The difficulty with the Book of Isaiah Part 10

For those who  wish to do their own research or additional reading beyond what I have shared here is my Bibliography.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barr, James. The Semantics of Biblical Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961.

 Broyles, C. C., and C. A. Evans, eds. Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah, vol 2. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

 Brueggemann, Walter. Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005.

 Childs, Brevard S. The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2004.

 Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. “The Christological Fulfillment of Isaiah’s Servant Songs.” Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (2006): pp. 384-403.

 Cooper, Kenneth R. “How Immeasurable is God? A Vision of the Greatness of God in Isaiah 40:9-20 Examined.” Journal of Dispensational Theology 13 (2009): pp. 45-73.

 Gorman, Michael J. Elements of Biblical Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009.

 Hengstenberg, E. W. Christology of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1970.

 ­­Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. ed. Classical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1972.

 _______. “The Promise Theme and the Theology of Rest.” Bibliotheca Sacra 130 (1973): pp. 134-149.

 _______.Toward an Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1978.

 _______.Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Principles for Preaching and Teaching. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1981.

 _______. “The Old Testament Promise of Material Blessing and the Contemporary Believer.” Trinity Journal 9 (1988): pp. 149-168.

 _______.The Messiah in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1995.

_______.The Christian and the “Old” Testament. Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 1998.

_______.The Promise-Plan of God: a Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2008.

­Kaiser, Walter C., Jr., and Moises Silva. An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1994.

 Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2004.

 Kuykendall, Michael. “Notes on Biblical Hermeneutics.” Class notes for S2199: Biblical Hermeneutics. Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, 2010.

 Martens, Elmer. “Old Testament Theology since Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50 (2007). pp. 668-690.

 Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006.

 Smith, Gary V. “Isaiah 40-55: Which Audience was Addressed?” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54 (2011): pp. 701-714.

 The Israel Museum. The Digital Dead Sea Scrolls. Jerusalem, 1995. < http://dss. collections. imj.org.il/project>.

 Unger, Merrill F. The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1988.

 Von Rad, Gerhard. Old Testament Theology. 2 vols. New York, NY: Harper and Row Publishers, 1957.

 Waltke, Bruce K., and Charles Yu. An Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishers, 2007.

 Wood, John Halsey, Jr. “Oswald T. Allis and the Question of Isaianic Authorship.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 48 (2005): pp. 248-263.

 Zuck, Roy B. ed. A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1991.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The difficulty with the Book of Isaiah Part 9

For those who wish to get right to the heart of the matter, here is my conclusion.

CONCLUSION

               The passages by some referred to as the Deutero-Isaiah are a source of much debate historically, semantically, and theologically. Gerhard von Rad believes there was not only a second author, but also a third author followed up with some redaction. Various scholars hold this point.[1] Brueggemann, Barr, and Waltke among others have a problem with the shift of both style and content between the First Half (1-39) and the Second Half (40-66). But the discovery of the Great Isaiah Scroll found in Qumran in 1947 and with the textual criticism work between LXX, DSS-IQ, and MT, there seems to be a growing effort to put emphasis on Isaiah as a single work by a single author.

               This author has sought to show Isaiah is a single document from a single source. The history of the debate over Isaiah detailed the position of many church scholars, to include early efforts, Middle Age, Reformation, and post-modern positions. In addition, a detailed description of hermeneutical methodologies necessary to understand the original intent of the author here given including, differences in societies, principles discussed, and applications.

               Walter C. Kaiser Jr. has done extensive study into biblical theology of the Old Testament. As pointed out earlier, Kaiser bases his biblical theology on promises made by God to Israel. Kaiser sees three main promises: (1) Abraham would have a great family and through him bless all the world, (2) God promised Moses his blessings if the nation of Israel would obey his commandments, and (3) the promise to David that his descendants would forever sit on the throne ruling Israel. Kaiser saw this promise theology detailed in the prophecies of Isaiah.

               Within the Second Half of Isaiah, the passages are in three enneads. The first speaks about God the Father. Three points were detailed concerning God the Father: (1) God is incomparable, for he is unique and no one is like him or compared to him, (2) God is the creator of all, and (3) apart from God there is no other. The second speaks to the subject of the Servant, seen as one coming with the blessings of God. The servant will suffer for many by a substitionary sacrifice of himself. The pinnacle of this ennead is Isaiah 52:13-53:12. This one passage has by itself caused Orthodox Jews to expend many hours trying to define the servant as the nation of Israel rather than an individual. Yet the passage details the perfection of the servant, and perfection is not a quality of Israel.

               Finally, the last ennead speaks to a time when the Holy Spirit will be active upon the earth, executing the will of God. The passage of Isaiah 61:1-3 is prominent, as Jesus quoted this passage in a small synagogue and attributed it to himself. In one part, Isaiah specifically uses the term Holy Spirit to speak concerning this time. This ennead finally speaks to the New Jerusalem and the New Earth, reflecting the very similar description found in the Revelation of John.

               The point that this author seeks to establish is that Justin Martyr referred to Isaiah as the Fifth Gospel and rightly so. From the prophecies of the Messiah’s virgin birth, the Emmanuel God with us, and the suffering Servant, Isaiah has detailed God’s plan as found in the New Testament. New Testament Christians may enjoy focusing on those books written after the time of Christ, but they need to remember the Old Testament laid the groundwork for the first advent of the Messiah. Isaiah is not two documents but rather a unified plan of God to redeem all mankind.  

[1] Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. 2 (New York, NY: Harper and Row Publishers, 1965), p. 238.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The difficulty with the Book of Isaiah Part 8

This is the final ennead of Isaiah.

ISAIAH 58-66

               The foregoing summary shows that the first ennead was about the Father, the second ennead was about the Son. The final ennead speaks about the Spirit. Kaiser makes it plain, “The third ennead, 58–66, triumphantly announces the dawning of a new day of salvation for nature, nations, and individuals. At the center of this ennead was a new principle of life—the Spirit-filled Messiah (61:1–63:6) who bore the powers and dignities of the prophetic, priestly, and kingly officers.”[1] The one passage considered the most recognizable from this ennead is:

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn; to grant to those who mourn in Zion—to give them a beautiful headdress instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning, the garment of praise instead of a faint spirit; that they may be called oaks of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he may be glorified (Isaiah 61:1-3).

 

This is the passage that Yeshua bin Yosef el Judah stood up and read in a small synagogue. He caused an uproar when he declared, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:20). The people there knew instantly he was referring to the Scriptures given by Isaiah.

               This passage starts with the phrase, “The Spirit of the Lord God.” It is this idea the third ennead is speaking to, that time when the Holy Spirit will be upon the earth actively pursuing the completion of God’s will. A further indication that this is a time of the Holy Spirit is found in 63:7-14. Twice during this passage, Isaiah uses the title “Holy Spirit.” Only does Isaiah use the phrase “The Spirit of the Lord.” This passage presents the call for a new Moses to lead a new Exodus into a promised rest. God promised a time of rest to Joshua, but to date that time of complete rest has not taken place.

               The main focus of Kaiser’s biblical theology is this idea that God has made promises to Israel and eventually they will culminate in: (1) Abraham’s seed through Isaac would be as countless as the stars and sand of the seashore, (2) they would be a great nation, (3) that kings would come from Abraham, Sarah, and Jacob, and (4) Abraham’s name would be great.[2] An additional promise of rest in God lives in this ennead.[3] So special was this rest that God would call it His rest (Ps 95:11; Isa 66:1).[4] This is not to say Israel at various times has not experienced temporal periods of rest. Joshua saw a temporary time of rest as depicted in Joshua 21:43-45. It is tempting to think of this as the promised rest, but parts of Canaan were still under rule by other people groups. This rest was still a promise made.

               This final ennead also points to the new covenant, the New Jerusalem, and the New Earth. The scenes described in Revelation 21 are virtually identical to those described in this final ennead. There will one day be a time of total rest; the land promised will finally be a gift from God to Israel. There will be a cessation of all violence against God’s people. Just as the Holy Spirit moved upon men to compose the Old Testament, he also inspired men to compose the New Testament: same Spirit, and same inspiration, one unified document describing the total plan, person, and work of God.

[1] Kaiser, The Promise-Plan of God: a Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments, p. 183.

[2] Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “The Promise Theme and the Theology of Rest,” Bibliotheca Sacra 130, no. 518 (1973): p. 136.

 [3] Ibid.

 [4] Ibid., p. 138.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The difficulty with the Book of Isaiah Part 7

This ennead (nine chapters) is some of the most controversial of all. One note: Yeshua bin Yosef el Judah is my own 21st century name for Jesus (Yeshua son of Joseph of the tribe of Judah).

ISAIAH 49-57

               The second ennead, according to Kaiser, speaks concerning the Servant who is the redeemer of all.[1] Bruce K. Waltke believes Isaiah’s unique contribution to Old Testament theology is his anonymous suffering servant’s songs. He further points out that, just as Cyrus is the political savior of Israel, so also the suffering servant is the spiritual savior of Israel.[2] E. W. Hengstenberg echoes this position, “As the Prophet had before plainly described Cyrus, the author of the first deliverance . . . he introduces the author of the second deliverance, the Messiah.”[3] Brueggemann counters that notion by stating, “The Old Testament has much to say about God, but not much to say about Jesus Christ.”[4]

Brueggemann does not see the Old Testament as the product of a divine inspiration, but rather the result of the exilic human experience. He further believes a large portion of the Old Testament to be a post-exilic document.[5] Brueggemann makes his position clear, “My own perspective, against that of Childs, suggests that such an overtly Christological reading of the Old Testament is not credible or responsible.”[6] Notwithstanding these thoughts and positions of an outstanding and reputable scholar, this ennead goes to great lengths to describe the actions of the Servant believed by many to be the Messiah.

The pinnacle of this ennead is Isaiah 52:13-53:12. This passage has long been a point of debate for Orthodox Judaism. Even for the Orthodox Jew, it must be clear that unless an alternative is identified, Yeshua bin Yosef el Judah was the suffering servant of Isaiah. However, the nation of Israel, rather than an individual, is sometimes viewed as the suffering servant.

Kaiser sees this portion as being a song with five verses (strophes).[7] The first strophe (52:13-15) details the shock of the people at seeing the servant following his severe punishment. They are stunned that a human being could receive so much punishment, to the point where he no longer even looks like a man. Kaiser believes verse 14 depicts his first advent of lowliness and sacrifice. Verse fifteen depicts his second advent of such glory it will cause kings to shut their mouths in astonishment.[8]

The second strophe (53:1-3) describes the rejection of the servant, “He was despised and rejected by men” (Isaiah 53:3). Kaiser points out the terms: rejected, forsaken, despised, thought of as an offense, and considered to be of little value, to high light the rejection of the servant.[9] The third strophe (53:4-6) speaks to the servant’s atonement, “We all went astray like sheep; we have all turned to our own way; and the Lord has punished him for the iniquity of us all” (Isaiah 53:6). Paul states this very similarly, “For if by the one man’s trespass the many died, how much more have the grace of God and the gift overflowed to the many by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:15). It is by the sacrifice of the servant that so many today have access to the grace and mercy of God.

The fourth strophe (53:7-9) speaks to the willing surrender of the servant. Kaiser points out the five illegal trials that took place the night Jesus was arrested, and yet he stayed silent.[10] The important point here is Isaiah 53:9, “. . . He had done no violence and had not spoken deceitfully.” This eliminates the possibility that the servant is the nation of Israel. Israel has surely done wrong and spoken deceitfully. This is strong evidence that the servant is an individual, not a nation.

The final strophe (53:10-12) speaks to the exaltation of the servant. “He is exalted to prosperity, to satisfaction, and to compensation. He will have many offspring and will see the plan of God completed successfully.”[11] Verse 12 gives the reasons God placed his seal of approval on the servant: He submitted himself to death, was counted among the rebels, bore the sins of many, and interceded for the rebels. The resurrection is literally the completion of the promise found in this final strophe.[12] The resurrection proved God had placed his seal of approval on Jesus. Surely the servant is Yeshua bin Yosef el Judah!

[1] Walter C. Kaiser Jr., The Christian and the Old Testament (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 1998), p. 189.

 [2] Bruce K. Waltke, An Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: 2007), p. 845.

[3] E. W. Hengstenberg, Christology in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1970), p. 217.

 [4] Brueggemann, p. 92.

 [5] Ibid., p. 74.

 [6] Ibid., 93.

 [7] Walter C, Kaiser Jr., The Messiah in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1995), pp. 178-181.

 [8] Ibid., p. 179.

 [9] Ibid.

 [10] Ibid., p. 180.

[11] Ibid., p. 181.

 [12]Willis J. Beecher, “The Servant,” Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation,” ed. Walter C. Kaiser Jr. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker House Books, 1972), p. 189.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The difficulty with the Book of Isaiah Part 6

If one is to accurately interpret these chapters an important scholar if Walter Kaiser Jr. He has spent 35 years studying and writing on the Old Testament as seen through the eyes of biblical theology.

TEXT

Kaiser states his belief concerning the importance of Isaiah chapters forty through sixty-six:

One of the most remarkable sections of all the Old Testament is Isaiah 40–66. In its general plan, it is laid out in three enneads—that is, sets of nine chapters: 40–48, 49–57, and 58–66. In each of these three sets of nine messages, the focus is directed to the particular aspect of the person and work of God. It is as close to being a systematic statement of Old Testament theology as is the book of Romans in the New Testament.[1]

 As the interpreter sets out to examine these chapters, he must remember there are many who do not agree with this division, nor do they accept the inference Kaiser is making here. It will be importance to reflect on these resources also.

               In 1947-1956 in the caves of Qumran, workers discovered documents later referred to as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), which directly affected the research into Isaiah. The scroll discovered is in fourteen parts and contains all sixty-six chapters. This is the oldest and most complete copy of any book in the Scriptures. Prior to this discovery the oldest extant copy was the Leningrad Codex dated AD 916. This discovery takes the date back to 200 BC. As part of the author’s efforts to determine a reliable document, the Great Isaiah Scroll (DSS-IQ) was compared against the Septuagint (LXX) and the Masoretic Text (MT), chapters forty through sixty-six.

ISAIAH 40-48

               The first step, as described by Kuykendall, is to determine the original intent of the author. Today’s scholars have not reached consensus concerning authorship. The difficulty encountered falls into two categories, style and prophetic accuracy. Brueggemann points out that coming out of the Reformation, “. . . [T]he biblical texts were generated through human effort, human faith, human passion, and human idiosyncrasy.”[2] He further professes, “The practical effect of this enterprise was to relativize the revelatory claims of the text and to treat it like any other book.”[3] Therefore, if the Scriptures are a human production, and the Scriptures’ treatment resembles that of any other book, then if the style changes from one part to another, the authorship changes. This has long been a difficulty because of the use of prose in the first half of Isaiah and predominantly poetry in the second half.

               The second area of difficulty is the question of how Isaiah could be so accurate unless written in the post-exilic period; in particular the mention of Cyrus, who lived over one hundred years after Isaiah. Furthermore, how could Isaiah have spoken of the destruction of Jerusalem as if it had already happened? This is an event that did not take place until 587 BC, over one hundred and fifty years after Isaiah.

               Not everyone is so quick to support the post-exilic writing and audience of Isaiah. David V. Smith states, “This study concludes that it is inappropriate merely to assume an exilic setting for the audience in Isaiah 40–55.”[4] He points out that seven passages that do not fit the post-exilic position and that establishing this theory opens the book to many enlightments. Secondly, God is all-knowing and could very easily have revealed these events to Isaiah. In the belief of this author, the single authorship of Isaiah is appropriate, reasonable, and supportable.

               With the authorship and reliable document issues established, the next step is to investigate the semantics and syntax of this first ennead. One phrase stands out, “The Holy One of Israel.” This phrase appears twenty-six times in the book of Isaiah, twelve times in the first half and fourteen times in the second half.[5] In this first ennead it appears eight times (40:25; 41:14, 16, 20; 43: 3, 14; 47:4; 48:17).

Three questions exist: Who is the Holy One of Israel? What if any attributes does he have? And is there only one or more than one? All three resources, the LXX, DSS-IQ, and MT all agree on the literal phrase, Kodesh Yisrael. The Hebrew word echad is normally translated as “one,” but the word echad does not appear in any instances that are translated in the English, “The Holy One of Israel.” In light of the answer provided concerning the existence of only one Kodesh Yisrael, it would appear this is an injection.

               Who is “The Holy One of Israel?” Robert B. Chisholm Jr. proposes, “For Isaiah, God is first and foremost ‘the Holy One of Israel’ who possesses absolute sovereign authority over his covenant people and the nations of the earth, but who at the same time personally intervenes in history to accomplish his purposes.”[6] Isaiah records the testimony given to him, “Our Redeemer—the Lord of hosts is his name—is the Holy One of Israel” (Isaiah 47:4). The Lord of hosts elsewhere in the Scriptures refers to God the Father. Two hundred and forty-two times in the Old Testament, the Lord of host refers to God the Father. Isaiah’s testimony is that the “Holy One of Israel” is God, he is the Elohim Yahweh. An additional reason for embracing this testimony is the eternity of the “Holy One of Israel.” Isaiah records, “I am the first and the last” (44:6). This is speaking of God’s eternity. God had no beginning and God will have no end.

            What are some of the attributes of “The Holy One of Israel?” First, he is the incomparable one. “To whom will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him” (40:18)? The third commandment of the Decalogue states, “You shall make no graven image” (Exodus 20:4). The reason is God is incomparable; he is one of a kind; he is the most unique of the unique.[7] Second, “The Holy One of Israel” is creator. God is the creator of all things (Isaiah 40:28; 41:20; 44:24; 45:18; 48:13). Finally, God is the revealer of all things. Isaiah records an almost sarcastic challenge given by God, “Who is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and set it before me, since I appointed an ancient people. Let them declare what is to come, and what will happen” (44:7). It is God that revealed the future through Isaiah; God is daring someone else to predict the future. They cannot, for God is the revealer of all things. How else could Isaiah have known Cyrus’ name two hundred years before he was born?

               As a follow-up to God being eternal, the omniscient revealer, and incomparable, the third, and probably the most important question is, are there one or many gods? God declares repeatedly in this ennead, “Apart from me there is no God” (44:6, 8; 45:5, 6, 11, 18, 22; 46:9).

               As this ennead ends the theological summary, Isaiah forty through forty-eight is speaking about God the Father. This is the first step in tying Isaiah forty through sixty-six forward to the New Testament by discussing and defining the Trinity.

These parallel theological truths are found in the New Testament. First, God is incomparable; who else would send his only son to die for all mankind? God’s grace is incomparable. Who would or could love man in spite of his sin? God’s grace and mercy is incomparable. Second, God is creator of all. The apostle John stated, “All things were created through him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created” (John 1:3). God not only created all but sustains all (Colossians 1:17). Third, God is the one and only. Several New Testament passages point to the oneness of God and how only through his son do we have access to him (John 14:6).

[1] Walter C. Kaiser Jr, The Promise-Plan of God: a Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2008), pp. 182–183.

[2] Walter Brueggemann, 10.

 [3] Ibid.

[4] Gary V. Smith, “Isaiah 40–55: Which Audience Was Addressed?” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54, no. 4 (2011): p. 712.

[5] Walter C, Kaiser Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapid, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1978), p. 204.

 [6] Robert B. Chisholm Jr., “A Theology of Isaiah,” A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, ed. Roy Zuck (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1991), p. 305.

 [7] Kenneth R. Cooper, “How Immeasurable is God? A Vision of the Greatness of God in Isaiah 40:9-20 Examined,” Journal of Dispensational Theology 13 (2009): p. 45. See also, Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “The Old Testament Promise of Material Blessings and the Contemporary Believer,” Trinity Journal 9 (1988): p. 155.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The difficulty with the Book of Isaiah Part 5

Some summarizing statements before actually looking at Isaiah 40-66.

In summary, several areas come into question in Isaiah. First, who authored Isaiah? Second, how is it that Isaiah was able to speak of the destruction of Jerusalem as if it had already happened? How did Isaiah know about King Cyrus? How can the variants between the Hebrew and the Septuagint be resolved? Why is Isaiah written in prose for the first half and poetry for the second half? Finally, do Isaiah and the gospels constitute a cohesive unit as a profession of God’s salvation for sinful man?

My hermeneutical constraints for  reviewing Isaiah 40-66 will be: discover what was the author’s original intent, what differences exist between then and now, what principles are being discussed, and what applications can be made.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The difficulty in the Book of Isaiah Part 4

Anytime one seeks to understand the Old Testament the name Walter Brueggemann is surely to come up. I don’t agree with him but it is important for us to understand what he is saying.

The effort expended by the church concerning the difficulties of Isaiah continue to this day, when the church finds itself in the postmodern period. Childs chose to focus on one individual to discuss the viewpoints and attitudes of many postmodern theologians concerning not only Isaiah but the connection between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Childs states, “For our immediate concerns, Walter Brueggemann (b. 1932) is the most important example of an interpreter of the book of Isaiah who is an avowed Christian theologian and consciously identifies himself as a postmodern interpreter.”[1]

Brueggemann makes it plain where he stands: “This means, most likely, that there can be no right or ultimate interpretation.”[2] Childs points to several statements detailing Brueggemann’s position: (1) There is no one correct interpretation of an Old Testament text, (2) there are limitless possibilities and potential that can be evoked by creative imagination, (3) Brueggemann harshly rejects traditional Christian interpretations, and (4) there is nothing in the Old Testament literature itself that can be objectively claimed to be Christian in any meaningful sense of the word. Childs summarizes, “Finally, Brueggemann considers any overarching meta-history such as Paul’s, or a trajectory of unfolding clarity in revelation, is rejected as unwarranted and offensive.”[3]

As one seeks to investigate the second half of Isaiah there must be an awareness that throughout the centuries difficulties have existed. Childs provides a concluding remark concerning his viewpoint versus that of Brueggemann’s, “With much sadness, I am forced to conclude that Walter Brueggemann’s postmodern interpretation of the Old Testament offers a serious break with the entire Christian exegetical tradition that I have sought to pursue from the earliest period to the present..”[4]

[1] Ibid., p. 306.

 [2] Walter Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005), p. 63.

[3] Childs, pp. 306-308.

 [4] Ibid., p. 309.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized