Isaiah (review)

Hebrew Studies 47 (2006) 450 Reviews ISAIAH. By John Goldingay. NIBCOT 13. Pp. x + 397. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2001. Paper, $11.95. John Goldingay, professor of Old Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary, is well acquainted with the book of Isaiah. He has also just published the International Critical Commentary volume on Isaiah 40–55 (with David Payne). This NIBC commentary can be read as a digest of Goldingay’s wider research into this complex but fascinating book. As the series title implies, this commentary is based on the New International Version, though Goldingay offers alternative translations where he feels the NIV misses the sense of the original Hebrew. The commentary is especially suited for a lay, Christian audience, but there is also much here for the scholar. This volume is a fine example of the approach espoused by the editors of the commentary series, which they call “believing criticism.” In other words, the commentators use all the tools and skills of critical scholarship , while viewing the text as sacred Scripture that testifies to God’s word and work within the believing community. An example of Goldingay’s “believing criticism” can be found in his approach to the book of Isaiah as a whole. Goldingay affirms that the book is divinely inspired and “that Yahweh’s revelation comes through at least four human voices” (p. 3). Isaiah of Jerusalem is identified as the “Ambassador.” Taking his lead from Isa 8:16, Goldingay identifies the “Disciple(s)” as the individual or group who edits and expands Isaiah’s oracles—primarily in the form of prose sermons—perhaps during the reign of Josiah. DeuteroIsaiah is re-signified as the “Poet,” and Trito-Isaiah as the “Preacher.” The Poet preached on texts from the Ambassador, and the Preacher on texts from both the Ambassador and the Poet. Chapters 24–27 “arguably deserves to be thought of as a fifth voice” (p. 4). Isaiah’s 66 chapters are covered in fourty-seven sections. These are broken down further into their discrete form-critical units, each of which receives a paragraph or several paragraphs of comment. Concluding each section are “Additional Notes,” which will particularly interest those familiar with the Hebrew text. Goldingay offers many significant insights, but some points are made simply by assertion, not argument. Such a shortcoming, however, may be inevitable for so brief a commentary on such a long and complex biblical book. While he is certainly abreast of scholarly debate, he does not become enmeshed in it. Goldingay strikes a reasonable balance in addressing the various factors that play in the composition and subsequent (re-)interpretation of prophetic oracles. His emphasis lies on the final, canonical text of the book, and so he respects its unity, though where helpful, he does give attention to historical background, later redaction, and ancient Near Eastern Hebrew Studies 47 (2006) 451 Reviews conventions. While he highlights the features that promote a unified reading of the book, he is prepared to bring surprising contrasts to light. For example , he notes how chapters 56–66 “discuss how to live with the Ambassador’s [i.e., Isaiah’s] challenges (you must do right) and the Poet’s [i.e., Deutero-Isaiah’s] promises (Yahweh will do right)” (p. 315). Yet he remarks that the Preacher’s/Trito-Isaiah’s definition of “maintaining justice and doing what is right” (Isa 56:1–8) would surprise both Isaiah and Deutero-Isaiah, namely observing Sabbath and welcoming eunuchs and foreigners. He also observes how this contrasts sharply with other passages within the biblical canon (e.g., Ezra-Nehemiah and Deut 23:1–8). For the most part, Goldingay is not doctrinaire but true to the text. Regrettably , however, he does domesticate the harshness of Yahweh’s commission to Isaiah in 6:9–10 (especially in the MT) by interpreting it merely as “a warning”: the people “are closing their minds, and God will let that have its natural effect” (p. 61). His comment on Yahweh’s imperative, “be ever hearing, but never understanding,” is simply that “he [by which Goldingay means Isaiah, not Yahweh!] does not mean it” (p. 61). Regarding the so-called “Servant Songs,” Goldingay rejects Duhm’s approach...