Isa 60 show. How they will be able to do so differs according to their different circumstances. Dispersed in the foreign land, the issue for the exiles is not their social righteousness but their relationship to YHWH. In the course of the proclamation of Isa 40–55 they are transformed through the ministry of the Servant to come back to Zion and be the Servants of YHWH (Isa 54:17). For those who live together in the homeland, the issues are the interconnection of their relationship to YHWH (religious righteousness) and their relationship to each other (social-political righteousness). They have to be transformed in these respects, which happens through the communicative process of Isa 56:9–59:21. The prospect is the restoration of universal righteousness, which goes forth from Zion (Isa 60). YHWH maintains righteousness by acting as the saving judge from Zion (Isa 60:1–3, 18–22) and guaranteeing the connection of action and consequences. Because of the equipment and ministry of the prophetic voice (Isa 61:1–3) this is salvation for the addressees because through this proclamation they may be transformed (Isa 57:14–59:21; see chapter 7) so that they can live in righteousness in Zion (Isa 61:3–11). This comprehensive transformation of city Zion and her children in the exile and in the homeland is inaugurated through the voice of the prophet, which is initiated in Isa 40:1–11. The transformation of the addressees and the rehabilitation of Zion are not the same, but they are interconnected and mediated through the proclamation of Isa 40–63:6. The light of the righteousness and salvation shines forth from Zion (Isa 62:1) and among her children (Isa 58) and it will be ultimately accomplished when YHWH comes back with the exiles (Isa 62:10–12). But, as Isa 59:15–20 indicated, salvation and judgement belong together in order to re-establish ‘connective righteousness’.47 And so the passage concludes with a notion of the children of Zion) and Isa 62:2–8 (YHWH will be her husband again), which is then summarized and concluded with Isa 62:10–12. 47 Isa 59:15–19 announces that YHWH will re-establish salvation as connective righteousness through judgement. With this scope that passage closes in the last two lines (v.19b–20): YHWH will come (¥ʠʥʡ) like an “oppressive” river (v.19b; this follows the interpretation of KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 207–208 who translates “like an oppressive mass of water”. The interpretation of v.19b is hugely problematic. See, therefore, also the different proposals in ROFÉ, Isaiah 59:19 and KRUGER, Who Comes and in particular his de-

302

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

coming of the one who (also) executes judgement, coinciding with YHWH’s return to Zion (cf. ʠʡ ʪʲˇʩ ʤʰʤ, Isa 62:11 and ʭʥʣʠʮ ʠʡ ʤʦʚʩʮ, Isa 63:1). As the judgement upon those who oppose YHWH is paradigmatically presented in the fate of Babylon, the arch-enemy of the exiles, as it is proclaimed to them (Isa 47), so here the proclamation to those in the homeland is heralded by the judgement on their arch-enemy Edom (63:1–3). Referring back to Isa 40:1–11, the passage Isa 62:10–63:6 indicates that the consoling proclamation of the prophet has reached its conclusion. The communal lament Isa 63:7–64:11 stands outside that proclamation, and therefore its distinctiveness is evident. c. Contrasts and Different Understandings in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 versus Isaiah 40:1–63:6 Various contrasts between the communal lament and the preceding chapters have been noted above. They show that the process of Isa 40:1–63:6 on the one hand and the perception of that by those who join in the prayer of Isa 63:7–64:11 on the other are fundamentally contrary. d. The ‘Confirmatory’ Function of the ‘Communal Speeches’ in Isaiah 40–66 In two previous passages, the addressees could confirm the perlocutionary act of the reversal of their hardness in a speech of “we”. Those who joined the TESTIMONY (Isa 53:1–10) or the CONFESSION (Isa 59:[5–8]9–14) as a group of “we”, emerged as those who have been transformed with their hardness overcome. In Isa 63:7–64:11, too, it is a group of “we” who speak about how they are affected by hardening. They claim that they are still hardened. In all these communal speeches, the state of those who join in them comes to the fore. Those who take up the PRAYER of Isa 63:7–64:11 and identify with it emerge as people unaffected by the transforming message of the prophetic voice. They are still hardened in contrast to those who already expressed the overcoming of their hardness. The latter would simply disapprove of the present PRAYER. This separation is confirmed by the answer that YHWH gives to Isa 63:7–64:11.

tailed survey) and at the same time he will come (¥ʠʥʡ) as redeemer to Zion (v.20). It is in these actions that one will see the glory of YHWH (ʣʥʡʫ, v.19a).

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

303

e. The Answer of YHWH in Isaiah 65:1–66:14 The answer of YHWH in Isa 65–66 marks the claims of the previous prayer as illegitimate.48 These chapters have recently gained increased interest, not the least in respect to their place within the whole book. Proposals about their origin and literary growth,49 literary consistency,50 rhetorical structure51 and relationship to the beginning of Isa52 vary significantly. 48 Some commentators disagree with the notion of Isa 65(66) as the reply of YHWH to the previous lament; thus, e.g., SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 208–209; ELLIGER, Einheit des Tritojesaja, 36, 114–115; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 281; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 266; AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 46–47; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 268. It must be said, however, that even those who agree with the understanding of an answer to Isa 63:7–64:11 in 65– 66, hugely differ in respect to the extent of that answer. Many confine it to only 65:1–7 (e.g. K ISSANE, Isaiah II, 288–289) or only 65:1–25 (thus, e.g., RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 81). For TOMASINO, Isaiah, 96–97 the “original” answer to the lament was Isa 66:1–21, 23. Cf. also the survey in GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 201–205. 49 Among those who determine different editorial stages are: e.g. W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 237–246, 316–340 (ET, 296–308, 398–429: TI [layer I]: 65:16b–25; 66:7–14; layer II: 65:1–16a; 66:3–4; 66:5; 66:17; layer III: 66:6, 15–16; 66:20, 22–24 and apocalyptic additions: 65:17, 25; layer IV: 66:18, 19, 21 perhaps also 66:1–2 [or independent]); P AURITSCH, Gemeinde, 171–218, 222–224 (by 65:1, 24 the redactor forms the originally independent unit vv.2–23 as a reply to 63:7–64:11; in 66 originally independent units [1–4, 5, 6–16, 17, 21, 23] have been connected and expanded by an editor; v.24 is later); SEHMSDORF, Studien I (Deuteronomistic hands, responsible for 65:1–16a, added 65:19b–24 to TI’s promise in Isa 65:16b–19a; the same procedure is recognizable in 66:1–4) and IDEM, Studien II (the apocalyptic editor added 65:25; 66:17–24 in Isa 65– 66); SEKINE, Sammlung, 54–67, 165–178, 231–233 (the editor [65:1, 24] grouped together the piece of TI 65:16b–23, 25 with the later 65:2–16a to form an answer to 63:7– 64:11; the editor also created 66:18–24 and formed a unit with 66:1–4 [originated before the rebuilding of the temple] and TI’s 66:7–16 by adding 66:5–6, 17); K OENEN, Ethik, 157–214 (the editor shaped the whole of 65:1–66:22 by the use of material of TI [65:16b–24; 66:1–2, 7–14a] to create the answer to 63:7–64:11; some minor additions in 65:6bȕ, 7b, 15aȕ, 25; 66:13bȕ, 16b, 19aII, parts of 20, 23–24); LAU, Prophetie, 126–150, 168–202 (Lau regards the following units as roughly independent works of “schriftgelehrte Propheten” that are sometimes related by similar topics/concerns to which the individual texts can be related; thus “Tradentenkreis I”: 65:16b–25; 66:7–14a; “Tradentenkreis II”: 65:1–7; 65:8–16a; 66:1–4; 66:5, 6, 14b–17; 66:18–24[v.24 added later]); RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 103–106 (chs. 65 and 66 are parallel but originated at different stages); GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 209–228 (original answer: 65:1–7, 16b–25; correction of that answer by adding 65:8–16a; 66:1–6; specifications at a later time: 66:7–15, 17; last expansion in order to create inclusio with the beginning of Isa: Isa 66:16, 18–24). 50 Among those who argued for a coherent forming of Isa 65–66 (sometimes except 66:17–24), see especially STECK, Anlage; IDEM, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,1–8; 63,7–66,24; B EUKEN, Closure; IDEM, Jesaja III/B, 54–55; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 128–132. The procedure that Koenen assumes for the editor of TI’s work goes in a similar direction. 51 Cf. MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 744–745, 757–758 and especially W EBSTER, Rhetoric of Isa 63–65; IDEM, Rhetorical Study; also P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 128–132.

304

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

For the purpose of this study we must confine ourselves to some of the main aspects of Isa 65–66 in their present literary context. One crucial element in Isa 65–66 is the change of addressees. In Isa 65:1–5 YHWH is speaking, but he addresses no one specifically. In some passages, YHWH addresses a group that is not “his servants” (65:8–12 and especially 65:12–15a); in others he speaks to those toward whom he acts with favour (e.g. 65:17b–18a; 66:10–11, 12–14). This coincides with several repeated phrases that serve as structural markers. After the ‘addresseeless’ speech in 65:1–5 the term ʤʰʤ, together with YHWH as the subject, introduces the speech in 65:6–7. Up to 65:15, YHWH addresses those who will not share in his salvation. Isa 65:17–18 addresses clearly another group, and again it is introduced by a form of ʤʰʤ, now with the suffix of 1.sg. of YHWH. Both cases precede a subsequent unit introduced by the messenger formula (65:8; 66:1) and another one introduced by the messenger formula with a preceding similar particle (65:13, ʯʫʬ + messenger formula; 66:12, ʩʫ + messenger formula).53 Thus we have two parallel panels of speech each segmented into three sub-sections by the parallel structural indicator: Isa 65:6–7 + 65:8–12 + 65:13–16 and Isa 65:17–25 + 66:1–11 + 66:12–14.54 52 The studies of LIEBREICH, Compilation I, 276–277; IDEM, Compilation II, 126–127 and LACK, Symbolique, 139–141, 142–143, 234–235 had a huge impact on this issue that is now a matter of much debate. For the pros and cons see now, e.g., SWEENEY, Isaiah 1– 4, 21–24; IDEM, Prophetic Exegesis; T OMASINO, Isaiah; CARR, Unity and IDEM, Reading Isaiah and in particular BEUKEN, Closure, 217–221. 53 SCHOORS, Jesaja II, 377 and BEUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 58 reject to regard the occurrences of the messenger formula as structural markers, but the way they are used is striking. 54 There are some further features that support the parallel structure of two panels of speech: – Isa 65:6–7 and Isa 65:17–25: The only strophe in 65:6–7 corresponds to 65:17–18, the first strophe of the other speech, in respect to the communicative structure (Some exegetes, however, regard Isa 65:16b as part of the unit 65:16b–25; thus, e.g., B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 463–464, 472–473; KOENEN, Ethik, 170–171; SCHRAMM, Opponents, 159; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 210–212; see also the discussion in SEKINE, Sammlung, 165–166. But BEUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 59 notes rightly that the contrast between the “former things” [v.16b] and the “new heaven and new earth” [v.17a] create an appropriate caesura, which also corresponds to the content of vv.1–16, vv.17–25. One may also note the division in 1QIsaa [see, e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 426 in this respect]): Both strophes, Isa 65:6–7 and Isa 65:17–18, consist of four lines that are roughly concentric. In Isa 65:6–7, YHWH speaks about what he will do (qatal forms in 1.sg.: ʩʺʮʬˇ, v.6b and ʩʺʣʮ, v.7b) to “them” (suffixes in 3.pl.masc.; see in particular the recurring ʭʷʩʧʚʬʲ, v.6b and v.7b) in the outer lines, while he directly addresses “you” in the inward line v.7a (Many scholars emend to 3.pl. [see also LXX], mainly because they want to fit it into their segmentation of 65:1–7 as one unit; thus explicitly, e.g., STECK, Anlage, 218; SWEENEY, Prophetic Exegesis, 459. But the reading

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

305

Isa 65:1–5 Isa 65:6(–7) Isa 65:8(–12) Isa 65:13(–16)

ʩʰʴʬ ʤʡʥʺʫ ʤʰʤ ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠ ʤʫ ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ ʸʮʠʚʤʫ ʯʫʬ

ʩʰʰʤʚʩʫ ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠ ʤʫ ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠ ʤʫʚʩʫ

Isa 65:17(–25) Isa 66:1(–11) Isa 66:12(–14)

Isa 66:15(–24) ʤʥʤʩ ʤʰʤʚʩʫ Figure 26: Structural Markers in Isa 65–66

Finally, the phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʤʰʤʚʩʫ, similar to Isa 65:17, appears in 66:15 marking another section for the last time. As the prophetic voice indicated the preliminary conclusion in 62:11 through a reference to Isa 40:10b, so the definite conclusion is introduced by a reference to Isa 40:10a.55 Now, the prophetic proclamation has come to an end and all flesh (ʸˈʡʚʬʫ) will become aware of YHWH in his judgement (v.16). The prophetic voice can give way to the final words of YHWH (vv.18–24). Including several aspects of Isa 40–66, YHWH finally confirms that all flesh will see his glory. Thus with the possibility Isa 40:5 fulfilled, the communicative strategy of Isa 40–66 has come to a conclusion. What remains is a contrasting reference to the beginning of the book: now “your offspring” (ʲʸʦ) will endure like the new “heaven” (ʭʩʮˇ) and “earth” (ʵʸʠ; 66:22) after in former times “heaven and earth” witnessed the rebellious “offspring” (1:2, 4). Now there will be true worship on “New Moons” (ˇʣʧ) and “Sabbaths” (ʺʡˇ) of MT is well attested [cf. 1QIsaa; Vulgate] and it is more likely that the 3.pl. in the variants has been inspired by the immediately surrounding lines than the other way round. The reading of MT is the lectio difficilior, but fits in the end to the overall structure, if one allows the present text to make its own impact rather than emending it for the sake of the exegete’s preferred segmentation). The addressees are the same as “they”. In the clearly corresponding outer lines in Isa 65:17–18 (both 65:17a and 65:18b begin identically: ʠʸʥʡ ʩʰʰʤ ʩʫ), YHWH says again, what he is about to do, and again with no direct addressee, while the inner line 65:18a consists of an imperative, directed one more time to 2.pl.masc. Moreover, as the “they” have to be identified with the direct addressees in 65:6–7, so the “they” of 65:19–25 are the same group as the directly addressed in 65:18a. This changes in the next sub-section. – Isa 65:8–12 and 66:1–11: Both sub-sections contain a series of lines that speak about a group (“they”) to no direct addressee (65:8–10; 66:3–4). But when YHWH turns into a direct address, it becomes obvious that the addressees are the opposite group then the formerly described (see especially ʭʺʠʥ in 65:11 and the contrast of fate between 66:4 and 66:12–13). Many, however, interpret Isa 66:1–4 as addressed to the wicked; thus, e.g., S TECK, Anlage, 217, 225–228; P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 132, 153–155. But SWEENEY, Prophetic Exegesis, 462 refers to the phrase “those who tremble at my word” (66:2, 5) and concludes that in both cases the addressees are the same. – Isa 65:13–16 and 66:12–14 The main parallel feature in these sub-sections is the reference to “his servants” at the end of each section (65:15b; 66:14b). 55 Cf. Isa 40:10a: ʠʥʡʩ ʷʦʧʡ ʤʥʤʩ ʩʰʣʠ ʤʰʤ and Isa 66:15a: ʠʥʡʩ ˇʠʡ ʤʥʤʩ ʤʰʤʚʩʫ

306

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

“before me” (ʩʰʴʬ) (66:23) after in former times YHWH had abhorred the worship on New Moon and Sabbath before him (1:12–13).56 Therefore, Isa 65–66 can be segmented into one general speech of YHWH (65:1–5) followed by two parallel panels of speech (Isa 65:6–16 and Isa 65:17–66:14) and the conclusion of Isa 40–66 as well as of the whole Book of Isaiah (66:15–24).57 The speech in 65:1–5 recounts the his56 Cf. for a detailed discussion BEUKEN, Closure, 220–221; see also B EUKEN, Closure, 217–220 for a detailed refinement of the frequent claim about the relationship between Isa 1 and Isa 65–66; cf. also IDEM, Jesaja III/B, 55–56, 126–127, 143–147. 57 Only a few competing suggestions can be discussed here: STECK, Anlage, 217–219 argues for Isa 65:1–7 as introduction and 65:8–25 parallel to 66:1–24 (65:8–12 and 66:1– 4; 65:13–25 and 66:5–24), but the closer parallel to 65:13 (messenger formula with preceding particle) is not 66:5 (simple imperative) but 66:12 (messenger formula with preceding particle); moreover 65:17 is introduced by the phrase ʩʰʰʤʚʩʫ, Isa 66:12, in contrast, by the messenger formula; Steck also claims that 66:15ff (ʩʰʰʤʚʩʫ) expands the assertions in 66:12ff (ʩʰʰʤǜǜǜʩʫ) as does 65:18bff (ʩʰʰʤʚʩʫ) expand the assertions of 65:17–18a (ʩʰʰʤʚʩʫ). But apart from the rather different nature of 65:17 and 66:12, noted already, also Isa 65:18b and 66:15 differ hugely in the way, they are constructed and relate to 65:17 and 66:12 respectively: the beginning of 65:18b repeats literally the beginning of 65:17a – I suggest it functions as an inclusio for the first strophe of that passage; in contrast 66:15 starts quite differently from 66:12. BEUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 58–62, 97–99, 114–116, 127–128 divides into 65:1–16; 65:17–25; 66:1–6; 66:7–14; 66:15–24. I agree with his observation about 65:17–25 being addressed to the servants and his characterization of 66:15–24, but his segmentation especially of Isa 66:1–14 against the occurrences of messenger formula and imperatives is not convincing. The problem in the reconstruction in TOMASINO, Isaiah is that the alleged reference to Isa 1:2–4 in 66:1 does not only exist at the level of his second edition, but already on the level of the first, which disturbs his alleged parallel structure 1:2–2:4 and 63:7–66:23 (without 65); moreover, on his level of the second edition the ‘heaven-earth’ merismus also occurs in 66:22, which sheds more doubt on his conclusion of Isa 66 being formed as a parallel conclusion to Isa 1. P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 129–132 argues that 66:17 concludes the whole primary section 65:1–66:17 by repetition of some phrases of 65:1–7 and divides it further into two sections: 65:1–66:4; 66:5–17. But the faithful are not only addressed in 66:5ff but already in 65:18a (contra P. SMITH, Rhetoric, 131); the parallel between 66:15a and 40:10a and the reference of ʸˈʡʚʬʫ (66:16) to 40:5 indicate that these verses refer to a broader literary context than only 65:1–7; the phrase ʤʥʤʩʚʭʠʰ occurs also in 66:22 and together with the phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʸʮʠ (66:20, 21, 23) this kind of marker seems to be a specific of the whole of 66:15–24 rather than an indicator of the original conclusion in 66:17; the parallels between 66:17 and 65:3–4; 66:3 than may serve to highlight that the ‘non-servants’ are included in the judgement of YHWH, with which the prophet concludes his consoling proclamation in 66:15–17. SWEENEY, Prophetic Exegesis, 458–463 divides into 65:1–7 (general announcement that YHWH will punish the wicked); 65:8–25 (YHWH’s address to the wicked); 66:1–24 (YHWH’s address to the righteous). This is mainly due to Sweeney’s disregard of the direct addresses in 65:7aĮ and in 65:18a. While one may regard the former as a gloss (thus explicitly p.459, but see my comments above), one should not overlook 65:18a. Moreover, the taking up of 40:10 in 66:15, which simultaneously indicates its structural significance by its parallel with 65:17, marks out that line

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

307

tory of the relationship between YHWH and his people (several qatalforms). In this respect, it corresponds to the first part of the previous prayer (Isa 63:8–14). Both reflect upon former times, but YHWH, in contrast to Isa 63:8–14, narrates it as the people’s total rejection of his efforts. With Isa 65:6–7 YHWH turns explicitly to a specific audience, with the recurrence of ¥ʤˇʧ clearly referring to the previous prayer and its concluding question (64:11). In the second sub-section (65:8–12), YHWH will protect some from punishment and he will do this “for the sake of my servants” (ʩʣʡʲ ʯʲʮʬ), which takes up the plea of those in 63:17. It seems to imply that YHWH announces to the addressees that their petition has been heard. But one colon defines who his servants and his people are: they are only those who have sought YHWH (65:10b: ʩʰʥʰˇʸʣ ʸˇʠ ʩʮʲ, note the contrast to 65:1). As the immediate continuation makes clear, the addressed ones do not belong to the servants of YHWH, introduced by the emphatic ʭʺʠʥ (65:11). Thus this passage corrects their view about being “YHWH’s people” and “servants”. The rest of this sub-section further specifies what the addressees have failed to do. Thus in this sub-section YHWH explicitly rejects the prayer of Isa 63:7–64:11, and especially their claim to be his people and his servants. In contrast he defines what makes his people and servants: they are those who “seek YHWH” (v.10). However, the addressees have not done so, they have not listened, when YHWH spoke, and they have done evil in his eyes (v.12).58 This division into people of YHWH/servants of YHWH on the one side and ‘non-servants’ on the other, as it is clarified in 65:8–12, is then confirmed in the next sub-section (65:13–16). Here several lines are shaped in the same pattern that comprises the argument of the previous sub-section: what “my servants” (ʩʣʡʲ, cf. 65:8–10) will experience is followed by the contrasting fate of “you” (ʭʺʠʥ, cf. 65:11–12). YHWH then juxtaposes to this rejecting reply to the ‘non-servants’ a parallel speech to his ‘servants’ (65:17–66:14), in which he commits himself to them, consoles them in the context of hostilities by their brothers (i.e. the non-servants) and summons them to rejoice. Thus several features indicate that Isa 65–66:14 is a reply to the previous prayer. But in the negative reply, YHWH shows that he does not regard those who joined that prayer as his actual servants and he juxtaposes a speech to his actual servants. With the manifestation of those who reand indicates for me that 66:15–24 serve as a conclusion to the whole book (with B EUClosure and IDEM, Jesaja III/B ad loc.). 58 This pattern of seeking YHWH by communicating with him and doing righteousness is similar to the argument in Isa 58:2–4. Thus the matter is not simply the action of ‘seeking’, but by what means. YHWH demands seeking by communicating properly and listening to him. KEN,

308

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

mained hardened in the prayer in Isa 63:7–64:11 a separation of the people of YHWH takes place, which is made explicit and confirmed through the parallel speeches of YHWH to two different groups in 65:6–16 and 65:17– 66:14. That it is indeed the aspect of failed communication, i.e. of enduring hardness, that separates the two groups is further supported by the repetition of an utterance of YHWH in both speeches, which in both cases serves to explain the difference/separation between “them” and “you”: in the speech to the ‘non-servants’ YHWH explains his judgement upon them in contrast to the fate of his servants (in this perspective the “they”) by: “for I have called but you did not answer, I have spoken but you did not listen and did evil in my eyes and chose what I do not like” (65:12). In the speech to his ‘servants’ YHWH emphasises that he wants them to listen to his word (66:2) and contrasts this with the fate of “them”, which is then again explained by the utterance: “for I have called and there was no-one who answered, I have spoken and they59 did not listen and did evil in my eyes and chose what I do not like” (66:4). f. The ‘Prehistory’ of Isaiah 63:7–64:11 One problem of the interpretation suggested above is the general ‘positive’ understanding of this prayer held by scholars. They note the important theological developments in this psalm, such as the designation of YHWH as “father”. Such features allegedly raise serious doubts about an exclusively negative understanding of Isa 63:7–64:11.60 However, this aspect cannot be addressed properly without diachronic considerations. The theological insights in this communal lament can be appreciated by recognizing their probable original setting. As older exegetes have argued, this prayer (possibly in an earlier form) could have originated independently from Isa 40–66. This claim stands, of course, in stark contrast to recent redaction-critical studies, which reckon this prayer to be composed for this literary context from the beginning. The most detailed and advanced study to support this view is Goldenstein’s work, which tries to identify verse by verse its literary parallels with the rest of Isa 40–66. By this means Goldenstein is indeed able to show that Isa 63:7–64:11 alludes back to the proclamation of Isa 40–63:6 in its present context. The question is, however, whether his study is able to show also that the prayer was never 59 It is not clear to me, from where RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 104 takes the translation “Denn als ich rief, gabt ihr nicht Antwort” for Isa 66:4. 60 See in particular AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 46–47 (“die positiv zu bewertende Theologie”, 47), but then also the studies of FISCHER, Jahweh, 284–291; EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 268–269; HARRELSON, Why, 163, 173–174; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 150–151, 191–201 et al.

3. The Communicative Strategy of Isaiah 63:7–64:11

309

composed independently from Isa 40ff. Although it is not possible to look at every argument of Goldenstein, I shall propose a different compositional history of the prayer on the basis of some additional observations: With Goldenstein following Beuken and Lau, Isa 42:10–17 is a probable background for the whole of Isa 63:7–64:11. It alludes to the former especially at the beginning,61 in the middle62 and at the end.63 However, these are the points, where an editor would have changed or added things. Most of the other allusions are too unspecific or do differ little from those in Isa 40–55 and Lam or other exilic laments. For Isa 63:8 Goldenstein notes that ʲʩˇʥʮ is a title for YHWH in DI and that ¥ʲˇʩ is related to ʤʸʶ also in Isa 33:2 and 46:7.64 But both features occur also in other contexts65 and are too unspecific to suggest a literary dependence on Isa 40–63:6. The occurrence of ¥ʬʠʢ is evidence of literary dependence on Isa 40–55, because it is a central characteristic of YHWH there.66 But its form here is similar to Ps 106:10 and in contrast to DI but in correspondence with Ps 106:10 it is used in this finite form in a summary of history. Moreover, the root ʬʠʢ is also used in Lam 3:58 for future hope – thus the root itself cannot lend support to an exclusive derivation from DI. In contrast, the participle in 63:16 is indeed reminiscent of DI, but it is striking that this is the case in the context where editorial work is very probable (63:15–16; see the suggestion above). For the expression ʺʥʮʤʺʡ ¥ʪʬʤ hi. in 63:13, Goldenstein suggests the author took up Isa 43:2 and 51:10. 67 But Isa 43:2 reads ʭʩʮʡ ¥ʸʡʲ and Isa 51:10 ¥ʸʡʲ ǜǜǜ ʭʥʤʺ ʩʮ ¥ʡʸʧ hi.; so neither of them shows a close resemblance. A far closer passage is Ps 106:9.68 For the summons of YHWH in 63:15 to “look from the heavens”, Goldenstein, taking up Steck,69suggests a development of the idea where YHWH dwells in the Isaiah tradition.70 But especially in (exilic) communal laments the idea of YHWH helping or judging “from heaven” (ʭʩʮˇʮ) is prominent: cf. Neh 9:27, 28; Ps 80:15; Lam 3:50.71 Undoubtedly, the theme of ‘hardening’ is a characteristic Isaianic theme, but this does not have to mean that it refers specifically to Isa 40ff. At first sight, the mentioning of the “servants” seems to support the Cf. ʤʬʤʺ (42:12; 63:7). Cf. ʤʠʰʷ + ʸʥʡʢ/ʺʥʸʥʡʢ (42:13; 63:15b). 63 Cf. ¥ʤˇʧ and ¥ʷʴʠ (42:14; 64:11). 64 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 52–53. 65 For ʲʩˇʥʮ as a title of YHWH, see, e.g., Ps 7:11; for ¥ʲˇʩ related to ʤʸʶ see, e.g., Judg 10:14; moreover the way ¥ʲˇʩ is related to ʤʸʶ depends on how one segments vv.8b–9; on this see below “Appendix 3: Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 63:7–64:11”. 66 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 58. 67 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 58n.140, 77–78. 68 Cf. ʸʡʣʮʫ ʺʥʮʤʺʡ ʭʫʩʬʥʩʥ (Ps 106:9b) and ʥʬˇʫʩ ʠʬ ʸʡʣʮʡ ʱʥʱʫ ʺʥʤʺʡ ʭʫʩʬʥʮ (Isa 63:13) 69 Cf. STECK, Der sich selbst aktualisierende “Jesaja”, 229. 70 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 86. 71 For a more detailed discussion of the idea of YHWH dwelling in heaven and its relationship to the Jerusalemite temple theology in particular see especially EGO, Herr. She also includes some traditio-historical reflections, according to which it seems to be no problem to situate this lament in exilic times (cf. EGO, Herr, 564). Given the importance of Isa 6:1–5 within the Jerusalemite temple theology, the observations of Ego may further strengthen the relationship between the present lament and Isa 1–39* (see below). 61 62

310

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

dependence upon Isa 40–55 (especially 54:17).72 However, the plural is quite common in exilic and postexilic times so it may not been composed with Isa 40ff in mind from the beginning.73 Goldenstein refers to Lam 5:22 and then especially to Isa 47:6; 54:8; 57:16, 17–18; 60:10 for the phrase ʳʶʷʺʚʬʠ74 (one may also add 48:9). But the parallels may not be different from those between Lamentations and Isa 40–66: the latter responds to the grievances of the post-destruction generation. The same may apply for the phrase ʯʥʲ ¥ʸʫʦ (64:8), which Goldenstein relates especially to Isa 43:25,75 but Ps 79:8 shows that this phrase was quite common even for exilic communal laments. In fact, the phrase in 64:8 stands closer to Ps 79:8 than to 43:25. The occurrences of the “(holy) cities”, “desolation”, “consumption of fire” are sufficiently explained by Isa 1:7; 6:11 so that a dependence upon Isa 40ff cannot be proven.76 There are a number of cases when Goldenstein has to admit that the present lament is especially close to other (features of) exilic communal laments: the image of Israel as a ‘flock’ (Isa 63:11 – cf. Pss 74:1; 77:21; 80:2);77 Isa 63:12b – cf. Neh 9;78 Isa 63:15 – cf. Ps 80:15;79 and the way the term ʺʥʠʸʥʰ is used in Isa 64:2 corresponds especially to Ps 106:22.80 At the same time, there are still a number of parallels that point to some kind of literary influence. The association of the ‘father’ imagery and the ‘potter’ imagery is close to Isa 45:9–11; it might be implied elsewhere only in Deut 32:6.81 But a clear conclusion remains difficult. Both Isaiah passages seem to have been inspired by Isa 29:16. 82 Another issue is the phrase ʪˇʣʷʚʭʲ that has close affinities to the new name in Isa 62:12.83 But the discussion above shows that most of the supposed literary dependences on Isa 40–63:6 are too unspecific to justify that claim. Many expressions and phrases are close to other exilic communal laments. So it remains justified to say that the parallels between Isa 63:7–64:11 and Isa 40:1–63:6 are of the same kind as those between, for instance, Lam and Isa 40–63: the latter addresses some of the concerns of the exilic laments. In respect to Isa 63:7–64:1, however, this notion has to be refined in one regard. This lament shows clear affinities with Isa *1–39.84 I would suggest that the ‘original’ 72 Cf. the discussion in GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 101; then also especially BEUKEN, Servants, 75–76. 73 Note in particular Ps 79:2, 10 for the use of “servants” for the Israelites in the context of an exilic communal lament; then also Exod 32:13; 1 Kgs 8:32, 36; Ps 89:51. 74 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 135–136. 75 Cf GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 137–139. 76 Contra the extensive constructions in GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 141–144. 77 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 72. 78 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 76–77. 79 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 85. 80 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 111. 81 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 130–132; then also AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 45n.62; EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 285n.714. LAU, Prophetie, 306n.209 denies literary dependence. 82 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 132, also EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 285n.714 attends to Isa 29:16. It is noteworthy that in the immediate context of the pottery imagery of Isa 29:16 the children are called ʩʣʩ ʤˈʲʮ (29:23). Moreover, the image of children (of Zion) occurs together with ‘pottery’ imagery also in Lam 4:2, so that a clear determination of the development of that idea remains difficult. 83 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 103. 84 See above in this chapter: “3.2.1 Literary Parallels between Isa 63:7–64:11 and the Book of Isaiah”.

4. The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 63:7–64:11

311

form of Isa 63:7–64:11 is an exilic lament that complains about and reflects upon the experiences of 587/6 B.C. in the specific context of Isa *1–39.85 Those lamenting here are represented as seeing their experience as the consequence of what is said in Isa *1– 39, in particular against the background of Isaiah’s commission to harden his people.

This suggestion still allows for an appreciation of the theological insights in this lament.86 Yet it also serves to point to those who are still hardened even after the proclamation of Isa 40–63. That is why it has been placed there (and perhaps reworked?). The prayer of Isa 63:7–64:11 may have had an important function in the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/6 B.C., when some people apparently reflected upon their fate in the context of the proclamation of Isaiah ben Amoz. At the present place in the Book of Isaiah, it probably has the function of indicating those who remain hardened after the consoling proclamation of Isa 40:1–63:6.

4. The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 4. The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 63:7–64:11

According to this interpretation, we have to reckon with a difference of communicative action between the illocutionary act of Isa 63:7–64:11 as an independent prayer and its use within the Book of Isaiah. So we shall discuss the theme of hardening also in these two different respects. a. The Theme of Hardening as Part of the Communal Petition Within Isa 63:7–64:11 we encounter the theme of hardening in two different contexts. In Isa 63:17 the people ask YHWH: “Why […] do you harden our hearts so that we do not fear you?” This is quite close to the task of 85

Thus I would maintain the suggestion of W ILLIAMSON, Laments, 13, 44 that Isa 63:7–64:11 may well be an exilic liturgy recited on the ruined site of the Jerusalemite temple. But part of those liturgies may have been recitals of prophetic writings. W ISCHNOWSKY, Tochter Zion, 99–100 explains the relationships between Lam and Jer by assuming that parts of Jer have been read in the course of such “Klagefeiern”. Taking up his suggestions, the parallels between Lam and Isa 63:7–64:11 may be due to the similar historical context/situation, while the parallels with Isa 1–39* could be ascribed to the fact that also parts of Isa have been read at those occasions, all the more as this writing plays such an important part in the Jerusalemite temple theology. 86 It must be finally said that the most recent traditio-historical investigation of the image of YHWH as father does not exclude the exilic provenance of Isa 63:7–64:11 either; for this see BÖCKLER, Gott, 277–291, 377–381. Thus apart from the literary parallels, there are no indications that Isa 63:7–64:11 must have been written at the late date that Goldenstein proposes. The question is then, how one interprets and assesses the literary parallels. According to the above observations there are not conclusive evidences that demand that Isa 63:7–64:11 could only have been written after Isa 40ff.

312

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

Isaiah ben Amoz, for as there in Isa 6:10 the heart as the basic organ of knowledge87 is made dysfunctional in order to prevent (ʯʮ) the people from an appropriate relationship with YHWH, expressed here as the ‘fear of YHWH’. The collocation ʡʬ ¥ʧˇʷ is unique in the OT and the verb ¥ʧˇʷ occurs elsewhere only in Job 39:16. But the probable etymology of ¥ʧˇʷ88 and the way it is translated in LXX89 and Vulgate90 indicate that its meaning is synonymous to ¥ʤˇʷ “to be hard”; both even might have the same original root.91 The notion of the hardness occurs in a question in Isa 63:17. The illocutionary force of questions is a difficult issue.92 In Isa 63:17 two elements deserve attention; that YHWH “hardens our heart” is said with the verbal form yiqtol. The people understand it to be a continuing process still happening in their present.93 At the same time, the interrogative “to what” (ʤʮʬ) urges YHWH94 to show what the future outcome will be.95 Thus the question contains a DESCRIPTION of the present as well as a DIRECTIVE act of urging YHWH to respond. By this combination, the main communicative acts of the PETITION in Isa 63:15–64:11 (see communicative analysis above) show that hardening is a central issue within the petition. It is a problem of the speaker’s present condition and must be addressed by YHWH for future change. Moreover, in the strophe Isa 63:15–17, harden87

However one determines the relationship between Isa 6:9–10 and 63:17, the occurrence of ʡʬ “heart” in both passages undermines the emphatic statement of AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 42n.48 that they have no single term in common. 88 Cf. KBL; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 99. 89 LXX translates ʡʬ ¥ʧˇʷ in Isa 63:17 as the similar ʡʬ/ʡʡʬ ¥ʤˇʷ in Exod 7:3; Ps 95:8; Prov 28:14 with ıțȜȘȡȣȞȦ. In Ezek 3:7 the LXX reads ıțȜȘȡȠțĮȡįȚȠȢ. 90 The Vulgate uses more various terms, although the meaning “to be hard, make hard” is always clear: It reads the verb induro in Isa 63:17 as in Exod 7:3; in Ezek 3:7 and Prov 28:14 it reads the adjective durus; in Ps 95:8 it reads the verb obduro. 91 Cf. already HESSE, Verstockungsproblem, 17n.3. The collocation ʡʬ/ʡʡʬ ¥ʤˇʷ “to harden the heart” occurs elsewhere in Exod 7:3; Ezek 3:7; Ps 95:8; Prov 28:14. 92 Cf. A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 239 and the literature noted ibid. 239n.167. 93 The assertion of 63:17 that YHWH is the subject of hardening them is quite clear. This has to be emphasized against those who try to soften this assertion by saying that “These phrases do not mean that God has made them err or has hardened their hearts, but that they have erred and their hearts were hardened – they were stubborn in their wickedness”; thus SNAITH, Isaiah 40–66, 238; similarly also H ARRELSON, Why, 170, 174. 94 A. W AGNER, Sprechakte, 239 sees the DIRECTIVE illocution as the predominant force in questions. 95 While the question ʲʥʣʮ points backwards, the question ʤʮʬ is concerned with the future or intent of an action or condition. Thus J ANOWSKI, Konfliktgespräche, 360n.56 referring to D. MICHEL, ”Warum” und “wozu”? Eine bisher übersehene Eigentümlichkeit des Hebräischen und ihre Konsequenz für das alttestamentliche Geschichtsverständnis, in: IDEM, Studien zur Überlieferungsgeschichte alttestamentlicher Texte (ThB 93), Gütersloh 1997, 13–34).

4. The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 63:7–64:11

313

ing emerges as a significant issue as regards the relationship between YHWH and the speakers. What is also noteworthy in this passage is how the speakers here recognize their hardness. They ask why YHWH hardens their heart. Thus hardness is perceptible to the hardened. As the continuation of that question indicates, the speaker can become aware of their hardness in their inability to find the right relationship to YHWH whom they cannot fear: “Why […] do you harden our hearts so that we do not fear you?” The theme of hardening occurs a second time in the context of the speaker’s wish for YHWH’s theophany in Isa 63:19b–64:3. It would “make known” (ʲʩʣʥʤʬ) YHWH’s name to his adversaries, and nations would tremble before him (Isa 64:1). Parallel to this, YHWH’s theophany (Isa 64:2b) would be a revelation as never before (Isa 64:3): “… and/so that never one had heard (ʥʲʮˇʚʠʬ), that never one perceived (ʥʰʩʦʠʤ), no eye had seen (ʤʺʠʸʚʠʬ ʯʩʲ) a God, except you”. As the result of YHWH’s theophany, YHWH would be recognized as the only God, as never before. The verbs and terms used in this line, however, are so remarkably close to Isa 6:10 that the resulting different perception is evidently painted as an overcoming of imperceptiveness and hardness “from of old”. This means at the same time that the speakers here regard their oppressors as so restricted in their present perception that only the revelation of YHWH could overcome the situation. Hence, they associate their affliction with the imperceptiveness of the other nations. According to these observations, the speakers regard themselves like the other nations that oppress them, with respect to their epistemological conditions. They are as hardened as the nations are “of old” and vice versa. The theme of hardening is a central issue in respect to their suffering from the nations just as much as it is with regards to their relationship to YHWH.96

96

From the diachronic perspective developed above it is interesting to see that Isa 40– 63:6 replies to the earlier communal lament Isa 63:7–64:11 also in this respect: Isa 42:14–44:23 takes up and presents the ‘epistemological conditions’ of Jacob-Israel and the nations as the same state of hardness. But Jacob-Israel is appointed as the witness of YHWH so that his own hardness can be overcome (Isa 43:10). YHWH’s act of revelation, however, happens when Jacob-Israel leaves Babel in YHWH’s presence (Isa 52:11– 12; cf. also Isa 48:20–21) and gives testimony of his overcome hardness in his insight in the Servant (Isa 53:1–10) before the nations and kings who will see and understand what they have not heard (Isa 52:15–53:1; 55:2b–5).

314

Chapter 8: Disclosing the Still Hardened: Isaiah 63:7–64:11

b. The Theme of Hardening in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 within the Communicative Strategy of Isaiah Within the larger context of the Book of Isaiah, this passage DISCLOSES hardness to those who remained unaffected by the previous proclamation in Isa 40:1–63:6. Those who would not identify with the previous communal speeches (Isa 53:1–10; 59:9–15a) but join this prayer emerge as still hardened. As YHWH explicitly claims in the subsequent reply, they do not longer belong to his “people” and his “servants”. In contrast, those who are not hardened any more and “tremble” at his word (cf. Isa 65:12; 66:2, 5) are his people and his servants, and they will now see the fulfilment of salvation. The frequently discussed separation within the people in Isa 65–66 is a matter of the communicative strategy of Isa. The differentiation into the servants of YHWH and those who no longer belong to his people is not due to different social classes, theological groups, etc., at least not predominantly, but to different receptions of the message of Isa 40–66. In Isa 63:7–64:11, this separation comes to the fore.

5. Summary 5. Summary

In contrast to most other interpretations, the present chapter has argued that the communal lament in Isa 63:7–64:11 does not reflect the disappointment of a later generation about the unfulfilled promises of Isa 40– 55(–63:6). Instead, it DISCLOSES those who are still hardened after the previous communicative process. Once again the addressees are provided with a communal speech. In this context, the theme of hardening is central in the addressees’ EXPRESSION of their condition. But while in Isa 53:1–10 and in Isa 59:9–15a the addressees can confirm the overcoming of their hardness, those who identify with the words of Isa 63:7–64:11 emerge as those who are still hardened. Remarkably, according to Isa 63:17 the state of hardening is recognizable for the hardened – in this specific case as they become aware of their inability to relate to YHWH and fear him. Throughout this study it has been argued that in reading Isa we do not simply deal with ‘theological concepts’, but with a dynamic communicative process that performs different communicative acts according to a certain strategy. The perlocutionary acts of DE-HARDENING the addressees that we have elucidated in previous chapters are not put into question by Isa 63:7–64:11. YHWH’s reply to the communal speech confirms this (cf. Isa 65–66). He refers to those who listen to his word and are his servants. For them his actions are salvation, while those who refuse to listen to YHWH’s word to be transformed, will be judged (cf. Isa 65–66, especially 65:13–

5. Summary

315

16). For the Book of Isaiah as a whole (cf. Isa 66:24), the theme of hardening ends with a serious note about those who will not participate in YHWH’s salvation. One can only wonder whether their state of hardness is unchangeable and terminal. Yet as long as the Book of Isaiah is read, chs.40–66 can enlighten its addressees anew about their present condition and transform them and reverse their hardness. Perhaps it is the unbearable conclusion of the theme of hardening and Isa as a whole that makes those who are still hardened flee to the whole proclamation anew, which can transform them as long as it is read (cf. Isa 59:21).

Chapter 9

Summary and Conclusion 1. Summary 1. Summary

The present study has investigated the challenging theme of hardening in Isa from the perspective of an analysis of communicative action. This analysis has been developed and applied based on the recognition of a prophetic book like Isa as a means of mediating communication. Such a notion necessitates that the insights of speech-act theory into the various actions performed in communication are integrated in the interpretation of a prophetic book. The approach of this study modifies the approach of rhetorical analysis, which also seeks to do justice to the communicativefunctional aspect of prophetic books, in order to include all illocutionary classes and to widen the perspective with respect to the perlocutionary effect of prophetic books. Furthermore, it amplifies the challenge to those studies, which remain restricted only to the discussion of descriptive aspects. However, the discussions of many communicative aspects in this context have merely begun. Future research will need to further illumine the social, political and religious aspects involved in producing prophetic books, and the reading conventions in the ANE and, in particular, in the times of the OT. The specific methodology of communicative analysis will need to be further developed and modified, not least in regard to its relationship to rhetorical analysis. In chapter 2, it was argued that the fundamental stage of the growth of Isa may have been after the appearance of Cyrus, perhaps around the time of the rebuilding of the Second Temple. In this context, some of the problems were noted to which the communicative strategy of Isa reacts. We saw that there are two prophetic voices proclaiming their message in Isa. The voice that serves as the communicative agent of Isa commissioned in Isa 40:1–11 first includes the message of Isaiah ben Amoz in its proclamation (Isa 1– 39), and only then directs its own words to its audience (Isa 40–66). From the perspective of the book as a whole, it was suggested that we have to perceive the audience as two different groups: the exiles in Babylon who are addressed in Isa 40–55, and those in the homeland who are addressed in Isa 56–66.

1. Summary

317

After this discusion, the main communicative aim of Isa was sketched. It was described as the proclamation of the restoration of ‘connective righteousness’ as the universal order by YHWH. ‘Connective righteousness’ is described as the principle according to which deed and consequences have to be connected; it needs to be maintained by reciprocal action, proper communication, and the right intention; and it applies to the political, social, religious and cosmic realms. In Isa 1–39, YHWH maintains the connection between deeds and consequences in judging the people, and thereby brings the consequences of their actions and behaviour upon them. Isa 1–39 also looks forward to a time when YHWH will establish universal righteousness (cf. especially Isa 24–27). Isa 40–66 then announces that YHWH is about to fulfil this vision, bringing justice and righteousness to the whole world, even to all of creation (cf. Isa 45:8). Although YHWH’s people are “far from righteousness” (Isa 46:12), his is a proclamation of salvation because he re-establishes them within the context of action and consequences. He lets the consequences of their sins fall on the Servant, so that they can live in righteousness again (cf. Isa 52:13– 53:12), and through the prophetic message (cf. Isa 58:1–59:21), he provides an opportunity to those in the homeland to confess their sins and act in righteousness. Chapter 2 concluded with a few notes on the structure of Isa. The discussion of these issues followed the ‘steps’ of the communicative analysis of Isa and sketched the context for interpreting the theme of hardening. Some of these conclusions challenge some common views of Isa, most notably the relationship between its different parts. Further research will need to substantiate these arguments and strengthen the view taken here by discussing in more detail issues such as the theme of righteousness or the relationship between Israel and the nations in Isa 40–66. This study has shown that the theme of hardening is a central and significant issue of the Book of Isaiah. It occurs at significant places throughout the book, is closely related to the issue of righteousness in Isa, and comprises a fundamental aspect of its communicative strategy. Applying the analysis of communicative action, chapters 3–8 discussed in detail the single units of Isa 6; 42:18–25; 48:1–11; 50; 56:9–57:2 and 63:7–64:11. They also clarified how these passages fit into the communicative strategy of the wider context and included notes on other passages containing aspects of the theme of hardening. What is commonly referred to as “hardening”, has to be regarded, according to the present interpretation of Isa 6, as a communicative act. It is the perlocutionary act of Isaiah, which makes his audience unable to perceive and understand. By Isaiah’s proclamation, his audience is hardened. For future studies on the message of the historical Isaiah, including its ex-

318

Chapter 9: Summary and Conclusion

tent and content, it is of crucial importance that our interpretation worked out a differentiation in his commission (as it is presented now) between the illocutionary acts that he has to perform and the perlocutionary effect that these acts will have. This poses the question in particular, of the degree to which one can take for granted Isaiah’s commission to harden his people (a perlocutionary action) as a criterion for the determination of his message (a question of his illocutionary action). The concept of hardening is not simply presented as a theological concept in Isa, but is also achieved through the communicative process of the book itself. We saw that Isa 6 and the whole proclamation of Isaiah is HARDENING for the addressees of Isa. This challenges various proposals, especially the common view that Isa 6 serves to explain the failure of Isaiah (or YHWH). In our discussion of various texts in Isa 40–66, we have found evidence that the reversal of hardening is also achieved through communicative action. In listening to the communication of the Servant (Isa 50:10) who has opened ears and knows how to speak comforting words (Isa 50:4–5), the exiles are transformed so that they finally “know righteousness” (Isa 51:7), and can give testimony to their insight in their redemption through the death of the Servant (Isa 53:1–10). Through the de-hardening effect of the prophetic proclamation, which will remove the stumbling block from the way of the people in the homeland (Isa 57:14; 58:1), they too are transformed so that they may realize their blindness, confess that they finally “know their sins” (Isa 59:9–15a), and can act instead according to righteousness (Isa 58). In the light of these communicative acts, we found that Isa 63:7–64:11 serves to disclose those who remain hardened despite the previous communicative process, and therefore do not belong to YHWH’s people, his servants. In the course of our investigations of individual passages, the theme of hardening emerged as the communicative aspect of righteousness in Isa. The interpretation of Isa 6 showed that in Isaiah’s commission to harden the people, YHWH brings the consequences of their “unclean lips” upon them. YHWH judges the people (cf. Isa 6:1–5) because they do not live in righteousness (see, e.g., Isa 5), and hardening is part of this, particularly in order to bring the consequences of their perverted communication (see, e.g., Isa 5:18–20) upon them. What is involved in hardening is precluding perception and understanding, the central presuppositions for communication (cf. Isa 6:10). This is the condition of the addressees, which is confirmed and clarified in the new proclamation in Isa 40–66, first to the exiles (cf. Isa 42:18–25; 48:1–11), and then to those in the homeland (cf. Isa 56:9–57:2). Furthermore, this condition is connected with their unrighteousness, either with respect to YHWH (cf. Isa 46:12; 48:1–11, said of the exiles), or with respect to each other (cf. Isa 56:9–57:2; 59:1–8, said of

1. Summary

319

those in Judah). However, the central aim of Isa 40–66 is to restore the people’s righteousness, which our study has shown to be fundamentally connected with the overcoming of hardening. For the exiles who listen to the Servant, the reversal of hardening and their attaining of righteousness coincide as they “know righteousness” (Isa 51:7). They confirm this change with the proper communicative act of giving TESTIMONY to the Servant (Isa 53:1–10). For those in Judah, the instruction about righteousness becomes part of the de-hardening proclamation of the prophetic voice (Isa 58:1–59:21), which leads to their communicative act of CONFESSING their sins. This connection may explain why the theme of hardening occurs frequently in Isa, and why it is an important part of its communicative strategy. Though the central issue of Isa is righteousness, in the theme of hardening we encounter the theme of communication, which is regarded as one aspect of ‘connective righteousness’. In the proclamation of YHWH’s judgement of his people in Isa 1–39, the hardening message of Isaiah embodies the judgement of their misguided communication. Yet by proclaiming the restoration of the people’s righteousness in Isa 40–66, the dehardening message of the new prophetic voice also restores their abilities to communicate. With these conclusions, the present study presents a distinctive interpretation of “hardening” in Isa. It takes up previous studies, which have noted the frequent occurrence of the theme of hardening in Isa, but extends them by analysing several relevant passages in detail, and by clarifying their role within the overall communicative strategy of Isa. It thereby makes a contribution to the interpretation of the Book of Isaiah as a whole. Future research will need to study in more detail those texts that, for limitations of space, were not included in this study.1 Furthermore, the theme of hardening will need to be of central importance for diachronic studies on the literary growth of Isa, especially with respect to the relationship between Isa *1–39 and Isa *40–55. Another question that needs to be addressed is the ‘effectiveness’ of the communicative strategy of Isa. Of central interest in this respect is the frequent claim that parts of Isa 40–66 (especially 56–66) reflect a later development which seeks to cope with the disappointment of the unfulfilled promises, especially of Isa 40–55. With a 1 Apart from various passages in Isa 1–39 (e.g. Isa 1:2–3; 11:2, 9; 29:9–10, 17–24; 32:1–4; 35:5; another question is how the answer of Hezekiah’s prayer is related to the communicative strategy as it is sketched in chapter 3) I must highlight Isa 42:7. A more detailed discussion of this verse in the context of the Servant passage Isa 42:1–9 would need to clarify, how the commission of the addressees as the Servant in Isa 42:1–9 fits together with their actual condition (cf. Isa 42:18–25; 43:16–28) and what role the individual Servant (Isa 49:1–12; 50; 51:1–8; 53:1–10) plays in this, which I could only hint at in this study.

320

Chapter 9: Summary and Conclusion

different evaluation of the communicative acts in Isa 40–55, it may no longer remain a question of disappointment about unfulfilled promises. In regard to this question, the question of the effectiveness of Isa and its reception needs to be resolved by including other books of the OT, especially Zech2 and Pss, in the examination. This study has shown that the theme of hardening is a complex issue in Isa, and that it plays a crucial role in the communicative process that reading/hearing Isa mediates. In the challenges of the early post-exilic era, Isa bids to (re-) shape the people of YHWH, furthers their faith in YHWH, and makes right their interactive relationships. The book casts the identity of the people of Judah as YHWH’s servants who emerge transformed and dehardened by the prophetic proclamation that depends on and mediates the ministry of the Servant. It provides a distinctive voice that lessens the impact of other factors and power interests. Neither the place of their living for the past time – Babylon or Judah – nor their social status – the hierarchy of religious leaders or of descendants of David – are of greater importance in Isa. The life and identity of the newly-emerging society is dependent on the effect of the prophetic book. This effect is rooted in and can only be realized by YHWH, who is presupposed for the success of Isa as a means of communicative action. In this process, the theme of hardening plays a significant role.

2. Conclusion 2. Conclusion

We began our study with the assumption that what seems to be at stake in the theme of hardening is whether or not the disturbing commission of Isaiah to render his audience unable to repent is part of the deserved judgement of God, or pictures an incomprehensible side of God. In other words, does hardening in Isa express the understandable wrath of God, or the incomprehensible wrath of God, the deus absconditus? The results of our study suggest that the discussion of the theme of hardening cannot be confined to these two theological categories. The related texts, Isa 6 in particular, go beyond these limits in several respects. On the one hand, there are features in Isa 6 in its immediate literary context that present hardening as an understandable action of YHWH. First, it is an act of revelation of YHWH. He discloses to Isaiah – and through him to his people – that the effect of Isaiah’s message is to make them imperceptive, ignorant and unable to repent. Secondly, we saw that in hardening, YHWH lets the sins of the people’s perverted communication (“unclean 2

For the time being, cf. SWEENEY, Debate.

2. Conclusion

321

lips”; cf. Isa 3:8–10; 5:18–20) fall back upon themselves; hence, it remains part of the understandable wrath of YHWH. On the other hand, what is so disturbing about Isa 6 is paradoxical: this understandable message and revelation makes its addressees unable to understand. We have explained this paradox by differentiating illocutionary and perlocutionary actions. The disturbing aspect of Isa 6 is that the illocutionary action of relating the encounter with YHWH (which indicates that hardening is the consequence of the people’s sins, and hence an understandable judgement) has the perlocutionary effect of making them not understand. In Isa 6 and in the whole message of Isaiah as it is presented in Isa 1– 39, the addressees’ sins so affect them that they cannot understand the understandable revelation of YHWH’s judgement. Both sides are present in Isa 6. In judging the people for their abuse of communication and understanding, YHWH makes them imperceptive. Some have designated Isa 6 as a borderline statement about God. However, perhaps it is more appropriate to speak about a borderline revelation of God to humanity. The sins of humanity are so severe in Isa 6, that they result in the concealing of God’s revelation, and thereby obscure the understanding of God. At the same time, the theological categories of the understandable and incomprehensible wrath of God do not suffice, because the theme of hardening is not limited to Isa 6. God does not abandon his people in judgement, but meets them anew; not in denial of their sins and hardness, but in order to overcome both. Yet this new future does not come without cost for God, or without effect on his characterization. To the extent that hardening could be perceived as a borderline revelation of human sin, the overcoming of both – humanity’s hardness and sins – can be seen as a borderline act of God in the Old Testament. He gives his Servant over to death for the sake of his people (Isa 52:13–53:12). He lets himself be defined by his responsibility for the death of one man so that his people can communicate and understand and live in righteousness again. It is in this extraordinary TESTIMONY of YHWH’s people about the Servant that the overcoming of their hardness is confirmed, and YHWH is revealed before the whole world (Isa 52:15–53:1). The present study has undertaken a critical explanation of Isa, especially regarding passages containing aspects of the theme of hardening, and how the mediation of communicative action is inscribed in these texts. In the course of this analysis, we have also recognized that the communicative action of both Isaiah ben Amoz (Isa 1–39; cf. Isa 6), and of the newly appointed prophetic voice (Isa 40–66; cf. Isa 40:1–11), and therefore of the whole Isa, is initiated and authorized by YHWH. The success of any communicative action is determined by the conventions and institutions that provide the rules for communicative acts. The authorizing basis

322

Chapter 9: Summary and Conclusion

of the communicative process of Isa is YHWH. As this divine basis evades the boundaries of critical analysis,3 the critical explanation of Isa as a means of communicative action reaches its limits and points at the same time beyond such constraints. It shows that the understanding of the communicative process in Isa includes an encounter with God. However, noting these dimensions of the interpretation of Isa goes beyond the limits of critical explanation of the text and the descriptive task of presenting these results. It would include a testimony of the encounter with God in the communicative interaction mediated through the prophetic book. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:5–6; ESV)

3

Cf. also the remarks in HOUSTON, Prophets, 144.

Appendix 1

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25 The problems facing the exegete of Isa 42:18–25 are manifold. There are many changes in person and number, several variations in the ancient versions even in respect to persons and numbers, an unintelligible term, an awkward repetitive line etc. In the following I shall discuss the main issues in order to provide the basis for the interpretation of the present form of this unit, as it is discussed in chapter 4. The line in v.19b is awkward in many respects. First, the meaning of the phrase ʭʬˇʮ (MT mƟšullƗm) is far from clear. Secondly, the occurrence of ʸʥʲ in both cola of the line stands out against the preceding lines, where we find an alternation of ʸʥʲ and ˇʸʧ (vv.18, 19a).1 Thirdly, the second colon is almost identical to v.19aĮ and the phrase ʣʡʲ ʤʥʤʩ is odd in a speech of YHWH and unique in Isa 40–55. Finally, the LXX reads only three cola in v.19. Therefore, many commentators delete v.19b as a later gloss;2 only a few try to give an explanation for this awkward addition.3 Notwithstanding 1

The immediately following line (v.20) again refers to ‘seeing’ and ‘hearing’. Thus, e.g., KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 16; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 32–33; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 91 (ET, 110); SCHOORS, Saviour, 203 and IDEM, Jesaja II, 269; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 79; GITAY, Prophecy, 137; H.-C. SCHMITT, Erlösung, 122–125; ascribing the primary layer of Isa 42:18–25* to a time later than DI, VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 208, 210 and LABAHN, Schuld, 210–212 regard v.19b as an even later gloss; BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 216–217. 3 B ALDAUF, Knecht, 22, 29 regards v.19b just as a “zustimmende Äußerung eines späteren Lesers” (ibid. 29). For different proposals of a gradual growth of the complex v.19, cf. ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 271–272 (He argues that the reading ʩʫʠʬʮʫ in MT is a misreading of a blurred line, the original of which could be reconstructed from LXX. This misreading in the MT had been recognized and the phrase ʭʬˇʮ mǀšƟlim was added as the right catchword for the disfigured reading. This single word had than been expanded to a whole sentence and became part of the main text. V.19bȕ is a gloss as well, which noted that ʩʣʡʲ had to be read as ʤʥʤʩ ʣʡʲ. For a critique, cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 257.); B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 154–155 (According to him, v.19aĮ, 19bĮ has been the original line, at which stage ˇʸʧ was read instead of ʸʥʲ in v.19bĮ. This line was later expanded by v.19aȕ when the idea became prominent that Israel was to fulfil the task of a prophet among the nations. Now ˇʸʧ appeared in this new colon and ʸʥʲ was added in v.19bĮ. The final colon v.19bȕ complemented the line.); and WILLIAMSON, Book, 257–258 (He thinks that v.19a was the original reading as it also stands now in MT. Later, v.19bȕ has 2

324

Appendix 1

these possible successive stages of growth, we have to establish how they fit into the unit now in its MT form. If we regard the wider literary context, the twofold occurrence of ʸʥʲ in this bicolon may not appear as awkward as it first seems. This has lead some interpreters to reckon with ˇʸʧ as the original reading either in v.19bĮ4 or in v.19bȕ.5 In Isa 42:7 the task of the Servant is among others ʺʥʸʥʲ ʭʩʰʩʲ ʧʥʷʴʬ “to open the eyes of the blind”. Nothing is said there about deafness. Moreover, in Isa 42:16, YHWH is saying that he will lead ʭʩʸʥʲ “the blind” by ways they have not known. Again there is no mention of a treatment of deaf people.6 It is through the exclusive concentration on ‘blindness’ in v.19b, after the previous lines mentioned it together with ‘deafness’, that the relationship to these former passages comes to the fore. Additionally, v.23 concentrates on one particular mode of perception.7 While v.19b exclusively refers to the blindness of the Servant, v.23 speaks only of ‘listening’. Given the structure of this passage (described above in chapter 4), it is remarkable that both lines stand in the centre of each strophe. Thus the theme of the introducing line (blindness and deafness) is broken up and distributed in both strophes, which suggests close connection. The phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʣʡʲ, which is used elsewhere in the OT for Moses, the Servant of YHWH (cf. Deut 34:5; Josh 1:1, 13, 15; 8:31, 33; 2 Kgs 18:12), and sometimes for David (cf. Pss 18:1; 36:1),8 is not unparalleled in Isa 40–55. Isa 54:17 speaks of the ʤʥʤʩ ʩʣʡʲ “servants of YHWH”9, and most remarkably, this phrase occurs in a

been added to make sure the right understanding of the first person suffix in v.19aĮ [ʩʣʡʲ]. It is possible according to Williamson that this stage is reflected in the translation of the LXX. Finally, he reckons that the colon of v.19bĮ was added at some point as a cross-reference to Isa 49:7 [ʭʩˇʬʮ ʣʡʲ]; being first just a commenting gloss, it has then been inserted as an additional colon into the text.). 4 Cf., e.g., TORREY, Second Isaiah, 330; KISSANE, Isaiah II, 45; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 476; yet there is at least no text-critical justification for the emendation of the first colon. 5 Cf., e.g., NORTH, Second Isaiah, 116; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 89n.2, 91 (ET, 108n.b, 110) regards v.19b secondary but seems to favour an emendation here as well; similarly B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 216; cf. also BHS. The same reading in Symmachus and two manuscripts is an advantage of this proposal over the former one, but in view of the many versions that support MT, their attempt is rather a harmonisation. 6 Cf. also LEENE, De vroegere, 140: “De voornaamste verbinding met het vorige loopt overigens niet via ‘doof’ maar via ‘blind’.” 7 Cf. also B ALDAUF, Knecht, 17. 8 See furthermore the lists in KAISER, Königliche Knecht, 19–20 and ORLINSKY, Servant, 9. 9 The plural is due to the train of thought of Isa 49–54 and the relationship between Isa 40–55 and Isa 56–66 and has therefore less impact on the supposed parallel.

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

325

speech of YHWH as well.10 In Isa 42:19b it may amplify the literary relationship – and contrast – to the Servant designated by YHWH in Isa 42:1– 9. Finally, the phrase ʭʬˇʮ has not only puzzled recent commentators, resulting in dozens of different proposals. It also seems to have been understood differently very early. While LXX and Peshitta associated the term with the verb ¥ʬˇʮ, other versions derived it from ¥ʭʬˇ. Symmachus rendered it in a passive sense of “to make complete”, Vulgate and Targum indicate the sense of “to repay”. None of the versions seems to have perceived the phrase ʭʬˇʮ in a denominative sense of ʭʥʬˇ. This corresponds to the use of the verbs ¥ʬˇʮ and ¥ʭʬˇ in the rest of the Book of Isaiah. In none of the other 12 occurrences of ¥ʭʬˇ11 is it used in the denominative sense. Thus though the interpretation of ʭʬˇʮ as “the one in a covenant of peace / the covenanted one” has been advocated quite often,12 it seems to be the least probable alternative.13 As regards the possibility of reading a form of ¥ʬˇʮ in v.19bĮ, it must be said that the passage hardly speaks of the addressees as rulers. Since the passage addresses Jacob-Israel, it makes no sense to reckon with any other addressee as ruling over them here either.14 Moreover, given these reflections, it is justified to say that even if v.19b has been later inserted, it was apparently well planned. This makes it hard to reckon with an accidental integration or expansion of a former gloss through carelessness. Accordingly, the thesis of the origin of v.19bĮ from a gloss cross-referencing to Isa 49:7 seems less likely.15 In sum, it

10

That vv.18–20 are a speech of YHWH is indicated through the forms in 1.sg. There is no sufficient evidence for emending v.19a to ʤʥʤʩ ʣʡʲ and ʧʬˇʩ ʪʠʬʮ as KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 17–18 and ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 270 do. 11 Cf. Isa 19:21; 38:12, 13; 44:26, 28; 57:18; 59:18 (2 times); 60:20; 65:6 (2 times); 66:6. 12 Cf., e.g., KISSANE, Isaiah II, 48; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 476; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 118; LEENE, De vroegere, 140; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 53; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 269; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 131; not for its meaning in the original line but when expanded also in B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 155. 13 Apart from other suggestions that are even more unlikely. The older assumed meaning “the surrendered one/devoted one” from Arab. muslim (thus, e.g., H ITZIG, Jesaja, 497–498) has been already rejected by former exegetes on the ground of a missing relationship between the Arab. term and Hebrew. There is only a correspondence to Aramaic (see DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 439 and DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 385). The suggested emendation to a form of ¥ʧʬˇ (thus, e.g., LAATO, Servant, 88; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 80 is undecided) has no text-critical justification (the single Kennicott manuscript hardly is one). 14 Therefore, also the suggestion of B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 150–151, who emends to ʭʲ ʬˇʮʫ or ʭʲʤ ʬˇʮʫ (“ruler of the people”), makes little sense. 15 This has been assumed by VOLZ, Jesaia II, 32n.2 and W ILLIAMSON, Book, 258.

326

Appendix 1

appears preferable not to assume that a form of ¥ʬˇʮ was intended in v.19bĮ. Thus the search for some form of ¥ʭʬˇ seems promising, which suggests four possible readings. First, the Masoretes vocalized it as a Pual part.masc., i.e. “the one who is requited”. This understanding finds special support in the Book of Isaiah itself, where some Piel forms of ¥ʭʬˇ appear in this sense (cf. Isa 59:18; 65:6; 66:6, here as Piel participle, predicated of YHWH). Such a reading fits more or less into the context and is supported by Vulgate and Targum. As a result, it has found some advocates.16 Others also preserve the vocalization of MT but give up any search for its meaning and regard the phrase as the common proper noun Meshullam,17 similar to Jeshurun in Isa 44:2.18 Thirdly, Spykerboer attends to the close terminological correspondences to Isa 44:26 and argues for the meaning “the one who performs”, suggesting a Hifil participle.19 Since ¥ʭʬˇ in the sense of Isa 44:26 necessitates an object, I regard this reading as less likely. Yet it is worth bearing in mind the correspondence with Isa 44:26. Fourthly, taking into account the closest mention of ¥ʭʬˇ before the present passage in Isa 38:12, 13 inspires another suggestion. There, Hezekiah laments about YHWH making an end of him.20 The consonants of MT allow the reading of a Hofal participle of ¥ʭʬˇ in v.19b taking up the meaning of the Hezekiah passage in a passive sense: “the one who has been finished off”. Such a reading would create a climax of paradox statements in vv.18–25 in view of Isa 42:1–9. While Isa 42:1–9 record the commission of Servant JacobIsrael as a mainly royal figure in order to fulfil a royal task, vv.18–25 indicate, how unsuitable (or incapable) Jacob-Israel is for this task at the moment. This is most apparent by the paradox of the Servant being commissioned to open the eyes of the “blind” (v.7), yet being blind himself. The juxtaposition of “the one who has been finished off” and “the Servant of 16

Thus LINDHAGEN, Servant, 216–219 (see there also for a treatment of views before 1950); RIGNELL, Study, 36; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 57 (though uncertain); EISENBEIS, Wurzel, 322–324; MERENDINO, Der Erste, 277; B ALDAUF, Knecht, 17; KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 122n.10; for the original saying also BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 155. 17 Cf. 2 Kgs 22:3; 1 Chr 3:19; 5:13; 9:7; 2 Chr 34:12; Ezra 8:16; Neh 3:4 etc. 18 Cf. T ORREY, Second Isaiah, 331; SAWYER, Isaiah 2, 70; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40– 55, 219. 19 Cf. SPYKERBOER, Deutero-Isaiah, 100 suggesting an emendation to ʭʩʬˇʮʫ. 20 The meaning of ¥ʭʬˇ Hifil in Isa 38:12, 13 is quite disputed. The suggestion of an Aramaic sense (cf. W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 28–39, 1443 [ET, 439]: “preisgeben” [“to give up”]) has been refused by EISENBEIS, Wurzel, 326–331 (yet he notes that a decisive answer is not possible). See also earlier exegetes, who took the meaning of ¥ʭʬˇ in Isa 38:12, 13 as synonym to ¥ʤʬʫ; thus HITZIG, Jesaja, 444 and DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 391. For the translation “to finish / make an end” see also, e.g., CHILDS, Isaiah, 279; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–39, 492; OSWALT, Isaiah 1–39, 684; BEUKEN, Isaiah II/2, 397; cf. also NIV; NRSV; ESV.

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

327

YHWH” may amplify this paradox: the Servant Jacob-Israel, who is commissioned to fulfil the royal task of the (failed) kings, himself is in a worse situation than king Hezekiah. The similarities of terminology in Isa 44:26 may then be not accidental. There it is stated that YHWH himself cares for his commissioned messengers21 and brings the task to an end.22 The first proposal fits quite well into the broader context (see especially Isa 40:2). Moreover, Vulgate and Targum attest such a reading and the similar Piel form appears in the Book of Isaiah as well. Against the fourth proposal is the problem that this emendation involves a hapax legomenon.23 Still one could assume that such a rare construction could easily fall a prey to scribal errors in view of the common name Meshullam. Thus perhaps influenced by the use of an atypical name for Jacob-Israel in Isa 44:2, the rare construction kƟmošlƗm has been falsely regarded as kimšullƗm, which was recognized as a participle in Vulgate and Targum. Both the first and the fourth proposal are probable. Given the difficulties, a final conclusion is not possible. The problems that one has to address in respect to v.20 include a decision about whether the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ should be preferred or the QƟre ʺʥʠʸ, and how one should deal with the change in person between v.20a (2.sg.masc.) and v.20b (3.sg.masc.). This is further complicated by the different ancient versions. LXX and Targum read the whole verse including the verbs in 2.pl. This is due to their general tendency to read plural in this passage.24 One must suspect that Peshitta’s rendering of ʸʮˇʺ and ʲʮˇʩ in 2.pl. is equally a harmonization with v.18. But even though its reading of ʺʩʠʸ/ʺʥʠʸ and ʧʥʷʴ in 1.sg. (referring to YHWH) is hardly preferable, it might hint at the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ in its Vorlage.25 This can also be presupposed for the reading of Vulgate (2.sg. in the whole line). Since the Latin translation is very accurate as regards the changes in person and number (see especially vv.22–25) in contrast to the other ancient translations, it is quite plausible to assume that the Latin translators were confronted with a read21

If both, the Servant and the messengers refer to Jacob-Israel, this line takes up the switch between singular and plural characteristic of Isa 42:18–25. For other interpretations of v.26a see W ILLIAMSON, Book, 50–55 (might refer to the proclamation of First Isaiah) and HERMISSON, Israel und Gottesknecht, 7–9 (it refers to Deutero-Isaiah). 22 One of the means for accomplishing his purpose is the commission of Cyrus, who “will accomplish (ʭʩʬˇʩ as in 44:26) my pleasure”. 23 The only other occurrence of a Hofal form of ¥ʭʬˇ is in Job 5:23 where it is used in the denominative sense of ʭʥʬˇ. 24 Contra MARTI, Jesaja, 292. 25 The 1.sg. reading of ʧʥʷʴ might be motivated by the first colon. Once the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ was taken for granted, the first colon of the line obviously has been regarded the decisive reading, as it is indicated by the changes of v.20b into 2.sg. in Vulgate and many medieval manuscripts (see below).

328

Appendix 1

ing of 2.sg. at least in one colon as well. Then they have harmonized the second one accordingly. However, the most important witness for an early appearance of the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ is 1QIsaa. The commentators treat these data differently. Some reckon that the whole verse addresses a 2.sg.masc., hence they adopt the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ and emend ʲʮˇʩ to ʲʮˇʺ.26 But apart from the early witness for the 3.sg. in v.20b in 1QIsaa, it is more difficult to imagine why someone would change only the second stich into 3.sg. while preserving the 2.sg. in the first one. It is simpler to suppose a harmonization bringing into line the second colon with the preceding one. Other scholars preserve the difference of subject in both cola, and many of them prefer the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ.27 They usually explain the QƟre ʺʥʠʸ as a harmonization with the inf. abs. in v.20b. But again it must be asked which scenario seems the more likely. The possibility of misreading ʩ as ʥ and vice versa is beyond question. But the construction ʺʥʠʸ for an inf. abs. of a verb ʤ’’ʬ “occurs very occasionally”28 and the reading ʺʥʠʸ is a hapax legomenon. It seems more likely to see a rare phrase misread and regarded as a common construction (as the KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ is), rather than a change of a normal phrase into a form not attested elsewhere.29 If one holds the reading ʸʮˇʺ as original, it would give a good motivation for misreading the normal ʺʩʠʸ for the uncommon ʺʥʠʸ (but see below). Thus it is quite reasonable to prefer the QƟre ʺʥʠʸ; and since the 2.sg.masc. addressee in v.20a is well attested, it is the MT text with the QƟre ʺʥʠʸ that is regarded as the most plausible reading by a majority of exegetes.30 It was especially Elliger, who challenged the position of an original 2.sg.masc. addressee in v.20a. According to him the misreading ʺʩʠʸ caused the emendation of the original ʸʮˇʩ to ʸʮˇʺ.31 But since the 2.sg.masc. in v.20a is well attested, it is equally possible to assume that the original reading ʸʮˇʺ caused the misreading ʺʩʠʸ. Thus given that the 26

Thus, e.g., OETTLI, Jesaja, 28; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 477; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 89n.3, 91 (ET, 108n.c.111); SCHOORS, Saviour, 201. 27 Cf., e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia 440; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 385; SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 33; NORTH, Second Isaiah, 117; and quite recently OSWALT, Isaiah 40– 66, 128n.61; B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 148, 151. 28 JM §79p (ibid. 209). 29 I have not become aware of any tendency in later Hebrew, which might suggest the influence of later common forms of inf.abs. of verbs ʤ’’ʬ to the QƟre; cf. SEGAL, Grammar, 91 and STRACK & SIEGFRIED, Lehrbuch §105 (ibid. 90). 30 Cf., e.g., B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 152; MERENDINO, Der Erste, 278, 282–283; B ALDAUF, Knecht, 17; MOTYER , Prophecy, 328; G OLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 54; K OOLE , Isaiah III/1, 270; KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 122. 31 Cf. ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 272. Thus already K ISSANE, Isaiah II, 45; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 33 and now B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 216–217.

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

329

QƟre ʺʥʠʸ is the original reading, we have two probable scenarios for the different readings KƟthib ʺʩʠʸ / QƟre ʺʥʠʸ and their relationship to ʸʮˇʺ. The proposal of Elliger seems to be inferior to the latter one for several reasons: the change of person in a single line per se is not so unusual;32 as noted above the scribal error does not have to be regarded necessarily as the reason for ʸʮˇʺ but can also be recognized as a result of this reading. The singular reading in v.20a is not as unsuitable with respect to v.18 as Elliger proposes: v.20 as it comes to us in MT mirrors the juxtaposition of direct speech to the Servant (v.20a; cf. v.18) and (indirect) speech about the Servant (v.20b; cf. v.19) of the preceding lines.33 The change into singular in v.20a simply keeps the concentration on the collective dimension of the Servant figure. Finally, there is almost no textual evidence for an original 3.sg.masc. reading in v.20a. Despite these significant considerations, I adopt the supposed reading by Elliger, for two reasons. First, v.20b concludes strophe I with a speech about the Servant in 3.sg.masc. as does the concluding line of the second strophe (v.25b; see Figure 8 in chapter 4). This correspondence appears even clearer, when one reckons with a preferable reading of ʸʮˇʩ in v.20a as well. In that case, one meets two almost identical constructions at the end of each strophe. It is clear that one should hesitate to emend words and phrases to make them fit in a certain scheme or structure. That is why a second observation is of major importance. A change in person in one line is not unusual per se, but the present reading of MT is suspect in the immediate context: though there are many changes in number and person, v.20a is the only instance in vv.18–25 where a 2.sg.masc. addressee appears. Every other person of strophe I occurs also in the second strophe,34 but this does not apply for the 2.sg.masc. All the arguments and observations taken together suggest an emendation of ʸʮˇʺ to ʸʮˇʩ in v.20a.35 Another issue of frequent debate is the meaning of the term ʤʸʥʺ in vv.21b, 24bȕȖ and how these lines fit in the whole unit. Many scholars regard the term as referring to the Mosaic Torah, and often exclude vv.21,

32

In this respect the notes in GK §144p have been quoted again and again by those, who defended the reading ʸʮˇʺ in v.20a., cf., e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 270; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 132n.77. 33 For further quite reasonable interpretations of the change in person, see especially B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 152 (followed by KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 279); MOTYER, Prophecy, 328; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 54. 34 The 2.pl.masc. addressee reappears in v.23; the 3.sg. recurs in vv.22aĮ.25. 35 Cf. also W ILLIAMSON, Book, 258–259, who comes to the same conclusions in respect to v.20.

330

Appendix 1

24bȕȖ, or parts of them, as later glosses or editorial insertions.36 With respect to the assumption of only v.21b being a later insertion,37 it does not seem appropriate to divide the sentence of v.21 for syntactical reasons: ¥ʵʴʧ in its verbal form is used only rarely without an object. But in those cases it has a meaning that hardly fits v.21a.38 Thus ¥ʵʴʧ seems to demand the second stich as its subordinated continuation.39 But if we recognize the relationship of vv.21, 24bȕȖ to other texts in Isa, it becomes evident that the references to ʤʸʥʺ contribute to the overall communicative strategy. So the alleged random insertion of a reference to the Mosaic Torah does not justice to it. It also shows the Mosaic Torah is the least likely reference of the term ʤʸʥʺ here40 or anywhere else in Isa. In this respect, the occurrence of ʤʸʥʺ and its meaning in Isa 42:1–4 deserve some attention. Williamson concludes from the observations of several

36 Cf. (often assuming quite more extensive expansions than vv.21b, 24bȕȖ), e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 319–321; MARTI, Jesaja, 291–294; G.A. SMITH, Isaiah II, 148–149; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 32–33; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 89–94 (ET, 108–114); ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 278–281; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 154–158; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 79; H.-C. SCHMITT, Erlösung, 122–125; B ALDAUF, Knecht, 22–24, 31, 32–35; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40– 66, 70; even those, who sketched a different picture of the origin of vv.18–25 treated vv.21, 24bȕȖ similarly; cf. MOWINCKEL, Komposition, 96n.3 (here these lines belong to the several additions of the original unit 42:18, 24a, 25–43:7); MERENDINO, Der Erste, 275–290 (especially 279–283; the appearance and meaning of “Torah” are one of the main reasons for ascribing the independent unit vv.18, 19b, 21v, 22[only ʩʥʱˇʥ ʦʥʦʡʚʭʲ ʠʥʤʥ], 23, 24bȕȖ, 25 to a later origin than the one of DI); according to VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 207–210, vv.21b, 24bȕȖ have been influenced by post-exilic Torah piety and were inserted into the gradually grown unit (vv.18–23* R1; vv.24a*–25 R3); LABAHN, Schuld, 210–222(especially 210–212) even distinguishes between vv.24*–25 (belonging to the “schuldorientierte Überarbeitungsschicht”, influenced by dtr. theology; cf. ibid. 222) and v.21 as derived from circles of post-exilic Torah piety. 37 Cf., e.g., ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 280, 286–287; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 155–156; VAN O ORSCHOT, Babel, 211–212. 38 KBL notes only Cant 2:7; 3:5; 8:4 with the meaning: “to have lust”. Yet HLA 1:340 notes in an absolute sense: Isa 42:21 and Jonah 1:14: “to be willing” and Cant 2:7; 3:5; 8:4 “to feel inclined”. But Isa 42:21 is in dispute here; the instance in Jonah is a relative clause and is therefore not used in an absolute sense. Therefore, the remark of Koole remains valid: “ʵʴʧ requires an object.” IDEM, Isaiah III/1, 272. See also the two other occurrences of the verb ¥ʵʴʧ in Isa 53:10; 55:11. The suggestion of E LLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 286 to reckon perhaps with a noun is not justified. 39 According to GK §120c it is an example of the subordination of an additional verb in imperfect; JM §157b treats it as an asyndetic object clause. See there also for further examples and KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 272. 40 Interestingly, in his earlier work Elliger emphatically denied such a meaning as well and proposed the meaning “Prophetenwort”; see ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 169n.2. However, there he argued for an editorial insertion of vv.19–23 as a whole through TritoIsaiah, who expanded the original unit Isa 42:18, 24, 25–43:7.

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

331

similarities between Isa 2:1–4 and 42:1–441 that ʤʸʥʺ bears the same meaning in both passages. Thus as Isa 2:1–4 presents YHWH as the universal king reigning from mount Zion to bring to the nations justice and ʤʸʥʺ “instruction”,42 so it is the Servant in Isa 42:1–4, who is commissioned to fulfil this royal task of bringing the nations justice and ʤʸʥʺ “instruction”.43 The same concern for a “ʤʸʥʺ ‘instruction’ for the nations” appears one more time in Isa 40–55, namely in Isa 51:4. It seems to me that v.21 fits quite well in that stream of “torah for the nations”.44 Isa 2:1–4 and Isa 42:1–4 indicate a very important and positive role of ʤʸʥʺ “instruction”. Such a positive tone reappears in the unique phrase ʸʩʣʠʩʥ ʤʸʥʺ ʬʩʣʢʩ. It well underlines the argument of vv.18–25: YHWH has commissioned his Servant for an important task (Isa 42:1–9), but at the present stage the Servant is not able to fulfil it (see the analysis in chapter 4). It is the same train of thought in vv.21–22 en miniature: YHWH wanted to magnify the ʤʸʥʺ “instruction” through the royal Servant, but the Servant is in prison himself.45 As regards v.24bȕȖ, we may attend to the other important stream of speaking of “torah” in the Book of Isaiah; in passages like Isa 1:10; Isa 8:16, 20 and Isa 30:9, the term ʤʸʥʺ most probably refers to the “prophetic instruction/teaching” of Isaiah.46 Uwe Becker and Antje Labahn, however, take the correspondences between Isa 30:9 and Isa 42:24bȕȖ (see on this the analysis in chapter 4) as evidence for editorial processes in both passages that are close in time and theological concept.47 This results in their different understanding of the term ʤʸʥʺ in Isa 30:9 and Isa 42:24bȕȖ: they 41

Besides W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 137–139 see especially L AATO, Servant, 80–81. Cf. JENSEN, tôrâ, 90–91; SWEENEY, Isaiah 1–4, 137; IDEM, Prophetic Torah, 59–60; W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 139. 43 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Variations, 139. 44 This takes up the phraseology of F ISCHER, Tora, 14–15, 117, who distinguishes between two major lines of speech of Torah: on the one hand the “tora für Israel” and on the other hand the “tora für die Völker”. Yet I do not agree with her designation of v.21 to the stream of “Torah for Israel”. This differentiation of the reference of “torah” between v.21 and v.24b is also overlooked in LOHFINK & ZENGER, God of Israel, 45. 45 Cf. similarly LEENE, De vroegere, 141. 46 Cf. W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 1–12, 345–346 (ET, 366–367); IDEM, Jesaja 28–39, 1171 (ET, 145); W ILLIAMSON, Book, 88–89; SWEENEY, Prophetic Torah, 60–61; B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 234–236, 409; LABAHN, Schuld, 111–112, 114–115 accepts such a meaning for Isa 8:16, 20 but rejects it for Isa 30:9. SWEENEY, Prophetic Torah argues that “prophetic instruction” is the meaning in the original context but that it has widened in the final form to mean Mosaic Torah and supports the ‘programme’ of Ezra’s reforms. 47 Both reckon with an influence of a late development of dtr. theology to the editors responsible for both passages. According to LABAHN, Schuld, 215–216 the phraseology of Isa 30:9 and 42:24bȕȖ has been influenced by the Isaiah school as well as the late dtr. theology; U. B ECKER, Jesaja, 252–253 characterizes Isa 30:9–11 as “post-dtr” and cautiously asks whether Isa 30:9–11 and 42:24 might belong to the same edition (199, 266– 267). 42

332

Appendix 1

reject the meaning “prophetic instruction/teaching” and suppose the meaning “torah” as a comprehensive manifestation of the will of YHWH available in a written document developed in the dtn./dtr. movement.48 Still, there are good reasons to maintain the meaning “prophetic instruction/teaching”. First, it has been noted variously that there are no dtr texts, that connect the expression ʲʥʮˇ ʥʡʠʚʠʬ with the unwillingness of Israel to listen to YHWH.49 Both U. Becker and Labahn notice this problem. They try to obviate it by comparing Isa 30:9–11 and Isa 42:24bȕȖ with Ezek 20:8 (and Labahn adds Ezek 3:7), which is supposed to be influenced by late dtr. theology. U. Becker states that Isa 1:19 takes up the dtr. conquest tradition. In Ezek 20:8, which is similar to Isa 30:9–11, the same phraseology again appears in the context of conquest. Accordingly, U. Becker concludes: the “Topos vom Nicht-hören-Wollen dürfte daher in der dtr Landnahmedarstellung seinen ursprünglichen Platz haben.”50 Even if one were to agree with the late date of Ezek 20:8, it is equally possible that it has been influenced by Isaiah (see the position of Labahn). This may be the case despite the claim of U. Becker that the collocation ¥ʤʡʠ (ʠʬ) + ¥ʲʮˇ cannot be found in any dtr. text. Labahn recognizes the latter argument and proposes a combination of concepts in the phraseology of Isa 30:9; 42:24bȕȖ and Ezek 3:7; 20:8. She takes for granted assertions of a later interpretation influenced by dtr. theology of parts of Ezek as well. But the dtr. concept, which relates the history of Israel to its disloyalty against YHWH, is not coined in the language of the dtr. school. Thus the motif of hardening of the Isaianic tradition may have had an impact in the coinage of the phrase ʲʥʮˇ ʥʡʠʚʠʬʥ: “So mag die Formulierung ʲʥʮˇ ʥʡʠʚʠʬ zwar im Wirkungskreis der Jesajaschule entstanden sein, doch hat das dtr Geschichtsbild einen maßgeblichen Einfluß darauf ausgeübt.”51 Yet this is exactly the point of dispute: can we suppose the dtr. concept, when no dtr. phraseology is present, especially since it is the meaning of ʤʸʥʺ itself that needs to be determined? The presence or influence of the dtr. concept is even more questionable, given the rare phrase ʤʸʥʺ(ʡ) ¥ʲʮˇ (see below). Becker notes two further arguments. The language of Isa 30:9–11 indicates its late origin, in view of the similar expression ʩʸʮ ʺʩʡ of Ezek and the phrase ʤʥʤʩ ʺʸʥʺ, mainly occurring in the Book of Chronicles. Furthermore, the passage fits in the conceptual unity of the editorial layer “Ungehorsamsschicht”, “für die schon aus bucheditorischen Gründen (vgl. bes. 1,2–20*) keine andere als die nachexilische Zeit in Frage kommt.”52 The term ʩʸʮ appears in the Book of Ezekiel with two exceptions (Ezek 2:7; 44:6) always in the collocation ʩʸʮ(ʤ) ʺʩʡ, which cannot be found in any other book of the OT. It is, therefore, a specific phrase for Ezekielian texts, a quasi idiolect that cannot serve for any conclusions regarding the origin of differing phrases with ʩʸʮ.53 With respect to the date 48

Cf. LABAHN, Schuld, 115. Thus already W ILDBERGER, Jesaja 28–39, 1168 (ET, 142) and then PERLITT, Jesaja, 138–140, 146–147 contra KAISER, Jesaja 13–39 ad loc. and W ILLIAMSON, Book, 90 and B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 408 contra V ERMEYLEN, Isaïe ad loc. 50 U. BECKER, Jesaja, 253. 51 LABAHN, Schuld, 218; cf. also LABAHN, Schuld, 114. 52 U. BECKER, Jesaja, 253. 53 The other occurrences of ʩʸʮ show no specific distribution (Deut 31:27; 1 Sam 15:23; Neh 9:17; Job 23:2; Prov 17:11; a similar construction to Ezek and Isa 30:9 may be found in Num 17:24 ʩʸʮʚʩʰʡʬ). 49

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

333

of the Book of Chronicles it is not surprising that the meaning of ʤʸʥʺ as the “Mosaic Torah” is well established there and the genitive construction ʤʥʤʩ ʺʸʥʺ has become a common and frequent phrase.54 Yet it is clear that the same meaning cannot be simply presupposed in the other few instances of its occurrence.55 It must be deduced from the literary and historical context in each case.56 For the linguistic and semantic reasons given above and the close relationship to Isa 8:1, 16, I would hold to a distinctive meaning of ʤʥʤʩ ʺʸʥʺ in Isa 30:9.57

Moreover, as Williamson points out, there is no single instance in dtr. texts, where ʤʸʥʺ is the object of “to listen”.58 The few other passages, where this is the case, would hardly have an impact on the coinage of the specific phraseology in Isa 30:9; 42:24.59 The association of ʤʥʤʩ ʪʸʣʡ/ʥʩʫʸʣʡ ʪʬʤ with ʤʸʥʺ (cf. Josh 22:5; 1 Kgs 2:3; similarly 2 Kgs 17:13) as well as the expression ʪʸʣ ʯʮ ¥ʸʥʱ (cf. Deut 9:12, 16; 11:28; 31:29; Judg 2:17) occur frequently in dtr. texts. However, this dtr. concept should not be presupposed either for Isa 30:9–11 or Isa 42:24.60 In Isa 30:9–11 ʪʸʣ is parallel with ʧʸʠ, which is not typical for dtr. texts but very common in wisdom literature.61 Moreover, Isa 30:9–11 corresponds closely to the terminology of Isa 2:1–4 where the nations stream to Zion that YHWH “may teach us ʥʩʫʸʣʮ and that we may walk ʥʩʺʧʸʠʡ For the meaning of ʤʸʥʺ in Chronicles see also W ILLIAMSON, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 411 and J APHET, I & II Chronicles, 1030. The same applies for its occurrence in Ezra/Neh (Ezra 7:10; Neh 9:3); cf. W ILLIAMSON, Ezra/Nehemiah, xxxvii–xxxix, 287– 288, 311; IDEM, Ezra and Nehemiah/OTGu, 90–98; B LENKINSOPP, Ezra-Nehemiah, 139, 152–157. 55 Cf. apart from Isa 5:24; 30:9 also Exod 13:9; 2 Kgs 10:31; Pss 1:2; 19:8; 119:1; Jer 8:8; Amos 2:4. 56 This is evident even in the paper of KAISER, Tendenzkritik, 68, who cannot avoid being in charge of giving evidence for the assertion of a late dtr. coinage of the formula in each case (at least by quoting one supporting study on each passage). Yet especially with respect to those passages that according to their literary setting could be quite early, the supposed meaning of ʤʸʥʺ close to dtr texts is far from certain; see with respect to Amos 2:4, e.g., ANDERSEN & FREEDMAN, Amos, 296; LOHFINK, deuteronomistische Bewegung, 330; BONS, Denotat, 205–209 contra W. H. SCHMIDT, Redaktion, 177. Thus instead of defending dtr. influence in Isa 5:24 and Am 2:4 by reasoning the one through the other and vice versa, it seems to me rather possible to reckon with the meaning “prophetic instruction” in these passages (cf. also Lohfink and Bons). 57 Cf. also the remarks in B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 409. 58 Cf. W ILLIAMSON, Book, 90–91. This is also the strongest argument against the supposed close relationship between the editorial process of Ezek 3:7; 20:8 and the one of Isa 30:9; 42:24. 59 I.e. Prov 28:9; Zech 7:12; Neh 13:3; in Ezek 44:5 the object of “to listen” is the plural of ʤʸʥʺ. See W ILLIAMSON, Book, 90–91. 60 Thus, e.g., LABAHN, Schuld, 214–215 who takes for granted the dtr origin of ʪʬʤ ʤʥʤʩ ʪʸʣʡ/ʥʩʫʸʣʡ; the differing construction in v.24 is a “free imitation” of the dtn./dtr. term (ibid. 215). 61 Cf. B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 409n.123. 54

334

Appendix 1

because from Zion will go out ʤʸʥʺ” (Isa 2:3).62 Thus regardless of the particular literary history of Isa 30:8–11 and its immediate context, it seems reasonable, to understand the passage as well as the phrase ʤʸʥʺ first and foremost from within the Book of Isaiah itself. Accordingly, Isa 30:9 speaks of the rejection of the prophetic teaching. There is still another problem in v.24, the so-called “confession of sin” in v.24aĮIII, 24bĮ: ʥʬ ʥʰʠʨʧ ʥʦ ʤʥʤʩ ʠʥʬʤ. Some of the ancient versions eased the problematic shifts of person and number by emending to a uniform reading. While LXX and Targum read 3.pl. for ʥʰʠʨʧ in accordance with ʥʲʮˇ, the Peshitta reads 1.pl. for both. These readings themselves offer strong testimony in their distinctiveness to the version of MT, which is further supported by 1QIsaa and Vulgate. However, critical scholarship has found the whole line suspect for several reasons and has often regarded it as a later insertion. The fact that the whole line answers the preceding question (v.24aĮI.II) is awkward for two reasons. First, the answer to the preceding line is so clear that an answer is unnecessary. Secondly, DI does not answer the rhetorical questions elsewhere.63 The occurrence of the 1.pl. is equally surprising, since the next line immediately changes into 3.pl.masc. Thus the line had been regarded as a later inserted “confession of sin”.64 But these judgements are not beyond question. First, there are indeed instances in Isa 40–55, where (rhetorical) questions are answered.65 Secondly, the designation of the question in v.24aĮI.II as a rhetorical question fails to recognize it within the context of one of the passage’s main arguments, that the addressees are blind and deaf and do not understand. Thus for the audience nothing is self-evident and it is certainly not clear that YHWH has caused their situation. This understanding is something this very passage has to argue for. By asking for the one responsible for the state of Servant Jacob-Israel (v.24aĮI.II), the audience is forced to attend to the fact that there is indeed someone responsible. The present answer pins the audience down to the origin of their destiny: it is YHWH.66 Thirdly, 62 For a similar reference, cf. FISCHER, Tora, 75 and B ARTHEL, Prophetenwort, 409n.123. 63 Cf. DUHM, Jesaia, 320; MARTI, Jesaja, 293; SCHOORS, Saviour, 207; ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 290; H.-C. SCHMITT, Erlösung, 124; similarly VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 208. 64 Cf., e.g., WESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 93 (ET, 113; still cautiously though), then ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 279, 290; B EUKEN, Jesaja II/A, 152, 158; MERENDINO, Der Erste, 280; VAN OORSCHOT, Babel, 208; LABAHN, Schuld, 211, 212–214. 65 Isa 41:25 answers Isa 41:2; Isa 41:26 presents the answer in the same verse as the question appears; Isa 48:14, 15 are closely related; and see in particular Isa 45:21 for a close correspondence. For a close similarity see further Mic 1:5. 66 HARDMEIER, Geschwiegen, 177n.62 also argues for a necessary continuation of the question in v.24a. Accordingly, he only deletes the answer in v.24 (from ʤʥʤʩ ʠʥʬʤ) as

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

335

the change of person into 1.pl. is not as awkward as often supposed. As noted in chapter 4, the speaker is identifying himself with his audience in order to gain their trust. This is even similar to some degree to what the prophet Isaiah has done (cf. Isa 6:5).67 Finally, it is worth looking at the way the different communicative levels are arranged in vv.23–24bĮ. With v.23 the speaker directly addresses his audience for the first time in strophe II right at its centre. By the question he uses, he appeals to his audience to listen to the present proclamation.68 This is followed by a second question (“Who gave up Jacob to the looter and Israel to the plunderer?”, v.24aĮI.II), which takes up the notion of the state of the people as spoiled and plundered from the previous lines but turns the attention to its cause. As regards communicative levels, this second ‘Who – question’ is subordinated to the first one. It is part of the communicative interaction that the first question introduces between the speaker and “you”. As part of this interaction, the speaker asks about someone else. Together with the subsequent answer, this question points to YHWH as the cause of the people’s desolate state that the outward lines of this strophe describe. In this respect, the form of the strophe also reflects its content: at the heart of the addressees’ terrible condition lies YHWH their God. But this central statement is correlated to and part of the appeal to listen to the present communicative interaction. The final colon (“against whom we have sinned”) returns to this presupposed interaction between the speaker and his audience. But here the prophet identifies with his audience.69 Moreover, it confesses why YHWH has been the cause of their captivity, because they have sinned. Thus despite – or perhaps because of – the brevity of these lines, we find an intense and complex communicative interaction in the centre of the second strophe. It demands that the readers pay attention to the whole communicative process (v.23), during which the speaker includes himself among his audience to express the wrong relationship they have with YHWH (v.24bĮ), the third party in the ‘web of interactions’. The ‘statements’ about YHWH as the cause of their situation are expressed in the form of questions (v.24aĮI.II: ʩʮ; v.24v,

secondary because of the confession of sin and the following notion of the lack of obedience to the torah. 67 Noted also in MOTYER, Prophecy, 329 and GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 61. 68 Cf. the remarks above in “1.3 Communicative Analysis of Isaiah 42:18–25”. 69 Thus some earlier commentators, e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 441; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 386; more recently also, e.g., G OLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 47, 61; FISCHER, Tora, 97; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 278. W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 93 (ET, 113) and BALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 149 think about this possibility but reject it in the end. Maintaining the line’s character as a later addition, E LLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 290 also says about it that “der Verfasser sich selbst in das Sündenbekenntnis einschließt”.

336

Appendix 1

24aĮIII: ʠʥʬʤ) so that they force the addressee to respond to these assertions. A final note regards the reading ʥʴʠ ʤʮʧ in v.25. The versions in 1QIsaa, LXX, Vulgate, Peshitta, Targum and the Arabic translation as well as one Kennicott manuscript indicate to read the construct of ʤʮʧ. Accordingly, many commentators suggest an emendation to ʺʮʧ.70 For others, ʥʴʠ stands in apposition to the absolute ʤʮʧ. However, Whitley persuasively argues that ʤʮʧ is the more concrete here than ʳʠ.71 Consequently, the construct rendering of ʤʮʧ is more appropriate.72 Whitley puts forward two observations why an emendation to ʺʮʧ was not necessary. First, he notes some instances of an equal absolute reading for a construct meaning of a feminine noun elsewhere in the OT.73 Secondly, he ascribes the reading ʤʮʧ to an intended assonance with ʤʮʧʬʮ in v.25.74 These notions seem to be further supported by the fact that in the OT ¥ʪʴˇ is usually constructed with ʤʮʧ.75 On the other hand, it must be said that ʳʠ ʯʥʸʧ is the more usual genitive construction in the OT.76 Moreover, Lam 4:11, which is similar to Isa 42:25,77 contains the rare collocation ʯʥʸʧ ¥ʪʴˇ. Given the difficulties that the absolute form ʤʮʧ poses, it could be originally a gloss or remark above the phrase ʳʠ ʯʥʸʧ that clarified this phrase or just hinted at the assonance

70 Cf., e.g., ELLIGER, Deuterojesaja, 273; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 126; B ALDAUF, Knecht, 19 etc. 71 Cf. WHITLEY, Further notes, 683–684. 72 This is to be said also against some recent publications, e.g., GOLDINGAY, Isaiah 42.18–25, 64; KOOLE, Isaiah III/1, 279–280; O SWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 129n.72; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 216 etc. 73 He notes the following examples: Num 28:3 ʣʩʮʺ ʤʬʲ (the Samarit.Pent. reads: ʺʬʲ ʣʩʮʺ); Jer 52:21 where the KƟthib reads ʣʮʲʤ ʤʮʥʷ but the QƟre ʣʮʲʤ ʺʮʥʷ; 1 Kgs 12:5 reads ʭʩʮʩ ʤˇʬˇ, but the parallel 2 Chr 10:5 ʭʩʮʩ ʺˇʬˇ. 74 Cf. WHITLEY, Further notes, 684. 75 For the common collocation ʤʮʧ ¥ʪʴˇ, cf., e.g., Ps 79:6; Jer 10:27; Lam 2:4; Ezek 7:8; 9:8; 14:19; 20:8, 13, 21. 76 While the construction ʳʠ ʯʥʸʧ appears 33 times in the OT the present passage is the only instance of the genitive construction ʳʠ ʤʮʧ. The only other instance of a similar construction could be found in Isa 66:15. Yet it must be added that both terms ʳʠ and ʤʮʧ are often juxtaposed to each other (as hendiadys: cf., e.g., Deut 9:19; 29:22; Jer 32:31; 33:5; 42:18; Mic 5:14; Dan 9:16; both in parallel: cf., e.g., Pss 6:2; 37:8; 90:7; Prov 15:1; 21:14; Isa 63:3, 6; Ezek 7:8). 77 Apart from the similar phraseology, Lam 4:11 is especially close to Isa 42:25 still in another respect: there we read the connection of anger, fury with burning as well. Thus if one looks for a possible influence on v.25, this seems to me to be the most likely; contra HERMISSON, Einheit, 298–299n.47 (influenced by Jer and Ezek) and contra LABAHN, Schuld, 220 (influenced by dtr theology).

Text-Critical and Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 42:18–25

337

with ʤʮʧʬʮ and then accidentally replaced only ʯʥʸʧ at a later stage of transmission.78

78

In a private conversation, Hugh Williamson has pointed to the so-called “cuckoo principle” in this respect, cf. ALLEN, Cuckoos and IDEM, More Cuckoos.

Appendix 2

On the Interpretation of the Term ʺʥʲʬ in Isaiah 50:4 and the Different Interpretations of Isaiah 50:10 Different proposals have been made to understand the term ʺʥʲʬ in v.4, which has been already rendered differently in the ancient versions.1 De Boer reckons with the verbal stem ʤʲʬ, related to ʲʲʬ and Arab. laƥƗ, translating it “to speak rashly, inconsiderately, excessively”.2 But ʲʲʬ and Arab. laƥƗ mean “to stammer, to talk nonsense” and so this proposal barely fits into v.4.3 Frey, presupposing ʺʲʸʬ, reads “weiden” (to graze),4 but this does not go well in the context of speaking (ʯʥˇʬ, ʸʡʣ). Another rather rare position has at least some support from the LXX and associates the reading ʺʥʲʬ somehow with ʺʲ “time”.5 However, the unsatisfying translations and further necessary emendations undermine this solution. More often scholars emend to ʺʰʲʬ “to answer”.6 Since the rest of vv.4–5 creates the impression of someone delivering speeches to depressed people rather than being challenged by them “to answer” through disputations, I tend to disagree with that proposal. No emendation is presupposed in the suggestion of Korpel and de Moor to read ʺʥʲʬ as a fem. inf.cs. in Qal of ¥ʣʥʲ translat-

1

Though 1QIsaa.b support MT. DE B OER, Message, 53 taken up by KAISER , Königlicher Knecht, 67; BEUKEN, Jesaja II/B, 81; LEENE, stem, 37n.43. 3 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 107 and already D ILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 434 against the same suggestion made by H ITZIG, Jesaja, 550. 4 Cf. FREY, Buch, 219; see also BHS; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 151 (though hesitating). 5 Cf. C LIFFORD, Fair Spoken, 157 who emends to ʺʲʬ (and obviously also dabbƝr, though not extra mentioned) translating: “to know how to speak with the faint in the time”. ORLINSKY, Servant, 89 also includes “time” though he does not indicate how exactly he understands it, translating “To know how to speak timely words to the weary”; similarly also MOTYER, Prophecy, 399. The LXX reads: IJȠȣ ȖȞȦȞĮȚ İȞ țĮȚȡȦ ȘȞȚțĮ įİȚ İȚʌİȚȞ ȜȠȖȠȞ, though not rendering ʳʲʩ and inserting another verb of speaking. 6 Cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 379; KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 42; ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 28; B EGRICH, Deuterojesaja, 55n.196; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 182n.1 (ET, 225n.a); MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 117; BALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 338. This might correspond with some ancient versions that put a verb of speaking at this place; cf. Targum and Peshitta. 2

The Interpretation of Isaiah 50:4 and Isaiah 50:10

339

ing “to know how to make witnesses those too tired for words”.7 At a first glance, their proposal seems to fit quite well into earlier passages that speak about the role of the exiles as witnesses for YHWH. But apart from the problem that none of the versions has understood it in that way, it does not fit into the overall strategy. The exiles have been appointed as witnesses already. 8 Therefore, the Servant certainly should help them fulfil their role, but he is not to “make them witnesses”. Finally, scholars have regarded ʺʥʲʬ as an inf. of ʺʥʲ. As a possible Aramaism of ¥ˇʥʲ,9 the equivalent to Arab. ƥƗta IV (“to help”), it is translated “to sustain”,10 which is supported by Vulgate. This seems to me to be the preferable reading. It fits best the context and the ancient versions that read “to say, to teach” (cf. Targum, Peshitta) might be seen as free renderings of “to sustain”, inspired by the appearance of “disciples”. Finally, Sanhedr. 97a attests that this was possibly the way ¥ʺʥʲ could have been understood.11 The interpretation of v.10, which we had determined as the speech of the prophetic voice above, faces an enormous amount of problems and varieties that mainly regard questions of syntax. A systematisation of the different suggestions is quite difficult, because of several possibilities of combinations. Accordingly, this attempt of systematisation, following a very helpful study of Beuken,12 remains, almost necessarily, fragmentary. Several translations are listed below and discussed according to their numbers.

7 KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 448n.3. According to them, as a fem. inf. cs. of the type qtult, ‘ût results from the actual form *‘ûdt through assimilation (*‘ûtt) and reduction of duplication at the end of a word. 8 Thus especially Isa 43:8–13, reconfirmed in Isa 44:6–8. 9 As a verb, the stem ˇʥʲ occours only once in the OT (Joel 4:11), but see the proper name ˇʥʲʩ (cf., e.g., Gen 36:5; 1 Chr 1:35; 7:10; 23:10). 10 Cf. with reference to this etymology DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 495; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 434; SKINNER, Isaiah XL–LXVI, 102 (still hesitating); MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40– 66, 583; B ONNARD, Second Isaïe, 230; LAATO, Servant, 123; KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 106– 107; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 320; adopting the meaning “to sustain” but with no etymological reference but deriving it from context, cf. NORTH, Second Isaiah, 201; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 151; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 195; SCHARBERT, Deuterojesaja, 39; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 318. STECK, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in den EJL, 14 remains undecided: either emendation to ʺʰʲʬ or assuming an Aramaism of ˇʥʲ. 11 Yalon hints at the phrase hajjǀker jƗ‘njt in Sanhedr. 97a and explains the form in Isa 50:4 as a Qal with the meaning of Piel; cf. H. YALON, ld‘t l‘wt ’t j‘p dbr, Lešonenu 30 (1965/66) 248–249 quoted from H. H AAG, Gottesknecht, 172 (mentioned also in OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 320n.20). 12 Cf. B EUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 .

340

Appendix 2

Different Translations of Isaiah 50:10 (1)

“Whoever among you reveres Yahveh, let him heed the voice of his servant; whoever is walking in the dark and has no glimmer of light, let him trust in the name of Yahveh and rely on his God.”13

(2)

“Who among you fears the LORD and obeys the voice of his servant, who walks in darkness and has no light, yet trusts in the name of the LORD and relies upon his God?” 14

(3)

“Whosoever among you fears YHWH, who hearkens to the voice of his servant, who walks in darkness so that no light shines for him: let him trust in the name of YHWH and lean upon his God.”15

(4)

“Who among you, fearing Yhwh, listening to the voice of his servant, [among you] that walks in darkness and has no light, trusts in Yhwh’s name and relies upon his God?”16

(5)

“Who is there among you that fears the LORD, obeying the word of his servant; that gropes in darkness and has no glimmer of light? Let him trust in the name of the LORD and firmly rely on his God!”17

(6)

“Who among you fears the LORD and obeys the voice of the servant? When he walks in darkness without light, let him trust and rely on his God.”18

(7)

“Who among you fears Yahweh, and hearkens to the voice of his servant? He who walks in darkness with no brightness upon him, Let him trust in the name of Yahweh, and lean upon his God.”19

The emendation of the participle ʲʮˇ šǀmƝa‘ to ʲʮˇʩ, advocated by earlier exegetes (1), results in convenient two parallel lines, each consisting of a subordinated clause introduced by an indefinite particle (ʩʮ, ʸˇʠ) and jussives in the principal clause.20 But there is no text-critical support for this 13

B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 318. MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 587. 15 SIMON, Theology, 174. 16 DE B OER, Message, 29–30. 17 NORTH, Second Isaiah, 59. 18 CHILDS, Isaiah, 389–390. 19 MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 115–116. 20 Cf., e.g., DUHM, Jesaia, 382; MARTI, Jesaja, 335–336; GRESSMANN, Analyse, 274n.2; KÖHLER, Deuterojesaja, 43; VOLZ, Jesaia II, 150–152; ELLIGER, Verhältnis, 35– 36; presupposed apparently also in W EIPPERT, Konfessionen, 108; quite recently again B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 40–55, 318. FREY, Buch, 225 also adopts this emendation but relates ʸˇʠ to ʥʣʡʲ; similarly B ALTZER, Deutero-Isaiah, 338 who mentions this emendation as a possible alternative but deals with ʸˇʠ like Frey. 14

The Interpretation of Isaiah 50:4 and Isaiah 50:10

341

suggestion, especially since the reading of the LXX might go back to a misreading of an abbreviation of the tetragramm in its Vorlage.21 A remarkable number of scholars read ʸˇʠ as a relative pronoun referring to ʥʣʡʲ, though there are divergent views about how the last line (v.10bȕȖ) then is related to the previous lines syntactically, whether or not v.10bȕȖ continues the propositions about the Servant from v.10bĮ (2).22 But since in that case the change from qatal-forms (v.10bĮ) into yiqtolforms (v.10bȕȖ) would be awkward, this interpretation is less likely. Instead, v.10bȕȖ may presuppose the addressees of v.10 as the subject, making the last line an admonition (3).23 But with Beuken, I regard this change of subject not the most obvious reading from v.10b and it seems that this is not the way the Masoretes read it either, because in that case one would expect them to have placed the ‘Atnah̟ with ʥʬ.24 Koenen also mentions the plural readings of 1QIsaa and LXX as evidences against any relation of ʸˇʠ with ʥʣʡʲ.25 Moreover, if we read the present passage in the context of the broader composition, it is worth recalling Isa 49:7–10. Despite the bad condition of the Servant (Isa 49:7), he is not counted among those who sit in the darkness, but is supposed to lead them out (Isa 49:8–10). By this means, he is to fulfil the commission, originally assigned to the Servant Jacob-Israel (Isa 42:1–9; cf. Isa 49:3). I would conclude that the Servant is less likely to be the one who walks in darkness here, too. There remain two different ways of relating ʸˇʠ to the context. First, those who are addressed in the first line are further characterized as those “who walk in darkness and have no light” through ʸˇʠ that subordinates this line to the former one. Associated to each other in this way, both verses are taken as subordinated to the main question that occurs in v.10bȕȖ in the studies of de Boer and Leene (4).26 With the position that takes ʸˇʠ as referring to the Servant and regards the whole verse as a question, the main problem is the change from qatal- to yiqtol-forms. Others confined the question to v.10bĮ and perceived the last line as an admonition (5). 27 Like Koole, I doubt whether the rare piety of “fearing YHWH” 21

Cf. CORNEY, Isaiah L 10. Cf., e.g., VON ORELLI, Jesaja, 182; RIGNELL, Study, 71; MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40– 66, 587–588; FOHRER, Jesaja 3, 140; MELUGIN, Formation, 72–73; SCHARBERT, Deuterojesaja, 40n.49, 46 and apparently also LANDY, Construction, 68. See already DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 436 arguing against this interpretation. 23 Cf. SIMON, Theology, 174. 24 Cf. B EUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 170. 25 Cf. KOENEN, Heil, 206. 26 Cf. DE B OER, Message, 29–30; LEENE, stem, 44n.86. 27 Cf., e.g., NORTH, Second Isaiah, 59, 204–205; BONNARD, Second Isaïe, 230; OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 327n.41. Similarly also MERENDINO, prophetisches Wort, 348 who takes ʸˇʠ as a conditional conjuction with a deictic meaning. Unlike the former, 22

342

Appendix 2

and “listening to the voice of his Servant” and the conversely widespread state of “walking in the darkness” and “having no light” (cf. Isa 42:7, 16; 49:8–10) are meant to function on the same communicational level of addressing the audience.28 Moreover, one would expect the ‘Atnah̟ to be placed with ʥʬ in that case as well. Secondly, ʸˇʠ introduces the subordinated clause in a new sentence that has its principal clause in the last line. As Koole points out, once this position is adopted, it is of less importance how one takes ʸˇʠ.29 Beuken interprets ʸˇʠ as a conditional particle for form-critical reasons, comparing vv.10–11 with paraenetic endings of the psalms of confidence. Accordingly, whenever the god-fearer will get into darkness because he listens and attends to the Servant, he is called to rely upon YHWH (6).30 Yet if we read the passage in the broader literary context, “walking in darkness” is not a possible condition but a specific and concrete one. The whole context is about leading the audience out of darkness (cf. Isa 42:16; 44:22; 49:8– 10). Therefore, I regard the particle ʸˇʠ as an absolute relative pronoun:31 the one who walks in darkness and has no light, should rely upon YHWH (7).32

Merendino regards v.10a, 10bĮ as the protasis and v.10bȕȖ as the apodosis of one sentence. Thus also KOENEN, Heil, 206–207 taking ʸˇʠ as a conditional conjunction. 28 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 124. 29 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 125; similarly already BEUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 174. 30 Cf. B EUKEN, Jes 50 10–11 , 180–181. This interpretation is adopted in SCHOORS, Jesaja II, 310; W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 194; CHILDS, Isaiah, 390, 395–396. 31 Cf. JM § 145a. 32 Cf. also DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 497; DILLMANN & K ITTEL, Jesaja, 436; W ESTERMANN, Jesaja 40–66, 188–190 (ET, 232–235); MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 115–117; W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 153; KORPEL & DE MOOR, Hebrew Poetry, 449; similarly W ERLITZ, Knecht, 40n.41. KOOLE, Isaiah III/2, 125 does not decide between this position and the former one. He adds as a further possible interpretation of ʸˇʠ its use as a concessive particle (“though he walks in darkness”, quoting JPS).

Appendix 3

Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 The problems that the exegete faces in Isa 63:7–64:11 are legion. I shall mainly concentrate on those issues that affect the discussion of this study. In Isa 63:9 the reading of ʸʶ ʠʬ is a matter of dispute and uncertainty. Related to this is also the question of how one segments v.9aĮ and determines its relationship to v.8b. The term ʸʶ s̢ar can be derived from the root ʸʶ I “narrow, affliction” or ʸʶ II “enemy”.1 Either way, it seems to be difficult to find a straightforward interpretation for the phrase ʸʶ ʠʬ.2 As a result, many exegetes choose to emend it, mostly on the basis of the textual traditions and variants. Some follow the proposal of the Masoretes (QƟre) and emend to ʸʶ ʥʬ. In this case, ʸʶ is regarded as the adjective or noun ʸʶ I “narrow, distress, affliction” and v.9aĮ starts a new line, resulting in the translation: “In all their affliction He was afflicted”3; thus YHWH himself is affected by the distress of his people. Others try to reconstruct a meaningful text on the basis of the LXX, which reads Ƞȣ ʌȡİıȕȣȢ Ƞȣįİ ĮȖȖİȜȠȢ ĮȜȜ’ ĮȣIJȠȢ țȣȡȚȠȢ İıȦıİȞ ĮȣIJȠȣȢ “not a messenger nor an angel but the LORD himself saved them”, possibly reading ʸʶ s̛ir / ʸʩʶ s̛îr “messenger” and making ʥʩʰʴ (read as “he himself”) the subject of “to save” by changing the segmentation. Most scholars who adopt this way of reading also regard the phrase ʭʺʸʶʚʬʫʡ as the continuation of v.8b, which leads to the following reading of vv.8b–9aĮ: “he became their Saviour in all their affliction. […] it was no messenger or angel, but his presence which saved them”4. Thus the present form could be the adjective or noun ʸʶ I “narrow, distress”; the noun ʸʶ II “enemy”; the 3.sg.masc. qatal of ¥ʸʸʶ I used intransitively “to be distressed, afflicted” or transitively “to afflict”; the 3.sg.masc. qatal or ptc.sg. of ¥ʸʥʶ I “to confine, besiege”; the 3.sg.masc. qatal of ¥ʸʸʶ II “to show hostility towards” or the 3.sg.masc. qatal or ptc.sg. of ¥ʸʥʶ II “to show hostility to”. 2 See already the discussion in DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 599–600 and now, e.g., KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 354–356. 3 KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 356; for the same interpretation, cf., e.g., DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 599–600; BEEK, Mit-Leiden, 24–25, 28–30; FISCHER, Jahwe, 6–11 (especially 7), 131– 132; W EBSTER, Rhetoric of Isaiah 63–65, 91, 102; HOASS, Passion, 155 (n.43 with further literature); OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 600–601n.34, 606–607; CHILDS, Isaiah, 519; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 252, 254. 4 Thus W HYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66, 257; cf. also W INTER, ȋǼǿȇ, 440 noting the Passover Haggadah as a parallel to the lost Hebrew original Vorlage of the LXX in Isa 63:9; then 1

344

Appendix 3

None of these proposals are satisfactory. Against the emendation of ʠʬ to ʥʬ, the KƟthib is very well supported in the textual tradition. In general, it can be said that most of the translations and versions can be traced back to the KƟthib of MT. Against the emendation oriented towards the reading of the LXX, Beek5 notes that ʸʩʶ s̛îr II “messenger” is always written plene.6 Fischer and Koole add that it is used exclusively for human messengers in the OT. So one would expect an adversative particle before ʥʩʰʴ in the reading like that of LXX, and after ʥʩʰʴ the verb must take a plural form.7 In addition, the emendation to ʸʩʶ s̛îr fails to recognize the wordplay of s̢ƗrƗtƗm – s̢Ɨr. I would therefore preserve the KƟthib and regard it as an intentionally ambiguous phrase that allows for various readings: ʸʶ is most probably a 3.sg.masc. qatal, but the root remains ambiguous: it alludes to “their affliction” by wordplay, evoking ¥ʸʸʶ I used transitively “to afflict”, hence the possible translation: “In all their affliction he did not afflict.”8 But as there is a contrast between 63:8–9 and 63:10,9 this might also evoke ¥ʸʸʶ II / ¥ʸʥʶ II “to show hostility towards” in contrast to v.10, where YHWH becomes an enemy. 10 Thus in the probably palistrophic line vv.8b–9aĮ,11 the centre colon expresses via negationis what the outward cola emphasize: in that time YHWH was their saviour, not their enemy and not one who afflicted them. If it was mainly read aloud, one could also hear ʥʬ for ʠʬ and then the elliptic centre colon expresses what the central idea of YHWH as the saviour means: their affliction is His affliction.12 If those mentioned in FISCHER, Jahwe, 8n.16; also GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 54–57 (and those mentioned ibid. 54n.114); then also, e.g., MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 188; CLIFFORD, Narrative, 96n.1; SCHRAMM, Opponents, 150–151; HÖFFKEN, Jesaja 40–66, 231–232; RUSZKOWSKI, Volk, 53; GOLDINGAY, Isaiah, 363. 5 Cf. BEEK, Mit-Leiden, 28–29; he also wonders whether the LXX (and thus also Duhm who called the reading of MT QƟre “naiv”) tried to avoid the “anthropopathischen Elemente der israelitischen Gottesvorstellung” (BEEK, Mit-Leiden, 24). 6 An exception is Isa 57:9. 7 Cf. FISCHER, Jahweh, 8–10; KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 355. 8 Thus W ATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 324; Targum and Peshitta read it that way. 9 See the discussion on “Structure and Poetics” in chapter 8. 10 Reading ¥ʸʸʶ II / ¥ʸʥʶ II in vv.8b–9aĮ, one would translate “And he became a Saviour for them; / in all their affliction he was not hostile (ʸʶ ʠʬ); / and the angel of his presence saved them”, which forms the contrast to the statement in v.10 that YHWH “became their enemy (ʡʩʥʠ)”. 11 I regard vv.8b–9aĮ as one tricolon, where the first and third colon are related by ¥ʲˇʩ and two forms of the root ʸʶ occurring in the centre colon: ʭʲʩˇʥʤ ʥʩʰʴ ʪʠʬʮʥ / ʸʶ ʠʬ ʭʺʸʶʚʬʫʡ / ʲʩˇʥʮʬ ʭʤʬ ʩʤʩʥ 12 The discussion of various Targumim in BEEK, Mit-Leiden, 23–28 shows that the QƟre of MT goes back to a long tradition. But especially interesting in this respect is the discussion of R. Jehoshu’an Ben Hurkanos (Sota 31 a Mishna; cf. B EEK, Mit-Leiden, 26, 28), which shows that some were quite aware of the possible ambiguity of hearing ʠʬ or ʥʬ in ʠʬ.

Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 63:7–64:11

345

the main characteristic of poetry is ambiguity, then the ambiguity should not be emended out of the poetry of the prayer.13 Isa 63:11 poses several difficulties. In the first line (v.11a), the subject of ʸʫʦʩʥ and the role of ʤˇʮ are not immediately clear. But against the many emendations,14 the solution of Delitzsch still fits best the train of thought (see below): the subject of ʸʫʦʩʥ is ʥʮʲ; and ʤˇʮ is genitive to ʭʬʥʲʚʩʮʩ.15 It seems that Delitzsch also provides help for understanding the rest of v.11:16 ʺʠ in v.11bĮ is not nota accusativi but preposition “with” so that one can also preserve the object suffix in ʭʬʲʮʤ. Thus the question goes: “Where is the one who brought them up from the sea with the shepherds17 of his flock?” The “holy spirit” is then set upon the people,18 which makes sense in the context of what is said in 63:10, 14. In Isa 63:15 many commentators regard the 1.sg. in ʥʷʴʠʺʤ ʩʬʠ as unsuitable in the present context, and with the help of the LXX 19 many reconstruct the reading ʷʴʠʺʺ ʠʰʚʬʠ,20 mostly relating this colon to v.16.21 13

Thus perhaps all three possible readings were heard together: And he became a Saviour for them; / (1) in all their affliction he did not afflict; / (2) in all their affliction he was not hostile; / (3) in all their affliction He was afflicted; / and the angel of his presence saved them. 14 Cf. the discussions in KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 361; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 66–67 and the positions noted in them. In addition, T ORREY, Second Isaiah, 463 emends ʤˇʮ to ʲʩˇʮ; CLIFFORD, Narrative, 97n.8 regards “Moses” as the subject and ʥʮʲ as a misreading of ʥʡʣʲ. His main argument against ʥʮʲ as the subject is that it is constructed with plural in the surrounding lines; but the singular may be used here to emphasize the collective aspect; SCHRAMM, Opponents, 151 follows those who emend to ʸʫʦʠʥ; CHILDS, Isaiah, 519, 521 prefers YHWH as the subject of ʸʫʦʩʥ. 15 Cf. DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 602; then also, e.g., GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 66 and those he mentions ibid. 66n.182. For a construction of an object before the subject, Delitzsch refers to 2 Kgs 5:13 (DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 602); for the accumulation of genitives, he refers to Isa 28:1 and its poetic impact (cf. DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 312, 602). Hence we would translate this line: “And the people remembered the days of old of Moses”. 16 Cf. DELITZSCH, Jesaia, 602–602. See also GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 68–74. 17 OSWALT, Isaiah 40–66, 602n.44 notes that it is more difficult to imagine someone changing an original clear reference to Moses in a singular form into a more unspecific plural form than the change from the plural form into a singular form. 18 The suffix in ʥʡʸʷʡ refers back to ʯʠʶ; cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 72. 19 The LXX reads: “ȠIJȚ ĮȞİıȤȠȣ ȘȝȦȞ” (“… so that you restrain yourself from us”). CHILDS, Isaiah, 502 changes with LXX into “from us” but keeps “your compassions” as the subject of “to restrain” instead of changing it into YHWH, as the LXX does. 20 Cf., e.g., MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah, 189, although he regards “compassion” as the object of the verb “to restrain”, translating: “Do not restrain your compassion!”; thus also SCHOORS, Jesaja II, 372. 21 This leads to the translation: “Refrain not, for thou art our Father!”, thus T ORREY, Second Isaiah, 461, 464; then HERBERT, Isaiah 40–66, 174; B LENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66,

346

Appendix 3

But this means they emend not only ʩʬʠ but also the form of the verb. The reading of MT is supported by Vulgate and 1QIsaa. But it can and should be preserved on internal grounds as well: v.15 is the turning point from the historical account to the petition in the present and the recurrence of 1.sg. from the beginning of the whole (Isa 63:7) highlights this turn. It emphasizes that the whole prayer is mediated through the prophetic voice, which corresponds to earlier passages in Isa 56–66 (cf. Isa 58:1; 61:1–3; 62:1).22 What this mediatory role of the prophetic voice could be, as Koole wonders,23 has been discussed in the course of this study.24 The wish in Isa 63:19b is either interpreted as what should have happened in the past25 or what should happen in the future. The qatal forms may indicate that the petitioners wish it had happened that way in contrast to what actually happened (64:4–6), but this does not exclude the future dimension of that wish. Thus a future translation is appropriate: “Oh that you would rend the heavens, come down, would the mountains quake before you!”26 Most commentators regard Isa 64:2b as a dittography and so they delete it.27 But repetitions are not necessarily carelessness of glossators; they can also serve as structural markers. Goldenstein, for instance, regards 64:2b as the appropriate conclusion of the wish for theophany in 63:19b–64:3: the actual wish that ends with 64:2a is concluded by a memory of YHWH’s earlier deeds in 64:2b–3.28 With those who delete 64:2b, Goldenstein regards v.2a as the continuation of v.1b.29 But the structure of 63:19b–64:3 252, 254 and those mentioned in KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 375 and in GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 88n.311 (in contrast to n.310). 22 Hence, a possible translation of v.15b: “The agitation of your bowels and your compassion have restrained themselves from me.” 23 Cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 375 referring to a prophet and taking up such a notion of B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 22. MT is preserved also by WEBSTER, Rhetoric of Isaiah 63–65, 93, GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 88–89 (and those he mentions ibid. 89n.315). 24 These reflections also make the cautious emendations of F ISCHER, Jahweh, 18 (emending to the demonstrative pronoun ʤʬʠ “these”) and LAU, Prophetie, 295–296 (the originally defective form ’ulai of ʩʬʥʠ “perhaps” has been wrongly vocalized into ’Ɲlai by the Masoretes) unnecessary. 25 Cf. MOTYER, Prophecy, 518n.1; AEJMELAEUS, Prophet, 43; BERGES, Buch, 491. 26 Cf., e.g., MUILENBURG, Isaiah 40–66, 739 and in particular the discussion in GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 106. 27 Cf. those mentioned in GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 111n.467 and BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66, 253, 256. HANSON, Dawn, 83, 86 deletes only ʺʣʸʩ (thus also HERBERT, Isaiah 40–66, 178 referring to the LXX) and emphasizes the function as a poetic device of v.2b. 28 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 111–112. For Goldenstein 64:2a does explain, why the enemies and nations shall tremble (64:1b; cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 110). 29 GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 276 translates: “[1]b Vor dir sollen Völker erzittern 2a ob deinem ehrfurchterregenden Handeln, das wir nicht erhoffen.”

Exegetical Problems in Isaiah 63:7–64:11

347

hints at a different rendering. The initial line (63:19b) is followed by two lines that each start with an infinitive with preposition.30 This is also the case in 64:2a, which indicates that it also starts a new line, subordinated to the initial line. This means that v.2a does not explain v.1b, but introduces an action that takes place simultaneously with the one in 63:19b. The only other similarly constructed passage in Num 20:3 indicates an action as well: ʥʰʩʧʠ ʲʥʢʡ ʥʰʲʥʢ ʥʬʥ. The particle ʥʬ with a verb in qatal expresses the wish, and the infinitive with the preposition ʡ introduces a simultaneous action when the wish should have come true. For the present passage, this means that the wish of the initial line is further specified as regards the manner (Isa 64:1aĮ; preposition ʫ), the consequence (Isa 64:1aȕ, 1b; preposition ʬ) and the time (Isa 64:2a; preposition ʡ) of its fulfilment. Isa 64:2a relates to 63:19b as follows: “Oh that you would rend the heavens, come down, the mountains would shake before you, … when you would do awesome things, which we no longer hope for”. This means that when YHWH would do exodus-like awesome acts, the wish is that this would be accompanied by rending the heavens. In other words, those awesome deeds should have a revelatory quality, and more specifically, the quality of a theophany. But what could be the function of the repetition of parts of 63:19b in 64:2b? I regard 64:2b as an elliptical repetition of the initial wish with three main functions. First, by the repetition the temporal specification is closely linked to the initial wish. Secondly, the repetition marks the beginning of a new strophe.31 Thirdly, it places the qatal forms in v.3 on the same level as the wish, when he eventually would come down, one would have not heard and seen a God except him.32 Cf. 64:1aĮ: ʧʣʷʫ; 64:1aȕ: ʲʩʣʥʤʬ. The repetition after the temporal specification makes sure the grammatical subordination of 64:2–3 to 63:19b. 32 Thus a possible translation might be as follows: 19b O, that you would rend the heavens, / [ʺʣʸʩ might be drawn to the second colon against MT?] come down, and that mountains might shake before you, 64:1aĮ as fire kindles brushwood / fire causes water to boil; 64:1aȕ, 1b in order to make known your name to your enemies / that nations may tremble before you; 30 31

64:2

64:3a 64:3b

when you do awesome things, which we do not expect; / (O that you) would come down, that mountains might shake before you so that never one had heard, / that never one perceived, no eye had seen a God, except you, / a God who acts for one who waits for him.

348

Appendix 3

Finally, the meaning of ¥ʲʢʴ is regarded in different ways. Some prefer the meaning “to meet, encounter”, often suggesting that the optative particle ʠʥʬ has to be thought of here as well, or it even might have been lost because of haplography, leading to the translation “That You would meet someone who does justice joyfully”33. Others rather reckon with the negative meaning “to fall upon, attack”34. The most common collocation is ʡ ¥ʲʢʴ, which can be used for “to hit, beat to death” (cf. 1 Sam 22:17; 1 Kgs 2:42), “to ask/plead” (cf. Jer 27:18; 36:25) and for “to meet” (cf. Gen 32:2). There are no indications that other collocations could not serve the same variety of meanings. While the only other instance of ʺʠ ¥ʲʢʴ in Exod 5:20 means “to meet”, the similar construction of ¥ʲʢʴ with a suffix is used for “to hit, to attack” (cf. Exod 5:3). It seems that at some places this ambiguity has been used intentionally (perhaps in Amos 5:19). This might be the case also here, although the context suggests the meaning “to attack”.35.36

33 KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 369, 390, for the discussion cf. K OOLE, Isaiah III/3, 390–391; then also, e.g., FISCHER, Jahweh, 22; EMMENDÖRFFER, Gott, 283–284 34 Cf. GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 116, who defends that meaning mainly on the basis of the supposed allusion to Isa 53:6. For the meaning “to attack”, FISCHER, Jahweh, 22n.78 also notes the unpublished study of W ALLIS, Die Gemeinde des Tritojesaja-Buches, Berlin, 114. 35 The parallel line 64:6b expresses a similar idea. It seems to me that the line Isa 64:4a frames the unit 64:4–6 together with v.6b instead of regarding 64:4a as the conclusion of 63:19b–64:4a (thus, e.g., K OOLE, Isaiah III/3, 373, 391). That v.4a and v.6b belong to one unit might be indicated by the way the centre lines of that unit are related to the outward lines: ʷʣʶ, ʤʷʣʶ (v.4a and v.5a); ʯʥʲ (v.5b and v.6b). 36 It goes without saying that not all exegetical problems could be discussed here. For a helpful treatment of the place of ʸʲʶʮʬ (63:18) in the lament, see, e.g., B EUKEN, Jesaja III/B, 20, 28–29; GOLDENSTEIN, Gebet, 108. The phrase ʷʣʶ ʤˈʲʥ ˈˈ (64:4) might be a hendiadys: “the one who does joyfully righteousness”, cf. KOOLE, Isaiah III/3, 391. In the parallel arranged bicola in 64:4 the phrase ʭʬʥʲ ʭʤʡ might refer elliptically to 64:4aȕ “they remembered you in your ways”, which resulted in the possible reading (bearing in mind the change into 1.pl. in v.4b): “in them (i.e. your ways) we remembered always, so that we might be saved”.

Bibliography ABMA, R., Travelling from Babylon to Zion: Location and its Function in Isaiah 49–55, JSOT 74 (1997) 3–28 –, Bonds of Love: Methodic Studies of Prophetic Texts with Marriage Imagery (Isaiah 50:1–3 and 54:1–10, Hosea 1–3, Jeremiah 2–3) (SSN), Assen: Van Gorcum, 1999 ACKERMANN, S., Under Every Green Tree: Popular Religion in Sixth-Century Judah (HSM 46) Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2001 ACKROYD, P. R., Isaiah I–XII: Presentation of a Prophet, in: Congress Volume: Göttingen 1977 (VT.S 29) Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978, 16–48 –, Isaiah 36–39: Structure and Function, in: DELSMAN, W. C. et al. (eds.), Von Kanaan bis Kerala: Festschrift für Prof. Mag. Dr. Dr. J. P. M. van der Ploeg O.P. (AOAT 211), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1982, 3– 21 ADAMS, J.W., The Performative Nature and Function of Isaiah 40–55 (LHB/OTS 448), New York; London: T & & Clark, 2006 AEJMELAEUS, A., Der Prophet als Klageliedsänger. Zur Funktion des Psalms Jes 63,7– 64,11, ZAW 107 (1995) 31–50 AITKEN, K. T., Hearing and Seeing: Metamorphoses of a Motif in Isaiah 1–39, in: D AVIES, P. R. & C LINES, D. J. A. (eds.), Among the Prophets: Language, Image and Structure in the Prophetic Writings (JSOT.S 144); Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993, 12–41 ALBERTZ, R., Das Deuterojesaja-Buch als Fortschreibung der Jesaja-Prophetie, in: B LUM, E. et al. (eds.), Die hebräische Bibel und ihre zweifache Nachgeschichte: Festschrift für Rolf Rendtorff zum 65. Geburtstag, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1990, 241–256 –, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E., (Studies in Biblical Literature 3), trans. D. Green, Atlanta, Georgia: SBL, 2003 ALLEN, L. C., Cuckoos in the Textual Nest, JThS NS 22 (1971) 143–150 –, More Cuckoos in the Textual Nest, JThS NS 24 (1973) 69–73 ALLIS, O. T., The Unity of Isaiah: A Study in Prophecy, Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1950 = repr. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2000 ALT, A., Die Rolle Samarias bei der Entstehung des Judentums, in: IDEM, Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel II, Munich: Beck, 1953, 316–337 ALONSO-SCHÖKEL, A., Die Stilistische Analyse bei den Propheten, in: Congress Volume: Oxford 1959 (VT.S 7), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1960, 154–164 ANDERSON, B. W., “God with Us” – In Judgment and in Mercy: The Editorial Structure of Isaiah 5–10(11), in: T UCKER, G. M., P ETERSEN, D. L. & W ILSON, R. R. (eds.), Canon, Theology, and Old Testament Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Brevard S. Childs, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988, 230–245 ANDERSEN, F. I., & FREEDMAN, D. N., Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AncB 24A), New York et al.: Doubleday, 1989

350

Bibliography

ARISTOTLE, The ‘Art’ of Rhetoric (The Loeb Classical Library 193), trans. J. H. Freese, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, U.K.: Harvard University Press, 1926 ASSMANN, J., Ma`at: Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im Alten Ägypten, Munich: Beck, 1990 –, J ANOWSKI, B. & W ELKER, M. (eds.), Gerechtigkeit. Richten und Retten in der abendländischen Tradition und ihren abendländischen Ursprüngen, Munich: Beck, 1998 –, J ANOWSKI, B. & WELKER, M., Richten und Retten. Zur Aktualität der altorientalischen und biblischen Gerechtigkeitskonzeption, in: J ANOWSKI, B., Die Rettende Gerechtigkeit, 220–246 = ASSMANN, J., J ANOWSKI, B. & W ELKER, M. (eds.), Gerechtigkeit, 9– 35 AULD, A. G., Prophets through the Looking Glass: Between Writings and Moses (1983), in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 22–42 –, Prophets through the Looking Glass: A Response to Robert Carroll and Hugh Williamson (1983), in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 57–60 –, Prophecy in Books: A Rejoinder (1990), in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 85–86 AURET, A., Jesaja 6:1aĮ meer as ‘n historiese nota?, NGTT 32 (1991) 368–77 AUSTIN, J. L., How to Do Things with Words: The William James Lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955, 2nd edition, URMSON J. O. & SBISÀ, M. (ed.); Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1975 B AKKER, E. J., How Oral is Oral Composition?, in: MACKAY, E. A. (ed.), Signs, 29–47 B ALDAUF, B., Jes 42,18–25. Gottes tauber und blinder Knecht, in: REITERER, F. V. (ed.), Gott, 13–36 B ALDERMANN, I. et al. (eds.), Der Messias (JBTh 8 [1993]), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993 B ALTZER, K., Die Biographie der Propheten, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1975 –, Deutero-Isaiah (Hermeneia), Augsburg: Fortress Press, 2001 B ARKER, M., Isaiah, in: DUNN, J. D. G. & ROGERSON, J. W. (eds.), Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 2003, 489– 542 B ARRÉ, M. L., Fasting in Isaiah 58:1–12: A Re-examination, BTB 15 (1985) 94–97 B ARSTAD, H. M., A Way in the Wilderness: The “Second Exodus” in the Message of Second Isaiah (JSSt.M 12), Manchester: University of Manchester, 1989 –, No Prophets? Recent Developments in Biblical Prophetic Research and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy, in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 106–126 –, The Myth of the Empty Land (SO.S 28), Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1996 –, The Babylonian Captivity of the Book of Isaiah: “Exilic” Judah and the Provenance of Isaiah 40–55 (Serie B-Skrifter 103), Oslo: Novus, 1997 –, Comparare necesse est? Ancient Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy in a Comparative Perspective, in: NISSINEN, M. (ed.), Prophecy, 3–11 –, After the “Myth of the Empty Land”: Major Challenges in the Study of the NeoBabylonian Judah, in: LIPSCHITS, O. & B LENKINSOPP, J. (eds.), Judah, 3–20 B ARTELT, A. H., The Book around Immanuel. Style and Structure in Isaiah 2-12 (Biblical and Judaic Studies 4), Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996 B ARTH, H., Die Jesaja-Worte in der Josiazeit: Israel und Assur als Thema einer produktiven Neuinterpretation der Jesajaüberlieferung (WMANT 48), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1977 B ARTHEL, J., Prophetenwort und Geschichte: die Jesajaüberlieferung in Jes 6–8 und 28– 31 (FAT 19), Tübingen: Mohr, 1997

Bibliography

351

B ARTHOLOMEW, C., GREENE, C. & MÖLLER, K. (eds.), After Pentecost: Language and Biblical Interpretation (SHS 2), Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan; Carlisle, U.K.: Paternoster, 2001 B ARTHOLOMEW, C. et al. (eds.), “Behind” the Text: History and Biblical Interpretation (SHS 4), Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan; Carlisle: Paternoster, 2003 B ARTON, J., Reading the Old Testament: Method in Biblical Study, 2nd edition, London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1996 –, What Is a Book? Modern Exegesis and the Literary Conventions of Ancient Israel, in: MOOR, J. DE (ed.), Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel: Papers Read at the Tenth Joint Meeting of the Society for Old Testament Study and het Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland en Belgie held at Oxford, 1997 (OTS 40), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 1998, 1–14 –, (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998 B AYER, O., Martin Luthers Theologie: Eine Vergegenwärtigung, 2nd edition, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004 B EALE, G. K., Isaiah VI 9–13: A Retributive Taunt Against Idolatry, VT 41 (1991) 257– 278 B ECKER, J., Isaias – der Prophet und sein Buch (SBS 30), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1968 –, Zur Beurteilung von Jes 48,22 und 57,21, BN 119/120 (2003) 5–7 B ECKER, U., Jesaja – von der Botschaft zum Buch (FRLANT 178), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997 –, Jesajaforschung (Jes 1–39), ThR 64 (1999) 1–37, 117–152 B ECKING, B. & KORPEL, M. C. A. (eds.), The Crisis of Israelite Religion: Transformation of Religious Tradition in Exilic and Post-Exilic Times (OTS 42), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 1999 B EDFORD, P. R., Temple Restoration in Early Achaemenid Judah (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 65), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 2001 B EEK, M. A., Das Mit-Leiden Gottes: Eine masoretische Interpretation von Jes. 63.9, in: IDEM et al. (eds.), Symbolae Biblicae et Mesopotamicae: Festschrift F. M. T. de Liagre Böhl, Leiden: Brill, 1973, 23–30 B EGG, C. T., Babylon in the Book of Isaiah, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), The Book of Isaiah, 121–125 B EGRICH, J., Studien zu Deuterojesaja (TB 20), Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1963 B EGUERIE, P., La vocation d’Isaïe, in: IDEM, LECLERCQ, J. & STEINMANN, J. (eds.), Études sur les prophètes d’Israël (Lectio Divina 14), Paris: Cerf, 1954, 11–51 B EN ZVI, E., A Historical-Critical Study of the Book of Obadiah (BZAW 242), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1996 –, Introduction: Writings, Speeches, and the Prophetic Books – Setting an Agenda, in: IDEM & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 1–29 –, Micah (FOTL 21B), Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 2000 –, The Prophetic Book: A Key Form of Prophetic Literature, in: SWEENEY, M. A. & B EN ZVI, E. (eds.), Changing, 276–297 – & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy (SBL.Symposium Series 10), Atlanta, Georgia: SBL, 2000 B ERGES, U., Das Buch Jesaja: Komposition und Endgestalt (HBS 16) Freiburg et al.: Herder, 1998 –, Personifications and Prophetic Voices of Zion in Isaiah and Beyond, in: MOOR, J. C. DE (ed.), The Elusive Prophet, 54–82

352

Bibliography

B ERLIN, A., The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985 B ERQUIST, J. L., Judaism in Persia’s Shadow: A Social and Historical Approach, Augsburg, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995 B EUKEN, W. A. M., 0,â3Ɩ7̙: The First Servant Song and Its Context, VT 22 (1972) 1–30 –, Jes 50,10–11: Eine kultische Paränese zur dritten Ebedprophetie, ZAW 85 (1973) 168– 182 –, Jesaja deel II A (POT), Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1979 –, Jesaja deel II B (POT), Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1983 –, Isa. 56:9–57:13 – An Example of the Isaianic Legacy of Trito-Isaiah, in: VAN HENTEN, J. W. et al. (eds.), Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature: Essays in Honour of Jürgen C. H. Lebram, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1986, 48–64 –, Trito-Jesaja: profetie en schriftgeleerdheid, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F., DE GEUS, C. H. J. & KLIJN, A. F. J. (eds.), Profeten en Profetische Geschriften, aangeboden aan Dr. A. S. van der Woude, Kampen: J.H. Kok; Nijkerk: G.F. Callenbach, 1987, 71–85 –, Jesaja deel III A (POT), Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1989 –, Jesaja deel III B (POT), Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1989 –, Servant and Herald of Good Tidings: Isaiah 61 as an Interpretation of Isaiah 40–55, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), The Book of Isaiah, 411–442 –, The Main Theme of Trito-Isaiah: “The Servants of YHWH”, JSOT 47 (1990) 67–87 –, Isaiah Chapters LXV–LXVI: Trito-Isaiah and the Closure of the Book of Isaiah, in: EMERTON, J. A. (ed.), Congress Volume Leuven 1989 (VT.S 43), Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991, 204–221 –, Isaiah II Volume 2/Isaiah 28–39 (HCOT), Leuven: Peeters, 2000 –, Jesaja 1–12, (HThK.AT), trans. U. Berges, Freiburg i. Breisgau; Basel; Vienna: Herder, 2003 B EYERLE, S., MAYER, G. & STRAUß , H. (eds.), Recht und Ethos im Alten Testament: Gestalt und Wirkung, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999 B ICKERT, R., König Ahas und der Prophet Jesaja: Ein Beitrag zum Problem des syrischephraimitischen Krieges, ZAW 99 (1987) 361–384 B IDDLE, M. E., Lady Zion’s Alter Egos: Isaiah 47.1–15 and 57.6–13 as Structural Counterparts, in: MELUGIN, R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 124–139 B LENKINSOPP, J., Ezra – Nehemiah: A Commentary (OTL), London: SCM Press, 1989 –, A Jewish Sect of the Persian Period, CBQ 52 (1990) 5–20 –, Temple and Society in Achaemenid Judah, in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), Second Temple Studies 1, 22–53 –, The Servant and the Servants in Isaiah and the Formation of the Book, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing and Reading I, 155–177 –, Isaiah 1–39: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AncB 19), New York et al.: Doubleday, 2000 –, Isaiah 40-55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AncB 19A), New York et al.: Doubleday, 2002 –, Isaiah 56-66: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AncB 19B) New York et al.: Doubleday, 2003 B LOCK, D. I., The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 1–24 (NICOT), Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1997 B LUM , E., Jesajas prophetisches Testament. Beobachtungen zu Jes 1–11 (Teil I), ZAW 108 (1996) 547–568 –, Jesajas prophetisches Testament. Beobachtungen zu Jes 1–11 (Teil II), ZAW 109 (1997) 12–29

Bibliography

353

B ÖCKLER, A., Gott als Vater im Alten Testament: Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Entstehung und Entwicklung eines Gottesbildes, Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2000 B OECKER, H. J., Redeformen des Rechtslebens im Alten Testament, 2nd edition (WMANT 14), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1970 B OER, P. A. H. DE, Second-Isaiah’s Message (OTS 11), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1956 B ONNARD, P.-E., Le Second Isaïe: Son Disciple et Leurs Éditeurs. Isaïe 40–66 (EtB), Paris: J. Gabalda, 1972 B ONS, E., Das Denotat von ʭʤʩʡʦʫ “ihre Lügen” im Judaspruch Am 2,4–5, ZAW 108 (1996) 201–213 B OSSHARD-NEPUSTIL, E., Rezeptionen von Jesaja 1-39 im Zwölfprophetenbuch: Untersuchungen zur literarischen Verbindung von Prophetenbüchern in babylonischer und persischer Zeit (OBO 154), Freiburg, Ch: Universitätsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997 B OTTERWECK, G. J., “Gott Erkennen” im Sprachgebrauch des Alten Testaments (BBB 2), Bonn: Peter Hanstein, 1951 – & BERGMAN, J., ʲʣʩ yƗda‘, TDOT 5:448–481 BRIGHT, J., Isaiah – I, in: BLACK, M. & ROWLEY, H. H. (eds.), Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, London et al.: Nelson, 1962, 489–515 BROCKELMANN, C., Grundriß der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen, 2 vols., Berlin et al.: Reuther & Reichard, 1908–1913, repr. Hildesheim; Zurich; New York: Georg Olms, 1999 BRONGERS, H. A., Einige Bemerkungen zu Jes 58:13–14, ZAW 87 (1975) 212–216 –, Jes LVI 10a, VT 25 (1975) 791–792 BROWN, W. P., The So-Called Refrain in Isaiah 5:25–30 and 9:7–10:4, CBQ 52 (1990) 432–443 BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition. Vol. 1 (VT.S 70,1) Leiden; New York; Cologne: Brill, 1997 BRUEGGEMANN, W., Isaiah 1–39 (Westminster Bible Companion), Louisville, Kentucky; London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998 –, Isaiah 40–66 (Westminster Bible Companion), Louisville, Kentucky; London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998 B UBER, M., The Prophetic Faith, trans. C. Witton-Davies, New York: Macmillan, 1949, repr. New York: Harper & Row, 1960 B UDDE, K., Zwei Beobachtungen zum alten Eingang des Buches Jesaja, ZAW 38 (1919– 1920) 58 –, Über die Schranken, die Jesajas prophetischer Botschaft zu setzen sind, ZAW 41 (1923) 154–203 –, Jesaja’s Erleben: Eine gemeinverständliche Auslegung der Denkschrift des Propheten (Kap. 6,1-9,6), Gotha: Leopold Klotz Verlag, 1928 B ÜHLMANN, W. & SCHERER, K., Sprachliche Stilfiguren der Bibel: Von Assonanz bis Zahlenspruch, 2nd edition, Gießen: Brunnen Verlag, 1994 CARR, D. M., Reaching for Unity in Isaiah, JSOT 57 (1993) 61–80 –, Reading Isaiah from Beginning (Isaiah 1) to End (Isaiah 65-66): Multiple Modern Possibilities, in: MELUGIN, R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 188–218 CARROLL, R. P., When Prophecy Failed: Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testament, New York: Seabury, 1979

354

Bibliography

–, Poets Not Prophets: A Response to “Prophets through the Looking Glass” (1983), in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 43–49 –, Whose Prophet? Whose History? Whose Social Reality? Troubling the Interpretive Community Again: Notes towards a Response to T. W. Overholt’s Critique (1990), in DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 87–101 –, Arguing About Jeremiah: Recent Studies and the Nature of a Prophetic Book, in: EMERTON, J. A. (ed.), Congress Volume: Leuven 1989 (VT.S 43), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991, 222–235 –, The Myth of the Empty Land, Semeia 59 (1992) 79–93 –, Blindsight and the Vision Thing: Blindness and Insight in the Book of Isaiah, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing and Reading I, 79–93 CARTER, C. E., The Emergence of Yehud in the Persian Period: A Social and Demographic Study (JSOT.S 294), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999 CAZELLES, H., La Vocation d’Isaie (Ch. 6) et les rites royaux, in: ALVAREZ VERDES, L. & ALONSO HERANDEZ, E. J. (eds.), Homenaje a Juan Prado: Miscelanae de Estudios Biblicos y Hebraicos, Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas Instituto « Benito Arias Montano » de Estudios Hebraicos, Sefardies y Oriente Proximo, 1975, 89–108 CHILDS, B. S., Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979 –, Isaiah: A Commentary (OTL); Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox, 2000 –, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2004 CHISHOLM, JR., R. B., Divine Hardening in the Old Testament, BS 153 (1996) 410–434 –, Handbook on the Prophets, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002 C LEMENTS, R. E., Isaiah 1–39 (NCeB), Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1980 –, The Unity of the Book of Isaiah (1982), in: IDEM, Old Testament Prophecy: from oracle to canon, Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996, 93–104 –, Beyond Tradition-History: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First Isaiah’s Themes, JSOT 31 (1985), 95–113 –, A Light to the Nations: A Central Theme of the Book of Isaiah, in: W ATTS, J. W. & HOUSE, P. R. (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature, 57–69 –, The Prophet as an Author: The Case of the Isaiah Memoir, in: B EN ZVI, E. & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writing, 89–101 C LIFFORD, R. J., The Function of Idol Passages in Second Isaiah, CBQ 42 (1980) 450– 464 –, Isaiah 55 – Invitation to a Feast, in: MEYERS, C. L. & O’CONNOR, M. (eds.), The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1983, 27–35 –, Fair Spoken and Persuading: An Interpretation of Second Isaiah, New York; Ramsey; Toronto: Paulist Press, 1984 –, Narrative and Lament in Isaiah 63:7–64:11, in: H ORGAN, M. P. & KOBELSKI, P. J. (eds.), To Touch the Text: Biblical and Related Studies in Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., New York: Crossroad, 1989, 93–102 COGGINS, R., Isaiah, in: B ARTON, J. & MUDDIMAN, J. (eds.), The Oxford Bible Commentary, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001, 433–486 COLLINS, T., The Mantle of Elijah: The Redaction Criticism of the Prophetical Books (The Biblical Seminar 20), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993 CONRAD, E. W., Reading Isaiah (OBT 27), Augsburg, Minnesota: Fortress Press, 1991

Bibliography

355

–, Prophet, Redactor and Audience: Reforming the Notion of Isaiah’s Formation, in: MELUGIN, R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 306–326 –, Reading the Latter Prophets: Toward a New Canonical Criticism (JSOT.S 376); London; New York: T & T Clark, 2003 CORNEY, R. W., Isaiah L 10, VT 26 (1976) 497–498 CRAIGIE, P. C., KELLY, P. M. & DRINKARD, JR., J. F., Jeremiah 1–25 (WBC 26), Dallas, Texas: Word Books, 1991 CRENSHAW, J. L., Education in Ancient Israel: Across the Deadening Silence (AncB Reference Library), New York et al.: Doubleday, 1998 –, Qoheleth’s Understanding of Intellectual Inquiry, in: SCHOORS, A. (ed.), Qohelet, 205– 224 –, Transmitting Prophecy across Generations, in: BEN ZVI, E. & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 31–44 CROSS, JR., F. M., The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah, JNES 12 (1953) 274–277 CRÜSEMANN, F., Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und Danklied in Israel (WMANT 32), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969 CULLEY, R. C., Orality and Writtenness in the Prophetic Texts, in: BEN ZVI, E. & F LOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 45–64 DARR, K. P., Like Warrior, like Woman: Destruction and Deliverance in Isaiah 42:10–17, CBQ 49 (1987) 560–571 –, Isaiah’s Vision and the Family of God (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation), Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994 –, Literary Perspectives on Prophetic Literature, in: MAYS, J. L., P ETERSON, D. L. & R ICHARDS, K. H. (eds.), Old Testament Interpretation: Past, Present, and Future. Essays in Honour of Gene M. Tucker, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1995, 127–143 DAVIES, A., Double Standards in Isaiah: Re-evaluating Prophetic Ethics and Divine Justice (Biblical Interpretation Series 46), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 2000 DAVIES, P. R., The Audiences of Prophetic Scrolls: Some Suggestions, in: REID, S. B. (ed.), Prophets, 48–62 –, “Pen of iron, point of diamond” (Jer 17 :1): Prophecy as Writing’, in: BEN ZVI, E. & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writing, 65–81 – (ed.), Second Temple Studies: 1. Persian Period (JSOT.S 117), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991 – (ed.), The Prophets: A Sheffield Reader (The Biblical Seminar 42), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996 – & Clines, D. J. A. (eds.), Among the Prophets: Language, Image and Structure in the Prophetic Writings (JSOT.S 144), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993 DAY, J., Echoes of Baal’s Seven Thunders and Lightnings in Psalm XXIX and Habakkuk III 9 and the Identity of the Seraphim in Isaiah VI, VT 29 (1979) 143–51 –, A Case of Inner Scriptural Interpretation: The Dependence of Isaiah xxvi.13–xxvii.11 on Hosea xiii.4–xiv.10 (Eng. 9) and Its Relevance to Some Theories of the Redaction of the “Isaiah Apocalypse”, JThS 31 (1980), 309–19 –, Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Testament (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 41), Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1989 –, The Dependence of Isaiah 26:13–27:11 on Hosea 13:4–14:10 and its Relevance to Some Theories of the Redaction of the “Isaiah Apocalypse”, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing I, 357–368 DECK, S., Die Gerichtsbotschaft Jesajas: Charakter und Begründung (FzB 67), Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1991

356

Bibliography

–, Kein Exodus bei Jesaja?, in: DIEDRICH, F. & W ILLMES, B. (eds.), Ich bewirke das Heil, 31–47 DELITZSCH, F., Commentar über das Buch Jesaia, 4th edition (Biblischer Commentar über das Alte Testament III/1), Leipzig: Dörffling & Franke, 1889 DEMPSEY, D., A Note on Isaiah XLIII 9, VT 41 (1991) 212–215 D IEBNER, B. J., Mehrere Hände – ein Text: Jes 58 und die Grenzen der Literarkritik, DBAT 29 (1998) 139–156 D IEDRICH, F. & W ILLMES, B. (eds.), Ich bewirke das Heil und erschaffe das Unheil (Jesaja 45,7). Studien zur Botschaft der Propheten: Festschrift für Lothar Ruppert zum 65. Geburtstag (FzB 88), Würzburg: Echter, 1998 D IETRICH, W., Jesaja und die Politik (BET 74), Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1976 D IJKSTRA, M., De Koninklijke Knecht: Voorstelling en investituur van de Knecht des Heren in Jesaja 42, in: GROSHEIDE H. H. et al. (eds.), De Knecht, 41–52 D ILLMANN, A. & K ITTEL, R., Der Prophet Jesaja, 6th edition (Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament 5), Leipzig: Verlag von S. Hirzel, 1898 D ION, P. E., The Structure of Isaiah 42:10–17 as Approached through Versification and Distribution of Poetic Devices, JSOT 49 (1991) 113–124 DOYLE, B., The Apocalypse of Isaiah Metaphorically Speaking: A Study of the Use, Function and Significance of Metaphors in Isaiah 24–27 (BEThL 151), Leuven: University Press; Peeters, 2000 DOYLE, R., Molek of Jerusalem?, in: HESS, R. S. & W ENHAM, G. J. (eds.), Zion, 171–206 DOZEMAN, T. B., Old Testament Rhetorical Criticism, ABD 5:712–715 DRIVER, G. R., Isaiah 6:1 “his train filled the temple”, in: GOEDICKE, H. (ed.), Near Eastern Studies, 87–96 DUHM, B., Das Buch Jesaja übersetzt und erklärt von Bernhard Duhm, 4th edition (Göttinger Handkommentar zum Alten Testament III/1), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1922 EGO, B., “Der Herr blickt herab von der Höhe seines Heiligtums”: Zur Vorstellung von Gottes himmlischem Thronen in exilisch-nachexilischer Zeit, ZAW 110 (1998) 556– 569 EICHRODT, W., Der Heilige in Israel: Jesaja 1–12 (BAT 17.1), Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1960 EISENBEIS, W., Die Wurzel ʭʬˇ im Alten Testament (BZAW 113), Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1969 ELLIGER, K., Die Einheit des Tritojesaja (Jesaja 56-66) (BWANT 45), Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1928 –, Deuterojesaja in seinem Verhältnis zu Tritojesaja (BWANT 63) Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1933 –, Prophet und Politik, ZAW 53 (1935) 3–22 –, Deuterojesaja: 1. Teilband Jesaja 40,1–45,7 (BK 11/1), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1978 – & RUDOLPH, W. (eds.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 4th. edition, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990 EMERTON, J. A., The Translation and Interpretation of Isaiah vi.13, in: IDEM & REIF, S. C. (eds.), Interpreting the Hebrew Bible. Essays in honour of E. I. J. Rosenthal (Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1982, 85–118 EMMENDÖRFFER, M., Der ferne Gott: Eine Untersuchung der alttestamentlichen Volksklagelieder vor dem Hintergrund der mesopotamischen Literatur (FAT 21), Tübingen: Mohr, 1998

Bibliography

357

EMMERSON, G. I., Isaiah 56–66 (OTGu), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992, repr. T & T Clark Study Guides; London; New York: T & T Clark International, 2004 ENGNELL, I., The Call of Isaiah: An Exegetical and Comparative Study (UUÅ 1949:4), Uppsala: Lundequistska; Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1949) ESLINGER, L., The Infinite in a Finite Organical Perception (Isaiah VI 1–5), VT 45 (1995) 145–173 EVANS, C. A., The Text of Isaiah 6,9–10, ZAW 94 (1982) 415–418 –, On the Unity and Parallel Structure of Isaiah, VT 38 (1988) 129–147 –, To See and not Perceive: Isaiah 6.9–10 in Early Jewish and Christian Interpretation (JSOT.S 64), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989 FENSHAM, F. C., The Root b‘r in Ugaritic and in Isaiah in the Meaning ‘to Pillage’, JNWSL 9 (1981) 67–69 F ICHTNER, J., Jesaja unter den Weisen, ThLZ 74 (1949) 75–80 F IRTH, D. G. & W ILLIAMSON, H. G. M. (eds.), Interpreting Isaiah: Issues and Approaches, Norton Street: Apollos; Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity, 2009 F ISCHER, I., Wo ist Jahwe? Das Volksklagelied Jes 63,7–64,11 als Ausdruck des Ringens um eine gebrochene Beziehung (SBB 19), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1989 –, Tora für Israel – Tora für die Völker: Das Konzept des Jesajabuches (SBS 164), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1995 FLOYD, M. H., Basic Trends in the Form-Critical Study of Prophetic Texts, in: SWEENEY, M. A. & BEN ZVI, E. (eds.), Changing, 298–311 FOHRER, G., Das Buch Jesaja: 1. Band Kapitel 1–23 (ZBK.AT), Zurich; Stuttgart: Zwingli Verlag, 1960 –, Das Buch Jesaja: 3. Band Kapitel 40-66 (ZBK.AT), Zurich; Stuttgart: Zwingli Verlag, 1964 –, Entstehung, Komposition und Überlieferung von Jesaja 1–39, in: IDEM, Studien zur alttestamentlichen Prophetie (1949-1965) (BZAW 99), Berlin: Töpelmann, 1967, 113– 147 FOKKELMANN, J. P., The Cyrus Oracle (Isaiah 44,24–45,7) from the Perspective of Syntax, Versification and Structure, in: RUITEN, J. VAN & VERVENNE, M. (eds), Studies, 303–323 FOLEY, J. M., What’s in a Sign?, in: M ACKAY, E. A. (ed.), Signs, 1–27 FOX, J., Semitic Noun Patterns (HSS 52), Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2003 FOX, M. V., Qohelet and His Contradictions (Bible and Literature Series 18), Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989 –, The Inner Structure of Qohelet’s Thought, in: SCHOORS, A. (ed.), Qohelet, 225–238 –, A Time to Tear Down and a Time to Build Up: A Rereading of Ecclesiastes, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1999 FRANKE, C. A., The Function of the Satiric Lament Over Babylon in Second Isaiah (XLVII), VT 41 (1991), 408–418 –, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Biblical and Judaic Studies 3), Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1994 –, Reversals of Fortune in the Ancient Near East: A Study of the Babylon Oracles in the Book of Isaiah, in: M ELUGIN , R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 104–123 FRETHEIM , T. E., ʲʣʩ, NIDOTTE 2:409–414 FREY, H., Das Buch der Weltpolitik Gottes: Kapitel 40–55 des Buches Jesaja ausgelegt von Mag. Hellmuth Frey, 5th edition (BAT 18), Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1958 FREY, J., Erwägungen zum Verhältnis der Johannesapokalypse zu den übrigen Schriften im Corpus Johanneum, in: HENGEL, M., Die johanneische Frage: Ein Lösungsversuch,

358

Bibliography

mit einem Beitrag zur Apokalypse von Jörg Frey (WUNT 67), Tübingen: Mohr, 1993, 326–429 FUHS, H. F., ʠʸʩ yƗrƝ, TDOT 6:290–315 FUTATO, M. D., ʡˈʲ, NIDOTTE 3:546 GELSTON, A., Knowledge, Humiliation or Suffering: A Lexical, Textual and Exegetical Problem in Isaiah 53, in: MCKAY, H. A. & CLINES, D. J. A. (eds.), Of Prophets’ Visions, 126–141 G ITAY, Y., Deutero-Isaiah: Oral or Written?, JBL 99 (1980) 185–197 –, Prophecy and Persuasion (Forum Theologiae Linguisticae 14), Bonn: Linguistica Biblica, 1981 –, Isaiah and His Audience: The Structure and Meaning of Isaiah 1–12 (SSN 30), Assen; Maastricht: Van Gorcum, 1991 GLAZOV, G. Y., The Bridling of the Tongue and the Opening of the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (JSOT.S 311), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001 GOEDICKE, H. (ed.), Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, Baltimore; London: Johns Hopkins Press, 1971 GOLDENSTEIN, J., Das Gebet der Gottesknechte: Jesaja 63,7–64,11 im Jesajabuch (WMANT 92), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2001 GOLDINGAY, J., The Arrangement of Isaiah XLI–XLV, VT 29 (1979) 289–299 –, Isaiah 42.18–25, JSOT 67 (1995) 43–65 –, Isaiah 43,22–28, ZAW 110 (1998) 173–191 –, Isaiah (NIBC 13), Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson; Carlisle: Paternoster, 2001 GORDON, R. P. (ed.), “The Place is Too Small for Us”: The Israelite Prophets in Recent Scholarship (Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 5), Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1995) GÖRG, M., Die Funktion der Serafen bei Jesaja, BN 5 (1978) 28–39 GOSHEN-GOTTSTEIN, M. H. (ed.), The Hebrew University Bible: The Book of Isaiah, Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1995 GOSSE, B., L’alliance d’Isaïe 59,21, ZAW 101 (1989) 116–118 GOTTWALD, N., The Hebrew Bible: A Socio-Literary Introduction, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985 GRABBE, L. L., Judaism From Cyrus to Hadrian. Volume One: The Persian and Greek Periods, Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1992 –, Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period: Belief and Practice From the Exile to Yavneh, London; New York: Routledge, 2000 GRAUPNER, A., DELKURT, H. & ERNST, A. B. (eds.), Verbindungslinien: Festschrift für Werner H. Schmidt zum 65. Geburtstag, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000 GRAY, G. B., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah I–XXXIX: Vol. I Introduction, and Commentary on I–XXVII (ICC), Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912 GRESSMANN, H., Die literarische Analyse Deuterojesajas, ZAW 34 (1914) 254–297 GROSHEIDE, H. H. et al. (eds.), De Knecht : Studies rondom Deutero-Jesaja door collega’s en oud-leerlingen aangeboden aan Prof. Dr. J. L. Koole, Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1978 GROSS, W., Jes 64,4: “Siehe, du hast gezürnt, und dann haben wir gesündigt”. Zu 2000 Jahren problematischer Rezeption zweier brisanter Sätze, in: KRATZ, R. G., KRÜGER, T. & SCHMID, K. (eds.), Schriftauslegung in der Schrift (BZAW 300), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000, 163–173

Bibliography

359

GUNKEL, H., & BEGRICH, J., Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels. Von Hermann Gunkel, zu Ende geführt von Joachim Begrich, 2nd edition, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966 GUNN, D. M., Deutero-Isaiah and the Flood, JBL 94 (1975) 493–508 HAAG, E., Israel und David als Zeugen Jahwes nach Deuterojesaja, in: DIEDRICH, F. & W ILLMES, B. (eds.), Ich bewirke das Heil, 157–180 HAAG, H., Der Gottesknecht bei Deuterojesaja (EdF 233), Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1985 HANSON, P. D., The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology, rev. edition, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979 –, Isaiah 40–66 (Interpretation), Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1995 HARAN, M., The Literary Structure and Chronological Framework of the Prophecies in Is. XL–XLVIII, in: Congress Volume: Bonn 1962 (VT.S 9), Leiden: Brill, 1963, 127– 155 HARDMEIER, C., Texttheorie und biblische Exegese: Zur rhetorischen Funktion der Trauermetaphorik in der Prophetie (BET 79), Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1978 –, Jesajas Verkündigungsabsicht und Jahwes Verstockungsauftrag in Jes 6, in: J EREMIAS , J. & PERLITT, L. (eds.), Die Botschaft, 235–251 –, Verkündigung und Schrift bei Jesaja. Zur Entstehung der Schriftprophetie als Oppositionsliteratur im alten Israel, Theologie und Glaube 73 (1983), 119–134 –, Jesajaforschung im Umbruch, VuF 31 (1986), 3–31 –, “Geschwiegen habe ich seit langem… wie die Gebärende schreie ich jetzt.” Zur Komposition und Geschichtstheologie von Jes 42,14–44,23’, WuD 20 (1989), 155–179 HARRELSON, W., “Why, o Lord, do You harden our heart?” A plea for help from a Hiding God, in: PENCHANSKY, D. & REDDIT, P. L. (eds.), Shall not the Judge, 163–174 HARTENSTEIN, F., Die Unzugänglichkeit Gottes im Heiligtum: Jesaja 6 und der Wohnort JHWHs in der Jerusalemer Kulttradition (WMANT 75), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1997 HAUSMANN, J., Israels Rest: Studien zum Selbstverständnis der nachexilischen Gemeinde (BWANT 124), Stuttgart et al.: Kohlhammer, 1987 –, ʠʬʫ kƗlƗ, TDOT 7:143–145 HAYES, J. H. & IRVINE, S. A., Isaiah the Eighth-Century Prophet: His Times and His Preaching, Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1987 HEIDER, G. C., The Cult of Molek: A Reassessment (JSOT.S 43), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985 HERBERT, A. S., The Book of the Prophet Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (CBC), Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1973 –, The Book of the Prophet Isaiah: Chapters 40–66 (CBC), Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1979 HERMISSON, H.-J., Diskussionsworte bei Deuterojesaja, EvTh 31 (1971) 665–680 –, Der Lohn des Knechts, in: JEREMIAS, J. & PERLITT, L. (eds.), Die Botschaft, 269–287 –, Israel und der Gottesknecht bei Deuterojesaja, ZThK 79 (1982) 1–24 –, Einheit und Komplexität Deuterojesajas: Probleme der Redaktionsgeschichte von Jes 40–55, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), Isaiah, 287–312 –, Jakob und Zion, Schöpfung und Heil: Zur Einheit der Theologie Deuterojesajas (1990), in: IDEM, Studien zu Prophetie und Weisheit: Gesammelte Aufsätze, ed. J. Barthel (FAT 23), Tübingen: Mohr, 1998, 117–131. –, Die babylonischen Aufstände am Anfang der Regierung des Xerxes und ihre Ahndung nach alter und neuer Geschichtsschreibung, in: M OMMER, P., SCHMIDT, W. H. &

360

Bibliography

STRAUß , H. (eds.), Gottes Recht als Lebensraum: Festschrift für Hans Jochen Boecker, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993, 71–92 –, Das vierte Gottesknechtslied im deuterojesajanischen Kontext, in: J ANOWSKI, B. & STUHLMACHER, P. (eds.), Gottesknecht, 1–25 (ET in: J ANOWSKI, B. & STUHLMACHER, P. [eds.], Suffering Servant, 16–47) –, Gottesknecht und Gottes Knechte: Zur ältesten Deutung eines deuterojesajanischen Themas, in: SCHÄFER, P. (ed.), Geschichte – Tradition – Reflexion. Festschrift für Martin Hengel zum 70. Geburtstag. Band I Judentum, Tübingen: Mohr, 1996, 43–68 –, Die Frau Zion, in: VAN RUITEN, J. & VERVENNE, M. (eds.), Studies, 19–39 –, Gibt es die Götter bei Deuterojesaja?, in: GRAUPNER, A., DELKURT, H. & ERNST, A. B. (eds.), Verbindungslinien, 109–123 –, Neue Literatur zu Deuterojesaja (I) + (II), ThR 65 (2000) 237–284, 379–430 –, Deuterojesaja: 2. Teilband Jesaja 45,8–49,13 (BK 11.2), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003 HERODOTUS, History, trans. A. D. Godley, 4 vols. (The Loeb Classical Library 117–120), Cambridge, Massachussetts: Harvard University; London: Heinemann, 1920–1925 HESS, R. S. & W ENHAM , G. J. (eds.), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1999 HESSE, F., Das Verstockungsproblem im Alten Testament (BZAW 74), Berlin: Alfred Töpelmann, 1955 H IRTH, T., Überlegungen zu den Serafim, BN 77 (1995) 17–19 H ITZIG, F., Der Prophet Jesaja, Heidelberg: C. F. Winter, 1833 HOAAS, G., Passion and Compassion of God in the Old Testament: A Theological Survey of Hos 11,8–9; Jer 31,20 and Isa 63,9+15’, SJOT 11 (1997) 138–159 HÖFFKEN, P., Grundfragen zu Jesaja 7,1–17 im Spiegel neuerer Literatur, BZ 33 (1989) 25–42 –, Das Buch Jesaja Kapitel 40–66 (NSK-AT 18/2), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1998 –, Jesaja: Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2004 HOFFMANN, H. W., Die Intention der Verkündigung Jesajas (BZAW 136), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1974 HØGENHAVEN, J., Gott und Volk bei Jesaja: eine Untersuchung zur biblischen Theologie (Acta Theologica Danica 24), Leiden et al.: E.J. Brill, 1988 HØGLUND, K. G., The Achaemenid Context, in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), Second Temple Studies 1, 54–72 –, Achaemenid Imperial Administration in Syria-Palestine and the Missions of Ezra and Nehemiah (SBL.DS), Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992 HOLLADAY, W. L., Jeremiah 1: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah chapters 1–25 (Hermeneia), Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986 –, Was Trito-Isaiah Deutero-Isaiah After All?, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS C. A. (eds.), Writing I, 193–217 HOLLENBACH, B., Lest They Should Turn and Be Forgiven: Irony, BiTr 34 (1983) 312– 321. HOLTER, K., Die Parallelismen in Jes 50,11abĮ – im Hebräischen und Syrischen Text, BN 63 (1992) 35–36 –, Second Isaiah’s Idol-Fabrication Passages (BET 28), Frankfurt am Main et al.: Peter Lang, 1995 HOPPE, L. J., Isaiah 58:1–12: Fasting and Idolatry, BTB 13 (1983) 44–47

Bibliography

361

HOUSTON, W., What Did the Prophets Think They Were Doing? Speech Acts and Prophetic Discourse in the Old Testament, in: Gordon, R. P. (ed.), Place, 133–153 HUBMANN, F. D., Der Bote des Heiligen Gottes. Jesaja 6,1–13 im Kontext von Berufung, ThPQ 135 (1987) 328–339 HUNTER, A. V., Seek the Lord: A Study of the Meaning and Function of the Exhortations in Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, and Zephaniah, Baltimore: John D. Lucas Printing, 1982 HURLEY, R., Le Seigneur endurcit le cœur d’Israël ?: L’ironie d’Isaïe 6,9–10, Theoforum 32 (2001) 23–43 HUROWITZ, V., Isaiah’s Impure Lips and Their Purification in Light of Akkadian Sources, HUCA 60 (1989) 39–89 HUTTER, M., “Asche” und “Trug”. Eine anti-zoroastrische Polemik in Jes 44,20, BN 64 (1992) 10–13 HVIDBERG, R., The Masseba and the Holy Seed, NTT 56 (1955) 97–99 IRSIGLER, H., Gott als König in Berufung und Verkündigung Jesajas, in: REITERER, F. V. (ed.), Gott, 127–154 –, Review of Hartenstein, Friedhelm, Die Unzugänglichkeit Gottes im Heiligtum. Jesaja 6 und der Wohnort JHWHs in der Jerusalemer Kulttradition, ThLZ 125 (2000) 495– 500 IRVINE, S. A., Isaiah, Ahaz, and the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis (SBL.DS 123), Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990 –, The Isaianic Denkschrift: Reconsidering an Old Hypothesis, ZAW 104 (1992) 216– 231 J ANOWSKI, B., Rettungsgewißheit und Epiphanie des Heils: Das Motiv der Hilfe Gottes “am Morgen“ im Alten Orient und im Alten Testament. Band I: Alter Orient (WMANT 59), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1989 –, Die Tat kehrt zum Täter zurück. Offene Fragen im Umkreis des “Tun-ErgehenZusammenhangs” (1994), in: IDEM, Rettende Gerechtigkeit, 167–191. –, JHWH der Richter – ein rettender Gott. Psalm 7 und das Motiv des Gottesgerichts (1994), in: IDEM, Rettende Gerechtigkeit, 92–124. –, JHWH und der Sonnengott. Aspekte der Solarisierung JHWHs in vorexilischer Zeit (1995), in IDEM, Rettende Gerechtigkeit, 192–219. –, Er trug unsere Sünden: Jes 53 und die Dramatik der Stellvertretung, in: IDEM & STUHLMACHER, P. (eds.), Gottesknecht, 27–48 (ET in: IDEM & STUHLMACHER, P. [eds.], Suffering Servant, 48–74) –, Der barmherzige Richter: Zur Einheit von Gerechtigkeit und Barmherzigkeit im Gottesbild des Alten Orients und des Alten Testaments (1999), in: IDEM, Gott des Lebens, 75–133. –, Die Rettende Gerechtigkeit: Beiträge zur Theologie des Alten Testaments 2, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999 –, Sühne als Heilsgeschehen: Traditions- und religionsgeschichtliche Studien zur priesterschriftlichen Sühnetheologie, 2nd edition, (WMANT 55), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000 –, Die Frucht der Gerechtigkeit: Psalm 72 und die judäische Königsideologie (2002), in: IDEM , Gott des Lebens, 157–197. –, Die heilige Wohnung des Höchsten: Kosmologische Implikationen der Jerusalemer Tempeltheologie (2002), in: IDEM, Gott des Lebens, 27–71.

362

Bibliography

–, Der Gott des Lebens: Beiträge zur Theologie des Alten Testaments 3, NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003 –, Konfliktgespräche mit Gott: Eine Anthropologie der Psalmen, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003 – & STUHLMACHER, P. (eds.), Der leidende Gottesknecht. Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie zu Jes 53 (FAT 14), Tübingen: Mohr, 1996 (ET: J ANOWSKI, B. & STUHLMACHER, P. [eds.], The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources, trans. D. P. Bailey, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 2004) J ANSSEN, E., Juda in der Exilszeit: Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Entstehung des Judentums (FRLANT 69), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1956 J APHET, S., I & II Chronicles: A Commentary (OTL), Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox, 1993 J ARICK, J., Prophets and Losses: Some Themes in Recent Study of the Prophets, ET 107 (1995–1996) 75–77 JENNI, E., Jesajas Berufung in der neueren Forschung, ThZ 15 (1959) 321–339 –, Lehrbuch der Hebräischen Sprache des Alten Testaments, 2nd edition, Basel; Frankfurt am Main: Helbing & Lichtenhain, 1981 JENSEN, J., The Use of tôrâ by Isaiah: His Debate With the Wisdom Traditions (CBQ.MS 3), Washington, D.C.: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1973 – & Irwin, W. H., Isaiah 1–39, in: BROWN, R. E. FITZMYER, J. A. & MURPHY, R. E. (eds.), The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, 2nd edition London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1989, repr. 2000, 229–248 JEPPESEN, K., Call and Frustration: A New Understanding of Isaiah viii 21–22, VT 32 (1982) 145–157 JEREMIAS, J., ʨʴˇʮ im Ersten Gottesknechtslied (Jes. XLII 1–4), VT 22 (1972) 31–42 –, Theophanie: Die Geschichte einer alttestamentlichen Gattung, 2nd edition (WMANT 10), Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1977 –, Der Prophet Hosea (ATD 24/1), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983 –, Die Reue Gottes: Aspekte alttestamentlicher Gottesvorstellung, 2nd edition (BThSt 31), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1997 – & PERLITT, L. (eds.), Die Botschaft und die Boten: Festschrift für Hans Walter Wolff zum 70. Geburtstag, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1981 J OHNSON, D. G., From Chaos to Restoration: An Integrative Reading of Is 24–27 (JSOT.S 61), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988 J OHNSTON, A., A Prophetic Vision of an Alternative Community: A Reading of Isaiah 40–55, in: HOPFE, L. M. (ed.), Uncovering Ancient Stones, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1994, 31–40 J OINES, K. R., Winged Serpents in Isaiah’s Inaugural Vision, JBL 86 (1967) 410–415 J ONES, B. C., Isaiah 8.11 and Isaiah’s Vision of Yahweh, in: GRAHAM, M. P., BROWN, W. P. & KUAN, J. K. (eds.), History and Interpretation (JSOT.S 173), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993, 145–159 J ONES, D., The Traditio of the Oracles of Isaiah of Jerusalem, ZAW 67 (1955) 226–246 J ONG, M. DE, Isaiah among the Ancient Near Eastern Prophets: A Comparative Study of the Earliest Stages of the Isaiah Tradition and the Neo-Assyrian Prophecies (VT.S 117), Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2007 J OOSTEN, J., La prosopopée, les pseudo-citations et la vocation d’Isaïe (Is 6,9–10), Bib. 82 (2001) 232–243

Bibliography

363

J OSEPHUS, Jewish Antiquities, trans. H. S. J. Thackeray, R. Marcus & L. H. Feldman, 7 vols. (The Loeb Classical Library 242, 282, 326, 365, 410, 433, 456), Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1930–1965 KAISER, O., Der Königliche Knecht: Eine traditionsgeschichtlich-exegetische Studie über die Ebed-Jahwe-Lieder bei Deuterojesaja (FRLANT, 70), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1959 –, Isaiah 1–12, 2nd edition (OTL), London: SCM Press, 1983 –, Literarkritik und Tendenzkritik: Überlegungen zur Methode der Jesajaexegese, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), Isaiah, 55–71 KAPELRUD, A. S., The Identity of the Suffering Servant, in: G OEDICKE, H. (ed.), Near Eastern Studies, 307–314 KAPLAN, D. M., Ricoeur’s Critical Theory, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003 KAPLAN, M., Isaiah 6:1–11, JBL 45 (1926) 251–259 KEEL, O., Jahwe-Visionen und Siegelkunst: Eine neue Deutung der Majestätsschilderungen in Jes 6, Ez 1 und 10 und Sach 4. Mit einem Beitrag von A. Gutbub über die vier Winde in Ägypten (SBS 84/85), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977 –, Rechttun oder Annahme des drohenden Gerichts? Erwägungen zu Amos, dem frühen Jesaja und Micha, BZ 21 (1977) 200–218 KELLENBERGER, E., Heil und Verstockung. Zu Jes 6,9f bei Jesaja und im Neuen Testament, ThZ 47 (1992) 265–275 –, Die Verstockung Pharaos: Exegetische und auslegungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Exodus 1–15 (BWANT 171), Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2006 KELLERMANN, U., Tritojesaja und das Geheimnis des Gottesknechts: Erwägungen zu Jes 59,21; 61,1–3; 66,18–24, BN 58 (1991) 46–82 KENDALL, D., The Use of Mišpatҗ in Isaiah 59, ZAW 96 (1984) 391–405 KESSLER, W., Gott geht es um das Ganze: Jesaja 56–66 und 24–27 (BAT 19) Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1960 KEY, A. F., The Magical Background of Isaiah 6:9–13, JBL 86 (1967) 198–204 K IDA, K., The Prophet, the Servant and Cyrus in the Prophecies of Second Isaiah, AJBI 16 (1990) 3–29 K IESOW, K., Exodustexte im Jesajabuch: Literarkritische und Motivgeschichtliche Analysen (OBO 24), Freiburg, Ch: Universitätsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979 K ILIAN, R., Der Verstockungsauftrag Jesajas, in: FABRY, H.-J. (ed.), Bausteine Biblischer Theologie: Festgabe für G. Johannes Botterweck zum 60. Geburtstag dargebracht von seinen Schülern (BBB 50) Köln; Bonn: Peter Haustein Verlag, 1977, 209–225 –, Jesaja 1–39 (EdF 200), Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1983 K ISSANE, E. J., The Book of Isaiah: Translated from a Critically Revised Hebrew Text with Commentary. Vol. I (I–XXXIX), Dublin: Brown & Nolon Limited The Richview Press, 1941 –, The Book of Isaiah: Translated from a Critically Revised Hebrew Text with Commentary. Vol. II (XL–LXVI), Dublin: Brown & Nolon Limited The Richview Press, 1943 KLAWANS, J., The Impurity of Immorality in Ancient Judaism, JJS 48 (1997) 1–16 KNIERIM, R., The Vocation of Isaiah, VT 18 (1968) 47–68 KNIGHT, G. A. F., Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, Nashville; New York: Abingdon Press, 1965

364

Bibliography

KOCH, K., Gibt es ein Vergeltungsdogma im Alten Testament? (1955), in: IDEM, Spuren des hebräischen Denkens: Bd. I, eds. B. Janowski & M. Krause, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991, 65–103 –, S̠ädaq und Ma’at. Konnektive Gerechtigkeit in Israel und Ägypten?, in: ASSMANN, J., J ANOWSKI, B. & WELKER, M. (eds.), Gerechtigkeit, 37–64 –, Profetenbuchüberschriften. Ihre Bedeutung für das hebräische Verständnis von Profetie, in: GRAUPNER, A., DELKURT, H. & ERNST A. B. (eds.), Verbindungslinien, 165– 186 KOENEN, K., Zur Aktualisierung eines Deuterojesajawortes in Jes 58,8, BZ 33 (1989) 255–59 –, Ethik und Eschatologie im Tritojesajabuch: Eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtliche Studie (WMANT 62), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1990 –, Heil den Gerechten – Unheil den Sündern! Ein Beitrag zur Theologie der Prophetenbücher (BZAW 229), Berlin; New York: de Gruyter, 1994 KÖHLER, L., Deuterojesaja (Jesaja 40–55) stilkritisch untersucht (BZAW 37), Giessen: Töpelmann, 1923 KOOLE, J. L., Isaiah III Volume 1/Isaiah 40–48 (HCOT), Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1997 –, Isaiah III Volume 2/Isaiah 49–55 (HCOT) Leuven: Peeters, 1998 –, Isaiah III Volume 3/Isaiah 56–66 (HCOT) Leuven: Peeters, 2001 KORPEL, M. C. A., Structural Analysis as a Tool for Redactional Criticism: The Example of Isaiah 5 and 10.1–6, JSOT 69 (1996) 53–71 – & MOOR, J. C. DE, The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40–55 (OTS 41) Leiden; Bosten; Köln: Brill, 1998 KOSMALA, H., Form and Structure of Isaiah 58, ASTI 5 (1967) 69–81 KRATZ, R.G., Kyros im Deuterojesaja-Buch: redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Entstehung und Theologie von Jes 40–55 (FAT 1), Tübingen: Mohr, 1991 –, Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes 40,1f und seine literarischen Horizonte, ZAW 105 (1993) 400–419 –, Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes 40,1f und das Jeremiabuch, ZAW 106 (1994) 243–261 –, Die Redaktion der Prophetenbücher, in: IDEM & KRÜGER, T. (eds.), Rezeption und Auslegung im Alten Testament und seinem Umfeld: Ein Symposion aus Anlass des 60. Geburtstags von Odil Hannes Steck (OBO 153), Freiburg, Ch.: Universitätsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997, 9–27 –, Redaktionsgeschichte/Redaktionskritik I. Altes Testament, TRE 28 (1997) 367–378 – & Spieckermann, H. (eds.), Liebe und Gebot: Studien zum Deuteronomium. (Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Lothar Perlitt) (FRLANT 190), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000 KRAUS, H.-J., Die ausgebliebene Endtheophanie. Eine Studie zu Jes 56–66, in: IDEM, Biblisch-theologische Aufsätze, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1972, 134– 150 –, Hören und Sehen in der althebräischen Tradition, in IDEM, Biblisch-theologische Aufsätze, 84–101 KREISSIG, H., Die Sozialökonomische Situation in Juda zur Achämenidenzeit (Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients 7), Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1973 KRUGER, H. A. J., Who Comes – Yahweh or Nahar? A Few Remarks on the Tradition of Isaiah 59:19c–d and the Theological Meaning of the Passage, OTE 10 (1997) 84–91, 268–278

Bibliography

365

KUNTZMANN, R., Une relecture du “salut” en Is 63:7–14: Étude du vocabulaire, RSR 51 (1977) 22–39 KUSTÁR, Z., “Durch seine Wunden sind wir geheilt“: Eine Untersuchung zur Metaphorik von Israels Krankheit und Heilung im Jesajabuch (BWANT 154), Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2002 L’HEUREUX, C. E., The Redactional History of Isaiah 5.1–10.4, in: B ARRICK, W. B. & SPENCER, J. R. (eds.), In the Shelter of Elyon: Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G. W. Ahlström (JSOT.S 31), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984, 99– 119. LAATO, A., Who Is Immanuel? The Rise and the Foundering of Isaiah’s Messianic Expectations, Åbo: Åbo Academic Press, 1988 –, The Composition of Isaiah 40–55, JBL 109 (1990) 207–228 –, The Servant of YHWH and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation of the Exilic Messianic Programme in Isaiah 40–55 (CB.OT 35), Stockholm: Alqvist & Wiksell International, 1992 –, “About Zion I will not be silent”: The Book of Isaiah as an Ideological Unity (CB.OT 44), Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1998 LABAHN, A., Wort Gottes und Schuld Israels: Untersuchungen zu Motiven deuteronomistischer Theologie im Deuterojesajabuch mit einem Ausblick auf das Verhältnis von Jes 40–55 zum Deuteronomismus (BWANT 143), Stuttgart; Berlin; Cologne: Kohlhammer, 1999 LACHEMAN, E., The Seraphim of Isaiah 6, JQR 59 (1968/69) 71–72 LACK, R., La Symbolique du Livre d’Isaïe: Essai sur l’image littéraire comme élement de structuration (AnBib 59), Rome: E Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 1973 LANDY, F., The Construction of the Subject and the Symbolic Order: A Reading of the Last Three Suffering Servant Songs’, in: DAVIES, P. R. & CLINES, D. J. A. (eds.), Among the Prophets, 60–71 –, Strategies of Concentration and Diffusion in Isaiah 6, BI 7 (1999) 58–86 LANGER, B., Gott als “Licht” in Israel und Mesopotamien, Klosterneuburg: Österreichisches Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1989 LANZ, E., Der ungeteilte Jesaja: Neues Licht auf eine alte Streitfrage (BWM 13), Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus, 2004 LAU, W., Schriftgelehrte Prophetie in Jes 56–66: Eine Untersuchung zu den literarischen Bezügen in den letzten elf Kapiteln des Jesajabuches (BZAW 225), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1994 LAUGHERY, G. J., Living Hermeneutics in Motion: An Analysis and Evaluation of Paul Ricoeur’s Contribution to Biblical Hermeneutics, Lanham, Maryland; New York; Oxford: University Press of America, 2002 –, Ricœur on History, Fiction, and Biblical Hermeneutics, in: B ARTHOLOMEW, C. et al. (eds.), “Behind”, 339–362 LECLERC, T. L., Yahweh is Exalted in Justice: Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah, Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2001 LEENE, H., Juda en de heilige stad in Jes 48:1–2, in: B OERTIEN M. et al. (eds.), Verkenningen in een Stroomgebied: Proeven van oudtestamentisch onderzoek ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van Prof. Dr. M. A. Beek van de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1974, 80–92 –, Universalism and Nationalism? Isaiah XLV 9–13 and Its Context, Bijdragen 35 (1974) 309–334

366

Bibliography

–, De stem van de knecht als metafor: beschouwingen over de compositie van Jesaja 50, Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1980 –, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij, 1987 –, History and Eschatology in Deutero-Isaiah, in: RUITEN, J. VAN & VERVENNE, M. (eds.), Studies, 223–249 LEMAIRE, A., Histoire et administration de la Palestine à l’époque perse, in: LAPERROUSAZ, E.-M. & LEMAIRE , A. (eds.), La Palestine à l’Époque Perse, Paris: Cerf, 1994, 11– 53 –, Nabonidus in Arabia and Judah in the Neo-Babylonian Period, in: L IPSCHITS, O. & B LENKINSOPP, J. (eds.), Judah, 285–298 LESCOW, T., Jesajas Denkschrift aus der Zeit des syrisch-ephraimitischen Krieges, ZAW 85 (1973) 315–331 LEVINE, B. A., Silence, Sound, and the Phenomenology of Mourning in Biblical Israel, JANES 22 (1993) 89–106 LEWIS, T. J., Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit (HSM 39) Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1989 LIEBREICH, L. J., The Position of Chapter Six in the Book of Isaiah, HUCA 25 (1954) 37–40 –, The Compilation of the Book of Isaiah: I. The Divisions of the Book, JQR 46 (1955– 56) 259–277 –, The Compilation of the Book of Isaiah: II. The Connections Between the Chapters, JQR 47 (1956–57) 114–138 LIND, M. C., Political Implications of Isaiah 6, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing 1, 317–338 LINDBLOM, J., A Study on the Immanuel Section in Isaiah, Isa vii,1–ix,6 (Scripta Minora, 1957–1958:4), Lund: Gleerup, 1958 –, Prophecy in Ancient Israel, Oxford: Blackwell, 1967 LINDHAGEN, C., The Servant Motif in the Old Testament: A Preliminary Study to the ‘Ebed-Yahweh Problem’ in Deutero-Isaiah, Uppsala: Lundequistska Bokhandeln, 1950 LINDSEY, F. D., The Commitment of the Servant in Isaiah 50:4–11, BS 139 (1982) 216– 229 LIPSCHITS, O. & B LENKINSOPP, J. (eds.), Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period, Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2003 LISS, H., Die Unerhörte Prophetie: Kommunikative Strukturen prophetischer Rede im Buch Yesha’yahu (ABG 14), Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2003 LOHFINK, N., Gab es eine deuteronomistische Bewegung?, in: GROSS, W. (ed.), Jeremia und die ‘deuteronomistische Bewegung’ (BBB 98), Weinheim: Beltz Athenäum, 1995, 313–382 –, Narrative Analyse von Dtn 1,6–3,29, in: B LUM , E. (ed.), Mincha: Festgabe für Rolf Rendtorff zum 75. Geburtstag, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000, 121– 176 – & ZENGER, E., The God of Israel and the Nations: Studies in Isaiah and the Psalms, Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 2000 LORETZ, O., Die Gattung des Prologs zum Buche Deuterojesaja (Jes 401–11 ), ZAW 96 (1984) 210–220 LUGT, P. VAN DER, De strofische structuur van he derde knechtslied (Jes. 50:4–11), in: GROSHEIDE, H. H. et al. (eds.), De Knecht, 102–117 MA, W., Until the Spirit Comes: The Spirit of God in the Book of Isaiah (JSOT.S 271), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999

Bibliography

367

MACKAY, E. A. (ed.), Signs of Orality: The Oral Tradition & its Influence in the Greek & Roman World (Mn.S 188), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 1999 MARTI, K., Das Buch Jesaja (KHC 10), Tübingen; Freiburg i. B.; Leipzig: Mohr (Siebeck), 1900 MARTÍNEZ, F. G., The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, trans. W. G. E. Watson, Leiden; New York; Cologne: E. J. Brill, 1994 – & T IGCHELAAR, E. J. C. (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition. Volume One 1Q1– 4Q273, Leiden; New York; Cologne: E. J. Brill; Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1997, 2000 MATHEUS, F., Jesaja XLIV 9–20: Das Spottgedicht gegen die Götzen und seine Stellung im Kontext, VT 37 (1987) 312–326 –, Singt dem Herrn ein neues Lied: die Hymnen Deuterojesajas (SBS 141), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1990 MATTERN, J., Paul Ricœur zur Einführung (Zur Einführung 119), Hamburg: Junius, 1996 MCCANN, JR. J. C., The Book of Isaiah – Theses and Hypotheses, BTB 33 (2003) 88–94 MCCONVILLE, J. G., Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law and the Politics of Legal Administration, JSOT 97 (2002) 19–36 –, Deuteronomy (AOTC 5), Leicester, U.K.: Apollos; Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2002 MCEVENUE, S. E., The Political Structure in Judah from Cyrus to Nehemiah, CBQ 43 (1981) 353–364 MCKANE, W., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jeremiah: Volume I. Introduction and Commentary on Jeremiah I–XXV (ICC), Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986 MCKAY, H. A. & C LINES, D. J. A. (eds.), Of Prophets’ Visions and the Wisdom of Sages: Essays in Honour of R. Norman Whybray on his Seventieth Birthday (JSOT.S 162), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993 MCKENZIE, J. L., Second Isaiah: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AncB 20), Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1968 MCLAUGHLIN, J. L., There Hearts Were Hardened: The Use of Isaiah 6,9–10 in the Book of Isaiah, Bib. 75 (1994) 1–25 MELUGIN, R. F., The Formation of Isaiah 40–55 (BZAW 141), Berlin; New York: de Gruyter, 1976 –, Prophetic Books and the Problem of Historical Reconstruction, in: REID, S. B. (ed.), Prophets, 63–78 –, Recent Form Criticism Revisited in an Age of Reader Response, in: SWEENEY, M. A. & BEN ZVI, E. (eds.), Changing, 46–64 – & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions of Isaiah (JSOT.S 214), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996 MERENDINO, R. P., Der Erste und der Letzte: Eine Untersuchung von Jes 40–48 (VT.S 31), Leiden: E. J.Brill, 1981 –, Allein und einzig Gottes prophetisches Wort: Israels Erbe und Auftrag für alle Zukunft (Jesaja 50,4–9a.10), ZAW 97 (1985) 344–366 –, Jes 50:1–3 (9b.11): Jahwes immerwährende Huld zum erprobten Volk, BZ 29 (1985) 221–244 METTINGER, T. N. D., A Farewell to the Servant Songs: A Critical Examination of an Exegetical Axiom (Scripta Minora 3), Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1983 –, Seraphim ʭʩʴʸˈ, DDD, 742–744 METZGER, M., Der Horizont der Gnade in der Berufungsvision Jesajas: Kritische Bedenken zum masoretischen Text von Jesaja 6,13, ZAW 93 (1981) 281–284 –, Eigentumsdeklaration und Schöpfungsaussage (1983), in: IDEM, Schöpfung, 75–94

368

Bibliography

–, Der Thron als Manifestation der Herrschermacht in der Ikonographie des Vorderen Orients und im Alten Testament (1985), in: IDEM, Schöpfung, 95–151. –, Himmlische und irdische Wohnstatt Jahwes (1996), in: IDEM, Schöpfung, 1–38. –, Schöpfung, Thron und Heiligtum: Beiträge zur Theologie des Alten Testaments, ed. W. Zwickel (BThSt 57), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003 M ICHEL, D., Zur Eigenart Tritojesajas, ThViat 10 (1965/66) 213–230 M ILGROM, J., Did Isaiah Prophesy during the Reign of Uzziah?, VT 14 (1964) 164–182 M ILLAR, W. R., Isaiah 24–27 and the Origin of Apocalyptic (HSM 11), Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1976 M ILLER, J. W., Prophetic Conflict in Second Isaiah. The Servant Songs in the Light of Their Context, in: STOEBE, H. J. (ed.), Wort, 77–85 (QUINN-)M ISCALL, P. D., Isaiah (Readings), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993 –, Isaiah 5–6, in: ADAM, A. K. M. (ed.), Postmodern Interpretation of the Bible – A Reader, St. Louis, Missouri: Chalice Press, 2001, 105–115 –, Reading Isaiah: Poetry and Vision, Louisville, Kentucky; London; Leiden: Westminster John Knox, 2001 MÖLLER, K., Words of (In-)evitable Certitude? Reflections on the Interpretation of Prophetic Oracles of Judgement, in: B ARTHOLOMEW, C., GREENE, C. & MÖLLER, K. (eds.), After Pentecost, 352–386 –, A Prophet in Debate: The Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Book of Amos (JSOT.S 372), London; New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003 MOOR, J. DE, Structure and Redaction: Isaiah 60,1–63,6, in: RUITEN, J. VAN & V ERVENNE , M. (eds.), Studies, 325–346 – (ed.), The Elusive Prophet: The Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous Artist (OTS 45), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 2001 MOTYER, J. A., The Prophecy of Isaiah, Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1993 –, Isaiah (TOTC), Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1999 MOWINCKEL, S., Die Komposition des deuterojesajanischen Buches, ZAW 49 (1931) 87– 112, 242–260 MUILENBURG, J., The Book of Isaiah Chapters 40–66: Introduction and Exegesis, in: B UTTRICK, G. A. et al. (eds.), The Interpreter’s Bible 5, New York: Abingdon Press, 1956, 381–773 –, Form Criticism and Beyond, JBL 88 (1969) 1–18 MÜLLER, H.-P., Glauben und Bleiben. Zur Denkschrift Jesajas Kapitel vi 1–vii 18, in: Studies on Prophecy: A Collection of Twelve Papers (VT.S 26), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974 25–54 –, Sprachliche und religionsgeschichtliche Beobachtungen zu Jesaja 6, ZAH 5 (1992) 163–185 MURAOKA, T., Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew, Jerusalem; Leiden: Magness Press, 1985 N IDITCH, S., Oral World and Written Word: Orality and Literacy in Ancient Israel (Library of Ancient Israel), London: SPCK, 1997 = Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996 N IEHR, H., Zur Intention von Jes 6,1–9, BN 21 (1983) 59–65 N IELSEN, E., Deuterojesaja. Erwägungen zur Formkritik, Traditions- und Redaktionsgeschichte, VT 20 (1970) 190–205 N IELSEN, K., Is 6:1–8:18 as Dramatic Writing, StTh 40 (1986) 1–16

Bibliography

369

–, There Is Hope For a Tree: The Tree as Metaphor in Isaiah (JSOT.S 65), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989 N ISSINEN, M., Spoken, Written, Quoted, and Invented: Orality and Writtenness in Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy, in: B EN ZVI, E. & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 235– 271 –, Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East with contributions by C. L. Seow and Robert K. Ritner, ed. P. Machinist (Writings from the Ancient World 12), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003 – (ed.), Prophecy in its Ancient Near Eastern Context: Mesopotamian, Biblical, and Arabian Perspectives (SBL.Symposium Series 13), Atlanta, Georgia: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000 NORTH, C. R., The Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation and Commentary to Chapters XL–LV, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964 –, The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah: An Historical and Critical Study, 2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969 NORTH, R., ʸʥʸʣ d erôr, TDOT 3:265-269 O’CONNELL, R. H., Concentricity and Continuity: The Literary Structure of Isaiah (JSOT.S 188), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994 ODEBERG, H., Trito-Isaiah (Isaiah 56–66): A Literary and Linguistic Analysis (UUÅ 1931 Teologi.1.), Uppsala: A.-B. Lundequistska Bokhandeln, 1931 ODED, B., Where Is the “Myth of the Empty Land” To Be Found? History versus Myth, in: LIPSCHITS, O. & B LENKINSOPP, J. (eds.), Judah, 55–74 ODELL, M. S., The Prophets and the End of Hosea, in: W ATTS, J. W. & HOUSE, P. R. (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature, 158–170 OEMING, M., Biblische Hermeneutik: Eine Einführung, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1998 OETTLI, S., Der Prophet Jesaja Kapitel 40–66 erläutert für Bibelleser (EzAT 4), Calw; Stuttgart: Verlag der Vereinsbuchhandlung, 1913 OLLEY, J. W., “No Peace” in a Book of Consolation: A Framework for the Book of Isaiah?, VT 49 (1999) 351–370 OORSCHOT, J. VAN, Von Babel zum Zion: eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (BZAW 206), Berlin; New York: W. de Gruyter, 1993 ORELLI, C. VON, Der Prophet Jesaja, 3rd edition, (KK A: 4/1), Munich: C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1904 ORLINSKY, H. M., The So-Called “Servant of the Lord” and “Suffering Servant” in Second Isaiah, in: IDEM & SNAITH, N. H. (eds.), Studies, 1–127 – & SNAITH, N. H., Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah (VT.S 14), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967 OSWALT, J. N., The Book of Isaiah Chapters 1–39 (NICOT), Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1986 –, Isaiah: Theology of, NIDOTTE 4:725–732 –, Righteousness in Isaiah: A Study of the Function of Chapters 56–66 in the Present Structure of the Book, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing I, 177–191 –, The Book of Isaiah Chapters 40–66 (NICOT) Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1998 OTTO, E., Theologische Ethik des Alten Testaments, Stuttgart; Berlin; Cologne: Kohlhammer, 1994

370

Bibliography

–, Woher weiß der Mensch um Gut und Böse? Philosophische Annäherungen der ägyptischen und biblischen Weisheit an ein Grundproblem der Ethik, in: BEYERLE, S., MAYER, G. & STRAUß , H. (eds.), Recht, 207–231 –, ʯʥʩʶ s̜îyôn, TDOT 12:333–365 OVERHOLT, T. W., Prophecy in History: The Social Reality of Intermediation, in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 61–84 –, “It is Difficult to Read”, in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 102–105 P ARRY, D. W., & QIMRON, E. (eds.), The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa): A New Edition (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 32), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: Brill, 1999 P AUL, S. M., Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos, ed. F. M. Cross (Hermeneia), Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991 P AURITSCH, K., Die neue Gemeinde: Gott sammelt Ausgestossene und Arme (Jesaia 56– 66): Die Botschaft des Tritojesaia-Buches literar-, form-, gattungskritisch und redaktionsgeschichtlich untersucht (AnBib 47), Rome: E Pontificio Institutio Biblico, 1971 PEELS, H. G. L., The Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM & the Function of the NQM-Texts in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament (OTS 31), Leiden; New York; Cologne: Brill, 1995 PELT, M. V. VAN & KAISER JR., W. C., ʠʸʩ, NIDOTTE 2:527–533 PENCHANSKY, D. & REDDIT, P. L. (eds.), Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is right? Studies on the nature of God in tribute to J. L. Crenshaw, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2000 PERLITT, L., Jesaja und die Deuteronomisten, in: FRITZ, V. et al. (eds.), Prophet und Prophetenbuch: Festschrift für Otto Kaiser zum 65. Geburtstag (BZAW 185), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989, 133–149 PETERSEN, D. L., Defining Prophecy and Prophetic Literature, in: N ISSINEN, M. (ed.), Prophecy, 33–44 –, The Prophetic Literature: An Introduction, Louisville, Kentucky; London: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002 –, The Basic Forms of Prophetic Literature, in: SWEENEY, M. A. & B EN ZVI, E. (eds.), Changing, 269–275 P FAFF, H.-M., Die Entwicklung des Restgedankens in Jesaja 1–39 (EHS XXIII.561), Frankfurt am Main et al.: Peter Lang, 1996 P ODELLA, T., S̟ôm – Fasten: Kollektive Trauer um den verborgenen Gott im Alten Testament (AOAT 224), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag; Kevelaer: Verlag Butzon & Bercker, 1989 –, Das Lichtkleid JHWHs: Untersuchungen zur Gestalthaftigkeit Gottes im Alten Testament und seiner altorientalischen Umwelt (FAT 15) Tübingen: Mohr, 1996 P OLAN, G., In the Ways of Justice Toward Salvation: A Rhetorical Analysis of Isaiah 56– 59 (AmUSt.TR VII/17), New York; Berne; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1986 PREUSS, H. D., Verspottung fremder Religionen im Alten Testament (BWANT 92), Stuttgart et al.: Kohlhammer, 1971 –, Deuterojesaja: Eine Einführung in seine Botschaft, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1976 – (ed.), Eschatologie im Alten Testament (WdF 480), Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1978 PRINSLOO, W. S., Isaiah 42,10–12: “Sing to the Lord a New Song...”, in: RUITEN, J. VAN & VERVENNE, M. (eds.), Studies, 289–301 PROCKSCH, O., Jesaia I übersetzt und erklärt von D. Otto Procksch (KAT 9/1) Leipzig: Deichertsche Verlagsbuchhandlung D. Werner Scholl, 1930

Bibliography

371

QUINN-M ISCALL, P. (see Miscall) RAD, G. VON, Wisdom in Israel, London: SCM Press, 1972 –, Old Testament Theology, Volume II: The Theology of Israel’s Prophetic Traditions, London, SCM Press, 1975 RAHLFS, A. (ed.), Septuaginta, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979 RECHENMACHER, H., Jes 8,16–18 als Abschluß der Jesaja-Denkschrift, BZ 43 (1999) 26– 48 REDFORD, D. B., Scribe and Speaker, in: BEN ZVI, E. & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 145–218 REGT, L. J. DE, Person Shift in Prophetic Texts: Its Function and its Rendering in Ancient and Modern Translations, in: MOOR, J. C. DE (ed.), The Elusive Prophet, 214–231 REID, S. B. (ed.), Prophets and Paradigms: Essays in Honor of Gene M. Tucker (JSOT.S 229), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996 REITERER, F. V., Gerechtigkeit als Heil: ʷʣʶ bei Deuterojesaja. Aussage und Vergleich mit der alttestamentlichen Tradition, Graz: Akademische Drucks- und Verlagsanstalt, 1976 – (ed.), Ein Gott – eine Offenbarung: Beiträge zur biblischen Exegese, Theologie und Spiritualität; Festschrift für Notker Füglister OSB zum 60. Geburtstag, Würzburg: Echter, 1991 RENDTORFF, R., Zur Komposition des Buches Jesaja, VT 34 (1984) 295–320 = IDEM, Kanon, 141–161 (ET: IDEM, Canon, 146–169) –, Jesaja 56,1 als Schlüssel für die Komposition des Buches Jesaja, in: IDEM, Kanon, 172–179 (ET: IDEM, Canon, 181–189) –, Jesaja 6 im Rahmen der Komposition des Jesajabuches, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), Isaiah, 73–82 = IDEM, Kanon, 162–171 (ET: IDEM, Canon, 170-180) –, Kanon und Theologie: Vorarbeiten zu einer Theologie des Alten Testaments, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991 (ET: IDEM, Canon and Theology, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993) –, The Book of Isaiah: A Complex Unity. Synchronic and Diachronic Reading, in: MELUGIN R. F. & SWEENEY M. A. (eds.), Visions, 32–49 –, Theologie des Alten Testaments: Ein kanonischer Entwurf. Band 1: Kanonische Grundlegung, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999 RENZ, T., The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel (VT.S 76), Boston; Leiden: Brill, 1999 –, The Use of the Zion Tradition in the Book of Ezekiel, in: HESS, R. S. & WENHAM, G. J. (eds.), Zion, 77–103 REVENTLOW, H. GRAF, Das Ende der sog. “Denkschrift” Jesajas, BN 38/39 (1987) 62–67 –, Ezechiel 18,1–20: Eine mutmachende prophetische Botschaft für unsere Zeit, in: B EYERLE , S., M AYER , G. & STRAUß , H. (eds.), Recht, 155–165 R ICŒUR, P., Appropriation, in: IDEM, Hermeneutics, 182–193 –, Hermeneutics and the Critique of Ideology, in: IDEM, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, 63–100 –, Metaphor and the Central Problem of Hermeneutics, in: IDEM, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, 165–181 –, The Hermeneutical Function of Distanciation, in: IDEM, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, 131–144 –, The Model of the Text: Meaningful Action Considered as a Text, in: IDEM, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, 197–221

372

Bibliography

–, What is a Text? Explanation and Understanding, in: IDEM, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, 145–164 –, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation, ed. and trans. J. B. Thompson, Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press; Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de L’Homme, 1981 –, Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning, Fort Worth, Texas Christian University Press, 1976 –, Oneself as Another, trans. K. Blamey; Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press, 1992 R IGNELL, L. G., A Study of Isaiah ch. 40–55 (Lunds Universitets Årsskrift 52), Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1956 R INGGREN, H., Zur Komposition von Jesaja 49–55, in: DONNER, H., HANHART, R. & SMEND R. (eds.), Beiträge zur Alttestamentlichen Theologie: Festschrift für Walther Zimmerli zum 70. Geburtstag, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1977, 371–376 –, ʯʩʡ bîn, TDOT 2:99–107 –, ʬʠʢ gƗ’al, TDOT 2:350–355 ROBERTS, J. J. M., Isaiah and His Children, in: Kort, A. & Morschauser, S. (eds.), Biblical and Related Studies Presented to Samuel Iwry, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1985, 193–203 –, Double Entendre in First Isaiah, CBQ 54 (1992) 39–48 ROBINSON, G. D., The Motif of Deafness and Blindness in Isaiah 6:9–10: A Contextual, Literary, and Theological Analysis, BBR 8 (1998) 167–188 ROFÉ, A., Isaiah 59:10 and Trito-Isaiah’s Vision of Redemption, in: V ERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), Isaiah, 407–410 –, The Piety of the Torah-Disciples at the Winding-up of the Hebrew Bible: Joshua 1:8; Psalm 1:2; Isaiah 5:21, in: MERKLEIN, H., MÜLLER, K. & STEMBERGER, G. (eds.), Bibel in jüdischer und christlicher Tradition: Festschrift für Johann Maier (BBB 88), Frankfurt/Main: Anton Hain, 1993, 78–85 RÖSEL, M., Inscriptional Evidence and the Question of Genre, in: SWEENEY, M. A. & B EN ZVI, E. (eds.), Changing, 107–121 ROTH, W. M. W., For Life, He Appeals to Death (Wis 13:18): A Study of Old Testament Idol Passages, CBQ 37 (1975) 21–47 RUITEN, J. VAN & VERVENNE, M. (eds.), Studies in the Book of Isaiah: Festschrift Willem A. M. Beuken (BEThL 132) Leuven: University Press; Peeters, 1997 RUSZKOWSKI, L., Volk und Gemeinde im Wandel: Eine Untersuchung zu Jesaja 56–66 (FRLANT 191), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000 SÆBØ, M., Zum Verhältnis von “Messianismus” und “Eschatologie” im Alten Testament. Ein Versuch terminologischer und sachlicher Klärung, in: BALDERMANN, I. et al. (eds.), Messias, 25–55 –, Yahweh as Deus absconditus: Some Remarks on a Dictum by Gerhard von Rad, in: PENCHANSKY, D. & REDDITT, P. L. (eds.), Shall Not the Judge, 43–55 SATTERTHWAITE, P. E., HESS, R. S. & W ENHAM, G. J. (eds.), The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts, Carlisle: Paternoster; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1995 SAUER, G., Die Umkehrforderung in der Verkündigung Jesajas, in: STOEBE, H.-J. (ed.), Wort, 277–295 SAVIGNAC, J. DE, Les “Seraphim”, VT 22 (1972) 320–325 SAWYER, J. F. A., Isaiah Volume 1 (The Daily Study Bible Series), Louisville, Kentucky; London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1984

Bibliography

373

–, Isaiah Volume 2 (The Daily Study Bible Series), Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986 –, Daughter of Zion and Servant of the Lord in Isaiah: A Comparison, JSOT 44 (1989) 89–107 SCHAMS, C., Jewish Scribes in the Second-Temple Period (JSOT.S 291), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998 SCHARBERT, J., Deuterojesaja – der Knecht Jahwes?, Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovaþ, 1995 SCHENKER, A., Gerichtsverkündigung und Verblendung bei den vorexilischen Propheten, in: IDEM, Text und Sinn im Alten Testament: Textgeschichtliche und bibeltheologische Studien (OBO 103) Freiburg, Ch: Universitätsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991, 217–234 SCHMIDT, J. M., Gedanken zum Verstockungsauftrag Jesajas (Is. VI), VT 21 (1971) 68– 90 SCHMIDT, W. H., Die deuteronomistische Redaktion des Amosbuches: Zu den theologischen Unterschieden zwischen dem Prophetenwort und seinem Sammler, ZAW 77 (1965) 168–193 –, Aspekte der Eschatologie im Alten Testament, in: B ALDERMANN, I. et al. (eds.), Messias, 3–23 SCHMITT, H.-C., Prophetie und Schultheologie im Deuterojesajabuch: Beobachtungen zur Redaktionsgeschichte von Jes 40–55*, ZAW 91 (1979) 43–61 –, Erlösung und Gericht. Jes 43,1–7 und sein literarischer und theologischer Kontext, in: HAUSMANN, J. & ZOBEL, H.-J. (eds.), Alttestamentlicher Glaube und Biblische Theologie: Festschrift für Horst Dietrich Preuß zum 65. Geburtstag, Stuttgart; Berlin; Cologne: Kohlhammer, 1992, 120–131 SCHMITT, J. J., The Motherhood of God and Zion as Mother, RB 92 (1985) 557–569 –, Isaiah and His Interpreters, New York: Paulist Press, 1986 –, The City as Woman in Isaiah 1–39, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing 1, 95–119 SCHOLL, R., Die Elenden in Gottes Thronrat: Stilistisch-kompositorische Untersuchungen zu Jesaja 24–27 (BZAW 274), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000 SCHOORS, A., Les choses antérieures et les choses nouvelles dans les oracles deutéroisaʀens, EThL 40 (1964) 19–47 –, Jesaja uit de grondtekst vertaald en uitgelegd (BOT 9A), Roermond: J. J. Romen & Zonen, 1972 –, I Am God Your Saviour: A Form-Critical Study of the Main Genres in Is. XL–LV (VT.S 24; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973) –, Jesaja II uit the grondtekst vertaald en uitgelegd (BOT 9B), Roermond: J. J. Romen & Zonen-Uitgevers, 1973 –, Isaiah, the Minister of Royal Anointment?, in: Instruction and Interpretation: Studies in Hebrew Language, Palestinian Archaeology and Biblical Exegesis (OTS 20), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977, 85–107 – (ed.), Qohelet in the Context of Wisdom (BEThL 136), Leuven: University Press; Peeters, 1998 SCHOTTROFF, W., “Unrechtmässige Fesseln auftun, Jochstricke lösen”: Jesaja 58:1–2, Ein Textbeispiel zum Thema Bibel und Ökonomie, BI 5 (1997) 263–278 SCHRAMM, B., The Opponents of Third Isaiah: Reconstructing the Cultic History of the Restoration (JSOT.S 193), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995 SCHREINER, J., Zur Textgestalt von Jes 6 und 7,1–17, BZ NF 22 (1978) 92–97 SCHULT, H., ʲʮˇ šm‘ to hear, TLOT 3:1375–1380

374

Bibliography

SCHULTZ, R., The King in the Book of Isaiah, in: SATTERTHWAITE, P. E., HESS, R. S. & W ENHAM, G. J. (eds.), The Lord’s Anointed, 141–165 SCHUNCK, K.-D., Das Amt des ʤʧʴ im Alten Testament, in: BEYERLE, S., MAYER, G. & STRAUß , H. (eds.), Recht, 91–99 SCHWARZ, G., Jesaja 50 4–5a: Eine Emendation, ZAW 85 (1973) 356–357 SCHWEIZER, M., Metaphorische Grammatik: Wege zur Integration von Grammatik und Textinterpretation in der Exegese (Arbeiten zu Text und Sprache im Alten Testament 15), St. Ottilien: EOS, 1981 SCHWIENHORST-SCHÖNBERGER, L., Das Buch der Sprichwörter, in: ZENGER, E. et al., Einleitung in das Alte Testament, 3rd edition (Kohlhammer Studienbücher Theologie 1/1), Stuttgart; Berlin; Cologne: Kohlhammer, 1998, 326–336 SCOTT, R. B. Y., The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39, in: B UTTRICK, G. A. et al. (eds.), The Interpreter’s Bible 5, New York: Abingdon Press, 1956, 149–381 SEARLE, J. R., Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969 –, A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Acts, in: IDEM, Expression, 1–29 –, The Logical Status of Fictional Discourse, in: IDEM, Expression, 58–75 –, Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1979 – & VANDERVEKEN, D., Foundations of Illocutionary Logic, Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1985 SEGAL, M. H., A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978 SEHMSDORF, E., Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte von Jesaja 56–66 (I) (Jes 65 16b–25 66 1–4 56 1–8), ZAW 84 (1972) 517–562 –, Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte von Jesaja 56–66 (II) (Jes 66 17–24), ZAW 84 (1972) 562–576 SEITZ, C. R., Isaiah 1–66: Making Sense of the Whole, in: IDEM (ed.), Reading and Preaching the Book of Isaiah, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988, 105–126 –, The Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of Isaiah, JBL 109 (1990) 229–247 –, Zion’s Final Destiny: The Development of the Book of Isaiah. A Reassessment of Isaiah 36–39, Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1991 –, Isaiah, Book of (First Isaiah), ABD 3:472–488 –, Isaiah, Book of (Third Isaiah), ABD 3:501–507 –, Isaiah 1–39, Interpretation; Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox, 1993 –, How Is the Prophet Isaiah Present in the Latter Half of the Book? The Logic of Chapters 40–66 Within the Book of Isaiah, JBL 115 (1996) 219–240 –, Isaiah and the Search for a New Paradigm: Authorship and Inspiration, in: IDEM, Word without End: the Old Testament as Abiding Theological Witness, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1998 –, The Book of Isaiah 40–66: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections, in: KECK, L. E. et al. (eds.), The New Interpreter’s Bible 6, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001, 307–552 SEKINE, S., Die Tritojesajanische Sammlung (Jes 56–66) redaktionsgeschichtlich untersucht (BZAW 175), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989 SHEPPARD, G. T., Isaiah, in: MAYS, J. L. (ed.), The HarperCollins Bible Commentary, rev. edition, New York: HarperCollins, 1988, 489–537 –, The “Scope” of Isaiah as a Book of Jewish and Christian Scriptures, in: MELUGIN, R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 257–281 S IMON, U. E., A Theology of Salvation: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, London: SPCK, 1953

Bibliography

375

SKINNER, J., The Book of the Prophet Isaiah Chapters XL–LXVI (CBSC), Cambridge: University Press, 1902 –, The Book of the Prophet Isaiah Chapters I–XXXIX (CBSC), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1915 SMART, J. D., History and Theology in Second Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 35, 40– 66, London: Epworth Press, 1967 SMITH, G. A., The Book of Isaiah in Two Volumes – Volume I: Chapters I–XXXIX, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1927 –, The Book of Isaiah in Two Volumes – Volume II: Chapters XL–LXVI, London : Hodder and Stoughton, 1927 SMITH, M. S., “Seeing God” in the Psalms: The Background of the Beatific Vision in the Hebrew Bible, CBQ 50 (1988) 171–183 –, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts, Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001 SMITH, P. A., Rhetoric and Redaction in Trito-Isaiah: The Structure, Growth and Authorship of Isaiah 56–66 (VT.S 62), Leiden; New York; Cologne: E. J. Brill, 1995 SNAITH, N. H., Isaiah 40–66: A Study of the Teaching of the Second Isaiah and its Consequences, in: ORLINSKY, H. M. & SNAITH, N. H., Studies, 135–264 SOMMER, B. D., Allusions and Illusions: The Unity of the Book of Isaiah in Light of Deutero-Isaiah’s Use of Prophetic Tradition, in: MELUGIN, R. F. & S WEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 156–186 –, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusions in Isaiah 40–66, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998 SONNET, J.-P., Le motif de l’endurcissement (Is 6,9–10) et la lecture d’ “Isaïe”, Bib 73 (1992) 208–239 SPIECKERMANN, H., Heilsgegenwart: Eine Theologie der Psalmen (FRLANT 148), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989 –, “Die ganze Erde ist seiner Herrlichkeit voll”: Pantheismus im Alten Testament? (1990), in: IDEM, Gottes Liebe zu Israel: Studien zur Theologie des Alten Testaments (FAT 33), Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001, 62–83 –, Schöpfung, Gerechtigkeit und Heil als Horizont alttestamentlicher Theologie, ZThK 100 (2003) 399–419 SPYKERBOER, H. C., The Structure and Composition of Deutero-Isaiah: With Special Reference To the Polemics Against Idolatry, Meppel: Krips Repro, 1976 STANSELL, G., Isaiah 28–33: Blest be the Tie that Binds (Isaiah Together), in: MELUGIN, R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 68–103 STECK, O. H., Deuterojesaja als theologischer Denker (1969), in: IDEM, Wahrnehmungen, 204–220 –, Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6 (1972), in: IDEM, Wahrnehmungen, 149–170 –, Beiträge zum Verständnis von Jesaja 7,10–17 und 8,1–4 (1973), in: IDEM, Wahrnehmungen, 187–203 –, Rettung und Verstockung. Exegetische Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 7,3–9 (1973), in: IDEM, Wahrnehmungen, 171–186 –, Wahrnehmungen Gottes im Alten Testament: Gesammelte Studien (TB 70), Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1982 –, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in Deuterojesajas “Ebed-Jahwe-Liedern” (1984), in: IDEM, Gottesknecht, 3–21 –, Aspekte des Gottesknechts in Jesaja 52,13–53,12 (1985), in: IDEM, Gottesknecht, 22– 43

376

Bibliography

–, Bereitete Heimkehr: Jesaja 35 als redaktionelle Brücke zwischen dem Ersten und dem Zweiten Jesaja (SBS 121) Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1985 –, Jes 60,13 – Bauholz oder Tempelgarten? (1985), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 101– 105 –, Jes 62,10–12 als Abschluß eines Großjesajabuches (1985), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 143–166 –, Der Grundtext in Jesaja 60 und sein Aufbau (1986), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 49–79 –, Der Rachetag in Jesaja 61,2: Ein Kapitel redaktionsgeschichtlicher Kleinarbeit (1986), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 106–118 –, Beobachtungen zu Jesaja 56–59 (1987), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 169–186 –, Beobachtungen zur Anlage von Jes 65–66 (1987), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 217–228 –, Lumen gentium: Exegetische Bemerkungen zum Grundsinn von Jesaja 60,1–3 (1987), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 80–96 –, Tritojesaja im Jesajabuch (1989), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 3–45 (= VERMEYLEN, J. [ed.], Isaiah, 361–406) –, Zion als Gelände und Gestalt: Überlegungen zur Wahrnehmung Jerusalems als Stadt und Frau im Alten Testament (1989), in: IDEM, Gottesknecht, 126–145 –, Zions Tröstung. Beobachtungen und Fragen zu Jesaja 51,1–11 (1990), in: IDEM, Gottesknecht, 73–91 –, Anschlußprobleme einer redaktionellen Entstehung von Tritojesaja (1991), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 269–279 –, Der Abschluß der Prophetie im Alten Testament: Ein Versuch zur Frage der Vorgeschichte des Kanons (BThSt 17) Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991 –, Studien zu Tritojesaja (BZAW 203), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1991 –, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,1–8; 63,7–66,24 (1991), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 229–265 –, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 56,9–59,21; 63,1–6 (1991), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 192–213 –, Zu jüngsten Untersuchungen von Jes 60–62 (1991), in: IDEM, Studien zu Tritojesaja, 119–139 –, Die Gottesknechts-Texte und ihre redaktionelle Rezeption im Zweiten Jesaja (1992), in: IDEM, Gottesknecht, 149–172 –, Gottesknecht und Zion: Gesammelte Aufsätze zu Deuterojesaja (FAT 4), Tübingen: Mohr, 1992 –, Israel und Zion: Zum Problem konzeptioneller Einheit und literarischer Schichtung in Deuterojesaja (1992), in: IDEM, Gottesknecht, 173–207 –, Der sich selbst aktualisierende “Jesaja” in Jes 56,9–59,21, in: Z WICKEL, W. (ed.), Biblische Welten: Festschrift für Martin Metzger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag (OBO 123), Freiburg/Ch: Universitätsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993, 215–230 –, Autor und/oder Redaktor in Jesaja 56–66 (1997), in: Broyles, C. C. & Evans, C. A. (eds.), Writing I, 219–259 –, The Prophetic Books and their Theological Witness, trans. J. D. Nogalski; St. Louis, Missouri: Chalice Press, 2000 STIVER, D. R., Ricœur, Speech-act Theory, and the Gospels as History, in: B ARTHOLOMEW, C., GREENE , C. & M ÖLLER , K. (eds.), After Pentecost, 50–72 –, Theology after Ricoeur: New Directions in Hermeneutical Theology, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001

Bibliography

377

STOEBE, H.-J. (ed.), Wort – Gebot – Glaube: Beiträge zur Theologie des Alten Testaments. W. Eichrodt zum 80. Geburtstag, Zurich: Zwingli, 1970 STRACK, H. L. & S IEGFRIED, C., Lehrbuch der Neuhebräischen Sprache und Literatur, Karlsruhe; Leipzig: H. Reuther, 1884 STUHLMUELLER, C., Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah (AnBib 43), Rome: E Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 1970 –, Deutero Isaiah: Mayor Transitions in the Prophet’s Theology and in Contemporary Scholarship, CBQ 42 (1980) 1–29 SWEENEY, M. A., Isaiah 1–4 and the Post-Exilic Unterstanding of the Isaianic Tradition (BZAW 171), Berlin; New York: W. de Gruyter, 1988 –, Textual Citations in Isaiah 24–27: Toward an Unterstanding of the Redactional Function of Chapters 24–27 in the Book of Isaiah, JBL 107 (1988) 39–52 –, The Book of Isaiah in Recent Research, CurBS 1 (1993) 141–163 –, Isaiah 1–39 with an Introduction to Prophetic Literature (FOTL 16), Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1996 –, The Book of Isaiah as Prophetic Torah, in: MELUGIN, R. F. & SWEENEY, M. A. (eds.), New Visions, 50–67 –, Prophetic Exegesis in Isaiah 65–66, in: B ROYLES C. C. & EVANS, C. A. (eds.), Writing I, 455–474 – & B EN ZVI, E. (eds.), The Changing Face of Form Criticism for the Twenty-First Century, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 2003 T ATE, M. E., The Book of Isaiah in Resent Research, in: W ATTS, J. W. & HOUSE, P. R. (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature, 22–56 THISELTON, A. C., New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992 –, Biblical Studies and Theoretical Hermeneutics, in: B ARTON, J. (ed.), Biblical Interpretation, 95–113 –, Communicative Action and Promise in Interdisciplinary, Biblical, and Theological Hermeneutics, in: LUNDIN, R., T HISELTON, A. C. & W ALHOUT, C., The Promise of Hermeneutics, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999, 133–239 –, “Behind” and “In Front Of” the Text: Language, Reference and Indeterminacy, in: B ARTHOLOMEW, C., GREENE, C. & MÖLLER, K. (eds.), After Pentecost, 97–120 T IEMEYER, L.-S., Geography and Textual Allusions: Interpreting Isaiah XL–LV and Lamentations as Judahite Texts, VT 57 (2007) 367–385 T ILLESSE, G. M. DE, TU & VOUS dans le Deutéronome, in: KRATZ, R. G. & SPIECKERMANN, H. (eds.), Liebe, 156–163 TOMASINO, A., Isaiah 1.1–2.4 and 63–66, and the Composition of the Isaianic Corpus, JSOT 57 (1993), 81–98 TOORN, K. VAN DER, From the Oral to the Written: The Case of Old Babylonian Prophecy, in: BEN ZVI, E. & FLOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 219–234 TORREY, C. C., The Second Isaiah: A New Interpretation, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1928 TRIBLE, P., Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of Jonah (Guides to Biblical Scholarship), Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994 TSEVAT, M., The Throne Vision of Isaiah, in: IDEM, The Meaning of the Book of Job and Other Biblical Studies: Essays on the Literature and Religion of the Hebrew Bible, New York: Ktav Publishing House; Dallas, Texas: Institute of Jewish Studies, 1980, 155–176

378

Bibliography

TUCKER, G. M., Prophetic Superscriptions and the Growth of a Canon, in: COATS, G. W. & LONG, B. O. (eds.), Canon and Authority: Essays in Old Testament Religion and Theology, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977, 56–70 –, The Book of Isaiah 1–39: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections, in: KECK, L. E. et al. (eds.), The New Interpreter’s Bible 6, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001, 26–305 UEHLINGER, C., “Powerful Persianisms” in Glyptic Iconography of Persian Period Palestine, in: B ECKING, B. & KORPEL, M. C. A. (eds.), Crisis, 134–182 UEMURA, S., Isaiah 6:9–10: A Hardening Prophecy?, AJBI 27 (2001), 23–56 UHLIG, T., Too hard to understand? The motif of hardening in Isaiah, in: F IRTH, D. G. & W ILLIAMSON, H. G. M. (eds.), Interpreting Isaiah, 62–83 UTZSCHNEIDER, H., Situation und Szene: Überlegungen zum Verhältnis historischer und literarischer Deutung prophetischer Texte am Beispiel von Hos 5,8–6,6, ZAW 114 (2002) 80–105 VAN SETERS, J., Prophetic Orality in the Context of the Ancient Near East: A Response to Culley, Crenshaw, and Davies, in: BEN ZVI, E. & F LOYD, M. H. (eds.), Writings, 83–88. VANDERHOOFT, D. S., The Neo-Babylonian Empire and Babylon in the Latter Prophets (HSM 59), Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1999 –, Babylonian Strategies of Imperial Control in the West: Royal Practice and Rhetoric, in: LIPSCHITS, O. & B LENKINSOPP, J. (eds.), Judah, 235–262 VANHOOZER, K. J., Is There a Meaning in This Text? The Bible, the Reader and the Morality of Literary Knowledge, Leicester: Apollos, 1998 –, From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts: The Covenant of Discourse and the Discourse of Covenant, in: B ARTHOLOMEW, C., GREENE, C. & MÖLLER, K. (eds.), After Pentecost, 1–49 VEIJOLA, T., Das Klagegebet in Literatur und Leben der Exilsgeneration am Beispiel einiger Prosatexte, in: Congress Volume: Salamanca, 1983 (VT.S 36), Leiden: Brill, 1985, 286–307 VENEMA, G. J., Reading Scripture in the Old Testament: Deuteronomy 9–10; 31 – 2 Kings 22–23 – Jeremiah 36 – Nehemiah 8 (OTS 48), Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2004 VERMES, G., The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, London et al.: Allen Lane Penguin Press, 1997 VERMEYLEN, J., Du prophète Isaïe à l’apocalyptique: Isaïe I–XXXV. miroir d’un demimillénaire d’expérience religieuse en Israël, 2 vols. (EtB) Paris: Gabalda, 1977–1978 – (ed.), The Book of Isaiah – Le Livre d’Isaïe: Les oracles et leurs relectures. Unité et complexité de l’ouvrage (BEThL 81), Leuven: Peeters, 1989 VETTER, D., ʤʠʸ r’h to see, TLOT 3:1176–1183 V INCENT, J. M., Das Auge hört: Die Erfahrbarkeit Gottes im Alten Testament (BThSt 34), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1998 VOLLMER, J., Geschichtliche Rückblicke und Motive in der Prophetie des Amos, Hosea und Jesaja (BZAW 119), Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1971 VOLZ, P., Jesaia II übersetzt und erklärt von D. Paul Volz (KAT IX/2), Leipzig: Deichertsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1932 W AARD, J. DE, A Handbook on Isaiah (Textual Criticism and the Translator 1), Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1997

Bibliography

379

W AGNER, A., Sprechakte und Sprachaktanalyse im Alten Testament: Untersuchungen im biblischen Hebräisch an der Nahtstelle zwischen Handlungsebene und Grammatik (BZAW 253), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1997 –, Die Stellung der Sprechakttheorie in Hebraistik und Exegese, in: LEMAIRE, A. (ed.), Congress Volume: Basel 2001 (VT.S 92), Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2002, 55–83 W AGNER, R., Textexegese als Strukturanalyse: Sprachwissenschaftliche Methode zur Erschließung althebräischer Texte am Beispiel des Visionsberichtes Jes 6,1–11 (Arbeiten zu Text und Sprache im Alten Testament 32), St. Ottilien: EOS, 1989 W AGNER, T., Gottes Herrschaft: Eine Analyse der Denkschrift (Jes 6,1–9,6) (VT.S 108), Leiden: Brill, 2006 W ALDOW, H.-E. VON, Anlass und Hintergrund der Verkündigung des Deuterojesaja, Bonn, 1953 W ALLIS, G., Das Tritojesajabuch, in: IDEM, Erfüllung und Erwartung: Studien zur Prophetie auf dem Weg vom Alten zum Neuen Testament, Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1990, 71–90 W ATSON, F., Text and Truth: Redefining Biblical Theology, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1997 W ATSON, W. G. E., Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to its Techniques (JSOT.S 26), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995 W ATTS, J. D. W., Isaiah 1–33 (WBC 24), Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1985 –, Isaiah 34–66 (WBC 25), Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1987 W ATTS, J. W., Public Readings and Pentateuchal Law, VT 45 (1995) 540–557 –, Rhetorical Strategy in the Composition of the Pentateuch, JSOT 68 (1995), 3–22 – & HOUSE, P. R. (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts (JSOT.S 235), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996 W EBER, B., Psalm 77 und sein Umfeld: Eine poetologische Studie (BBB 103), Weinheim: Beltz Athenäum, 1995 –, Werkbuch Psalmen I: Die Psalmen 1 bis 72, Stuttgart; Berlin; Cologne: Kohlhammer, 2001 W EBSTER, E. C., A Rhetorical Study of Isaiah 66, JSOT 34 (1986) 93–108 –, The Rhetoric of Isaiah 63–65, JSOT 47 (1990) 89–102 W EINFELD, M., ʣʥʡʫ kƗbôd, TDOT 7:22–38 –, Deuteronomy 1–11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AncB 5), New York et al.: Doubleday, 1991 W EIPPERT, M., Die “Konfessionen” Deuterojesajas, in: ALBERTZ, R., GOLKA, F. W. & KEGLER, J. (eds.), Schöpfung und Befreiung: Für Claus Westermann zum 80. Geburtstag, Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1989, 104–115 –, “Das Frühere, siehe, ist eingetroffen…” Über Selbstzitate im altorientalischen Prophetenspruch, in: HEINTZ, J.-G. (ed), Oracles et propheties dans l’antiquité, Paris: de Boccard, 1997, 147–169 W ENHAM, G. J., The Book of Leviticus (NICOT), Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1979 –, Purity, in: BARTON, J. (ed.), The Biblical World: Volume II, London; New York: Routledge, 2002, 378–394 W ERLINE, R. A., Penitential Prayer in Second Temple Judaism: The Development of a Religious Institution (Early Judaism and Its Literature 13), Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998 W ERLITZ, J., Studien zur literarkritischen Methode: Gericht und Heil in Jesaja 7,1–17 und 29,1–8 (BZAW 204), Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1992

380

Bibliography

–, Vom Knecht der Lieder zum Knecht des Buches. Ein Versuch über die Ergänzungen zu den Gottesknechtstexten des Deuterojesajabuches, ZAW 109 (1997), 30–43 –, Redaktion und Komposition: Zur Rückfrage hinter die Endgestalt von Jesaja 40–55 (BBB 122) Berlin; Bodenheim b. Main: Philo, 1999 W ERNER, F., Die Wortbildung der hebräischen Adjektiva, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1983 W ERNER, W., Vom Prophetenwort zur Prophetentheologie: Ein redaktionskritischer Versuch zu Jes 6,1–8,18, BZ 29 (1985) 1–30 –, Eschatologische Texte in Jesaja 1–39: Messias, Heiliger Rest, Völker, 2nd edition, (FzB 46), Würzburg: Echter, 1986 W ESTERMANN, C., Das Buch Jesaja Kapitel 40–66 übersetzt und erklärt (ATD 19), Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1968 = repr. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966 (ET: IDEM, Isaiah 40–66: A Commentary, trans. D. M. G. Stalker [OTL], London: SCM Press, 1969) –, Grundformen prophetischer Rede, Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1978 –, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas. Mit einer Literaturübersicht „Hauptlinien der Deuterojesaja-Forschung von 1964–1979“, zusammengestellt und kommentiert von Andreas Richter (CThM 11), Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1981 W HEDBEE, J. W., Isaiah and Wisdom, Nashville; New York: Abingdon Press, 1971 W HITE, H. C. (ed.), Speech Act Theory and Biblical Criticism (Semeia 41), Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988 W HITLEY, C. F., The Call and Mission of Isaiah, JNES 18 (1959) 38–48 –, Further Notes On the Text of Deutero-Isaiah, VT 25 (1975) 683–687 –, The Language and Exegesis of Isaiah 8,16–23, ZAW 90 (1978) 28–43 W HYBRAY, N., Isaiah 40–66 (NCeB), Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1975, 1981 W IERINGEN, A. L. H. M. VAN, Jesaja 6–12: Die Vegatationsbildsprache und die Prophetische Struktur, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), Isaiah, 203–207 –, Jesaja 40,1–11: eine drama-linguistische Lesung von Jes 6 her, BN 49 (1989) 82–93 –, The Implied Reader in Isaiah 6–12 (Biblical Interpretation Series 34), Leiden; Boston; Cologne: E. J. Brill, 1998 W ILCOX, P. & P ATON-W ILLIAMS, D., The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah, JSOT 42 (1988) 79–102 W ILDBERGER, H., Der Monotheismus Deuterojesajas (1977), in: IDEM, Jahwe und sein Volk: Gesammelte Aufsätze zum Alten Testament, ed. H. H. Schmid and O.H. Steck (TB 66), Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1979, 249–273 –, Jesaja: 1. Teilband Jesaja 1–12, 2nd edition (BK X/1), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980 (ET: IDEM, Isaiah 1–12: A Commentary, trans. T. H. Trapp [Continental Commentaries] Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991) –, Jesaja: 2. Teilband Jesaja 13–27, 2nd edition (BK 10/2), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1989 (ET: IDEM, Isaiah 13–27: A Continental Commentary, trans. T. H. Trapp [Continental Commentaries], Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997) –, Jesaja: 3. Teilband Jesaja 28–39. Das Buch, der Prophet und seine Botschaft (BK X/3), Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1982 (ET: IDEM, Isaiah 28–39: A Continental Commentary, trans. T. H. Trapp [Continental Commentaries], Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002) W ILLEY, P. T., Remember The Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah (SBL.DS 161), Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1997 W ILLI, T., Juda – Jehud – Israel: Studien zum Selbstverständnis des Judentums in persischer Zeit (FAT 12), Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1995

Bibliography

381

W ILLIAMSON, H. G. M., Da’at in Isaiah LIII 11, VT 28 (1978) 118–122 –, Word Order in Isaiah XLIII.12, JThS 30 (1979) 499–502 –, 1 and 2 Chronicles (NCeB), London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1982 –, A Response to A. Graeme Auld (1983), in: DAVIES, P. R. (ed.), The Prophets, 50–56 –, Ezra, Nehemiah (WBC 16), Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1985 –, Ezra and Nehemiah (OTGu), Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987 –, The Governors of Judah under the Persians (1988), in: IDEM, Studies, 46–63 –, The Concept of Israel in Transition, in: CLEMENTS, R. E. (ed.), The World of Ancient Israel: Sociological, Anthropological and Political Perspectives, Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1989, 141–161 –, Isaiah 63,7–64,11: Exilic Lament or Post-Exilic Protest?, ZAW 102 (1990) 48–58 –, Laments at the Destroyed Temple: Excavating the Biblical Text Reveals Ancient Prayers, BiRe 6/4 (1990) 12–17, 44 –, First and Last in Isaiah, in: MCKAY, H. A. & C LINES, D. J. A. (eds.), Of Prophets’ Vision, 95–108 –, The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiah’s Role in Composition and Redaction, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 –, Isaiah XI 11–16 and the Redaction of Isaiah I–XII, in: E MERTON, J. A. (ed.), Congress Volume: Paris 1992 (VT.S 61), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995, 343-347 –, Isaiah and the Wise, in: DAY, J., GORDON, R. P. & W ILLIAMSON, H. G. M. (eds.), Wisdom in Ancient Israel: Essays in honour of J. A. Emerton, Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 133–141 –, Synchronic and Diachronic in Isaian Perspective, in: MOOR, J. C. DE (ed.), Synchronic or Diachronic? A Debate in Old Testament Exegesis (OTS 34), Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995, 211–226 –, Isaiah 6,13 and 1,29–31, in: RUITEN, J. VAN & VERVENNE, M. (eds.), Studies, 119–128 –, Relocating Isaiah 1:2–9, in: BROYLES, C. C. & EVANS, C. A., Writing I, 263–277 –, Judah and the Jews (1998), in: IDEM, Studies, 25–45 –, Variations on a Theme: King, Messiah and Servant in the Book of Isaiah, Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1998 –, “From One Degree of Glory to Another”: Themes and Theology in Isaiah, in: B ALL, E. (ed.), In Search of True Wisdom: Essays in Old Testament Interpretation in Honour of Ronald E. Clements (JSOT.S 300), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 174– 195 –, Promises, Promises! Some Exegetical Reflections on Isaiah 58, Word and World 19 (1999) 153–160 –, Biblical Criticism and Hermeneutics in Isaiah 1:10–17, in: BULTMANN, C., DIETRICH, W. & LEVIN, C. (eds.), Vergegenwärtigung des Alten Testaments: Beiträge zur biblischen Hermeneutik. Festschrift für Rudolf Smend zum 70. Geburtstag, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2002, 82–96 –, Studies in Persian Period History and Historiography (FAT 38) Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004 –, Recent issues in the study of Isaiah, in: FIRTH, D. G. & W ILLIAMSON, H. G. M. (eds.), Interpreting Isaiah, 21–39 W ILSON, R. R., The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart, CBQ 41 (1979) 18–36 W INTER, P., ȅȊ ǻǿǹ ȋǼǿȇ ȆȇǼȈǺǼȅȈ ȅȊǻǼ ǻǿǹ ȋǼǿȇ ȈǼȇǹĭ ȅȊǻǼ ǻǿǹ ȋǼǿȇ ǹīīǼȁȅȊ. Isa lxiii 9 (Gk) and the Passover Haggadah, VT 4 (1954) 439–441

382

Bibliography

W ISCHNOWSKY, M., Tochter Zion: Aufnahme und Überwindung der Stadtklage in den Prophetenschriften des Alten Testaments (WMANT 89) Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2001 W OLTERSTOFF, N., Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995 –, The Promise of Speech-act Theory for Biblical Interpretation, in: BARTHOLOMEW, C., GREENE, C. & MÖLLER, K. (eds.), After Pentecost, 73–90 WRIGHT, D. P., Unclean and Clean (OT), ABD 6:729–741 YOUNG, E. J., The Book of Isaiah: Volume 1 Chapters 1–18, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1965, repr. 2001 –, The Book of Isaiah: Volume 3 Chapters 40–66, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1972, repr. 2001 YOUNGBLOOD, R. F., The Book of Isaiah: An Introductory Commentary, Baker Book House, 1993 = repr. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2000 ZENGER, E., A God of Vengeance? Understanding the Psalms of Divine Wrath, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996 ZERON, A., Die Anmassung des Königs Usia im Lichte von Jesajas Berufung: Zu 2. Chr. 26,16–22 und Jes. 6,1ff, ThZ 33 (1977) 65–68 ZIEGLER, J., Isaias, 3rd edition (Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum 14), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983 ZILLESSEN, A., “Tritojesaja“ und Deuterojesaja: Eine literarkritische Untersuchung zu Jes 56–66, ZAW 26 (1906) 231–276 ZIMMERLI, W., Zur Sprache Tritojesajas (1950), in: IDEM, Gottes Offenbarung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zum Alten Testament (TB 19), Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1963, 217–233 –, Das “Gnadenjahr des Herrn” (1970), in: IDEM, Studien zur alttestamentlichen Theologie und Prophetie: Gesammelte Aufsätze II (TB 51) Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1974, 222– 234. –, Ezekiel 1: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, Chapters 1–24 (Hermeneia), Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979

Source Index Old Testament Genesis 4:9 6–8 7:11 7:16 15:12 18:21 21:16 22:16 29:32 32:2 32:33 36:5 48:10 50:2 Exodus 3:7 4:10 5:3 5:20 7:3 7:14 7:15–16 7:18 7:21 8:11 8:28 9:7 9:34 10:1 10:21–23 10:27 12:34 13:9 15–17 16:29 20:7

98 229 38 38 235 98, 99 153 166 269 348 202 339 101 103

99 101 348 348 201, 312 101 106 229 229 101 101 101 101 101 229 162 124 333 92 97 91

20:16 24:3–7 24:7 24:9–11 25:8 28:33–34 32:9 32:13 33:3 33:5 34:9 34:10 35:30 39:24–26

91 20 124 38 124 85 201 310 201 201 201 124 97 85

Leviticus 1–27 1:3 3:1 4:4 5:1 5:3 5:4 5:14–26 10:1–2 16:7 19:19

265 125 125 125 98 98 98 63 125 125 134

Numbers 1–36 11–21 11:25 11:29 16:8 17:24 20:3 20:10 21

265 92 152 152 97 332 347 97 88

384

Source Index

21:4–9 21:6 21:8–9 21:8 24:2 28:3

87, 88 87, 88 88 87 152 336

Deuteronomy 1–34 2:30 4:5–10 4:35 6:13 7:3 7:8 8:15 9–10 9:6 9:12 9:13 9:16 9:19 10:16 10:20 11:28 13:14 14:25 16:18 19:17 22:17 25:2 26:3–4 26:5–10 29:3 29:22 31 31:9–11 31:10–13 31:27 31:29 32:6 32:15 32:34 32:39 34:5

134, 155, 190 162 21 170 194 134 258 87 21 201 333 201 333 336 201, 202 194 333 169 124 264 125 125 125 107 107 98 336 21 20 21 332 333 310 101 124 97 324

Joshua 1:1 1:13 1:15

324 324 324

8:4 8:8 8:30–35 8:31 8:32 8:33 10:14 11:20 22:5 22:22 23:7

97 97 20 24 125 324 309 258 333 98 194

Judges 2:17 5:3 18:28

333 97 154

Ruth 4:7

126

1 Samuel 6:6 6:9 9:17 10:6 10:10 12:13 15:23 16:2–3 16:4 16:13 22:7 22:17 23:18 25:29

101 99 151–152 152 152 152 332 107 259 152 97 348 125 124, 125

2 Samuel 2:30 5:3 7:5 14:6 16:12 23:2

166 125 106 154 269 152

1 Kings 1:18 2:3 2:13 2:42 3:9

98 333 259 348 99

385

Source Index 8:10–13 8:32 8:36 12:5 12:10 12:14 21:8 22 22:21 22:23 22:28

89 310 310 336 101 101 124, 125 83 169 152 97

2 Kings 5:13 5:23 9:3 10:31 16:5 16:6 16:7–9 17:13 17:14 18:4 18:12 22–23 22:3 22:16–20 22:20 23:2–3 23:3

345 124 107 333 135 135 135 333 201, 202 87 324 21 326 257 258 20 125

1 Chronicles 1+2 Chr 1:35 2:23–24 3:19 4:36 5:13 7:8 7:10 9:7 23:10 26:3

332, 333 339 92 326 92 326 92 339 326 339 92

2 Chronicles 10:5 16:12 17:7–9 18:22 20:7

336 103 21 152 134

28 28:7 28:15 30:8 34:12 34:30–31 36:18 36:20–21 36:23

135 135 135 201, 202 326 20 202 43 226

Ezra 1:3 1:7–8 5:14–15 5:14 7:10 8:4 8:16 9:2 10:22 10:27

226 43 43 43 333 92 326 134 92 92

Nehemiah 3:4 8 9 9:3 9:16–17 9:16 9:17 9:25 9:27 9:28 9:29 10:1–2 12:41 13:3

326 20–21 20, 310 333 201 202 202, 332 101 309 309 202 125 92 333

Esther 3:12 8:8 8:10

124, 125 124, 125 124, 125

Job 5:4 5:23 9:7 10:11 13:1 13:17

154 326 125 202 99, 170 98

386

Source Index

14:14 14:17 18:2 21:2 23:2 24:16 26:8 37:7 39:16 40:17

48 124, 125, 127 98 98 332 125 124 124, 125 312 202

Psalms 1–150 1 1:2 3 4 4:9 5 6 6:2 7 7:2 7:3 7:5 7:7–12 7:7 7:9–12 7:9–10 7:9 7:11–12 7:11 7:12 7:15–17 7:18 11:7 13 15 15:1 15:2–3 15:3 17 17:3 17:15 18:1 18:12 19:8 22 24 24:1

205, 320 79 333 109 109 223 109 109 336 60, 63, 109, 284 284 154 284 60 284 60 60 284 63 284, 309 60, 284 60 284 92 109 90 90 90, 91 91 109 196 92 324 235 333 109 90 90

24:3 24:4 24:7–10 24:10 26 27 27:1–3 27:4 27:13 29 31 31:8 31:16 35 35:13 36:1 37:8 38 41 41:5–11 42–43 42:2–3 46 46:2 48 48:6 49:20 49:21 50 50:7–15 50:10 50:12 50:22 51 51:10 51:12–13 55 57 58:5 63 63:3 63:10 66:16 69 71:11 72 72:1 72:2–4 72:2 72:3

90 90, 91 90 90 109 109 157 92 92 47 109 99 157 109 265 324 336 109, 157 109 109 109 92 86 157 86 157 157 98 44 40 40 40 154 109 157 152 157 109, 157 204 109 92 252 97 109 154 61 61 61 61 61

387

Source Index 72:4 72:5–7 72:6 72:7 72:12–14 72:12 72:13 72:14 72:16–17 72:16 73–83 73:22 74:1 77:21 79:2 79:6 79:8 79:10 80:2 80:15 82 82:2 82:3–4 82:5 82:8 84:11–13 88 89 89:51 90:7 93 93:4 94:5 95:8 102 105:6 105:28 105:29 106:9 106:10 106:22 107:30 109 119:1 119:7 119:62 119:70 119:106 119:164 135:16–17

61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 44 98 310 310 310 336 310 310 310 309, 310 47, 60, 61 60 60 60, 64, 235 60 92 109 44 310 336 86 86 265 201, 312 109 134 229 229 229, 309 309 310 265 109 333 264 264 101 264 264 96

137 139:12 143

55 235 109

Proverbs 8:6 10:18ff 11:26 11:31 12:14 13:13 13:21 15:1 17:11 21:13 21:14 24:11 24:12 24:24–25 26:8 27:9 28:9 28:14 29:1 29:19 30:4

97 91 59 59 59 59 59 336 332 204 336 59 98 59 124 101 333 201, 312 201, 202 98 124

Ecclesiastes 1–12 3:1 3:17 5:17 8:6

105 265 265 265 265

Song of Solomon 2:7 330 3:5 330 4:12 125 7:13 203, 204 8:4 330 Isaiah 1–66

2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 26, 27, 29, 31, 33–35, 37–39, 42, 44, 45, 52, 55, 56, 65, 66, 73, 77, 95, 102, 121, 122, 128, 129, 133, 140, 143, 161, 162, 188–190, 200, 204–206, 214, 218,

388

1–55 1–39

1–37 1–35 1–33 1–12 1–6 1–5 1 1:1–63:6 1:1–31 1:1 1:2–20 1:2–9 1:2–3 1:2 1:3 1:4–9 1:4 1:5–6 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:10–19 1:10–15 1:10 1:11–17 1:12–13 1:15 1:17 1:18–20 1:19 1:21–11:6 1:21–11:5 1:21–27 1:21–23

Source Index 224, 226, 238, 252, 261, 269, 270, 287, 292, 296–299, 303, 306, 307, 311, 314– 322, 325–327, 331, 334 3, 5 4, 7, 8, 21, 27, 33, 34, 45, 46, 48, 50–53, 55, 56, 64–67, 72, 73, 106, 139, 140, 142, 143, 150, 151, 156, 157, 198, 205, 206, 218, 235, 248, 276, 287, 298, 299, 309–311, 316, 317, 319, 321 67 4, 52 67 19, 83, 138, 154 50 5, 50, 75, 76, 110 7, 48, 50, 161, 306 287 70 22, 31, 32, 45, 50, 52, 66, 67, 132, 140 332 7 2, 142, 161, 319 97, 298, 305 250 161 46, 48, 134, 298, 305 245 132 101 94, 298, 310 161 7 161, 239, 331 161 306 91, 139, 161, 270 129, 235, 236, 265 8, 160 160, 161, 332 122 84 48–49 272

1:21 1:23 1:25–26 1:25 1:26 1:28 1:29–31 1:31 2–39 2–12 2–5 2:1–5:30 2:1–4 2:1 2:2–4 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:6 2:12–16 3 3:8–10 3:8–9 3:8 3:9 3:13–15 4:4 5 5:1–7 5:1 5:5–6 5:7 5:8–30 5:8–24 5:8–23 5:8ff 5:8 5:9 5:11–16 5:11 5:12 5:16 5:18–20 5:18–19 5:18 5:19 5:20 5:21 5:22

200 91 200 94, 196, 200 200 200 133 94 50 84 83, 84 91 331, 333 45, 50, 52, 66, 132 83, 198 273 264, 334 128 91 138 83 91, 142, 321 110 83, 91, 237 91 83 48, 94 7, 83, 110, 136–138, 154, 318 84 50, 84 110 83, 110 84 136 137 135 83, 110, 137 50, 84 110 137, 256 7, 83 80 91, 110, 142, 318, 321 83, 91 91, 95, 137 7, 80, 91, 99, 160, 170 91, 92, 137 137 137

Source Index 5:23 5:24–30 5:24 5:25–30 5:25 5:29 6–39 6–12 6–8 6

6:1–9:6 6:1–8:18 6:1–8:16 6:1–13 6:1–11 6:1–10 6:1–9 6:1–8 6:1–7 6:1–5 6:1–4 6:1–3 6:1 6:3–4 6:3 6:4 6:5–7 6:5

6:6–7 6:6 6:7 6:8–11 6:8–10

83 137 80, 83, 84, 91, 162, 333 136 136, 137 154 5, 50, 52, 142, 144, 157, 206 52, 133 50, 67 1–3, 5, 7, 9, 27, 33, 45– 50, 52, 65, 67, 72, 73– 85, 87–91, 94, 95, 100, 101, 106, 110, 111, 114–116, 118–122, 124, 129–131, 133, 139, 141–144, 161, 162, 236, 275–277, 280, 285, 317, 320, 321 8, 73, 84, 122, 136 84, 122, 135, 136 73 SEE I SA 6 80, 131 79, 80 74 79, 118 78, 79, 82–84, 95, 105, 106, 141 92, 311, 318 47, 81, 89, 117 85, 132 48, 78–80, 82, 85, 116, 117, 275 46 46, 48, 80, 81, 85, 90, 91, 93, 111, 117, 275 46, 48, 78–81, 85, 88– 90, 93, 117, 118, 132 116, 117 48, 78–81, 84, 85, 89– 91, 93, 94, 110, 111, 117, 118, 120, 141, 237, 275, 335 78, 80, 88, 94, 111, 114, 130 94 46, 48, 80, 81, 94, 95 79, 89 1, 105, 106, 236

6:8 6:9–11 6:9–10

6:9

6:10–11 6:10

6:11–13 6:11–12 6:11

6:12–13 6:12 6:13 7–39 7–35 7–10 7–9:6 7–8 7 7:1–9:6 7:1–8:18 7:1–9 7:3–9 7:3–4 7:13 8 8:1–15

389 46–48, 78–80, 111, 117, 119 80, 129 3, 4, 6–7, 9, 46, 47, 73– 79, 81–83, 89, 95, 96, 104–106, 108, 111– 116, 130, 139–141, 155, 160–163, 170, 190, 216, 217, 235, 239, 243, 250, 276, 298, 299, 312 6, 76, 78–81, 96–100, 103, 105–108, 111– 115, 117, 118, 120, 121, 141, 162, 238, 246, 249, 260, 276 117 78–81, 96, 99–103, 105–108, 111–115, 118, 120, 141, 142, 153, 164, 170, 186, 201, 204, 216, 235, 245, 247, 249, 261, 270, 275, 280, 312, 313, 318 79, 83, 131, 134, 139, 141, 142, 157, 236 7, 132 47, 48, 74, 78–80, 82, 95, 130–132, 134, 140, 298, 299, 310 74, 79, 82, 104, 131– 133 47, 79, 117, 132 47, 81, 82, 104, 132– 134 131, 134, 139, 140 50 138 122 122 45, 52, 122, 129, 139 135 91 135 135 106 97 118, 122, 280 129

390 8:1–10 8:1–4 8:1–2 8:1 8:2 8:3–4 8:5–6 8:6 8:11–9:6 8:11–18 8:11 8:12–13 8:12 8:13–18 8:13 8:14–15 8:14 8:16–18 8:16–17 8:16 8:17–18 8:17 8:18 8:19–9:6 8:19–21 8:19–20 8:20 8:21–23 8:22–23 8:22 8:23–9:6 8:23 9 9:1–6 9:1 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:7–10:4 9:7–20 9:11 9:16 9:20 10 10:1–4 10:1 10:4 10:5–32

Source Index 126 5, 124, 126, 135 124 154, 333 124, 126 124 118 118, 162 130, 132, 136, 235 129, 130, 276, 280, 285 118, 129, 130, 276, 298 130, 131, 235 298 276 137, 276, 298 130 129, 276 94, 129, 130, 142 124, 130 5, 121–131, 235, 236, 239, 276, 331, 333 130 90, 118, 124, 129, 130, 137, 276, 298, 299 124, 129–131, 276 84, 130 126 130 123, 126, 331 130 130 235 84 131, 205 137 130 131, 235 85 85 85, 130 84, 135, 136, 138 135–137 135 135 135 154 89, 136–138 137 135 136

10:5–19 10:5 10:6 10:12 10:13 10:17 10:27–31 10:27ff 10:27 10:28–32 10:32 11 11:1–9 11:2 11:3 11:9 12:1 13–39 13–35 13–34 13–27 13–23 13 13:1–14:27 13:1–14:23 13:1 13:6–16 13:17 14–22 14:3–21 14:14 14:20 14:24–27 14:25 14:28–17:6 14:28–32 14:28–29 14:28 14:29 15:5 15:6 16:5 17:7–8 17:9–11 17:14 18–19 19:21 20 20:3 21

89, 137 137 154 136 154 94 136, 137 136 101 136 136 137 136, 142 142, 152, 319 136, 298 2, 136, 142, 319 46 55, 66 55 55 138, 139 138 32 138 55, 66, 138, 198 32, 45, 52, 65, 66 138 32–33, 65, 205, 206 138 138 93 134 66, 138 139 138 89 135 136, 138 87 85 85 265 138 138 154 138 325 45, 52, 67, 138 152 138

Source Index 21:15 21:16 21:17 22 24–27 24:1–8 24:1–3 24:1 24:3 24:4–23 24:4 24:5 24:16 24:17–18 24:18–20 24:18 24:21–23 25:4–5 25:6 25:9 26 26:9 26:10 26:13–27:11 26:20 26:21 27:7–11 27:12–13 27:17–18 28–39 28–33 28–32 28 28:1–32:20 28:1–4 28:1 28:5–6 28:7 28:9–13 28:9–12 28:11 28:12 28:14 28:15 28:17 28:21 29:1 29:9–24 29:9–12

85 85 85 138, 139 37–39, 64, 138, 139, 317 38 64 38 38 64 64 64 64 64 64 38 64 64 101 64 64 64, 128 128 38 38 38 37 38 38 138 55, 137 138 138 137 49 137, 345 49 3 137 160 118 161 21, 118 110 110 137 118, 137 7 137

29:9–10 29:9 29:10 29:11 29:13 29:14 29:15 29:16 29:17–24 29:18–19 29:18 29:20–21 29:23–24 29:23 29:24 30 30:1 30:6 30:8–14 30:8–11 30:8–9 30:8 30:9–13 30:9–11 30:9 30:12 30:15 30:18 30:19–21 30:20–21 30:22 30:27 30:30 30:33 31 31:1 32:1–4 32:2–3 32:3–4 32:3 32:5–6 32:9–11 33 33:1 33:2 33:12 33:14–16 33:15

391 3, 4, 6, 142, 260, 298, 319 102, 106 235 125 91, 128 92, 118 137 298, 310 142, 319 298 2, 3, 137 110 2 137, 298, 310 128, 137, 298 137 137, 166 87 236 334 137, 139, 140 5, 126 105 154, 155, 160, 332, 333 154, 160–161, 236, 239, 298, 331–334 110, 162, 236 160, 161 137 137 3 137 94 2, 137 94 137 137 142–143, 319 142, 298 2, 6 3, 102 110 137 67, 137 137 309 94 91 204

392 34–66 34 35 35:5–6 35:5 36–66 36–39 36–38 36–37 37:4 37:17 37:21 37:35 37:36 38–55 38–39 38 38:1 38:4 38:12 38:13 38:19 39 39:6–7 39:8 40–66

40–63 40–62 40–55

40–52 40–48 40

Source Index 67 55, 138 7, 8, 55 3 2, 142, 204, 219, 319 50 7, 45, 50, 52, 67, 139 139 8, 66 139 139 139 152 139 67 139 139 139 139 325, 326 325, 326 139 7, 66, 67, 138–140 139 71, 139 2, 5, 7, 9, 27, 31–34, 39, 48–56, 61, 62, 64–67, 71, 72, 134, 140, 143, 239, 266, 296, 302, 305, 306, 308, 310, 314–319, 321 310, 311 4 4, 6, 8, 16, 25, 48, 50, 51, 53–55, 62, 63, 65, 67–69, 71, 72, 140, 143, 150, 152, 175– 177, 188, 189, 196, 197, 203–205, 208, 210, 213, 219, 226, 228, 241, 242, 244, 245, 247–249, 252– 257, 259, 260, 266, 277–279, 285–287, 296, 297, 301, 309, 310, 314, 316, 319, 320, 323, 324, 331, 334 34 19, 25, 32, 33, 205, 206 33, 47, 49, 67, 277–280

40:1–63:6 40:1–53:12 40:1–49:13 40:1–48:22 40:1–44:23 40:1–11

40:1–8 40:1–5 40:1–3 40:1–2 40:1 40:2 40:3–8 40:3–5 40:3 40:5–28 40:5 40:6–8 40:6–7 40:6 40:7–8 40:7 40:8 40:9–11 40:9 40:10–11 40:10 40:11 40:12–49:15 40:12–42:13 40:12–42:9 40:12–31 40:12 40:14 40:20 40:21 40:22 40:26 40:27 40:28–29 40:28 41–44 41:1–44:22

287, 297, 299–302, 308–311, 313 176 218, 219 71 176, 177 33, 45–51, 66, 69, 70, 224, 240, 279, 300– 302, 316, 321 277, 278 48 277 46, 47, 49, 52, 228, 300 46, 52, 65, 67, 218, 276, 277, 299 46, 48, 68, 198, 227, 277, 300, 327 146, 176, 226 46, 49, 300 46, 47, 51, 228, 277, 300 4 46, 67, 305, 306 47–49, 51, 53, 67, 298, 300 48 5, 46, 47, 49–52, 277 47 46, 53 47–49, 67 47–49, 52, 198, 300 47, 49, 51, 273, 278 49 47, 278, 300, 305, 306 253, 256 53 163 69 163, 164 62 128, 175 196 4, 99, 164 62 62, 164 163, 226 163 62, 164, 175 205 177

Source Index 41:1–42:9 41:1–20 41:1–4 41:2–4 41:2 41:8–20 41:8–9 41:8 41:9 41:10–14 41:10 41:11 41:14 41:15 41:16 41:17–20 41:17–19 41:20 41:21–42:17 41:21–42:9 41:21–29 41:21–28 41:21–24 41:22 41:25 41:26 41:27–42:9 41:27 42 42:1–43:7 42:1–13 42:1–9

42:1–4 42:1 42:3 42:4 42:5–17 42:5–9 42:5–8 42:5–7 42:6–7 42:6 42:7

166, 169 163 62, 65, 164, 198, 210 63 32–33, 334 151, 164 198, 297 134, 151, 196 151, 196 164 62 63 166 203 225 63 164 4, 99, 150, 164, 225 176 151, 163 32, 62, 65, 164, 206 198, 206, 210 32 32 32–33, 334 33, 205, 206, 334 224 33 279 288 176 50, 51, 150–153, 155, 163, 164, 168, 180, 188, 215, 216, 224, 279, 319, 325, 326, 331, 341 151, 152, 177, 224, 278, 330, 331 152, 277, 278 278 153 176 51, 177, 206 278 164 6, 152 152 3, 6, 152, 153, 164, 180, 185, 319, 324, 326, 342

42:8 42:9 42:10–44:8 42:10–43:8 42:10–17 42:10–13 42:10–12 42:11 42:13–43:21 42:13–16 42:13 42:14–44:23

42:14–44:22 42:14–44:8 42:14–43:13 42:14–17 42:14–16 42:14 42:15–16 42:15 42:16 42:17 42:18–44:23 42:18–43:21 42:18–43:15 42:18–43:13 42:18–43:10 42:18–43:8 42:18–43:7 42:18–25

42:18–23 42:18–22 42:18–21 42:18–20 42:18–19

393 195 33 177 176 177, 185, 309 69, 163, 177 177 68 176 177 68 144, 151, 163, 164, 176, 178, 179, 185, 186, 188, 189, 207, 213, 214, 217, 246, 313 69 176 176 176–180, 184, 185, 298 178 156, 180, 185 178, 185 180, 185, 229 3, 4, 156, 180, 182, 184–186, 232, 324, 342 180, 185 164, 177 176 178, 181, 183, 186, 214 180 176 166 145, 176 3–5, 140, 144–146, 149–151, 153, 155– 159, 162–164, 166, 168, 169, 175, 176, 178–182, 185–187, 206, 207, 213, 214, 217, 226, 237, 242, 243, 247, 254, 297, 317–319, 323, 326, 327, 329, 331 145, 330 146, 150 3, 146 2, 4, 7, 146–147, 180, 187, 226, 325 4, 8, 153, 156, 160, 168

394 42:18

42:19–21 42:19

42:20–22 42:20

42:21–25 42:21–24 42:21–22 42:21 42:22–25 42:22–24 42:22 42:23–25 42:23–24 42:23

42:24–25 42:24

42:25

43:1–7 43:1 43:2 43:3–4 43:3 43:5 43:6 43:7 43:8–13

Source Index 21, 144–147, 149–152, 155, 156, 158–160, 162, 177, 178, 184, 187, 249, 323, 327, 329, 330 145 144–147, 149, 150, 152, 153, 155, 156, 159, 160, 225, 249, 323–326, 329, 330 146 144, 146, 147, 149, 151, 153, 156, 157, 159, 160, 327–329 146, 149, 153, 226 147 146, 148, 150, 331 145–149, 152, 153, 329–331 146, 327 147 145, 148, 149, 153, 154, 330 146, 157 145–148, 335 144–145, 148–150, 155, 158–160, 162, 180, 187, 226, 232, 324, 335 145–146, 150, 156, 330 144–149, 153–155, 157, 158, 160, 161, 185, 187, 264, 329, 330, 332–336 144–149, 151, 157, 160, 166, 187, 250, 253, 330, 336 167, 178–183, 186, 241, 329 62, 178, 180, 182, 198, 297 183, 184, 198, 214, 309 181, 211 42, 167, 181, 182 62 181, 184 169, 297 5, 7, 62, 65, 144, 155, 165–168, 175, 176, 178, 179, 181, 184–

43:8–10 43:8–9 43:8

43:9–44:5 43:9–10 43:9 43:10–13 43:10

43:11–44:5 43:11 43:12 43:13 43:14–44:23 43:14–44:5 43:14–21 43:14–15 43:14 43:15 43:16–44:22 43:16–28

43:16–21 43:16 43:18–21 43:18 43:19–20 43:19 43:22–45:8 43:22–44:23 43:22–28 43:22–27 43:22–24 43:22 43:24 43:25 43:26 43:27 44:1–5 44:1 44:2

186, 188, 198, 237, 243, 246, 339 187 166 2–4, 8, 140, 165–171, 178, 181, 184, 185, 217, 249 176 166–167 165–167, 169, 184 167, 169, 180 4, 165, 166, 170, 171, 175, 180, 181, 185, 187, 188, 196, 246, 248, 313 176 165, 167, 181 165–167, 180, 184 165, 167, 176 176 176 178 55, 176, 178, 179, 181, 184–187, 229 178, 181, 182, 184, 297 181, 185 178, 183 178, 179, 182–184, 186, 189, 207, 213, 214, 217, 227, 242, 247, 319 178 178 183 182 183 183 176 176 178, 182, 183 182 273 194 182 213, 310 228 62, 182, 213 178, 179, 183, 186 178, 184 184, 326, 327

Source Index 44:3–4 44:3 44:6–28 44:6–23 44:6–20 44:6–9 44:6–8 44:6 44:7 44:8 44:9–20 44:9–11 44:9 44:10 44:11 44:12–17 44:16–17 44:16 44:17 44:18–20 44:18–19 44:18 44:19–20 44:19 44:20 44:21–45:19 44:21–23 44:21–22 44:21 44:22 44:23 44:24–49:13 44:24–49:12 44:24–45:8 44:24–28 44:24–26 44:24 44:25 44:26–28 44:26 44:27 44:28 45:1–7 45:1

183 278 176 176, 178 65, 144, 171, 174–176, 179, 183, 185–187, 198 188 171, 172, 176, 178, 198, 246, 339 178 172, 175 172, 175, 180 4, 171, 172, 176–178, 180, 185, 246 171–173 172–176, 186 173 172, 173 171–173, 175 173 173, 175 172, 173 171–173, 176, 186 174 3, 4, 6, 7, 98, 172–175, 186, 250 173 173–175 172–176 177 176 176, 179, 183–185, 187, 227 178, 184 62, 184, 185, 342 68, 69, 177–179, 208 68, 71, 188–190, 207– 210, 216–218 69 178, 208–210, 213, 215 208, 210 210, 220 62, 208 175 62, 210 198, 325–327 210, 229 198, 210, 325 51, 62, 208, 210, 279 208

45:3 45:5–7 45:5 45:6 45:7 45:8 45:9–17 45:9–13 45:9–11 45:9–10 45:11–48:21 45:11–46:13 45:11–19 45:11–13 45:11 45:12–13 45:12 45:13 45:14–46:2 45:14–17 45:14 45:14–25 45:14–15 45:15 45:16–17 45:16 45:17 45:18–19 45:18 45:19 45:20–46:13 45:20–25 45:20–21 45:20 45:21 45:22–25 45:22 45:23 45:22 45:24 46–48 46:1–4 46:1–2 46:1 46:3–13 46:3–7 46:3 46:4 46:7

395 210 210 210 210 210 63, 68, 144, 208, 210, 215, 242, 317 211 177, 211 213, 298 208–211, 215 209 209 211, 310 152, 209, 211 209, 211 63 62, 211, 212 33, 62, 211 176 198, 209, 211, 241 209, 211 176 146 211, 212 172 212 211 209, 211 62, 209, 211, 212 212 217 198, 210, 212, 213, 215 62 98, 209, 211, 213, 250 209, 211, 213, 334 209, 211, 213 212 209, 213 172, 209 172 199, 214 42 199, 208, 209, 212, 213 42 199, 210, 212–214, 217 209, 213 21, 209, 213 213 213, 309

396 46:8–13 46:8–11 46:8 46:9–11 46:12–13 46:12

46:13 47–48 47 47:1–48:16 47:1–48:11 47:1–7 47:1–4 47:1 47:4 47:5–7 47:5 47:6 47:7 47:8–11 47:8–9 47:8 47:9 47:10 47:11 47:12–15 47:12 47:13 47:14 47:15 48 48:1–11

48:1–8 48:1–2 48:1

48:2 48:3–11 48:3–8 48:3–6 48:3

Source Index 217, 242 207, 209, 213 190, 209, 213, 217 62 207, 209, 213 21, 62, 63, 209, 213, 216, 217, 239, 241, 249, 317, 318 198, 199, 213, 215, 216, 240, 241 214 48, 55, 63, 198, 199, 210, 214, 274, 300, 302 209 217 190 209 190, 199, 209 214 209 190, 199, 203, 209 101, 310 185, 274 209 300 150, 199, 209 199, 274 175, 185, 199 199 199, 209 209, 274 274 274 274 71, 199 5, 7, 33, 65, 155, 168, 188–191, 193, 197, 199, 201, 207–210, 214, 215, 217, 218, 285, 297, 317, 318 195, 199, 200 190–193, 199, 200, 216 21, 150, 190, 191, 193, 194, 197–200, 207, 209, 239, 241, 242, 249 191, 193, 194, 200 200 33 190, 192, 194, 198 190, 192, 193, 199, 203

48:4 48:5 48:6–8 48:6–7 48:6 48:7–8 48:7 48:8–10 48:8

48:9–11 48:9 48:10–11 48:10 48:11 48:12–21 48:12–16 48:12–14 48:12–13 48:12 48:14–15 48:14 48:15 48:16

48:17–21 48:17–19 48:17 48:19 48:20–52:12 48:20–21

48:20 48:22 49–55 49–54 49

3, 189–194, 197, 199– 203, 216 190, 191, 193, 194, 197, 199, 203–205 33, 192–194, 198, 201, 203, 207, 297 190, 194, 203 191–193, 197, 200, 204, 215 189, 216 189–193, 197, 199, 203, 204, 207, 216 190, 191 3, 62, 140, 190, 192– 194, 197, 199, 200, 203–207, 214, 216, 217, 219, 227, 235, 239, 241–243, 247 192, 193, 199, 200, 214, 215 193, 195, 197, 310 190 193, 195–197, 200, 203, 204, 227, 261 190, 191, 193, 195, 197 192 206, 215 214 209, 214 190, 209 62, 209, 214 209, 334 334 51, 150, 209, 210, 214– 218, 226, 242, 247, 277, 279, 297 208, 209, 215 209 128, 209, 214 200 220 55, 65, 68, 188, 209, 210, 214–218, 228, 240, 245, 247, 276, 313 55, 68, 209, 297 63, 68, 71, 208, 209, 215 239 324 273, 279

Source Index 49:1–57:21 49:1–50:9 49:1–50:3 49:1–23 49:1–12 49:1–6 49:1ff 49:1 49:3 49:4 49:7–13 49:7–10 49:7 49:8–13 49:8–12 49:8–10 49:8 49:9 49:13 49:14–55:13 49:14–52:10 49:14–52:8 49:14–51:3 49:14–50:11 49:14–26 49:14ff 49:14 49:16 49:17ff 49:18–22 49:22–50:3 49:22–50:1 49:22 49:24–50:3 49:25 50

50:1–51:8 50:1–11 50:1–3 50:1–2 50:1 50:2–3

71 220 220 220 151, 152, 208, 209, 215, 224, 226, 242, 319 51, 152, 208, 215, 224, 226 224 200, 208, 215 216, 341 231, 278 224 341 208, 243, 324, 325, 341 220 208, 216, 247 341, 342 208 228 68, 69, 177, 208, 209 218, 219, 247 219, 237, 239, 241, 242 69 220 220, 240 53, 65, 239, 240, 301 40 226, 227 240 215 240 220 220 53, 220, 228, 240 220 220, 240 151, 219, 220, 223, 224, 227, 233, 234, 237, 239–242, 279, 297, 317, 319 220, 246 SEE I SA 50 220, 221, 223, 224, 226–228, 231–233, 247 53, 237, 240 221, 223, 226–228, 233, 237, 240 220, 221, 223, 228– 231, 234

50:2 50:3 50:4–52:12 50:4–11 50:4–9

50:4–6 50:4–5 50:4 50:5 50:6 50:7–9 50:7 50:7–8 50:8–9 50:8 50:9 50:10–51:20 50:10–11 50:10

50:11

51–52 51 51:1–52:10 51:1–8 51:1–3 51:1–2 51:1 51:2 51:3 51:4–8 51:4–6 51:4–5 51:4 51:5 51:6–8

397 221, 223, 226–229, 232, 270 220, 221 220 220, 224 5, 51, 152, 220, 221, 223, 224, 226, 230, 231, 233–235, 238, 241, 247, 278 235, 236 6, 221, 222, 230, 234, 236, 239, 241, 318, 338 51, 128, 219, 222, 233, 235–238, 278, 338, 339 8, 204, 222, 231, 234, 236 222, 230, 231, 237 221, 222, 230, 231, 243 222, 223, 231, 237 223, 231 222, 223, 230, 233 223, 233, 245 221–223, 226, 230, 231, 234 220 221, 223, 225, 226, 233, 342 219–221, 223–227, 230–237, 240, 241, 243, 247, 279, 297, 318, 338–341 63, 150, 221, 223–225, 227, 229, 230, 233, 234, 237, 243 214 239 53, 240 219, 237–242, 244, 247, 249, 319 238 221, 239, 241 221, 238, 240, 241 238, 297 68, 238 221 238, 239 238 239–241, 331 63 221

398 51:6 51:7–8 51:7 51:8 51:9–52:10 51:9–52:9 51:9 51:10 51:12–52:10 51:16 51:17 51:19 51:22–23 51:22 52:1–2 52:1 52:3–6 52:4 52:7–10 52:7–8 52:8 52:9–10 52:9 52:10–12 52:11–55:13 52:11–53:12 52:11–53:10 52:11–53:1 52:11–15 52:11–12 52:11 52:12 52:13–53:12

52:13–15 52:13 52:14–15 52:14 52:15–53:1 52:15 53 53:1–10

53:1 53:2 53:3 53:4

Source Index 239, 241 63, 238, 248 238–244, 246, 247, 279, 317, 319 238, 241 240, 241 53 240 309 240 278 48, 240 199 48 203 199, 300 240 300 38 227, 241 256, 300 253, 256 68, 69 68 55 237, 242, 245 69 245 245 249 65, 240, 245, 247, 313 228, 245 54, 245 151, 152, 219, 224, 242, 245–247, 278, 279, 317, 321 243 85, 245 245 244 246, 248, 313, 321 4, 243, 244, 245 6, 146, 279 242–247, 249, 279, 281, 286, 302, 313, 314, 318, 319 242, 245, 246 244 243, 244 242

53:5–6 53:5 53:6 53:7 53:10 53:11–12 53:11 53:12 54–55 54 54:1–17 54:1–4 54:1–3 54:1 54:4–10 54:5–10 54:8 54:13 54:16 54:17 55 55:1–13 55:1–5 55:1–3 55:1 55:2–5 55:2–3 55:2 55:3–5 55:3 55:6 55:7 55:8–9 55:10–11 55:11 55:12–13 56–66

56–62 56–59 56–58 56

321 103, 104, 245 63, 242, 245, 256, 297, 348 63 63, 134, 175, 278, 279, 330 242, 244 63, 242–244, 246, 297 242 239 53, 65, 68, 214, 245, 273, 300 69 300 245 68, 69, 245 245 300 298, 310 128, 245 203 134, 150, 225, 245, 248, 279, 301, 310, 324 67, 68, 245, 256, 265 69 297 255, 260 248, 253, 255, 256 247, 313 6, 99, 247, 248 99, 246, 247, 253, 255, 256 247, 248 21, 100, 247, 255, 277 264 264 264 67 67, 330 68, 69, 245, 248 4, 8, 16, 35, 50, 51, 53– 55, 64, 65, 67, 69–72, 140, 143, 226, 248, 249, 254, 266, 276, 316, 319, 324, 346 53 53 272 67

Source Index 56:1–66:17 56:1–63:6 56:1–8 56:2 56:3–7 56:4 56:5 56:6–7 56:6 56:7 56:8 56:9–66:24 56:9–59:21

56:9–59:8 56:9–57:21 56:9–57:13 56:9–57:12 56:9–57:2

56:9–12 56:9 56:10–57:2 56:10–12 56:10–11 56:10 56:11–12 56:11 56:12 57 57:1–21 57:1–12 57:1–13 57:1–2 57:1 57:2 57:3–13 57:3 57:4 57:5–7 57:5 57:6–13

39 48, 286, 301 69, 70, 260, 272 68 68 68 68 259 68, 259 67, 68, 259 251 260 249, 250, 260, 271– 273, 275, 280, 281, 285, 287, 301 272 69–71, 249, 250, 275 69, 271, 274 272 2, 5, 55, 140, 249–256, 260, 272, 274, 276, 280, 281, 285, 297, 317, 318 250, 253, 272 70, 250, 251, 253, 255, 256, 258, 265, 271 3 253 4, 250, 251 8, 249–251, 255, 259, 260, 269, 271 250, 251, 256, 260 249–253, 255, 256, 258–260, 274 251, 253, 256 274, 279, 280 250 272 250 250, 252, 255, 257– 259, 271, 272, 274, 275 4, 249–251, 253, 255, 257, 258, 260, 272 250, 251, 257–259 55, 64, 272–274, 280 70, 250, 271, 272, 274 272 273 273 273, 274

57:6–8 57:6 57:7–8 57:7 57:8–10 57:8 57:9 57:10 57:11–13 57:11 57:12 57:13 57:14–59:21 57:14–21 57:14–19 57:14

57:15 57:16–19 57:16 57:17–18 57:17 57:18 57:19–21 57:19 57:20–21 57:21 58–62 58–59 58 58:1–66:24 58:1–59:21 58:1–59:15 58:1–59:13 58:1–14 58:1–12 58:1–4 58:1–3 58:1–2 58:1

58:2–4 58:2–3 58:2

399 273 273 259 273, 274 273 273 344 265, 274 273 265, 274 274 273, 274 301 69, 270–272, 274, 275, 279, 280 275–277, 279, 281 51, 65, 70, 250, 268, 271, 274, 276, 277, 279–281, 285, 297, 318 265, 274–276, 279 274 310 274, 310 153, 274, 276, 277, 298 274, 275, 277, 325 272, 274 271, 272, 275 63, 271, 272, 275 71, 271 282, 284 64, 70, 261, 263, 266, 268, 281 266, 268, 269, 282, 284, 285, 301, 318 71 70, 264, 272, 275, 280, 285, 317, 319 268, 270, 297 272 272 267 69, 263, 267 262 261, 262 49, 51, 70, 267, 268, 270, 271, 277–281, 285, 297, 318, 346 264, 266, 307 263, 265 261, 263–266, 270

400 58:3–14 58:3–12 58:3–5 58:3–4 58:3 58:4 58:5–59:20 58:5–14 58:5–12 58:5–9 58:5–6 58:5 58:6–12 58:6 58:7–14 58:7–11 58:7–9 58:7 58:8 58:9–12 58:9–11 58:9–10 58:9 58:10 58:11 58:13–14 58:13 58:14 59–64 59 59:1–20 59:1–15 59:1–13 59:1–8 59:1–4 59:1–3 59:1 59:2 59:3 59:4–15 59:4 59:5–15 59:5–14 59:5–8 59:5 59:6

Source Index 263 261, 267 268 262–266, 269 261, 263, 265, 266, 269, 271, 280, 281 263, 265 266 266 262 262 262 262, 263 268 262 267, 268, 275, 282 284 262, 269, 270 262, 263, 267, 270, 282, 284 54 262, 263, 269 54 64 262, 263, 267, 270, 282, 284 262, 263, 267, 282, 284 262, 267, 282, 284 261–263, 282, 284 263, 269, 282 282 272 262, 264 269 69, 263, 266–268 272 64, 264, 318 262, 264 263 102, 204, 261, 269, 280, 281 270, 298 267, 269 270 263, 269 264 297, 302 262, 263, 270, 297, 302 267 267

59:7 59:8 59:9–15

59:9–14 59:9–13 59:9–12 59:9–11 59:9–10 59:9 59:10–15 59:10 59:11 59:12–15 59:12–13 59:12 59:13 59:14–60:22 59:14–20 59:14–15 59:14 59:15–21 59:15–20 59:15–19 59:15–16 59:15 59:16 59:17–18 59:17 59:18 59:19–20 59:19 59:20–21 59:20 59:21–62:12 59:21–60:22 59:21 60–62 60 60:1–63:6 60:1–62:9 60:1–22 60:1–3 60:1–2

267 261, 270, 271, 282 70, 262–264, 270, 272, 281, 282, 285, 286, 314, 318 297, 302 263 271 283 4 283 267, 268 3, 8, 140, 261, 270, 271, 280–283 268, 283 283 273 261, 267, 270, 271, 280–282 267, 269 272 272 263 268 264 63, 69, 262, 264, 268, 272, 275, 284, 301 301 264 264, 284 264, 284 264 264, 284 262, 284, 325, 326 264, 301 264, 301, 302 262 264, 267, 302 272 262 49, 70, 262, 270, 272, 277–279, 315 69, 268 40–41, 53, 65, 70, 259, 273, 300, 301 296 70 272 41, 283, 300, 301 41

Source Index 60:1 60:4 60:7 60:8–9 60:10 60:11 60:13 60:18–22 60:20 61 61:1–62:12 61:1–9 61:1–4 61:1–3 61:1ff 61:1 61:3–11 61:4–7 61:5–6 61:8 61:9 61:10–62:9 62 62:1 62:2–9 62:2–8 62:8–9 62:10–63:6 62:10–12 62:10 62:11 62:12 63–64 63:1–64:11 63:1–7 63:1–6 63:1–3 63:1 63:3 63:6 63:7–65:7 63:7–64:11

63:7–14 63:7–9 63:7

283 300 39–41 300 303 203, 204 39–41 301 325 51, 70, 277, 278 262 278 51 33, 49–51, 278, 279, 346 224 152, 256 301 300 278 278 278 278 70, 278 49, 283, 298, 301, 346 53 301 278 70, 259, 300, 302 70, 301 300 300–302, 305 301, 310 37, 288 288 55 63, 69 302 302 336 336 288 8, 34–37, 41, 48, 69, 70, 286–288, 292, 296– 299, 302, 307–311, 313, 314, 317, 318, 343 294 288 49, 278, 288, 291–293, 295, 346

63:8–14 63:8–11 63:8–10 63:8–9 63:8 63:9 63:10–14 63:10 63:11–14 63:11 63:12–14 63:12–13 63:12 63:13–14 63:13 63:14 63:15–64:11 63:15–19 63:15–17 63:15–16 63:15

63:16 63:17–18 63:17

63:18–19 63:18 63:19–64:3 63:19 64:1 64:2–3 64:2 64:3 64:4–6

401 288, 292–296, 307 288 288, 289, 293 289, 344 288, 289, 291, 292, 294, 296, 309, 343 288, 289, 291–293, 296, 343 288 36, 288, 289, 292, 293, 295, 298, 344, 345 288, 289, 293, 294 36, 288, 289, 291–295, 298, 310, 345 296 292 36, 289, 292, 294, 296, 310 289 309 36, 288, 292–294, 296, 345 288, 289, 312 290 289–291, 293, 312 309 36, 49, 278, 288, 290– 294, 296, 309, 310, 345, 346 36, 290–294, 296, 309, 345 288 2–6, 140, 275, 286, 287, 290, 292, 295– 299, 307, 311, 312, 314 290, 291, 294 36, 288, 291, 292, 298 287, 290, 291, 294, 296, 313, 346, 348 36, 290, 292, 294, 296, 297, 346, 347 36, 287, 290, 292, 294, 296, 313, 347 294, 346, 347 290, 292, 294, 295, 298, 310, 313, 346, 347 287, 290, 292, 295, 298, 313 290, 291, 295, 346, 348

402 64:4 64:5 64:6 64:7 64:8–11 64:8 64:9–10 64:9 64:10 64:11 65–66 65:1–66:14 65:1–25 65:1–16 65:1–7 65:1 65:1–5 65:5 65:6–16 65:6–7 65:6 65:8–12 65:8–10 65:8 65:10 65:12–12 65:11 65:12–15 65:12 65:13–16 65:13 65:15 65:17–66:14 65:17–25 65:17–18 65:17 65:25 66 66:1–21 66:1–11 66:1–6 66:1–4 66:1–2 66:1 66:2

Source Index 290, 291, 292, 294– 296, 348 290–292, 294, 296, 348 36, 290–292, 294–296, 299, 348 290–292, 294, 296 288, 291, 293 288, 291, 292, 295– 297, 310 34–36, 39, 41, 293, 296, 299 291, 292, 298 42, 291, 292 288, 291, 296, 297, 307 34–37, 39, 44, 53, 70, 272, 303–306, 314 303, 307 303 69 303 307 304–306 36–37 63, 306, 308 304, 305, 307 305, 325, 326 304, 305, 307 307 304, 305 307 307 67, 307 304 307, 308, 314 304, 305, 307, 314, 315 304, 305 304 306–308 63, 69, 304, 305 304 305 67 67, 273 303 304, 305 69 39 34, 39–40 39–40, 304, 305 39–40, 308, 314

66:3–4 66:3 66:4 66:5 66:6 66:7–24 66:10–11 66:11 66:12–14 66:12 66:13 66:14–18 66:14 66:15–24 66:15 66:16 66:17–24 66:18–24 66:18 66:19 66:20 66:21 66:22 66:23 66:24

40 39 308 35–37, 44, 67, 314 39, 325, 326 69 304 67 304, 305 304, 305 67 63 67, 99 305–307 305, 336 67, 305 303 305 67 67 67, 68 68 63, 305 67, 68, 303 67, 71, 230, 315

Jeremiah 1–52 1 1:1–3 1:5 1:8 2:4 2:24 2:33 3 3:22 4:1–2 5:3 5:28 6:17 6:29–30 7:12 7:18 7:26 8:8 8:22 9:6 10:1 10:27

128, 205, 206, 311, 336 83 22 152 166 21 128 128 227 104, 109, 110 194 202 101 254 195, 196 258 153 201, 202 333 103 196 21 336

403

Source Index 12:7–13 12:9 12:10 12:11 12:16 13:15 13:21 13:22 13:23 13:26 14:18 16:18 17:12 17:23 19:15 22:5 22:19 23 23:1 25:9 25:17 25:36–37 27:18 29:6 29:14 32:10–14 32:31 33:5 33:26 36 36:6–10 36:25 39:17 42:18 44:3 48:2 48:43–44 49:13 51:3 51:6 51:64 52:21 Lamentations 1–5 1:9 1:11 1:20 2:4

253 253 253 253 194 21, 97 128 85 128 85 98 48 86 201, 202 202 166 153 254 166 166 48 93 348 99 166 125 336 336 134 21 20 348 166 336 258 93 38 166 48 48 258 336

44, 205, 206, 309, 310, 311 85, 269 269 269 336

2:13 3:7 3:50 3:58 4:2 4:6 4:11 4:21–22 4:22 5:22 Ezekiel 1–48 2:4 2:7 3 3:4 3:5–6 3:7

103 101 309 309 310 48 336 55 48 310

3:16–21 3:17 5:3 7:8 9:8 10:4 10:6 10:20 14:9 20:8 20:13 20:21 28:12 32:2 33:1–9 33:2 33:6 33:7 34 37–48 37:6 37:8 44:5 44:6

46, 55, 190, 332, 336 201, 202 332 83 106 101 162, 201, 202, 312, 332, 333 256 254 124 336 336 89 94 99 336 332, 333, 336 336 336 125 93 256 254 254 254 254 32 202 202 333 332

Daniel 7–11 9 9:16 9:24

32 21 336 125

404

Source Index

12:4 12:8 12:9

125 98, 99 125

Hosea 1–14 2 4 4:1 4:5–6 4:14 4:19 5:1 5:3 6:1 6:10 6:11–7:1 7:1 8:4 10:15 11:1–6 11:1 11:5 11:7–11 11:8–9 11:10 11:11–16 11:11 11:14 12:7–9 13:4–14:10 14:2–9 14:2–4 14:2 14:5–9 14:5 14:10

227 38 38 21 93 98 124 21, 90 90 104 90 104 109 98 258 37 37 37–38 37–38 38 37 38 37, 38 38 109 38 110, 133 104 109 109 109 21

Joel 1:2 3:1 4:11

21 152 339

Amos 1–9 2:4 3:1 4:1

46, 70, 105 333 21 21

5 5:1 5:19 6:3 7:15 9:1–4

38 21 349 36 106 89

Obadiah 1–21

55

Jonah 1–4 1:2 1:14 3:2

1 106 330 106

Micah 1:2 1:3 1:5 2:10 3:1 3:2 3:9 5:14 6:1 6:9

97 38 334 90 21 97 21 336 21 21

Nahum 1–3 2:11 3:5

205 38 85

Haggai 2:3 2:4 2:6–9 2:6 2:20–23

226, 232 166 41 41 41

Zechariah 1–14 7:11 8–13 9:9–10 10:10–11 13:9

320 102, 204, 261, 270 32 152 38 196

405

Source Index

New Testament Matthew 1–28

104

Mark 1–16

104

Luke 1–24

104

John 1–21

32

Revelation 1–22 8:5

32 94

Apokrypha Sirach 38:24 39:1

21 21

Old Testament Pseudepigrapha 1 Enoch 61:10 71:6

87 87

Other Ancient Sources Qumran 1QH 2:39 7:10 7:14 8:36 1QIsa a

1QIsa b

124, 128 128 128 128 47, 49, 67, 169, 196, 199, 203, 244, 251, 304, 305, 328, 334, 336, 338, 341, 346 169, 244, 338

CD 20:4

128

4QIsa d

244

Classical Aristotle Rhetoric 1.2.1356a 1.3.3–4

158 25

Herodotus History 3.17–25

42

Author Index Abma, R. 221, 228 Ackermann, S. 273 Ackroyd, P. R. 17, 46, 79, 128, 139 Adams, J.W. 23–24 Aejmelaeus, A. 288, 295, 297, 303, 308, 310, 312, 346 Aitken, K. T. 8 Albertz, R. 42–43, 46, 109, 205 Allen, L. C. 337 Allis, O. T. 31 Alt, A. 43 Alonso-Schökel, A. 80 Anderson, B. W. 136 Andersen, F. I. 36, 333 Aristotle 24–25, 30, 158 Assmann, J. 56–61, 92, 268 Auld, A. G. 15, 20 Auret, A. 86 Austin, J. L. 13–14, 23, 112 Bakker, E. J. 19 Baldauf, B. 145, 148, 151, 156, 323, 324, 326, 330, 336 Baltzer, K. 93, 146, 150, 156, 158, 165, 169, 170, 177, 181, 182, 192, 195, 196, 201, 211, 220–222, 228, 244, 278, 325, 328, 335, 338, 340 Barker, M. 86, 94 Barré, M. L. 263, 265 Barstad, H. M. 15, 42–43, 54–55, 185 Bartelt, A. H. 84, 135, 136 Barth, H. 32, 123, 126, 132 Barthel, J. 3, 46, 74, 75, 83, 87, 88, 94, 102, 108, 118, 119, 122, 126, 128, 129, 131, 132, 161, 331–334 Barton, J. 10, 23 Bayer, O. 1–2 Beale, G. K. 76, 96, 114, 133 Becker, J. 71, 134–135, 205

Becker, U. 1, 3, 4, 74, 75, 79–81, 85, 91, 92, 103, 107, 122, 139, 154, 161, 331, 332 Bedford, P. R. 41 Beek, M. A. 343, 344 Begg, C. T. 214 Begrich, J. 107, 135, 144, 167, 170, 191, 220, 228, 338 Béguerie, P. 94 Ben Zvi, E. 15, 17–18, 20–23, 30, 45 Berges, U. 22, 31, 32, 39–42, 53, 74, 79, 80, 96, 102, 107, 115, 177, 226, 234, 236, 240, 261, 267, 275, 297–299, 346 Bergman, J. 98, 99, 269 Berlin, A. 193 Berquist, J. L. 42–44 Beuken, W. A. M. 3, 22, 35, 75, 84, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 95, 99, 102, 103, 122, 123, 131, 132, 134–136, 139, 145, 146, 148, 150–152, 165, 169–173, 177, 181, 182, 191, 194, 199, 200, 211, 215, 220–223, 225, 228–230, 233, 237, 253, 255–258, 271, 273, 274, 277–279, 283, 288, 290, 297– 299, 303, 304, 306, 307, 309, 310, 323, 325, 326, 328–330, 334, 338, 339, 341, 342, 346, 348 Bickert, R. 135 Biddle, M. E. 273, 274 Blenkinsopp, J. 22, 31, 36, 42–43, 47– 48, 74, 85, 87, 90, 93, 123, 132, 136, 145, 170, 171, 180–182, 200, 204, 210, 220, 222, 226, 229, 251, 257, 262, 269, 277–279, 297, 303, 323, 324, 328, 333, 336, 339, 340, 345, 346 Block, D. I. 202 Blum, E. 74, 84, 114, 115, 122, 135, 136, 160

Author Index Böckler, A. 311 Boer, P. A. H. de 177, 212, 338, 340, 341 Bonnard, P.-E. 36, 166, 169, 171, 172, 182, 222, 229, 230, 251, 257, 258, 261, 262, 277, 304, 339, 341 Bons, E. 333 Booth, W. C. 105 Bosshard-Nepustil, E. 31, 32, 40 Botterweck, G. J. 98, 99, 269 Bright, J. 77 Brockelmann, C. 127 Brongers, H. A. 250, 263 Brown, W. P. 136 Brownlee, W. H. 67 Broyles, C. C. 17 Brueggemann, W. 17, 46, 48, 50, 75, 88 Buber, M. 75 Budde, K. 81, 121–122 Bühlmann, W. 221, 223, 264 Carr, D. M. 304 Carroll, R. P. 15, 20, 22, 23, 54, 74, 75, 77, 116, 127, 130 Carter, C. E. 43–44 Cazelles, H. 74, 94 Childs, B. S. 17, 33, 46, 49, 75, 87, 93, 94, 135, 136, 146, 172, 180, 182, 194, 203, 205, 211, 212, 215, 220, 228, 229, 257, 271, 326, 340, 342, 343, 345 Chisholm, Jr., R. B. 31, 76, 96, 114 Clements, R. E. 3, 4, 32, 74, 76, 91, 93, 96, 115, 122, 124, 128, 175, 235, 283 Clifford, R. J. 171, 176, 191, 211, 214, 215, 235, 247, 288, 289, 294, 338, 344, 345 Coggins, R. 74 Collins, T. 16 Conrad, E. W. 4–5, 17, 30, 50, 139 Corney, R. W. 341 Couroyer, B. 201 Cowley, A. E. 153 Craigie, P. C. 128 Crenshaw, J. L. 19, 113 Cross, Jr., F. M. 46 Crüsemann, F. 109 Culley, R. C. 19 Dandamaev, A. 44

407

Darr, K. P. 17, 31, 45, 50, 177, 180, 184 Davies, A. 17, 31, 77, 116 Davies, P. R. 15, 17–18, 20–23 Day, J. 38, 87, 88, 273 Deck, S. 79, 106–107 Delitzsch, F. 36, 71, 85, 94, 101, 121, 123, 129, 139, 153, 158, 168, 169, 195, 196, 199, 203, 211, 215, 220, 222, 225, 228, 257, 325, 326, 328, 335, 339, 342, 343, 345 Dempsey, D. 169 Derrida, J. 9, 77 Descartes, R. 9 Diebner, B. J. 263 Dietrich, W. 74, 122 Dijkstra, M. 151 Dillmann, A. 85, 101, 123, 124, 158, 168, 169, 190, 195, 196, 210, 215, 225, 253, 325, 328, 335, 338, 339, 341, 342 Dion, P. E. 177 Doyle, B. 37, 53, 240 Doyle, R. 273 Dozeman, T. B. 24 Driver, G. R. 84, 85, 124 Duhm, B. 12, 36, 37, 53–54, 71, 101, 122, 145, 151, 159, 168–171, 190, 195, 196, 199, 211, 215, 220, 222, 225, 236, 250, 251, 261, 262, 330, 334, 338, 340, 341 Ego, B. 309 Eichrodt, W. 85, 124 Eisenbeis, W. 326 Eissfeldt, O. 273 Elliger, K. 75, 145, 148, 150, 153, 158, 159, 164, 165, 167–175, 177, 178, 180–182, 191, 203, 210, 220, 222, 225, 229, 230, 234, 251, 253, 261, 262, 295, 297, 303, 323, 325, 328– 330, 334–336, 338, 340 Emerton, J. A. 81, 131, 133 Emmendörffer, M. 288, 289, 294, 296, 297, 308, 310, 348 Emmerson, G. I. 69 Engnell, I. 75, 90, 94, 115 Eslinger, L. 85 Evans, C. A. 4, 17, 67, 75, 76, 95, 96, 115

408

Author Index

Fensham, F. C. 82 Fichtner, J. 93 Fischer, I. 122, 123, 128, 146, 153, 158, 288, 291, 293, 294, 296, 308, 331, 334, 335, 343, 344, 346, 348 Floyd, M. H. 15, 17–18 Fohrer, G. 74, 123, 168, 171, 182, 211, 212, 254, 261, 262, 272, 273, 326, 341 Foley, J. M. 19 Fox, J. 127 Fox, M. V. 113 Franke, C. A. 192, 193, 195, 196, 201, 214, 215 Freedman, D. N. 36, 333 Fretheim, T. E. 98, 161 Frey, H. 146, 168, 203, 211, 215, 220, 228, 338, 340 Frey, J. 32 Fuhs, H. F. 294 Futato, M. D. 180 Gadamer, H.-G. 9, 11 Gelston, A. 244 Gesenius, W. 99, 103, 127, 153, 169, 173, 195, 269, 329, 330 Gitay, Y. 16, 19, 24–25, 75, 76, 97, 98, 115, 145, 150, 155, 158, 170, 176, 191, 211, 215, 323 Glazov, G. Y. 87, 88, 90–94 Goldenstein, J. 40, 279, 288, 294, 295, 297–299, 303, 304, 308–310, 312, 344–346, 348 Goldingay, J. 3, 22, 51, 54, 75, 87, 88, 91, 100, 115, 131, 139, 146–148, 153, 155, 156, 158, 170, 176, 178, 181, 182, 220, 221, 230, 262, 272, 296, 325, 328, 329, 335, 336, 344 Görg, M. 86, 87 Gosse, B. 278 Gottwald, N. 69 Grabbe, L. L. 39, 43–44 Gray, G. B. 73, 85, 87, 118, 122 Gressmann, H. 167, 191, 220, 221, 340 Gross, W. 295 Gunkel, H. 107, 229 Gunn, D. M. 229 Haag, E. 166, 167, 169, 180, 181 Haag, H. 63, 151, 224, 339

Habermas, J. 11 Hanson, P. D. 167, 211, 226, 250, 272, 273, 297, 346 Haran, M. 176 Hardmeier, C. 23, 38, 74, 96, 102, 108, 114, 115, 122, 168, 177, 178, 180, 186, 334 Harrelson, W. 288, 308, 312 Hartenstein, F. 79, 81, 84–89, 91, 93, 117 Hausmann, J. 132, 134, 181 Hayes, J. H. 118, 123 Hehn, J. 84 Heider, G. C. 273 Herbert, A. S. 87, 261, 262, 273, 345, 346 Hermisson, H.-J. 4, 22, 42, 53, 63, 152, 168, 171, 177, 184, 191, 192, 194– 197, 199, 201–205, 210, 211, 213, 214, 225, 230, 231, 234, 235, 240, 244, 327, 336 Herodotus 42 Hesse, F. 3, 73–74, 160, 275, 295, 312 Hirth, T. 87, 88 Hitzig, F. 71, 101, 107, 121, 123, 195, 196, 211, 215, 325, 326, 338 Hoaas, G. 343 Höffken, P. 3, 42, 45, 50, 122, 145, 171, 173, 178, 180, 195, 196, 226, 230, 234, 262, 296, 330, 344 Hoffmann, H. W. 74, 114, 118 Høgenhaven, J. 74 Høglund, K. G. 41, 43 Holladay, W. L. 128, 273 Hollenbach, B. 114 Holter, K. 171–174, 229 Hoppe, L. J. 265 Hornung, E. 56 Houston, W. 23–24, 322 Hubmann, F. D. 75, 87, 90, 93, 119, 135 Hunter, A. V. 75, 76, 96, 115 Hurley, R. 76, 96, 97, 104–106, 114 Hurowitz, V. 75, 85, 90, 94 Hutter, M. 173 Hvidberg, R. 133 Irsigler, H. 79–81, 85–87, 93 Irvine, S. A. 118, 122–124, 135, 136 Irwin, W. H. 86

Author Index Janowski, B. 40, 57, 59–61, 63–64, 79, 81, 84–86, 90, 92–94, 109–110, 243, 283, 284, 312 Janssen, E. 42 Japhet, S. 135, 202, 333 Jarick, J. 15 Jenni, E. 93, 96, 100, 115 Jensen, J. 86, 93, 126, 331 Jeppesen, K. 130 Jeremias, J. 37, 89, 109, 151 Johnson, D. G. 37 Johnston, A. 176 Johnstone, W. 244 Joines, K. R. 87 Jones, B. C. 118, 129, 276 Jones, D. 123, 125, 126, 205 Jong, M. de 21, 79 Joosten, J. 74, 96, 106, 111, 114, 115 Joüon, P. 97, 99–101, 103, 104, 107, 127, 129, 130, 153, 169, 195, 225, 264, 330, 342 Kaiser, O. 74, 87, 93, 122, 123, 126, 151, 152, 221, 224, 225, 230, 231, 324, 332, 333, 338 Kaiser Jr., W. C. 294 Kapelrud, A. S. 151 Kaplan, D. M. 11 Kaplan, M. 75 Kautzsch, E. 99, 103, 127, 153, 169, 173, 195, 269, 329, 330 Keel, O. 76, 80, 84, 85, 87, 88 Kellenberger, E. 75, 100, 101 Kellermann, U. 262, 277, 278 Kendall, D. 264 Kessler, W. 36, 257, 261 Key, A. F. 76 Kida, K. 224 Kiesow, K. 46 Kilian, R. 75 Kissane, E. J. 75, 100, 115, 220, 221, 224, 230, 254, 288, 303, 324, 325, 328 Kittel, R. 85, 101, 123, 124, 158, 168, 169, 190, 195, 196, 210, 215, 225, 253, 325, 328, 335, 338, 339, 341, 342 Klawans, J. 90 Knierim, R. 75, 94, 96 Knight, G. A. F. 212, 215

409

Koch, K. 16, 21, 57, 59 Koenen, K. 16, 39–40, 53, 70, 223, 225, 230, 232–234, 250–253, 256–258, 261, 262, 264, 265, 267, 274, 277, 278, 282, 284, 288, 296, 303, 304, 341, 342 Köhler, L. 145, 167, 182, 190, 220, 222, 323, 325, 338, 340 Koole, J. L. 47, 63, 100, 104, 128, 146, 150, 151, 153, 156, 158, 164, 165, 167–172, 174, 175, 180, 182, 192– 196, 199, 201, 203, 210–212, 220– 223, 225, 227, 228–231, 233, 234, 244, 245, 250, 251, 256–258, 262, 263, 264–266, 271, 272, 277, 283, 288, 295, 301, 304, 325, 328–330, 335, 338, 339, 342–346, 348 Korpel, M. C. A. 136, 146, 169, 220– 222, 326, 328, 339, 342 Kosmala, H. 261 Kratz, R.G. 4, 12, 16, 32, 34, 42, 46, 48–49, 146, 155, 171, 172, 176, 211, 215 Kraus, H.-J. 54, 114 Kreissig, H. 42–44 Kruger, H. A. J. 301 Kuntzmann, R. 289, 293 Kustár, Z. 40, 102, 103, 108–109, 245, 274–277, 279, 281 L’Heureux, C. E. 136 Laato, A. 7–8, 33, 35, 46, 50–51, 54, 75, 100, 115, 146, 147, 151, 152, 176, 178, 220–222, 230, 234, 235, 239, 271, 298, 325, 331, 339 Labahn, A. 145, 146, 154, 191, 194, 195, 202, 323, 330–334, 336 Lacheman, E. 86 Lack, R. 17, 80, 81, 117, 177, 271, 304 Landy, F. 77, 86, 101, 102, 116, 118, 229, 341 Langer, B. 283, 284 Lanz, E. 31 Lau, W. 250–252, 256–259, 261, 262, 265, 272–275, 282, 296, 298, 303, 309, 310, 346 Laughery, G. J. 9–11, 29–30 Leclerc, T. L. 61 Leene, H. 25, 38, 167, 177, 180–182, 192, 194, 195, 196, 199, 200, 205,

410

Author Index

211, 214, 215, 220, 221, 228–230, 324, 325, 331, 338, 341 Lemaire, A. 43 Lescow, T. 122, 129 Levine, B. A. 93 Lewis, T. J. 273 Lichtheim, M. 56 Liebreich, L. J. 80, 304 Lind, M. C. 79, 91, 129, 276 Lindblom, J. 94, 122, 123 Lindhagen, C. 326 Lindsey, F. D. 220, 225 Liss, H. 76, 77, 87, 90, 93, 94, 96–99, 108, 114, 115, 122, 124, 139 Lohfink, N. 34, 331, 333 Lord, A. 19 Loretz, O. 46 Lugt, P. van der 221, 222 Ma, W. 278 Man, P. de 77 Marti, K. 122, 145, 168, 170, 171, 190, 195, 210, 220, 222, 229, 261, 262, 327, 330, 334, 340 Martínez, F. G. 124, 128 Matheus, F. 3, 68, 171, 172, 177, 220, 226 Mattern, J. 9–10 McCann, Jr. J. C. 40 McConville, J. G. 155, 194 McEvenue, S. E. 43 McKane, W. 128 McKenzie, J. L. 199, 220, 229, 231, 257, 261, 262, 338, 340, 342, 344, 345 McLaughlin, J. L. 6, 76, 186, 295, 299 Melugin, R. F. 17, 30, 46, 48, 167, 172, 177, 191, 220, 221, 225, 341 Merendino, R. P. 145, 146, 169, 191, 211, 212, 221, 230, 326, 328, 330, 334, 341 Mettinger, T. N. D. 68, 87 Metzger, M. 40, 86, 94 Michel, D. 262, 269, 312 Milgrom, J. 75 Millar, W. R. 37 Miller, J. W. 145, 159 (Quinn-)Miscall, P. D. 17, 31, 94 Möller, K. 20, 22, 24–26, 46, 70, 158

Moor, J. de 146, 169, 220–222, 278, 326, 328, 339, 342 Motyer, J. A. 31, 67, 87, 88, 122, 123, 146, 170, 192, 215, 221, 235, 250, 272, 328, 329, 335, 338, 346 Mowinckel, S. 145, 167, 177, 220, 330 Muecke, D. C. 104–105 Muilenburg, J. 24, 145, 170, 171, 174, 176, 178, 182, 191, 192, 195, 211, 212, 215, 220, 222, 225, 229, 250– 252, 257, 261, 271, 273, 283, 288, 303, 324, 325, 328, 339–341, 346 Müller, H.-P. 74, 79, 85, 87, 94, 95, 123, 133 Muraoka, T. 97, 99–101, 103, 104, 107, 127, 129, 130, 153, 169, 170, 195, 225, 264, 330, 342 Niditch, S. 18–19 Niehr, H. 74, 106, 160 Nielsen, E. 166 Nielsen, K. 75, 81, 118, 129, 132, 276 Nissinen, M. 15, 19, 21, 22 North, C. R. 151, 165, 169, 171, 178, 182, 191, 204, 215, 220, 222, 225, 229, 230, 324, 325, 328, 339–341 O’Connell, R. H. 67, 177, 222 Odeberg, H. 261, 262, 297 Oded, B. 42 Odell, M. S. 15 Oeming, M. 10 Oettli, S. 170, 328 Olley, J. W. 71 Oorschot, J. van 4, 16, 42, 46, 145, 148, 167, 170, 171, 176, 191, 195, 201, 203, 214, 215, 323, 330, 334 Orelli, C. von 33, 71, 123, 169, 195, 201, 205, 220, 341 Orlinsky, H. M. 151, 222, 324, 338 Oswalt, J. N. 31–33, 54, 87, 88, 93, 124, 128, 139, 156, 169, 170, 174, 186, 192, 195, 196, 201, 203, 211, 215, 220, 222, 227, 229, 257, 272, 275, 277, 325, 326, 328, 329, 336, 339, 341, 343, 345 Otto, E. 53, 59 Overholt, T. W. 15, 22 Parry, M. 19

Author Index Parry, D. W. 244 Paton-Williams, D. 151, 215 Paul, S. M. 36 Pauritsch, K. 250, 262, 267, 271, 303 Peels, H. G. L. 284 Pelt, M. V. van 294 Perlitt, L. 332 Petersen, D. L. 15, 16, 22 Pfaff, H.-M. 132 Podella, T. 88, 92, 265, 266 Polan, G. 252, 262, 271, 283 Preuss, H. D. 38, 171, 180 Prinsloo, W. S. 177 Procksch, O. 37, 75, 90, 122, 127 Qimron, E. 244 Quinn-Miscall, P. (see Miscall) Quintillian 104–105 Rad, G. von 1, 113, 176 Rechenmacher, H. 118, 123, 125, 129– 130 Redford, D. B. 19 Regt, L. J. de 158, 270 Reiterer, F. V. 153 Rendtorff, R. 3, 17, 46–47, 61 Renz, T. 24–26, 46, 53, 158 Reventlow, H. Graf 16, 122, 130 Ricœur, P. 9–12, 15, 20, 29–30 Rignell, L. G. 123, 169, 170, 220, 229, 326, 341 Ringgren, H. 98, 151, 181 Roberts, J. J. M. 93, 124, 196 Robinson, G. D. 1, 6–7, 31, 76, 96, 98, 206 Rofé, A. 278, 301 Rösel, M. 16, 21 Roth, W. M. W. 172, 173 Rousseau, J. 77 Ruiten, J. van 17 Ruszkowski, L. 268, 273–275, 277, 297, 303, 308, 344 Sæbø, M. 1, 38 Sarna, N. M. 124 Sauer, G. 102, 103 Savignac, J. de 87 Sawyer, J. F. A. 46, 75, 91, 102, 122, 131, 273, 326 Schams, C. 20

411

Scharbert, J. 225, 230, 339, 341 Schenker, A. 75, 115 Scherer, K. 221, 223, 264 Schmidt, J. M. 74, 114 Schmidt, W. H. 38, 333 Schmitt, H.-C. 145, 191, 323, 330, 334 Schmitt, J. J. 53, 75, 100, 115, 240 Scholl, R. 31, 37–38 Schoors, A. 74, 75, 79, 87, 94, 123, 124, 145, 166, 167, 170, 191, 205, 212, 220, 225, 228, 229, 257, 262, 304, 323, 328, 334, 345 Schottroff, W. 266 Schramm, B. 261, 272, 296, 304, 344, 345 Schreiner, J. 106, 107 Schultz, R. 4 Schunck, K.-D. 43 Schwarz, G. 236 Schweizer, M. 23, 96, 98, 114, 115 Schwienhorst-Schönberger, L. 59 Scott, R. B. Y. 85, 90 Searle, J. R. 12, 14, 23, 25, 111, 112, 119 Segal, M. H. 328 Sehmsdorf, E. 303 Seitz, C. R. 3, 17, 33, 37, 46–47, 49, 51, 78, 88, 115, 123, 132, 136, 190, 194, 205, 211, 212, 214, 215, 226, 235 Sekine, S. 261, 262, 274, 303, 304 Sheppard, G. T. 3, 46–47 Siegfried, C. 328 Simon, U. E. 42, 145, 194, 203, 215, 220, 227, 228, 340, 341 Skinner, J. 36, 87, 169, 170, 199, 215, 220, 222, 253, 257, 303, 328, 339 Smart, J. D. 146, 166, 170, 171, 177, 220, 226, 261, 262, 288 Smith, G. A. 73, 145, 190, 330 Smith, M. S. 89, 176 Smith, P. A. 35, 39, 252, 253, 256, 258, 259, 262, 264, 266–268, 271, 272, 279, 296, 303, 305, 306 Snaith, N. H. 52, 200, 212, 312 Sommer, B. D. 47, 154, 275 Sonnet, J.-P. 8, 76, 77, 121, 129, 276 Spieckermann, H. 40, 61, 90, 155, 284 Spykerboer, H. C. 159, 171, 177, 191, 214, 215, 220, 229, 326 Stansell, G. 3

412

Author Index

Steck, O. H. 16, 18–23, 31, 32, 34–35, 37–38, 40–41, 45, 53–54, 63, 73, 75, 89, 96, 113, 122, 205, 221, 222, 227, 231, 234, 239, 240, 253, 261, 262, 268, 269, 272, 275–277, 279, 281, 283, 297–300, 303–306, 309, 339 Stiver, D. R. 10, 29–30 Strack, H. L. 328 Stuhlmueller, C. 145, 159, 167, 229 Sweeney, M. A. 3, 17, 22, 31, 34, 38, 45, 67, 79, 86, 126, 128, 132, 136, 304–306, 320, 326, 331 Tate, M. E. 3 Thiselton, A. C. 9, 10, 12–14, 25, Tiemeyer, L.-S. 55 Tigchelaar, E. J. C. 124, 128 Tillesse, G. M. de 155 Tomasino, A. 297, 303, 304, 306 Toorn, K. van der 19 Torrey, C. C. 171, 195, 220, 288, 324, 326, 345 Trible, P. 24 Tsevat, M. 75, 100, 115 Tucker, G. M. 22 Uehlinger, C. 44 Uemura, S. 102–103 Uhlig, T. 89 Utzschneider, H. 30 Van Seters, J. 15, 19, 21 Vanderhooft, D. S. 42 Vanderveken, D. 14, 25, 111 Vanhoozer, K. J. 9–10, 12 Veijola, T. 295 Venema, G. J. 21 Vermes, G. 128 Vermeylen, J. 17, 75, 100, 115, 332 Vervenne, M. 17 Vetter, D. 114 Vincent, J. M. 6, 92, 243 Vollmer, J. 95 Volz, P. 145, 170, 171, 174, 177, 190, 195, 196, 204, 211, 222, 261, 262, 303, 323, 325, 328, 330, 338, 340 Wagner, A. 14, 23–24, 108, 119, 120, 149, 166, 180, 182, 183, 196, 312 Wagner, R. 75, 96, 98, 99, 114, 119

Wagner, T. 122 Waldow, H.-E. von 167, 191 Wallis, G. 256, 348 Watson, F. 12 Watson, W. G. E. 97, 157, 201, 202, 223, 272 Watts, J. D. W. 3, 17, 31, 67, 88, 122, 176, 177, 181, 182, 190, 196, 199, 220, 222, 251, 252, 271, 336, 339, 342, 344 Watts, J. W. 20 Weber, B. 30, 44, 79, 157, 223, 291 Webster, E. C. 288, 303, 343, 346 Weinfeld, M. 201, 283 Weippert, M. 206, 340 Welker, M. 60–61, 92 Wellhausen, J. 12 Wenham, G. J. 90, 125 Werline, R. A. 295 Werlitz, J. 68, 122, 145, 178, 191, 225, 226, 230, 342 Werner, F. 127 Werner, W. 38, 123 Westermann, C. 16, 68, 145, 158, 159, 169–171, 174, 177, 180, 181, 191, 196, 220–222, 225, 228, 230, 232, 250, 252, 253, 257, 262, 275, 303, 323, 324, 328, 330, 334, 335, 338, 342 Whedbee, J. W. 93 White, H. C. 14, 23 Whitley, C. F. 74, 124, 126, 336 Whybray, N. 145, 171, 181, 211, 212, 220, 222, 225, 228, 229, 232, 253, 262, 269, 273, 295, 303, 323, 325, 330, 339, 342, 343 Wieringen, A. L. H. M. van 52, 75, 81, 82, 87, 100, 115, 117, 120, 133 Wilcox, P. 151, 215 Wildberger, H. 37, 78, 84, 86, 87, 90, 91, 97–99, 103, 122, 126, 127, 129, 132, 136, 167, 184, 326, 331, 332 Willey, P. T. 205, 206 Willi, T. 42–43 Williamson, H. G. M. 3, 4, 5–6, 15, 32, 38, 43–44, 46, 48, 50–52, 61, 71, 74, 88, 93, 99, 122–127, 131, 133–136, 140, 145, 151, 152, 154, 167, 205, 216, 226, 235, 236, 238, 240, 244, 247, 263, 275, 278, 279, 291, 295,

Author Index 296, 299, 311, 323–325, 327, 329– 333 Wilson, R. R. 101 Winter, P. 343 Winton Thomas, D. 244 Wischnowsky, M. 53, 221, 228, 229, 240, 311 Wolterstoff, N. 52 Wright, D. P. 90, 115

Young, E. J. 31, 75, 85, 123 Youngblood, R. F. 31, 77, 78, 115 Zenger, E. 284, 331 Zeron, A. 93 Zillessen, A. 256 Zimmerli, W. 54, 202

413

Subject Index Abraham 134 Achaemenid 41, 65, 71 Action-consequences connection – see Deed-consequences connection Addressee 27, 29, 33, 36, 40–42, 45, 51–56, 62, 64, 65, 67, 71, 76, 95, 97, 103, 107, 121, 142–144, 147, 150, 151, 153–160, 162–164, 167–169, 171, 172, 175, 181–184, 186–190, 193–204, 206, 207, 210–220, 223, 226–229, 232–235, 237–249, 252, 254, 256, 259, 260, 263, 266–268, 272, 273, 275–278, 280–282, 284– 287, 301, 302, 304, 305, 307, 314, 315, 318, 321, 325, 328, 334, 335, 341 Administration 18, 41–43 Affirmation 171 Agent 9, 27, 29, 45, 50, 52, 55, 59, 78, 100, 101, 104, 257, 258, 278, 291, 316 Ahaz 67, 118, 129, 134–136, 138, 139 Alexander the Great 37, 38 Alliance 137 – see also Coalition Altar 94 Ambiguity 81, 82, 101, 123, 129, 132, 139, 140, 152, 196, 197, 228, 231, 233, 246, 253, 344, 345, 348 Amphiboly 81, 223 – see also Janus parallelism Amulet 88 Ancient Near East (ANE) 15, 16, 19, 21, 53, 84–86, 89, 90, 93, 152, 240, 282–284, 316 Antigonus 35 Apotropaic 87 Appeal 150, 155, 158, 160–162, 176, 179, 180, 182, 185–187, 223, 224,

226, 230, 232–235, 237, 241, 247, 277 – emotional 158 – ethical 158 – rational 158 Appointment 165–168, 170–172, 179, 181, 183–189, 210, 246, 248 Arabia, Arabic 138, 244, 325, 338, 339 Arrogance 136 Assonance 157, 265, 276, 336 Assurance 183, 186, 198, 213, 241, 245 – see also Salvation assurance Assyria, Assyrian, Assur 37, 38, 66, 87, 118, 135, 138, 139, 206 Atonement 116 Aurality, aural 18, 21, 160 Autobiographic narrative 74 Babel, Babylon, Babylonian 8, 33, 41– 45, 48, 53–55, 62, 65, 66, 68, 72, 138–140, 142–144, 169, 181–183, 185, 188, 190, 198, 199, 206, 209, 210, 213–218, 226, 228–230, 239– 242, 245, 247, 249, 261, 266, 274, 276, 287, 297, 300, 302, 313, 316, 320 Babylonian captivity 53, 241, 248 Benjamin 42 Blindness 3–7, 60, 76, 77, 137, 142– 144, 149–153, 155, 158–160, 163, 166–169, 173–175, 179–181, 237, 261, 271, 280–282, 285, 324, 326, 334 Call, prophetic 1, 3, 5, 47, 49, 50, 53, 73, 74, 83, 84, 119, 132, 152, 155, 161, 188, 267, 276, 277, 280, 281, 285 Cambyses 42

Subject Index Captivity, prison 134, 179, 180–184, 187, 195, 214, 227, 335 – see also Babylonian captivity Captive 153, 164 Canon, canonical 17 Carchemisch 136 Characterization 150, 151, 153, 155, 157–160, 162, 180, 182, 183, 185– 189, 194, 197, 199, 200, 202, 207, 210, 213, 216–218, 249, 252–254, 260, 285, 287, 298, 306, 321 Cherubim 86, 94 Children 161, 228, 240, 241, 245, 274, 277, 300, 301, 310 Coalition 135, 136, 138 – see also Alliance Commission 1, 2, 7, 33, 46, 47, 49, 51– 53, 66, 67, 73–79, 82, 83, 95, 96, 102, 110–122, 130, 131, 139, 141, 142, 146, 151, 153, 161, 163, 164, 167, 168, 170, 180, 181, 184, 198, 217, 226, 230, 235, 238, 245, 275– 280, 300, 311, 316, 318, 320, 326, 327, 331 Communication 1, 2, 22, 23, 26–28, 45, 57, 58, 61, 65, 91, 92, 97, 98, 100, 110, 113, 114, 117, 141, 142, 144, 156, 159, 161, 162, 169, 187, 202, 216, 236, 237, 268–270, 280, 285, 286, 299, 308, 316, 317–321 Communication organs 95 Communicative act/action 2, 8, 12, 21, 23–28, 41, 45, 46, 52, 64, 71, 73, 76, 78, 91, 95, 97, 100, 108, 110, 112– 116, 119, 120, 141, 150, 168, 179, 194, 202, 223, 234, 236, 237, 239, 241, 244, 247, 261, 263, 264, 275, 285, 287, 290, 299, 311, 314, 316, 317, 319–322 Communicative aim 27, 29, 55, 56, 61, 70, 72, 73, 163, 182, 287, 317 Communicative analysis 15, 23, 27, 29, 66, 78, 223, 251, 316, 317 Communicative convention 97 Communicative disagreement 77, 97, 115 Communicative function 53 Communicative interaction 26, 90, 97, 98, 104, 108, 111–113, 116, 117,

415

119, 121, 147, 148, 161, 162, 247, 322, 335 Communicative levels 95, 97, 110–112, 114, 140, 211, 335, 342 Communicative process 2, 9, 24, 28, 29, 35, 44, 45, 52, 57, 62, 66, 100, 147, 162, 218, 242, 247, 248, 252, 259– 261, 267, 268, 281, 287, 300, 301, 314, 318, 320, 335 Communicative role 78, 95, 116 Communicative situation 29, 30, 45, 52, 55, 61, 148 Communicative strategy 26–29, 33–35, 39, 42, 51–53, 55, 64, 67, 73, 79, 83, 84, 144, 149–151, 156, 158–160, 163–166, 168, 171, 173, 175, 176, 178–180, 182, 183, 185–190, 197, 201, 204, 207, 208, 210, 214, 217– 219, 224, 232, 233, 239, 244, 245, 253, 261, 264, 268, 270, 271, 275, 281, 285, 292, 296, 299, 300, 305, 314, 316, 319, 330 Communion 161, 292, 293 Compensation 63 Complacency 137, 138 Confession 158, 194, 198, 267, 270, 271, 273, 275, 280–283, 285, 286, 295, 297, 302, 317–319, 334, 335 Confirmation 179, 186, 246, 249, 286, 302, 308, 314, 321 Conquest 332 Coronation 74 Courtroom scene 163, 198 – see also Lawsuit, Trial, Trial scene Covenant 125, 259, 277, 278, 325 Creation 62, 210, 212, 213, 229, 241, 248, 317 Cush 138, 211, 212 Cyrus 32–34, 42, 44, 51, 62, 65, 152, 163, 198, 205, 209–213, 215, 226, 279, 316, 327 Cyrus Cylinder 44 Damascus 138 Darius I. 41, 44 Date 31, 34, 35, 37–40, 42, 116, 118, 122, 139, 311, 332 David, Davidic, Davidide 41, 86, 247, 248, 320, 324

416

Subject Index

Deafness 3–7, 57–58, 76, 137, 142–144, 149–153, 155, 158–160, 163, 166– 169, 179–181, 204, 237, 324, 334 Deconstruction 77 Deed-consequences connection 2, 56– 64, 72, 141, 142, 153, 161, 216, 242, 246, 248, 266, 268, 282, 284, 301, 317 De-hardening 219, 239, 249, 285, 286, 314, 318–320 Deixis, deictic 76, 121, 150 Delay 54, 228, 299 Description 179, 251, 252, 254, 255, 291 Designation 25 Detour 161 Deus absconditus 1, 320 Deutero-, Second Isaiah – see Isaiah, prophet Deuteronomic (dtn.), deuteronomistic (dtr.) 145, 154, 195, 278, 303, 330– 333, 336 Diagnosis 160, 249 Diaspora 38 Disclosure 287, 299, 314, 318 Disobedience 161 Dispensation 131 Disputation 191 – speech 191 Dissonance 75 Distanciation 156, 254 Dittography 124, 346 Divine council – see Heavenly council Document 123, 125, 126 Doom 94 Double standard 77 Doxology 86, 195 Drama, dramatic 228 – progress 205 – setting 192 Dumah 138 Editor, editorial 145, 154, 191, 211, 226, 227, 250, 262, 263, 303, 309, 330, 331 – layer 34, 37–39, 160, 161, 171, 191, 228, 261, 262, 274, 323, 330, 332 – see also Redaction Edom, Edomite 55, 135, 302

Effectiveness, efficacy 26, 28, 184, 319, 320 Egypt, Egyptian 37, 38, 42, 58, 94, 138, 211, 212 Emendation 123, 124, 147, 156, 168, 170, 182, 196, 199, 221, 244, 251, 252, 284, 305, 324, 325, 336, 338, 340, 343, 344, 346 Enemy 109, 230, 289, 290, 293, 294, 296, 302, 343, 346, 347 Ephraim 135, 138 Epiphany – see Theophany Epistemology, epistemological 98, 113, 141, 174, 216, 241, 270, 271, 280, 313 Eschatology, eschatological 38, 40, 41, 83, 195, 214, 283 Ethiopia 42 Exile 8, 32, 42, 50, 54, 62, 65, 161, 205, 240, 247, 266, 279, 286 Exiles 38, 41, 43, 44, 55, 63, 65, 68, 69, 211, 212, 228, 245, 249, 252, 256, 257, 259, 260, 270, 285, 297, 300– 302, 316, 318, 319, 339 Exodus 101, 169, 185, 215, 216, 229, 279, 347 Ezra 41, 331 Falsification 10 Fasting 263, 265, 266, 268, 269 Fear–not oracle – see Salvation assurance oracle Final form 3, 6, 8, 16, 19, 21, 23, 29, 31, 34, 35, 39, 45, 52, 53, 83, 118, 122, 123, 136, 168, 206, 224, 226 Flood Story 229 Foretelling 163, 210 – see also Prediction Forgiveness 114, 279 Form criticism/-critical 15, 17, 20, 46, 106, 107, 191, 228, 253, 342 Former things 32, 33, 167, 179, 182, 183, 190, 191, 193, 194, 197, 198, 201, 204–206, 209, 210, 213–217, 304 – see also Prediction Fulfilment 32, 51, 100, 130, 132, 139, 141, 154, 157, 166, 188, 314, 331, 339, 347

Subject Index Fusion 157, 279 – of audiences 156 – of tenses 156, 157, 162, 206 Genre 2, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 Gloss 145, 190, 221, 251, 252, 306, 323, 324, 330 Guess 10, 15, 201 Hardening 1–9, 12, 14, 26–29, 33, 47, 50, 56, 61, 66, 67, 71–78, 83, 84, 95, 96, 100, 108, 112–122, 124, 127, 129–132, 134–137, 139–144, 155, 159–164, 168, 170, 171, 174–176, 185–190, 197, 200–204, 206–208, 213, 214, 216–220, 230, 235–247, 249, 250, 253, 260, 261, 268–271, 275–277, 279–282, 285–287, 295, 297–299, 302, 309, 311–321, 332 Hardness 2, 6, 8, 57–58, 78, 112, 115, 134, 135, 139, 142, 161, 162, 173– 175, 201, 202, 207, 216, 217, 219, 239, 241–244, 246, 248, 249, 261, 268, 271, 276, 281, 286, 287, 297– 299, 302, 308, 312–315, 321 Heading, headline 45, 66, 70, 211 – see also Superscription Healing 103, 104, 108–110, 113, 117, 139, 245, 274–276, 279 Heavenly council 49, 88 Hell 230 Hellenism, Hellenistic 31, 33, 37, 38 Hermeneutics, hermeneutical 1, 9–13, 15, 24, 27, 30, 41, 73, 205 – hermeneutical arc 9, 12, 29 Hezekiah 66, 67, 93, 134, 137–139, 319, 326, 327 Hiding, hidden 1, 2, 89, 90, 142, 163, 212, 295, 298, 299 History 95, 176, 293, 296, 309, 332 Historical – account 288, 346 – context 30, 32 – criticism/-critical 10, 30, 35 – recital 294 – setting 27–31, 35, 42, 55 – situation 29 – value 135

417

Holy, holiness 81, 85, 87, 88, 90–95, 133, 134, 141, 185, 200, 259, 263, 273, 294, 296, 298, 310, 345 – law of holiness 134 Holy One 80, 91, 132, 137 Holy seed 82, 133–136, 141 Homeland 42–44, 54, 55, 62, 143, 249, 252, 255, 256, 259–261, 266, 272, 277, 279, 280, 286, 297, 300–302, 316–318 Hubris 93 Huldah 257 Hymn 68, 69, 71, 163, 176–178, 208, 245 Iconography 84, 87, 88 Ideology critique 11, 12 Idol 31, 33, 48, 62, 65, 76, 145, 171– 176, 180, 185, 186, 194, 198, 199, 212, 213, 217, 229 – maker, making 172–175, 183, 184, 186, 187, 212 – worship 62, 96, 133, 137, 172–174, 176, 184–187, 212, 246 – parody, polemics 171, 176, 177 Ignorance 2, 142, 143, 171, 173, 175, 204, 207, 237, 238, 252, 260, 271, 281, 285, 320 Illness 108–110, 133, 139 Illocutionary act – see Speech-act Immanuel 135 Implied audience/reader 5, 50, 121, 122, 131, 140 Inauguration 119, 239, 301 Initiation 94 Injustice 93 Inscription 16 – of Neferhotep 56 – of Tell Deir ‘Allah 21 – Akkadian royal inscription 152 – Assyrian 135 – royal inscriptions 58 – tomb inscriptions 58 Intention 47, 57, 61, 148, 161, 162, 179, 184, 185, 187, 188, 216, 274, 280, 293, 317 – see also Will

418

Subject Index

Interaction 26, 36, 46, 56, 108–110, 115, 116, 161, 162, 266, 267, 270, 284, 335 Intermediary 17, 22 Intermediation 21, 22 Interpolation 37, 39, 145, 191, 262 Invective 191, 253 Irony 75–76, 96, 97, 104–106, 114, 115 Isaiah, prophet 1–3, 5, 6, 31–33, 45–50, 52, 53, 56, 64–66, 72–79, 82–86, 88– 97, 101, 102, 105–108, 110–123, 126, 127, 129–132, 134–137, 139– 144, 150–157, 161–163, 170, 186– 188, 201, 205, 206, 208, 216–218, 226, 235–239, 245–248, 260, 261, 276, 280, 281, 285, 287, 298, 309, 311, 312, 316–321, 335 – Deutero-, Second Isaiah 3–7, 16, 50– 52, 106, 154, 168, 171, 190, 191, 205, 206, 215, 224, 228, 256, 278, 309, 323 – Trito-, Third Isaiah 3, 39, 51, 190, 191, 256, 261, 278, 303, 330 Isaiah memoir 73, 118, 121, 122, 130, 135 Isaiah’s children 130, 131 Isaianic authorship 31–33, 45, 206 Israel 37, 64, 80, 90, 91, 109, 132, 133, 136, 137, 139, 151, 152, 165, 167, 172, 175, 180, 182, 194, 195, 197, 199, 200, 202, 204, 205, 211, 213, 215, 216, 224, 253, 268, 277, 279, 310, 323, 332 Jacob-Israel 151, 163, 164, 179–184, 190, 198, 199, 208–210, 212–217, 226, 279, 325–327, 334 Jeremiah, prophet 152, 231 Jerusalem 2, 34, 35, 39–41, 43, 47–49, 52, 53, 65, 86, 89, 93, 121, 129, 132, 136, 139, 140, 196, 205, 210–212, 226, 227, 239–241, 274, 276–278, 298 Josiah 38, 257 Jotham 67, 74, 134 Judah 2, 7, 41, 42, 44, 47, 53–55, 65, 72, 83, 84, 87, 89, 90, 121, 132, 135– 138, 140, 142, 199, 228, 230, 249, 285, 287, 320

Judgement 1, 7, 40, 43, 49, 54, 55, 60, 61, 63–65, 69, 71, 75, 82, 83, 89, 90, 93–97, 105, 115, 117–119, 129–137, 139–142, 144, 157, 180, 185, 215, 223, 224, 229–231, 233, 234, 237, 247, 250, 253, 255, 257, 258, 283– 285, 301, 302, 305, 306, 308, 319– 321 Judging presence 89 Justice 41, 60, 61, 92, 93, 135, 152, 153, 238, 263–266, 269, 282–284, 317, 331, 348 King, kingship – human 94, 152, 284, 327 – YHWH’s (see YHWH’s kingship) Knowledge 2, 18, 19, 46, 98, 136, 142, 143, 173–175, 179, 181, 184, 185, 187, 189, 199, 203, 205, 207, 239, 243, 244, 246, 250, 260, 261, 264, 269, 276, 280, 312 Lament 8, 36, 41, 69, 109, 110, 142, 157, 249, 278, 280, 281, 286, 287, 293–299, 302, 303, 308–311, 314, 326, 348 Land 79, 80, 117, 132, 134, 135, 139, 161, 253, 273, 332 Language – everyday language 30 – figurative language 30, 102, 107, 111–113 – irrational language 76, 97 – ordinary language 30 – poetic language 30, 263 Latter things 205, 206 Law-court 222 Lawsuit 164, 185 Leader 252–255, 260, 271, 272, 277, 280, 281, 320 Lex talionis 96 Literacy 18 Literary criticism, -critical 12, 74, 106, 108, 201, 212 Literary context 4, 83, 89, 93, 94, 110, 129, 196, 197, 208, 297–299, 304, 306, 308, 324, 329, 333, 334, 342 Literati 18, 21 Literature 17–20, 29, 87 – of the dead 58

Subject Index Liturgy 22 Locutionary act – see Speech-act Ma ҄at 56–58 Magic, magical 76 Malachi, prophet 190 Marduk 42, 89, 213 Media, Medes 33, 206 Mediation 2, 48, 100, 161, 231, 232, 237, 241, 247, 249, 252, 275, 282, 284, 287, 301, 316, 321, 322, 346 Mercy 2 Merodach-Baladan 138 Meshullam 325–327 Mesopotamia, Mesopotamian 90, 94 Messenger formula 166, 171, 177, 178, 181, 208, 211, 220, 226, 227, 240, 304, 306 Messianism 61 Method, methodology, methodological 1, 9–12, 14, 15, 23, 24, 26, 27, 30, 41, 73, 145, 316 Mixed marriage 134 Mizpah 43 Moab 138 Molech 273 Monotheism 176 Mosaic Torah 145, 329–331, 333 Moses 296, 324 Mouth – opening 88, 90, 94 – purification 88, 90, 94 – washing 94 Nabu 213 Nations 32, 33, 40, 41, 55, 62, 63, 83, 89, 152, 153, 165, 166, 168, 170, 180, 185, 188, 189, 198, 209–215, 238, 244–248, 254, 290, 313, 317, 323, 331, 346, 347 Nehemiah 31, 41 Nehushtan 87, 88 New things 33, 183, 191, 194, 197, 203–206, 209, 210, 214–218 Northern kingdom, - Israel 132, 135, 137, 138 – see also Ephraim Obduracy 4

419

Obedience 160 Offering 63 Oracle 243 – formula 166 – against the nations (OAN) 138 Orality, oral 18–21, 126, 130 Overcoming 6, 8, 142, 171, 181, 184, 188, 219, 227, 235–237, 239, 241, 242, 244, 246–249, 271, 279–282, 285, 287, 297, 302, 313, 319, 321 Palestine 31, 42, 43, 53, 54, 87 Paradox 36, 108, 153, 159, 162, 163, 187, 295, 321, 326, 327 Patriarch 197, 297 Pekah 118, 135 Pentateuch 205 Perception 1, 3, 21, 75, 78, 79, 81, 88, 96–100, 102, 111, 113, 114, 122, 142–144, 150, 151, 157, 159, 160, 162, 163, 168, 170, 174, 179, 185, 187, 190, 202, 204, 207, 219, 234, 235, 237, 241, 249, 251, 260, 261, 270, 276, 302, 313, 324 Performance, performative 13, 14, 21, 76, 95, 110, 111, 113, 116, 119, 166, 181, 182, 196, 205, 264, 314, 316 – explicit performative 13, 14, 23, 164, 166, 180, 183, 195, 197, 299 – performative sentence 13 – primary performative 13, 14, 23 Perlocutionary act – see Speech-act Persia, Persian 18, 31, 37, 41–43, 54, 173 Personification 53 Persuasion 25, 120, 158, 197 Philistia, Philistine 135, 138 Phonocentrism 9 Poetry, poetic 30, 41, 136, 190, 221, 222, 252, 278, 287, 288, 291, 345, 346 Poverty, poor 164 Praise 177, 195, 214, 215, 293 Prayer 139, 286, 288, 291–294, 297– 300, 302, 303, 307–309, 311, 319, 345, 346 Prediction 32, 33, 65, 74, 137, 171, 172, 179, 192–194, 198, 206, 213, 217 Pride 136, 203

420

Subject Index

– see also Complacency Priest 94 Prison 153, 331 Prolongation 132, 140, 142, 144, 157, 187, 206, 216 Promise 25, 159, 167, 183, 232, 238, 267, 268, 282, 298, 299, 303, 314, 319 Prophecy 15, 22, 41, 54, 125, 152, 205, 278 – Assyrian 21 Prophet 1, 7, 15, 16, 18–22, 24, 32, 33, 39, 45, 47–51, 70, 73–80, 83, 84, 86, 90, 93, 94, 96, 98, 100, 104–108, 111, 113–116, 118, 119, 121, 123, 126, 129, 132, 135, 136, 139–141, 145, 152, 158, 160–163, 170, 186, 215, 224–226, 235, 254, 255, 261, 262, 268, 270, 278, 279, 281, 283, 302, 303, 306, 323, 335, 346 – Tradent prophet 17 Prophetess 257 Prophetic – book 2, 9, 15–24, 26, 29–31, 44, 45, 71 – experience 231 – figure 262, 278 – instruction 125, 126 – literature 16, 24 – logion 19 – oracle 206 – scroll 21 – self-quotation 206 – task 231, 234 – threat 253 – tradition 196, 227, 231 – voice 33, 46–53, 66, 72, 226, 227, 230–235, 239, 269, 270, 275, 277– 281, 285, 297, 298, 300–302, 305, 316, 319, 321, 339, 346 – writing 21, 311 Protests of the Eloquent Peasant 56 Provocatio 97 Psalm 109, 110, 225 – of confidence 231, 342 Pseudo-citation, -quotation 74, 96, 111, 114 Ptolemy I. 31, 34, 35 Public 18, 21, 23, 127 Purification 90, 93, 94, 117, 118, 121

Qumran 128 Reader, readership 18 Reason 176, 201 Rebuilding 211 Reciprocity 57, 60, 161, 237, 266, 282, 284 Reciprocal Action 57, 59, 62, 187, 207, 317 Red Sea 229 Redaction, redactional 122 – criticism/-critical 12, 16, 17, 21, 30, 32, 34, 48, 122, 146, 176, 211, 214, 308 – development 3, 37 – history 18, 38, 136 – see also Editor Redeemer (see YHWH) Redemption 180–184, 214, 318 Referentiality 30 Refinement 195–197, 199, 200, 214 Rehabilitation 65, 68, 240, 241, 301 Religion History, religio-historical 3, 89, 284 Remnant 7, 8, 123, 133, 136, 139, 142 Removal 180 Repentance 76, 115, 117, 119, 161, 267, 295, 320 Restoration 4, 56, 61, 65, 72, 198, 241, 317, 319 Retribution 59 Retrojection, retrojection hypothesis 73–75, 141 Return, turn 8, 38, 47, 76, 109, 110, 113, 136, 142, 176, 189, 211–213, 215, 228, 240, 241, 245, 247, 248, 267, 270, 293, 295, 297, 300, 302 Revelation 210, 214, 217, 218, 313, 321, 347 Reversal 2, 6, 7, 38, 164, 170, 182, 219, 236, 237, 245, 246, 249, 261, 275– 277, 285, 287, 302, 315, 318, 319 Rezin 118, 135 Rhetorical – analysis 24–26, 158, 191, 316 – criticism/-critical 24–26 – discourse 180 – entrapment 270 – impact 97, 135 – means 105

Subject Index – purpose 120 – question 155, 156, 159, 221, 223, 227, 334 – speech 176 – strategy 24, 26 – structure 303 Righteousness 2, 41, 54, 56, 58, 60–65, 72, 92, 93, 135, 136, 142, 153, 194, 195, 198, 200, 207, 210, 213, 215, 216, 218, 238–244, 246–249, 259, 263–266, 268, 270, 281–287, 295, 301, 307, 317–319, 321, 348 – connective righteousness 2, 38, 56– 59, 61, 63, 65, 110, 153, 161, 162, 187, 188, 243, 266, 268–270, 282, 284, 287, 301, 317, 319 – saving righteousness 60, 63, 64, 92, 223, 231, 241, 284 Sabbath 259, 263, 282, 305, 306 Sabea 211, 212 Salvation 8, 49, 51, 53, 54, 60–66, 69, 71, 75, 101, 102, 103, 115, 142, 143, 153, 164, 172, 176, 179, 180, 185, 205, 210–213, 216, 228, 229, 233, 234, 240–242, 247, 248, 252, 256, 257, 259, 264–268, 275, 277, 280, 282–285, 299–301, 304, 314, 315, 317 – conditional 54, 102, 282 – unconditional 54, 102 Salvation assurance 179 Salvation assurance oracle 180 Salvation history 3, 37, 38, 295 Sanctuary 132, 298 – see also Temple Sargon II. 136 Scene 78, 79, 82, 85, 88, 116, 118, 176, 220 Scribe 18, 20–22 Seal 87, 88 Sealing 122–127, 142, 235, 239, 276, 280 Segmentation 146, 147, 192, 220–222, 231, 243–245, 272, 287, 304–306, 343 Semantic Field 3, 36, 143, 144, 159, 203, 237, 249–251, 290, 292 Sennacherib 139

421

Separation 35, 36, 70, 118, 130, 227, 230, 237, 250, 308, 314 Seraph, Seraphim 80, 81, 84–90, 93–95, 118 Servant 8, 33, 50, 51, 63, 64, 86, 134, 146, 148, 150–153, 155, 156, 160, 163, 166–169, 175, 179–182, 184, 185, 187, 188, 198, 204, 205, 209, 215, 216, 219, 221–249, 273, 277– 279, 286, 297, 301, 313, 317–321, 324–327, 329, 331, 334, 339–342 – poem, song 220, 221, 234, 245 Servants 36, 39, 51, 134, 226, 248, 279, 301, 304–307, 309, 314, 318, 320 Sheshbazzar 42–43, 224, 225 Sin, sinner 1, 91, 94, 95, 109, 114, 119, 125, 127, 133, 142, 158, 179, 182– 185, 187, 189, 200, 207, 213, 214, 217, 227, 228, 242, 246–248, 261, 267, 268, 270, 271, 273, 275, 279– 282, 285, 286, 295, 297, 317, 318, 320, 321, 334, 335 Soteriology, soteriological 172, 184, 210 Speech-act 14, 23, 24, 45, 62, 106, 111– 113, 115, 119, 166, 180, 182, 198, 210, 228, 281, 293, 296, 299 – indicator 166, 196 – theory 12–14, 23–26, 108, 119, 180, 316 – classes of speech-acts 14, 23, 25, 111, 149, 316 – indirect speech act 183 – complex illocutionary acts 111, 112, 149, 150, 158, 179 – illocutionary act, role 13, 14, 23–27, 45, 110–113, 115, 116, 119, 120, 130, 141, 150, 158, 159, 165, 180, 182, 194, 207, 223, 228, 231, 239, 242, 247, 251, 254, 255, 267, 268, 275, 281, 285, 287, 311, 312, 316, 318, 321 – locutionary act, role 13, 26, 111–113, 115, 116 – perlocutionary act, role 13, 25, 26, 35, 111–113, 115, 116, 120, 121, 139, 141, 143, 144, 186, 239, 247, 281, 285, 302, 314, 316–318, 321 Spirit 136, 152, 277, 278, 294, 345

422

Subject Index

Statement 22, 23, 37, 40, 68, 77–79, 83, 95, 100, 110, 128, 150, 151, 153, 156, 157, 159, 160, 168–170, 172– 175, 186, 188, 189, 193, 194, 196– 198, 200, 201, 203, 204, 206, 207, 216, 217, 221, 223, 227, 229, 231, 233, 236, 238, 245, 246, 250, 260, 264, 265, 276, 280, 294, 335 Structuralism 10 Stubbornness 77, 198, 200, 202, 213, 216 Stumbling block 129, 271, 276, 277, 279–281, 285 Superscription 22, 66 – see also Heading, headline Syro-Ephraimite Crisis 73, 74, 83, 118, 135, 138, 141 Šamaš 85 Tabeel 135 Tablet of Nippur 44 Taxonomy 14 Teaching of Merikare P 123 57 Temple 34, 35, 39–43, 80, 85–87, 95, 303, 311, 316 Temple theology 86, 93, 309, 311 Tenth 79, 82, 132, 134 Testimony 175, 184, 219, 223, 231, 235, 241–247, 249, 279, 286, 302, 313, 318, 319, 321, 322 Text 9, 15, 77, 105, 116, 141, 159, 321 Theophany, epiphany 69, 88, 89, 185, 283, 284, 294–296, 313, 346, 347 Tiglat-pileser 136 Tomb inscriptions 58 Torah piety 145, 330 Tradition-history, traditio-historical 86, 89, 309, 311 Transgressor, transgression 213, 227, 271, 274, 280 Trial 166, 167, 169, 172, 175, 183, 186 – scene 151, 185 – speech 167, 169, 176, 228 – see also Lawsuit Trishagion 80, 81 Trito-, Third Isaiah – see Isaiah, prophet Trust 231, 234, 237, 240, 241, 247, 274, 335, 340 Tyranny 138

Ugarit, Ugaritic 82 Uraeus 87, 88, 94 Uzziah 66, 67, 76, 82, 86, 97, 134 Validation 10 Vindication 126, 214, 231, 238, 245, 279 Vindicator – see YHWH Vorlage 169, 341, 343 Wilderness 183 Will 160–162, 175, 185, 201, 202, 236, 332 – free will 162 Wisdom 93, 113, 252, 333 Witness 144, 165, 166, 168, 170–175, 179–181, 183–185, 187–189, 198, 246–248, 313, 339 Xerxes I. 42 Yehud 43 YHWH – creator 163, 164, 210–212 – enemy 293, 295, 343, 344 – father 293, 294, 310 – potter 293, 298, 310 – redeemer 172, 182, 267, 292, 293, 296 – saviour 167, 176, 181, 292, 296, 343– 345 – vindicator 223, 231 – warrior 293 YHWH’s – anger 135, 137, 214, 295 – arm 226, 294 – guidance 293, 296 – glory 80, 86, 91, 92, 95, 195 – kingship, YHWH as king 84–86, 88, 90, 92, 93, 95, 331 – mercies 292 – name 195, 198, 238, 290, 292, 294– 297, 313, 340 – plan 126 – presence 90, 94, 95, 117, 118, 125, 129, 132, 164, 211, 223, 245, 264, 276, 294, 313, 343, 345 – throne 85

Subject Index – uniqueness 167, 172, 181, 184, 210, 213, 217 – vengeance 284 – wrath 1, 2, 60, 320, 321 Zechariah, prophet – Deutero-Zechariah 190 Zerubbabel 40, 41

423

Zion 35, 41, 47–49, 52, 53, 65, 68, 69, 83, 85, 86, 95, 117, 134, 136, 198– 200, 211, 213, 214, 216, 226–228, 239–241, 245, 248, 256, 259, 273, 274, 277, 278, 283, 296, 297, 300– 302, 310, 331, 333, 334 Zion tradition 53 Zoroastrianism 173, 174