RBL 03/2015 John Goldingay Isaiah 56-66: Introduction, Text, and Commentary International Critical Commentary London: Bloomsbury, 2014. Pp. xxviii + 527. Cloth. $100.00. ISBN 9780567569622. Johanna Erzberger Catholic University of Paris Paris, France John Goldingay, the David Allan Hubbard Professor of Old Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary, is the author of an impressive number of publications on the book of Isaiah. This commentary on Isa 56 66 for the International Critical Commentary series follows his two-volume commentary on Isa 40 55 (2006), which he co-authored with David Payne. The commentary s preface places it in the context of the preceding volumes. This is followed by an extensive bibliography and a detailed introduction. The introduction defends the traditional delimitation of Isa 56 66 as Trito-Isaiah against various alternative proposals by scholars such as Penna, Seitz, and Watts and recently also by Berges. Goldingay argues that Isa 56 66 form a coherent and relatively independent collection in the sense that they have a beginning and end and a structure of their own with a distinctive argument (2). For a general discussion of the underlying proto-mt, Goldingay refers to the preceding volumes. He offers a rough analysis of the chapters concentric structure that is similar to analyses proposed by Vermeylen, Berges, and others, though it differs in its details. This is followed by a discussion of the historical context of final form of the text, which Goldingay situates in Persian period Judah around the same time as the composition of Ezra and Nehemiah. An overview of the history of
research on Isaiah covers the greater part of the introduction. The approaches discussed (redaction-historical, sociological, textual, poetic, postcolonial, and Isianic ) are not of the same nature, but they allow for a sharpening of Goldingay s own approach. Goldingay argues for an approach that interprets the final text form of the text in a way that profits from its tensions rather than using them for redaction-critical purposes. Goldingay does not deny that Tritio-Isaiah has a redaction history, but he argues that redaction-historical and sociological approaches are impeded by both a lack of precise data relating the book to any concrete historical event and the book s embeddedness in a broader stream of biblical traditions. Goldingay s final understanding of Isa 56 66 as a compilation of material issuing from a number of prophets (7) is accepted as a working assumption. The underlying premise of sociological approaches that make divisions in the community the key to understanding prophecy in Second Temple times (18) is called into question. Instead, Goldingay adopts a synchronic approach that seeks to read the text on its own terms and explicitly highlights the text s presentation of itself as a religious text. Arguing against a sharp distinction between prose and poetic texts in Isaiah, he relates the text s seeming contextlessness, which makes precise dating difficult, to its overall poetic nature. He also acknowledges postcolonial readings, which allow for a perspective oriented toward the text s modern readers. Goldingay finally defines the place of Isa 56 66 in the context of the whole book. Isaiah 56 66 is considered to be a compilation that stands on its own whose intertextual references to other parts of the book of Isaiah on the one hand and to other biblical books on the other do not substantially differ. The commentary is divided into sections that largely follow the assumed concentric structure of Isa 65 66: the external framing passages 56:1 8 and 66:18 24 discuss the place of foreigners in the service of YHWH; 56:9 59:8 and 65:1 66:17 confront the community with its transgressions, while also incorporating promises; 59:9 15a and 63:7 64:11 contain prayers of lament and confession and pleas for YHWH s forgiveness and for Jerusalem s restoration; 59:15b 21 and 63:1 6 contain visions about YHWH s judgment; 60:1 22 and 61:10 62:12 deal with the future restoration of Jerusalem; they frame 61:1 9, which concern the prophet s mission and form the center of the third part of the book. Isaiah 56:9 59:8 are divided into two sections. Longer sections are further divided into subsections. Each section of the commentary offers a translation of the given passage and is accompanied by an apparatus. The apparatus highlights variant texts, while paying special attention to the Qumran texts and the LXX. It frequently refers to the masorah. An introduction to each section justifies the delimitation of each passage while paying special attention to the paragraphing of the manuscripts. It offers an analysis of the passage s
form, a short summary of its content, and an overview of relations to other biblical texts within and outside the book of Isaiah. The introduction leads to a detailed commentary on one or two verses at a time. As the proto-mt is considered to be the oldest text form, the variant versions mainly serve to highlight its wording as well as early interpretations. Individual expressions are discussed against the background of occurrences of the same word in other biblical texts as well as their meaning in their present context according to the early translations. Though Goldingay s overall approach is synchronic, he frequently refers to debates concerning the presumed diachronic history of the text. Goldingay pays close attention to intertextual relations to other parts of the book of Isaiah as well as to other biblical books. Thematic parallels with contemporaneous books such as Ezra and Nehemiah are underlined. Goldingay s commentary stands out for its frequent references to the text s reception history, in particular to interpretations in the New Testament, rabbinic literature, and the writings of the church fathers. Where they are deemed appropriate, postcolonial interpretations are cited. Each section closes with a conclusion, which summarizes the interpretation of the individual verses and places the passage in its broader context. According to Goldingay s synchronic reading of Isa 56 66, the text has a concentric pattern but also develops a trajectory that develops from beginning to end. A lament, a confession, and a plea for YHWH s forgiveness and for the city s restoration (59:9 15a) stand between an admonition (56:9 59:8) and God s promise (59:15b 21), so that they answer the former and are answered by the latter; the parallel text (63:7 64:11) answers God s (unfulfilled) promise (63:1 6) (423) and is answered by an insistence that God only restores the faithful and judges the faithless (65:1 66:17). While Isa 56 59, 60 62 seem to be characterized by a view of the future that, notwithstanding the more specific critique of the community s leaders (56 59), affects the whole of the community for better or for worse (202, 316), Isa 63 66 seems to distinguish between the fate of the righteous and the evil within the community. The exceptional handling of the role of eunuchs and foreigners in 56:1 8 influences the understanding of the place of the foreigner in the community reflected in Isa 60 62. The topic is once more taken up in the book s final part, 66:18 24. Diachronic interpretations are frequently cited and occasionally buttress the commentary s own synchronic perspective: Conflicting hypothesis regarding the growth of a text support Goldingay s general judgment that the complex processes of redaction history can hardly be precisely reconstructed. Ultimately, the commentary s synchronic reading entails a change of perspective. From a diachronic point of view, the unconditional promises of Isa 60 62, which differ from the framing passages in both style and content, might or might not have been later called into question by the conditions imposed on the community according to the more confrontational (and presumably
later) chapters 56 59. On the level of the final text, however, the promise given to Israel according to Isa 60 62 has to be understood as only given on condition of what precedes. Notwithstanding his overridingly synchronic perspective, Goldingay frequently refers to the text s redaction history wherever contradictory structures overlap or where distinctive features of the text cannot easily be explained exclusively on a synchronic basis. For example, the isolated nature of 63:7 64:11, which is characterized by a dearth of links to other parts of the book of Isaiah or any other biblical books, is explained by it being an earlier text that was later introduced into its present context to match its counterpart, 59:9 15a (382). Among the various subjects of Isa 56 66 addressed in the commentary, three topics that characterize the commentary s understanding of Isa 56 66 are worth mentioning explicitly. (1) Regarding the date of the text, Goldingay localizes the final version in Persian period Judah. Subjects such as communal fasting and discussions of the role of the Shabbat and the place of foreigners lead Goldingay to the conclusion that it was written at approximately the same time as Ezra-Neh. Parallels to Isa 40 55 show that the Judeans situation in the land is felt to be similar to that of the Babylonian exile, during which they were likewise dependent on a foreign hegemonic power. (2) Goldingay repeatedly rejects an eschatological reading of Isa 56 66, or at least calls for a revaluation of the term eschatological. Although Isa 56 66 differs from Isa 1 39 and 40 55 in its lack of references to any concrete contemporary event, either as characterizing the people s present situation or as giving cause for hope for its immediate future (such as the appearance of a figure such as Cyrus in Isa 44:28; 45:1 would do), the promises do not seem detached from the original addressees present situation. Though marked by metaphorical language and exceeding what can realistically immediately be hoped for, they describe a future still characterized by birth and death and by everyday work. (3) Regarding the role of the nations (a topic frequently dealt with in the literature), Goldingay argues that the foreigners are granted vis-à-vis Israel the role of Israel vis-à-vis the Levites. One small detail in which Goldingay differs with recent interpretations seems noteworthy: in his interpretation of Isa 57:7 and similar passages, Goldingay seems to take for granted a historical background of child sacrifice even in Persian times (117). The commentary impresses by its wealth of information. By the sheer number of intertextual parallels it provides, however, it risks losing its reader in the tangle of connections. No picture of the text s overarching dynamics is provided explicitly, so such a picture only develops in the reader s imagination. A more detailed overview of these dynamics than the very rough summary presented in the introduction would have been helpful. In addition, Goldingay s failure to put forth a coherent diachronic hypothesis, though it accords with his synchronic approach, makes it difficult to classify those
diachronic hypotheses that are nevertheless frequently mentioned. (Isolated remarks suggest that Goldingay supports a model consistent with mainstream scholarship, but this is never made explicit.) My final point is a query rather than a critique. As Goldingay treats Isa 65 66 more or less as a distinct work, the overridingly synchronic perspective of his interpretation does not necessarily apply to the relationship of Isa 65 66 to Isa 1 39, 40 55. The question of dependency seems in fact crucial to Goldingay s understanding of the relation of Isa 56 66 to Isa 1 39, 40 55, which he seems to consider earlier (249) throughout. But should late additions in Isa 1 39 that obviously refer to Isa 60 not influence the reading of Isa 65 66 in the same way as Isa 58 influences the reading of Isa 60? If Isa 66:18 24 seems to have been added to conclude the book of Isaiah as a whole (525), the linking of Isa 56 66 to the preceding parts of the book of Isaiah cannot be merely part of its reception history. Goldingay s commentary is helpful due to the large quantity of detailed information that it presents. Its numerous references to the text s early reception history are informative. While Goldingay remains conservative in his delamination of Isa 56 66 as Trito-Isaiah as well as in most of his individual interpretations, he breaks new ground in his overridingly synchronic reading and critical revaluation of the eschatological nature of the text. To appreciate the work s full value, one must read it as a continuation of the preceding two volumes. The commentary s language and style make it easy to follow. Whether the occasional side notes, which borrow from the present reader s world to, for example, define a coat of mail as the ancient equivalent to a bullet-proof vest (227), serve more to amuse the reader or to aid in understanding is left for the reader to decide.