|
www.stephendawes.com UNIVERSITY DIPLOMA OR DEGREE go to university certificate (1) go to university certificate (2) go to Truro Theological Society go to powerpoint presentations
This pic is of Handsworth Theological College in Birmingham (1881-1970), one of the 5 theological colleges training Methodist ministers in the late 60's. It was at Handsworth that I learned that academic rigour and Biblical Study were allies and not enemies, a tradition in Methodism going back to our beginnings (not every student agreed, of course). This page, very much still in the process of being constructed, contains some of the handouts I have used in various diploma or degree courses, mainly in the Old Testament modules I have taught for the Exeter Dip.Theol and BTh but also from ventures further afield, such as at Wesley College, Bristol. There is nothing here from the course I have enjoyed teaching the most - Reading the Psalms - as most of that was tweaked to be used in Studyguide: The Psalms which was published by SCM in May 2010. Once that goes out of print the whole book will, no doubt, appear on this website.
INDEX
1
A Guide to Old Testament Commentaries (updated
October 2009). There is no end to the writing of Bible commentaries,
even though publishers appear and disappear regularly.
Several new series of commentaries have appeared in recent years, just as
some older ones have faded away. In
addition one-off commentaries on particular books appear from time to time
outside of any series. What follows
is my guide to the various commentary series currently on offer.
Obviously the quality of individual commentaries within each series will
vary and so you must shop around. I
have marked with * the commentaries which I think are particularly good in each
series – though that of course reflects my own opinions and experience which
not all would share! The
Old Testament Commentary Survey by T Longman lll, IVP, latest edition 2003,
is worth consulting. You will also
find numerous Bible commentaries on the web, usually old ones (eg Matthew
Henry’s commentary which was published in umpteen volumes in the 17th
century) which are often devotional and pre-critical – these should be used
with caution and are generally not the kind of thing which you should be using
for your assignments. Likewise
series like The Bible Speaks Today, the Welwyn
Commentary series, Crossway Bible
Guides, Evangelical Press Study
Commentaries, Mentor Bible Commentaries and Focus
on the Bible are generally unsuitable for use in assignments and the NIV
Application Commentaries should be used for assignments only with caution
and only to supplement commentaries from the series below
Level
1 Apollos Old
Testament Commentaries is a new series just beginning to appear.
They are from a conservative stable, aimed primarily at preachers, but
academically rigorous The Cambridge
Bible Commentary series, published by Cambridge University Press to
accompany the publication of the New English Bible in the 1960s is a good
example of moderate scholarship made accessible in a clear and straightforward
way, now dated of course - *1&2 Samuel (2 vols P R Ackroyd).
A new series of these is coming out soon but at a higher level The Daily Study
Bible series, now published by Westminster/John Knox, aims to continue for
the OT the excellent introductory and popular work of the 1950s William Barclay
series on the New Testament - *Genesis (2 vols – J C L Gibson)
*Isaiah (2 vols – J F A Sawyer)
The Epworth
Commentaries, published by Epworth Press/SCM are aimed primarily at
preachers - *Psalms (A Curtis) The
International Theological Commentary series, published by Eerdmans/Handsel
Press uses a variety of international scholars and tries (usually
unsuccessfully) to ‘transcend the parochialism of Western civilisation’ -
*Genesis 1-11 (D E Gowan) The People’s
Bible Commentary series, published by the Bible Reading Fellowship, is an
entry-level series aimed at nurturing mind and heart – *1&2 Kings (S B
Dawes – sorry, couldn’t resist this!) The Tyndale
Bible Commentaries/Tyndale OT Commentaries, published by Tyndale Press, come
from a conservative base and provide a ‘sound and solid’ commentary on the
text - *Ezekiel (J B Taylor). There
is now a new set of these appearing – it looks good - to replace the old The Westminster
Bible Companion series, published by Westminster/John Knox, is based on NRSV
and tries to be relevant and accessible with a message for Christians today -
*Psalms (J Limburg) *Isaiah 1-39 (W Brueggemann) *Isaiah 40-66 (W Brueggemann) Level
2 Readings
is a new series published by Sheffield Academic Press which operates on the
current ‘readerly’ way of reading texts which is notably and excitingly
different from that of the majority of commentaries which still follow the more
traditional approaches The Anchor
Bible series,
published by Doubleday, is a solidly academic and meaty series from the The Baker
Commentary on the OT series is a new one, and with stars like John Goldingay
doing Psalms it looks good at this stage Berit Olam is
a new series published by Michael Glazier (its NT series is called Sacra
Pagina) offering a variety of ‘literary readings’ The
Interpretation series from Westminster/John Knox, subtitled ‘A Bible
Commentary for Teaching and Preaching’ aims to bridge the gap between the
academic and less critical approaches but tends to be pricey (don’t confuse
this series with the entry-level Interpretation
Bible Studies series from the same publishers) - *Genesis (W Brueggemann)
*Exodus (T Fretheim) *Psalms (J L Mays) *Proverbs (L Perdue) The New Century
Bible Commentary went through a number of publishers and recently
disappeared altogether, which is sad because it was a thoroughly useful series.
Look second-hand where possible - *Leviticus (P J Budd) *Numbers (E W
Davies) *Psalms (2 vols - A A Anderson) *Proverbs (R N Whybray) The New
International Biblical Commentary series, based on the NIV, published by
Paternoster/Hendrickson is conservative but lively, a possible replacement for
the New Century Bible series as being
the most generally workmanlike and useful at this level - *1&2 Kings (I W
Provan) The Old
Testament Library series was published by SCM as the British flagship of
mainstream OT studies aimed at ministers, teachers and the ‘thinking
layperson’, but most are now out of print at SCM so look second-hand.
The series has been taken over by Westminster/John Knox and some of the
classics are available from them, though at a price, and they are adding new
titles too - *Genesis (G von Rad) *Exodus (B S Childs) *Ruth (K Nielsen)
*Ecclesiastes (J L Crenshaw) *Proverbs ( Worth looking out for is the emerging series called
the SCM Theological Commentary on the
Bible, which, as its name suggest, aims for an explicitly theological
reading of the texts The Shorter
Commentary series, now appearing, is a shorter version of the ICC
commentaries (see below) minus the highly technical stuff – no OT example yet
but it’s on its way The Smith and
Helwys Bible Commentary series is another new series making its appearance.
If the first, on 1 and 2 Kings by Level
3 These series use Hebrew and that does deter some
students, but much can be gained with perseverance by students without any
knowledge of that language The
Hermeneia series, published by Fortress Press is based on a German model and is very
thorough in a Historical-critical mode - *Jeremiah (2 vols W L The
International Critical Commentary series first appeared at the beginning of
the 20th century and older volumes are being replaced in an ongoing
programme. It is published by T
& T Clark (Continuum) and represents traditional British Historical-critical
scholarship at its best - *Jeremiah ( The New
Cambridge Bible Commentary is a new series from Cambridge University Press
replacing the old Cambridge Bible
Commentary series and moving to higher levels The Word
Biblical Commentary series is published by Word Publishing and usually (but
not always) represents a conservative perspective on the Historical-critical
model - * Psalms (3 vols: P C Craigie on 1-50, M E Tate on 51-100, L C Allen on
101-150) *Job (2 vols, D J A Clines) *Daniel (J Goldingay) One-offs J H Eaton, Psalms,
T&T Clark reflects a lifetime’s thoughtful and faithful engagement with
the Psalms by my old teacher J Goldingay, ‘Men behaving badly’, is a literary
commentary on 1&2 Samuel published
by Paternoster, an excellent read R P Gordon, 1&2
Samuel, published by Zondervan D Kidner, ‘A Time to Mourn, and a Time to Dance’,
is a small commentary on Ecclesiastes
in the The Bible Speaks Today series.
It was first published by IVP in 1976 but is still around C Westermann’s single volume commentary on Genesis
published by T&T Clark/Continuum is an abbreviation of his major 3-volume
work published by Augsburg/Fortress One
Volume Commentaries, Dictionaries and Concordances If you want a one volume Bible Commentary, then the
best is probably the Oxford Bible
Commentary ed Barton & Muddiman, published by Oxford University Press
followed by Eerdman’s Commentary on the
Bible, ed J D G Dunn and J Rogerson, published by Eerdmans and Harper's
Bible Commentary, ed J L Mays, published by Harper.
In addition you should note the Women’s
Bible Commentary ed C Newsom & S Ringe, published by Westminster/John
Knox and written from a feminist perspective If you are looking for a good Bible Dictionary I
recommend P Achtemeier, Harper's Bible
Dictionary, published by Harper & Row.
The Oxford Companion to the Bible
covers some of the same ground, as does the A decent Concordance is an indispensable tool, and for my money the 19th century Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible remains the best, readily available second-hand. There are various free online versions of concordances and three good ones are OnlineStudyBible at http://bible.crosswalk.com, http://www.bibletab.com and http://bible.oremus.org
(A Study Day for the ‘Images of God and the World in the Hebrew Bible’ module of the University of Exeter, January 31st, 2004) Introduction to the Day Since the early 19th century it has been customary for practitioners of the Historical-critical method to divide the Book of Isaiah into distinct parts – sometimes two, sometimes three - each with an identifiable context, meaning and author, and there is still (in my view) value in that enterprise With the advent of the new literary criticism in the 1970’s it was customary to look at the book in its final, whole, canonical, form; and there is still (in my view) value in that enterprise With the advent of the intentionally post-modern enterprise of reader-criticism in the 1980’s it became the vogue for readers to bring their interests to the text and play with it in whatever ways might turn them on; and there is still (in my view) value in that enterprise It has also been somewhat customary for practitioners of these different approaches to be rude about the others and there is, in my view, no value in that More recently sanity has begun to set in and each of these enterprises is increasingly being seen to have its own value. Today we will dip into each of them: we will pay close attention to passages in Deutero-Isaiah, and the very use of the term indicates allegiance to the HCM; but we will also look elsewhere in the Book of Isaiah, exploring its intertextuality; and we will also simply pick and choose those images, themes, metaphors, theologies and verses which appeal to me! To give some shape to the day I propose three sessions:
Session 1 YHWH the Redeemer 1 The sublime and the scurrilous Even in the most cursory reading of Isa 40-55 you can hardly fail to be struck by the contrast between those passages which speak of God in the most sublime of ways, and those passages which pour scorn on idols in the crudest polemic. DI contains, on the one hand, what is regarded by almost everyone as the Hebre Bible’s clearest statements of monotheism and its highest doctrine of God, and on the other hand, some of the HB’s cheapest attacks on idols I want therefore, first and briefly, to consider these sets of images side by side, which is the way they are juxtaposed in DI itself, and there are, at least on my reckoning, four sets:
This contrast – which functions to point up YHWH as the only God – to whom no other god compares (hence refrain of 40:18, 40:25, 44:7, 46:5) dominates Isa 40-47. It is not, however, found in 48-55 which focuses, I hope to demonstrate, on YHWH as Israel’s ‘redeemer.’ This rhetoric or polemic of contrast has an important role in the book in making the case that though idols are expensive to produce, maintain and service, they have no cash value, they cannot deliver a product, they cannot ‘save’. On the other hand, YHWH not only ‘saves’ but does so for free (55:1-2). I am not proposing a ‘consumerist reading’ of DI but you could read these chapters in terms of a product, a market, an advertising strategy and a sales pitch 2 Redemption, return and renewal – naming Israel’s God as ‘Redeemer’ The theme of Isa 48-55 is Israel’s impending exodus from Babylon and its return to the Promised Land – a theme which is expressed through many images and which utilises a variety of rhetoric - and if this suggests to you that you might find points of contact between the ‘servant figure’ in these chapters and God’s servant Moses in the narratives of the Exodus from Egypt, then you might like to bear that in mind for this afternoon’s session. Here, however, I want to focus on how God is named, for the names of God are, it seems to me, significant in the HB generally. Before we look at how Israel’s God, the One and Only God, is named in these chapters as Israel’s ‘redeemer’, we might just recap on some of the other ways that he is named here DI repeats what might be said to be HB’s standard way of speaking of God as YHWH ‘the LORD,’ often in the form of ‘the LORD your/our God’ and occasionally in the expression ‘the LORD of Hosts.’ None of this is distinctive and it need not detain us here Likewise, DI uses the typically Isaianic way of speaking of God as ‘the Holy One of Israel’ ((40:25), 41:14, 41:16, 41:20, 43:3, (43:15), 45:11, 47:4, 48:17, 49:7, 49:7, 54:5, 55:5) – 12/14/2 times in FI/DI/TI respectively The incomparability of Israel’s God, a main point in the polemic against idols, is also picked up in the description of him as ‘the first and the last’ (41:4, 44:6, 48:12) Without using explicit ‘redeemer’ language the very interesting verse - 40:28 with its 4 parts (a/ Everlasting God, b/ Creator, c/ not faint or weary and d/ unsearchable in understanding) encapsulates the pictures painted in 40:10-26 and paints pictures of the renewal and re-energising which are possible for ‘those who wait for the LORD’ (40:28-31). Which brings me to ‘redeemer’ language in naming God in DI. The ten occurrences of the description of God as Israel’s ‘redeemer’ (using the participle of the verb mainly with the pronominal suffix ‘your’) is, statistically, the most frequently used descriptor of God in DI after ‘Holy One of Israel’, usually in the powerful self-references of God where the prophet speaks in the first person oracular style in the name of YHWH:
Then we can note these six occurrences of the verb with YHWH as subject:
Plus the single occurrence of the passive participle ‘the redeemed’ of Israel at 51:10 (parallel ‘the ransomed of the LORD’, note the parallel with ransom also in Jere 31:11) in a reference to the Exodus as a paradigm of the new deliverance To complete some Isaian statistics: The only occurrence of this verb in First Isaiah is of the passive participle at 35:9 which is arguably a later passage anyway and forms the text for 51:10. The noun is used of God three times in TI (59:20, 60:16, 63:16), the verb once (63:9), the passive participle once (62:12) and the abstract noun [‘redemption’] once at 63:4 Analysis of the sentences and paragraphs in which these words are found in DI shows that this action of God (an act of power which does not exclude the use of violent force) is predicated on the relief of need and the restoration to prosperity, particularly the need of a people in exile and the restoration of their prosperity in a return to and a reconstruction of their homeland Having seen this usage in DI we can look at its occurrence elsewhere in the HB. The figure of a go’el is, you may remember, prominent in the Book of Ruth. In that theological novel the go’el is the ‘redeeming kinsman’ (NJPS) ), the nearest male of Naomi’s dead husband’s family with the responsibility of restoring Naomi’s fortune after the death of her husband and sons, only the shrewd mother-in-law and daughter-in-law find a much better redemption through a not quite so close relative, Boaz, instead. The harsher side of such a redeeming role is set out in Leviticus (25:26), Numbers (35:19ff) and Deuteronomy (19:6ff), especially in the setting of violence done and life taken where the go’el is, in the words of NJPS, the ‘blood-avenger.’ So what we have in DI is an application of this person and this activity – the ‘kinsman-redeemer’ and the ‘redemption of a kinsman in trouble’ as a metaphor for YHWH and his deliverance of Israel DI is not the only HB book to use this metaphor. Ps 107:2 uses the phrase ‘the redeemed of YHWH’ and in 18 other places this vocabulary is used with YHWH as its subject (and once one with King in Ps 72:14). Some of these are general references to YHWH as a redeemer, from the Pit, Sheol, enemies or from no threat in particular (Ps 103:4, Ho 13:14, Ps 69:19 and Ps 19:5/107:2/119:154/Prov 23:11 respectively) but 6 refer to the Exodus (Ex 6:6, 15:3, Pss 74:2, 77:16, 78:35 and 106:10) and 4 to deliverance from Babylon (Jere 31:11, 50:34, Lam 3:58, Mic 4:10). Another is in the blessing in Gen 48:16. To these can be added the enigmatic Job 19:25. The prominence of literary associations with the Exodus is instructive for its use in DI, adding to the other ways in which the announced return from Babylon is frequently expressed in exodus-type terms A final link with Exodus in the naming of YHWH as redeemer in DI can be seen in the use of ‘I am He’ at 43:13, 43:25, 48:12 and 51:12, in which many commentators recognise an association with the ‘I am’ of Exodus 3:6, 14 and 6:2, 6. Compare also the phrases ‘I am YHWH’ (42:6, 42:8, 43:11, 43:15, 44:24, 45:5, 45:6, 45:18) and ‘I am God’ (43:13, 45:22, 46:9) and note the polemic on this in 47:8, 10 against the ‘I am’ of Babylon’s pretensions Before we attempt a conclusion we can look at another interesting verse - 54:5 – and here cf the translations in NJPS, NIV and NRSV Conclusion There is no doubt about DI’s monotheism. What I hope we have seen in this session is the way in which God’s power is seen as redemptive – aiming to restore what had been lost and repair what had been destroyed – and that there is an intratextual source for this metaphor in the exodus traditions – to which there are direct allusions in 41:18, 43:2, 43:16-20, 48:21, 50:2-3?, 51:10, 52:12 as well as in the connotations of this redemption vocabulary. In this metaphor Babylon is Egypt and the exodus becomes the promise of a re-entry into the homeland. DI is content to work with an ideology of imperial military and political leadership – to which there are direct allusions in 41:2f, 41:25, 44:28, 45:1, 45:13 – in that Cyrus is seen as YHWH’s agent: but I suggest that this redemption vocabulary might also function as a reminder that YHWH is a God whose incomparable power is directed in favour of the poor and needy, a fact which Israel will forget at its peril – as TI will go on to assert in the old prophetic style after the return has taken place
Session 2 The ‘Servant of the LORD’ Introduction: Many books have been written on ‘The Servant of the LORD’ in DI (as they have on most things of course, given that scholarship is primarily about economics these days) and many of the questions asked remain unanswered (which might be telling us something, if you think about it). In this session I want to do things, first to look rather generally at the ‘Servant Songs’ and about servant imagery in DI as a whole, and, secondly, to look at these ‘Servant Songs’ canonically, and see how they are read in the rest of the Bible 1 The ‘Servant Songs’ and servant imagery in DI Since Bernard Duhm’s commentary of 1892 four passages in DI have traditionally been called the ‘Servant Songs/Poems’ (42:1-4 (v1), 49:1-6 (vv3,5,6,7), 50:4-9 (word doesn’t occur), 52:13-53:12 (vv13 and 11 only)), which are said to speak of the role of God's servant in a way different from the way that the word ‘Servant’ is used elsewhere in DI where it is applied to the People of Israel as a whole (41:8,9; 42:19; 43:10; 44:1,2,21 (x2); 45:4; 48:20; 50:10(?); 54:17). 44:26 also doesn’t work as ‘nation’, and possibly 50:10 goes here too. More recently Mettinger has questioned whether these four passages should be singled out at all This imagery is not used in First Isa (20:3, 22:20, 37:35 are only places where ‘My servant’ is found and in each case the person is identified as Isaiah, Eliakim and David respectively in the conventional formula). In TI 56:6 promises that some foreigners will be YHWH’s servants, 63:17 identifies faithful Israelites of old as such, 65:8,9,13(x3),14,15 divide Israelites into YHWH’s ‘servants’ and the rest and 66:14 distinguishes the happy fate of YHWH’s servants from the unhappy fate of his enemies. All of TI supports the ‘nation’ idea or its ‘true nation’ variant Endless attempts have been made to identify the Servant of the Songs. Some have seen the Nation of Israel itself, or a community within the nation as being the Servant of God; while others have opted for individuals who could be named, like Jeremiah or Zerubbabel, or anonymous individuals like the prophet himself. No conclusions have been agreed. Whilst the question of the Servant's identity might be important (though the fact that the writer makes no identification is a factor worthy of some consideration), it has tended to overshadow all other questions, especially that of the Servant's role. What is clear is that the Servant suffers on behalf of others in faithfulness to his call and commission from God, and that his suffering is not punishment but the result of his being faithful in a faithless world – a relatively controversial idea in HB of course (which means that the Fourth Song must be placed with Job and Hab as protests against Deut Orthodoxy and Orthodox Wisdom. It is not clear that that suffering was to the death, or how far the language being used is literal or rich metaphor 2 The ‘Servant of the LORD’ in canonical perspective in the Hebrew Bible The commonest way this imagery is used in DI is in the expression ‘my servant’ (13 times out of the total of 20 occurrences of ‘ebed). In HB the idiom ‘x my servant/my servant x’ in speech of God is used of individuals eg Abraham, Moses, David, Zerubbabel, ‘the Branch’ (Zech 3:8) and Job; and remarkably in Jeremiah of Nebuchadnezzar (25:9; 27:6, 43:10), . ‘My servant Jacob’ is used of the nation in Jere 30:10 and 46:27,28, as is ‘my servant Jacob/Israel’ 7 times out of the 20 occurrences of the word in DI (8 if you count the controversial 49:3) Thus, the fact that the identity of this servant is not clear in the second and fourth Servant Songs (the reference of this expression to the nation will just about work in the first and third Songs) is quite startling in HB terms - unless it is understood there too in terms of the nation as in most of the rest of the occurrences in DI, or in terms of the prophet himself as in 44:26(?) And finally, note in passing that in Jewish interpretation ‘Suffering Servant’ imagery is never used of the Messiah 3 The ‘Servant of the LORD’ in canonical perspective in Christian Bibles a Quotes from the Servant Songs in the NT The Servant motif is used in the NT and verses from these Songs quoted; and interesting and controversial questions emerge here too. For example, did Jesus think of himself and his ministry in these terms, or was this reflection on his life, death and resurrection later ascribed to him by the Early Church? For our purpose the passages which concern us are those which see Jesus' life, death and resurrection as the fulfilment of the prediction of the Servant Songs. They are where the direct link is made in Mt 8:17 (to 53:4) and Lk 22:37 = Mk 15:28 (to 53:12) in terms of the fulfilment of scripture, plus where the connections are made without reference to any direct fulfilling of scripture in Acts 8:32-35 (to 53:7-8) and 1 Pet 2:24-25 (to 53:5-6). This process is seen fully developed in the Authorised Version which simply gives the page heading to Isa 53 as ‘Christ's free redemption: His passion, and the good success thereof’, and in the use of Isa 53 as a Good Friday lection. Just what is going on here? is the question: but before we look at it, however, I want to digress and consider a simpler case, that of the use of Isa 7:14 in Mt 1:23 b A digression – but an important one Were it not for Mt 1:23 Isa 7 would be, by the standards of the OT prophetic books anyway, a straightforward one presenting few if any real difficulties. Its historical setting is clear enough in vv1-2, and this Syro-Ephraimite coalition which is leaning on Ahaz of Judah can be dated to around 738 BCE. Isaiah's message in that situation is plain enough, that Ahaz should do nothing at all because the threat from Ephraim (Israel) and Syria is very temporary and will soon pass. Much more serious for him is the greater threat from Assyria, which God will bring on Judah unless ways are mended. The attempt to join with Syria and Ephraim to avert the Assyrian threat is not only politically and militarily futile, it is a theological failure to see where the hand of God is at work in current affairs In the light of this the various parts of the chapter make sense:
Our problem is created by Mt 1:23. This is of a piece with a number of other such ‘fulfilled prophecy’ statements in Mt 1-2, eg 2:5, 2:15, 2:17f, 2:23, cf 3:3. Of these only the Micah quote is legitimate by our standards, the others contain misreadings (re John the Baptist), misapplications (Ramah & My Son) or simply inventions (Nazarene). Thus, what are we to make of Matthew? Let us assume that he is neither a fool nor a charlatan and ask if his use of the OT text about Immanuel is legitimate? On one level no; because the plain sense is that which we have already seen. The meaning and intention of Isaiah are plain. But at another level yes; because the intention of preserving the writings of the prophets must have been paradigmatic, ie to gain inspiration from a parallel event or experience from the past for the present. The Immanuel Oracle is therefore a suitable ‘sermon text’ to speak of God's deliverance, and the proof of the delivering God was seen in Judah's deliverance from both Pekah/Rezin and Assyria. Thus Mt can use the paradigm to proclaim the birth of the New Deliverer, and in this sense Mt is asserting that the deliverance through Jesus is the complete and final fulfilment of the deliverance of Judah in the 8th century BCE There is no reason in this case (and I think this method works for all of Mt's "predictions-fulfilled"), why we should not both have our cake (Isaiah's words were addressed to and relevant to Ahaz etc) and eat it (Isaiah's words really are fulfilled in our Immanuel, JC). Thus: this verse is not a prediction about J of Naz, but J is the perfect fulfillment of the promise expressed in it c Returning to the Servant texts Isaiah 53 and the other Servant Songs present real difficulties to us in terms of understanding their original meaning and reference, unlike the clear original meaning and reference of the Immanuel oracle, so the hermeneutical situation is more complex here than it is with the Immanuel oracle. BUT the same broad principle applies, and there is no reason why we cannot both have our cake and eat it. DI was presumably speaking of something or someone which his hearers would have recognised, though we cannot, for the Servant Poems are integrally related to the rest of his message which is addressed to the people of his day. On the other hand the NT clearly understands Jesus in terms of this Servant, and on two (or three) occasions goes so far as to express this in ‘fulfilment of prophecy’ terms. Whoever or whatever DI intended it certainly was not the Jesus of Nazareth of 500 years later: but as with the Immanuel oracle, Christians believe they are quite right to see the ideal, the spirituality, the ministry, the mission and the faith of the Suffering Servant ‘fulfilled’, expressed par excellence and lived out in the One from Nazareth, hence their use of these texts This method, I suggest, is the only way to hold on to the integrity of both the OT in its historical context, and the NT in its Biblical exegesis. Put very crudely the basic interpretive method of the NT is a variant of the pesher method of Qumran, which identifies current people and events with people and events in old prophetic texts (see the Qumran Habakkuk Commentary). The variant is that Christianity sees JC as God’s last, best and final Word and therefore sees anything else said by God previously to be summed up in him, a view which allows them to see Christ spoken of in all kinds of places in the OT. In the spectrum of this pesher methodology in the NT, Mt’s use of Isa 7:14 and the uses of the Servant Songs are found at the more sober and rational end of things
Session 3 Two Images of Humanity This session illustrates two features of contemporary OT study, one is the freedom of the Reader to focus on images which arrest them or speak particularly to them – the playfulness of postmodernity – and here I want us to look at the image of ‘grass’; and the other is to look at what is sometimes called DI’s ‘universalism’ and to look at that within two canonical contexts 1 Isaiah 40:6 - ‘All flesh is grass’ (AV) or ‘All people are grass’ (NRSV) Come with me to my desk on the Sunday morning after Christmas: 1 I had already decided to explore this image in this verse in DI because it rang bells with Ps 103:15-18 and anything that connects with Ps 103 interests me for I see that psalm as ‘the theology of the OT in a nutshell’ 2 So first I reread this verse and then using my concordance I found that there are two other references to grass (hatsir) in DI: 44:4 which I found didn’t exist in NRSV and 51:12 which I checked out 3 Then using my concordance I found that there are two other references in Isa – 15:6, and 37:27, which I also checked out, and noticed that Isa 37:22-29 is highly reminiscent of the style of DI 4 Then, still using the concordance, I checked out the other references in the OT, noticing that in addition to Ps 103:15-18 there are also occurrences in Ps 102:11 and 104:14 (thus we can call these three psalms ‘the grass psalms’) and also 37:2, 90:5, 129:6 and 147:8 5 But when I read Ps 129:6 I thought I had read this somewhere before, and I had, for its resemblance to Isa 37:27 is clear. A further glance at my concordance showed that Isa 37:27 = 2 Kings 19:26, and when I looked that one up I found that these two passages are almost verbatim: so we have a textual connection Ps 129:6 = 2 Kings 19:26 = Isa 37:27 6 Then I looked up the few other occurrences and I found that outside of this ‘Jerusalem nexus’ ‘grass’ as metaphor is not found 7 Then I checked another concordance to see what other Hebrew words for grass were used and if that added anything (I had already seen hatsir // with ‘eseb in 2 Kings 19:26/Isa 37:27) anywhere, and found metaphorical uses at Job 5:25 (an unusual one) and Pss 72:16, 92:7 and 102:4,11 plus Isa 66:14 8 Finally I returned to the problem of Isa 44:4 and found that the Heb word here is indeed ‘grass’ but NRSV translates it as ‘a green tamarisk.’ I looked up ‘tamarisk’ in my dictionary, because I thought a tamarisk was a monster which attacked Harry Potter. I then looked up other translations here and found ‘grass’ in AV, RSV, NIV, GNB, NJB and NJPS and only REB giving ‘tamarisk’. I had already discovered that in Num 11:5 it is translated as ‘leeks’ and at this point this non-gardener decided that he had had enough of ancient horticulture, and so ended a fascinating and illuminating 1.5 hours How sad!, I hear some of you muttering. But what had I found out by this point? I had found by using my concordance that ‘grass imagery’ is used only in a certain number of places in the OT. Looking those passages up I had found that, apart from in one place, the metaphor is fixed and univocal (ie it means the same thing everywhere and means only one thing – it is a metaphor of transcience) – which is also the point of Isa 66:14 where the amazing blessing ahead is that the temporary delights of the post-rain blossoming and blooming will be permanent! And thirdly, from my general OT knowledge, I was able to locate this metaphor in a particular theological and cultural tradition – Jerusalem and its Temple At this point I had to resist the temptation to pursue this search further – because the use of ‘grass’ at Mt 6:30/Lk 12:28 and Jas 1:11 and the quotation of Isa 40:6-8 at 1 Peter 1:24 would take me too far away Which left me with the simple task of reflecting on this metaphor, and two things came to mind as I did this. First, that this metaphor of transcience, which contrasts the transcience of humanity with the permanence of God, is a much healthier contrast than the usual Christian one of the sinfulness of humanity with the holiness of God, or the badness of humanity with the goodness of God. Which takes me back to my use of Ps 103 at funerals. Second, that this metaphor arises in a very different geographical and climatic context from ours, and which, indeed, is not possible in ours where ‘grass’ is, if we were ever to notice it, symbolic of the very opposite of transcience, ie permanence 2 Isaiah 42:6 and 49:6 - ‘A light to the nations’ I think it is fair to say that HB is preoccupied with the nature and destiny of Israel, and that it does not have a lot to say on the future of the ‘nations.’ There are passages, some more positive than others, which speak of the nations coming to the New Jerusalem: but I think few readers of HB would contest my statement just made, and Judaism itself has never seen itself as any kind of missionary religion – unlike both its descendents Christianity and Islam This ‘light to the nations’ imagery in DI is therefore unusual, and worth exploring on that account alone, though I don’t want to spend any time on doing that. The image occurs just after the first and in the middle of the third ‘Servant Song’, and indicates the wish of God that ‘his salvation may reach to the end of the earth’ (49:6). Within DI itself the nations are found as witnesses and onlookers to the action, just as international history forms the stage on which the action is and will be played out. And this is picked up in 60:3 and in the conclusion of the scroll at 66:23 (though note the juxtaposition with 66:24), which itself reflects the vision of 2:3 and 11:9f But for the rest of this session I want to set this in a wider, canonical, context. We usually read the OT and the New in bits and pieces. If it is a Library or an Anthology (or even a web-site) it is quite acceptable to pick a book off the shelf or to read a particular item. But as we have it the HB and the OT plus NT together in the various Christian Bibles in use in the different Churches are complete collections, put together into a particular order (or variety of orders) and published in a single bound volume. The different orders of the books in the different collections mean that the reading of the whole thing from beginning to end (should anyone have the patience to try it) produces different reading experiences in the different collections. To put it another way, they tell different overall stories. Each reading highlights different themes and different theologies. Each ‘canon’ tells a different tale HB (or ‘TaNaK’) is an anthology of ancient Jewish writings arranged according to a Jewish agenda. The solution to the problem seen in Gen 1-11 is renewed faithfulness to God's Torah
The ‘OT’ is an anthology of ancient Jewish writings arranged according to a Christian agenda in which Jesus is the solution to the problem seen in Gen 1-11. The other Christian versions of the OT which have extra books in them follow exactly the same agenda:
‘The theme of the Pentateuch’: is a phrase symptomatic of the newer ways of approaching the OT, and is the title of the very influential book by D J A Clines, Journal for the Study of the OT, Supplement series 10, 1978 revised in a second edition, 1996. In it Clines asserts that Gen 12:1-3 is the key to the plot of the Pentateuch in that it sets out 3 promises to Abraham:
Thereafter, he argues, the story is of the partial fulfilment (but also the partial unfulfilment) of these promises. So the story unfolds so that by the end of Genesis no.2 is well on the way to being completed, by the end of Deuteronomy no.3 is complete and the stage is set for the fulfilment of no.1 which has been the motif since the beginning of Exodus. Though note that this key narrative ends with the People of God on the wrong side of the River Jordan, and leaves the question of will they? (or we?)/won’t they? (or we?) cross over and enter the Land of Promise hanging, open, in the air If you look them up you will find that each updating of the story in Prophets and Writings ends in a similar place where the same question hangs waiting for an answer. But a canonical reading of the Christian Bibles, however, goes somewhere different and shows the universal Gospel and the evangelical mission of the Church to be the fulfillment of that third promise to Abraham, as in Mt’s ‘Wise men’ at the beginning and Great Commission at the end, and Luke’s Nunc Dimitis at 2:32 which looks very much like A quotation of these passages from DI We can’t explore these issues of canonical shapes and the different ‘canonical readings’ they produce any further, or explore the limitless possibilities of intertextuality any more, but I hope this session has shown you how rich both these areas are. Though I hope too that you have also seen that drawing authoritative readings from canonical criticism – which some people want to do – does depend on an authoritative canon, a decision about ‘the Bible’ made inevitably from outside it, which again demonstrates that the only authority the Bible has is that which its Readers (individual or corporate) give to it
go to university certificate (1) go to university certificate (2) |
