R etrospective R eading

o f the O ld T estam ent P rophets

By Brevard s. Childs
(Yale Univ., 409 Prospect St., N ew Haven, Ct. 06511)

It has long been recognized th at the text of the Id Testam ent is

m ultilayered, and much energy has been expended in an effort to deter-
mine just how the different levels of a com position relate. M ost recently
the problem has been exacerbated as m odern interpretations of the He-
brew prophets have focused attention on alleged retrojections of later
historical and religious issues onto earlier and prior levels of a text
w ithin a discrete literary unit. The goal of this essay is critically to ana-
lyze the nature of different kinds of retrojections thought present within
the prophetic literature, to evaluate the effect on understanding a book
as a whole, and to address the basic herm eneutical issues at stake in the
continuing debate.

I. Proposals ^ the E xtension o f Prophetic Tradition

1. The Technique of A daptation
In the post-W orld War 11 period initial credit goes to Seeligmanns
stim ulating article of 1953 for introducing a new approach to the phe-
nom enon of a tex ts ability to evoke fresh and different interpretations
from later readers. Building on a rich rabbinical knowledge of midrashic
exegesis, Seeligmann sought to show how w ords have an innate capacity
for indeterm inacy which flexibility was then exploited by midrashic
techniques to encompass a variety of new meanings which could then
accom m odate the religious and cultural issues of a later historical era.
This phenom enon of textual adaptation, which at times was very serious
but at other times quite playful, assum ed a quasi-stable biblical text
which established fixed ^ ra m e te rs w ithin which an expansion of mean-
ing was available. For example, the Greek translator of Isa 9,11 ex-
changed the p ro p h ets references to the A ram aeans and Fhihstines as the
enemies of Israel for those of the Syrians and Greeks of his own time.

L. Seeligmann, Voraussetzungen der Midraschexegese, in: Congress Volume Copen-

hagen 1953, VT.S 1, 1953, 1 5 0 -8 1 .

ZAW 108. Bd., S. 3 6 2 -3 7 7

Walter de Gruyter 1996
 Retrospective Reading the Old Testament ?rophets 363

W ithin Christian academic circles during this same perd a sme-

w hat sim ilar attem pt at a d a p t a t i f was sught under theological rubrics
such as the living w ord of Scripture^, w ordevent3, or actualiza-
tion4. Very shortly the concept was extended beyond single w ords to
them es which were re-used in a new and different context. For example,
in his well-know n essay on the unity of Isaiah, Clements^ traced the
later application by II Isaiah of the them e of blindness and dum bness
found in I Isaiah. Terms which once were understood literally were rein-
terpreted metaphorically, or the direction could be reversed as in Fzek-
iels use of Jerem iahs imagery. In a broad sense, the traditional concept
of typology traded on a som ewhat analogous concept of one event being
adum brated in another in a type-antitype relationship. Thus, in order to
em phasize structural similarity, the imagery of the exodus from Egypt
was re-used frequently to depict Israels return from the exile in Babylon.
D uring the period of the 50s and 60s G. von R ads exegesis was deemed
particularly successful in com bining form critical analysis w ith a typo-
logical adaptation tow ard the goal of Vergegenwrtigung.6

2. Fortschreibung
Hertzberg^ had first introduced the term Nachgeschichte into the
exegetical discussion, but it was Zim m erh who developed a sim ilar con-
cept o f Fortschreibung in the greatest detail. In contrast to his earlier
w orks which were largely oriented tow ard form critical and history-of-
trad itio n s analysis, Z im m erhs concentrated study of the book of Ezek-
iel pushed him in a new direction. He came to the conclusion that the
grow th of the book had developed at least on the literary level
from an Urtext which had been consistently expanded either by the
prophet himself or by a circle of disciples. The nature of the expansion
was a secondary layering of the basic text much like a commentary,
which was evoked either by the need for further explanation, or from
some difficulty within the text itself, or by a tension which had devel

2 P. R. Ackroyd, The Vitality of the Word o f God in the Old Testament, in: ders., $tudies
in the Religions Tradition of the Old Testament, 1987, 6 1 75.
3 G. Rbeling, >Sola Scriptura< and Tradition, ET The Word of God and Tradition, 1968,

4 G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments, Bd. 11, 1960, 329 ff.
5 R. E. Clements, The Unity of the Book of Isaiah, Interp. 36 (1982), 117129.
6 Cf. the analysis of von Rads use of the term by Joseph w. Groves, Aetualization and
Interpretation in the Old Testament, SBLDS 86, 1987.
7 W. H. Hertzberg, Oie Naehgeschiehte alttestamentlicher Texte innerhalb des Alten Te-
staments, in: Werden und Wesen des Alten Testaments, ed. p. Volz, BZAW 66, 1936,
110- 121.
364 Brevard s. Childs

oped because of the effect of subsequent historical events. A lthough the

recognition of the process of Fortschreibung depended initially a
sense of discontinuity between alleged levels w ithin a passage, the basic
concern expressed by Zim m erli was th at of continuity between the basic
text and its subsequent expansion. O l y rarely did Zim m erli evaluate
an expansion as an unfortunate m isunderstanding of the au th o rs origi-
nal intent (cf. Ez 23,3649). O f im portance is to note th at Z im m erhs
approach of Fortschreibung has exerted considerable influence and has
frequently been adopted by younger scholars when analyzing prophetic
books beside th at of Ezekiel.9

3. Editorial Redaction
Characteristic of this approach is its attem pt to describe systematic
editorial activity which reflects a consistent perspective of interpretation
rather than simply identifying isolated glosses. Redactional analysis
deals with larger literary units within a given book, but can also extend
across an entire prophetic corpus. Classic examples of redaction criti-
cism are T hiels analysis of the D tr.s editing of the book of Jeremiah,
or H . B arths*! isolating an Assyrian redaction of the book of Isaiah
during the period of Josiah. R edactional editing stems from various con-
cerns: a) to clarify points of conflict in a text, particularly in the light
of hindsight, b) to bring a new historical or theological perspective on
older m aterial which has been evoked by changing events or cultural
shifts. Usually in the redactional process the initial literary point-of-
standing of the prophet is retained, but the original historical perspective
is altered. For exam ple, the 8th century narrative context of Isa 2 ,6 4,1
has been retained, but the passage has been substantially rew orked to
include elements from the experience of the fall of Jerusalem in 587.
However, occasionally explicit breaks in a narrative context are regis-
tered as in Isa 23, 13: Look at the land of the C haldaeans This is the
people it was not Assyria.

8 w. Zimmerli, Das Phnomen der >Portsehreibung< im Bueh Bzechiel, in: Prophecy.

ssays Presented to G. Pohrer, BZAW 150, 1980, 174191.
R. Albertz, Das Deuterojesaja-Buch als Fortschreibung der Jesaja-Prophetie, in: Die
Hebrische Bibel und ihre zweilache Nachgeschichte, FS R. Rendtorff, eds. Blum
et al., 1990, 241256; Martti Nissinen, Prophetie, Redaktion und Fortschreibung im
Hoseabuch, AOAT 231, 1991; w. Lau, Schriftgelehrte Prophetie in Jes 5666, BZAW
225, 1994.
10 w. Thiel, Die deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 125, WMANT 41, 1972.
11 H. Barth, Die Jesaja-Worte in der Josiazeit, W M A N T 48, 1977.
12 R. E. Clements, The Prophecies o Isaiah and the Fall of Jerusalem in 587 B. C., VT 30
(1980), 4 2 1 -4 3 6 .
 R e s p e c tiv e Reading the Testament Prnphets 365

Editorial redaction is akin to Fortschreibung and sometimes the

term s are interchanged, even by Zim m erli; nevertheless, there are char-
acteristic diferences in emphasis. The m ajor force evoking Fortschrei-
bung is the desire for clarification o a text. The impulse is highly spe-
ciic and text oriented, whereas in editorial redaction there is a shift in
the prim ary focus. The emphasis foils, above all, on the effect o chang-
ing sociological forces on the editors w ho then sought to harm onize an
original text with their new perspectives through a systematic process
o literary layering. However, the tw o approaches share m uch in com-
m on which is the reason why they are frequently identified. In both
there is an original w ritten core tradition which is reinterpreted and
extended in both later historical perspectives are retrojected onto the
tex t in both critical literary and historical reconstruction is needed to
disengage the levels. Only rarely is the voice o editorial com m entary
assigned an independent role within the original narrative context.

4. Etiology and Vaticinium ex Eventu

These tw o literary techniques o construing history are not parallel
to foe preceding ones. They are not independent categories, but rather
are often made use o as a means o historical retrojection w ithin foe
three above m entioned exegetical techniques. The term inology o each
arose w ithin a discrete scholarly context and was developed in order to
describe a particular way o retrojecting history into the past. O n the
one hand, the reerence to vaticinium ex ev en tu 13 is ancient and emerged
in relation to the interpretation o foe Bible very early in connection with
the dating o D aniels prophecies (Porphyry vs Eusebius and Jerome). On
the o th er hand, the entrance o foe term inology o etiology into m odern
biblical studies occurred rom the history-oreligions school associated
w ith G unkel . Etiological stories were derived rom a mythological con-
cept o causality which was a genre prom inent in foe fable (Ovid, Pau-
sanias) and in the primeval history o Genesis.
T he tw o term s, etiology and vaticinium ex eventu, are closely allied,
yet once again there are different nuances reflected in each. The focus
o etiology is on causality however as a literary category distinct rom
its m odern medical usage, it refers to a particular form o causality.
An etiological story is one which proceeds rom observing an existing
phenom enon in nature (Gen 19,26) or in foe cuh (32,32) which it links
causally and retrospectively to an ancient occurrence in the prim ordial
past. Gunkel sought to describe different categories o etiological stories

13 E. Osswald, Zum Problem der vaticiuia ex eventu, ZAW 75 (1 .44 2 63

7 ,
H. Gunkel, Arten der Sagen der Genesis, in: Genesis, HK III.1. 4. Aufl. 1 1 7 , X X xxvi
Cf. F. G. Gnlka, Die tiolngie im Aken Testament, Diss. Heidelberg 972
366 Brevrd s. Childs

including cultic, ethnological, and etym ological. Later E. C assirer^ at-

tem pted to analyze foilosophically the understanding of reality reflected
in such m ythological theories of causality.
In the period of the 50s and 60s the debate over the role of etiology
was narrow ly prescribed around form critical issu es^ whereas in the
recent discussion the use of etiology has been greatly extended by closely
linking it to a form of redaction criticism. For exam ple, an entire redac-
tional layer such as one stressing divine retribution can be described by
o. Kaiser as functioning to explain etiologically a sociological change
which occurred in the Persian or Greek era and which was then pro-
jected back into history to form an integral com ponent of the message
of a pre-exilic prophet. An etiological force has also been linked with
other retrospective theories of prophetic developm ent such as that of
cognitive dissidence . However, in both of these examples, the ren-
dering of the biblical text as a purely literary construct runs the danger
of undercutting the very rationale for etiological retrojection of histori-
cal m aterial from one age to another.

II. Controversial Features o f Retrospective Interpretation

In spite of the genuine contributions which the newer exegetical
techniques have produced, there have also emerged m ajor problem s
which call for a critical assessment.

1. M ethodological Problem s related to Fortschreibung

We have already seen that one of Z im m erlis m ajor concerns in
developing a theory of Fortschreibung was to provide a means of retain-
ing a m eaningful exegetical continuity w ithin a passage while at the
same time recognizing different levels of textual extension through
grow th. His was a m ajor voice in opposing H lschers radical reduction
of the genuine book of Ezekiel to a small poetic core at the cost of losing
the largest portion of the book as w orthless prose accretion. Z im m erhs
approach called for a critical literary reconstruction of different layers
which could then be form ed into a meaningful continuity along a devel-
oping trajectory.
In the last tw o decades tw o m ajor m ethodological criticisms of
Zim m erlis m ethod have emerged, both of which presented serious chal

15 E. Cassirer, ?hilosphie der symbolischen Formen, Bd. 11, 1 25 ET 1955, 1 0 4 ff.

16 B. S. Childs, A Study of the Formula Until this D ays JBL 82 (1963), 2 7 9 - 2 9 2 The
Etiological Tale Re-Examined, VT 24 (1974), 3 8 7 -3 9 7 .
17 o. Raiser, Das Buch des Fropheten Jesaja Kap. 1 12, ATD 17, 5. Aufl. 1981, 24 ff.
R. P. Carroll, When Prophecy Failed, 1979.
 Retrospective Reading of the Old Testament ?rophets 367

lenges. The first came with . G arschas bk Ezekiel in 197419 which
had made use of an earlier w ork by H. Schulz in 196920. Both books
called forth a vigorous response from Z im m erl2*. W hat was significant
in the debate was not merely the attacks on Zim m erli from younger
scholars. Actually Garscha had built m uch of his literary analysis on
Zim m erlis commentary. Rather, the significance lay in Zim m erlis re-
sponse to the results of their analyses w ith which he did not agree at
all, but which nevertheless shared much in com m on with his approach
to exegesis in distinguishing different redactional layers. Although Zim-
merli attacked G arschas w ork for its being one-sided in its literary
focus and in being hastily w ritten, he was unable offer any m ajor
m ethodological criticism. R ather w hat emerged was a m ore historically
conservative reading of Ezekiel over against G arschas more radical re-
dactional analysis; nevertheless a sim ilar exegetical m ethod inform ed
both. The disturbing herm eneutical (question which emerged from the
debate was w hether Garscha had indeed followed logically the conse-
t^uences of Zim m erlis own m ethod. In sum, it appeared as if the younger
redactional critics had seriously dam aged the very elements of theologi-
cal continuity within the book which lay at the heart of Zim m erlis
exegetical approach. Fortschreibung had been absorbed within redac-
tional criticism along with its emphasis on literary tension and disconti-
nuity.
The second m ajor challenge to Zim m erlis exegetical m ethod came
with the publication of M. G reenbergs Ezekiel com m entary in 198322.
G reenberg offered a detailed criticism of Z im m erlis exegesis of ch. 3
and rejected his retrojection of later post-587 elements of ch. 33 onto
the earlier call narrative (8297). M oreover, there was an implicit de-
bate with Zim merli throughout the com m entary (e. g. ch. 20). Both Zim-
merli and Greenberg agreed that the book of Ezekiel was a baroque
com position, often filled with tortuous imagery and stylistic shifts. The
crucial exegetical issue turned on how to account for these peculiarities
of the book. Zim m erli worked on the assum ption that the tensions
w ithin the book were a result of the books lengthy grow th, hence the
concept of Fortschreibung and redactional expansion. In contrast,
Greenberg m ounted a strong argum ent, buttressed with impressive par-
allels from Ancient N ear Eastern sources, that Ezekiels style was from

19 j. Garscha, Studien zum Ezechielbuch. Eine redakt^nskritische Untersuchung vn

1 - 3 9 , 1974.
2 H. Schulz, Das Todesrecht im Alten Testament, BZAW 114, 1969.
2 w Zimmerli, review Schulz, ThLZ 95 (1970), 8 9 1 -8 9 7 Deutero-Ezechiel?, ZAW
84 (1972), 501516 ^ zur 2. Auflage Ezechiel, in: Ezechiel 124, BK XIII/1,
1979, ix -x v iii.
22 M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 120, AB 22, 1983.
368 Brevard s. Chld$

the beginning non-m em etic and did not develop in a trajectory from a
simple structure to a com plex one. This challenge raises the g e s t i o n
w hether m uch of Zim m erlis complex theory of redactional expansion
rests on an unproven hypothesis.

2. C onceptional ^ tio n a liz a tio n and Literary Fragm entation

During the period of the dom inance of the form critical, traditio-
historical approach to the prophets, tensions in the text were, of course,
recognized, but in contrast to the older literary criticism of, say, D uhm
and M arti, it was argued that diverse and even conflicting elements often
were picked up and retained in the history of transm ission w ithin a
unified social setting. In this regard redactional criticism has largely re-
turned to the older literary critical position, although its term inology
has shifted to th at of redactional layers {Schichten) rather than th at of
glosses and conflicting sources.
For example, in much the recent work on 11 Isaiah (e. g. Steck, Hermisson, Kratz)
the discovery of allegedly conceptual tensions in the biblical text provides the initial indica-
tion that a different layer is present. H erm isson^ mounts a case for a qarob layer which
is characterized by a particular concept o the imminent deliverance from exile and is
coupled conditionally with a demand for better conduct from Israel. He contrasts this
level with that o f unconditional forgiveness (40,1.), and concludes that the qarob layer
is a later level which stems from the prophets disciples. However, is there not the same
danger present which once afflicted source critical analysis? The assumption that concep-
tual tension always implies different literary strands results in the endless proliferation o f
redactions. Is it not possible that the tensions which Hermisson observes regarding divine
salvation constitute the very unfoueness of 11 Isaiahs message and to posit a separate and
later redactional layer pulls apart elements which closely cohere, even in tension?^ It is
significant to note that the redactional method begins as a purely literary analysis which
is then only secondarily correlated with historical events and periods. Farticularly in recent
work on 11 and 111 Isaiah, five or six different redactional layers within a single passage
are often reconstructed which rival in complexity any source critical analysis ever at-
tempted by Marti!
Or again, Steck^ has mounted an argument that Isa 49,1426 is not a unified unit,
as previously held, but a redactional construct. Although it may seem at first ffom a form
critical analysis that V. 14 offered Zions complaint and v v . 1526 Yahwehs answer, Steck

23 H.-J. Hermisson, Einheit und Komplexitt Deuterojesajas, in: The Book of Isaiah, ed.
j. Vermeylen, Leuven 1987, 294296.
24 Hermisson offers a clear formulation of his approach: Yielmehr ist zuerst nach der
sachlichen Einheit eines theologischen Konzepts zu fragen, dessen innere Konsistenz
sich durch sprachliche und formale Einheitlichkeit besttigen mu, ibid., 289 f. H ow -
ever, he seems unaware of the serious hermeneutical problems involved in foe terminol-
ogy of Konzept and innere Konsistenz.
25 . H. Steck, Gottesknecht und Zion, FAT 4, 1992, 4 7 59.
 Retrospective Reading the Old Testament Prophets 369

argues that the complaint and the answer reflect different redactional levels in which the
latter is literarily dependent on the former. As support he maintains that 21 is not simply
a rhetorical uestion, but a real uestion 0 the community relating to the return the
second and later generations of Jews who were born and raised in exile away ffom Jerusa-
lem. The divine response given in 22 ff. addresses the su b se^ en t role of the nations
and the continuing presence of the Babylonians.

The problem w ith this newer redactional analysis is that under the
guise of diversity the biblical text is subjected to the criteria of rigorous,
conceptual coherence which has been defined according to m odern ratio-
nal categories. Imagery which seems clearly to function contextually in a
m etaphorical m anner Isa 49,21 is a classic exam ple is first rendered
literally, thus changing its sem antic function in order to provide a histor-
ical source for direct referential inform ation. The danger of acute frag-
m entation is immediately apparent which is an im pression buttressed by
the lack of anything even vaguely resem bling a scholarly consensus. Sim-
ilar m ethodological criticism can also be leveled against K ratzs recent
an alysis^.
Surely no one seriously doubts th at there are m ajor tensions within
II Isaiah, m ost notably respecting the servant songs. Few wish to re-
turn to a traditional interpretation which w ould flatten tensions by
m eans of dogm atic rubrics. Likewise the recent appeals to synchronic,
post-m odern readings fail to do justice to the tex ts depth dimensions
and diverse literary contours. Nevertheless, the crucial exegetical task
remains how skillfully to handle the very different kinds of tension pre-
sent. There is wide agreem ent th at a consistently corporate interpreta-
tion of the servant passages in Isa 4 0 55 (Budde, M uilenburg, Clifford)
does not ade(juately account for the genuine tensions in these c h a p te rs^ .
H owever equally unconvincing is a redactional approach which attem pts
to resolve the problem s by endless fragm enting of foe text into layers as
if the m odern interpreter had the freedom to retroject later events into
the past w ithout the c o ^ r a i n t s of historical roots or concern for tra-
d ents of trad ition.

3. The M isapplication of foe Term Midrash

The concept of m idrash had its origins within foe specific historical
context of rabbinic Judaism during foe Tannaite and post-Tannaite
periods. In foe early 19th century Jewish scholars such as Z unz and
Geiger found the w arrant for this approach to interpretation already
present in foe late books of foe H ebrew Bible, especially in Chronicles,

26 R. G. Kratz, Kyros im Deuterojesaja-Buch, FAT 1, 19 1

27 H.-J. Hermisson, Israel und der (fotteskneebt bei Deuterje$aja, ZThK 79 (1982),
124 vreiliger Absehied den G otesknechtsliedern, ThR 49 (1984), 2222 9 .
370 Brevard s. Childs

but the technieal use of the term s rabbinic in origin. The m idrashic
approach to exegesis w orked with a variety of assum ptions. It assumed
a largely stable text of the H ebrew Scriptures which form ed a coherent
corpus of authoritative writings. The w ritten text was com plem ented by
a body of equally authoritative oral tradition. Scripture thus provided an
inexhaustible resource for the interpreter to draw from the text religious
w isdom for the continuing instruction of the com m unity in Torah. Ten-
sions which arose in the text were to be resolved w ith the help of oral
tradition by a form of intertextuality in which one passage illum inated
another according to a pattern of holistic reading. In sum, the m idrashic
m ethod w orked w ithin carefully articulated restraints which were
grounded in certain religious precepts of orthodox ^ d a is m and which
had been shaped by careful philological and contextual rules.
W ithin Christianity m idrashic exegesis was largely m isunderstood
and rejected as trivial by m ost of the C hurch Fathers, Schoolmen, and
Reformers which attitude continued through the 19th century. The last
vestige of this position can be seen in W ellhausens derogatory character-
izarion of the Chronicles as midrash, by which he m eant pious illu
s io n ^ . Unfortunately, within recent years this false application of the
term m idrash has returned as a tool of m odern redaction criticism.
R. E. Clements29 was convinced that the only truly historical account o Sennacher-
ibs invasion Jerusalem in 701 was to be found in the Assyrian annals and in the so-
called A account of 11 Reg 18,1416. Hezekiah capitulated before Sennacherib by pay-
ing a heavy tribute, and as a vassal was allowed to retain his office. The problem then
arose how to interpret the subsequent narrative of Sennacheribs further demands, deliv-
ered by the Rabshakeh (18,17 ff.) for the surrender of the city which finally resulted in the
destruction of the Assyrian army according to Isaiahs word of promise to Hezekiah.
According to Clements, this narrative (the B account) had been composed by a process
o f midrashic elaboration of Isaiahs prophecies. Moreover, this interpretation turns out
to be theological embellishment, a piece of theological colouring, and an exaggeration
far removed from the real world. Midrash thus turned Hezekiahs humiliating surrender
into a victory and transformed Isaiahs message of judgment into a pledge of Z ions inviola-
bility which a redactor retrojected into Hezekiahs reign during the Josianic era. Midrash
in this sense is an unfortunate religious aberration akin to Wellhausens characterization
of the Chroniclers distortion of the book of Kings.

My criticism of this widespread, m odern usage of a concept of mid-

rash does not stem merely from its m isapplication of the term , but from
this entire projection of textual expansion. A level of grow th is con-

28 j. Wellhausen, ?rolegomena zur Ceschichte Israel, 4. Aufl., 1 8 5 : Oer Midrasth ist

die Folge der Heilighaltung der Reliquien der Vergangenheit, eine ganz eigene Wieder-
erweckung der toten Gebeine, auf knstlichem und zunchst auf schriftlichem Wege

29 R. E. Clements, Isaiah and the Deliverance of Jerusalem, JSOT.S 13, 1980.

 theo Testament Prophets
Retrospective Reading 371

tructed which does not rest on a descriptive textual analysis, but on a

jrior theological value judgm ent respecting the content which equates
tory w ith fantasy and illusion. In the case of II Reg 18,17ff. the reader
s instructed in a world come of age th at our knowledge of history
... shows us unm istakably th at angels do not come from heaven to slay
the enemy (Clements, 26). But surely there are other options for the
nodern interpreter besides that of naive supernaturalism or arrid histori-
al rationalism . In sum, under the rubric of m idrash a whole set of
issum ptions regarding the content of a story has been m ade which far
txceeds the task of tracking editorial redaction.

4. Theological R eductionism through Etiological

R econstructions
An earlier paragraph described the separate origins of the term s
tiology and vaticinium ex eventu, and briefly analyzed their literary
unctions. However, in m odern redactional criticism of the prophets the
wo concepts always closely allied have been firmly joined to form
com prehensive theory for reconstructing literary developm ent. By ex-
)anding the concept of etiological causality, post-factum events now
unction retrospectively as a m eans for explaining the grow th of redac-
ional layers. For example, according to the hypothesis of H. B arth30
md C lem ents3* the growing weakness of the Assyrian empire in the
atter p art of the 7th century, coupled with the political successes of
[osiah in regaining Ju d ah s pow er and prestige, caused a sense of na-
ional optim ism to develop. The Assyrian/Josianic redaction ret-
*ojected these 7th century conditions back into the 8th century preaching
)f Isaiah. The destruction of Assyria was construed by this redactional
ayer as a typological anticipation of Yahwehs ultim ate victory over the
nations. A sim ilar example of retrospective reconstruction has also been
out forw ard by K aiser^ who assigns the essential process of editing the
[saianic corpus to the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods and sees
possibility of recovering the contours of the prophet Isaiahs original
8th century message.
I think it fair to state that the m ajority of critically-oriented m odern
O T scholars recognize the presence of post-factum elements in the pro-
phetic literature (cf. even M. Greenberg, 215). However, m ost would
resist em bracing a theory of etiological retrojection which assigns it as
the m ajor force in the developm ent of the entire prophetic tradition.
Yet increasingly this retrospective approach has become the hallm ark of

30 H. Barth, ){ , cit., 203 ff.

31 R. E. Clements, Isaiah 1 - 3 9 (NCB), 1980, 5
32 o. Kaiser, op. cit., 2 4.
372 Brevard s. Childs

rdatinal criticism. This understanding of interpretive expansion is

quite the opposite from Fortschreibung which described the expansion
as a secondary grow th on a core tradition. By reversing the direction of
the m ain force of grow th, Israels history has become a literary construct
w ithout genuine historical rootage.
There are several serious exegetical im plications stem m ing from
this form of etiological reconstruction. First, traditional historical con-
trois for dating the biblical m aterial have been greatly weakened. His-
tory now serves largely to provide patterns of events or cultural condi-
tions which are retrojected into the past. The cause is shaped by the
effect, not the effect by the cause. Because sim ilar patterns recur during
different historical periods, it is largely a m atter of conjecture as to
w hether the circum stances retrojected are from the Babylonian, Fersian,
or Hellenistic eras. Kaisers dictum th at the interpreter w orks initially
from the assum ption of a passages inauthenticity, not authenticity, only
exacerbates the problem .
Secondly, the influence of Israels religious faith on the shaping of
the prophetic corpus has been largely subordinated to political, eco-
nomic, and social factors which are deemed to be the only real forces at
w ork in the w orld. The result is a massive dem ythologizing of the OT.
Frobably the m ost consistent form ulation of this position is th at of N.
G ottw ald w ho regards theological language as only a heuristic cover for
the real forces at w ork which are always sociological.^
Thirdly, retrospective redactional criticism in the form described
presents a m ajor threat to the theological substance of the H ebrew Bible.
The literature which lays claim to be Israels response to divine interven-
tion is now rendered into ideological constructs of editors whose agenda
is largely determ ined by wishful thinking or self-interest. The point is
not to deny th at hum an factors were at w ork, but the total im pact of
the prophetic literature calls into question this cynical evaluation of the
whole.

Ill. Crucial H erm eneutical Issues at Stake

It is one thing to criticize the exegetical efforts of others it is quite
another to offer a positive alternative. H ow then is a m utilayered, retro-
spectively edited text to be interpreted? Recent conservative attem pts to
deny completely the presence of redactional extension, particularly in
the book of Is a ia h ^ , are highly unconvincing. Rather, the difficult issue

33 N . K. Gottwald, The Tribes 0 Yahweh. A Sociology 0 the Religion of Liberated Israel

1 2 5 0 -1 0 5 0 BCE, 1 7 69 2 . ,
34 j. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy 0 Isaiah, Downers Grove, 1993: the whole literature
is the product 0 Isaiah 0 Jerusalem, 45.
 Retrospective Reading the Old Testament ?rophets 373

turns on how redactional extensions, espeeially in the form of retrospec-

tive techniques, are to be understood and properly interpreted w ithin
the prophetic corpus. I w ould argue th at there are characteristic ways
in which the prophets were edited, not simply in term s of particular
literary techniques, but through a theological stance tow ard the m aterial
which has deeply affected the transm ission process throughout the oral,
w ritten, and redactional stages.

1. Tem poral Sequence and Prophetic Dialectic

A m ajor contribution of the m odern historical critical study of the
prophets has been to anchor each prophet within a discrete and concrete
historical setting. It has become a truism to assert th at the prophets
were not proclaim ers of eternal truths within a timeless context. Thus,
Zim m erlis strong com m itm ent to this axiom is w hat caused him to
analyze redactional extension in Ezekiel in such a way as to avoid a
threat to the concrete, existential quality of the p ro p h ets preaching.35
Yet within this real history the year th at King Uzziah died
there is the entrance of another history and another time. The nature of
G ods rule which had been revealed to Isaiah obtained long before the
death of Uzziah. The whole w orld is filled with G ods glory and has
always been. God does indeed rule and his reign continues to be cele-
brated in a heavenly litany. W hen w ithin the book of Isaiah passages of
salvation and judgm ent are juxtaposed in the sharpest polarity (2,25/
6 22), this structure certainly reflects a late redactional ordering. H ow -
ever, the theology expressed in this juxtaposition is already deeply em-
bedded in the earlier tradition. Isa 2,2 ff. offers an eschatological vision
of G o d s coming rule which picks up a variety of ancient motifs. The
brittle quality of the present literary structure only confirms the basic
theological point th at eschatological history, th at is G ods time, cannot
be sm oothly com bined with empirical history, nor can the tw o be cleanly
separated. The subtlety of the book of Isaiah turns on the dialectical
relationship of this interaction. W hat seems to be a political threat to
Judah from the Assyrians suddenly becomes the entrance of an eschato-
logical divine judgm ent.
The herm eneutical point to emphasize is th at for Isaiah history is
understood in the light of prophecy, not prophecy in the light of history.
This stance form s the inner logic of the book and dom inates the whole.
It also accounts for the fact th at critical attem pts to date redactionally
passages such as Isa 2,25 and then to assign their content to some
post-exilic historical experience are deeply flawed. These approaches fail

35 W. Zimmerli, Vom ?ro^ eten w ort zum ?rophetenbuch, ThLZ 104 (1979), 4 8 2 496.
374 Brevard s. Childs

to understand th at prophetic eschatology is not an unm ediated deriva-

tive of empirical history, but of a different order of divine intervention
which is only dialectically related to tem poral sequence. Reconstructed
political history cannot supply the source of Isaiahs eschatological hope
nor provide the explanation for textual extensions which rather reflect
the ongoing experiences of Israel with God m ediated through Scripture.
To characterize eschatological passages as prophetic optimism is to
trivialize the biblical text in the extrem e.
The inner logic of prophetic literature also provides the reason why
eschatological passages cannot be merely historicized. It is, of course,
possible that behind, say, Isa 9 there was once a description of a royal
enthronm ent m uch like A. A h conjectured, but the main exegetical point
to make is th at in the editorial process these inherited elements were
m ade to function m etaphorically in the background whereas the full
force from the tex ts foreground foils on the eschatological dimension
of the coming of a prom ised ruler according to G ods time. O r again,
to suggest th at the divine threats to Judah and Jerusalem as recorded in
2,64,1 were regarded as fulfilled by the destruction of 587 is to miss
the function of prophetic eschatology which rem ains future-oriented to
every successive generation. At the same fime, foe book of Isaiah retains
foe figure of King Ahaz unchanged in all his historical particularity. He
stands frightened on the highway to Fullers field aw aiting foe im m inent
attack from the coalition powers (7,1 ff.). He is fully a p art of Ju d ah s
fragile hum an history. An interpretation which flattens this distinctive,
dialectic approach to history can only result in serious exegetical reduc-
tionism.

2. Criteria of Prophetic Truth

The prophetic understanding of tru th is not determ ined by concep-
tual consistency. This prophetic message is not transm itted in the form
of theological tractates nor of philosophical rum inations about abstract
m oral ideals. Rather, foe prophets bear witness to a divine reality by
which they have been constrained. Their response is not always logically
structured and often a divine encounter is only indirectly perceived. The
prophet com m unicates foe divine will for Israel and for the nations in a
great variety of different forms, styles, and images, o fte n the content is
too awe-inspiring for conceptual clarity and its ad hoc articulations ap-
pear fragmentary, visceral, and partial. Frequently the subject m atter
runs roughshod over tem poral and logical categories, and the editors
link together events of similar qualities of time according to their sub-
stance. This move accounts for the consistently theocentric orientation
of foe prophets. Little attention is paid to foe psychological state of foe
messenger, nor to the m odern concern over the nature of the filtering
process by hum an tradents. Rather, prophetic truth is m easured by w hat
 Retrospective Reading of the Old Testament Prophets 375

rightly conform s to its divine subject m atter and evokes a faithful re-
sponse from its recipients (Isa 8,11 ff.).
The im plications from this biblical ^ rs p e c tiv e is that too m uch
w eight cannot be assigned to logical inconsistencies or to conceptual
tensions within a given passage as a m eans by which to reconstruct
unified literary redactions. Because the nature of prophetic speech was
to reflect an encounter with the reality of God, an analysis of a prophetic
oracle as if it were simply a freely com posed literary construct does not
do justice to the m aterial. Careful attention to the function of m etaphors
in rendering reality is usually m ore indicative of the prophetic m eaning
th an the coherence of larger literary structures.
Again to assume that m eaning can only be rightly determ ined when
it is firmly located w ithin a conceptually evolving trajectory rests on a
questionable sem antic foundation. Because the prophetic writings were
soon treasured as authoritative Scripture, textual expansion occurred in
the process of continual usage not tow ard foe goal of correcting con-
cepts deemed false a concept quite unthinkable in Judaism but in
order to elucidate and confirm for its hearers the tru th of a prophetic
message which it was assumed to possess.

3. The Text as Tradent of A uthority

Prophetic authority is related to the function of foe biblical text.
The text is the tradent of authority in establishing a link with specific
prophetic figures. The literature has no lifo apart from Israels life, insti-
tutions, and offices. The prophet serves as foe living voice of God now
preserved in a living text of Scripture. The text can certainly be extended
beyond foe scope of the original prophecy, but the theological link with
its origin must be m aintained in order to sustain its authority. It is im-
possible to have free-floating literary constructs which are totally with-
out historical rootage because authority ultim ately rests on divine com-
m unication through these prophetic messengers. The prophetic text is
not a creation of nameless editors to m anipulate for a private agenda,
but it remains the irreplacable vehicle in the service of God for the sake
of Israel.
There are different functions of textual authority which directly
relate to the issue of the retrospective reading of the prophets. One
such role provides the proper theological explanation for the function
of etiology w ithin biblical prophecy. The technique of historical retro-
jection is not an attem pt, as often claimed, to buttress a failing prophetic
authority, but rather a means of confirm ing its recognized truth. Bvents
in history were retrojected into the past precisely to confirm the author-
ity of a prophetic voice. Thus, m ost likely foe savage imagery of the
utter destruction of Jerusalem in 587 was used post-factum in Isa 6,11 ff.
376 Brevard s. Childs

to register the truth of the prophetic threat which the editors viewed as
a unified reality according to its substance which unfolded in history as
predicted. Similarly, Isa 22,8b11 appears to be a retrojection of the
destruction of the city which functions as the voice of the prophet who
outlined the plan of God which was never heeded by Israel either in the
8th or 6th century.
Then again, the role of the biblical text as tradent of prophetic
authority explains the im portant feature of intertextuality com m on to
the prophetic corpus. A prophetic text is specific and concrete, yet its
imagery continues to reverberate within the tradition. It continues to
exert a coercion on future generations of recipients and gives evidence
of its force in the way in which a text is repeatedly actualized to remain
highly existential even in changing historical contexts. This echoing ef-
feet arises from a widespread conviction th at the authority of a single
text extends to the larger story and partakes of the selfsame reality. By
means of intertextuality a text can be extended into the future by means
of Fortschreibung or it can be retrojected into the past by expanding
and enriching the earlier imagery from the content of later events. Both
redactional m ovements em ploying intertextuality rest on the same inner
logic of Scriptures textual authority.

4. The Final Form of the Text

In the past the use of the term final form has evoked much con-
troversy. Does the biblical text ever have a final form? Does it not vary
within different textual traditions? Certainly such questions are fully
legitimate w ithin a discussion of textual transm ission, variants, and
stabilization. However, in reference to the herm eneutical issue of final
form , the above questions are peripheral to the subject. N or is the real
issue at stake a debate between a diachronic or synchronic handling of
the OT.
Rather, the basic herm eneutical issue of the so-called final form
turns on determ ining the nature of this set of writings. To suggest th at
the Bible is literature, even religious literature, while in a sense correct,
does not address its uniqueness. These writings reflect the experience
of a historic people which developed over a long period of collection,
transm ission, and grow th. However, at some point in this history
roughly in the Hellenistic period the scope of the received books was
limited and a process of stabilization of the tradition set in supported
by critically authorized texts. ven m ore crucial, these diverse writings
were designated as Scripture and given a special function w ithin a com-
munity. The H ebrew Bible became the story of Israel under Torah to
which the prophetic writings were joined. In addition, the Psalms were
tied to David and W isdom to Solomon. In a w ord, a larger structure
 Retrospective Reading the Testament Prophets 377

was imposed on this m aterial which form ed the distinct parts into a
loosely ordered whole.
The herm eneutical im plications of this developm ent for interpreta-
tion suggest th at this larger narrative structure is constitutive for the
prophetic corpus and should be respected. Regardless of the ability of
critical research to unearth earlier stages lying beneath foe present form
of the text, interpretation of this entity received by Israel as Scripture
must ultim ately focus its finai attention on the received form . O f course,
these writings can always be read as an ancient N ear astern fragm ent,
but it is not the Bible that is being interpreted. Similarly, the interpreta-
tion of foe Old Testam ent is seriously im paired if critical literary analysis
assigns to reconstructed redactional layers foe decisive sem antic role in
construing the tex ts meaning.
The concluding point to make is that foe concept of final form is
closely connected with the issue of readership. An im portant corollary
to the designation of a w ritten corpus as Scripture is th at these writings
function as Scripture for someone. They have been ordered tow ard a
present and future audience who receives its identity in some way from
Israels past story which is lost if a new story is reconstructed apart from
the received narrative form. Thus to suggest th at foe m ajor force involve
in shaping Israels prophetic history derives from readings retrojected as
literary constructs runs in the face of the final form of Scripture which
is eschatologically oriented tow ard foe goal of instructing every future
generation of Israel in the reality of God w ho continues to act on its
behalf.

The author analyzes different approaches ro retrospective reading of the prophets

which are presently used, including adaptation, Fortschreibung, editorial redaction, etiol-
ogy, and vaticinia ex eventu. A critical assessment of these various proposals is offered.
Then an attempt is made ro address the hermeneutical issues involved in such readings,
and ro offer four proposals for evaluating the positive, theological function of prophetic
retrojection.


Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your resp ective ATT,AS subscriber agreem ent.

No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s) express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission
from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ajourna!
typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, tbe author o fth e article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use covered by the fair use provisions o f tbe copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initia funding from Liiiy Endowment !).

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property o fthe American
Theological Library Association.