Zions Rock-Solid Foundations

dekker_f1_prelims.indd i 2/12/2007 4:10:56 PM

 Oudtestamentische Studin
Old Testament Studies
published on behalf of the Societies for
Old Testament Studies in the Netherlands and
Belgium, South Africa, the United Kingdom
and Ireland

Editor
B. Becking
Utrecht

Editorial Board
H.G.M. Williamson
Oxford

H.F. Van Rooy

Potchefstroom

M. Vervenne
Leuven

VOLUME 54

dekker_f1_prelims.indd ii 2/12/2007 4:10:56 PM

 Zions Rock-Solid Foundations
An Exegetical Study of the Zion Text
in Isaiah 28:16

by

Jaap Dekker

LEIDEN BOSTON
2007

dekker_f1_prelims.indd iii 2/12/2007 4:10:56 PM

 Translated by Brian Doyle with financial support from the
Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO)

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Dekker, Jaap.
[Rotsvaste fundering van Sion. English]
Zions rock-solid foundations : an exegetical study of the Zion text in Isaiah 28:16 /
by Jaap Dekker.
p. cm. (Oudtestamentische Studin, ISSN 0169-7226 ; 54)
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBN-13: 978-90-04-15665-4 (hard : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 90-04-15665-8 (hard : alk. paper) 1. Bible. O.T. Isaiah XXVIII, 16
Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Series.

BS1515.52.D4513 2007
224'.106dc22
2006050012

ISSN 0169-7226
ISBN 978 90 04 15665 4

Copyright 2007 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored
in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written
permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by

Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to
The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive,
Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

printed in the netherlands

dekker_f1_prelims.indd iv 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 CONTENTS

Foreword ..................................................................................... ix
List of Abbreviations .................................................................. xiii

Chapter 1. Introduction ............................................................. 1

1.1. Situating the issue ............................................................ 1
1.2. Relevance ......................................................................... 2
1.3. Goals and methodology .................................................. 6

Chapter 2. The Zion Text of Isaiah 28:16 in the History of

Exegesis ...................................................................................... 9
2.1. Introduction ..................................................................... 9
2.2. Septuagint ........................................................................ 11
2.3. New Testament ................................................................ 13
2.3.1. Romans 9:32b 33 and 10:11 ............................... 13
2.3.2. 1 Peter 2:6 ............................................................. 17
2.3.3. Evaluation ............................................................... 22
2.4. Judaism ............................................................................ 24
2.4.1. Qumran ................................................................. 25
2.4.2. Targum .................................................................. 28
2.4.3. Talmud .................................................................. 30
2.4.4. Evaluation ............................................................. 33
2.5. Early Church ................................................................... 34
2.5.1. The Letter of Barnabas ....................................... 34
2.5.2. Tertullian and Cyprian ......................................... 37
2.5.3. Jerome and Augustine ........................................... 40
2.5.4. Cyril and Theodoret ............................................. 45
2.5.5. Evaluation ............................................................. 47
2.6. Middle Ages .................................................................... 48
2.7. Reformation .................................................................... 51
2.8. Modern biblical research ................................................ 54
2.8.1. The future kingdom of God ................................ 56
2.8.2. The new Israel ...................................................... 56
2.8.3. The true religion of yhwh ................................... 57
2.8.4. The new temple / new Zion ................................ 58
2.8.5. Metaphorical interpretation ................................. 58
2.8.6. The existing temple / Zion .................................. 59
2.9. Conclusions ....................................................................... 60

dekker_f1_prelims.indd v 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 vi contents

Chapter 3. The Literary and Historical Context of the Zion

Text of Isaiah 28:16 ............................................................... 65
3.1. Introduction ..................................................................... 65
3.2. Colometric subdivision of Isaiah 28 .............................. 66
3.3. Pericope delineation within Isaiah 28 ............................ 73
3.4. Isaiah 28:1422 as original unity ................................... 78
3.5. Isaiah 28:1422 as Isaianic prophecy ............................. 83
3.6. Dating Isaiah 28:1422 ................................................... 86
3.7. Dating the reign of Hezekiah ......................................... 90
3.8. Hezekiahs revolt and Sennacheribs campaign ............. 94
Excursus 1: Prophetic historiography in 2 Kings
1819 ............................................................................. 101

Chapter 4. Exegesis of Individual Pericopes within Isaiah 28

and their Reciprocal Relationships ........................................ 109
4.1. Introduction ..................................................................... 109
4.2. Isa. 28:1422 ................................................................... 110
4.2.1. Isa. 28:1415: Complaint ..................................... 112
4.2.2. Isa. 28:16: Salvation-historical retrospective ........ 124
4.2.3. Isa. 28:17a: The benchmarks of justice ............... 144
4.2.4. Isa. 28:17b18: Actual announcement of
judgement ............................................................. 147
4.2.5. Isa. 28:1921: Twofold conclusion to the
announcement of judgement ............................... 153
4.2.6. Isa. 28:22: Exhortation ......................................... 163
Excursus 2: The covenant with death and
necromancy ....................................................... 166
4.3. Isa. 28:713 ..................................................................... 177
4.3.1. Isa. 28:78: Accusation ......................................... 177
4.3.2. Isa. 28:910: Rejoinder ........................................ 182
4.3.3. Isa. 28:1113: Announcement of judgement ...... 189
4.4. Evaluation ........................................................................ 197
4.5. Isa. 28:16 and 28:2329 ............................................... 203
4.5.1. Isa. 28:16: Prophecy of judgement and promise
of salvation ............................................................ 204
4.5.2. Isa. 28:2329: Prophetic instruction .................... 218
4.5.3. Evaluation ............................................................. 234

dekker_f1_prelims.indd vi 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 contents vii

Chapter 5. The Place and Function of Isaiah 28:1422 in the

Context of Isaiah 2833 ........................................................ 243
5.1. Introduction ..................................................................... 243
5.2. Isaiah 2833 as a redactional unit ................................. 245
5.2.1. Structural cohesion ............................................... 245
5.2.2. Content based cohesion ........................................ 249
5.2.2.1. Themes .................................................... 249
5.2.2.2. Metaphors ................................................ 255
5.2.3. Evaluation ............................................................. 257
5.3. Isaiah 28 as overture ....................................................... 258
5.4. Isaiah 28:1422 as key text and guide ........................... 262

Chapter 6. The Zion Text of Isaiah 28:16 and the Zion

Tradition in Isaiah .................................................................. 265
6.1. Introduction ..................................................................... 265
6.2. Zion in the first part of the book of Isaiah (139) ........ 266
6.3. Results of the exegesis of the Zion text of Isaiah
28:16 ................................................................................ 275
6.4. The place of the Zion tradition in the preaching of
Isaiah ............................................................................... 282
6.4.1. Research into the Zion tradition .......................... 283
6.4.1.1. Identification of an independent Zion
tradition ................................................... 283
6.4.1.2. The Zion tradition and the Jebusite
cultic tradition ......................................... 299
6.4.1.3. The Zion tradition and the Ark
tradition ................................................... 303
6.4.1.4. The Zion tradition as a specifically
Israelite election tradition ........................ 317
6.4.2. Further research into the Zion preaching of
Isaiah ..................................................................... 318
6.4.2.1. Isaiah and the Zion tradition .................. 318
6.4.2.2. Zion and Isaiahs preaching of judgement
and salvation ............................................ 325

dekker_f1_prelims.indd vii 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 viii contents

Chapter 7. Summary and Conclusions ..................................... 339

1. The Zion Text of Isa. 28:16 in the Septuagint, the
New Testament and Judaism .......................................... 339
2. The Zion Text of Isa. 28:16 in the History of
Interpretation ................................................................... 340
3. The Zion Text of Isa. 28:16 in its Literary and
Historical Context ........................................................... 342
4. Exegetical Conclusions with Respect to the Zion Text
of Isa. 28:16 .................................................................... 343
5. The Covenant with Death .............................................. 345
6. Isa. 28:1422 in the Context of Isaiah 28 and Isaiah
2833 ............................................................................... 346
7. Zion in Isaiah 139 ......................................................... 347
8. Research into the Zion Tradition and its Origins .......... 348
9. Isaiah and the Zion Tradition ........................................ 349
10. Zion and Isaiahs Preaching of Judgement and
Salvation .......................................................................... 351

Appendix: The Zion text of Isaiah 28:16 and the New

Testament ................................................................................ 355

Bibliography ................................................................................ 367

Index of Authors ........................................................................ 391

Index of Biblical Texts ............................................................... 397

dekker_f1_prelims.indd viii 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 FOREWORD

In the prologue to his Latin translation of the book of Isaiah, Jerome

writes: Isaiah deserves to be called an evangelist more than a prophet.
He offers such a clear description of all the mysteries of Christ and
the Church that one would think he was writing about recent history
rather than prophesying about the future.1 For the same reason, the
book of the prophet Isaiah came to be referred to in later centuries
as the fifth gospel. If one bears in mind the significant place the book
has enjoyed since New Testament times in both Christian preaching
and Christian art, the aforementioned qualification is understandable
in every respect.2 With the possible exception of the book of Psalms,
no other Old Testament book has provided such inspiration for our
reflection on the gospels and our understanding of the works of Jesus
Christ than that of Isaiah. Jesus allusion to the scribe, trained for the
kingdom of heaven, who brings out of his treasure what is new and
what is old (see Mt. 13:52), certainly applies in equal measure to the
book of Isaiah. The treasures to be found in the book and the prophetic
preaching that forms its foundations serve as a guarantee that those
who devote themselves to the study of Isaiah are sure to encounter the
Lord and his wondrous deeds.
The present study focuses its attention on the statement referring to
the stone in Zion to be found in Isa. 28:16. The statement represents
just one of many drawn from the book of Isaiah that came to enjoy
an important place in New Testament preaching by being brought
into association with the advent of Jesus Christ (see Rom. 9:32b33;
10:11 and 1 Pet. 2:6). In the first instance, however, our research will
address the interpretation of Isa. 28:16 in its Old Testament context.
Employing this Zion statement as point of access, I have endeavoured
to establish a picture of the prophetic preaching of Isaiah and the place
ascribed to Zion therein.

1
See B. Fischer et al. (eds.), Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Stuttgart 19944,
p. 1096: Deinde etiam hoc adiciendum, quod non tam propheta dicendus sit quam
evangelista. Ita enim universa Christi Ecclesiaeque mysteria ad liquidum persecutus
est, ut non eum putes de futuro vaticinari, sed de praeteritis historiam texere.
2
Cf. J.F.A. Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel. Isaiah in the History of Christianity, Cambridge
1996.

dekker_f1_prelims.indd ix 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 x foreword

Given the fact that available literature on the book of Isaiah is vir-
tually endless and that my study thereof had to run parallel with my
other daily activities, the present research project has been roughly ten
years in the making. While there were difficult moments during this
period, when it appeared that my research was stagnating, hindsight
reveals that these were moments of genuine maturation. With gratitude
to God for the gift of health and strength, however, I am now able to
present the results of my research in the awareness that no prophecy of
scripture is a matter of ones own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came
by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
(2 Pet. 1:2021 NRSV) The same can be said with respect to the ref-
erence to the stone in Zion in Isa. 28:16. My exegetical research has
its roots in a desire to understand this word of God concerning Zion,
which later came to be of such significance for the church. Grounded
in a tradition that endeavours to hold theology and church community,
academic study and preaching in close relationship with one another,
I genuinely hope that the present volume, including those passages
where I have been obliged at times to call the traditional interpreta-
tion of Isa. 28:16 into question, does not merely represent my own
interpretation, and I hope that it will ultimately be of service to the
continuing witness of the church.
A number of individuals deserve recognition for their unfailing sup-
port during the years of research and writing. Particular gratitude is due
to my respected teacher and promoter, H.G.L. Peels, who guided the
entire process with kindness and expertise. While my enthusiasm for the
Old Testament, and for the prophetic literature in particular, was first
aroused under the watchful eye of the late B.J. Oosterhoff, his successor
Prof. Peels was ultimately responsible for ensuring that this enthusiasm
was sustained and that my research could bear its present fruit under
his tutelage. Without the stimulating discussions that nourished the
genesis and evolution of the present work, I would not have been able
to muster the necessary courage to stay on track, especially when faced
with often lengthy interruptions. The willingness of W.A.M. Beuken,
an internationally renowned authority on the book of Isaiah, to serve
as the co-promoter of my dissertation came as a pleasant surprise and
an added bonus. His valued contribution and amicable engagement in
the final phase of this study served to expedite its completion consider-
ably. On January 23rd, 2004, my dissertation was defended cum laude
at Apeldoorn Theological University.
K.R. Veenhof and M.C. Mulder deserve recognition for their will-
ingness to read and comment on a number of passages from the per-

dekker_f1_prelims.indd x 2/12/2007 4:10:57 PM

 foreword xi

spective of their own field of specialisation (Veenhof for the material

relating to Hezekiah and Sennacheribs military campaign, Mulder for
the material relating to the interpretation of Isa. 28:16 in the Targum
and the Talmud, together with the appendix on the Zion text of Isa.
28:16 in the New Testament). I am likewise grateful to J. Hoftijzer and
J.P. Lettinga for the linguistic observations they provided during the
early stages of my research.
Particular gratitude is due to H. de Jong, my teacher and predecessor
at the Theological Study Advice Service, for his willingness to review
my exegesis and refine it with his critical observations. (The Theological
Study Advice Service, Theologische Studiebegeleiding TSB, has
recently been transformed into a theological seminary for the Dutch
Reformed Churches and is accommodated at Apeldoorn Theological
University.) De Jong also deserves thanks for the fact that his courses
were ultimately responsible for convincing me of the importance of
Zion as one of the two core salvific themes in the Old Testament (the
other being David). The recent publication of this material (Van oud naar
nieuw. De ontwikkelingsgang van het Oude naar het Nieuwe Testament, Kampen
2002) has facilitated reference thereto in the present publication.
My work on the present publication would not have been possible
without the willingness of the church council and community of the
Dutch Reformed Churches in Nijverdal and Amstelveen to grant me
an annual period of study leave. Given the fact that research, preach-
ing and the preparation of lectures were not always easy to combine,
I came to depend on these moments of freedom from other duties to
focus on research. I am also grateful to the Board of Trustees of the
TSB and to my colleagues for affording me extra liberty to concentrate
on the completion of my work.
For translating this present study into English I wish to thank B.
Doyle (K.U. Leuven). His work was carried out with considerable care
and he was always more than willing to improve my often amateurish
suggestions in achieving a readable text. Furthermore, the success of
this project was also partly due to the substantial financial support made
available from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
(NWO). I also feel sincerely privileged that the editors of Oudtestamentische
Studin (OTS) were willing to accept my study in their renowned series,
and that Brill was willing to offer their professional services in the
publication of this book.
The primary environment that was necessary for my work was ulti-
mately created by my wife Gerda. Her selfless care and engagement
on behalf of our growing family made it possible for me to devote

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xi 2/12/2007 4:10:58 PM

 xii foreword

myself to study. The knowledge that we could also rely on the practical
support of our parents, especially during the more hectic moments at
home and at work, likewise provided for some welcome moments of
rest and relaxation. Our children Jolanda, Irene, Pieter Dirk and Henri
each in their own way expressed an interest in the book their father
was writing, although it may have taken up more of his time than they
would have preferred. We share the joy of completing this work as a
family and with all who are close to us.

Amstelveen, October 2006

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xii 2/12/2007 4:10:58 PM

 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

The list provided has made use where possible of the collection of
abbreviations found in S.M. Schwertner in Theologische Realenzyklopdie.
Abkrzungsverzeichnis, Berlin-New York 19942.

AB Analecta Bruxellensia, Brussels

ACEBT Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese en Bijbelse Theologie,
Kampen
AfO.B Archiv fr Orientforschung, Beiheft, Graz
AnB The Anchor Bible, New York
AnBib Analectica Biblica, Rome
AJSL American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures,
Chicago
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament, Kevelaer-Neukirchen
ATD Das Alte Testament Deutsch, Gttingen
BA The Biblical Archaeologist, New Haven
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research,
Jerusalem-Baghdad-New Haven
BAT Die Botschaft des Alten Testaments, Stuttgart
BBB Bonner Biblische Beitrge, Weinheim
BEThL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium,
Leuven
BEvTh Beitrge zur Evangelischen Theologie, Munich
BHK Biblia Hebraica Kittel, 3rd edition
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
BHTh Beitrge zur Historischen Theologie, Tbingen
Bib. Biblica. Commentarii periodici ad rem biblicam scienti-
fice investigandam, Rome
BibOr Biblica et Orientalia, Rome
BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, Manchester
BKAT Biblischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament, Neukirchen
BN Biblische Notizen. Beitrge zur exegetischen Diskussion,
Bamberg
BOT De Boeken van het Oude Testament, Roermond
BrSyn C. Brockelmann, Hebrische Syntax, Neukirchen 1956
BS Bibliotheca Sacra, London
BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin, Jamaica

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xiii 2/12/2007 4:10:58 PM

 xiv list of abbreviations

BWANT Beitrge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament,

Stuttgart
BZ Biblische Zeitschrift, Paderborn
BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fr die alttestamentliche Wissen-
schaft, Berlin
CNEB Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible,
Cambridge
CB.OT Coniectanea BiblicaOld Testament Series, Lund
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Washington, D.C.
CChr.SL Corpus ChristianorumSeries Latina, Turnhout
COHP Contributions to Oriental History and Philology of the
Columbia University, New York
CRBS Currents in Research: Biblical Studies, Sheffield
DCH D.J.A. Clines et al. (eds.), The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew,
Sheffield 1993ff
DDD K. van der Toorn et al. (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons
in the Bible, Leiden 19992
EB tudes Bibliques, Paris
EdF Ertrge der Forschung, Darmstadt
EeT Eglise et Theologie, Paris
ET The Expository Times, Edinburgh
EThL Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniences, Leuven
EvTh Evangelische Theologie, Munich
FAT Forschungen zum Alten Testament, Tbingen
FZB Forschung zur Bibel, Wrzburg
FOTL The Forms of the Old Testament Literature, Grand Rapids
FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und
Neuen Testaments, Gttingen
Fs Festschrift
GAT Grundrisse zum Alten Testament. Das Alte Testament
Deutsch, Ergnzungsreihe, Gttingen
GKG E. Kautzsch et al., Gesenius Hebrew Grammar, Oxford 19102
GrTS Grazer Theologische Studien, Graz
HAHAT R. Meyer et al., Wilhelm Gesenius Hebrisches und Aramisches
Handwrterbuch ber das Alte Testament, 18. Auflage, Berlin
1987ff
HALAT L. Khler, W. Baumgartner and J. Stamm, Hebrisches und
Aramisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament, Leiden 19671996
HAR Hebrew Annual Review, Columbus, Ohio
HBS Herders Biblische Studien, Freiburg

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xiv 2/12/2007 4:10:58 PM

 list of abbreviations xv

HCOT Historical Commentary on the Old Testament, Leuven

HSAT Die Heilige Schrift des Alten Testamentes, Bonn
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs, Cambridge
HThKAT Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament,
Freiburg
HThR Harvard Theological Review, Cambridge
HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual, Cincinnati, Ohio
IDS In die Skriflig, Potchefstroom
Interp. Interpretation. A Journal of Bible and Theology, Richmond,
VA
IntBCTP Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and
Preaching, Louisville
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society, Baltimore
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature, Philadelphia
JES Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Philadelphia
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Wheaton
J-M P. Joon & T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew III,
SubBi 14/III, Rome 1991
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Chicago
JNWSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, Leiden
JPOS Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society, Jerusalem
JRT Journal of Religious Thought, Washington, D.C.
JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic
and Roman Period, Leiden
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Sheffield
JSOT.S Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement
Series, Sheffield
JSNT.S Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement
Series, Sheffield
JSP Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Sheffield
JSP.S Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Supplement
Series, Sheffield
JSSt Journal of Semitic Studies, Manchester
JThS The Journal of Theological Studies, Oxford
KAT Kommentar zum Alten Testament, Leipzig
KBL L. Khler & W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti
libros, Leiden 1985
KHC Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testament, Tbingen
KTU M. Dietrich et al., Die keilalphabetische Texte aus Ugarit, AOAT
24, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1976

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xv 2/12/2007 4:10:58 PM

 xvi list of abbreviations

KVHS Korte Verklaring der Heilige Schrift, Kampen

LXX Septuagint
MSSNTS Monograph SeriesSociety for New Testament Studies,
Cambridge
MT Masoretic Text
MThA Mnsteraner Theologische Abhandlungen, Altenberge
NBG Nederlands Bijbelgenootschap, Haarlem
NCBC The New Century Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids
NEB Neue Echter Bibel, Wrzburg
NICOT New International Commentary on the Old Testament,
London
NSKAT Neuer Stuttgarter Kommentar Altes Testament, Stuttgart
NT.S Novum Testamentum, Supplements, Leiden
NTS New Testament Studies, Cambridge
OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, Freiburg
OTL Old Testament Library, London
OTS Oudtestamentische Studin, Leiden
PCC.PG J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Patrologiae Graecae,
Paris
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly, London
PJ Palstinajahrbuch des Deutschen Evangelischen Instituts fr
Altertumswissenschaft des Heiligen Landes zu Jerusalem,
Berlin
POT De Prediking van het Oude Testament, Nijkerk
PThMS Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series, Pittsburgh
RB Revue Biblique, Paris
REJ Revue des tudes Juives, Paris
RHPhR Revue dHistoire et de Philosophie Religieuses, Strasbourg
RNBC Readings: A New Biblical Commentary, Sheffield
RdQ Revue de Qumran, Paris
(N)RSV (New) Revised Standard Version
SAT Die Schriften des Alten Testaments in Auswahl, Gttingen
SBB Stuttgarter Biblische Beitrge, Stuttgart
SBL.SPS Society of Biblical LiteratureSeminar Papers Series,
Missoula
SBS Stuttgarter Bibelstudien, Stuttgart
SBT Studies in Biblical Theology, London
ScrB Scripture Bulletin, Birmingham
SDPI Schriften des Deutschen Palstina-Instituts, Gtersloh

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xvi 2/12/2007 4:10:58 PM

 list of abbreviations xvii

SHCANE Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near

East, Leiden
SJOT Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, arhus
SJT Scottish Journal of Theology, Edinburgh
StANT Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament, Munich
StTh Studia Theologica. Scandinavian Journal of Theology,
Lund
STL Studia Theologica Lundensia, Lund
StrB H.L. Strack & P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
aus Talmud und Midrasch, Band IIV, Munich 19261928
SubBi Subsidia Biblica, Rome
TA Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv
TBST The Bible Speaks Today, Leicester
TB Theologische Bcherei. Nachdrcke und Berichte aus dem
20. Jahrhundert, Munich
THAT E. Jenni & C. Westermann (eds.), Theologisches Handwrterbuch
zum Alten Testament, 2 volumes, Munich 19783 and 19792
(first edition: 1971 and 1976 resp.)
ThLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung, Leipzig
ThSt Theologische Studien, Zurich
TR Theologia Reformata, Woerden
ThR Theologische Rundschau, Tbingen
TRE Theologische Realenzyklopdie, Berlin
TTh Tijdschrift voor Theologie, Nijmegen
TTZ Trierer Theologische Zeitschrift, Trier
TWAT G.J. Botterweck & H. Ringgren (eds.), Theologisches Wrter-
buch zum Alten Testament, Stuttgart 19702000
TWNT G. Kittel (ed.), Theologisches Wrterbuch zum Neuen Testament,
Stuttgart 19331979
TynB Tyndale Bulletin, London
TZ(W) Theologische Zeitschrift, Vienna
UF Ugarit-Forschungen, Neukirchen
VF Verkndigung und Forschung. Beiheft zu Evangelische
Theologie, Munich
VIKJ Verffentlichungen aus dem Institut Kirche und Judentum,
Berlin
VL De Voorzeide Leer, Barendrecht
VR Vox Reformata. Faculty of the Reformed Theological
College, Geelong, Victoria

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xvii 2/12/2007 4:10:59 PM

 xviii list of abbreviations

VT Vetus Testamentum, Leiden

VT.S Vetus Testamentum, Supplements, Leiden
VWGT Verffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft fr
Theologie, Gtersloh
WA D. Martin Luthers Werke, Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Weimar
WBC World Biblical Commentary, Waco
WMANT Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen
Testament, Neukirchen
WStB Wuppertaler Studienbibel, Wuppertal
WTJ Westminster Theological Journal, Philadelphia
WuD Wort und Dienst, Jahrbuch der Theologischen Schule
Bethel, Bielefeld
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament,
Tbingen
ZAH Zeitschrift fr Althebristik, Stuttgart
ZAW Zeitschrift fr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Berlin
ZBK Zrcher Bibelkommentare, Zurich
ZDMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlndischen Gesellschaft,
Wiesbaden
ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palstina-Vereins, Wiesbaden
ZNW Zeitschrift fr die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, Berlin
ZRGG Zeitschrift fr Religions- und Geistesgeschichte, Cologne
ZThK Zeitschrift fr Theologie und Kirche, Tbingen
1QIsa First Isaiah scroll from Cave 1 of Qumran
1QIsb Second Isaiah scroll from Cave 1 Qumran

dekker_f1_prelims.indd xviii 2/12/2007 4:10:59 PM

 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Situating the issue

No other biblical book ascribes such a prominent place to the theme of

Zion than the book of Isaiah. Any endeavour to provide a reasonable
explanation for this fact is obliged to presume that its inspiration must
ultimately be sought in the original preaching of the prophet Isaiah
himself. While it remains difficult for the exegete to establish a precise
distinction between the prophets original preaching and the work of
later redactors, it is likewise unimaginable that Zion would have been
afforded such prominence in the present canonical form of the book
of Isaiah if it had not been occasioned by Isaiah of Jerusalem himself.
Old Testament scholars tend to share this hypothesis with a significant
degree of unanimity.1 Major differences of opinion emerge, however,
when one is required to determine what place the theme of Zion had
in Isaiahs preaching and the extent, moreover, to which the prophet
was dependent on an already existent Zion tradition.
One of the most important statements regarding Zion is to be
found in Isa. 28:16, a text that speaks of the laying of a foundation
stone in Zion: thus says the Lord God: See, I am laying in Zion a foundation
stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation: One who trusts
will not panic. (NRSV 1991) This statement, which the remainder of
the present study will refer to as a Zion text, enjoys a place of some
importance in Isaiah 28 as a whole. It is explicitly introduced as a
word of the Lord YHWH via the use of the so-called messenger formula
thus says . . . whereby the statement that follows is ascribed additional

1
Becker (1999:56) laments the fact that recent research has been inclined to ascribe
more theological weight to the statements of the prophet Isaiah than to the contribution
furnished by the redactors of the book of Isaiah. While it is indeed correct to insist
that the theological deposit established by the redactors should not be underestimated
and that the meaning of the text should not be forced to depend on the question of
authorship, it is difficult to imagine how the book of Isaiah could have acquired the
name of the prophet and retained it throughout the process of transmission if the
impulses rooted in the preaching of the prophet Isaiah himself were not substantial.
This is certainly the case with respect to the theme of Zion.

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 1 1/18/2007 10:07:53 AM

 2 chapter one

accentuation. Furthermore, the Zion text of 28:16 gives the impression

of being a promise of salvation, while the immediate context resounds
with nothing more than words of judgement. The publishers of the
NRSV provide the said segment of Isaiah 28 with the superscription
Judgement on corrupt rulers, priests and prophets. The average Bible reader
would thus be surprised to encounter an explicitly accentuated promise
of salvation. In the context of Isaiah 28, therefore, the readers atten-
tion is unavoidably drawn to the Zion text of 28:16.
It is thus hardly surprising that the Zion text of 28:16 drew the atten-
tion of the writers of the New Testament. Indeed, both the Letter of
Paul to the Romans (see Rom. 9:32b33 and 10:11) and the First Letter
of Peter (see 1 Pet. 2:6) explicitly refer thereto. This, together with the
continued influence of Isa. 28:16 in the Christian church (see 2.5.
2.7.), serves to provide the background against which the importance
of the Zion text can be measured. The scholarly endeavour to explain
Isa. 28:16 is nevertheless faced with a number of difficulties on the level
of translation and exegesis. The results of exegetical research up to the
present have been and remain a source of significant dispute.2 Never-
theless, the critical degree of scholarly consensus concerning the authen-
ticity of this Zion text, together with the importance ascribed thereto
in later tradition, tends to raise the expectation that a correct under-
standing of the message of Isa. 28:16 is likely to shed significant light on
the place of Zion and the Zion tradition in the preaching of Isaiah.3

Summary: The issue at stake in the present study is exegetical in nature.

It can be described in short as an endeavour to determine the mean-
ing of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 and the significance of the latter for
our understanding of the place of Zion and the Zion tradition in the
preaching of Isaiah.

1.2. Relevance

Towards the end of the last century an important shift in accent was
to be observed in the arena of biblical studies. Since the emergence of
2
Lindblom 1955:125 already sighted a groe Uneinigkeit betreffs der Erklrung
des wichtigen Jesajaworts vom Eckstein. Roberts 1987:27 even refers to Isa. 28:16 as
one of the most notable cruxes in the Hebrew Bible.
3
Cf. Roberts 1987:27: . . . in the case of Isa 28:16 the struggle to resolve the tech-
nical difficulties is at the same time a struggle to understand one of Isaiahs central
theological affirmations.

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 2 1/18/2007 10:07:54 AM

 introduction 3

historical-critical research, diachronic analysis tended to dominate the

scholarly study of the Old Testament for the best part of a century.
The advent, however, of structuralism and literary criticism on the one
hand, and the approaches that have placed the canonical form of the
text centre stage on the other, have brought about a radical change in
the overall situation. More than ever before, the attention of exegetes
is currently focused on a synchronic approach to a particular segment
of the Bible (c.q. an entire book of the Bible) in its present textual
form.4 The consequences of this accent shift are perhaps most evident
with respect to the study of the prophet Isaiah.5 The history of the
latter can be divided in broad terms into three distinct periods. In the
period prior to the emergence of historical-critical research, interpreters
generally accepted the view that the entire book was to be ascribed to
the prophet Isaiah who had been active in the eighth century BCE.
Since the end of the nineteenth century, most scholars were inclined to
regard the present book of Isaiah as having been constructed on the
basis of three independent works stemming from three different peri-
ods in time. The first part (139) eventually acquired the designation
Proto-Isaiah and was ascribed for the most part to the prophet him-
self; the second part (4055) was designated Deutero-Isaiah and was
dated to the period of the Babylonian exile; the third part (5666)
was designated Trito-Isaiah and was considered to have been written
against the background of the post-exilic period.6 Characteristic of this
second phase in Isaiah research was the appearance of commentaries
written by individual authors that focused on each of the three afore-
mentioned segments independently. During the last decades of the
twentieth century, however, the book of Isaiah came to be seen as a
literary unity and, as a consequence, prevailing opinion has tended to
suggest that the book should be studied as a single work and no longer
as an amalgamation of three distinct and independent parts.7 It should

4
Cf. Barton 1999:348: On all sides today we are told that we should be attending
to the final form of Old Testament texts, not to the earlier stages in their development
that interested people in the heyday of historical criticism. Synthesis, rather than
analysis, is the watchword now. The volume De Bijbel Literair (Fokkelman & Weren
2003) represents a recent example of such an accent shift/paradigm change.
5
For an outline of developments in Isaiah research see Hardmeier 1986:331, Sweeney
1993(A):141162, Tate 1996:2256, Becker 1999:137, 117152 and Hffken 2004.
6
This threefold division has its roots in the work of Duhm 19143 (1st edition:
1892).
7
Berges 2003:203 describes the current motto as giving priority to the prophetic
books as a whole before the individual words of the prophets.

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 3 1/18/2007 10:07:54 AM

 4 chapter one

be noted, nevertheless, that this development did not signify a return

to the pre-critical period in which the entire book of Isaiah had been
ascribed to the prophet himself. The historical figure of the prophet in
this third period of Isaiah research has more or less disappeared into
the background since it is no longer considered possible to distil the
original words of the prophet from the tradition as a whole. Attention
now tends to be focused on the one book of Isaiah and the significance
of its present redactional composition rather than on the prophet Isaiah
as an historical figure.8
It cannot be denied that recent interest in the present literary unity
of the book of Isaiah has given rise to important and valuable research.
At the very least this makes a welcome change when considered against
the background of a lengthy period in the history of Isaiah research
in which attention tended to be focused one-sidedly on the diachronic
analysis of individual textual units that had frequently left the book of
Isaiah in exegetical tatters.9 The advantages and results of recent studies,
however, cannot eliminate the fact that contemporary approaches to
the book of Isaiah as a redactional composition also exhibit a degree
of one-sidedness. The synchronic approach characteristic of literary
criticism tends to maintain an a-historical attitude to the text when it
considers the Sitz im Buch to be more important for our understand-
ing of a biblical text than the Sitz im Leben. Indeed, there is even
a tendency to be anti-historical, especially when the historical roots
of a prophetic word are considered to be irrelevant for our present
understanding thereof.10 In such instances, the historical figure of the
prophet Isaiah disappears from view and the original content of his

8
Cf. Rendtorff 1984:295320. Tate 1996:2225 tersely characterises these three
successive periods in the history of Isaiah research as The One-Prophet Interpretation,
The Three-Book Interpretation and The One-Book Interpretation. The two-volume
commentary of Watts 1985/1987 on the complete book of Isaiah can be seen as one
of the first examples of the said accent shift. Childs recent 2001 commentary on the
entire book of Isaiah represents a further illustration of this trend.
9
Cf. Rendtorff 1999:153: Die wissenschaftliche Auslegung hat sich berwiegend
darauf konzentriert und sich auch damit begngt, die unterschiedlichen ursprnglichen
Bestandteile des Jesajabuches zu rekonstruieren und je fr sich auszulegen.
10
Conrad 1991:27ff argues in favour of reading the book of Isaiah as an aesthetic
monument. Becker 1999:10 gives expression to this tendency as follows: Die Frage
nach der Entstehung wird dabei nicht grundstzlich abgelehnt, aber doch als unntig
eingestuft, weil sie an der Intention des Buches vorbeigeht. In addition to this literary-
aesthetic motif, Becker has also identified a religious background and a growing aversion
towards the results of historical-critical research, both of which have contributed to
the predominance of a synchronic approach to the book of Isaiah.

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 4 1/18/2007 10:07:54 AM

 introduction 5

preaching is no longer considered to be of any particular interest.11 In

order to avoid such bias, which is essentially docetic in nature, it is vital
that the synchronic approach be allowed to interact with a thorough
diachronic analysis.12
The present work will focus on the preaching of the historical prophet
Isaiah and the role of Zion therein. Our aim is thus to offer a con-
tribution to present day understanding of one of the most important
elements in the preaching of Isaiah. Throughout the history of Isaiah
research, scholars have struggled with the specific character of Isaiahs
preaching, especially with respect to the relationship between his words
of judgement and his words of salvation. It almost goes without saying
that an enormous variety of positions have been adopted in this regard.
The understanding of the element of obduracy in Isaiahs call vision
(Isaiah 6) has also tended to occupy an important place in the discus-
sion. While interest in the character of Isaiahs preaching has clearly
diminished as a result of the contemporary predominance of literary
and book-redactional approaches, the present author is convinced nev-
ertheless that the contours of our understanding of the message of the
book of Isaiah will become more apparent against the background of
a study of the message of the prophet Isaiah. It is likewise the authors
expectation that a study of the place of Zion and the Zion tradition in
the preaching of Isaiah can provide an important contribution to our
understanding of the relationship between words of judgement and
words of salvation in general and in the book of Isaiah in particular.

Summary: Against the background of the shift in accent evident in

biblical research, whereby attention is focused one-sidedly on the book
of Isaiah and the historical figure of the prophet himself is inclined
to disappear beyond the horizon, the significance of the present con-
tribution lies in its endeavour to assist our understanding of the role
played by Zion in the preaching of the prophet Isaiah, in particular
with respect to the relationship between his words of judgement and
his words of salvation.

11
Perhaps the most explicit example of an anti-historical approach to the book of
Isaiah can be found in the postmodern exegesis of Brueggemann in which the emphasis
is placed squarely on the power of rhetoric. Perdue 1994 characterises this accent shift
in Old Testament exegesis, with its particular consequences for biblical theology, as a
result of the collapse of history.
12
Cf. Rendtorff 1991:820 and Talstra 2002:112117.

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 5 1/18/2007 10:07:54 AM

 6 chapter one

1.3. Goals and methodology

The present study takes the important Zion text of Isa. 28:16 as its point
of departure with a view to establishing a clear picture of the place
of the Zion tradition in the prophet Isaiah. The following chapter (2)
provides a survey of the various ways in which this Zion text has been
understood in the course of history. We begin with the Septuagint
reading of 28:16 ( 2.2.), followed by the interpretation thereof in the
New Testament ( 2.3.) and by a number of prominent exegetes in the
early church ( 2.5.). The reception of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 within
Judaism is treated separately ( 2.4.). After a brief review of pertinent
medieval exegesis ( 2.6.), we focus our attention on the interpreta-
tion of Luther and Calvin, bearing in mind that one of the goals of
the Reformation movement had been to realign Christianity with the
Scriptures ( 2.7.). We conclude our survey of the history of exegesis of
Isa. 28:16 with a review of twentieth century interpretations ( 2.8.).
The third chapter focuses on a number of important preliminary
issues as a necessary foundation for our own exegetical study of the
text: colometric analysis of Isaiah 28 ( 3.2.), delineation of pericopes
within Isaiah 28 ( 3.3.), the unity of the pericope in which the Zion
text of 28:16 is to be found ( 3.4.), the authenticity and date of the
said prophecy ( 3.5. and 3.6.) together with a sketch of the histori-
cal situation coinciding with the proposed date ( 3.7. and 3.8.). An
excursus dealing with the prophetic historiography of 2 Kings 1819
is added at this juncture (Excursus 1).
The fourth chapter is devoted in its entirety to our own exegesis of
Isa. 28:16 within the immediate context of the pericope in which it is
located ( 4.2.) and against the broader background of Isaiah 28 as a
whole ( 4.3. 4.5.). A further excursus related to the exegesis of the text
follows 4.2. and deals in particular with the relationship between the
covenant with death referred to in 28:15, 18 and necromancy (Excursus
2). This fourth chapter represents a pivotal stage in our research since
it endeavours to provide an adequate answer to the question regarding
the exegesis of the Zion text in 28:16.
Having offered an exegetical analysis of the individual pericopes of
Isaiah 28 and their relationship with one another, we then widen the
circle in the fifth chapter to focus on the place of Isaiah 28 as a whole
and 28:1422 in particular within the redactional unit Isaiah 2833
( 5.2. 5.4.).

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 6 1/18/2007 10:07:54 AM

 introduction 7

Following a survey of the place of the Zion theme in Isaiah 139

( 6.2.), chapter six endeavours to draw a number of conclusions based
on the results of our exegesis ( 6.3.). We then turn our attention to
the question of the potential significance of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16
for our understanding of the place of Zion and the Zion tradition in
the preaching of Isaiah. While a comprehensive investigation of the
Zion tradition would take us beyond the established boundaries of the
present study, it remains our conviction nevertheless that a number of
elements important for further research into the Zion preaching of the
prophet Isaiah can be derived from the exegesis of 28:16 ( 6.4.).
The seventh and final chapter of the present study offers a summary
of the main conclusions that represent the results of our research.
In light of the fact that Isa. 28:16 plays an important role in a vari-
ety of New Testament texts, we conclude the present volume with an
appendix in which the results of our research are further examined
from a New Testament perspective.

Summary: The primary goal of our study is to offer an exegesis of the

Zion text of Isa. 28:16 in its present context. Based on the results of
this study, we endeavour to determine the extent to which an adequate
understanding of the said text can contribute to contemporary research
into the place of Zion and the Zion tradition in the preaching of
Isaiah.

dekker_f2_1-7.indd 7 1/18/2007 10:07:54 AM

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 8 1/18/2007 10:08:34 AM
 CHAPTER TWO

THE ZION TEXT OF ISAIAH 28:16 IN THE

HISTORY OF EXEGESIS

2.1. Introduction

If one accepts the hypothesis that every new study of the Bible or a
part thereof rests on the shoulders of its predecessors, then it makes
sense to explore the way in which Isa. 28:16 has been explained in the
course of history before endeavouring our own exegesis of the text in
question. The reception history of a biblical text also has a place among
the exegetes areas of interest since it raises the questions and hypoth-
eses necessary to enter into dialogue with the various religious reading
traditions and thereby provides the foundations for ones own exegeti-
cal perspective. The importance of such a dialogue is aptly expressed
by Talstra: The exegesis of the Old Testament is not about trying to
explain a recently discovered work from the ancient past. Academic
institutions are not likely to do themselves much of a service should
they pretend that such is indeed the case. Exegesis, rather, is about
explaining texts that have been ascribed a fundamental value as they
passed through the hands of many generations up to and including the
contemporary faith community.1
In order to obtain an adequate picture of the history of exegesis,
one is obliged to focus ones attention on a cross-section thereof, tak-
ing a number of standard benchmarks as ones point of departure.
Given the necessary limits of space, the said benchmarks have to be
chosen with care in order to avoid any potential misrepresentation or
distortion. The most appropriate point of departure with respect to the
text of Isaiah is the Septuagint, bearing in mind that every translation
already contains an element of exegesis.2 The Greek translation of the

1
Talstra 2002:73.
2
I am aware of the difficulties surrounding the idea of the Septuagint, as if the
latter can be understood as a unified translation, while in fact it is more of a collec-
tion of Greek translations stemming from a variety of different places and dates. I will
maintain the use of the term, nevertheless, for the sake of ease and because it has long
been the convention to do so.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 9 1/18/2007 10:08:34 AM

 10 chapter two

Old Testament might even be considered as one of the earliest wit-

nesses in the history of exegesis.3 This is certainly the case with respect
to the Greek translation of the book of Isaiah, which is well-known
for its relatively free rendition. Furthermore, the Septuagint extends
backwards into pre-Christian times and is of major significance from a
variety of perspectives for the way in which the New Testament dealt
with the Old Testament in terms of both text and content.4 A second
benchmark in our exploration of the history of exegesis can be found in
the New Testaments interpretation of the Isaiah text. New Testament
allusions to the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 are to be found in the Letter
of Paul to the Romans (Rom. 9:32b33; 10:11) and in the First Letter
of Peter (1 Pet. 2:6). Prior to continuing the line of Christian exegesis
from the New Testament to the early church, however, it makes sense
to include Jewish exegesis of the Isaiah text in our survey, beginning
with the function of the Zion text within the community of Qumran
and further discussing the information found in the Targum and the
Talmud.
A third benchmark in our exploratory survey has its roots in the
early church (2nd to 5th century). After a brief intermezzo in the
Middle Ages, in which we will focus on the Glossa Ordinaria and Thomas
Aquinas, we will turn our attention to the period of the Reformation
(16th century). Influenced by the Renaissance and by Humanism, the
Reformation was determined to return to the original sources. Luther
and Calvin will serve as our representatives of the exegesis characteristic
of the Reformation and their explanation of Isa. 28:16 as the fourth
benchmark in our historical survey. Our fifth and final benchmark con-
sists of the highly diverse contributions of modern biblical research. Our
discussion of the latter will be thematic and summarising in character,
given that the contributions in question cannot strictly speaking be
considered a part of the reception history of Isa. 28:16. With a view
to our own exegesis of the text, however, and within the framework of
the present chapter, we consider it relevant to offer a brief overview of
the various interpretations of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 provided by
modern biblical research.

3
See Jobes/Silva 2000:146: . . . the LXX may be regarded as the earliest surviving
interpretation of the Bible, and the exegesis of the translators, even when wrong, can
be very valuable in our own exegetical process. (cf. p. 89)
4
Cf. Jobes/Silva 2000:23: The Septuagint, not the Hebrew Bible, was the primary
theological and literary context within which the writers of the New Testament and
most early Christians worked.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 10 1/18/2007 10:08:35 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 11

2.2. Septuagint

The Septuagint translation of the book of Isaiah evidently introduced

its own exegesis of the text in the process of translation. This becomes
immediately clear when one compares the Greek text of Isa. 28:16 with
the Hebrew of the Masoretic text:
hwIhy yn:doa} rma; hKo kl;
ba;= wOYxiB] dS'yI ynInhi
dS;Wm ds;Wm tr"q]yI tN"Pi j'Bo b,a,
.vyjiy: al ymia}M'h'

Basing itself on the Masoretic text as found in the Biblia Hebraica

Stuttgartensia (1977; second emended edition 1983), the NRSV translates
the Zion text of 28:16 as follows: therefore thus says the Lord GOD: See, I
am laying in Zion a foundation stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure
foundation: One who trusts will not panic.
It should be evident from the text provided in parallel form above
that the Septuagint contains a number of unusual readings, two of
which are of particular interest with respect to the present chapter.
The readers attention is to be drawn in the first instance to the expres-
sion . The verb in the Septuagint takes the
form of a future (1st person), while the Masoretic text employs a pi el
perfect (3rd person) for the corresponding Hebrew verb. It is reason-
able to assume that the Greek translators read the Hebrew construction
dsy ynnh as dseyO ynInh,i whereby the pi el perfect of the Masoretic text is
understood as a qal participle. Such a reading is hardly surprising since
a construction combining ynnh with a participial form is fairly common
(cf. the same as the translation of tewOn ynInhi in 37:7).
As a consequence, however, and with respect to content, the Greek
translation now advocates an interpretation of the Zion text of 28:16
as a promise for the future: See, I shall lay a stone . . ..
The second major point upon which important Septuagint manu-
scripts differ from the Masoretic text has to do with the plus in the final
clause of 28:16,5 namely the expression ,6 whereby the verb

5
In line with a variety of Septuagint researchers I speak here of a plus rather
than an addition since the latter term is not without prejudice. Indeed, one cannot
insist in advance that the Vorlage of the Septuagint was the same as the Hebrew text
established by the Masoretes. See Jobes/Silva 2000:52n.
6
The words are lacking in the Codex Vaticanus and in the translations of

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 11 1/18/2007 10:08:35 AM

 12 chapter two

is immediately provided with an object in contrast to ymia}M'h'

in the Hebrew Masoretic text which is employed in the absolute sense.
While it remains difficult to determine the precise origin of the plus in
question, it seems reasonable to assume that the addition of the words
was intended as a means to clarify the text.7 As a consequence,
however, the expression one who trusts must now be directly associated
with the stone referred to in the first half of the verse since the said
stone functions in the Greek text as the antecedent of and
as such can be personified.8
In summary, it seems fair to argue that the Septuagint has passed on
a more unequivocal text of Isa. 28:16. If the same Hebrew text version
lay at the basis of this tradition as that of the Masoretic text then we
are even at liberty to speak of an important exegetical decision on the
part of the Septuagint translators. Where the syntax employed in the

Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, cf. Stanley 1992:124. The translations of Aquila,
Symmachus and Theodotion serve as Jewish recensions aimed at bringing the text of
the Septuagint closer to the original Hebrew text. An explanation can be offered as to
why they lack the words . In comparison with Codex Alexandrinus, Codex
Vaticanus is generally considered the most reliable manuscript. With respect to the book
of Isaiah, however, the Codex Alexandrinus would appear to be the better witness. The
Greek translation of the book of Isaiah found in the Codex Vaticanus is representa-
tive of the Hexaplaric recension (the text of Codex Sinaiticus agrees for the most part
with Codex Vaticanus, although it occasionally contains Hexaplaric readings; Ziegler
1939:32f signals traces of an Egyptian recension). For this reason, the text of Isa. 28:16
found in the Codex Vaticanus cannot be considered a witness to the original LXX text.
See Jobes/Silva 2000:59f, 190. Bearing these considerations in mind, the presupposition
of K.H. Schelkle, Die PetrusbriefeDer Judasbrief, Freiburg 1976/2002:61, that the plus
in the Septuagint (Codex Alexandrinus) should be understood as a Christian gloss (cf.
Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet. 2:6), must be rejected.
7
Van der Kooij 1977:91 considers the Septuagint of Isaiah to be an important
pre-Christian witness to Jewish exegesis. He insists (1997[B]:24) that the interpretations
and actualisations of the book of Isaiah in both the Septuagint and the Isaiah Scrolls
from Qumran stem from the same Hellenistic period and that both text witnesses,
therefore, are of importance in acquiring a picture of the exegetical tradition which
the New Testament writers may also have employed.
8
Oss 1989:186f draws attention to the shift in faith perspective implied by the text
of the Septuagint. The translation of vyjiy: by associates faith with the
avoidance of risking being put to shame on the day of judgement rather than stability
in ones daily life. The question remains, however, as to whether we must interpret the
verb as found in the Septuagint in a strictly eschatological sense. This is
clearly not the case elsewhere in the book of Isaiah (see 3:15 and 54:4). As a matter
of fact, the Septuagint of Isaiah makes more frequent use of the verb (eight-
een times), usually as the translation of vwb. It is probable that the Septuagint read
vwObyE aOl in 28:16, which means he shall not be put to shame (cf. 29:22). The translation
provided by the Septuagint may have been inspired by the emphasis on the theme of
being ashamed in relation to the covenant with Egypt so detested by the prophet in
30:15 (cf. 20:5).

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 12 1/18/2007 10:08:35 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 13

Hebrew text allows for a degree of ambiguity in terms of temporal

aspect (the construction dsy yggb can be read in a variety of ways; see
exegesis 4.2.2.), the Septuagint has clearly understood the Zion text
of 28:16 as a promise for the future. Moreover, where the Hebrew
text leaves a certain openness with respect to the interpretation of the
expression one who trusts, the Septuagint would appear to have made
an unequivocal decision in this regard by alluding explicitly to the
aforementioned stone. While a definitive decision in the matter remains
difficult to achieve, it is nevertheless possible that the Septuagint transla-
tion already presupposed a Messianic interpretation of the stone referred
to in 28:16.9 Whatever the truth may be, the Septuagints addition of
the words has evidently facilitated a Messianic interpretation
of the said biblical text.10

2.3. New Testament

Isa. 28:16 is cited in three places in the New Testament, twice in the
Letter of Paul to the Romans and once in the First Letter of Peter. We
will examine each of these witnesses and their interpretation of the
Zion text in turn.

2.3.1. Romans 9:32b 33 and 10:11

The apostle Paul makes reference to Isa. 28:16 on two occasions in his
Letter to the Romans: Rom. 9:32b33 and Rom. 10:11. In order to
facilitate an adequate comparison with the Septuagint translation of
28:16 (see above), we will first provide both texts in Greek together
with an English translation:11

9
Cf. Jeremias 1942:276.
10
Cf. Snodgrass 1977:100: With regard to the LXX, if the of Isa. xxviii.16
is not messianic, it is at least personal. Jobes/Silva 2000:97 suggest with caution: It
is very difficult to decide, for instance, if a rendering that could be read as evidence
of a developing messianism actually reflected the state of messianic thinking when
the translation was made or was simply the result of happenstance, a result that later
during the Christian era was congenial to a messianic reading. In general, Jobes/Silva
2000:300 conclude that the Messianic expectation did not acquire a prominent place
in the Septuagint when compared with contemporary texts from Palestine itself.
11
In both this and the following sub-paragraph I will make use of the NRSV
(1991).

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 13 1/18/2007 10:08:35 AM

 14 chapter two

Rom. 9:32b33:
They have stumbled over the stumbling
, , stone, as it is written:
See, I am laying in Zion a stone that
, will make people stumble, a rock that will
make them fall, and whoever believes in him
will not be put to shame.
Rom. 10:11:
, The scripture says:
No one who believes in him will be put
to shame.
Aside from the remarkable intermingling of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16
with the text concerning the stumbling stone found in Isa. 8:14, the
reader is immediately struck by the fact that Paul only follows the text
of the Septuagint in part. Instead of
in 28:16, Rom. 9:33 reads .
Paul thus employs a different verb ( instead of ) and
exhibits a preference for the present rather than the future. The verb
form employed at the conclusion of the text (, indic.
fut.) likewise differs to a degree from that employed by the Septuagint
(, conj. aor.). It is possible that Paul either had a different
version of the Greek text at his disposal or that he deliberately adapted
the text with a view to his own interpretation thereof. Given the fact
that the text of the quotation of 28:16 as found in 1 Pet. 2:6 agrees to
a significant degree with the text of Rom. 9:33 (1 Pet. 2:6 also reads
) while mutual dependence is difficult to
determine, it would thus appear that the former possibility deserves
preference with respect to the Zion text of Isa. 28:16.12 This does
not exclude the possibility that Paul also had a theological preference
for the verb , namely as a description of the deeds of God.13
Similarly, the text version employed would appear to fit in well with
Pauls intentions from an alternative perspective: the expression

12
Wilk 1998:3334 thinks of eine dem hebrischen Text angenherte LXX-Ver-
sion. Cf. Wagner 2002:128131.
13
Cf. Maurer 1969:157 (in relation to Rom. 9:33): Darin zeigt sich, wie sehr Paulus
diese Vokabel fr geeignet hlt, das Handeln Gottes in seiner Vielschichtigkeit auszu-
drucken. Muller 1969:81 suggests the possibility that the choice of the verb may
have been influenced by the Greek translation of Isa. 50:7. It is striking that the latter
text also makes reference to not being put to shame ( ).

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 14 1/18/2007 10:08:36 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 15

offers more opportunity to identify the stone mentioned in 28:16 with

the stumbling stone of 8:14 than the foundation stone terminology
employed by the Septuagint in .
With respect to content, one is immediately aware of the fact that
the quotations of 28:16 in Rom. 9:33 and 10:11 are both incomplete.
Of greater importance, however, is the fact that the text version
employed by Paul agrees with the major Septuagint manuscripts with
respect to the additional .14 The plus in question made it pos-
sible for Paul to interpret the Zion text of 28:16 in Messianic terms.
While Christ is not mentioned by name in the immediate context of
Rom. 9:32b33, the suggestion that the stone ought to be related to
the coming of Christ is already unmistakable.15 Given that Rom. 10:11
only quotes the conclusion of 28:16 without mention of the stone in
Zion, the originally intended antecedent of would
appear in this instance to be lacking.16 In the context of Rom. 10:11,
however, the place of the lacking antecedent is taken by the
referred to in 10:9.
While the quotation from 28:16 functions as a core text in Rom.
9:33, the context that occasioned Pauls use of the Zion text is to be
found in his polemical exposition with respect to Israel in which the
stumbling stone of 8:14 was already introduced into the argument in
the preceding verse. It remains surprising, however, that Pauls ingenuity
allowed him to introduce this allusion to 8:14 into his quotation of the
Zion text of 28:16. Isa. 8:14 speaks of a stone one strikes against and
a rock one stumbles over.17 The text version of this verse found in the

14
Cf. Stanley 1992:124. Jobes/Silva 2000:190 consider Rom. 9:33 as the oldest
evidence that the words belonged to the original text of the Septuagint from
the very beginning.
15
With respect to Rom. 9:33 Wagner 2005:122f (see also 2002:155157) suggests
the possibility of an intentional polyvalence of the stone metaphor. The stone could
refer to God, Christ or the law. Arriving at Rom. 10:11, however, it is clear that the
stone should be identified with Christ.
16
Paul adds the word at the beginning of the quotation because it fits his
argument that there can be no distinction between Jew and Greek. See also the
quotation from Joel 3:5 (LXX; NRSV 2:32) in Rom. 10:13. It is worthy of note that
Paul apparently considered himself free to render the same scriptural text in two dif-
ferent versions in short succession. Cf. Koch 1986:133134, Stanley 1992:133f and
Jobes/Silva 2000:192f.
17
According to Stanley 1992:120124, this interpolation does not hark back to an
earlier tradition but has its roots rather in Paul himself. See also Koch 1980:180.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 15 1/18/2007 10:08:36 AM

 16 chapter two

Septuagint, however, differs considerably from that of the Masoretes.

In order to facilitate comparison we once again provide both text ver-
sions (the Masoretic text followed by the Septuagint) together with an
English translation:
v=D;q]mil] hy:h;w He will become a sanctuary,
l/vk]mi rWxl]W g<n< b,a,l]W a stone one strikes against,
laer;c]yI yTeb; ynEv]li for both houses of Israel he will become a
vqe/ml]W jp'l] rock one stumbles over,
.Il;v;Wry bvewyol] a trap and a snare
for the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
And if you trust in him,
he will be a sanctuary for you
and you shall not encounter him as a stone
one strikes against nor as a stumbling block,
but the house of Jacob ( falls) in a trap
and the inhabitants of Jerusalem in a snare.

It is evident that Paul has mixed his quotations at this juncture, melt-
ing 8:14 and 28:16 together.18 Given that Pauls use of 8:14 is closer
in terms of content to the Masoretic text than to the Septuagint,
which has cast the stumbling stone in a strikingly negative statement,19
it is probable that he made use of a revised Greek text.20 While it is

18
The use of the Old Testament in the form of mixed quotations is found only
sporadically in the rabbinic literature. Muller 1969:71f concludes from this da
Mischzitate keine lehramtliche Billigung erfuhren and is surprised that Paul explicitly
appeals to the authority of scriptural revelation for his mixed quotation. The combina-
tion of various scriptural quotations, however, would appear to be fairly common in the
Qumran documents. See Stanley 1992:296306. Cf. Oss 1989:183184: It is a creative
use of the Biblical text quite in conformity with the LXX, targums and Qumran. See
also Oss 1989:188: The use of textual variants to fit the text to ones interpretation
was a common method in Qumran exegesis. Thus by his very inclusion or rejection of
the LXX modifications, by substituting one word for another, perhaps by his omission
of other material from the MT/LXX-text, and certainly by combining two texts in
a merged quotation, the NT author is doing theology. Generally speaking, one can
argue that the freedom with which Paul quoted the Old Testament was in line with
the way people of his day quoted texts (see Stanley 1992:338360).
19
According to Oss 1989:185f, the theological motivation of the translator is evident
here in his effort to present yhwh more as the protector of faithful Israel than as the
judge of unfaithful Israel. He refers in this regard to LXX 6:912 and 8:2123.
20
Wilk 1998:23. There are numerous indications that would make the existence
of such text revisions plausible, both in order to bring the text into agreement with a
Hebrew source and to correct the Greek (see Stanley 1992:4448). Stanley (1992:7379)
explains the diversity of the text versions employed by Paul on the basis of a sort of
florilegium of written texts that had come into existence during Pauls journeys and

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 16 1/18/2007 10:08:36 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 17

not certain whether the words If you trust in

him . . . formed a part of the text version employed by Paul, it seems
reasonable to suggest that his merging of quotations from the book of
Isaiah came about, at least in part, as a result of this plus in the Greek
text of Isa. 8:14. On account of the said clause, which would appear
to have been borrowed from 8:17 ( ) and
which should be understood as a clarification, a clear affinity emerged
in the Septuagint with the final words of 28:16. The expressions
and came to function as more or less
synonymous expressions.21 Since the antecedent of in 8:14
would appear to be the term referred to in 8:13, Pauls identi-
fication of the stone referred to in 28:16 with Christ thus seems to be
understandable. He saw the Zion text of 28:16 fulfilled in Christ.
Surprisingly enough, however, by merging the quotation of 28:16 with
the text alluding to the stumbling stone in 8:14 in the form of a mixed
quotation, Paul has ascribed to the former the primary significance of
an announcement of judgement.

2.3.2. 1 Peter 2:6

The Zion text of Isa. 28:16 has also been ascribed a place of significance
in 1 Pet. 2:6. The fact that the stone motif would also appear to play
an important role in the surrounding verses, however, suggests that a
review of the entire passage of 1 Pet. 2:48 might be appropriate at
this juncture. Once again we provide the Greek text together with an
English translation:

which the latter had put together in the course of his studies of the scriptures with a
view to his letters. Muller 1969:73 observes that where Isa. 8:14 is concerned, the text
of Rom. 9:33 exhibits similarities with the translation of Symmachus, according to
Eusebius version thereof. Given that an alternative version of Symmachus translation
exists, there can be no certainty as to the text version employed by Paul.
21
Snodgrass 1977:99 is of the opinion that the plus in 8:14
came into existence under the influence of the Septuagint translation of 28:16 and
concludes that the New Testament tendency to associate prophetic texts concerning
faith with one another harks back to the early translations of the Old Testament: The
connection of the two verses in Christian literature then is not an innovation based on
theological necessity, but follows Jewish tradition. See also Betz 1987:95. The plus
in 8:14, however, can also be explained on the basis of 8:17. See
Jobes/Silva 2000:198 and Wagner 2002:140ff. Compared to the opinion of Snodgrass
mentioned above, Wagner 2002:145 argues the other way round, supposing that the
LXX translator rendered 28:16 with 8:14, 17 in mind.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 17 1/18/2007 10:08:37 AM

 18 chapter two

4 Come to him, a living stone,

though rejected by mortals,
, yet chosen and precious in Gods sight,
5 and like living stones, let yourselves be
built into a spiritual house, to be a holy
priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices
acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
[] .
, 6 For it stands in scripture:
See, I am laying in Zion a stone, a
cornerstone chosen and precious;
and whoever believes in him,
. will not be put to shame.
, 7 To you then who believe, he is precious;
but for those who do not believe,
, The stone that the builders rejected has
become the very head of the corner,
8 and A stone that makes them stumble,
and a rock that makes them fall. They
. stumble because they disobey the word, as
they were destined to do.
Of the three New Testament texts in which reference is made to Isa.
28:16, 1 Pet. 2:6 would appear to be the most explicit in its Messianic
interpretation. The stone in Zion is identified unequivocally with
Christ. The invitation come to him in verse 4 enjoys an immediate
link with the previous verse, which concluded with the expression
, further explaining the said with the metaphor of the
living stone. And even though in the quotation from Ps. 34:9 in
verse 3 alludes to yhwh, it is impossible to deny that 1 Pet. 2:6 under-
stands the living stone to be Christ. It may even be possible that the
term ( ), stemming from the Greek translation
of Ps. 34:9 (LXX Ps. 33:9), already represents an allusion to Christ in
the context of 1 Peter 2.
The text version of 28:16 employed in 1 Pet. 2:6 agrees to a significant
extent with that found in Rom. 9:33.22 In contrast to the text transmit-
ted by the Septuagint of 28:16 (

22
It would appear from the study of Ellis 1957:12 that Paul usually gives prefer-
ence to the Septuagint when quoting the Old Testament (see also Stanley 1992:67f ),
whereas Peter seems to prefer agreement with the Hebrew text. See also Voorwinde
1987:56. Peters quotation of the Zion text from Isa. 28:16, however, constitutes an
important exception in this regard.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 18 1/18/2007 10:08:37 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 19

), 1 Pet. 2:6 likewise makes use of the clause

. Given the fact that mutual dependence of one form or another
does not seem possible (in contrast to Rom. 9:33, 1 Pet. 2:6 does not
mix the quotations from 28:16 and 8:14) it is probable that both New
Testament texts were dependent in this instance on the same text
version.23 While it is possible to argue that Paul exhibits a theological
preference for the verb , it is equally arguable that the choice of
the same terminology in 1 Pet. 2:6 can be associated with the theme of
election (cf. the use of the same verb in 1 Pet. 2:8).24 The plus
in the second verse half of 28:16 is shared by all three New Testament
texts, but the use of (conj. aor.) serves to associate 1
Pet. 2:6 more closely with the Septuagint than is the case with respect
to Rom. 9:33 and 10:11 ( , indic. fut.).25 The cita-
tion of 28:16 in 1 Pet. 2:6 is also more extensive than in Rom. 9:33. In
reasonably close agreement with the Septuagint, the stone to be set in
Zion is further qualified as a chosen and precious cornerstone. When
compared with the Septuagint, the term is lacking in 1 Pet.
2:6 and the word order differs slightly:
instead of .
The reference to the Zion text of 28:16 in 1 Pet. 2:6 functions
more explicitly than in Rom. 9:33 as a salvific promise for the future.
Both the context and the form in which the Zion text is spoken of in
1 Peter differ from the Pauline references. While Paul employs the Zion
text of 28:16 in order to substantiate his argument with respect to the
mystery of Israels rejection of Christ, the text functions in 1 Peter 2
in the context of an invitation to come to Christ. As a consequence,
the Zion text of 28:16 is treated in more positive terms in 1 Pet. 2:6.

23
According to Muller 1969:7475, this presupposition is confirmed by the fact that
the combination + dat. in the sense to believe in does not occur in the
letters of Paul (Muller does not include the pastoral letters) or in 1 Peter beyond the
quotation of Isa. 28:16.
24
See Bauckham 1988:311: is a natural word to use for laying a foundation,
and so probably simply a variant translation, not originally designed for any special
interpretative purpose. But the author of 1 Peter has selected it for his purpose, because
it can also mean appoint, and so again stresses the theme of election at the outset
of his series of texts.
25
Bauckham 1988:313 points to an interesting connection between 1 Pet. 2:6 and
Ps. 34:6, which boils down to the expression in the Greek trans-
lation (LXX 33:6). Given that 1 Pet. 2:34 already alludes to Ps. 34:9 (and possibly
also to Ps. 34:5) and the psalm in question also has an important role to play in 1
Pet. 3:812, Bauckham presumes that the psalm must have been important for the
author of 1 Peter.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 19 1/18/2007 10:08:37 AM

 20 chapter two

In contrast to Rom. 9:32b33, which appears to employ a mixed

quotation, the various allusions to Old Testament texts in 1 Pet. 2:48
are more deftly woven together.26 In addition to 28:16 references are
made to ( parts of ) Isa. 8:14 and Ps. 118:22. While the characterisa-
tion of the living stone as already given
in verse 4 is borrowed from 28:16, the preceding
alludes to the stone mentioned in Ps. 118:22. Verse
7 quotes Ps. 118:22 in its entirety and in complete agreement with the
text of the Septuagint.27 The reference to Isa. 8:14 in verse 8a, how-
ever, is more in line with the text as cited in Rom. 9:33 than with the
Septuagint.28 This reinforces our argument that both New Testament
texts are dependent on the same Greek text version.29
It is possible that the quotation from Ps. 118:22 has to do with a
proverb30 in which reference is made to a stone rejected by the build-
ers that nevertheless became the cornerstone.31 While the Septuagint
provides a more or less literal translation of the text, Symmachus dif-
fers from the Septuagint by translating the unique Hebrew construct
hN:Pi vaOr with instead of the literal . The
term , however, is only employed in the Septuagint in
the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 and is unknown to profane Greek litera-
ture. One is inclined to conclude, therefore, that even before the date
of Symmachus there may have been a Jewish tradition, independent
of the New Testament, that had already associated both stone texts
with one another.32

26
Oss 1989:183 suggests that Paul and Peter employ different methods in their quo-
tation of the Old Testament, both of which were customary in their day. The method
employed by Paul whereby two biblical texts are mixed together is known as gzr
w and is particularly familiar to us from the documents of Qumran. The method
employed by Peter whereby various biblical texts are chained together is frequently
employed in the Talmud and is referred to as hrz.
27
On the text and function of Ps. 118:22 in 1 Pet. 2:7, see Woan 2004:215219.
28
The difference berween the two is minimal: 1 Pet. 2:8 employs a nominative
construction while Rom. 9:33 employs an accussative construction on account of the
close connection with the quotation from 28:16.
29
See Stanley 1992:121f.
30
Cf. Schrten 1995:82: V.22 ist ein Sprichwort, das aufgrund seines allgemeinen
Charakters auch aus anderen Zusammenhngen entnommen sein kann.
31
For reasons of logic and on account of the fact that hN: P i can also mean
corner turret, Cahill 1999:345357 is of the opinion that hN:Pi vaOr does not refer to the
cornerstone but rather to the capstone of the castle. The translation of the expression
as cornerstone is the result of a later fusion of stone texts.
32
Cf. Berder 1996:169: On peut sans doute comprendre le choix du mot par
Symmaque en rfrence ce texte prophtique.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 20 1/18/2007 10:08:38 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 21

Acts 4:11 relates how Peter employed the stone text from Ps. 118
in his confrontation with the Sanhedrin in order to provide the events
of Jesus crucifixion and resurrection with scriptural foundations.33 This
application of Ps. 118:22 to the death and resurrection of Christ is
completely in line with the psalms own content as a song of deliverance
from death (cf. Ps. 118:1718).34 Nevertheless, the explicit identification
of the stone with Christ and the builders with the Jewish leaders in
Acts 4:11 is exceptional. The naturalness with which Peter alludes to
the text of the psalm and applies it to the person and work of Christ
makes it reasonable to assume that Ps. 118:22 had already been ascribed
a Messianic interpretation at an early date and that it had played an
important role among the first Christians.35
Confirmation of the aforementioned assumption can be derived from
the synoptic gospels, all three of which have preserved a parable of
Jesus in which he himself alludes to the text in question. Jesus relates
how the owner of a vineyard finds himself in a conflict situation with
his leaseholders (Mk. 12:112; Mt. 21:3346; Lk. 20:919)36 employing
an image borrowed from the song of the vineyard in Isa. 5:17. At the
beginning of this song, the lord of the vineyard is qualified three times
as my beloved. By using the same qualification with respect to the
son of the vineyard owner in his parable ( ) and relating
his death at the hands of the leaseholders, Jesus intentionally ascribes
a Messianic charge to his parable (cf. in Mk.

33
The text of Acts 4:11 deviates to a degree from the Septuagint in terms of verb
forms: , ,
. On the text of Acts 4:11, see Berder 1996:306309 and Doble
2004:97105.
34
Some discussion exists as to whether the I of the psalm refers to an individual
or to the people. Given the groups mentioned in vv. 24, the nature of the situation of
need, the kinship with Exodus 15 (see v. 14) and the liturgical character of the psalm,
Schrten 1995:76 suggests that we identify the I with the people of Israel, although
the I passages would probably have been recited by a soloist in the context of the
liturgy. Even understood as a collective subject, the cohesion between verse 22 and
the preceding description of need remains important. Cf. Schrten 1995:77 and 134:
Das Sprichwort greift also das im Danklied Formulierte wieder auf und zeichnet die
Rettung aus der Not in der Geschichte Israels als etwas unendlich Kostbares, als die
Basis fr Neues, das entstehen will und wird. For a survey of the various possible
interpretations of the I of Psalm 118, see Berder 1996:7479.
35
It is possible that the explicit allusion in Ps. 118:23 to the wonderful event of a
rejected stone being transformed into a cornerstone may have contributed
to the association of this text with Christ.
36
For a comparison of the synoptic descriptions and a discussion of the function
of the psalm quotation, see Berder 1996:249297.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 21 1/18/2007 10:08:38 AM

 22 chapter two

1:11 and 9:7). Thus, in a context already laden with Messianic implica-
tions, the synoptic Jesus quotes Ps. 118:2223 according to the text of
the Septuagint: Have you not read this scripture: The stone that the builders
rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lords doing, and it is amazing in
our eyes? (Mk. 12:1011; Mt. 21:42).37

2.3.3. Evaluation
In the context of the present review of the history of exegesis of Isa.
28:16 a number of observations can be made with respect to the inter-
pretation of the text provided by the New Testament:
The fact that the Zion text from 28:16 is associated with the stumbling
stone text from Isa. 8:14 in both Rom. 9:32b33 and 1 Pet. 2:48,
implies that a Messianic interpretation of the various stone texts
already constituted an element of the early Christian tradition.38
The significant degree of agreement at the level of terminology also
tends to point in this direction. While the quotations of Isa. 28:16
and 8:14 are more extensive in 1 Pet. 2:48 than in Rom. 9:32b33,
neither text is in complete agreement with the Septuagint, although
they do agree for the most part with one another.39
One of the first stone texts to acquire a Messianic interpretation in
the early Christian tradition was clearly Ps. 118:22. This is apparent
from the important place the text in question came to acquire in the
New Testament tradition as a whole (see Mk. 12:1011; Mt. 21:42;

37
In contrast to the customary hypothesis that the quotation from Psalm 118 does
not stem from Jesus himself but was added to the parable by the community after the
Easter event, Noordegraaf 1987:251255 defends the authenticity of the quotation. For
a recent survey of the different hypotheses in this regard together with the arguments
employed thereby, see Berder 1996:281290. According to Oss 1989:183, Jesus himself
is also the source of the New Testament stone tradition. Cf. Snodgrass 1977:106: I
would suggest that the Church was attracted to the stone testimonia through the use of
Psa. cxviii.22 at the conclusion to the Parable of the Wicked Tenants (Mark xii.112//)
and in the early apologetic for the resurrection (Acts iv.11). Quite naturally and early
the already popular Isaiah passages were adapted for use alongside Psa. cxviii.22.
38
According to Koch 1980:183, we should not only ascribe the interpolation of
8:14 into the Zion text of 28:16 to Paul, but we should also ascribe the Christological
explanation of 8:14 as such to him. While it is obvious that a Christological interpreta-
tion of 8:14 fits well within Pauls theology, the present author is not convinced that
it can be considered a decisive argument.
39
Based on a comparative study, Snodgrass 1977:99102 and Oss 1989:187, 189
conclude that Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6 probably hark back to a common tradition.
Cf. Snodgrass 1977:98n: The form of the NT quotations apparently resulted from
the frequent use of Isa. xxviii.16 in the Jewish world.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 22 1/18/2007 10:08:38 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 23

Lk. 20:17; Acts 4:11 and 1 Pet. 2:48). Furthermore, the Messianic
interpretation of Ps. 118:22 must have contributed to its use in
1 Pet. 2:48 in one and the same context with the stone texts from
28:16 and 8:14.40 The fact that reference is made in both 28:16 and
Ps. 118:22 to a cornerstone clearly facilitated the association of the
said stone texts in the New Testament as well as possibly in early
Jewish tradition (cf. Eph. 2:20).41
When compared with the text of the Septuagint, the change of verb
and verb form found in Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6 remains striking

40
Cf. Merklein 1973:150: berhaupt scheint von den atl Stein-Worten ein Anreiz
zu messianischer oder eschatologischer Interpretation ausgegangen zu sein. Dieser
Usus der Stein-Theologie hat sich auch im NT niedergeschlagen. Ellis 1957:98107
describes the emergence of the hypothesis which claimed the existence of a so-called
Book of Testimonies that had preceded the documents of the New Testament. The
hypothesis in question, in which the stone texts had an important role to play, was
propagated at the beginning of the last century primarily by J.R. Harris (Testimonies,
Cambridge 19161920). After achieving almost general acceptance, the hypothesis fell
subject to more and more doubt after the studies of Dodd 1952 and B. Lindars (New
Testament Apologetic, 1961), based, among other things, on the enormous textual diversity
between the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament. It was considered
possible, nevertheless, that an oral tradition of Old Testament proof texts had come into
existence at an early stage and later acquired written form. Cf. Snodgrass 1977:105f:
There was no testimony book but there were texts that were grouped thematically to
assist in worship, proclamation, teaching and defense of faith. The stone testimonia
are still the first witness to such collections. Since the recognition of some sort Testi-
monia in the legacy of the Qumran community (4QFlorilegium and 4QTestimonia),
the possibility that such collections may also have existed in early Christianity in one
or other written form has gained credibility. See Snodgrass 1994:2951. Albl 1999 has
recently argued anew in favour of the existence of so-called Testimonia collections
upon which the authors of the New Testament are said to have based themselves. See
also Moyise 2001:1718. Skarsaune 1996:420 is much more cautious when he states:
Very likely one should rather think of the testimony tradition as part and parcel of
the growing theological heritage within early Christianity, which was transmitted within
the mainstream of early Christian literature, in varying literary formats. Each author
within this tradition borrowed Old Testament quotations from his predecessors, but
only some of these are known to us.
41
Based on the common appearance of and Merklein
1973:137 considers it possible that Eph. 2:20 was also dependent on Isa. 28:16. Cf.
Berder 1996:341: Si renvoi il y a, il ne passe que par lintermdiaire du vocabulaire
de la pierre angulaire, qui est manifestement emprunt Is 28,16 (), mais
qui peut spontanment voquer Ps. 118,22 dans la mesure o lon admet, larrire-
plan du texte, une tradition mettant en relation les deux passages vtrotestamentaires
appliqus au Christ. Jeremias 1930:264280 (see also 1933:792793) understood
in Eph. 2:20 and 1 Pet. 2:6 and in Mk. 12:10 par.; Acts
4:11 and 1 Pet. 2:7 to be a keystone that was introduced above the gate. In his opinion
the term means cornerstone only in LXX Isa. 28:16. While Jeremias
vision initially found significant following it has been abandoned in recent years. For
a critical discussion and rejection of Jeremias vision, see McKelvey 1962:352359 and
Merklein 1973:144152. Cf., however, Cahill 1999:345357.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 23 1/18/2007 10:08:38 AM

 24 chapter two

( instead of ). At the same time, however, the ver-

sion of the Zion text of 28:16 offered by Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6
presupposes a Hebrew text in which the verb dsy in the construction
dsy ynnh is understood as a participle.
Rom. 9:33; 10:11 and 1 Pet. 2:6 have preserved the plus
so characteristic of the Septuagint at the end of 28:16.42 This plus
has an important role to play in the Messianic interpretation of the
Zion text of 28:16 ascribed to it by the New Testament.
The Zion text of Isa 28:16 as quoted in 1 Pet. 2:6 is understood as
a promise of salvation for the future. The same text in Rom. 9:33,
on the other hand, has acquired the sense of an announcement of
judgement on account of its intermingling with the text concerning
the stumbling stone from Isa. 8:14.
The context within which the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is quoted in
1 Pet. 2:6 is more notably determined by ecclesiological motifs than is
the case with respect to Rom. 9:33. This is clearly voiced in the appeal
in 1 Pet. 2:5 to let oneself be used as living stones in the construction
of a spiritual house and in the qualifications employed for the faithful
as people of God both in 1 Pet. 2:5 and in 1 Pet. 2:9.

2.4. Judaism

Before continuing our line of research from the New Testament to the
early church, it goes without saying that attention is due at the present
juncture to the Jewish explanation of our text. I will limit myself in
this instance to Jewish exegesis of Isa. 28:16 as found in Qumran, the
Targum and the Talmud. Since their discovery more than fifty years
ago, the writings of the community of Qumran have become our most
significant source of information concerning Judaism in the final centu-
ries before the Common Era. The importance of the Aramaic Targums
has its roots in the centuries old tradition of synagogue preaching that
ultimately evolved into a written form. The Talmud represents the most
important written material stemming from the late rabbinic period.
This work harks back for the most part to the originally oral rabbinic
tradition dating from the period following the exile. The core of the
Talmud is formed by the Mishnah, which provides further explanation

42
In addition to Isa. 28:16; Rom. 9:33; 10:11 and 1 Pet. 2:6, the expression
is only found elsewhere in 1 Tim. 1:16.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 24 1/18/2007 10:08:39 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 25

to the Torah. The Gemarah, which should be dated around the 3rd to
the 5th century CE, offer a commentary on the Mishnah based on the
Toseftah that constitute the oldest interpretation of the Mishnah. While
it is true that the apocryphal and pseudepigraphal literature make fre-
quent reference to the book of Isaiah43 and similarly frequent allusion
to Zion and to the temple, there are no direct quotations of Isa. 28:16
or the elaboration thereof to be found in the material in question.44

2.4.1. Qumran
Two scrolls of the book of Isaiah were found in the caves of Qumran.45
It is striking with respect to the text of Isa. 28:16 found in both Isaiah
scrolls that the verb dsy is rendered as a participial form. The First
Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) employs a pi el participle dsym the Second (1QIsab)
a qal participle dswy.46 While the First Isaiah Scroll itself already bears
something of an interpretative character and occasionally offers clear
expression to ideas current within the Qumran community,47 we are nev-
ertheless directed in particular to two other documents bequeathed by
Qumran where the communitys interpretation of 28:16 is concerned.
Both the Rule of the Community (1QS) and the Thanksgiving Scroll
(1QHa) make reference to the Zion text from Isa. 28:16, although
neither context provides it with a Messianic interpretation. Both texts
explain it, in fact, as a prophecy of the new eschatological community
that God is to establish in the future. While the book of Isaiah would
appear to have been popular in the community of Qumran and to
have been used as a basic text for the Pesharim,48 not a single fragment
is available to us among the Pesher manuscripts in which allusion is
made to the Zion text of 28:16.49

43
See Knibb 1997:633650.
44
Ps. 118:22 is quoted in the Testament of Solomon 2223, a document of Jewish
origin with a Christian final redaction. While allusion to Isa. 28:16 is possible, the
primary focus remains Ps. 118:22. See Berder 1996:170180.
45
For a description of the smaller fragments of text from the book of Isaiah that
have been discovered, see Ulrich 1997:477480 and Flint 1997:481489.
46
See Burrows 1950: Plate XXII.
47
See Pulikottil 2001. At the end of his study on the textual transmission of 1QIsaa
Pulikottil 2001:199 concludes among other things that: The scroll has a definite con-
ceptual orientation, which is distinctly that of certain Qumran texts. This affinity reflects
the ideology of the Yachad documents. The cardinal themes of the Yachad documents
are attested in the interpretative readings of the scroll.
48
See Brooke 1997:609632.
49
A fragment has been discovered in which the characterisation found in 28:14

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 25 1/18/2007 10:08:39 AM

 26 chapter two

The Rule of the Community (Serek ha-yahad, 1st century BCE) sets
out the rules and regulations governing the life of the community and its
membership (1QS 17). From 1QS 89 onwards, however, we are offered
a draft design for the foundation of a future community, a spiritual
temple in the wilderness.50 This part of the document dates from a
period prior to the actual formation of the community around 120
BCE and represents an originally independent document. It states,
among other things, that in Israels immediate future the Community
council shall be founded on truth (. . .) to be an everlasting plantation, a holy house
for Israel and the foundation of the holy of holies for Aaron, true witnesses for
the judgement and chosen by the will (of God) to atone for the land and to render
the wicked their retribution. A clear allusion to 28:16 follows: This (the
Community) is the tested rampart, the precious cornerstone that does not (. . .) whose
foundations shake or tremble from their place. (It will be) the most holy dwelling
for Aaron . . . (1QS 8,58).51 According to this text, the community of
Qumran understood itself as the fulfilment of the prophecy in question.
It is striking in this regard that the designation wyxb in Zion is dropped
from the quotation from 28:16, which is now effectively stripped of its
character as a Zion text. This reflects the difficulties evident within the
community of Qumran with respect to Jerusalem and its temple, which
was considered to have been desecrated by the priesthood.
The fact that the community of Qumran considered itself to be
Gods living temple is expressed in the Thanksgiving Scroll (1QHodayot a,
1st century BCE), a document containing a collection of hymns that
were composed within the community and were profoundly inspired

reverberates (4QpIsab = 4Q162: ylvwryb rva wxlh yvna). See Brooke 1997:625.
Of greater importance in this regard is a Pesher manuscript in which an explanation
is given of 54:1112, which is related to 28:16 (4QpIsad = 4Q164). The restoration
of Jerusalem described in this text is associated with the community of Qumran itself
and with its leaders. See Garcia Martnez & Tigchelaar 1997:319, 327 and Berder
1996:191.
50
For the community of Qumrans understanding of itself as the spiritual temple,
see Dimant 1986:165189. In a document known to us as 4QFlorilegium reference is
made to three temples in the context of a Pesher on 2 Samuel 7: the temple of Israel,
the temple of human persons and the temple of yhwh. The first of these is the temple
of Solomon and the last is the temple to be established in the future by yhwh himself.
The community identifies itself with the construction of the temple of human persons
(da vdqm), dedicated by God, in which the works of Torah had to be offered because
the temple of Israel had been destroyed and the eschatological temple of yhwh still
had to be built (see 4QFlor 1,67 = 4Q174 1,67).
51
See Garcia Martnez & Tigchelaar 1997:89. For a short discussion of the text of
this passage see also Berder 1996:188189.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 26 1/18/2007 10:08:39 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 27

by the language of the biblical Psalms. Allusion is made to 28:16 on

two occasions among the hymns of this document. The first is to be
found in 1QHa 14,2527: I have become like someone who enters a fortified
city, and finds shelter on the high wall until salvation. My God, I le[an] on your
truth, for you place the foundation upon a rock, and beams to the correct size, and
a t[rue] plumb line to [str]etch out, tested stones to build a fortress which will not
shake. All those who enter there will not stagger, for a foreigner will not penetrate
it . . . 52 In the hymn from which this passage is taken, the poet sings of
his liberation from the assembly of futility and of the new life that he
has found in the holy council (read: the community of Qumran) (cf.
14,5). In order to be able to stand up to the temptations and dangers
that he has experienced among his fellow people (who allow themselves
to be led by Belial, cf. 14,2122), the poet seeks and finds security and
a sure footing in a fortified city (read: the community of Qumran).
The second allusion to 28:16 follows in 1QHa 15,89 where the same
thematic elements are evident: . . . You placed me like a sturdy tower, like a
high wall, you founded upon rock, my building and everlasting foundations as my
base, all my walls are like a tested unshakeable wall. 53
We can thus argue, in summary, that the interpretation of 28:16 in the
documents of Qumran is eschatological in character, with the conviction
that the end time had already commenced taking centre stage.54 The
Zion text of 28:16 is directly associated with the community as such.
While the name Zion appears to have been avoided, the community
in question is nevertheless spoken of as a spiritual house, employing
language (esp. in 1QS 8,58) that exhibits considerable kinship with
the way in which 28:16 has found its way into 1 Pet. 2:48.55

52
See Garcia Martnez & Tigchelaar 1997:177.
53
See Garcia Martnez & Tigchelaar 1997:179. Cf. Merklein 1973:123, Betz
1987:9596 and Tan 1997:3738.
54
Cf. Brooke 1997:613: . . . those responsible for the scrolls were certain that the
prophets had spoken predictively directly or indirectly about them and their contem-
porary situation in the first centuries BCE and CE.
55
The technique whereby prophetic texts from the Old Testament were applied
directly to the community itself is characteristic of the community of Qumran. This
is particularly evident from the many fragments of biblical commentariesthe so-
called Peshersthat have been preserved. See Muszynski 1975:3539 and Dohmen
1982:8687.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 27 1/18/2007 10:08:39 AM

 28 chapter two

2.4.2. Targum
In our discussion of the data provided by the New Testament it was
evident that the Messianic interpretation of the so-called stone texts
(Ps. 118:22; Isa. 8:14; 28:16) was relatively old. Indeed it is probable,
moreover, that such Messianic interpretations are pre-Christian in origin,
given the fact that the (Babylonian) Targum of the prophets (referred
to as Targum Jonathan after Jonathan ben Uzziel), which is rooted in
synagogue preaching, already offers a Messianic explanation of the stone
from Isa. 28:16. The expectation of Israels restoration evident in the
Isaiah Targum and already prominent in the tradition surrounding chapter
28 (to be dated around 70 CE),56 is associated with the figure of the
Messiah (4:2; 9:5f; 11:1; 14:29b; 16:1,5; 28:5; 43:10; 52:13; 53:10).57
While the Isaiah Targum does not employ the designation Messiah
with respect to the Zion text of 28:16, it nevertheless alludes explicitly
to a strong, mighty and terrible king whom God shall install on Mount
Zion.58 It is noted, in addition, that the righteous ones who believe will
not be shaken.59 The notion of being shaken most likely refers to
the final judgement.60 Elsewhere in the Targum we encounter further
examples whereby an important stone text is clearly associated with
the kingship of David but not directly linked with the Messiah. With

56
Isaiah 28 plays an important role in the Isaiah Targum. Cf. Chilton 1983:15:
Chapter twenty-eight in the Targum will figure prominently in our discussions of
several of the characteristic terms and phrases. In it, the meturgeman (a general des-
ignation for the various exegetes who had contributed explanations to the Targum,
JD) expresses his hope for Israels vindication even as he bitterly laments her apostasy
(especially in respect of Temple service). The ground of both his expectation and his
bitterness is his assurance that Israel has been chosen by God and that the law is the
seal of her election (vv. 9, 10). See also Chilton 1983:39: . . . a coherent and primitive
paraenesis is reflected in chapter 28 of the Targum.
57
See Chilton 1983:8696. With regard to the identification of the servant of yhwh
and the Messiah Chilton 1983:94 notes that in his messianic reading of the Isaian ser-
vant, the meturgeman attests a primitive exegesis common to Judaism and Christianity.
For Messianic readings in the Isaiah Targum see also Chilton 1997:547562.
58
Cf. Chilton 1983:115f: Understood as a metaphor for the Temple, stone (and
similar words) is probably rendered by reference to the messiah because the messiah
is understood to build the Temple . . . (cf. Targum Zech. 4:7 and 10:4).
59
Chilton 1987:56 translates the said passage as follows: therefore thus says the
LORD God, Behold I am appointing in Zion a king, a strong, mighty and terrible
king. I will strengthen him and harden him, says the prophet, and the righteous who
believe in these things will not be shaken when distress comes. Cf. StrB III,276 and
593, Jeremias 1942:276, Wildberger 1982:1076 and Roberts 1987:33.
60
Betz 1987:95 argues that this eschatological interpretation of the Targum is
influenced by Hab. 2:4b.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 28 1/18/2007 10:08:40 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 29

regard to the stone mentioned in Ps. 118:22, the Targum speaks of a

young man among the sons of Jesse who had become king and ruler,
an unmistakeable allusion to the kingship of David.61
A number of exegetes have expressed their suspicion that the fre-
quent allusion to God as a rock in the Old Testament has contributed
to the Messianic interpretation of this and other stone texts.62 While
this hypothesis is difficult to prove, a brief examination of the text of
8:14 will serve to illustrate the credibility of such a position. As we
observed in 2.3., this text, which was associated with the Zion text
of 28:16 relatively early in the tradition, refers to yhwh with both the
word b,a, stone as well as the word rWx rock. In spite of the fact that
both terms are employed in a negative sense in 8:14g<n< b,a, a stone
one strikes against and l/vk]mi rWx a rock one stumbles over, they both
refer nevertheless to yhwh. The designation of yhwh as rWx rock is
commonplace in the context of the Psalms where it serves to elicit a
sense of solidness and to inspire fidelity.63 The prophets use of this
divine image in 8:14, however, clearly inverts the significance thereof in
a manner that would probably have shocked his audience. The word b,a,
stone likewise functions as a divine designation in a few Old Testament
passages. Gen. 49:24, for example, would appear to speak of the
laer;c]yI b,a, the Rock of Israel .64 Given the fact that the designation b,a,
stone stands in parallel to rWx rock in 8:14, and with the support of
evidence that the latter text was probably read in close association with

61
See Schrten 1995:144146 and Berder 1996:204213. An old apocryphal psalm
of David related to the psalms of Qumran was also discovered in the Cairo Geniza,
which explicitly associates Ps. 118:22 with David and ascribes the text a Messianic
explanation. See Berder 1996:193203. Cf. Berder 1996:243: Si le pome alphabtique
de la Geniza du Caire que nous avons tudi a vraiment t compos (. . .) au mme
moment que les autres psaumes apocryphes connus sous le nom de David, il constituerait
le premier tmoignage de linterprtation messianique de ces versets, dans la tradition
juive. For the Messianic interpretation of Ps. 118:22 within Judaism see also StrB I,876
and Berder 1996:213245. The later rabbinic documents also associate the stone of
Ps. 118:22 with Abraham, Jacob, Joseph or the people of Israel.
62
Cf. Jeremias 1942:276277 and Maiburg 1984:249.
63
See Ps. 18:3,32,47; 19:15; 28:1; 31:4; 42:10; 62:3,7,8; 71:3; 73:26; 78:35; 89:27;
92:16; 94:22; 95:1; 144:1; cf. Deut. 32:4,15,18,30,31; 1 Sam. 2:2; 22:3,32,47; 23:3 and
Isa. 17:10; 26:4; 30:29; 44:8; Hab. 1:12. Kraus 1979:36 presupposes that this divine
designation was borrowed from the Jerusalem cult and that the original notion had to
do with the sacred rock in the temple sanctuary (cf. Schmidt 1933). This is difficult to
prove, however, on the basis of the available texts.
64
According to Van der Woude 19792:542, no divine designation is employed in
Gen. 49:24, but reference is made to the children of Israel.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 29 1/18/2007 10:08:40 AM

 30 chapter two

the stone mentioned in 28:16, it is not unthinkable that the relatively

common allusion to yhwh as rock may indeed have promoted the
Messianic interpretation of this and other stone texts.

2.4.3. Talmud
A relatively early Messianic interpretation is likewise identifiable in
the Rabbinic literature with respect to a number of stone texts from
the Old Testament. This is certainly the case with regard to the stone
referred to in Dan. 2:34 (Midrash Tanchumah, cf. 4 Ezra 13:3236),
as well as those referred to in Gen. 28:18 and Zech. 4:7,10 (see also
the Messianic explanation offered by Rashi with regard to the stone
mentioned in Ps. 118:22).65 The Zion text of Isa. 28:16 similarly enjoys
a position of some significance in the Talmud. This is not so much due
to the frequency with which the latter stone text is quoted or to the
fact that it is ascribed a Messianic interpretation, but rather because
the text contributed to the emergence of a complex of images relating
to the sacred rock on Mount Zion. The Jewish tradition speaks of the
sacred rock in question as the hY:tiv] b,a, Shetiyyah.
It is said of the Shetiyyah, as early as Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, that
God had used the said stone to close off access to the depths of the
primal sea and that his name is inscribed therein.66 The customary
picture, which is already evident in a passage from the Mishnah (end
2nd century/beginning 3rd century; Yoma V,2)67 and the Tosephtah
(redaction end 4th century; TYoma III,6),68 represents the Shetiyyah as

65
See StrB III,506 and IV,879.
66
See Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (= Jerushalmi I) of Ex. 28:30, Le Daut 1979:227:
Car sur eux (Urim and Tummim, JD) se trouve grav en toutes lettres le Nom grand
et saint par lequel ont t crs les trois cent dix mondes; (il est) aussi grav en toutes
lettres sur la pierre fondamentale avec laquelle le Matre de lunivers scella la bouche
du grand abme lorigine.
67
Meinhold 1913:53 translates Joma V,2 as follows: Nach der Fortfhrung der
Lade, war dort seit den Tagen der ersten Propheten ein drei Finger breit aus der Erde
herausragender Stein, den man Schetijja nannte. Cf. also Sanhedrin 26b in which
reference is made once again to the Shetiyyah in relation to the foundations referred
to in Ps. 11:3.
68
Schmidt 1933:9798 translates TJoma III,6 as follows: Ein Stein war dort (im
Allerheiligsten) seit den Tagen der ersten Propheten. Schetijja wurde er genannt. Er
ragte drei Finger breit aus der Erde hervor. An der Stelle hatte nmlich ursprnglich
die Lade gestanden. Seitdem nun die Lade fortgenommen war, pflegte man das
Rucheropfer des Allerheiligsten darauf darzubringen. Rabbi Jose sagt: Von ihm aus
wurde die Welt gegrndet; denn es heit: Aus Zion, der Krone der Schnheit, strahlte
Gott auf (Ps. 50:1f ). Cf. Bhl 1974:257.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 30 1/18/2007 10:08:40 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 31

already having been present in the days prior to the exile in the place
where the temple later stood and that it only became visible when the
Ark was removed. The same Shetiyyah is later named in association with
representations of the navel of the earth.69
The Palestinian Talmud ( beginning 5th century), for example, alludes
to the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 within the framework of the Shetiyyah
depictions referred to above and endeavours to explain the name
Shetiyyah with the help of the Zion text. Reference is made in pYoma
42c to the stone that became visible when the Ark was removed from
the temple. A rabbi then asks why the stone in question bears the name
Shetiyyah and the response states that the world was founded from out
of the said stone. Reference is thus made in this context to both Ps.
50:12 and Isa. 28:16.70 From the etymological perspective it is possible
that the term hY:tiv] has its semantic roots in the verb htv to weave.71
Others take the notion of a foundation stone as their point of departure.72
Something similar is written of the Shetiyyah in the slightly younger but
no less authoritative Babylonian Talmud (6th century; cf. bYoma 54b),
referring explicitly to Zion as the place from which the world is founded
without, however, directly quoting the text of Isa. 28:16.73

69
Bhl 1974:259ff.
70
See the translation by Avemarie 1995:135: R. Yochanan sagte: Warum heit er
Stein der Shetiyya? Weil von ihm aus die Welt gegrndet wurde (hushta). R. Chiyya
lehrte: Und warum heit er Stein der Shetiyya? Weil von ihm aus die Welt getrnkt
wurde (hushta). Es steht geschrieben: Ein Psalm Asafs. Gott, Gott, der Herr, spricht und ruft
die Erde usw., aus Zion, der vollkommnen Schnheit, leuchtet Gott auf (Ps 50,12), und heit:
Darum (spricht Gott, der Herr:) Siehe, ich lege einen Grundstein in Zion usw. ( Jes. 28,16).
71
See Bhl 1974:258.
72
Cf. Meinhold 1913:53 and Avemarie 1995:135.
73
See Epstein 1974: And it was called shethiyah: A Tanna taught: [ It was so called]
because from it the world was founded. We were taught in accord with the view that
the world was started [created] from Zion on. For it was taught: R. Eliezer says: The
world was created from its centre, as it is said: When the dust runneth into a mass, and the
clods keep fast together ( Job 38,38). R. Joshua said: The world was created from its sides
on, as it is said: For He saith to the snow: Fall thou on the earth, likewise to the shower of rain,
and to the showers of His mighty rain ( Job 37,6). R. Isaac the Smith said: The Holy One,
blessed be He, cast a stone into the ocean, from which the world then was founded
as it is said: Whereupon were the foundations thereof fastened, or who laid the corner-stone thereof ?
( Job 38,6) But the Sages said: The world was [started] created from Zion, as it is
said: A Psalm of Asaph, God, God, the Lord [ hath spoken], whereupon it reads on: Out of
Zion, the perfection of the world (Ps. 50,12), that means from Zion was the beauty of the
world perfected. It was taught: R. Eliezer the Great said: These are the generations of the
heavens and of the earth, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven (Gen. 2,4). The
generations [the creations] of heaven were made from the heaven and the generations
of the earth were made from the earth. But the Sages said: Both were created from
Zion, as it is said: A Psalm of Asaph: God, God, the Lord, hath spoken, and called the earth

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 31 1/18/2007 10:08:40 AM

 32 chapter two

The representations thus associated with the Shetiyyah are made clear
from a couple of passages stemming from a few later Midrashim.
Midrash Tanchumah (Qedoshim 10), for example, speaks of the central
location of the Shetiyyah. Just as Israel constitutes the centre of the world
and Jerusalem the centre of Israel, so the temple building is located
in the centre of Jerusalem and the Ark and the Shetiyyah are located in
the centre of the temple. The conviction is likewise expressed in this
context that the world is founded from out of the Shetiyyah. Elsewhere
in Midrash Tanchumah (Achareimot 3) further reference is made to
the Shetiyyah as having been present in this place since the days of the
first prophets. It could thus be said of the first temple that the Holy
One dwelt on the rock.74
In addition to contexts in which the Shetiyyah is part of the discussion,
the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is also alluded to on a few other occasions
in the midrashic literature, in this instance more by way of association.
A midrash on Lev. 14:42, for example, offers stipulations concerning
the removal of stones from a house infected by a plague of leprosy
and their replacement with new stones. Reference is thus made to Isa.
28:16 in this regard.75 In a midrash on Deut. 10:1, in which Moses is
given the charge to carve out two stone tablets, a reference is made to
Qoh. 3:5 with its application to emperor Hadrian and is followed with
a question asking when God shall rebuild the temple. The response to
the question is a quotation from the Zion text of Isa. 28:16.76
It would appear from the Talmud passages referred to above that the
rabbis were not inclined to interpret Isa. 28:16 in association with the
Messiah but rather, and in particular, with the temple: as a component
in the complex of images surrounding the presentation of the Shetiyyah,
the sacred rock on Mount Zion, and as a promise concerning the future
reconstruction of the temple. It is not unimaginable that the significant
role played by the said stone text of Isa. 28:16 in the conceptualisa-
tion of the Shetiyyah may have served to limit the space available for a
Messianic interpretation of the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16.

from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof. And Scripture further says: Out of Zion,
the perfection of beauty, God has shined forth, that means from it the beauty of the world
was perfected.
74
See the text of this passage in Schmidt 1933:99100.
75
See Israelstamm-Slotki 19613:222.
76
See Rabbinowitz 19613:8283.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 32 1/18/2007 10:08:41 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 33

2.4.4. Evaluation
The following conclusions can be drawn from our brief survey of the
Jewish explanation of Isa. 28:16:
The Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is interpreted within the Qumran com-
munity in ecclesiological terms and associated directly with the
community itself. The community of Qumran saw itself as the new
eschatological community that God was to establish at the end of
time. In like fashion to the New Testament community in 1 Pet.
2:48, the community of Qumran also understood itself as a spiri-
tual house. In neither the Rule of the Community (1QS) nor the
Thanksgiving Scroll (1QHa), two extremely important documents
left to posterity by the Qumran community, is the stone referred to
in the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 given a Messianic interpretation.
The rendition of Isa. 28:16 found in the Isaiah Targum (Targum
Jonathan), on the other hand, alludes explicitly to a strong, mighty
and terrible king whom yhwh shall install on Mount Zion. This is in
line with a tendency observable within the Isaiah Targum that associ-
ates the expectation of Israels restoration with the Messiah. Such a
Messianic interpretation of the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16 exhibits
a degree of kinship with the way in which the Targum is similarly
able to link the stone mentioned in Ps. 118:22 with the ascendance of
King David. Targumic explanations such as these serve to reinforce
the suspicion that the Messianic explanation of the Old Testament
stone texts already enjoyed a pre-Christian heritage. A number of
passages from the Midrash likewise point in this direction.
In the Talmud we find reference to the Zion text of 28:16 primarily
with respect to the temple and almost exclusively within the frame-
work of explanations related to the Shetiyyah, the sacred stone or rock
on Mount Zion. The stone/rock in question served as the location
from which the world was founded and as the place upon which the
ark had stood in the days of the prophets. On one single occasion,
the Zion text of 28:16 is linked with the promise of a future restora-
tion of the temple. In light of the Messianic interpretation of other
stone texts found in a number of places in the Midrash (Gen. 28:18;
Dan. 2:34; Zech. 4:7,10), it is surprising that the Talmud contains
no Messianic interpretations of the stone referred to in 28:16. It is
possible that this coincides with the significant place occupied by
the said Zion text in the conceptualisation of the Shetiyyah. It is thus

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 33 1/18/2007 10:08:41 AM

 34 chapter two

reasonable to argue that the space occupied by our stone text in

the conceptualisation of the Shetiyyah limited the space available for
a Messianic interpretation of the stone referred to in 28:16.

2.5. Early Church

Having reviewed the Jewish exegesis of Isa. 28:16 as found in the docu-
ments of Qumran, in the Targum and in the Talmud, we will now
focus our attention on the Christian reception history of our text in
the early church. The Letter of Barnabas dates from the beginning of
the 2nd century and serves as one of the most important documents
related to the churchs beginnings. The first sub-paragraph will endea-
vour to determine the manner with which the document in question
interprets the Zion text of Isa. 28:16. In the second sub-paragraph we
will turn our attention to the explanations of Tertullian and Cyprian
as representatives of Christian exegesis from the 3rd century. The third
sub-paragraph will then address itself to relevant works of Jerome and
Augustine, two prominent Church Fathers from the 4th and 5th cen-
tury whose significance for the western (Latin) church is considerable.
The fourth sub-paragraph will be dedicated to the explanations found
in the work of two exegetes who came to be very significant for the
eastern (Greek) church, namely Cyril of Alexandria and Theodoret of
Cyrus, both from the 5th century. The final sub-paragraph will offer a
summary of our findings with respect to the explanation of the Zion
text of Isa. 28:16 in the early church.

2.5.1. The Letter of Barnabas

With its roots in the churchs earliest beginnings, the Letter of Barnabas
has proven its value for the study of this period time and again.
Probably written around 130 CE, the document alludes to a number
of Old Testament texts in the service of Christian preaching. A passage
on the soteriological significance of Christs work of suffering makes
reference to Isa. 28:16 as a proof text (Barn. 6:2b3).77 For the sake

77
Cf. Skarsaune 1996:386: Barn. 5.16.7 is mainly a collection of Christological
proof-texts, most of which can be traced in Christian writers earlier than Barnabas,
and which recur in later writers. In other words: Barnabas is here working with
Christological mainstream testimonies.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 34 1/18/2007 10:08:41 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 35

of clarity we quote the entire passage from Barn. 6:14, together with
an English translation:78
, 1 And so, when he issued the commandment,
; what did he say?
; Who is the one who takes me to court?
Let him oppose me!
; Or who acquits himself before me?
. Let him approach the servant of the Lord!
, 2 Woe to you, for you will all grow old like a
, garment and a moth will devour you.
. And again, since he was set in place as a
, strong stone used for crushing, the prophet
says,
, See, I will cast into Zions foundation a
, precious stone that is chosen, a cornerstone,
, , one to be valued.
, . 3 Then what does he say?
; The one who believes in him will live for-
ever.
. Is our hope then built on a stone? May it
; never be!
But he says this because the Lord has set his
flesh up in strength.
. For he says,
He set me up as a hard rock.
. 4 And again the prophet says,
A stone that the builders rejected has become
the very cornerstone.
, And again he says,
.
This is the great and marvellous day the
Lord has made.
, .

In contrast to the quotations found in Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6, the
Zion text from Isa. 28:16 cited in the Letter of Barnabas is in almost
exact agreement with the Septuagint.79 Only the concluding words of
the quotation as found in the letter would appear to differ to any degree

78
Ehrman 2003:31.
79
Of the almost 100 Old Testament quotations in the Letter of Barnabas, one quar-
ter are taken from the book of Isaiah. In contrast to quotations from the Pentateuch
and the other prophets, references to Isaiah exhibit strong affinity with the text of the
Septuagint. See Kraft 1960:337.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 35 1/18/2007 10:08:41 AM

 36 chapter two

from the Septuagint ( instead of

).80 They are linked by way of allusion to Gen. 3:22b
( instead of ). Surprisingly
enough, the quotation of 28:16 in Barn. 6:24 is likewise linked by
way of allusion to Isa. 50:68 (Barn. 5:1314). Given the fact that this
Isaiah text also speaks of a stone, it would seem that one allusion/
quotation calls to mind the other. The link itself is somewhat associative.
Isa. 50:68 makes reference to the voluntary suffering of the servant
of yhwh, but also to the assistance of yhwh who did not allow his
servant to be put to shame. The allusion in question ends in Barn.
5:14 with the words:81
Again he says,
See! I have set my back to whips and my
cheeks to blows;

and I have set my face as a hard rock.
.

In light of the information garnered from New Testament sources,

it is hardly surprising that the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16 is like-
wise identified in the Letter of Barnabas with Christ, although it is
surprising that the said identification is borrowed in the first instance
from the already quoted segment (50:7b), which is repeated in Barn.
6:3 in direct association with the quotation of 28:16. With a view to
establishing a sound scriptural foundation for the salvific significance
of Christs death and resurrection, and in line with 1 Pet. 2:48, the
text goes on to speak of the rejected stone from Ps. 118:22 (Barn. 6:4).
The observant reader, however, will already have noted the indirect
allusion to the stone from 8:14 in the introduction to the quotation
from 28:16 (Barn. 6:2). The sequence of stone texts in the Letter of
Barnabas provides further evidence in support of the hypothesis derived
from New Testament sources, namely that the various Old Testament
stone texts were already linked with one another at an exceptionally
early stage and that they enjoyed an established place in the Messianic
witness of the early church from the very beginning.82

80
A single manuscript has: those who hope in him. See Barnard
1966:120.
81
See Ehrman 2003:29.
82
Cf. Prostmeier 1999:253: Hierbei ist die Wahl der Segmente aus dem seman-

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 36 1/18/2007 10:08:41 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 37

2.5.2. Tertullian and Cyprian

Although Tertullian (circa 150223) lived most of his life in the second
century, his exegesis of the Scriptures can be considered together with
that of Cyprian (circa 200258) as representative of Christian exegesis
of the 3rd century.
Tertullian deals with the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 for the most part in
his five volume Adversus Marcionem,83 an apologetic work in which the
Old Testament stone texts pass in review on more than one occasion
in order to prove that the Christ promised by the Creator in the Old
Testament is none other than the Christ of the New Testament gos-
pels. In III,7,23, for example, he relates the stumbling stone referred
to in Isa. 8:14 to the first coming of Christ, a coming in lowliness, via
an allusion to Isa. 53:23. He then relates the rejected stone from Ps.
118:22, which subsequently became the cornerstone, with the second
coming of Christ. Tertullian immediately associates the said corner-
stone with the stone referred to in Dan. 2:34, which broke loose from
a mountain and crushed the image of the kingdoms of the earth.84
Tertullian makes no explicit allusion to 28:16 in this passage, nor does
he do so in IV,35,1415 in which he returns for a second time to the
Messianic explanation of Ps. 118:22. In V,17,16 he returns to Ps. 118:22
for the third time, in this instance as a source for Pauls claim in Eph.
2:20 that Christ is the cornerstone.
The Zion text from Isa. 28:16 is dealt with for the first time in V,5,9.
On the occasion of Marcions treatment of 1 Corinthians 1, Tertullian

tischen Potential der Steinmetapher signifikant durch das Interesse geleitet, das Christus-
ereignis als die Erfllung der Prophetien ad vocem zu erweisen. See also Albl
1999:279281.
83
Tertullian published in total three editions of this work, the first possibly as early
as 198, the third in 208. See Evans 1972:xviii.
84
Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem III,7,3: Quae ignobilitatis argumenta primo adven-
tui competunt, sicut sublimitatis secundo, cum fiet iam non lapis offensionis nec petra
scandali, sed lapis summus angularis post reprobationem adsumptus et sublimatus in
consummationem templi, ecclesiae scilicet, et petra sane illa apud Danielem de monte
praecisa, quae imaginem saecularium regnorum comminuet et conteret. Translation
Evans 1972 I:189: These tokens of ignobility apply to the first advent, as the tokens of
sublimity apply to the second, when he will become no longer a stone of stumbling or
a rock of offence, but the chief corner-stone, after rejection taken back again and set on
high at the summit of the templethat is, the Churchthat rock in fact mentioned by
Daniel, which was carved out of a mountain, which will break in pieces and grind to
powder the image of the kingdoms of the world. This passage is more or less identical
to Tertullians Adversus Iudaeos XIV,23. See CChr.SL 2,1392 and Trnkle 1964.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 37 1/18/2007 10:08:42 AM

 38 chapter two

remarks that even though the proclamation of Christ is a stumbling

block for the Jews, it can, however, still be understood as a guarantee
of a prophecy of the Creator. In this regard, Tertullian quotes the
Zion text of 28:16 in such a way that the text in question merges with
that of 8:14,85 thereby giving rise to a striking agreement with the way
in which these texts are quoted in Rom. 9:33. The only, and at once
surprising difference is the fact that Tertullian quotes the text in the
perfect tense (posui).
In V,6,10 Tertullian introduces 28:16 once again, this time in rela-
tion to 1 Cor. 23. While the combination with Isa. 8:14 is no longer
employed, we find a surprising combination with Isa. 3:3 in its place
in which it is announced that the Lord is about to remove every form
of support from Jerusalem and Judah. Tertullian explains this text as a
prediction of Pauls break with Judaism, since the wise builder (sapi-
entem architectum) was also to be removed from Judah. Paul was thus
taken away from Judaism in order to establish Christianity and to set
its foundations in Christ. With an allusion to 28:16, Tertullian goes on
to illustrate the fact that the creator had already spoken of this one
and only foundation. This time his quotation is in the present tense
(inicio) and makes use of a verb that would appear to be more in line
with the Septuagints than with the verb as employed
in the New Testament. Tertullian also takes a text version as his point
of departure that contains the characteristic plus of the Septuagint in
the second half of 28:16 (in eum).86

85
Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem V,5,9: Etiam quod scandalum Iudaeis praedicat
Christum, prophetiam super illo consignat creatoris, dicentis per Esaiam, Ecce posui in
Sion lapidem offensionis et petram scandali. Petra autem fuit Christus: etiam Marcion
servat. Translation Evans 1972 II:539: Even in saying that his preaching of Christ
is to the Jews an offence, he sets his seal on the Creators prophecy about that, who
speaks by Isaiah, Behold I have placed in Sion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence. But
the rock was Christ. Even Marcion has kept that.
86
Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem V,6,10: Et numquid ipse tunc Paulus destinabatur,
de Iudaea, id est de Iudaismo, auferre habens in aedificationem Christianismi, positurus
unicum fundamentum, quod est Christus? Quia et de hoc per eundem prophetam
creator, Ecce ego, inquit, inicio in fundamenta Sionis lapidem pretiosum, honorabilem,
et qui in eum crediderit non confundetur. Translation Evans 1972 II:547: And was
that not a presage of Paul himself, who was destined to be taken away from Judaea,
which means Judaism, for the building up of Christendom? For he was to lay that one
and only foundation which is Christ. Indeed of this too the Creator speaks, by the
same prophet: Behold I insert into the foundations of Sion a stone precious and honourable, and
he that believeth in it shall not be put to shame.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 38 1/18/2007 10:08:42 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 39

Cyprian, who considered himself to be a pupil of Tertullian, deals

with the Zion text of 28:16 in Testimonia ad Quirinum addressed to his
son. This document contains a chapter entitled Quod idem et lapis
dictus sit (liber II, caput XVI) in which Cyprian strings together all
sorts of scriptural quotations relating to a stone or to stones in the
plural. In addition to the now familiar texts of Isa. 28:16; Ps. 118:22ff
and Acts 4:812, allusion is also made to Zech. 3:89 (the stone with
seven eyes), Deut. 27:8 (the memorial stones on Mount Ebal) and
Jos. 24:2627 (the memorial stone at Shechem).87 The evident ease
with which such unrelated stone texts are ascribed a Messianic inter-
pretation is apparent from the commentary Cyprian supplies to this
string of allusions in which the stone of Jacob at Bethel (Gen. 28:18),
the stone upon which Moses sat during Israels confrontation with
Amalek (Ex. 17:12), the stone at Beth-shemesh (1 Sam. 6:14), the stone
with which David knocked out the giant Goliath (1 Sam. 17:49) and
the stone Ebenezer set up by Samuel between Mizpah and Jeshanah
(1 Sam. 7:12) are directly associated with one another.88
Even though the work of Tertullian shows the anchoring of the
Messianic interpretation of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 firmly in place
in the early church, it is primarily in the work of Cyprian that we
encounter a considerable expansion of the number of stone texts, all
of which are interrelated. The possibilities created by the allegorical
method would appear to have provided the Messianic interpretation of
the Old Testament stone texts with some extra stimulus.

87
Dan. 2:3135 is treated by Cyprian separately in the following chapter (see caput
XVII).
88
See CChr.SL 3,5153: Hic est lapis in Genesi, quem ponit Iacob ad caput
suum, quia caput viri Christus, et dormiens videt scalam ad caelum pertingentem, in
quia constitutus erat Dominus, et anguli ascendebant et descedebant: quem lapidem
consecravit et unxit sacramento unctionis Christum significans. Hic est lapis in Exodo,
super quem sedit Moyses in cacumine collis, quando Iesus Naue contra Amalech dimi-
cabat, et sacramento lapidis et stabilitate sessionis Amalach superatus est ab Iesu, id
est diabolus a Christo victus est. Hic est lapis magnus in Basilion primo, super quem
posita est arca testamenti, quando eam ab allophylis remissam et redditam in plaustro
boves reportaverunt. Hic est lapis item in Basilion primo, quo David frontem Goliae
percussit et occidit, significans diabolum et servos eius inde prosterni victos scilicet ea
capitis parte, quam signatam non habent: quo signo nos et tuti summus semper et
vivimus. Hic est lapis, quem cum alienigenas Israhel vicisset, statuit Samuhel et appel-
lavit nomen ens Abbennezer id est lapis auxiliator.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 39 1/18/2007 10:08:42 AM

 40 chapter two

2.5.3. Jerome and Augustine

In order to establish an accurate picture of the way in which the ancient
church understood the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 in later centuries, we
do well to turn our attention to the exegetical works of Jerome and
Augustine. There can be little doubt that Jerome (circa 347420) and
Augustine (354430) are the two most prominent exegetes of the 4th
and 5th centuries.
The ease with which Jerome associates all the Old Testament stone
texts with Christ is apparent from a treatise on Ps. 134. In a fashion
highly reminiscent of Cyprian, Jerome speaks of Christ as cornerstone
in the context of his comments on verse 3 (May the Lord . . . bless
you from Zion). He alludes in detail to the dream of Jacob at Bethel
whereby he identifies the stone under Jacobs head with Christ. He then
goes on to associate this stone with the cornerstone from Ps. 118:22
and the Stone of Help (Ebenezer) from 1 Sam. 7:12.89 Isa. 28:16 is
alluded to in the sermon In Dei Dominica Pascha, in which Jerome com-
plains about the Jews, for their rejection of Christ and their inability
to understand that the stone referred to in 28:16 is the Messiah and
Son of God.90
Jeromes interpretation of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is to be found
for the most part, however, in his Bible commentaries. It is evident in
this regard that the accent has shifted from the stone to be set in Zion
to the construction in which the stone is to function as a cornerstone.
The emphasis likewise shifts from a Messianic interpretation to an
ecclesiological one,91 a shift that would appear to go hand in hand with

89
See CChr.SL 78,292: Sub capite ipsius lapis erat Xpistus. Vultis scire quia
lapis ille, qui erat ad caput Iacob, Xpistus erat lapis angularis? Lapis quem reprobaverunt
aedificantes hic factus est in caput anguli. Lapis ille, qui scriptus est in Regnorum libro,
Abenezer. Lapis iste Xpistus est. Abenezer autem interpretatur lapis adiutorii. Consurrexit,
inquit, Iacob mane. Et quid dixit? Haec, inquit, domus Dei est. Et quid fecit? Tulit, inquit,
oleum, et inxit lapidem . . .
90
See CChr.SL 78,549: O vere infelices Iudaei, o vere miseri atque miserabiles,
qui non intellexistis lapidem, qui per Esaiam repromissus est, quod poneretur in fun-
damentis Sion, et populum utrumque coniungeret, esse Dominum Salvatorem, esse
Dei Filium. Hunc vos reprobastis aedificantes quondam congregationem Domini et
templi eius mysteria custodientes. Qui reprobatus a vobis, factus est in caput anguli,
et primam ecclesiam de Iudaeorum populo congregatam et credentes ex nationibus in
unum gregem et mysterium faederavit. A Domino factum est istud. . . .
91
Cf. Maiburg 1984:252: Wegen des zumeist ekklesiologischen Anliegens der Vter
interessieren die frheren Fragen nicht mehr, sondern das Bild vom Bau als Ganzem,
der Ekklesia, wird relevant, in das das Bild vom Eckstein als Bestandteil eingefgt

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 40 1/18/2007 10:08:42 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 41

the new status of the Christian faith as an established religion. The

defence of the truth of the Christian faith as opposed to the Jewish faith
is thus no longer the primary focus when interpreting the Old Testament.
Given the focus on the ecclesiological aspect at this juncture, it is strik-
ing how the imagery of the cornerstone comes to be elaborated further
and further and to acquire all sorts of associations, less and less related
to the original architectural intention of the cornerstone. As a mat-
ter of fact, Jerome merges together all the instances in the Scriptures
that have anything to do with a cornerstone, combining them into a
single whole in such a way that the texts serve to mutually interpret
one another.92
In line with the tradition, Jerome combines Isa. 28:16 in his Commen-
tarium in Esaiam with texts such as Ps. 118:22 and Dan. 2:3135. The
shift towards emphasis on the ecclesiological dimension only becomes
apparent, however, when he establishes an immediate link between 28:16
and the church foundational work of Paul who refers to himself in
1 Cor. 3:1011 as an expert architect who has established the foundation
in Christ and in Christ alone. Reference to the cornerstone is then
explained on the basis of Eph. 2:20 in which the unity of the com-
munity is central and the cornerstone is ascribed a connective function
in the amalgamation of two walls, in casu the Jews and the Gentiles,
into one people of God: angularis lapis, quia circumcisionis et gentium
populos copulavit.93 The New Testament community is built upon this
stone. Jerome likewise makes reference to the cornerstone in relation
to Isa. 54:11 whereby he alludes to the well-known stone texts. Once

wird. Nicht mehr das Schicksal des Steins ist von Belang, sondern seine Funktion
im Gebude der Kirche. The shift in accent from a Messianic to an ecclesiological
interpretation is also evident in Eusebius (circa 265339) who associates the stone
mentioned in 28:16 in the first instance with Mt. 16:18 in his commentary on Isaiah.
See Ziegler 1975:183: ,
> <.
, >
<.
.

. .
92
Maiburg 1984:254. A highly unusual association is also to be found in a sermon
by Peter Chrysologus of Ravenna based on Lk. 17:12 in which he associates the
millstone to be hung round a persons neck with the cornerstone, the stone of help
and the stone that freed itself from the mountains without human interference. See
CChr.SL 24,158159 (Sermo XXVII).
93
See CChr.SL 73,363.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 41 1/18/2007 10:08:42 AM

 42 chapter two

again, and with allusion to Eph. 2:20 and Hebr. 11:10, he places the
emphasis on the ecclesiological function of the cornerstone.94
In his Commentarium in Hiezechielem, Jerome makes allusion to the stones
of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:1920) and the precious stones on the
breastpiece of the High Priest (Ex. 28:9,17) in relation to the precious
stones mentioned in the lament concerning the king of Tyre (Ezek.
28:13). He then associates the latter with the living stones referred to
in 1 Pet. 2:5, the construction referred to in Eph. 2:2021 and lapis
lazuli referred to in Isa. 54:11. Other now familiar stone texts then
pass the review.95 Against the background of the four tablets of hewn
stone referred to in Ezek. 40:42, Jerome even proposes an allegorical
explanation whereby the number four is associated with the four gos-
pels and the three equal measures with the mystery of the Trinity. The
stones themselves serve as symbols for the living stones, whereby the
cornerstone is mentioned as the stone that holds together the walls of
the old and new covenant.96
Jeromes specifically ecclesiological interests are also expressed in his
Commentarium in Zachariam Prophetam. In order to arrive at an adequate
explanation of the stone with seven eyes alluded to in Zech. 3:89 he
turns once again to Eph. 2:20.97 Similarly, when he speaks of the cor-
nerstones from Ps. 118:22 and Isa. 28:16 in relation to the Corner Gate
referred to in Zech. 14:1011, his explanation is completely determined
by the ecclesiological perspective of Eph. 2:1422. The cornerstone
binds two walls and thereby two peoples.98
The development evident in the work of Jerome, moving from an
originally Messianic to a more ecclesiological explanation of the corner-
stone, is also a characteristic feature of the writings of Augustine.
Indeed, where Augustine is concerned, both the Messianic and the eccle-
siological interpretations are bound together inseparably. Augustines
confrontation with the Manichean Faustus places particular emphasis

94
See CChr.SL 73,610: Qui factus est in caput anguli, et duos populos continet,
gentium et Israel; qui aedificavit civitatem, cuius artifex et conditor Deus est.
95
See CChr.SL 75,393.
96
See CChr.SL 75,582: . . . isti sunt vivi lapides qui volvuntur super terram et habent
secum angularem lapidem quo veteris et novi testamenti parietes continuentur . . .
97
See CChr.SL 76A,775.
98
See CChr.SL 76A,887: Qui angularis lapis parietem utrumque connectit, et duos
populos in unum redigit, de quo et Deus loquitur per Esaiam: Ecce ponam in Sion lapidem
angularem, electum et pretiosum in fundamentis eius; et qui crediderit in eum, non confundetur.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 42 1/18/2007 10:08:43 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 43

on the Old Testament as a source of statements about Christ. Faustus

had considered it a sign of weakness in a persons faith if he or she was
unable to believe in Christ apart from the search for Jewish witnesses.
While the Manicheans were even of the opinion that the New Testament
itself required a good deal of weeding out, their opinion on the Old
Testament was entirely negative: a corporal book that bore no relation-
ship whatsoever with Christ and deserved to be rejected.99 For Augustine,
Christ was the fulfilment of the Old Testament and everything therein
had to be related to him: if we desire to follow the path of right
judgement and wish to avoid deviation from the cornerstone and risk
suffering shipwreck in our judgement. Augustine understands Christ
not only as Head, but when he thinks of Christ, he also thinks of the
body of Christ, his church on earth. This implies that his interpretation
of the Old Testament is both christocentric and ecclesiocentric.100
If we turn in particular to Augustines explanation of the cornerstone
referred to in Isa. 28:16, it is striking that the identification of this stone
along with other stones alluded to in the Old Testament, with Christ
functions as an obvious point of departure. In his commentary on Jn.
1:52, Augustine is able to draw a connection, in line with Cyprian
and Jerome, between the stone of 28:16 and the stone of Jacob at
Bethel (Gen. 28:18), which as a matter of fact was also anointed.101 It
is evident from a significant portion of Augustines work that he found
the imagery of Christ as cornerstone attractive. When writing on par-
ticular biblical texts, he frequently alludes to the lapis angularis.102 It

99
See Polman 1955:7582.
100
Polman 1955:8687.
101
See CChr.SL 36,80: . . . et lapidem quem sibi posuerat ad caput, unxit. Audistis
quia Messias Christus est, audistis quia unctus Christus est. Non enim sic posuit lapidem
unctum, ut veniret et adoraret; alioquin idololatria esset, non significatio Christi. Facta
est ergo significatio, quo usque oportuit fieri significationem, et significatus est Christus.
Lapis unctus, sed non in idolum. Lapis unctus: lapis quare? Ecce pono in Sion lapidem
electum, pretiosum, et qui crediderit in illum, non confundetur. Quare unctus? Quia Christus a
charismate. Quid autem vidit tunc in scalis? Adscendentes et descendentes angelos.
Sic est et ecclesia, fratres; angeli Dei, boni praedicatores, praedicantes Christum . . .
As a matter of fact, the same texts are effortlessly linked together by Augustines friend
and contemporary Quodvultdeus of Carthage. See his Liber Promissionum I, caput XXIII
in CChr.SL 60,4041.
102
See, for example, CChr.SL 36 (Tractatus in Johannis Evangelium), 99, 161, 175, 207,
407, 442; CChr.SL 38 (Enarrationes in Psalmos IL), 23, 539542; CChr.SL 39 (Enarrationes
in Psalmos LIC), 751, 1063, 1139, 11991200, 1203, 1221, 1337, 1354, 1356; CChr.
SL 40 (Enarrationes in Psalmos CICL), 1437, 1567, 1570, 1626, 1636, 1857; CChr.SL 41
(Sermones de Vetere Testamento IL), 33, 523; CChr.SL 4748 (De Civitate Dei ), 185, 618.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 43 1/18/2007 10:08:43 AM

 44 chapter two

is striking, however, that while he regularly alludes to Eph. 2:1422 in

this regard, and quotes it directly from time to time, the Zion text of
Isa. 28:16 is virtually always absent from his considerations. It is clear
that Eph. 2:1422 serves as an important interpretative framework
for Augustine, understandable in light of his ecclesiological interests.
By way of illustration we can refer to his interpretation of the plural
montes Sion in the Latin text of Ps. 47:3 (NRSV Ps. 48:2). Augustine
explains the plural with an allusion to Eph. 2:1422 in combination
with Ps. 118:22, seemingly overlooking the fact that the presence of the
term Zion left open the possibility of establishing an association with
Isa. 28:16.103 In his explanation of Ps. 118:22, Eph. 2:1422 functions
similarly as the interpretative framework without any reference to the
Zion text of Isa. 28:16.104 It is only in Augustines discussion of the
superscription to the Latin text of Ps. 111 (NRSV Ps. 112), in which
reference is made to Haggai and Zechariah and their involvement in the
construction of the temple, that we find an allusion to Isa. 28:16, albeit
as part of a quotation from 1 Pet. 2:46, which Augustine immediately
associates thereafter with a quotation from Eph. 2:1922.105
It is also apparent that Christ and the church are inseparably linked
in the Old Testament exegesis found in Augustines major work De
Civitate Dei (413426).106 The same applies at this juncture as noted
above, however, namely that the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is not dealt
with separately, in spite of the fact that Augustines discussion of the
period and the writings of the prophets explicitly states that Isaiah

103
See CChr.SL 38,540: An qui ad Sion pertinuerunt etiam qui de diverso venerunt,
ut sibi occurrerent in lapidem angularem, et fierent illi duo parietes tamquam duo
montes, unus ex circumcisione, alter ex praeputio, unus ex Iudaeis, alter ex gentibus;
non iam adversi, etsi diversi, quia ex diverso, iam in angulo nec diversi? Ipse est enim,
inquit, pax nostra, qui fecit utraque unum. Ipse ille angularis lapis, quem reprobaverunt aedificantes,
factus est in caput anguli. Duos iunxit in se mons montes . . .
104
For Ps. 118:22, see CChr.SL 40,1662: At istum quem dicimus? Lapidem quem
reprobaverunt aedificantes: nam hic factus est in caput anguli; ut duos conderet in se,
in unum novum hominem, faciens pacem, et connecteret utrosque in uno corpore
Deo, circumcisionem scilicet et praeputium.
105
See CChr.SL 40,1626.
106
Cf. Book XVI,2 However, what is certain to all men of faith is, first, that these
things were not done and recorded without some prefiguring of what was to come
and, second, that they are to be referred only to Christ and His Church, which is the
City of God . . . (R.J. Deferrari [ed.], The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Vol. 7,
Writings of Saint Augustine, City of God Books VIIIXVI (tr. G.G. Walsh & G. Monahan),
CUA Press, Washington, 1950, p. 489).

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 44 1/18/2007 10:08:43 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 45

was more an evangelist than a prophet because he spoke more about

Christ and the church than the other prophets.107 Counter to expecta-
tions, the lapis angularis is only referred to on one single occasion
throughout De Civitate Dei, in a passage (book XVIII,28) in which the
author alludes to the cornerstone of Eph. 2:20 in the context of the
vocation of the Gentiles and in association with Hos. 1:1011: Let
the reader, therefore, on his own, bring to mind that chief cornerstone
and those two walls and he will recognise the one made up of the
Jews under the designation Juda, and the other made up of Gentiles
under the designation Israel, both of them built upon, and supported
by, a single foundation and both rising out of the earth.108
It would appear from the writings of both Jerome and Augustine
that a shift in emphasis has taken place in the direction of a more
ecclesiological interpretation of the cornerstone spoken of in the Old
and the New Testaments. Eph. 2:1422 seems to have functioned as
a primary interpretative framework in the 4th and 5th centuries, also
with respect to our understanding of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16.

2.5.4. Cyril and Theodoret

Two commentaries have been preserved from the time of the christologi-
cal struggle between the Alexandrian and the Antiochian schools, one
ascribed to Cyril of Alexandria (378444), who played a primary role
in the said struggle and was a fierce opponent of the ideas of Nestor,
the other by one of his opponents, the Antiochian Theodoret of Cyrus
(393circa 466). The Antiochian school included the renowned exegete
of the day Theodore of Mopsuestia (circa 350428) and the latters
friend John Chrysostom (circa 354407), who had acquired consider-
able fame as a preacher. While Theodore and John are both known to
have written commentaries on the prophet Isaiah, that of the former,

107
Cf. R.J. Deferrari (ed.), The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Vol. 24, Writings
of Saint Augustine, City of Books XVIIXXII (tr. G.G. Walsh & D.J. Honan), CUA Press,
Washington, 1954, pp. 123126. (Book XVIII, 29). In order to bring his work to a
conclusion, Augustine limits himself in this regard to Isa. 52:1353:12 and 54:15.
108
R.J. Deferrari (ed.), The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Vol. 24, Writings
of Saint Augustine, City of God Books XVIIXXII (tr. G.G. Walsh & D.J. Honan), CUA
Press, Washington, 1954, p. 122. See the Latin text in CChr.SL 48, 618: Recolatur
tamen lapis ille angularis et duo parieter, unus ex ludaeis, alter ex gentibus; ille nomine
filiorum luda, iste nomine filiorum Israel, eidem uni principatui suo in id ipsum inni-
tentes et ascendentes agnoscantur a terra.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 45 1/18/2007 10:08:43 AM

 46 chapter two

like so many of his other works, has been lost, while that of the latter
breaks off suddenly at Isa. 8:10.109
Cyril relates the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16 directly to Jesus Christ
whom he characterises as foundation and place of refuge, stating that
Christ has become the immovable foundation of the spiritual Zion,
that is, the church. Cyrils standpoint in the christological struggle of
his day is expressed in the association he establishes between the pre-
ciousness of the stone mentioned in 28:16 and Christs all-surpassing
divine glory and excellence.110 Eusebius of Caesarea (circa 265339),
on the other hand, had associated the stone with the human body of
Christ.111 In line with Jerome and Augustine, Cyril likewise leans in
the direction of Eph. 2:1422 in his explanation of the cornerstone,
pointing out how two nations have been joined together in a spiritual
unity through faith in Christ.112
In his treatment of 28:16, Theodoret of Cyrus fiercely opposes any
explanation of this prophecy that would attempt to relate the stone in
Zion with king Hezekiah. He even goes so far as to refer to such an
explanation as the height of ignorance.113 It is possible that Theodore
of Mopsuestia had proposed such an explanation. Theodoret of Cyrus
refers to a number of scriptural passages in order to show that the
Scriptures in fact forbid us from placing our trust in human beings
and that Isa. 28:16 certainly cannot be understood as an appeal to do
so. The cornerstone referred to in 28:16 can be none other than Jesus

109
See Dumortier 1983. At the end of the 19th century an Armenian version of
Chrysostoms commentary was found that continues surprisingly enough to Isaiah 54
while exhibiting a large lacuna consisting of chapters 2130.
110
See PCC.PG 70,632: , ,
, .
, ,
, ,
.
111
See Ziegler 1975:183:
> <
,
.
112
See PCC.PG 70,632f: ,
, ,
,
,
.
113
See PCC.PG 81:373:

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 46 1/18/2007 10:08:43 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 47

Christ.114 Even within the exegetical tradition of the Antiochian school,

which was characterised by its rejection of the allegorical method and its
preference for literal-historical interpretation, it would appear that the
Messianic explanation of the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16 was firmly
anchored. Theodoret also makes direct reference to Eph. 2:14 and to
Pauls statement on Christ as the only foundation in 1 Cor. 3:11. With
respect to the threat confronting the kingdom of David in Isa. 28:16he
locates the text in the period of the Syro-Ephraimitic war Theodoret
considers it important that an element of the invincible character of this
foundation stone be allowed to emerge in the prophecy. He compares
the latter with the stone mentioned in Daniel 2.

2.5.5. Evaluation
It is apparent from what we have said so far that the Messianic inter-
pretation of Isa. 28:16 probably has pre-Christian credentials and may
even have already been presupposed by the text of the Septuagint (see
2.2. and 2.4.). In any event, this explanation was stimulated to a
significant degree by the New Testament (see 2.3.). With respect to
the contribution of the early church to the reception-history of the
Zion text of 28:16, the following observations are important:
In line with the New Testament, the early church associated the
Zion text of Isa. 28:16 with the advent of Christ. Nevertheless, the
number of allusions to Christ as the cornerstone in the first centuries
remains relatively limited.115
The New Testament tradition whereby the stone referred to in 28:16
was related in particular to Isa. 8:14 and Ps. 118:22 is continued in
the early church. It is evident from the Letter of Barnabas that the
said stone texts enjoyed an established place in the Messianic wit-
ness of the early church (2nd century) from the very outset.
At the service of Christian witness in opposition to Jews and heretics,
the tendency arose relatively early to thread more and more stone
texts from the Old Testament together and to provide them with
a Messianic interpretation. This is clearly evident in the documents
ascribed to Tertullian and Cyprian (3rd century). The allegorical

114
See PCC.PG 81:373: <
> etc.
115
Maiburg 1984:252253.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 47 1/18/2007 10:08:44 AM

 48 chapter two

method with its highly associative character played an important

role in this regard.
It is hardly surprising against such a background that the Zion text
of 28:16 was likewise applied to Christ in the Alexandrian tradition
as a more or less obvious given. Cyril of Alexandrias commentary
on the book of Isaiah represents a clear witness in this respect (5th
century). Even the Antiochian tradition, with its strong preference
for a literal-historical interpretation, would appear to have com-
monly included the Messianic interpretation of the stone referred
to in 28:16. Theodoret of Cyrus comment on Isa. 28:16 is no less
Messianic in this regard than that of his Alexandrian colleague Cyril
(5th century).
In the 4th and 5th centuries, however, the exegesis of Isa. 28:16 and
of the other Old Testament stone texts underwent something of a
shift of emphasis. The originally Messianic interpretation made way
for an ecclesiological interpretation, whereby Eph. 2:1422 came to
function more and more explicitly as the interpretative framework.116
The shift in emphasis can be clearly observed in the biblical com-
mentaries of the Church Fathers Jerome and Augustine. The shift
towards a more ecclesiological interpretation forced the Zion element
in 28:16 into the background to some degree while the focus was
turned to the designation of the stone in 28:16 and Ps. 118:22 as
a cornerstone. In light of Eph. 2:20, the said cornerstone came to
be understood in the first instance in relation to its uniting function,
especially in a church made up of both Jews and Gentiles.

2.6. Middle Ages

The so-called Glossa Ordinaria function as a standard work of exegesis

in the Middle Ages. This Bible commentary came into existence in the
12th century and consisted of a sort of florilegium made up of all sorts
of explanatory notes based on the Church Fathers. The church of the

116
Given the fact that the ecclesiological element was not absent in older interpreta-
tions it is thus better to speak of a shift in emphasis. Cf. Snodgrass 1977:105: The
stone testimonia were used to help the church to express her Christology, her under-
standing of Christs rejection and exaltation, her soteriology, her ecclesiology, and her
understanding of judgement. Incidentally, it should be pointed out that wherever the
stone testimonia appear in the NT and Qumran the concept of the people of God is
usually present in the immediate context.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 48 1/18/2007 10:08:44 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 49

Middle Ages ascribed a great deal of authority to just such explanatory

material stemming from the Church Fathers. The source and norm of
biblical exegesis was to be found in this tradition.117 Consistent refer-
ence was made to this authoritative work for a considerable period
of time, including its explanation of the book of Isaiah to which the
Middle Ages, in line with the New Testament and the early church,
had ascribed significant importance, both for its demonstrations that
Jesus was the Messiah and for its condemnation of Judaism.118
The Glossa Ordinaria read 28:16 as a word of compassion against
the background of the fact that the addressees were in a state of great
distress and desperation (quia desperastis; cf. the interlinear gloss in
relation to 28:15: semel salutem desperavimus). In relation to the
construction referred to in 28:16, God is compared with a wise archi-
tect (quasi sapiens architectus). The shift of emphasis towards an
ecclesiological interpretation observed in the preceding centuries would
appear to have likewise determined the exegesis of the Middle Ages
since the Glossa Ordinaria immediately adds that the verse in question
has to do with the church. While the stone in question is evidently
Christ, the Zion text of 28:16 is likewise associated with Eph. 2:1422
in the Glossa Ordinaria: Gentiles and Jews are united (gentes et iudeos
copulate). The preciousness of the stone mentioned in 28:16 is then
related to Christs work of redemption: the world is redeemed by Him
(quo redimitur mundus). In a marginal note adjacent to verse 16 ref-
erence is made to Ps. 118: lapidem quem edificantes reprobaverunt,
viri scilicet illusores.119
In order to gain access to the exegetical insights prevalent during the
Middle Ages, we need to go beyond the Glossa Ordinaria and focus our
attention in particular on the work of Thomas Aquinas (12251274).
Immediately following his appointment as professor in Paris, Thomas
wrote a commentary on the book of Isaiah as one of his first theological
works (12521253).120 His work harks back to the work of Jerome and

117
See De Knijff 19852:28ff.
118
See McMichael 1996:144151 and likewise Sawyer 1996.
119
See Biblia Latina Cum Glossa Ordinaria III, 1992:46.
120
Both the authenticity and the dating of Thomas commentary on Isaiah have been
the subject of dispute for a considerable period of time. Based on a striking parallel
with a passage from the work of Albertus Magnus, R. Guindon has argued that the
commentary must stem from the early period of Thomas appointment in Paris. See
Thomas Aquinas 1974:20* (Prface).

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 49 1/18/2007 10:08:44 AM

 50 chapter two

to the aforementioned Glossa Ordinaria.121 The designation of this work

as a commentary is somewhat misleading, however, since Thomas
offers detailed commentary on only the first eleven chapters while the
rest of his work contains little more than a few very concise exegetical
observations.122 Bearing this in mind, it is evident that we should not
expect anything much in terms of innovative insights with respect to
the explanation of Isa. 28:16, not even from Thomas Aquinas. In rela-
tion to 28:14ff, Thomas remarks that Isaiah speaks of two remedia.
The first is that upon which the Israelites trusted, namely the covenant
with idols, the so-called covenant with death referred to in 28:15,
which Thomas sees as a covenant with the devil.123 The second is the
remedia that God ordained for the saints, namely Christ. Thus, in
line with the tradition of the early church, Thomas also establishes a
direct link between the stone mentioned in the Zion text of 28:16 and
Christ. He likewise makes immediate reference to the quotation from
Ps. 118:22 in the margin of the Glossa Ordinaria.124
Based on the Glossa Ordinaria and the work of Thomas Aquinas,
all we can establish is the fact that the Middle Ages offered no new
exegetical insights with respect to the explanation of the Zion text of
28:16. This evidently goes hand in hand with the fact that considerable
efforts had been made at the time to follow the traditional explana-
tion of the Church Fathers, the latter serving as authoritative figures:
auctor and auctoritas.125 The norms for the explanation of biblical texts,
moreover, were so embedded in the teaching of the church that it was
practically impossible to introduce anything in the way of genuinely
innovative exegetical insights during the Middle Ages, in spite of the
positive things that could be said of the aforementioned hermeneutic
orientation on the Fathers.

121
See Thomas Aquinas 1974:52* (Prface).
122
The publishers of his Isaiah commentary explain this as follows: Il semble que
le jeune bachelier, press par le rythme de ses cours, na pas pu poursuivre le genre
magnanime du dbut. Peut-tre cette faiblesse de louvrage explique-t-elle que lauteur
ait renonc la publier . . . See Thomas Aquinas 1974:20* (Prface).
123
Such an identification of the covenant with death and a covenant with the devil
can already be found in the Glossa Ordinaria. The connecting hinge is to be located in the
reference to the refuge of lies (Isa. 28:17), the devil being the father of lies (diabolo
qui est pater mendacii). See Biblia Latina Cum Glossa Ordinaria III, 1992:46.
124
Thomas Aquinas 1974:131: Secundum est remedium Deus sanctis parat, sci-
licet Christum: Ecce ego, Ps. Lapidem quem reprobaverunt edificantes; Qui crediderit
non festinet, sed expectet, Abacuc II3 Si moram fecerit, expecta eum, et hoc contra
malorum blasphemiam.
125
See De Knijff 1985:2838.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 50 1/18/2007 10:08:44 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 51

2.7. Reformation

From the period of the Reformation, the biblical interpretation of

Luther (14831546) and Calvin (15091564) exercised considerable
influence. Their exegesis of Isa. 28:16 represents the focus of the fol-
lowing paragraph.
In similar fashion to the Church Fathers, the Reformers considered
the stone mentioned in Isa. 28:16 as referring to Christ as self-evident.
Luther in particular, in his Vorlesung ber Jesaja, was quick to estab-
lish a link between the cornerstone and Christ.126 The reference to
Zion is completely ignored in this regard while every effort is made to
elaborate the significance of the cornerstone for his teaching on justi-
fication by faith. It is striking to note how Luther is able to relate one
thing to another and thereby arrive at a robust soteriological exegesis.
He understands the Zion text of 28:16 in the first instance as a word of
comfort and encouragement for the pious, since Christ is the cornerstone
upon whose righteousness the pious can rely in order themselves to be
righteous. Such knowledge provides the conscience of the pious with
certainty.127 The person with a bad conscience will take flight even at
the sound of rustling leaves, but the person of faith knows no fear and
does not allow him or herself to be terrorised because faith relies on
Christ and not on the self or ones own works. In this regard, Luther
refers to Christ as the Lord not only of life and death but also, surpris-
ingly enough, of sin.128 The extent to which he involves his teaching on
righteousness in his explanation of the biblical text is more than appar-
ent from his interpretation of the concluding words of Isa. 28:16. He

126
See Vorlesung ber Jesaja 15271529Scholia 1532/4, WA 25,187188. Luther
likewise speaks of the identification of the cornerstone with Christ in his explanation
of the gospel. With regard to Mt. 21:4244 he notes: Es ist aber Christus der Stein,
so zum Eckstein worden. Den keine Historien leret, das andere Ecksteine verworffen
werden, oder das Jherusalem ein verworffen Stein sei. Aber von Christo, gottes sohn,
mus man das verstehen, wie den von dem Eckstein S. Petrus und Paulus viel reden,
und Esaias am 8. und 28. cap. spricht: Sihe da, ich lege einen in grund zu Sion, einen
edelen Stein, ein bewerten, polirten stein und ein eckstein, alle, die sich auf in verlassen,
sollen nicht zu schanden werden. Und hat Esaias den vers Davids im 118. Psalm wol
verstanden, das er in nennet ein kostlichen Eckstein, ein polierten stein, ein grossen
Jaspis, Demant oder Schmaragd, der wol versucht, der durchs leiden und creutz glatth
und poliret worden ist und zum eckstein gemacht . . . (see Matthus Kapitel 1824
in Predigten ausgelegt 15371540, WA 47,417418).
127
WA 25,187: Simul autem hoc Propheta significat, cum dicit Fundabo lapidem
fore, ut certae sint conscientiae: Certo statuentes se huius lapidis iusticia iustos esse.
128
WA 25,188: Novit enim Christus esse dominum mortis et vitae et peccati.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 51 1/18/2007 10:08:45 AM

 52 chapter two

likewise associates the expression he who believes with Christ129 and

considers it to represent a condemnation of all works, as such works
are unable to rectify ones conscience in Gods judgement.130 It is prob-
able that Luthers soteriological exegesis of 28:16 was influenced by the
context within which the Zion text in Rom. 9:33 is quoted. It is in this
very context that Paul raises the question concerning justification by
faith or by works (see Rom. 9:3032). It goes without saying, therefore,
that Luther explicitly associated the concluding statement of 28:16
concerning the one who believes with his teaching on justification in
his commentary on Rom. 9:33.131
As with Luther, Calvin also identified the stone in Zion with Christ.
More than Luther, however, he explained the legitimacy of such a
Messianic interpretation. Calvin was aware that the apostles had made
use of the Septuagint and that their own identification of the stone
with Christ was closely related thereto. Nevertheless, he did not allow
this fact to stand in the way of his use of the New Testament in his
exegesis of 28:16. He explicitly appeals in this regard to the author-
ity of the evangelists and the apostles. Calvin is convinced that they
had done justice to the original significance of the text, in spite of the
freedom they sometimes allowed themselves when quoting texts from
the Old Testament.132 When compared with Luthers highly soterio-
logical exegesis, the exegesis of Calvin is much more ecclesiological in
character.133 This interest in ecclesiology brings him into line with the

129
WA 47,418: Aber auf den stein gebawet werden, ist glauben an Christum, das
er unser Heiland sei.
130
WA 25,188: Sic per Verbum qui crediderit simpliciter omnia opera damnat,
quod non possint conscientiam in iudicio Dei erigere. Est enim exclusice accipiendum
qui crediderit, quasi dicat: Omnis qui operatus fuerit, festinat.
131
See Vorlesung ber die Rmerbrief 15151516, WA 56,97: Quia Iustitia
Christi est eius, qui credit in eum, Et peccatum credentis est Christi, in quem credit.
Ideo non potest stare peccatum cum credente, sicut nec in Christo peccatum potest
perseverare.
132
See Pringle 1948:290291: Yet they never changed the meaning, but taking care
to have it properly applied, they gave the true and genuine interpretation. Whenever,
therefore, they quote any passage from the Old Testament, they adhere closely to its
object and design.
133
Not that the ecclesiological element is lacking in Luthers explanation. Cf. WA
47,418: Und hat Esaias den vers Davids im 118. Psalm wol verstanden, das er in
nennet ein kostlichen Eckstein, ein polierten stein, ein grossen Jaspis, Demant oder
Schmaragd, der wol versucht, der durchs leiden und creutz glatth und poliret worden ist
und zum eckstein gemacht, der zwo mauern oder seitten fasse. Den es ist ein unterschied
zwisschen diesem Eckstein und andern steinen. Dan der Eckstein reckt seine beide arm
in beide seitten, als solt er sagen: bisher hab ich nur ein maur, ein volck allein gehabt,

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 52 1/18/2007 10:08:45 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 53

exegetical insights of Jerome and Augustine. Calvin similarly under-

scores the fact that the redemption of the human person depends on
Christ and that the promise of peace and rest is only given in Him.
Unlike the Church Fathers in question, however, Calvin does not go
on to accent the unifying function of Christ as cornerstone, preferring
rather to focus on the foundational significance of Christ for the church:
He is the cornerstone upon which the entire structure of the church
rests. The prophets were only able to speak of this as a future event
because Christ still had to be revealed. Isa. 28:1617a presents this
event more or less as a reformation of the existing church.134
Calvin thus draws attention to the foundational significance of the
cornerstone and even goes so far as to distance himself explicitlywith
regard to the cornerstone mention in Ps. 118:22, for examplefrom
the interpretation found in Jerome and Augustine, hallmarked as it was
by Eph. 2:1422.135 The consequence of an explanation based on Eph.
2:1422 was that the Zion element of 28:16 had disappeared into the
background. Luther had likewise more or less ignored the allusion to
Zion in his soteriological interpretation. Calvins explanation of 28:16,
however, returns to the specific significance of Zion once again. Zion,
for Calvin, is the place from which Christ must come forth and did
come forth. He sees the fact of Christs coming forth from this place,
long since designated for this purpose, as a support to the faith.136

als zu Jerusalem, aber itzt wil ich ein gebeu, ein neu Jherusalem aufrichten, das sol ein
solch gebew sein, das sich schicke zum hause und zur wohnung. Die Aposteln haben
diesen spruch weitleuftig gehandelt, als zun Ephesern am 2. cap: . . .
134
See Pringle 1948:291: On this account the Prophet speaks of it as a future
event, that believers may be fully persuaded that the Church, which they saw not only
tottering and falling, but grievously shaken and almost laid in ruins, will yet be made
firm by a new support, when it shall rest on a stone laid by the hand of God.
135
See Morrison 1972:20: The stone is said to be the head of the corner not in that
He is only a part of the building (since it is clear from other passages that the Church
is founded solidly on Him alone) but because the prophet wishes to make Him the
chief support of the structure. There is some ingenious argument over the word corner,
that Christ is placed in the corner because He brings together the two different walls,
that is to say, the Gentiles and the Jews. In my opinion David meant nothing more
than that the cornerstone takes the chief weight of the building. See also Johnston
1963:261: The subtle meaning that some have given to the word corner, as though
it meant that Christ joins together Jews and Gentiles, as two distinct walls, is not well
founded. Let us be content with the simple explanation, that He is so called, because
the weight of the building rests on Him.
136
In his commentary on 1 Pet. 2:6, Calvin emphasises the idea that the church
stems from Zion in which the beginning of Gods spiritual temple is to be found. He
refers in this regard to Isa. 2:3. See Johnston 1963:261.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 53 1/18/2007 10:08:45 AM

 54 chapter two

2.8. Modern Biblical Research

The Messianic interpretation of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16, whereby

the stone in question is associated directly with Christ, has held its
ground down through the centuries. Scholarly reorientation on the
Masoretic text together with the emergence of modern biblical research,
however, slowly but surely introduced a change in this state of affairs.
The classical Messianic interpretation survived, nevertheless, into the
20th century and would appear to have likewise influenced a number
of modern exegetes. A clear example in this regard is the indirect
Messianic interpretation of, among others, Delitzsch and Procksch.
Delitzsch, for example, associates the stone to be set in Zion with the
Davidic monarchy, whereby he focuses attention, not on the institu-
tion of the monarchy in general, but rather on the specific promise
of durability and the promise of the one true king who is to come.137
Entirely in agreement with traditional exegesis, Delitzsch then explicitly
associates the concluding words of 28:16 concerning the person who
believes with the promised king.138 Even a figure such as Procksch, who
is well aware of the absolute use of ymia}M'h,' considers the traditional
interpretation, whereby the stone is associated with the Messiah, as
still the most natural. The Messiah stands in 28:16 for the foundation
of the new temple.139
In spite of the respectable tradition upon which the Messianic
interpretation of the Zion text of 28:16 is able to appeal for support,
there are few exegetes nowadays who are inclined to maintain this line
of exegesis.140 There can be little doubt that this goes hand in hand
with the efforts of modern biblical research to avoid the use of the

137
Delitzsch 1889:316 alludes in this regard to the prophecies of Isaiah 7, 9 and
11. Ridderbos 1922:173 likewise associates the stone in Zion with Davids royal house
and in the deepest sense with Christ, in whom the royal house of David ultimately
achieved its full significance. See also Fischer 1937:189. Cf. Kraus 1951:98: Dieser
Grundstein ist kein anderer als der nach Jahwes grundlegendem Erwhlungs- und
Einsetzungswort erwartete und in der Erwartung um die Verheiung Gottes willen
bereits als gegenwrtig geglaubte Heilsknig aus Davids Geschlecht.
138
Delitzsch 1889:317: Wer an den Verheienen glaubt, wird nicht flchtig . . .
139
Procksch 1930(A):358. Wildberger 1982:1076 also mentions Driver, Sellin, Fischer
and Virgulin as exponents of a Messianic explanation of Isa. 28:16. Cheynes expla-
nation, which understands the cornerstone to allude to yhwh, is related to a degree
to the Messianic interpretation. See Lindblom 1955:125 and Wildberger 1982:1076.
Ziegler 1948:86 likewise associated the cornerstone with yhwh.
140
Exceptions: Ohmann s.d.:99, Vonk 1980:114 and Mare 1992:1096.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 54 1/18/2007 10:08:45 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 55

New Testament interpretation of Old Testament texts in its exegesis

of the latter, in contrast, for example, to Calvin. The text of the Old
Testament deserves to be interpreted according to its own historical
and literary context. Such an emphasis on its own context implies at
the same time that the Hebrew text ought to be the primary point of
departure for Old Testament exegesis. Given the fact that the text of
the Septuagint, on account of its additional , was responsible
to a significant degree for the Messianic interpretation of 28:16, an
exegesis that focuses more specifically on the Hebrew text will thus be
granted the freedom to arrive at a different set of conclusions. It will
be evident from the following survey that while the new interpretations
acquired by the Zion text of 28:16 in modern biblical research do not,
on the whole, exhibit a Messianic character, a large number thereof can
nevertheless be typified as eschatological interpretations. Characteristic
of such new interpretations is the fact that the single focus of attention
is no longer the significance of the cornerstone itself but that the entire
act of foundation is included in the explanation. This shift in focus
stands to reason, given the perspective of the new orientation on the
Hebrew text, which implies that the object of ymia}M'h' no longer has to
be sought exclusively in the stone.
In order to provide a convenient survey of the plurality of interpre-
tations, we can begin by distinguishing four specifically eschatological
interpretations. The interpretations in question can be identified as
eschatological because the Zion text of 28:16 is explained in each
instance as the announcement of a future activity of God at the end
of time. The concretisation of this future activity, however, takes a
variety of different forms. While it remains impossible to establish a
water-tight distinction between the various concretisations, it remains
possible nevertheless to distinguish the following eschatological inter-
pretations: the Zion text of 28:16 is associated with the construction
of the future kingdom of God (1), with the formation of the New
Israel on the basis of the faithful remnant (2), on the realisation of
the true religion of yhwh (3) or on the new temple to be constructed
in the future (4). In addition to these eschatological interpretations we
can also distinguish a further two that do not exhibit eschatological
features: the strictly metaphorical interpretation whereby the Zion
text is understood as an announcement of judgement (5) and a more
historical interpretation that associates the Zion text with the existing
temple and with the Zion of that day (6).

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 55 1/18/2007 10:08:45 AM

 56 chapter two

2.8.1. The future kingdom of God

A number of exegetes interpret the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 as an
announcement concerning the construction of the future kingdom of
God and the stone as its foundation. In light of the fact that modern
biblical research has more or less let go of a Messianic explanation
of the text in question, alternative possibilities for understanding the
stone have emerged. Marti, for example, considers the stone to be a
determination of faith in yhwh, spoken of in the concluding words.
He thus translates these words as He who believes, remains steadfast and
argues that this is a further specification of the cornerstone used in the
kingdom that God is planning to establish. The foundation of the future
kingdom would appear to be ethical in character and, like the corner-
stone itself, hidden from the eye yet bearing the weight of the whole.141
Duhm had likewise drawn attention to the invisibility of the cornerstone
implied in 28:16, although he associated the stone itself with yhwhs
attitude towards his people, of which Zion is the head (cf. Isa. 7:8).142

2.8.2. The new Israel

Instead of the impersonal category of the future kingdom of God, the
more personal category of the new Israel can also function as a further
concretisation of the building activity announced in 28:16. The rep-
resentatives of this interpretation, in particular figures such as Hans
Schmidt, Mowinckel and Eichrodt, generally emphasise the idea that
this new Israel is made up of the faithful remnant of Gods people
that had survived subsequent to the implementation of judgement.
This remnant is to form the firm foundation of a new and future faith
community.143 Faith as foundation and as characteristic of the new
community is likewise proposed in this variant of the eschatological

141
Marti 1900:208: Also: Wer glaubt, weicht nicht ist der kostbare Eckstein der
Grndung Jahwes auf Zion; der Glaube, der so verborgen und unsichtbar ist, wie
der Eckstein des Fundamentes, aber dennoch alles trgt, das Vertrauen auf Jahwe
ist der feste Punkt, der nicht wankt . . . Lindblom 1955:124 also refers to Buhl as a
representative of this standpoint.
142
Duhm 19143:175: . . . ein Verhltnis, das aerlich so wenig sichtbar ist, wie das
Fundament eines Hauses, trotzdem aber die Unvergnglichkeit Zions verbrgt.
143
See, for example, Donner 1964:152 and Schoors 1972:168. Snijders 1969:285286
likewise considers 28:16 to contain an announcement of a new temple, i.e. a new
community that is not determined by blood kinship but by faith in yhwh. Cf. Berges
1998:224225.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 56 1/18/2007 10:08:45 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 57

interpretation of the Zion text. Scholars frequently argue that the con-
cluding words of 28:16 are intended to represent an inscription carved
into the cornerstone. The background of such a proposal is said to
have its roots in the more or less magic custom, whereby Gods bless-
ing is proclaimed over the building work and any abuse thereof placed
under threat of a curse.144 In contrast to the exegetes referred to in the
preceding paragraph, emphasis is now placed on the solid and immovable
character of the stone in question rather than its invisibility.145

2.8.3. The true religion of YHWH

Closely related to both perspectives outlined above, Lindbloms inter-

pretation maintains that the establishment of a stone in Zion refers to
the true religion of yhwh rather than the coming kingdom of God or
the new Israel. This true religion of yhwh is characterised by faith,
uprightness and justice and is already to be found among Isaiahs own
disciples. Lindblom is not inclined to speak of the so-called remnant
in this regard, since the latter is only revealed after the catastrophe.
This remnant is nevertheless prefigured in the disciples of Isaiah. The
true religion of yhwh stands in contrast to the external cult in which
the people had sought their security (cf. Isa. 1:1017).146 Lindblom
emphasises the strictly metaphorical character of the building termi-
nology employed in 28:1617a. In line with the exegetes referred to
in the preceding paragraphs, he also associates the stone of the Zion
text with faith in yhwh.147

144
Cf. Schmidt 1923:94: Jene Inschrift des Grundsteins wird die Losung sein, an der
die Gemeinde der Heiligen sich erkennt; sie wird der Triumphgesang der Geretteten
sein, das Grundgebot der Religion in der neuen Welt. The inscription hypothesis
is also supported by Herbert 1973:164, Procksch 1930(A):358, Rohland 1956:154,
Eichrodt 1967:131, Schoors 1972:168, Tsevat 1973:591 and Clements 1980(B):231,
among others. Fohrer 1973:59 and Oswalt 1986:519 are undecided.
145
Cf. Eichrodt 1967:131: . . . eine menschliche Gemeinschaft, die die Brgschaft
ihrer unzerstrbaren Dauer in jenem Zusammenschlu mit Gott trgt, den Jesaja schon
einmal als Glauben bezeichnet hat . . . (cf. Isa. 7:9).
146
Lindblom 1955:130: Wenn das trgerische Versteck die verflschte Religion
und der entartete Kultus ist, mu diese geistliche Schpfung Jahwesund das ist das
Ergebnis dieser Untersuchungdie unverflschte, wahre Jahwereligion sein, deren Hauptelemente
Glaube, Recht und Gerechtigkeit sind.
147
Lindblom 1955:127. Cf. Graffy 1984:30.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 57 1/18/2007 10:08:46 AM

 58 chapter two

2.8.4. The new temple / new Zion

The fourth non-Messianic eschatological interpretation associates the
Zion text of Isa. 28:16 with the temple as a future construction. Gese,
for example, maintains that the text alludes to the new Zion that is to
replace the old temple along with its official but meaningless cult.148
Roberts holds to a position closely related to this perspective, but pre-
fers nevertheless to avoid any suggestion of a literal temple building.
While the construction terminology is borrowed from the latter, the
temple in 28:16 is intended in the first instance as a symbol of the
presence of yhwh. Given that yhwh refuses to dwell in a city built
of blood and injustice, He announces a restoration project aimed at a
construction based on uprightness and justice. The demolition of the
present construction is necessary, however, for the realisation of the
new project.149

2.8.5. Metaphorical interpretation

In addition to the preceding eschatological interpretations of Isa. 28:16,
Wildbergers strictly metaphorical explanation deserves separate men-
tion. In spite of the differences evident between the interpretations
outlined thus far, they nevertheless exhibit significant agreement when
it comes to the expectation of future salvific activity.150 Wildbergers

148
Gese 1977:134. Watts 1985:370, on the other hand, emphasises the continuity
in Gods actions with respect to Zion and suggests that the Temple, its function and
its witness, is the abiding element in Zion. Cf. Watts 1985:372: The Kingdom was
doomed. But the values inherent in Zion and the temple, symbols of Yahwehs pres-
ence and purpose, would remain the foundations of faith.
149
Roberts 1987:4445. The rabbinic literature also contains material whereby the
foundation of the stone in Zion is similarly associated with the temple as future reality.
In a midrash on Qoheleth, the Zion text of 28:16 is linked in a surprising fashion with
Qoh. 3:5, where reference is made to the throwing away of stones and to the collection
thereof. In a midrash on Deut. 10:1, the throwing away of stones is associated with
the destruction of the temple by Hadrian. The collection of stones is explained with a
view to the future presupposed in Isa. 28:16, the future in which God is to reconstruct
his sanctuary. See StrB III,276. Oddly enough, the text of Isa. 28:16 referred to in the
rabbinic documents is translated in the perfect in contrast to the Targum of Isaiah.
See also the quotation from 28:16 in Midrash Tanchuma, StrB III,506.
150
Without being specific as to what he understands by the construction referred to
in 28:16, Kaiser 19762:202203 associates the stone with a promise of salvation and
with faith respectively: So drfte der Eckstein formal die Verheiung, material aber
der Glaube sein, der eine Bergung gewhrt wie die Fundamentsteine, denen Hagel
und Regenfluten nichts anzuhaben vermgen. Cf. Oswalt 1986:518: Perhaps no
identification is correct. The cornerstone may be the whole complex of ideas relating
to the Lords revelation of his faithfulness and the call to reciprocate with the same
kind of faithfulness toward him.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 58 1/18/2007 10:08:46 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 59

explanation, however, focuses on the here and now. He concludes that

the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 should not be understood as an eschatologi-
cal promise of salvation but rather as an announcement of judgement.
He bases himself in this regard on the basic pattern of the prophecy
of judgement that consists of an accusation/complaint (Scheltwort)
followed by an announcement of judgement (Drohwort). Given the
fact that Isa. 28:16 is clearly preceded by an accusation/complaint, it
is reasonable to assume, Wildberger would maintain, that the Zion text
was intended to be understood as precisely such an announcement.
The text does not imply the construction of one or other new build-
ing project, therefore, but rather yhwhs intent to submit the present
Jerusalem to his judgement with the help of a testing stone and a plumb-
line. The stone is thus intended as a judgement metaphor. According to
Wildberger, any endeavour to further concretise the stone would take
us beyond the boundaries of the metaphor. The message remains that
Jerusalem is to be subjected to Gods judgement.151

2.8.6. The existing temple / Zion

Wildbergers strictly metaphorical interpretation already implies the
abandonment of characteristically eschatological explanations of Isa.
28:16. This is even more clearly the case among those exegetes who
associate the establishment of the stone in Zion in very concrete terms
with the existing temple rather than some future divine activity. Isa.
28:16 is thus considered to allude to the existing temple in Zion as a
place of refuge for those who had remained faithful to yhwh. Such an
explanation can be found as early as Ewald.152 Bentzen is similarly of the
opinion that the existing temple is designated by God in Isa. 28:16 as a
refuge for all who believe. At the same time, the terminology employed
by the text is considered to have formed part of the liturgy of the feast
of accession (to the throne), the existence of which Bentzen accepted.153
In addition to Ewald and Bentzen, Jeppesen likewise associates the Zion
text of 28:16 with the existing temple.154 In his interpretation, content
based and semantic kinship with the Zion text of Isa. 14:32 plays an
important role. Since the verb form dsy in both texts is vocalised as
a pi el perfect, the action referred to in 28:16 is thus also understood

151
Wildberger 1982:10631082.
152
Ewald 18672:421.
153
See Lindblom 1955:124.
154
Jeppesen 1984:9399.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 59 1/18/2007 10:08:46 AM

 60 chapter two

to refer to the past.155 In order to further clarify the agreement with

14:32, Huber and Irwin argue that we should read the b of /YxiB] as a
b-essentiae.156 In such an event, the b is no longer to be understood in
its locative sense in but rather as in the quality of .157

2.9. Conclusions

The preceding chapter has offered a cross-section of the history of the

exegesis of Isa. 28:16. We can now establish some conclusions based
on more than twenty centuries of exegesis.
The Greek translation of 28:16 found in the Septuagint determined
the orientation of its exegesis for centuries to come. The translation in
question is characterised by its clear future orientation (future:
instead of the potentially
polysemic ba wyxb dsy ynnh) and by the addition of the expression
to the conclusion of verse 16. It is possible that the plus in
the Greek text presupposes an already existent Messianic interpreta-
tion of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16. Whatever the case, the addition
of the words offer significant reinforcement to such an
interpretation.
In practice, the exegesis of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 was deter-
mined to a significant degree by the way in which the New Testament
understood the text in question. The New Testaments content based
(rather than textual) adhesion to the future orientation found in the
Septuagint ultimately ascribed canonical authority to the Messianic
interpretation of the said Zion text. The stone referred to in Isa.

155
Delitzsch, Duhm, Hans Schmidt, Eichrodt and Kissane likewise prefer the
Masoretic vocalisation of dsy as a perfect, in spite of the fact that they interpret 28:16
as a promise of future salvation. A distinction is usually made between the founda-
tion that has already been laid (v. 16) and the building that God is to complete in the
near future (v. 17a). The interpretation of Fohrer also deserves mention in this regard.
While he is unwilling to explain the Zion text of 28:16 as an explicit announcement of
salvation (1962:5859), he nevertheless emphasises that a certain salvific perspective is
being opened at this juncture, namely on account of the designation of the possibility
of a solid and reliable construction on the basis of faith.
156
Irwin 1977:31: I have founded Zion as a stone . . . Cf. Motyer 1993:233: A
stone in Zion could be a stone, namely Zion. The hypothesis was already supported in
the nineteenth century by Hitzig and Knobel. See Lindblom 1955:125 and Wildberger
1982:1076.
157
Cf. GKG 119i, J-M 133c and BrSyn 106g.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 60 1/18/2007 10:08:46 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 61

28:16 is unequivocally identified with Christ in the New Testament

(Rom. 9:32b33; 10:11 and 1 Pet. 2:6).
Based on information from the New Testament, it would appear that
a Christian tradition had emerged at a relatively early date in which
various Old Testament stone texts were linked together and given
a Messianic interpretation. The texts in question are Ps. 118:22; Isa.
8:14 and 28:16. The text found in Ps. 118:22 concerning the stone
rejected by the builders that unexpectedly became the cornerstone
enjoys a place of significant importance in the New Testament tradi-
tion (Mk. 12:1011; Mt. 21:42; Lk. 20:17; Acts 4:11 and 1 Pet. 2:48).
It is probable that this particular stone text was the first to acquire
a Messianic interpretation and that this contributed considerably to
the Messianic interpretation of the other two Old Testament stone
texts. It is striking in this regard that the Zion text of 28:16 is associ-
ated in Rom. 9:32b33 (though in the form of a mixed quotation)
and 1 Pet. 2:6, with the stone one strikes against from Isa. 8:14.
Both New Testament texts would appear to agree with one another
in terms of word usage. This is an important argument in support
of the suggestion that the association of Old Testament stone texts
with one another had already taken place prior to the composition
of the said New Testament letters. The unique mixed quotation in
Rom. 9:33, however, is almost certainly the work of Paul himself.
In light of the fact that the early Jewish Targumic tradition was
inclined to ascribe a Messianic interpretation to the Old Testament
stone texts, the suggestion that such an interpretation has pre-
Christian roots is not unthinkable. The text of Ps. 118:22 concerning
the stone initially rejected and the text of Isa. 28:16 concerning the
stone in Zion are both interpreted by the Targum with the Davidic
king in mind.
In contrast to other Old Testament stone texts, the stone referred
to in the Zion text of 28:16 is associated in the Talmud with the
temple rather than the Messiah. The text of 28:16 functions almost
exclusively in the Talmud with reference to explanations of the
Shetiyyah, the sacred stone/rock on Mount Zion. It would appear that
the formation of ideas concerning the Shetiyyah and the important
role fulfilled therein by the Zion text of 28:16 served to limit the
space available for a Messianic interpretation of this text.
The community of Qumran likewise steers clear of a Messianic
interpretation of the stone mentioned in 28:16, preferring rather to

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 61 1/18/2007 10:08:46 AM

 62 chapter two

associate the text in question with the community itself in ecclesio-

logical terms. The emphasis on ecclesiology is akin to the way in
which 28:16 functions in 1 Pet. 2:48.
In the first days of the early church, more and more Old Testament
stone texts came to be laced together and provided with a Messianic
interpretation. While the number of allusions to Christ as the cor-
nerstone remained relatively limited in the first centuries, the Letter
of Barnabas bears clear witness to the fact that the Zion text of
28:16 together with other Old Testament stone texts had acquired
an established place in the Messianic witness of the early church
(see Barn. 6:24). One can observe in the writings of Tertullian
and Cyprian (3rd century) that other texts, in which mention is
made of a stone, were associated with one another according to the
allegorical method and subsequently provided with a Messianic
interpretation.
From the 4th and 5th century onwards, when Christianity had
acquired the status of an established religion, the text of Eph. 2:1422
came to function more and more explicitly as the interpretative
framework for the stone texts. In the early period, the Old Testament
stone texts were employed in the first instance to demonstrate the
truth of the Christian faith on the basis of the Old Testament itself.
The altered ecclesial situation had its consequences for the interpre-
tation of 28:16, focusing attention on the ecclesiological function of
the cornerstone. This is clearly evident in the biblical commentaries
of Jerome and Augustine. Their works, together with those of the
Alexandrian exegete Cyril and the Antiochian exegete Theodoret
of Cyrus, ascribe a specifically unifying function to the cornerstone
referred to in Eph. 2:1422, namely in the unification of Jews and
Gentiles. Theodoret insisted, in the meantime, that the stone referred
to in the Zion text in question was to be associated with Christ alone
and not with worldly kings. In spite of its ecclesiological orientation,
therefore, the Messianic interpretation of 28:16 remained the natural
point of departure for exegesis in the first centuries of the history of
the church.
In the Middle Ages and the period of the Reformation, the Messianic
interpretation of Isa. 28:16 remained undisputed. Both the Glossa
Ordinaria and the commentary on the book of Isaiah by Thomas
Aquinas seek explicit points of contact with the exegetical tradition
established by the Church Fathers. Luthers interpretation of the Zion

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 62 1/18/2007 10:08:46 AM

 isaiah 28:16 in the history of exegesis 63

text of 28:16 is highly soteriological. He is particularly interested in

the concluding words of the verse, concerning the one who believes,
which he deftly associates with his teaching on justification. Christ,
for Luther, is the cornerstone upon whose righteousness the pious
can rely in order to attain righteousness themselves. While many of
his predecessors took the Messianic interpretation of the stone men-
tioned in 28:16 for granted, it is Calvin in particular who considers
himself obliged to give account of his own Messianic interpretation.
He does so by appealing to the authority of the New Testament in
which Christ is designated as the cornerstone given by God and
stemming from Zion. As cornerstone, Christ is the foundation of the
Church. While Calvins explanation is profoundly ecclesiological, he
distances himself from an interpretation in which the text of Eph.
2:1422 functions as the interpretative framework for the meaning
of the cornerstone. Calvin thus emphasises the foundational function
of Christ as cornerstone rather than the unifying function thereof.
The emergence of modern biblical research implied an inevitable
end to a centuries long tradition of Messianic interpretation of the
Zion text of 28:16. The hermeneutical context that would determine
the orientation of the texts interpretation was to be sought from
this point on within the Old Testament itself. The concentration on
the Hebrew text of 28:16 that accompanied this change ultimately
implied a radical reorientation with respect to the direction taken by
the Septuagint. Only a few modern exegetes continue to maintain a
Messianic interpretation of the stone referred to in 28:16. The major-
ity offer an eschatological interpretation of the stone as referring to
either the future kingdom of God, the new Israel, the true religion of
yhwh or the new temple or new Zion. Based on the hypothesis that
the Zion text of 28:16 constitutes part of a prophecy of judgement
that is constructed according to the established pattern of accusation
and announcement of judgement, Wildberger is the only exegete to
offer a strictly metaphorical interpretation of the stone alluded to
in 28:16. He understands the stone in question to be a testing stone
and explains it as an instrument of Gods judgement.
In association with the Messianic interpretation of 28:16, the con-
struction dsy ynnh employed in the Hebrew text has been translated
down through the centuries, and almost without exception, as a
present or a future. While both Isaiah scrolls from Qumran confirm
the legitimacy of this translation, it can also be argued that the text

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 63 1/18/2007 10:08:47 AM

 64 chapter two

of the Septuagint and the rendition of 28:16 in the New Testament

have had a decisive influence in this regard. Within modern biblical
research, those interpretations that consider the Zion text to be an
announcement of some future activity are strongly represented. The
majority of exegetes favour salvific activity in this regard; a few an
act of judgement. A minority of exegetes relate the reference to the
establishment of a stone in Zion in 28:16 to the past, focusing on
the existing temple or on Zion itself.

dekker_f3_8-64.indd 64 1/18/2007 10:08:47 AM

 CHAPTER THREE

THE LITERARY AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE

ZION TEXT OF ISAIAH 28:16

3.1. Introduction

A number of preliminary questions need to be raised in the present

chapter by way of introduction to the exegesis of Isa. 28:16. The first of
these is related to the colometric subdivision of Isaiah 28, followed by a
closely related question concerning pericope designation. Given the fact
that the Zion text of 28:16 does not stand on its own, but forms rather
a constitutive part of a larger whole, it is necessary that we establish the
boundaries of the latter with the greatest possible precision. In addition,
it is important that we establish clarity with respect to the extent of the
context within which the exegesis of 28:16 ought to take place. Once the
various pericopes have been determined, we will endeavour to provide
an albeit provisional answer to the question whether the pericope in
question can be understood as an original unity or whether the present
text exhibits traces of later redactional intervention. The question of
the originality of the textual unit is important because prophetic texts,
like others, are primarily rooted in history. While it will not be possible
to establish certainty in every instance with respect to the origins of a
particular prophecy, a clear perspective on the roots of a prophetic text
in history will ultimately contribute to the understanding of its message.
In line with the question of original unity, further questions will need
to be asked with regard to the authenticity and dating of the Zion text
of 28:16 and the pericope in which it is found. If the Zion text can be
ascribed to the prophet himself, then we must search for indications that
might help us delimit the dating of the text to one of the active periods
of Isaiahs life. With the assistance of a number of biblical and extra-
biblical sources, the concluding paragraphs will endeavour to sketch
the historical situation associated with the dating proposed. Given
the unique character of the biblical sources, an excursus on prophetic
historiography in 2 Kings 1819 has been included.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 65 1/18/2007 2:17:00 PM

 66 chapter three

3.2. Colometric subdivision of Isaiah 28

In order to establish a correct subdivision of the various text units within

Isaiah 28 and to carry out the actual exegesis thereof, it is important to
pay due attention to the indicators already introduced into the Hebrew
text itself during the process of textual transmission. In addition, it is
not simply a question of subdividing the text into larger units, which
function as individual pericopes, but also, and more specifically, a ques-
tion of subdividing into smaller units that can be designated as strophes,
verse lines and cola. The colometric version of the Hebrew text of Isaiah
28 provided below makes use of the method outlined by M.C.A. Korpel
in an article in which she discusses the importance of the indicators
that have survived the process of textual transmission.1 I limit myself
in the colometric analysis to the indicators found in the Masoretic text,
although research into the indicators transmitted in other textual tradi-
tions may provide interesting comparative material. Up to the present,
however, comparative study has tended to conclude that the Masoretic
accentuation system is, for the most part, extremely reliable.2
In order to subdivide the larger units within a given textual segment,
the Masoretes made use of spaces in the text, known to us as Setumot and
Petuchot, which BHS renders with the help of a detached s and a de-
tached respectively. A Petuchah stands for an open unit (a new Petuchah
begins after a space at the end of a line or after a completely open line),
a Setumah for a closed unit in the text (a new Setumah begins after a space
in the middle of a line). While the reliability of the transmitted indica-
tors designating such larger textual units in the Masoretic text can, on
occasion, be called into question, and in spite of the many errors that
may have found their way into the text in the copying process,3 Old
Testament research has become more and more convinced that their
importance cannot simply be ignored.4 The subdivision maintained by

1
See Korpel 2000:150. Cf. De Hoop 2000(A):4773 and 2000(B):65100.
2
Cf. De Hoop 2000(B):94: Recent studies of the colometry of Hebrew verse in
which the Masoretic accentuation was compared to other traditions has demonstrated
(with regard to dichotomic structures) that the colometry suggested by the Masoretes is
to a very large extent reliable.
3
Korpel 2000:12f quotes De Moor: We think to have found convincing evidence
that from an early date on all scribes, even the medieval Hebrew scribes, did not fully
understand the function of the major delimiters anymore which unfortunately has
resulted in a rather sloppy transmission.
4
The discovery of the Qumran scrolls has played an important role herein, suggest-
ing that a pre-Masoretic tradition of demarcating larger and smaller units may have
existed. See in this regard Korpel 2000:213.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 66 1/18/2007 2:17:01 PM

 the literary and historical context 67

the Masoretes ultimately has something to say about the way in which
they interpreted a text. The importance of the transmitted indicators
is even more evident with respect to the demarcation of smaller tex-
tual units introduced by the Masoretes. The reliability of the Masoretic
tradition is significantly greater in this regard. Indeed, there are indi-
cations that the colometric subdivision of the text established by the
Masoretes harks back to an ancient reading tradition.5 The demarca-
tion of strophes, verse lines and cola took place with the help of a series
of disjunctive accents that were placed above and below the transmitted
text. According to the Tabula Accentum of BHS, the most significant
disjunctive accentsin order of importanceare the following: [1] Sil-
lq (with Sf psq); [2] Atnch; [3] Seglt; [4] allet; [5] Zqf parvum;
[6] Zqf magnum; and [7] Rev a . These accents are mostly employed in
ascending order (= descending enumeration), e.g. [5][2] in Isa. 1:2a.
Should a less important accent with a higher number immediately fol-
low an important accent with a low number (e.g. [2] or [1]) then it is usu-
ally possible to determine the beginning of a new verse line, e.g. [5]
[1] in Isa. 1:2b. While exceptions are possible they nevertheless tend to
confirm the rule. Regardless, syntax and content remain important, if
only to avoid overdependence on the Masoretic accentuation.
In the colometric subdivision of Isaiah 28 presented below I take the
location of the aforementioned seven disjunctive accents as my point of
departure.6 The first column contains the Hebrew text according to the
Masoretic vocalisation, including the two most important accents they
employed, namely Sillq (with Sf psq) [1] and Atnch [2]. The second
column contains an enumeration of the various verses, following the
customary verse divisions (1, 2, 3, etc.), further divided into half verses
(lower case a and b) on the basis of the Atnch. The upper case letters (A,
B, C, etc.) serve to enumerate the individual cola in each half verse. The
third column contains the disjunctive accent employed by the Maso-
retes presented in square brackets according to the summary outlined
above. The less important disjunctive accents are not included in the
present survey. Where the latter have contributed to the subdivision of a
colon reference will be made to them in the exegesis. The fourth column

5
Korpel 2000:18.
6
Cf. Korpel 2000:31: The relative weight of the distinctive Masoretic accents is
well-known and does not need discussion here. In general the Masoretic colometry is
very reliable, as recent research has shown and may well serve as the point of departure
for any discussion about the meaning of the text.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 67 1/18/2007 2:17:01 PM

 68 chapter three

indicates the type of colon observed in the verse lines of the text. The
different types are known to us as monocolon, bicolon or tricolon. The
term anacrusis serves to designate a word or word group that would
appear to stand outside the metre. The fifth and final column provides
the number of metrical beats contained in each verse line. Individual
words and words joined by a maqqeph represent a single beat.
While the strophic division of a Hebrew text remains a question of
some dispute, the survey below nevertheless endeavours to provide an
accurate rendition thereof. Once again I have followed the method pro-
posed by Korpel.7 Korpels point of departure is that a strophe coincides
for the most part with a text unit rounded off by the Masoretes with Sf
psq (confirmed on occasion by Setumah or Petuchah) and frequently con-
sists of two, regularly of three and sometimes of four verse lines. The
beginning of a strophe is occasionally marked by the reversal of the
usual syntactical word sequence or by the use of particles that imply a
certain degree of emphasis.
It is important to realise with respect to the method followed by the
present study and elsewhere that the establishment of the colometry
of Old Testament texts remains a much discussed and complicated
endeavour.8 While I have taken the Masoretic indicators as my point of
departure for the analysis of the colometry of Isaiah 28, I have never-
theless deviated from the Masoretic accentuation in a number of places.
Such deviations will be explained in the exegesis.

Colometric rendition of the Hebrew Colon Acccents Verse lines Metre

text of Isaiah 28 MT
Tabula

Strophe 1
y/h 1aA [7] anacrusis 1
yIr'p]a, yrEKOvi tWaGE tr<f,[} 1aB [5] bicolon 4+4
/Tra'p]ti ybix] lbenO yxiw 1aC [2]
ynIm;v]AayGE vaOrAl[' rv,a} 1bA bicolon 3+2
.yIy: ymeWlh} 1bB [1]

7
See Korpel 2000:4043.
8
Cf. Korpel/De Moor 1988:6: . . . the re-establishment of the colometric division
intended by the ancient poets is often a hazardous undertaking. Even the most conscien-
tious researcher would do well to recognize this in all fairness.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 68 1/18/2007 2:17:01 PM

 the literary and historical context 69

Table (cont.)
Colometric rendition of the Hebrew Colon Acccents Verse lines Metre
text of Isaiah 28 MT
Tabula
Strophe 2
yn:doal' Mia'w qz:j; hNEhi 2aA [5] bicolon 4+4
bf,q;= r['c' dr:B; r<z<K] 2aB [2]
ypif]vo yrIyBiK' yIm' r,z<K] 2bA bicolon 4+3
>dy:B] r<a;l; j"yNIhi 2bB [1]
[hN:s'm]r:T]e (hn:s]m-'r:T)e yIl'gr'B] 3aA [2] bicolon 2+4
.yIr;p]a, yre/Kvi tWaGE tr,f,[} 3bA [1]

Strophe 3
/Tra'p]ti ybiix] lbenO tx'yxi ht;yh;w 4aA [5] bicolon 5+4
ynIm;v] ayGE vaOrAl[' rv,a} 4aB [2]
yIq' r,f,B] [hr;WKbiK]] (Hr;WKbiK]) 4bA [5] tricolon 3+4+3
Ht;/a ha,roh; ha,ryI rv,a} 4bB [5]
s .hN:[,l;b]yI /Pk'B] Hd:/[B] 4bC [1]

Strophe 4
aWhh' /YB' 5aA [7] anacrusis 2
ybix] tr,f,[}l' t/ab;x] hw:hy hy<h]yI 5aB [5] [5] bicolon 5+4
./M[' ra;v]li hr;=a;p]Ti tr'ypix]liw 5a/bC [2] [1]
fP;v]Mih'Al[' bve/Yl' fP;-v]mi h"Wrl]W 6a/bA [2] [5] bicolon 4+4
s .hr;[v] ; hm;jl; m] i ybeyvim] hr;Wbglwi 6bB [5] [1]

Strophe 5
Wgv; yIY"B' hL,aeAg"w 7aA [5] bicolon 3+2
W[T; rk;Veb'W 7aB [2]
rk;Veb' Wgv; aybin:w heKo 7bA tricolon 4+2+2
yIyIY"h'Ami W[l]b]nI 7bB [7]
rk;Veh'Ami W[T; 7bC [5]
ha,roB; Wgv; 7bD [5] bicolon 2+2
.hY:liyliP] WqP; 7bE [1]
t/nj;l]vuAlK; yKi 8aA [5] tricolon 2+3+2
ha;=xo ayqi Wal]m; 8aB [2]
s ./qm; yliB] 8bA [1]

Strophe 6
h[;de hr,/y ymiAta, 9aA [5] bicolon 3+3
h[;=Wmv] ybiy: ymiAta,w 9aB [2]
bl;j;me yleWmg 9bA [5] bicolon 2+2
.yId;V;mi yqeyTi[' 9bB [1]
wx;l; wx' wx;l; wx' yKi 10aA [5] tricolon 5+4+4
wq;=l; wq' wq;l; wq' 10aB [2]
.v; ry[ez v; ry[ez 10bA [1]

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 69 1/18/2007 2:17:01 PM

 70 chapter three

Table (cont.)
Colometric rendition of the Hebrew Colon Acccents Verse lines Metre
text of Isaiah 28 MT
Tabula
Strophe 7
hp;c; ygE[}l'B] yKi 11aA [5] tricolon 3+2+3
tr=,j,a' /vl;b]W 11aB [2]
.hZ<h' [;h;Ala, rBed'y 11bA [1]
h,ylea} rm'a; rv,a} 12aA [7] tricolon 3+2+2
hj;WnM]h' taOz 12aB
yE[;l, WjynIh; 12aC [5]
h[;=GErM'h' taOzw 12aD [2] bicolon 2+3
.["/mv] aWba; alw 12bA [1]

Strophe 8
hw:hyArb'D h,l; hy:h;w 13aA [7] monocolon 3
wx;l; wx' wx;l; wx' 13aB tricolon 4+4+4
wq;l; wq' wq;l; wq' 13aC [5]
v=; ry[ez v; ry[ez 13aD [2]
r/ja; Wlv]k;w Wkl]yE ['m'l] 13bA bicolon 4+3
.WdK;l]nIw Wvq]/nw WrB;v]nIw 13bB [5] [1]

Strophe 9
hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi kel; 14aA bicolon 3+2
/xl; yvena' 14aB [2]
hZ<h' [;h; ylev]mo 14bA [5] bicolon 3+2
.Il;v;WryBi rv,a} 14bB [1]

Strophe 10
T,rm'a} yKi 15aA [7] monocolon 2
tw<m;Ata, tyrIb] Wnt]r'K; 15aB [5] bicolon 3+3
hz<jo Wnyci[; l/av]A[iw 15aC [2]
[ rb-o[}y"] (rb'[); AyKi fe/v [f/v] (fyvi) 15bA bicolon 3+2
Wnae/by al 15bB [5]
Wnsej]m' bz:k; Wnm]c' yKi 15bC bicolon 4+2
s .WnrT;s]nI rq,V,b'W 15bD [1]

Strophe 11
hwIhy yn:doa} rm'a; hKo kel; 16aA [7] [5] monocolon 5
ynInhi 16aB anacrusis 1
b,a;= /YxiB] dS'yI 16aC [2] bicolon 3+2
j'Bo b,a, 16bA
tr'q]yI tN"Pi 16bB bicolon 2+2
dS;Wm ds;Wm 16bC [5]
.vyjiy: al ymia}M'h' 16bD [1] monocolon 3

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 70 1/18/2007 2:17:01 PM

 the literary and historical context 71

Table (cont.)
Colometric rendition of the Hebrew Colon Acccents Verse lines Metre
text of Isaiah 28 MT
Tabula
Strophe 12
wq;l] fP;v]mi yTim]c'w 17aA [5] bicolon 3+2
tl,q;=v]mil] hq;d;x]W 17aB [2]

Strophe 13
bz:k; hsej]m' dr;b; h[;y:w 17bA [5] bicolon 4+3
.Wpfov]yI yIm' rt,sew 17bB [1]
tw<m;Ata, k,t]yrIrB] rP'kuw 18aA [5] bicolon 3+4
Wqt; al l/av]Ata, k,t]Wzj;w 18aB [2]
rbo[}y" yKi fe/v f/v 18bA [5] bicolon 4+3
.sm;rmil] /l t,yyIh]wI 18bB [1]

Strophe 14
/rb][; yDemi 19aA bicolon 2+2
k,t]a, jQ'yI 19aB [5]
rbo[}y" rq,BoB' rq,Bob'AyKi 19aC bicolon 3+2
hl;yL;=b'W /YB'' 19aD [2]
h[;w:zAqr' hy:h;w 19bA bicolon 2+2
.h[;Wmv] ybih; 19bB [1]

Strophe 15
["r=eT;c]hime [X;M'h' rx'q;AyKi 20aA [2] bicolon 3+3
.sNEK't]hiK] hr;x; hk;SeM'h'w 20bA [1]

Strophe 16
hw:hy Wqy: yxir;P]Arh'k] yKi 21aA [5] bicolon 4+3
z=G:ryI /[b]gIB] qm,[eK] 21aB [2]
Whce[}m' t/c[}l' 21bA bicolon 2+2
Whce[}m' rz: 21bB [5]
/td;bo[} dbo[}l'w 21bC [5] bicolon 2+2
./td;bo[} hY:rIk]n: 21bD [1]

Strophe 17
Wxx;/lt]TiAla' hT;['w 22aA [5] bicolon 2+2
k=e,yres]/m Wqz j]y<AP, 22aB [2]
yTi[]m'v; hx;r;jn<w hl;k;AyKi 22bA [7] tricolon 4+4+3
t/ab;x] hwIhy yn:doa} taeme 22bB
.r,a;h;AlK;Al[' 22bC [1]

Strophe 18
yli=/q W[m]viw WnyzI a}h' 23aA [2] bicolon 3+3
.ytir;m]ai W[m]viw Wbyviq]h' 23bA [1]

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 71 1/18/2007 2:17:02 PM

 72 chapter three

Table (cont.)
Colometric rendition of the Hebrew Colon Acccents Verse lines Metre
text of Isaiah 28 MT
Tabula
Strophe 19
/Yh' lkoh} 24aA [5] tricolon 2+3+3
["ro=zli vrejoh' vroj}y" 24aB [2]
./tm;da' dDec'ywI jT'p'y 24bA [1]

Strophe 20
a/lh} 25aA anacrusis 1
h;yn<p; hW:viAai 25aB [5] tricolon 2+2+2
jx'q, ypihew 25aC
qro=zyI Mok'w 25aD [2]
hr;/c hF;ji c;w 25bA tricolon 3+2+2
m;s]nI hr;[oc]W 25bB [5]
./tl;buG tm,S,kuw 25bC [1]

Strophe 21
fP;v]Mil' /rS]yIw 26aA bicolon 2+2
.WNr,/y wyh;la 26aB [1]

Strophe 22
Wrj;b, al yKi 27aA bicolon 3+2
jx'q, vd'Wy 27aB [5]
hl;g:[} p'/aw 27aC [5] bicolon 2+2
bS;=Wy MoK'Al[' 27aD [2]
jx'q, fb,j;yE hF,M'b' yKi 27bA bicolon 4+2
.fb,V;B' Mok'w 27bB [1]

Strophe 23
qd:Wy j,l, 28aA [5] monocolon 2
WN=v,Wdy v/da; jx'n<l; al yKi 28aB [2] tricolon 4+4+2
wyv;r;p;W /tl;g[, lG"l]GI m'h;w 28bA
.WNQ,duyAal 28bB [1]

Strophe 24
ha;=x;y: t/ab;x] hw:hy [ime taOzAG" 29aA [6] [2] tricolon 5+2+2
hx;[e aylip]hi 29bA [5]
s .hY:viWT lyDighi 29bB [1]

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 72 1/18/2007 2:17:02 PM

 the literary and historical context 73

3.3. Pericope delineation within Isaiah 28

The Zion text of Isa. 28:16 does not stand on its own. Rather, it
constitutes part of a larger textual composition. This larger unit
can be described in the first instance as the pericope to which 28:16
belongs. The beginning and the end of the pericope in question must
be determined as accurately as possible after which the circle can be
widened to include questions concerning the redactional embedment
of the pericope within the broader context of the chapter as a whole.
The goal of the present paragraph is to establish clarity concerning the
extent of the context within which the exegesis of the Zion text of 28:16
ought to take place.
The end of the pericope of which 28:16 forms a part is simpler to
determine than its beginning. While the Masoretes did not designate
verse 23 as the beginning of a new Petuchah or Setumah,9 the emphatic call
for attention in 28:23 (a sequence of four imperatives!) is known to us as
characteristic of wisdom teaching (in German Lehrerffnungsformel).
The latter usually functions as the introduction to a textual unit that
can be qualified as a teaching.10 In the present instance, the end of the
teaching in question is also clearly recognisable, since 28:29 provides a
summary conclusion formulated as a so-called summary appraisal.11
As a teaching, Isa. 28:2329 thus constitutes a new unit that is evidently
delineated from the preceding unit. This leads us to suspect that
the pericope to which the Zion text of 28:16 belongs in the present
composition reaches its conclusion in 28:22. By explicitly tracing back
the preceding announcement of judgement in this verse to the authority
of t/ab;x] hwIhy yn:doa} the Lord YHWH Zebaot , the text also presents itself as
a conclusion in terms of content.
In principle, it is conceivable that the pericope to which the Zion text
of 28:16 belongs reaches its conclusion prior to verse 22. In such an
instance either verse 18 or verse 21 might then serve as a concluding
verse. An important argument in favour of considering verse 18 as the
conclusion to the pericope is the fact that the actual announcement of
judgement has already taken place by this point, and that verses 17b18

9
In 1QIsaa, by contrast, 28:23 is marked as the beginning of a new unit. See Olley
1993:3132.
10
The Lehrerffnungsformel is familiar to us from Wisdom Literature (cf. Ps. 49:2;
78:1; Prov. 4:1,20; 5:1; 7:24; Job 13:17; 33:1; 34:2; see also Gen. 4:23; 49:2; Deut. 32:1;
Judg. 5:3; Hos. 5:1), although it is also used elsewhere in Isaiah (Isa. 1:2,10; 32:9; cf. Isa.
34:1; 49:1; 51:4).
11
The designation summary appraisal stems from Childs 1967:128.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 73 1/18/2007 2:17:02 PM

 74 chapter three

explicitly hark back to the content of the complaint expressed in verse

15. Verse 21 might also function in its turn as a concluding verse since
the following verse, verse 22, contains an exhortation that together with
hT;['w would appear at first sight to constitute a new initiative. In the
present composition of Isaiah 28, however, verse 22 is related to the
expression /xl; yvena ' boasters in verse 14 by way of its use of the verb
yl to boast. It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that both these
verses belong to the same pericope. Bearing in mind that verses 1921
do not present themselves as an independent pericope and noting that
the twice repeated use of the verb rb[ to pass through in verse 19 clearly
elaborates on a preceding theme (see verses 15 and 18), our already
expressed suspicion that the pericope in which the Zion text of 28:16 is
located reaches its conclusion in the present composition in verse 22 is
thus confirmed to some degree.
As noted above, the beginning of the pericope in question is more
difficult to determine than its conclusion. Three possibilities present
themselves at this juncture. 28:14 is first to qualify as an opening verse
because the verse in question is designated by the Masoretes as the
beginning of a new Petuchah. Verse 14 represents a clear call to hear
the word of yhwh, a call addressed to a carefully designated addressee.
On the other hand, the particle kel; that precedes the call suggests a
direct association with the preceding verses.12 In light of the fact that
the content of 28:1422 is also akin to that which precedes it, 28:7
represents the second possible opening verse. Verse 7 is marked in MT
as the beginning of a new Setumah. While a specific addressee is absent,
the verse in question begins unmistakeably with a complaint addressed
to a category of people that had not been mentioned in the previous
verses, namely the priest and the prophet. The thus established pericope
(28:722), however, also begins with a particle, in this instance g"w,
which establishes a direct link with the prophecy of 28:14(6) in which
the same theme of drunkenness is dealt with. We could see in 28:1,
therefore, a third potential opening verse. In the latter case the pericope
to which the Zion text of 28:16 belongs would consist of Isa. 28:122.
In order to weigh up the possibilities in a responsible manner we can
best begin with the third option. The number of exegetes that consider
28:122 to be a single unit is extremely limited.13 Although scholars

12
The fact that both MT and 1QIsaa mark 28:16 itself as the beginning of a new
unit is probably due to the messenger formula employed.
13
Lindblom 1955:128 mentions Kissane and Bentzen. Wildberger 1982:1056 also
refers to Scharbert. Procksch 1930(A):359 considers 28:14,713,1415,17b22 to be a
closed unit. Delitzsch 1889:311 is even of the opinion that Isaiah 28 in its entirety should

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 74 1/18/2007 2:17:02 PM

 the literary and historical context 75

generally recognise that the theme of drunkenness relates the prophecy

of 28:7ff with that of 28:14the promise of salvation found in 28:56
is considered to be a late addition,14 a significant shift in addressation
nevertheless takes place in 28:722. While the prophecy of 28:14 is
addressed against Samaria, the capital of the northern kingdom of
Ephraim, 28:722 addresses its complaint against the priest and the
prophet and those who rule in Jerusalem. Such a shift simultaneously
implies an alternative dating. The prophecy of 28:14 must have been
uttered prior to the fall of Samaria in 722/720,15 at a time when the
Assyrians were threatening the northern kingdom of Ephraim, while
28:722 presupposes a time when the Assyrian threat had also become
a reality for Judah and Jerusalem. Shifts of this type within 28:122
are too significant to be able to speak of a single pericope. Moreover,
the prophecy of 28:14 is characterised by a high degree of internal
cohesion that is expressed in the copious use of metaphors, comparisons
and wordplays.16 The Masoretes also introduced a certain division
within Isaiah 28. Verses 5 and 7 are both marked as the beginning of a
new unit (Setumah).17
The copulative particle g"w with which the new pericope commences
in verse 7 is probably due to redactional intervention. Indeed there is
much to be said for the idea that verse 7a in its entirety enjoys redactional

be considered as a single independent prophecy. He bases himself in this regard on the

fact that five new segments are introduced by a so-called woe formula in 2833 (28;
29; 30; 3132; 33). Such a structure, however, tends to suggest that a later compiler was
responsible for the configuration of the prophecies in this part of the book. See 5.2.
14
Marti 1900:204 was among the first to point to formal and content related kinship
with 4:26 and the presupposed knowledge of 11:1ff. Cf. Driver 1968:4767. Procksch
1930(A):351 argues that 28:56 originally preceded 4:23 and stems from a later period
in the activities of the prophet. Ziegler 1948:84 likewise considers it possible that 28:56
belongs to a different context and is addressed to Judah/Jerusalem. Snijders 1969:279
considers pinpointing the original location of 28:56 to be difficult and takes the cur-
rent link with 28:14 as his point of departure. Sweeney 1996:361 is more inclined to
establish a link with the verses that follow (28:529). In contrast to Procksch, Eichrodt
1967:121 dates 28:56 to the beginning of Isaiahs activities, when the prophet had
still expected that a remainder would change their ways. Fohrer 1962:46 and Schoors
1972:165 maintain that 28:56 is a later interpolation designed to complete the preced-
ing threat with an eschatological promise of salvation. In order to reinforce his hypoth-
esis that 28:56 is a later addition, Wildberger 1982:1044 bases himself on the use of
prose, the presence of aWhh' /YB' common for such interpolations and the transition from
Ephraim/Samaria to the rest of the people.
15
For the problems surrounding the date of the siege and fall of Samaria, see Galil
1996:8397. Becking 1992 dates the fall of Samaria to 723. See also Becking 2003:54.
16
See Beuken 2000:17.
17
1QIsaa likewise marks 28:5 as the beginning of a new unit. This is consistently
the case in 1QIsaa, however, when a verse begins with the formula aWhh' /YB'. See Olley
1993:3233.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 75 1/18/2007 2:17:03 PM

 76 chapter three

origins.18 Such a redactional connection with 28:14(6) transforms the

fate of Samaria into a warning example for Jerusalem (cf. 2 Kgs 17:17
23).19 Only one exegete argues, however, that the addressees should
only be sought in Jerusalem from 28:14 onwards, and that the segment
running from vv. 713 is still addressed to the northern kingdom. This
would imply that the priest and prophet referred to in 28:7 are to be
localised in the aforementioned Ephraim and that 28:113 must thus be
treated as a single pericope.20
If one is inclined to argue that 28:122 should not be considered a
single pericope, however, then one is obliged to address the question
whether verses 722 then constitute an original unity. This seems to
be a fairly reasonable possibility since there is much to be said for the
suggestion that the addressees from verse 7 onwards should be sought in
the southern kingdom of Judah and in Jerusalem.21 Nevertheless, there
are a number of arguments that would appear to support the hypothesis
that in spite of the already mentioned cohesion between 28:713 and
28:1422, 28:722 should likewise not be considered an original unity:

18
Wildberger 1982:10551056. See also Donner 1964:148, Kaiser 19762:194, Diet-
rich 1976:151, Clements 1980(B):226, Gonalves 1986:188 and Kilian 1994:159. In
line with Duhm 19143 (1st edition:1892):171 Marti 1900:205 sees the passage 28:78 as
a bridge between 28:14 en 28:922 inserted at a later date by Isaiah himself.
19
See Snijders 1969:278, 280, Schoors 1972:164 and Schneider 1988:378. Cf. Sweeney
1996:367: The present form of the passage is not directed to announce the fall of the
northern kingdom, but to warn the southern kingdom of a potential disaster based on
the example of the north. Sweeney associates this, however, with 28:113 as a whole.
Together with Fohrer 1962:43, Wildberger 1982:1046 sees the motif of drunken-
ness as a connecting factor. In his view, the compilers were no longer interested in
Samaria as such but rather in the arrogance of the drinkers, a phenomenon that might
be considered timeless. Roberts 1987:3738 doubts whether 28:713 ever existed inde-
pendently of 28:14 and presupposes, in line with Procksch 1930(A):353, that Isaiah
himself reused the old prophecy against Samaria of 28:14 as an introduction to a
prophecy against the Judean leaders in the Assyrian period. Marti 1900:204 points out
that Wellhausen and others were of the opinion that Jerusalem is being addressed as a
Samaria in 28:14.
20
See Oswalt 1986:506, 509. With regard to the addressees in 28:713, the explana-
tion of Exum 1982:108139, Tanghe 1993:235260 and Sweeney 1996:365 is related
to that of Oswalt. While Beuken 2000:18 already sees Jerusalem coming into view in
28:713, he nevertheless considers 28:713 to be a climax in relation to 28:16. He
speaks in this regard of a dynamic progression that is given expression in the more
realistic character of the prophecy in question, in the threat of divine eclipse and in the
semantic contrast between the proud and glorious drunkards of Ephraim, on the one
hand, and the perversity of the drunken priests and prophets on the other.
21
Van der Toorn 1988:200 argues in favour for understanding of 28:722 as a liter-
ary unit. See also Stewart 1988:376.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 76 1/18/2007 2:17:03 PM

 the literary and historical context 77

1. The powerful appeal hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi hear the word of YHWH which
opens 28:14 marks the beginning of a new prophecy.22
2. The phrase Il;v;WryBi rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; ylev]mo /xl; yvena' boasters who rule
this people in Jerusalem in 28:14 explicitly designates a new addressee.
The detailed address need not necessarily coincide with the aybin:w heKo
priest and prophet mentioned in 28:7.23
3. An interpolation from Isa. 8:15 has found its way into the conclusion
of verse 13: WdK;l]nIw Wvq]/nw WrB;v]nIw in order that they may . . . be broken, and
snared, and taken. This interpolation serves to underline the definitive
character of the judgement announced in 28:1113 and reinforces
the concluding character of 28:13.24
4. The pattern of complaint and announcement of judgement charac-
teristic of a prophecy of judgement is clearly recognisable in 28:7
13. The fact that 28:14f begins with a new complaint suggests the
strong possibility of a new prophecy at this juncture.
5. The Masoretes likewise marked 28:14 as a new unit (Petuchah). The
same was done by the scribe responsible for 1QIsaa.25
6. 28:713 is formulated, in its entirety, in the third person, as well as in
the announcement of judgement, while 28:1422 falls more into line
with a direct address in the second person.26
7. Reference can be made to the inclusio established by the use of the
verb yl to boast in verses 14 (/xl;) and 22 (Wxx;/lt]TiAla').27 The clause
type (imperative) further reinforces the character of the inclusio
between the two verses.
Based on the aforementioned arguments, one can conclude that the
link created by the particle kel; in 28:14 is secondary.28 In so doing we
leave the question as to whether Isaiah himself was responsible for the

22
Cf. Dietrich 1976:152 and Wildberger 1982:1068.
23
Commentators occasionally simplify identification with priest and prophet men-
tioned in 28:7 by translating ylev]mo in 28:14 as proverb makers. See Fohrer 1962:5456
and Snijders 1969:283.
24
Cf. Dietrich 1976:152.
25
See Olley 1993:32: Hear the word of YHWH occurs 4 times, each commencing a
major division (i 10, xxviii 14, xxxix 5, lxvi 5).
26
The hypothesis proposed by Eichrodt 1967:127 that an originally more illuminat-
ing connection with the preceding text has disappeared from 28:14 cannot be estab-
lished with any degree of certainty. Cf. Westermann 19683:121122 for the use of the
third person in announcements of judgement addressed to the entire people.
27
Cf. Exum 1982:123 and Tanghe 1993:242.
28
See Marti 1900:207, Rohland 1956:147, Donner 1964:148, Kaiser 19762:199,
Dietrich 1976:161, Clements 1980(B):230 and Wildberger 1982:1068.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 77 1/18/2007 2:17:03 PM

 78 chapter three

link unresolved.29 Whatever the case, the prophecy of 28:1422 is to be

understood as an independent pericope. The exegesis of the Zion text
of 28:16 should thus focus itself within the context of this pericope.
Of course, it goes without saying that the exegesis of 28:16 need not
be strictly limited to the immediate context. It became apparent in
our delineation of 28:1422 that the pericope enjoyed redactional
associations with 28:713 in particular. Cohesion in terms of content
can also be established between the two pericopes. Furthermore, both
28:1422 and 28:713 would appear to presuppose a period in which
the Assyrian threat against Jerusalem was a real one. It makes sense,
therefore, to pay particular attention to the prophecy of judgement
in 28:713 in our exegesis of the Zion text of 28:16. In addition, the
prophecy relating to Ephraim/Samaria in 28:14(6) and the didactic
material found in 28:2329 can also be included within the broader
context. Within the context of Isaiah 28 as a whole, both external
pericopes are linked to the central pericopes 28:713 and 28:1422 by
way of numerous semantic and redactional cross-connections. This is
most clearly the case with respect to the prophecy of 28:14(6),30 though
the didactic material of 28:2329 should also be read in association
with the preceding text.31 Within the framework of the present study,
however, we will be obliged to content ourselves with a limited treatment
of 28:14(6) and 28:2329.

3.4. Isaiah 28:1422 as original unity

Having established in the preceding paragraph that the Zion text of

Isa. 28:16 constitutes part of the prophecy delineated in 28:1422, the
present paragraph will have to address questions concerning the original

29
While Roberts 1987:3738 doubts whether the connection between verses 13
and 14 is secondary, he maintains nevertheless that Isaiah himself would have been
responsible for such a secondary association (idem Duhm 19143:174). Schoors 1972:167
explains the connection on the basis of the fact that 28:1422 does indeed deal with
boasters, but in this case with boasters from the ruling classes.
30
Cf. Roberts 1987:38: At any rate, this wider literary context of 28:122, as well as
other passages that share the same themes and reflect the same historical setting, may
be drawn to elucidate Isaiahs meaning in Isa 28:16. Donner 1964:149f refers to Isaiah
28 as a redactional unity. He argues, nevertheless, that this does not give us permission
to interpret one saying on the basis of another.
31
Wildberger 1982:1069 goes a little too far when he insists that 28:2329 is an
absolutely new segment that does not even have a redactional link with the preceding
verses.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 78 1/18/2007 2:17:03 PM

 the literary and historical context 79

unity of the said prophecy or the possibility that it exhibits traces of

later reworking.
The concluding verses 1922 represent a particular problem for a
number of exegetes, many of whom consider them to be a later exten-
sion of the prophecy. The primary argument in this regard maintains
that 28:18 bears the character of a concluding verse since all the ele-
ments of the complaint in 28:15 have been picked up already in the an-
nouncement of judgement of 28:17b18. The concluding word sm;rm il]
is likewise said to function as a sort of climax, thus raising the question
as to what remains to be said thereafter. In addition, the fact that verses
1922 are fairly disparate reinforces the impression that we are deal-
ing here with a number of secondary additions. Dietrich characterises
28:1922 as a collection of broken fragments.32
In order to provide an impression of the distinct origin often ascribed
to these broken fragments we can take the vision of Wildberger as an
illustration. Based on the apparent weakening of the message of 28:18
by the first verse half of 28:19, Wildberger considers 28:19a as a typical
gloss introduced by a reader who wanted to underline the fact that the
words announced by Isaiah to his own age could be repeated in every
age.33 The second verse half of 28:19, however, is said to be ascribed to
a redactor who wanted to associate both pericopes (28:713 and 28:14
22) more closely with each other than was possible on the basis of the
particle kel; alone. As a matter of fact, the clause h[;Wmv] ybih; the under-
standing of the message harks back to h[;Wmv] ybiy: he will explain the message in
28:9.34 Moreover, Wildberger recognises evidence of a proverb in 28:20
and presupposes that the latter could have been introduced by Isaiah
himself. He notes, however, that others have ascribed the said proverb
to a later redaction.35 Evidence of a typically Isaian way of speaking of
the work of yhwh in 28:21 suggests that this verse also decidedly stems
from Isaiah himself.36 With respect to 28:22, however, Wildberger can

32
Dietrich 1976:152.
33
Wildberger 1982:1070. Cf. Dietrich 1976:152.
34
Wildberger 1982:1070. Rohland 1956:147148 is of the opinion that Isaiah
himself was responsible for the redaction of Isaiah 28 as a whole and that he thereby
introduced 28:19a as a transition to what follows and 28:19b as a link with the preced-
ing proverbs. Donner 1964:149 favours a prosaic addition stemming from the period
in which 28:713 and 28:1418 were already associated at the literary level. Dietrich
1976:153 argues that 28:19b was originally located after 28:13a.
35
Wildberger 1982:1070. Cf. Marti 1900:209 and Procksch 1930(A):362. See also
Clements 1980(B):230. Kilian 1994:163 insists that the origin of the proverb cannot be
determined.
36
Wildberger 1982:1070f. According to Kilian 1994:163, however, 28:21 also

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 79 1/18/2007 2:17:04 PM

 80 chapter three

only say that such a conclusion in the form of an exhortation is simply

unthinkable after the preceding prophecy of judgement.37 Wildberger
considers 28:22 as the actualising gloss of a reader whereby the second
verse half is to be understood as reminiscent of 10:23.38
While absolute certainty with regard to the origins of the various
component parts of 28:1922 is difficult to achieve, the typification of
the verses in question as a collection of broken fragments would appear
nevertheless to be out of place. In the present textual composition, the
verses in question exhibit more mutual cohesion than such a typification
would lead one to believe. In any case, it remains quite reasonable to
accept that verses 1921, which, as with the preceding verses 1418, are
thoroughly poetic in nature and likewise leave an authentic impression
in terms of content, constitute an integrative component of the preced-
ing prophecy of judgement from more or less the outset.39 While the
exegesis of these verses will be discussed in greater detail in the follow-
ing chapter, reference to the internal structure of these verses should not
go unmentioned at this point. It is indisputable that the first verse half
of 28:19 is closely associated with 28:18 by way of the verb rb[ pass
through and can be considered the first conclusion to the announcement
of judgement. Instead of weakening the preceding announcement of
judgement as Wildberger presupposes, the conclusion in question serves
rather to underline the fact that there can be no escape whatsoever from
the judgement to come. Verses 19b21 then function as a sort of second

constitutes a part of a later eschatological interpolation: eine sptere eschatologische

Erweiterung, die die Totalitt des Endgerichtes ausmalt, das allgemeines Entsetzen
hervorruft. Cf. Kaiser 19762:203 and Clements 1980(B):230. Petersen 1979:112 sees
28:2022 as a collection of three separate pieces, each of which provides a commen-
tary on the earlier oracle. Donner 1964:153 maintains with respect to 28:2021 that
origin and character remain uncertain.
37
The originality of 28:22 is also seriously questioned by Rohland 1956:147148.
38
Wildberger 1982:1071. According to Duhm, Guthe and Procksch, only the
; Al[' allude to 10:23. Clements 1980(B):229 and Gonalves
concluding words r<a;hAlK;
1986:200 consider 28:22 to be an apocalyptic gloss. Donner 1964:149 speaks of one or
two prosaic interpolations. Dietrich 1976:152 argues that the collector of the broken
fragments found in 1922 presents himself as Isaiahs heir via 28:22.
39
Cf. Rohland 1956:147n: Da nun aber gegen die Echtheit von V.1921 kein trif-
tiger Grund angefhrt werden kann, mu angenommen werden, da Jesaja selbst die
Zusammenarbeitung der verschiedenen Sprche von Kap. 28 zu einer greren Ein-
heit vorgenommen und dabei V.19a als bergang von V.1418 zu den folgenden, V.19b
als Verklammerung zu den vorhergehenden Sprche eingefgt hat. Based on a differ-
ence in tone, the apocalyptic formulation and the new beginning with hT;['w, Rohland
considers verse 22 to be an addition stemming from the use of the text by the later exilic
or post-exilic community (148).

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 80 1/18/2007 2:17:04 PM

 the literary and historical context 81

conclusion to the announcement of judgement. This passage likewise

serves to underline the seriousness of the announced judgement and
offers, among other things, a theological explanation as to why escape
is no longer possible. Each in its own fashion, the saying of 28:20 and
the comparison of 28:21, serve to explain why the understanding of
the preceding announcement of judgement represents sheer terror
(28:19b).40 Both verses begin with the motivating particle yKi. Wildber-
gers argument that the exhortation of 28:22 is simply inconceivable as a
conclusion to a prophecy of judgement is dictated by the presupposition
that a prophecy of judgement cannot by definition leave open any pos-
sibility of a change of heart. It remains very much a question, however,
whether we can apply the conventions of contemporary logic in this
regard.41 Based on the inclusio formed with 28:14 via the use of the verb
yl to boast, it is quite possible that the exhortation of 28:22a belonged
to the prophecy of judgement in its original form. The possibility of a
later interpolation can only be considered with any degree of certainty
with respect to verse 22b on account of the apocalyptic character of the
expression hx;r;jn<w hl;K; destruction irrevocably determined (see Dan. 9:27; cf.
Dan. 9:26 and 11:36).
Of greater consequence than the questions surrounding the origi-
nality of 28:1922 are those doubts raised from time to time with re-
spect to the Zion text of 28:16 itself. A variety of exegetes have difficulty
in accepting 28:1617a as an original component of the prophecy of
28:1422. In his commentary on Isaiah, Procksch launched the idea
that 28:1617a was originally located after verse 13 and that it found its
present location in the prophecy against the boasters (28:1415,17b22)
by accident. Procksch most important argument in support of remov-
ing 28:1617a from its present context is based on the simple presup-
position that the verses in question can be missed without interrupt-
ing the cohesion of the remainder. For Procksch, the Zion text leaves
the impression of being something of an aside in its present location,
and this does not do justice to its great significance in Isaiahs vision of
the future as a whole. The text concerning the cornerstone becomes

40
Given the fact that no lesson would appear to have been learned from 28:20, the
designation saying seems more appropriate than proverb. Cf. Beuken 2000:55.
41
Cf. Beuken 2000:58: There is a growing insight that logic cannot account for the
relationship between admonition and verdict in Old Testament Prophecy. They do not
appear to be mutually exclusive. The ruin of Israel and the possibility of a return to
God are, in the prophetic vision, on the same level of feasibility.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 81 1/18/2007 2:17:04 PM

 82 chapter three

all the more effective when it is allowed the opportunity to shine its
own light. The relationship with 28:12 likewise becomes more visible
when, in direct continuation of 28:713, yhwhs new construction is
predicted, one which is certainly able to bring the longed for rest and
reprieve.42 Herrmann likewise questions the originality of 28:1617a in
its present context. Given the fact that 28:1617a bears the features of
a promise, the verses in question would appear to be all the more out
of place within the judgement character of the surrounding verses.43
For the same reason, Childs characterises 28:1617a as a secondary,
interpolated, oracle of promise.44 His position can be summed up in the
following three arguments:
1. Prophecy of judgement is characterised by a complaint followed by
an announcement of judgement. This genre is so well established in
the Old Testament that the deviation apparent in 28:1422 would
appear to be virtually unique.
2. 8th century prophets rarely locate a promise in such a context.
3. A literary seam is evident in 28:17b.
Childs arguments against the originality of 28:1617a in its present
location, however, are far from convincing. While the content of 28:12
and 28:16 clearly gives us reason to speak of cohesion, yhwhs construc-
tion in Zion referred to in 28:16 also functions in its present context as
an appropriate antithesis to the deceptive constructions of the boasters
in Jerusalem.45 The relocation of the text proposed by Procksch is un-
necessary and clearly misunderstands the fact that the said antithesis
is even explicitly called to mind through the use of the verb yc both
in 28:15 and 28:17a.46 Placing the exegetical question as to whether
28:1617a should indeed be understood as a promise to one side, and
bearing Childs genre-critical argumentation in mind, one is obliged

42
Procksch 1930(A):356357. Fey 1963:122 agrees with Procksch.
43
Cf. Herrmann 1965:143: Es wre doch zu merkwrdig, annehmen zu wollen,
da diese verheiende Verse mitten in einer Unheilsweissagung ihren legitimen Ort
haben sollten. Cf. also Blenkinsopp 2000(B):473: Allusion to an eventual new founda-
tion in Jerusalem (vv. 1617a) would be rhetorically ineffective at this point and does not
fit the pattern of prophetic diatribe.
44
Childs 1967:3031 (cf. Childs 2001:207). Cf. Boehmer 1923:8493.
45
Lindblom 1955:132. See also Eichrodt 1967:135.
46
Cf. Melugin 1974:309: The scoffers say, Wnsej]m' bz:k; Wnm]c' (vs 15), but Yahweh says,
wq;l] fP;v]mi yTim]c'w (vs 17). This wordplay exhibits the basic unity of vss. 1419. Gonalves
1986:197199 describes how verse 15 on the one hand and verses 1617a on the other
represent each others logical counterparts.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 82 1/18/2007 2:17:04 PM

 the literary and historical context 83

nevertheless to ask a methodological question concerning whether it is

correct to deny the prophet the artistic freedom to deal with the estab-
lished patterns of a genre in his own creative fashion.47 As a matter of
fact, form-critical arguments alone provide insufficient reason to treat
28:1617a as a secondary interpolation. Moreover, if 28:1617a origi-
nally circulated as an independent promise of salvation, as Childs pre-
supposes, then its present condition is surprisingly fragmentary. Needless
to note, in addition, that the transition from complaint to announce-
ment of judgement in the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 would
lack the conventional transitional characteristics without 28:1617a.48
Together with the majority of exegetes, one can conclude that the Zion
text of 28:16 constitutes an integrative and central component part of
the context in which it is currently located.49

3.5. Isaiah 28:1422 as Isaianic prophecy

In our discussion of the unity of 28:1422, the question of authenticity

was also raised, albeit in the margins. Definitive certainty is difficult to
establish with respect to the concluding verses 1922. The most serious
doubts are raised in relation to the second verse half of 28:19 and the
conclusion of 28:22. Both clauses hark back to earlier texts, 28:9 and
10:23 respectively, and may therefore stem from the hand of a redac-
tor. In the case of 28:19b, the apocalyptic motif of history as teacher50
and the fact that the term h[;w:z occurs almost exclusively in the book of
i with Qere hw:[}zl
Jeremiah (always as Ketib h[;w:zl " ] [I will make them] a hor-
ror) might be considered evidence of a later redaction.51 In 28:22b it is
primarily the expression hx;r;jn<w hl;K; destruction irrevocably determined that
exhibits apocalyptic features (see Dan. 9:27; cf. Dan. 9:26 and 11:36),

47
In reaction to Childs, Melugin 1974:308 asks himself the fundamental question:
Should we agree with him that in Isa 28:1422 the elements which do not normally
belong to the genre are the work of a redactor? Or should we see in these unique
features of the text the prophets artistic freedom to modify the customary pattern of
the genre?
48
Roberts 1987:3839.
49
See also the critique of Eichrodt 1967:135 on the perspective of Procksch. Wild-
berger 1982:1073 points out that the word field of verse 16 is borrowed from the ideol-
ogy of the temple and adds that the terms hsjm and rtsn employed in verse 15 also
constitute a part thereof (cf. Ps. 27:5).
50
Clements 1980(B):232 and Beuken 2000:55.
51
See Jer. 15:4; 24:9; 29:18; 34:17; 2 Chron. 29:8. Cf. hw:[}z"l] in Deut. 28:25 and Ezek.
23:46.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 83 1/18/2007 2:17:05 PM

 84 chapter three

although Isaianic authenticity cannot be excluded in this instance with

any degree of certainty either (cf. 10:2223).52 In any event, the divine
designation t/ab;x] hwIhy yn:doa} the Lord YHWH Zebaot employed in 28:22b is
characteristic of the prophet Isaiah.53
While a degree of hesitation is evident among scholars with respect
to the authenticity of 28:19b and 28:22b, there are no convincing rea-
sons to deny the Isaian authorship and thus authenticity of the saying
in 28:20 or the comparison in 28:21. The saying found in 28:20 may
have been borrowed from the wisdom tradition with which Isaiah was
very familiar.54 The verse is characterised by its high poetic content,
given expression to by its use of rare vocabulary as well as its choice of
style features. The comparison in 28:21 likewise exhibits clear poetic
structure and speaks of the work of YHWH in typically Isaianic style (cf.
5:12,19; 10:12; 19:25; 29:23).
Within the framework of the present study the question of the au-
thenticity of the Zion text of 28:16 is naturally a high priority. While
some discussion exists concerning whether 28:1617a is in its original
place in its present context, there would appear to be a considerable
degree of consensus as to the authenticity of these verses. Even Childs,
who considers 28:1617a to be a secondary interpolation and considers
the said verses to be the work of a redactor, nevertheless, and along with
Procksch, recognises the Isaianic character of the passage in question.
Fey goes a step further, convinced that only Isaiah himself could have
been responsible for the interpolation of 28:1617a into the present
context. He supports his hypothesis by pointing to the unusual and radi-
cal character of the interpolation.55 It remains difficult to understand,
however, why Isaiahs creativity could not have left its mark on the cur-
rent form of the prophecy from the very beginning. The fact that such
creativity is a particular characteristic of Isaiah is apparent, for example,
from the way in which the prophet is able to disrupt the typical pattern
of prophetic judgement in texts such as 28:12 and 30:15 (both taken to

52
See Beuken 2000:59.
53
See Isa. 3:15; 10:2324; 22:5,12,1415; cf. t/ab;x] hw:hy /da;h; in 1:24; 3:1; 10:16,33;
19:4.
54
See Whedbee 1971.
55
Fey 1963:122: Die Zusammenstellung ist zu eigenwillig, die Strung des Grund-
bestandes zu entscheidend, als da man sie einem Schler oder spteren Redaktor
Jesajas zutrauen knnte. So blieben Ursach und Zweck dieses Einschubs weiterhin
ungeklrt. Jeppesen 1984:9399 considers the Zion text of 28:16 (he understands
28:17a to be part of the threat) to be an independent Isaianic unit that was only placed
in its current position by Deutero-Isaiah.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 84 1/18/2007 2:17:05 PM

 the literary and historical context 85

be authentic) by inserting a quotation containing words of expectation

and hope.56
A number of exegetes are inclined, nevertheless, not only to deny the
redaction of 28:1617a to Isaiah but also the texts authorship. Kaiser
ascribes 28:16ab17a to an early exilic editor,57 while Vermeylen even
goes so far as to date the Zion text in the post-exilic period.58 Kilian con-
siders the authenticity of 28:1617a an open question, but leans none-
theless in the direction of rejecting Isaianic authorship. In his opinion,
the Isaianic origin of the Zion text can only be maintained if 28:16a
is translated as a perfect (dann ist der Gerichtscharakter gewahrt) and
28:16b is understood as an interpolation, which brings us to a later pe-
riod and demands eschatological explanation.59 It is apparent from an
earlier study of the same author that he himself is completely convinced
that 28:1617a should be understood as a promise of salvation. He con-
cludes on this basis that we are dealing with a secondary redactional ex-
pansion, because the current context of judgement (28:1422) does not
permit us to ascribe Isaianic origin to the said message of salvation.60
It is clear that the difficulties concerning the presupposed Isaianic
authorship of 28:1617a expressed by the exegetes to whom we have
referred are not only based on form-critical considerations, bearing in
mind that the hypothesis of a later interpolation need not exclude the
possibility that Isaiah was the original author of the Zion text. Their
difficulties with the authenticity of 28:1617a are related rather to their
vision of the character of Isaiahs preaching. When one considers Isa-
iah a prophet of judgement and nothing more, then ascribing words
of salvation to him would, by definition, make no sense. Whether such
a position does justice to reality, however, remains open to question.
Whatever the case, it is methodically incorrect to exclude in advance
the possibility that Isaiah may have spoken words of salvation based on
the presupposed judgement character of his preaching. In Kilians case,
moreover, his inclination to challenge the authenticity of the Zion text

56
Melugin 1974:309. Cf. also Irwin 1977:26. Delitzsch 1889:316 alludes to 7:14 in
which a promise instead of an expected announcement of judgement follows kel;. Rob-
erts 1987:3839 ascribes the frequent mixture of threat and promise in a single form
to the creativity of the prophet. Hermisson 1973:69 refers to the latter as the ambiva-
lence of Isaiahs expectation of the future. Kilian 1983:61 by contrast, characterises this
notion as ein recht zweifelhaftes Postulat.
57
See Kaiser 19762:199.
58
See Jeppesen 1984:97 and Becker 1997:232.
59
Kilian 1994:162.
60
Kilian 1983:5863. Idem Becker 1997:231.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 85 1/18/2007 2:17:05 PM

 86 chapter three

of 28:16 is related to his vision of the origin and date of the so-called
Zion tradition. Kilians argument leaves one with the strong impression
that he desires to exclude 28:16 in advance from any discussion of the
Zion tradition relating to Isaiah. His opinion is thus in sharp contrast
to that of Herrmann who considers the Zion text in question to be the
very seed of Isaiahs Zion expectation.61 Even Hardmeier, who follows
Kilian to a considerable degree with respect to the Zion texts in the
book of Isaiah, insists that a more thorough discussion is necessary con-
cerning, among other things, Isa. 28:16.62

3.6. Dating Isaiah 28:1422

Having discussed the question of the authenticity of the prophecy of

28:1422, we must now address ourselves to the dating of these verses.
It goes without saying, of course, that the dating of the Zion text of
28:16 depends on ones perspective on the authenticity thereof. With
respect to the latter, we were able to discern a high degree of unanimity
among exegetes. There is no convincing reason to deny the authenticity
of 28:16 in advance. There would likewise appear to be a solid consensus
concerning the dating of the prophecy of judgement of which the Zion
text constitutes an integrative and central part. A significant majority
of exegetes date both the prophecy of 28:713 and that of 28:1422
in the later years of the prophets active life, in the period around 701,
when Jerusalem came under threat from the Assyrian king Sennacherib
(705681).
Globally speaking, four different periods can be distinguished in the
active life of the prophet Isaiah. The first period falls under the reign of
King Jotham who ruled at the latest up to 742 during a period in which
social turmoil gave the prophet occasion to deliver a biting critique of
all forms of social injustice. The second period coincides with the reign
of King Ahaz (742727). Isaiah was particularly vocal in this period
during the years of the Syro-Ephraimitic war (734732). The third and
fourth periods of Isaiahs activities both fall under the reign of King
Hezekiah (727698).63 The third period coincides with Ashdods futile

61
Herrmann 1965:144: Jes. 28,16.17a ist die Keimzelle der Zion-Erwartung
Jesajas.
62
Hardmeier 1986:10: so wird mindestens um 1,2126 und 28,16 noch lnger und
grndlicher zu kmpfen sein.
63
See 3.7. for the various issues surrounding the date of King Hezekiah.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 86 1/18/2007 2:17:05 PM

 the literary and historical context 87

revolt against Sargon II (722705) of Assyria in 713711; the fourth

with the similarly futile revolt against Assyria in 705701, on which
occasion Hezekiah himself was also directly implicated. The majority
of prophecies collected in Isaiah 2833 would appear to stem from
this latter period. According to most exegetes, this is also the case with
respect to the prophecies of judgement found in 28:713 and 28:1422.
The covenant with Egypt, to which 28:15 seems to allude (cf. 30:15
and 31:13), fits most appropriately in the period in which Hezekiah
himself revolted against Assyria.
A few exegetes argue in favour of an earlier date with respect to
28:1422. While it is customary to date the prophecy in question to the
time of King Sennacherib (705681), some have been inclined to date
the prophecy during the reign of one or other of his predecessors:
Sargon II (722705), Shalmaneser V (727722) and even Tiglath-Pileser
III (745727).64 Schmidt, for example, locates the prophecy of 28:1422
during the reign of King Sargon II and associates it in particular with
the revolt of Ashdod in 713711.65 Although Egypt was also implicated
in the latter revolt (cf. Isaiah 20), Jerusalems involvement remained on
this occasion relatively limited. While the revolt of Ashdod enjoyed King
Hezekiahs sympathyhe may even have been personally involved in
negotiations with Egypt (cf. 18:16), he did not revoke his status as
a vassal on this occasion. The radicality of the judgement announced
in 28:1422, however, would thus appear to be inappropriate to this
particular situation.
Hayes and Irvine opt for an even earlier dating during the reign of
Shalmaneser V (727722). They are of the opinion that Isaiah 28 follows
Isaiah 18 in chronological terms and is to be dated to the final years
of Ephraim. Upheaval is evident in Ephraim from the latter years of
Tiglath-Pileser III to the moment Sargon II appeared in the west (722).
In the intervening years, Shalmaneser V was unsuccessful in subjugating
the west. While he was in Assyria in 726, the west had the opportunity
to seek support from Egypt. Ephraim was certainly not alone in hoping
for such support since it would appear that sympathy was growing at
the time in both Judah and Jerusalem for the idea of turning to Egypt
for assistance. Hezekiah had just succeeded to the throne in Jerusalem
at that very moment. According to Hayes and Irvine, the prophecy
of 28:1422 must have been uttered during this period together with

64
For the chronology of the Assyrian kings we follow Veenhof 2001:315.
65
H. Schmidt 1923.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 87 1/18/2007 2:17:05 PM

 88 chapter three

the prophecies in the following chapters. The prophecy of 30:67, for

example, is said to allude to the emissaries from Ephraim that Hezekiah
had allowed to pass through his land. Shalmaneser V returned to the
west in 725, however, from which point the fall of Samaria was virtually
guaranteed.66
While there is little doubt that the dating proposed by Hayes and
Irvine is original, it nevertheless falls outside the four working periods
of Isaiahs life that are familiar to us. Their vision is based entirely on
the unusual presupposition that Isaiah 2833 deals with the final years
of Ephraim and Samaria.67 They make the dating of the entire textual
segment dependent on the opening verses thereof in 28:14. The
probability of such a dating remains limited, however, if one accounts
for the fact that the judgement announced in 28:1422 had not yet
become a reality for Jerusalem in 725. While Hezekiah may indeed have
already acceded to the throne in 727, it is more or less certain that he
would have been too young in 725 to be able to offer political support to
Ephraims endeavours to seek help from Egypt.
A few exegetes go even further and argue in favour of an extremely
early dating of 28:1422 during the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III (745
727), when Ahaz was king of Judah. Lindblom is even inclined to date
28:122, which he considers an original unity, to Isaiahs earliest years,
prior to the outbreak of the Syro-Ephraimitic war in 734. He is of the
opinion that a dating after the Syro-Ephraimitic war is undermined
by the fact that Isaiah does not appear to be aware of the war in
the prophecy of 28:14 addressed against Samaria. Isaiahs attack is
ultimately focussed on the moral decline in Samaria and is independent
of political considerations. According to Lindblom, the prophet took
the opportunity to go public with his prophecy during a disorderly cultic
feast in Jerusalem. In order to add strength to his words, Isaiah then
linked this revelation concerning Ephraim/Samaria with a prophecy of
judgement against the drunken priests and prophets who were described
in 28:14 as those who rule the people and who despise yhwh.68 Besides
Lindblom, Fey also dates the prophecy of 28:1422 in Isaiahs earliest

66
Hayes and Irvine 1987:320330. According to Lindblom 1955:128, Bentzen
1943/44 also opts for a dating immediately prior to 722.
67
Hayes and Irvine 1987:1315.
68
Lindblom 1955:128129. Kissane 19602 likewise leans towards a dating of Isaiah
28 as a whole in the period of King Ahaz: Indeed, if this poem were placed after
Chapter vii, there would be no question about its late date.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 88 1/18/2007 2:17:06 PM

 the literary and historical context 89

years, although he considers 28:1617a to be an interpolation made by

the prophet himself at a later date. According to Fey, the prophecy of
28:14 must at the very least have come into existence before Isaiahs
opinion with respect to the Assyrians had changed, in other words
before 10:519 and 14:2427.69
In like fashion to the dating proposed by Hayes and Irvine, Lind-
bloms early dating is entirely determined by the prophecy addressed
to Samaria in 28:14. Apart from the fact that there is no single reason
to date 28:14 prior to the Syro-Ephraimitic war, the dating of the
prophecy in question ultimately has nothing to say with respect to
dating the remainder of Isaiah 28. Indeed, it is highly unlikely that
28:122 should be understood as an original unity.70 The curious
situation sketched by Lindblom of a prophet who has received a
revelation yet still has to search for the appropriate moment to make it
public remains implausible.71 Furthermore, the focal point of Isaiah 28
is thus concentrated in the prophecy of 28:14, while the remainder of
the chapter is ascribed a subordinate function. In the present authors
opinion, it is more reasonable to trace the focal point of Isaiah 28 to the
prophets preaching against Jerusalem, whereby the prophecy of 28:14
is ascribed a subordinate function. The fate of Samaria was to serve as
a warning example for Jerusalem. With respect to Feys hypothesis one
can argue that Isaiahs opinion of Assyria represents a separate question
in Isaiah research, whereby the exegesis of the relevant texts alone can
provide for any degree of certainty. It is methodically incorrect to turn
matters around and to arrive at an early date for 28:1422 on the basis
of a supposed change in Isaiahs thinking.
Bearing all the above considerations in mind, a date for the prophecy
of 28:1422 is best sought during the reign of Sennacherib, when
the Assyrian threat against Jerusalem was at its height and help was
sought in desperation from Egypt. The place ascribed to the prophecy
in question in the book of Isaiah supports such a dating. Indeed, the
segment of Isaiah consisting of chapters 2833 would appear to contain
a large number of prophecies from the period 705701. This leads to the
conclusion that the dating of 28:1422 during the period of Hezekiahs
revolt against Sennacherib ultimately enjoys the best credentials.

69
Fey 1963:122.
70
See the discussion hereof in 3.3.
71
Cf. Lindblom 1955:128129: Er fhlte den Drang, diese Revelation irgendwie
ffentlich bekannt zu machen.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 89 1/18/2007 2:17:06 PM

 90 chapter three

3.7. Dating the reign of Hezekiah

The deliberations presented in the preceding paragraph led us to the

conclusion that the prophecy of 28:1422, within which the Zion text of
28:16 is set, should be understood against the background of Hezekiahs
revolt against Sennacherib. In the following paragraph, we will offer a
sketch of the historical situation relative to this background. In order to
do so, however, we must first register a number of details relevant to the
reign of King Hezekiah.
Few kings of Judah have been as important for the history of Israel
as King Hezekiah. It seems surprising, therefore, that the extent of his
reign is among the most difficult to establish of all the kings of Judah.
The biblical data relevant to the chronology of Hezekiah present the
exegete with a number of problems that remain impossible to resolve
at the present moment. The literature contains a minimum of three
different perspectives on the dates of Hezekiahs reign:72
1. The first perspective is based on the reference found in 2 Kgs 18:1
to Hezekiahs accession to the throne in the third year of the reign
of Hoshea, the last king of the northern kingdom. Given that the
fall of Samaria (722/720) is dated in 2 Kgs 18:10 in the ninth year of
Hosheas reign, and bearing in mind that 2 Kgs 18:2 informs us that
Hezekiah reigned for 29 years, we are left with a reign dating from
727 to 698 (Tadmor).
2. The second perspective is based on 2 Kgs 18:13 in which the
campaign of Sennacherib (701) is dated in the fourteenth year of
Hezekiahs reign. Given that Hezekiah fell ill during the same period
and was granted, according to 2 Kgs 20:6, an extension to his life
of 15 years, it would appear that Hezekiah remained in power until
686. If we account for the 29 years referred to in 2 Kgs 18:2, we are
left with a reign dating from 715/714 to 686 (Thiele/Bright).
3. The third perspective endeavours to harmonise the information
supporting the first two by presupposing that Hezekiah began his
reign in 727 as co-regent and only later, from 715/714, acceded to
the throne as sole monarch. The 29-year reign referred to in 2 Kgs

72
The three distinct perspectives are to be found in Naaman 1994:236. See also
Hutter 1982:5255, Gonalves 1986:5160 and the literature referred to in Herrmann
1986:398.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 90 1/18/2007 2:17:06 PM

 the literary and historical context 91

18:2 can thus be calculated on the basis of both dates. This leaves us
with two alternative reigns: 727(715/714) to 698 or 727(715/714) to
686 (Gonalves).73
The discussion does not only revolve around the contradictory features
of the information relating to Hezekiah himself but also the problem of
determining the year in which his father Ahaz died. In spite of the fact
that there is no consensus on the matter, a dating of the year of Ahaz
death in 727 seems likely. If we take the data from 2 Kgs 16:20 and 2
Kgs 18:1 together then the year of Ahaz death coincides with the third
year of the reign of Hoshea, the last king of Israel. Based on the fact
that the fall of Samaria (722/720) is dated in 2 Kgs 18:10 in the ninth
year of Hosheas reign, the year in which Ahaz died can be established
in 727. This dating is unexpectedly reinforced by the prophecy con-
cerning Philistia passed on to us in Isa. 14:2832.74 The said prophecy
is dated in the year of Ahaz death and would appear to have been ut-
tered on the occasion of the recent death of an Assyrian king and the
arrival of a Philistine emissary in Jerusalem. The Assyrian king in ques-
tion is described as the rod that struck you and is difficult to identify
with anyone other than Tiglath-Pileser III (745727).75 The arrival of
the Philistine emissary in Jerusalem probably relates to an attempt to
make use of the death of Tiglath-Pileser III to stimulate the formation
of an anti-Assyrian coalition. The fact that other sources cannot con-
firm that such an endeavour to form a coalition took place in 727 should
not be understood as conclusive evidence in rejection of the proposed
date. The efforts of the Philistines were apparently unsuccessful. In any
event, the fact that Judah did not want to join such a coalition is hardly
surprising given the interregnum that must have followed, more or less,
the simultaneous death of King Ahaz. Moreover, Judah had voluntarily
submitted itself to Assyrian vassalship a couple of years earlier on King
Ahaz initiative and had been witness to the atrocities committed by the
Assyrians at the end of the Syro-Ephraimitic war (734732) in Aram
and Ephraim.
According to 2 Kgs 16:2, Ahaz was 20 years old when he took to
the throne and he reigned for 16 years in Jerusalem. This implies that

73
Becking 2003:55 presupposes the Hezekiahs co-regentship had already com-
menced in 730/729.
74
Cf. Ahlstrm 1993:688689.
75
Other perspectives are listed in Schoors 1997:8687.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 91 1/18/2007 2:17:06 PM

 92 chapter three

Ahaz died when he was 36 years of age. The idea that his son Hezekiah
was 25 years old when his father died, as related in 2 Kgs 18:2, implies
that Ahaz had become a father at the age of 11, which is more or less
unimaginable. By contrast, however, there is much to be said for the
ancient tradition that the announcement to Ahaz of the birth of the
Emmanuel, son of David, in Isa. 7:14, was to be fulfilled in the birth of
Hezekiah. In such an instance, the birth of Hezekiah can be dated to
the beginning of the Syro-Ephraimitic war (734732), thus making He-
zekiah 8 years old at the most when his father died and far too young to
be able to exercise his reign. Other senior officials must have attended to
the running of the royal court for a number of years until Hezekiah was
old enough to succeed to the throne.76 Bearing in mind the accession to
the throne in the third year of the reign of Hoshea related in 2 Kgs 18:1
on the one hand, and the date of Sennacheribs military campaign pro-
vided by 2 Kgs 18:13 in the fourteenth year of Hezekiahs reign on the
other, this means that Hezekiah was already king in name from 727 but
did not come to exercise his reign as such until 715/714 or thereabouts.
Instead of the co-regentship proposed by the third perspective outlined
above, a solution might be found in the idea of temporary guardianship.
The fact that no mention can be found of the latter, however, remains a
source of dissatisfaction.77
2 Kgs 18:2, however, poses a problem to this dating. It states that
Hezekiah was 25 years old when he took to the throne. According to
the information outlined above, however, Hezekiah had not reached
the age of 25 when his father Ahaz died in 727 nor was he 25 when he
actually acceded to the throne in 715/714. At his fathers death, he was
probably no more than 8 years old, and when he actually acceded to
the throne in 715/714 he was 20 years of age at the most. In order to
uphold the age of 25 years referred to in 2 Kgs 18:2, we would have
to set the year of Hezekiahs birth back by a minimum of five years.
This would not provide Hezekiahs age during the third year of the

76
B.J. Oosterhoff, Bijbels Handboek 2a, Kampen 1982:366 speaks of guardianship.
Hutter 1982:5557 suggests the queen mother Abu and the priest Uriah (Isa. 8:2). He
also considers it possible that Isaiah himself had an important role to play in the royal
court at the time, but admits that there is no conclusive evidence in support of such a
hypothesis.
77
Galil 1996:102 presupposes that the dating of Sennacheribs campaign in the four-
teenth year of Hezekiahs reign as given in 2 Kgs 18:13 is not original, but due rather to
the calculations of the redactor. The redactor in question endeavoured in vain to har-
monise the length of Hezekiahs reign (= 29; see 2 Kgs 18:10) with the 15-year extension
to the kings life promised around the time of the siege of Jerusalem (see 2 Kgs 20:6).

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 92 1/18/2007 2:17:06 PM

 the literary and historical context 93

reign of Hoshea (the year in which his father Ahaz died, 727) alluded
to in 2 Kgs 18:1 but rather the actual age at which he acceded to the
throne in 715/714. It is highly improbable, however, that two different
dating systems were at work within the context of 2 Kgs 18:12. Based
on the information we have at our disposal, it would appear that the
problem of Hezekiahs age will have to be left for the time being without
a satisfactory solution.
A second intractable problem evident in current research is related
to the 15-year extension granted to Hezekiahs life and referred to in 2
Kgs 20:6. The year of Hezekiahs death can be established as 698, since
a later date would unavoidably disrupt the chronology of his successors.
The 55-year reign of Hezekiahs son Manasseh came to an end in 642
at the latest. If we date Hezekiahs reign as 727(715/714)698, we are
left with little if any room to be able to offer a meaningful place to the
15-year extension to his life. The promise of an ample life extension
was related to the promise of deliverance for Jerusalem from the might
of Assyria. Hezekiahs illness must thus be located in the years prior to
Sennacheribs campaign and, in spite of the reversal of events narrated
in the Bible, prior to the liberation of Jerusalem.78 It would appear that

78
The reversal of the chronological order, whereby the story of Hezekiahs illness
and the arrival of the emissaries from Babylon (2 Kings 20) is only related after the
liberation of Jerusalem (2 Kings 1819), can be explained as follows. Given that the
prophecy uttered by Isaiah on the occasion of the arrival of the emissary from Babylon
already speaks of the future deportation to Babylon and the exile that followed (2 Kgs
20:1718; verse 18 may be a later interpolation), it is possible that the biblical authors
found occasion herein to remove the prophecy with regard to Babylon from its historical
context, which was characterised by the threat from Assyria. The miraculous libera-
tion of Jerusalem, moreover, may have created the impression that the core of Isaiahs
prophecy was no longer valid. By relating the story of Hezekiahs illness and cure after
that of Jerusalems liberation, the suggestion is avoided that Jerusalem was also to be
kept free of future hostile conquest. In fact, a number of prophets of salvation would
later give vivid expression to this suggestion in their pronouncements (cf. Jeremiah 28).
The reversal of narrative sequence emphasises the fact that both Jerusalem and Heze-
kiah had been granted a miraculous reprieve. This implied, however, that judgement
had been postponed and not withdrawn. It is worthy of note that the book of Chronicles
tries to straighten out the creases brought about by this reversal of chronological order.
According to 2 Chron. 32:23, Hezekiah is said to have received all sorts of valuable gifts
from every side after the liberation of Jerusalem. This is intended to remove the tension
in the narratives of the second book of Kings between the riches revealed by Hezekiah
to the emissaries from Babylon (2 Kgs 20:13) and his earlier payment of tribute to the
king of Assyria (2 Kgs 18:1516). The actual reason for the Babylonian visit is likewise
obscured to a degree by the absence of any reference to a tour granted to the emissary
(of the armoury, among other things! Cf. 2 Kgs 20:13) or to Isaiahs harsh words. The
sin of Hezekiah is presented as pride and ingratitude (2 Chron. 32:25), while it is sug-
gested that Babylon was driven by astronomical concerns (2 Chron. 32:31).

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 93 1/18/2007 2:17:06 PM

 94 chapter three

the number 15 is based on a later reconstruction whereby an endeavour

was made to harmonise the 29-year reign referred to in 2 Kgs 18:2 with
Sennacheribs campaign, which is dated in 2 Kgs 18:13 in the four-
teenth year of Hezekiahs reign. In light of the visit of emissaries from
Babylon around 704/3 referred to in 2 Kgs 20:12, when Merodach-
Baladan reigned as king for nine months, Hezekiah must have lived
no more than five years after his illness, returning thus to rest with his
fathers in 698.79

3.8. Hezekiahs revolt and Sennacheribs campaign

The description of the situation surrounding Hezekiahs revolt and the

subsequent campaign of Sennacherib is based on the proposed dating
of Hezekiahs reign outlined above, namely 727(715/714)698. When
Hezekiah was old enough to rule in his own name in 715/714, it be-
came apparent that he had aspirations that made him sensitive from the
outset to any initiative that might lead to a break with Assyria. The first
opportunity arose when King Yamani of the Philistine city of Ashdod
attempted revolt in 713.80 Hezekiah sympathised with the rebels, which
gave rise to the prophecy passed on to us in Isaiah 20. While it is pos-
sible that he was involved in negotiations with Egypt (cf. Isa. 18:16),
Hezekiah did not seek to shake off his own vassal status at this stage and
he judiciously withdrew his support of Ashdods revolt.81 This appeared
in hindsight to be a sensible decision, given the fact that the Assyrian
king Sargon II immediately dispatched an expedition to punish Ashdod
in 712.82 In perfect line with the prophecy of Isaiah 20, placing ones
hope in Egypt would indeed prove pointless. Ashdod was captured and
turned into an Assyrian province. King Yamani, who had fled to Egypt
in the interim, was handed over to Assyria. All these events must have

79
A dating of the emissary of Merodach-Baladan around the time of the revolt of
Ashdod in 713 seems unlikely. Clements 1980(A):67, Hutter 1982:6771, Vogt 1986:2;
Galil 1996:104 and Goldberg 1999:363ff nevertheless follow this option. Merodach-
Baladan already occupied the throne of Babylon from 722 to 710. Reference to this
event in the context of the history of Sennacheribs campaign, however, argues in
favour of a dating in 704/3 (cf. 2 Kgs 20:6). Galil 1996:104 dates Hezekiahs reign from
726 to 697/6.
80
Cf. Ahlstrm 1993:692694.
81
Cf. Mittmann 1990:91, 9596.
82
Sargon had already engaged in a campaign in southern Palestine in 716, prior to
Hezekiahs autonomous reign. The impact thereof on Judah, however, remains unclear.
See Veenhof 2001:257.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 94 1/18/2007 2:17:07 PM

 the literary and historical context 95

convinced the young Hezekiah that revolt against Assyria would have to
be extremely well prepared if it was to stand any chance of success.83
Hezekiah was to busy himself with these preparations in the years
that followed. This period includes the reformation he pushed through
in the first years of his reign (2 Kgs 18:4; cf. 2 Chron. 29:3).84 While
there is no need to call Hezekiahs religious motives into question, it
cannot be denied that they were not exclusively religious in nature. The
implementation of his reformation was also made to serve his political
aspirations to restore the kingdom of David to its former glory.85 Of
course, the opposite is also true, namely that Hezekiah allowed himself
to be driven in his political aspirations by religious motives. The extraor-
dinarily positive evaluation given by the biblical authors with respect to
Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:56; cf. 23:25) can only be explained on the basis
of the Messianic expectation that had been evoked by his activities. He-
zekiah is one of the few kings who could be compared to David when it
came to religious passion (2 Kgs 18:3; see also Asa in 1 Kgs 15:11 and
Josiah in 2 Kgs 22:2; cf. Jehoshaphat in 2 Chron. 17:3). Just as yhwh
had once been with David and made him prosper in all his ways (1
Sam. 18:14), so yhwh appeared also to be with Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:7a),
although it must be pointed out that this statement does not seem to
be in keeping with the results of the excavations. Hezekiahs devotion
to yhwh reinforced the idea that he was a David Redivivus.86 The fact
that Hezekiahs devotion made little sense in political terms and the fact

83
Miller/Hayes 1986:353. Based on the dating of the so-called Azekah Inscription
in 712 (instead of the now accepted dating in 701), Goldberg 1999:369ff argues that
Sargons 712 campaign must also have been directed against Hezekiah and the tribute
mentioned in 2 Kgs 18:1416 should be associated with this occasion and not the events
of 701.
84
For further information on Hezekiahs reformation see Hutter 1982:6167. Spie-
ckermann 1982:170175 considers the said reformation to have been a construction of
the Deuteronomistic historiographer who employed Hezekiah to further elaborate the
antithesis between Manasseh and Josiah. Spieckermann follows the classic Wellhau-
sian line in this regard. See also Schoors 1998:34, 100101 in association with H.-D.
Hoffmann, Reform und Reformen. Untersuchungen zu einem Grundthema der deuteronomistischen
Geschichtsschreibung (1980). Ahlstrm 1993:701707 and Naxaman 1995:179195 also
raise significant doubt as to the historicity of Hezekiahs reformation.
85
Borowksi 1995:148155. See also Hutter 1982:6566 and Miller/Hayes 1986:356
357. Gonalves 1986:73101 (see also 533) concludes that both Hezekiahs revolt and
his reformation were part of one and the same national reform movement. In his opin-
ion, Hezekiahs cultic reform was intended in the first instance to counter Canaanite
influence and thereby protect Judah from the fate that had overcome Israel.
86
Cf. the Messianic expectation surrounding Jesus entry into and purification of the
temple (Mt. 21:117).

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 95 1/18/2007 2:17:07 PM

 96 chapter three

that his political behaviour attracted Isaiahs condemnation time after

time does not seem to have had a negative influence on the positive
evaluation of Hezekiahs piety furnished by the biblical authors. One is
left in the meantime, however, with a highly tendentious historiography,
determined to a large extent by religious motives.
Together with a number of cultic measures, Hezekiah also imple-
mented a series of changes at the level of government and the economy.87
The latter had become necessary in part because of the enormous pop-
ulation increase that had taken place in Judah in the preceding years as
a result of the arrival of large numbers of refugees from the northern
kingdom of Ephraim.88 Jar handles have been found in several loca-
tions with the inscription lmlk from the king, which provide a clear
indication as to the way in which Hezekiah organised the distribution of
food.89 Numerous building projects, among them the so-called tunnel of
Siloam, which was designed to secure the supply of water to Jerusalem
in the event of a siege (2 Chron. 32:30; cf. 2 Chron. 32:4), fit well in the
context of Hezekiahs preparations for a possible revolt.90
The appropriate moment for the planned revolt presented itself on
the sudden death of Sargon II in 705. Merodach-Baladan had man-
aged to recapture the throne in Babylon and hold it for a period of
nine months in 704/3. The illness and miraculous healing of Hezekiah
should be dated to the same period (2 Kgs 20:111), at which occasion
Merodach-Baladan sent emissaries to visit Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:1221).
The visit in question is not as innocent as its presentation in 2 Kgs 20:12
would lead us to believe. Hezekiahs illness and healing would appear to
have functioned as a front, since one can deduce both from the inspec-
tion of Hezekiahs treasure house and armoury (!) and from Isaiahs re-
action to this inspection that the envoys from Babylon also had political
intentions, namely the organisation of a major revolt against Assyria. It
is probable that Merodach-Baladan was aware of Hezekiahs political
aspirations and the various activities he had undertaken in this regard
and that he wanted to fan the flames of revolt. Hezekiah thus seems

87
See Hutter 1982:7780.
88
Zwickel 1999:356377.
89
Borowski 1995:152. See also Ahlstrm 1993:699701.
90
Miller/Hayes 1986:354. For a survey of Hezekiahs building activities see Ahl-
strm 1993:697699 and Gonalves 1986:6068. Rogerson/Davies 1996:138149
recently tried to redate the Siloam tunnel and its inscription to the Hasmonean period.
Hendel 1996:233247 and Norin 1998:3748, however, demonstrated serious weak-
nesses in their argumentation.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 96 1/18/2007 2:17:07 PM

 the literary and historical context 97

to have been the right man for the job at that moment in time, given
that he quickly became the driving force behind a broad anti-Assyrian
coalition.91 Even the Philistine cities joined in the fray, although in light
of their painful experiences during the campaign of Sargon II in 712 it
will have been likely that they were not all equally enthusiastic members
of the coalition. King Mitinti of Ashdod had to be forced to participate
and when King Padi of Ekron continued to refuse to join the coalition,
Hezekiah took him prisoner and annexed his city. The city of Gaza,
however, was successful in keeping out of the coalition, although it did
not remain completely unscathed, having lost a significant portion of its
territory to Judah.92 Reference is also made in 2 Kgs 18:8 to this politics
of expansion into Philistine territory. It seems apparent that Hezekiah
did not appear to shy away from annexations and crusades of retribu-
tion. Surprisingly enough, and contrary to what one might expect, his
successes are viewed as the expression of Gods blessing. In order to
cover his back, Hezekiah likewise reassured himself of Egypts support,
much against Isaiahs repeated warnings.
Assyria did not hesitate to react. Having dealt provisionally with
Merodach-Baladan in 704/3,93 Sennacherib initiated a campaign
against Palestine in 701 in the fourteenth year of Hezekiahs reign (2
Kgs 18:13).94 The precise course of the campaign is difficult to trace in

91
Becking 2003:68 doubts whether Hezekiah was the real leader of the revolt. The
emissary from Merodach-Baladan, Hezekiahs actions against the Philistines, the grad-
ual yet strategic fortification of Jerusalem, and the way in which the Assyrian annals
describe Hezekiah as one of their most important enemies, however, all serve to rein-
force the opposite position.
92
See Mittmann 1990:92103.
93
It is possible that the prophecy of 21:110 should be understood against this
background. See Gallagher 1999:2246. Gallagher 1999:6074 makes an intriguing
attempt to persuade the reader that it is also acceptable to read 22:114 against the
same historical background.
94
Given the fact that the sources contradict one another in places, namely with
respect to the outcome of the campaign, many have endeavoured to arrive at a reli-
able reconstruction of events. Although Childs 1967:118120 concluded that a pre-
cise reconstruction of the events surrounding 701 was probably impossible, attempts
to arrive at such a reconstruction continued nevertheless (Gonalves 1986; Van der
Kooij 1986; Laato 1987, 1988; Seitz 1992; Gallagher 1999). It has become clear in
the meantime that the proposed possibility of two different campaigns, the first in 701
resulting in Assyrian victory, the second around 689687 resulting in Assyrian defeat
(see, among others, Van Leeuwen 1965:267272 and Shea 1985:401418), suggested
by some scholars should be rejected on the grounds that it lacks any form of supporting
evidence (see the discussion in Hutter 1982:99102, Gonalves 1986:125131, Van der
Kooij 1986:106, Yurco 1991:3545 and Gallagher 1999:89). A variant of the same
hypothesis is suggested by Goldberg 1999:360390 who maintains that a minor cam-
paign led by Sargon in 712 preceded the major campaign led by Sennacherib in 701.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 97 1/18/2007 2:17:07 PM

 98 chapter three

every detail. The annals of Sennacherib allude to major conquests but

do not always follow the correct chronological order in their reference
to particular victories.95 Generally speaking, however, we can subdivide
the campaign into three stages.96 In the first instance, Sennacherib fo-
cused his attention on Judahs allies along the Phoenician coast. He then
turned against the Philistine cities after which he headed towards the
territory of Judah itself.
It was evident from the beginning that the coalition front was neither
strong enough nor resolved enough to oppose Sennacheribs advance.
The cities of Arvad and Byblos, Hezekiahs allies in Phoenicia, quickly
surrendered to the Assyrians. King Luli of Sidon (also of Tyre?) fled to
Cyprus and Sidon capitulated, while Tyre remained unconquered.97 The
Philistine front was also unable to hold firm against Sennacheribs forces.98
Ashdod, which had never been a solid member of the coalition, quickly
capitulated, followed thereafter by the conquest of Ashkelon, Elteke,
Timna, Azekah and finally Ekron.99 It is not completely clear at what
moment the Egyptian forces, under the leadership of Prince Taharqa,
arrived on the scene. The battle of Elteke that followed their arrival
must, in any case, have taken place prior to the conquest of Ekron.100

Becking 2003:4672 likewise presupposes an earlier campaign led by Sargon, although

he dates this around 715/714. The campaign in question may have been led by crown
prince Sennacherib. For a recent and succinct survey of the history of research into
Sennacheribs campaign see Grabbe 2003:2036.
95
For the text of the annals of Sennacherib and a description thereof, see Frahm
1997. For a critical evaluation of the historicity of the Assyrian annals see Laato
1995:198226.
96
See Naaman 1979:6465, Gonalves 1986:109115, Frahm 1997:1011, Gal-
lagher 1999:7 and Veenhof 2001:263267.
97
The annals of Sennacherib make no reference to the fate of Tyre in 701, in spite
of the fact that it must have been the most important city in Phoenicia at the time.
According to Vogt 1986:9, Tyre was intentionally left alone. For a discussion of the dif-
ficulties involved in determining the fate of Tyre see Gallagher 1999:91104. It would
appear from the Rassam-Cylinder of Sennacherib that Ammon, Moab and Edom also
directly capitulated (cf. Gallagher 1999:105112).
98
For this phase of the confrontation see Gallagher 1999:113128.
99
Mittmann 1990:100, 103.
100
Laato 1995:216217 presupposes that the battle of Elteke took place prior to
the invasion of Judah because Philistia and Judah participated therein. In line with
Kitchen, Ahlstrm 1993:713 maintains that there were two confrontations with the
Egyptian army. The first took place prior to the conquest of Ekron, while the second
took place at Libnah. In the latter instance, Taharqa was able to withdraw his troops in
time to avoid a battle. There is some discussion surrounding the question of Taharqas
age at the time and whether he would have been old enough to lead the Egyptian army
against Sennacherib.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 98 1/18/2007 2:17:07 PM

 the literary and historical context 99

Based on 2 Kgs 18:17ff, it is probable that Sennacherib had already

sent a military attachment to Jerusalem prior to his confrontation with
the Egyptians at Elteke, in an endeavour to provoke Hezekiah to give
up the revolt and open the gates of the city to him. While Hezekiah
remained firm at this juncture, one can deduce from the report found
in 2 Kgs 18:1416 that he was surprised at the speed with which the
coalition had disintegrated and that he had endeavoured to mitigate im-
pending disaster even before the arrival of the Assyrian envoy. By way
of a delegation to Sennacherib, who was encamped outside Lachish at
the time, Hezekiah offered to submit to Assyria and asked Sennacherib,
under confession of his sin,101 to withdraw from him (2 Kgs 18:14).102
Although Sennacherib went on to impose a hefty tribute,103 it is possible
that he was not satisfied with Hezekiahs surrender and the compensa-
tion he had been willing to pay,104 since he sent his officials to Jerusalem
nonetheless105 and demanded that the gates of the city, the focal point of

101
Hezekiahs sin refers to the violation of the vassal oath he had sworn in the pres-
ence of yhwh; cf. Ezek. 17:1121.
102
According to Gallagher 1999:256, surrender at this point was conditional on the
departure of Sennacherib and his troops. This would explain why the Assyrian annals
state that Hezekiah dispatched his tribute to Sennacherib in Nineveh. It seems improb-
able, however, that Hezekiah would have been in a position to negotiate conditions.
103
In line with Seitz 1993(B):5052, Goldberg 1999:362 also maintains that 2 Kgs
18:1416 should be dated during an earlier Assyrian campaign (712). In contrast to that
of 701, the campaign of 712 would actually have taken place in the fourteenth year of
the reign of Hezekiah. In Goldbergs opinion, the invasion in question was a limited
one, under the leadership of Sargon, which got mixed up in the process of transmission
with that of Sennacherib, in like fashion to the conquest of Samaria, which is wrongly
ascribed in 2 Kgs 17:3; 18:9 (according to Goldberg) to Shalmaneser V, while it actually
took place under Sargon. The most important argument in support of this hypoth-
esis revolves around 2 Kgs 18:14 and the observation that the imposed tribute did not
square with the description thereof in the Assyrian annals. Goldberg also insists on a
post-invasion dating of both Hezekiahs illness and the visit of the envoys from Babylon
in 2 Kings 20, whereby he endeavours to account for the fact that Hezekiah still pos-
sessed riches after the presupposed invasion of 712 by appealing to the statement in
2 Chron. 32:23. It is more likely, however, that the statement found in 2 Chron. 32:23
is itself the result of a harmonisation effort.
104
2 Chron. 28:21 relates how King Ahaz, the father of Hezekiah, pointlessly emp-
tied the house of yhwh and his palaces, giving everything to Tiglath-Pileser III (cf.
2 Kgs 16:8).
105
I am aware that this reconstruction does not entirely square with the evidence.
The narrative of Sennacherib dispatching his officials follows the report of Hezekiahs
payment of tribute, but both events are not explicitly related to one another in the
text, in spite of suggestions to the contrary found in some translations. As a matter
of fact, both 2 Kgs 18:13 and 2 Kgs 18:17 are marked by the Masoretes as the begin-
ning of a new Petuchah. This might signify that the report of 2 Kgs 18:1416 originally
bore a more independent character and that it was intended as a very brief summary
of the events surrounding 701. If this were the case then the tribute paid by Hezekiah

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 99 1/18/2007 2:17:08 PM

 100 chapter three

the resistance, be opened to him.106 Given the fact that he still had one
last card to play, namely military reinforcements from Egypt, Hezekiah
refused to open the gates to Sennacherib, in spite of the fact that he was
now locked up like a bird in a cage. The Egyptian army was defeated,
however, and the Assyrians then went on to capture the city of Ekron.107
Sennacheribs accelerated advance and the destruction left in its wake
placed Hezekiah and his city under ever increasing pressure.
In spite of the enormous threat posed by the Assyrian army, Jeru-
salem was unexpectedly spared. The annals of Sennacherib are silent
about the events that followed and disguise the fact that the Assyrian
siege of Jerusalem had to be abandoned prematurely.108 Reference is
made in 2 Kgs 19:35 to the miraculous liberation of the city upon the
intervention of an angel of yhwh. The allusion to an angel of yhwh
may be related to an outbreak of plague in the Assyrian military camp
(cf. 2 Sam. 24:1517). The epidemic in question did not only claim a
large number of victims, but it was also probably seen by Sennacherib
as a divine sign that his campaign had to be brought to an abrupt end.109

and the tribute sent to Sennacherib in Nineveh, as recorded in the Assyrian annals, may
have been one and the same. The narrative of 2 Kgs 18:17ff might then be understood
as an interpolation for the sake of completeness and at the service of the prophetic
imagination.
106
Cf. Gallagher 1999:111: Through the imprisonment of Padi and his attacks
on pro-Assyrian cities in Philistia, Hezekiah had made himself Sennacheribs main
enemy and main target. Gallagher 1999:256ff presupposes that Sennacherib was only
willing to accept Hezekiahs surrender in the second instance and that he made an
agreement with him at this juncture and departed from Jerusalem. The fact that
Sennacherib considered Hezekiah to be a rebel leader, however, makes such a scenario
highly implausible.
107
Sennacherib is probably referring to the city of Ekron in the so-called Azekah
Inscription. The latter alludes to the conquest of a royal city in the land of Philistia.
Naaman (1974:2539) was first inclined to identify the said city as Gat (idem Ahlstrm
1993:711), but was later convinced by Mittmann 1990:9899, albeit with some linger-
ing doubts, that the city in question must have been Ekron, which had been annexed
and fortified by Hezekiah (Naaman 1994:245). In recent years, however, some scholars
have ascribed the Azekah Inscription to Sargon and dated it in 712 (see Goldberg
1999:363). For this reason, Gallagher 1999:1213 does not include the inscription in
his study of Sennacheribs campaign. Becking 2003:5657 dates the inscription to 715,
during an Assyrian offensive intended to reinforce the border with Egypt. The sources
remain unclear as to the moment Hezekiah set his captive, King Padi of Ekron, free.
Hutter 1982:94 links the latter to the second Assyrian mission to Jerusalem. While this
sounds plausible, it remains speculation.
108
Van der Kooij 1986:93109 has written an interesting article claiming that the
siege of Jerusalem took the form of a blockade. He appeals in support of his hypothesis
to the Assyrian sources and to the information contained in 2 Kgs 19:3233.
109
See Laato 1995:225n. For a discussion of the usefulness of Herodotus as a source
for reconstructing the closing stages of Sennacheribs campaign see Grabbe 2003:
119140.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 100 1/18/2007 2:17:08 PM

 the literary and historical context 101

Since Hezekiah had been the driving force behind the revolt, it does not
seem reasonable to presume that Sennacherib had already reached his
goal with the payment of tribute referred to in 2 Kgs 18:1316,110 or that
he had given up his plans to capture Jerusalem for political reasons.111
It seems more likely that Sennacherib would have preferred to replace
the ambitious Hezekiah, all the more so since Hezekiahs revolt in 703
701 had not been his first attempt, but that he was forced to abandon
his plans due to unforeseen circumstances. According to the Assyrian
annals, Hezekiah later dispatched significant tribute to King Sennach-
erib in Nineveh in the probable hope that the Assyrian army would
not return to Jerusalem.112 In spite of the fact that Jerusalem had been
miraculously spared, Judah as a whole was in a sorry state. The annals
of Sennacherib refer to the conquest of 46 fortified cities and countless
other minor locations. Reference is also made to mass deportations.

Excursus 1: Prophetic historiography in 2 Kings 1819

Scholars generally maintain that two parallel sources have been com-
bined in the narrative of Jerusalems liberation as described in 2 Kings
1819. To distinguish these sources from the fragment in which He-
zekiah endeavours to purchase Jerusalems freedom (2 Kgs 18:1316
designated as A), the sources in question are generally designated as
B1 (2 Kgs 18:1719:9a + 2 Kgs 19:3637) and B2 (2 Kgs 19:9b35).113
Although the textual unit running from 2 Kgs 18:17 to 2 Kgs 19:37 can
easily be read as one single prophetic account, it is not improbable that

110
Gonalves 1986:133134, 543544 even argues that Sennacherib never had the
intention of changing the status of Judah or of replacing King Hezekiah.
111
Berges 1998:208 (see also 282) presupposes that the relief of Jerusalem was a
result of rein machtpolitischem Kalkl, intended to avoid destabilising the region and
thereby favouring Egypt.
112
Laato 1995:218 considers it possible that the tribute referred to in the Assyrian
annals is not a second tribute following the one Hezekiah had offered to Sennacherib in
Lachish but rather the first annual tribute following Hezekiahs capitulation. The Assyr-
ian annals want to suggest the idea of a victory and camouflage the fact that Jerusalem
was not taken captive. For a description of the tendency in the Assyrian annals to glorify
the king and his divinity see Millard 1985:6177.
113
Childs 1967:69103. For a recent endeavour to date B1 and B2, see Naxaman
2000:393402 and 2003:201220. With a few minor variations, this account of Jeru-
salems liberation (B) can also be found in Isaiah 3637. Opinions differ considerably
as to the original location of this account, although the hypothesis that it stems from
the book of Isaiah is gaining ground. See in this regard, for example, Smelik 1986:70
93; 1992:97101; Konkel 1993:462482 and Vermeylen 1997:95118. A good survey
of the various positions is provided by Berges 1998:266277. For the present state of
research on Isaiah 3639, see also Hffken 2004:134139.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 101 1/18/2007 2:17:08 PM

 102 chapter three

a number of sources lie at its origins.114 The account itself does indeed
appear to contain a number of repetitions: the twofold reference to the
threatening words of the officials of Sennacherib, the twofold appeal
to yhwh for help and the twofold announcement of Jerusalems libera-
tion on the part of the prophet Isaiah. The book of Chronicles would
appear to have weeded out these doublets to the best of its ability and
transformed the account into a single, uninterrupted narrative (see 2
Chron. 32:123).115 On closer inspection, however, the dual character
of the account found in 2 Kings 1819 would appear to be rooted in a
deliberate, prophetic compositional technique.116
The story of Jerusalems liberation would appear to consist of two
phases. While it is no longer possible to determine with any degree of
certainty whether this two-phase sequence matches reality, it would
seem that distinguishing the two phases is nevertheless important in our
understanding of the prophetic exposition of the events surrounding
Hezekiah and the liberation of Jerusalem. Indeed, the second phase is
not simply a repetition of the first, since it is evident that the scenes pre-
sented in twofold form do not agree with one another in every respect,
but differ rather in a number of highly telling ways.

114
Gallagher 1999:143159 rejects the division of B into two separate and parallel
sources and defends the suggestion that B is intended to be read as one single whole. He
has collected a large amount of information in support of the historical reliability of B
(see pp. 160254). While Van der Kooij 2000:108111 accepts the current subdivision
into B1 and B2 (in line with Hardmeier 1990:157159 he considers B2 as a secondary
interpolation and not as an originally independent source), he defends the suggestion
that the entire composition of A + B1 + B2 exhibits thematic cohesion and is intended
to be read as one single account: The motif of bwvthe withdrawal, return, of
Sennacheribconstitutes a golden thread through the entire story. The fact that Sen-
nacherib does not return the first time, nor the second, but only at the third occasion,
creates a great deal of suspense: as a reader, one becomes curious to know if and when
the king of Assyria will actually withdraw and return to his country. (110) Van der
Kooij notes the dramatic effect of the bwv motif: Sennacherib does not disappear after
receiving silver and gold nor on account of rumours concerning Taharqa, but only on
account of the devastating activities of the angel of yhwh. In terms of historical reli-
ability, Van der Kooij gives priority to the Assyrian annals in spite of their propagandist
character (112113).
115
For a comparison with Kings and an appraisal of the ideological motives of the
Chronist see Ben Zvi 2003:8589.
116
Cf. Smelik 1992:123 . . . repetition is a literary device in order to clarify the
authors intention and to enhance the readers suspense. See also Hess 1999:39: This
concept of narrative parallelism has its poetic correspondent on a smaller scale in poetic
parallelism, especially synonymous parallelism whose purpose may be to reinforce the
statement in psalms and proverbs.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 102 1/18/2007 2:17:08 PM

 the literary and historical context 103

In the first instance, there is a clear difference in the presentation of

the behaviour of the Assyrian field marshal (the Rabshakeh). When he
arrives for the first time by himself, he mocks Hezekiah and tries to un-
dermine his confidence (2 Kgs 18:1920). In so doing he suggests two
possibilities, namely that Hezekiah either trusts in Egypt (2 Kgs 18:21)
or he trusts in yhwh (2 Kgs 18:22). In the eyes of the field marshal, how-
ever, there is little difference between the two since Hezekiah is going to
be cheated in the end anyway. Pharaoh is just as unreliable as a broken
reed and no other god, including yhwh, has ever been able to deliver a
people from the might of Assyria (2 Kgs 18:3335). He explicitly calls
upon the people of Judah not to let themselves be cheated and misled
by Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:29,32). In the second phase of the narrative, the
field marshal is even more pointed in his choice of words. Instead of
saying to the people dont let yourselves be cheated by Hezekiah . . .
he has his envoys declare to Hezekiah himself Do not let your God on
whom you rely deceive you . . . (2 Kgs 19:10).117 In the second instance,
the field marshals mockery is directed less against the person of Heze-
kiah and more against yhwh. It is possible that his directness goes hand
in hand with the hurriedness of his words this time round, since it would
appear that an Egyptian army led by the Ethiopian prince Taharqa had
arrived to offer Hezekiah assistance. It is clear that the field marshals
second appearance is not a simple repetition of the first, but rather that
it represents a climax. In the second phase of the narrative, the issue
surrounding Hezekiah and the God of Jerusalem is pushed to its limits.
This fact is an important indication that the two-phase structure of the
narrative of Jerusalems liberation is an intentional composition and
can be characterised as prophetic historiography.118

117
For the importance of the notion jfb trust in this narrative see Olley 1999:59
77. The concept occurs ten times in 2 Kings 1819 and only three times elsewhere in
the books Genesis to Kings (Deut. 28:52; Judg. 9:26; 20:36). In the book of Isaiah, by
contrast, jfb occurs 17 times (excluding Isaiah 3639; see Olley 1999:6669) and in the
book of Psalms no less than 52 times (see Olley 1999:6971). Based on the contexts in
which the concept jfb is employed, Olley contests Clements idea that the narrative of
Jerusalems liberation should be read against the background of a faith in the inviolabil-
ity of Zion that arose in 701: . . . the integral place of jf'B; in the narrative points to
the absence of an inviolability of Zion theology as crucial to the narrative from the
beginning. The key is trust in yhwh. (73)
118
Cf. Rudman 2000:101: It has been argued that the purpose of the passage
is not merely to explain the apparently miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem from
Sennacherib in 701 B.C.E. but to render a literary portrait of a duel between two war-
rior-antagonists, Yahweh and Sennacherib. Fewell 1986:7990 speaks in this regard of
words at war. Cf. also Ben Zvi 1990:7992 and Clements 1994:231246.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 103 1/18/2007 2:17:08 PM

 104 chapter three

The prophetic character of the account is given expression in the

prophetic depiction of the field marshals intervention.119 Indeed, the
very location in which he delivers his message (2 Kgs 18:17) has pro-
phetic attributes, since it is the same location in which the prophet Isa-
iah had earlier confronted King Ahaz and appealed to him not to place
his trust in Assyria but rather in yhwh. The question of trust is at issue
once again in the present text.120 As a matter of fact, the Assyrian field
marshal is presented as the prophet Isaiahs opposite.121 Not only does
this come to expression in the location in which the message is deliv-
ered and in the theme of his speech, but it also finds expression in his
threefold use of the messenger formula (2 Kgs 18:19,29,31; cf. the mes-
senger formula in Isaiahs response in 2 Kgs 19:6) whereby Sennacherib
is explicitly referred to as l/dG:h' l,M,h' the great king (2 Kgs 18:19,28), a
term of address employed exclusively of yhwh in the Psalms: l,m,
r,a;h;AlK;Al[' l/dG: great king over all the earth (Ps. 47:3) and l,m,W l/dG: lae
yhilaAlK;Al[' l/dG: a great God, and a great King above all gods (Ps. 95:3; cf.
Mal. 1:14).122 When the field marshal turns to address the people, more-
over, he employs an introductory formula with prophetic associations:
rWVa' l,m, l/dG:h' l,M,h'Arb'D W[m]vi Hear the word of the great king, the king of
Assyria! . In addition, the field marshal presents himself in 2 Kgs 18:25 as
one sent by yhwh (cf. Isa. 10:5,7). The extent to which he has taken the
prophetic mantle upon himself, however, becomes all the more explicit
in 2 Kgs 18:3132 when he combines the promise of an eschatologi-
cal blessing (cf. Mi. 4:4; Zech. 3:10) with the appeal to listen to him.123
The prophetic features already evident in the field marshals message in
the first phase of the account serve to depict him as a false prophet in
contrast to the true prophet Isaiah.124 The suggestion that this antitheti-

119
Cf. Rudman 2000:101: One of the most remarkable features of the Rabsakehs
speech in Account B1 is that it is full of prophetisms. See also Smelik 1981:5864.
120
The account concerning Ahaz, however, does not employ the Hebrew word jfb,
but rather the word ma (see 7:9; cf. 28:16).
121
Cf. Rudman 2000:103: One is tempted to ask whether the narrators intention
in this passage may be to portray the Rabshakeh as being, in a sense, among the
prophets.
122
It would appear that even the hr;WbgW hx;[e strategy and power referred to in 2 Kgs
18:20 and associated with the Spirit of yhwh in Isa. 11:2 is claimed, albeit implicitly, by
Sennacherib. Cf. Rudman 2000:14.
123
According to Rudman 2000:106108 the words of the field marshal even imply
a new exodus and a new covenant that will exceed the old covenant with yhwh in
power.
124
Cf. Rudman 2000:103: By this reading, the Rabshakeh is to be considered as an

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 104 1/18/2007 2:17:09 PM

 the literary and historical context 105

cal juxtaposition is intentional is further supported by the fact that both

prophets speak to the king in the first round via intermediaries.125
In the second round, the appearance of the field marshal moves
towards its climax in that he now aims his arrows directly at yhwh
(2 Kgs 19:10). The same climactic movement is also evident in the ap-
pearance and message of Isaiah. While Isaiahs first announcement of
Jerusalems liberation is striking on account of its succinctness (2 Kgs
19:67), the second announcement is introduced in great detail (2 Kgs
19:2034). The evolution in yhwhs address via his prophet Isaiah (first
succinct, then detailed), is inversely similar to that of Sennacherib via
his prophet the field marshal (first detailed, then succinct). In terms of
content, the latters words represent an intensification but in terms of
form there is evidence of a weakening, a weakening also made mani-
fest in the fact that the field marshal no longer threatens Jerusalem in
person but does so rather by dispatch. At the same time, as the climax
is reached in the second round of the confrontation between the field
marshal and Isaiah (Sennacherib and yhwh respectively), a certain shift
of control takes place.126 The form of the account already makes clear
that Sennacherib had lost ground and that yhwh was the stronger of the
two.127 The climactic process is further underlined by the fact that the
prophet Isaiah no longer has to wait for an envoy from Hezekiah but is
able to react directly to Hezekiahs prayer addressed to yhwh. This di-
rectness typifies the entirety of Isaiahs message. Having first addressed
Hezekiah in person, he even goes on to address himself directly to the
field marshal and his king (2 Kgs 19:2228). The fact that Isaiah does
this head on corresponds to the direct verbal attack aimed at yhwh in
the field marshals second appearance. Isaiah emerges from the second

anti-Isaiah and the passage as a whole construed not just as a confrontation between
Sennacherib and Yahweh, but also as a prophetic duel between the Rabshakeh and
Isaiah.
125
Rudman 2000:103 presents this in the following schema:
Sennacherib Eliakim/Shebna/Joah Hezekiah Servants of Hezekiah
Isaiah Yahweh.
126
The designation is borrowed from Fewell 1986:82.
127
This evolution is part of the development of the narrative as a whole. The nar-
rative begins with an impressive witness to the fierce and formidable undertakings of
Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:13), but ends with an even more impressive witness to the sov-
ereignty of yhwh. Cf. Fewell 1986:82: Thus, the story is framed by two dominant,
self-autonomous characters playing symmetrically opposing roles. The crisis begins with
the presence and power of Sennacherib; the crisis is resolved through the presence and
power of Yahweh.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 105 1/18/2007 2:17:09 PM

 106 chapter three

round as the true prophet, delegated to speak on yhwhs behalf and

to offer a sign of blessing in yhwhs name (2 Kgs 19:29) to counter
the false promise of blessing held up by the field marshal to the people
(2 Kgs 18:3132).128 The climax, which is not only evident in the second
appearance of the field marshal but also in the second response of Isa-
iah, reinforces the hypothesis that the phased structure of the narrative
in question is the result of prophetic motivations rather than historical
reconstruction.129
In addition to the intensification of the field marshals presence and
the reaction on the part of yhwh, there is also evidence of an important
shift of accent in the words of King Hezekiah himself. Although it is
stated in both instances that Hezekiah entered the house of yhwh (2
Kgs 19:1,14), it is striking in the first instance that he asks the prophet
Isaiah to pray for the city, while his twofold use of the expression yhwh,
your God (2 Kgs 19:4) suggests a certain distance on the part of the
king. In the second part of the account, however, Hezekiah no longer
asks Isaiah to pray for him and we are informed that Hezekiah himself
prayed to yhwh and interacted with yhwh in a very direct fashion. The
way in which the narrative of Jerusalems liberation is constructed cre-
ates the unmistakable impression that Hezekiah has come closer and
closer to God in the midst of hardship. It is not only the mockery and
threatening statements of the field marshal that reach their climax in
the second phase of the account but also Hezekiahs faith and trust
in his God. The prayer in 2 Kgs 19:1419 is an eloquent witness to
Hezekiahs faith in YHWH alone (cf. D,b'l] at the beginning and end of
Hezekiahs prayer) and confirms the hypothesis that this narrative form
has been chosen from the perspective of prophetic historiography. The
two-phase structure of the narrative makes it clear that Hezekiahs faith
had to be born in and through the crisis he was facing.

128
Cf. Fewell 1986:86: The ironic contrast of Yahwehs promise of bounty with
Sennacheribs promise of bounty brings a new dimension to the theme of blasphemy.
From the beginning the Assyrian has intimated that he has control over life and death.
Only he can offer such a choice to the oppressed city. In this oracle, Yahweh reasserts his
autonomy over life and death. It is his choice to offer (Deut. 30.15), not Sennacheribs.
Thus, in his claiming control over life and death, Sennacherib has not simply ridiculed
Yahwehs power, but he has attempted to usurp the role of Yahweh. His own death,
then, at the will of Yahweh becomes the ultimate irony.
129
Smelik 1992:125126 argues that the discourses of the field marshal should be
understood as a dramatisation of 10:519. Gallagher 1999:7487 disputes this sugges-
tion and argues in favour of the opposite, namely that 10:811 can be designated as a
summary of the field marshals words.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 106 1/18/2007 2:17:09 PM

 the literary and historical context 107

The fact that Hezekiahs faith grew significantly in the context of a

major crisis stands in sharp relief to reports of his endeavour to fend off
approaching disaster with money. We are told in 2 Kgs 18:1516 that
the king plundered all his treasure houses, including that of the temple,
and how the occasion was used to strip the very doors and doorposts of
the temple which he had recently had gilded.130 The succinctness of the
account serves to underline the humiliation and shame that must have
accompanied such a deed. Hezekiah considered himself compelled to
personally clean out the very temple he had purified with his reforms.
From the biblical-theological perspective, one can argue that this re-
strained account ultimately implies the bankruptcy of Hezekiahs Mes-
sianic dream. In spite of his great piety, Hezekiah was unable to bring
the Messianic kingdom closer to reality. The narrative of the siege of
Jerusalem reveals how Hezekiah was forced to learn the painful lesson
that the Messianic kingdom was not to be realised on political grounds.
The deconstruction of the temple related in 2 Kgs 18:1416 reveals the
failure of Hezekiahs Messianic endeavours. The two-phase account of
Jerusalems liberation portrays the lengthy process Hezekiah had to un-
dergo in order to move from rock bottom, through crisis, to arrive at a
purity of faith in yhwh alone.
It would appear from the narrative of Jerusalems liberation that the
abortive arrival of the Egyptian army serves as an important pivotal
point. While the prophet Isaiah had held out the possibility of Jerusa-
lems deliverance after the first address of the field marshal, it appears
to have taken the failure of his final trump card, namely Egypt, before
Hezekiah was finally able to have complete faith in yhwh.131 The pro-
phetic elucidation of the said narrative seems to imply that yhwh inten-
tionally forced Hezekiah further and further into a corner. The phased
structure with which the narrative is constructed suggests that Hezekiah
had first to behold the failure of his final trump card and the disappear-
ance of every form of human support before he dared place his trust in
yhwh alone.132

130
In essence, Hezekiah does the same as his father Ahaz had done (2 Kgs 16:8; cf.
2 Chron. 28:21).
131
Cf. Smelik 1981:54: Alliance with a foreign prince cannot bring deliverance, only
yhwh brings deliverance.
132
It would also appear from the prophecies of Isaiah that Hezekiah did not arrive
at this position without difficulty. Isaiah had to insist time and again that he should
not place his trust in Egypt (cf. Isa. 30:17 and 31:13). The statement concerning
Hezekiahs trust in YHWH found in 2 Kgs 18:5 (a unique statement applied in the Old

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 107 1/18/2007 2:17:09 PM

 108 chapter three

By way of summary, one can conclude that the narrative of Jerusa-

lems liberation, as it is related in 2 Kings 1819, can be characterised as
prophetic historiography. The twofold form of the account is based on
a premeditated prophetic composition that leads the reader towards a
climax at a variety of different levels. While it remains difficult to recon-
struct the exact chronology of events from the historical perspective, it
would appear nevertheless that the narrative makes theological sense.

Testament only to Hezekiah, see Olley 1999:63) is ultimately brought into line with the
final outcome of the account related in 2 Kings 1819. Ackroyd 1987 (1984):183 char-
acterises 2 Kgs 18:5 as a kind of anticipatory summary.

dekker_f4_65-108.indd 108 1/18/2007 2:17:10 PM

 CHAPTER FOUR

EXEGESIS OF INDIVIDUAL PERICOPES WITHIN ISAIAH 28

AND THEIR RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIPS

4.1. Introduction

In dealing with the issues surrounding the delineation of pericopes in

3.3., we were able to conclude that the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 consti-
tutes part of the pericope 28:1422. Although we were able to carefully
delineate the said pericope within its immediate context, it appeared
nevertheless to exhibit both redactional and content based associations
with the preceding pericope, namely 28:713. The redactional associa-
tion between the two pericopes is established by the particle kel; at the
beginning of 28:14, while reciprocal cohesion is determined in terms
of content by the fact that both 28:713 and 28:1422 presuppose a
period of time in which Judah and Jerusalem were under threat from
the Assyrians. In spite of the fact that the pericope 28:713 in its turn
exhibits both thematic and redactional links with 28:14(6) and that
semantic and redactional cross-references would likewise appear to exist
with respect to 28:2329, there is much to be said for the suggestion
that both 28:713 and 28:1422 should be considered central pericopes
within the context of Isaiah 28. Within the framework of the present
study, with its focus on the Zion text of 28:16, the exegesis of both
pericopes will thus be given pride of place. The next paragraph will
deal, therefore, with the exegesis of 28:1422, followed by an excursus
on the so-called covenant with death referred to in 28:15 and 18, and
a paragraph dedicated to the exegesis of 28:713. Once the exegesis of
both 28:1422 and 28:713 is complete, we will compare the results of
both studies, by way of evaluation, in order to determine the degree of
cohesion evident between the pericopes as well as the apparent differ-
ences. A concluding paragraph will focus attention on the outermost
pericopes of Isaiah 28, namely 28:14(6) and 28:2329 respectively.
The exegetical method we intend to follow can be described as a
combination of both synchronic and diachronic analyses, whereby
historical and structural questions are treated together. Based on the

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 109 1/18/2007 2:17:41 PM

 110 chapter four

pericopes delineated in 3.3., we will endeavour to establish the literary

structure of the individual textual units, paying due attention to the
genre of the text in question. Genre, after all, determines to an extent
the nature of the message that the text intends to communicate. While
the establishment of genre has long been employed in the context of
traditional form criticism as an important aid in the historical re-
construction of a text, it ought to serve in the first instance as a means
to determine the singularity of a given text. This is of particular
importance where prophetic texts are concerned, since the creativity
of the prophet is often given expression, albeit in part, in the way
he employs a specific genre. Based on its literary structure, we will
divide the text of the most important pericopes for the present study
(28:713 and 28:1422) into a number of segments which, for the sake
of convenience, will be treated separately in sub-paragraphs. Our study
will focus significant attention on the poetical features of the various
segments of the text, bearing in mind that such features fulfil an impor-
tant function in the communication process. Form and content in this
regard are inseparably linked. The Masoretic text serves as the point
of departure. It goes without saying, however, that readings based on
other textual traditions (such as Qumran or the Septuagint) will be
discussed in relation to the text in question where they are considered
important for our exegesis. To conclude our discussion of the individual
text segments, an evaluative review will return, among other things, to
the question of the historical situation and authenticity of the textual
units already considered in some detail in 3.3. to 3.6. in connection
with Isa. 28:1422. It is important to determine whether the conclu-
sions reached in the said paragraphs can be confirmed by the exegesis
of the individual textual units.

4.2. Isa. 28:1422

In order to guarantee a thorough and systematic exegesis of 28:1422,

it makes sense to begin by determining the genre thereof and provide
a more detailed picture of the structure of the said pericope. The
genre to which 28:1422 belongs can be recognised quite simply as a
prophecy of judgement. Characteristic of the pattern associated with
this genre is that it commences with a complaint which is then followed
by an announcement of judgement. This pattern is clearly evident in
28:1422. The complaint is unmistakeably recognisable and is formed
by verses 1415. An introductory call to listen addresses and accuses

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 110 1/18/2007 2:17:42 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 111

a clearly identified group of people. The complaint is formulated as a

statement explicitly introduced as a quotation. The way in which 28:16
then begins, employing the formula familiar to the genre of prophetic
judgement hwIhy yn:doa} rm'a; hKo kel;, leads one to expect the announce-
ment of judgement to commence at that point. This expectation would
appear to remain unfulfilled, however, until 28:17b where judgement
is announced and explicit reference is made to elements contained in
the initial complaint. In the present composition, the announcement
of judgement covers verses 17b22, whereby the command not to
boast in 28:22 functions as a conclusion. An important question for
the exegesis of this text thus concerns the function of verses 1617a
within the context of the prophetic judgement genre. In 3.4., where
we discussed the unity of the present pericope, we already posed the
methodical question concerning the prophets artistic freedom to cre-
atively manipulate the established pattern of the prophetic judgement
genre. Some degree of moderation is certainly called for when deal-
ing with form critical arguments. In order to determine the function
of 28:1617a within the context of the prophecy of judgement of
28:1422, however, we will have to establish clarity with respect to the
element of salvation usually associated with these verses.1
For the sake of clarity, we will divide the exegesis of this prophecy
of judgement into a number of sub-paragraphs, taking the structure
outlined above as our point of departure. Given the crucial role played
by the Zion text of 28:16 in the present study, verses 16 and 17a will
be treated separately. A series of six sub-paragraphs will thus deal with

1
Graffy 1984:2431 considers 28:1419 to belong to the disputation speech genre.
He distinguishes this genre from the disputation or dialogue disputation characteristic
of a dialogue in direct speech (9). According to Graffy, the most important criterion for
establishing the genre of the disputation speech prophecy is the formal structure of an
explicit and faithfully rendered quotation that is then subject to prophetic refutation.
For a variety of reasons, however, Graffys association of 28:1419 with the disputation
speech can be called into question. In contrast to what Graffy considers to be char-
acteristic of the disputation speech prophecy (119120), we shall see in the context of
our exegesis of the passage that the quotation in 28:15 should not be understood as
a genuine quotation but rather as bearing the characteristics of a fictional quotation.
The said fictional quotation is employed as a style feature to reinforce the complaint.
The point of the prophecy is not to be found in the refutation of incorrect reasoning,
but rather in the announcement of Gods judgement. Graffy himself notes that the
quotation in 28:15 is conspicuously lengthy when compared with what he presumes
to be the convention (26, 110). He likewise considers the appeal to listen at the begin-
ning of the pericope to be unique (25) and is even inclined to understand 28:1419 as
an exception to the rule that the genre of the disputation speech prophecy was used
around the time of the exile, in particular by Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Deutero-Isaiah and
Haggai (119). Cf. Graffy 1989:28.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 111 1/18/2007 2:17:42 PM

 112 chapter four

verses 1415; 16; 17a; 17b18; 1921 and 22. The discussion will be
preceded in each instance with both the Hebrew text and an English
translation. In order to avoid significant disruption to the flow of the
discussion, we will dedicate an excursus at the end of the present
paragraph to the question of the covenant with death referred to in
verses 15 and 18 and the extent if any to which allusion is being made
to the phenomenon of necromancy.

4.2.1. Isa. 28:1415: Complaint

hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi kel] 14 Therefore hear the word of YHWH,
/xl; yvena' you boasters
hZ<h' [;h; ylev]mo who rule this people
.Il;v;WryBi rv,a} in Jerusalem.
T,rm'a} yKi 15 Because you have said,
tw<m;Ata, tyrIb] Wnt]r'K; We have made a covenant with death
h=z<jo Wnyci[; l/av]A[iw and with Sheol we have an agreement;
?rbo[}y" rb'[;AyKi fe/v ?f/v fyvi when the overwhelming scourge passes
Wnae/by aOl through,
it will not come to us,
Wnsej]m' bz:k; Wnm]c' yKi for we have made lies our refuge,
s .WnrT;s]nI rq,V,b'W and in falsehood we have taken shelter.
In spite of the fact that verse 14 begins with the copulative particle
kel;, the summons hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi unmistakably marks the beginning
of a new prophecy, a prophecy of judgement addressed against the
political leaders of Jerusalem who are designated as /xl; yvena' and
Il;v;WryBi rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; yle]mo. For a number of reasons, we concluded in
our treatment of the sub-division of pericopes in 3.3. above that the
particle kel; should be understood as a redactional link with 28:713.
In the present context, the particle serves to underline the contrast
between the unwillingness to hear in verse 12 and the present call
to hear in verse 14.
The poetic structure of verse 14 confirms the assertion that the
said verse forms the introduction to a new prophecy of judgement.
The summons addressed to the leaders in Jerusalem is made up of
two bicola, each with 3 + 2 beats. The second bicolon is intended as
a direct continuation of the first. Had the call to listen hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi
been repeated in similar fashion to that found in 1:10, a clear parallelism
would have been established.2 Given the fact that the second bicolon
2
In Isa. 1:10, the same appeal hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi is parallel with the appeal WnyzIa}h'
Wnyhela tr'/T.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 112 1/18/2007 2:17:42 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 113

begins immediately with the designation hZ<h' [;h; ylev]mo [ you who] rule
this people, which serves as a parallel to /xl; yvena', the boasters of the
first bicolon, specifying Il;v;WryBi rv,a} in Jerusalem became necessary
in order to bring the second bicolon into balance. This style feature,
known as a ballast variant provides verse 14 with the patterns a-b //
*-b-c. In addition to the function of balancing cola with one another,
the style feature in question frequently serves to open a new poem or
couplet.3 The poetic composition of verse 14 is also striking for its use
of alliteration. A word containing the letter v is placed at the begin-
ning of each colon (W[m]vi / yvena' / ylev]mo / rv,a}). The letter in question
ultimately determines the phonetic character of the verse.4 The obvious
presence of alliteration can be further specified. The first colon of both
bicola contains alliteration of the letter combination v and m (W[m]vi /
yle]mo), while the second colon of both bicola contains alliteration of the
letter combination a and v (yvena' / rv,a}). The use of this style feature
does not only serve to establish cohesion, it also introduces a degree
of emphasis.5
The formula hw:hyArb'd W[m]vi with which the leaders of Jerusalem are
called to attention, is used with frequency primarily in Jeremiah and
Ezekiel, although it also occurs more frequently in Isaiah. The same
call to attention can be found in 1:10, at the beginning of an authentic
prophecy in which Jerusalems politicians are addressed as leaders of
Sodom.6 In 28:14, Jerusalems politicians are first designated as /xl; yvena '
boasters 7 and then labelled in the second part of the same verse as ylevm ] o

3
For this style feature see Watson 1984:343348; 1994:30, 375 and Bhlmann/
Scherer 19942:39. Watson describes the ballast variant as simply a filler, its function
being to fill out a line of poetry that would otherwise be too short. Duhm 19143:174
misunderstands the said style feature when he argues that Ilv ; W; ryBi rv,a} should be under-
stood as an unnecessary addition that does not improve the poetry of verse 14.
4
For the style feature of alliteration see Watson 1984:225229. Alonso Schkel
1988:22 limits the definition of alliteration to the repetition of a consonant at the
beginning of a word. The present work gives preference to the broader definition
proposed by Watson 1984:225: Alliteration is here understood in its wider sense of
consonant repetition and is not confined to word-initial alliteration.
5
In line with Wheelock, Watson 1984:228 calls this the vocative function of allitera-
tion: giving a sense of energetic imperative or request.
6
See also Isa. 66:5. For the summons W[m]vi as the opening word of a prophecy see
Rterswrden 1994:272273.
7
The only other place in which the expression /xl; yvena' can be found is Prov. 29:8
(NRSV: boasters). The designation yxile (NRSV: boasters/scorners, sg. le) is in more
frequent use, especially in wisdom texts (e.g. Prov. 1:22; 3:34; see also Isa. 29:20). The
yxile frequently represent the antithesis of the ymik;j} (see, for example, Prov. 9:8; 13:1;
15:12; 21:11). The same antithesis would appear to be at work in Isa. 28:14 (cf. DCH

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 113 1/18/2007 2:17:42 PM

 114 chapter four

Il;v;WryBi rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; rulers of this people in Jerusalem. Even if we were
to set the identification of the boasters to one side for the time being,
the second designation transports us immediately into the political stage
in Jerusalem.8 Some exegetes are inclined, however, to translate ylev]mo
as proverb makers or Spruchdichter rather than leaders, whereby
a recognisable parallelism would be established in the translation with
boasters from the first bicolon.9 Preference should be given, however,
to the translation rulers for a number of reasons. In the first instance,
the association between ylem] o and Ilv ; W; ryBi rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; tends to support
such a translation since the latter serves to designate the scope of the
dominance of the yliv]m.o In the second place, reference can be made
to the fact that the Septuagint translates the term ylev]mo as (cf.
LXX Isa. 1:10).10 Third, the use of the term yliv]mo elsewhere in the
book of Isaiah tends to point in the direction of Jerusalems leaders.11
While the forefronted expression /xl; yvena ' clearly establishes a degree of
ambiguity with respect to the ylev]mo, it is also possible that the reference
to the rulers of this people in Jerusalem causes /xl; in the first half of the
verse to function as a wordplay alluding to /Yxi Zion.12 Whatever the

men of scorning), since Jerusalems leaders probably thought of themselves as ymik;j}

and ynIbon (cf. 29:14). The translation boasters or braggarts, however, fits the context of
28:1422 better than mockers, especially since /xl; (cf. Prov. 1:22) in the context has
to do with bragging/boasting rather than mockery (cf. Wildberger 1982:1072; Barth
1984:567571 and HALAT).
8
A fragment has been found among the Pesher manuscripts of Qumran quoting
this part of Isa. 28:14 in abbreviated form: ylwryb rva wxlh yvna (4QpIsab). See
Brooke 1997:625.
9
Cf. Procksch 1930(A):359: Smhdichter and Ziegler 1948:85: Spruchdichter.
This option gained in popularity following the study of Fohrer 1962:54 (ihr Sprche-
macher dieses Volkes da, das in Jerusalem lebt!). See Donner 1964:151, Eichrodt
1967:127, Kaiser 19762:197, 199, Huber 1976:90, Wildberger 1982:1064, Schneider
1988:386, Kilian 1994:161.
10
The Septuagint translates the expression /xl; yvena ', however, as
oppressed men. It would appear that the Greek translator of Isaiah misunderstood the
text at this juncture and derived his translation of /xl; from the verb jl to oppress,
whereby a reference is probably being made to the threat from Assyria. The transla-
tion of Symmachus mocking men does more justice to the Hebrew
text. Nevertheless, the Septuagint correctly translates /xl; yvena' as in
Prov. 29:8.
11
Cf. 14:5, 16:1 and 49:7. See Soggin 19783:930933, Gro 1986:7477 and
Gonalves 1986:203.
12
Cf. Irwin 1977:2225, Holladay 1978:81, Exum 1982:124 and Halpern 1986:116.
Watson 1984:311 mentions Isa. 28:14 as an example of irony, the effect of which he
describes as intended to increase the distance between speaker and listener. (308) Roberts
1992:43 is even inclined to consider the text a conscious expression of Isaiahs contempt
for the leaders of Judah.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 114 1/18/2007 2:17:43 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 115

case, it is more than apparent that Jerusalems leaders do not enjoy the
prophets favour, a fact underlined by the expression hZ<h' [;h; (cf. 28:11)
which can be understood as an expression of contempt.13
We can conclude, in summary, that the ambiguity created by the
prophets choice of terms of address in verse 14 cannot disguise the
fact that the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 is ultimately addressed
to an audience with a political background. The translation of ylev]mo as
composers of proverbs should not be used, therefore, as a means to remove
this prophecy of judgement from its political context.14

Following the introductory summons to hear in verse 14, the complaint

characteristic of the pattern of the prophetic judgement genre follows
in verse 15. Introduced by the clause T,rm'a} yKi, the complaint takes
the explicit form of a quotation.15 The complaint as such appears to
consist of three bicola (with 3 + 3, 3 + 2 and 4 + 2 beats respectively).
The first bicolon and the third bicolon correspond with one another
on account of the fact that both contain two parallel expressions in
the first person plural, while the second or central bicolon contains an
expression in the third person singular. The first colon exhibits a chiastic
structure according to the pattern ab-c // c-ab:16
tw<m;Ata, tyrIb] Wnt]r'K; We have made a covenant with death,
h=z<jo Wnyci[; l/av]A[iw and with Sheol we have an agreement;
The third bicolon exhibits a partial chiastic structure since the verb
in the first colon is followed by a double object while the verb in the
second colon is preceded by a single object:
Wnsej]m' bz:k; Wnm]c' yKi for we have made lies our refuge,
s >WnrT;s]nI rq,V,b'W and in falsehood we have taken shelter.

13
Cf. J-M 143d: hz does not in itself contain a nuance of contempt, but it can
sometimes have this nuance by the omission of a fuller expression. In 28:14, hZ<h' [;h;
takes the place of, for example, hwhy [ (cf. Hulst 19792:302307). See also Lipiski
1984:191192: Der Ausdruck hzh [h hat oft (aber nicht immer, vgl. Ex 3,21; 5,22)
einen verchtlichen Klang ( Jes 6,9; 8,6.11; 28,11; 29,13 etc.). Allein der Kontext erlaubt
eine semantische Fixierung.
14
Fullerton 1920:12 unjustifiably presupposes that /xl; yvena' alludes to the drunk-
ards who ridiculed Isaiah in the preceding pericope and that 28:14 addresses itself to
false prophets. In order to set the political context in greater relief, Dietrich 1976:161,
Clements 1980(B):230 and Oswalt 1986:514 opt resolutely for the translation rulers.
15
The introductory formula T,r]m'a} yKi is only to be found elsewhere in Jer. 29:15.
16
Watson 1984:203; 1994:337338 speaks in this regard of a split-member
chiasmus.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 115 1/18/2007 2:17:43 PM

 116 chapter four

Both external bicola of verse 15 serve to frame the second or central

bicolon:17
?rbo[y} " rb'[; AyKi fe/v ?f/v fyvi when the overwhelming scourge passes through,
Wnae/by aOl it will not come to us
The recognition of the concentric structure of verse 15 is of essential
importance for the exegesis of the complaint. Although the prophet
formulates the complaint as a quotation, the latter is perhaps best
understood as fictional, since it is difficult to imagine that the words
contained in both external bicola were actually spoken word for word by
the rulers in Jerusalem. It is likewise hard to imagine that the prophets
opponents would have boasted publicly about the fact that they had
entered into some kind of deal with death and Sheol.18 Indeed, the
suggestion that they were proud of the fact that lies and deceit had
become their refuge is virtually out of the question. The statement in
the central bicolon, on the other hand, is quite plausible as a statement
of Jerusalems leaders, although the metaphorical designation of Assyria
as fe/v f/v the overwhelming scourge clearly stems from the prophet (cf.
10:26a). I would argue that the words of the central bicolon, which are
heavily accented within the framework of the external bicola, contain
the actual boasting that the prophet accuses his audience of engaging
in: When the overwhelming scourge passes through, it shall not come to us! 19 The
prophet allows himself the freedom, however, to include, in his own
words, the less explicit motivation of the boasters in Jerusalem in his
complaint. The highly ironic external bicola thus serve to this end.20
In order to grasp the full significance of verse 15, it seems appropri-
ate to begin in the centre of the verse and establish first the signifi-
cance of the actual boasting. Reference is made to a fe/v ?f/v fyci,
which clearly represents an enormous threat when one considers that

The accent Pat [10] in rbo[}y"AyKi serves to demarcate the first colon.
17

While l/av] refers in fact to the underworld, we leave it untranslated in line with
18

the NRSV.
19
Cf. Gonalves 1986:204.
20
Cf. Barthel 1997:318: Das Zitat ist weder als Protokoll eigener Rede der Gegner
Jesajas noch berhaupt als direkter Ausdruck ihres Selbstverstndnisses mizuverstehen.
Es dient vielmehr der kritischen Charakterisierung ihres Verhaltens durch den Propheten,
wie sie in der Bezeichnung Prahler bereits anklang. Barthel would appear to under-
stand the first bicolon as a direct expression of Isaiahs opponents. Graffy 1984:27, 119
mistakenly understands 28:15 in its entirety to be a genuine quotation: The quotation
is a true life expression of the rulers limitless arrogance. This perspective goes hand
in hand with his vision of 28:1419 as a disputation speech.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 116 1/18/2007 2:17:43 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 117

the boasters maintain that in actual fact they will remain unharmed:
Wnae/by al ?rbo[}y" rb'[;AyKi. While the expression fe/vi ?f/v fyv) itself is
not without ambiguity, it clearly alludes to Assyria and its characteristic
imperialist and expansionist policies. The verb fv literally means to
flow (cf. 28:2), but the preceding fyvi does not appear to fit such an
interpretation. Indeed, it is apparent from the difference between verses
15 and 18 that the Masoretes also had a problem with the expression.
The natural option would be to follow the Qere f/v (cf. 28:18 and
1QIsaa) and to interpret the term as scourge (cf. 10:26a).21 An alternative
option, however, would be to presuppose the existence of a noun IIfwv
meaning a sudden flood of water (cf. Job 9:23),22 though the existence of
II
fwv remains uncertain.23 Based on a number of Versions, including the
Septuagint which has a sudden storm wind,24 some
scholars have proposed the reading f,v,.25 It would appear, however,
that the Versions were ultimately trying to smooth out the text. It seems
advisable, therefore, to remain with the more difficult reading of the
Masoretic text. Geses comments in this regard are worthy of note. He
translates the expression literally as strmende Geissel, pointing by
way of explanation to the weather god Hadad who is portrayed with
a scourge in his hand.26 One remains confronted, nevertheless, with
the question as to why the prophet felt it necessary to resort to the
use of a Hadad mythologoumenon when referring to the advance of
Assyria?27 Moreover, Geses explanation does not relieve the tension
between the designation scourge and the verb to flow. It would seem

21
According to Wildberger 1982:1065, it is possible that the Masoretes wanted to
leave the choice open between f/v scourge and fyIv' oar/paddle (hapax in 33:21).
22
See Barth 1913:306307, Poznanski 1916:119120, Fullerton 1920:1314,
Procksch 1930(A):361 and Graffy 1984:27. Supporting himself with a number of Psalm
texts, Kaiser 19762:200 suggests that the advancing flood of water alludes to the waters
of death and the underworld.
23
See Waschke 1993:1183.
24
Cf. LXX 29:6 and in LXX 17:13.
25
Dietrich 1976:161 refers in this regard to Joon and notes that Isaiah employs the
verb fv, in contrast to fwv, more frequently (8:8; 28:2,17). Cf. Schmidt 1923:9293:
flutende Flut. Wildberger 1982:1065 agrees de facto with the Versions, because a
scourge cannot flow, but remains at a loss to explain the origin of the corruption of
the Hebrew text.
26
Gese 1970:127134.
27
Cf. Dietrich 1976:161. Sweeney 1996:370 considers the use of a Hadad mytholo-
goumenon acceptable because Assyria advanced against Israel from Aram and because
Assur was also a weather god. As an imaginative literary construction in service of the
polemical context, Blenkinsopp 2000(B):478 likewise considers an allusion to Hadad
reasonable.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 117 1/18/2007 2:17:44 PM

 118 chapter four

most appropriate, therefore, to understand the expression ?f/v fyvi

fe/v as a combination of two metaphors, that of the scourge and
that of the flood of water.28 This then accounts for the translation the
overwhelming scourge.
Both metaphors combined in the expression fe/v ?f/v fyvi point
without question in the direction of Assyria. The representation of
Assyria as a scourge is in harmony with the presentation of this world
power elsewhere in the book of Isaiah and serves to emphasise the
imperialistic character of the Assyrian empire in those days. Its goal
was so fixed on absolute supremacy that many nations in the second
half of the eighth century experienced Assyria in reality as a scourge.
The metaphor incorporated in the verb most closely associated with
the scourge, namely fv, serves in the first instance to emphasise the
expansionist character of the Assyrian empire at the time. The kings
of Assyria continually sought to extend their sphere of influence, so
much so that the prophet Isaiah frequently resorted to the image of a
great flood to describe their activities (see 8:58 and 28:2).29 When the
prophet makes use of the combined metaphor the overwhelming scourge
in the complaint of verse 15, he underlines from the outset the naivet
of the bragging that follows, namely, that Assyria will not come to
those who rule in Jerusalem.30 The formulation of their boasting itself
raises questions concerning the basis of such a naive sense of security
in the face of the Assyrian advance. In both external bicola, which
surround the bragging in the central bicolon, the prophet exposes the
background to this bragging.
The structural cohesion evident between the first and last bicolon,
which together serve to frame the central bicolon, raises expectations
of similar cohesion with respect to their content. It is reasonable to

28
The prophet uses a similar combination of metaphors (Oswalt 1986:516 speaks
of a mixed metaphor) in 14:29 where the imagery shifts from fb,ve rod to vj;n: serpent.
See also the sudden change of metaphor in 28:4 and 30:1214. Duhm and Marti
decrease the tension by translating fv as to scourge (Stachelpeitsche, eine geielnde
Geiel), but this remains an artificial solution since the remainder of the text speaks
of being swept away (see v. 17b). Eichrodt 1967:130 speaks of ein terminus technicus
der Volkseschatologie and understands fe/v [f/v] (fyvi) to refer to a new flood against
which the addressees claim to have found a place of refuge.
29
This image was also used by the Assyrian kings themselves to underline their
irrepressible strength. Cf. Hartenstein 2004:497498: Mit der Flutmetaphorik wrde
eine direkte Anspielung auf die textliche und bildliche Propaganda der assyrischen
Herrscher der Zeit vorliegen.
30
The Qere rbo[}y" (cf. 1QIsaa) should also be followed here. Duhm 19143:175 prefers
to maintain the Ketib rb'[; and Oswalt 1986:514 similarly suggests that the use of an
inf. abs. is possible in principle.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 118 1/18/2007 2:17:44 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 119

suppose that both external bicola, which surround the bragging of the
addressees in the central bicolon, are closely related to one another and
deliver more or less the same message.31 Such a presupposition is of
great importance for our interpretation of the covenant with death
and the agreement with Sheol in verse 15a. Both these expressions
should not, therefore, be explained as references to the phenomenon
of necromancy, which was also known to be at work in Israel (cf. 8:19;
19:3; 29:4).32 The expressions covenant with death and agreement
with Sheol, rather, are probably intended to mean something like
lies as refuge and falsehood as shelter.33 Both expressionswith bz:K;
and rq,v , are not intended in verse 15 to designate a specific refuge or
shelter but rather to typify them. The prophet reproaches the leaders
of Jerusalem for having sought a place of refuge that will ultimately
deceive them. He does not name the place of refuge in question but
simply typifies it (cf. Jer. 28:15; 29:31). His opponents will not have
appreciated his reproach but they will certainly have understood the
place of refuge to which the prophet is alluding.34 It is extremely tell-
ing in this regard, that the term bz:K; is also to be found in Hos. 12:2
(NRSV 12:1), in a prophecy addressed against those, among others,
who enter into illegitimate political alliances: Ephraim herds the wind, and
pursues the east wind all day long; they multiply falsehood and violence; they make
a treaty with Assyria, and oil is carried to Egypt. 35 Presuming, therefore, that
both external bicola of 28:15 carry more or less the same message, it
is likewise extremely probable that tw<m; and l/av] are not intended as
designations of a particular covenant or agreement but rather as typifica-
tions thereof. Jerusalems leaders have entered into a covenant and in so
doing have in fact signed their own death warrant.36 Counter to their
own expectations they will emerge from their agreement deceived.
Given the fact that the covenant upon which the prophet bases his

31
Barthel 1997:320 considers verse 15b to contain the motivation behind the
central statement of bragging as well as verse 15a.
32
See Excursus 2 below.
33
Beuken 2000:46 speaks in this regard of a mirror symmetry.
34
Graffy 1984:26 is of the opinion that Isaiahs opponents prided themselves in their
own cunning and were not ashamed to admit that they had used lies and treachery
in their negotiations with their covenant partner. This explanation clearly stems from
Graffys conviction that verse 15 is a genuine quotation.
35
There is no reason to suggest that the background to Hos. 12:2 represents a form of
communication with foreign gods as Blenkinsopp 2000(B):479 proposes. The same can
also be said with respect to the background to Isa. 28:15. See further in Excursus 2.
36
Cf. Wolff 19733:84: Bringt Jesaja die Wahrheit ber die Bundesgenossen innerhalb
des Zitates, so wird den Bndnisgesonnenen damit indirekt die Aktivitt vorgehalten,

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 119 1/18/2007 2:17:44 PM

 120 chapter four

complaint is actually left unmentioned, it is not immediately clear

which covenant or agreement he is referring to in verse 15.37 The
political situation resulting from Assyrias expansionist policy, however,
is characterised by one particular temptation, a temptation mentioned
by many a prophet, concerning the suggestion that Judah should seek
help from Egypt and rely on the power of Pharaoh. It is highly likely,
therefore, that the prophets complaint in verse 15 refers to a covenant

mit der sie ihr eigenes Unheil besorgen. Cf. also Galling 1928:32: Jesaja nimmt ihre
Worte auf, aber er zitiert sie so, wie sie Jahwe beurteilt: ihre Sicherheit ist auf Lug
und Trug gebaut, ihr Bund ist mit der schreckenvollen Scheol und mit dem Tode
geschlossen; der wahre Jahwebund fhrt zum Leben (Wer da glaubt, bleibt!), ihr Bund
fhrt zum Tode!
37
The translation of hz<jo is a source of difficulty since the customary meaning
seer does not fit the context of 28:15. We offer a summary presentation of the most
prominent solutions:
a. Marti 1900:207 mentions the suggestion of O.R. Krtzschmar, Die Bundesvorstellung
im Alten Testament in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, Marburg 1896, p. 52, that we read
tWsj; place of refuge (cf. 30:3 hapax).
b. Khler 1930:227228 suggests that we read ds,j, and translate the term as community.
He notes in this regard that ds,j, occurs in parallel with tyrIB] on 15 occasions. See
also KBL/HALAT, Rohland 1956:148 and Fohrer 1962:57.
c. Procksch 1930(A):359361 considers it better to read hz:jo in line with Buhl (see
also BHS) or tzUj; on the basis of 28:18 and understands the term to refer to a
Schau mit der Unterwelt, a magical variant of divination using sacrificed animals
in order to provide a vision of the future. Duhm 19143:174175 follows a similar
line of inquiry: wir haben ein Gesicht mit Scheol gemacht, heit: wir haben einen
Toten oder die Todesgottheit selber zitiert und mit der Erscheinung einen Vertrag
abgeschlossen. Cf. Marti 1900:207.
d. Driver 1968:58 associates hz<ho with hz<j; chest. According to Watson 1978:132133 hz<j;
corresponds with the Akkadian sibit tul an oath performed by touching a partners
breast, a gesture whereby a covenant was ratified (see also Watson 1984:213).
e. Kutsch 19783:341 presupposes a certain development with respect to the significance
of hz<josehen-ersehen-bestimmen-verordnen. In his opinion, the concept tyrIB]
covenant evolved in a parallel fashionsehen, auswhlen, bestimmenfrom a root
II
hrb (cf. Akkadian bar). Kutsch thus rejects any form of emendation. Wildberger
1982:10641065 follows suit (see also HAHAT), insisting that agreement represents
an ungefhren Bedeutung of hz<jo and twzj;. Cf. also LXX, which translates hz<jo with
and tyrIB] with (Vulg.: pactum and foedus). Weinfeld 1973:783 is
not convinced of the development Kutsch presupposes and prefers to associate tyrIB]
with the Akkadian biritu band, fetter.
f. Blenkinsopp 2000(B):475f considers it possible that the words hz<jo and twzj; may
represent a mocking allusion to the tradition of the Sinai covenant on account of
the connotation of visionary experience. He associates the latter with the visionary
experience described in Ex. 24:911 as part of the establishment of the covenant.
Given the lack of certainty surrounding derivation, etymology and semantic develop-
ment, one would be advised to exercise caution with respect to the various radical
emendations and ingenious interpretations. The meaning of hz<jo and twzj; is deter-
mined in the present instance on the basis of the context and must be derived from
the parallelism with tyrIB.]

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 120 1/18/2007 2:17:45 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 121

or agreement with Egypt. The word tyrIB] functions in this context as

a political concept.38
Comparison with the prophecy of 30:15, a prophecy considered
authentic, might serve to clarify the situation. In 30:15, the prophet
explicitly takes issue with Judahs efforts to attract Egypt as an ally and
their willingness to submit themselves to the protective hand of the
Pharaoh. Reference is also made in this regard to the establishment of
a covenant, although the conventional formula tyrIB] tr'K; is not used
at this juncture. In parallel to hx;[e t/c[}l' in 30:1, the prophet uses
the expression hk;Sem' sonli which literally means to pour out a libation.39
Directly thereafter, however, the verb hsj to take refuge and the related
term z/[m; shelter are used in 30:2, the latter of which can function as
a parallel to hs,j]m'; employed in 28:15 (cf. 25:4). In the context of the
prophecy of 30:15, the words in question, which are particularly at
home in the psalms, acquire an undeniably political charge. Against
the explicit will of yhwh, the leaders in Jerusalem sought refuge under
the protection of Pharaoh, and shelter in the shadow of Egypt.40 In
30:3, the prophet then announces that the h[orP' z/[m; will become their
shame and the yIr'x]miAlxeB] tWsj; their humiliation. The prophecy of
30:15 would appear in terms of semantics and content to be closely
related to the complaint of 28:15.
Based on the kinship observed with respect to 30:15, one can argue
that the prophets complaint in 28:15 likewise alludes to the alliance
established by the leaders of Jerusalem with Egypt and that the char-
acterisation of this alliance as a covenant with death and an agreement
with Sheol is rooted in the profound conviction that Judah would not
profit from such an alliance.41 While it is not unthinkable that the
prophet may have been alluding simultaneously to the Egyptian cult

38
Cf. Wildberger 1982:1073.
39
The Septuagint of 28:15 first speaks of the agreement with Sheol (
) and then of the covenant with death ( ).
In verse 18, the Septuagint maintains the sequence of the Hebrew text although its
formulation differs slightly from that of verse 15:
.
40
Cf. Huber 1976:90.
41
In reaction to Day 1989:5864, who rejects every allusion to an alliance with
Egypt and dates the present prophecy in the time of Ahaz, Blenkinsopp 2000(B):474
argues: It is true that the covenant does not refer directly to an alliance with Egypt,
but the context of chapters xxviiixxxiii strongly favours reference to a political situ-
ation under Hezekiah between the years 704 and 701 when the Egyptian connection
was politically crucial.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 121 1/18/2007 2:17:45 PM

 122 chapter four

of the dead, I am not inclined to believe that tw<m; and l/av] themselves
should be understood as designations for Egypt or as references to
gods involved in the establishment of the alliance.42 Judahs option for
Egypt, however, is clearly typified as an option for death. It is difficult
to deny the presence of a degree of irony in the way in which the
prophet formulates his complaint and places the statement concerning
the covenant with death on the lips of his opponents.43 Given that the
first and last bicola of verse 15 correspond with one another and the
fact that the expressions lies as refuge and falsehood as shelter in the last
bicolon would be unthinkable on the lips of the leaders of Jerusalem
(the expression employed in verse 17b bz:k; hsej]m' is even a contradictio in
terminis!), it is hardly likely that the covenant with death represents a
sort of life insurance policy or a non-aggression treaty about which the
infinitely self-assured politicians of Jerusalem might have boasted.44 It is
thus a simulated quotation intended to underline the irony associated
with boasting of a covenant with death.45 Isaiah makes use of this
irony to ridicule the boasting of Jerusalems leaders who are under the
illusion that they enjoy some kind of immunity against death while they
are in fact guilty of embracing death with their kamikaze politics. The
covenant with Egypt that was to bring redemption from disaster was

42
Some exegetes detect an allusion to the Egyptian gods Isis and Osiris in the use
of the terms tw<m; and l/av]. See Duhm 19143:174, H. Schmidt 19232:93 and Auvray
1972:250251.
43
Cf. Wolff 19733:71, Eichrodt 1967:130, Good 1981:119120 and Brueggemann
1998:225226. Clements 1980(B):229 speaks of heavily satirical language. Oswalt
1986:516 even of sarcasm. The suggestion proposed by Klopfenstein 1964:148149
that Isaiah deliberately placed the words tw<m; and l/av] instead of an original Egypt
and Ethiopia on the lips of his opponents is impossible to substantiate and difficult
to accept. The same is true for the suggestion that Isaiahs opponents mockingly reit-
erated his complaint in order to show how little effect it had on them. It seems more
appropriate that we ascribe the ironic formulation of the complaint to the creativity
of the prophet.
44
Cf. Fohrer 1962:58, Driver 1968:58 and Gonalves 1986:204. Reference is made
in Hos. 2:20 (NRSV 2:18) to a non-aggression treaty with the animal world.
45
According to Wolff 19733:69f, the most important characteristic of a simulated
quotation is the Stichwortverknpfung between the quotation as such and the rest
of the prophecy. The most important element in terms of content with regard to
such quotations is the fact that the prophetic judgement is already apparent therein.
From the theological perspective, however, it is not a question of the authenticity of
the quotation but rather of its truth wre das echte Zitat unwahr, so bildet er (the
prophet, JD) selbst das Zitat. (19733:99) Galling 1928:32 was among the first to under-
stand the reference to the covenant with death as an ironic condemnation on the part
of the prophet himself. Instead of associating the covenant in question with one or
other political alliance, however, he maintains that the words death and Sheol can
be replaced by YHWH, since rigid adhesion to faith in Israels election always made its
appeal to YHWH (cf. Am. 5:14; Hos. 8:2 and Mi. 3:11).

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 122 1/18/2007 2:17:45 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 123

ultimately ill-fated and bound to lead to enormous disillusionment.46

In like fashion to 30:23, the semantic field employed in the final
bicolon of verse 15 is reminiscent of the language of the psalms. The
psalms frequently speak of seeking refuge in yhwh (see, for example,
Ps. 14:6; 46:2),47 a conviction closely associated with the temple cult of
Jerusalem and belief in yhwhs presence in Zion (cf. Isa. 4:6; 14:32; 16:4;
25:4; 32:2).48 The use of this religiously shaded terminology associated
with the Zion tradition contrasts with what is stated in the Zion text of
28:16 and functions as such as a religious disqualification of Jerusalems
coalition politics.49 Judahs sin is ultimately a form of idolatry.50 It is
hardly surprising, therefore, that the later Wisdom of Solomon quotes
28:15 in order to describe the attitude of the godless.51

46
Cf. Burns 1973:338: Their political manoeuvres are a covenant with death,
for their outcome will be fatal. Barthel 1997:318n objects to this explanation based
on the statement in verse 18 concerning the annulment of the covenant with death
and the claim that the agreement with Sheol will not stand. His objection need not
be understood, however, as a decisive factor. In his announcement of judgement, the
prophet harks back to the ironic statement he had placed on the lips of his adversaries.
He uses the announcement of judgement to make explicit the expectation that was
implicit in the complaint, namely that Jerusalems leaders would not emerge unscathed
from their coalition politics. As already expected on the basis of the characterisation
provided, the covenant with death will be annulled and the agreement with Sheol
will not stand. While some might argue that the use of words here is verging on the
pleonastic, they nevertheless have a clear function in the context of the prophecy of
judgement. They underline the naivet of Jerusalems leaders and the blatant palpability
of the outcome announced by the prophet.
47
It is striking that the Septuagint translates Wnsejm
] ' with . The Greek
translator of Isaiah 28 would appear to have had a significant preference for the word
hope, given the fact that he employed it no less than ten times; see verses 4, 5,
10 (2x), 13 (2x), 15, 17, 18 and 19.
48
Cf. Gonalves 1986:208: Cette prsentation est lie la prsence de Yahv dans
son Temple, et constitue lun des lments des traditions de Sion.
49
Cf. Gamberoni 1982:79: Religis geprgte Sprache ist absichtlich fr gottwidriges
Tun verwendet.
50
Cf. Gonalves 1986:158: Et en faisant leur refuge et leur abri, les Judens
attribuent au Pharaon et lgypte un rle que la prire clbrait comme tant le
privilge exclusif de Yahv, la politique judenne est une idoltrie, sans doute plus
subtile, mais non moins grave et dangereuse que celle qui consiste dans le culte des
idoles de mtal et de bois.
51
See Wisdom 1:16 in which it is argued that death was not created by God (1:13)
but summoned rather by the godless:
But the ungodly by their words and deeds
summoned death;
considering him a friend,
they pined away and made a covenant with him,
because they are fit to belong to his company.
(NRSV)

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 123 1/18/2007 2:17:45 PM

 124 chapter four

4.2.2. Isa. 28:16: Salvation-historical retrospective

hwIhy yn:doa} rm'a; hKo kel; 16 Therefore, thus says the Lord YHWH:
ynInhi See, I am the one
b,a;= /YxiB] dS'yI who laid in Zion a foundation stone,
j'Bo b,a, a weighty stone,
tr'q]yI tN"Pi a precious cornerstone,
dS;Wm ds;Wm a sure foundation.
>vyjiy: al ymia}M'h' One who trusts shall not hurry off.
Having made his scathing complaint against the leaders of Jerusalem
within the confines of a single verse, the prophet is now expected to
turn to the announcement of judgement in verse 16, in line with the
conventional pattern of the prophecy of judgement. Indeed, verse 16
clearly opens with the traditional introductory particle of an announce-
ment of judgement kel;, followed by the familiar messenger formula
hwIhy yn:doa} rm'a; hKo.52 The said messenger formula is employed with
the greatest frequency in the book of Ezekiel, although it is also to
be found on a number of occasions in Isaiah (see 7:7 and 30:15; cf.
10:24; 21:16; 22:15). As introduction to the expected announcement of
judgement, the messenger formula adds an extra accent to what follows
in verse 16,53 although the content of the verse is surprisingly enough
not directly recognisable as an announcement of judgement. Attention
is first drawn to a deed of yhwh that implies a promise of salvation.
It is not clear in advance, however, whether the said deed should be
situated in the past, the present or the future. A decision in this regard
depends in part on our interpretation of the construction dS'yI ynInh.i
Given that the combination of ynInhi with dS'yI vocalised as a pi el perfect
is uncommon and that ynInhi is usually associated with a participle (see,
for example, 37:7 and 38:8),54 several exegetes opt to depart from the

The historical background and political context of Isa. 28:15 no longer figure at this
juncture. In a more neutral sense, Sir. 14:12 also alludes to Isa. 28:15, totally detached
from its political-historical context:
Remember that death does not tarry,
and the decree of Hades has
not been shown to you. (NRSV)
The decree of Hades alludes in this regard to the preordained day of a persons death.
See further Schwemer 1996:8485.
52
Procksch 1930(A):357 suggests we add t/ab;x] for metrical reasons. Cf., however,
7:7 and 30:15.
53
The Masoretes probably based their decision to mark 28:16 as the beginning of
a new pericope on the basis of the messenger formula (Setumah, cf. 7:7). The same
applies with respect to 1QIsaa, see Olley 1993:29f.
54
Cf. GKG 116p; J-M 121e and Humbert 1958 (orig. 1934):5459.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 124 1/18/2007 2:17:46 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 125

Masoretic text in this regard and vocalise dsy as a qal participle dseyO.55
Since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, this proposed emendation
has enjoyed the support of both Isaiah scrolls from Qumran.56
In spite of the readings found in the Qumran scrolls, however, a
number of exegetes continue to argue to the present day in favour of
the pi el perfect dS'yI, translating the construction dS'yI ynInhi in the past
tense: See, I am the one who laid . . .. Agreement with 14:32b with respect
to content and semantics has an important role to play in this regard,
since 14:32b contains the related statement that yhwh has established
Zion, likewise employing the pi el perfect dS'yI. In order to intercept
the objection that the pi el perfect dS'yI in 28:16 is preceded by ynInhi
and that ynInhi is generally followed by a participle, reference is usu-
ally made to 29:14 and 38:5, in both of which ynInhi is followed by
a hiph il imperfect si/y.57 Ezek. 25:7 is also referred to in this regard
because it contains ynInhi followed by a qal declarative perfect (1st person)
ytiyfin.: 58 Why then did the Masoretes opt to vocalise dsy in 28:16 as
a pi el perfect dS'y?I The accentuation of the text with the distinctive
Tevr [12] in relation to ynInhi is also surprising in this regard since the
construction ynInhi + participle usually takes a conjunctive accent. If one
bears in mind that the Masoretic distinctive accents probably hark back
to a pre-Masoretic tradition, it goes without saying that they should
not be dismissed as insignificant.59 In establishing the pronunciation
and articulation of the Hebrew text according to the tradition passed
down to them, the Masoretes apparently made use of vocalisation
and punctuation in order to prevent the careless reader of the Zion
text of 28:16 from accidentally reading dsy as a futurum instans and

55
See, among others, Marti 1900:208, Fullerton 1920:10, Procksch 1930(A):
356, Driver 1968:59, Roberts 1987:2729, Blenkinsopp 2000(A):392 and Childs
2001:208.
56
1QIsaa reads a pi el participle dsym and 1QIsab a qal participle dswy.
57
BHS suggests we vocalise swy both in 29:14 and in 38:5 as a participle swOy. See
also Roberts 1987:28. While the orthographic from swy would appear to support such
a suggestion, the hiph il imperfect of sy is frequently written with a w and thus remains
a possibility. Indeed, the use of the matter lectionis y with the hiphil of sy is much less
frequent than is generally the case. It should not come as a surprise, therefore, that
neither 29:14 nor 38:5 have ysi/y (see also ysi/y in 1 Sam. 14:44; 1 Kgs 6:31 and Prov.
10:22; the orthograpic forms ysiwyO and ysiyO each occur 15 in the Old Testament).
58
GKG 155f. See also Delitzsch 1889:317, Duhm 19143:175, Fohrer 1962:54 and
Irwin 1977:3132.
59
De Moor/Watson 1993:xv. Cf. Korpel/De Moor 1988:vii: . . . we make use of
the Masoretic accents which often, though by no means always, prove to be a more
reliable guide than is generally assumed.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 125 1/18/2007 2:17:46 PM

 126 chapter four

thereby mistakenly associating it with some future salvific action on

Gods part.60
While material for comparison remains limited, it would appear
nevertheless from the combination ytiyfin: ynInhi in Ezek. 25:7 that the
possibility of ynInhi followed by a perfect should not be dismissed in
advance.61 The combination si/y ynInhi in 29:14 and 38:5 even presup-
poses the possibility of a change of subject from the first to the third
person, although such changes tend to be rare. This implies that from
the grammatical and syntactic perspective the construction dS'yI ynInhi in
28:16 is not impossible and that the vocalisation of the Masoretic text
thus deserves preference as the lectio difficilior.62 Given the fact, moreover,
that the pi el of the verb dsy always relates to the technical construction
of foundations, the reading of dsy as a pi el perfect dS'yI fits well within the
semantic context of verse 16.63 The pi el perfect dS'yI can be understood

60
Should one prefer to vocalise dsy as a qal participle dseyO on grammatical/syntactic
grounds, this need not imply that the expression dseyO ynInhi should be translated per se
as a futurum instans, since the latter option depends entirely on the context (cf. GKG
116m and Kaiser 19762:201). The possibility of translating a participle in the past
tense is supported by Gen. 41:17 in which the clause raoyh' tp'c]Al[' dme[o ynInhi must be
translated as See, I was standing on the banks of the Nile (see GKG 116o, J-M 121f,
Huber 1976:91, Petersen 1979:121n and Kilian 1994:162; Rohland 1956:151 and
Schreiner 1963:171 likewise translate the qal participle dseyO in the past tense).
61
While Childs 2001:208 himself would appear to prefer a participle, he recognises
in the meantime that the Masoretic vocalisation can also be upheld: This construction
is grammatically possible, but extremely rare. It would be translated: Behold, I am the
one who laid a stone for a foundation.
62
See also Gonalves 1986:196 and Beuken 2000:1415. According to Roberts
1987:28, 28:16 is a clear example in which the lectio difficilior should not be followed
because we are unaware of an adequate parallel for the construction employed in
MT. Cf., however, Wildberger 1982:1523: Es gilt zudem zu bedenken, da das Alte
Testament durchaus Aussagen machen kann, welche fr modernen Exegeten nur
schwer nachvollziehbar sind. Gerade auch bei der Textkritik mssen die Grenzen
unserer Einfhlungsgabe, aber auch unserer linguistischen Kenntnisse bedacht und
respektiert werden.
63
Mosis 1981:668682 discusses a striking difference in meaning between the qal and
the pi el of dsy. The meaning of the verb in the qal is broader than that of the pi el.
In the qal, dsy frequently means more than simply the laying of foundations and can
include the entire building process, including restoration work (cf. 2 Chron. 24:27). In
the pi el, however, dsy always enjoys the specific technical significance of laying founda-
tions. With regard to 28:16, Jenni 1968:212 states: In der textlich schwierigen Stelle
Jes. 28,16 Siehe, ich lege in Zion einen Stein wre demnach das Pi el beizubehalten,
wie auch immer die Stelle aufzufassen ist. Mosis suggests nonetheless that we should
read a pi el participle dsym (cf. 1QIsaa) and is of the opinion that the m, which can
easily be confused with the ending yn in Phoenician script, has been omitted due to
haplography. This latter hypothesis is somewhat speculative, since we do not know
enough about ancient palaeography to determine which letters resembled one another
(cf. Seeligmann 1948:61). Retaining the pi el perfect thus deserves preference.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 126 1/18/2007 2:17:46 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 127

at this juncture as the beginning of an asyndetic subordinate clause in

relation to ynInh,i which implies that the text ought best to be translated
See, I am the one who laid . . ..64
Although difficult to prove, we cannot dismiss the possibility that
the Masoretic vocalisation of dsy as a pi el perfect dS'yI may be due to a
reaction to the New Testament use of 28:16 in which the Zion text is
understood in Messianic terms and related to the advent of Jesus (Rom.
9:32b33; 10:11; 1 Pet. 2:6).65 Nevertheless, the Messianic interpreta-
tion of the so-called stone texts established within the Jewish tradition
certainly seems to make this possibility less likely (see 2.4.2.). The
fact that the Zion text of 28:16 was no longer ascribed a Messianic
significance in later rabbinic literature, at least as far as we could deter-
mine, probably has more to do with the place acquired by the text in
the Shetiyyah tradition (see 2.4.3.) than with potentially anti-Christian
tendencies.66 Such a tendency need not be sought, therefore, behind
the Masoretic vocalisation of 28:16. Semantic and content based agree-
ments between the Zion texts in 14:32b and 28:16 would thus appear
to serve as the most important motivating factor behind the Masoretic
vocalisation and punctuation.67
While form-critical considerations are not in themselves of overrid-
ing importance in the analysis of a prophetic text, the translation of
dsy as a futurum instans would imply nevertheless that the prophetic
judgement genre had been interrupted in verse 16 by a promise of

64
See GKG 155f. It is also possible to understand the combination dS'yI ynInhi as
an asyndetic main clause and to translate it as See, I myself have . . ., although one
would expect the use of a first person perfect rather than a participial form in such
an instance (cf. Ezek. 25:7).
65
Cf. Fullerton 1920:50: It looks as if they wished to prevent the Christian use of
the passage which saw in it a prediction of Jesus.
66
Cf. Stembergers 1996:573574 appeal for caution at this juncture: Certain shifts
in Jewish exegesis, changes in comparison with Jewish interpretations of the Second
Temple period, may frequently be explained with good reason as reactions against
the theological use of a biblical text in the Christian tradition. But in most cases this
remains at the level of educated guesses; too much has changed in Judaism after 70
CE to attribute every break of continuity directly and exclusively to rabbinic reaction
against Christianity.
67
Marti 1900:208 suspects that the vocalisation dS'yI in 28:16 came about under the
influence of 14:32b and refers the reader in this regard to Cheyne and Knig, Syntax
344b. Roberts 1987:28 follows a similar line of thought. Procksch 1930(A):357 pre-
supposes that the vocalisation of the Masoretic text is inspired by a refusal to accept
a new foundation stone in addition to that of the temple in Zion. Laberge 1978:10
considers it possible that the Masoretes endeavoured to avoid anthropomorphism by
using the 3rd person.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 127 1/18/2007 2:17:47 PM

 128 chapter four

salvation. This possibility cannot be excluded in advance since one

cannot deny the prophet a certain degree of artistic licence in his
work.68 To further support the understanding of 28:16 as a promise
of salvation, one can compare the present text with the Immanuel
prophecy of 7:14. This latter text would appear to represent the most
striking example of a promise of salvation located in the context of a
prophecy of judgement.69 In like fashion to the Zion text of 28:16, the
Immanuel prophecy of 7:14 is also introduced by the particle kel;, which,
in relation to the preceding complaint (7:13) and in agreement with
the conventional structure of the prophecy of judgement would lead
one to expect an announcement of judgement to follow rather than a
promise of salvation.70 It is difficult, nonetheless, to read the Immanuel
prophecy of 7:14 as anything other than a promise of salvation.71 It
appears, however, that the introduction to the Immanuel prophecy of
7:14 has been composed as an announcement of judgement. In contrast
to Ahaz sanctimonious refusal to ask for a sign we are confronted with
the indignant announcement that yhwh himself will provide a sign in
spite of Ahaz. Given that the possibility offered in the first instance by
yhwh to ask for a sign from Him represents the powerful confirmation
of an announcement of salvation (7:79; cf. 7:4), it should not surprise
us in the present context that the sign ultimately provided by yhwh in
the second instance also contains the features of a promise of salvation
(cf. 7:16). The fact that this Immanuel prophecy is introduced as an
indignant announcement of judgement, however, sets the given sign in
a particular light. No matter how he attempts to portray his rejection

68
Melugin 1974:301311 employs three examples to point out that the prophet
Isaiah could be creative in his use of the existing prophecy of judgement genre and
that he introduced variations thereto that differ from the already common variations.
Based on the idea that 28:16 contains a promise of salvation for the future, 28:1422
is one of the examples he treats. The other texts are 30:1517 and 28:713.
69
Cf. Delitzsch 1889:316: Auf das wieder aufgenommene kel; v. 16 folgt ebenso
wie 7,14 Verheiung statt Drohung . . . See also Snijders 1969:283.
70
Cf. Wildberger 1972:288.
71
The present author disagrees with Fohrer 1956:55 (see also 1960:102) on this point
who denies any salvific significance to 7:14: Das Zeichen, das der Prophet ankndigt,
kann aber nicht den gleichen Sinn haben wie das zuvor dem Ahas angebotene und von
diesem abgelehnte, also nicht die Vergewisserung darber, da Jahwe die Bedrohung
von Jerusalem abwenden werde. Auf das Versagen des Ahas folgt keine Heilszusage,
sondern eine Unheilsdrohung. In order to advance this thesis, Fohrer is obliged to
deny that the announced sign is to be found in the birth and naming in 7:14. In his
opinion, the intended sign is described in vv. 1516. For a survey of literary critical
questions relating to Isaiah 7, see Hffken 1989:2542.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 128 1/18/2007 2:17:47 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 129

of a sign as piety, Ahaz response ultimately represents a rejection of

the fidelity (stand firm) called for in 7:9b. To Ahaz personal shame,
the Immanuel prophecy of 7:14, the birth and naming of the son
announced by the prophet, is set in sharp contrast to his rejection.72
In a certain sense, therefore, the sign given in 7:14 carries a degree of
ambivalence.73 Directly following the sign given by yhwh, Ahaz is made
to understand the consequences of his lack of faith. The liberation
announced will come to pass and there is thus no reason to be afraid
of the kings of Aram and Ephraim (7:16; cf. 7:4). The depopulation,
however, of the land of Aram and that of Ephraim are to prefigure
the fate that will ultimately confront the kingdom of Ahaz. In the not
so distant future, Ahaz and his house will have to face an even greater
threat, namely the king of Assyria (7:17).74
The comparison of 28:16 with 7:14 thus allows us to see that within
the context of an announcement of judgement room is sometimes
available for a promise of salvation, without devaluing the general
character of the prophecy of judgement. This ought to serve, there-
fore, as an important argument in support of reading the Zion text of
28:16 primarily as a promise of salvation. Of course, the meaning and
function of the Immanuel prophecy of 7:14 cannot simply be placed
on an equal footing with the Zion text of 28:16, since the former
is emphatically associated with a promise of salvation already given
within the context of Isaiah 7 (7:79).75 This is not the case in 28:16,
however, whereby the transition to a potential reading of the Zion
text of 28:16 as a promise of salvation within the context of Isaiah 28
is much more abrupt.76 Should one ascribe salvific significance to the

72
Cf. Beuken 2003:205: Der Name gibt nicht den aktuellen Glauben des Ahas
wieder, sondern den Glauben, den eigentlich von ihm verlangt wird. Einst soll die
Daseinsberechtigung dieses Namens deutlich werden.
73
Cf. Wildberger 1972:295: Grundstzlich beinhaltet das Zeichen Heil, fr Ahas
selbst, aber schwerste Drohung, eine Drohung, die paradoxerweise gerade in der
Ankndigung sichtbar wird, da Jahwe zu seiner Verheiung steht.
74
Cf. Beuken 2003:188: Das Zeichen wird in seiner Erfllung wiederum zu
einem Zeichen. Die Geburt des Kindes und sein Name Immanuel verheien, dass
jhwhs Gegenwart bei seinem Volk (Gott mit uns) unverzglich in der Katastrophe
sichtbar wird, die die angreifenden Vlker trifft (V 16). Aber in dieser Erfllung des
Immanuelzeichens ist zugleich ein Hinweis auf die Not des Landverlustes mitgegeben,
mit der jhwh mittels des Knigs von Assur das Haus David strafen wird (V 17).
75
Cf Childs 2001:67: The giving of the sign to Ahaz (vv. 1017) is a continuation
of the previous challenge for faithfulness to the promise of God given to the house
of David in vv. 39.
76
While the Zion text of 28:16 is related within the context of Isaiah 28 to 28:12
(likewise designated by the present author as a Zion text), the latter text does not

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 129 1/18/2007 2:17:47 PM

 130 chapter four

Zion text of 28:16, then one should do so first and foremost on the
basis of its context in Isaiah 28.77
According to the traditional pattern of the prophecy of judgement,
the announcement of judgement should follow at this juncture, after
the complaint of verse 15 and the messenger formula at the beginning
of verse 16. The remainder of verse 16, however, does not appear to
live up to expectations in this regard. Should the Masoretic vocalisation
imply that dS'yI ynInhi relates to a salvific deed from the past and not some
future event, then the interruption of the traditional genre structure
would appear to be less radical and it becomes possible to include
the Zion text of verse 16 as a formal element of the announcement
of judgement. Within the framework of the announcement of judge-
ment, the salvific act being called to mind serves as the norm against
which the seriousness of the actual judgement can be measured. The
seriousness of the judgement that the prophet is obliged to announce
from verse 16 onwards is underlined from the outset by explicit refer-
ence to Gods salvific activities with respect to Zion, which, based on
the complaint of verse 15, were misunderstood.78

Comparison of MT with 1QIsaa / 1QIsab and LXXspotlighted

Having explained that the Masoretic text of 28:16 presupposes an
interpretation whereby the Zion text of 28:16 is not to be understood
as a promise of salvation given for the future, it is now important to
focus attention on the Qumran Isaiah scrolls and their interpretation
of the said text.79 The scrolls in question, with respect to which there

relate to an actual promise of salvation or one given for the future but consists rather
of a reference to an earlier statement on the part of yhwh with respect to Zion. See
4.3.3.
77
For a discussion of the position of Wildberger, who translates dsy as a futurum
instans but interprets it nevertheless as an announcement of judgement, see below.
78
Cf. Beuken 2000:44: It is a unique feature of this oracle that the announce-
ment of doom is projected against a salvific act in the past, i.e. Gods founding of
Zion. Blenkinsopp 2000(B):473 states with reference to 28:21: Bringing up salvific
interventions of Yahweh in the past would be equally (i.e. just as the allusion to a
future, new foundation in Jerusalem, JD) out of place in a sentence of doom. By
way of comparison, however, reference can be made to important allusions to Gods
earlier words in 28:1112, a reference that constitutes a part of an announcement of
judgement in similar fashion to the Zion text of 28:16 (see also 30:15 in which the
prophet prefaces his complaint with reference to a promise of salvation given in the
past; complaint and announcement of judgement are woven together in 30:1517,
cf. Gonalves 1986:167f ).
79
For the characteristics of both scrolls see Tov 1997:491511. For an introduction
to 1QIsaa and a German translation thereof see Steck 1998. Steck 1998:18 typifies

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 130 1/18/2007 2:17:48 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 131

is no absolute certainty that they were both composed in Qumran,80

read a participle form in verse 16 after ynnh and thus serve as primary
witnesses in support of emending the Masoretic vocalisation. While the
use of the pi el participle dsym or a qal participle dswy after ynnh need
not automatically imply that the text of verse 16 should be translated
in a future sense, it would appear from the documents discovered at
Qumran that the community took such an interpretation as its point of
departure and thus understood the Zion text of 28:16 to be a proph-
ecy of salvation for the future. The use of 28:16 in both The Rule of
the Community (1QS 8,58) and The Thanksgiving Scroll (1QHa
15,89) leads one to believe that the text in question was interpreted
in an eschatological sense and that the community of Qumran saw
itself as the fulfilment thereof (see 2.4.1.). For this interpretation to
be possible, reference to the word Zion is left out of any allusions to
28:16. This can be understood against the background of the com-
munitys own belieftogether with its lack of interest in the temple in
Jerusalemthat it was with Gods living temple that the designation
Zion was associated.81 The same is likewise expressed on occasion in
the text of 1QIsaa itself.82 For the interpretation of the community of

1QIsaa as eine interpretative Fassung des MT-nahen Jes-Textes, die anderen Zwecken
als allein der Textberlieferung dienen sollte, resp. as ein Gebrauchstext zur Lektre
oder allenfalls eine Vorlage fr die Herstellung interpretativer Lektrekopien.
80
Cf. the cautious position held by Steck 1998:17 with respect to 1QIsaa: Da sie
ein spezifisches Produkt der essenischen Gemeinschaft von Qumran darstellt und gar
von vornherein den Jes-Text da und dort mit besonderen Absichten dieser Gemeinschaft
in Verbindung brachte, ist heute weniger selbstverstndlich als frher. Sollte die aus-
gedehnte Siedlung von Qumran nmlich erst gegen 100 v.Chr. bezogen wurden sein,
ist nicht mehr sicher, da 1QIsa wirklich in Qumran geschrieben wurde. While
Pulikottil 2001:160ff recognises the heterogeneous character of the Qumran docu-
ments, he nevertheless endeavours to gain support for the idea that the author of the
first Isaiah scroll should in all probability be located within the Qumran community.
Pulikottil places the emphasis on the interpretative character of 1QIsaa and concludes
that the author of this scroll was oriented towards the community of Qumran: The
foregoing discussion of the reading of the scroll has illustrated the overall conceptual
relationship of the scroll with that of certain Qumran texts, most of which can cer-
tainly be termed as Yachad documents. Though not all the changes to the scroll can be
said to have this ideology only, most of the major themes of these texts are reflected
in the scroll. (2001:185)
81
Cf. Dohmen 1982:86: Wenn in Jes. 28,16 Jahwe sagt: Seht, ich lege in Zion
einen Grundstein, einen bewhrten Stein, einen kostbaren Eckstein, dann wird es
hier so verstanden, da Jahwe dies in der Grndung von Qumran vollzogen hat mit
dem Ziel, den Bund nach ewigen Gesetzen aufzurichten. Hier klingt an, was spter
fr die Gemeinschaft von Qumran spezifisch wird, da sie sich gegen bzw. anstelle
des offiziellen Judentums stellt. See also W.H. Schmidt 19783:738, Muszynski 1975:5
and Betz 1987:9596.
82
Pulikottil 2001:143145 draws attention to the text of 2:3, where the expression

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 131 1/18/2007 2:17:48 PM

 132 chapter four

Qumran, it was essential that the verb dsy in 28:16 could be understood
as a participle and translated in the future sense. A pi el perfect dS'yI
would ultimately have represented an obstacle to the application of the
text to the community. The theological perspectives of the community
at Qumran thus made it desirable to read dsy as a participle. It should
be clear, therefore, that the emendation of the Masoretic vocalisation of
dsy as a pi el perfect dS'yI on the basis of the text of both Isaiah scrolls
from Qumran is not to be recommended.
The Septuagint, with its interpretation of the Zion text of 28:16 as
a promise of salvation associated with the future, is more explicit than
the readings found in both Qumran scrolls. The Septuagint of Isaiah is
characterised by the fact that the Greek translator employed a surprising
degree of freedom and independence in his work.83 As a consequence,
the translation in question provides a specific interpretation in several
places and is even considered to represent an important pre-Christian
witness to Jewish exegesis.84 The combination dsy ynnh is translated in
the Septuagint with an explicitly future orientation:
. This translation corresponds with a possible
presence of an already Messianising tendency given expression in the
plus of in the concluding passage of 28:16:
.85 The plus serves to relate the expres-
sion one who trusts directly to the stone in such a way that the latter
is personified.86 Given the considerable freedom the Greek translator

hw:hyArh'Ala, is absent and where the task of teaching is ascribed to an undetermined

plural they and not to YHWH. Pulikottil thus interprets the concluding words of 2:3 in
the sense that the Law has departed from Zion and concludes: . . . the passage brings
a radical difference in portraying Jerusalem deprived of its privilege as a centre of reli-
gious instruction in the end of the days, as the Law has departed from it. The centre of
religious instruction is now the bwq[y yhwla tyb (house of the God of Jacob), where a
group represented by an unidentified they will be in charge of instruction.
83
Cf. Seeligmann 1948:56: With this we come to a characteristic trait in our
translator; he often sacrifices grammatical accuracy to his own stylistic text-formula-
tion. He deals pretty arbitrarily with gender and mood of the verb, with person and
number. Seeligmann signals a clear tendency on the part of the Greek translator to
give his work a more Greek style and to employ a more Greek sentence structure. He
thus presupposes that the latters knowledge of Hebrew was probably more theoretical
and lexicographical than grammatical and syntactical.
84
Van der Kooij 1977:91. See also Van der Kooij 1997(A):513: . . . a free translation
which reflects at several places an actualizing interpretation of the Isaianic prophecies.
Cf. Van der Kooij 1989:127133 and 1997(B):925.
85
For a discussion of the problem Messianisms in the Septuagint see Harl 1988:
219222 and 282288.
86
In its translation of Ps. 118:22, the Septuagint has likewise promoted a Messianic
interpretation by way of the plus of the explicative .

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 132 1/18/2007 2:17:48 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 133

of Isaiah permitted himself, it goes without saying that a significant

degree of caution should be employed when using the Septuagint in
order to establish the correct reading of 28:16.87
It is the present authors conclusion that the textual renditions found
in Qumran and the Septuagint do not provide decisive reasons to emend
the Masoretic vocalisation of 28:16. It would appear that the Masoretes
employed unusual vocalisation and punctuation precisely in order to
avoid accidently associating the Zion text with some future salvific
activity on the part of God. The form-critical considerations outlined
above tend rather to reinforce the impression that verse 16 should be
understood as a salvation-historical retrospective moment intended to
underline the seriousness of the judgement being announced.

The content of the salvation-historical retrospective moment in verse 16

is determined by the mention of the stone that yhwh has established
in Zion. It is in fact the stone that is given particular emphasis. This is
not only evident from the variety of characterisations with which the
stone is described, but also from the poetical structure ascribed by the
prophet to the Zion text. Following the introductory particle kel; and
the messenger formula hwIhy yn:doa} rm'a; hKo we have what would appear
at first sight to be a bicolon after which the verse is rounded off with a
monocolon. In that case, with verse 14, the prophet employs the poetic
technique of the ballast variant for this crucial statement concerning
the stone that yhwh has established in Zion. In verse 16, however, this
can be further specified as a form of the so-called expanded repetition.
In the second half of verse 16 there is no parallel for the statement ynInhi
/YxiB] dS'y,I but rather the word b,a, stone is taken up once again and
then supplemented with a variety of typifications.88 The printed form
of verse 16 in BHS, however, interferes with the recognition of the
apparent structure. An alternative typography even makes the chiasm
visible whereby the structure of verse 16 can be characterised: at the
beginning and end a form of dsy, and at the pivotal point between
both halves of the verse twice b,a,:

87
Cf. Seeligman 1948:5866 and Wildberger 1982:15181520. Aquila, Symmachus
and Theodotion do not follow the translation of dsy ynnh as a future
but opt rather for the participle .
88
Cf. Watson 1984:343348 and Bhlmann/Scherer 19942:39.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 133 1/18/2007 2:17:48 PM

 134 chapter four

b,a;= /YxiB] dS'yI ynInhi See, I am the one who laid in Zion a
foundation stone,
dS;Wm ds;Wm tr'q]yI tN"Pi j'Bo b,a, a weighty stone, a precious cornerstone,
a sure foundation.
The expanded repetition in the second half of the verse calls for
particular attention, because b,a, has been supplemented to such a
degree that the balance would seem to have tilted in the wrong direc-
tion. While this is not an exceptional phenomenon in Hebrew and
Ugaritic poetry,89 the chain of characteristics typifying the b,a, in 16b
leaves one with a sense of exaggeration. In order to reduce the length
of the Zion text to some degree, the course of history has witnessed a
variety of proposed emendations:
1. Several exegetes have suggested that we scrap the first b,a., 90 This
proposal not only removes an element of weight from a verse in
which the stone as such is being emphasised, it also misinterprets
the style feature referred to above, namely the ballast variant, in
which both the first b,a, and the second are essential!
2. Others have suggested that we consider tr'q]yI as an interpolation.91
In spite of the fact that tr'q]yI creates problems with respect to the
translation of the text, this hypothesis has gained little if any fol-
lowing.
3. The suggestion that we scrap the second dS;Wm has received the most
approval because its presence can be explained as a simple example
of dittography.92 It is striking, however, that the second dS;Wm has
a dage in the s. This suggests that we are dealing with a hoph al

89
See Korpel/De Moor 1988:16: In accordance with the tendency towards sym-
metry in this kind of poetry the number of feet of the cola forming a verse is usually
the same. However, unbalanced verses are quite common. Korpel and De Moor
maintain the following rule of thumb with respect to poetry: Within certain limits
every structural unit could be expanded or contracted, as the singers saw fit. (2)
90
Marti 1900:208 is of the opinion that the first b,a, stems from a gloss ds;Wm b,a,,
which was later divided over two verse segments. Fullerton 1920:10 and Procksch
1930(A):356 scrap the first b,a, metri causa and support their action with an appeal to the
Septuagint, which only has one . Boehmer 1923:90 presupposes that the original
reading must have been hr;q;y hN:Pi j'Bo b,a, /YxiB] dS'yI ynInhi and considers every elaboration
hereof to be artificial (see, in this regard, the critique of Dietrich 1976:164).
91
Duhm 19143:175.
92
See Marti 1900:208, Fullerton 1920:10, Procksch 1930(A):356, Rohland 1956:148,
Donner 1964:148, Wildberger 1982:1064 and Gonalves 1986:197, KBL/HALAT,
BHS, HAHAT.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 134 1/18/2007 2:17:49 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 135

participle (cf. hoph al perfect ds'Wh in Ezra 3:11).93 Based on a count

of the number of syllables it has also been suggested that we read
the second dS;Wm as part of the last verse line.94
Over and against the various attempts to restore the balance within
verse 16 by way of emendation, the present author is inclined to follow
the possibility that allows for taking the presence of two bicola instead
of one as its point of departure. Given the fact that the particle ynInhi
enjoys a deictic function and has a distinctive accent Tevr [12], it is
possible that the term should be understood as anacrusis.95 In light of
the fact that the words j'Bo and tr'q]yI likewise have distinctive accents,
Gre or Tres [13] and Pat [10] respectively, the Masoretic accentua-
tion leads to the presupposition that the Zion text of verse 16 is made
up of two bicola, with 3 + 2 and 2 + 2 metrical beats:
ynInhi See, I am the one
b,a;= /YxiB] dS'yI who laid in Zion a foundation stone,
j'Bo b,a, a weighty stone,
tr'q]yI tN"Pi a precious cornerstone,
dS;Wm ds;Wm a sure foundation.
I consider myself supported in this rendition of the poetic structure of
verse 16 by the observation that dS;Wm ds;Wm tr'qy] I tN"Pi j'Bo b,a, read in the
first instance as a single clause, actually consists of three end-rhyming
pairs: j'Bo b,a
, tr'qy] I tN"P
i dS;Wm ds;Wm.96 Any attempt to eliminate one of
the components thus disrupts the pattern. The exaggerated impression
created in the meantime by the build-up of characteristics of the stone,
may serve to establish the greatest possible emphasis.

93
Oswalt 1986:519 registers the possibility of an alternative spelling for the same
word, but his suggestion lacks plausibility. GKG 71 points out that dsy functions here
as a strong verb because the y is understood as a full consonant that is assimilated in
the following consonant.
94
See Roberts 1987:35. Without counting the syllables, Hartenstein 2004:499
makes the same suggestion but proposes an alternative vocalisation. He reads dswm
in both instances as ds;/m foundation, although this singular form never occurs in the
Old Testament.
95
This suggestion was proposed by Beuken, although he himself opts for a bicolon
with 5 + 4 beats, which is indeed less unusual than a bicolon with 4 + 6 beats:
h'Bo b,a, b,a;= /YxiB] dS'yI
dS;Wm ds;Wm tr'qy] I tN"Pi
The disadvantage of this construction, however, lies not only in the fact that the Atnch
must be ignored but also in the fact that the style feature of the ballast variant is
less manifest.
96
For the function of rhyme as a style feature see Watson 1984:229234. Cf. the
typography of 28:16 in Jeremias 1930:265.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 135 1/18/2007 2:17:49 PM

 136 chapter four

The provision of an accurate translation of the various characteristics

of the stone given in verse 16 is not a simple task. Traditionally, the
word j'Bo has been associated with the verb jb to test. In that case,
two possibilities present themselves with respect to the translation of
j'Bo b,a:, testing stone 97 or tested stone.98 The latter can be objected to
on the basis of the fact that, with one single exception, the verb jb
always has God or human beings and their heart, kidneys, thoughts,
ways or words as its object.99 This makes the translation of j'Bo b,a, as
tested stone implausible, in spite of the fact that Aquila, Symmachus and
Theodotion translated j'Bo b,a, with and the Vulgate with
lapidem probatum.100 Moreover, the context (verse 17) does not relate
to the testing of the foundation but rather to the building constructed
thereupon.101 A translation opting for testing stone thus fits the context
better, but given the fact that the subject of the verb jb is likewise
always personal (God or humans), the sense of such a translation is
not immediately apparent.102
Given the fact that a satisfactory translation was hard to establish,
scholars have also endeavoured to explain j'Bo b,a, as a specific sort of
stone. Khler, who considered j'Bo to be an Egyptian loanword referring
to a particular type of stone used especially for monuments, is associ-

97
Clements 1980(B):231 and Wildberger 1982:1067.
98
Fullerton 1920:3, Exum 1982:126, Klopfenstein 1964:147f.
99
Tsevat 1973:590: es hat keine sachlich-praktischen Haupt- oder Nebenbereiche,
die die Aufmerksamkeit vom Seelischen oder Religisen abziehen knnten (Ausnahme
Sach 13,9, ein Gleichnis). Somit ist jb das Wort, das von allen Synonyma das gei-
stigste ist; bei ihm geht es ganz speziell um die Person. Cf. Jenni 19783:273.
100
As is evident from the translation of j'Bo by , the Septuagint would appear
to have based itself on the verb rjb to choose. Cf. in LXX 54:12.
101
Cf. Roberts 1987:30.
102
Wildberger 1982:10761077 translates j'Bo b,a, as testing stone and offers a strictly
metaphorical explanation. Jerusalem is to be subjected to Gods judgement on account
of its faith or lack thereof. According to Wildberger, the testing stone mentioned in
verse 16 is one of the instruments of Gods judgement in addition to the measuring
line of justice and the plummet of righteousness in verse 17a. It is clear that Wildberger
bases his interpretation on the presupposition that verse 16 is referring to the future,
although the verse cannot be a promise of salvation for form-critical reasons. This
leads to his somewhat artificial metaphorical interpretation of the stone in verse 16.
The stone in question, however, is given so much emphasis that one cannot avoid the
conclusion that the prophet is explicitly drawing attention to the object itself. The use
of foundation terminology likewise makes a metaphorical explanation of the stone
as an instrument of divine judgement virtually impossible.
103
Khler 1947:390393. See also KBL/HALAT. This perspective is followed by
Fohrer 1962:54, 59, Donner 1964:152, Driver 1968:59, Huber 1976:91 and Petersen
1979:110. Dietrich 1976:164 is of the opinion that Khlers interpretation is not of
essential significance for the interpretation of the text.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 136 1/18/2007 2:17:49 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 137

ated in particular with this interpretation.103 The question remains,

however, whether the said Egyptian bhn-stone was already being used
in ancient Jerusalem at the time of the prophet Isaiah.104 Inspired by
the potentially Egyptian associations of j'Bo, others have suggested that
we identify ba ba with the Egyptian bn bn obelisk.105 The question of
the suitability of such an obelisk as a foundation stone to one side,106
this interpretation simply ignores the structure of verse 16 as outlined
above. Others still have endeavoured to identify the Egyptian bhn with
the Greek , the well-known testing stone employed since the
end of the sixth century BCE to establish the purity of gold.107 Egyptian
bhn-stone, however, turns out to be a material used for statues, steles
and sarcophaguses quarried at Wadi Hammamat and commonly known
today as greywacke (a sort of grey sandstone).108
More acceptable than the idea that j'Bo b,a, represents one or other
type of Egyptian stone is the possibility of associating j'Bo with WjB' in
23:13 (Ketib wyn:yjib] with Qere wyn:Wjb'; NRSV: their siege towers) and with
j'B' in 32:14 (NRSV: watchtower). It is probable that the first Qumran
Isaiah scroll (1QIsaa) read j'B' in 28:16 rather than j'Bo, otherwise a mater
lectionis would have been introduced and the term written as jwb.109 The
community of Qumran thus identified jb in 28:16 with j'B' employed in
23:13 and 32:14. This would also appear to be the case in the passages
that make reference to 28:16 in The Rule of the Community (1QS
8,58) and in The Thanksgiving Scroll (1QHa 14,2527 and 15,89).
Basing himself on the manuscripts of Qumran, Tsevat is thus able to
propose the translation fortification stone.110 While Wildberger is critical

104
Tsevat 1973:591 and Wildberger 1982:1066 argue that such stones were only
imported into Palestine at a later date. Roberts 1987:30 does not ascribe much weight
to this objection, arguing that j'Bo might likewise be a loanword for a different type of
stone. There is no evidence to support this argument.
105
LeBas 1950:103115.
106
Wildberger 1982:1066.
107
See Khler 1947:390393.
108
See Harris 1961:7882 and Nicholson/Shaw 2000:5758.
109
See Otzen 1957:9495 and Wernberg-Mller 1958:248. Cf. Gonalves 1992
III:471: Every instance of the vowels o and u, whether long or short, is rendered
by waw.
110
Tsevat 1973:591: d.h. der fr den Burgbau der Knigszeit charakteristerische
Quader. Tsevat refers in this regard to the image and description found in Galling
1937:372f. Roberts 1987:33 agrees with Tsevat and concludes: Indeed all three of the
Qumran passages interpret Isa 28:16 as referring to a place of refuge and therefore
emphasize the solidity of the structure envisioned. See also HAHAT, DCH and Betz
1987:9596.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 137 1/18/2007 2:17:49 PM

 138 chapter four

of this translation, given that the three documents from Qumran only
offer general allusions to 28:16 and therefore do not permit far reach-
ing conclusions,111 it is striking to say the least that a similar sort of
explanation governed the later Jewish tradition.112 The suggestion that
we read j'Bo b,a, as a reference to a sort of fortification stone fits well
in verse 16 in which foundation terminology is given such a particular
accent. The combination j'Bo b,a, might therefore be translated as heavy
stone.113 Any endeavour to establish the reasons behind the Masoretic
vocalisation j'Bo, however, remains guesswork.114
The heavy stone mentioned in verse 16 is further described with the
term tN"P,i a word that is to be found, for the most part, in the context
of building and construction. A few references can be found elsewhere
in the Old Testament in which allusion is made to a hN:Pi b,a, cornerstone
(see Job 38:6; Jer. 51:26 and Ps. 118:22).115 In verse 16, the cornerstone
in question is further qualified as tr'q]yI precious. The combination b,a,
hr;q;y precious stone or jewel is likewise to be found elsewhere in the
Old Testament.116 Where verse 16 is concerned, the plural form ynIb;a}
t/rq;y employed in 1 Kgs 5:31 (NRSV 5:17) and 7:911 is of primary
significance. The precious stones referred to in 1 Kgs 5:31 in particular
are used for the foundation of the temple, while those mentioned in

Wildberger 1982:1066.
111

Roberts 1987:3334 points to the Targums Messianic interpretation, which

112

places the emphasis on the power of the future king and recognises in jb in 28:16
the same word as in 32:14 and 23:13. He goes on to speak of the medieval Jewish
scholars Rashi and David Kimchi who both explain jb in 28:16 as rx;b]mi fortification
with reference to 32:14. Ibn Ezra follows a similar line of thought but without the use
of rx;b]m.i Saadias Arabic translation likewise employs one and the same word in the
three Isaiah texts: fortification.
113
Cf. the translation found in Beuken 2000:12: a massive stone.
114
Intentional ambiguity based on a conscious allusion to the verb jb to test, belongs
among the various possibilities but remains uncertain.
115
Jer. 51:26 places t/ds;/ml] b,a, next to hN:pil] b,a,. Cf. Oeming 1989:627. The
Septuagint of 28:16 translates tN"Pi with . This term is also employed
in Eph. 2:20 and 1 Pet. 2:6. Jeremias 1930:264280; 1933:792793 understands
in Eph. 2:20 and 1 Pet. 2:6 and in Mk 12:10 par.;
Acts 4:11 and 1 Pet. 2:7 as a capstone introduced above an entrance. The Greek
term should only be understood as cornerstone in LXX Isa. 28:16. This
vision initially attracted a considerable following that has dissipated in recent years.
Cf. Merklein 1973:144152. Cf., however, Cahill 1999:345357.
116
See 2 Sam. 12:30; 1 Kgs 10:2,10,11; 1 Chron. 20:2; 29:2; 2 Chron. 3:6; 9:1,9,10;
32:27; Ezek. 27:22; 28:13; Dan. 11:38. GKG 130f1 considers tr'q]yI to be a noun
and not an adjective: a cornerstone of the preciousness of a fixed foundation, or: a
precious cornerstone of surest foundation. Roberts 1987:34 points out, however, that
Deut. 21:11 contains a similar construction of noun and adjective, both in the status
constructus and followed by a further noun.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 138 1/18/2007 2:17:50 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 139

1 Kgs 7:911 are used for the foundation as well as the construction of
the palace of Solomon. It should not go unnoticed that the verb dsy to
lay a foundation is employed in both texts in close association with the
said t/rq;y ynIb;a} and in like fashion to the Zion text in 28:16.117 The
aforementioned t/rq;y ynIba ; } must in any event have referred to substan-
tial stones suitable for tooling that could be used in the foundations of
a building.118 The important parallel between the Zion text of 28:16 on
the one hand and 1 Kgs 5:31 and 7:911 on the other run counter to
the explanation of Khler who considers tr'q]yI to be a hapax, derived
from the verb hrq to encounter. Khler thus understands the corner
in 28:16 to be the place at which the foundation walls meet.119
The use of the construct form associates tr'q]yI tN"Pi directly with the
following dS;Wm ds;Wm. The first ds;Wm is a substantive meaning foundation
(cf. 2 Chron. 8:16).120 The second dS;Wm should probably be understood
as a hoph al participle of dsy (cf. Ezra 3:11), functioning in 28:16 to
reinforce the first ds;Wm. We are thus left with the figura etymologica a
founded foundation, whereby significant emphasis is placed on the said
foundation.121
In order to understand what the prophet had in mind when he spoke
of the weighty and precious cornerstone laid by yhwh in Zion as an
immovable foundation, it makes sense to include the statement found
in 14:32b in our considerations. In the text in question, which, in addi-
tion to the Zion text of 28:16 itself, also exhibits semantic conformity
with its direct context via the use of the verb hsj to hide, take refuge
(cf. the references to the hs,j]m' hiding place, refuge chosen by the leaders
of Jerusalem in 28:15,17 and related to the Zion tradition), Zion itself
is seen as the object of foundation:

117
See 1 Kgs 5:31: tyzIg: ynEb]a' tyIB;h' dSey"l] t/rq;y ynIb;a} t/ldoG ynIb;a W[SiY"w" l,M,h' wx'yw"
(NRSV 5:17: At the kings command, they quarried out great, costly stones in order to lay the
foundation of the house with dressed stones.); 1 Kgs 7:10: t/ldoG ynIb;a} t/rq;y ynIb;a} dS;yUm]W
t/Ma' hn<mov] ynEb]a'w t/Ma' rc,[, ynEb]a' (NRSV: The foundation was of costly stones, huge stones,
stones of eight and ten cubits.)
118
Cf. Wagner 1982:858: Da das Steinmaterial in Palstina in der Qualitt unter-
schiedlich ist, wird diese Notiz besagen, da es feste und hinsichtlich ihres Maes
besonders groe Steine sein mssen, die als Fundamentsteine zu Quadersteinen bear-
beitet werden knnen. jqr gewinnt die Bedeutung von geeignet.
119
Khler 1947:391.
120
The feminine form hd;s;Wm occurs in 30:32 and the plural form t/ds]Wm in the
Qere associated with Ezek. 41:8.
121
Cf. GKG 117pr and J-M 125p. Krauss 1945:31 compares the statement ds;Wm
dS;Wm with yrIyVih' ryvi and translates the best of the foundation, the peak of them.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 139 1/18/2007 2:17:50 PM

 140 chapter four

/Yxi dS'yI hw:hy yKi For YHWH has founded Zion,

s ./M[' yYEnI[} Wsjy< Hb;W and the needy among his people will
find refuge in her.
Given the significant agreement between both texts in terms of content
and semantics, the preposition B] in /YxiB] in 28:16 is sometimes under-
stood as a b-essentiae, meaning in the quality of .122 Roberts is of the
opinion, however, that the b-essentiae should have been placed before
b,a, and not /Yxi and he argues in favour of a locative interpretation
with respect to the preposition B].123 The present author is inclined to
agree that in this instance the interpretation of the preposition as a
b-essentiae is not entirely adequate, given the use of the b-essentiae
elsewhere.124 A strictly locative interpretation, however, leaves the
impression, perhaps incorrectly, that the stone and Zion are to be dis-
tinguished from one another, while the said stone would appear rather
to allude to the secret of Zion. The formulation in 28:16 (b,a; /YxiB] dsy)
is clearly more elaborate than in 14:32 (/Yxi dsy), but in essence they are
virtually synonymous. In any case, it is in all respects probable that the
prophet Isaiah used the foundation stone set in Zion (cf. t/ds;/ml] b,a,
in Jer. 51:26) to allude to Gods election of Zion as his dwelling place
(see 8:18 for yhwhs dwelling in Zion). The semantic field employed in
verse 15 also points in this direction.125 Zion thus functions as a symbol
of Gods presence and thereby as synonymous with the temple. This
would also appear to be evident from the semantic field employed by
the prophet in the verse following verse 16.
Verse 16 concludes with the short monocolon vyjiy: al ymia}M'h' which
serves structurally to delineate the verse in question from verse 17
following.126 The Septuagint closely associates this clause with that which
precedes it by translating .
The plus refers to the stone already mentioned that can now

122
See GKG 119i (I make Zion a foundation), Huber 1976:91, Irwin 1977:31
and Gonalves 1986:213.
123
Roberts 1987:29. Beuken 2000:15 follows along similar lines.
124
Cf. J-M 133c, DCH, and in particular Jenni 1992:7989. Jenni does not
dedicate a separate discussion to Isa. 28:16, although he does list the text under the
locative use of b.
125
See also Beuken 2000:49.
126
For the given function of the monocolon in Biblical Hebrew Poetry see Watson
1984:168172. Fokkelman 2000:54 characterises the monocolon literally as a peripheral
phenomenon: it mostly occupies a demarcating position at the beginning or the end
of a higher textual unit such as a strophe or stanza.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 140 1/18/2007 2:17:50 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 141

be understood in Messianic terms.127 While the New Testament has

adopted the said plus (see Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet. 2:6) and understands
the Zion text of 28:16 in Messianic terms, this interpretation does not
square with the significance of the Hebrew text, which uses the verb
ma hi. to believe in the absolute sense.128 As far as the latter is concerned,
there is a surprising agreement with the way in which ma hi. is similarly
employed in 7:9 in the absolute sense. The statement yKi Wnymia}t' al ai
Wnmea;te al in 7:9 (NRSV: If you do not stand firm in faith, you shall not stand
at all.) lacks an explicit reference to an antecedent.129
In addition to the aforementioned syntactic agreements between the
faith statements of 28:16 and 7:9, agreement can also be established
with respect to their content. The background against which the state-
ment of 7:9 resounds is that of yhwhs salvific deeds in relation to the
royal house of David. In 2 Sam. 7:16, yhwh promises David by way
of the prophet Nathan that his house and monarchy will last. In Isa.
7:49, King Ahaz is encouraged to hold on to this promise, which is
confirmed once again in the Immanuel prophecy explicitly directed to
the house of David in 7:14. If Ahaz trusts in yhwhs salvific interven-
tion, his throne also shall stand firm. Yhwh himself will ensure that the
hostile plan to make the son of Tabeel king of Judah comes to nothing
(7:67). Just as the faith statement of 7:9 should be understood against
the background of yhwhs salvific activity on behalf of the house of
David, so the faith statement of 28:16 acquires its expressiveness from
the salvific activities of yhwh with respect to Zion. Given that ma hi.
is also used in the absolute sense in 28:16, it seems evident that the
concluding faith statement should not only be related to the stone as

127
Eichrodt 1967:134 considers the text of the Septuagint to be a degeneration of
prophetic grandeur because faith in the Septuagint is no longer focused on God but
on the foundation stone set by God. Faith is thus no longer an all-embracing spiritual
attitude but is related rather to the temple. In the New Testament, the original mean-
ing of faith as a personal relationship emerges once again because it focuses faith on
Christ.
128
For a survey of the discussion surrounding the meaning of ma hi. see Ridderbos
1970:167178 and Jepsen 1973:320333. In light of Ridderbos critique, Wildbergers
contribution 19783:187193 will have to be treated with a degree of reserve. Even when
ma hi. is used in the absolute, as in 7:9 and 28:16, it is apparent from the context that
to believe can be related to the prophetic word that has been uttered and need not
represent a designation of a particular personal attitude. Cf. Jepsen 1973:329: ymah
ist hier (in 7:9, JD) das Ernstnehmen eines ganz konkreten Gotteswortes; an diesem
Ernstnehmen hngt die Existenz. See also Sedlmeier 2000:3853 and the recent study
of Hagelia 2001:2653.
129
The formulation in 7:9, by contrast, is supported by an antecedent in 2 Chron.
20:20: Wnmea;tew k,yhela hw:hyB' Wnymia}h' Believe in YHWH your God and you will be established.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 141 1/18/2007 2:17:51 PM

 142 chapter four

such but also to the entire Zion text.130 In our study so far, it has become
apparent that the Zion text should not be interpreted as a promise for
the future but as a salvation-historical retrospective moment offered
within the framework of an announcement of judgement. The explicit
remembrance of Gods salvific deeds on behalf of Zion underlines
the seriousness of the judgement being announced. If the rulers of
Jerusalem were only to trust in yhwhs salvific deeds then they would
have no reason to seek their refuge elsewhere (cf. 30:2).
The interpretation of vyjiy: a Ol clearly represents an exegetical crux.
The verb form vyjiy: is to be understood as a hiph il imperfect of the
verb vwj to hurry oneself , but the precise meaning of the hiph il is difficult
to determine in the semantic context. Given their deviation from the
Masoretic text, the ancient translations would already appear to have
had the necessary problems with the text. The Septuagint probably
read v/byE al he shall not be ashamed (cf. bqo[}y" v/byE hT;['Aal in 29:22).131
The Syriac translation and the Targum may have read lyjiy: al he shall
not be anxious (cf. yBirqiB] lyjiy: yBili in Ps. 55:5).132 In spite of the fact that
proposed emendations are numerous, remaining with the Masoretic text
is recommended when searching for an adequate translation.133 The
primary meaning of the verb vwj qal/hi. is to hurry oneself (cf. 5:19), but
the hiph il can also be understood in the transitive sense to speed up (cf.
60:22).134 Based on 28:16 the majority of the lexica presuppose a third

130
Cf. Beuken 2000:50. I see no reason to consider the statement concerning faith
as an originally independent proverb without direct relationship to the context as
Hagelia 2001:41 proposes. Hagelia would appear to need this presupposition in order
to be able to include 28:16 in his research into the Yahwistic spirituality of ancient
Israel. Together with 7:9, Hagelia sees 28:16 as the core of the man-God-relation in
Isaiah. (53)
131
Procksch 1930(A):358 suggests that we emend the Masoretic text in this sense.
Wildberger 1982:1067 correctly counters this suggestion, arguing that vyjiy: al cannot
be explained as a corruption of v/byE al. Seeligmann 1948:56 has noted, moreover,
that free rendition of verb forms in the hiph il is particularly characteristic of the
Septuagint of Isaiah.
132
Donner 1964:148 points also to Ps. 29:6, although a hiph il lyjiy: is used at this
juncture.
133
BHK mentions the option tj;yE al do not be shocked (cf. 30:31), Fullerton 1920:42,
Wolff 19733:31 and many others give preference to the reading vWmy: al shall not shift
from his place (cf. 54:10). Procksch 1930(A):358 mentions the option vl;j,y< al do not be
weak (cf. Job 14:10), but gives preference to the reading v/byE al on the basis of the
Septuagint.
134
The verb vwj is employed in the Old Testament for the most part in the qal (15x),
primarily in the Psalms and in the context of the psalmists appeal to God to hasten
to help him (see Ps. 22:20; 38:23; 40:14; 70:2,6; 71:12; 141:1). Beyse 1977:821822
points to similar prayers in Ugaritic texts.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 142 1/18/2007 2:17:51 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 143

meaning, namely to show oneself agitated or to give way.135 The most

obvious interpretation of the vwj hi., however, remains to hurry oneself ,
whereby the allusion to the alliance with Egypt in the complaint of verse
15 suggests hurrying elsewhere. Reference to Ps. 55:9 may be of value in
this regard, the verse in question being one of the few places in which
the verb vwj is likewise employed in the hiph il.136 Strikingly enough,
Ps. 55:9 speaks of the hasty search for a place of refuge whereby the
metaphor of the storm is used as in Isa. 28:16. Given the fact that the
semantic field of verse 15 is related to numerous psalms, it is possible to
determine the meaning of vyjiy: al along similar lines and translate he
shall not hurry off .137 The advantage of such a translation is that, given
the background of the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422, it can refer
to the search for refuge in Egypt and to a more general religious sense
of inner conflict.138 Yhwhs salvific activity with respect to Zion implies
the promise of a safe refuge for his people (cf. 14:32). The leaders in
Jerusalem misunderstand yhwhs deed, however, and they hurry off in
search of refuge elsewhere (cf. 30:2). In light of Gods salvific deeds on

135
See KBL: sich aufgeregt zeigen; DCH: give way, be dislodged; HALAT:
weichen. KBL and HALAT refer hereby to Driver 1931:253f. Based, among other
things, on the Akkadian au to stumble, Driver translates: shall not be agitated, shall
not be moved. Wildberger 1982:1067 argues that this translation strays too far from
the Hebrew, while Oswalt 1986:514 and Beuken 2000:15 agree with Driver. Roberts
1987:36 similarly appeals to the Akkadian au, but relates it to the foundations on
the basis of 1QS 8,8 and translates a foundation which will not shake for the one
who trusts. Cf. Hartenstein 2004:499505 who changes the vocalisation, ignores the
syntactic agreement with Isa. 7:9 and translates as follows: ein Fundament, das fest ist, nicht
weicht es. To support his proposed translation, Hartenstein not only refers to 1QS 8,8,
but also to a few Hittite and Mesopotamian iconographic and textual examples that
demonstrate the symbolic significance attached to the founding of temple buildings
in the Near Eastern world. Founding rituals stressed the idea of the buildings stabil-
ity. It is not necessary, however, to follow the vocalisation and translation proposed by
Hartenstein to admit that the said idea of stability does indeed play an important role
in the stone metaphor of Isa. 28:16.
136
vwj hi. occurs only five or six times in the Old Testament (see Judg. 20:37; Ps.
55:9; Isa. 5:19; 28:16 and 60:22; Job 31:5 is uncertain).
137
The suggestion has been made that we read /l in 28:16 instead of al: the one
who believes will hasten to this sure foundation. Wildberger 1982:1067 mentions the name
of Montgomery Hitchcock in this regard. In spite of the fact that vwj hi. is used in its
absolute form, Tsevat 1973:591592 considers the possibility of a causative translation:
wer vertraut, drngt nicht, or in other words: he can wait.
138
Beyse 1977:821822 observes that the verb vwj can also be used for inner move-
ment with respect to human beings and presupposes that vwj in 28:16 functions as a
designation of internal restlessness: Die Haltung der Glaubende beschreibt Jes 28,16
Der Glaubende wird nicht fliehen, wobei hier wie bei Ps 55,9 weniger an eine wirkliche
Flucht gedacht ist, sondern vwj die innere Unruhe bezeichnet.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 143 1/18/2007 2:17:51 PM

 144 chapter four

Zions behalf, the prophet considered this behaviour reproachable and

rooted in a lack of faith. It thus serves to underline the seriousness of
the pending announcement of judgement.139
There is no adequate reason to conceive the words vyjiy: al ymiaM
} h' ' as
a sort of inscription carved into the foundation stone. The monocolon
with which verse 16 concludes does not draw attention to a possible
inscription but rather to the implications of yhwhs act of laying a
stone in Zion. The emphasis is placed entirely on the reliability of
Gods salvific acts with respect to Zion.140

4.2.3. Isa. 28:17a: The benchmarks of justice

wq;l] fP;v]mi yTim]c'w 17a Thus I will make justice the line,
tl,q;=v]mil] hq;d;x]W and righteousness the plummet.
In light of the fact that the Zion text of verse 16 is often incorrectly
understood as a promise of salvation with a view to the future, scholars
have frequently taken the words of verse 17a to be a component of
the said promise. Verse 17a does indeed follow seamlessly after verse
16, not only at the level of syntax (the consecutive perfect gives the
verse the character of a continuation), but also because the statement
in verse 17a is in the first person and it extends the use of building
terminology. Even the 3 + 2 meter employed in verse 17a echoes the
short cola out of which the Zion text of verse 16 is constructed.141
Everything would appear to suggest, therefore, that verse 17a should
be read together with the Zion text of verse 16 as a single unit. It has
become apparent from our exegesis in the meantime that the Zion text
of 28:16 constitutes part of an announcement of judgement and not

Cf. Gonalves 1986:201202: Loin dattnuer la gravit de la faute des destina-

139

taires ou dadoucir la menace, cette promesse ne fait que souligner lune et renforcer
lautre. En effet, la faute des destinataires devient dautant plus grave quils refusent
formellement les conditions du salut que Yahv leur avait explicitement dictes et leur
opposent leurs propres plans.
140
Based on the use of the singular, Beuken 2000:5051 considers it possible that
the final clause in the present context should be associated with the prophet himself
as a sort of encouragement following the mocking reaction of his opponents (28:9).
Similar encouragement is found elsewhere (see 8:1118). According to Beuken, the
final redaction of the book of Isaiah is characterised by a tendency to present Isaiah
to its readers as an example of obedience in faith. The final words of verse 16 are
thus indirectly addressed to the readers of the book.
141
The prophet makes use of a bicolon in verse 17a with synonymous parallelism
whereby the second colon lacks an equivalent for the verb form yTim]c'w. This style figure
is familiar to us as ellipsis. Watson 1984:174177 speaks of an abc // bc couplet.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 144 1/18/2007 2:17:52 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 145

a promise of salvation. In light of the apparent unity between verse

16 and verse 17a, therefore, it would be strange to say the least if the
latter were to contain just such a promise of salvation. At any rate, the
syntactic cohesion between the two verses strongly suggests that we read
verse 17a within the framework of an announcement of judgement.
The place occupied by verse 17a within such a framework, however, is
not the same as that occupied by the Zion text of verse 16, which we
characterised as a salvation-historical retrospective moment. Verse 17a
is unmistakably future oriented. This temporal transition does not come
entirely out of the blue, however, since it has already been heralded by
the fact that verse 16 ends with a monocolon, whereby the Zion text
is, to a degree, structurally detached from what follows.142 In order to
express this transition in the translation, therefore, verse 17a is presented
as a concluding clause. The evident syntactic cohesion between verse
16 and verse 17a can be understood in the meantime as intended to
underline the unity of Gods activities.143
The content of verse 17a confirms our suspicion that the passage
should indeed be interpreted as an announcement of judgement. Refer-
ence is made to two instruments of measurement, namely wq' (measuring)
line and tl,q,v]mi plummet, which belong among the standard tools of
the carpenter (cf. 44:13). Unlike wq', tl,q,v]mi only occurs elsewhere in
the Old Testament in one other place (2 Kgs 21:13). On the surface,
both wq' and tl,q,v]mi can be understood as neutral terms for tools that
carry no specific positive or negative connotations (cf. 1 Kgs 7:23; 2
Chron. 4:2; Jer. 31:39; Ezek. 47:3). The building terminology employed
in 28:1617a is also to be found in Job 38:46, in which reference is
made to the foundations of the earth, using not only the verb dsy to
found but also the expression Ht;N:Pi b,a, her cornerstone. The use of wq'
a (measuring) line is likewise presupposed. Similarities with Job 38:46,
however, should not lead to the conclusion that 28:17a is referring to the
construction of a (new) building (cf. Zech. 1:16), since it would appear
that wq' is repeatedly used as a metaphor in the context of judgement
(2 Kgs 21:13; Isa. 34:11,17; Lam. 2:8).144 2 Kgs 21:13 is of particular
importance in this regard because it represents the only other place in

142
For the function of the monocolon in Hebrew poetry see Watson 1984:168172
and Fokkelman 2000:54.
143
Cf. Beuken 2000:52: . . . the past founding act (v. 16) and the present establish-
ment of a measuring line (v. 17a) can be seen as forming the one building activity
of yhwh.
144
Cf. Beyse 1989:1224.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 145 1/18/2007 2:17:52 PM

 146 chapter four

which wq' and tl,q,v]mi are used in parallel with one another, while the
judgement context is comparable with that of 28:17a. In 2 Kgs 21:13,
yhwh announces that He intends to employ the same measuring line
in his judgement of Jerusalem as He once did with respect to Samaria
and the house of Ahab: tyBe tl,qov]miAta,w /rm]vo wq; tae Il'v;WryAl[' ytiyfin:w
ba;j]a' (NRSV: I will stretch over Jerusalem the measuring line for Samaria, and
the plummet for the house of Ahab . . . ).145
In contrast to 2 Kgs 21:13, the measuring line and plummet are
further concretised in verse 17a. fP;v]mi and hq;d;x] are referred to as
benchmarks of judgement. While fP;v]mi stands for legal order in gen-
eral, the word hq;d;x] places the emphasis more specifically on the actual
behaviour that would be expected from fP;vm ] i in general. The combina-
tion of fP;v]mi and hq;d;x] is characteristic of the idiom of the prophet
Isaiah.146 According to the prophecy of 1:2126, it was Gods intention
that Jerusalem be filled with fP;v]mi and hq;d;x,] but that He was forced
to observe that the opposite was the case. The same disappointment is
expressed in the Song of the Vineyard (5:17), which concludes with
the familiar and unambiguous statement: hq;d;x]li jP;c]mi hNEhiw fP;v]mil] wq'yw"
hq;[;x] hNEhiw (NRSV: He expected justice, but saw bloodshed; righteousness, but
heard a cry.). It could not have been considered other than threatening,
when yhwh states in verse 17a that it is precisely these two things, fP;vm ] i
and hq;dx ; ], that would be used as measuring line and plummet by which
his own people would be measured (cf. Amos 7:78).147
In spite of the fact that the building terminology employed in verse
17a is ascribed negative connotations in contrast to the Zion text of

145
It is striking that the Septuagint understood wq' to have stemmed from the verb
hwq to hope ( for) and translated tl,q,v]mi with the noun balance, weight (also:
stopping place, doorpost; cf. and in 2 Kgs 21:13). The words
fP;v]mi and hq;d:x] are translated by the Septuagint as judgement and
compassion: . In 1:27
and 59:16 the Septuagint likewise translates hq;dx : ] as (cf. Deut. 6:25; 24:13;
Ps. 23:5 = MT 24:5; 32:5 = MT 33:5; 102:6 = MT 103:6), although the translation
is also to be found in the book of Isaiah and the term is the
usual translation of the Hebrew term ds,j, (see Prov. 3:3; 15:27; 19:22; 20:28; 21:21;
31:28). The announcement of judgement in verse 17a is thus unmistakably trans-
formed into an announcement of salvation: and I will cause judgement to be for hope, and
my compassion shall be for just measures.
146
For the combination of fP;v]mi and hq;d:x] see Johnson 1989:907908. Von Rad II
19807:156 notes that these words have a central role to play in the preaching of Isaiah
whom he calls ein unerbittlicher Wchter und Sprecher des Gottesrechtes.
147
Donner 1964:153 incorrectly understands fP;v]mi and hq;d:x] to be instruments in
the service of the construction work of verse 16.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 146 1/18/2007 2:17:52 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 147

verse 16, it remains important that we have a clear picture of the

cohesion between the two verses. In order to underline the seriousness
of the judgement, the prophet offers a salvation-historical retrospective
in verse 16, thus calling to mind yhwhs salvific activity with respect
to Zion. It is precisely this activity towards Zion, however, that has
implications for the maintenance of justice. YHWHs inhabitation of
Mount Zion (8:18) is inseparably linked to the demand for justice
and righteousness (5:16; cf. 1:27).148 Without making use of the terms
fP;v]mi and hq;d;x,] the important Zion text of 14:32 would likewise
appear to underline the relationship between Gods salvific activity
on Zions behalf on the one hand, and the maintenance of justice on
the other.149 It would appear implicit from the final words of verse 16
that the rulers of Jerusalem misunderstood yhwhs deeds on behalf of
Zion. In verse 17a, therefore, the conclusion is drawn that yhwh has
the right to measure his people on the basis of his former deeds of
salvation. The instruments of his act of judgement are determined by
his own deeds of salvation.150 The announcement of judgement thus
flows immediately forth from the misunderstanding of Gods salvific
deeds on behalf of Zion.
By way of summary, therefore, we can state that the wq' and tl,q,v]mi
referred to in verse 17a are not intended for a (new) building project,
but function rather as instruments intended to take measure of the exist-
ing situation.151 The use of the metaphor of the measuring line should
be understood against the background of the fact that the rulers of
Jerusalem were expected to build further on the foundations established
by yhwh, according to the same norms of justice and righteousness
that are now being introduced as benchmarks of judgement.152

4.2.4. Isa. 28:17b18: Actual announcement of judgement

bz:k; hsej]m' dr;b; h[;y:w 17b Then shall hail sweep away the refuge of lies,
.Wpfov]yI yIm' rt,sew and waters will overwhelm the shelter;
tw<m;Ata, k,t]yrIB] rP'kw 18 then your covenant with death will be wiped out!
Wq=t; al l/av]Ata, k,t]Wzj;w and your agreement with Sheol will not stand;

148
The motif of salvific expectation associated with fP;v]mi and hq;d:x] enjoys a place
of primary importance (see 9:6; 11:35; 16:5; 32:1,16; 33:5; 56:1).
149
Cf. Beuken 2000:49.
150
Cf. Petersen 1979:111.
151
See Fohrer 1962:60, Kaiser 19762:202, Clements 1980(B):231, Wildberger
1982:1077 and Schneider 1988:387.
152
Cf. 1 Pet. 3:1015.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 147 1/18/2007 2:17:53 PM

 148 chapter four

rbo[}y" yKi fe/v f/v when the overwhelming scourge passes through,
.sm;rmil] /l t,yyIh]wI you will be beaten down by it.
Having first established the benchmarks of judgement in verse 17a,
the actual announcement of judgement is further concretised in verses
17b18. The content of the announced judgement corresponds with the
content of the accusation formulated in verse 15. A chiastic structure is
evident in both passages. The sequence in verse 15 runs as follows:
A tw<m;Ata, tyrIb] Wnt]r'K; // hz<jo Wnyci[; l/av]A[iw
B Wnae/by al [rbo[}y]" (rb'[;)AyKi fe/v [f/v] (fyvi)
C Wnsej]m' bz:k; Wnm]c' yKi // WnrT;s]nI rq,V,b'W
The sequence in the announcement of judgement in verses 17b and
18 runs:
C bz:k; hsej]m' dr;b; h[;y:w // Wpfov]yI yIm' rt,sew
A tw<m;Ata, k,t]yrIB] rP'kuw // Wqt; al l/av]Ata, k,t]Wzj;w
B sm;rmil] /l t,yyIh]wI rbo[}y" yKi fe/v f/v

The accusation in verse 15 and the announcement of judgement in

verses 17b18 thus mirror one another more or less.153 The chiastic
structure is disrupted, however, by the fact that the expression relating
to the overwhelming scourge is removed from the central position in the
announcement of judgement. Although Fullerton is of the opinion that
the announcement of judgement would have been more eloquent had
the chiastic structure been maintained, this is open to question.154 In
our treatment of the accusation in verse 15, we were able to determine
that the central bicolon contained the bragging statement of which the
prophet is accusing his opponents: When the overwhelming scourge passes
through it will not come to us! (B). In both the surrounding bicola of verse
15 (A and C), the prophet provides the background to the said boast-
ing in his own, decidedly ironic terms. The fact that the bicolon (B),
which corresponds with the boasting statement, is no longer central
but rather concludes the chiasm, has the effect of focusing attention
on the judgement given in response to the boasting. The judgement is

153
Fey 1963:123 speaks of a nahezu spiegelbildliche Gerichtsankndigung. Cf.
Watson 1994:61: The chiastic pattern (. . .) is evident as is its function: to express the
reversal of existing conditions.
154
Fullerton 1920:18.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 148 1/18/2007 2:17:53 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 149

devastating. The prophet exposes the nave self-confidence of his oppo-

nents, confronting them with hard reality: the overwhelming scourge
will beat them down. Given the incomplete chiasm, this segment of
the announcement of judgement thus concludes with the inauspicious
sm;rmil.]
In like fashion to the corresponding bicola in verse 15 (A and C), both
bicola of verses 17b and 18a (C and A) exhibit a chiastic structure.
While the chiasm is complete in the first bicolon (C: abc // cba), the
second bicolon (A), in line with the corresponding bicolon from verse
15 (A), can be understood as examples of split-member chiasmus
(a-bc // bc-a).155 The chiastic structure of verses 17b and 18 results in
the avoidance of a sequence of weqatal clauses (cf. v. 13b). The poetic
character of the announcement of judgement is reinforced by the
imagery employed by the prophet. He refers to dr;B; hail and yIm' waters
as the elements yhwh is going to use in order to carry out his judge-
ment. Such imagery points unmistakably in the direction of Assyria (cf.
8:58) and is also determinative for the prophecy of judgement against
Samaria/Ephraim in 28:2.156 In verse 15, Assyrias imperialistic and
expansionist character had already been indicated with the expression
fe/v [f/v](fyvi) the overwhelming scourge. The prophet consciously returns
to this allusion to Assyria in verse 17b in his use of the verb fv to
flow. As a matter of fact, the rulers of Jerusalem must face the same
misfortune as that encountered by the drunkards of Ephraim (28:2f ).
The expression bz:k; hsej]m' refuge of lies and the term rt,se shelter (bico-
lon C) echo the terminology employed in the accusation in verse 15
(bicolon C).157 It is now evident why the prophet was already able to
characterise the refuge in verse 15 as bz:K; lies and the shelter as rq,v,
falsehood . The rulers of Jerusalem are to emerge deceived from yhwhs
judgement, because the said refuge and shelter have no protection to
offer in spite of exaggerated expectations.158

155
Bicolon A from verse 15 is characterised by the pattern ab-c // c-ab. Cf.
Exum 1982:127. See Watson 1984:203; 1994:337338 on so-called split-member
chiasmus.
156
Kaiser 19762:201 points out that here and elsewhere, hail represents an instru-
ment of eschatological judgement. Cf. also 30:30 and 32:19.
157
Donner 1964:148 considers verse 17b to be an addition intended to allow all
the elements from the accusation to return in the announcement of judgement. In
his opinon, the storm images would have been out of place in the original proverb.
See also Petersen 1979:112.
158
Verse 17b is rendered rather freely in the Septuagint:

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 149 1/18/2007 2:17:53 PM

 150 chapter four

The contrast between the word-pair fP;vm ] i and hq;dx; ] on the one hand
and the word-pair bz:K; and rq,v, on the other, leads one to suspect that
the prophets references to lies as a refuge and to deceit as a shelter are
not only aimed at a lethal politics of coalition but also at the failure of
justice as a whole.159 One can indeed argue that the use of fP;v]mi and
hq;d;x] as the benchmarks of yhwhs judgement introduces the motif of
social justiceor in this instance the lack thereofinto the prophecy
of judgement.160 Reference can also be made in this regard to the fact
that the term rq,v, is particularly at home in the legal context and is
frequently used to designate a sort of breach of faith.161 At the same
time, however, the motif of social justice evident in the use of the
word-pair bz:K; and rq,v, in 28:15,17 clearly does not enjoy a foreground
position, since it is particularly apparent that the words hsej]m' and rt,se
in verse 17b play the most important role in determining the primary
focus of this prophecy of judgement, namely Jerusalems deadly alli-
ance politics.162 It is clearer here that the term bz:K; in the combination
bz:k; hsej]m' is intended as a further characterisation of the refuge than is
the case in verse 15, in which the formulation employed remains more
or less ambiguous.163 This makes sense when one considers the basic
meaning of the word bz:K; which can be described as untrustworthiness
or deceitfulness. Rooted in this basic meaning, therefore, the term
should not in the first instance be understood in the ethical sense but
rather as a statement concerning the object in relation to which it is
employed,164 in this case the chosen refuge to which a deceitful character

(and you believe in vain in the lie that the storm

wind will not reach you). The lie is thus no longer seen as a characterisation of the place
of refuge but related rather to the bragging of verse 15. The refuge and shelter are no
longer mentioned, nor are the hail and the waters. The author of 1QIsaa likewise places
the emphasis on the word lie via the subtle interpolation of an extra m. 1QIsaa runs:
bzk hsjmm drb h[yw (and the hail shall wash the lie out of the shelter). Pulikottil 2001:112
considers this alteration to be one of the many interpretative emendations introduced
into the text by the author of the Isaiah scroll.
159
Barthel 1997:320.
160
Cf. Beuken 2000:53: It is here, therefore, that we meet the ethical message of
the historical Isaiah expressed in words which were considered worthy of constituting
a refrain throughout the book.
161
See Seebass/Beyerle/Grnwaldt 1994:466467. Klopfenstein 19792:1012 de-
scribes the original meaning of rqv as Bruch eines vertraglich geregelten oder sonst
selbstverstndlich vorausgesetzten Treue- und Vertrauensverhltnisses.
162
See Excursus 2.
163
In line with Duhm, Marti 1900:209 considers bz:K; to be a gloss from verse 15b.
164
See Mosis 1982:115117: Was kzb I primr meint, gehrt zunchst nicht in
den Bereich des verantwortlichen Tuns und somit nicht in den Bereich der Ethik,
sondern dient zur Beschreibung dessen was ist, gehrt also insofern in den Bereich
einer Ontologie.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 150 1/18/2007 2:17:54 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 151

is ascribed. The fact that the word rq,v, is not repeated in verse 17 is
likewise striking in this regard.165 The lies and deceit are not going to
be washed away by the hail and the water but rather the refuge of lies
and the shelter. This serves to suggest that the motif of social justice,
in as far as it has an echo in the chosen terminology, is not intended
at this juncture to be read in the foreground.
In our discussion of the accusation in verse 15 we noted that both the
refuge/shelter and the covenant/agreement alluded to the protection
the rulers in Jerusalem believed they had found in Egypt. In order to
characterise the deceitfulness of such political manoeuvre, the prophet
introduces a contradictio in terminis in his announcement of judgement
in verse 17b, referring to a refuge of lies and speaking anew in verse
18a of a covenant with death and an agreement with Sheol.166 In this
instance, both of the latter phrases function as subject of the clause.
The prophet is convinced that judgement will not only shed light on
the deceitful character of Jerusalems coalition partner (verse 17b), but also
on that of Jerusalems coalition politics (verse 18a). By engaging in such
politics, the rulers have in fact embraced death instead of protecting
themselves against it and are now facing the disastrous consequences
thereof (verse 18b).
The precise meaning of the verb form rP'kuw in the context of verse
18a is not entirely clear.167 The form in question is derived from the
verb rpk, the pu al of which means to be reconciled (see, for example, Isa.
6:7; 22:14; 27:9). There is no consensus, however, on the etymology of
this verb. The lexica, on the one hand, presuppose a possible associa-
tion with the Arabic kafara to cover. Others are inclined to associate
rpk with the Akkadian kapru or kuppuru, basically meaning to wipe
away/purify.168 In relation to 28:18, others have proposed to be annulled
as a possible meaning for rpk.169 Given the fact that alternative texts

165
Procksch 1930(A):361 presumes that a word is missing from verse 17b, because
he had expected a Siebener. He suggests that we read k,r,t]si instead of the unclear
rt,s.e In line with several other scholars, Fullerton 1920:18 suggests we supplement
rt,se with rq,v.,
166
The same translation problems arise with respect to k,t]Wzj;w as with hz< jo in verse
15. The Septuagint translates in this instance with .
167
GKG 145o makes reference to the clause k,t]yrIB] rP'kuw as a deviation from
the rule that predicate and subject must agree in terms of number and gender. The
verb remains in the initial position and remains at first undetermined. See also J-M
150j.
168
Cf. Maass 19783:842843 and Lang 1984:304305.
169
See Driver 1933:3438, KBL/HALAT. Wildberger 1982:1077 understands the
semantic development along the following lines: the covenant is gradually muffled away
= annulled, because no one wants to be reminded of it. Beuken 2000:53 suggests

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 151 1/18/2007 2:17:54 PM

 152 chapter four

supporting such a usage are unavailable, however, some have given

preference to emendation. Based on the Septuagint (
) some suggest that we read rp'tuw and it shall be broken (cf.
8:10 in which rp'tuw functions as a parallel of Wqy: alw) .170 While argu-
ments against such emendation point out its syntactic impossibility,171
the primary objection thereto is in fact a matter of content. Verse
18a is not referring to the breaking of a covenant (by one or other of
the covenant partners, cf. 24:5; 33:8), but of its failure on account of
external (divine) intervention. In order to understand the significance
of rP'kwu , it is important that we bear its relationship with verse 17b closely
in mind. In the latter verse, the prophet announces that the refuge of
lies is to be swept away by hail and that the waters are to overwhelm
the shelter. Hail and water appeared to be a metaphor for Assyria. This
metaphor continues to function when the verb rpk is employed with al
Wqt;.172 The violence that is to break loose when the overwhelming scourge
passes through will not only sweep away the refuge of lies and wipe out
the shelter, but the same violence will also wipe out the covenant with
death, and the agreement with Sheol will be unable to stand.173 The
presupposed subject of the activity referred to by rP'kuw is thus not, in
the first instance, yhwh (indirectly so, of course), but the hail and the
waters referred to in verse 17b. This is supported by the fact that the
metaphor of the waters, explicit in verse 17b and implicit in verse 18a,
is made explicit once more in verse 18b. The verb fv thus establishes
the surrounding framework of verse 18a and provides an indication for
our understanding of the verbs employed in the said bicolon.
The announcement of judgement in verse 18 concludes with the
devastating statement sm;rmil] /l t,yyIh]wI whereby the boasting of verse

that we likewise take the basic meaning as our point of departure in 28:18: It is (. . .)
the basic meaning of the root which applies here: removing the tension between two
partnershere the rulers of Jerusalem and yhwh who has laid its foundation stone
by removing the cause of the outrage.
170
See, for example, Fullerton 1920:17, Rohland 1956:148, Kissane 19602:303 and
Dietrich 1976:161.
171
Kaiser 19762:198.
172
The use of the formulation Wqt; al in 28:18a is closely related to the use thereof
in 7:7 and 8:10. In both these texts, reference is likewise made to the concoction of
political plans that cannot be maintained when they are confronted with the plans of
yhwh (cf. 14:24 and Prov. 19:21). Beuken 2000:53 points out that the prophet borrowed
this theme from wisdom circles.
173
The verb h[y would appear to be a hapax. In line with Delitzsch (1889) and
Duhm 19143:176, Wildberger 1982:1068 refers in this regard to the Arabic and Hebrew
[y: that designates the shovel with which the altar was purified.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 152 1/18/2007 2:17:54 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 153

15 (Wnae/by al) is completely turned on its head. There are no adequate

reasons to emend sm;rmil] as some have suggested.174 Although the verb
smr to trample seems less appropriate in the context of the metaphor
of the overwhelming scourge, this was also in fact the case with respect
to the verb rb[ to pass through. Furthermore, the verb smr is used in
other instances to indicate the severity of Gods judgement (cf. 26:6;
28:3).175 The imagery surrounding to trample might stem from the activi-
ties of the potter (cf. 41:25; Nah. 3:14) or from the treading of grapes
(cf. 63:3), but may also be related to horses hoofs (Ezek. 26:11; cf.
2 Kgs 9:33) or indeed to trampling by human feet (2 Kgs 7:17,20). The
same verb is employed in 28:3 as part of the description of the fall of
Samaria. It would appear that Judah and Jerusalem respectively must
undergo the same fate as Ephraim.176 Similarly, the construction hyh
sm;rmil,] whereby sm;rmi functions in fact as an infinitive,177 is employed
elsewhere in the book of Isaiah to designate Gods judgement (5:5;
7:25; cf. Mi. 7:10). In 10:6, sm;rmi even refers explicitly to Assyria as
Gods instrument.

4.2.5. Isa. 28:1921: Twofold conclusion to the announcement of judgement

/rb][; yDemi 19 As often as it passes through,
k,t]a, jQ'yI it will take you;
rbo[}y" rq,BoB' rq,Bob'AyKi yes, morning by morning it will pass through,
hl;yL;=b'W /YB' by day and by night;
h[;w:zAqr' hy:h;w and it will be sheer terror
.h[;Wmv] ybih; to understand the message.
['=reT;c]hime [X;M'h' rx'q;AyKi 20 For the bed is too short to stretch oneself on,
.sNEK't]hiK] hr;x; hk;SeM'h'w and the covering too narrow to wrap oneself in.
hw:hy Wqy: yxir;P]Arh'k] yKi 21 For YHWH will rise up as on Mount Perazim,
z=G:ryI /[b]gIB] qm,[eK] He will rage as in the valley of Gibeon,
Whce[}m' t/c[}l' to do his deed
Whce[}m' rz: strange is his deed!
/td;bO[} dbo[}l'w and to work his work
./td;bO[} hY:rIk]n: alien is his work!

174
Duhm 19143:176 suggests we read rs;Wml] to discipline/chastise (cf. 30:32). The said
emendation, however, had already been rejected as unnecessary by Marti 1900:209.
175
The verb smr is primarily employed in the context of prophetic announcements
of judgement; see Waschke 1993:533.
176
Cf. Exum 1982:127 and Beuken 2000:54.
177
See Waschke 1993:533. According to KBL/HALAT, sm;rmi is a deverbative noun
meaning trampled pasture (cf. 7:25 and Ezek. 34:19). See also DCH.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 153 1/18/2007 2:17:54 PM

 154 chapter four

Given the fact that verse 18 reaches a climax in the final word sm;rmil]
and all the elements from the accusation contained in the announce-
ment of judgement have been recapitulated, we would appear to have
reached the appropriate place for the prophet to draw his prophecy
of judgement to a conclusion. A significant number of exegetes are
of the opinion that Isaiah did indeed do so and that verses 1922 are
due to a later addition stemming from more than one hand. When
compared with the clause construction in verses 1418, it is striking
that verses 1921 make frequent use of the infinitive construct (six
in total). Nevertheless, the clause type characteristic of the preceding
verses is also employed. Whatever the case, it is clear that the degree
of cohesion in terms of content that was so characteristic of verses
1418 is also present in verses 1921. The exhortation of verse 22 will
require separate treatment.
Verse 19a can be understood as the first conclusion to the preceding
announcement of judgement that, in light of the repeated use of the
verb rb[, would appear to be closely associated with verse 18. The
association is in fact already established by way of preparation in verse
18, where the clause concerning the overwhelming scourge (bicolon B) has
been located at the end of the announcement of judgement and not
in the middle thereof. As a result, the chiastic relationship between the
accusation in verse 15 and verses 17b18 is disrupted at an important
point. In addition to the fact that this places all the emphasis on the
said bicolon, it also has the effect that verse 19a can easily take up the
verb rb[ and provide further elaboration on the activity it represents.
Scholars have raised questions, however, as to whether verse 19as
extension of the preceding announcement of judgement can still be
considered poetry. If this is not the case, then the idea of a later inter-
polation or a readers gloss becomes all the more probable.178 In an
ancient language such as biblical Hebrew, however, the establishment
of a clear distinction between prose and poetry is far from simple. How
one distinguishes the one from the other depends on the presence of
a number of characteristically poetic style features.179 It makes sense

Cf. Wildberger 1982:1070.

178

Alonso Schkel 1988:19 insists that there is no watertight division to be established

179

in Hebrew between poetry and prose: Just as we cannot distinguish strictly between
prose vocabulary and poetic vocabulary, neither can we distinguish techniques which
are exclusively poetic. We must speak rather of frequency, predominance, density,
intensity. De Moor/Watson 1993:xiii agree and propose the following criteria as useful
in distinguishing poetry from prose (xiv): acrostic pattern, comparison with passages

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 154 1/18/2007 2:17:55 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 155

at this juncture, therefore, to examine verse 19a to determine whether

it exhibits the style characteristics that would allow us to determine
whether the passage in question is to be qualified as poetry.
If we take the most important Masoretic distinctive accents as our
point of departure, then it would appear at first sight that verse 19a
consists of two parallel cola of unequal length (4 + 5 beats). The long
clause hl;yL;b'W /YB' rbo[}y" rq,BoB' rq,Bob'AyKi, however, is easily identifiable
as a bicolon with 3 + 2 beats, whereby the expressions rq,BoB' rq,BoB'
morning after morning and hl;yL;b'W /YB' by day and by night are unmistak-
ably intended as parallels.180 The absence of a parallel for the verb
form rbo[}y" in the second half of the bicolon leaves the parallelism
incomplete. This phenomenon is referred to as verb-gapping and is
known to be one of the most common forms of ellipsis (cf. 28:17a).
The recognition of this style feature represents an important argument
in qualifying the passage in question in verse 19a as poetry.181 If we
understand the clause hl;yL;b'W /YB' rbo[}y" rq,BoB' rq,Bob'AyKi to be a bicolon
with 3 + 2 beats, then we are obliged to ascribe a demarcative function
to the accent Tifch [8]. The question then arises whether the same
can be said of the less important distinctive accents Pat [10] and
Tifch [8] employed at the beginning of verse 19a and in verse 19b.
It would appear to be acceptable at the present juncture to presup-
pose evidence of short cola as before. While it would be possible to
construe verse 19a as a tricolon, the emphatic yKi is more commonly
found at the beginning of a bicolon. The poetic structure of verse 19
can thus be best understood as consisting of three bicola (2 + 2, 3 +
2 and 2 + 2 beats respectively). The first bicolon establishes the link

in verse, denseness of corresponding features, lineation or stichometry, metre or rather

rhythm, repetition. The most characteristic criteria are parallelism, ellipsis, forms
of chiasmus, vertical grammar, overall analysis of structure. Explicit indications with
respect to the structure of a text are likewise of importance in this regard. De Moor
and Watson also include the Masoretic distinctive accents, in the conviction that they
hark back to a pre-Masoretic tradition (xv). See in this regard Watson 1984:4462;
1994:27, 3144.
180
Procksch 1930(A):362 is completely without justification in suggesting that we
scrap hl;yL;b'W wOYB' because it does not fit well with the distributive rq,BoB' rq,BoB'. Driver
1968:61 likewise suggests that a gloss had been made in order to avoid the misunder-
standing that only the morning would bring disaster. It is conceivable, however, that the
expression rq,BoB' rq,BoB', which occurs thirteen times in the Old Testament, acquires the
meaning day after day in a poetic context, just as rq,Bo can be employed in combination
with hl;yl' as pars pro toto for the entire day. Cf. Barth 1973:751.
181
In the context of determining the poetic character of a particular passage, Watson
1984:48 maintains that the use of ellipsis is a powerful test and would outweigh any
other criterion . . .

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 155 1/18/2007 2:17:55 PM

 156 chapter four

with the preceding verse 18 with the help of the verb rb[. The goal of
the second bicolon is to reinforce the statement made in the first. The
continued use of the verb rb[ functions once again as a link with the
preceding bicolon, while the parallel expressions rq,BoB' rq,BoB' morning
after morning and hl;yL;b'W /YB' by day and by night serve as a concretisa-
tion of the conjunction yDemi as often as.182
Wildberger is of the opinion that verse 19a exhibits a weakening of
the announcement of judgement made in verse 18. He presupposes
that a reader had wanted to emphasise the point that the judgement
announced by Isaiah for his own time was repeatable in every day and
age.183 It is more probable, however, that verse 19a was intended to
emphasise the impending judgement rather than to enfeeble it, because
it underlines the fact that it is inescapable. The boasting of the rulers of
Jerusalem consisted in the claim that the the overwhelming scourge would
not touch them as it passed through (verse 15). The conclusion to verse
18 clearly counters this claim, whereafter verse 19a underlines the fact
that the painful encounter will not be a one-off experience. Each time
Assyria passes through, they will not escape its destructive force. In order
to emphasise the unavoidability of the scourge, the expression as often
as is further reinforced with the expressions morning after morning and
by day and by night .184 It is possible that the reference at this juncture
to a repeated confrontation with Assyria represents a later explanatory
intervention.185 Given the fact that such an explanation can neither be
confirmed nor excluded, and in light of the explicit association between
both bicola of verse 19a and the end of verse 18, I am inclined to argue
that verse 19a ought to be understood as an original and integrative
constituent part of the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422.186 The
statement made in verse 19a brings the preceding announcement of
judgement to an initial and provisional conclusion.
Having reached this initial and provisional conclusion to the announce-
ment of judgement, the words of verse 19b predict even further disaster:

182
yD' means what is enough/necessary for. yDemi means with a view to the need. As a con-
junctivum with an infinitive, it means as often as . . . (see, for example, 2 Kgs 4:8).
183
Wildberger 1982:1070. See also Clements 1980(B):231f.
184
This explains my translation of the originally deictic particle yKi with the emphatic
yes and not with the explanatory for. Oswalt 1986:514 is of the opinion that this verse
fits well with Assyrian military procedure: several campaigns in the same territory.
185
Beuken 2000:54 presumes that the formulation of verse 19 implies an extension
of its addressees to include the readers of the book of Isaiah up to and including the
present day. The conflict between the prophet and the rulers of Jerusalem thus acquires
an exemplary character.
186
Cf. Graffy 1984:25.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 156 1/18/2007 2:17:55 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 157

h[;Wmv] ybih; h[;w:zAqr' hy:h;w and it will be sheer terror to understand the message.
Verse 19b is a bicolon that is linked as summarising conclusion to that
which precedes it on the one hand while serving on the other as an
introduction to a new passage constituted by verses 20 and 21. Verses
20 and 21 function together as a second conclusion to the announce-
ment of judgement in the present composition of the prophecy of
judgement of 28:1422. Verses 20 and 21 are linked to verse 19b by
way of the particle yKi.
The bicolon of verse 19b is immediately striking on account of the
unusual sequence whereby the subject does not follow directly after
the verb but is preceded rather by the predicate. This serves to place
the emphasis firmly on the words h[;w:zAqr' sheer terror. The fact that the
word h[;w:z is found almost exclusively in the book of Jeremiah, albeit in
every instance as Ketib h[;w:zli with Qere hw:[}z"l] as a horror, is frequently
employed as one of the reasons supporting the hypothesis that verse
19b is a later expansion of the text.187 Moreover, the words h[;Wm]v] ybih;
would appear to hark back to an earlier passage in Isaiah 28, namely
in verse 9 (h[;Wmv] ybiy: ymiAta,w), while the emphasis in verse 19b on the
terror to be experienced at the understanding of the message exhibits
a content related association with the motif of history as teacher as
is found in later apocalyptic literature.188 In spite of the elements of
agreement with 28:9, however, the context of prophetic judgement
found here in 28:1422 suggests that we would be better advised to
associate h[;Wmv] in verse 19b in the first instance with the appeal W[m]vi
in verse 14. The prophet calls his audience to listen to a message and
once he has delivered it he observes its terrifying effects. In the pres-
ent context of 28:1422, h[;Wmv] is to be associated with the preceding
announcement of judgement,189 the understanding of which will be a
source of terror.
In line with the customary syntactic sequence, some exegetes suggest
that we read h[;w:zAqr' as subject of the sentence instead of h[;Wmv] ybih.;

187
Cf. Jer. 15:4; 24:9; 29:18; 34:17; 2 Chron. 29:8. Cf. hw:[}z"l] in Deut. 28:25 and
Ezek. 23:46.
188
See, for example, Clements 1980(B):232 and Beuken 2000:55.
189
Wildberger 1982:1078 suggests the report of an uninterrupted flood of enemy
forces. According to Melugin 1974:301311, h[;Wmv] refers to the message of 28:1617a.
Its intention is ironic, since one only understands the said message at the moment
one is swept away. Eichrodt 1967:135 relates what is heard to the revelation received
in visionary form. According to Clements 1980(B):232, h[;Wmv] refers to the prophetic
message as a whole, which is explained at this juncture as an apocalyptic unfolding of
Gods plan. Fohrer 1962:6061 speaks in broad terms about hearing the spoken voice
of revelation, which, in the context of judgement, can no longer be misunderstood.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 157 1/18/2007 2:17:55 PM

 158 chapter four

The text then no longer implies that the understanding of the message
will be sheer terror but that the terror of the judgement itself will make
an essential contribution to the understanding of the message according
to the adage those who refuse to listen will feel the consequences.190 By
analogy with 28:9, h[;Wmv] ybih; in verse 19b can thus also be translated as
a causative cause to/make understand instead of the transitive understand.191
While there is much to be said for making the points of agreement with
28:9 visible in the translation of verse 19b, verses 20 and 21, which
are linked to verse 19b by way of the particle yKi, are best understood
as an elaboration of h[;w:zAqr'. This is most clearly expressed when
h[;w:zAqr' is read as a predicate and verse 19b is translated sheer terror
shall be the understanding of this message. The fact that the understanding
of the announcement of judgement is designated as sheer terror and
not so much the announcement itself probably goes hand in hand with
the revelatory insight that none other than yhwh is at work behind
Assyrias military activities (cf. verse 21).192

In order to reinforce the statement made in verse 19b, namely that the
understanding of the message will bring sheer terror, two additional
explanations follow in verses 20 and 21, both bound to the terrifying
announcement in the preceding verse with the particle yKi. The first
explanation stands out on account of the fact that it is formulated as
a qatal clause, most likely because it is a saying or proverb. The second
explanation is adjoined to verse 19 via two yiqtl formulations and takes
the form of a comparison.
The first reinforcing explanation takes the form of a saying or pro-

190
Cf. Procksch 1930(A):362: und eitel Graus lehrt Offenbarung verstehen and
Schreiner 1963:169: Erst Schrecken lehrt Offenbarung verstehen. Luther also under-
stands h[;w:zAqr" as the subject: Denn allein die Anfechtung lehrt aufs Wort merken.
According to Mller 1984:272274, Luthers interpretation here is in line with the
Vulgate. Mller is inclined to follow Luthers translation because h[;Wmv] in both verse
9 and verse 19 can thereby be associated with Isaiahs message (see also Fullerton
1920:17). The entire chapter is saturated with the idea that God leads his people to
inner reflection and knowledge of salvation via judgement.
191
Beuken 2000:55 offers a translation that attempts to expose the relationship with
verse 9 without making h[;w:zAqr" into the subject: It will be sheer terror to be made
to understand the message. Beuken understands the scourge of verse 18 to be the
subject of to be made to understand.
192
The Septuagint translates verse 19b with ,
thereby exhibiting its preference for the term once again: there shall be an
evil hope. The words possibly function as a new sentence: learn to
listen.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 158 1/18/2007 2:17:56 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 159

verb, the content of which is taken from day to day life.193 Understanding
the message will be sheer terror because the disappearance of the ref-
uge of lies and the collapse of the covenant with death implies that
no level of protection against the might of Assyria remains. As the
saying explains, every means employed to escape will turn out to be
inadequate: the bed is too short to stretch oneself on, and the covering too nar-
row to wrap oneself in.194 Given that this adage from verse 20 leaves the
impression of having been borrowed from the wisdom tradition, and
bearing in mind that the prophet Isaiah was decidedly familiar with
the said tradition, there is no reason to doubt the authorship of the
verse in question. In terms of both structure and content, moreover,
the verse is closely related to that which precedes it. The presence of
assonance based on the repetition of a sounds in verses 19b20 fur-
ther reinforces the link between them. The location of the assonant a
sound in the final syllable of several words in these verses also has a
rhyming effect.195 Verse 20 is structured as a bicolon with 3 + 3 beats.
The poetic content of the verse is augmented by the use of a form
of chiasm (ab-c // ba-c) on the one hand, and the employment of
relatively uncommon words on the other. While the verb IIrxq to be
(too) short is reasonably common (see, for example, 37:27; 50:2; 59:1),196
the terms used in the parallel colon[X;M'h' bed and hk;SeM'h' covering/
blanketoccur only rarely if ever in this sense.197 Likewise, both the

193
Irwin 1977:34 suggests the motif of the bed in the underworld (cf. Job 17:13),
but this seems a little far-fetched given the context of verse 20.
194
Once again the Septuagint offers a significantly free translation:
(Cornered, we are
unable to fight and we are even too weak to rally ourselves.). The Greek text would appear to
have understood verse 20 as a reaction on the part of Isaiahs opponents.
195
For further explanation of assonance as a style figure and its cohesive function
see Watson 1984:222225. With regard to rhyme, Watson 1984:229 notes: There
is some overlap with both repetition and assonance, and in Semitic particularly it is
sometimes difficult to make sharp distinctions.
196
See Marbck 1993:112117.
197
[X;m' bed is a hapax (cf. Qoh. 10:20 where BHS proposes [}X;m'B)] , while IIhk;Sem';
in the sense of blanket is only found elsewhere in 25:7. The interpretation of sonli
hk;Sem' in 30:1 is uncertain. Scholars are inclined for the most part to opt for to pour
out a libation as a synonym for to establish a covenant (see Schoors 1973:178, Kaiser
1976:224, Wildberger 1982:11471148, Clements 1980(B):243244), but Snijders
1969:297 favours taking IIhk;Sem' blanket as the point of departure and translates the
expression hk;Sem' sonli with to weave a refuge. He thus understands the blanket that is
too small in 28:20 to be Egypt. It is indeed surprising that hk;Sem' also functions here
in the context of establishing a covenant and that Ihk;Sem' is not found elsewhere in the
sense of libation (where one would normally expect s,n)< .

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 159 1/18/2007 2:17:56 PM

 160 chapter four

hithpa el infinitivesx"reT;c]hi to stretch oneself (cf. Lev. 21:18; 22:23) and

sNEKt]hi to wrap oneselfoccur only here.198
Verse 21 follows the adage in verse 20 with a second additional
reinforcement of the statement found in verse 19b concerning the ter-
rifying character of the judgment announced in the preceding verses.
In this instance, the verse takes the form of a comparison whereby the
work of yhwh is spoken of in typically Isaianic fashion.199 While the
said comparison would seamlessly follow on from verse 19b without
the intervening saying in verse 20, each of the verses nevertheless
establishes its own unique accent in reinforcing the expected terror.
The accent in verse 20 revolves around the notion of protection, which
is ultimately insufficient to fend off the impending threat. The accent
in verse 21 focuses on the threat as such, against which no protection
is possible because its source is unexpected to say the least. While the
saying of verse 20 continues to hark back to the threatening advance of
the Assyrian forces, the overwhelming scourge against which no adequate
protection is possible, the comparison in verse 21 refers explicitly to
yhwh as the one whose hand is at work in the approaching judgement.
It is this insight in particular that transforms the understanding of
the announcement of judgement into sheer terror. It is in fact yhwh
himself who is at work when the overwhelming scourge sweeps away
everything in its path.
In similar fashion to the adage of verse 20, the comparison in verse
21 exhibits a clear poetic structure and there is no convincing reason
to doubt its authenticity. Verse 21 begins with a parallel bicolonwith
ellipsis of the subjectfollowing the pattern abc // ab:
hw:hy Wqy: yxir;P]Arh'k] yKi For YHWH will rise up as on Mount Perazim;
zG:ryI /[b]gIB] qm,[eK] He will rage as in the valley of Gibeon,
The second half of verse 21 consists of two perfectly parallel bicola.
The object is repeated in the second segment of each bicolon and
further qualified, whereby the predicate precedes the substantive in
both instances for the sake of emphasis:200

198
It is striking that the first infinitive takes the preposition mi while the second takes
the preposition Ki. If one is intent on restoring the parallelism one ought then to follow
the suggestion offered by BHK and read sNEK't]him.e This is unnecessary, however, since
the interchange of prepositions occurs elsewhere in the chapter (cf. 28:6 and 28:15a)
and it has no effect on the translation. For the use of mi in a comparison meaning
to . . ., see GKG 133c. 1QIsaa reads snkthb and is supported by Donner 1964:149,
Wildberger 1982:1068 and Oswalt 1986:515.
199
Cf. 5:12,19; 10:12; 19:25 and 29:23.
200
Cf. GKG 132b.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 160 1/18/2007 2:17:56 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 161

Whce[}m' t/c[}l' to do his deed

Whce[}m' rz: strange is his deed;
/td;bo[} dbo[}l'w and to work his work
./td;bo[} hY:rIk]n: alien is his work.
Both parallel bicola together provide the second conclusion to the
announcement of judgement with a shocking climax.
The comparison with which verse 21 begins is twofold in character.
With the help of the verb wq to rise up201 and the verb zgr to rage,
the latter being employed for the most part in poetical contexts, the
author announces a new intervention on the part of yhwh.202 The
said new intervention will be comparable with two of yhwhs previ-
ous interventions. The first part of the comparison calls to mind an
event that took place on Mount Perazim; the second an event that took
place in the valley near Gibeon.203 Mount Perazim is close to Jerusalem
and the reference alludes to Davids victory against the Philistines in
the same location (2 Sam. 5:1725 // 1 Chron. 14:817).204 David
explicitly ascribed his victory on this occasion to yhwhs intervention,
comparing the latter to a flood of water with a wordplay based on
the name Perazim. A similar flood motif is also evident in 28:21 (cf.
28:17b18).
The allusion to an intervention on the part of yhwh in the valley of
Gibeon is more difficult to establish, however. Some exegetes relate it to
the battle against the five kings of the Amorites at Gibeon mentioned
in Joshua 10, whereby the victory is similarly ascribed directly to yhwh
( Jos. 10:1014).205 The hailstone motif ( Jos. 10:11) exhibits a degree
of kinship with the way in which judgement is announced in 28:17.
It remains unlikely, however, that verse 21 is alluding to the days of
Joshua in addition to and even subsequent to the allusion to the time
of David. It would seem more obvious to seek an association between
the reference made in the first part of the comparisonDavids conflict

201
Cf. 2:19,21; 14:22; 31:2; 33:10. See Amsler 1979 3:639 and Gamberoni
1989:12681271.
202
When the verb zgr is employed with God as subject (8x), it is always related to
the revelation of his power. See Vanoni 1993:330.
203
While the expected preposition B] is lacking in both instances, this is not particu-
larly unusual after the preposition K]; see J-M 133h and GKG 188t. 1QIsaa drops
the comparative particle K] and reads rhb and qm[b.
204
The Septuagint has translated the name yxirP : A] rh' as mountain of the
godless. It is possible that the Greek translator had the word yrIP; tyrant in mind.
205
See Wildberger 1963:9192, Kaiser 19762:203, Petersen 1979:113, Clements
1980(B):232, Exum 1982:128, Oswalt 1986:520, Schneider 1988:390 and Brueggemann
1998:227.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 161 1/18/2007 2:17:57 PM

 162 chapter four

with the Philistinesand the reference here to Gibeon.206 As a matter

of fact, Davids conflict with the Philistines consisted of a sequence of
two confrontations. In 2 Sam. 5:25, it is stated after the second con-
frontation that David struck down the Philistines from Geba all the way
to Gezer. The Septuagint translates Geba in this instance as
Gibeon, while the Masoretic text likewise speaks of /[b]gI Gibeon instead
of Geba in the parallel text in 1 Chron. 14:16.207 It is likely, therefore,
that the prophet was alluding in verse 21a to these events, which were
presumably familiar to his audience in Jerusalem. Given that Davids
conflict with the Philistines took place immediately after the conquest
of Jerusalem, the reference in question also exhibits historical proxim-
ity to verse 16 in which reference is made to the establishment of a
stone in Zion.
The allusion to events from the time of David ascribed by the
tradition to the intervention of yhwh is intended to shock its pres-
ent addressees. Yhwhs intervention in the time of David was on
the side of his people, on their behalf. The prophecy of judgement
contained in 28:1422, however, implies that yhwhs imminent inter-
vention is to be directed against his people.208 In typically Isaianic
style, verse 21b describes the said intervention as yhwhs hc,[}m'209
and hd; b o [ ,} 210 which it then goes on to qualify as rz: strange and
hY:rIk]n: alien.211 Such an intervention against his own people stands in

206
Marti 1900:209, Ziegler 1948:86, Fohrer 1962:61, Dietrich 1976:183, Wildberger
1982:1078.
207
Based on the connection with the designation Gibeon in 1 Chron. 14:16, Kilian
1994:163 favours a late dating for verse 21a, maintaining that even the painful experi-
ence of 587, when yhwh sided with the Babylonians, ought to be presupposed.
208
Cf. Vanoni 1993:330: die Anknpfung an 2 Sam. 5 weist auf einen pervertierten
JHWH-Krieg [rgz qal].
209
See Wildberger 1963:8789, 94ff for Isaiahs use of hc,[m } ,' l['Po and hxexe (see 28:29)
for yhwhs engagement in history: es geht nicht um einzelne Werke, die Jahwe in der
Geschichte tut, sondern um das eine Walten Gottes, das sie durchgehend bestimmt. So
darf man den Satz wagen: Die Geschichte ist das Werk des einen Jahwe der Heere, der auf dem
Zion thront und sie vollzieht sich nach dem Plan, der von ihm beschlossen ist. (89) Cf. Von Rad
1966:290298, Vollmer 19792:367369 and Ringgren 1989:429430.
210
Cf. Westermann 19792:200: Der uns gelufige Begriff des Wirkens und des
Werkens Gottes ist hier, soweit wir sehen, zum erstenmal konzipiert.
211
The Septuagint translates verse 21b with

(In wrath He shall do his deeds, a work of bitterness, and his wrath shall act strangely and his
bitterness shall be strange.). The Septuagint already makes reference to
the wrath of the Lord in 28:2. Cf. 28:28:
(for I shall not be wrathful towards you for
ever, nor shall the voice of my bitterness trample you.).

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 162 1/18/2007 2:17:57 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 163

sharp contrast to yhwhs familiar deeds that were recalled in the sal-
vation-historical retrospective of verse 16. Indeed, in light of yhwhs
past salvific activity on behalf of Zion, the present condemnation of
Jerusalem can only be understood as strange and alien.212 The shocking
dimension of these qualifications becomes clear if one bears in mind
that yhwhs deeds normally reveal who He is.213

4.2.6. Isa. 28:22: Exhortation

Wxx;/lt]TiAla' hT;['w 22 Now therefore do not be such boasters,
=k,yres]/m Wqzj]y<AP, or your bonds will be made stronger;
yTi[]m'v; hx;r;jn<w hl;k;AyKi for I have heard a decree of destruction
t/ab;x] hwIhy yn:doa} taeme from the Lord YHWH Zebaot
.r,a;h;AlK;Al[' upon the whole land.
While the announcement of judgement has reached a conclusion in
verses 1921, an explicit exhortation still follows in the present composi-
tion of the prophecy of judgement comprising 28:1422. Given the fact
that the presence of an exhortation at the end of an announcement of
judgement is surprising, many an exegete has come to the conclusion
that verse 22 should not be counted as part of the original prophecy.214
While the phenomenon of an exhortatory appeal at the end of a
prophecy of judgement may be unusual, it is not as such unique (cf.,
for example, Jer. 29:20). Moreover, there is a growing insight among
biblical scholars that the prophets were more creative in their employ-
ment of particular genres than certain exegetes are willing to admit.
The originality of the first half of verse 22aa bicolonis supported
by clear terminological agreements with the preceding prophecy of
judgement. The imperative Wxx;/lt]TiAla' harks back creatively to the
adressation /xl; yvena' boasters in the imperative of verse 14. In order
to make this connection clear, the appeal Wxx;/lt]TiAla' is best translated
as do not be such boasters.215

212
According to Beuken 2000:57, the foundation for this qualification was already
established in the Song of the Vineyard (5:17). Based on the fact that the word rz: is
frequently used to refer to the enemy or the aggressor, Snijders 1977:560 remarks: jhwh
wird sich nicht benehmen wie ein Partner, sondern wie ein Feind, z.b. ein Assyrer oder
Edomiter; die Folgen sind fr die Gemeinschaft vernichtend. The term yrikn] : is likewise
used for another people, although it would appear to enjoy figurative significance in
28:21 and Jer. 2:21 (cf. Martin-Achard 19792:6768; Lang 1986:456460).
213
Cf. Vollmer 19792:367: Wer Jahwe ist, erweist sich in seinem h. Sein Tun ist
Explication seines Namens.
214
Cf. Wildberger 1982:1071.
215
For the translation boasters instead of scoffers see the exegesis of verse 14. The

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 163 1/18/2007 2:17:57 PM

 164 chapter four

In terms of content, it remains surprising that the exhortation of

verse 22a appears to leave open the possibility of a change of heart
even though following an emphatic statement in which judgement is
proclaimed as irreversible. A number of exegetes are inclined, there-
fore, to consider the link with the preceding text as artificial.216 Much
depends, however, on ones interpretation of the term k,yres]/m your
bonds. The mention of bonds or tethers usually alludes to a situation
of imprisonment or some similar limitation of personal freedom.217
In the context of the present prophecy of judgement, k,yres]/m can be
understood as a reference to the threat that emanates from Assyria, a
threat that must likewise have been felt by Jerusalem as a whole.218 In
spite of the knowledge that the overwhelming scourge was surely to pass
through, the rulers of Jerusalem were still of the opinion that they could
maintain their freedom and avoid subjection to Assyrian constraints.219
The prophets conviction that they are wrong in this regard is appar-
ent from the pointedness with which he exposed their boastfulness in
the preceding verses. The content of verse 22a is thus appropriate in
this regard. While verse 22a has the character of an exhortation and
presupposes the possibility of a change of heart, this need not be seen
as a weakening of the preceding message of judgement. It is possible
to make an announcement of irreversible judgement without by defini-
tion being required to exclude the possibility of a change of heart.220
The prophet wants to warn his audience that the rulers of Jerusalem
might become even more indurate and by their boasting make the
judgement even worse.
The exhortation in verse 22a is reinforced in verse 22b with a refer-
ence to the decree of destruction that yhwh has decided to enforce.
The reference in question would appear to have been borrowed to a

reflexive (reduplicative) verbal root usually has an intensive significance, but it can also
be understood in the sense of reciprocity: do not be such boasters to one another. For hithpa el
and hithpolel see GKG 54 and 72m; J-M 53 and 80h. The Septuagint translates
with do not rejoice (cf. 14:29 and LXX 28:26 ).
216
See 3.4.
217
See Ps. 116:16 and Isa. 52:2; cf. the use of the feminine equivalent form t/rs]/m
in Ps. 2:3; 107:14; Jer. 2:20; 5:5; 27:2; 30:8; Nah. 1:13.
218
Irwins suggestion that the tethers refer to the covenant with death and that we
should understand verse 22a as irony seems a little contrived. See Irwin 1977:37; see
also Exum 1982:128 and Watson 1984:311.
219
For Wqzj]y< as a comparative see J-M 141gN. The root qzj is also employed in
28:2 with respect to the power of Assyria.
220
Cf. Beuken 2000:58.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 164 1/18/2007 2:17:57 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 165

significant degree from the text of Isa. 10:23 (hwIhy yn:doa} hx;=r;jn<w hl;k; yKi
r,a;h;AlK; br,q,B] hc,[o t/ab;x;] NRSV: For the Lord GOD of hosts will make a
full end, as decreed, in all the earth.) and ought therefore to be considered
a potentially later interpolation.221 In contrast to the preceding verses,
verse 22b leaves the impression of being more prose than poetry. While
the unusual syntax whereby hx;r;jn<w hl;K; and r,a;h;AlK;Al[' are separated
from one another by t/ab;x] hwIhy yn:doa} taeme yTi[]m'v; (cf. 21:10) gives the
verse half something of a poetic tint, this may also be inspired by the
sequence of terms employed in 10:23. Based on the syntax, it is possible
to consider verse 22b as a tricolon.222 The only semantic connection
with the preceding verses is formed by the verb [mv to hear, which is
also employed in the appeal of verse 14 (W[m]vi) and the statement of
verse 19b (h[;Wmv]).
The expression hx;rj; n w< hl;K; a decree of destruction can be understood as
a hendiadys in the sense of an unavoidable destruction.223 The expression
in question is even emphasised by the fact that it precedes the verb form
yTi[]m'v.; A variety of exegetes are of the opinion that verse 22b should
be understood in an eschatological-apocalyptic sense.224 The use of the
expression hx;rj ; n w< hl;K; (Dan. 9:27; cf. Dan. 9:26 and 11:36) may indeed
point in this direction, although an originally Isaianic construction
cannot be excluded from the outset (cf. the connection between 10:22
and 10:23).225 The scope of the impending devastation r,ah ; A; lK;Al[' over
all the earth can also be understood as an apocalyptic feature. In the
present context of the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422, however,
the expression r,a;h;AlK;Al[' ought best to be translated as upon the whole
land. Nevertheless, bearing in mind that r,aj ; A; lK; elsewhere in the book
of Isaiah usually refers to the whole earth,226 it is probable that this
meaning is being echoed here also in verse 22b and that the horizon
is being deliberately extended. The judgement confronting the rulers

221
See 3.4.
222
It is difficult to determine the metre here with any degree of certainty. It is hard
to imagine the final colon as having one single beat, in spite of the fact that the words
r<a;h;AlK;Al[' are joined to one another with the Maqqph. It is possible to read verse
22b as a tricolon with 3 + 4 + 3 or 4 + 4 + 3 beats.
223
The Septuagint reads works finished
and cut short. Cf. LXX 10:23: .
224
Duhm 19143:202; Procksch 1930(A):363.
225
Cf. Beuken 2000:59.
226
See 6:3; 10:14,23; 13:5; 14:7,26; 25:8 and 54:5. Isa. 7:24 serves as the exception
that confirms the rule.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 165 1/18/2007 2:17:58 PM

 166 chapter four

of Jerusalem thus comes to serve as a model for the judgement that

will one day confront the entire world.227

Excursus 2: The covenant with death and necromancy

In 1988, K. van der Toorn suggested that virtually every study of
28:722 to date had failed to determine the nature of the opposition
to which the prophet is reacting in this passage. In his opinion, the
addressees of verse 14 should not be sought in political circles but rather
among the priests and (cultic) prophets. In a detailed contribution, Van
der Toorn endeavours to persuade his readers that Isaiahs opponents
not only believed in yhwh, but they also practiced necromancy.228 In
so doing, Van der Toorn argues against a political explanation of the
covenant with death. In the same year, A.C. Stewart also published
an article calling this now common interpretation into question and
proposing a relationship with the practice of necromancy.229 In the pres-
ent excursus I will endeavour to determine whether the interpretation
of the covenant with death offered by Van der Toorn and Stewart
stands up to test.
The primary building blocks of Van der Toorns hypothesis can be
summarised in seven points:
1. The basic presupposition that Van der Toorn takes as his point
of departure is the unity of 28:722. This presupposition implies
that the passages 28:713 and 28:1422, which are generally dis-
tinguished from one another, are addressed to the same audience.
Those addressed in verse 14 with /xl; yvena' and rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; ylev]mo
Il;v;WryBi are thus to be identified with the subjects of the accusation
in verse 7, namely aybin:w heK.o Van der Toorn observes terminological
and content-based indications that allow him to accept the presup-
posed unity of 28:722. The terminological indications are to be
found in the use of h[;Wmv] in verses 9 and 19 and of wq' in verses 10
(13) and 17, while the thematic agreements between 28:713 and
28:1422 function as content-based indications.230
2. The designations tw<m; and l/av] employed in verses 15 and 18 should
be taken literally, as is the case in a number of other places in the

227
Cf. Donner 1964:149, Clements 1980(B):232, Wildberger 1982:1071, Kilian
1994:164.
228
Van der Toorn 1988:199217.
229
Stewart 1988:375377.
230
Van der Toorn 1988:199201.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 166 1/18/2007 2:17:58 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 167

Old Testament, and understood as the names of divinities. The

Canaanite belief in the gods of the underworld had also established
itself among the people of Israel.231
3. Against the background of the tendency prevalent in the Old
Testament to camouflage traces of Israels idolatry wherever pos-
sible, Van der Toorn suggests that we consider the designations bz:K;
and rq,v, in verse 15 as a cryptic allusion to the gods Chemosh and
Milcom/Moloch. He finds evidence in support of his suggestion in
: ] gods of lies in Am. 2:4 and in the pres-
the reference to idols as ybizK
ence of cultic centres dedicated to the chthonic gods Chemosh and
Milcom in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. Both deities are identi-
fied with Nergal, the Mesopotamian god of the underworld.232
4. While the mention of a covenant with death says nothing as such
with respect to the religious practices associated therewith, Van der
Toorn argues on the basis of the addressees mentioned in verse
7, namely the priests and (cultic) prophets, that necromancy was
one of the forms adopted by the cult of the gods Chemosh and
Milcom.233
5. With the help of this explanation, Van der Toorn is likewise con-
vinced that he is able to offer a satisfying exegesis of verses 10 and
13. Instead of the commonly accepted dialogue between the prophet
and his opponents in verses 911, Van der Toorn maintains that
only the prophet himself is speaking in the said verses. He considers
the words of verse 10 as an imitation or even a literal report of the
oracle-like utterances of the necromancers. The potential significance
of wx' and wq' is of secondary importance, because verse 10 is to be
understood as a transcription of the bird-like sounds that emanate
from the spiritist sances.234
6. Counter to the generally accepted exegesis, the people referred to in
verse 11 who speak tr,ja, ' /vl;bW] hp;c; ygE[l} B' ] with stammering lip and with
alien tongue are not to be identified with the Assyrians but rather with
the priests and prophets of verse 7. Stammering lip and alien tongue
do not thus refer to the language of the Assyrians but to an esoteric
language accessible only to the initiated. The image portrayed in
verses 78 is that of a cultic banquet, akin to the marz a familiar

231
Van der Toorn 1988:202203.
232
Van der Toorn 1988:203204.
233
Van der Toorn 1988:204.
234
Van der Toorn 1988:205212.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 167 1/18/2007 2:17:58 PM

 168 chapter four

from Ugaritic texts, at which alcohol was employed as a means to

enter into a visionary trance and thereby pass on messages from the
dead.235
7. The verb form h[;Wmv] employed in verses 9 and 19 is a terminus
technicus for a specific prophetic message that was received (heard)
in a half-conscious state. Van der Toorn suggests we read h[;Wmv] as
the Hebrew equivalent of the Akkadian egirr, which is used, among
other things, in the context of divination.236
In like fashion to Van der Toorn, Stewart presupposes that the prophet
issued his complaint against the background of a cultic feast. Stewart
agrees with Gese who considered the fe/v f/v in 28:15 and 18 to be
a mythologoumenon that referred to the weather god Hadad who is
portrayed with a scourge in his hand. Inspired by the said Hadad-
mythologoumenon, Gese also asks himself whether the covenant
partners tw<m; and l/av] should not also be understood in the mytho-
logical sense. Given the problems he encountered in transposing the
characteristics of a god of vegetation into the arena of history, Gese
considered it better to interpret tw<m; and l/av] as personifications only,
as they occur in numerous places elsewhere in the Old Testament.237
Stewart is able to get round Gezes objection by presupposing a cultic
Sitz im Leben for the prophets complaint rather than a political one.
Arguing that the text as such contains no reference to an historical
event, he maintains that the prophet did not speak his word for political
reasons but rather on the occasion of an orgiastic feast celebrating the
covenant with Mot. Since reference is made to a covenant, the intended
ritual must have involved something more than so-called necromancy.
Stewart is of the opinion that no other interpretation can explain the
presence of a metaphor borrowed from Baal-Hadad. He suggests that
the Canaanite myth was consciously turned on its head by the prophet
when he announced that Mot would be defeated by yhwh.238
While the practice of necromancy was also known in Israel (see
8:19; 19:3; 29:4) and the interpretation of the covenant with death
offered by Van der Toorn and Stewart provides us with a relatively
closed image, it remains problematic on account of the fact that it is

235
Van der Toorn 1988:212213.
236
Van der Toorn 1988:213215.
237
Gese 1970:127134. See also 4.2.1.
238
Stewart 1988:375377.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 168 1/18/2007 2:17:58 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 169

based on a series of presuppositions and hypotheses. The first weak

link in the interpretative chain is the presupposed unity of 28:722 and
the derived identification of the /xl; yvena' and the rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; ylev]mo
Il;v;WryBi referred to in verse 14 with the accused aybin:w heKo of verse 7.
While it cannot be denied that a degree of terminological and thematic
kinship is evident between 28:713 and 28:1422, the identification
proposed by Van der Toorn is not confirmed thereby. An important
objection to such an identification is the fact that the verb lvm to rule
is not employed elsewhere in the Old Testament to designate influential
individuals (priests and prophets) who function backstage on the politi-
cal arena; its use goes hand in hand rather with the actual exercise of
power.239 It is likewise apparent from the description of the addressees
sphere of influenceIlv ; W; ryBi rv,a} hZ<h' [;h; joined by way of a construct
relationship with the yliv]mothat reference is being made to political
leaders. Moreover, the Septuagint, which translates ylevm ] o with ,
as well as the use of ylivm] o elsewhere in the book of Isaiah (cf. 14:5; 16:1
and 49:7), favour associating the prophecy of 28:1422 with political
leaders. The parallel structure also introduces the term boasters into the
equation but only in the second instance. There is evidence of deliber-
ate ambiguity.240 Moreover, stylistic and form-critical arguments tend to
undermine any interpretation of 28:722 as an original unity.241 Van
der Toorns adhesion to the latter is strongly determined by his vision
of the circles that gave rise to Isaiahs opponents.242
A second point of criticism revolves around the presupposition that
the terms tw<m; and l/av] represent the Canaanite gods Mot and Sheol.
While Mot has a role to play in a few mythological texts, the ritual
texts and onomastica found at Ugarit tend not to mention the name at
all. In contrast to other gods, there appears to have been no cult sur-
rounding Mot.243 Although it may be possible to speak of establishing

239
Soggin 1978:930933, Gro 1986:7477.
240
Wolff 19733:49 speaks incorrectly of politisierenden Gegenpropheten. The
designation Bndnispolitiker employed later (123) by the same author does more
justice to the text.
241
See the discussion hereof in 3.3.
242
Cf. Tropper 1989:329.
243
Cf. Healey 1999:600: He is, rather, to be regarded as a demonic figure, wholly
evil and without redeeming features. See also Healey 1999:598599: Mots absence
from the Ugarit cult and personal names suggests that he was not a deity worshipped
like others in the pantheon. Mot is absent from the local pantheon and offering lists.
. . . it seems much more likely that Mot was not regarded as a deity to be worshipped
like others. . . . he is not a deity in the full sense.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 169 1/18/2007 2:17:59 PM

 170 chapter four

a covenant with one or other god, Mot must ultimately be excluded

from such a possibility since he did not belong to the heavenly pan-
theon. The same has to be said with respect to Sheol. There is no
single indication that Sheol was ever considered a divinity.244 One has
to be particularly careful when speaking of personification and demy-
thologisation in the present instance.245 In any event, there is nothing
forcing us to understand a personification of the kingdom of the dead
as having its roots in mythology, since such a personification can easily
be explained on the basis of day to day experience: death significantly
influences life.246
In rejecting a literal interpretation of verse 15 as a reference to the
Canaanite gods Mot and Sheol, we are nevertheless left with a residual
question concerning the possibility of a concealed allusion to one or
other ritual of invocation. While Wildberger interprets the covenant
with death metaphorically and relates it to the political situation, he
considers it conceivable nevertheless that the prophet was able to use
the metaphor because certain parties in Jerusalem were familiar with

244
Day 1989:62f is of the opinion that allusion is being made here to the cult
of Moloch, given the fact that the latter was considered to be the Canaanite god of
the underworld. Day is surprised that other exegetes appear to be unaware of this.
Blenkinsopp 2000(B):477, in turn, is surprised at the fact that, should Days interpre-
tation be correct, Moloch is not simply named in the text. While there is evidence
of a revival of the cult of Moloch during the Assyrian period, Day is nevertheless
obliged to admit that there is no evidence in the said cult of establishing a covenant.
The do ut des principle has facilitated such an interpretation. Day sees a parallel
with 57:9 in this regard. As a consequence of his interpretation, we would be obliged
to date 28:1422 during the reign of King Ahaz who, in contrast to King Hezekiah,
was associated with the cult of Moloch (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6). Doyle 1999:190 is of the
opinion that the discoveries at Ugarit do not provide sufficient evidence to associate
Moloch directly with Mot. Heider 1999:585 considers it reasonable to accept that
Moloch was a god of the underworld, but draws the line at an association with the
worship of ancestors.
245
Gerleman 19783:893897 speaks with respect to tw<m; of weak traces of personifica-
tion in the Old Testament. He notes, in any case, that the Old Testament never ascribes
personifying attributes to death. Cf. Barstad 1999:769: Since the texts in which we find
descriptions of Sheol personified in their present shape are purely poetical, any attempt
to go beyond the texts and ask whether these texts ultimately go back to mythological
descriptions is bound to end as sheer speculations. The whole issue becomes even
more vital when we know that no deity Sheol has ever been attested.
246
Cf. Blenkinsopp 2000(B):476: . . . some degree of personification is inevitably
present in the metaphoric language used about death . . . He considers it equally
unavoidable that personified Death would be identified with the deity Mot . . . I
would venture to call the latter into question. The Old Testament itself contains no
evidence in support of such an identification. Moreover, Blenkinsopps claim does not
square with the observation that he himself makes, namely that Mot does not have a
place in the cult of Ugarit.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 170 1/18/2007 2:17:59 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 171

magical rites with which they endeavoured to protect themselves against

the power of death. Wildberger refers in this regard to an amulet found
at Arslantas in 1939 to support his hunch. There is a possibility that the
invocation inscribed on the said amulet speaks of an eternal covenant
established with humanity and of a pact set up by Asherah on behalf
of humanity with all the sons of the gods and with the entire heavenly
pantheon.247 The reference to a covenant is striking indeed and would
appear to agree with Isa. 28:15. Before jumping to conclusions and
identifying the content of the amulet with that of our text, it should
be borne in mind that the incantation on the amulet makes no refer-
ence to a covenant established by human beings, as is the case in 28:15,
but rather of a covenant established on behalf of human beings. The
suggestion that we are dealing here with a veiled allusion to magical
rituals is further undermined by the fact that such incantations always
appeal to the great and the good among the gods, precisely because
protection is being sought from demons and from death. A covenant
with death thus becomes difficult to place within the context of such
an incantation. The same can be said with respect to the concept of
necromancy itself, which generally addresses itself to deceased ancestors
and not to Mot and Sheol.248 It is also difficult to understand why the
prophet should speak only in veiled terms in 28:15 if the text were in
reality a reference to necromancy (cf. 8:19).249
Van der Toorns interpretation of the designations bz:K; and rq,v, from
the perspective of his explanation of tw<m; and l/av] is hypothetical to
say the least and ultimately leads to a somewhat artificial understanding
of the terms bz:K; and rq,v, as cryptic references to the gods Chemosh
and Milcom.250 His appeal in this regard to the idols designated in Am.
2:4 as ybiz:K] gods of lies, remains unconvincing. The meaning of this

247
Wildberger 1982:10731074.
248
Cf. Day 1989:6162 and B.B. Schmidt 1996:161. In a recent study on the family
and private religion in Babylon, Syria and Israel, Van der Toorn has endeavoured to
chart the presence of ancestor worship in Israel (1996:206235): A hidden heritage:
the Israelite cult of the dead. Van der Toorn makes a distinction in this regard
between the cult of the dead found within family circles, and necromancy as practised
among specialists.
249
Cf. B.B. Schmidt 1996:160: it should be noted that rites related to the ancestor
cult or necromancy are nowhere explicitly mentioned in Isa. 28:722.
250
Gruber 1999:517 agrees with Van der Toorns interpretation without further
motivation. Cf. also the more general interpretation of Blenkinsopp 2000(B):479: From
the point of the prophetic author of Isa. xxviii 15 the lie and the falsehood refer, in the
last analysis, to foreign deities, the cult offered to them, and accommodations with them
which, on the prophetic view, were endemic in foreign alliances sealed by treaty.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 171 1/18/2007 2:17:59 PM

 172 chapter four

designation has its roots in the fact that the gods tempt and mislead.
In Am. 2:4, there can be no misunderstanding: h,ybezKi is not a desig-
nation but rather a typification of the idols in question.251 The idols are
characterised as unreliable.252 When 28:15 speaks of bz:K; as a refuge,
it is reasonable to assume that also in this instance the intention is not
to name the refuge but to typify it. This is further reinforced by the use
of bz:k; hsej]m' refuge of lies in 28:17. It is highly unlikely that a cryptic
designation of one or other idol is intended here. It is a question, rather,
of an unambiguous typification of the refuge as a place from which one
is likely to emerge deceived. The political leaders in Jerusalem have
allowed themselves to be misled.253 A meaningful comparison can also
be made in this regard with Ps. 62:10, in which the vyai ynEB] those of
high estate are designated as bz:K; because they are not to be trusted.254
It is better to trust in God and to say WnL;Ahs,j}m' yhila (Ps. 62:9). There
is no conclusive reason to read the terms bz:K; and rq,v, in 28:15 as a

251
Cf. Klopfenstein 1964:236f: Eine bestimmte, in ihrem Wesen liegende Haupt-
eigenschaft der Gtzen wird hier zum Namen fr sie: Ihr Wesen ist Lge, Tuschung,
Schein; sie scheinen zu existieren und etwas zu vermgen, wo sie doch nichts sind.
So heien sie denn einfach Lgen. Klopfenstein argues that this designation of
the idols signifies more or less the same as the designation h,yleb]h' (their) vanities in
Deut. 32:21, referring in support of his argument to Jer. 10:14f; 16:19; Ps. 62:10 and
to the Septuagint, which translates h,ybezKi in Am. 2:4 with . Klopfenstein
considers Am. 2:4 as the only scriptural text in which bz:K; refers with certainty to the
religious domain.
252
Van Leeuwen 1985:74 argues that idols are not only spoken of as lies because
they cannot save and thus proclaim lies when they present themselves as saving gods,
but primarily because they themselves are the product of the false notions of human
beings. The aspect to be emphasised depends on the primary significance one ascribes
to bzk. Klopfenstein 19783:817823 takes the notion of speaking lies as his point of
departure whereby a speaking subject is presupposed. Mosis 1982:111130 is more
inclined to associate the primary significance of the term with the object: unreliable,
deceptive.
253
Mosis 1982:126 makes note of the important theological perspective that bz:K;
also contains an implicit critique, not only of the object designated by the term but
also of those who allow themselves to be deceived by expecting reliability and truth
therefrom.
254
Klopfenstein 1964:151 concludes that bz:K; and rq,v, designate rather eine religis
verkehrte innere Haltung: bz:K; und rq,v, in v. 15c sind theologische Urteile Jesajas ber
eine falsche religise Haltung des judischen Volkes in einer Zeit uerster Bedrngnis
durch die Assyrermacht. This conclusion goes hand in hand with Klopfensteins
understanding of the primary meaning of bz:K; (speaking untruths, see 19783:818). The
word bz:K; thus represents an ethical statement with respect to the people of whom it
is employed. The significance ascribed by Mosis 1982:116117 to bz:K; (unreliability,
deceptiveness), however, does greater justice to 28:15. bz:K; is thus employed in the first
instance in direct relationship to the object. In determining this primary significance,
Mosis points out that bzk is frequently employed as an antonym for ma, wk and dsy.
Two of the aforementioned verbs are also employed in the context of 28:15.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 172 1/18/2007 2:17:59 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 173

reference to specific gods. Van der Toorns interpretation is speculative

since it bases the identification of bz:K; and rq,v, with the gods Chemosh
and Milcom on the presupposition that tw<m; and l/av] also refer to
gods.255 The fact that Milcom is known to have had a connection with
the underworld and to have potentially played a role in necromancy256
remains an insufficiently stable basis upon which to justify such an
exegesis of the clause in question.
Since the interpretation of the covenant with death as an allusion
to the phenomenon of necromancy is now barely tenable on exegetical
grounds, the most important pillar of Van der Toorns exegesis of verses
10 and 13 is also forced to collapse. His presupposition that the verses
in question represent a transcription of birdlike utterances stemming
from spiritist sances is likewise considerably speculative. Moreover, his
explanation completely ignores the relationship between the words wx'
and wq' in verse 10 and the terms ayqi vomit and ha;xo filth in verse 8.
The association between the words of the prophet (verse 8) and the
words of his opponents (verse 10) is intended to give expression to the
incomprehensibility of Isaiahs message as well as its indigestibility. While Van
der Toorn does indeed suggest that we understand verse 10 as an echo
of verse 8, his exegesis offers no further explanation in this regard.
A further weak link in the chain of Van der Toorns explanation
lies in the fact that the relationship between verses 11 and 12 is insuf-
ficiently accounted for in his exegesis. Verse 12 is clearly connected at
the level of syntax to the preceding verses via the relative pronoun rv,a.}
Given that the content of verse 12 is determined by the motif of rest
and the latter clearly has a political tone in the preaching of Isaiah,
the announcement of judgement in verse 11 thus calls for a political
interpretation. Van der Toorn does not factor this political context into
his argument when he presupposes that the incomprehensible language
and alien tongue should be understood as an allusion to the esoteric
utterances of the priests and prophets referred to in verse 7. There
can be little doubt that verse 11 is intended to announce the arrival
of the Assyrians (cf. 33:19). Van der Toorn ignores the association
between Gods words in the near future and Gods words in the past
established in verses 11 and 12. Ultimately this is due to the fact that

255
Tromp 1969:47, 97 considers rt,se in Isa. 45:19 and Ps. 139:15 to be one of the
many names for the kingdom of the dead. Irwin 1977:2829 concludes on this basis
that bz:K; and rq,v, in 28:15 are symbolic names for tw<m; and l/av].
256
Cf. Puech 1999:575.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 173 1/18/2007 2:18:00 PM

 174 chapter four

he still considers this passage to be a complaint, while the customary

pattern of the prophecy of judgement would clearly have us begin the
announcement of judgement in verse 11.
Furthermore, the obvious character of the link drawn by Van der
Toorn and others between the phenomenon of the marz a (cf. tyBe
j"zErm' in Jer. 16:5) and necromancy is open to negotiation in a variety
of ways.257 In a detailed study of the cult of the dead in Ancient Israel
and Ugarit, Lewis has called the apparent obviousness of this link into
question.258 His study points out that only one single text (KTU 1.21)
would appear to suggest a link with a funeral ritual, while the majority
of texts in which marz a occurs relate it to a drinking party.259
Lewiss conclusion that the marz a refers exclusively to a drinking
party has been reconfirmed in a recent monograph by McLaughlin
on the phenomenon. After a thorough discussion of all the relevant
texts, McLaughlin concludes that the phenomenon of the marz a can
be recognised throughout the centuries as having three different char-
acteristics:
1. the participants at a marz a belong to the upper echelons of the
population,260

257
For the association in question see also Jackson 1974:9496, Pope 1981:176179
and Halpern 1986:109f.
258
Lewis 1989:8094. See also Fabry 1986:1116.
259
Cf. Lewis 1989:88: In other words, the raison dtre of the marz a organizations
may have been the desire to have a drinking club. The men of the marz a organiza-
tion could have been known for their drinking. And: its association with funerary
customs could have arisen due to the abundant beer imbibed by mourners to console
themselves. It would also have been consoling to the mourners to know that their
dear departed loved one is having a jolly good time drinking away with the rpm and
El, the partier par excellence. Lewis 1989:134135 is not particularly consistent in
his treatment of 28:15,18 when he agrees with Halpern 1986:109f who suggests that
Isaiah was ridiculing his opponents as participants in the ancestral cult with refer-
ence to the phenomenon of the marz a . Halpern even states that The logical home
of this complex is in the ancestral or funeral cult. Halpern bases his conclusion in
this regard, however, entirely on the study of Pope 1981:176179, while Lewis himself
had introduced a necessary degree of nuance with respect to Popes opinions on the
marz a as a funerary banquet in an earlier chapter (1989:8094). Cf. also Lewis own
conclusion: In fact, there is nothing explicitly funerary about the marz a documented
at Ugarit. The strongest evidence for its funerary character (though problematic) is the
association of the rpm with the [m]rz in KTU 1.21 (CTA 21). In other words, the
evidence looked at above does not demonstrate that the marz a can ever be dissociated
from the funerary ritual. Yet the case for the marz a as always involving a funerary
banquet is quite weak. (172) B.B. Schmidt arrives at the same conclusion in a recent
study 1996:6266, 144147, 246249.
260
McLaughlin 2001:6668. The suggestion that those who participated at a marz a
enjoyed a relatively elevated social status is not only apparent from the texts that speak

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 174 1/18/2007 2:18:00 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 175

2. the marz a took place in a religious context in the sense that a par-
ticular deity served as its patron,261 and
3. the most important goal of the marz a was the excessive intake of
alcohol.262
The suggestion that the marz a also had something to do with the dead
is firmly denied in McLaughlins study.263 Bearing this in mind, it is
difficult to understand why McLaughlin explicitly agrees with Van der
Toorns interpretation of 28:722264 and even concludes that the text
in question represents an important development in the study of the
phenomenon of the marz a , since it would seem for the first time to
establish a relationship with the cult of the dead (cf. Jer. 16:5).265 If Van
der Toorns explanation of 28:722 is no longer tenable for the reasons
outlined above and McLaughlin fails to introduce new elements into the
argument beyond those already proposed by Van der Toorn, then the

of the marz a themselves but also from the place in which they were found: Simply
put, the sites where the various marz a tablets were excavated favour situating the
marz a itself among the upper levels of society. (67)
261
McLaughlin 2001:6869. It is important to note in this regard that the marz a ,
according to McLaughlin, cannot be typified as a cultic activity: So while the vari-
ous deities are best interpreted as divine patrons, worship of these patrons does not
seem to be the primary purpose of the marz a s dedicated to them. The marz a and
its gathering was religious, in the sense that it was connected with a patron deity or
deities, but it was not cultic. (69)
262
McLaughlin 2001:6970: . . . it is likely that a major purpose of the marz a
itself was to get drunk.
263
McLaughlin 2001:66: A fourth element, namely a funerary connection, is often
claimed as an essential aspect of the marz a , but the evidence does not support that
view. For the argumentation in support of this claim see McLaughlin 2001:7079.
264
See McLaughlin 2001:179: More directly, since Moth is their patron, he is the
more probable source of a revelation. Thus, I think Karel van der Toorn is correct
when he suggests that the syllables in v. 10 are a slightly deformed reproduction of
that revelation. McLaughlin is nevertheless inclined to consider Van der Toorns pro-
posed identification of bz:K; and rq,v, with the gods Chemosh and Milcom somewhat
speculative.
265
See McLaughlin 2001:180: In conclusion, vv. 78 reflect the basic elements of a
marz a , namely a definable portion of the elite getting drunk in an explicitly religious
context. At the same time, the larger context presents the first clear connection between
a marz a and the cult of the dead. Cf. McLaughlin 2001:184: This has great impor-
tance for the marz a s history. Isa 28:722 is the first instance of a marz a text that also
exhibits an explicit link with the cult of the dead. As such it sets a precedent, but not
a requirement, for subsequent instances of a marz a . Since this particular one was a
means for contacting the realm of the dead, the possibility that later ones might be as
well is increased. But that possibility should not be mistaken for a necessity. Funerary
elements cannot establish a passage as a marz a allusion. Drinking in a religious context
by a definable portion of the elite remain essential characteristics of a marz a , and
subsequent texts will still have to be evaluated on the basis of those criteria.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 175 1/18/2007 2:18:00 PM

 176 chapter four

most important grounds for presupposing a development with respect

to the said text in the direction of the cult of the dead is completely
undermined. It is unfortunate that McLaughlins critical yet careful
analysis of extra-biblical texts is not maintained to the same degree in
his exegesis of 28:722.266
The hypothesis maintained by Stewart, namely that 28:718 should
not be understood as a historical text as there would appear to be no
particular historical event to which it alludes, must also be rejected.
When Stewart argues that the storm and hail mentioned in verses 17
and 18 do not refer to Assyria but rather to yhwh himself, to whom
the attributes of Baal-Hadad are ascribed, then it becomes clear that
he is not familiar with the function of the said metaphor elsewhere
in the preaching of Isaiah (cf. 28:2 and 8:58). Stewarts endeavour
to get round any political explanation of the covenant with death is
clearly contrived. He is of the opinion that the only point of support
for a political explanation of the text is lost when we translate the term
yliv]mo in verse 14together with Fohreras composers of proverbs and
he presupposes that the context itself must have given initial impetus to
a political interpretation of the covenant with death.267 I am inclined
to argue, however, that the addressees referred to in verse 14 (see above)
as well as the contrast with Zion in verse 16 together favour a political
explanation of the covenant with death, with Egypt serving as back-
ground. The prophet similarly refers to Zion in 14:32 as a safer place
of refuge against the background of political negotiations in which
the assistance of Egypt had an important role to play. Stewart takes
the easy way out when he argues that both verses 1617a and verses
1113 are later interpolations, when the political explanation of the
covenant with death had already been introduced.268
We can affirm, in summary, that there are no convincing arguments

266
It is worthy of note that in spite of his agreement with the careful conclusions
of Lewis, Blenkinsopp 2000(B):481 nevertheless asserts a relationship between the
covenant with death and the practice of necromancy: These reservations having
been expressed, it seems that some form of necromantic practice is not only compatible
with the making of a covenant with Death but a necessary part of it. Blenkinsopp
appeals in this regard to 57,8b9, which he is inclined to consider a parallel text. In
so doing, however, he is forced to emend the clause h,me l;Atr;k]Tiw" you have agreed on
your wage from them (whose copulation you have loved) (57:8b) to read h,M;[i l;Ayti/rk]Tiw" you
made a pact for yourself with them.
267
Stewart 1988:376.
268
Cf. Stewart 1988:377: Before the addition of this material we have one unified
oracle, the work of a cult prophet.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 176 1/18/2007 2:18:01 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 177

available to relate the covenant with death referred to in the context of

the prophecy of 28:1422 with the phenomenon of necromancy. The
arguments proposed in support of such an association are hypothetical
to say the least and, to a degree, even speculative in character.

4.3. Isa. 28:713

In like fashion to the prophecy of 28:1422, Isa. 28:713 also belongs

to the prophecy of judgement genre and clearly exhibits the usual
pattern of accusation and announcement of judgement. The accusa-
tion is made up of verses 710 and the announcement of judgement
of verses 1113. At the same time, however, both the accusation and
the announcement of judgement contain an element that deviates to a
certain degree from the expected pattern. The accusation is dramatised
in verses 910 by the insertion of a quotation borrowed by the prophet
from the words of his opponents. In the context of the announcement
of judgement, the prophet also inserts a quotation in verse 12, but in
this instance taken from the words of yhwh. Once again, the prophet
appears to have employed the pattern of the prophecy of judgement
in his own creative fashion.
Two important questions need to be raised with respect to the exegesis
of these verses. The first concerns the cohesion between 28:713 and
the preceding prophecy against Samaria/Ephraim in 28:14(6). The
second concerns the addressees and the context of the prophecy of
judgement of 28:713. The discussion will be divided into three sections
and will focus on verses 78, 910 and 1113 respectively. As with our
treatment of 28:1422, the discussion of each segment is preceded by
the Hebrew text and an English translation.

4.3.1. Isa. 28:78: Accusation

Wgv; yIY"B' hL,aeAg"w 7 But these also reel with wine
W[=T; rk;Veb'W and stagger with strong drink:
rk;Veb' Wgv; ayb]n:w heKo priest and prophet reel with strong drink,
yIY"h'Ami W[l]b]nI they are clouded with wine,
rk;Veh'Ami W[T; they stagger with strong drink;
ha,roB; Wgv; they totter in vision,
.hY:liyliP] WqP; they stumble in giving judgement.
t/nj;l]vuAlK; yKi 8 Yes, all tables
h=a;xo ayqi Wal]m; are covered with filthy vomit,
s ./qm; yliB] no place is clean!

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 177 1/18/2007 2:18:01 PM

 178 chapter four

The accusation with which the prophecy of judgement of 28:713

begins is connected to the preceding prophecy concerning Samaria/
Ephraim at the levels of both content and redaction. Everything would
seem to suggest that the entire bicolon with which verse 7 (yIY"B' hL,aeAg"w
W[T; rk;Veb'W Wgv;) commences is in fact redactional.269 While verse 7b is
characterised by a sequence of asyndetic qatal clauses, verse 7a consists
of two we-x-qatal clauses, which are intended to establish a link between
the prophecy of judgement of 28:713 and that of 28:14. The use of
the opening hL,aAe g"w harks back explicitly to the yIrp
' a] , yrEKvo i drunkards of
Ephraim (cf. the same formula hL,aAe G" in Prov. 25:1) already mentioned in
the woe statement of 28:1 while the words W[T; rk;Vb e W' Wgv; yIYB" ' anticipate
what follows. The accusation of this prophecy of judgement must have
originally started in the tricolon with which verse 7b begins.270 The fact
that the redactor responsible for the redactional passage of verse 7a had
acquired a degree of sensitivity with respect to style, is apparent from
the reversal of the clause sequence when compared with what follows.
The location of both yIY"B' and rk;VeB' in verse 7a before the verb, draws
attention to this important word-pair.271 The said word-pair yIy" wine
and rk;ve strong drink is not only used in verses 7a and 7b, it also has
an important role to play in the woe statement of 28:1. In terms of
meaning, the verbs hgv reel and h[t stagger are virtually synonymous,
both referring in the context of this accusation to the uncontrolled
progress of someone who has had too much to drink.272
Verse 7b is structured as a tricolon (4 + 2 + 2) and a bicolon (2 + 2),
which together form a single sentence. The tricolon begins with an
introductory formulation in which the spiritual leaders against whom
the accusation is directed are presented. Moreover, aybin:w heKo priest and
prophet are given a foreground position in verse 7b as the subject of all

269
See Donner 1964:148, Kaiser 19762:194, Dietrich 1976:151, Petersen 1979:108,
Clements 1980(B):226, Wildberger 1982:10551056, Gonalves 1986:188, Kilian
1994:159 and Beuken 2000:36.
270
Beuken 2000:11 considers the beginning of verse 7b to be a bicolon followed by
a tricolon. Bearing in mind the use of the word-pairs yIy" wine and rk;ve strong drink
on the one hand and ha,ro vision and hY:liyliP] judgement on the other, however, such a
subdivision of the text is not so evident.
271
Cf. Watson 1984:134. For the use of word-pairs in general see Watson 1994:262
312 and Alonso Schkel 1988:6163.
272
Seidl 1994:1059. See also Sawyer 19792:1056. The Septuagint of verse 7a twice
employs a form of the verb to mislead:
.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 178 1/18/2007 2:18:01 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 179

the expressions relating to drunken behaviour that follow.273 The motif

of drunkenness is already evident in the first introductory colon. In
the remainder of the tricolon and the associated bicolon, the motif is
elaborated in pairs with the ellipsis of the subject. The emerging pat-
tern can be visualised as follows:
rk;Veb' Wgv; aybin:w heKo A a-b-c
yIY"h'Ami W[l]b]nI B *-b-c // *-b-c
rk;Veh'Ami W[T; B
ha,roB; Wgv; C *-b-d // *-b-d
hY:liyliP] WqP; C
It is striking that each of the four cola that elaborate the motif of
drunkenness in pairs begins with a different verb: III[lb confuse (B),274
h[t stagger (B), hgv totter (C) and qwp stumble (C).The parallel cola B
and B (yIY"h'Ami W[l]b]nI // rk;Veh'Ami W[T;) continue the motif of drunken-
ness while the parallel cola C and C (ha,roB; Wgv; // hY:liyliP] WqP;) let the
reader see what the combination of spiritual leadership and drunken-
ness can signify. Drunkenness obstructs the priest and the prophet
in the exercise of their duties and is even explicitly forbidden where
priests are concerned in Lev. 10:811. The words ha,ro vision and
hY:lyi liP] judgement allude to the exercise of spiritual leadership, the former
focusing on the prophets visionary qualities,275 and the latter on the

273
The Isaiah Targum of 28:7 and indeed 9:14 reads rps scribe instead of aybin:
prophet. According to Wildberger 1982:1053, this is an indication that the rabbis wanted
to spare the prophets the serious accusation of drunkenness. Nevertheless, the word-
pair aybin:w heKo priest and prophet occurs with relative frequency in the Old Testament,
especially in texts from the late period of kings (cf. Jer. 2:8,26; 6:13; 8:10; 14:18; 18:18;
23:11,33; 32:32). The function of both must have been particularly similar in those
days (see Jeremias 19792:10; Mller 1986:158 and Dommershausen 1984:7778). It is
probable that Isaiah saw himselfin line with his older colleague Amosmore as a
hz<jo seer (cf. 1:1; 2:1; 30:10) than as a aybin: prophet (cf. 37:2; 38:1; 39:3).
274
HAHAT derives W[l]b]nI from I[lb to devour (cf. hN:[,l;b]yI in 28:4). A derivative of
III
[lb to confuse (an equivalent form of llb), however, seems closer to the parallels
employed in 7b (in DCH II[lb). The translation clouded is an attempt to give adequate
expression to the confusion brought on by wine. See also 3:12 and 9:15 in which the
verb III[lb is used as here in 28:7, in both instances side by side with a form of the
verb h[t to stagger. Cf. Duhm 19143:172, KBL/HALAT, Wildberger 1982:1053,
Barthel 1997:291.
275
Given the fact that the vocalisation of the Masoretic text is unusual, BHS sug-
gests in line with Procksch 1930(A):352/354 that we vocalise as follows: ha;roB;. While
this does indeed appear to be better Hebrew, it is not impossible to presume that we
are dealing here with a form of IIha,ro apparition, vision (cf. Vetter 19792:700 and Fuhs
1990:263).

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 179 1/18/2007 2:18:01 PM

 180 chapter four

( judicial) statements expected among other things from the priest.276

The prophets formulation of verse 7b effectively expresses the core of
his accusation.277
In order to underline his accusation of spiritual incompetence, the
prophet offers his readers a portrayal of the drunkenness of their
spiritual leaders in verse 8. The structure of this verse is usually taken
to be a bicolon278 although the individual cola differ considerably from
one another in length (5 + 2). Given that the first colon appears to be
too long and the second to be too short, the suggestion is sometimes
made that we should relocate the Atnch to ayqi.279 The present author
is of the opinion that this relocation would be ill-advised. When the
Masoretic distinctive accents are taken as the point of departure, verse
8 is clearly to be understood as a tricolon with three short cola (2 + 3
+ 2). This obviates the need to relocate the Atnch. The resulting struc-
ture, moreover, fits well with the fact that ha;xo ayqi can be understood
as a hendiadys (see below). The use of short cola in both verse 7 and
verse 8, furthermore, can be understood as an expression of outrage
or indignation.
The scene portrayed by the prophet is far from edifying. The sub-
ject t/nj;l]vuAlK; all tables is placed in first position for emphasis (cf.
the same sequence at the beginning of verses 7a and 7b). The tables
intended for sacrificial meals in the temple are completely soiled.280 The
prophet expresses his disgust with the terms ayqi vomit and ha;xo filth.
The word ayqi is also used elsewhere in relation to drunkennesscf.
19:14 and Jer. 48:26. The term ha;xo suggests images of human filth

276
Von Rad 19787:257: Auf dem Dienst des Priesters stand der gesamte Verkehr
des Jahwevolkes mit seinem Gott; so war er vor allem als Vermittler jeder Art von
Gottesentscheiden zustndig. The verb llp is used in this sense in 1 Sam. 2:25.
A nominal form hl;yliP (hapax) is also to be found in Isa. 16:3 (see Gerstenberger
1989:613). Several exegetes suggest we place a b before hY:liyliP] by analogy with ha,roB.;
Wildberger 1982:1053 is even inclined to consider such an emendation unavoidable.
GKG 119hh points out, however: In poetic parallelism the governing power of a
preposition is sometimes extended to the corresponding substantive of the second
member. Isa. 28:7 can thus be added to GKG 119hh as an example.
277
The structure of verse 7b is no longer recognisable in the Septuagint, which has
combined colon A and B to read and
rewritten colon B as . Colon C is translated as
, while colon C has disappeared in the translation.
278
See, for example, Beuken 2000:11.
279
See BHS and Wildberger 1982:1053.
280
Reference is also made in the books of Chronicles to the presence of various
tables in the temple (1 Chron. 28:16; 2 Chron. 4:8,19; cf. Ezek. 40:3943).

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 180 1/18/2007 2:18:02 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 181

in general (cf. t,a;xe in Deut. 23:14 and d;a;h; ta'xe in Ezek. 4:12; see
also the use of ha;xo in 4:4; Qere 36:12 and Prov. 30:12),281 although it
probably functions in the present context of 28:8 as a parallel concept
to ayqi, albeit with strongly negative connotations. Given the fact that
ayqi and ha;xo are joined together asyndetically, it is possible to under-
stand the combined expression ha;xo ayqi as a hendiadys in the sense of
filthy vomit. The prophets abhorrence of the way in which the priests
and the prophets go about their duties could not be more pointedly
expressed.282 The short colon of verse 8b functions in this regard as a
climax and can be understood as an expression of profound indignation:
nothing is sacred! The intended climax would be missed if one were
to relocate the Atnch to ayqi and transform the verse into a bicolon.283
The meaning of this exclamation is that there is actually nothing left
that is clean.284 In light of the purity that had to be maintained in the
(temple) service of yhwh, the prophets accusation is grave and requires
no further explanation.285
In a recent study based, among other things, on the phenomenon
of the marz a known to us from Ugarit, McLaughlin presupposes that
28:78 contains reference to such a drinking feast. While the criteria
established by McLaughlin are indeed useful, the question remains
nevertheless whether they are also applicable to 28:78. As a matter
of fact, McLaughlin himself has explicitly argued that a marz a should
not be understood as a cultic activity but rather as a drinking feast at
which one or other god served as patron.286 The scene portrayed in

281
Tanghe 1993:236.
282
Cf. Ernst 1994:78: Drastischer als Jes 28,8 kann ein prophetischer Schuldaufweis
fehlende Erkenntnis von Priester und Prophet in religis-sittlichen Bereich kaum aus-
drcken. Strangely enough, B.B. Schmidt 1996:161 interprets Wal]m; as a prophetic
perfect. Such an interpretation, however, is out of place in the context of an accusa-
tion and interrupts the recognisable pattern of the prophecy of judgement evident
in 28:713.
283
Cf. Oswalt 1986:503.
284
Dietrich 1976:153 suggests we scrap both concluding words because they do not
fit well with t/nj;l]v.u The present author can see no valid reason to agree with him.
285
The Septuagint would appear to offer a rather free translation of verse 8:
a curse shall devour that
plan, for this plan is (rooted in) greed . The Septuagint thus clearly understood verse 8 as
an announcement of judgement, the plan in question being a possible allusion to the
politics of those days that had been rejected by the prophet. Cf. the use of in
LXX 29:15; 30:1 and 31:6. See also LXX 24:6 in which reference is made to a curse
that will devour the earth.
286
See McLaughlin 2001:69: So while the various deities are best interpreted as
divine patrons, worship of these patrons does not seem to be the primary purpose of

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 181 1/18/2007 2:18:02 PM

 182 chapter four

28:7, however, would appear to be cultic in nature, as McLaughlin

readily admits.287 The fact that McLaughlins description of 28:78
argues nevertheless in favour of the presence of the phenomenon of
the marz a , has to do with the association he establishes, in line with
Van der Toorn, with the covenant with death in 28:15,18.288 Based on
this association, he argues that the god Mot functioned as the patron
of the marz a described in 28:78. In the excursus on the covenant
with death and necromancy (Excursus 2) preceding 4.3., I offer a
detailed rejection of such an explanation. If the association between
the description offered in 28:78 and the covenant with death in
28:15,18 is removed and one upholds the basic criteria proposed by
McLaughlin, it becomes difficult to maintain the idea that the scene
presented in 28:78 should be understood as a marz a .289 The situation
described in 28:78 is better understood in general terms as a cultic
activity in the temple.

4.3.2. Isa. 28:910: Rejoinder

h[;de hr,/y ymiAta, 9 Whom will he teach knowledge
h=[;Wmv] ybiy: ymiAta,w and to whom will he explain the message?
bl;j;me yleWmG Those who are weaned from milk,
.yId;V;mi yqeyTi[' those taken from the breast?
wx;l; wx' wx;l; wx' yKi 10 For it is all filth
wq;=l; wq' wq;l; wq' that he vomits over us;
.v; ry[ez v; ry[ez a little here, a little there.
Having reached its climax in verse 8, the prophets accusation is fol-
lowed in verses 910 by a passage in which two critical questions are
posed (9a), provisionally answered (9b) and further motivated (10). Verse
9 consists of two carefully paralleled bicola; verse 10 is a tricolon of
the type A-A-B.
The character of verses 910 is not immediately evident. A difference
with verses 78 in which qatal clauses predominated consists nevertheless

the marz a s dedicated to them. The marz a and its gathering was religious, in the sense
that it was connected with a patron deity or deities, but it was not cultic.
287
Cf. McLaughlin 2001:178: . . . intoxication coincides with the performance of
their religious duties.
288
Cf. McLaughlin 2001:178: In sum, Isa. 28:78 reflects the basic elements of
a marz a . But further information about the religious component of this particular
marz a can be derived from the larger context of those verses.
289
Other Old Testament texts in which McLaughlin 2001:80213 detects allusion
to the phenomenon of the marz a include Am. 4:1; 6:1,37; Hos. 4:1619; Jer. 16:5
and Ezek. 29:1720.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 182 1/18/2007 2:18:02 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 183

in the use of yiqtl clauses (verse 9) and a series of nominal clauses (verse
10). It is not exactly clear how the Masoretes understood the relationship
between these and the preceding verses. The transition from verse 8
to verse 9 is provided with a pericope indicator (Setumah), while this is
lacking at the beginning of the announcement of judgement in verse
11. It is possible that the Masoretes also struggled in determining the
correct interpretation of these verses. This surely goes hand in hand
with the fact that it is not immediately clear who is speaking in verses
910 or who should be understood as the subject of hr,/y and ybiy: in
verse 9a. There are four possibilities:
1. The prophet himself is the subject of hr,/y and ybiy: and he is quoting
his opponents. The priest and the prophet from verse 7 are included
in the dialogue and they respond with indignation to the accusation
addressed against them by the prophet in verses 78. They are no
longer open to correction and they see the prophet as a know-it-all
who is treating them as if they were children. This is the most cur-
rent hypothesis.
2. The priest and the prophet are the subjects of hr,/y and ybiy:. The
prophet himself is speaking and he is still addressing the same heKo
aybin:w referred to in verse 7. In 9a, he poses a twofold sarcastic ques-
tion: to whom do the spiritual leaders think they are going to impart
knowledge in their drunken condition? The prophet has no need
to wait for an answer, however, since he is able to provide one for
himself in verse 9b: they can only teach infants.
3. Yhwh is the subject of hr,/y and ybiy:. Verses 910 are spoken by the
prophet and addressed to the aybin:w heKo referred to in verse 7. The
question is posed with a degree of irony: to whom shall yhwh now
direct his attention inasmuch as the spiritual leaders have given up?
With whom should yhwh now share knowledge and revelation?
4. Yhwh is the subject of hr,/y and ybiy:, but as with the first option, it
is the opponents of the prophet who are speaking in verses 910.
According to this option, the speakers not only reject the prophet
but their reaction represents an open rejection of the message of
yhwh.
Our preference with respect to the four interpretative possibilities
will ultimately determine our understanding of the difficult words in
verse 10.
Options two and three are supported by the fact that the text does
not contain any explicit indication that verses 910 should be read

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 183 1/18/2007 2:18:02 PM

 184 chapter four

as a quotation as is the case with respect to the accusation in 28:15.

Moreover, reference to God as the explicit subject of hry hi. to teach in
verse 26 (WNr,/y wyh;la his God teaches him) supports the option in which
verse 9a likewise presupposes yhwh to be the subject of hr,/y and ybiy:
(option 3).290 The fact that yhwh is left unmentioned while the prophet
himself is said to be speaking in these verses, however, represents an
insurmountable objection to such an explanation. The same objection
applies to the fourth interpretative option, which is likewise improbable
on account of its presupposed explicit blasphemy (option 4).291 The
words h[;De knowledge and h[;Wmv] revelation would appear to point more
in the direction of the priest and prophet referred to in verse 7, since
the terms in question respectively designate the activity of both.292 In
verse 7, the exercise of their tasks had already been designated with
the terms ha,ro vision and hY:liyliP] judgement, whereby the former was to
be associated with the prophet and the latter with the priest. In verse
9a, the presupposed subject of h[;De hr,/y can easily be understood as
the priest and the subject of h[;Wmv] ybiy: as the prophet (option 2).293
Two important objections can be raised against this explanation. In the
first instance, the presupposed subjects aybin:w heKo (verse 7b) are actually
located at too great a distance from the verbs in question, namely hr,/y
and ybiy: (verse 9a). In the second instance, the said aybin:w heKo would
appear to continue to function as the plural subject of the verb forms
employed in verse 7b. Similarly, the function of prophet and priest is
not split into two distinct subjects with respect to the designations ha,ro
and hY:liyliP] employed in verse 7b, but this verse continues rather to use
the plural form. This fact undermines the hypothesis which posits an
unexpected and otherwise unexplained division into two single subjects
in relation to the verb forms employed in verse 9a.

290
Cf. Calvin and the translators of the Dutch Authorized Version. See also Petersen
1979:109, Exum 1982:120 and Halpern 1986:114.
291
Gonalves 1986:189 mentions this option as a tempting interpretation but in the
end does not accede to it.
292
Cf. Wildberger 1982:1059. The term h[;De (cf. Ps. 73:11; Jes. 11:9; Jer. 3:15)
employed here is closely related to the expression yhila t['D', which is to be found
in Hosea and Jeremiah in particular as a key concept and can be seen as a termi-
nus technicus fr das priesterliche Berufswissen (Schottroff 19783:695696; see also
Liedke/Petersen 19792:1035, Botterweck 1982:509510 and Wagner 1982:925926).
For the connection between priesthood and knowledge see Hos. 4:6: the rejection of
t['D'h' by the priests leads to the rejection of the heKo by God! Rterswrden 1994:278
speaks with respect to h[; W mv] of a Bezeichnung fr prophetische Offenbarung
(cf. 28:19; Jer. 49:14 and Ob. 1:1).
293
For this hypothesis see in particular Deck 1991:243244 and Barthel 1997:
298.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 184 1/18/2007 2:18:03 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 185

The present author is thus inclined to follow the most current option
(option 1) and to understand verses 910 as a response addressed to the
prophet on the lips of his opponents.294 The argument that there is no
evidence of an explicit introduction to the quotation at this juncture
cannot be taken as critical.295 The location of a Setumah at the end of
verse 8 suggests that the Masoretes had accepted the presence of some
kind of caesura between verses 8 and 9. This need not imply that the
connection between verses 78 and 913 was not original.296 By intro-
ducing his opponents into the dialogue, the prophet allows them to
demonstrate the effects of their cloudedness in person. The drunken
stupefaction of the aybinw: heKo is not only evident in their facial expression
but also in their speech. They consider themselves insulted and react
with indignation, as if the prophet still had to teach them knowledge
and as if they needed his help to achieve any degree of insight into the
message. In addition, this option also incorporates the fact that the words
h[;De and h[;Wmv] serve to designate the specific character of the priestly
and prophetic task respectively. The priest and the prophet pose the
questions in verse 9a, considering themselves slighted in their spiritual
competence. When compared with verse 7, it is striking that the priestly
is mentioned first in verse 9a and that the prophetic is associated with
hearing (h[;Wmv]) instead of with seeing (ha,r)o .297
In the second half of verse 9 it becomes clear that the opponents of
the prophet consider themselves to have been slighted in their profes-
sional competence by his critique. Indignant and not without a degree
of scorn, they ask him if he sees them as infants.298 By referring to
the bl;j;me yleWmG those who are weaned from milk and the yId;V;mi yqeyTi[' those

294
See, for example, Gonalves 1986:189 and Beuken 2000:36.
295
For dialogue as a style feature see Alonso Schkel 1988:170179.
296
The connection between verses 78 and 913 is occasionally considered to be
problematic because the priest and the prophet are no longer mentioned in what fol-
lows. In addition, verses 913 do not repeat concepts that are reminiscent of verses
78. Cf. Van Selms 1973:332 and Exum 1982:137n. The fact that the images of
staggering and falling backward portrayed in verse 13 correspond with the images
of drunkenness portrayed in verse 7, however, already serves as sufficient argument
in support of the unity of 28:713 (cf. Gonalves 1986:190191). Duhm 19143:171
and Marti 1900:205 consider verses 78 as a later redactional association with 28:14
inserted by the prophet himself.
297
Given its use of the first person plural, the Septuagint would also appear to
have considered verse 9 as a reaction on the part of the priest and the prophet:
(to whom have we revealed misfortune,
to whom have we revealed tidings? ). Instead of h[;De knowledgethe Septuagint probably
read h[;r; evil.
298
Beuken 2000:36 characterises this argumentation as a reductio ad absurdum.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 185 1/18/2007 2:18:03 PM

 186 chapter four

taken from the breast they suggest an answer to their own question. The
bl;j;me yleWmG are children who have recently made the transition from
the breast-feeding phase to the phase of playing and learning (cf. qnE/y
nursing child and lWmG: weaned child in 11:8).299 The parallel designation
yId;V;mi yqeyTi[' functions in this regard as a synonym.300
Verse 10 likewise forms a part of the passage in which the prophet
introduces his opponents into the dialogue in the context of his accu-
sation. This verse is a crux interpretum and has given rise to many and
various interpretations. Everything revolves around the words wx' and
wq', the most important question being whether one should ascribe any
meaning to the said terms or simply take them to suggest something
incomprehensible. While wx' is sometimes associated with the verb hwx
to command and wq' with the verb hwq to hope, the majority of exegetes
have nevertheless abandoned any efforts in finding substantial meaning
in the terms wx' and wq'.301 The sound of the clause wq' wx;l; wx' wx;l; wx' yKi
wq;l; wq' wq;l; is taken to be more important than its meaning. The entire
phrase is understood as the imitation of a speech deficiency on the
part of Isaiah302 or as the imitation of the prophets ecstatic speech.303
Others presume that we are dealing with meaningless babble304 or
the imitation of the slurred speech of a drunkard.305 Others still sug-

299
See Seybold 1977:28.
300
Cf. Schmoldt 1989:488.
301
The NRSV proposes a meaningful interpretation: For it is precept upon precept,
precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little. As is apparent from
the translation
(distress upon distress, expect hope upon hope, still a while, still a while), the Septuagint also
seems to have made an effort to discover meaning in the words in question. It is prob-
able that the Septuagint read rx' distress instead of wx' and derived wq' from hwq to hope.
By introducing the imperative in connection with , the Septuagint
appears to aim at a positive interpretation of verse 10 and to appeal for perseverance
hope in the context of distress. The words likewise point in this
direction. Cf. LXX Job 2:9:
(see, I continue to have hope in my salvation a little longer ). The suggestion
of Rise 1973/4:16 that we read rx at this juncture and translate: A stone, a stone, a
stone, a stone, a line, a line, a line, a line, a few here, a few there is unusual and in
the context of 28,713 somewhat confusing. Kissane 19602:306 is of the opinion that
the root of wq' can also mean to speak and he translates the term as oracle. He sees
verse 10 as a summary of the content of Isaiahs preaching: obedience to the law the
threat of judgement promise of restoration.
302
Wildberger 1982:1059 makes reference to I.P. Seierstad (1946) in this regard.
303
See KBL under wx'.
304
Duhm 19143:173. Beuken 2000:38 refers to the translation of The Revised English
Bible: A babble of meaningless noises, mere sounds on every side.
305
Ridderbos 1922:171. Driver 1968:56, 64 interprets verse 10 as a call for another
little drink.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 186 1/18/2007 2:18:03 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 187

gest it has to do with a sort of baby-talk306 or sounds intended to help

children learn to walk.307 Several exegetes have followed the suggestion
that verse 10 constitutes an allusion to the teaching of the Hebrew
alphabet.308 Van Selms even argues that the apparently meaningless
words are to be understood as an Assyrian transcription.309 Van der
Toorn understands verse 10 as the imitation of the spiritist oracular
utterings of Isaiahs opponents.310
None of these explanations do justice to the careful structure to
be found in the first part of the prophecy of judgement (accusation,
including response). After the redactional verse 7a, the prophet pieces
together his accusation in two corresponding parts, structured in a more
or less parallel fashion. In the first part (7b8) it is the prophet himself
who is speaking, while in the second part (910) he lets his opponents
have their say. For the sake of clarity and to allow for comparison we
have printed both parts of the accusation side by side:
Verse 7b Verse 9
rk;Veb' Wgv; aybin:w heKo h[;de hr,/y ymiAta,
yIY"h'Ami W[l]b]nI h=[;Wmv] ybiy: ymiAta,w
rk;Veh'Ami W[T; bl;j;me yleWmG
ha,roB; Wgv; .yId;V;mi yqeyTi['
.hY:liyliP] WqP;

306
Schoors 1972:166. Cf. Kilian 1994:160: Was soll sein Gestamel, sein Papper-
lapapp, sein Geschwtz bald hier, sein Geschwtz bald dort?
307
Marti 1900:206 is even of the opinion that the verse imitates the patter of tiny
feet.
308
See Montgomery 1912:141142, Procksch 1930(A):354, Kennett 1933:12, Driver
1948, Hallo 1958:237f, Herbert 1973:163, Jackson 1974:86, Fohrer 1962:5152,
Snijders 1969:282, Pfeiffer 1972:343345, Irwin 1977:22f, Petersen 1979:109, Clements
1980(B):228, Gonalves 1986:189, Brueggemann 1998:223 and HALAT. For Wildberger
1982:1053, the possibility of this interpretation depends on our understanding of
v; ry[ez, which is mostly taken as a neutral form in the sense of a little. Procksch
1930(A):355 presupposes a masculine form: Kleiner hier, kleiner dort and understands
the expression as the words of a school teacher addressing his pupils one after the other.
Driver 1948:90 proposes that we should read v; as yci and translate: Attend child!
Kaiser 19762:193 follows this suggestion. Twenty years later, Driver 1968:62 offers an
alternative translation another drop here, seeing the expression as an invitation to
have another drink of wine. Dietrich 1976:155 follows this suggestion.
309
Van Selms 1973:338 translates: Go out! Let him go out! Go out! Let him go out!
Wait! Let him wait! Wait! Let him wait! Servant, listen! Servant, listen!, arguing that
the entire statement is an appeal to those Judeans set aside for exile. Watson 1984:277
agrees with this suggestion. See also Jackson 1974:98.
310
Van der Toorn 1988:206 is of the opinion that verse 10 does not contain a
quotation. He argues that the prophet himself is speaking at this juncture and that he
is imitating the speech of his opponents as they pursue their necromantic practices.
See Excursus 2.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 187 1/18/2007 2:18:04 PM

 188 chapter four

Verse 8 Verse 10
t/nj;l]vuAlK; yKi wx;l; wx' wx;l; wx' yKi
h=a;xo ayqi Wal]m; wq;=l; wq' wq;l; wq'
s ./qm; yliB] .v; ry[ez v; ry[ez
Words are employed in both verse 7b and verse 9 that refer to the pro-
fessional activities of the priest and the prophet: in verse 7b ha,ro vision
and hY:lyi liP] judgement, in verse 9 h[;De knowledge and h[;Wmv] message. Both
word-pairs cross-reference one another: ha,ro and h[;Wmv] allude to the
work of the prophet, hY:liyliP] and h[;De to the work of the priest. At the
beginning of verse 7b, the prophet designates his opponents as heKo
aybin:w priest and prophet. This designation is not repeated in verse 9, but
set in contrast with the small children referred to in the second half of
the verse, whereby the term bl;j; milk functions as a counterpart to the
word-pair yIY" wine and rk;ve strong drink employed in verse 7b. Verse 7b
refers to the professional functioning of the priest and the prophet while
verse 9 refers to the professional status of the priest and the prophet.
The prophets accusation with respect to the unbefitting behaviour of
his opponents elicits a reaction on their part whereby they consider
themselves treated unbefitting their status. They resort to a familiar
defence strategy and ask the prophet if he is at all aware of the status
of his addressees. He should address them as professionals and not as
if they were little children.
Verses 8 and 10 likewise correspond with one another. Both verses
are introduced with the particle yKi and provide further motivation
with respect to the preceding accusation and response. Once again
there is an evident terminological cross-reference. The words wx' and
wq' in verse 10 correspond with ayqi and ha;xo in verse 8, whereby the
multiple repetition is intended as a caricature of Isaiahs accusation.
In an effort to arrive at a correct interpretation of this crux interpretum,
I follow the line established by Driver who argued that the words wx'
and wq' are an allusion to the words ayqi and ha;xo in verse 8a.311 An
appropriate translation in which the allusion continues to be evident is
virtually impossible. As a matter of fact, no translation can do justice to
the striking sounds of the Hebrew, which as such already confirm that

311
Driver 1968:55. Schmidt 1923:80 and Kennett 1933:12 already offered sugges-
tions in this direction, although Kennett himself was inclined to think of the letters
of the alphabet. It is probable, however, that Theodotions translation of Isaiah read
wx' as ha;xo: and wq' as (a)yqi: (see Van der Kooij 1981:152 and Halpern
1986:113). Grg 1985:16 and Halpern 1986:119 return to this ancient interpretation
and Sweeney 1996:371 follows. Grg 1985:1516 endeavours to find an etymological
basis in Egyptian. Flo 1990:77 correctly insists on prudence in this regard.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 188 1/18/2007 2:18:04 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 189

the priest and the prophet are indeed in a state of inebriation. In an

endeavour to maintain this important allusion to verse 8a, the present
author opts for a paraphrasing and perhaps unconventional translation:
For it is all filth that he vomits over us. 312 Isaiahs opponents find his cri-
tique just as hard to digest as ayqi and ha;x.o The striking accumulation
of the words wx' and wq' in verse 10 is not only intended to express the
incomprehensibility of Isaiahs message from the perspective of his
opponents but also the indigestibility thereof.
In light of the evidently artistic formation of verses 7b10, one might
consider the question whether the clause v; ry[ez v; ry[ez in verse
10b is intended in one way or another to correspond with /qm; yliB] in
verse 8b. With the exception of the present text, the word ry[ez is to be
found only one more time elsewhere. It is a diminutive form related
to the root r[z, which has the primary meaning to be/become small
and is regularly used to designate triviality and insignificance.313 It
became apparent from the exegesis of verse 8b that the text functions as
a climax and as an expression of serious outrage, the prophet employ-
ing the expression /qm; yliB] no place is clean! to illustrate his horror at
the fact that the vomit left by his opponents is everywhere. Given the
association observed between verses 8a and 10a, it is reasonable to
suggest that the clause v; ry[ez v; ry[ez a little here, a little there should
likewise be understood as a climax in verse 10b. In their turn, Isaiahs
opponents are also outraged that nothing is spared the prophets critique.
It seems that no matter when or where, Isaiah always has a comment
about everything: something insignificant here, something trivial there.
There always seems to be something the matter.

4.3.3. Isa. 28:1113: Announcement of judgement

hp;c; ygE[}l'B] yKi 11 Truly, with stammering lip
tr,=j,a' /vl;b]W and with alien tongue,
.hZ<h [;h;Ala, rBed'y He will speak to this people,
h,ylea} rm'a; rv,a} 12 to whom He has said,
hj;WnM]h' taOz This is the resting place;
yE[;l, WjynIh; give rest to the weary;
h=[;GErM'h' taOzw and this is the place of repose.
.x"/mv] aWba; alw But they would not listen.

312
As a variant on the interpretation that sees these words as baby-talk (Papperlapapp),
Tanghe 1993:246248 speaks of Kackerlakack.
313
Cf. Saeb, 1989:10831087. See GKG 86g1 on diminutives, which are mostly
formed in Semitic languages by the insertion of a y after the second radical.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 189 1/18/2007 2:18:04 PM

 190 chapter four

hw:hyArb'D h,l; hy;h;w 13 Therefore the word of YHWH will be to them:

wx;l; wx' wx;l; wx' it is all filth
wq;l; wq' wq;l; wq' which is vomited over them;
=v; ry[ez v; ry[ez whenever and wherever,
r/ja; Wlv]k;w Wkl]yE ['m'l] in order that they may go, and fall backward,
.WdK;l]nIw Wvq]/nw WrB;v]nIw and be broken, and snared, and taken prisoner.
The announcement of judgement begins in verse 11. Following the accu-
sation, the announcement constitutes the second part of the prophecy
of judgement. This is introduced by the particle yKi, which functions
here in its original deictic sense, and as such is not out of place at the
beginning of a proverbial statement. The judgement being announced
corresponds with the mocking rebuttal on the lips of priest and prophet,
spiritual leaders who no longer understand a simple word from yhwh.
They are no longer open to correction and refuse to let Isaiah teach
them anything. For this reason, yhwh is now obliged to speak to them
in a different way, namely with stammering lip and with alien tongue. This
statement should be understood as an allusion to the people of Assyria,
the clause hp;c; ygE[}l'B] being associated with the stammering impression
made by the Assyrians when they spoke.314 In verse 11, the expression
in question stands in cross-referenced parallel with tr,j,a' /vl;b]W. Isaiah
thus introduces the incomprehensibility of the Assyrian language (see
the similar designation of the people of Assyria in Isa. 33:19: yqem][i ['
hn:yBi yae /vl; g['l]nI x"/mV]mi hp;c; the people of an obscure speech, which you
cannot comprehend, stammering in a language that you cannot understand) and
refers thereby to the incomprehensibility that will characterise yhwhs
future communications.315

314
While the customary meaning of the verb g[l is to mock (cf. Septuagint:
), this meaning does not fit in the present instance. For this reason
we have opted for the translation stammer , though aware that this word also carries
connotations of mockery. GKG 116b translates with men of stammering lips and
notes thereby that a character is ascribed to them which is inseparably connected
with their personality. Wildberger 1982:1054 likewise places the emphasis on the
stammering aspect of Assyrian speech: unter Lippengestammel.
315
Tanghe 1993:249 has difficulty designating Gods speech as stammering and
prefers to interpret the verb as meaning mock (see Barth 1984:583; similarly, Kedar-
Kopfstein 1984:602 can see no reason to ascribe the meaning to stammer in 28:11 and
33:19 instead of the more usual to mock : Die unverstndliche Laute einer fremden
Sprache reizen uns zu Spott, wie sie andererseits auch uns zu verhhnen scheinen.
At a later date, however, Kedar-Kopfstein 1992:844 is nevertheless inclined to employ
Stammellippe). According to Tanghe, the expression tr,j,a' /vl; should be understood
in the same sense, namely as slanderous language rather than alien language. He appeals
for support in this regard to the Babylonian Talmud, which is said to understand slander
as a sort of third language. YHWH speaks mit spottender Lippe und in zweideutiger

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 190 1/18/2007 2:18:05 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 191

The poetic structure of verse 11 is that of a tricolon. Although

verse 12 begins with the relative rv,a} (see the comparable situation in
verse 1b), the Masoretic accentuation supports the suggestion that we
should envisage the beginning of a new tricolon at this juncture. In
spite of this suggestion, a semantic link can be found between verse 12
and the preceding verse in the correspondence between the verbs rbd
(verse 11b) and rma (verse 12a) on the one hand, and the designation
of the addressees via hZ<h' [;h;Ala, (verse 11b) and h,ylea} (verse 12a) on
the other. If one were to take the most important disjunctive accents
of verse 12 as ones point of departure, it would appear at first sight
that the verse in question is made up of two bicola.316 Given that the
summons yE[;l, WjynIh; give rest to the weary! functions in terms of syntax
as an independent clause and that the use of short cola is a character-
istic feature of verses 11 and 12, however, I am inclined to ascribe a
demarcative function to the accent Pat [10] employed in association
with this clause. This implies that verse 12 is made up of a tricolon
(3 + 2 + 2) and a bicolon (2 + 3) rather than two bicola.
An important piece of syntactic evidence that should not be over-
looked is the fact that the actual subject of the judgement announced
in verses 1112 has not been nominalised. Even though the subject is
traced out in further detail in verses 11 and 12 given that reference is
made to the words of yhwh in former times, it is not until verse 13
that the name of yhwh is actually and explicitly mentioned! This strik-
ing element of style is not without significance. The prophet skilfully
employs this procedure not only as far as content is concerned, but also
with respect to his choice of words in order to express the concealed
involvement of yhwh behind the speech of the Assyrians. Judgement
carries with it a divine eclipse. The Assyrians will continue the dialogue
between yhwh and his people in a different and incomprehensible
manner.317 The detached sounding hZ<h' [;h;Ala, to this people (cf. 6:9,10;

Sprache zu den Propheten. The incomprehensibility of their language, however, would

appear to be a characteristic of the Assyrians (cf. Deut. 28:49; Jer. 5:15 and Ezek. 3:56).
Fohrer 1962:53 refers in this regard to the confusion of tongues in Genesis 11, whereby
the inability to understand one anothers language is seen as a sign of being cursed by
God. In light of the aforementioned texts, Van der Toorns 1988:212 suggestion that
this verse refers to the esoteric language of the initiated, only comprehensible to the
priests and the prophets mentioned in verse 7, is unacceptable.
316
See, for example, Beuken 2000:12.
317
The Septuagint has removed the edge from verse 11 by translating the singular
verb form rBed'y with the plural form . It is striking that Paul quotes this
verse, with its unequivocal judgement character, in 1 Cor. 14:21 in order to underline
the fact that he values the gift of prophecy above the phenomenon of glossolalia.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 191 1/18/2007 2:18:05 PM

 192 chapter four

8:6,11,12; 9:15; 28:14; 29:13,14) is an expression employed consistently

in the book of Isaiah in reference to the population of Judah.318 In the
context of verse 11, the expression emphasises the strange and extraor-
dinary character of the alternative manner with which yhwh is soon
going to address his people. The fact that the entire people is involved
in the judgement while the spiritual leaders are its actual target should
not be surprising since the leaders represent the people and the people
bear the consequences of their shortcomings.319
In order to underline the change in yhwhs speech as well as its new-
ness and strangeness, verse 12 offers a brief summary of yhwhs words
in former times employing a relative clause. This summary reference
to the past deviates from the customary pattern expected within the
framework of an announcement of judgement. A similar deviation
had been observed in 28:16, in which instance reference was made
to yhwhs deeds in former times rather than to his words (cf. also
30:1517).320 While the relative clause with which the link with the
preceding verse (11) is established comes across as rather prosaic, verse
12 as a whole is nevertheless characterised by a recognisable poetic
structure in which the clauses hj;WnM]h taOz this is the resting place and taOzw
h[;GErM'h' and this is the place of repose and the exclamations yE[;l, WjynIh; give
rest to the weary! and x'/mv] aWba; alw yet they would not listen correspond
with one another. Given the fact that verses 11 and 12 are also clearly
linked at the level of content, there is insufficient reason to accept the

See Beuken 2000:38.

318

Barthel 1997:300 is of the opinion that the people in general are not the targets
319

of judgement but rather the religious and political uppercrust mentioned in verse 12a.
There is no evidence to support the reading of hZ<h' [;h;Ala, as the corruption of an
original yhila as proposed by Donner 1964:147f who maintains that the corruption
took place after h,ylea} had mistakenly found its way into verse 12. There is no reason,
however, to scrap h,ylea} from verse 12 since it fits well within the relative clause that
relates back to the preceding hZ<h' [;h;. Dietrich 1976:154, Wildberger 1982:1054 and
Barthel 1997:292, therefore, correctly reject Donners proposal. For Becker 1997:230,
the extension of judgement to include the entire people is an important argument in
favour of seeing verse 11 as a secondary re-interpretation. He uses the following argu-
ments in this regard: 1. yKi is only a loose connection; 2. verse 11 aims at interpreting
the stammering of verse 10 as a foreign language; 3. YHWH is unexpectedly introduced
as indirect speaker. His arguments remain unconvincing, however. Verse 11 functions
well as the beginning of an announcement of judgement and employs both the char-
acterisation of the Assyrians as well as the hiddenness of the subject to emphasise the
aspect of divine eclipse with which the said judgement goes hand in hand.
320
For a description of similarities and differences in structure between 28:713;
28:1418 and 30:1517, see Gonalves 1986:192193.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 192 1/18/2007 2:18:05 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 193

suggestion that verse 12 should be considered a later addition.321 The

explicit reference to yhwhs words in former times serves to underline
the strangeness with which his dialogue with his people is about to be
continued and thus functions exceptionally well in the context of the
present announcement of judgement.
The words of yhwh in former times were characterised by intel-
ligibility and consisted in concrete terms of directions to the path of
rest. The prophet, however, has announced a divine utterance in which
this is no longer the case. YHWH is going to conceal himself behind
the incomprehensible language of the Assyrians and as a consequence
any form of rest will disappear. Reference to the designated place of
rest and place of repose in the words of yhwh in former times was
made with the two parallel key words hj;WnM]h' and h[;GErM'h' (cf. Mi. 2:10:
hj;WnM]h' taOzAal). The word hj;Wnm] place of rest, is best understood in the
first instance as an actual place of rest and not as an abstract concept.
This is in agreement with the use of the term elsewhere in the Old
Testament (see, for example, Num. 10:33; Deut. 12:9; Isa. 11:10; Mi.
2:10; Ps. 95:11 and 132:8,14).322 It falls within the contours of Isaiahs
preaching, however, to then associate the said place of rest with Zion,
the place in which yhwh himself had found a hj;Wnm] (Ps. 132:8,14),
which could be extended to the people of Israel (1 Kgs 8:56; cf. Isa.
14:32).323 While a link with the motif of entry into the promised land
is less evident in the context of the book of Isaiah, the entry into the
promised land and the election of Zion line up well with each other
elsewhere (see, for example, Ex. 15:17 and Psalm 132) and while they
can be distinguished from one another they cannot be separated. Ps.
95:11, for example, makes the close association between the land and
Zion as place of rest particularly clear. Given the fact that the retrospec-
tive glance towards Israels period in the wilderness is to be found in the
context of a psalm that calls upon pilgrims to bow down before yhwh,
the latters oath that the hardened generation shall never find its place
of rest can refer to either the land or the temple.324 The second word

321
Kaiser 19762:196 speaks of eine aus dem Rckblick formulierte Zusammenfassung
der Predigt Jesajas durch den frhestens zwischen 597 und 587 anzusetzenden
Bearbeiter. Kilian 1994:161 follows this opinion. Clements 1980(B):228, Wildberger
1982:1060 and Oswalt 1986:513 correctly reject the idea as unnecessary.
322
See Gonalves 1986:193f and Beuken 2000:3940.
323
Cf. Preu 1985:305, Gonalves 1986:194 and in particular De Jong 2002:1243.
For Becker 1997:231, the allusion to Zion is already sufficient reason to consider verse
12 as secondary.
324
Braulik 1986:3344 offers a plausible argument for interpreting Ps. 95:11 as a

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 193 1/18/2007 2:18:05 PM

 194 chapter four

h[;GrE m ' repose is only found here (cf. x"/Grm' rest in Jer. 6:16), although the
meaning is clear on the basis of the verb [gr to rest and the parallel
with hj;Wnm].325 It is striking that the Septuagint translates h[;GErm' repose
with rupture or destruction (cf. LXX Isa. 22:4; 30:14,26;
Rom. 3:16):
this is the place of rest for the hungry and this is the destruction rather than
as a parallel of hj;Wnm] place of rest. As was the case with verse 10 (and
13), the Septuagint would appear to have conjoined the preaching of
salvation and of doom at this juncture as well.
The short appeal to give rest to the weary is central to verse 12.326
The appeal in question, which is absent oddly enough in the Septuagint,
indicates yhwhs intention with respect to the place of rest He has
designated. From the very beginning, the choice of Gods resting place
enjoyed a social dimension. Zion was intended as the place of rest
and refuge for the unfortunate (cf. 14:32). The term yE[; weary stands
for those who are exhausted and in need of compassion whatever the
reason (cf. Job 22:7). It is part of the prophetic expectation that God
himself will replenish the hp;yE[} vp,n< the weary soul ( Jer. 31:25). In line
with the other prophecies of Isaiah, we can observe in the final colon
of verse 12 that the realisation of the said social justice had not taken
place in the prophets day, though not as a consequence of impotence
but rather as a result of the obstinacy of the spiritual leaders of Judah
and Jerusalem respectively. In their very refusal to give ear to yhwhs
appeal and to grant rest to the weary, the incapacity of the priest and
the prophet to provide spiritual leadership is painfully exposed. Their
stubborn reaction to the words of yhwh in former times is summarised
in a brief but powerful statement: x"/mv] aWba; alw but they would not listen
(cf. 30:15: t,ybia} alw but you refused . . .).327 This disappointing reaction

reference to the temple, but incorrectly opposes this to interpreting the said place of
rest as the land. The psalm itself does not occasion such a contrast. The land and Zion
can be seen as a continuation of one another (cf. 1 Chron. 23:25).
325
See Kronholm 1990:347350.
326
I see no reason to follow Roberts 1980:50 and supplement yE[;l, WjynIh; give rest to
the weary with wybal w[ygrh let the poor rest. While such a suggestion serves to restore a
degree of symmetry, it misunderstands existing correspondence between the expressions
yE[;l, WjynIh; give rest to the weary and x"/mv] aWba; alw but they would not listen.
327
The orthography of aWba; is unusual. GKG 23i presupposes the possibility that
the concluding a may represent an early scribal error (cf. Aramaic aba). 1QIsaa and
many other mss have wba. Given the fact that this reading would appear to be the more
correct (cf. 30:9), Procksch 1930(A):356, Donner 1964:148 and others emend the text.
Wildberger 1982:1054 points out, however, that similarly unusual orthography can be
encountered elsewhere in the Masoretic text. Oswalt 1986:503 refers in this regard

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 194 1/18/2007 2:18:06 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 195

on the part of the spiritual leaders of Judah and Jerusalem, which was
already evident in verses 9 and 10, is now extended to include the
people themselves. Given the fact that the subject of x"/mv] aWba; alw
is not nominalised in verses 12 and 13, it is possible to understand it
as both the aybin:w heKo priest and prophet referred to in verse 7 and [;h;
hZ<h' this people in verse 11. The explicit observation of their refusal to
listen at the end of verse 12 serves to underline the inevitability of the
approaching judgement (cf. 1:1920).

The announcement of judgement is concluded in verse 13 with a

description of the effect yhwhs new and strange manner of speaking is
going to have on this people. In the first half of the verse, the prophet
returns to the reaction of his opponents in verse 10. While this remains
difficult to render with satisfaction, the correspondence between the
rejection and ridicule expressed by the spiritual leaders of Judah and
Jerusalem in response to the prophet and his message on the one hand
and the judgement of yhwh that they brought upon themselves in so
doing on the other hand becomes all the more clear. Isaiahs opponents
accused him of always and everywhere having something to say about
everything. The approaching judgement represents a confirmation of
this state of affairs in which they are to be presented with the bill in
full. If they considered the prophets accusation to be incomprehensible
and unpalatable, then their experience of the judgement they are about
to encounter from yhwh will definitely be the same.
While the words of yhwh in former times offered a place of rest and
refuge for his people (verse 12), his words are now focused on the
destruction of this people. Those who refuse to listen must face the
consequences. Where divine instruction is rejected, destruction inevitably
follows.328 It would appear from the second half of verse 13 (introduced
by ['m'l)] that the said destruction is to be the new and terrifying goal
of Gods present speech. Its addressees will stumble and fall backwards.
Three weqatal clauses then present us with a picture of the intended
goal of this fall: WdK;l]nIw Wvq]/nw WrB;v]nIw they shall be broken, and snared, and
taken prisoner (cf. 8:15: WdK;l]nIw Wvq]/nw WrB;v]nIw Wlp]n:w yBir' b; Wlv]k;w and
many among them shall stumble, and they shall fall and be broken; they shall be

to Jos. 10:24. It is similarly unnecessary to follow 1QIsaa and read [wmvl. The l is
also lacking in 30:9, a fact that is not entirely unusual with respect to the infinitive (cf.
GKG 114m and the examples mentioned in Gerstenberger 19783:23).
328
Exum 1982:121.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 195 1/18/2007 2:18:06 PM

 196 chapter four

snared and taken prisoner.). If yhwh turns against his people, the conse-
quences are devastating. The piling up of verb forms (1 yiqtl and
4 weqatal ) at this juncture underlines the totality of the destruction
in similar fashion to the fact that piling up of verb forms in verse 7b
(5 qatal ) demonstrated the total character of the confusion of the
priest and the prophet on account of their drinking.329 As a matter of
fact, verses 7b and 13 also correspond with one another in terms of
content: drunken confusion and devastation both result in one mas-
sive fall!330 The fact that the terms employed in verse 13b transcend
those employed in verse 7b in terms of force, serves to underline the
seriousness of the refusal to listen. The destructive force of the word
of yhwh is ultimately more powerful than that of wine!
The poetic structure of verse 13 is surprising in the sense that a
monocolon is followed by a tricolon, an unusual phenomenon in Old
Testament poetry.331 The use of the tricolon in verse 13a, however, is
related to the fact that it refers back literally to verse 10. The precise
configuration of the bicolon in verse 13b requires a slight deviation
from the Masoretic accentuation. It is difficult to determine why the
Masoretes placed a Zqf parvum [5] with the word WrB;v]nIw. This is
somewhat unexpected if one bears in mind the imbalance it creates
in the bicolon (5 + 2) and the interruption it introduces into the series
of verb forms WdK;l]nIw Wvq]/nw WrB;v]nIw they shall be broken, snared and taken
prisoner, which are otherwise closely associated with one another in
terms of form and content (cf. 8:15). A departure from the Masoretic
accentuation is thus advised in this instance with a bicolon consisting
of 4 + 3 beats. I can see no reason, however, to consider verse 13 as
a secondary interpolation.332 The fact that the conclusion to verse 13
agrees with 8:15 is insufficient reason to support the designation of verse
13 as secondary. Indeed, both 13a and 13b are too closely related to
the accusation of the present prophecy of judgement to be considered
secondary. In addition, verses 11 and 13 do not contain mutually exclu-
sive announcements of judgement. The hw:hyArb'D contained in verse 13
can be considered a further concretisation of hZ<h' [;h;Ala, rBed'y in verse
11. Following the beginning of the announcement of judgement in

329
Cf. Barth 1984:370. For the specific meaning of the verbs employed here see
Gro 1984:573576, Knipping 1993:10271040 and Ringgren 1982:866868.
330
Cf. Exum 1982:122, Barthel 1997:293 and Beuken 2000:41.
331
See also verse 28.
332
Donner 1964:148, Kaiser 19762:194, Clements 1980(B):228229 and Wildberger
1982:1054, 1061.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 196 1/18/2007 2:18:07 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 197

verse 11, the effect of yhwhs new and strange manner of speaking as
described in the concluding verse 13 is given priority (cf. 28:4, likewise
a weqatal clause). After the observation of the refusal to listen to the
words of yhwh in former times at the end of verse 12, a concluding
description of the approaching judgement is far from out of place at
this juncture (cf. 30:1517). Indeed, without verse 13, verse 12 would
constitute a rather unusual conclusion to a prophecy of judgement and
a further concretisation of the judgement alluded to in verse 11 would
thus be lacking. The delay in revealing yhwh himself as the subject of
the words spoken in verses 11 and 12 until verse 13, serves to confirm
that the announcement of judgement only reaches its final conclusion
in this latter verse.

4.4. Evaluation

Given that the pericopes 28:713 and 28:1422 are closely related with
one another in the present composition of the book of Isaiah, it seems
appropriate at this juncture to provide an evaluation of the exegesis so
far. In so doing, we will endeavour to establish a picture of the simi-
larities and points of connection between the two pericopes as well as
the differences.
The relationship between 28:713 and 28:1422 goes much further
than the redactional connection created by the particle kel; at the begin-
ning of verse 14. The careful comparison of both pericopes provides
evidence of formal points of association together with agreement in
terms of content:
Both 28:713 and 28:1422 belong to the prophecy of judgement
genre, whereby the common pattern of accusation followed by
announcement of judgement is clearly recognisable. In the prophecy
of judgement of 28:713, the accusation consists of verses 710, with
the announcement of judgement following in verses 1113. In the
prophecy of judgement of 28:1422, the accusation consists of verses
1415 and the announcement of judgement of verses 1622.
Both prophecies of judgement likewise agree with one another in
the sense that the traditional pattern of the accusation is interrupted
in each instance in a comparably creative fashion. The prophet has
integrated a quotation which is clearly marked as such in the accusa-
tion of the second prophecy of judgement (28:15). In the exegesis
of 28:713, it likewise became apparent that verses 910 can best

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 197 1/18/2007 2:18:07 PM

 198 chapter four

be explained as a reaction on the part of Isaiahs opponents. The

prophet thus appears to have incorporated this latter reaction into his
accusation in the form of a quotation. While verses 910, in contrast
to 28:15, are not explicitly introduced as a quotation, both prophecies
of judgement have nevertheless created space in the formulation of
the accusation for the words of the accused (see also 30:16).
A similar interruption in the customary pattern of the announce-
ment of judgement is likewise evident in both prophecies. In the
announcement of judgement in the first prophecy, the prophet makes
an explicit reference to the past, namely to the words spoken by
yhwh in former times (verse 12). The announcement of judgement
in the second prophecy contains a similar reference to the past in
verse 16, namely to the deeds undertaken by yhwh in former times
(see also 30:15).333
The connection between the prophecies of judgement in 28:713
and 28:1422 is not only a formal one, it is also content based.
Both prophecies refer to the past and are related specifically to Zion.
Gods designation of Zion as place of rest (verse 12) corresponds
with the establishment of Zion or, more specifically, of a stone in
Zion (verse 16).
While both 28:713 and 28:1422 clearly belong to the prophecy
of judgement genre and the reference to Zion has been ascribed a
place in the context of the announcement of judgement, the allusion
in both instances is related nevertheless to yhwhs original plan of
salvation.
It became evident from our exegesis of the texts in question that both
prophecies presuppose Judah/Jerusalem as addressees. While 28:14
explicitly identifies its addressee, the content of 28:713 makes it clear
that the addressee of the prophecy in question should be identified
as Judah and Jerusalem respectively. This can be determined on the
basis of the reference to this people in verse 11 as well as the words
concerning the place of rest in verse 12. It would appear that the
expression hZ<h' [;h; always refers to the population of Judah in the
book of Isaiah, while the term hj;WnM]h' in the same context points
unmistakably in the direction of Zion.
Formulations are employed in the announcement of judgement in
both 28:713 and 28:1422 that suggest that the world power Assyria

333
Cf. Gonalves 1986:201: Cest la lumire de Is., XXVIII, 7b13 et XXX,
1517 que lon doit interprter la fonction de Is., XXVIII, 16.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 198 1/18/2007 2:18:07 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 199

is to be understood as the executor of divine judgement. Allusion is

made in 28:11 to the incomprehensible language of the Assyrians
with the words tr,ja, ' /vl;bW] hp;c; ygE[l} B' ]. In 28:(15,)18, the designation
fe/v f/v constitutes a reference to the imperialism and expansionism
that characterised the Assyrians.
The prophecies of judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422 correspond
in the way they make reference to the hiddenness of God in the
approaching judgement. Both prophecies allude to the fact that yhwh
is going to conceal himself behind Assyrian hostilities. This takes
the form of a dramatic transformation in the speech of yhwh in
28:713. God is going to continue his interaction with his people in
an incomprehensible language and in an alien tongue (verse 11). The
suggestion emerging from this observation is that Gods own words
are going to become incomprehensible and alien. In the prophecy
of judgement of 28:1422, this element of alienation is related to
Gods deedsas opposed to his words, which shall be strange and
out of the ordinary (verse 21). There is thus a clear link between the
strange deeds of yhwh in verse 21 and the strange words of yhwh
in verse 11. The announcement of judgement in both prophecies
implies a complete turnabout in Gods interaction with his people.
Yhwh conceals himself behind the hostile advance of Assyria. Judah
is about to undergo the shocking experience of a hitherto unknown
divine eclipse. The shocking aspect is not only related to the divine
judgement as such but primarily to the insight that yhwh himself is
at work behind the Assyrian advance (cf. verse 19b).
A number of differences in accent, however, are also evident between
28:713 and 28:1422, which are likewise both formal and content
based:
The prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 is explicitly addressed to
the political leaders to whom it refers as the hZ<h' [;h; yle]mo (28:14).
The prophecy of judgement of 28:713, on the other hand, refers
to the spiritual elite and identifies the latter as the aybin:w heKo (28:7).
While both prophecies presuppose Judah and/or Jerusalem as their
addressee, the latter is only localised explicitly in 28:1422 in which
both Jerusalem (28:14) and Zion (28:16) are mentioned. 28:713
lacks indicators of place. The prophecy of judgement of 28:1422
is thus more explicit in the localisation of its message.
An important difference between both prophecies relates to the use of
direct address in the second person, which significantly determines the

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 199 1/18/2007 2:18:07 PM

 200 chapter four

timbre of both the accusation and the announcement of judgement

of 28:1422. The prophecy of judgement of 28:713 is composed
entirely in the third person.
While both prophecies have included a significant reference to Gods
salvific plan in their announcement of judgement, the accent in 28:12
is placed on yhwhs words in former times and in 28:16 on his deeds
in former times.
Likewise in terms of content, both Zion texts have a specific accent.
In 28:12, the socio-ethical implications of Gods choice of Zion are
in the foreground, in 28:16 the political implications thereof. One
can derive from 30:15 that the refusal of Jerusalems leaders to listen
had to do with both the social and the political dimension related
to Gods choice of a place of rest. While both aspects can be dis-
tinguished in practice, they nevertheless cannot be strictly separated.
It is possible that a political background existed to the statement of
28:12, since it would primarily have been the ordinary citizen who
would have suffered as a result of the political options stemming from
Jerusalem.334 In the prophecy of judgement of 28:713, however,
politics does not enjoy a foreground position.
One can conclude on the basis of the differences in accentuation evident
between 28:713 and 28:1422 that both prophecies of judgement can
be distinguished from one another in terms of clarity and focus. The
prophecy of 28:713 is characterised by a striking degree of reserve in
the orientation of its message. While it is unmistakably clear that the
prophecy in question intends to be understood in relation to Jerusalem
and Zion, further detailed localisation is lacking. The effect of the
composition of Isaiah 28 as we now have it is thus a visible increase in
clarity and focus with respect to 28:713 and 28:1422. This increasing
definition is also expressed in the use of direct speech in the second
person. Together with the explicit localisation of the addressees and
the mention of Zion, the said direct speech provides the prophecy
of judgement of Isa. 28:1422 in its present literary context with the
character of a climax.335
Given the fact that both prophecies of judgement (28:713 and
28:1422) are closely connected with one another in terms of form and

334
Cf. Gonalves 1986:534536. The term yE[; is used here as kollektivisch den
Israeliten der Jesajazeit, der durch alle Kriegswirren und Ausbeutung erschpft ist.
(Hasel 1982:716)
335
Cf. Beuken 2000:44.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 200 1/18/2007 2:18:08 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 201

content, it would thus seem reasonable to date them both to the same
period.336 The message in both instances is best understood against
the background of the revolt against Sennacherib, which reached its
dramatic conclusion in the year 701. Terminological kinship, in par-
ticular between 28:1422 and 30:15, serves to support such a dating.
The prophet expresses his revulsion concerning the policy adhered to
in Jerusalem during the years of the revolt, a policy that sought help
from Egypt as a means of protection against the power of Assyria.
He denounces the bragging self-assuredness of the political authorities
with stern language in 28:1422. In their endeavour to seek the help
of Egypt they have ultimately signed their own death warrant. Their
covenant with Egypt will turn out to be a covenant with death. Their
self-destructive policy is explained by the prophet as a grave misunder-
standing of Gods salvific deeds in former times. In opting for Zion,
God established a rock-solid foundation, a rock-solid foundation that
invites faith. Judgement is the natural consequence of such a misun-
derstanding of Gods former salvific deeds. The prophet announces
this forthcoming judgement by staying as close as he can to the words
of the initial accusation. The security sought by Jerusalems leaders in
a covenant with Egypt will not hold out against the violence of the
Assyrians that is about to be let loose upon them. The seriousness of
the said judgement is underlined by the divine eclipse with which it is
accompanied.
The prophecy of 28:713 is likewise best understood against the
background of Judahs uprising against Sennacherib. In 28:713, the
prophet expresses his disgust concerning the spiritual leaders of Judah,
namely the priests and (cultic) prophets who overindulge themselves
by participating in extravagant feasts. Much is made of the motif of
drunkenness in exposing the incompetence of Judahs spiritual lead-
ers. The priests and prophets of Jerusalem are completely incapable
of providing the people with spiritual leadership.337 This incompe-
tence is evident in the first instance in their refusal to allow the place

336
Cf. Gonalves 1986:195.
337
A difference of opinion exists with respect to the cultic or political nature of
the feast in question. In line with Procksch 1930(A):353, Dietrich 1976:155 emphati-
cally opts for the latter. It is probable, however, that both cult and politics are being
mixed together at this juncture, although a more or less generalising description is
not unthinkable (see Barthel 1997:296). In any event, the focus of Isaiahs critique is
without doubt the drunken confusion of Judahs spiritual leaders (see also 22:1214).
Cf. Donner 1964:151 and Clements 1980(B):226.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 201 1/18/2007 2:18:08 PM

 202 chapter four

designated by yhwh as a place of rest to be likewise a place of social

justice. Once again Gods salvific plan with respect to Zion has been
completely misunderstood. The judgement subsequently announced by
the prophet at this juncture again corresponds with the accusation and
likewise implies a dramatic divine eclipse expressed in the transforma-
tion of yhwhs words. Instead of a clear message of rest, the people
are now confronted with an incomprehensible and unpalatable message
of judgement, which, in line with 28:1422, will be brought about at
the hands of the Assyrians.
It is probable that the Assyrians already constituted a growing threat
to Judah at the moment both prophecies were uttered. Bearing in mind
the remaining prophecies collected in this segment of the book (chapters
2832[33]), it seems reasonable to date both 28:713 and 28:1422 to
the period prior to the siege of Jerusalem in 701.338
There would appear to be no reason to call the authenticity of
either prophecy of judgement into question. Theme and terminology
together with creative interaction with the genre of prophetic judge-
ment and masterful use of poetic technique point in both instances to
the prophet Isaiah himself. There is no evidence to suggest that one
or both of the prophecies in question was not composed by Isaiah.
Significant unanimity in this matter exists among exegetes. The Isaianic
character of the prophecy of 28:713 is virtually undisputed and the
same is true, albeit to a lesser degree, of the prophecy of 28:1422.
The question of authenticity has already been discussed in considerable
detail in 3.5. The fact that both prophecies of judgement of 28:713
and 28:1422 exhibit such a degree of cohesion further reinforces our
conviction that the Isaianic authorship of 28:1422 cannot be denied.
While it is difficult to be certain with respect to the concluding verses
1922, it would be exegetically irresponsible to question the authentic-
ity of verses 1418. The same can thus be said for the Zion text of
28:16. The evident structural and content based agreement with the

338
Fohrer 1962:49 dates 28:713 to the period of Ashdods uprising against Sargon
(713711). A similar suggestion is to be found in Schoors 1972:165 and Schneider
1988:382. The location of this prophecy prior to 28:1422, and the associations
between both prophecies in terms of form and content, make a later date more prob-
able. Wildberger 1982:1057 considers this prophecy to be the earliest statement of
Isaiah on the occasion of the revolt against Sennacherib. Cf. also Ridderbos 1922:169,
Procksch 1930(A):353, Donner 1964:151, Eichrodt 1967:122, Kaiser 19762:187 and
Clements 1980(B):226. The date ascribed by Schmidt 1923:82 during the period of
the Syro-Ephraimitic war (734732) is striking, but highly improbable. Cf. also Kissane
19602:299 and Lindblom 1955:128129.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 202 1/18/2007 2:18:08 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 203

preceding prophecy in which allusion is made within the framework

of an announcement of judgement to the words of YHWH uttered in the
past concerning Zion (28:12), leads unavoidably to the conclusion that the
allusion to the deeds of JHWH performed in the past on behalf of Zion (28:16),
likewise within the framework of an announcement of judgement, must
also be ascribed to the prophet Isaiah.
The fact that some exegetes nevertheless find it difficult to accept the
authenticity of verses 1617a has to be seen in combination with two
additional factors. On the one hand, their reticence is a consequence
of the hitherto widely affirmed hypothesis that the verses are to be
interpreted as a promise concerning the future, and that they do not
fit well in their present context for this reason. On the other hand, the
assignment of a later date to the Zion tradition likewise has a clear
role to play in this regard. It has become evident from the exegesis,
however, that verses 1617a should not be explained as a statement of
promise. Indeed, verse 16 does not appear to make reference to Gods
salvific deeds in the future but rather to his salvific deeds in the past. The
content of verse 17a likewise makes it clear that this verse should not
be interpreted as a promise of future salvation but rather as already
containing the announcement of judgement. While the use of the first
person and the striking location of the verses in questionin between
a pair of statements that more or less mirror one anotherdo indeed
distinguish verses 1617a from their context, one would misunderstand
the content-based and terminological associations with their own context
and the content-based and structural associations with the prophecy
of judgement of 28:713, were one to remove these verses from their
context and question their Isaianic origins. The exegesis of our text
still has to draw its final conclusions with respect to the dating of the
Zion tradition. It goes without saying, however, that one should not
exclude the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 from the discussion in advance. On
the contrary! The present author is convinced that his exegesis of both
prophecies (28:713 and 28:1422) has provided sufficient evidence to
include the Zion text of 28:16 as part of the authentic preaching of
the prophet Isaiah.

4.5. Isa. 28:16 and 28:2329

While the exegesis of both the prophecies of judgement 28:713

and 28:1422 is of primary importance for our research, it neverthe-
less seems appropriate to conclude the present chapter with some

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 203 1/18/2007 2:18:08 PM

 204 chapter four

considerations related to the external pericopes of chapter 28, namely

28:16 and 28:2329. Both texts constitute a part of the transmitted
composition of Isaiah 28 and function thereby as the most proximate
context for the central pericopes of the chapter. Following a discussion
of the individual texts we will endeavour to determine and evaluate
the relationship of both with the prophecies of judgement of 28:713
and 28:1422 within the context of Isaiah 28 as a whole.

4.5.1. Isa. 28:16: Prophecy of judgement and promise of salvation

The pericope formed by verses 16 of Isaiah 28 consists of a proph-
ecy of judgement (28:14) and a promise of salvation (28:56), both
of which are linked at the thematic level. The pericope can thus be
understood as a redactional unity. A prophecy of judgement is com-
monly made up of a complaint and an announcement of judgement.
In the case of 28:14, the function of the complaint is fulfilled by a
woe saying (28:1), which is followed immediately by the announcement
of judgement (28:24), introduced by the interjection hNEhi.339 In rather
florid language, the prophet announces the fall of Samaria, the once
so proud capital of the northern kingdom, Ephraim. The challeng-
ing message of the prophecy of judgement is followed in 28:56 by a
promise of salvation, which sets an understandably more friendly tone.
Although the Masoretes have marked the latter off as a separate unit
(Setumah), it remains closely linked to the preceding prophecy of judge-
ment in terms of theme and terminology. In the exegesis of the text in
question, we will discuss whether the promise of salvation of 28:56
was linked to the prophecy of judgement of 28:14 from the outset
or whether it should be understood as a later addition. A further yet
related question concerns the addressation of the pericope, whether the
promise of salvation is addressed to Samaria, the primary addressee
of the prophecy of judgement. We will conclude our discussion of
this part of the text with a number of considerations related to the
authenticity of 28:16. We begin, as usual, with the Hebrew text and
its English translation:

According to Janzen 1972:54, the formal characteristics of a prophecy of judge-

339

ment are not evident in 28:14: While punishment is to come upon the haughty, the
formal structure is determined by this reversal of imagery, rather than the balance
of Begrndung und Ankndigung.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 204 1/18/2007 2:18:08 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 205

y/h 1 Woe
yIr'p]a, yreKovi tWaGE tr,f,[} the proud garland of Ephraims drunkards,
/T=ra'p]ti ybix] lbenO yxiw the fading flower, its glorious jewel,
ynIm;v]AayGE vaOrAl[' rv,a} which is at the head of the fertile valley,
.yIy: ymeWlh} of those overcome with wine.
yn:doal' Mia'w qz:j; hNEhi 2 See, the Lord has one who is mighty and strong
bf,q;= r['c' dr;B; r,z<K] like a storm of hail, a destroying tempest.
ypif]vo yrIyBiK' yIm' r,z<K] Like a storm of mighty overflowing waters,
.dy:B] [r,a;l; j"yNIhi he slaps to the ground with his mighty hand,
[hN:s'm]r;T]e (hn:s]=m'r;T)e yIl'gr'B]3 trampled underfoot he will be,
.yIr;p]a, yre/Kvi tWaNE tr,f,[} the proud garland of Ephraims drunkards.
/Tra'p]ti ybix] lbenO tx'yxi ht;yh;w 4 And the fading flower, its glorious jewel,
ynIm;v] ayGE vaOrAl[' rv,a} which is at the head of the fertile valley,
yIq' r,f,B] [hr;WkbiK]] (Hr:WkbiK]) will be like a first-ripe fig before the summer,
Ht;/a ha,roh; ha,ryI rv,a} whoever sees it
s .hN:[,l;b]yI /Pk'B] Hd;/[B] and while it is still in his hand, eats it up.
aWhh' /YB' 5 On that day
ybix] tr,f,[}l' t/ab;x] hw:hy hy<h]yI YHWH Zebaot will be a garland of glory
/M[' ra;v]li h=r;a;p]Ti tr'ypix]liw and a diadem of beauty to the remnant
of his people.
fP;v]Mih'Al[' bve/Yl' fP;=v]mi j"Wrl]W 6 And (he shall be) a spirit of justice to
s .hr;[v] ; hm;jl; m] i ybeyvim] hr;Wbglwi the one who sits in judgement,
and (a spirit of ) strength to those who
turn back the battle to the gate.
The complaint with which the judgement prophecy of 28:14 begins
takes the form of a woe saying, a frequently employed genre borrowed
from the funerary lament or mourning cry.340 Prophets regularly made
use of the woe saying to make clear that the judgement they had
announced was inevitable.341 The fact that the exclamatory y/h stands
outside the metre of verse 1 (anacrusis), serves to reinforce this
inevitability.342 The object of the woe saying is referred to as the proud

340
Westermann 19683:137140 presumes that the woe saying has its roots in the
imprecation, but this hypothesis no longer enjoys any following. Whedbee 1971:80110
follows Gerstenberger ( JBL 81, 1962) who argues that the genre of the woe saying
originated from wisdom circles, in spite of the fact that the expression rarely occurs
in wisdom literature as such. Whedbee bases himself, nevertheless, on Isa. 3:1011
and Qoh. 10:1617. On the genre of the woe saying see Williams 1967:7591, Wolff
1969:284287, Janzen 1972, Zobel 1977:382388, Jenni 1978:474477 and Hillers
1983:185188.
341
Zobel 1977:387: Wenn die hoj-Worte der Propheten auf den Totenklageruf
zurckgehen, dann bedeutet das Lautwerden des hoj soviel wie Todesansage, wie
Verkndigung des Gerichts jhwhs. Cf. Beuken 2000:3: It colours the prophetic oracles
with the suggestion of death as the inevitable consequence of immoral behaviour.
342
Beuken 2000:23.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 205 1/18/2007 2:18:08 PM

 206 chapter four

garland of Ephraims drunkards. The word tr,f,[} represents the most

important key to the entire pericope (see also verses 3 and 5). In spite
of the fact that the term is commonly translated as crown, our option
for garland is not without reason and is related to the motif of drunken-
ness that sets the tone of the prophecy.343 It would appear that wealthy
individuals from the upper echelons of society frequently gathered in
those days for drinking feasts at which it was the custom to tie a garland
of flowers around ones head.344 Ezek. 23:42 likewise appears to allude
to this custom.345 In the woe saying of 28:1, the prophet denounces
such drinking sprees and masterfully transforms the garland associated
therewith into an image for Samaria, the proud capital of Ephraim
located high above the valley (cf. 7:9: /rm]vo yIr'p]a, vaOrw). By typifying
the garland as tWaGE proud, the prophet underlines its metaphorical
character from the outset.346 The parallel between tWaGE tr,f,[} proud
garland and lbenO yxi fading flower confirms the translation of tr,f,[} as
garland.347 The syntactical connection between lbenO yxi and /Trap ' t] i ybix]
the jewel of its glory, or its glorious jewel, is not entirely clear.348 Some
exegetes understand the segment to be a nominal clause, describing
the pathetic state of the proud garland: for its glorious jewel is a fading
flower.349 The present author is more inclined to understand /Trap ' t] i ybix]
as appositional to lbenO yxi350 or to treat the stilted sentence structure as

343
Cf. Steins 1989:1030. According to Kellermann 1989:24, garland even precedes
crown in terms of etymology.
344
See Asen 1996:7387 whose explanation revolves around the relationship between
flowers, drunkenness and religion. Asen argues that Ephraims leaders, in like fashion
to their counterparts in Judah (cf. 28:713), participated in lavish banquets reminis-
cent of the ancient marz a , where flowers, food, unguents and wine were essential
ingredients. (73) McLaughlin 2001:169 disputes the suggestion that the presence of
flowers in 28:14 serves as evidence in support of an allusion to the marz a . On the
marz a see Excursus 2.
345
Ezek. 23:42: The sound of a raucous multitude was around her, with many of the rabble
brought in drunken from the wilderness; and they put bracelets on the arms of the women (i.e. Oholah
and Oholibah = Samaria and Jerusalem, JD), and beautiful crowns (tr,a,p]Ti tr,f,[)} upon
their heads. (NRSV)
346
Reference is made in Ps. 93:1; Isa. 12:5 and 26:10 to the tWaGE of God which
clearly alludes to Gods magnificence. When used of persons, however, the term
quickly acquires the negative connotation of pride. See Kellermann 1973:881882
and Sthli 19783:381.
347
The word yxi literally means blossom, but can also serve to designate a form of
headdress with a flower motif (cf. the golden rosette on Aarons turban in Ex. 28:36).
348
On the strength of a number of philological and archaeological considerations,
Gilula 1974:128 suggests that we understand ybix] as the designation of a form of head-
dress. Grg 1977:1723 has disputed this proposal.
349
See Deck 1991:80 and Barthel 1997:280, both of whom appeal to Vogt.
350
Wildberger 1982:1042.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 206 1/18/2007 2:18:09 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 207

a conscious allusion to the pompousness of the accused drunkards.351

In spite of these alternatives, however, the message of the woe saying
is clear: from the prophets point of view, Samaria already counts as
part of Ephraims faded glory.
In the subordinate clause that forms the second part of verse 1,
the allusion to Ephraims capital is more explicit, although the name
Samaria remains unspoken both here and in the remainder of the
prophecy.352 A number of exegetes are of the opinion that ynIm;v]AayGE
the fertile valley in verse 1 is a later interpolation taken from verse 4,
insisting that the original text only referred to the garland on the heads
of those drunk with wine.353 In such an instance, reference to the city
of Samaria would thus have to be deferred until verse 4.354 The use of
the suffix in /Tra'p]ti ybix] its (not: their) glorious jewel suggests, how-
ever, that the prophet is referring to Samaria from the start. It would
seem ill advised, therefore, to take the expression ynIm;v]AayGE as a later
interpolation.
Other exegetes point their arrows at the concluding expression ymeWlh}
yIy: those overcome with wine.355 Arguing that it is syntactically clumsy
to associate the expression yIy: ymeWlh} as a genitive with the preceding
ynIm;v]AayGE the fertile valley, they suggest relocating these words to the
beginning of the verse where they then take their place as parallel to
yIr'p]a, yreKovi Ephraims drunkards,356 or alternatively to understand the
words yIy: ymeWlh} as a gloss.357 Nevertheless, the association of yIy: ymeWlh}

351
Beuken 2000:24.
352
The suggestion proposed by Marti 1900:202, namely that ynImv ; ] is a corrupt gloss
rooted in rom]vo Samaria is unacceptable. It is more likely that the prophet intentionally
left Samaria unidentified as an expression of his contempt. This style figure is known
as aposiopesis. See Beuken 2000:24.
353
Kaiser 19762:189 draws this conclusion on the basis of the syntax and refers in
this regard to GKG 128c in which the text is determined to be almost certainly cor-
rupt on account of the unusual genitive following a status absolutus. Cf. also Williams
1967:79. Duhm 19143:169 and Procksch 1930(A):349, however, had already objected
to this solution because it suggests that the drunkards in question wore Samaria on
their heads.
354
Wildberger 1982:1042.
355
See also Prov. 23:35 for the use of the verb lh to cast down in relation to
drunkenness.
356
Kissane 19602:303. Loretz 1977:362 considers the entire intervening clause as a
gloss on account of its presumed prose character. Donner 1964:76 relocates the words
yIy: ymeWlh} to the end of verse 2. Laberge 1982:162 maintains that verse 1b as a whole
exhibits a secondary character.
357
Barthel 1997:281. In an attempt to get round the problem of the genitive, Driver
1968:48 suggests we accept an ancient text correction and read in line with 1QIsaa,

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 207 1/18/2007 2:18:09 PM

 208 chapter four

with vaOrAl[', without the elimination of ynIm;v]AayGE, deserves serious

consideration. We would then be left with a translation along the fol-
lowing lines: Woe the proud garland of Ephraims drunkards, the fading flower,
its glorious jewel, which is at the head of the fertile valley, (on the heads) of those
overcome with wine. Such a solution is the least problematic in terms of
syntax, requires minimal interference with the text and respects the
ambiguity of the woe saying.358
The poetic structure of verse 1 becomes clear if one takes two bicola
as ones point of departure, verse 1a consisting of a bicolon with 4 +
4 beats (y/h taken as anacrusis), and verse 1b consisting of a bicolon
with 3 + 2 beats. At first sight, however, the Masoretic system leaves
one with the impression of a tricolonic structure, since the important
distinctive accent (see nr. 1 to 7 of the Tabula Accentuum in BHS) is
missing with respect to ynIm;v]AayGE. The fact that yIy: ymeWlh} is syntactically
dependent on vaOrAl[' rv,a} , however, suggests the presence of ellipsis
in verse 1b. This firmly supports the reading of verse 1b as an inde-
pendent bicolon. By way of exception, the accent Tif h [8] related to
ynIm;v]AayGE thus serves to demarcate a colon.

The announcement of judgement in verses 24 follows the woe saying

in verse 1, the latter functioning as a complaint or accusation. The
former also begins with a nominal clause introduced with the help of
an interjection. This syntactical datum confirms the connection between
verses 24 and the woe saying. Prediction is made, in the first instance,
of Gods (yn:dao )} imminent intervention in verses 23. Emphasis, however,
is not placed on yn:doa} himself, but rather on the fronted expression qz:j;
Mia'w one who is mighty and strong, which serves as subject.359 Reference is
clearly being made here to Assyria. The emphasis with which the said
subject is presented in the text corresponds with the activities ascribed
thereto in verses 23.360 As part of his announcement of the coming

ynmvAyag men proud of fat things. He agrees with Rost 1935:292 in this regard. Herbert
1973:160161 and Asen 1996:83 follow Drivers explanation. For further information
on this text-critical question, see De Waard 1997:118.
358
See Oswalt 1986:507 and Beuken 2000:14.
359
Laberge 1982:164 considers it possible that the expression Mia'w qz:j; one who is
mighty and strong represents an allusion to the familiar exhortation m;aw< qz"j} be strong and
courageous, which is often used in the context of the War of YHWH (see, for example,
Jos. 1:69).
360
Verses 23 are structured as three bicola (4 + 4, 4 + 3 and 2 + 4 beats respec-
tively). An important distinctive accent is missing in verse 2b. From the perspective of
consistency, however, it seems reasonable to take this likewise as a bicolon (4 + 3). The
accent T evr [12] thus functions at this juncture as the demarcation of a colon.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 208 1/18/2007 2:18:09 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 209

judgement, the prophet makes use of metaphors that function elsewhere

as phenomena accompanying a theophany (cf. Hab. 3:10 and Ps. 18:13;
see also Isa. 30:30). Reference is made to a hailstorm, a whirlwind and
a powerful flood of water.361 The presence of theophanic terminology
in 28:23, however, is completely focused on the appearance of Assyria
rather than the appearance of God. The phenomena accompanying
the theophany function here and in other prophecies in the book of
Isaiah as metaphors for the Assyrian army (cf. 8:78; 17:1213 and
28:17). The fact that the name of Assyria is not explicitly mentioned
is likely related to the prophets desire to focus attention completely on
the activity of God, which goes hand in hand with the suggestion of a
theophany called to mind by the metaphors he employs.
The announced divine judgement is presented in the form of a double
comparison (2x r,z<K] like a storm of . . . ), which alludes effectively to the
unrestrained violence that characterised Assyrian military interventions.
The fact that violence was Assyrias trademark is not only expressed
in the double comparison but also in the term with which verse 2
concludes. While the word dy:B] can be translated simply as with power,
this would leave the evident parallel with yIl'gr'B] underfoot at the begin-
ning of verse 3 unaccounted for. We thus opt for the translation with
mighty hand (cf. the familiar formula hq;z:h} dy:B)] . Given the surprising
parallelism between the conclusion of verse 2 (dy:B)] and the beginning
of verse 3 (yIl'gr'B]), however, it is no longer evident that the subject of
dy:B] [r,a;l; j"yNIhi he slaps to the ground with his mighty hand is the Lord, as the
Dutch Authorised Version would appear to presuppose.362 The passage
in question refers rather to the behaviour of Assyria already alluded
to in the words Mia'w qz:j; one who is mighty and strong, and represents
a more detailed description thereof. The Lord is at liberty to make
use of Assyria in his plans because He has the might and strength of
Assyria at his disposal. This is a familiar motif in the book of Isaiah
(cf. 10:515). With respect to the object of dy:B] r,a;l; j"yNIhi it is likely

361
For the various semantic nuances associated with these words for rainstorm see
Zobel 1984:827830. Zobel is of the opinion that 28:2,17 takes ancient images from
the context of the War of yhwh and redirects them against Israel (835836). It is
also possible that the verses in question contain a reminiscence of the cosmic chaos
powers, particularly when reference is made to the ypif]vo yrIyBiK' yIm' (cf. Clements
1984:853, 861).
362
See also Wildberger 1982:1048. Exum 1982:115116 argues that the subject
should be left open on account of the ambivalent character of the metaphorical lan-
guage. Cf. also Beuken 2000:27.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 209 1/18/2007 2:18:10 PM

 210 chapter four

that reference is being made to the garland metaphorising Samaria in

verse 3 (taken up from the woe saying of verse 1).363 It is thus Ephraims
proud garland that is being slapped to the ground with force . . . and
trampled underfoot.
While verse 2 limits itself to the humiliation of the city of Samaria,
the message of verse 3 clearly suggests that the destruction of Samaria
is imminent. The use of the verb smr to trample leaves little over to
the imagination (cf. sm;rmil] to be beaten down in 28:18).364 After being
cast to the ground with mighty hand, the proud garland of Ephraim
will be trampled underfoot by the Assyrian army. It would appear in
the first instance that the plural hn:s]m'r;Te they will be trampled does not
square with the singular subject tr,f,[} garland. In order to solve this
problem, some suggest the emendation of the subject to read a plural:
trof][' or t/rf;[} garlands.365 The difficulty with this suggestion, however,
lies in the fact that tr,f[ , } is used throughout the pericope in the singular,
and a plural trof][' in verse 3 would make the imagerythe garland
alluding to Samariaincomprehensible. The solution, therefore, is
best found in an alternative vocalisation of the verb, namely as a forma
energica of the third person singular (fem.): hN:s'm]r;Te she (i.e. the garland)
will be trampled.366

The announcement of Gods intervention is concluded in verse 4 with

a depiction of the consequences of the said intervention. The poetic
structure of this verse can be determined without difficulty on the basis
of the Masoretic accents, namely a bicolon followed by a tricolon.
Verse 4 initially gives the impression of being a later expansion of the
announcement of judgement.367 The opening ht;yh;w (w eqatal ) represents

363
Donner 1964:76 suggests we relocate the expression yIy: ymeWlh} those overcome with
wine from verse 1 to verse 2 and take it as the object of j"yNIhi. Such an emendation of
the text seems to the present author, however, to be unnecessary.
364
The verb smr to trample is used primarily in the context of prophetic announce-
ments of judgement. See Waschke 1990:533.
365
See BHK, Kissane 19602:304 and Kaiser 19762:189. Cf. the Dutch Authorised
Version.
366
See Procksch 1930(A):350, Driver 1968:50, BHS and Wildberger 1982:1043.
There is some difference of opinion among scholars with respect to the existence of
(the remains of ) a modus energicus in Hebrew. GKG 42c maintains that there is
little evidence in support of the suggestion that the remains of a modus energicus with
ending -anna should be accepted in Hebrew by analogy with the Arabic. Cf., however,
Lettinga 42c. Landy 1993:140 considers the unusual combination hn:s]m'r;Te yIl'gr'B] to
be a conflation of feet shall tread down and with feet it (the crown, etc.) is trodden
down, thereby achieving an ellipsis, a collision of active and passive experiences.
367
Cf. Laberge 1982:163.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 210 1/18/2007 2:18:10 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 211

a new beginning whereby verse 4a harks back almost literally to the

imagery of verse 1 with the imagery in question suddenly changing in
verse 4b. Moreover, the expression yIr;p]a, yre/Kvi tWaGE tr,f,[} the proud
garland of Ephraims drunkards at the conclusion of verse 3 forms a perfect
inclusion with the same expression in verse 1. The manner with which
the words from verse 1 are recapitulated in verse 4a does indeed sug-
gest evidence of redactional activity in the text. Nevertheless, it is not
unusual to find reference to the consequences of a divine intervention
in the context of an announcement of judgement (see 28:13, likewise
a weqatal clause; cf. also 29:4). In order to give expression to these con-
sequences, the author first employs the metaphor of the fading flower,
taken almost literally from verse 1, and then uses it as the subject of a
strikingly new comparison. The prophet compares the fading flower,
Ephraims glorious jewel, with a first-ripe fig that is greedily devoured.
The repetition of the subordinate clause ynIm;v] ayGE vaOrAl[' rv,a} which
is at the head of the fertile valley from verse 1 with the omission of ymeWlh}
yIy: of those overcome with wine, makes verse 4 less ambiguous than the
woe statement of verse 1 and facilitates the introduction of the new
metaphor. Only Samaria, Ephraims capital, can now be understood
as the subject of the comparison.
In spite of this fact, some exegetes still consider the transition from
fading flower to first-ripe fig to be too sudden. They suggest that we
relocate the verb form ht;yh w; with which verse 4 begins to the beginning
of the second half of the verse,368 thereby getting rid of the somewhat
strange comparison between the fading flower and the first-ripe fig.
According to this scenario, the expressions lbenO yxi fading flower and ybix]
/Tra'p]ti its glorious jewel are to be taken in apposition to tr,f,[} garland
(verse 3). Such an emendation, however, remains unnecessary. Given
that the ambiguity of the metaphor employed in verse 4 has disappeared
and the fading flower is to be identified exclusively with Samaria, there
is no reason to argue that the prophet would not have made such a

368
See, for example, Duhm 19143:169, Procksch 1930(A):347, Donner 1964:76,
Wildberger 1982:1043 and Barthel 1997:282. According to some, the relocation of
ht;yh;w to the beginning of verse 4 simultaneously led to the unexpected feminine form
of the subject in verse 1 lbenO tx'yxi the fading flower . The use of this feminine form,
however, also goes hand in hand with the equally feminine /Tra'p]ti ybix] its glorious jewel.
Since verse 1 lacks a verb form, such gender harmonisation was thus irrelevant with
respect to verse 1. It is thus unnecessary to reconstruct the text of verse 4 on the basis
of verse 1 as proposed by Marti 1900:203, Donner 1964:76 and Steins 1989:1031. For
the verb forms employed in the text reference should be made to GKG 128p and
128w and to J-M 135n and 141f.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 211 1/18/2007 2:18:10 PM

 212 chapter four

sudden transition in his use of imagery.369 Indeed, a similarly sudden

transition can be found in 30:1214.370
The new comparison with the greedy consumption of the first-ripe
fig371 does not only underline the attractiveness Samaria must have
had to those who beheld her, but also the inevitable and unavoidable
destructiveness of Gods judgement.372 We are left with the impression
that Assyria is impatient, as it were, and ready to attack with greater
speed that many will have expected. The fact that Assyrias siege of
Samaria was to last two years, does not detract from the swiftness of
the judgement that has befallen the city and as such does not provide
reason to suggest that these words are not original. The contrary seems
much more probable. The consequences for Samaria of the announce-
ment of divine intervention will be dramatic in every respect.

The prophecy of judgement against Samaria is followed in verses 5

and 6 with a promise of salvation for the remnant of the people of
yhwh. The most important key words from the prophecy of judge-
ment of 28:14 return in the promise of salvation: tr,f,[,} ybix] and
hr;a;p]T,i serving as evidence of a conscious endeavour to link up with
the preceding material.373 The use of terminology in this promise of

369
Cf. Laberge 1982:165: The image is new in the context, but it agrees with the
general source of wealth for the northern kingdom . . .
370
Based on 30:1214, Exum 1981:334 has demonstrated that it is typical for the
style of Isaiah that the core of one comparison forms the point of departure for the
following comparison. With respect to 30:1214 she speaks of an enclosed simile, or a
simile within a simile, in which a vehicle of the first has become the tenor of a second.
The present author is of the opinion that the same can be said of 28:4.
371
It is preferable to read Hr;WKbiK] without a suffix in line with the MT. See, for
example, Driver 1968:50. The suffix, which is lacking in the ancient Versiones, may
be a later endeavour on the part of the MT to associate the comparison with the
metaphor of the garland (ynIm;v] ayGE as antecedent).
372
Cf. Hausmann 1990:28: Nach Jes 28,4 werden die Frchte gleich von der Pflanze
weggegessenanalog, und d.h. vernichtend, wird es auch Samaria ergehen. The
term employed[lbmeans verschwindenlassenden Verschlingens and is used in
contexts of judgement and destruction (see Schpphaus 1973:658661). While some
exegetes emend the expression ha,roh; ha,ryI whoever sees to read ha,roh; hray whoever sees
it, plucks . . . (IIhra to pluck; see, for example, Procksch 1930(A):351, Kissane 19602:303,
Driver 1968:50 and Asen 1996:84), the present author is inclined to consider this
unnecessary. As it now stands, the imperfect in combination with a determined par-
ticiple of the same verb functions perfectly in designating the impersonal whoever
(cf. Lettinga 65i and J-M 155d).
373
Zieglers 1948:84 hypothesis that 28:56 originally stems from a different context
I am inclined to consider unlikely. The same can also be said for the concretisation of
the said hypothesis by Procksch 1930(A):351, who was of the opinion that the verses
in question originally preceded 4:23. Terminological kinship and (partial) agreement

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 212 1/18/2007 2:18:11 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 213

salvation likewise bears a typically Isaianic character. In spite of this,

however, it is quite likely that the promise of salvation of verses 5 and
6 was added to the preceding prophecy of judgement of 28:14 at a
later period. The following information serves to confirm the secondary
character of this promise of salvation:
1. The use of the typically redactional formula aWhh' /YB' on that day,
frequently employed in the context of such interpolations.374
2. The designation of God with t/ab;x] hw:hy YHWH Zebaot instead of
yn:doa} Lord in verse 2.
3. Reference to the /M[' ra;v] the remnant of this people instead of yrEKovi
yIr'p]a, Ephraims drunkards in verse 1.
4. The alternative association that is created between the key words
tr,f,[,} ybix] and hr;a;p]T.i Verse 1 speaks of the tWaGE tr,f,[} the proud
garland and of the /Tra'p]ti ybix] lbenO yxi the fading flower, his glorious
jewel, while verse 5, by contrast, speaks of yhwh becoming tr,f,[}l'
hr;a;p]Ti tr'ypix]liw ybix] a garland of glory and a diadem of beauty.
5. The introduction to the prophecy of judgement of 28:713, which
harks back to the prophecy of judgement of 28:14 and ignores the
promise of salvation of 28:56.
This secondary promise of salvation is intended to be read as a clear
antithesis to the preceding text. Given its use of the same key words
as those employed in the prophecy of judgement of 28:14, it is prob-
able that it never existed independently. While the garland with which
Ephraim is itself adorned is to be cast to the ground and trampled
underfoot, a different garland is introduced in these verses. The first
garland is characterised by pride, and that which is characterised by
pride will not survive. The second garland is identified with t/ab;x] hw:hy
YHWH Zebaot, a designation frequently employed in the first part of the

at the level of content with 4:23 is unmistakably evident. Petersen 1979:107 thus
presupposes that the author of 28:56 also wrote 4:24 and that he interpreted 28:14
with the help thereof.
374
In the book of Isaiah, this redactional formula occurs more than thirty times,
and almost exclusively in the first part of the book. De Vries 1995:3863 has made
a detailed study of the formula. After a discussion of each relevant passage in Isaiah
135 he concludes: There are no authentic futuristic transitions in Isaiah with integral
bayym hah ; this is therefore eo ipso a mark of redaction. (124) De Vries 1995:118
dates the interpolation of 28:56 in the period before the exile. Cf. Beuken 2000:28:
The expectation of a decisive appearance of YHWH who would put the world in
order, entailed the projection of all particular divine interventions into one unknown
moment in the proximate future.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 213 1/18/2007 2:18:11 PM

 214 chapter four

book of Isaiah and an expression indicating that Gods exaltedness

puts every form of human pride to shame (cf. 2:12). In contrast to the
preceding prophecy of judgement, the divine name now functions as
subject. This syntactic fact corresponds with the message of verse 56,
namely that in the future yhwh will draw complete attention to himself
and that the divine eclipse is over. The contrast with the garland men-
tioned in 28:1 could not be greater. The first garland already bore the
seed of its own decay while the second garland brings salvation and
justice (cf. 60:19). In order to do justice to the antithetical character of
the promise of salvation in 28:56, the term tr,f,[} ought likewise to
be translated as garland in preference to crown. The future expecta-
tion of Gods people is that yhwh himself will be its true garland.375
It is striking, however, that of the four key words in the text, the word
employed for flower in verse 1 and 4 (yxi / tx'yxi) is the only one to be
avoided in the promise of salvation of 28:56! Associations with exces-
sive drinking and drunkenness would appear to be inappropriate with
respect to yhwh! Instead of yxi or tx'yxi the writer employs the term
tr'ypix,] which in the sense of diadem is probably a no hapax.376
In contrast to the prophecy of judgement of 28:14, which is
addressed to Ephraims drunkardsSamarias leading upper crust, the
promise of salvation of 28:56 is intended for the /M[' ra;v] the remnant of
his (i.e. YHWHs) people. It is perfectly clear that the designation remnant
in the promise of salvation presupposes a preceding judgement. In itself,
reference to the remnant of Gods people bears a degree of ambivalence,
since it implies both doom and salvation (a mere remnant . . . a rem-
nant nevertheless). The negative aspect of such expression will originally
have enjoyed priority (cf. 10:19; 14:22; 16:14; 17:3; 21:17). One can
determine on the basis of the name ascribed to one of Isaiahs sons
bWvy: ra;v] a remnant shall return (7:3)that reference to a remnant here
harks back to the witness of the prophet himself and is not of post-exilic
origin. The exile nevertheless stimulated such language, shifting the
emphasis to the salvific character of the notion of the remnant. The
Isaianic familiarity with the concept, however, is difficult to deny.
Bearing this in mind, the promise of salvation in 28:56 is most
probably to be dated in the exilic or post-exilic period, since it not

375
Cf. Asen 1996:85. In the post-exilic prophecy found in Isa. 62:3, the people of
Zion are themselves referred to as hw:hyAdy"B] tr,a,p]Ti tr,f,[} a crown of beauty in the hand
of the Lord.
376
The same word is only found elsewhere in Ezek. 7:7,10, but its meaning remains
unclear.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 214 1/18/2007 2:18:11 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 215

only appears to presuppose the fall of Samaria in 722 but also that
of Jerusalem in 586. The connection with the prophecy of salvation
in 4:26 clearly points in this direction.377 While the expression the
remnant of my people consistently refers to those who had remained in
I ' those who are left in Zion // Ilv' W; ryBi rt;/Nh' those
Zion (cf. 4:3: /YxiB] ra;vN] h
who remain in Jerusalem), it is possible that the point of reference in 28:5
is intentionally more general with a view to including the northern
kingdom of Ephraim in the promise of salvation.378 Although the
primary focus of references to the remnant of the people of yhwh will
have been Judah and Jerusalem respectively, the absence of the name
Zion can be explained on the basis of an intentional association with
the preceding prophecy of judgement.379
Following the more generally formulated promise of salvation in verse
5, verse 6 introduces a more specific concretisation. It would appear
from verse 5 that an honourable existence has been set aside for the
remnant of Gods people whatever the circumstances and that yhwh
himself is the guarantor thereof. The concretisation of this honourable
existence is provided in verse 6 in which yhwh promises to establish a
well-ordered and safe society, a society that will be characterised inter-
nally by the maintenance of justice and externally by resolute protection.
Reference is made in the first half of the verse to a fP;v]mi h"Wr spirit
of justice. Reference is likewise made to a fP;v]mi h"Wr in 4:4. Given the
context and the parallel with r[eB; j"Wr spirit of burning, however, the
fP;v]mi h"Wr in 4:4 acquires a negative connotation. God has cleansed the
bloodstains of Jerusalem with the spirit of justice and of burning. In 28:6,
by contrast, the fP;v]mi h"Wr acquires a positive connotation on account
of the context and the parallel with hr;WbG (spirit of ) strength. By way of
the spirit of justice, God ensures a new future in which justice shall be
maintained.380 The term fP;vm] i belongs among Isaiahs typical vocabulary

377
Cf. also 62:3.
378
Cf. Hffken 1993:194: Nach Lage der Dinge handelt es sich um eine Stimme,
die die samaritanische Gemeinschaft nicht aus dem kommenden Heilsbereich Israels
ausgeschlossen sein lassen mchte. See also 11:1116 where reference to the remnant
of his people forms an inclusion in a prophecy of salvation in which Ephraim is also
explicitly involved. The prophecy of salvation found in 10:2023, which would appear
to be exclusively addressed to the northern kingdom, speaks of the remnant of Israel
and the remnant of Jacob.
379
Krauss 1945:1821 derives the meaning of the name Zion from ybix], whereby
verse 5 becomes more than just a fine metaphor. While a phonological allusion to Zion
may be present, Krauss etymology is far from certain.
380
The connection between the granting of Gods spirit and the presence of justice
is also expressed in 32:1516 and in the first song of the servant in 42:1.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 215 1/18/2007 2:18:12 PM

 216 chapter four

and refers to legal order in general. A king, for example, is expected

to ensure fP;v]mi in his kingdom (cf. 32:1). Given the fact that yhwh
presents himself here in regal fashion as a garland of glory and a diadem
of beauty to the remnant of his people, this also implies that He will take
the responsibility for legal order upon himself as befits a king.381
As such, it is possible to explain the second half of verse 6 on the
basis of the same theme of legal order. The gate referred to is the place
in which justice is given concrete form. Nevertheless, the expression
those who turn back the battle at the gate would seem more obviously to
refer to a hostile, external threat that has found its way into the city
and now has to be repelled. Indeed, the enemys forces need to be
kept outside the city gate.382 Such a notion fits better with hr;WbG (spirit
of ) strength. Given the parallelism with the first half of the verse, it is
not inconceivable that hr;Wbgli should be understood as an ellipsis of
hr;Wbg j"Wrl]. This idea is reinforced by 11:2, which speaks of a hx;[e j"Wr
hr;WbgW a spirit of counsel and might. The fact that the word j'Wr is not
repeated in the second half of verse 6 may have its roots in metrical
considerations.383
The latter remains tentative, however, since the Masoretic accentua-
tion of verses 5 and 6 is not unambiguous enough to determine the
poetic structure of the verses with absolute certainty. At first sight,
the many distinctive accents might appear to point in the direction of
short cola (a tricolon + bicolon in verse 5 and two bicola in verse 6).
The final bicolon of verse 6, however, then acquires the improbable
metrical pattern of 1 + 3 beats, unless the addition of the now absent
h"Wrl to hr;Wbgli is presupposed. On account of the speculative character
that tends to typify such metrical emendations, I am inclined to ignore
the Atnch in both verse 5 and verse 6 and to presuppose the presence
of long cola. The formula aWhh' /YB' in verse 5 is understood as an
extra-metrical element (anacrusis).384 In this instance, verses 5 and 6

381
The return of justice and righteousness is a familiar eschatological motif in the
book of Isaiah.
382
In line with Delitzsch, Barthel 1997:282 associates the words hm;j;l]mi and hr;[]v;
with one another: the battle against the gate (cf. 22:7).
383
In Qoh. 10:17, the term hr;WbG is employed in contrast to getting drunk. The rul-
ers of a land should excel ytiV]b' alw hr;WbgBi in strength and not in drinking. Cf. Kosmala
1973:904. A similar contrast is evident in 28:16. Given the fact that the promise of
salvation of 28:56 is located in a context of drunkenness, a sharp contrast is evident
here also between the drunkards of Ephraim and the (spirit of ) power of YHWH Zebaot.
384
While the formula aWhh' /YB' functions as a temporal indicator and does not enjoy
any particular deictic value, its syntactic significance for what follows is irrelevant and
can thus be understood as anacrusis.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 216 1/18/2007 2:18:12 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 217

can be seen as consisting of a single bicolon each with 5 + 4 and 4 + 4

beats respectively.

Looking back at the exegesis of 28:16, one can conclude that the
prophecy of judgement in 28:14 and the promise of salvation in 28:56
form a clear unity at the thematic and redactional levels. Nevertheless,
only the prophecy of judgement in 28:14 can be ascribed to the
prophet Isaiah with any degree of certainty. Generally speaking, schol-
ars have expressed little doubt as to the authenticity of the two central
prophecies of judgement in this chapter 28:713 and 28:1422. The
Isaianic character of 28:713 is virtually undisputed and the same is at
least true with respect to 28:1418 as the core of the second prophecy
of judgement. The most important indicators of authenticity revolve
around their use of Isaianic themes, typically Isaianic terminology,
the creative employment of the prophecy of judgement genre and the
clear-cut poetic structure evident in both texts. On the basis of the same
arguments, it is likewise possible to accept the prophecy of judgement
in 28:14 as authentic.
Reference should be made in the first instance to the creative manner
with which the prophecy of judgement genre is employed. The genre in
question follows a fixed structure of complaint followed by announce-
ment of judgement. In 28:14, however, the prophet has creatively
employed the said structure by presenting the complaint of 28:1 as a
woe saying. In so doing, the prophet has in fact ingeniously combined
two different genres into one, with the result that the complaint ele-
ment of the prophecy of judgement already implies in fact an element
of the announcement of judgement itself. Borrowed from the dirge or
funerary lament genre, the woe saying is employed to underline the
inescapability of the imminent judgement. Similarly, the prophet has
introduced an element of complaint into the announcement of judge-
ment segment of both central prophecies of judgement in 28:713 and
28:1422 by referring to Gods salvific words from the past (28:12) and
Gods salvific deeds from the past (28:16). The rhythm of the text, its
abundant use of metaphors, the initial ambiguity and the surprising
combination thereof, all contribute to the poetic contours of 28:14
and reveal the work of a master. The use of one comparison as the
starting point of the following comparison is typical of the style of the
prophet Isaiah (cf. 30:1214).385

385
See Exum 1981:334.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 217 1/18/2007 2:18:12 PM

 218 chapter four

The theme of the prophecy of judgement concerning Samaria is

likewise unmistakably Isaianic. As a matter of fact, the prophet Isaiah
turned against every form of pride and self-aggrandisement as no other
(cf. 2:12ff ). The announcement of the coming of Assyria as the instru-
ment of Gods judgement counts in equal measure as an important
element of Isaiahs preaching (cf. Isa. 10:5ff ). The metaphor of hail and
flood employed for Assyrias intervention is also to be found in other
prophecies of Isaiah (cf. 8:78; 17:1213 and 28:17). While there are
no indications that the prophet Isaiah himself had already used the
prophecy of judgement concerning Samaria as a warning example
addressed to the people of Judah, the arguments outlined above make
it difficult to call the authenticity of the prophecy into question.
The same cannot be said, however, for the promise of salvation of
28:56, which was introduced into the prophecy of judgement at a
later date. While the vocabulary employed in the said promise exhibits
Isaianic characteristics and there is little doubt that the remnant theme
harks back to the prophet himself, other more conclusive arguments
nevertheless confirm that the promise of salvation should be understood
as a secondary addition. Given its strong connections with the prophecy
of salvation in 4:26, it can be argued that the promise of salvation of
28:56 must have been added to the preceding prophecy of judgement
after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 at the earliest and as a result, the text
can no longer be understood to stem from Isaiah himself.386

4.5.2. Isa. 28:2329: Prophetic instruction

Up to this point, the various pericopes we have been examining in Isaiah
28 have belonged for the most part to the genre of the prophecy of
judgement. The concluding pericope of Isaiah 28, however, no longer
presents itself as a prophecy of judgement but can be understood rather
as a teaching or instruction based on the opening formula. The instruc-
tion itself can be divided into two more or less analogous parts, the first
consisting of the verses 2426, the second of the verses 2729. Both
parts conclude with an explicit reference to God and yhwh Zebaot.
The instruction genre is typically chokmatic in character. Our task is to
determine whether the instruction of 28:2329 also contains prophetic
elements and, if so, whether it is possible to speak of a comparison or
even a prophetic discussion, as several exegetes presuppose. The present

386
See the exegesis of 28:56 in 4.5.1.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 218 1/18/2007 2:18:12 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 219

sub-paragraph will conclude with some observations concerning the

authenticity of 28:2329. Prior to the exegesis, however, we present
the Hebrew text and the English translation:
yl=i/q W[m]viw WnyzIa}h' 23 Listen, and hear my voice;
.ytir;m]ai W[m]viw Wbyviq]h' Pay attention, and hear my speech!
/Yh' lkoh} 24 Is it continually,
["r=ozli vrejoh' roj}y" that the farmer ploughs for sowing,
>/tm;da' dDec'ywI jT'p'y that he opens his ground and harrows?
a/lh} 25 Is it not like this?
h;yn<p; hW:viAai When he has leveled its surface,
jx'q, ypihew Then he scatters dill
qr=ozyI Mok'w and sows cumin.
hr;/c hF;ji c;w Then he plants wheat in rows,
m;s]nI hr;[oc]W and barley in its proper place,
./tl;buG tm,S,kuw and spelt as the border.
fP;v]Mil' /rS]yIw 26 For He instructs him well,
.WNr,/y wyh;la his God teaches him.
Wrj;b, al yKi 27 However, it is not with a threshing sledge
jx'q, vd'Wy that dill is threshed,
hl;g:[} p'/aw nor is the wheel of a cart
b=S;Wy MoK'Al[' rolled over cumin.
jx'q, fb,j;yE hF,M'b' yKi But dill is beaten with a stick,
.fb,V;B' Mok'w and cumin with a rod.
qd;Wy j,l, 28 Grain on the other hand is crushed for bread.
WN=v,Wdy v/da; jx'n<l; al yKi But even then one does not thresh it forever;
wyv;r;p;W /tl;g[, lG"l]GI m'h;w one drives the cart wheel and horses
.WNQ,duyAal over it,
but does not pulverize it.
ha;=x;y: t/ab;x] hw:hy [ime taOzAG" 29 This also comes from YHWH Zebaot.
hx;[e aylip]hi He is wonderful in counsel
s .hY:viWT lyDIghi and excellent in wisdom.
The introductory formula in verse 23 with which this pericope begins,
generally referred to as a Lehrerffnungsformel,387 is familiar to us
from wisdom literature (cf. Ps. 49:2; 78:1; Prov. 4:1,20; 5:1; 7:24; Job
13:17; 33:1; 34:2), and contains a strongly worded appeal to listen.
The same opening formula is likewise employed by the prophet Isaiah
on a number of occasions (1:2,10; 32:9; cf. 34:1; 49:1; 51:4).388 Such
an opening line qualifies the words that follow as an instruction. The
appeal to listen in verse 23 consists of a perfectly parallel bicolon, each
of the cola containing two imperatives that give rise to a persuasive

387
See Wolff 1961:122123. Mosis 1993:202 prefers to speak of a more general
feierliche Aufforderung zur Aufmerksamkeit, which is not tied to a specific genre.
388
See also Gen. 4:23; 49:2; Deut. 32:1; Judg. 5:3; Hos. 5:1.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 219 1/18/2007 2:18:12 PM

 220 chapter four

appeal. The imperative W[m]viw repeated in both cola serves to reinforce

the first imperative. It is already striking that, in contrast to its use
elsewhere, the appeal in verse 23 does not appear to have a specific
addressee. The absence of the latter creates the initial impression that
the instruction that will follow enjoys a timeless character (see however
vv. 2729). Similarly, the subject contained in the words yli/q my voice
and yTir;m]ai my speech is not further identified. This need not imply,
however, that the instruction of 28:2329 was intended for a read-
ing audience rather than a listening audience.389 The option for the
expression yli/q my voice makes it clear that the prophet was addressing
himself in the first instance at least to a listening audience (cf. Gen.
4:23 and Isa. 32:9).390
The first part of the instruction to which the audience is called to
give ear begins in verse 24. Two rhetorical questions are employed
to present a general truth related to the agricultural activities of the
farmer. As a matter of fact, vrejoh' the farmer (lit. the one who ploughs, cf.
Am. 9:13; Ps. 129:3), is the subject of all the active verbal formulations
in verses 2425. The rhetorical question as style feature has a didactic
purpose and presupposes a positive or negative response from those
to whom it is addressed. In the case of verse 24, a negative reaction
is to be expected. It goes without saying that a farmer, whose activi-
ties require more than ploughing and harrowing, does not continue to
repeat the same activities ad infinitum.391
While verse 24 would appear at first sight to be a bicolon (5 + 3
beats), the Masoretic accentuation suggests that the verse is intended
389
Kaiser 19762:206 speaks of an originally literary Sitz im Leben. Idem Beuken
2000:63.
390
Based on the use of yli/q and ytir;m]ai and the absence of any clear reference
to the word of yhwh, Whedbee 1971:65 deduces that Isaiah is rendering his own
thoughts at this juncture and cannot speak with the same degree of certainty as he does
elsewhere: I have no special message from Yahweh; so I cannot give a special word
of promise. Yet I can give you my reflections as to the probable course of Yahwehs
future actions. The text of verse 23, however, does not support such a distinction. If
a prophet employs the wisdom style, this need not imply that his prophetic authority
is thereby mitigated. By way of comparison: the presence of the same formula in the
prophecy of 32:9 is unlikely to lead to a similar distinction!
391
The verb ddc pi. to harrow is only found elsewhere in Job 39:10 (MT) and Hos.
10:11. In the latter text, it is found in parallel with the verb vrj to plough, as is the
case here in 28:24. The verb htp to open is employed as a synonym for to harrow. As
a matter of fact, there is some doubt as to the adequacy of the translation to harrow,
since some maintain it to be a practice that was still unknown in ancient Palestine.
Healey 1984:114 presupposes, therefore, that the term refers to a form of ploughing:
We see here then a progression of three types of ploughing, repeated ploughing of
the type already referred to. iddd may be the climax.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 220 1/18/2007 2:18:13 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 221

to be read as a tricolon (2 + 3 + 3 beats). The first colon consists of

a short interrogative clause,392 upon which both the second and third
cola are dependent. The latter cola parallel one another in terms of
content and in part in terms of syntax. The two verb forms dDev'ywI jT'p'y
he opens and harrows correspond with the preceding verb form vroj}y" he
ploughs. While the second colon makes explicit reference to the subject
(vrejoh' the farmer) and, anticipating the following verse, the purpose of
his activities (["rozli for sowing),393 the third colon only makes explicit
reference to the object (/tm;da' his land).

Verse 25 is closely linked to the preceding verse and is also formulated

in terms of a rhetorical question. The style feature that employs the
sequence of two rhetorical questions would appear to have been a
respected didactic technique.394 In response to this second rhetorical
question, however, an affirmative answer is expected. Reference is
made once again to a general and familiar fact. Verse 25 begins with
the interrogative a/lh}, which in the present context is best translated
with a separate clause: Is it not like this? 395 The verse goes on to detail
the various and highly systematic activities of the farmer.
The poetic structure can be designated as follows: verse 25 consists
of two tricola. The establishment of the structure of the verse is based
in part on the presence of the Masoretic accents Tifch [8] (see jx'q),
and Pat [10], which enjoy a demarcative function. The same can be
said for the use of the accent Pat [10] in relation to the interroga-
tive a/lh}. Partly because this interrogative does not make an essential
contribution to the syntax of the following sentence, one can consider

392
For our translation of the expression /Yh' lkoh} see J-M 139g.
393
In line with Duhm 19143:178 and Marti 1900:210, BHS suggests we scrap ["roz]li
for metrical reasons. See also Procksch 1930(A):364, Kaiser 19762:205, Clements
1980(B):233, Barthel 1997:329 and Beuken 2000:64. Irwin 1977:38 suggests we read
['roz]li as part of the second colon and translates the expression as an equivalent [rzm
without sowing, but this is somewhat contrived. Watson 1984:219, however, refers to
verse 24 as an example of a pivot pattern couplet, a style figure he describes as fol-
lows: Basically, the pivot pattern is a couplet where the expected final word is not
expressed as it is implied by the last word (or words) of the first line. (214) According
to Watson, the said pivot pattern functions primarily to demarcate the beginning of
a new text unit.
394
Whedbee 1971:60 refers by way of example to Am. 6:12; Jer. 12:5; Prov. 6:2728;
Job 6:56 and 8:11.
395
The word a/lh} at the beginning of a clause does not always have the value of
an interrogative particle, but sometimes functions rather in the same sense as hNEh.i See
Beuken 1992:50 and Brongers 1981:180181.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 221 1/18/2007 2:18:13 PM

 222 chapter four

it as extra-metrical (anacrusis). The first tricolon, which is made up of

2 + 2 + 2 beats, begins with a short initial clause. This is followed by
a long concluding clause that runs on into the second tricolon and in
terms of both structure and content is made up of two parts. The first
part of the concluding clause consists of two cola in chiastic formation:
verbobject // objectverb. The objects referred to are jx'q, and
MoK,' two different types of herb that only occur in the present pericope
and can be translated as dill and cumin respectively. The verb forms,
both of which designate a sowing movement, are more common.396
The second part of the concluding clause is formed by the second
tricolon (verse 25b, a tricolon of 3 + 2 + 2 beats) and characterised
by the ellipsis of the verb in the second and third cola. Following the
verb referring to a careful placing of the seed, we are introduced to
three different sorts of grain as object: hF;j,i hr;[oc] and tm,S,K.u The first
two terms are the most common. The term hF;ji means wheat and the
term hr;[oc] barley.397 The term tm,S,Ku is less common (found only two
times elsewhere) and means something like spelt.398 The three sorts of
grain are each explained in further detail with respect to the manner
in which they are sown. The precise significance of the terms hr;/c] and
m;s]nI raises some difficulties, however, since both are hapax legomena.399
This has led some exegetes to follow the Septuagint and propose that
we scrap the terms in question, but such a solution is hardly adequate.400
Only one exegete is of the opinion that the terms refer to different spe-

396
The verb wp hi. means to disperse or to scatter and is usually employed for the
scattering of people or nations. The verb qrz means to sprinkle and is frequently used
for blood sprinkled around an altar; it can also be used for sprinkling with water and
dust. Cf. Ringgren 1989:545 and Andr 1977:687.
397
Both words are used more frequently in the plural (Ruth 2:23; 2 Sam. 17:28;
2 Chron. 2:9,14; 27:5; Jer. 41:8; Ezek. 4:9; 45:13) than in the singular (Deut. 8:8;
Job 31:40; Joel 1:11) and occur together with some regularity.
398
See sg. in Ex. 9:32; see pl. in Ezek. 4:9.
399
According to Wildberger 1982:1084, hr;/c] can be understood as an example of
dittography on account of the following hr;[oc] and on the basis of the metre and the
LXX (see also Fohrer 1962:63). KBL opts for the translation millet (HALAT speaks
of an undetermined grain sort), but a fourth grain sort (also presupposed by Eichrodt
1967:138, Auvray 1972:254, Schoors 1972:170, Kaiser 19762:207 and De Waard
1997:120) would disrupt the structure of the verse. The word m;s]nI is explained by
KBL/HALAT as a niph al ptc. of ms, but left untranslated. According to Wildberger
1982:1084, the word does not fit the metre. The majority of exegetes follow the
translation found in the Targum, which renders the words hr;/c] and m;s]nI as locatives:
in rows and in its proper place.
400
See Duhm 19143:178, Marti 1900:211, Procksch 1930(A):366, Kaiser 19762:205
and Clements 1980(B):234.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 222 1/18/2007 2:18:13 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 223

cies of grain.401 The structure of the tricolon, however, favours three

similar subordinate clauses. Given the fact that /tl;buG clearly functions
as a locative, it therefore makes sense to understand hr;/c] and m;s]nI
likewise as locatives.402

Verse 26 concludes the first part of the instruction. In a tersely for-

mulated bicolon, in which the Masoretes have surprisingly enough
employed the less important distinctive accent Tifch [8] instead of the
expected Atnch, the farmers systematic approach is brought back to
its divine origins: For He instructs him well, his God teaches him (cf. Ex.
35:3035).403 While the use of the term fP;v]mi justice is characteristic
of the prophet Isaiah, it reflects more in the present instance on the
order of creation than on the legal order to which it usually refers (cf.
28:6,17). Nevertheless, it can also be used to designate a certain rule or
customary order (see, the expression fP;v]miW t[e time and way in Qoh.
8:6). The verb forms rsy to instruct, to discipline (see also 8:11) and
III
hry to teach (see also 2:3; 9:14; 28:9) have a primary role to play in
the wisdom literature.404 It is worthy of note that the subject of /rS]yIw in
the present verse is only identified in the second colon: his God teaches
him (cf. the same phenomenon in 28:1113!).405 The bicolon of verse
26 may be short (2 + 2 beats), but it has a great deal to say. It marks
the conclusion of the first part of the instruction.

After the conclusion to the first broadly chokmatic part of the instruction
with its reference to God in verse 26, verse 27 introduces the second part
thereof, which distinguishes itself in terms of syntax by its exclusive use
of passive verb forms (in verse 27: vd'Wy . . . is threshed, bS;Wy . . . is rolled
over and fb,j;yE . . . is beaten; in verse 28a qd;Wy . . . is crushed).406 What is
important at this juncture, however, is the shift in content within the
instruction that goes hand in hand with the verb forms employed. The
first part of the instruction gave pride of place to the process of sowing
while the second focuses rather on the process of harvesting. As such,

401
Schuman 1981:9293, cf. the Dutch Authorised Version.
402
For a detailed analysis see Barthlemy 1986:195200.
403
Cf. Whedbee 1971:55.
404
See Saeb 19783:738742, Branson 1982:688697 and Wagner 1982:920930.
405
Watson 1984:336337 refers to this style feature as delayed identification. Irwin
1977:40 spoke earlier of delayed explicitation.
406
1QIsaa has changed the verb forms in the second part of the instruction from
passive to active.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 223 1/18/2007 2:18:13 PM

 224 chapter four

therefore, the chokmatic instruction takes on an unmistakably prophetic

character, the harvest being a familiar metaphor for judgement among
the prophets (see, for example, Jer. 51:33; Joel 3:13 and Hab. 3:12)! Our
initial question concerning whether the instruction of 28:2329 also
exhibits prophetic features can now, in principle, be answered in the affir-
mative. While the agricultural terminology continues apparently without
interruption, the use thereof cannot conceal the fact that the prophet
has shifted from culture to history, a shift the attentive reader/listener
will not have missed. The shift of focus to the process of harvesting
and its associated judgement metaphors deprives the instruction of its
initially timeless character.407 In the second part of the instruction, the
prophet endeavours to convince his audience that the events confront-
ing them at the level of history also come from God. With hindsight,
even the word to plough in verse 24 now acquires negative connotations
(cf. Ps. 129:3). The instruction of 28:2329 is evidently not intended
to be a lesson in agricultureotherwise the powerful call to listen in
verse 23 would have been exaggerated to say the leastbut is related
to the contemporary history of its audience!
Verse 27 consists of three bicola, the first and the last of which begin
with the particle yKi:408
Wrj;b, al yKi However, it is not with a threshing sledge
jx'q, vd'Wy that dill is threshed,
hl;g:[} p'/aw nor is the wheel of a
b=S;Wy moK'Al[' cart rolled over cumin.
jx'q, fb,j;yE hF,M'b' yKi But dill is beaten with a stick,
.fb,V;B' mok'w and cumin with a rod.
The first two bicola are dependent on the negative particle al and thus
contain a negative statement. The third bicolon, on the other hand,
is affirmative. We noted a similar interchange in the use of rhetorical
questions in the first part of the instruction. The question in verse 24
expects a negative answer and that of verse 25 an affirmative answer.
The structural relationship between the first part (28:2426) and the
second part (28:2729) of the instruction, however, extends beyond
this observation:

407
Wildberger 1982:1085 speaks incorrectly of a double comparison whereby both
segments are intended to say the same thing.
408
Without justification, Kaiser 19762:205 suggests we scrap the first yKi on account of
the metre. In so doing he ignores the important bridging function of the said particle,
joining the two segments of the instruction.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 224 1/18/2007 2:18:14 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 225

Verse 27a begins with the negation al, which is determinative for both
bicola. The question /Yh' lkoh} is it continually . . .? fulfils the same func-
tion with respect to the cola following this phrase in verse 24.409
In like fashion to the tricolon in verse 25b, the bicolon of verse 27b
is characterised by an ellipsis of the verb. The verb form fb,j;yE . . . is
beaten is not repeated.
As was the case with sowing, there are rules for the harvest of every
sort of crop. The crops in question now function as the subjects of
almost all of the verbs, whereas attention was focused on the vrejoh'
the farmer as subject in the first part of the instruction. Reference is
first made to the herbs jx'q, dill and MoK' cumin. The suggestion that
the instruction of 28:2329 also exhibits prophetic elements is further
supported by the choice of words in verse 27. The verb vwd to thresh,
together with the instruments thereof, Wrj; threshing sledge, hF,m' stick and
fb,ve rod, are all used elsewhere in the book of Isaiah in the figurative
sense, particularly where there is reference to punishment by God or
by human persons.410 This represents an important confirmation of the
prophetic character of the instruction given in the present pericope.
The precise significance of the hl;g:[} p'/a the wheel of a cart is difficult
to determine since it can refer to the wheel of a cart carrying the har-
vest or the wheel of a threshing cart.411 It is not unimportant to note,
however, that the same termp'/ais employed more than once for
the wheel of a battle chariot (Ex. 14:25; Nah. 3:2; cf. esp. Prov. 20:26),
while the term hl;g[ : } in Ps. 46:10 clearly refers to such chariots!412 At the
very least, therefore, one should bear in mind that the expression p'/a
hl;g:[} the wheel of a cart may be introducing an association with battle
chariots. Such an association establishes a degree of ambiguity in verse
27, reinforcing the prophetic character of the instruction.

409
See J-M 160q.
410
For vwd to thresh see 21:10; 25:10 and 41:15 (cf. Judg. 8:7; 2 Kgs 13:7; Am. 1:3;
Mi. 4:13 and Hab. 3:12). For Wrj; threshing sledge see 41:15 (cf. Am. 1:3). For hF,m' stick
and fb,ve rod see 10:5,15,24,26; 11:4; 14:5,29 and 30:3132. Cf. Schuman 1981:9496.
In 27:12, the verb fbj to beat (out) likewise acquires a figurative meaning, albeit in
the positive sense.
411
See the discussion in Kellermann 1986:1065. Kellermann himself follows the
hypothesis proposed by Gese 1962:419, which maintains that hl;g[ : } nur den Lastwagen
als Erntewagen, nicht jedoch einen Dreschwagen oder eine Dreschwalze bezeichnen
kann. (cf. 1 Sam. 6:7; 2 Sam. 6:3)
412
Procksch 1930(A):364 suggests we scrap p'/a, while Kaiser 19762:205 suggests we
scrap hl;g:[.} The present author is inclined to agree with Wildberger 1982:1084 who
considers neither suggestion convincing.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 225 1/18/2007 2:18:14 PM

 226 chapter four

Verse 28 is firmly adjoined to the preceding verse via the use of a

passive verb form in the first colon ( qd;Wy . . . is pulverized), although it
also marks the transition from herb sorts to grain sorts. The second
part of the instruction thus follows the same sequence as the first in
this respect (see verse 25). With the emphasis now placed on threshing
and the various instruments employed in the process, verse 28 restricts
its reference to the various grain sorts mentioned in verse 25b to the
summary j,l, grain for bread.413
The structure of verse 28 is unusual. It consists of four cola, of
which the first and the last form an inclusion based on the use of the
verb qqd crush, pulverize:414
qd;Wy j,l, Grain on the other hand is crushed for bread.
WN=v,Wdy v/da; jx'n<l; al yKi But even then one does not thresh it forever;
wyv;r;p;W /tl;g[, lG"l]GI m'h;w one drives the cart wheel and horses over it,
.WNQ,duyAal but does not pulverize it.
The relationship in terms of content between the first and last colon
is not clear at first sight. The suffix attached to WNQ,duyAal but does not
pulverize it refers back to the grain for bread in the first colon. Both
statements, however, would appear to contradict one another: grain
is crushed for breadone does not pulverize it. The problem here can be
solved in a variety of ways:
1. The first colon can be understood as a (rhetorical) question: Is grain
not crushed for bread? 415
2. The words hx'n<l; al yKi are sometimes relocated to the beginning
of verse 28, giving rise to a construction similar to aOl yKi in verse
27.416
3. The particle of negation in WNQ,duyAal is understood in the absolute
sense: No one pulverizes it.417

413
Wildberger 1982:1084 points out that the interpretation of j,l, as grain for bread
is established on the basis of 30:23 and Ps. 104:14. Schuman 1981:97 also considers
this a possible interpretation for the same term in Gen. 41:54 (cf. Dommershausen
1984:540).
414
Schuman 1981:97 points out that the verb is employed in the figurative sense in
the context of disciplinary measures (cf. 2 Sam. 22:43; Isa. 41:15; Mi. 4:13).
415
Delitzsch 1889:321, Marti 1900:211, Ziegler 1948:87, Eichrodt 1967:138,
Schoors 1972:170, Clements 1980(B):234, Healey 1984:116 and Kilian 1994:165.
Duhm 19143:179 even suggests that an interrogative particle be inserted for the sake
of clarity (see also BHK).
416
BHS in line with Procksch 1930(A):364. See also Kissane 19602:303. Kaiser
19762:205 restricts the relocation to the particle yKi.
417
Thexton 1952:8182.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 226 1/18/2007 2:18:14 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 227

4. The last colon can also be understood as adding further nuance to

the first. In the last analysis, grain is indeed crushed for bread, but
not during the threshing process.418
Our evaluation of the various options requires us to account for the
contrast with the preceding verse established by the striking location of
j,l, grain for bread at the beginning of the first colon. The said con-
trast has already been prepared for in verse 27 via its reference to the
threshing sledge and cartwheel, two instruments utilised for heavy-duty
types of work. The use of such instruments with herbs such as dill and
cumin would be disastrous. The herbs in question call for much more
careful handling, but grain for bread is a different matter. Grain for
bread has to be crushed, finely ground, but this does not take place
during the threshing process!
The entire clause beginning with hx'n<l; al yKi is best understood
as a tricolon providing further information with respect to the short
monocolon qd;Wy j,l, with which verse 28 opens. While the sequence
monocolontricolon is unusual, this structure of verse 28 is nevertheless
supported by the verb forms employed therein. The monocolon employs
the passive verb form qd;Wy . . . is crushed and establishes a link thereby
with verse 27. The tricolon, on the other hand, is held together by the
use of active verb forms in the first and last colon, both of which take
the energic form and are provided with a suffix: WNv,Wdy one threshes it419
and WNQ,duy one does not pulverize it. In addition, the emphatic character of
the particle yKi, which is generally not found in the initial colon, rein-
forces the idea that the poetic structure of verse 28 is best understood
as a monocolon followed by a tricolon rather than two bicola.
Only when one interprets the tricolon as a further nuancing of the
preceding monocolon is it possible to do justice to the intended contrast
with the preceding verse 27 (see 4th option). If one interprets the mono-
colon qd;Wy j,l, as a rhetorical question (1st option) or reorganises the

418
Fohrer 1962:65, Kaiser 19762:208, Irwin 1977:41, Schuman 1981:99100, Watts
1985:374.
419
Given the fact that the paranomastic construction WNv,Wdy v/da; keep on thresh-
ing consists of a combination of two different roots (inf. abs. of vda impf. of vwd),
Wildberger 1982:1084 suggests we read v/da; as an example of dittography (see also
Duhm 19143:179). BHS, KBL/HALAT and HAHAT read an inf. vwd (cf. GKG
113wnote 3) in line with Kissane 19602:303. Procksch 1930(A):367 suggests the
reading v/na a person but has found little following for his proposal. Barthel 1997:331
substitutes v/da; with vdejo the thresher thereby providing the verse with an appropriate
subject by analogy with verse 24.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 227 1/18/2007 2:18:15 PM

 228 chapter four

word order to obtain the same construction as in verse 27 (2nd option),

then one loses the said contrast. Such is clearly not the intention, how-
ever, since the short monocolon with which verse 28 begins and which is
asyndetically linked via the passive verb form with verse 27, deliberately
implies contrast. The contrast in question is then further elaborated in
the tricolon that follows (yKi as adversative) in order to introduce elements
of hope into the message of judgement: But even then one does not thresh
it forever. The expression jx'n<l; al yKi but not forever . . . corresponds in a
certain sense with /Yh' lkoh' is it continually . . .? in verse 24 and should
be understood against the background of the lament (cf., for example,
the use of jx'n<l; in Ps. 44:24; 74:1,10,19; 77:9; 79:5; 89:47; Lam. 5:20
and the use of jx'n<l;Aal in Ps. 103:9 and Isa. 57:16). The second and
third part of the tricolon are best understood as a concessive clause in
which the nuancing provided in 28a is further elaborated: Even if one
drives the cart wheel and horses over it, one does not pulverize it.420 The sugges-
tion that the negation in the latter clause should be taken as absolute
(3rd option) is unacceptable. Such a hypothesis is not only strained from
the linguistic perspective, it also ignores the content-based cohesion
with the nuancing given in verse 28a. Wildberger suggests we read the
said term wyv;r;P; its horses in relation to the last colon.421 In spite of the
fact that the clause WNQ,duyAal is asyndetically adjoined to the preceding
clause, however, Wildbergers proposal cannot be recommended since
the plural horses does not square with the singular verb form.422
As was the case in verse 27, the present verse also contains a number
of terms that substantiate the prophetic character of the instruction and
confirm its orientation towards the activity of yhwh in history:

420
This conditional clause consists of a protasis without an introductory conditional
particle adjoined asyndetically to the apodosis. Such a construction is not entirely
uncommon (see GKG 159b, J-M 167a and Lettinga 80g). For the interpretation
of verse 28b as a conditional clause see also Irwin 1977:42 and Watts 1985:375.
421
Wildberger 1982:1083.
422
Barthel 1997:331 thus understands the said horses as a sort of accusative and
adds the preposition with to his translation: with his horses he does not pulverize it. For
a similar translation see Beuken 2000:16. Given the fact that the verb mh to confuse
is more often employed in combination with armies and horses as its object, Beuken
is uncomfortable with the direct association of the horses mentioned in 28:28 with
threshing. Bearing in mind the intentional ambiguity employed in this second part of
the instruction, however, Beukens objection need not be considered crucial. In line with
Duhm 19143:179 and Marti 1900:211, BHS suggests we read as follows: aOlw wOvr;pW] thus
he separates it out = he winnows instead of the more difficult reading of the MT: wyv;r;p;W
AaOl. This emendation is also followed by Fohrer 1962:64, Eichrodt 1967:138, Schoors
1972:171 and Kaiser 19762:205. For a detailed discussion see Barthlemy 1986:200201.
Ehrlich suggests we read /vrp]hiw and that we emend mh to read hmh: Und wenn die
Rder seines Wagens zu knarren anfangen, dann scheidet man es das Korn aus.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 228 1/18/2007 2:18:15 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 229

The verb mh, which normally means to confuse, is almost exclusively

employed in the Old Testament in the context of the so-called Wars
of yhwh (see, for example, Ex. 14:24; Jos. 10:10 and Judg. 4:15).423
It is quite possible that the prophet had the same idea in mind in
verse 28.
The use of the word lG"lGi I for wheel as an alternative for the word p'/a
wheel employed in verse 27 is striking. We noted that the term p'/a,
in some instances, is used to refer to the wheel of a war chariot (Ex.
14:25; Nah. 3:2; cf. Prov. 20:26). Wherever the term lG"lGi I is employed
to designate a wheel, however, it always refers to the wheel of a war
chariot (Isa. 5:28; Jer. 47:3; Ezek. 23:24; 26:10; cf. Ps. 77:19)!424
Given the preceding remarks, it is remarkable that the text employs
the term hl;g:[} (cf. verse 27) instead of the term bk,r< (war) chariot
(cf. Jer. 47:3; Ezek. 23:24; 26:10). Nevertheless, the prophet speaks
in this regard of wyv;r;P; its horses rather than the oxen usually associ-
ated with a hl;g:[}.425 The term vr;P; normally refers to a horse used
in battle (see 31:1)!426
The word j,l, (grain) for bread is used more than once in the book
of Isaiah in a situation of threatening annihilation (3:1,7; 4:1; 21:14;
30:20,23; cf. 33:16 and 36:17).427
It is evident from the above survey that the instruction of 28:2329 has
made ample use of words that allude to battle and war. This confirms
our suspicion that 28:2329 is not an ordinary wisdom poem, but is
intended rather to be understood against the background of contem-
porary history and as focusing primarily on the realisation of Gods
judgement. In the context of the book of Isaiah, it is difficult to imagine
anything but the appearance of Assyria in this regard. Even the ele-
ment of hope implicitly present in verse 28 acquires different contours
against such a background. YHWH used Assyria as an instrument of
his judgement, but did not desire to annihilate his people completely

423
See Stolz 19783:503 and Mller 1977:450453.
424
See Mnderlein 1977:22. Instead of the vocalisation lg"l]gI wheel, which is
employed only here, BHS suggests we read the more conventional lg"lg". The present
author sees little need to adopt this suggestion.
425
Cf. Kellermann 1986:1065: Die Erwhnung der Pferde ist insofern auffllig,
als man im Altertum Pferde nicht zu wirtschaftlichen Arbeiten gebrauchte. See also
Schuman 1981:98. De Waard 1997:120 and Barthel 1997:331, 338 maintain that there
are indications that horses were also employed in farming.
426
Niehr 1989:785786.
427
Beuken 2000:66.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 229 1/18/2007 2:18:15 PM

 230 chapter four

(cf. 10:5ff ). Even when God comes for judgement, He nevertheless

deals carefully with his people.428 In the course of history, however, it
became evident that Assyria had surpassed itself in fulfilling its task.
Its advance was characterised by the brute violence of its chariots and
horses.429 Nevertheless, even in this situation Gods people had the
right to know that yhwh would not allow his people to be completely
pulverized by his judgement. While it is evident that God opted for a
firm approach in the current circumstances, even the grain for bread
that requires such an approach in the process of threshing as opposed
to dill and cumin is not pulverised completely. The element of hope
implicitly ascribed to the instruction of 28:2329 by this verse consists
of the fact that although it is yhwh who is at work in the judgement
confronting his people, He is also in control of the situation! Believers
can thus console themselves in the midst of judgement that yhwhs
anger will not be forever (cf. 57:16). The Septuagint translation has
even made this aspect of the message explicit:
The bread, by contrast, shall be eaten,
for I shall not be angry with you forever
and the voice of my bitterness shall not
crush you.

The second part of the instruction is rounded off in verse 29. The
surprising use of three qatal clauses (ha;xy; ,: ayliph
] i and lyDIgh )i immediately
draws our attention, bearing in mind the preceding use of primarily
yiqtl and weqatal clauses.430 This can be understood as a formal indica-
tion that the intended scope of the entire pericope is being presented
in the tricolon of verse 29. It is here that the instruction reaches its
goal. Childs characterises such concluding formulations as summary
appraisals (cf. Job 8:13; 18:21; 20:29; 27:13; Ps. 49:14; Prov. 1:19; Isa.
14:26).431 Emphasis is placed on the fronted expression taOzAG" this also
in 28:29. From the structural perspective, taOzAG" joins together both
analogous parts of the pericope. In terms of content, it refers to the
instruction concerning threshing provided in the second part of the

428
Cf. Botterweck-Freedman-Lundbom 1982:233: Israel ist in seinen Augen wie Dill
und Kreuzkmmel und mu mit einer Rute oder einem Stock geschlagen werden.
429
Cf. Simian-Yofre 1984:825: Assyrien hatte einen Auftrag, den es mit Stock und
Stab vollbringen sollte, hat ihn aber mit den Rdern seiner Streitwagen vollbracht.
430
Cf. Schuman 1981:105.
431
Childs 1967:128. See also Whedbee 1971:7579.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 230 1/18/2007 2:18:16 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 231

pericope. The first part of the instruction was concluded in verse 26

and concerned a general truth that could count on self-evident approval.
Such is not the case with respect to the second part of the instruction.
It is difficult to understand judgement in the form of Assyrian aggres-
sion as likewise stemming from yhwh. It is the prophets goal, never-
theless, to bring his audience to this realisation and he thus states with
emphasis: This also comes from YHWH Zebaot. He is wonderful in counsel and
excellent in wisdom. Should a member of his audience have missed the
transition in the preceding verses and not have interpreted the state-
ment on threshing as a metaphor, then the terminology employed in
verse 29 insists once again that the instruction is related to history and
is thereby prophetic in nature:
The expression t/ab;x] hw:hy YHWH Zebaot makes it clear that the
prophet is speaking of the God of history and not only the God
who instructs the farmer.432 As a matter of fact, the expression [ime
t/ab;x] hw:hy is typically Isaianic (see 8:18 and 29:6).
The use of the verb alp to deal wonderfully almost always refers to
the activities of God in history. It is used of divine salvific activity
in specific situations in which human imagination ultimately falls
short. The Psalms in particular make frequent reference to Gods
t/al;p]nI wonderful deeds (cf. al,P, t;yci[; // t/x[e) in Isa. 25:1; see also
the name [e/y al,P, Wonderful Counsellor in 9:5).433 The prophet uses
the verb alp in 28:29, however, with the same negative connotations
as in 29:14: Gods wonderful intervention implies judgement and
not salvation (cf. Lam. 1:9).434 The same is true for the great things
that God does (in contrast to the use of ldg hi. do great things in
1 Sam. 12:24; Joel 2:21 and Ps. 126:2,3). Gods dealings bring about
alienation because they appear to be directed against his own people
(cf. 28:21).

432
Wildberger 1982:1094. See also Schuman 1981:100. Procksch 1930(A):364 and
Kaiser 19762:206 consider t/ab;x] to be a later addition.
433
Cf. Albertz 19792:417 and Conrad 1989:570575.
434
I thus do not share the conclusion reached by Clements 1980(B):234: The
meaning of the various questions is clear: there is a time for gentler, saving work
on the farm, and so also is this true of God in his dealings with Israel. Clements
1980(B):233 suggestion that the parable seems to be directly designed to soften the
implication of v. 21 that God will execute a strange work of judgment against his
people is untenable in light of the exegesis.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 231 1/18/2007 2:18:16 PM

 232 chapter four

One can determine on the basis of Jer. 18:18b that the word hx;[e
counsel probably stems from the wisdom tradition (cf. Isa. 19:11).435
This likewise holds true for the term hY:vWi T policy, plan, use of which
is almost exclusively confined to the books of Job and Proverbs (Isa.
28:29 and Mi. 6:9 serve as the only exceptions). The primary func-
tion of the term hx;[e in the book of Isaiah, however, is as a terminus
technicus for (the possibility of ) Gods intervention in human history
(see 5:19; 14:2627; 19:17; 25:1; 46:1011). As is the case in 5:19,
where the words laer;c]yI v/dq] tx'[} the plan of the Holy One of Israel
parallel Whce[}m' his work (cf. 28:21), the emphasis in 28:29 is placed
on judgement.436
By way of summary we can state that 28:2329 clearly exhibits the
character of an instruction from start to finish. Indeed, the very open-
ing formula presents the textual unit as an instruction. In the second
part thereof, however, there would appear to be a significant number
of prophetic features that transcend the framework within which the
general wisdom orientation of the first part is located. The use of
rhetorical questions as a style feature in both parts of the instruction
confirms from the outset that it was the prophets intention to convince
his audience of the veracity of a particular insight,437 an insight that
had to do with contemporary history. In concrete terms, the prophet
wants to convince his audience that the judgement confronting them
in the form of Assyrian aggression stems from yhwh, and that Gods
hand is at work therein. The statement found in 5:19 implies that not
everyone had accounted for such an eventuality. Gods wonderful wis-
dom, however, is diametrically opposed to the wisdom of Jerusalems
politicians. Its core is as follows: God has the capacity to intervene in
human history and that in so doing He can also turn against his own
people (cf. 29:14; 31:2). This insight is both shocking and encouraging
at the same time. It is shocking because it confirms that the misfor-
tune confronting the people of God comes from God Himself and
contradicts all the plans of the politicians of Jerusalem who consider
themselves to be wise. It is encouraging because God, in like fashion
to the farmer whom He instructs, proves to work according to a plan

Cf. Whedbee 1971:111148.

435

Cf. Wildberger 1972:188189, 192, Sthli 19783:752 and Ruppert 1982:

436

738742.
437
Cf. Barthel 1997:338.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 232 1/18/2007 2:18:16 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 233

and is not interested in total destruction. Gods hand is not only at work
in judgement, it is also in control of it.
Given the fact that the terminology employed in the present instruc-
tion is consciously ambiguous and repeatedly suggests metaphorical sig-
nificance, 28:2329 has been frequently defined as a parable.438 While a
certain degree of kinship with the parable genre is unmistakably present,
such a designation is not completely adequate with respect to 28:2329.
Not only does the pericope lack the characteristically narrative form of
the parable, it also lacks an interpretation of the metaphors employed,
which is consistently present where a parable or an allegory is concerned
(cf. Judg. 9:815; 2 Sam. 12:14 and Isa. 5:17).439 A few commenta-
tors are inclined to typify 28:2329 as a prophetic discussion or as a
prophetic dispute.440 The evident associations with wisdom incline the
present author to speak of an instruction or didactic teaching, more
specifically defined as a prophetic instruction.
This prophetic instruction clearly bears an authentic character.
Indeed, our discussion of the authenticity of the prophecy of judge-
ment in 28:14 can be repeated here with slight variation concerning
28:2329. In his use of the genrein the present instance that of
instructionthe prophet exhibits a surprising degree of creativity.
Scholarly research has revealed that the prophet Isaiah was decidedly
familiar with the wisdom tradition. He made use of it in a creative
fashion, however, in order to communicate his prophetic message.
The prophetic instruction of 28:2329 represents a fine example of
poetic artistry both with respect to the two-part, more or less analogous
structure of the instruction as a whole as to the repeated use of com-
pact and powerful rhythm in the individual verses. This reinforces our
conviction that the textual unit stems from Isaiah himself.441 Similarly,
several of the words employed in the instruction are typically Isaianic

438
See Delitzsch 1889:319, Procksch 1930(A):364, Ziegler 1948:87, Eichrodt
1967:138, Snijders 1969:288, Whedbee 1971:5168, Schoors 1972:170, Kaiser
19762:208, Clements 1980(B):232, Watts 1985:373 and Motyer 1993:235. Sweeney
1996:366 is even inclined to speak of an allegory. For a detailed survey of the
various opinions concerning 28:2329 see Schuman 1981:114126 and Wildberger
1982:10871089.
439
Cf. Schuman 1981:105, 127, 131132.
440
Schuman 1981:131132. Cf. Burden 1981:4245: I (. . .) conclude that this pas-
sage is in form a parable and in function a disputation-mashal. Fohrer 1962:64 speaks
of a wisdom poem, implying a prophetic Diskussionswort.
441
Wildberger 1982:1084 considers the rhythm to be an indication of a decisive
Isaianic statement.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 233 1/18/2007 2:18:16 PM

 234 chapter four

(verses 26 and 29), while the ambiguity of the agricultural terminol-

ogy (verses 27 and 28)442 as well as the theme of judgement stemming
from yhwh together with his wonderful plan that is simultaneously
expressed therein (verse 29), unmistakably point in the direction of the
great prophet. The number of exegetes who dispute the Isaianic origin
of this prophetic instruction is fairly limited.443

4.5.3. Evaluation
Having now discussed both external pericopes of Isaiah 28, we are now
obliged to focus our attention on the question as to how the prophecy
of judgement of 28:14(6) and the prophetic instruction of 28:2329
relate to the prophecies of judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422. Is
there a degree of cohesion within the present context of Isaiah 28 that
associates the two external pericopes with the two internal pericopes
and if so what is its nature?
To begin with the prophecy of judgement of 28:14, the thematic
association with 28:713 is perhaps the most apparent. The said
association is based on the drunkenness motif, which represents a
significant portion of 28:14 and is firmly present in the first verse
of 28:713. While the orientation of the prophecy of judgement of
28:14Samariadiffers from the orientation of both central prophe-
cies of judgement 28:713 and 28:1422Jerusalemthe accusation
elements of both texts are in clear agreement: both the leaders of
Ephraim/Samaria and those of Judah/Jerusalem are subject to accusa-
tion on account of their deteriorating leadership. As a matter of fact,
the motif of drunkenness functions as the adjoining link. The nature of
the deteriorating leadership, however, is not further elaborated in the
woe saying of 28:1, while it clearly is in both the central prophecies of
judgement28:713 and 28:1422. The accusation of 28:710 makes
reference to a spiritual elite in decline while that of 28:1415 makes
reference to a similarly degenerating political elite.
Important motifs that serve to associate the prophecy of judgement
of 28:14 with those of 28:713 and 28:1422 are not only evident

442
In line with Fohrer 1962:6970, Snijders 1969:289 and Schoors 1972:170171,
Beuken 2000:65 is also of the opinion that the farmer mentioned in the first part of
the instruction functions as a symbol for the prophet Isaiah who himself was instructed
by God concerning Gods activities in history. See also Hffken 1993:201.
443
See Cheyne 1895:184ff, Marti 1900:210, Kaiser 19762:206207, Clements
1980(B):233 and Kilian 1994:164.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 234 1/18/2007 2:18:16 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 235

in the accusation element but also in the announcement of judgement

itself. Without explicit reference to the name Assyria, it remains clear
nevertheless that the unmistakably brutal advance of this world power
is being announced in each of the prophecies of judgement. The
metaphors of hail and flood serve as the primary points of associa-
tion between the prophecy of judgement of 28:14 and what follows,
particularly with the announcement of judgement in 28:17b18. An
important motif that likewise exhibits an associative function in the
context of Isaiah 28 is the element of divine eclipse that accompanies
Assyrias advance. In both 28:2ff, 28:1113 and 28:17b22, emphasis
is placed on the divine intervention that is being announced. While the
name Assyria is not mentioned explicitly, 28:2 refers nevertheless to yn:dao }
who has someone mighty and strong at his disposal. In the announce-
ment of judgement of 28:1113, it is hw:hy who will speak (through
human persons) with stammering lip and with alien tongue, while
28:21 explicitly refers to hw:hy rising up for a strange deed and an alien
work. The hiddenness of yhwh in the announcement of judgement is
made explicit in both of the central judgement prophecies in which the
contrast is indicated between yhwhs former salvific words (28:12) and
deeds (28:16), and yhwhs words (28:11) and deeds (28:21) of judge-
ment now being announced.444 The motif of divine eclipse is already
implicitly present in the announcement of judgement of 28:2. From
the perspective of syntax, the term yn:doa} does not function as subject
in verse 2 but rather Mia'w qz:j; one who is mighty and strong. Moreover,
though the metaphors employed in the text would suggest a theophany,
it is rather the destructive advance of Assyria that is announced where
one might expect a divine manifestation.
While the announcement of Assyrias aggression represents a the-
matic link between the prophecy of judgement of 28:14 on the one
hand and the central prophecies of judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422
on the other, the origin of the prophecies cannot be reduced to the
same historical situation. While both central prophecies of judge-
ment of Isaiah 28 are best understood as having been born against
the background of Judahs revolt against Sennacherib (705701), the
prophecy of judgement of 28:14 is to be situated twenty years earlier
and dated prior to the fall of Samaria (722). The prophecy of judge-
ment of 28:14 will thus have been intended originally for the northern
kingdom of Ephraim rather than Judah. This important difference in

444
See also 4.4.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 235 1/18/2007 2:18:17 PM

 236 chapter four

historical origin, however, does not undermine the fact that 28:14 in
its present literary context must be understood as being addressed to
Judah and Jerusalem respectively. In the literary context of Isaiah 28,
the prophecy concerning Samaria is primarily a warning addressed to
Judah and Jerusalem inviting them to learn a lesson from the fate of
Ephraims former pearl. This is evident in the first instance from the
way in which the prophecy of 28:713 is redactionally associated with
that of 28:14 (via verse 7a), but also with respect to the terminologi-
cal correspondences between 28:14 and the two central prophecies of
Isaiah 28. The schematic survey below makes it clear that a significant
number of cross-references are apparent in the use of terminology in
Isaiah 28:

28:14(6) 28:713 28:1422 28:2329

1 yreKovi 7 rk;ve
3 yre/Kvi strong drink (3x)
drunkards
1 yIy" 7 yIy"
wine wine (2x)
2 qz:j; 22 Wqzj]y<
strong they become
stronger
2 yn:doa} 22 yn:doa}
Lord Lord
2 dr;B; 17 dr;B;
hail hail
2 yIm' 17 yIm'
waters waters
2 ypif]vo 15 en 18 fe/v
overflowing overflowing
2 r,a;l; 22 r,a;h;AlK;Al['
down to the earth upon the whole land
3 hn:s]m'r;Te 18 sm;rmil]
he is trampled to be beaten down
underfoot
4 ha,roh; ha,ryI 7 ha,ro
whoever sees vision
4 hN:[,l;b]yI 7 W[l]b]nI
from the verb [lb from the verb III[lb
he eats it up they are confused

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 236 1/18/2007 2:18:17 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 237

Table (cont.)
28:14(6) 28:713 28:1422 28:2329

5 t/ab;x] hw:hy 22 t/ab;x] hw:hy 29 t/ab;x] hw:hy

YHWH Zebaot YHWH Zebaot YHWH Zebaot
6 fP;v]mi 17 fP;v]mi 26 fP;v]mi
justice justice justice
9 hr,/y 26 WNr,/y
he shall teach he teaches him
9 h[;Wmv] ybiy: 19 h[;Wmv] ybih;
he shall explain the understanding the
message message
10 wq' 17 wq'
vomit measuring line
11 hZ<h' [;h; 14 hZ<h' [;h;
this people this people
12 rm'a; 15 T,rm'a}
he said you say
16 rm'a;
he says
12 ["/mv] 14 W[m]v] 23 W[m]v]w
listen hear! and listen! (2x)
22 yTi[]m'v;
I have heard
13 hw:hyArb'D 14 hw:hyArb'D
the word of YHWH the word of YHWH
15 Wnm]c' 25 c;w
we have made and he places
17 yTim]c'w
I will make

The above survey offers evidence of an extensive terminological kin-

ship between the prophecy of judgement of 28:14 and both central
prophecies of 28:713 and 28:1422. This fact reinforces the introduc-
tory function fulfilled by the prophecy of judgement against Ephraim/
Samaria in the present context of Isaiah 28. The fall of proud Samaria
is held up as a warning example to Judah/Jerusalem.445
Bearing this in mind, therefore, it does not come as much of a sur-
prise that a promise of salvation would be added at a later date to the

445
Stansell 1996:8082 is even inclined to see 28:16 as a thematic link serving to
join together Isaiah 112 and 2833.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 237 1/18/2007 2:18:17 PM

 238 chapter four

prophecy of judgement against Samaria, a promise that now addresses

itself to the remnant of Judah. The verses 5 and 6 contain a promise
of salvation that is closely related to the preceding prophecy concern-
ing Samaria in terms of themes and word options. The relationship
is clearly antithetical in character, making it unlikely that the promise
of salvation ever enjoyed an independent existence. In spite of the
relationship with the preceding verses, however, a remarkable shift in
focus takes place in 28:56. Although Judah and Jerusalem are not
mentioned by name, it is evident from the context of the book of Isaiah
that the remnant referred to in verse 5 should be sought precisely in
Judah and Jerusalem. Based on the parallel text in 4:2, it is plausible
that the fall of Samaria in 722 BCE announced in 28:14 was already
presupposed in the interpolated verses 5 and 6 together with the fall of
Jerusalem in 586 BCE. The addition of a promise of salvation for the
remnant of Judah to the prophecy of judgement against Samaria was
in fact prepared for in advance by the redactional process in which the
prophecy of judgement of 28:14 was held up to Judah/Jerusalem as
a warning example. The interpolation of the promise of salvation of
28:56 presupposes that the warning contained in the fall of Samaria
had little lasting effect on Judah.446 Not only did Samaria succumb to
Assyrian aggression, but Jerusalem was also to encounter the same fate a
century and a half later at the hands of the Babylonians. The promise
of salvation of 28:56 makes it clear that these dramatic events did not
augur the end of Gods involvement with his people. The remnant of
his people were to expect a glimmering new future, which would be
guaranteed against assault from within and without. When that day
dawned, yhwh himself would be the glorious garland of his people.
It is likewise apparent from the above survey that the instruction of
28:2329 is associated terminologically with both the central prophecies
of judgement of Isaiah 28. In contrast to the preceding prophecies of
judgement, however, the instruction of 28:2329 is primarily character-
ised by its use of typically chokmatic terminology (rsy instruct, admon-
ish; IIIhry teach; hx;[e counsel and hY:viWT policy, plan) and style features
typical of the wisdom tradition (Lehrerffnungsformel, sequence of

446
Beuken 2000:22 prefers to avoid the word interpolation and is inclined to
consider 28:16 as a whole as the work of a post-exilic redactor. The said redactor,
Beuken maintains, reworked an originally Isaianic prophecy and addressed it to his
own time. The connection between 28:7 and 28:14, however, leaves the impression
that 28:14 originally functioned without verses 5 and 6 and alerts the reader to the
secondary character of the verses in question.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 238 1/18/2007 2:18:17 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 239

rhetorical questions, summary appraisal). The genre of instruction as

such already exhibits the tone of the wisdom tradition.447 It became
apparent in our exegesis of the text that the instruction of 28:2329
also contained prophetic elements and that it can thus be best defined
as a prophetic instruction. Within the present context of Isaiah 28, this
combination of prophetic and chokmatic elements gives the instruction
of 28:2329 the character of a summary conclusion.
The fact that the motif of divine eclipse resounds once again in
28:2329 is particularly appropriate for such a summary conclusion.
The motif in question is most explicit in the two central prophecies of
judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422, but it is also implicitly present
in the announcement of judgement of 28:2. It would appear to be a
thread that runs through the whole of Isaiah 28 and serves to bind its
various textual units together. This is likewise true for the prophetic
instruction of 28:2329. The concluding verse, in which the instruction
reaches its goal, speaks emphatically of yhwhs wonderful deeds and
the great things that He has done. Such words usually refer to Gods
salvific actions for which He is worthy of praise. As was the case in
29:14, however, yhwhs wonderful deeds and the great things that
yhwh does refer in 28:29 to the fulfilment of his judgement! Indeed,
the wonder of Gods actions would appear to be the fact that they are
turned against his own people. The use in this regard of terminology
from the domain of the Wars of yhwh (verse 28) makes this fact all
the more painful (cf. 28:21). Based on this observation with regard to
the motif of divine eclipse, it is apparent that the prophetic instruction
of 28:2329 is thematically closely related to the central prophecies of
judgement of Isaiah 28.
While the audience addressed in 28:23 is not further defined, it is
conceivable nonetheless that the addressees of the prophetic instruction
may have enjoyed their home at the court of Jerusalem, more specifi-
cally within the circles of wise men who would have functioned more
or less as political advisors (cf. 5:19). In the present context of Isaiah
28, these circles of wise men coincide with the rulers of Jerusalem
referred to in 28:14. We were already able to determine in our exegesis
of verses 1422 that the /xl; yvena' scoffers (cf. yxil)e addressed in 28:14
represent the opposite counterpart to the ymik;j} the wise! Given that
the opponents addressed by the prophet considered themselves to be

447
Cf. Whedbee 1971:5455.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 239 1/18/2007 2:18:17 PM

 240 chapter four

wise and understanding in political terms (cf. 29:14), it is possible to

identify the same group as the addressees of the prophetic instruction of
28:2329.448 Bearing in mind the instructional character of 28:2329,
however, it is also possible that Isaiahs own followers qualify as his
addressees as well. Since the instruction of 28:2329 does not appear
to be a general wisdom poem, but is focused rather on the fulfilment of
Gods judgement, it seems evident that it would owe its historical origins
to the experiences endured in confrontation with Assyria. The eclipse of
God preached by Isaiah and potentially experienced in the meantime
by his audience will doubtless have raised the same question among
his disciples as he himself had been inspired to ask at the moment of
his calling: yt'm;Ad[' how long? (6:11). It is possible that this question, or
one similar to it, served as the direct occasion of the instruction and
that it received its answer in verse 28 in the words jx'n<l; al not forever,
words which implicitly contain an element of hope. Given the scope
of 28:2329, which is strongly defined by judgement motifs, it is to be
recommended that the identity of the addressees be sought among the
readers of the book of Isaiah only in the second instance.
The cohesive terminological, thematic and historical relationship
between the central prophecies of judgement (28:713 and 28:1422)
and the instruction (28:2329) is done insufficient justice if one under-
stands the latter as a sort of general treatment of the relationship
between judgement and salvation in the preaching of Isaiah.449 The
instruction in question is also, and in the first instance, a form of
judgement preaching in which there is evidence once again of divine
eclipse. This observation, however, is not undermined by the fact that
the instruction contains an element of hope. The prophetic instruction
is decidedly not designed to justify a particular transition from judge-
ment preaching to salvation preaching that took place according to
some at a given moment in the year 701 BCE.450 Such an approach has
the potential to quickly lead to the interpretation of the instruction as

448
Idem Barthel 1997:343345. Beuken 2000:61 excludes this possibility on the
grounds that it is difficult to imagine that one and the same group would be confronted
with a radical judgement only to be invited thereafter to marvel at Gods magnificent
wisdom. Cf. Exum 1982:130132 and Beuken 1995:2526. Such an objection need
not be seen as critical, however, where Gods magnificent wisdom has to do with the
realisation of his judgement (cf. 29:14 and 31:2).
449
Contra Procksch 1930(A):365 and Clements 1980(B):233.
450
Contra Fohrer 1962:67 and Wildberger 1982:1089. See also Dietrich 1976:127
and Simian-Yofre 1984:825 who locate the transition around 713 BCE. Duhm 19143:178
proposes a period of greater calm: 711705 BCE.

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 240 1/18/2007 2:18:18 PM

 exegesis of individual pericopes 241

a promise of salvation. The statement in verse 29, however, in which

the scope of the entire prophetic instruction is to be found, does not
revolve around the promise of Jerusalems liberation. On the contrary,
Gods wonderful deeds consist precisely of his capacity to intervene in
human history and even to turn against his own people in judgement!
The suggestion proposed by Beuken that 28:2329 bestows a certain
paradigmatic character to the conflict between the prophet and the
leaders of Jerusalem deserves consideration in this regard.451 Indeed, it
is not by accident that a prophetic instruction, in which the language of
wisdom is employed, is located precisely at the end of Isaiah 28. It is
conceivable that the said paradigmatic expansion of the present conflict
was prepared for in redactional terms in the verses 1922.452

451
Beuken 2000:20.
452
Childs 2001:211 underlines the theocentric character of 28:2329 and refers
specifically to 28:21 in this regard: The transition is made in v. 21: The Lord will
rise up . . . to do his work. Strange and alien is this work. Yet the final oracle makes
clear that even the farmers activity seems strange and incoherent as he tears open the
ground before sowing his seed, so also Yahwehs apparently violent acts of judgment
also follow a wise purpose. In his own time and according to his own counsel he will
also bring forth suitable fruits from his creation (cf. 4:1).

dekker_f5_109-241.indd 241 1/18/2007 2:18:18 PM

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 242 2/12/2007 10:56:30 AM
 CHAPTER FIVE

THE PLACE AND FUNCTION OF ISAIAH 28:1422 IN THE

CONTEXT OF ISAIAH 2833

5.1. Introduction

An important shift has arisen within scholarly research into the book of
Isaiah in recent years.1 For a considerable time, the threefold subdivision
proposed by Duhm as far back as 1892 (Proto-Isaiah: 139; Deutero-
Isaiah: 4055; Trito-Isaiah: 5666) served as the immutable point of
departure for every study of the book. The value of this approach for
our historical understanding of the book of Isaiah remains to the present
day. On the other hand, however, the said threefold subdivision created
a tendency to presupposition with respect to the historical situation of
the various individual texts within each of the three parts of the book
and to the simplification of the origin and evolution of the book as
a whole. Indeed, it ultimately led to a threefold division of the book,
whereby researchers exhibited little if any interest in the present unity
of the book of Isaiah. An important and necessary correction can be
observed in the last twenty years in this regard. More than before,
contemporary scholarly research into the book of Isaiah addresses the
book according to its present unity.2
The question remains nevertheless whether one should be looking for
the unity of the book of Isaiah in a strictly determined total structure.
The search for such a total structure has lead in practice to a variety of
highly sophisticated analyses that often lack the capacity to convince.
The danger of a degree of arbitrariness seems to be substantial in this
regard. An example thereof can be found in the work of OConnell who
considers the book of Isaiah to be an extremely complex composition

1
For a recent survey of the current state of affairs in Isaiah research see Becker
1999:137, 117152 and Hffken 2004. The disadvantage of Beckers descriptions and
evaluations is to be found in the fact that he allows himself to be lead by the much dis-
puted literary-critical and redaction-historical insights of Kaiser.
2
Cf. Sweeney 1993:141: Studies of the component parts of Isaiah continue to ap-
pear, but the recent focus on the final form of the book has clearly established itself as
the central issue of Isaiah studies. See also 1.2.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 243 2/12/2007 10:56:30 AM

 244 chapter five

made up of seven asymmetric, concentric units, each supported by a

complex framework of repetitions.3 The slightly more dated work of
Watts might be less complex, but given its speculative character it is
no less implausible. Watts characterises the book of Isaiah as a vision
presented in the form of a drama in twelve acts, each of which is
geared towards a new and different historical situation.4 Berges typifies
the book of Isaiah as a sevenfold literary drama concerning the fate of
Judah and Jerusalem in the midst of great misfortune.5 While this latter
typification is attractive, and Berges is not pressed to introduce forced
demarcations within the book of Isaiah as a whole, it is nevertheless
necessary to bear in mind that every endeavour to search for a unifying
literary total structure within a book that clearly exhibits the character
of a redactional collection might perhaps be doomed to failure from
the outset.6 The characterisation of the book of Isaiah as a drama
maintained by Berges and others, for example, seems to work better
for the second part of the book than for the first. The present author
is nevertheless inclined to support the idea that the final redactors of
the book of Isaiah probably allowed themselves to be guided more by
religious motivations than by literary-aesthetical ones.7 The unity of the
book of Isaiah appears more often in practice to be theological and
lexicographic in nature rather than literary-aesthetic.8

3
See OConnell 1994:1920. OConnell interprets the entire book of Isaiah as an
exemplar of the prophetic covenant disputation genre.
4
Watts 1985:xlivliv.
5
Berges 2003:207. The seven acts distinguished by Berges are 112; 1327; 2835;
3639; 4048; 4955 and 5666. He considers the central act as the narrative climax
of the book of Isaiah.
6
Cf. Childs 2001:7: . . . it is a modern anachronism to require a clear and rational
reason for every structural division. The designation of the book of Isaiah as a col-
lection is no longer burdened with negative connotations. Cf. Tate 1996:50: The col-
lection concept can accommodate the highly complex unity in Isaiah without having
to assume a tight, precisely fitted macro-literary structure. A collection should not be
regarded as simply a haphazard agglomeration of materials.
7
Cf. Hffken 2004:90: Die Lektre des Gesamtzusammenhangs ist ein modernes
Leseinteresse. Dagegen ist nichts zu sagen, aber antike Juden und Christen pflegten
ganz offensichtlich eine andere Lesepraxis, die nicht am Gesamtbuch, sondern an Tex-
ten im Gesamtbuch interessiert und orientiert war. Sie hat immer wichtig erscheinende
Texte und Aussagen hervorgehoben. Das Buchganze war ein Sammelbecken fr diese
wichtigen Texte.
8
Cf. Clements 1997:6: It is then an exciting and stimulating advance of recent
methodology to have begun the task of tracing carefully the basic motives and themes
which give the book its essential unity. Cf. also Clements 1982:126: the factors which
have led to the bringing together of its various sections of sayings were essentially the-
matic and religious rather than literary or biographical.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 244 2/12/2007 10:56:30 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 245

While differences of opinion exist with respect to the various sub-

divisions of the book of Isaiah, there is a reasonable degree of unanimity
when it comes to the global division of the book into a number of
redactional units that can be distinguished yet but not separated from
one another: 112; 1323; 2427; 2833; 3435; 3639; 4055; 56
66.9 Given the fact that the present study focuses on Isa. 28:1422, I
will limit myself in the present chapter to determining the place of the
said pericope within the redactional unit of Isaiah 2833. Redaction-
historical questions will have to be left aside in this process. While such
questions, which touch on the origins of the book of Isaiah, are enjoying
an increasing amount of attention in contemporary research, consensus
has yet to be achieved on the matter.10

5.2. Isaiah 2833 as a redactional unit

The most accessible studies written in recent years on Isaiah 2833

as a redactional unit within the book of Isaiah are the articles of
G. Stansell from 1996 (Isaiah 2833: Blest Be the Tie that Binds (Isaiah
Together))11 and W.A.M. Beuken from 1998 (Women and the Spirit,
the Ox and the Ass. The First Binders of the Booklet Isaiah 2832).12
I will use both studies as a guide in describing first the structural and then
the content based cohesion that is evident within Isaiah 2833.13 I will
restrict myself at the present juncture to the main lines of inquiry.

5.2.1. Structural cohesion

Following a brief status quaestionis, in which he focuses on the long
and complex origins and evolution of Isaiah 2833, Stansell endeavours
to read the said chapters as a redactional unity in the books present

9
Traditionally speaking, and in line with Duhm, the transition to Isaiah 40 is seen
as the most important demarcation within the book of Isaiah. Recent endeavours have
been made nonetheless to include chapters 3439 within the second part of the book.
Such endeavours go hand in hand with the bridging function both 3435 and 3639
would appear to fulfil. See Watts 1985/1987 and especially Sweeney 1996.
10
See, for example, Seitz 1991, Barthel 1997, Becker 1997 and Berges 1998. The
first steps towards a redaction-historical approach to the book of Isaiah were taken by
Kaiser 19762 (1973), Barth 1977 and Vermeylen 1977.
11
Stansell 1996:68103.
12
Beuken 1998:526. Unfortunately, the dissertation of M.J. OKane, Isaiah 2833: a
literary and contextual analysis, diss. Edinburgh 1989, was unavailable for consultation.
13
For the present state of research on Isaiah 2835, see Hffken 2004:129134.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 245 2/12/2007 10:56:30 AM

 246 chapter five

canonical form. The first formal element he takes as his point of departure
is the structure of this segment of the book, which, as Duhm already
noted in 1892, is determined by the six so-called woe statements:
yIr'p]a, yrKovi tWaGE tr,f,[} y/h 28:1 Woe to the proud garland of Ephraims
drunkards
layrIa} layrIa} y/h 29:1 Woe, Ariel, Ariel
hx;[e rTis]l' hw:hyme yqiymi[}M'h' y/h 29:15 Woe! You who hide a plan too deep for YHWH
yrIr/s ynIB; y/h 30:1 Woe, rebellious children
Hr:z[,l] yIr'x]mi ydIrYOh' y/h 31:1 Woe, to those who go down to Egypt for help
dWdv; al hT;a'w dd/v y/h 33:1 Woe, you destroyer, who yourself have
not been destroyed
The six woe statements serve as a skeleton framework for Isaiah 2833
and fulfil a unifying function.14 It is striking, however, that the first rib
of the skeleton, the woe statement addressed to Samaria in 28:1, bears
a paradigmatic character. The sixth and last rib, the woe statement in
33:1, even appears to be something of a floating rib since it is addressed
against the enemy (Assyria)15 while the first five are addressed against
Gods own people (the first against Samaria; the second against Ariel/
Jerusalem; the third to the fifth against the leaders of Jerusalem).16 The
sixth woe statement in 33:1 thus exhibits a different character to those
who hear/read it. The call to mourn in 32:914 appears, moreover, to
function as an appropriate conclusion to a segment of the book that is
structured around a pattern of woe statements.17 Based in part on the
remaining content of Isaiah 33, certain authors hesitate in associating
this chapter with Isaiah 2832 as a component of the same segment of
the book.18 The fact that Isaiah 33 begins with a woe statement, however,

Cf. Laberge 1982:157190.

14

Cf. Laberge 1982:157190.

15
16
Barthel 1997:269270 draws attention to the content based and terminological
cohesion between the third, fourth and fifth woe statements, which provide a degree of
focus to the series after beginning with Samaria and Jerusalem. Berges 1998:209214
points out that the five woe statements found in Isaiah 2831 exhibit a logical structure.
He maintains that the first two woe statements allow for a certain degree of hope, while
this is no longer the case in the third woe statement. Berges considers the statement
made in 31:3 to be the prophet Isaiahs last word.
17
Cf. Beuken 2000:3 . . . one can justifiably consider the five woe cries together with
the call to go into mourning (28:131:9 and 32:914) as an original literary composi-
tion. Given its content, the announcement of disaster, this composition clearly stems
from before the exile. See also Beuken 1998:67.
18
Fohrer 1962 and Kaiser 19762 consider Isaiah 2832 to be a literary unity, while
Wildberger 1982 takes Isaiah 2831 as his point of departure.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 246 2/12/2007 10:56:31 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 247

represents a formal indication that this chapter also constitutes a part

of the redactional unit Isaiah 2833 in the present form of the book of
Isaiah.19 On account of its compositional character and the multiple
allusions it contains with respect to both earlier and later texts in the
book of Isaiah, Isaiah 33 functions in addition as the conclusion to the
said redactional unit and demarcates the transition to the second part of
the book.20 The diptych Isaiah 3435, which can be comfortably read
as an independent redactional unit in spite of its various connections
with preceding chapters, probably fulfils a bridge function within the
context of the book of Isaiah as a whole towards Isaiah 40ff.21 The same
can be said for the narratives concerning the liberation of Jerusalem
contained in Isaiah 3639. The very presence of diverse textual units,
each fulfilling one or other bridging function, allows us to argue that
the present form of the book of Isaiah was preceded by an extremely
complex process of genesis and evolution.
In addition to the structuring principle provided by the woe statements,
Stansell has pointed out an even more complex structuring principle
in Isaiah 2833 based on the interchange of prophecies of judgement
and prophecies of salvation.22 He illustrates the said principle with the
following diagram:
Woe Woe Woe
Judgement 28:14 28:722 29:14 29:914 29:1516
Salvation 28:56 28:2329 29:58 29:1724
Woe Woe Woe
Judgement 30:117 31:14 32:914 33:1
Salvation 30:1826 31:58 32:18 32:1520 33:224
It is indeed striking that the woe statements do not follow one another in
any form of sequence, but are interrupted rather by words of salvation.

19
Berges 1998:199 considers the pithy statement at the end of Isaiah 33 concerning
the forgiveness of injustice for the people that live in Zion (33:24), as a content based
confirmation of the structure based conclusion that Isaiah 2833 ought to be read as
a unity.
20
Beuken 1991:535 characterises Isaiah 33 as a Mirror text in the book of Isaiah.
Cf. also Beuken 2000:245.
21
For Isaiah 34 and 35 as a diptych see Peels 1995:148160. Berges 1998:199265
treats Isaiah 3435 in association with 2833 (idem Childs 2001:199258) and refers
in this regard to a consistency of motifs between 3233 on the one hand and 3435
on the other (202203). He goes on, however, to focus on the elaboration of the func-
tion fulfilled by Isaiah 3435 in the broader context of the book of Isaiah as a whole
(203207).
22
Stansell 1996:7071.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 247 2/12/2007 10:56:31 AM

 248 chapter five

The pattern that thus emerges, however, taking chapters 28 to 33 as

a whole, is not consistent enough to speak of a genuine structuring
principle. Moreover, 28:2329 is better understood as an example of
judgement preaching rather than salvation preaching.23 It is also unclear
why the woe statement in 33:1 is counted as part of the preaching
of judgement. This is confusing since the target of the judgement
expressed therein is Assyria and not Jerusalem. Judgement for Assyria
thus implies salvation for Jerusalem. Moreover, had 30:2734, in which
Gods judgement concerning Assyria is announced, not been missing
from his diagram, Stansell would doubtless have included it as part of
the preaching of salvation. Stansells observations are only relevant
with respect to chapters 2831 whereby one can speak prudently of a
structuring principle.24 While the redaction history of the book of Isaiah
falls outside the framework of the present study, it remains worthy
of note that precisely these chaptersIsaiah 2831are frequently
considered to be the original core of this part of the book. The particle
he see with which Isaiah 32 begins, stands in contrast to the fivefold y/h
woe of the preceding chapters and functions more or less as a point
of demarcation.25 In the present form of the book of Isaiah, however,
chapters 2833 are intended as a redactional unit.

23
See 4.5.2. Cf. also Berges 1998:202 and 2003:212 who adopts Stansells dia-
gram, but modifies it with respect to 28:1617 (word of salvation) and 28:2329 (word
of judgement). Berges also adds Isaiah 34 ( judgement) and 35 (salvation) to the survey
of texts.
24
Barthel 1997:256f also typifies the interchange of prophecies of judgement with
words of salvation as a structural characteristic of Isaiah 2832. In contrast to the sub-
division proposed by Stansell, Barthel takes larger units as his point of departure, main-
taining that the character of the various words of salvation is not always the same. In
some instances the judgement announced is overturned, by way of Fortschreibung, in
the following message of salvation (the latter presupposing a judgement that has already
taken place), while in other instances the message of salvation consists of a judgement
against one of the nations (styled by Barthel, in line with Barth, as a non-Isaianic layer,
but dated in part later than the Josianic period presupposed by Barth). As such, the
structure of the text would appear to be more complex than Stansells subdivision would
lead us to believe. Barthel distinguishes four large substructures within Isaiah 2832,
each being characterised by the interchange of judgement and salvation: A. 28:729:24;
B. 30:133; C. 31:132:8; D. 32:920. Given the exemplary character of the inter-
change of judgement and salvation apparent at the beginning of this segment of the
book, Barthel considers Isa. 28:16 as eine Art Exposition des Ganzen.
25
Sweeney 1996:354f is even inclined to consider the particle he here as the intro-
duction to Isaiah 3233 as a climactic unit. Sweeney sees the focus of Isaiah 2833 in
the announcement of a royal redeemer in Jerusalem who will take the place of the citys
corrupt leadership. The suggestion that 2831 represents the original core is confirmed
by the study of Beuken 1998:1617, although the latter also includes the prophecy of
32:914 as part of the said original core.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 248 2/12/2007 10:56:31 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 249

5.2.2. Content based cohesion

In addition to the structural cohesion evident in Isaiah 2833, one can
clearly observe elements of consistency at the level of content within
these chapters. The prophecy of judgement with which this segment of
the book begins in 28:14 is continued in the present redactional state
of the book in an announcement with respect to the exaltation of yhwh
as a garland/crown of glory and a diadem of beauty for the remnant
of his people (28:5). This corresponds with the announcement at the
end of the segment, namely that yhwh is exalted and dwells on high
(33:5). Reference is likewise made in 33:17 to a King who will be looked
upon in all his beauty.26 As King, yhwh shall also be Judge and Lawgiver
(33:22). This expression corresponds with what was already implied in
28:6, namely that yhwh will establish a safe and well-ordered society
(cf. also 33:5). As a consequence, Zion/Jerusalem may also be looked
upon in the future. It is to become a safe city (33:20). The contrast
with Isaiahs observations concerning the Jerusalem of his own day is
enormous. Isaiah 2833 cuts through the announcement of judgement
and destruction with a visionary experience that is reminiscent of the
prophets vocational vision (6:15). Even the inhabitants of Zion will
behold yhwh as King, an experience that is inconceivable without the
observation that the purification from injustice undergone by Isaiah
himself (6:7) will also be the fate of the inhabitants of Zion (33:24; cf.
the contrast with 1:4 and the elaboration of this motif in 40:12).

5.2.2.1. Themes
Cohesion in terms of content within the framework of Isaiah 2833
as outlined above is largely determined on the basis of a number of
important themes that represent a continuous presence throughout this
part of the book. No less than eight important themes return time and
again in the segment under analysis. Once we have established a list of
the said themes we will describe them in sequence and make reference
to relevant texts in each instance:27

26
Beuken 2000:246247 considers it plausible that the king in question does not
refer to yhwh, but rather to the Davidic king promised in 32:18, since one would be
more likely to speak of the glory of yhwh rather than of his beauty. See also Childs
2001:247248. While there is certainly something to be said for this argument, the
accent on the beauty of yhwh is not out of place if one accounts for the imagery em-
ployed in 28:56. It is possible that 33:17 is intentionally ambiguous.
27
Stansell 1996:7278 maintains a more global identification of four themes: Zion/
Jerusalem, the exaltation of yhwh, hearing/seeing/insight, and foreign alliances and

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 249 2/12/2007 10:56:31 AM

 250 chapter five

1. Judgement concerning Zion/Jerusalem,

2. Liberation and a new future for Zion/Jerusalem,
3. Exaltation of yhwh,
4. (Not) hearing/(not) seeing/(lack of) insight on the part of Judah,
5. Social injustice and the restoration of justice respectively,
6. Turning to Egypt for support,
7. Assyria as instrument of Gods judgement,
8. Judgement concerning Assyria.

1. Judgement concerning Zion/Jerusalem

The first time Zion/Jerusalem becomes the explicit point of discussion
in Isaiah 2833 it is as the object of Gods judgement in the prophecy of
judgement of 28:1422. The leaders of Jerusalem are confronted with
strongly worded accusation and presented with unavoidable judgement.
Jerusalem returns again in 29:16 under the name Ariel/altar hearth
and is referred to as a city that will be visited by yhwh Zebaot. In the
prophecy of 32:914, allusion is made for the last time in this segment
of the book to Gods judgement of Jerusalem, the latter designated in
this instance as the city.28

2. Liberation and a new future for Zion/Jerusalem

While the prophecy of 28:56 alludes early in the segment to a new
future for the remnant of the people of yhwh in Judah and Zion
respectively, clear associations with the preceding prophecy of judgement
addressed to Samaria restrict such an allusion to general terminology.
The first time that explicit reference is made to the liberation of Zion
is in 29:78. Somewhat surprisingly, it appears that the struggle of the
hostile nations against Ariel and Mount Zion respectively is pointless.
Liberation is at hand, but further motivation thereof remains lacking.
The reader is presented with the motivation, however, in the prophecy
of salvation of 30:1826: yhwh is a God of justice and He shall respond
with mercy to the cry of the people that live in Zion. 31:45 presents
us once again with an intervention on the part of yhwh in favour of
Zion. Yhwh descends on Mount Zion to engage in battle with those

the threat from Assyria. Along with the central themes of judgement and restoration for
Jerusalem, Brueggemann 1998:217218 draws special attention to the motifs of ears
and eyes and Jerusalems readiness for obedience to Yahweh.
28
According to some exegetes, the theme of yhwh Zebaot visiting Zion/Jerusa-
lem is also present in 31:45 (see Wildberger, Fohrer, Schoors). See, however, Beuken
2000:194203.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 250 2/12/2007 10:56:31 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 251

who threaten Zion. He shall protect and liberate Jerusalem. Without

explicit reference, 32:1520 also describes a new future set aside for
Zion. The theme of liberation and a new future for Zion/Jerusalem
ultimately reaches its climax in 33:2024, in which the eye of the reader
is turned towards the new Zion/Jerusalem.

3. Exaltation of YHWH
The third theme that enjoys significant presence in Isaiah 2833 is
that of the exaltation of yhwh with its antithesis in the humiliation
of every form of human power and every form of human pride. The
theme is immediately and robustly present in 28:56 in a magnificent
set of images intended to be read in contrast with 28:1. Yhwh Zebaot
will be a garland of glory and a diadem of beauty for the remnant of
his people. The second place in which we find reference to the theme
of the exaltation of yhwh is in 30:18, the beginning of the prophecy
of salvation. Yhwh will rise up and show mercy to Zion. The third
place in which the theme is evident is 33:5 (cf. also 33:3,10,21). Stansell
makes the important observation that a close association is apparent in
all the aforementioned texts between the exaltation of yhwh and the
establishment of justice (fP;v]mi). In addition, 30:18 and 33:2 would also
appear to contain a link with the reception of mercy (nj).29

4. (Not) hearing/(not) seeing/(lack of ) insight in Judah

The fourth theme occurs in a variety of different forms in Isaiah 28
33.30 In the prophecy of judgement of 28:713, the priests and the
prophets of Judah are accused of refusing to listen to Gods earlier
words in which He had shown them the path to rest (28:12). Both the
prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 and the prophetic instruction of
28:2329 make an urgent appeal to the reader/listener to pay heed
to yhwhs present message. Lack of insight among the spiritual elite
of Judah is already evident in the mocking question of 28:9 and in the
sheer terror predicted in 28:19. The theme is also implicitly present in
the prophetic instruction of 28:2329 (see 28:26). In the prophecy of

29
Stansell 1996:74: These three texts, 28.16; 30.18; and 33.224, occurring at
the beginning, middle, and end of the section, exhibit close thematic and linguistic ties
which further suggest a thematic unity of the section.
30
Carroll 1997:7993 points to the importance of this theme for our understanding
of the entire book of Isaiah: From 1:23 to 66:24 the book of Isaiah is about seeing
and perceiving, lacking understanding and being blind. (80)

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 251 2/12/2007 10:56:32 AM

 252 chapter five

judgement of 29:914, the accent is placed on the spiritual blindness

of Judahs prophets, which would appear to serve as a reason for guilt
and an element of judgement simultaneously. While allusion to the
said theme was already evident in 28:7, it is elaborated at this juncture
in greater detail. Refusal in Gods judgement becomes a no longer
able.31 In both instances this is associated with the motif of drunkenness.
Cohesion in terms of content is confirmed with respect to Isaiah 28
33 when the prophecy of salvation of 29:1724 presents the renewed
capacity to hear and to see (29:18) and to receive insight (29:24) as
essential elements of the predicted new future.
Once again, the theme of refusal to hear and refusal to see is part of
the complaint in 30:911 (cf. 30:15), while the promise of future seeing
and hearing returns in 30:2021.32 The prophecy of salvation in 32:18
is even more explicit in this regard, speaking as it does of the future
restoration of Judahs capacity to hear and see, including the capacity to
receive insight and knowledge. It is worthy of note that 32:34 exhibits
particular kinship with 29:18. The presence of the theme in question
constitutes an important point of association between 32:18 and Isaiah
2831,33 while the presence of the motif of the royal redeemer also
establishes a firm link between this prophecy and 33:1724. The theme
of (not) hearing/(not) seeing/(lack of ) insight on the part of Judah is
also evident, albeit in a slightly modified form, in the last pericope of
this segment of the book. Seeing is no longer oriented towards the way
revealed by yhwh to his people or the way along which He accompanies
his people, but rather towards the King who is to come (33:17; cf. 30:11
by way of contrast) and towards Zion/Jerusalem (33:20).34

31
For the motif of hardening within Gods judgement, see in particular Isaiahs vi-
sion of call in Isaiah 6. Beuken 1998:19 sees a connection between the call to lament in
32:914 and the motif of Judahs inability to listen. The call to listen (32:9) is intended
to connect the call to lament (32:11f ) with Isaiah 2831: the addressees who refused to
listen to the message of yhwh are now forced to listen to the call to lament.
32
Stansell 1996:76 includes 30:3031 in his treatment of this motif, but the question
of hearing and seeing refers in this instance to the enemy Assyria and not Judah.
33
Beuken 1998:1415 points to additional semantic associations with the preceding
text.
34
After his discussion of this motif, Stansell 1996:77 concludes: The many instances
of the theme, albeit in a variety of forms and contexts, and their close interrelationships
are further indicative of coherence and unity of chs. 2833. Stansell 1996:7887 also
turns his attention in this regard to the important points of cohesion between Isaiah
2833 and Isaiah 112. He begins by noting a number of structural agreements and
then goes on to emphasise the importance of the introductory 28:16, which functions
as an important associative link with Isaiah 112. Stansell speaks of a pattern with
respect to the theme of Zion (Zion indicted/threatened then rescued), which enjoys

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 252 2/12/2007 10:56:32 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 253

5. Social injustice and the restoration of justice respectively

The theme of justice is already present in the promise of salvation of
28:56. Yhwh promises that He will stand as guarantor of a future,
well-ordered society. In the prophecy of judgement of 28:713, it
becomes clear that said well-ordered society is not yet a reality since
Judahs priests stumble in giving judgement (28:7). They refused to
listen to Gods earlier words, which also bore social implications (28:12).
Given the fact that justice and righteousness are so important to God, it
should not come as much of a surprise that they would appear to serve
as the measure of Gods judgement in the announcement of judgement
of 28:17. The need to restore justice is referred to once again in the
prophecy of salvation of 29:1724. The new future will primarily
bring joy to the socially weak, for those who commit injustice will be no
more (29:1921). It is probable that 30:811 and 30:1214 also contain
allusion to all the injustices of which the people are guilty.35 They have
turned aside from the path God has shown them. Nevertheless, the first
part of the prophecy of salvation of 30:1826 also makes reference to
a future change in this regard (30:1821), for yhwh is a God of justice
(30:18). While the prophecy of judgement of 31:13 is addressed in the
first instance against Judahs political activities, allusion is also made in
31:2 to the social injustice present within Judah itself.
The same theme of social injustice is also prominent in Isaiah 3233,
although the emphasis here is placed on the restoration of justice. Firstly,
it is stated in 32:18 that the future king will reign in righteousness and
the princes will rule with justice (32:1). Social injustice will be no more.36
Some forms of social injustice are mentioned by name in 32:58 (cf.
29:21). 32:1617 once again presents a transformation. The future
shall be filled with justice and righteousness. In 33:15 this new future

a thematic and structural parallel in Isaiah 112. In 2833, however, a further develop-
ment takes place of the complex presence of yhwh in Jerusalem, already referred to in
Isaiah 112. On the basis of this further development of the theme of Zion, Stansell is
inclined to consider Isaiah 2833 more as a complement to Isaiah 112 than a supple-
ment to it (thus Clements 1980[B]:3): These chapters also participate in the function
of enhancing and completing the presentation of a prophet begun in chs. 112. It may
therefore be suggested that chs. 2833 are not a supplement but rather a complement
to chs. 112. (85) This conclusion is further reinforced with a reference to the ongoing
development of the theme of (not) seeing/(not) hearing in Isaiah 2833.
35
Exum 1981:335336 has Judahs coalition politics in mind with regard to 30:
1214.
36
Beuken 1998:14 underlines the conscious antithesis between the king and princes
in 32:1 on the one hand, and the princes referred to in 31:9 on the other.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 253 2/12/2007 10:56:32 AM

 254 chapter five

is focused on Zion: God has filled Zion with justice and righteousness.
The consequences of this become visible in 33:1416 where it is stated
that there is only place in a renewed Zion for those who have radically
rejected every form of social injustice.

6. Turning to Egypt for support

In spite of the fact that Egypt is not yet mentioned by name, it is
clear that allusion is already being made in 28:15 to Judahs political
endeavours to seek the support of Egypt in defending itself against
Assyrian imperialist expansionism. In the eyes of yhwh, such a policy
is ultimately a dead end street since Egypt is unreliable as a place of
refuge. The woe statement in 29:15 likewise gives expression to yhwhs
abhorrence of Judahs behaviour in this regard. This only becomes
explicit, however, in the prophecy of judgement of 30:15, which
exhibits terminological kinship with 28:15ff. The oracle concerning the
animals of the Negev (30:67) represents a similar rejection of Judahs
foreign policy. Egypt is disqualified as a source of help and designated
Rahab who sits still. Egypt is a nation that brings no advantage (30:6;
cf. 30:5). The last time we find reference in Isaiah 2833 to the theme of
turning to Egypt for support is in the prophecy of judgement of 31:13,
which begins with a woe statement. Egypts unreliability as an ally is
succinctly stated one final time in the almost axiomatic formulation
found in 31:3: the Egyptians are human, and not God; their horses are flesh, and
not spirit. The presence of the theme of turning to Egypt for support
is limited to what is generally seen as the original core of the present
segment of the book (Isaiah 2831).

7. Assyria as instrument of Gods judgement

While the threat of Assyrian aggression (a consequence of Judahs
rebellion) also represents the occasion whereby help was sought from Egypt,
the threat itself is only discussed within Isaiah 2831 as a consequence
of Judahs coalition politics. God will use Assyria as an instrument of
his judgement. It is striking that Assyria is never mentioned by name
within the framework of the theme under discussion. This only happens
when Assyria itself is confronted with Gods judgement (see below).
The presence of Assyria as instrument of Gods judgement is palpably
evident, however, in a variety of metaphors. This begins immediately in
28:2 (one who is mighty and strong, like a storm of hail, a destroying tempest . . . ),
although the prophecy in question refers strictly speaking to Ephraim
and not to Judah. In the prophecy of judgement of 28:11, the expression

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 254 2/12/2007 10:56:32 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 255

people with an incomprehensible language likewise refers to Assyria. In the

prophecy of judgement of 28:1422, the threat of Assyrian aggression
is first portrayed with the metaphor of the overwhelming scourge (28:15,18),
and then with a return to the metaphors of hail and water (28:17; cf.
28:2). An allusion to the Assyrian army is similarly contained in the
terminology employed in verse 28 of the prophetic instruction (28:23
29; see exegesis above). 29:3 also alludes to the army of Assyria, which
will be used by God together with its towers and siege-works as an
instrument of Gods judgement. To conclude, the pursuers mentioned
in 30:16 refer to none other than the forces of Assyria.

8. Judgement concerning Assyria

While the varied announcements of judgement concerning Judah/
Jerusalem tend to dominate in terms of number, the theme of Gods
judgement concerning Assyria also occurs from time to time. The first
allusion to a change in the fortunes of the nations is to be found in 29:78,
but explicit reference to Gods judgement concerning Assyria only
emerges in 30:2733. The fall of Assyria is likewise spoken of in 31:89,
a text that makes emphatic allusion to Gods personal involvement in
the said fall. Finally, the woe statement concerning the destroyer in 33:1
alludes to Assyria, which is now to be the subject of destruction. Yhwhs
intervention on behalf of Jerusalem clearly has consequences for the
nations that threaten the city (33:34,12). The fact that God is bringing
about a change in the fortunes of his people unavoidably implies that
Assyria must be removed from the scene (33:19).

5.2.2.2. Metaphors
Cohesion at the level of content within Isaiah 2833 is not only
determined by a variety of recurring themes, the text also employs a
number of metaphors with a degree of regularity that likewise enjoy a
cohesive function within the framework of this segment of the book. The
three most important metaphors are drunkenness, waters/rainstorms
and fire.
The first chapter of the segment of Isaiah under analysis is conspicuous
for its various references to the drunkenness of the spiritual leaders of
both Ephraim (28:13) and Judah (28:78). While there is doubtless
a degree of reality behind these references, the motif of drunkenness
functions in the first instance as a metaphor for failing leadership. The
same metaphor is employed in 29:9 to express the reasons for Judahs
inability to see (cf. 32:10,12).

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 255 2/12/2007 10:56:32 AM

 256 chapter five

The metaphor of waters/rainstorms is primarily employed in

the book of Isaiah in reference to the threat emanating from Assyria
(see, for example, 8:58). The frequency of this usage is particularly
striking in Isaiah 2833. The first text to be mentioned in this regard
is the prophecy of judgement of 28:14. The words employed within
the framework of the said metaphor are: drB r<z< hailstorm, bf,q r['c'
tempest and finally ypif]vo yrIyBiK' yIm' r,z< storm of mighty overflowing waters
(28:2). When the threat from Assyria is mentioned once again in the
prophecy of judgement of 28:1422, it is striking that the metaphor
of waters/rainstorms likewise makes its return. In verses 15 and 18,
Assyria is designated as fe/v [f/v] (fyvi) the overwhelming scourge, while
in verse 17 reference is made once again to dr:B; hail and yIm' waters in
combination with the verb fv to flow (cf. 28:2). While reference is made
in the prophecy of judgement of 29:16 to yhwhs visitation, whereby
elements of nature serve as metaphors (see verse 6), the metaphor of
waters/rainstorms is not explicitly present in the said text. The use of
the metaphor in the prophecy of judgement of 30:2733 is particularly
interesting. Although the metaphor is evident in verse 28 (fe/v lj'n" an
overflowing stream) and in verse 30 (dr;B; b,a,w r,z<w: p,n< cloudburst, tempest and
hailstones), it is no longer employed as a reference to the threat stemming
from Assyria but rather for the punishing intervention of yhwh against
Assyria. The substance of Gods judgement concerning Assyria would
appear to be in harmony with the threat that once emanated from
Assyria. The waters/rainstorms metaphor reappears in the prophecy
of salvation of 32:18. The king who is to come and the princes will
be a refuge from the tempest (r,z: rt,s,e 32:2). The use of this particular
metaphor clearly contains an echo of the threat once posed by Assyria.37
The same can also be said for the hailstorm referred to in 32:19, a
hailstorm (dr;B); that can no longer harm Gods people.
A third metaphor employed repeatedly in Isaiah 2833 and which
further serves to bind these chapters together is that of devouring fire,
first mentioned in 29:6. In the prophecy of judgement against Jerusalem,
the altar hearth (laeyrIa,} 29:1,2,7), Gods own people are given the
message that it is going to be visited by yhwh with, among other things,
hl;ke/a vae a devouring fire (29:6). In the prophecy of judgement of 30:27
33 Assyria also receives this message in turn, namely that yhwhs tongue

37
The streams of water spoken of in the same verse have a positive significance and
as such do not form part of the present survey. The same can be said of the rivers and
broad streams referred to in 33:21.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 256 2/12/2007 10:56:33 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 257

is a devouring fire (tl,k;ao vaeK,] 30:27) and his wrath a devouring flame
of fire (hl;ke/a vae bh'l', 30:30). The same message addressed to Assyria
is to be found in a slightly different form in 30:33, in which reference is
made to the presence of a place for burning (hT,p]T); , its pyre (Ht;r;dum]), and
of fire and wood in abundance (hBerh' yxi[ew vae). While the metaphor of
devouring fire is not explicitly present in Isaiah 31, verse 9 announces
nevertheless that yhwhs fire is in Zion (/YxiB] /l rWa) and his furnace is in
Jerusalem (Il;iv;WryBi /l rWNt'w) . 33:11, however, explicitly returns to the fire
that will consume (k,l]k'aOT vae). The extraordinary aspect of the use of
the metaphor at this juncture lies in the fact that the devouring fire that
will consume the destroyer comes from himself. The metaphor reaches
its highpoint in 33:14 when the inhabitants of Zion are asked who can
live with a devouring fire? (hl;ke/a vae). This is close to the statement
found in Deut. 4:24 (cf. Hebr. 12:29), in which God himself is referred
to as a devouring fire.

5.2.3. Evaluation
The chapters of Isaiah 2833 would appear to exhibit a high degree
of cohesion at the level of both structure and content. The six woe
statements (28:1; 29:1; 29:15; 30:1; 31:1 and 33:1) serve as the skeleton
of this segment of the book. Nevertheless, the tone and content of Isaiah
2833 is not only determined by the said woe statements, since it is
characteristic of these chapters that the woe statements are interchanged
to an increasing degree with words of salvation. Cohesion at the level
of content within Isaiah 2833 is evident in the themes described
above, which present themselves repeatedly throughout the chapters
in question. Together with the repeated use of certain metaphors, the
aforementioned themes confirm the conclusion already established by
the structure of the segment, namely that it is intended to be read as a
redactional unity.38
Cohesion at the level of content within Isaiah 2833 can be explained
to a significant degree on the basis of the historical background against
which the original core of this part of the book in all probability
came into existence: Isaiahs involvement during the Assyrian crisis,
while Hezekiah was on the throne, which culminated in the siege of

38
Childs 2001:200 also points out that this segment of the book of Isaiah, to which
he adds chapters 34 and 35, is characterised by an abundant use of expressions stem-
ming from the wisdom tradition together with the technique of intertextual allusion. He
borrows the latter insight from the studies of Beuken in particular.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 257 2/12/2007 10:56:33 AM

 258 chapter five

Jerusalem around 701.39 As a matter of fact, the crisis in which Jerusalem

found itself under threat from Assyria forms the narrative setting within
which a variety of texts, some of a later date, have been incorporated
on the basis of redactional reworking and actualisation.40 What is clear,
nevertheless, is that the content of Isaiah 2833 as we now have it is not
only determined by the threat from Assyria but alsoand in increasing
measureby Jerusalems liberation therefrom.41

5.3. Isaiah 28 as overture

Within the structure of Isaiah 2833 as outlined above, the woe statement
with which Isaiah 28 begins constitutes the first of a series of six woe
statements. While this initial woe statement has to do with Samaria,
its present place in this segment of the book of Isaiah is unmistakably
related to Jerusalem. The location of a prophecy of judgement
against Samaria (28:14) prior to the prophecies of judgement against
Jerusalem and Judah has been determined by a redactional motif. The
fate of Ephraim had to be held up as a warning example to Judah. It is
conceivable as such that 28:16 is intended as an introduction to Isaiah
2833 as a whole, certainly in light of the motif of yhwhs exaltation
that connects 28:16 with 33:5,17 (see 5.2.2.). Given that the prophecy
of 28:713 resolutely continues the theme presented in 28:14 and given
that the four pericopes of Isaiah 28 form a close unity at the level of
both redaction and content within the larger redactional unit of Isaiah
2833, it seems more reasonable to accept that Isaiah 28 in its entirety
is intended as a sort of overture.

39
Cf. Gonalves 1986:138: Indpendant de leur position au sujet de lhistoire de la
rdaction de Is., l-XXXIX, la plupart des critiques situe entre 705701 la plus grande
partie sinon la totalit des oracles isaens de Is., XXVIII, 7XXXII (XXXIII). De lavis
dun grand nombre, la base de ces chapitres il y aurait justement un recueil doracles
isaens relatifs aux vnements des annes 705701.
40
Childs 2001:200 calls this the context of the narrative sequence.
41
Watts 1985:352 one-sided characterisation of Isaiah 2833 as a Requiem for the
Kingdom of Judah does not do justice to the way in which the present form of this
segment of the book of Isaiah presents itself. Indeed, the characterisation requiem is
based in part on the fact that Watts reads Isaiah 2833 against the background of the
final period of Judahs existence as an independent nation during the reigns of kings
Josiah and Jehoiakim (640605). This unusual choice of historical setting does not make
Watts characterisation any less one-sided. The characterisation proposed by Sweeney
1996:353 of Isaiah 2833 as a Prophetic instruction concerning yhwhs plans for Je-
rusalem: announcement of royal saviour is for the present author similarly one-sided,
since it places all the emphasis on chapters 3233. Cf. Berges 2003:199: The divine
king and the Zion community (Isaiah 2835).

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 258 2/12/2007 10:56:33 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 259

An important argument in favour of my suggestion that Isaiah 28

be read in its entirety as the overture to the chapters 2833, lies in
the observation that Isaiah 28 leaves the impression of being a highly
intentional composition. Both prophecies of judgement (28:713 and
28:1422) constitute the core and function together as a diptych (see
4.4.). The said diptych is enclosed on one side by the introductory
prophecy of judgement of 28:14(6) and by the summarising prophetic
instruction of 28:2329 on the other. The presupposition that Isaiah
28 is an intentional composition is confirmed by the realisation that
three of the four individual pericopes of which the chapter is made up
are connected with one another at the redactional level by copulative
particles: g"w in 28:7 (it is probable that 28:7a as a whole is redactional)
and kel; in 28:14. In the chapters that follow this never emerges as
prominently as it does here in chapter 28. It also became apparent that
the individual units within Isaiah 28 are closely related to one another
via a striking degree of word repetition and the use of words of the
same root. One or more cross-references can be found between all four
pericopes of Isaiah 28 (see 4.5.3.).
Not only does the composition of Isaiah 28 support our understanding
of the chapter as the overture to a new segment of the book, the content
thereof also favours such a reading. As a matter of fact, the most impor-
tant themes treated in Isaiah 2833 are already present in Isaiah 28:
1. While judgement concerning Jerusalem/Zion is the central message
of 28:1422, this is already prepared for in the prophecy of judgement
of 28:713.
2. Allusion is already made in the prophecy of 28:56 to the deliverance/
new future for the remnant of the people of yhwh in Judah/Zion.
3. The exaltation of yhwh is referred to explicitly in 28:56, where it is
overtly held up against the pride and arrogance of Ephraims leaders
(28:1). The same theme is also implicitly present in the announcement
in 28:21 that yhwh will rise up to confront the boasters mentioned in
28:14.
4. The theme of (not) hearing/(not) seeing/(lack of ) insight is explicit
in 28:12.
5. The theme of justice is present in 28:56. Yhwh promises that He
will stand as guarantor of a well-ordered society. This contrasts with
28:7 in which reference is made to priests who stagger and reel in
the exercise of justice. The theme of justice and righteousness also
resounds in the important prophecy of 28:1422 (see verse 17).
6. Turning to Egypt for support is alluded to in 28:15.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 259 2/12/2007 10:56:34 AM

 260 chapter five

7. The theme of Assyrian threat is very prominently present in 28:24;

28:11 and 28:15,1719.
The theme of deliverance for Jerusalem/Zion, which becomes increas-
ingly important in the remainder of Isaiah 2833, is only spoken of
in general terms in Isaiah 28. The same can also be said of a closely
related theme, that of the judgement concerning Assyria. The centre of
gravity of Isaiah 28 turns unmistakably around the divine judgement
announced concerning Jerusalem that is to be realised through the
instrumentality of Assyria. Nevertheless, the references to yhwhs salvific
deeds with respect to Zion in 28:16 and the element of hope enclosed
within the prophetic instruction of 28:2329, already constitute the
necessary points of departure for further elaboration in what follows.
As the reader progresses in his or her reading of Isaiah 2833, he or she
will discover that echoes of salvation are becoming louder and louder,
reaching their climax in the final chapter in the woe statement (33:1)
concerning the destroyer (Assyria).
Before the reader arrives at the joyful tidings of the final woe statement,
however, he or she must still pass through four other woe statements
that function as tidings of misfortune for Jerusalem/Judah (29:1; 29:15;
30:1; 31:1). After the first introductory and paradigmatic woe statement
of 28:1, the four central woe statements of this segment of the book
exposes the seriousness of the situation in which Jerusalem finds itself. For
the reader who has read beyond Isaiah 28, this revelation should come
as no surprise. The announcement of imminent judgement concerning
Jerusalem already constitutes the focal point of the individual pericopes
of this first chapter. The emphasis on judgement fits hand in glove
with the message of the four woe statements that are central to Isaiah
2833. Taken together, the woe statements in question give expression
to the inevitability of the judgement with which Jerusalem/Judah are
to be confronted. At the same time, however, the woe statements are
increasingly interrupted with words of salvation. The message of this
structural feature of the text is clear: the salvation towards which this
part of the book is working, which constitutes its ultimate goal, reveals
Gods deepest plans for Jerusalem and its leaders, but remains a goal
that can only be achieved in and through judgement.42

42
From the perspective of the book of Isaiah as a whole, Berges favours an ab-
stracting interpretation of the five woe statements in 2831, claiming that they are not
intended to expose concrete guilt but rather to draw attention to the behaviour ex-
pected of the Zion community; cf. Berges 1998:200: Sie dienen im Gegensatz zu ihren

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 260 2/12/2007 10:56:34 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 261

In terms of the judgement itself, Jerusalem is to undergo the same fate

as Samaria. The reader is lead to this conclusion on the basis of the first
woe statement in 28:1. The fact that Samaria functions as the paradigm
for Jerusalem and its leaders, however, only becomes evident in the course
of the chapter. Initially, 28:14 appears to be nothing more than the
continuation of the prophecies against the nations described in Isaiah
1323. Via the motif of drunkenness, which connects the prophecy
of judgment of 28:713 with the woe statement of 28:1, however, a
surprising analogy is established between Ephraim and Judah: Judah
also staggers with wine. Nevertheless, the addressees are only explicitly
localised in Jerusalem in the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422. While
the place of rest mentioned in 28:12 refers unmistakably to Zion, the
absence of a more precise localisation in the prophecy of judgement
of 28:713 might initially leave the impression that the drunkards of
Ephraim are its addressees. Isaiah 28 is edited in such a way that the
transition from Samaria to Jerusalem is only gradually made explicit.
The effect of such a refined structure is that the paradigmatic woe
statement of 28:1 ascribes the character of an introduction to Isaiah
28 as a whole. By placing Samaria and Jerusalem on an equal footing,
it assures itself of an attentive audience and raises the albeit implicit
question how such a confrontational identification can be reconciled
with Gods past salvific deeds on behalf of Jerusalem/Zion (cf. 28:16).
It is this question that ultimately receives an answer in the remainder of
this segment of the book with its characteristic structure. Gods plan of
salvation for Zion is to be maintained, but it implies that Jerusalem must
first endure judgement.
Based on the above considerations and observations, which relate to
the internal structure and content of Isaiah 28 as well as the place of
this chapter within the framework established by the six woe statements
around which Isaiah 2833 is constructed, one can conclude that Isaiah
28 enjoys a unique character and a unique function within Isaiah 28
33, thus justifying its typification as an overture.

Vorgngern (the woe statements from Isaiah 5, JD) nicht mehr dem Nachweis konkreter
Schuld, sondern sind die dunkle Folie, auf der sich hell abzeichnet, was von Volk und
Fhrern erwartet wird, die jhwh als ihren Richter, Knig und Retter bekennen: allei-
niges Vertrauen auf ihn, auf keine andere Macht im Himmel oder auf Erden! The
present author does not share Berges position in this regard.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 261 2/12/2007 10:56:34 AM

 262 chapter five

5.4. Isaiah 28:1422 as key text and guide

If we are correct in understanding Isaiah 28 as the overture to the

redactional unit Isaiah 2833, then the next step would be to further
determine the place of Isa. 28:1422 in the given context. We already
noted in 4.4. above that the prophecies of judgement of 28:713 and
28:1422 occupy a central place in the context of Isaiah 28 and are
both closely connected in terms of structure and content. Given the fact
that both prophecies differ from one another in clarity and pointedness,
however, and that an increase in clarity and pointedness is evident with
respect to 28:1422, everything would seem to suggest that the prophecy
of judgement of 28:1422 functions as a core text within the context
of Isaiah 28.
While the prophecy of 28:713 is striking on account of its guardedness
with respect to the setting of its message and limits itself to the spiritual
elite, the political leaders, who are responsible for the imperfect course
that is being followed, are directly addressed for the first time in the
prophecy of 28:1422 (cf. the use of the 2nd person) and explicitly
located in Jerusalem. This provides the prophecy of judgement of
28:1422 with the character of a climax within Isaiah 28. Moreover,
the said prophecy informs us for the first time of the precise situation
in which Jerusalem finds itself: political crisis resulting from a misplaced
alliance policy. Jerusalem is under serious threat from the imperialistic
and expansionist advance of Assyria and its leaders are of the opinion
that their alliance with Egypt offers them sufficient protection. This pro-
Egyptian policy serves as the historical background to the majority of
the prophecies of judgement in the remainder of the present segment
of the book. The fact that yhwh despises this coalition policy is made
increasingly explicit in the four central woe statements. While the first
woe statement of 29:1 addresses Jerusalem itself under the name Ariel,
the following woe statement of 29:15 speaks of a clandestine plan. The
woe statement of 30:1 characterises this plan as not having stemmed
from yhwh and refers to it as an alliance. In the further elaboration of
this woe statement mention is made of Egypt as the alliance partner
sought by Jerusalem. The woe statement of 31:1 addresses itself most
directly against the content of the alliance policy so despised by yhwh,
namely the request for assistance in the form of Egyptian horses and
chariots instead of assistance from yhwh, the Holy One of Israel. The
fact that this alliance policy is already referred to in the prophecy of
judgement of 28:1422 and that the alliance with Egypt is typified as a

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 262 2/12/2007 10:56:34 AM

 the place and function of isaiah 28:1422 263

covenant with death, underlines the core character of 28:1422 within

the context of Isaiah 28.
If the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 does indeed function
within Isaiah 28 as a core text, and if the chapter as a whole bears the
character of an overture, then we are obliged to ask ourselves what the
precise meaning of the said prophecy might be for the reader faced
with this entire segment of the book of Isaiah, namely the chapters
2833. It has become apparent from our exegesis of 28:1422 that the
uniqueness of these verses lies primarily in their theological dimension,
which this prophecy of judgement discloses. The judgement announced
concerning Jerusalem would appear to contain a profound theological
motif, a motif expressed in the extremely fundamental statement made
with respect to Zion. Yhwhs salvific engagement on behalf of Zion, an
engagement intended to establish a reliable foundation for the future
of Gods people, has been rejected. It is this rejection of his salvific
engagement that is so offensive to yhwh and that functions as the deepest
motif of the judgement facing Jerusalem and its leaders in the prophecy
of 28:1422 and in the remainder of this segment of the book of Isaiah.
If the reader bears this theological motif of the announced judgement
in mind, it will help him or her to understand the woe statements that
directly follow the overture of Isaiah 28 as they give expression one by
one to the inevitability of the impending judgement.
At the same time, the reader will find security in the knowledge
which he or she can derive from both central pericopes of the overture
that the judgement announced in this segment of the book is a matter of
divine eclipse. The prophecies of judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422
are both characterised by their emphasis on the element of alienation
that is to accompany the divine judgement (see 28:11 and 28:21). Yhwhs
words and deeds will be strange because it appears that He is behind the
advance of Assyria. In addition to the fact that Jerusalems experience
of divine eclipse is in itself extremely dramatic and an extraordinary
shock, the very notion of divine eclipse implies that, for yhwh, speaking
and acting in judgement are profoundly uncharacteristic divine features.
In other words, following the initial shock (see verse 19b), the careful
reader will already be able to derive an element of hope from the way
in which divine judgement is announced in the central pericopes of the
overture, namely that judgement is not Gods final word with respect
to Jerusalem. In other words, the statement concerning Zion in 28:16
in particular is so fundamental that its significance and eloquence rises
above the context of the announcement of judgement within which

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 263 2/12/2007 10:56:34 AM

 264 chapter five

it is located. The emphasis placed by the Zion text of 28:1643 on the

rock-solid character of the foundation being established by yhwh has
the capacity to stimulate the expectation among its readers that yhwhs
salvific deeds with respect to Zion will endure through the period of
divine eclipse and will never be undone by the announced judgement,
no matter how inevitable the latter presently seems. While there is an
absence of faith among its addressees, the prophecy of judgement of
28:1422 does not state that yhwh intends to go back on his plan of
salvation for Zion. Even in the context of the prophecy of judgement,
therefore, the terminology employed for the stone in Zion serves to
underline the reliability of the foundation laid by yhwh in the past. It
should not come as a complete surprise to the reader of Isaiah 2833
that the remainder of this segment of the book contains an increasing
number of promises of salvation for Zion.
Based on the abovementioned considerations, the present author is
able to conclude that the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 serves as
a guide for the reader of Isaiah 2833, more so than the closely related
prophecy of judgement of 28:713, and in particular because of the Zion
text of 28:16.43 As a salvation-historical retrospective in the context of
the announcement of judgement, the Zion text exposes the theological
motif behind the various statements of judgement concerning
Jerusalem and yhwhs detestation of the alliance politics of its leaders.
As a reference to the reliability of yhwhs salvific deeds, the Zion text
simultaneously opens a new perspective for its readers, namely that the
impending judgement of Jerusalem cannot be yhwhs last word. This
is underlined by the fact that the judgement itself is designated in this
prophecy as an uncharacteristic and strange work of yhwh. As core text
within the context of Isaiah 28 understood as an overture, the prophecy
of judgement of 28:1422 can thus be understood as an interpretative
key to the remainder of this segment of the book.

43
Cf. Watts 1985:368369: The strategic position of this episode (28:1422, JD) in
Act V (Isaiah 2833, JD) is clear. It states the terms of tension which will dominate the
act as they had the history of Judah during its final decades of existence.

dekker_f6_242-264.indd 264 2/12/2007 10:56:34 AM

 CHAPTER SIX

THE ZION TEXT OF ISAIAH 28:16 AND THE

ZION TRADITION IN ISAIAH

6.1. Introduction

The present volume has limited itself to the Zion text of Isa. 28:16,
with the presentation of an exegesis of the said Zion text in its present
context as its primary goal. This exegesis is to be found in the fourth
chapter, in which Isaiah 28 as a whole serves as the context. In chapter
five, the context of our study was expanded to include Isaiah 2833.
In the present chapter, we will offer the results of our research with a
view to drawing some provisional conclusions as a point of departure
for further research into the place of Zion and the Zion tradition in
the preaching of Isaiah.
Given that the only point of access we have at our disposal to the
preaching of the prophet Isaiah is via the book that bears his name,
we will begin the present chapter with a survey of the extent to which
Zion as a theme is represented in the first part of the book of Isaiah
(139) together with the manner with which it is presented therein.
While limiting ourselves to the first part of the book of Isaiah might
seem strange at a time in which the book in question has come to be
considered more and more as a unity, the procedure nevertheless goes
hand in hand with the goal of our study, which is oriented in the first
instance towards the preaching of the prophet Isaiah. As a matter of
fact, Isaiahs preaching serves as the point of departure that ultimately
made it possible for the book of Isaiah to evolve and crystallise through
the centuries into the book we now have at our disposal, the book
in which the theme of Zion has acquired such a prominent role.
Even though contemporary research into the book of Isaiah tends to
approach the text as a unity and is less inclined to speak of a Proto-
Isaiah, a Deutero-Isaiah and a Trito-Isaiah, it remains a fact that the
book of Isaiah as a whole came into existence against the background
of a variety of temporal frameworks (globally subdivided as pre-exilic,
exilic and post-exilic) and that the original preaching of the Jerusalemite
prophet was ultimately written down in the first part of the book. The

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 265 1/18/2007 1:36:40 PM

 266 chapter six

survey we plan to provide in the present chapter, therefore, is intended

to offer an impression of the prominent place already enjoyed by the
theme of Zion in this first part of the book.
The promised survey will be followed by a presentation of the results
of our exegesis of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16. To this end, we will refer
back to the observations made in chapter four of the present volume
and to the step by step evaluation already provided therein. The said
observations can now be brought together with the results of chapter
five concerning the place of 28:1422 in the context of Isaiah 2833
as we move towards the formation of a more complete picture.
A detailed and extensive study of the Zion tradition would take us
far beyond the boundaries of the present work. The numerous biblical-
theological dimensions of the theme and the many religio-historical
questions that accompany them, deserve independent study. The same
is ultimately true even if we were to limit ourselves to a study of the
Zion tradition within the preaching of Isaiah as a whole. Indeed, an
adequate treatment of the subject would demand the submission of
many more texts from the book of Isaiah to exegetical analysis than
has been possible in the present study. The author remains convinced
nevertheless that this exegetical study of the Zion text of 28:16 can
contribute to the understanding of the place of Zion and the Zion
tradition in the preaching of Isaiah. Bearing this in mind, a survey of
the history of research into the Zion tradition represents an essential
element of this chapter. The survey will limit itself to the more signifi-
cant moments in this history, confronting them with the results of our
research into the Zion text of 28:16.

6.2. Zion in the first part of the book of Isaiah (139)

The name /Yxi Zion occurs with considerable frequency in the book
of Isaiah: 47 references in total, consisting of roughly one third of the
references found in the Old Testament as a whole (153)1 and precisely
the same number as all of the remaining prophetic texts taken together.2

1
Otto 1989:1007 arrives at a total of 152 references in the Old Testament and 46
in Isaiah because he does not include Isa. 30:19. Stolz 19792:544 arrives at a total of
154 places in which Zion is referred to in the Old Testament because he counts more
references in the Psalms.
2
For the sake of comparison: Jeremiah: 17x, Joel: 7x, Amos: 2x, Obadiah: 2x, Micah:
9x, Zephaniah: 2x, Zechariah: 8x. Among the historical books of Samuel, Kings and

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 266 1/18/2007 1:36:41 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 267

Of the 47 references in the book of Isaiah, no less that 29 are to be

found in the first part of the book (Proto-Isaiah, 139).3 In the present
paragraph we will offer a brief overview of the various contexts in which
the name Zion is referred to in the first part of the book of Isaiah.
In order to establish a clear picture of the various contexts in which
the name Zion is employed in Isaiah 139, we subdivide its usage into
three distinct categories:
1. Texts in which explicit reference is made to Mount Zion (9);4
2. Texts in which reference is made to the daughter of Zion (3);5
and
3. Texts in which Zion is employed independently (17).6

1. Mount Zion
References to /YxiArh' Mount Zion in the book of Isaiah are numerous.
The designation usually bears theological connotations, in the sense
that Mount Zion no longer represents a hill in the south-eastern part
of Jerusalem with a fortified stronghold on top as was originally the
case (see 2 Sam. 5:7; 1 Chron. 11:5), but rather the hill to the north-
east of Jerusalem upon which the presence of the temple can be
dated back to the tenth century. The said theological connotations are
already evident in 8:18, in which Mount Zion is explicitly designated
as the dwelling place of yhwh Zebaot (/Yxi rh'B] keVoh' t/ab;x] hw:hy).7
Mention of Mount Zion in Isaiah 139 is consistently related to the
presence of yhwh and his temple in the location. This is evident, for
example, from 18:7, in which t/ab;x] hw:hyAve /qm] the place of the name of

Chronicles, the name Zion is only found 6x. The Psalms contain 37 references, Song
of Songs 1, and Lamentations 15.
3
When compared with the Masoretic text, the name Zion is found on 8 more
occasions in the Septuagint of Isaiah. In the following texts, the presence of the name
represents a plus in the LXX: 1:21; 9:10; 22:1,5; 23:12; 25:5; 32:2 and 52:1. The only
Old Testament biblical book to exhibit the same phenomenon is the book of Daniel.
This information stems from a reading given by A. van der Kooij to the Jesaja Werkplaats
(Isaiah Workshop) on September 20th, 2002.
4
See Isa. 4:5; 8:18; 10:12; 18:7; 24:23; 29:8; 31:4 and 37:32. I also include 10:32
(Ketib: the mountain of the house of Zion) in this category. Cf. 16:1 (the mountain of the
daughter of Zion).
5
See Isa. 1:8; 16:1; 37:22; cf. Qere 10:32.
6
See Isa. 1:27; 2:3; 3:16,17; 4:3,4; 10:24; 12:6; 14:32; 28:16; 30:19; 31:9; 33:5,14,20;
34:8; 35:10.
7
Cf. Ps. 74:2: /B T;nk'v; hz< /YxiArh' Mount Zion, where you came to dwell. The same idea
is also present in Ps. 68:17: /Tb]vil] yhila dm'j; rh;h; the mount that God desired for his abode.
See also Ps. 78:68: bhea; rv,a} /Yxi rh' Mount Zion, which He loves.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 267 1/18/2007 1:36:41 PM

 268 chapter six

YHWH Zebaot is identified with Mount Zion, and from 24:23, in which
Mount Zion is explicitly associated with the kingship of yhwh Zebaot
(/YxI rh'B] t/ab;x] hw:hy l'm;AyKi for YHWH Zebaot will reign on Mount Zion).
The connection between Mount Zion and the temple of yhwh pres-
ent upon it is most clearly expressed in 10:32, in which the unaltered
Masoretic text speaks of /YxiAtyBe rh' the mountain of the house of Zion.8
This designation is akin to the manner with which reference is made
to hw:hyAtyBe rh' the mountain of the house of YHWH in 2:2. Even where the
connection between mountain and temple is not explicit, as in 10:12, its
implicit presence should nevertheless be maintained.9 A less emphatic
association with the temple is only evident in 37:32, in which Mount
Zion is mentioned as a parallel of the house of Judah and of Jerusa-
lem. In the majority of instances, however, the sequence is the other
way round with Jerusalem functioning as a parallel of Mount Zion (see
10:12 and 24:23; cf. 2:3).10
If the presence of the temple or the dwelling of yhwh is included
within the reference to Mount Zion, then it is understandable that the
mountain also functions as a place of religious assembly. This is clearly
the case in 4:5, in which Mount Zion is mentioned in connection with
the gathering of the holy remnant (/YxiArh' /km]AlK; l[' // h;a,r;q]miAl['w) .11
While the prophecy of 1:14 announces that yhwh abhors Israels festive
assemblies (k,yde[}/m) and that his people are ripe for judgement, Zion
in the future, in its capacity as Wnde[}/m ty"rqi city of our festive assemblies,
shall be a secure habitation, a tent whose stakes will never be pulled
up (33:20).
The book of Isaiah not only makes reference to the assemblies of
Gods own people of Israel on Mount Zion but also alludes to the sur-
rounding nations. In 2:25, the otherwise unidentified peoples come

8
The Targum of 10:32 speaks of the mountain of the sanctuary in Zion (see
Chilton). The reference to the sanctuary follows the Ketib of the Hebrew text. The
Septuagint translates, however, with (cf. the Qere of the
Masoretes: /YxiAtB' rh' the mountain of the daughter of Zion).
9
Via the plus Mount Zion in 9:10, the Septuagint also indicates that this moun-
tain is the place in which God is at work:
.
10
The author of 1QIsaa has adapted the text of 37:32 to the usual sequence.
Pulikottil 2001:46, 6566 mentions this as an example of the harmonising tendency
of 1QIsaa.
11
It is announced in 27:13 that the lost and driven out children of Israel will come
from Assyria and Egypt to bow down before yhwh Il;v;WryBi vd,Qoh' rh'B] on the holy
mountain in Jerusalem.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 268 1/18/2007 1:36:42 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 269

to Mount Zion to receive teaching from the Torah and the word of
yhwh. While the designation /YxiArh' Mount Zion is itself not present in
this prophecy, related terminology is used that makes it clear that the
Zion referred to in 2:3 is primarily a reference to Mount Zion. The text
alternates between hw:hyAtyBe rh' the mountain of the house of YHWH (2:2) and
hw:hyArh' the mountain of YHWH (2:3; cf. 30:29). In 18:7, a more specific
announcement is made that the people of Ethiopia are going to bring
a gift for yhwh Zebaot on Mount Zion. Mount Zion, however, can also
stand for the place against which all the nations set out to war (29:8).
In 31:4, Mount Zion is the place upon which yhwh Zebaot descends
in order to go to war against those who threaten Zion!12
Only the first part of the book of Isaiah speaks of /YxiArh' Mount
Zion as such.13 In the remainder of the book of Isaiah, Zion appears
to function as a person, both the subject and object of spoken address.
Reference to Zion as a mountain would seem to be less appropriate in
such instances.14 The third part of the book of Isaiah evidently exhibits
a strong preference for the designation yvidq;Arh' my holy mountain (56:7;
57:13; 65:11,25; 66:20; cf. 11:9 and Il;v;WryBi vd,Qoh' rh'B] in 27:13), a
designation that is also to be found in the Psalms (see Ps. 2:6), albeit in
the majority of cases with a different suffix.15 Reference is also made to
Mount Zion outside the book of Isaiah, especially, once again, in the
Psalms (see Ps. 48:3,12; 74:2; 78:68; 125:1; cf. Ps. 133:3).16

2. Daughter of Zion
A number of references are made in the first part of the book of Isaiah
to the /YxiAtB' daughter of Zion.17 This designation, which exhibits a
degree of affection, is consistently used as a personification of the city of

12
The expression /YxiArh'Al[' in 31:4 is sometimes translated as against Mount Zion
instead of on Mount Zion. This interprets the text in question in light of yhwhs coming
judgement rather than as a defensive operation on his part (cf. 29:14).
13
The Septuagint also refers to a valley of Zion. The expression /yZ:ji ayGE valley of
the vision is translated in 22:1 as and in 22:5 as .
14
See Berges 2001:64.
15
Cf. /vdq;Arh' in Ps. 3:5; 48:2; 99:9 and v,dq; rh' in Ps. 15:1; 43:3.
16
The remaining locations are: 2 Kgs 19:31 (= Isa. 37:32); Lam. 5:18; Joel 2:32;
Ob. 1:17,21 and Mi. 4:7.
17
Stinespring 1976:985 suggests we translate /YxiAtB' as maiden Zion, meaning
something like darling Zion. While such a translation correctly renders the intention
of the expression, daughter of Zion has become a fairly standard expression in Old
Testament exegesis and thus deserves to be maintained if for this reason only. In some
manuscripts of the Septuagint, /dyxiAtB' daughter of Sidon in 23:12 is also translated as
daughter of Zion.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 269 1/18/2007 1:36:42 PM

 270 chapter six

Jerusalem (and its inhabitants).18 The said personification is most explicit

in 37:22 in which the name Il;v;Wry tB' daughter of Jerusalem is used by
analogy with /YxiAtB' (tl'WtB]).19 The fact that /YxiAtB' already functioned
as a personification of Jerusalem at a relatively early date is apparent
from a particular Isaianic text1:8in which /YxiAtB' is identified with
hr;Wxn ry[i a besieged city (BHS: hr;/xn ry[i). Of particular interest in this
regard is the expression /YxiAtB' rh' the mountain of the daughter of Zion,
employed in 16:1. The theological connotations originally associated
with reference to Mount Zion would appear to be lacking here. It is
conceivable that the designation /YxiAtB' in 16:1 already refers to the
community of the remnant that had gathered round Mount Zion. If
we follow the Masoretic Qere, then it might be possible to say the same
with respect to 10:32, in which /YxiAtB' rh' the mountain of the daughter
of Zion would then be read instead of /YxAtyBe rh' the mountain of the
house of Zion, further designated in the same verse as Il;v;Wry t['b]GI the
hill of Jerusalem.20
In the remainder of the book of Isaiah, the expression /YxiAtB' daughter
of Zion is only found elsewhere in 52:2 and 62:11. The designation is
much more frequent in Jeremiah and Lamentations. The same can be
said for the related expression yMi['AtB' daughter of my people, which, as
far as the book of Isaiah is concerned, only occurs in 22:4.21

3. Zion (used independently)

The majority of examples of the name Zion in the first part of the
book of Isaiah represent independent use. This occurs within a variety

18
Van der Kooij (reading Jesaja Werkplaats [Isaiah Workshop] dated September 20th,
2002) presupposes that the expression daughter of Zion in the Septuagint of Isaiah
serves as a designation of Mount Zion and not of the city of Zion. He appeals in this
regard to 10:32, in which the words /YxiAtB' rh' mountain of the daughter of Zion (Qere
MT) are rendered in the Greek text in such a fashion that both expressions are unre-
lated: . The designation daughter of Zion would appear
in this instance to function as an explicitation of the mountain.
19
The designation /YxiAtB' tl'WtB] virgin Zion only occurs elsewhere in the Old
Testament in 2 Kgs 19:21 (= Isa. 37:22) and Lam. 2:13. Cf. yMi['AtB' tl'WtB] in Jer. 14:17;
laer;c]yI tl'WtB] in Jer. 18:13; 31:4,21; Am. 5:2 and hd:WhyAtB' tl'WtB] in Lam. 1:15. The
designation Il;v;Wry tB' daughter of Jerusalem is also found in 2 Kgs 19:21 (= Isa. 37:22);
Lam. 2:13,15; Mi. 4:8; Zeph. 3:14 and Zech. 9:9.
20
Cf. 31:4 in which Ht;[;b]GI her hill is used as a parallel for /YxiArh' Mount Zion.
21
Of the 23 uses of the expression /YxiAtB' daughter of Zion in the Old Testament,
the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations account for no less than 11. Distribution
throughout the remaining books is as follows: Kings: 1x, Psalms: 1x, Micah: 4x,
Zephaniah: 1x, Zechariah: 2x. In addition to Isa. 22:4, the expression yMi['AtB' is only
found elsewhere in Jeremiah (9x) and Lamentations (5x).

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 270 1/18/2007 1:36:43 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 271

of semantic frameworks. While it is impossible to make a strict distinc-

tion between them, the texts containing an independent use of Zion
can nevertheless be subdivided into two groups: (a) those in which
Zion stands for the city of Jerusalem, with or without its inhabitants;
(b) those in which Zion stands for the place of Gods presence and/or
salvific deeds.22
a. The name Zion can be used simply to designate the city of Jeru-
salem. This is the case in 1:27, in which it is stated that Zion shall
be redeemed by justice. Reference here is being made to the city of
Jerusalem. According to 1:21, Jerusalem was once known as hy:rqi
hn:m;an< a faithful city and via the intervention of yhwh it will once
again be called qd,Xh , ' ry[i a city of righteousness and hn:ma; n < hy:rq
i a faith-
ful city (1:26).23 Given the fact that the parallel second colon of 1:27
makes reference to h;yb,v;w those in her who repent, it is highly likely that
the use of the name Zion in the first colon includes its inhabitants.
A statement similar to that of 1:27 can be found in 33:5, which
states that yhwh has filled Zion with justice and righteousness. It
is likewise evident at this juncture that reference is being made to
the city of Jerusalem, which will once again do justice to the name
already mentioned in 1:26. This element is also part of the expres-
sion found in 33:20, in which Zion/Jerusalem is designated as hw<n:
n:a}v' a safe habitation.
The name Zion is likewise used with frequency in the remainder
of the book of Isaiah as designation for the city of Jerusalem (see,
for example, 40:9; 41:27; 64:10), and in most instances the term is

22
Rendtorff 2001:149159 maintains a slightly different subdivision: a. Zion as
location of the temple; b. Zion as location of Gods throne; and c. Zion as designa-
tion of the city of Jerusalem and its inhabitants. Given that the association between
Zion and both the temple and the motif of the kingship of yhwh is most explicitly
employed in reference to /YxiArh' Mount Zion in the first part of the book of Isaiah,
I have not adopted Rendtorffs distinction. When the name Zion is employed with a
theological connotation, it seems preferable to speak in more general terms of Zion as
the place of Gods presence and/or his salvific deeds. It remains true, of course, that
both these notions can only be explained against the background of Jerusalem as the
temple city and that the kingship of yhwh had an important role to play in Isaiahs
conceptualisation of God.
23
The Septuagint of 1:26 has translated the words hn:m;an< hy:rqi as
, whereby the name Zion comes from the following verse 27. The Greek transla-
tor has likewise anticipated verse 27 in 1:21 by adding the name Zion and translating
. The designation of Zion as in 1:26 is striking, given that
LXX speaks elsewhere of Zion as .

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 271 1/18/2007 1:36:43 PM

 272 chapter six

also to be understood as inclusive of the citys inhabitants and/or

the entire people of God (see, for example, 46:13; 49:14; 51:16).
When reference is being made to the population of Jerusalem in
the first part of the book of Isaiah, this is generally made explicit.
The inhabitants of Jerusalem, for example, can be spoken of as
/Yxi bveyO yMi[' my people who live in Zion (10:24) or in short as /Yxi tb,v,/y
the inhabitants of Zion (12:6). The expression employed in 30:19 is
a little more elaborate: Il;v;WryBi bveyE /YxiB] [' people in Zion, inhabit-
ants of Jerusalem. All three of the aforementioned expressions are
used in the context of encouragement. This is likewise the case, in
a certain sense, with respect to the only text in which reference is
made to /YxiB] ra;v]NIh' those who are left in Zion (4:3 // Il'v;WryBi rt;/nh'w
those who remain in Jerusalem) or /Yxi rh'me hf;yleP] a band of survivors
from Mount Zion (37:32 // tyrIaev] axeTe Il'v;Wrymi from Jerusalem a rem-
nant shall go out). Such language presupposes that divine judgement
has been brought to bear upon Zion and the people of Jerusalem
respectively (cf. 1:9).
It is striking thatwith the exception of 2 Kgs 19:31 (= Isa.
37:32)there are no Zion texts outside the book of Isaiah itself
that speak of a remnant in Zion, although there are numerous texts
in which a return to Zion and a restoration of Zion are presented
as future events. The prophecies in the second part of the book
of Isaiah in particular reveal that Zion is to remain Gods beloved
in spite of his judgement and that yhwh will comfort her (see, for
example, 51:3). The name of Zion acquires a broader significance
at this juncture, which then functions as a synonym for Israel as a
whole (cf. 46:13 and 51:16). A small number of places in the first
part of the book, however, already make reference to a return to
Jerusalem/Zion on the part of yIrx ; m] i r,aB, ] yjiDN; hI w' rWVa' r,aB, ] ydIba] ho ;
those who were lost in the land of Assyria and those who were driven out to the
land of Egypt (27:13), and of hw:hy yyEWdP] the ransomed of YHWH (35:10;
cf. 51:11). Reference is similarly made in 34:8 to /Yxi byrI Zions cause,
namely that yhwh plans to side with the city and seek his revenge
against the enemies of his people.24
The necessity of such judgement is evident, for example, from
texts in which reference is made to /yxi t/nB] the daughters of Zion. In

24
52:8 even speaks concisely of the return of yhwh to Zion. According to the
prophecy of 60:14, Zion shall even be called laer;c]yI v/dq] /Yxi hw:hy ry[i the city of YHWH,
Zion of the Holy One of Israel.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 272 1/18/2007 1:36:43 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 273

contrast to Song 3:11, this designation is not used as a respectable

term of address in the first part of the book of Isaiah. It would
appear from Isa. 3:1617 that the expression /Yxi t/nB] refers to
female inhabitants of Jerusalem who are noteworthy for their whor-
ish behaviour whereby they have called yhwhs judgement upon
themselves. Isa. 4:4 even speaks of a spirit of judgement and a spirit
of burning, whereby the Lord shall wash away /YxiAt/nB] ta'xo the filth
of the daughters of Zion and cleanse the bloodstains of Jerusalem. In
more general terms, 33:14 makes reference to yaiF;j' /YxiB] the sinners
in Zion.25
b. The designation yaiF;j' /YxiB] the sinners in Zion employed in 33:14 is
actually a contradictio in terminis, since the presence of yhwh would
appear to be included along with the name of Zion. There is an
evident awareness that people who behave unjustly cannot live in
proximity to yhwh, for He is hl;ke/a vae a devouring fire (see also 29:6
and 30:30) and l;/[ ydeq/] m an everlasting furnace (cf. 31:9). Several texts
can be mentioned in which the presence of yhwh echoes explicitly
in the use of the name Zion. In addition to the aforementioned
33:14, this is clearly the case with respect to 31:9, which states that
yhwh has a fire /YxiB] in/on Zion and a furnace Ilv ; W; ryBi in Jerusalem.
In spite of the parallel with the name Jerusalem, the use of Zion
in this instance does not refer to the city as such, but rather to the
place of Gods presence. Zion is likewise placed in the foreground
here. Reference is also made in the immediate context to Mount
Zion (see 31:4), a designation with explicit theological connotations.
It can also be said of Isa. 2:5 that the name Zion does not func-
tion in this instance as a simple parallel for the city of Jerusalem.
In the preceding verses, reference is made to the pilgrimage of the
nations to hw:hyAtyBe rh' the mountain of the house of YHWH (2:2), hw:hyArh'
the mountain of YHWH and bqo[}y" yhela tyBe the house of the God of Jacob
(2:3). When it is then stated that Torah goes forth from Zion and
the word of yhwh from Jerusalem, it is clear that allusion is being
made to the temple as the place of Gods presence. Once again,
Zion enjoys pride of place in this instance.

25
Rendtorff 2001:158 concludes: Bei allen Unterschieden im einzelnen zeigt sich,
da die Bezeichnung Zion fr die Stadt und ihre Bewohner vor allem dort verwendet
wird, wo von ihrer Bedrohung und Verletzlichkeit bis hin zur Zerstrung, dann aber
auch von ihrer Trstung und Wiederherstellung die Rede ist.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 273 1/18/2007 1:36:44 PM

 274 chapter six

While the name Zion in the remainder of the book of Isaiah

usually functions as the addressee of salvation and thereby as repre-
sentative of the people of yhwh, the return of yhwh to Zion (52:8)
implies at the same time that Zion can be designated /Yxi hw:hy ry[i
laer;c]yI v/dq] city of YHWH, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel (60:14).
Jerusalem is similarly referred to in the second part of the book as
vd,Qho ' ry[i the holy city (48:2; 52:1; cf. v]dq
; yre[; your holy cities in 64:9,
translated by LXX as: city of your sanctuary).
The Psalms in particular make frequent reference to Zion in this
theological sense.26
An important theological connotation is also present in the two
texts in which reference is made to the foundation of Zion. The
Zion text of 14:32 proclaims that yhwh has founded Zion (dS'yI hw:hy
/Yxi) and that the afflicted of his people find refuge in her. Isa. 28:16
makes reference to the foundation stone that yhwh has laid in Zion

26
In Ps. 9:12 we find the expression /Yxi bveyO hw:hy YHWH, who dwells in Zion (cf. also
Ps. 135:21: Ilv ; W; ry kevo /Yximi hw:hy WrB; blessed be YHWH from Zion, He who dwells in Jerusalem.).
Ps. 76:3 explicitly proclaims that Gods dwelling is in Zion (/Yxib] /tn:/[m]), a fact that has
its roots in a choice that ultimately gives expression to Gods love (Ps. 87:2; cf. Ps. 78:68
and 132:13). Psalm 132 in particular employs a selection D of words to describe Gods
dwelling on Zion: hw:hyl' /qm; a place for YHWH (v. 5), bqo[}y" rybia}l' t/nK;v]mi a dwelling place
for the Mighty One of Jacob (v. 5; cf. v. 7: wyt;/nK]v]mi his dwelling place), wyl;gr' doh' his footstool
(v. 7), t,j;Wnm]li your resting place (v. 8; cf. v. 14: ytij;Wnm] my resting place) and /l bv;/m his
habitation (v. 13). It is possible that Psalm 132 was one of the songs of Zion, sung on
joyous occasions (cf. Ps. 137:3), especially while travelling along the roads to Zion (ykerD "
/Yxi, Lam. 1:4). Rooted in Gods preference, the Psalms describe Zion as yhilaAry[i
(Ps. 46:5 // /yl][, ynEK]v]mi vdoq] the holy habitation of the Most High), and yhilah; ry[i the city
of God (Ps. 87:3). This also explains the call to count Zions towers in Ps. 48:13. While
the latter clearly has to do with Jerusalem as a city, it also goes hand in hand with the
fact that the city in question is br; l,m, ty"rqi the city of the great King (Ps. 48:3) as well
as t/ab;x] hw:hyAry[i the city of YHWH Zebaot (Ps. 48:9 // Wnyhela ry[i the city of our God,
cf. v. 1). Ps. 101:8 likewise makes reference to Jerusalem as hw:hyAry[i the city of YHWH.
Indeed, Jerusalem is the place in which his temple is located (cf. Ps. 68:30). Given
that yhwh dwells in/on Zion, it is possible to address Him as /YxiB] yhila God in Zion
(Ps. 65:2; see also 84:8), and praise Him as /YxiB] hw:hy YHWH in Zion (Ps. 99:2). It is clear
in both Psalm 65 and Psalm 84 that the temple is the point of reference. Since Zion
functions as the dwelling place of yhwh, the Psalms likewise give relatively frequent
expression to the expectation that help and salvation for Israel is to come from Zion
(Ps. 14:7 = 53:7). Particular reference can be made in this regard to the sanctuary,
as is evident from the parallel use of vd,Qomi from the sanctuary and /YXimi from Zion in
Ps. 20:3 (cf. Ps. 3:5). The appeal to yhwh to bless those who fear God/his servants from
Zion echoes repeatedly throughout the Psalms (Ps. 128:5; 134:3). Zion is the location
par excellence from which the glorious manifestation of God can be expected (Ps. 50:2)
and from which the priest-king receives divine legitimation for the exercise of his rule
(Ps. 110:2). Observed from this perspective, it is thus inconceivable that anyone who
hates Zion should go unpunished (Ps. 129:5).

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 274 1/18/2007 1:36:44 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 275

(b,a; /YxiB] dS'yI ynInhi). It would be wrong to argue that the name of
Jerusalem could just have easily been employed in both texts. Yhwhs
salvific deeds are associated in particular with the name of Zion.
The foundation of Zion refers to the place created by yhwh for his
deeds of salvation. The moment of Zions foundation coincides with
the actual realisation of yhwhs option to dwell therein.
In the remainder of the book of Isaiah, no further reference is
made to the earlier foundation of Zion. Yhwh presents himself as
the one who founded the earth (48:13; 51:13,16). In 51:16, the said
foundation of the earth is mentioned in one and the same context
as Gods deeds in relation to Zion: /Yxl] rmoalew r,a; dsoyliw yIm'v; x"fonli
hT;a;AyMi[' I, who stretch out the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth,
and say to Zion: You are my people. Reference is also made in a few
places to a new foundation in Zion. In 54:11, for example, Zion is
informed that yhwh intends to lay her foundations on sapphires
(yrIyPiS'B' yTids'ywI yIn"b;a} WPB' yBirm' ykinOa; hGEhi See, I will set your stones
in sparkling ore and lay your foundations with sapphires). In the context of
the announcement of the advance of Cyrus, moreover, Jerusalem
is similarly informed that the temple shall be provided with a new
foundation (44:28).
One can conclude, by way of summary, that the name Zion is most
frequently used independently in the first part of the book of Isaiah
(139). In contrast to the remainder of the book of Isaiah, Mount Zion
is also referred to with regularity. Much less frequent reference is made
to the daughter of Zion. When Zion is used independently it often
refers to the city of Jerusalem, sometimes including its inhabitants. Of
greater importance are the texts in which the name Zion functions as
the place of Gods presence and/or his salvific deeds. Such theological
connotations resound, for the most part, automatically when reference
is made to Mount Zion, since the latter is primarily associated with the
presence of the temple.

6.3. Results of the exegesis of the Zion text of Isaiah 28:16

The Zion text of Isa. 28:16 constitutes part of a prophecy of judge-

ment that stretches from verse 14 to verse 22. This represents the texts
most immediate context, which is particularly determinative for the
way in which the Zion text functions. While the expression concerning
the stone in Zion in the New Testament and in the tradition of the

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 275 1/18/2007 1:36:45 PM

 276 chapter six

church is almost universally understood as a promise of salvation for

the future, there are four important indications to suggest that such an
interpretation of Isa. 28:16 is not so evident as it might seem:
1. In the first instance, the Masoretic vocalisation and punctuation of
the construction dS'yI ynInhi would appear to point in a different direc-
tion. Indeed, the Masoretes used their vocalisation and punctuation
in all probability to prevent the careless reader from interpreting the
verb dsy as a futurum instans (dseyO ynInhi) and thereby associating the
Zion text with some future salvific deed on the part of God. While
Qumran and the Septuagint presuppose an interpretation of 28:16
as a promise of salvation in contrast to the Masoretic text, there is
no compelling reason to suggest that the vocalisation of the latter
(the lectio difficilior) be thus emended. Theological conviction within
the community of Qumran and the liberty the Greek translators
permitted themselves provide sufficient explanation of the variant
readings of 28:16.
2. The reading of the Masoretic text is supported by the semantic
value of the pi{el of the verb dsy. While the qal of dsy has a broader
meaning, the pi{el thereof has a specific architectural significance,
namely to lay a foundation. The Masoretic vocalisation dS'yI thus fits
well within the semantic field of 28:16.
3. Agreement with the Zion text of 14:32b, moreover, likewise rep-
resents an important indication that the Zion text of 28:16 should
not be ascribed a future meaning but should be understood rather
as calling to mind a former salvific deed with respect to Zion.
4. The Zion text 28:16 is located within the framework of a prophecy
of judgement. In line with the usual pattern exhibited by such a
prophecy (accusation + announcement of judgement), we would
expect an announcement of judgement from verse 16 onwards,
following the formulation of the accusation in verses 14 and 15. A
salvation-historical retrospective moment fits better within such a
context than a promise of salvation for the future.
Based on this information it seems logical not to understand the Zion
text of 28:16 as a promise of salvation but rather as a salvation-historical
retrospective moment within the framework of an announcement of
judgement. The seriousness of the judgement being announced by the
prophet is underlined by an explicit reminder of Gods misunderstood
salvific deeds with respect to Zion: See, I am the one who laid in Zion a
foundation stone, a weighty stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 276 1/18/2007 1:36:45 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 277

With the reference to the foundation stone laid in Zion, the prophet
alludes to the tradition that yhwh has chosen Zion as his dwelling
place. While this tradition is referred to explicitly in 8:18, the belief
that yhwh dwelt on Zion is implicitly contained in a number of state-
ments concerning Zion, particularly those in which Zion is referred
to as Mount Zion. The appositional expression in Zion should not
therefore be understood in the locative sense, which would otherwise
mean that the said stone was to be distinguished from Zion as such and
further located within Zion, but rather as functioning as an additional
qualification. Yhwh has established a rock-solid foundation in Zion itself.
The message of 28:16 agrees more or less with that of 14:32b, which
speaks of the founding of Zion. In line with the text of the Septuagint,
the stone referred to in 28:16 acquires a Messianic interpretation in the
New Testament and in the Early Church (Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet. 2:6).
This Messianic interpretation presupposes an understanding of 28:16
as a promise of salvation for the future, whereby the stone and Zion
are automatically distinguished from one another. We are then in fact
dealing with the announcement of something new, of a new deed on
the part of yhwh that is to take place in an already existing Zion. The
faith referred to at the end of 28:16 is associated in the New Testament
with Christ, as personification of the stone laid in Zion. As the plus in
the Septuagint ( ) and the New Testament suggests, however,
the Masoretic text does not associate the said faith with the foundation
stone as such but rather with the entirety of the aforementioned salvific
deed with respect to Zion. The verb ma hi., employed in the absolute
form, is intended to underline the reliability of this salvific deed. The
concluding words of 28:16 also implicitly expose a lack of faith in the
case of the rulers of Jerusalem, since those who believe in Gods salvific
deeds would not have had reason to hurry off. The prophet implies at
this juncture that he is already aware that Jerusalems political leaders
had misunderstood the salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion.
The announcement of judgement in 28:17a is the immediate result of
this knowledge. Yhwh is going to take measure of his people on the
basis of his previous salvific deeds with respect to Zion. The norms of
justice and righteousness that were established together with yhwhs
dwelling in Zion would now appear to be employed as the standard
criteria for judgement.
In the context of the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422, the politi-
cal implications of the foundation stone laid in Zion are perhaps the
most conspicuous. The salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 277 1/18/2007 1:36:45 PM

 278 chapter six

imply the promise of a safe refuge for his people (cf. 14:32). The fact
that the leaders of Jerusalem misunderstand these deeds, however, forces
them to depart in haste in search of an alternative place of refuge.
Their behaviour is evocatively described in the accusation as establish-
ing a covenant with death. This latter expression does not serve to name
the futile efforts of the powerful in Jerusalem in seeking refuge in the
protection of Egypt against the Assyrian advance but rather to char-
acterise these efforts. In order to disqualify Jerusalems coalition politics
on religious grounds also, the prophet employs words of a strikingly
religious hue. In spite of their expectations, their choice of refuge will
turn out in reality to be deceptive. The prophet gives expression to this
conviction by speaking about the covenant with death with a degree
of irony. By looking to Egypt for refuge instead of placing their trust
in the promise contained in Gods salvific deeds with respect to Zion,
the leaders of Jerusalem ultimately signed their own death warrant. In
the deluded process of securing sufficient protection against death they
ultimately embraced death. There would appear to be no convincing
arguments in support of a connection between the said covenant with
death and the phenomenon of necromancy. The arguments raised in
this regard tend to be extremely hypothetical and, in certain instances,
even speculative.

The broader context of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is constituted by

the prophecies of judgement found in 28:713 and 28:1422, which
function together as a sort of diptych. Both prophecies of judgement
are closely related to one another in terms of structure and content.
Taking the traditional structure of a prophecy of judgement as our
point of departure, namely the formulation of an accusation followed
by an announcement of judgement, it is striking that both prophecies
each contain two surprising elements:
1. In the formulation of the accusation, the prophet has integrated
a quotation into both prophecies, whereby the accused themselves
are given a verbal role in the debacle. In the accusation of the first
prophecy of judgement, the quotation consists of verses 9 and 10;
verse 15 is marked as a quotation in the accusation of the second
prophecy.
2. In the announcement of judgement of both prophecies, the prophet
includes a reference to the past: in verse 12 to the salvific message
spoken by yhwh in the past, in verse 16 to a salvific deed performed
by yhwh in the past.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 278 1/18/2007 1:36:45 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 279

Cohesion at the level of content between both prophecies of judgement

(28:713 and 28:1422) is both historical and theological in nature:
1. From the historical perspective it is important that the world power
Assyria represents the executor of Gods judgement in both instances.
Although the name of Assyria is not mentioned explicitly, the
prophet alludes to the incomprehensible language of the Assyrians
in verse 11, and employs a metaphor in verse 18 (cf. v. 15), which
refers to their imperialism and expansionism. Both prophecies are
best understood against the background of Judahs revolt against
Sennacherib and both can thus be dated to the period prior to the
siege of Jerusalem in 701.
2. From the theological perspective it is important to note that both
prophecies of judgement introduce the theme of Zion. This takes
place in verse 12 without reference to the name of Zion as such. It
would be difficult to identify the place of rest designated by yhwh,
however, as anywhere else. The name Zion is explicitly mentioned
in verse 16. While the theme of Zion is raised in both instances
in the context of the announcement of judgement, it nevertheless
enjoys a special place therein as a salvation-historical motif intended
to underline the seriousness of the announced judgement. Already
proclaimed in former times and now misunderstood by the accused,
yhwhs salvific plans are here associated with the theme of Zion.
3. While requiring separate treatment, a further theological component
is evident that goes hand in hand with the above, namely the motif
of divine eclipse, which binds both 28:713 and 28:1422 together.
Both prophecies allude to the fact that yhwh is concealed behind
the advance of the Assyrians. The said concealment is present in
verse 11 in the incomprehensible speech and alien language of the
Assyrians. It is in fact Gods own speech that has become alien
and incomprehensible. The motif of divine eclipse is present in
verse 21 in the unusual and strange deeds of yhwh. Reference is
made to a complete turnaround in Gods dealings with his people
against the background of Gods salvific message and salvific deeds
respectively.
Based on the kinship outlined so far, with its structural, content-based,
historical and theological features, it is clear that both prophecies of
judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422 function as a diptych. They can
be understood as two originally independent prophecies, each addressed
to a specific addressee, namely the spiritual leaders in Jerusalem on the

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 279 1/18/2007 1:36:45 PM

 280 chapter six

one hand (see v. 7) and the political leaders in Jerusalem on the other
(see v. 14). Both prophecies are now so closely associated that they can
be read as complementing one another.
If we expand the context a little further, Isaiah 28 as a whole comes
into view. The individual prophecies out of which this chapter is con-
structed would appear to be linked redactionally with one another to
such an extent that the entire chapter can be understood as a redac-
tional composition.
The prophecy with which this chapter begins in 28:14, was originally
addressed to the deteriorating leaders of Samaria and should thus be
dated prior to the fall of Samaria. In the present context, however, the
prophecy in question is so closely adjoined to what follows with the
help of the redactional verse 7a that it now functions as a warning to
the leaders of Judah and Jerusalem, that they should learn a lesson
from the fate of Samaria, the former pearl of Ephraim. In addition
to the semantic cross-references between the prophecy of 28:14 and
both central prophecies of judgement of Isaiah 28, evident cohesion
is also observable at the level of content. The said cohesion is created
in particular via the motif of drunkenness (accusation) and the motif
of divine eclipse (announcement). In the present context of Isaiah
28, the prophecy of 28:14 enjoys an introductory function. Against
the background of the fall of Samaria, which was also announced in
advance, the lack of historical awareness on the part of Jerusalems
leaders becomes all the more apparent. Their misunderstanding of
yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion is now supplemented by their
misunderstanding of Gods righteous judgement that had already been
executed against Samaria. They are faced with an urgent question:
what guarantee does Jerusalem have that Samaria did not that can
protect her against the aggressive advance of the Assyrians? The most
important difference between Jerusalem and Samaria is to be found in
the promise hidden within Gods salvific deeds with respect to Zion. If
these salvific deeds are misunderstood, then Jerusalems downfall will
be just as inevitable as that of Samaria.
It is conceivable that the prophetic instruction with which Isaiah
28 concludes originally also existed independently of the preceding
prophecies. In contrast to the introductory pericope of 28:14, this
concluding instruction is probably uttered in the same historical con-
text as Jerusalems revolt against Sennacherib. In the present literary
and redactional context of Isaiah 28, however, 28:2329 functions
as a summarising conclusion. Once again the motif of divine eclipse

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 280 1/18/2007 1:36:46 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 281

enjoys an important place. In contrast to what one would expect in

relation to the announcement of Gods wonderful deeds, it appears
that yhwhs wonderful deeds announced in 28:29 are directed against
his own people. This motif establishes a strong link between 28:2329
and the preceding material, including the semantic association with the
diptych of 28:713 and 28:1422. At the same time, the combination of
prophetic and chokmatic material suggests summary and conclusion.
With the introductory prophecy of 28:14 and the summarising
instruction of 28:2329, Isaiah 28 as a whole can be understood as
a redactional composition within which the diptych of 28:713 and
28:1422 has been given a central place.

Within the present arrangement of the book of Isaiah, the redactional

composition of Isaiah 28 functions as introduction to the segment of
the book consisting of chapters 2833. The narrative setting of this
segment of the book is determined by the Assyrian threat confronting
Jerusalem during the reign of Hezekiah (701) and Jerusalems liberation
from Assyrias grip. The framework of Isaiah 2833 is made up of six
woe statements, the first directed against Samaria (28:1), the second
to the fifth against the leaders of Jerusalem (29:1; 29:15; 30:1; 31:1)
and the sixth against Assyria (33:1). Given its compositional character
and the multitude of allusions to both earlier and later texts from the
book of Isaiah, Isaiah 33 has the capacity to function as a redactional
conclusion to this segment of the book. In comparison with the chapters
that follow, however, Isaiah 28 has a unique function as well. It not only
leaves the impression of being a consciously redactional composition,
but also the content related fact that the most important themes dealt
with in 2833 are already present in Isaiah 28, argues in favour of
understanding the said chapter as an overture. Given the fact that the
paradigmatic character of the first woe statement (28:1), which identi-
fies the fate of Jerusalem with the fate of Samaria, becomes more and
more evident in the course of Isaiah 28, the chapter as a whole thus
acquires an introductory flavour. As noted above, the diptych constituted
by the two prophecies of judgement of 28:713 and 28:1422 enjoys a
central place within the context of Isaiah 28. The more explicit char-
acter of the second prophecy of judgement (28:1422) grants it the
flavour of a climax, allowing us to designate the prophecy in question
as a core text within Isaiah 28 as a whole. The prophecy of judgement
of 28:1422, moreover, is important in respect to what follows Isaiah
2833, and can thus be considered at the literary level as a key text

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 281 1/18/2007 1:36:46 PM

 282 chapter six

and guide. It is the Zion text of 28:16 that gives this pericope such
a function. The statement concerning the rock-solid character of the
foundation laid by yhwh enjoys a degree of eloquence that sets the
significance of the said Zion text above the context of the announce-
ment of judgement in which it has been located. The Zion text of 28:16
reveals the theological motif for the judgement concerning Jerusalem
announced in Isaiah 2833. Judgement is, according to the repeated
woe statements, completely unavoidable. At the same time, however,
the Zion texts emphasis on the reliability of yhwhs salvific deeds on
behalf of Zion already kindles the expectation that yhwh, in spite of
the judgement now confronting Jerusalem, will not abandon the work
of his hands.

6.4. The place of the Zion tradition in the preaching of Isaiah

Prior to the presentation of the results of my exegesis, an overview was

offered ( 6.2.) of the extent to which Zion is referred to in the first
part of the book of Isaiah (139) together with the manner with which
the given references are made. It became evident from the overview
that Zion as a theme already enjoyed a place of prominence in the
first part of Isaiah. The question that now confronts us is the follow-
ing: does this conclusion, which is related to the book of Isaiah, also
apply to the actual preaching of the prophet in the historical context of
the 8th century?
Given the fact that the book of Isaiah exhibits a long and complex
genesis and evolution that extends over more than two centuries, estab-
lishing a picture of the original preaching of the Jerusalemite prophet
is clearly no simple matter. It is generally accepted that the original
core of the book of Isaiah can be traced back to the prophet himself
and that his preaching ultimately acquired its written form in the first
part of the book that bears his name. At the same time, however, it is
also generally accepted that the texts that now constitute Isaiah 139
have undergone a complex redaction-historical evolution. It is for this
reason that contemporary exegetes must exercise great care in their
endeavour to distinguish the ipsissima verba of the prophet himself from
the later redactional contours thereof. In any event, consensus on the
question of authenticity, so important for academic research, is lacking
with respect to a significant portion of the texts that have been passed
down to us. While this might not seem the most auspicious point of

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 282 1/18/2007 1:36:46 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 283

departure, it need not prevent us from endeavouring to explore the role

of the Zion tradition in the preaching of Isaiah. We do so supported
by the positive conviction that no other explanation can be found for
the prominent place enjoyed by the theme of Zion in the present
book of Isaiah than that it was inspired by the original preaching of
the prophet Isaiah himself.
My point of departure is taken from the Zion text of 28:16. The
exceptional fact that a considerable degree of consensus has been
reached within the world of Old Testament studies with respect to
the authenticity of this text enkindles the expectation that a correct
understanding of Isa. 28:16 can shed significant light on the question
of the preaching of the prophet.
Before we endeavour to draw conclusions relevant to the question
of the Zion tradition in the preaching of Isaiah on the basis of our
exegesis of the Zion text of 28:16, however, and before we propose
topics for further research in this regard, it is important that we address
our attention to the Zion tradition as such: what does it mean and how
can it be described?

6.4.1. Research into the Zion tradition

6.4.1.1. Identification of an independent Zion tradition
The designation Zion tradition was introduced by E. Rohland, who
defended his doctoral dissertation in Heidelberg in 1956 with a study
on the significance of Israels election traditions for the eschatological
preaching of the prophets (Die Bedeutung der Erwhlungstraditionen Israels
fr die Eschatologie der alttestamentlichen Propheten).27 Rohland was the first to
speak in this regard of the existence of a Zion tradition and to endea-
vour to describe it. In so doing he made an important contribution
to research into the theme of Zion in the Old Testament. Rohlands
work would be unthinkable, however, without that of his predecessors,
the most important of whom we mention below:
Modern academic interest in the place of Zion in the Old Testament was
stimulated by the historical reality that marked the beginning of the 20th
century. With the fall of the Turkish Ottoman Empire, Jerusalem came under
British authority on December 9th, 1917. From that moment on it was taken
as a matter of course that Jerusalem was to be seen as the capital and seat
of government of Palestine. The fact that Jerusalems privileged position

27
See Rohland 1956.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 283 1/18/2007 1:36:46 PM

 284 chapter six

could not, in the light of history, be taken as a matter of course, however,

was explained in detail by A. Alt, who published an important article in
1925 on the rise of Jerusalem (Jerusalems Aufstieg).28 For centuries, both
the Romans and the Arabs had shown preference for other cities as political
centra (Caesarea, Lydda and Ramla respectively). Moreover, in ancient his-
tory, up to the 1st millennium BCE, Jerusalem had been a minor city state,
in which even the Judeans and Benjaminites, already established in the hill
country, had no particular interest (cf. Judg. 1:21). Alt underlines the fact that
the city of Jerusalem had ultimately been condemned to a Winkelexistenz in
history on account of its natural geographical location, but that the conquest
of the fortress Zion by David had led to the city acquiring a significant role
in the course of history.
In 1928, K. Galling published his dissertation on Israels election traditions
(Die Erwhlungstraditionen Israelsdefended in 1924).29 In order to study Israels
awareness of election, however, Galling limited himself to a discussion of the
Exodus tradition and that of the Patriarchs, although he notes at the same time
that the election of Zion should likewise be mentioned within the framework
of Israels political-religious awareness of its election. Galling characterises
Zions election as pars pro toto and as such did not elaborate the idea as an
independent election tradition.30

In 1933, H. Gunkel published his now classic introduction to the Psalms

(Einleitung in die Psalmen. Die Gattungen der religisen Lyrik Israels),31 in which he
distinguished twelve different genres and introduced the expression Songs
of Zion (in line with Ps. 137:3) to designate a particular group of psalms
that he included among the hymn genre, a genre abundantly represented
throughout the Old Testament (Psalm 46; 48; 76; 84; 87 and 122). A charac-
teristic feature of these psalms is the fact that they not only praise God but
also, and in particular, his sanctuary. While the latter is also to be found with
some regularity in a number of other hymns (Ps. 29:9; 68:16f; 93:5; 96:6; cf.
Ps. 78:68f), greater emphasis on the praise of the sanctuary is evident in the
Songs of Zion.32 Gunkel already suggested the possibility that certain feast
days existed on which the sanctuary was the focus of attention and the Songs
of Zion were recited.33 He makes particular reference in this regard to Psalm
132, which, given its lack of hymnic structure, he includes among the Royal
Psalms and not the Songs of Zion.34
With respect to the relationship between the Songs of Zion and the prophets,
Gunkel presupposes the priority of prophetic preaching. He explains the

28
See Alt 1925:119. This article was later included in Alt 1959:243257.
29
See Galling 1928.
30
Galling 1928:4.
31
See Gunkel 19662.
32
Gunkel 19662:80.
33
Gunkel 19662:63, 81, 368f.
34
Gunkel 19662:140.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 284 1/18/2007 1:36:46 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 285

presence of prophetic-eschatological elements in the Songs of Zion against the

background of the fact that Zion had come to play a significant role in the
future expectations of the prophets precisely after Isaiah.35 Moreover, Gunkel
interprets the fact that God is presented as speaker in a few of the Songs of
Zion as evidence of the dependence of the said psalms on the prophets.36 This
dependence, according to Gunkel, is given expression in terms of content in the
manner with which the joy of the eschatological time of salvation is concretised
in the Songs of Zion.37 It should be noted for the sake of clarity, that Gunkel
limits the dependence on the prophets observed, among others, in the Songs
of Zion, to the eschatological message of the prophets of salvation.38 It is not
surprising that Gunkel dates the majority of the psalms he considers to be
eschatological in character to the post-exilic period. He makes an exception,
however, for the motif of the hostile advance of the nations against Zion and
their ultimate downfall before the walls of the city of Jerusalem. He considers
it probable that such motifs had already been taken up in the Psalms from the
time of Isaiah, referring in this regard to Psalm 48. Gunkel presupposes that
the historical experience of 734 and 701 played an important role herein.39
Perhaps the most powerful initiative in the drive to recognise the existence of
a Zion tradition was to come from G. von Rad who published an important
study in 1949 on the presentation of Zion as the chosen city of God (Die
Stadt auf dem Berge).40 In an endeavour to readjust the image of the prophets
that had remained in force since the time of Duhm, an image whereby the
prophets were seen as the founders of a new religion, Von Rad suggests that

35
Gunkel 19662:81f, 345.
36
Gunkel 19662:82: die Abhngigkeit dieser Hymnendichter von dem Propheten
wird auch daran deutlich, da jene es zuweilen wagen, den Gott selber redend auftre-
ten zu lassen (Ps. 46:11; 68:23; 75:3f; vgl. 84:7f ), was in den berlieferten Hymnen
Israels sonst unerhrt (. . .), in der prophetischen Redeweise aber bekanntlich sehr
hufig ist.
37
See the detailed paragraph Gunkel 19662:329381 devotes to the said theme: 9
Das Prophetische in den Psalmen. Gunkel describes the joy of the eschatological time
of salvation in seven forms: 1. the restoration of the city of Jerusalem and the people
of Israel (333334); 2. the end of the dominion of the nations (334337); 3. victory
over the great natural disasters of the end time (337); 4. the victory of yhwh over the
nations attacking Zion (337340); 5. the dawn of durable peace and a kingdom of
justice under yhwhs kingship (340341); 6. the glorification of the sanctuary on Zion
(341342); 7. the subjugation of the gods to yhwh (342343).
38
Cf. Gunkel 19662:361: nicht die Eschatologie der groen Unheilspropheten, sondern
nur die der Heilspropheten mit ihren lichten, Israel freundlichen Botschaft hat in der
Psalmendichtung Widerhall gefunden. (. . .) Die Auswahl, welche die Psalmendichtung
aus den prophetischen Enderwartungen trifft, besttigt noch einmal, da sie nicht der
Ursprungsort der Eschatologie ist, da sie vielmehr die Propheten voraussetzt. Ihnen
gegenber steht die Psalmendichtung durchaus auf zweiter Stufe, und bei ihr ist
Nachahmung, was bei den Propheten Original ist.
39
Gunkel 19662:379f. Gunkel nevertheless considers Psalms 46 and 76 to be post-
exilic.
40
See Von Rad 1948/49:439447.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 285 1/18/2007 1:36:46 PM

 286 chapter six

the prophets had employed existing traditions in the formulation of their

message.41 As an example of such an actualisation of a notion rooted in the
tradition, Von Rad draws attention to the place ascribed by the prophets, and
in particular the prophet Isaiah, to Zion as the city of God chosen by yhwh.42
While Von Rad makes no reference to an independent Old Testament election
tradition with respect to Zion, he speaks nevertheless of ein eigentmlicher
Vorstellungskreis vom Gottesberg, dessen Herkunft aus der gemeinorien-
talischen Mythologie ziemlich deutlich ist. He considers it conceivable that
the presentation of Zion as divine mountain was associated with the tradition
of the Davidic covenant for the first time by Isaiah.43
Given the limited goals and perspectives of his study, it is understandable
that Von Rad did not achieve a systematic analysis of the various motifs
associated with the Zion tradition. His primary intention was to make it clear
that the preaching of the prophet Isaiah harked back to existing eschatological
propositions and he illustrates this with a discussion of the prophecy found in
Isa. 2:14. According to Von Rad, the said prophecy is authentically Isaianic
and constitutes the first and perhaps the oldest representation of Zion as
divine mountain. While Von Rad is not yet inclined to speak of an indepen-
dent Zion tradition and would appear to prefer to group the Old Testament
references to Zion under the Davidic tradition, he refers nevertheless to 14:32
and suggests in this regard that for the prophet, the legitimacy of Zion con-
sisted exclusively in the fact that yhwh had established it and that the throne
of David was the address of great promises. The reference to 14:32 and the
striking qualification of Zion as der Ort, an den Jahwe sein Heil gebunden
hat,44 already provide an implicit picture of the possibility that the prophetic
statements concerning Zion might also be recognised as an independent and
important election tradition within the Old Testament.
Shortly after Von Radand apparently independent of himM. Noth
also provided an important stimulus to the growing academic interest in the
significance of Jerusalem/Zion within the faith tradition of Israel (Jerusalem
und die israelitische Tradition).45 In line with Alt, Noth also insists that Jeru-

41
Von Rad 1948/49:439: Wir sehen die Propheten vielmehr als Trger und
Verkndiger von eschatologischen Vorstellungen, die in der Volksberlieferung schon
in allem Wesentlichen durchaus fertig ausgestaltet vorlagen.
42
Cf. Von Rad 1948/49:439: Jesajas ganze Prophetie kreist um die von Jahwe
erwhlte Gottesstadt, den Zion.
43
Von Rad 1948/49:440. Von Rad appeals in this regard to the study of J. Jeremias
published in 1919 (Der Gottesberg. Ein Beitrag zum Verstndnis der biblischen Symbolsprache)
among others. Prior to the important discoveries at Ugarit (from 1929), Jeremias had
endeavoured to chart the various propositions associated with the divine mountain.
While his references to Mount Zion as such are few (134141), it is striking neverthe-
less that he is inclined to search for the origins of the motif of Zions inviolability in
the liberation of Jerusalem in 701 (138) and that he attaches a late date to the Zion
Psalms (140).
44
Von Rad 1948/49:441.
45
See Noth 1950:2846. The article in question is also included in Noth 1957:172
187.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 286 1/18/2007 1:36:47 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 287

salem did not play a significant role until the time of King David.46 Noths
observation does not allude so much to the political significance of the city of
Jerusalem as to its religious significance, focused in particular on the people
of Israel.47 The primary transformation of the religious significance of the
city of Jerusalem lies in the transfer of the Ark thereto by King David. Noth
was in fact the first to write in detail on the importance of this event. Given
that the latter had significant doubts as to the cultic legitimacy of this deed48
and was even inclined to characterise it as high-handedness,49 he considers the
hypothesis that yhwh had chosen Jerusalem as the divine city as an attempt
on the part of the Davidic court to justify the kings removal of the Ark to
Jerusalem.50 Indeed more than Von Rad, who also appears to have included
references to Zion as divine city as part of the Davidic tradition, Noth was
inclined to give priority to the said tradition in both historical and theologi-
cal terms. According to Noth, Jerusalem needed the monarchy of David and
his court theology in order to evolve into a city of God. In short, if the city
of Jerusalem had not first been the city of David, then it would never have
been able to become the city of God! Noth ascribes the fact that Jerusalem
was able to maintain this religious status for both north51 and south after the
division of the kingdom52 to the presence of the Ark in the city and to the
enormous significance the Ark had enjoyed in the history of Israel as a whole

46
While a reference to Alts article is absent, Noth 1950:33, 45 would appear to
allude to it on no less than two occasions when speaking of Jerusalems Aufstieg.
47
Cf. Noth 1950:30: Jerusalem hatte keine Beziehungen zu den fundamentalen
berlieferungen des israelitischen Stmmeverbandes, auf denen seine Existenz, sein
Selbstverstndnis und seine Glaube ruhten. Bis zum Ende der vorstaatlichen Zeit
bedeutete Jerusalem fr die israelitischen Stmme, fr ihren Glauben und ihr Leben
schlechterdings nichts.
48
Cf. Noth 1950:32: Es wardas verdient ausdrcklich hervorgehoben zu werden
ein khner und in seiner Legitimitt durchaus fragwrdiger kniglicher Eingriff.
49
Noth 1950:45. Noth writes on p. 31 that Davids decision to bring the Ark to
Jerusalem was based aus anscheinend eigener Machtvollkommenheit unter dem
Gesichtspunkt politischer Klugheit.
50
Cf. Noth 1950:33.
51
Noth 1950:35ff refers in this regard to the reportwhich he considered to be
Northern Israeliteof the activities of the prophet Ahijah of Shiloh. According to
the prophetic narrative, Ahijah considered the abandonment of Jerusalem and the
Davidic monarchy to be legitimate in the political sense, although he likewise strongly
disapproved of the idea of distancing oneself from the cultic significance of Jerusalem
(cf. 1 Kgs 11:36 and 14:118). Noth also maintains on the basis of Jer. 41:5 that a
Northern Israelite tradition of pilgrimage to Israel must have existed, which presupposes
an ongoing recognition of the cultic significance of Jerusalems sanctuary.
52
Noth 1950:39ff is struck by the fact that the prophets of the 8th century do not
make reference to Jerusalem within the context of their Messianic prophecies (appar-
ently finding Jerusalem as royal city not so essential for the Messianic monarchy),
although they do speak of Jerusalem as the place of Gods presence and set aside an
important role for Jerusalem as divine city in the future. In this regard Noth refers to
Isa. 2:24 and 28:16.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 287 1/18/2007 1:36:47 PM

 288 chapter six

immediately prior to its transportation to Jerusalem.53 As a consequence, the

significance attached to the Ark came to be transferred more and more to
the sanctuary in Jerusalem, and Mount Zion was able to evolve into a sacred
mountain, the holiness of which was no longer dependent on the presence
of the Ark. Thanks to this development, Jerusalem was able to maintain its
importance even after the demise of the Ark and the temple.54
In the 1950s, O. Eifeldt was the primary figure who continued to embroider
with the threads first exposed by Noth. Noths contribution had spoken in
more general terms of Israels tradition that had been associated inseparably
with the Ark and transferred to Jerusalem. His hypothesis of the amphyctionic
structure of ancient Israel unmistakably provided the background hereby.
Beginning in 1950, Eifeldt published a number of articles in an endeavour
to chart a few of the traditions that had accompanied the Ark to Jerusalem.
In so doing, he drew attention to the role played by the sanctuary at Shiloh
at the end of the period of the judges. The Ark had in fact enjoyed more
or less permanent residence in Shiloh for a considerable period of time (cf.
Jer. 7:12). In addition to the article published by Eifeldt in 1950 on yhwh
Zebaot,55 reference should be made in the first instance to his study on Shiloh
and Jerusalem dating from 1956 (Silo und Jerusalem).56 The latter article
was written to encourage the resumption of excavations at Shiloh.
Eifeldt argues that the use of the title Zebaot, a virtually untranslatable
epitheton used to give expression to the glory of yhwh, emerged at the time
of Samuel and was associated in all probability with the sanctuary at Shiloh
where the Ark was located (cf. 1 Sam. 1:3,11; 4:4).57 The same was true, he
maintained, for references to the throne of cherubs which, together with the
epitheton Zebaot, gave expression to die Machtflle und Majestt Gottes.58
The title yhwh Zebaot must then have quickly spread throughout Israel and
have remained alive in Israels consciousness even after the destruction of the
sanctuary by the Philistines (around 1050).59 Both the title yhwh Zebaot and
the originally Canaanite notion of the throne of cherubs travelled together
with the Ark to Jerusalem (cf. Psalm 24). Eifeldt is convinced in any case

53
Cf. Noth 1950:43: Denn nur ein Kultobjekt mit schon gefestigter und einmaliger
Tradition konnte dem nicht israelitischen Jerusalem zu jener kultischen Rolle verhelfen,
die bald die Sttze des Knigtums nicht mehr brauchte.
54
Noth 1950:44f.
55
See Eifeldt 1950:128150. This article was published anew in Eifeldt
1966:103123.
56
See Eifeldt 1957:138147. This article was published anew in Eifeldt 1966:417
425. See also the articles written by Eifeldt in 1973: Kultzelt und Tempel. In:
H. Gese and H.P. Rger (red.), Wort und Geschichte, FS K. Elliger, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1973,
5155 and Monopol-Ansprche des Heiligtums von Silo, OLZ 68 (1973), 327333.
Both articles are also included in R. Sellheim and F. Maass (red.), Kleine Schriften VI,
Tbingen 1979.
57
Eifeldt 1950:139ff.
58
Eifeldt 1950:142ff.
59
Eifeldt 1950:148.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 288 1/18/2007 1:36:47 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 289

that Jerusalem would not have become what it ultimately became without
Shiloh.60 With the Ark as Trgerin alter in Israels vorkanaanische Zeit zurck-
reichender gesamtisraelitischer Werte, David transferred the national-religious
values embodied in Shiloh to Jerusalem.61 Eifeldt sees the importance of this
action, among other things, in the counterbalance David was thus able to offer
to the supremacy enjoyed by the Canaanite-Jebusite cultic tradition, which
could have endangered Israels inheritance of service to yhwh.62
At more or less the same time as the studies of Von Rad and Noth discussed
above, H.-J. Kraus was likewise engaged with the theme of Zion, and in an
entirely unique manner. Kraus defended his doctoral dissertation in 1948 with
a study in which he endeavoured to convince scholars of the existence of a
royal Zion feast. Building further on the latter, he published his vision of things
in a book which appeared in 1951 on the kingship of yhwh (Die Knigsherrschaft
Gottes im Alten Testament. Untersuchungen zu den Liedern von Jahwes Thronbesteigung).63
Kraus study primarily represents a rejection of the hypothesis proposed by
S. Mowinckel, who had claimed the existence of a pre-exilic Israelite feast of
accession to the throne by analogy with the feast of the accession of the god
Marduk in the Babylonian tradition. While there is no evidence in the Old
Testament of the existence of such a feast, Mowinckel nevertheless maintained
that a feast celebrating the accession to the throne must have taken place on
the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles (Succoth). Mowinckel had gone on to
ascribe a cultic-mythical interpretation to the so-called psalms of accession.64
On account of its unsound foundations, Kraus vehemently rejects the idea of
an Israelite accession feast for yhwh.65

60
Eifeldt 1957:140.
61
With respect to Gen. 49:10, Eifeldt 1957:140ff points out that the proverb in
question must stem from the time prior to the destruction of Shiloh and that David
may have been known on account of this proverb. In any event, King David did not
bring about the fulfilment of the proverb by going to Shiloh (hlyvi aboy:AyKi d[' until he
comes to Shiloh; the Masoretes mention a Qere /lyvi at this juncture), but rather by
bringing Shiloh to Jerusalem. Von Rad 19787:55 quotes Eifeldt on this point and
with agreement.
62
Cf. Eifeldt 1957:145: Aber dank der Tat Davids hat sich Jahwe strker erwiesen
als El Eljon, so stark, da sogar die Priesterschaft dieses El, Zadok und seine Nach-
kommen, ergebene und zuverlassige Anhnger Jahwes geworden sind.
63
See Kraus 1951.
64
Kraus 1951:1719. Mowinckel associates no less than 46 psalms with his presup-
posed feast of accession to the throne. Gunkel took only five psalms of accession as his
point of departure (47; 93; 96; 97; 99), favouring a post-exilic dating thereof, although
he considered the introduction of a feast of accession already conceivable during the
end of the period of the kings. Gunkel favoured a cultic-eschatological interpretation
of the so-called psalms of accession. See Kraus 1951:1920.
65
Cf. Kraus 1951:23: Solange ein israelitisches Thronsbesteigungsfest nicht durch
berzeugende Argumente aus dem Alten Testament gesttzt werden kann, ist die Existenz
einer solchen Feier in Israel sehr zweifelhaft. See also Kraus 1960(A):201205;
19622:239242 and 1979:103125.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 289 1/18/2007 1:36:47 PM

 290 chapter six

In line with Mowinckel, Kraus claims nonetheless that the story of the
removal of the Ark to Jerusalem by King David in 2 Samuel 6 and the story
of the dedication of the temple by King Solomon in 1 Kings 8 were both
written on the basis of annually repeated festal customs. Given the fact,
however, that the chapters in question make no mention of an accession to
the throne on the part of yhwh, and that 2 Samuel 6 should be read in close
association with 2 Samuel 7, Kraus presupposes that a cultic feast was already
being celebrated at the time of David, a feast in which the election of Zion
and the election of David and his dynasty held pride of place (cf. 1 Kgs 8:16).
Kraus refers to the said feast, albeit provisionally, as the Royal Zion Feast
and places it on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles.66 In any event,
important moments during the feast included the procession with the Ark as
a verbum visibile of Zions election, and the repetition and actualisation of the
prophecy of Nathan. Kraus goes on to derive evidence for the existence of a
Royal Zion Feast from Psalm 132 (cf. Ps. 78:6572).67 He also includes Songs
of David such as Psalm 2; 72 and 89, and Songs of Zion such as Psalm 84;
87 and 122 as part of the cultic hymnal of the Royal Feast of Zion.68 Only
after the exile, and under the influence of the preaching of Deutero-Isaiah
(see, in particular, Isa. 52:710), would it have been possible for the said Royal
Zion Feast to be transformed into an accession feast of yhwh.69 The feast in
question would have been celebrated during the Jewish New Year (1 Tisri).70
It would also have been possible to associate the so-called psalms of accession
with this feast.71
For our present purposes, an important element in Kraus view of things
lies in the fact that he explicitly makes the election of Zion dependent on the
election of David. Noth had characterised Davids transportation of the Ark
as a deed of royal high-handedness and had questioned the cultic legitimacy
thereof. According to Kraus, however, the religious legitimation for the removal
of the Ark as described in 2 Samuel 6 is to be found in the Nathan prophecy
of 2 Samuel 7. The prophecy in question contains an answer to the question

66
Kraus 1951:44ff. On the presupposed Royal Zion Feast see also Kraus 1960(B):879
883 and 19622:215220.
67
Kraus 1951:5159.
68
See Kraus 1951:6581. Kraus excludes Zion Psalms 46; 48 and 76 on account
of their eschatological character (1951:78).
69
Kraus 1951:100111. Cf. the summarising conclusion of Kraus 1951:108:
Deuterojesaja hat die innere Umgestaltung der Botschaft des kniglichen Zionfestes
der vorexilischen Zeit herbeigefhrt, indem erin den Formen und Bildern seiner
Verkndigung durch den babylonischen Kultus beeinflutdie Wiedererwhlung des
Zion und den Anbruch der Knigsherrschaft Jahwes in Jerusalem kundtut.
70
Kraus 1951:112122.
71
Kraus 1951:123143. In his commentary on the Psalms, Kraus is less inclined
to speak of the psalms of accession to the throne. Based on syntactic considerations
(a forefronted subject) Kraus agrees that the formula l;m; hw:hy designates a state of
affairs and as such ought to be translated in the present tense. Only Ps. 47:9 calls for
an alternative translation. See Kraus 1960(A):201205 and 19622:240.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 290 1/18/2007 1:36:48 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 291

addressed by the pilgrims as to the legitimacy of Jerusalem as Israels central

cultic location. As one chosen by yhwh as king, David considered himself
authorised to remove the Ark to Jerusalem.72 The election of Zion is thus
contained within the election of David.73
Inspired by Galling, and with research oriented more towards the original
cultic traditions of Jerusalem, H. Schmid published an abbreviated version
of his doctoral dissertation in 1955 (Jahwe und die Kulttraditionen von
Jerusalem).74 Schmid argues that the cult of El Elyon had long been associ-
ated with Jerusalem and that this god was worshipped as creator and king.
The passage concerning Melchizedek in Gen. 14:1824 plays a crucial role
in Schmids argumentation.75 In line with Mowinckel, Schmid postulates the
existence of an accession feast in Jerusalem that originally focussed on the god
El Elyon. Yhwh, by contrast, had not been worshipped as creator and king
from the beginning.76 Schmid likewise rejects the hypothesis that the king-
ship of yhwh came from Shiloh together with the title Zebaot.77 Yhwh only
took on the characteristics of the god El Elyon after his arrival in the city of
Jerusalem,78 after which He likewise took the place of El Elyon in the accession
feast.79 An important element in Schmids vision of events is the suggestion
that Jerusalem was already known as the divine mountain of El Elyon prior
to the time of King David.80 In the meantime, the removal of the Ark from
Shiloh to Jerusalem by David saw to it that both the Sinai tradition and the
traditions of Israels salvation history were now anchored in Zion and could be
associated with the cultic traditions of Jerusalem.81 This association becomes

72
Cf. Kraus 1951:36: Ohne dieses prophetisches Orakel ist die ganze Lade-
Erzhlung in Gefahr, von den anderen israelitischen Stmmen als Ausdruck einer
politischen Machenschaft der Juder oder eines dynastischen Machtstrebens abgewertet
und sogar abgelehnt zu werden.
73
Cf. Kraus 1951:37: Im Orakel des Propheten Nathan, in der Erwhlung und
Ermchtigung Davids und seiner Dynastie, liegt die gttliche Legitimation des Einzuges
der Lade nach Jerusalem und damit zugleich die Erwhlung der neuen Kultsttte auf
dem Zion beschlossen. See also Kraus 19622:214: Die Erwhlung Jerusalems konnte
auf die Dauer nur mit der Erwhlung Davids erklrt und legitimiert werden.
74
See Schmid 1955:168197.
75
Schmid 1955:177. Schmid dates the text concerning Melchizedek to the period
after the division of the kingdom when Jerusalem had also to be made acceptable as
a cultic location for the northern kingdom and was therefore brought into association
with the patriarchal tradition.
76
In so doing, Schmid 1955:171f turns his back on the hypothesis of Buber
(1932).
77
This was the suggestion of Alt (1946); see Schmid 1955:173f.
78
For the theologoumenon of yhwh as creator see Schmid 1955:181183.
79
Schmid 1955:186. In contrast to Kraus (1951), for example, Schmid maintains
a pre-exilic date for the accession psalms. He seeks support in this regard in Ps. 47:6.
Deutero-Isaiah did not transform an original Royal Zion Feast into a post-exilic acces-
sion feast as Kraus had argued, but harked back rather to an already existing accession
feast of yhwh.
80
Schmid 1955:187192.
81
Schmid 1955:192195.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 291 1/18/2007 1:36:48 PM

 292 chapter six

visible, for example, in the Song of Moses in which Israels ancient traditions
are given a place side by side with the temple mountain in Jerusalem and the
confession of the kingship of yhwh (Ex. 15:1718).82
Continuing the work of his predecessors, E. Rohland was the first
to speak of the existence of a Zion tradition as one of Israels most
important election traditions. It is clear from the outset that Rohlands
study follows in the footsteps of Von Rad. Von Rad had based his
explanation of the prophets on the presupposition that the latter had
harked back to existing traditions for their eschatological preaching.83
Rohlands study is in fact an endeavour to provide Von Rads important
hypothesis with broad exegetical foundations and thereby, where pos-
sible, to arrive at a new definition of the eschatological statements of
the pre-exilic prophets. Instead of searching for the origins of eschatol-
ogy in mythology (following Gremann),84 in the unique experience at
Mount Sinai (following Sellin)85 or in the cult (following Mowinckel),86
Rohland considers it more likely that the eschatological expectation of
the prophets emerged from Israels own traditions, which bear witness
to the intervention of yhwh on behalf of his people.87 Rohland goes

82
Schmid 1955:171, 196f. In order to establish the features of Israels credo in the
period prior to merging with the traditions of El Elyon, Schmid 1955:168 takes Joshua
24 as his point of departure in which he distinguishes three traditions: the patriarchal
tradition (vv. 24), the exodus and entry into the land tradition (vv. 513) and the
covenant tradition (vv. 1428). In contrast to Von Rad and in line with Weiser, Schmid
identifies the latter with the Sinai tradition.
83
See Von Rad 1948/49:439.
84
See H. Gremann, Der Ursprung der israelitisch-jdischen Eschatologie, FRLANT 6,
Gttingen 1905.
85
See E. Sellin, Der alttestamentliche Prophetismus, Leipzig 1912.
86
See S. Mowinckel, Psalmen Studien II. Das Thronbesteigungsfest Jahwes und der Ursprung
der Eschatologie, Kristiania 1922. Rohland 1956:11 considers the radical correction of
the understanding of the influence of the prophets on the Psalms, expressed among
others by Gunkel, to be one of the most important results of Mowinckels study. The
origin of numerous mythological motifs found in the Psalms should not be sought in
the prophetic tradition but rather in the cultic tradition.
87
Rohland 1956:18 describes the goal of his study in the following words: Es
mu gefragt werden, ob die alttestamentliche Eschatologie, das Ende der Zeit, nicht
in erster Linie auf die von Israel selbst bezeugte Geschichte Jahwes mit seinem Volk
bezogen werden mu. (. . .) Aufgabe dieser Studie wird es daher sein, das Verhltnis
der Zukunftserwartung der Propheten zu den Traditionen von den Erwhlungstaten
Jahwes in der Geschichte eingehend zu untersuchen. He points out that Th.C. Vriezen
(Prophecy and Eschatology, VT.S 1, Leiden 1953) likewise placed emphasis on Israels
election faith rooted in its salvation history, but laments the fact that Vriezen did not
allow this information to sufficiently influence his description of eschatology. Rohland
is determined to obtain a more refined definition of the relationship between the deeds
of yhwh in the past and his future deeds.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 292 1/18/2007 1:36:48 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 293

on to observe that a total of three election traditions are spoken of

independently among the pre-exilic prophets: the exodus tradition, the
Zion tradition and the Davidic tradition. His work is thus dedicated in
the first instance to the study of these three traditions.88
One observes immediately in the study of Rohland that he was not
only the first to treat the Zion tradition as an independent election
tradition,89 but also that he allowed his treatment of the Zion tradition
to take precedence to that of the Davidic tradition. In light of Noths
hypothesis outlined above, which describes references to Jerusalem as
divine city as a form of court theology, this represents an important
evolution. Rohland agrees with Noth that Jerusalem likewise appears to
have had early significance as a cultic centre independent of its associa-
tions with the Davidic tradition, but he argues that this independence
was already part and parcel of the origin of the Zion tradition. Noth
had appealed to historical transmission in support of his hypothesis
whereby priority was given to the Davidic tradition. Rohland recognises
that the said historical transmission did indeed presuppose a basis for
the election of Zion within that of the house of David, even though
historical transmission as such offers little information with respect to
the Zion tradition.90 Information gleaned from the Psalms, however,
would appear to point in the opposite direction. Rohland is particularly
critical in this regard of the hypothesis supported by Kraus who had
found his most important evidence for the proposition that the elec-
tion of Zion was contained in the election of David in Psalm 132 and
who went on to postulate the existence of a Royal Zion Feast.91 Based
on the position held by the priests (vv. 9 and 16), the Deuteronomistic
references to Gods covenant with David (v. 11f ) and the election of

88
In contrast to Galling 1928, Rohland does not discuss the patriarchal tradition
because reference thereto in the prophets is only sporadic. This is even more evident
with respect to the Sinai covenant tradition, which Rohland likewise does not handle
as an independent election tradition. See Rohland 1956:2023.
89
Rohland 1956:23n appeals in this regard to Noth 1950, who was first to suggest
that we make a distinction between the Zion tradition and the Davidic tradition.
90
In line with Noth, Rohland 1956:120 similarly refers to the tradition surrounding
the prophet Ahijah from Shiloh (1 Kgs 11:2939; 12:120,2631 and 14:118) and
concludes: Wir werden also in dieser Erzhlungabgesehen von der Lade-Erzhlung
selbsteines der frhesten Belege fr die Tradition von der Erwhlung des Zion
innerhalb der geschichtlichen berlieferung sehen drfen, die Lsung der Verbindung
mit der Erwhlung der davidischen Dynastie jedoch aus der besonderen Situation des
Nordreiches mit seinem von Jerusalem unabhngigen Knigtum sehen mssen.
91
See Kraus 1951:3637.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 293 1/18/2007 1:36:48 PM

 294 chapter six

Zion (v. 13), Rohland is more inclined to date Psalm 132 in the time
of King Josiah. Moreover, he is attentive to the fact that the election
of David in Psalm 78 is only mentioned after the election of Zion and
that the holiness of Mount Zion is likewise presupposed in Ps. 2:6 in
the context of the appointment of a successor to the throne.92 It is
primarily on the basis of the fact that the Davidic tradition is not even
mentioned in the most important Zion Psalms (46, 48 and 76), however,
that Rohland argues in favour of the priority of the Zion tradition.93
Rohland thus takes the said psalms as the point of departure for his
discussion of the Zion tradition.
The most significant contribution made by Rohland to the study of
the Zion tradition is to be found in his description of the various motifs
associated therewith. Based on three Zion Psalms, namely Psalm 46,
48 and 76,94 Rohland observes that Zion is praised as dwelling place
of yhwh with the help of the Ancient Near Eastern notion of the
divine mountain, which extended in fact beyond the actual dimensions
of Zion. Four motifs are evident within this notion, motifs that can
also be found in Psalms 46; 48 and 76 and that can be reduced to a
common tradition:
1. the motif of the highest mountain;
2. the motif of the source of the river of paradise;
3. the motif of yhwhs victory over the chaos waters;
4. the motif of yhwhs victory over kings and nations.95

Rohland 1956:121122.
92

Rohland 1956:123.
93
94
In contrast to Gunkel 1933, Rohland does not characterise Psalm 46 as a hymn but
rather as a psalm of trust recited at the end of a Volksklagefeier, with a view to an
approaching battle (cf. 2 Chron. 20:19). He considers Psalm 48 to be a hymn and Psalm
76, to which he ascribed a late date, as a mixed form: hymn and thanksgiving.
95
See Rohland 1956:141142: Um die Erhabenheit des Zion als Wohnung Jahwes
zu preisen, sind auf ihn in Israel Zge des vorderorientalischen Urbildes vom Gt-
terberg bertragen worden. Zu diesen Motiven gehrten vor allem die im Folgenden
genannten:
1) der Zion ist der Gipfel des Zaphon, d.h. der hchste Berg (48,3f ).
2) Von ihm geht der Paradies-Strom aus (46,5).
3) Gott hat dort den Ansturm der Chaos-wasser besiegt (46,3).
4) Gott hat dort die Knige und ihre Vlker besiegt (46,7; 48,57; 76,4.6f ).
Als besonders charakteristisch galt dabei fr diesen Sieg:
a) er erfolgte durch einen Gottesschrecken, sei es als Theophanie (48,6), sei
es durch das Schelten Gottes (46,7; 76,7).
b) Er erfolgte vor Morgengrauen (46,6).
c) Gott zerbrach dabei die Waffen und machte jenem groen Krieg ein
definitives Ende (76,4).

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 294 1/18/2007 1:36:49 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 295

The last motif referred to, for which the pre-Israelite origin is least clearly
demonstrable,96 is understood by Rohland as the heart of the Zion
tradition. Rohland is convinced that the election tradition, as expressed
in the Zion Psalms, stems from the period prior to the prophets.
He appeals in this regard to existing consensus concerning the age
of Psalm 46. The fact that the other Zion Psalms tend to be younger
in date is no longer relevant because it is not a question of the age of
the said psalms but rather the age of the motifs they employ. While
the prophets were at liberty in stating their message to hark back
to the cultic tradition expressed in these psalms, they were also free in
the manner with which they employed the motifs identified above.97
In order to reinforce this proposition, which ultimately represents the
reverse of the dependence hypothesis proposed by Gunkel, Rohlands
study pays a visit to all the pre-exilic prophets (incl. Deutero-Isaiah) and
discusses the various texts in which the motifs of the Zion tradition are
employed by the prophets in question.98
An important moment in Old Testament studies in general and in
the study of Israels tradition history in particular was the publication
of the influential two-volume theology of G. von Rad, in 1957 and
1960 respectively. The second volume is of particular significance when
it comes to the Zion tradition (Theologie des Alten Testaments. Band 2: Die
Theologie der prophetischen berlieferungen Israels).99 The most important

96
After a discussion of the motifs present in Psalm 48, Rohland 1956:137 concludes:
Immerhin besttigt ber die Tatsache, da sich das Motiv vom Vlkerkampf zwischen
zwei sicher ursprnglich nichtisraelitischen Motiven vom Gottesberg findet, die Vermu-
tung, da auch der Vlkerkampf mglicherweise eine Vorstellung ist, die zu dem durch
den vorisraelitischen Kult auf dem Zion vermittelten Bild vom Gottesberg gehrte.
With respect to Psalm 76 Rohland 1956:140 notes: Ist aber die Verbindung des Sieges
Jahwes mit der Tatsache der Erwhlung des Zion als Gottesberg aus der geschichtli-
chen berlieferung Israels nicht zu erklren, so bleibt nur dieschon aus Ps. 46 und
48 erschlossene und damit zu groer Wahrscheinlichkeit erhobeneMglichkeit, da
hier eine auerisraelitischen Tradition vorliegt, die nachtrglich auf Jahwe bertragen
worden ist. Ihr inhalt ist, da Gott, der auf dem Zion wohnte, sich dort nach einem
groen Sieg niedergelassen hatte. Rohland 1956:141 then borrows supportive evidence
from Ps. 110:4f, which speaks of a victory over foreign kings, in combination with the
motif of Melchizedek that stems from Jerusalems cult.
97
Rohland 1956:143144.
98
Rohland 1956:19 offers two reasons in support of the fact that he limits himself
to the pre-exilic prophets: in the first instance, he wants to demonstrate in contrast to
older hypotheses (see, for example, Wellhausen and Marti) that eschatology is not only
a post-exilic phenomenon; secondly, he wants to demonstrate that eschatology already
received its most important expression in the pre-exilic period.
99
See Von Rad 19807:162175. With respect to the Zion tradition see also Von
Rad 19787:5561.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 295 1/18/2007 1:36:49 PM

 296 chapter six

hypothesis on the basis of which Von Rad wrote this book is the sug-
gestion that the prophets were not independent religious personalities
but firmly rooted their message rather in the ancient traditions and
that they continually actualised and interpreted the said traditions of
Israel.100 This dependence on Israels traditions is particularly evident
with respect to the prophet Isaiah, whose preaching Von Rad charac-
terises somewhat lyrically as das gewaltigste theologische Phnomen
des ganzen Alten Testamentes.101 Von Rad states his explicit agreement
with the study of Rohland, which he sees as a necessary supplement
to the article written by Noth in 1950. The necessary supplementation
consists in the recognition of the existence of a specific Zion tradition
in Jerusalem, which had been integrated into the religion of yhwh.102 In
line with Rohland, Von Rad alludes in this regard to the Zion Psalms
46; 48 and 76, which are to be reduced to a common tradition, namely
the tradition of Zion as the mountain and dwelling place of God. The
mythological presentations of this tradition have Canaanite roots and
were only transferred to Zion in a second phase.103 With reference to the
prophets through whom the said tradition acquired great significance,
Von Rad likewise characterises the Zion tradition as an independent
election tradition.104 Von Rad motivates his designation of the Zion
tradition as an election tradition with a reference to the legitimacy
certain circles derived therefrom during the period of the kings.105

100
See Von Rad 19807:1315.
101
Cf. Von Rad 19807:156: Es lt sich nmlich zeigen, da die breite, ausladende
Flle der Botschaft Jesajas auf ganz wenigen religisen Vorstellungen ruht, die ihm
von der Tradition, vor allem der jerusalemischen, vorgegeben waren.
102
Von Rad 19807:163. While Von Rad 19787:56f recognises that we know little of
the cultic situation that preceded Davids conquest of Jerusalem, he argues nevertheless
that the worship of the god El Elyon in Jerusalem was a given fact and that the presen-
tation of yhwh as heavenly king also stems from the Jerusalem cult. Von Rad follows
the findings of Schmid 1955:168197 and Kraus 1960(A):197201 in this regard.
103
Von Rad 19787:5960.
104
See Von Rad 19787:60: Die Zion-Gottesbergtradition ist also nichts anderes als
eine selbstndige Erwhlungstradition; sie stellt sich, wenn auch als die jngste dieser
Traditionsbildungen, selbstndig neben die lteren Erwhlungstraditionen von den
Erzvtern und der Herausfhrung aus gypten. Inhaltlich ist sie bestimmt von dem
Bewutsein unbegrenzter Sicherheit und Geborgenheit bei Jahwe, und gerade dieser
Klang wird von den Weissagungen Jesajas aufgenommen und sogar nog berboten.
105
See Von Rad 19807:180181: So kann man also sagen, da die gesamte Verkn-
digung Jesajas auf zwei berlieferungen steht, der Zion- und der Davidberlieferung.
Beides sind Erwhlungstraditionen, d.h. von ihnen aus haben sich in der Knigszeit
gewisse Kreise in Israel vor Jahwe legitimiert; auf die gttliche Setzungen, die diese
berlieferungen verbrgten, haben sie ihre ganze Existenz vor Jahwe, ihren Glauben
und ihre Zuversicht gegrndet.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 296 1/18/2007 1:36:49 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 297

Of course, it goes without saying that research into the Zion tradition
did not come to an end with the fundamental contributions of Rohland
and Von Rad. The existence of an independent Zion tradition is now
generally accepted as a given fact and the hypothesis that Zions elec-
tion should be considered dependent on the election of David has,
since Rohland, been the subject of dispute from a variety of quarters.
Reference should primarily be made in this regard to the study of
H. Gese, in which the author endeavoured to arrive at an alternative
determination of the relationship between the election of David and
that of Zion (Der Davidsbund und die Zionserwhlung).106 Witness to
the election of Zion in the Old Testament remains inseparably linked
to the removal of the Ark to Jerusalem initiated by David (2 Samuel
6). Kraus has insisted, however, that historical and theological priority
should be given to the election of David (2 Samuel 7), otherwise it
would have been difficult for David to legitimate the removal of the Ark
to Jerusalem. According to Kraus, the extraordinary position granted
by yhwh to David included the authority, as it were, to have the Ark
transferred to Jerusalem and to transform Jerusalem into Israels central
cultic location. Gese dryly observes nonetheless that this proposition
does not fit the sequence of events found in 2 Samuel 67: The Nathan
prophecy is explicitly linked to Davids plan to build a temple for the
Ark, which has been transferred in the meantime to Jerusalem. Gese
seeks support in addition from Psalm 132 in defence of his hypothesis
that the covenant with David should be understood more as a divine
response to his removal of the Ark to Jerusalem. In practice, the removal
of the Ark did not require Davids election to legitimate it because
the act itself was sufficiently legitimated by Davids victory against the
Philistines as well as the loss of significance undergone by the Ark in
the preceding decades.107 Permission from a higher authority than the
king at that moment was simply not necessary.108
Based on Psalm 132, which he dates in the early pre-exilic period,109
Gese argues that Davids vow to find a place of rest for the Ark (Ps.

106
See Gese 1964:1026. This article is also included in Gese 1974:113129.
107
Gese 1964:12 presupposes a period of 50 years between the destruction of the
sanctuary at Shiloh and the removal of the Ark to Jerusalem.
108
Gese 1964:14n rejects the suggestion made by Kraus, namely that the Ark still
had an amphyctionic significance at the time that would have impeded self-authorised
action on the part of David.
109
Rohland 1956:120ff still presupposed a dating of Psalm 132 to the later period
of the kings.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 297 1/18/2007 1:36:49 PM

 298 chapter six

132:25) and yhwhs promise to David (Ps. 132:1112) belong together

and that the election of David and his house is founded in the elec-
tion of Zion (Ps. 132:13).110 To reinforce his position, Gese points to
the fact that David had become Jerusalems landowner by right of
his victorious conquest. As a matter of fact, the election of Jerusalem
by yhwh ultimately included the election of the house of David.111
Attention is likewise drawn in 2 Samuel 24 to the fact that David is
the rightful owner of the new cultic centre on account of the bill of
purchase. According to Gese, therefore, the close relationship between
the election of Zion and that of the house of David is located in the
kings property rights concerning Jerusalem.112 It is for this reason that
the Davidic kingship is so explicitly associated with Zion in a number
of the Psalms (see, for example, Ps. 2:6).113
With reference to 2 Samuel 7, Gese goes on to argue that the
prophecy contained therein, which he maintains was only written in
the post-Solomonic period and can be explained as a polemic reaction
to the ideas contained in Psalm 132, was intended to emphasise the
mercy character of the covenant with David. The chapter in question
does not, therefore, draw associations with Davids removal of the
Ark to Jerusalem, as if he deserved to be rewarded for doing so, but
rather with his plans to build a temple.114 The said plans are ultimately
rejected because yhwh alone, and not a human being, has the right
to introduce such an initiative. Yhwh nevertheless promises to build
a house for David, that is to say that He will place Solomon on the
throne and let him build the temple.115

110
Gese 1964:14ff.
111
Gese 1964:17: Ergreift Jahwe Besitz von diesem Grund und Boden Davids,
indem er sich fr immer daran bindet, diesen Grund und Boden erwhlt, so ist auch
die Davidfamilie, das Haus Davids, fr immer erwhlt. According to Gese, the rela-
tionship between the Ark and Davids ownership of the land is already alluded to in
the reference to Ephrathah in Ps. 132:6. According to him, mention of Ephrathah =
Bethlehem already suggests den auf seinem angestammten Grundbesitz wohnenden
David.
112
Gese 1964:17: Aus den urtmlichen bodenrechtlichen Anschauungen ergibt sich
eine tiefe Beziehung zwischen der Zionserwhlung und der Erwhlung der Davidsfamilie
durch Gott. Beides scheint dem Wesen nach ein und dasselbe zu sein, nur nach zwei
Seiten hin interpretiert.
113
Cf. Gese 1964:18: Die Dynastieverheiung ist der politisch-religise Ausdruck
der kultisch-religise Bindung Jahwes an den Zion.
114
Gese 1964:24: In der rein negativen Art der Anknpfung wird polemisch das
sola gratia der Davidverheiung zum Ausdruck gebracht: nicht ist die Dynastiezusage
ein Lohn des frommen Davidwerkes, der Ziongrndung, sondern Jahwe spricht aus
freiem Entschlu von sich aus die Verheiungen David zu.
115
Gese 1964:2126. Gese concludes in summary: 2 Sam 7 geht wohl aus von dem

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 298 1/18/2007 1:36:49 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 299

The general conviction at the present moment is that the Zion tradi-
tion cannot be subsumed into the Davidic tradition, but rather that it
should be ascribed an independent significance. There is no consensus,
however, on the question whether one can actually refer to an election
tradition when one speaks of the Zion tradition. In order to obtain a
correct description of the Zion tradition it is important that we face
this question. We will return to this question in 6.4.1.4. below.

6.4.1.2. The Zion tradition and the Jebusite cultic tradition

While Rohland and Von Rad insisted on describing the Zion tradition
as an Israelite election tradition, it is striking nevertheless that Rohlands
description of the various motifs that characterise the said tradition
is borrowed from three Zion Psalms and that he relates the origin of
the motifs in question to the Ancient Near Eastern presentation of the
divine mountain. It is for this reason that Kraus objected to the treat-
ment of the tradition of the divine mountain with election tradition
as its common denominator. Given that the election of Zion constituted
a specifically Israelite event, closely associated with the history of the
Ark, Kraus considered it better to designate the originally mythologi-
cal tradition of the divine mountain expressed in the Zion Psalms as
a cultic tradition to the glorification of Zion.116 It was primarily this

durch die Tradition gegebenen inneren Zusammenhang zwischen Zionserwhlung und

Davidsbund. Aber gegen diesen Zusammenhang wird entschieden protestiert, da er
den theologischen Vorstellungen nicht entsprach. Allein aus sich heraus, aus eigener
Freiheit und Autoritt habe Gott die Dynastie verheien. Hier liege keine reactio
Gottes auf eine actio Davids vor.
116
Cf. Kraus 19622:237n: Die mythologischen Rudimente der kanaanisch-
jebusitischen Welt wurden vom Jerusalemer Kult als Verherrlichungsaussagen rezi-
piert; mit der Erwhlung des Zion haben sie nur in einem untergeordneten Sinne zu
tunnmlich in der Angliederung an den hieros logos, der die erwhlte Stadt bezeichnet.
See also Kraus 1960(A):345: Es mte scharf getrennt werden zwischen den (vorisra-
elitischen) Kulttraditionen (. . .) und dem genuin israelitischen Akt der Erwhlung des
Zion. Es mu auffallen, da in den (vorisraelitischen und tief im Mythos verwurzelten)
Kultberlieferungen die Lade nicht erwhnt wird. Dagegen ist z.B. in Ps 132 ausdrck-
lich von der Einfhrung der Lade und von der Erwhlung des Zion die Rede. Man
mte also die in diesem Exkurs erfaten Aussagen unter das Thema Kulttraditionen
zur Verherrlichung des Zion stellen. See also Kraus 1979:102. In addition to Kraus,
Ollenburger 1987:6163 also objected to the designation of the Zion tradition as an
election tradition. Although Ollenburger emphasises the importance of the Ark tradi-
tion for the genesis of the Zion tradition, he argues nevertheless that Zion was more
associated with creation motifs in the earliest cultic traditions of Jerusalem and that
reference to the election of Zion in Psalm 132 harks back to a later Deuteronomistic
development: . . . Zion, in Jerusalems earliest cultic traditions, is associated with creation
(dsy) of the earth and is itself created by Yahweh (Isa 14.32) as his dwelling-place.
This tradition, originating in connection with traditions from the Shiloh Ark in the

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 299 1/18/2007 1:36:50 PM

 300 chapter six

presupposed non-Israelite origin of the said cultic tradition that captured

the attention of further research into the Zion tradition.
In the context of a study on the book of Lamentations (Studies in
the Text and Theology of the Book of Lamentations), B. Albrektson has also
offered a description of the Zion tradition.117 Albrektson considers the
motif of Zions inviolability, as found in the Zion Psalms 46, 48 and
76, to be central to the tradition and guaranteed by the presence of
God.118 He insists that the said motif should not be explained against
the background of the historical event of Jerusalems liberation in 701,
as many, for the most part older commentaries were inclined to argue,119
but that it already constitutes a part of a pre-Israelite, Jebusite cultic
tradition.120 Albrektson speaks in this regard of a Zion tradition deeply
rooted in the Canaanite cult.
Even more insistent than Albrektson, J.H. Hayes has also under-
lined the Jebusite origin of the motif of Zions inviolability. Indeed,
he devotes an entire study to the question entitled: The Tradition of
Zions Inviolability.121 Hayes defends the position that the tradition
of Zions election was associated with the Jebusite tradition by anal-
ogy with the adoption of Jebusite elements (the Melchizedek tradition)
into the Davidic tradition. In more concrete terms, Hayes singles out
the motif of divine protection that Zion could rely on as a sacred
place.122 The origin of this motif, according to Hayes, should not be

pre-Jerusalem period, is the basis for the development of an independent Zion tradi-
tion. It is in the later literature, principally Deuteronomistic, that Zion is elected as
Yahwehs chosen city. Originally (. . .) Zion is simply the place of Yahwehs dwelling
created primordially through the defeat of the powers of chaos.
117
See Albrektson 1963.
118
Albrektson 1963:220.
119
See, for example, Jeremias 1919:138.
120
Cf. Albrektson 1963:222: Probably such motifs were already incorporated into
the Jerusalem traditions before David captured the city; thus they would belong to the
Jebusite heritage within Israel.
121
See Hayes 1963:419426.
122
Hayes 1963:421: It is thus quite clear that the special Davidic tradition concern-
ing Yahwehs unique election was interspersed with pre-Israelite traditions regarding a
Jebusite king-succession. In a similar manner, I think it can be shown that the special
tradition concerning Zions election, which was originally based on Yahwehs presence
in Zion symbolized by Ark and temple, incorporated pre-Israelite traditional thought
concerning Zion as a holy place protected by the divine. This is apparent in certain
of the Zion Psalms (46, 48 and 76) and is witnessed to by some of the Zion speeches
in Isaiah.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 300 1/18/2007 1:36:50 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 301

sought in the historical event of 701, or in the preaching of Isaiah,

in spite of the fact that Isaiah made frequent use of the tradition of
Zions inviolability and exposed the blindness of Israels faith in the
protection of Zion.123
In an article dealing with Jerusalems El tradition, W.H. Schmidt has
also endeavoured to map out the contribution the original cultic tradi-
tions of Jerusalem might possibly have made on Israels faith in yhwh
(Jerusalemer El-Traditionen bei Jesaja. Ein religionsgeschichtlicher
Vergleich zum Vorstellungskreis des gttlichen Knigtums).124 Based
on the texts discovered at Ugarit, Schmidt concludes that references
to the kingship of yhwh, his holiness and glory (cf. Isaiah 6), can all
be traced back to the Canaanite El traditions.125 Schmidt presupposes
that the said Canaanite divine predicates were taken up into the Zion
tradition via El Elyon, the city god of Jerusalem who can be under-
stood as a local manifestation of El. The prophet Isaiah harked back
to important elements of this tradition, thus allowing Schmidt to argue
that Jerusalems El tradition had more or less remained alive in the
words of Isaiah.126
F. Stolzs book entitled Strukturen und Figuren im Kult von Jerusalem,
even attempts a complete reconstruction of the basic features of the
Canaanite cult in Jerusalem.127 On the basis of this reconstruction, Stolz
endeavours to determine the extent to which Israels faith was modified
in the encounter with the given cult. Stolz takes it as a matter of course
that the cultic traditions of Jerusalem exercised significant influence on
the faith of Israel because David, having captured the city from the
Jebusites, would appear to have taken the original cultic functionaries
of the cityincluding the priest Zadok and the cultic prophet Nathan
(possibly also Araunah)into his own service.
Following closely in line with Stolz and with multiple references to his
work, O.H. Steck has also endeavoured to provide a detailed description

123
Hayes 1963:425426.
124
See Schmidt 1964:302313.
125
Cf. Schmidt 1964:311: Es scheint sich also bei allen hier kurz gekennzeich-
neten Vorstellungen der kanaanischen Religion, wie sie uns aus den Texten von
Ras Schamra/Ugarit bekannt werden, um einen einzigen groen Aussagenkreis zu
handeln: Dem Gtterknig El, der als heilig gilt, wird von seinem Pantheon Ehre
dargebracht.
126
Schmidt 1964:312313.
127
See Stolz 1970.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 301 1/18/2007 1:36:50 PM

 302 chapter six

of Jerusalems cultic tradition (Jerusalemer Vorstellungen vom Frieden

und ihre Abwandlungen in der Prophetie des alten Israels).128 Steck
understands the said cultic tradition, as expressed in a large number of
the psalms, as the result of a religious concept reworked by Israel that
is to be located in the first instance in Jebusite Jerusalem. He refers in
this regard to the city theology of Jerusalem,129 central to which is not
the relationship between yhwh and Israel but rather between yhwh
and the Mount/City of Zion. Together with Stolz, Steck also insists
that the motif of Vlkersturm should also be seen as a Jebusite element
in Jerusalems cultic tradition.130 Steck suggests the early period of the
kings as the most acceptable time at which Jerusalems cultic tradition
acquired its Israelite form.

When the Zion tradition as expressed in the Zion Psalms is insis-

tently understood as an extension of the pre-Israelite cultic tradition
of Jerusalem, the danger of a degree of conceptual confusion is not
far from the surface. While it is true that the Zion Psalms contain all
sorts of elements which, in all probability, have a pre-Israelite origin,
this does not mean that the said elements provide us a clear picture
of the essence of the Zion tradition. One should not be left with the
impression that the Zion tradition is essentially a continuation of the
Jebusite cultic tradition and that one can in fact already speak with
respect to the latter of a pre-Israelite Zion tradition. Such an impression
is often incorrectly encouraged by the fact that the motifs identified by
Rohland are frequently identified in practice with the Zion tradition
itself.131 When the origin of a variety of motifs employed in relation to
Zion is to be sought in the pre-Israelite cult, this need not imply that

128
See Steck 1972(A):7595. An expanded version of this lecture, which Steck gave
to a study group in 1971, appeared in 1972 together with a detailed argumentation.
See Steck 1972(B).
129
Cf. Steck 1972(B):12: Die Annahme liegt am nchsten, da wir es hier met
einer israelitischen Modifikation der religisen Konzeption im jebusitischen Jerusalem
zu tun haben, die mit dem bergang Jerusalems in den politischen und kultischen
Besitz Israels eingesetzt hat.
130
Steck 1972(B):18f recognises the absence of consensus on this point, although
he maintains four guiding arguments in support of his position: 1. The Vlkersturm
is not described with formulations from the War of yhwh, but in terms of cosmic
chaos; 2. The conquest of the said cosmic chaos and the related global dominion of
God in Jerusalem hark back to pre-Israelite notions; 3. The deliverance that dawns in
the morning refers to the worship of the gods Salem and Sachar; 4. The nations are
restrained on occasion with the help of a cosmic deed.
131
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:15.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 302 1/18/2007 1:36:50 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 303

the beginning of the Zion tradition as such is to be found in the same

location. It is thus important to inquire whether points of association
are to be found in Israels own history and faith traditions that might
help to explain the origins of the Zion tradition. In this regard, the
history of the Ark and the traditions related thereto are of particular
interest for further research if one bears in mind that the emergence
of Jerusalem/Zion as Israels most important cultic location is closely
related to the conquest of the said city by David and his decision to
relocate the Ark of yhwh within its walls.

6.4.1.3. The Zion tradition and the Ark tradition

While Noth and Eifeldt had already drawn attention to the crucial role
played by the Ark and its traditions in the development of Jerusalem
into Israels most prominent cultic location, J. Schreiner in particular
has made an impressive attempt to describe not only the religio-his-
torical but also the biblical-theological dimension that binds the Ark
tradition and the Zion tradition together. Schreiner was the first to set
about a systematic-thematic treatment of the theme of Jerusalem as
holy city in the Old Testament (Sion-Jerusalem. Jahwes Knigssitz. Theologie
der Heiligen Stadt im Alten Testament).132
While Schreiner agrees with the suggestion that the city of Jerusalem
must already have been an important religious centre for the worship
of El Elyon = alem prior to its conquest by David,133 he takes his
point of departure from the texts that relate how Jerusalem became
the holy city of yhwh, namely 2 Samuel 6 and 2 Samuel 24.134 With
respect to 2 Samuel 6, Schreiner concurs with the hypothesis current
since the studies of L. Rost,135 namely that the history of the Ark found
in 1 Samuel 46/2 Samuel 6 is intended as of the sanctu-
ary in Jerusalem, dating from the period of David and Solomon.136 In
contrast to the preceding, more religio-historical studies of the history of
the Ark, however, Schreiner draws attention to the biblical-theological
relationship between the history of the Ark and Zion. As a matter of

132
See Schreiner 1963.
133
Schreiner 1963:1920.
134
Cf. Schreiner 1963:13: . . . seitdem Sion Davids Stadt geworden ist (2 Sm 5,7),
hat der Sion seinen festen Platz in dem Handeln Gottes an seinem Volk, rckt er in
die Mitte der Heilsgeschichte und bleibt dort.
135
See Rost 1926:447.
136
Schreiner 1963:22. Cf. Rost 1926:38: Somit drfte daran festzuhalten sein, da
die Ladeerzhlung als des Ladeheiligtums zu Jerusalem im Priesterkreisen
zur Zeit Davids bzw. im Anfang der Regierung Salomos entstanden ist.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 303 1/18/2007 1:36:51 PM

 304 chapter six

fact, he maintains that the history of the Ark is to be read from the
perspective of Zion, its final destination. In other words, one should
always bear Zion in mind when one considers the events that occurred
with and around the Ark.
In this regard, Schreiner not only emphasises the indisputable sta-
tus conferred by the Ark upon Jerusalem as a sacred place, but also
that the presence of yhwh both in the history of the Ark and in Zion
theology137 is not simply an evident fact but rather an expression of
Gods grace.138 The history of the Ark itself, however, already contains
the message that yhwh is not powerless if He relinquishes the place
of his presence for a period of time into the hands of the pagans. It
is this latter fact that the prophets were first to proclaim with respect
to Zion.139 The pilgrims in the temple will have thought in the first
instance of Zion upon hearing the words of the Philistines who said
that the Ark should return to its own place (/mqom]l,i 1 Sam. 5:11; cf.
1 Kgs 8:6).140 The delay in the transportation of the Ark to Jerusalem
that occurred near Beth-shemesh not only underlines the holiness of
yhwh, it also draws particular attention to the grace character of the
election of Zion by yhwh.141 In the meantime, the blessing experienced
by the house of Obed-Edom (2 Sam. 6:11) stimulates the expectation
that Zion will also become a place of blessing on account of the presence
of yhwh. The Michal episode at the end of the history of the Ark
served to convince the pilgrims that the removal of the Ark to Jerusalem

137
Schreiner 1963:27, 55 would appear to prefer the expression Zion theology
instead of the expression Zion tradition which continues in current usage to the present
day. The biblical-theological intentions of his study may explain this fact. Within the
framework of the present study, however, we give preference to the use of the expression
Zion tradition instead of Zion theology. The concept theology presupposes a degree
of unity of concept that is not always evident wherever reference is made to Zion.
138
Schreiner 1963:27: Gottes Gegenwart ist nicht eine absolut feste oder von
vorneherein festgelegte, eine auf die Dauer sicher und auf alle Flle zur Verfgung
stehende, sondern sie ist eine jeweils ungeschuldete und immer neu geschenkte Gnade.
Diese Erfahrung hatte Israel schon aus seinem Wstenaufenthalt mitgebracht.
139
Cf. Schreiner 1963:32: Doch werden sie (the pilgrims in the temple of Jerusalem,
JD) wahrscheinlich nicht herausgehrt haben, was hier schon mitschwingt, aber erst von
den Propheten klar und immer wieder ausgesprochen worden ist: Auch wenn Jahwe im
Gericht sein Volk beinahe untergehen lt und den Ort seiner Gegenwart in den Augen
der Menschen aufgibt, ist er nicht ohnmchtig oder etwa einem der Gtter unterlegen.
Gerade dann wird er zeigen, da er der erhabene, groe und einzige Gott ist.
140
Schreiner 1963:33.
141
Cf. Schreiner 1963:42: Von seinem Willen hing es ab, da Jerusalem wurde,
was es fr das Gottesvolk ist: Nicht menschliche, sondern Gottes Grndung, durch die
gttliche Zusage steht Sion.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 304 1/18/2007 1:36:51 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 305

did not take place to the greater glory of David but rather to the glo-
rification of yhwh.142
Based on Psalms 78 and 132, Schreiner goes on to emphasise the
importance of the concept of Zions election by yhwh.143 Bearing in
mind the age of the use of the election formula with regard to Zion, he
agrees with the hypothesis proposed by K. Koch, who had demonstrated
that the use of the verb rjb to choose in the Psalms cannot be ascribed to
the influence of Deuteronomy, but that the employment of the verb for
the king and for Zion should be associated with the rise of the monarchy
in the time of David.144 Schreiner himself insists that the construction
of Solomons temple should be understood in any event as the terminus
a quo.145 Schreiner also introduces 2 Samuel 24 into the discussion in
this regard. While the Ark narrative legitimises the election of the city
of Jerusalem as the central cultic location, Schreiner maintains that
2 Samuel 24 deals with the permanent character of this election and the
determination of the specific location for the later temple. He suggests
that we conceptualise this chapter chronologically prior to 2 Samuel 7,
and that its current position has to do with the required connection with
the narrative concerning the construction of Solomons temple, which
the book of Kings relates. The reason that Jerusalem has been spared
can be explained on the basis of Gods love for the city (cf. Ps. 87:2).
In comparison with the Ark narrative, however, the altar narrative of
2 Samuel 24 introduces a number of important theological notions
into the discussion, an important one being the explicit promise on the
part of yhwh that He desires to dwell in Jerusalem as his holy place.
2 Samuel 24 likewise underlines the fact that Jerusalem is the place of
Gods mercy, while the accent was placed in 2 Samuel 6 on Jerusalem
as the place of Gods blessing. The sacrificial liturgy that acquires an
established place in Jerusalem in conjunction with the establishment of

142
Cf. Schreiner 1963:4546: Am Ende der Ladeerzhlung aber steht vor dem
hrenden Pilger Jerusalem, die heilige Stadt, erkoren durch Gottes gndige Herablas-
sung, Zustimmung und freien Willen als Ort seiner besonderen Gegenwart zum Segen
fr ganz Isral, geschaffen durch den demtigen, eifrigen und frommen Knig David
im Auftrage Jahwes.
143
Cf. Schreiner 1963:56: Die Auserwhlung des Sion besteht nicht in einem
allmhlichen bergang von Bedeutsamkeiten, die vom Heiligtum auf den Ort im
Laufe der Zeiten bergestrmt wren, sondern in einer geschichtlichen Entscheidung
und Tat Jahwes. Bezeichnenderweise wird auch niemals gesagt, David habe sich die
Stadt ausgesucht (rjb). Israels Gott ist es, der die Wahl getroffen hat.
144
See Koch 1955:205226.
145
See Schreiner 1963:52, 55.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 305 1/18/2007 1:36:51 PM

 306 chapter six

the altar by David, represents both a gesture of thanksgiving for Gods

mercy as well as prayer for its continuation.146
In the second part of his study, which deals with Jerusalem as the
seat of yhwhs monarchy, Schreiner argues that the promise of Nathan
from 2 Samuel 7, although intentionally located after 2 Samuel 6, is
not intended as having a close relationship with that which precedes
it and does not contribute to any significant extent to the response to
the question regarding the legitimacy of the removal of the Ark to
Jerusalem by David. 2 Samuel 7 says more about the legitimacy of
the Davidic monarchy.147 Taking a presupposed distinction between
the verbs bvy and kv as his point of departure, Schreiner suggests
that the prophecy of Nathan with respect to yhwhs inhabitation of
Jerusalem rejects any notion that would bind yhwh too specifically to
this location. The prophecy of Nathan thus underscores the freedom
of yhwh and the mercy character of his presence.148 While Psalm 132
at first sight would appear to suggest otherwise, Schreiner insists that
the promise for the house of David is itself a gesture of mercy and
is not intended as a reward for the removal of the Ark to Jerusalem.
It is not David but yhwh who has chosen Zion, and the election
of the house of David is anchored within the election of Zion (cf.
Ps. 132:13).149 Zion thus has an important role to play in the relation-
ship between God and king, as is evident, for example, in royal psalms
such as Psalm 2 and Psalm 110 (cf. also Ps. 20:3 and 101:8).150 Indeed,
the actual King of Jerusalem is yhwh.

146
Schreiner 1963:62ff agrees with the proposal of Schmidt 1933:7883, among
others, namely that two different traditions relating to the construction of the altar
have been amalgamated in 2 Samuel 24. In the one tradition, Davids sacrifice is an
expression of gratitude for the cessation of the plague epidemic and the emphasis is
placed on yhwhs change of heart, while in the other the purchase of the threshing
floor and the construction of the altar by David has reconciliation as its goal. In both
traditions, however, it is yhwh alone who chooses the location and the means of his
mercy: Unmiverstndlich wird zum Ausdruck gebracht, da Gott sich die Stelle
whlt, an der er in Jerusalem verehrt werden will, nicht der Knig, der wohl die uere
Macht besa, einen geeigneten Platz auszusuchen. (66)
147
Schreiner 1963:7778.
148
Schreiner 1963:8994.
149
Schreiner 1963:103107.
150
Cf. Schreiner 1963:111: Er, Sion, ist die Grundlage fr alle Ansprche und
Erwartungen des Knigtums in Jerusalem, des Davidshauses. Cf. also Schreiner
1963:129: Von hier, von Jahwes heiliger Stadt aus, werden alle Aussagen ber und
alle Zusagen an den Knig, mgen sie auch Formulierungen altorientalischen Hofstils
an sich tragen, ins rechte Lot gerckt, finden sie ihre wahre Grundlage und ihren
theologischen Ort.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 306 1/18/2007 1:36:51 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 307

The narrative of the dedication of the temple and the procession

with the Ark that accompanied it (1 Kings 8) leads Schreiner to observe
that the event in question was of great significance for the status of
Jerusalem as holy city and city of yhwh respectively.151 The established
dwelling place that yhwh had found in the temple naturally led to ques-
tions surrounding the how of Gods presence. By way of an answer
to this difficult question, the book of Deuteronomy speaks emphatically
of the dwelling of the Name of yhwh in Jerusalem. Schreiner refers
to this as Shem theology and endeavours to locate the origins thereof
in the Ark tradition. Indeed, it is said of the Ark that it was called by
the name of yhwh Zebaot, who is enthroned upon the cherubs (see
2 Sam. 6:2; cf. Jer. 7:12). In the darkness of the Holy of Holies, however,
the Ark receded more and more into the background in a process that
came about as a result of the growing significance of Name theology
and as a reinforcement thereof.152 The construction of the temple in
Jerusalem in the meantime stimulated the use of building terminology
to represent Gods salvific activity. Both the verb hnb to build and dsy
to establish/found are no longer used exclusively against the background
of creation but also in the context of the building of the temple (see,
for example, Ps. 78:69; 87:1f and Isa. 14:32).153 This is evidently the
case with respect to the Zion text of Isa. 28:16. According to Schreiner,
however, exegetes draw too much attention to the question of the identity
of the stone mentioned in 28:16. What is important is that the text is
reminiscent of 1 Kgs 5:31 (= NRSV 1 Kgs 5:17; cf. 1 Kgs 7:911), in
which reference is made to an earlier foundation likewise established
with precious stones on Zion, namely that of the temple.154 Isa. 28:16
thus refers to Gods salvific project in association with Zion, a spiritual
edifice, which, in principle, also bears a Messianic promise.155

151
Cf. Schreiner 1963:148: In Jahwes Stadt besteht von da an eine feste Sttte
seines Zugegenseins, und damit wird Jerusalem selber auf Dauer und nicht nur, was
bis dahin noch immer offen war, fr ene begrenzte Zeit zum heiligen Ort fr Israels
Gott, zur Heiligen Stadt.
152
Schreiner 1963:158164. Cf. 1963:156: Als dann die Schem-Theologie die
Anwesenheit Jahwes als das Verweilen seines Namens erklrte und betonte, da Gott
im Himmel throne, verlor die Lade als Thron Jahwes ihre Bedeutung. Sie wurde nicht
vermit, nachdem sie der Zerstrung der Stadt zum Opfer gefallen war.
153
Schreiner 1963:165168.
154
Cf. Schreiner 1963:171: Es wurde bereits einmal in israelitischer Zeit auf dem
Sion ein Fundament eingesenkt, das fr die Religion und das Leben des Jahwevolkes
groe Bedeutung hatte. Das waren die Grundmauern des Hauses Jahwes.
155
Cf. Schreiner 1963:172: Es ist die mit Sion fest verbundene Heilsveranstaltung
Gottes, die alles umfat, was Jahwe hier und von hier aus fr sein Volk zu wirken

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 307 1/18/2007 1:36:51 PM

 308 chapter six

The third part of Schreiners study is dedicated to Jerusalem as the

unshakable city of God. Under this heading he discusses the psalms
that glorify Jerusalem as the city of yhwh, namely the now familiar
Zion Psalms 46, 48 and 76. While Schreiner considers it conceivable
that the notion of Zions inviolability stems from pre-Israelite traditions
relating to the city of Jerusalem,156 he simultaneously emphasises a
possible association with the Sinai tradition in which the unapproach-
ability of yhwh represents an important motif (cf. Ex. 19:12,23).157
In line with Rohland, however, Schreiner considers the idea that the
emergence of this motif was dependent on the events around 701 to be
unacceptable.158 With respect to the motif of yhwhs victory over kings
and nations, Schreiner similarly presupposes pre-Israelite roots, although
he also detects the continued working of the exodus tradition.159

Since Schreiner, a number of other scholars have also employed a more

biblical-theological approach in their endeavour to describe the theme
of Zion and its associated motifs. Reference can be made, for example,
to the work of G. Fohrer and that of his student G. Wanke, both of
whom support a late dating of the Zion tradition in contrast to Rohland
en Schreiner. According to Fohrer and Wanke, there is no evidence of
a connection with the Ark tradition. While the work of Wanke was
already prepared for by the studies of his mentor and teacher Fohrer,160

gedenkt. Schreiner adds in an explanatory note: Darin ist auch das davidische
Knigtum miteingeschlossen, das in der Weiterfhrung der Idee schlielich auf den
Messias zielt.
156
Schreiner 1963:279 suggests that a city theology was alive in Jerusalem for a
considerable time before David.
157
Cf. Schreiner 1963:223. See also 1963:235: Die auf Sion bertragenen Aussagen
werden mit israelitischen Gedankengut durchsetzt und mit den alten Erlebnissen der
Heilsgeschichte in Verbindung und Beziehung gebracht.
158
Schreiner 1963:224. Schreiner nevertheless describes the importance of the events
around 701 for Jerusalem as the city of yhwh in two separate chapters (236242 and
271278).
159
Cf. Schreiner 1963:226: Man kann sicherlich nicht leugnen, da Jerusalem, schon
bevor es an David kam, Erfahrungen von einem Ansturm feindlicher Volksscharen
haben mochte, die es nicht bezwangen, und da diese sich bereits zu einer Tradition
verdichtet haben konnte. Man mu aber sagen, da die wunderbare und vollstndige
berwindung feindlicher Heeresmacht, wie Israel sie beim Auszug sah, in der Ausbil-
dung der Vorstellung von der Abwehr eines Angriffs der Vlker auf Jerusalem durch
Jahwe mitgewerkt hat. Jahwes machtvolle Heilstat ist nur an einen anderen Ort verlegt.
Schreiner 1963:29 already sees a connection between the history of the Ark and the
exodus tradition in the words of the Philistines in 1 Sam. 4:7f.
160
See Fohrer 1960(A):401420; 1964:291318 = 1969:195241.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 308 1/18/2007 1:36:52 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 309

Wanke deserves respect for having presented a complete draft of what

he refers to as the Zion theology of the Korahites.161 Wanke disputes
the hypothesis generally upheld since the contributions of Rohland and
Von Rad, namely that a more or less pre-Israelite Zion tradition existed
in Jerusalem. He argues that this hypothesis was inspired by the early
dating of the tradition incorporated in the Zion Psalms. He himself
endeavours to gather support for a later dating of the tradition by taking
his point of departure in a post-exilic positioning of the Korahites.162
Wanke presupposes that the Korahites were not only collectors, but
that they had also made an essential contribution to the very genesis
of the Zion Psalms. A characteristic feature of their highly developed
Zion theology was the fact that yhwhs dwelling in the temple and
on the temple mountain with its associated attribute of holiness, was
ultimately transferred to the city of Jerusalem itself. In the pre-exilic
period, such a concept would have been inconceivable.163 Wanke also
suggests that the association of ancient mythological motifs with Jeru-
salem (divine mountain, paradise, victory over chaos), is best explained
from the (post-)exilic perspective, because attention was concentrated
as a matter of course on Jerusalem during that period.164
With respect to the origins of the important Vlkerkampf motif,
Wanke presupposes a connection with the prophecy concerning Gog
in Ezekiel 38 and 39. According to Wanke, Ezekiel made use of the
concept of an enemy from the north for the said prophecy, a concept
already employed by the prophet Jeremiah and one that can be traced
back as a motif to a legend that arose in association with the arrival of
the sea peoples. In the context of post-exilic eschatological prophecy, this
concept acquired a different elucidation and was applied for the first time
to Jerusalem (see, for example, Zech. 12:29; 14:13,1215). Accord-
ing to Wanke, we can only speak of the existence of a Vlkerkampf
motif from that moment onwards.165 In his opinion, the Zion theology
of the Korahites should thus be understood in close relationship with
the eschatological preaching of the post-exilic prophets.
The late dating of the Zion Psalms that results from this hypothesis
then provides Wanke with the space to endeavour to locate a point

161
See Wanke 1966.
162
See Wanke 1966:2331.
163
See Wanke 1966:3435, 105.
164
See Wanke 1966:6470, 108.
165
See Wanke 1966:7493.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 309 1/18/2007 1:36:52 PM

 310 chapter six

in the history of Israel itself for the emergence of the Vlkerkampf

motif: the advance of Sennacherib in 701 and his sudden withdrawal
thereafter. Wanke considers the narratives concerning Isaiah in 2 Kings
18 and 19 to be an important factor that contributed to the develop-
ment of the said motif. Particular attention is drawn to Psalm 46 as
an example of a psalm in which an echo of the events in question
continues to resound.166 In a certain sense, Wankes proposal brings us
back to an exegetical position current in the first half of the twentieth
century, against which Von Rad in particular was outspoken.
J. Jeremias, by contrast, convincingly maintains the hypothesis that the
Zion tradition is an ancient and specifically Israelite tradition, the ori-
gins of which are associated inseparably with the Ark and its traditions
(Lade und Zion).167 Jeremias set himself the goal of arriving at the
best possible description of the relationship between the Ark tradition
on the one hand and the Zion tradition on the other.168 He was in fact
of the opinion that scholars such as Wildberger and Von Rad, both in
the footsteps of Rohland, had ascribed a much too one-sided emphasis
to the Zion tradition with a presupposed pre-Israelite foundation for
its most important motifs in response to the question concerning the
origins of the primary religious significance of Jerusalem for the faith
of Israel. In line with Noth, Jeremias observes that Jerusalem owed its
actual religious significance in particular to the removal of the Ark to
the city by David. This deed not only led to the intermingling of Israels
faith with all sorts of Canaanite elements (cf. Gen. 14:1820), it also
created the conditions for the formation of an independent Davidic
tradition that would have been simply inconceivable without the removal
of the Ark.169 Given the fact that the significance of the Ark, once it
had arrived in Jerusalem, was quickly and surprisingly overshadowed
by the city itself, Jeremias asks himself whether the Zion tradition did
not ultimately take the place of the Ark tradition and whether it might
thus be understood as its successor (cf. Jer. 3:1617).

166
See Wanke 1966:9399.
167
See Jeremias 1971:183198. D.L. Eiler appears also to have referred to the
importance of Shiloh and the Ark traditions, although his study (The Origin and History
of Zion as a Theological Symbol in Ancient Israel, diss. Princeton 1968) was not available for
consultation. For a presentation of Eilers position see Ollenburger 1987:18.
168
Cf. Jeremias 1971:183: Es ist ntig, das Verhltnis von Lade- und Ziontradi-
tion mglichst exakt zu bestimmen, wenn man erklren will, wie die ursprnglich
kanaanische Stadt Jerusalem eine fr den Glauben Israels so bedeutsame Rolle
spielen konnte.
169
See Jeremias 1971:185186.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 310 1/18/2007 1:36:52 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 311

In this regard, Jeremias disputes the post-exilic dating of the Zion

tradition and of the Vlkerkampf motif upheld by Wanke, point-
ing out that Wankes hypothesis would appear to be based on a large
number of unlikely presuppositions. Jeremias agrees with Wanke on
one point, however, namely that the Zion tradition cannot be explained
in its totality on the basis of the Jebusite tradition. Jeremias considers
Stolz renewed endeavour to associate the Vlkersturm motif with
pre-Israelite, mythological origins to be unsuccessful.170
According to Jeremias, the origins of the Zion tradition are best
explained on the basis of the Ark tradition. In spite of the fact that the
pre-Israelite origin of the predicates with which Zion is characterised
in the Zion Psalms cannot be denied, this need not yet imply that the
existence of a Jebusite-Canaanite Zion tradition ought to be accepted.171
Jeremias considers it unlikely that the hill of Jerusalem was already
referred to as the city of Elyon, as divine Mount Zaphon and as
cosmic global mountain prior to the period of David. Based on the
emphasis placed in particular by the Zion Psalms on the dwelling of
yhwh on Mount Zion, he considers it more likely that youthful Israel
itself combined the Canaanite notions together and used them to further
describe the Ark-related dwelling of yhwh.172 The Ark tradition had
in the meantime become determinative for the way in which the said
Zion tradition was shaped. Jeremias draws particular attention in this
regard to the motif of the battle of the nations against Zion, which is
to be understood against the background of the Ark-related tradition
of the Wars of yhwh.173
Jeremias concludes in summary that the Zion tradition is in fact
nothing more and nothing less than a modern interpretation of the
Ark tradition put together with the support of Canaanite motifs.174 This

170
See Jeremias 1971:188189.
171
Cf. Jeremias 1971:193: Die Zion-Prdikationen hngen zwar durch ihre
gemeinsame Herkunft zweifellos zusammen, doch nicht so, da sie in sich einen festen
Traditionskomplex bilden wrden.
172
Cf. Jeremias 1971:194: Die statische Aussagen der Ziontradition wollen dann letzt-
lich nichts anderes, alsweithin mit Hilfe kanaanischen Vorstellungsgutesexplizieren
und interpretieren, was die Gegenwart des auf der Lade thronenden Jahwe fr Israel und speziell
Jerusalem bedeutet.
173
Cf. Jeremias 1971:195: Der Vlkerkampf in den Zionpsalmen ist letztlich wie-
derum nichts anderes als Explikation dessen, was das Handeln des mit der Lade verbundenen
Kriegers Jahwe bedeutet.
174
Cf. Jeremias 1971:197: Es sind somit entscheidend die Lade und die mit ihr
verbundenen Vorstellungen gewesen, die zur Aufnahme wesentlicher kanaanischer
berlieferungen und zur Bildung einer Ziontradition gefhrt haben, und zwar sowohl

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 311 1/18/2007 1:36:52 PM

 312 chapter six

simultaneously explains how the place and significance of the Ark could
be taken over by Mount Zion at a given moment in time. In any event,
however, the Zion tradition in Jerusalem quickly acquired a degree of
independence from its origins.
In addition to the work of Schreiner, Wanke and Jeremias, we are
likewise obliged in the present sub-paragraph to examine the contribu-
tion made by J.J.M. Roberts to research into the Zion tradition. In a
series of studies, Roberts has also endeavoured to focus attention on
the specifically Israelite character of the Zion tradition (The Davidic
Origin of the Zion Tradition;175 Zion Tradition;176 Zion in the
Theology of the Davidic-Solomonic Empire).177
In the first instance, Roberts turns his critical attention to the still
dominant so-called Jebusite Hypothesis in research into the Zion tradi-
tion. The hypothesis in question seeks the origins of the Zion tradition
and its most important motifs in a presupposed pre-Israelite and specifi-
cally Jebusite cultic tradition.178 Roberts is convinced that this popular
hypothesis ultimately stands in the way of a correct understanding of
the Zion tradition. He thus endeavours to demonstrate on the basis of
a series of arguments that the Jebusite Hypothesis is based on a num-
ber of presuppositions in support of which, on closer inspection, little
if any evidence is to be found.179 Roberts underlines the fact that the
theological insights of the Jebusites did not differ essentially from those
maintained by the Canaanites. The combination of the various motifs
related to the Zion tradition and consisting of mythological elements
from both the cult of Baal and the cult of El cannot simply be ascribed
to the Jebusites without succumbing to circular argumentation.180 This
is particularly the case with respect to the important motif of Zions
inviolability.181 Texts such as 2 Sam. 5:6 and Ps. 110:45 are not able

die statischen Vorstellungen vom thronenden Jahwe als auch die dynamischen von Jahwe
als Krieger. Die gesammte Ziontradition ist in ihrer ltesten Gestalt fr das damalige
Israel nichts anderes gewesen als eine moderne, mit Hilfe kanaanischer Motive voll-
zogene Exegese der Lade und ihrer Tradition.
175
See Roberts 1973:329344.
176
See Roberts 1976(B):985987.
177
See Roberts 1982(A):93108.
178
Among the supporters of the Jebusite Hypothesis, Roberts 1973:329330
includes Schmid, Rohland, Kraus, Von Rad, Hayes, Schreiner, W.H. Schmidt, Lutz
and in particular Stolz.
179
Cf. Roberts 1973:331: Thus the Jebusite theory remains the most popular view,
and it must be destroyed before a new hypothesis can be constructed in its place.
180
Roberts 1973:332336.
181
In terms of the description of the Zion tradition, Roberts 1973:329 initially

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 312 1/18/2007 1:36:53 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 313

to bear the burden of proof for the Jebusite origins of this motif.182
Roberts concludes that the city of Jebus did not enjoy sufficient political
or religious significance to allow us to ascribe the development of the
Zion tradition to the Jebusites.183
Roberts is also critical of the extremely late dating of the motifs
associated with the Zion tradition as proposed by Wanke,184 arguing
that it is more acceptable to locate the motif of Zions inviolability
and the other motifs associated with the Zion tradition in the golden
age of David and Solomon.185 He suspects that the identification of
yhwh with the Canaanite El and Elyon had already taken place prior
to the time of David (cf. Num. 24:16; Deut. 32:89), but that Davids
conquest of the city gave an extra impulse to the said identification
in order to provide theological legitimation for his extensive territorial
dominion. The same is true, Roberts maintains, for the intermingling of
mythological material from the cult of Baal.186 While he argues that the
various motifs that glorify Jerusalem as the city of yhwh may contain
elements that are probably to be dated prior to the period of the kings,
Roberts nevertheless insists that the Zion tradition in its present form
presupposes the conquest of Jerusalem by David and that its credibility
depends on the latter.187
Roberts detects the religious justification required by David for the
removal of the Ark to Jerusalem in the various prophetic utterances
related to the election of Zion together with that of David himself
in Psalm 132. As a matter of fact, the belief that yhwh had chosen
Zion as his dwelling place serves as a point of crystallisation out of
which the various motifs of the Zion tradition were ultimately able

agrees with Rohland, who had identified four motifs, to which Wildberger 1957:6281
later added a fifth (see also Roberts 1976[B]:985f ). At a later date, however, he offers
his own description, emphasising two fundamental concepts associated with the Zion
tradition and its related motifs: (1) yhwh is the great king and (2) yhwh has chosen
Jerusalem as his dwelling place. See Roberts 1982(A):93108.
182
Roberts 1973:337338.
183
Roberts 1976(B):986.
184
See Roberts 1973:338339.
185
Cf. Roberts 1973:339: I suggest that all the features in the Zion tradition can be
explained most adequately by positing an original Sitz im Leben in the era of the Davidic-
Salomonic empire. For detailed argumentation see Roberts 1982(A):93108.
186
Cf. Roberts 1973:342: Politico-religious propaganda has never been overly con-
cerned with keeping its mythology straight. (. . .) Thus to give Yahweh full supremacy,
the Israelites had Yahweh absorb some of the mythological traits and functions of
Baal, as well as those of El.
187
See Roberts 1976(B):986.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 313 1/18/2007 1:36:53 PM

 314 chapter six

to develop.188 While there is little information available to us from the

period of David and Solomon concerning insurrection among vassal
states, Roberts nevertheless considers the fact that David had to deal
with various vassal states and that the Philistinesaccording to 2 Sam.
5:1725definitely came close to the city as sufficient explanation for
the emergence of the motif of the pilgrimage of the nations to Zion189
and for that of Zions inviolability.190 According to Roberts, it is thanks
to the authority of the prophet Nathan that any resistance to the asso-
ciation of yhwh with Zion was quickly defeated.191
It is reasonable to say that Roberts is not alone in his critique of
the Jebusite Hypothesis. Despite the various studies that continue to
further elaborate upon the said hypothesis,192 it would appear to have
had its day or at least to have lost its indisputable character. After
Roberts, R.E. Clements likewise expressed the necessary criticism of
the presupposed Jebusite origins of the Zion tradition (Isaiah and the
Deliverance of Jerusalem).193 Clements had particular difficulty with the
motif of Zions inviolability, arguing that the inhabitants of many a
city would have had the conviction that their god would protect them
in time of need. Jerusalem, he thus maintains, was not unique in this
regard. Clements rejects the presupposition of a historicisation of the
myth of the chaos waters as a hypothesis that cannot be proven. Based
on the description of the insurgent peoples in Psalm 2 and in the Zion
Psalms, he concludes a possible correlation between the motif of victory
against the rebellious nations and the rise of the kingdom of David.194

188
Roberts 1982(A):105.
189
Wildberger 1957:6281 was the first to consider this motif as original to the
Zion tradition. Not everyone has followed him in this regard, especially on account
of continuing hesitations related to the dating of Isa. 2:24. Cf. Ollenburger 1987:16:
Even if the text is pre-exilic it seems insufficient to establish the presence of a pilgrim-
age of the nations as a constituent motif of the Zion tradition.
190
See Roberts 1973:343344. Roberts is later more inclined to allow for the pos-
sibility of a mythological background to the motif of Zions inviolability. See Roberts
1982(A):99ff.
191
Roberts 1973:343.
192
See, for example, Otto 1980(B):316329; Laato 1988:8087 and Preu
1992:47.
193
See Clements 1980(A):7289.
194
Cf. Clements 1980(A):7980: There are strong reasons therefore for concluding
that the theme of the Conflict with the Nations, with its portrayal of the defeat of
rebellious nations by Yahweh to bring in an age of peace, was an aspect of the royal
Davidic ideology which had become established in Jerusalem. (. . .) We may therefore
conclude that it is virtually certain that this motif entered into Israel as a part of the
Davidic royal ideology which flourished in the cult of Jerusalem. There is no reason
therefore why we should continue to look for its origin in a hypothetically reconstructed
Jebusite mythology concerning a sacred mountain.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 314 1/18/2007 1:36:53 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 315

He maintains, nevertheless, that the actual dogma of Zions inviolability

is an interpretation of the said original motif dating from the time of
Josiah and against the background of the events of 701. Clements even
considers it misleading to ascribe the dogma of Zions inviolability to
an already existing Zion tradition, because this would give rise to the
suggestion that Isaiah was already familiar with the said motif and the
relationship with Davidic theology thereby disappears from view.195
While I agree with both Roberts and Clements that the origins of
the Zion tradition are best dated in the Davidic period, both authors
place enormous emphasis on the influence of Davidic theology, as if
the Zion tradition as such was a creation of the Davidic court. While
it is evident that the emergence of the Davidic dynasty went hand in
hand with the Zion tradition, scholarly research thus far has led to the
conclusion that the Zion tradition cannot be subsumed into the Davidic
tradition, but must be understood rather as an independent tradition.196
It is of singular importance that justice be done to the connection
between the Zion tradition and the Ark tradition.
J.D. Levenson and B.C. Ollenburger provide a more synchronic
description of the Zion tradition and its motifs. In line with the work of
Clifford (The Cosmic Mountain in Canaan and the Old Testament),197 Levenson
(Sinai and Zion)198 places the emphasis on the description of the motif
of the cosmic mountain (1) as meeting place of the gods; (2) as battle
place of conflicting natural powers; (3) as meeting place of heaven and
earth; (4) as administrative centre of the cosmos; and (5) as location
of the miraculous streams of water. With respect to the relationship
between Zion and Sinai, Levenson is convinced that the former as heir
must always remain subordinate to the latter.199

195
Clements 1980(A):8384.
196
Cf. Ollenburgers critique 1987:60ff: . . . the two traditions formed around Zion
and David had different traditio-historical origins. The Zion tradition, whatever its
indebtedness to previous traditions associated with Jerusalem may have been, is traditio-
historically related to the Ark and specifically to the Ark of the Shiloh sanctuary. The
Davidic tradition, on the other hand, while very difficult to assess, evidently arose in
connection with the problems of legitimation and succession in the Davidic-Solomonic
Court. See also Levenson 1992:11001101.
197
See Clifford 1972.
198
See Levenson 1985.
199
See Levenson 1985:188: Gods continuing availability is at Zion, not Sinai, but
the canonical division of the Pentateuch from the rest of the Hebrew Bible, adumbrated
in Deut. 34:10, insures that the heir will be eternally subordinate to the testator, Zion
to Sinai, David to Moses. (. . .) The presence is the presence of Zion, but the voice
is the voice of Sinai. See also Levenson 1992:10981102.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 315 1/18/2007 1:36:53 PM

 316 chapter six

Ollenburger (Zion the City of the Great King),200 a student of Roberts, is

aware of the value of tradition-historical research into the origins and
development of the Zion tradition, although he addresses his attention
in the first instance to the message thereof, the central elements of the
Zion traditions theological character.201 Ollenburger sees the heart of
the Zion tradition in the confession of the kingship of yhwh on Zion.
Everything that can be said about Zion beyond this is ultimately rooted
therein. In this regard, Ollenburger also underlines the importance of
the Ark tradition in order to arrive at a correct understanding of the
Zion tradition. With respect to the origins of the notion of the king-
ship of yhwh, he explicitly agrees with Jeremias, who considers the
Zion tradition to be an exegesis of the Ark traditions.202 Ollenburger is
also aware in this context of the creation features (conquest of chaos)
associated with the kingship of yhwh and the connotation integrated
therein of the protection of Israel.203 Partly in line with the position

200
See Ollenburger 1987.
201
Ollenburger 1987:14. Cf. Ollenburger 1987:145: This means (. . .) that the investi-
gation of Zion symbolism here undertaken has been guided not by the traditio-historical
development of the Zion tradition or Zion mythology, but by the nature of Zion as a
symbol, as this is elaborated in the theology of the Jerusalem cult tradition.
202
See Ollenburger 1987:43 Cf. 1987:48: We have also endeavoured to show that
much of the material associated with Yahwehs kingship in Jerusalem was not created
ad hoc by the theologians of Davids court, nor need its origins be sought in a hypo-
thetical Jebusite tradition, but it was already in existence in association with the Ark at
Shiloh. See also Levenson 1992:1101: Though the evidence is more exiguous than
we would like, it does suggest strongly that one antecedent of the Zion traditions lay
in the Ark traditions, especially as they developed at Shiloh just before the emergence
of the monarchy. In reaction to the emphasis placed by Jeremias on the Ark tradition
in his study of the origins of the Zion tradition, Janowski 1991:231264 introduced
the somewhat speculative andin light of the available textsmore or less unac-
ceptable hypothesis that it was not the Ark in Jerusalem but rather the cultic symbol
of the cherubs set up in the temple of Solomon that made an essential contribution
to the genesis of the Zion tradition. In this regard, he disputes the originality of the
for the most part presupposed association between the cherub throne and the title
yhwh Zebaot on the one hand and the Ark on the other. According to Janowski, the
title Zebaot was already associated with the Ark in Shiloh, while the cherub throne
was associated with Shiloh by way of retro-projection from within the temple cult of
Jerusalem. As a consequence, the origins of the Zion tradition are not to be sought
in the Ark tradition but rather in the Canaanite presentations of the cosmic divine
mountain. Janowski likewise maintains that the presentation of the cherub throne
(Thronsitz des unsichtbar darauf vorgestellten Zionsgottes, Symbol der Entsprechung
von irdischer und himmlischer Prsenz jhwhs) is to be associated with the notion of
the divine mountain. Based on this argumentation, Janowski considers a dating of the
Zion tradition in the period of the early monarchy unthinkable.
203
See Ollenburger 1987:5758. Cf. Ollenburger 1987:2122: We will argue that
the Arks transfer to Jerusalem provided such conditions (the conditions under which

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 316 1/18/2007 1:36:53 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 317

of Kraus, Ollenburger presupposes that the kingship of yhwh was

celebrated annually at an autumn feast in Jerusalem.204

6.4.1.4. The Zion tradition as a specifically Israelite election tradition

By way of conclusion to the survey provided in the preceding sub-
paragraphs of questions related to research into the Zion tradition, we
must now endeavour to answer the following question: what should we
understand as the actual core of the Zion tradition to which the variety
of motifs associated therewith through time have given expression? Our
response to the question is brief: Israels conviction that Zion enjoys a
special place and significance in the journey God has made with his
people. I speak here intentionally of a special place and significance
ascribed to Zion on the journey God has made with Israel, because the
factor of Gods deeds with respect to Zion is consistently determinative
of the way in which Zion is presented in the Old Testament. It may
therefore be clarifying in this regard to define the Zion tradition along
similar lines: The Zion tradition is that group of Israels traditions related to
the unique place and significance of Zion on the journey God has made with his
people.
Defined as such, there would be no objection to speaking of an
election tradition. Kraus was among the most vehement critics of this
designation because he sought the uniqueness of the Zion tradition in
the originally mythological tradition related to the divine mountain. He
himself thus prefers to speak of a cultic tradition to the glorification of
Zion.205 Nevertheless, when it would appear that the Zion tradition is
closely associated with the Ark tradition, the concept of election lends
itself as the concept par excellence for giving expression to the specifically
Israelite character of the said tradition. Even without reference to the
question concerning the time at which the term rjb to elect became a
more or less technical term in the context of the relationship between
God and Zion (cf. Ps. 132:13), the essence of what is implied thereby
is already present in the genesis of the Zion tradition. In spite of the

it was possible for Zion to evolve into a theological symbol, JD) and also supplied the
set of denotations or primary meanings for which Zion is an iconic vehicle.
204
See Ollenburger 1987:33: On the basis of the evidence available it would seem
best to conclude that Yahwehs kingship, which was seen to endure from his primordial
victory over chaos, and to be exercised on Zion from the time of the Arks transfer
there, was celebrated as part of the Autumn festival which incorporated many Canaanite
and traditionally Israelite notions.
205
Kraus 1960(A):345.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 317 1/18/2007 1:36:54 PM

 318 chapter six

structure given to the Zion tradition in the Zion Psalms, whereby use
is made of all sorts of originally mythological forms of expression, it
seems reasonable to conclude that the Zion tradition is essentially a
specifically Israelite tradition, the origins of which are inseparably bound
to the removal of the Ark to Jerusalem and its associated traditions.

6.4.2. Further research into the Zion preaching of Isaiah

6.4.2.1. Isaiah and the Zion tradition
If the Zion tradition can be understood as a specifically Israelite tradi-
tion, the origin of which is closely associated with the arrival of the Ark
and its traditions in Jerusalem, then it would be reasonable to suggest
that Isaiah, the prophet of Jerusalem, would also have been familiar
with the Zion tradition and its associated motifs and that he would have
used them in his preaching. In spite of the ongoing points of discus-
sion and surviving questions surrounding the Zion tradition, a growing
consensus can be observed within the world of Old Testament studies
on this point. The post-exilic dating of the Zion tradition supported by
Fohrer and Wanke has not found a broad basis of agreement.206
Consensus is less apparent with respect to the influence of the
miraculous liberation of Jerusalem in 701 on the development of the
Zion tradition. Indeed, when the motif of Zions inviolability is seen
as the core of the Zion tradition, the temptation is great to ascribe the
remarkable events of 701 an important and constitutive significance.207
It is important to note, however, that the Zion tradition should not be
reduced to a presupposed faith in Zions inviolability. As a matter of
fact, a sufficient explanation for the Zion tradition as a whole is difficult
to find in the story of Jerusalems liberation. The heart of the Zion
tradition lies in the belief that yhwh chose Zion as his dwelling place

206
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:17: There is no scholarly consensus regarding the date
and origin of the Zion tradition, but we are now able to say with some certainty that
the efforts of Fohrer and Wanke, for example, to date the origin of this tradition to a
period later than Isaiah of Jerusalem have failed. Without awareness of the work of
Ollenburger, Laato 1988:41 laments the ongoing influence of the vision of Wanke.
207
Cf. Clements 1980(A):84: The doctrine of the inviolability of Jerusalem,
therefore, which several scholars have come to regard as a central feature of the so-
called Zion tradition, must rather be understood as a particular adaptation of the
interpretation placed upon what happened in 701. A similar option is maintained
by Otto 1989:1015: Vorexil. Zionstheologie ist ein vornehmlich in der Assyrerzeit
ausgearbeiteter Partikularaspekt Jerusalemer Tempeltheologie, der die Sicherheit der
Stadt in Zeiten ihrer Gefhrdung theologisch begrndet.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 318 1/18/2007 1:36:54 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 319

and that Zion is thus the city of the great King.208 It is probable never-
theless that the event of Jerusalems liberation in 701 gave a powerful
endorsement to the peoples faith in the inviolability of Zion, as the
preaching of the prophet Jeremiah appears to presuppose.209 At the
same time, however, it is not inconceivable that the earliest origins of
this motif are already to be found in the Ark tradition, given the fact
that it includes a certain belief in the inviolability of the Arks location
and in the sign of Gods presence (cf. 1 Samuel 4).210 If one bears the
Ark tradition in mind, then the belief in the inviolability of Zion should,
in any event, not come as much of a surprise. In a certain sense, this
belief was inherent in the very fact of yhwhs royal presence in Zion (cf.
Mi. 3:11).211 This implies that the prophet Isaiah would also have been
familiar with this motif of the Zion tradition in one form or another.
I can see no compelling reason to deny in advance the authenticity of
the texts that bear witness to this fact and date them in a later period
of Israels history. Bearing in mind, however, that it would be impossible
to provide an in-depth analysis of all the issues associated with the texts
in question and with the Zion tradition as a whole within the present

208
See Ollenburger 1987 and Roberts 1982(A):93108.
209
While Gowan 1986:6f associates the emergence of the Zion tradition with the
period of David and Solomon and the Davidic royal theology, he emphasises the impact
that the liberation of Jerusalem in 701 must have had on the peoples faith. He does
not appear to take a position, however, on whether the belief in Zions inviolability can
be ascribed to this event: The miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem from Sennacheribs
army, which captured every other city in Judah in 701, no doubt added to the aura
that was developing about this city and either reinforced or produced the belief in its
invulnerability, depending on whose theory one accepts.
210
I am inclined to disagree with Levenson on this point and his belief in the pos-
sibility of a Jebusite influence on the Zion tradition with respect to the given motif.
Cf. Levenson 1992:11011102: If the cultus of Jerusalem in the early Monarchy was
influenced by Jebusite traditions, it is entirely possible that those elements in the Zion
tradition that seem to lack secure rooting in old Israelite tradition came in from this
Canaanite source. Ollenburger 1987:23n argues plainly that the notion of Zions
inviolability is given together with the notion of the royal presence of yhwh on Zion
and need not be associated with the original sacrality of Mount Zion itself.
211
Cf. Mettinger 1982:37: We have not here had the occasion to discuss the notion
of the inviolability of Zion, but it would perhaps be appropriate to ask whether those
scholars who assign it to a late date and derive its origins from the Assyrian crisis in
701 have done justice to the fundamental importance of the motif of the Presence in
the Zion tradition. If the heavenly King is present in his capital city, that city must ipso
facto enjoy a privilege of security guaranteed by God himself. See also Ollenburger
1987:46: This Kingship is exercised on Zion and it is only natural that the rejoicing
over Yahwehs kingship there should be extended to the security of Zion itself. (. . .)
The annual celebration of Yahwehs kingship is thus at the same time a celebration
of Zions security under the protection of her king.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 319 1/18/2007 1:36:54 PM

 320 chapter six

volume, I am obliged to limit myself to a presentation of a number

of particular lines of research that can be drawn from my exegesis of
the Zion text of 28:16.
The Zion text of 28:16 allows us to see the way in which the prophet
Isaiah made use of the Zion tradition during the period of the Assyrian
crisis. It is remarkable, however, that many studies of the Zion tradi-
tion draw little if any attention to this Zion text.212 Where attention
is given, the tendency is to treat the Zion text of 28:16 as a future
oriented text, referring to the future Zion as an important theme in the
preaching of the prophet.213 While it cannot indeed be denied that the
prophet Isaiah also spoke of Zion in terms of the future (see below),
it should be observed that Isaiahs preaching was, in the first instance,
closely linked to the concepts of contemporary Zion passed on to him in
the tradition, namely Zion as the dwelling place of yhwh. My exegesis
has demonstrated that the Zion text of 28:16 should not be understood
as a promise of salvation nor should it be related to some future sal-
vific deed on the part of yhwh. The Zion text of 28:16 functions as a
salvation-historical retrospective moment within the framework of an
announcement of judgement. The prophet underlines the seriousness
of the announced judgement by explicitly recalling a salvific deed of
yhwh with respect to Zion situated in the past. The stone referred to
in 28:16 alludes to the rock-solid foundation that yhwh himself has
established in Zion. In so doing, the prophet draws attention to the
reliability of the salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion as the
foundation for Gods salvific plans for his people Israel. This founda-
tion is inseparably bound to yhwhs decision to make Zion a hiding
place for the wretched among his people (14:32), a place of rest and
respite for the weary (28:12).
In order to establish a clear picture of the way in which Isaiah harked
back in his preaching to the Zion tradition, it is important that we pay
due attention to the close relationship between the texts 14:32; 28:12
and 28:16. Isa. 28:12, a verse we likewise designated as a Zion text

212
The absence of any discussion of 28:16 is most striking in the studies of Fohrer
1964; 1969 and Wanke 1966. Roberts 1982:93108 likewise leaves the Zion text of 28:16
untreated. Roberts only focuses attention of 28:16 in a separate study (1987:2745).
213
See, for example, Rohland 1956:147; Wildberger 1957:71 and Herrmann
1965:142143. Cf. also Gowan 1986:9n. Zion is dealt with in Gowans study for the
most part as the centre of Israels hope and expectation. Gowan describes Israels escha-
tological expectation as a threefold transformation of human society (Peace in Zion),
the human person (The People of Zion) and nature (Highest of All the Hills).

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 320 1/18/2007 1:36:54 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 321

referring to the place of rest and respite for the weary, is associated in
terms of content with the Zion text of 14:32. The Zion text of 28:16
and its reference to the Zion stone as the foundation of yhwh even
has literal agreements with 14:32. The various components of the Zion
text of 14:32 are further elaborated in 28:12 and 28:16 in two different
directions: in 28:12 in a more socio-ethical direction and in 28:16 in a
more political direction. In like fashion to the Zion text of 28:16, the
Zion text of 14:32 would also appear to have been uttered in a political
context. Reference is made to the arrival of an emissary. If we are at
liberty to take the unity of 14:2832 as our point of departure, then
the emissary in question must stem from among the Philistines and
the Zion text is to be dated in the earlier years of Isaiahs preaching,
in the year in which both Ahaz and the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser
III died (727). In speaking of the foundation of Zion, Isaiah exhorts
his audience not to let themselves be tempted to participate in an anti-
Assyrian coalition. Such would appear to be the political implication
of the statement that yhwh had established Zion. The fact that the
prophet makes reference to Zion as a hiding place for the wretched
in precisely the same context, however, introduces us also to the social
implications of the foundation of Zion. The wretched of his people
refers to those who have nothing to hope for in life except yhwh. In
practice, social circumstances frequently led to such wretchedness. In
the Zion text of 14:32, however, the social and political implications of
Gods salvific deeds with respect to Zion go hand in hand. In 28:12 and
28:16, on the other hand, the social and political dimensions of Zion
are explored separately, although it can also be noted at this juncture
that while both dimensions can be distinguished from one another it
is impossible to separate them entirely. Based on the evident points
of cohesion between the Zion text of 14:32 on the one hand (date:
around the year 727) and the two Zion texts of 28:12 and 28:16 on
the other (date: around the year 701), I am able to conclude that the
manner with which the prophet gives expression to the Zion tradition
in his preaching exhibits a high degree of consistency through the years.
The attitude Isaiah expects of Jerusalems leaders in both political and
socio-ethical terms, is repeatedly and explicitly based on Zion and the
salvific deeds of yhwh that have been associated with Zion from of
old.214 The prophets appeal for faith and his critique of the actions

214
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:116: The fundamental position of Isaiahs salvation
message is then that Yahweh associates himself with Zion as the place of security

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 321 1/18/2007 1:36:54 PM

 322 chapter six

of Jerusalems political leaders are both rooted in his conviction that

yhwh founded Zion.215
Where the activities of Jerusalems politicians are concerned, the
preaching of Isaiah during the years of the Assyrian crisis is much
sharper than before. The statement in 14:32 is clearly rooted in a dif-
ferent political climate than that of 28:12 and 28:16. In contrast to the
Zion text of 14:32, which is formulated more in terms of a confession
than a promise and as such likewise implies the expectation that it is
accepted by Gods people, each of the latter Zion texts was uttered
within the context of a prophecy of judgement that no longer has any
illusions about the possibility of a receptive audience and even presup-
poses a situation in which the audience refuses to listen (see 28:12). It
is important to bear in mind that it is not Isaiahs vision of the Zion
tradition as such that changes thereby but only the context in which
Isaiah speaks of the Zion tradition. It would appear from both prophe-
cies of judgement (28:713 and 28:1422) that the prophet Isaiah also
harked back to the Zion tradition with which he was familiar during
the years of Hezekiahs revolt against the king of Assyria, but he does
so in the present instance in order to underline the serious and outra-
geous character of the judgement of yhwh he is proclaiming. In the
context of Isaiahs judgement preaching, yhwhs deeds of judgement
with respect to Jerusalemtogether with the instruments used in the
processare motivated firmly on the basis of the actual rejection of
yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion.
It is frequently suggested that the prophet Isaiah adapted the Zion
tradition he had inherited by making the deliverance of Zion dependent
on faith.216 It is presupposed in this regard that this was not yet the
case with respect to the so-called Zion Psalms (see Psalm 46; 48 and
76) and that the psalms in question promise salvation to Zion without

and peace for those who do not attempt to secure their own or Jerusalems defence
through practical, military means, leaving the matter of security absolutely in the
hands of Yahweh.
215
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:149: Thus for Isaiah the security of Jerusalem is grounded
in the kingship of Yahweh on Zion and is dependent upon the acknowledgment of
Yahwehs exclusive prerogative. Hence, security is not something intrinsic to Jerusalem
by virtue of its location, but is rather the result of Yahwehs royal presence and is
available insofar as Judah and its leaders exercise faith, by resisting the temptation to
seek security through armaments and alliances that would infringe upon a prerogative
exclusively Yahwehs.
216
See, for example, Huber 1976:239.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 322 1/18/2007 1:36:55 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 323

condition. While it is indeed true that Isaiahs preaching is unique in its

insistence on the necessity of a faith response, this need not imply that
the latter should be understood as an adjustment of the content of the
Zion tradition. On the one hand, it is far from certain that the Zion
Psalms should be understood as speaking of an unconditional promise
of salvation. On the other hand, it is striking that the prophet Isaiah,
even when he preaches Gods impending judgement to the leaders
of Jerusalem, takes the inseparable bond between yhwh and Zion as
his point of departure.217 The fact that Isaiah frequently insists on an
attitude of faith, moreover, does not imply that this condition need be
expressed explicitly in all his prophecies with respect to Zion.218
In one of the preceding chapters, I already made note of the com-
parable manner with which the prophet Isaiah harks back in Isaiah
28 to salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion and in Isaiah 7 to
salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to the house of David. During the
Syro-Ephraimitic crisis, it was the royal house of David that was under
particular threat (cf. 7:2,13) because Ahaz enemies endeavoured to
make the son of Tabeel king of Judah (see 7:6). The prophet Isaiah,
however, was then able to ensure King Ahaz that this would not take
place (7:7). This reassurance is to be understood against the background
of the promise already made in the prophecy of Nathan that the royal
house of David would endure (see 2 Sam. 7:16). The said promise
also forms the background of the Emmanuel prophecy that follows in
Isa. 7:14.219 The prophet insists on faith in response to both yhwhs

217
Cf. Laato 1988:233: Even though Yahweh would deliver Zion he would destroy
the ungodly ones there. We can really say that, in Isaiahs opinion, Zion could never be
captured. The inviolability of Zion was unconditional for Isaiah. See also Ollenburger
1993:830: Zion will endure even beyond Jerusalems destruction.
218
On account of the unconditional character of the salvation preaching contained
in 8:910 and 17:1214 and addressed to the people in Jerusalem and Judah, Barth
1977:4954 considers both these texts to be secondary. On the basis of 1:2126;
14:32; 28:12,16, however, he recognises that Isaiahs preaching presupposes a bond
between yhwh and Zion, die auch durch die Frevelhaftigkeit seiner Bewohner und
das Vernichtungsgericht an ihnen nicht aufgehoben wird. Barth considers it essential
to Isaiah that he never preached unconditional salvation for Jerusalem but insisted
rather on a corresponding reaction of faith/trust upon which he considered salvation
to be dependent. To this extent, Isaiah is thus said to have adjusted the Zion tradition
he had inherited in his preaching.
219
Cf. Wildberger 1972:293: Wenn das Zeichen von 7,14 irgendwie in Verbin-
dung mit dem Heilsorakel von 7,49 steht, dann mu also der Name lawnm[ aus dem
Zusammenhang der Davidstradition gedeutet werden. See also Beuken 2003:49. I
am inclined to disagree with Ollenburger 1987:124ff on this point who disputes the
connection between Isaiah 7 and 2 Samuel 7: What Ahaz is asked to believe (v. 9b)

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 323 1/18/2007 1:36:55 PM

 324 chapter six

salvific deeds with respect to the house of David and yhwhs salvific
deeds with respect to Zion (7:9; 28:16). The refusal to have faithby
King Ahaz in response to the promise contained in the Davidic tradition
and by the political elite in the days of King Hezekiah in response to
the promise contained within the Zion traditionprovides Isaiah with
the occasion to announce judgement.
It is also conceivable that in the context of the Syro-Ephraimitic
war, Isaiah not only harked back to the Davidic tradition but also to
the Zion tradition (cf. 8:910). The context of Isaiahs Zion preaching,
however, is more determined by the threat posed by Assyria than it
is by the threat posed by Aram and Ephraim. The threat in question
begins in Judah at the moment King Ahaz turns for help to the king
of Assyria, determines the politics of Jerusalem for decades thereafter
and culminates in the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrian king Sen-
nacherib. The concentration of Zion texts in Isaiah 2833 confirms the
impression that Isaiahs preaching was particularly inspired by the Zion
tradition during the Assyrian crisis. From the Judean perspective, the
threat from Assyria was directed at the time more specifically towards
the city of Jerusalem itself (cf. 10:32) rather than against Judah and
the royal house of David. In the context of the Syro-Ephraimitic war,
by contrast, mutual rivalry between Israel and Judah still had a role to
play, a rivalry that had become explicit in those days in the open schism
between Israel and the house of David (cf. 1 Kgs 12:16). Roberts pre-
supposes that Isaiah was still close to the original Zion tradition during
the Syro-Ephraimitic crisis, but that his disappointment in the attitude
of the leaders of Jerusalem led him thereafter to adopt a more critical
stance and to make use of the Zion tradition he had received in a more
critical way.220 I can see no evidence, however, for such a change in
Isaiahs preaching. As a matter of fact, continuity in Isaiahs preaching
during both major crises that faced Jerusalem is much more striking
than difference. In both crises, the prophet harked back to Jerusalems
salvific traditions and he expected an attitude of faith in response to
Gods deeds with respect to the house of David and Zion alike.

is not that the head of Jerusalem is the Davidic house, or some such, but that Yah-
weh, whose exclusive prerogative it is to provide security, is sufficient for the defence
of Zion. (127) Roberts 1982(B):139 presupposes that Isaiah harked back to both the
Davidic tradition and the Zion tradition in 7:79.
220
Roberts 1982(B):138.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 324 1/18/2007 1:36:55 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 325

6.4.2.2. Zion and Isaiahs preaching of judgement and salvation

An important consequence of our exegesis of the Zion text of 28:16
is to be found in the fact that one is not obliged to accept contradic-
tion between Isaiahs preaching of judgement on the one hand and
his preaching of salvation on the other. This has been one of the most
disputed questions in the history of research into the prophet Isaiah.
Down through the years, scholars have proposed countless images
of Isaiah, each of which exhibits its own accents. It is often the case
that such images of Isaiah lie at the foundation of the suggestion that
Isaiah was primarily if not exclusively a prophet of judgement.221 While
scholars have refined their position on this point in numerous ways,
the presupposition nevertheless continues to represent a characteristic
feature of Isaiah research. In the following paragraph we will focus on
the most striking perspectives on the nature and content of Isaiahs
preaching.
G. von Rad can serve as the prototype of a scholar whose image of
the prophet Isaiah is highly determined by salvation-historical matters.
Von Rad endeavoured to maintain the unity of Isaiahs judgement and
salvation preaching by emphasising the course of salvation history,
whereby salvation is realised in and through judgement. The vision
of H. Wildberger is generally understood to be in line with that of
Von Rad.
In line with G. Fohrer (Wandlungen Jesajas),222 H.W. Hoffmann
(Die Intention der Verkndigung Jesajas)223 characterises Isaiah as Prophet der
Umkehrforderung, a preacher of repentance. Isaiah endeavoured to
convert his audience by speaking about the future. To achieve this goal,
his preaching revolved for the most part around judgement. Fohrer and
Hoffmann claim that most promises of salvation are not authentically
Isaianic and where the prophet did preach salvation it was always in
the service of the call to repentance. While it is clear from 6:910 that

221
Cf. Childs 1967:63: It has long been observed by critical scholars that the oracles
of promise play a subordinate role in the primary Isaianic tradition. In fact, for some
scholars of the last century it became a petitio principii that Isaiah spoke only words of
judgment. Based on 7:3ff; 28:12 and 30:15, Childs himself maintains that Isaiahs
preaching must have contained a promise of hope (cf. also the prophecies against
the nations in 14:25; 17:12ff ). He nevertheless considers the Zion text of 28:16 to be
the only prophecy of Isaiah that exhibits the formal structure of a promise. Given the
specific context of the said promise, he calls for prudence in drawing general conclu-
sions with regard to the motif of Zions inviolability in Isaiahs preaching.
222
See Fohrer 1981:1123.
223
See Hoffmann 1974:3780.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 325 1/18/2007 1:36:55 PM

 326 chapter six

the commission to make Gods people obdurate was part of Isaiahs

vocation, Hoffmann is nevertheless of the opinion that this was not
the goal of Isaiahs preaching. He maintains that the words of 6:910
were intended on the one hand to expose Israels obduracy as sinful
and on the other to give expression to Isaiahs own understanding of
God, according to which no one is capable of doing anything that is
against Gods will. The possibility of conversion was thus not excluded
by the commission Isaiah received at his call. According to Hoffmanns
image of Isaiah, however, the exclusion of this possibility was only
the case after Jerusalems liberation in 701 (cf. 22:14).
W. Werner (Eschatologische Texte in Jes 139. Messias, Heiliger Rest,
Vlker)224 and R. Kilian ( Jesaja 139)225 strongly disagree with the
image of Isaiah maintained by Fohrer and Hoffmann. H.W. Wolff
was among the first to argue that Isaiah should be understood as a
prophet of judgement only. In Kilians presentation, Isaiahs exhorta-
tions only functioned to point to Israels guilt and did not open up the
possibility of conversion. According to Kilian, the commission to make
Gods people obdurate given in the context of Isaiahs vocation excludes
such an option. For Kilian it has become axiomatic that Isaiah was
not a prophet of salvation. Even if authentic prophecies of salvation
are to be found in the book of Isaiah, they are to be read from the
perspective of the commission to make the people obdurate. Kilian
is completely convinced, however, that no such original prophecies
of salvation written by Isaiah are to be found, and he recognises that
his image of Isaiah is dependent on literary-critical considerations.
P. Hffken (Das Buch Jesaja. Kapitel 139)226 upholds a vision of the
prophet similar to that of Kilian.
The vision developed by O. Kaiser (Das Buch des Propheten Jesaja)227
on the nature and content of Isaiahs preaching takes us a step further
than that of Kilian. For Kaiser it is an open-and-shut case that only a
few texts found in the book of Isaiah are actually to be ascribed to the
prophet himself. He is even inclined to deny the authenticity of texts
such as 6:111 and 7:19, which are generally accepted as authentic.
An important point of departure for Kaiser is the methodically debat-
able conviction that every text that can be explained on the basis of

224
See Werner 1982.
225
See Kilian 1983:112140.
226
See Hffken 1993:26.
227
See Kaiser 1981:1927.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 326 1/18/2007 1:36:56 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 327

a different time should be denied Isaianic authenticity.228 Kaiser thus

radically reverses the burden of proof. As a result, he no longer consid-
ers Isaiah to be a great prophet whose preaching was coloured by his
commission to make the people obdurate and who was characterised
by Von Rad as a theological phenomenon. Kaiser understands Isaiah
to be a simple preacher, who was aware of impending disaster and
tried to warn his people about it with his woe statements.
Based on and in line with the literary-critical insights of his teacher
and mentor Kaiser, U. Becker ( Jesajavon der Botschaft zum Buch)229
developed a radical new vision of the preaching of Isaiah. Becker
argues that Isaiah was not originally a prophet of judgement but
rather a prophet of salvation (associated with the cult), as the slightly
later narratives found in Isaiah 3639 still presuppose. It was only in
the post-exilic period, he maintains, when Judahs downfall could be
subject to theological reflection, that Isaiah could be transformed into a
prophet of judgement via the interpolation of the commission to make
the people obdurate and other prophecies of judgement addressed
to Judah (the oldest prophecies in Isaiah 2831 are thus said to have
already been dependent on Isaiah 3639).

Isaiahs call vision related in Isaiah 6 along with its commission to

make Gods people obdurate has played a primary and important
role in the establishment of the variety of scholarly positions on the
prophet. Indeed, the explanation thereof seems to have been crucial
for the theological vision that scholars have developed with respect
to the prophet and his preaching.230 On the other hand, it is also the
case that personal theological perspectives have had an important role
to play in the scholarly explanation of Isaiahs vision of call and his
commission to make the people obdurate. A detailed discussion of
the latter would take us far beyond the boundaries set for the present
study. The vision of Isaiah 6 is sometimes explained as a one-off
commission that cannot be identified with Isaiahs initial vocation.231
In such instances, the commission appears less objectionable since its

228
See Kaiser 1976:4.
229
See Becker 1997 and 1999:130ff.
230
Cf. Becker 1999:146: Beinahe jeder Beitrag zum (Proto-)Jesajabuch befat sich
auch mit dem Berufungs- bzw. Sendungsbericht, weil sich in ihm wie in einem Brennglas
alle Probleme der Jesajaforschung zu konzentrieren scheinen.
231
See, for example, Snijders 1969, Watts 1985, Evans 1989, Sweeney 1996, Rend-
torff 1999:160 and Beuken 2003. A similar explanation can also be found in Calvin.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 327 1/18/2007 1:36:56 PM

 328 chapter six

sting has thus been removed. More frequently, however, it is argued as

opinio communis that the commission of 6:910 is both theologically and
psychologically difficult to conceive and that it must have been projected
back into Isaiahs call vision at a later date.232 By projecting Israels
refusal to listen back into his vision of call, Isaiah thus endeavoured
to come to terms with his own disappointments at both the theological
and psychological level. At the same time, such an explanation tends to
separate the theophany from the commission as described in Isaiah 6.
The text itself, however, which is clearly a unity running from verse 1 to
verse 11, does not provide arguments in support of such a separation.233
The description of the vision already anticipates the character of the
commission Isaiah receives. This is particularly true with respect to the
shaking of the thresholds and the smoke that filled the temple. Such
phenomena accompanied the theophany and gave the vision a threat-
ening character from 6:4 onwards. Besides, it would be ill-advised to
allow our own opinions of theology and logic to play a decisive role
in the exegesis of texts of this sort.
I am inclined to consider it acceptable that the present formulation in
which Isaiah describes his commission to make the people obdurate
may in part have been influenced by later personal experiences and
later events but that this is not necessarily true of the content. The ret-
rojection hypothesis is not only speculative, it also implies that, from
the hermeneutical perspective, the exegete has opted for a position
outside the text.234 In the end, the hypothesis in question does not solve
the theological problem because it does not make the present text of

232
See, for example, Hoffmann 1974 and Kilian 1983. Berges 1998:9798 offers a
succinct articulation of the commonly held opinion concerning Isaiahs commission to
make Gods people obdurate: Die Verbindung von Sendung und Verstockungsauftrag,
die im Endtext vorliegt, ist eine logische und theologische Unmglichkeit.
233
The text of Isaiah 6 is structured by the use of four imperfect consecutives in
the first person: I saw (v. 1), I said (v. 5), I heard (v. 8), I said (v. 11). The more or less
parallel construction is worthy of note. The second and fourth passage both begin
with Isaiahs reaction to what he has seen or heard. With regard to the conclusion
to Isaiah 6, it might be argued that verses 12 and 13a do not belong to the original
vision. Verse 12 breaks the chain of imperfects with a perfect consecutive in the third
person. While this might point in the direction of a later interpolation, it is equally
possible that Isaiah deliberately allowed the description of his vocation to flow over
at this juncture into preaching. The formulations are Isaianic and it would not be the
first time that a change of subject was employed in the service of preaching (see the
same phenomenon in 8:1115). Isaiah 6 as a whole can thus be characterised as a
prophetic retrospective with a view to preaching.
234
Cf. Von Rad 19807:160.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 328 1/18/2007 1:36:56 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 329

Isaiah 6 any less objectionable and because a theology of obduracy

is to be found elsewhere in the Old Testament. The present location
of Isaiahs call vision in chapter 6 would appear in the meantime to
have been intended as an indication that a period of obduracy had pre-
ceded the commission to make obdurate. As a matter of fact, the people
are accused of lacking understanding and insight as early as 1:3 (see
also 5:1213). The commission accepted by the prophet demarcates
an important change in yhwhs dealings with his people Israel.235 The
judgement Isaiah is now expected to execute according to the com-
mission he received at his call would appear to consist of the fact that
Gods people are to be handed over to their own sin.236 Isaiahs preach-
ing is to serve as an instrument designed to expose unrepentant Israel
in the clearest of terms. By asking how long? in 6:11 (cf. Psalm 13),
the prophet gives expression to his own belief that judgement cannot
be Gods final word and that there is a path to be followed in and
through judgement along which yhwh continues to accompany his
people (see also 8:17).237
It is also important to note in this regard that Isaiahs call does not
state that the obduracy his preaching ought to bring about will only
be realised by his judgement preaching. If the commission to make the
people obdurate demonstrates the result and goal of Isaiahs preaching,
namely the exposition of Israels refusal to change its ways, then the
commission as such ultimately says nothing concerning the content of
Isaiahs preaching.238 The content of Isaiahs preaching, therefore, need
not be reduced to judgement preaching, not any more so than were
the parables of Jesus, which were likewise characterised by the peoples
obduracy and were intended to expose the choices people had made
with respect to the Kingdom of God (cf. Mt. 13:1315; Mk. 4:12;
Lk. 8:17).239 The limitation of Isaiahs preaching to judgement preaching

235
Cf. the considerations concerning Isaiahs commission to make the people obdu-
rate in Childs 2001:57.
236
Cf. the principle as articulated in Mt. 13:12: For to those who have, more will be
given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will
be taken away. See also Rev. 22:11.
237
Cf. Beuken 2003:163: seine Frage: Bis wann? (V 11) ist stark genug, um
das Szenario eines vollstndigen Unterganges im Sinne einer neuen, letzten Chance
positiv zu durchbrechen. Diese Perspektive beherrscht das gesamte Buch.
238
Cf. Childs 2001:57: His commission is not one of strategy of how he is to
preach, but concerns the effect of his proclamation.
239
The quality of such a comparison with Jesus speaking in parables is to be found
in the fact that Jesus message did not suddenly change into judgement preaching only.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 329 1/18/2007 1:36:56 PM

 330 chapter six

could even be understood as somewhat remarkable for a prophet who

bore the hope-giving name yhwh is salvation and one who himself had
undergone a paradigmatic purification from sin (6:7). At the moment of
his call, however, Isaiah was already informed that even his salvation
preaching would reinforce the peoples refusal to change their ways.
While it sounds like a contradiction in terms, even Isaiahs words of
salvation were to contribute to the ripening of Israel for Gods judge-
ment. Nevertheless, Isaiahs commission need not be understood so
exclusively that there was no one among all his listeners who paid due
attention to his preaching.240 His commission makes it clear, however,
that such individuals were the exception to and thereby the confirma-
tion of the rule given in his call vision.241 The majority were ultimately
to reject his preaching. It is within such a framework that references
to a remnant that listened and changed are appropriate. Only a holy
remnant was to survive judgement (cf. 6:13).242
The suggestion that the rejection of Gods salvific deeds with respect
to Zion served as the primary motivating force for Isaiahs announce-
ment of judgement in 28:16, need not automatically imply that the
prophet had thus abandoned the Zion tradition and the expectations
associated therewith. On the contrary, Isaiahs preaching appears to be
saturated with notions of salvation that were associated with the Zion
tradition from of old. This is particularly the case with respect to the
notion of Zion as a guarantee of safety and that of Zion as a place of
refuge. Closely related to one another and sharing political and social

Even in his parables, Jesus continues to announce the message of the Kingdom, to be
understood by all those to whom the secrets of the Kingdom have been revealed. For
all those who had cut themselves off from the Kingdom, however, even Jesus salvation
preaching now has a hardening effect, an effect made most visible in the parable of
the unjust tenants (reminiscent of the preaching of Isaiah, see Isa. 5:17!). The one
need not necessarily exclude the other.
240
Based on an exclusive understanding of Isaiahs commission to make the people
obdurate, Berges 1998:98 argues that exegesis can no longer do without the retrospec-
tion hypothesis. In Berges opinion, the commission excludes the possibility that Isaiahs
preaching may have enjoyed a positive hearing among the circles of his followers
(8:1618): . . . wre Jesaja wirklich Verstockungsprediger gewesen, htte er gerade in
seinem engsten Schlerkreis erfolgreichen Mierfolg gehabt!
241
Cf. the same phenomenon in Jn. 12:42 and Acts 28:24, where reference is made
to Isaiahs commission in Isa. 6:910. The said commission to make the people obdu-
rate does not appear to be understood in such exclusive terms in the New Testament,
in the sense that no one would remain to give ear to his preaching. More favourable
exceptions would appear to have been possible with regard to the rule of obduracy,
although only with respect to a remnant.
242
For the importance of the remnant as a theme in the Old Testament see
Rendtorff 2000:265279.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 330 1/18/2007 1:36:56 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 331

implications, both these notions are inseparably bound to the Zion tradi-
tion and have their roots in the confession of the kingship of yhwh on
Zion so central to the said tradition.243 Given the relationship between
yhwh and Zion, it was possible to refer to both as a place of refuge
(cf. Ps. 46:2; Isa. 14:32). Zion serves in particular as a place of refuge
for the weary (cf. Ps. 9:1213; Isa. 28:12), spoken of in New Testament
terms as the poor in spirit (Mt. 5:3). They place their trust in yhwh on
Mount Zion, in contrast to the arrogant and proud who trust only in
themselves (cf. Ps. 10:6). If yhwh is king then his kingship is an exclusive
one and only yhwh can be the object of faith and trust.244 This is also
an important notion, one already present in the song of Hannah sung
in the sanctuary of the Ark in Shiloh. It is a notion that was combined
with the Zion tradition in the cult of Jerusalem and it can be found in
the preaching of Isaiah.245 As no other, the prophet Isaiah confronted

243
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:66: As the dwelling-place of Yahweh, creator of the
cosmic order and defender of Israel, Zion functions pre-eminently as a symbol of
security. This component of Zion symbolism has been traditionally viewed as the
predominant aspect of the Zion tradition, leading scholars to speak of the inviolability
of Zion/Jerusalem. For our present purposes it is sufficient to note that the security
symbolized by Zion is rooted first of all in Yahwehs presence. With regard to the notion
of Zion as refuge, Ollenburger 1987:75 points to the origin of this motif in the Ark
traditions: The development of Zion as a symbol of refuge is most likely associated,
traditio-historically, with the Ark sanctuary as a place of refugei.e., the site of the
Ark was a sanctuary in the true sense of the term.
244
Ollenburger 1987:84 considers yhwhs claim to exclusivity to be an important
notion that has been given little attention in the context of Zion research: It is this
component of Zion symbolism that we wish to emphasize here: that Yahweh reserves
to himself the exclusive prerogative as the effective agent in providing security and
refuge for his people. That is, he reserves his power to himself in the exercise of his
dominion. That is why all human attempts to insure security which rely on the power
or capacity of humankind are repudiated in the Jerusalem cult tradition as acts of
arrogance and rebellion against Yahweh. Within the language of the Jerusalem cult
the opposite of poor is not rich, but proud.
245
See Ollenburger 1987:107129. Cf. Ollenburger 1987:140: In our discussion
of the prophets, and particularly Isaiah, it became clear that the notion of Yahwehs
exclusive prerogative is dependent upon earlier traditions, namely those traditions
stemming form the Ark sanctuary of Shiloh which emphasized the kingship of Yahweh
and consequently his exclusive status as saviour and sovereign over Israel. In Isaiah
this notion is bound up so completely with the symbol Zion that the symbol itself
entails or evokes the entire range of notions inherited by Isaiah from the Jerusalem
cult, chief among which is the notion of Yahwehs kingship. We can say, then, that
for Isaiah the source of the notion of Yahwehs exclusive prerogative was the Zion
symbolism of the Jerusalem cult. Ollenburger 1987:134f locates the origins of the
combination of yhwhs kingship and yhwhs claim to exclusivity in the sanctuary of
the Ark in Shiloh: The notion of Yahwehs exclusive prerogative is then precisely
derived from the exercise of his prerogative as king and hence as the exclusive refuge
of his people. (135)

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 331 1/18/2007 1:36:57 PM

 332 chapter six

his audience with the consequences of faith in the kingship of yhwh

on Zion.246 The flip-side of this important notion from the Zion tradi-
tion lies in the fact that Zion can also be understood as a symbol of
judgement for those who seek their security elsewhere. Such a notion
of judgement is also bound inseparably with the kingship of yhwh on
Zion.247 In his call vision, Isaiah became deeply imbued with this aspect
of the kingship of yhwh and its close association with the notion of
the holiness of yhwh.248 It is reasonable to assume that his encounter
with the King, yhwh Zebaot, set the tone for his judgement preaching
and continued to influence it throughout his active life.
The dialectic character of Zion as a theme in Isaiahs preaching is
particularly visible in 28:16. The kingship of yhwh in Zion implies a
promise of security but likewise calls for trust and faith.249 The guarantee
of security and the place of refuge that yhwh has offered his people in
Zion, however, are faced with the stubbornness and lack of faith of the
religious and political leaders in Jerusalem. Instead of Zion, they seek a
guarantee of security and refuge in Egypt. For Isaiah, such a manoeuvre

246
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:128f: It is because Yahweh is exalted as king on Zion
that Zion is secure, and it is because Yahweh as king assumes all responsibility for
Zions security that the responsibility of Jerusalems leaders is exhausted in trusting
in Yahweh and making Zion that for which it was founded, namely a refuge for the
poor. . . . Isaiahs development of Yahwehs exclusive prerogative in association with
the Zion symbol is not simply the artificial conjunction of a theme with an appropriate
symbol, but is the consistent, reflective exegesis of that symbol within the tradition of
the Jerusalem cult itself.
247
See Ollenburger 1987:7072.
248
For the motif of the holiness of yhwh in Isaiahs theology see Roberts 1982(B):
132134.
249
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:120: In ch. 28 Isaiah not only connects Yahwehs exclusive
prerogative to the Zion symbol, and derives from this combination the demand for
faith on the part of Judahs leaders, but he also makes the presence of faith, defined
as the recognition of Yahwehs exclusive prerogative, a discriminatory instrument on
the basis of which Yahweh decides the fate of Judah. That is to say that while Yahweh
makes unconditional promises regarding his intention to defend Zion, these promises
can be turned precisely against the leaders of Judah who, if they act faithlessly and
turn to Assyria or Egypt for deliverance, become the enemies of Yahweh and are thus
the object of his saving action on behalf of Zion. Thus, Yahweh, who characteristically
battles the hostile forces assembled against Zion, can himself become the leader of
these forces brought against the city to purge from its midst those who have become
its true enemy. Yahwehs enemy is thus defined simply as anyone who makes plans
contrary to his plan, that Zion should be a refuge for the poor who rely solely on the
exercise of his exclusive prerogative for their security. So (1) those who rely on any
other power for their security and (2) those who try to battle against Zion are equally
in opposition to Yahwehs plan and are hence his enemy. They are instances of the
arrogance against which Yahweh is exalted in his day (2.622).

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 332 1/18/2007 1:36:57 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 333

exposes a lack of confidence in the Holy One of Israel and a lack of

faith in the salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion. What they seek
in Egypt, they ought to be able to find in Zion. In addition to 28:12
and 28:16, particular reference can be made in this regard to 30:15
and 31:13. In light of the Zion tradition, it is not accidental that in
these texts Isaiah makes full use of cultic expressionsas he does in the
direct context of 28:16similar to those that appear with frequency
in the Psalms. Isaiahs familiarity with the central notions of the Zion
tradition is also given expression in 2:619(22) and 30:1517.
In line with the preceding considerations, one can argue that Gods
former salvific deeds with respect to Zion, as pointedly expressed in
28:16, determine Isaiahs judgement preaching on the one hand but
give rise to his expectations for the future on the other. Zion functions
in this sense as the point at which Isaiahs judgement and salvation
preaching coincide. The fact that Isaiah motivates the judgement he is
announcing with reference to Gods salvific deeds on behalf of Zion,
does not exclude the possibility that the same prophet may also have
uttered words of salvation with respect to Zion.250 An important conse-
quence of our exegesis is that the authenticity of the words of salvation
with respect to the future of Zion that were already present in the first
part of the book of Isaiah need not be denied in advance. The same is
true for those statements in which Assyria is explicitly threatened with
Gods judgement. Particular reference can be made in this regard to
statements such as those found in 8:910 and 17:1214.
H. Barth, whose hypothesis has acquired a considerable following,
ascribes this (and other) statement(s) relating to the fall of Assyria to
a so-called Assyrian redaction dating from the time of King Josiah.251
For Clements, Barths hypothesis even enjoys an axiomatic function
and he presumes without further ado that the prophet himself cannot
have made specific reference to the fall of Assyria within the framework
of his preaching during the Assyrian crisis.252 Such a presupposition,

250
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:119: Although Isaiah sees clearly that Jerusalem is doomed
to destruction because of her rulers reliance on the wisdom of her wise men (29,14b),
he sees just as clearly that this doom does not mark the end of Yahwehs promise to his
people nor for his commitment to Zion. While Judahs Hauptstadt may be violated, the
heilige Stadt Jahwes is indeed inviolable. (with reference to Schreiner 1963:256)
251
Barth 1977:178183. Clements 1980(A):4151 in particular has sided for the
most part with Barth.
252
Clements 1980(A):33 sees no reason to presuppose that Isaiah uttered judgement
concerning Assyria at a later date (Schreiner) or at the same time (Dietrich): We must

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 333 1/18/2007 1:36:57 PM

 334 chapter six

however, remains open to dispute. The fall of Assyria is announced in

several places in the book of Isaiah, sometimes explicitly and some-
times implicitly in the context of an announcement of deliverance in
favour of Judah/Jerusalem. Reference can be made, for example, to
10:534; 14:2427; 18:16; 29:58; 30:2733 and 31:5,89, although
the authenticity of all these texts has been called into question. While the
existence of a Josian/Assyrian redaction is quite conceivable since the
fall of the Assyrian empire would have been experienced in Josiahs
days as a confirmation of Isaiahs preaching, it is nevertheless impor-
tant to be aware that the danger of circular argumentation is very real
in this regard. Clements hypothesis that the prophet Isaiah himself
did not announce the fall of Assyria, in any event not in relation to
the events surrounding the siege of Jerusalem in 701, is based to a
significant degree on a presupposed late dating of the Zion tradition,
particularly with respect to the motif of Zions inviolability.253 Given
the fact that there are sufficient indications to support an earlier dating
of the said tradition, however, and bearing in mind that Isaiah must

assume that he (Isaiah, JD) remains consistent in his attitude, so that the only way in
which we could find room for a warning of the impending destruction of the Assyr-
ian armies which were attacking Jerusalem would be to argue that, at some point,
he turned sharply against them, after initially regarding them as having fulfilled the
chastisement upon Judah determined by God. Clements is convinced that the defeat
of Sennacherib at Jerusalem cannot have been predicted by Isaiah: We do not need
to doubt the Isaianic origin of the prophecy (10:515, JD) therefore, but with equal
certainty we cannot find in it any evidence at all to suggest that Isaiah had expected the
year 701 to provide a spectacular setback, or defeat, for the military might of Assyria.
(3839) He traces his most important argument to 22:114, in which no indication
can be found of an unusual and unexpected destruction of the Assyrian army and
in which the joy of the people is condemned as a new sin that will carry new judge-
ment in the future. Clements recognises the same situation in 1:48 and is convinced
that the passage in question cannot be squared with an expectation on the part of
the prophet of Assyrian defeat. He concludes that the image of Isaiahs preaching is
consistent although he recognises that specific utterances are distributed throughout
the book of Isaiah that speak of a time at which Assyria is to be punished by yhwh
on account of its blasphemous pride (esp. 10:515). Nevertheless, Clements 1980(A):37
sees no reason to date this prophecy in the period 705701 and he presupposes that
it is related to the period 722715, after the fall of Samaria and before the outbreak
of revolt in Ashdod. While the prophecy in question does indeed make reference to
the judgement of Assyria it does not suggest that the said judgement was imminent.
Clements considers verses 1619 as well as verse 12 as a later interpolation intended
to make clear that the judgement of Assyria would only take place when God was
finished with his work against Jerusalem. In his opinion, therefore, Isaiah may indeed
have announced judgement over Assyria in the general sense of the term, but he did
not associate it with the period around 701.
253
Cf. also Gonalves 1986:539540.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 334 1/18/2007 1:36:57 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 335

have been familiar with the motif of Zions inviolability in a more

or less detailed form, an important pillar of this hypothesis is thus
removed.254 Statements inspired by the Zion tradition such as those
found in 8:910 and 17:1214 allow us to see what is being implied
precisely by the faith called for in 28:16. There is no reason to inter-
pret these words as unconditional promises of salvation, which would
run counter to the emphasis placed by Isaiah himself on the necessity
of faith. It would be remarkable to say the least if no prophecies of
salvation concerning Zion had been preserved elsewhere in the book
of Isaiah that one could ascribe to the prophet himself. As a matter of
fact, the faith referred to in the Zion text of 28:16 has to do with the
salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion and implies that the latter
need not fear hostile attack from the nations.255 While the question of
authenticity needs to be investigated text for textan investigation that
falls outside the boundaries of the present studyit is clear nevertheless
from our exegesis of the Zion text of 28:16 that a greater degree of
reserve should be shown in questioning the authenticity of prophecies
concerning Zion than is currently the case in contemporary research
into the book of Isaiah.
The fact that Isaiah also makes it clear in both prophecies of judge-
ment of 28:713 and 28:1422 that the judgement Gods people are
to undergo implies a divine eclipse presupposes that the prophet has
held firm to the continuing significance of yhwhs salvific deeds with

254
Isaiahs attitude towards Assyria has been the repeated subject of scholarly
research. Laato 1988:210247 distinguishes three different perspectives in this regard
that have been adopted in the course of time:
a. Isaiahs image of Assyria changed under the influence of events around 713 or
705701; he initially envisages Assyria as the rod of yhwh but later announces
Gods judgement against Assyria (Procksch, Fohrer; Dietrich likewise takes a
degree of change in Isaiahs preaching as his point of departure but in this
case in the opposite direction!);
b. Isaiah never preached judgement against Assyria (Werner, Kilian, Hard-
meier);
c. Isaiahs preaching with respect to Assyria is characterised by a certain dialectic
(Childs, Huber, Wildberger).
Based on an analysis of 29:17(8); 30:2733 and 31:49, which he designates the
Ariel songs on account of their thematic kinship, Laato himself concludes that
Isaiah preached Jerusalem as the place of the downfall of the ungodly as well as the
downfall of Assyria. The central idea in these texts is the theophany of Yahweh.
The Lord who dwells in Zion will descend to war against the ungodly of Jerusalem
and Assyria. (216)
255
Cf. Ollenburger 1987:121: We are justified, I believe, in seeing Isa 8.910 and
17.1214 as providing the rationale for Isaiahs demand for faith.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 335 1/18/2007 1:36:58 PM

 336 chapter six

respect to Zion. While it would take us beyond the limits of the pres-
ent study to elaborate this in greater detail, it remains reasonable to
accept the possibility that the prophet had developed a more future
oriented Zion preaching rooted in his faith in the ongoing significance
of yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion.256 It would be difficult to
determine whether the Zion text of 28:16 may have functioned as the
germ cell for such Zion preaching. Nevertheless, the ideas expressed in
this and related Zion textssuch as 14:32 and 28:12most probably
contributed to a more future oriented salvific expectation with respect
to Zion. Bearing this in mind, it would thus be incorrect to exclude
the possibility of Isaianic authorship of Zion texts such as 2:24 and
33:2021 without further question, in spite of the fact that current
opinion dates these texts in the post-exilic period.257 Whatever the
case may be, there is no reason whatsoever to deny the authenticity of
the salvation preaching with respect to Zion contained in the book of
Isaiah as if the prophet only made use of the Zion tradition in a nega-
tive manner.258 While it is clear nevertheless that the texts in question,
being more eschatological in character, presuppose a certain shift of
accent, it is not inconceivable that this shift did not already take place
in the prophets own time since the attitude of faith and trust he had
expected did not transpire.259 The fact that Isaiah was obliged first of

256
In our opinion, Berges 1998:214 is too categorical in his exclusion of this pos-
sibility: Auch und gerade Jesaja ist in seinem Bemhen, die pro-gyptischen Krfte
in Jerusalem vom eingeschlagenen Weg der Rebellion gegen Assur abzubringen, ges-
cheitert! Taking a (chrono)logical construction based on the five woe statements as
his point of departure with respect to Isaiah 2831, Berges presupposes that authentic
statements on the part of the prophet can no longer be expected after 31:4.
257
Cf. Beuken 2000:247 with respect to Isaiah 33: Although redaction critics tend
to date the entire chapter late, the chapter itself is surprisingly attuned to the core of
Isaiahs preaching: yhwh exercises his kingly dominion on Zion as an exclusive privilege
(6:1,5) and thereby transforms the mountain into an inviolable place of safety for his
people (28:16). In his unwillingness to endure other conquerors, God offers security on
Zion. Roberts 1983(B):16 supports the Isaianic authorship of Isaiah 33 in its entirety, in
spite of the composite character of the chapter in question: Once one has recognized
the temporal priority of the Zion tradition and Isaiahs dependency on that tradition,
there remains no compelling reason to deny the Isaianic authorship of Isaiah 33.
258
Cf. Otto 1989:1012f: Unumstritten nachjesajanisch sind die von der Zionsthe-
ologie beeinfluten Heilsankndigungen in Jes. 1,27f; 4,26; 10,12.2427a; 18,7; 29,8;
33,16.716.1724; 35,110. Auf Jesaja zurckzufhren ist die negative Wendung
von Elementen der Zionstheologie in den Unheilsankndigungen Jes. 1,49.2126(a);
3,16f; 8,58.1115.18; 10,27b32; 28,16f; 29,14; 31,1.(2).3.4 sowie Jes 7,117*. See
also Preu 1992:48.
259
Cf. Roberts 1982(B):138: Isaiah picks them up from the Zion tradition where they
were already at home, but he does alter the significance of the tradition by projecting

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 336 1/18/2007 1:36:58 PM

 the zion tradition in isaiah 337

all to preach a message of judgement on account of the fact that his

audience misunderstood yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion does
not make this any less the case.260 As a matter of fact, Isaiah typified
the realisation of judgement against the inhabitants of Jerusalem as
the alien work of yhwh (28:21). The eclipse of God that went hand in
hand with this strange work implies the conviction that the realisation
of judgement could not have spelled the end of Gods concern for
Zion (see also 1:2428). Furthermore, the eloquence of the Zion text of
28:16 is simply too great for such a purpose. The foundation of Zion is
proclaimed by Isaiah as a rock-solid foundation. From the very outset,
Isaiahs preaching must have been rooted in the conviction that yhwh,
even in and through judgement, would uphold the salvific institutions
He had once established, Zion being the most important of all in this
regard.261 Based on such insights it is even possible to identify Isaiah as
a prophet of salvation, in accord with the name he bears.262

the vision into the future. These features are no longer present realities, but future
promises. The vision of the future Jerusalem has the effect of devaluing the present
city.
260
Childs 1967:116 considers the notion of judgement preceding the deliverance of
Zion characteristic of the post-exilic period: . . . the fact of inner judgement preceding
deliverance is a prophetic note which was not present in the ancient Zion tradition and
indicates an alteration which becomes characteristic of the post-exilic age.
261
Later prophecies and expectations of salvation would appear to have been able
to follow upon Isaiahs preaching without difficulty. Cf. Roberts 1982(B):144: Isaiahs
transformation of the royal ideology and the Zion tradition became the wellspring from
which the later messianic expectations and the hopes for a new Jerusalem arose. See
also Beuken 2000:9: According to those who passed on Isaiahs oracles, the prophet
had also announced that yhwh was resolute in his intention to remain faithful to Zion.
For this reason, they expected that after the fall of Jerusalem, God would bring about
new salvation (ch. 33).
262
Cf. Sweeney 1996:62: Isaiah is ultimately a prophet of salvation, and it is this
perspective that motivates the continued growth of the book from the time of the
8th-century prophet to the emergence of the final edition of chs. 166 in the late
5th century.

DEKKER_f7_265-337.indd 337 1/18/2007 1:36:58 PM

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 338 1/17/2007 9:23:22 PM
 CHAPTER SEVEN

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The present and final chapter will present the most important conclu-
sions of our research in summary fashion. We shall endeavour to fol-
low the sequence maintained in the other chapters of the book. The
conclusions are grouped together on the basis of content. Reference
is made in brackets to the respective paragraphs from which a given
conclusion has been distilled.

1. The Zion Text of Isa. 28:16 in the Septuagint,

the New Testament and Judaism

In many studies of the Zion tradition, the Zion text of Isa. 28:16
has been unjustly given little if any attention. It is possible that this
is due in part to the degree of difficulty associated with the text itself.
Where 28:16 is treated nevertheless, this usually takes place within the
framework of a description of Isaiahs future expectation, whereby
the Zion text is seen as a promise for the future. Such an explanation
of the Zion text of 28:16 as a promise of salvation can look for sup-
port to an exegetical tradition that stretches back more than twenty
centuries and, in principle, as far back as the Septuagints translation
of this particular biblical text. When compared with the Hebrew text,
the Septuagint translation of 28:16 is characterised by a clear future
orientation ( instead of
thein principlepolysemic Hebrew ba wyxb dsy ynnh) and by a plus
( ) that presupposes or at least facilitates a Messianic reading
of the text (see 2.2.).
Given the fact that the New Testament explicitly associated the Zion
text of Isa. 28:16 with Christ (Rom. 9:32b33; 10:11 and 1 Pet. 2:6)
and adopted thereby the characteristic plus of the Septuagint
the Messianic explanation of 28:16 ultimately acquired a
degree of canonical authority. A number of indications suggest that a
Christian tradition emerged at a relatively early date with respect to
the Messianic interpretation of a number of so-called stone texts from
the Old Testament. The fact that the Zion text of 28:16 is related in

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 339 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 340 chapter seven

several places with the text concerning the stumbling stone from Isa.
8:14 and the evident agreement between the said texts at the level of
language would seem to point in this direction. Based on the fact that
Ps. 118:22 in particular had acquired an important place in the New
Testament tradition (Mk. 12:1011; Mt. 21:42; Lk. 20:17; Acts 4:11
and 1 Pet. 2:48), it is possible to conclude that this very stone text
had been understood in the Messianic sense at an early date. It is thus
probable that the Messianic interpretation of the stone text of Ps.
118:22 promoted a similar interpretation of and an alignment with
other Old Testament stone texts (see 2.3.).
The fact that the Targum was able to associate both Ps. 118:22 and
Isa. 28:16 with the advent and expectation of a Davidic king confirms
our suspicion that the Messianic explanation of Old Testament stone
texts already enjoyed pre-Christian origins. It is all the more striking,
therefore, that the Qumran community and the rabbis represented in
the Talmud did not understand the Zion text of 28:16 in the Messianic
sense. Where the Qumran community is concerned this goes hand in
hand with its self-understanding as the new eschatological community
established by God, concerning which Isa. 28:16 is also said to have
prophesied. In the case of the rabbis, the significant role played by the
Zion text of 28:16 in their conceptualisation of the Shetiyyah tended to
limit the space available for a Messianic interpretation of the stone
referred to in 28:16, in spite of their Messianic interpretation of other
Old Testament stone texts (see 2.4.).

2. The Zion Text of Isa. 28:16 in the History of Interpretation

Under the influence of the New Testament, the Messianic explanation

of Isa. 28:16 determined the manner with which the Zion text was
read from the early beginnings of church history up to the last century.
While references to Christ as the cornerstone are relatively limited in
number in the first centuries, Isaiahs prophecy concerning the stone in
Zion together with other Old Testament stone texts quickly acquired
an established place in the Messianic witness of the early church (see
Barn. 6:24). The possibilities presented by the allegorical method of
interpreting scripture contributed to the fact that more and more Old
Testament texts that made reference to one or other stone came to be
provided with a Messianic explanation (see Tertullian and Cyprian).
From the 4th and 5th centuries, the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 340 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 summary and conclusions 341

came more and more emphatically to be associated with the corner-

stone referred to in Eph. 2:1422, whereby a shift in accent can be
detected at this time from a primarily Messianic orientation to a more
ecclesiological explanation. The combining function ascribed to the
cornerstone in Eph. 2:1422, namely the establishment of spiritual unity
between Jews and pagans, increasingly came to serve as interpretative
framework also for Isa. 28:16 (see Jerome and Augustine). The fact that
the stone referred to in the Zion text was to be related exclusively to
Christ, continued in the meantime to be the natural point of departure
that even the exegetes of the Alexandrian and those of the Antiochian
traditions would appear to have shared with one another (see Cyril of
Alexandria and Theodoret of Cyrus) (see 2.5.).
The period of the Middle Ages produced no new exegetical insights
with respect to the interpretation of 28:16 because an effort was made
to remain as close as possible to the traditional explanation of the
Church Fathers (see Glossa Ordinaria and Thomas Aquinas), and because
the hermeneutical key for the explanation of the Bible was established
by the teaching of the church (see 2.6.).
It would appear from the works of Luther and Calvin that the Zion
text of 28:16 was also explained in soteriological and ecclesiological
terms (see Luther and Calvin respectively) during the period of the
Reformation. When compared with medieval exegesis and its strong
orientation towards the Church Fathers, Calvin nevertheless appears
to have arrived at a critical evaluation of the explanation the Church
Fathers produced. He explicitly distances himself from the long tradi-
tion in which Eph. 2:1422 functions as the interpretative framework
for understanding the significance of Christ as cornerstone. Instead
of the combining function of the cornerstone, Calvin emphasises the
foundational function thereof for the church. While the identification of
the stone referred to in Isa. 28:16 with Christ remains beyond dispute
for Calvin, he nevertheless endeavours to take the notion of Zion into
account in his explanation as the place from which Christ came forth.
When compared with the exegesis of the Middle Ages and its eccle-
sio-dogmatic constrictions, it is particular striking that Calvin was the
first to account for the legitimacy of his Messianic interpretation in
significant detail (see 2.7.).
With the emergence of modern biblical research, however, it became
evident that the Messianic explanation of Isa. 28:16 no longer enjoyed
the same influence and that scholars were more and more interested
in the Old Testament context of the biblical text. Of all the different

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 341 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 342 chapter seven

explanations that can be observed in the meantime, one particular inter-

pretation tends still to dominate among modern exegetes whereby the
Zion text of 28:16 is understood in eschatological terms and explained
as an announcement of a future salvific deed. Explanations vary from
a clarification with respect to the future kingdom of God or the new
Israel to a concretisation in the direction of a new temple. It is remark-
able that only a few endeavour to explain 28:16 as an announcement
of a future deed of judgement, whereby the stone referred to in the Zion
text is related in the strictly metaphorical sense as a testing stone to the
announcement of Gods judgement (see 2.8.).

3. The Zion Text of Isa. 28:16

in its Literary and Historical Context

The Zion text of Isa. 28:16 is part of a pericope that consists of

verses 14 to 22 in the composition as we now have it. In spite of the
redactional connections introduced into verse 7a and the beginning of
verse 14, it is possible to identify four pericopes within Isaiah 28, which
serve as the point of departure for exegetical exploration: 28:14(6);
28:713; 28:1422 and 28:2329. While the addressees of the two
central prophecieswhich follow the established pattern of complaint
and announcement of judgement characteristic of the judgement
genreare located in the southern kingdom of Judah and in Jerusa-
lem and both prophecies also exhibit cohesion at the level of content,
numerous indications suggest nevertheless that 28:713 and 28:1422
should be understood as two distinct prophecies. The most important
of these indications are the new beginning in verse 14 and the clear
addressation of Jerusalems political leaders who do not coincide with
the spiritual leaders (priests and prophets) addressed in the prophecy of
28:713. The exegesis of the Zion text of 28:16, however, is obliged to
account for redactional and content based cohesion that is particularly
evident between these two prophecies of Isaiah 28 (see 3.3.).
While it is impossible to achieve one hundred percent certainty at
this juncture with respect to the origin of verses 19 to 22, the verses in
question, which are frequently understood as a collection of unrelated
fragments, nevertheless leave one with the impression of authenticity
with regard to the form and content thereof. They seem to have formed
an integrating component of the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422
from the outset. The possibility of a later apocalyptic interpolation

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 342 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 summary and conclusions 343

cannot be excluded with respect to 22b only. The arguments employed

from time to time against the original character of verses 1617a are
not convincing. Together with the majority of exegetes one can con-
clude that the Zion text of 28:16 is at home within the context of the
prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 in which it occupies a central posi-
tion. There would also appear to be a high degree of consensus among
exegetes with respect to the authenticity of 28:16. In terms of content
and method there is no single reason to deny the Isaianic authenticity
of this Zion text in advance (see 3.4. and 3.5.).
The prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 presupposes a period
in which Jerusalem was under significant threat from Assyria and in
response to this threat sought assistance from Egypt. The prophecy can
thus best be dated during the reign of King Hezekiah (727/715698)
and in particular during the time of the well-prepared and broadly sup-
ported revolt against the Assyrian king Sennacherib (705701). In the
course of Sennacheribs campaign in response to this revolt, Hezekiah
was obliged to stand and watch as all his trump cards failed, including
his covenant with Egypt. In spite of this, and in contrast to the remain-
ing cities in Judah, Jerusalem was surprisingly spared. Since Hezekiah
functioned as the driving force behind the revolt and it is improbable
that Sennacherib would have allowed such a key figure to go unpun-
ished, the suggestion that the miraculous event of Jerusalems liberation
was due to the payment of tribute on the part of King Hezekiah and
political tactics on the part of King Sennacherib is difficult to support
(see 3.6. 3.8.).

4. Exegetical Conclusions with Respect to the

Zion Text of Isa. 28:16

While the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 has been read for many centuries
as a future oriented promise of salvation, it nevertheless constitutes
part of a prophecy of judgement (28:1422) and, given the Masoretic
vocalisation and punctuation, it ought to be associated with an event
in the past. Bearing this information concerning the text and its genre
in mind, I would support an exegesis whereby the Zion text of 28:16
is explained as a salvation-historical retrospective moment within the
framework of an announcement of judgement: See, I am the one who laid
in Zion a foundation stone, a weighty stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure founda-
tion. The seriousness of the judgement announced by the prophet is

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 343 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 344 chapter seven

underlined by an explicit reference back to a former deed of yhwh

with respect to Zion. In terms of text and content, the Zion text of
28:16 thereby exhibits a close kinship with the Zion text of 14:32b,
which also contains a reference to a salvific deed of yhwh with respect
to Zion. In spite of the fact that the text versions of Qumran and the
Septuagint presuppose, in contrast to the Masoretic text, that 28:16
is to be interpreted as a promise of salvation, there would appear to
be no compelling reason to emend the Masoretic vocalisation in this
regard and bring it into line with the latter. Theological convictions
within the Qumran community and the freedom the Greek translators
permitted themselves are sufficient to explain the different renderings
of 28:16 (see 4.2. and 6.3.).
Justice is done to the intrinsic and structural coherence between
the prophecy of judgement of 28:1422 and that of 28:713, both of
which constitute a diptych, when the Zion text of 28:16 is read as a
salvation-historical retrospective moment within the framework of an
announcement of judgement. Although the name of Zion is not yet
mentioned, 28:12 nevertheless makes a statement concerning Zion,
likewise within the framework of an announcement of judgement,
a statement harking back to the past and intended to underline the
seriousness of the judgement being announced. The difference lies in
the fact that the Zion text of 28:12 harks back to a message of salva-
tion uttered by yhwh in the past, while the Zion text of 28:16 harks
back to a salvific deed performed by yhwh in the past (see 4.3., 4.4.
and 6.3.).
The stone mentioned in 28:16 refers to the rock-solid foundation
that yhwh has established in Zion. Attention is thus focused in the first
instance on the reliability of the salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to
Zion. In concrete terms, the salvific deed in question has to do with
yhwhs choice to dwell in/on Zion, a choice most explicitly described
within the context of the entire book of Isaiah in 8:18. The belief that
yhwh dwelt on Zion is implicit in other statements concerning Zion,
in particular those that refer to Zion as Mount Zion. The rock-solid
foundation established by yhwh in Zion has both social and political
implications. The implications evident in the prophecy of judgement
of 28:1422 are primarily political in relation to his choice of Zion,
implications misunderstood by the leaders of Judah/Jerusalem. The
said misunderstanding on the part of the political leadership is given
expression in a coalition policy oriented towards Egypt, which Isaiah
somewhat ironically characterises as a covenant with death on account

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 344 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 summary and conclusions 345

of the evident futility thereof. An attitude of faith and trust rooted in

yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion is nowhere to be found. In
the preceding prophecy of judgement of 28:713, emphasis was placed
on the misunderstanding of the social implications of yhwhs salvific
plans with respect to Zion. Designated by yhwh as a place of rest,
Zion was also intended as a place of social justice. Isaiah considers
the misunderstanding of the political implications of the salvific deeds
of yhwh with respect to Zion primarily as a question of unbelief and
he ultimately ascribes the misunderstanding of the social implications
of the salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion as obstinacy (see
4.2. 4.4. and 6.3.).
If the Zion text of 28:16 is not intended to be understood as a
promise of salvation, then the stone referred to thereinin spite of the
long exegetical tradition to the contraryshould not be interpreted in
the Messianic sense within the context of the book of Isaiah. This need
not imply that there is no evidence of a Messianic secret hidden within
the references to yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion. The faith
spoken of in absolute terms at the conclusion to 28:16, however, does
not allude to a person to be identified with the said stone, but rather
to the entirety of yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion called to
mind by the prophet (see 4.2.).

5. The Covenant with Death

There would appear to be no convincing arguments to associate the

covenant with death referred to in Isa. 28:15,18 with the phenom-
enon of necromancy. Arguments proposed in this regard by K. van der
Toorn and A.C. Stewart are too hypothetical in character and might
even be referred to as speculative in certain aspects. The hypothesis of
Van der Toorn and Stewart is based on the presupposed original unity
of 28:722, a unity that cannot be substantiated on the basis of the
text. Given the fact that Mt and Sheol were not the object of wor-
ship, there is no good reason to maintain that the terms tw<m; and lwOav]
employed in these verses refer to the Canaanite gods Mt and Sheol,
let alone that the terms bz:K and rq,v, likewise employed in these verses
should be identified with the gods Chemosh and Milcom/Moloch.
The personification of the kingdom of the dead can be explained
on the basis of daily experience, namely that death has an enormous
influence on life. The reference to the covenant with death can thus

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 345 1/17/2007 9:23:23 PM

 346 chapter seven

best be understood as an ironic typification of the coalition politics of

Jerusalems governing political leaders so despised by the prophet. In
entering into such political alliances they are ultimately signing their
own death warrant (see Excursus 1).

6. Isa. 28:1422 in the Context of Isaiah 28 and Isaiah 2833

The Zion text of 28:16 is part of a prophecy of judgement (28:1422),

which is closely associated at the redactional level with the preced-
ing prophecy of judgement (28:713). At the same time, however, it
is also evident that the remaining prophecies of which chapter 28 is
constructed exhibit such clear semantic and content-related coherence
that the entire chapter can be considered as a deliberate redactional
composition. The diptych constituted by both central prophecies of
judgement28:713 and 28:1422is introduced by a prophecy
of judgement formulated on the basis of a woe statement addressed
to Ephraim/Samaria (28:14(6)) and is concluded by a summarising
prophetic instruction (28:2329) (see 4.4. and 4.5.).
Within the structure of the present book of Isaiah, chapter 28 marks
the beginning of a new segment consisting of chapters 2833. The
skeleton framework of Isaiah 2833 consists of six woe statements
that give collective and individual expression to the inevitability of the
announced judgement. In contrast to the four central woe statements
(29:1; 29:15; 30:1; 31:1), all of which are directed towards the leader-
ship of Jerusalem, the first (28:1) and the sixth (33:1) are directed to
Samaria/Ephraim and Assyria respectively. It is a characteristic feature
of this part of the book that the woe statements are interchanged in
increasing number with words of salvation. The narrative setting of
both is determined by the Assyrian threat to Jerusalem during the
reign of King Hezekiah and Jerusalems deliverance from the hold of
Assyria in 701 (see 5.2.).
The redactional composition of Isaiah 28 functions as an overture to
the segment of the book consisting of chapters 2833. In addition to the
fact that chapter 28 strongly exhibits the character of an intentionally
structured composition, the content of this chapter points in a similar
direction since the main themes that are dealt with within this segment
of the book (2833) are already treated in the first chapter (28). The
woe statement with which Isaiah 28 begins exhibits a paradigmatic
character that becomes all the more clear in the course of the chapter.

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 346 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 summary and conclusions 347

In spite of Gods salvific deeds with respect to Zion, Jerusalem is to

undergo the same fate as Samaria. In light of the fact that the anal-
ogy between Samaria and Jerusalem is revealed gradually in Isaiah 28,
the paradigmatic woe statement of 28:1 thus provides the chapter as a
whole with an introductory character. The message as such is already
made crystal clear in the said overture, raising the question how Gods
salvific plans with respect to Zion (cf. 28:16) are to be squared with the
identification of Jerusalem and Samaria expressed in the judgement.
The answer, to be derived from the structure and content of the fol-
lowing chapters, is that salvation for Jerusalem can only be established
in and through judgement (see 5.3.).
Within the context of Isaiah 28, it would appear that the prophecy
of judgement of 28:1422 functions as a core text. In relation to the
chapters that follow Isaiah 2833, the prophecy in question can be
understood at the literary level as a key text and guide for the reader
of this part of the book of Isaiah. This goes hand in hand with the
significance and eloquence of the Zion text of 28:16. On the one hand,
the said Zion text discloses the theological motif behind the judgement
proclaimed in this part of the book over the city of Jerusalem and the
coalition politics of its leaders so detested by yhwh, while revealing,
on the other hand, that the given judgement will not be yhwhs final
word for his people by emphasising the reliability of his salvific deeds
with respect to Zion (see 5.4.).

7. Zion in Isaiah 139

Based only on the prominent place ascribed to the theme Zion in

the book of Isaiah, one is already inclined to suspect that Zion like-
wise enjoyed a prominent role in the Jerusalemite prophets original
preaching. The absence of consensus concerning a significant number
of the texts that have been passed down to us and the difficulty one
encounters in distinguishing between the ipsissima verba of Isaiah himself
and the later redactional modifications thereof, need not stand in the
way of such a conclusion. There can be little doubt that it was Isaiahs
preaching that stimulated the creation of the book of Isaiah and that
the same preaching must have served as guide for the unique theologi-
cal message the book contains.
A considerable percentage of the references to Zion are already to
be found in the first part of the book of Isaiah, namely chapters 139.

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 347 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 348 chapter seven

The name Zion is used most frequently in this part of the book in its
independent form (17), althoughand in contrast to the remainder of
the book of Isaiahreference is also made in these chapters to Mount
Zion (9). The number of references in these chapters to the daughter
of Zion as personification of the city of Jerusalem or as designation of
the remnant community remains limited (3). When the name Zion is
employed independently it is frequently used to designate the city of
Jerusalem, on occasion including its inhabitants. The places in which the
name Zion functions as a designation of the place of Gods presence
or of his salvific deeds, however, are of the greatest theological signifi-
cance. The said theological connotation likewise resounds automatically
when reference is made to Mount Zion, since the latter is primarily
associated with the location of the temple (see 6.2.).

8. Research into the Zion Tradition and its Origins

Given the fact that it is difficult to refute the authenticity of the Zion
text of 28:16, one is obliged to conclude that the prophet Isaiah was
familiar with and harked back to an already existing tradition relating
to the unique place and significance enjoyed by Zion in the journey
travelled by God with his people Israel. The tradition in question, which
can be referred to as the Zion tradition, most likely had its origins in
the Davidic period, although it should not be included as part of the
Davidic tradition as such, as if it were merely a theological product of
the court of David. E. Rohland and H. Gese expended considerable
energy in disputing every detail of this hypothesis as it was represented
by M. Noth and H.-J. Kraus. By identifying the Zion tradition as an
independent election tradition, Rohland in particular has been able
to shed light on the uniqueness of the said tradition and to make an
essential contribution to scholarly research into the religio-historical
origins thereof (see 6.4.1.1.).
For a considerable period of time, scholars sought the religio-historical
origins of the Zion tradition and the various motifs associated therewith
in a presupposed Jebusite cultic tradition. Exegetes such as H.J. Hayes
and F. Stolz are particularly associated with this view. Little can be said
with any degree of certainty, however, on the existence of a specifically
Jebusite cult. One is at liberty to argue, moreover, that when one is
obliged to seek the origins of the various motifs associated with Zion
in a pre-Israelite cult, this need not imply that the Zion tradition as

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 348 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 summary and conclusions 349

such is pre-Israelite in origin. The suggestion that a pre-Israelite Zion

tradition once existed of which the Old Testament Zion tradition is
a continuation, goes hand in hand with the fact that the pre-Israelite
motifs associated with the Zion tradition are often identified in practice
with the Zion tradition itself. Such a suggestion ought to be carefully
avoided since the origin of a tradition cannot be identified with that
of a number of its motifs (see 6.4.1.2.).
The emergence of the Zion tradition was most probably closely asso-
ciated with the Ark and its traditions. In any event, the removal of the
Ark to Jerusalem by King David must have had inestimable significance
for the development of the Zion tradition. While the importance of this
event was already underlined by M. Noth and O. Eifeldt, J. Schreiner
and J. Jeremias distinguished themselves with their description of the
religio-historical and biblical-theological relationship that binds the
history of the Ark with the Zion tradition (see 6.4.1.3.).
Given the importance of history as a constituent factor in the
emergence of the Zion tradition, the latter can be characterised as
an exclusively Israelite tradition, to be defined more specifically as the
entirety of Israels traditions relating to the unique place and significance of Zion
in the journey travelled by God with his people. No difficulties arise in this
regard when one speaks of an election tradition, precisely because the
origin of the Zion tradition appears to be so closely associated with the
history of the Ark. Apart from the question as to the period in which
the explicit use of the more or less technical term rjb to elect ought
to be dated, the essence of the concept of Zions election is already
provided in terms of content in the historical origins of the Zion tradi-
tion (see 6.4.1.4.).

9. Isaiah and the Zion Tradition

Somewhat in contrast to prevailing views, G. Fohrer and G. Wanke

endeavoured to make a late dating of the Zion tradition an acceptable
option. While they likewise maintain that the Zion tradition bears a
specifically Israelite character, they prefer to date it in the period after
the exile. Such an extremely late dating of the Zion tradition is difficult
to maintain, however, in the light of the results of the present study.
Not only does the reconstruction of Fohrer and Wanke clearly misun-
derstand the religio-historical and biblical-theological relationship with
the history of the Ark and its traditions, but the concrete results of the

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 349 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 350 chapter seven

present study of the Zion text of 28:16 allow us no other conclusion

than to admit that the Jerusalemite prophet Isaiah was familiar with
the Zion tradition and its most important motifs (see 6.4.2.1.).
The latter conclusion is confirmed by the contribution made by
J.J.M. Roberts to research into the Zion tradition and its motifs. Roberts
employed a variety of arguments in support of his hypothesis that the
birth of the Zion tradition should be associated with the time of David
and Solomon. He does an injustice to previous research, however, when
he presents the Zion tradition once again as a theological product of
the Davidic court. It is indeed impossible to do justice to the unique-
ness of the Zion tradition if one does not treat it as an independent
tradition, the origin of which is closely bound with the history of the
Ark and its traditions. There is much to be said for the position adopted
by J. Jeremias, who maintained that the Zion tradition is in essence a
modern interpretation of the Ark tradition accomplished with the help
of Canaanite motifs (see 6.4.2.1.).
The heart of the Zion tradition should not be sought in the motif of
Zions inviolability but rather in the conviction that yhwh had chosen
Zion for his dwelling place and that Zion was therefore the city of the
great King. The motif of Zions inviolability naturally evolves from
such a conviction. While it is possible that the origin of this motif is
already to be found in the Ark tradition, there can be little doubt that
the miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem in 701 would have provided
enormous impetus to the belief in Zions inviolability. The Zion tradi-
tion as a whole, however, should not be reduced to this single motif,
nor should the emergence of the tradition be ascribed to the events
around 701 (see 6.4.2.1.).
The salvation-historical framework within which the Zion text of
28:16 functions serves as an important indication that the Zion tradi-
tion also bore a specifically Israelite character for the prophet Isaiah.
In his preaching, Isaiah intimately shared the traditions passed down
to him with respect to contemporary Zion as the dwelling place of
yhwh. It would appear from our study of the meaning and function of
the Zion text of 28:16 that Isaiah did not only motivate the imminent
judgement of God in his preaching on the basis of the social injustice
that governed in Jerusalem. The deepest motivation behind Gods
judgement was to be found in the peoples rejection of Gods salvific
deeds (see 6.4.2.1.).
Based on the coherence between the Zion text of 14:32 on the one
hand and both Zion texts of 28:12 and 28:16 on the other, each of

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 350 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 summary and conclusions 351

which elaborates on an important component from 14:32, it is possible

to argue that the manner with which the Zion tradition is given expres-
sion in the preaching of Isaiah down through the years exhibits a high
degree of consistency. It is the conviction that yhwh had established
the foundations of Zion that provides the basis not only of Isaiahs call
to faith but also of his critique of the political leadership in Jerusalem.
While it is true that the political and historical context within which
Isaiah made reference to the Zion tradition with which he was familiar
changed, this did not imply a change in the prophets understanding
of the content of the Zion tradition. The emphasis placed by Isaiah
on faith in 28:16, likewise does not imply an adjustment to the Zion
tradition as some have argued. Even in the midst of his judgement
preaching addressed to the leaders of Jerusalem, Isaiah continues to
take the indissoluble bond between yhwh and Zion as his point of
departure (see 6.4.2.1.).
In the preaching of Isaiah, the Davidic tradition in 7:9 functions in
much the same way as the Zion tradition in 28:16. A degree of paral-
lel is to be observed in the way in which Isaiah has made use of both
traditions and introduced the necessity of faith into the discussion.
The salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to the house of David and the
salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion constituted the two most
important pillars that supported the preaching of Isaiah in the political
crises of his day. The remarkable concentration of words inspired by
the Zion tradition found in Isaiah 2833 confirms our suspicion that
the prophet was inspired by the Davidic tradition in particular during
the Syro-Ephraimitic crisis (734732) and that during the Assyrian crisis
(705701) the Zion tradition served as his primary source of inspira-
tion (see 6.4.2.1.).

10. Zion and Isaiahs Preaching of Judgement and Salvation

Since yhwhs deeds of judgement and the instruments employed

thereinas expressed in the judgement prophecy of Isa. 28:1422are
motivated at their deepest level by the salvific deeds of yhwh, there
is no need to presuppose a level of contradiction between Isaiahs
preaching of judgement on the one hand and salvation on the other.
The rejection of Gods salvific deeds with respect to Zion observed
by Isaiah in the context of his judgement preaching does not mean
he had abandoned the Zion tradition and the expectations associated

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 351 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 352 chapter seven

therewith of old. Isaiah is not only a prophet of judgement. As a mat-

ter of fact, Gods former deeds of salvation with respect to Zion serve
as the source of inspiration for both his judgement preaching and his
future expectation. The preaching of Isaiah is permeated with the most
important ideas of the Zion tradition, each of which is rooted in the
confession central to the said tradition, namely the kingship of yhwh
on Zion (see 6.4.2.2.).
The commission to make the people obdurate extended within the
framework of Isaiahs vision of call likewise does not imply that Isaiahs
preaching was limited to judgement preaching alone since the commis-
sion in question does not describe the content of Isaiahs preaching but
rather the effect and the intention thereof. The commission to make the
people obdurate received by Isaiah in the context of his call cannot pos-
sibly serve to deny the authenticity of every salvific utterance in the book
of Isaiah, not even if we were to understand the said commission in
exclusive terms, the necessity of which I would be inclined to question.
This stylised commission was intended to make clear from the outset
that Isaiahs preaching, and thus also his words of salvation, were to
ready Israel for judgement. The so-called retrojection hypothesis, which
presupposes that Isaiahs commission was based on a later construc-
tion, is speculative in character and does not do justice to the unity of
the text of Isaiah 6. The hypothesis in question says more about the
theological perspective of its proponents than about the character of
Isaiahs preaching and fails, moreover, to solve the theological problem
associated with the peoples obduracy (see 6.4.2.2.).
Given the results of the exegesis of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 pro-
vided in the present study, scholars would be better advised to exercise a
greater degree of caution when calling the authenticity of the Zion texts
contained in Isaiah 139 into question than is currently to be observed.
The same can be said for statements referring to the fall of Assyria.
The attribution of important texts such as 8:910 and 17:1214 to a
later so-called Assyrian redaction is frequently founded on a circular
argumentation whereby a later date is presumed with respect to the
emergence of the Zion tradition and the motif of Zions inviolability
respectively (see 6.4.2.2.).
As a matter of fact, Zion serves as the point of conjunction between
Isaiahs preaching of judgement and his preaching of salvation. The
ambivalence evident in Isaiahs preaching is related to the realisation
that the judgement of yhwh is inescapable when his salvific deeds with
respect to Zion are misjudged on the one hand and to the conviction

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 352 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

 summary and conclusions 353

that yhwh has established an inseparable union with Zion on the other.
Against the background of this latter conviction, it is understandable
why Isaiahs preaching characterises the impending judgement as a
divine eclipse in a variety of ways. This is related to the fact that the
ongoing relationship between yhwh and Zion was never a question
of dispute, not even in Isaiahs judgement preaching. While the Zion
text of Isa. 28:16 functions in the context of an announcement of
judgement, its power of expression is so great that the idea expressed
therein and in related Zion texts must doubtless have contributed to
a more future oriented salvific preaching with respect to Zion. The
conviction that yhwh would uphold the salvific institutions He had
once established (Zion being the most important)even in and through
judgementmust be understood as characteristic of the preaching of
Isaiah (see 6.4.2.2.).

DEKKER_f8_338-353.indd 353 1/17/2007 9:23:24 PM

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 354 1/18/2007 1:37:25 PM
 APPENDIX

THE ZION TEXT OF ISAIAH 28:16

AND THE NEW TESTAMENT

Bearing in mind that Isa. 28:16 plays an important role in a variety

of places in the New Testament, we offer here an appendix in which
the exegetical results of the present study are examined from the New
Testament perspective.
We already noted in 2.3. that the Zion text of 28:16 is quoted
three times in the New Testament, twice in the letter of Paul to the
Romans (Rom. 9:33; 10:11) and once in the first letter of Peter (1 Pet.
2:6). The quotation in Rom. 10:11 is the least complete of the three
since it only refers to the conclusion to 28:16. We present the most
important observations of this paragraph in summary:
1. In all three of the aforementioned New Testament texts, the Zion
text of 28:16 is associated with the stumbling stone from 8:14.
2. The Zion text of 28:16 is spoken of in 1 Pet. 2:6 in one and the
same breath as the stone text from Ps. 118:22.
3. In both Rom. 9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6, the Zion text of 28:16 has been
given a Messianic interpretation.
4. The Zion text of 28:16 is understood explicitly in 1 Pet. 2:6 as a
promise of salvation for the future.
5. Due to intermingling with the statement on the stumbling stone in
8:14, the Zion text of 28:16 in Rom. 9:33 has acquired the character
of an announcement of judgement.
6. The Zion text of 28:16 does not agree completely with the Septuagint
in any of the three New Testament quotations although the latter
agree with each other to a significant degree.
7. The New Testament quotations of the Zion text of 28:16 include
the concluding expression , a characteristic plus in the
Septuagint.
8. The context within which the Zion text of 28:16 is quoted in 1 Pet.
2:6 is more explicitly determined by ecclesiological motifs than is
the case with respect to its quotation in Rom. 9:33.
It became apparent from our exegesis of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16
that the text, in its original Old Testament context, constituted part of

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 355 1/18/2007 1:37:26 PM

 356 appendix

a prophecy of judgement. Rather than alluding to a future salvific deed

on the part of God, it functioned as a salvation-historical retrospective
moment within the framework of an announcement of judgement.
The seriousness of the judgement being announced is underlined by
an explicit reference to Gods misunderstood salvific deeds with respect
to Zion: See, I am the one who laid in Zion a foundation stone, a weighty stone,
a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation. Given the fact that this Zion text
of 28:16 is understood as a promise of salvation for the future in
1 Pet. 2:6 and is given a Messianic interpretation in Rom. 9:33, in spite
of the different tenor of the latter, one is obliged to ask whether the
New Testament appeal to Scripture is legitimate in this regard. Before
turning to the specific appeal to the Zion text of 28:16, however, it
seems appropriate to begin with some observations concerning the New
Testament appeal to Scripture in general.1

When the Old Testament is quoted in the New Testament, the high
degree of freedom the New Testament authors permitted themselves
is apparent and striking. The said freedom relates to both the original
text and the original significance of the scriptural text being quoted. An
important factor that has to be accounted for in this regard is the fact
that the New Testament authors mostly made use of the Septuagint
or other Greek translations of the Old Testament in circulation at the
time which from their perspective enjoyed the authority of Scripture.2

1
The New Testament quotation of Old Testament texts has been the subject
of extensive research since the time of Jerome. Studies such as those of Ellis 1957
(cf. also 1985 and 1991), Koch 1986, Hays 1989 (cf. also 2005), Stanley 1992, Wilk 1998
and Wagner 2003, which limit themselves to the letters of Paul, would be unthinkable
without the work of countless predecessors in the field and contain extensive biblio-
graphical references (see esp. Stanley 1992:828). In this respect the collection of studies
in Beale 1994, though not restricted to the letters of Paul, provides an interesting
overview. From a more recent date are the numerous studies of Moyise and Menken.
See, among others, Moyise 2001 and Evans 2004. Hbner was even inclined to take
the New Testament use of the Old Testament as the point of departure for his three-
volume biblical theology of the New Testament. See Hbner 1990:28.
2
The Septuagint was not only of great importance for early Christianity, it also
served ancient Judaism to a significant degree. The hypothesis proposed by Hbner
1990:64 that the Septuagint enjoyed theological priority over the Hebrew text of the
Old Testament in the New Testaments use of the Old Testament is nevertheless a step
too far: Die LXX-Prdominanz im Neuen Testament impliziert natrlich die theologische
Prdominanz des griechischen Textes vor dem hebrischen. (cf. 1990:4546) The fact
that various revisions entered into circulation that were intended to bring the Greek
translation more into line with the Hebrew text demonstrates the importance of the
Greek translation at the time as well as the ultimate theological priority ascribed to
the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. See Stuhlmacher 1999:291.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 356 1/18/2007 1:37:26 PM

 isaiah 28:16 and the new testament 357

While the nature and extent of textual variants differed from book to
book, the translations in question frequently deviated on numerous
points from the original Hebrew text and often exhibited an interpre-
tative character. The process of interpreting Old Testament texts thus
harks back to a period prior to the New Testament. It is likewise the
case that the Hebrew text of the Old Testament underwent a long and
complex evolution and that its ancient and not so ancient readers have
left their mark in the process of textual transmission.3 Where the New
Testament authors had a Hebrew text of the Old Testament at their
disposal in addition to a Greek translation, moreover, it is important to
bear the possibility in mind that alternative Hebrew text versions were
available on occasion over and above the text version that, due to the
efforts of the Masoretes, has acquired virtual exclusivity down through
the centuries and which lies at the foundations of our interpretation
of the Old Testament. The discoveries at Qumran in particular have
demonstrated that both the Hebrew and the Greek text of the Old
Testament had not been established in a uniform text version in the
New Testament period, but rather that various text versions were in
circulation at the time. Even though these text versions differ little from
one another in practicewith a few exceptions to the contrary such as
the book of Jeremiahand the lack of uniformity should not be exag-
gerated, there can be little doubt that the actual situation with respect
to the available basic text must have been responsible for a number
of textual and content-related differences that we can observe today
between the text of the Old Testament and the form it had acquired
in the New Testament.4
Apart from the translation employed and the original text versions
that were available, it must be observed, however, that the New Testa-
ment exhibits a degree of freedom in the way it quotes and/or interprets

3
Talstra 2003:10 illustrates this effectively with reference to the world of architec-
ture: anyone opening the Bible is not going to be confronted with a unique work of
art written by an individual creative spirit. Anyone opening the Bible is walking into a
classical monument, a centuries old building. Like all ancient monuments, the building
they are entering exhibits traces of centuries of occupation and renovation. Berges
2003:203 makes use of a similar metaphor, that of the medieval cathedral which took
centuries to complete and was the work of countless master builders.
4
Stanley 1992:3161 has made every effort to put together a workable method
designed to identify the texts in the letters of Paul that can be designated as quotations,
the text version at the basis thereof, and to what degree one can speak of potential
adaptations in the text.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 357 1/18/2007 1:37:26 PM

 358 appendix

Old Testament Scripture.5 Nevertheless, such freedom should not be

taken as arbitrary. While we might consider the manner with which
the New Testament read the Old Testament somewhat unusual in the
light of contemporary hermeneutical insights and scholarly exegetical
methods, its procedures do not only agree with the characteristic Jewish
approach to the interpretation of Scripture current at the time (see the
writings of the Qumran community in particular),6 they are also in line
with the literary conventions of the Graeco-Roman world of the day.7
The most significant difference with the Jewish approach to exegesis is
related to the results thereof, since the exegesis of the New Testament
authors was determined in terms of content by the fact that they had
become disciples of the Kingdom of Heaven (cf. Mt. 13:52).8 In other
words, the New Testament authors read the Old Testament from the
perspective of their knowledge of Christ.9
This observation, of course, does not completely satisfy questions
pertaining to the persuasiveness of the scriptural appeal made in the
New Testament. It does, however, place the question of the legitimacy

5
Ellis 1985:199 speaks in this regard of deliberate alteration, i.e. by ad hoc
translation and elaboration or by the use of a variant textual tradition, to serve the
purpose of the New Testament writer. This is also what Stanley 1992 was trying to
demonstrate in his study: the present study aims to demonstrate two basic theses:
(1) that Paul actively adapted the wording of his biblical quotations to communicate his
own understanding of the passage in question and to obviate other possible readings
of the same text, and (2) that, in offering such interpretive renderings of the bibli-
cal text, Paul was working consciously but unreflectively within the accepted literary
conventions of his day. (29) In order to prevent misunderstanding, as if Paul had
been guilty of some form of manipulation, Stanley 1992:359 concludes his study by
emphasising that: The bulk of the adaptations uncovered in the present study have
little effect on the meaning of the original text, and those that do can normally be
explained as the result of a sincere attempt to understand the context of the authors
own culture and/or community.
6
See Snodgrass 1994:2951 and Moyise 2001:920.
7
See Stanley 1992:338360. It would be interesting and informative to compare
the freedom observed in the New Testament rendering of quotations from the Old
Testament with the literary conventions that governed the rendering of speeches or
the use of direct speech in narrative contexts.
8
Cf. Ellis 1957:83: If Paul used Jewish interpretations, he culled and moulded them
to a Christological understanding of the OT; if he was a child of his times, they were
for Paul the times of Messiah, His Cross and resurrection, and His revelation of the
true meaning of Scripture. Paul was a disciple of Christ not of Gamaliel.
9
Cf. Stuhlmacher 1999:295: Der entscheidende Unterschied zum jdischen Schrift-
verstndnis bestand freilich darin, da der die Schriften durchwehende Geist Gottes
fr das Neue Testament nicht mehr nur der Geist war, der sich Israel und der ganzen
Welt in der mosaischen Lehrtradition mitteilt, sondern der Geist des Vaters Jesu Christi
und des erhhten Christus selbst. See also Enns 2003:263287.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 358 1/18/2007 1:37:26 PM

 isaiah 28:16 and the new testament 359

of appeal in a different light. As a matter of fact, it would be incorrect

to endeavour to measure the legitimacy of the New Testament appeal to
Scripture according to our modern academic standards. The standards
according to which the New Testament makes reference to the Old
Testament may not be the same as those upheld by modern scholarly
exegesis, but this need not imply that the message of the Old Testament
is thereby subject to some form of violation. Such a conclusion would
not only be premature, it would also imply an unjustified absolutising
of modern exegetical methods.
Where modern exegetes are used, in the first instance, to focus on the
direct textual context of scriptural references, one can argue that the
New Testament not only ascribed meaning to the said textual context but
it also ascribed meaning to the scriptural context beyond particular texts.
In other words, the context within which individual Old Testament texts
are to be read is often more extensive than that of the pericope, the
chapter or even the biblical book. In principle, the entire Old Testament
can serve as the context when an individual biblical text is quoted and
interpreted. This need not imply that the direct textual context within
which a text quoted from Scripture is to be found is less important
from the New Testament perspective. Scholars have become more and
more aware of the fact that the direct context is also a frequent factor
in the rendering of scriptural quotations.10 In addition to the textual
context, the New Testament would appear to attach importance to
the scriptural context of the texts quoted or alluded to from the Old
Testament. Texts stemming from a variety of different biblical books
can thus be related to one another and allowed to interpret one another
in spite of their unrelated origins.11 It is here that we find the basis of

10
Cf. Dodd 1952:126: The method included, first, the selection of certain large sec-
tions of the Old Testament scriptures, especially from Isaiah, Jeremiah and certain minor
prophets, and from the Psalms. These sections were understood as wholes, and particular
verses or sentences were quoted from them rather as pointers to the whole context than
as constituting testimonies in and for themselves. At the same time, detached sentences
from other parts of the Old Testament could be adduced to illustrate or elucidate the
meaning of the main section under consideration. But in the fundamental passages it
is the total context that is in view, and is the basis of the argument. Recently, Wagner
2002 has made a strong case for Paul knowing larger portions of Israels scriptures by
heart, even if he made use of written texts for his Old Testament quotations. Accord-
ing to Wagnerand with the focus on the book of Isaiah, Paul was always aware
of the larger context of his scriptural quotations. He thus selected these quotations for
reasons beyond simple catchword association.
11
Boertien 1974:20 characterises this more associative method upheld by the New
Testament authors in quoting the Old Testament, which in essence presupposes the

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 359 1/18/2007 1:37:26 PM

 360 appendix

the conviction that the Scriptures are one and that the one God speaks
through the texts thereof.
All this means that the authors of the New Testament consciously or
unconsciously, or at the very least without scruples of any sort, allowed
other biblical texts to resonate in their quotation of Old Testament
texts. In so doing they were able to extract both old and new things
from the Scriptures, whereby they considered themselves legitimated
by their belief that Christ was the fulfilment of the Old Testament.
Indeed, in such instances, whereby other biblical texts echoed in the
background of a particular biblical quotation, it would perhaps be
better to argue from the contemporary perspective and with a view to
the phenomenon of inter-textuality that the New Testament ultimately
made use of the Old Testament texts in order to reinforce its own message
rather than quoting the latter. Such making use of served to actualise
ancient words of Scripture and even made it possible on occasion for
the scriptural texts to be cast anew with a view to New Testament
proclamation. In practice, therefore, while the function of the appeal to
Scripture did not always play a constitutive role in the argumentation
of the New Testament authors it often served both to illustrate and
affirm. The expression appeal to Scripture is thus more appropriate
than the expression scriptural evidence in this regard. Indeed, the
New Testament authors were not primarily interested in establishing
logical and conclusive arguments. Their goal was to reinforce what they
had witnessed in Christ and to expose a degree of continuity with Old
Testament revelation.12 While it would take us beyond the limits of the

explanatory rules maintained by the midrash, as scribal exegesis and contrasts the latter
to the literal approach of those who focus on single words and forget that the entire
context must also be accounted for. Ellis 1985:201208 illustrates and confirms the
suggestion that the New Testament did indeed make use of the exegetical methods of
the midrash on the basis of a number of illustrations. He distinguishes two methods:
implicit midrash and explicit midrash. The former has to do with the interpretation
of a text incorporated in the translation while the latter has to do with a separate
explanation in relation to a text. As an example of an implicit midrash he refers to the
addition of in Rom. 10:11. Mixed quotations, such as that found in Rom. 9:33,
can also be understood as implicit midrash. On account of his objections to the use
of the designation midrash, Hays 1989:1021in line with M. Fishbaneprefers to
speak of the phenomenon of inter-textuality: the revisionary hermeneutical opera-
tions that later came to be called midrash were already manifest in the work of the
writers of the biblical texts, who collected, interpreted, and transmuted still earlier
texts and traditions. (14)
12
Up to this time, studies concerning the use of the Old Testament in the New
have tended to focus on the hermeneutical strategy followed by the New Testament

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 360 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 isaiah 28:16 and the new testament 361

present appendix to examine this hypothesis in greater detail, it should

be stated nevertheless that the kerygmatic and parenetic character of
the New Testament appeal to Scripture needs to be accounted for in the
analysis of the New Testament use of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16.13

Bearing these general remarks in mind, we now turn our attention to

the question whether and if so to what extent the manner with which
the New Testament made use of the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 still exhibits
any degree of continuity with the original message of the text. Would
it be more accurate to say that the New Testament use of this Zion
text is so novel and different that all that remains to observe in the
relationship is discontinuity? Our response to this question serves an
important hermeneutical purpose, given that the compelling nature
of the now current New Testament interpretation of the Zion text of
28:16 is related thereto.
It is clear that the New Testament authors read the Zion text of
28:16 in a different manner than the present author, whose study
is based on the Masoretic text. This fact is related to a significant
degree to the influence exercised by the Greek translation of the book
of Isaiah. Where the Septuagint is concerned, one can demonstrate
that the translators endorsed a Messianic interpretation of 28:16 on
two particular points. Where the Hebrew text exhibited a degree of
ambiguity with respect to temporal aspect, the Septuagint is clearly
unequivocal. By translating the Hebrew construction dsy ynnh as

authors. This is still the case in Wilk 1998 and Wagner 2003. Stanley 2004 recently
focused attention on the rhetorical strategy underlying Pauls arguing with Scripture,
thus exploring a new field of research in this area of New Testament studies. Stating
that the majority of Pauls addressees would have been unable either to read or study
the biblical text for themselvessince both illiteracy and scarcity of bible scrolls were
historical realities in the ancient worldStanley tries to demonstrate weaknesses in
a number of the assumptions scholars traditionally make about the way in which
Paul and his churches interacted with the biblical text. According to Stanley, in every
instance of quotation from Scripture more attention should be paid to the rhetorical
effect Paul wanted to achieve with it.
13
Versteeg 1989:3842 characterises the New Testament appeal to Scripture as
typological (see also Ellis 1985:210212) and distinguishes the use of the said designa-
tion from the allegorical method: The NT quotation does not indicate a particular
meaning or a deeper meaning of the OT text. The NT quotation places the OT text
in the light of NT fulfilment. The constant between the OT biblical text and the NT
quotation is not to be found in a plurality of meaning. The constant is the reliability
of God in which the relationship can be located between type and anti-type, between
promise and fulfilment.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 361 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 362 appendix

, the Septuagint interpreted the Zion text

of 28:16 without further ado as a promise for the future. While Rom.
9:33 and 1 Pet. 2:6 would appear to have depended on a different Greek
text version on this pointsince both texts read , both
text versions nevertheless appear to point in a similar direction. This is
even more evident with respect to the conclusion of Isa. 28:16, where
the Greek textthe Septuagint and the version employed in the New
Testamenthas a noticeable plus when compared with the Hebrew
text, namely the expression . Reference is made thereby to the
aforementioned stone as object of faith, while the Hebrew text speaks
of believing in the absolute sense. The Septuagints addition of the
words made it possible to personify the stone mentioned in
28:16 and the possibility of a Messianic interpretation thus emerged.
The manner with which the Zion text of 28:16 is explained in the
New Testament can be traced back to a significant degree to the Greek
translation of the book of Isaiah.
Having established continuity between the New Testament use of
the Zion text of 28:16 and the Greek translation thereof in the book
of Isaiah, the question of continuity with the original message of the
said Zion text and the question of the present day persuasiveness of this
New Testament appeal to Scripture nevertheless remain unanswered.
Since the Reformation, the Hebrew text of the Old Testament has
served the churches of both the Catholic and the Protestant tradi-
tions as the point of departure for exegesis and preaching rather than
the Greek, since the books of the Old Testament were written in the
Hebrew language. In response to our initial question, therefore, it would
seem reasonable at the very least that the Hebrew text of Isa. 28:16 be
accounted for. Without any suggestion of completeness, I consider the
following observations to be of importance in this regard:
1. In the context of the prophecy of judgement of Isa. 28:1422, the
prophet refers to the salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion
in 28:16. While the said salvific deeds are situated in the past, they
were nevertheless oriented towards the future. The stone established
by yhwh in Zion serves as a rock-solid and reliable foundation for
Gods salvific plans for his people Israel. Yhwhs decision to make
Zion his dwelling place implies likewise his decision to create a place
of hiding in Zion for the less fortunate among his people (14:32), a
place of rest and a breathing space for the weary (28:12). Although
Jerusalems leaders lack faith with respect to this salvific deed of

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 362 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 isaiah 28:16 and the new testament 363

yhwh and the said lack of faith occasions a dramatic announcement,

the prophecy of judgement does not leave one with the impression
that yhwh is going back on the promises He once made with respect
to Zion. Even in the context of Isaiahs prophecy of judgement, the
terminology employed for the stone in Zion precisely reinforces
the reliability of the foundation yhwh had established in the past.
It is here that we find the most important point of association with
the New Testament preaching of Christ since the emphasis on the
ongoing reliability of Gods salvific deeds contains an implicit open-
ing towards the future.
2. In 6.4.2. we observed that the manner with which the Zion tra-
dition is given expression in the preaching of Isaiah has remained
consistent to a large extent down through the years. The years of
the Assyrian crisis must clearly have had an influence on the tone
of Isaiahs preaching. It was not Isaiahs perspective on the Zion
tradition itself that may have been subject to change through the
years in terms of content, however, but the context within which
the prophet made use of the Zion tradition. Even when we take the
wider framework of Isaiahs Zion preaching into consideration, there
is no reason to presuppose that the other side of the coin of the
prophets announcement of judgement over Jerusalem represented a
rupture of the bond between yhwh and Zion. While the rejection of
Gods former salvific deeds with respect to Zion are determinative
in part of Isaiahs judgement preaching in the context of 28:1422,
the same salvific deeds also disclose the prophets expectations for the
future. The said salvific expectation is not dependent on the presence
or absence of faith on the part of Israel. Faith as a precondition
determines whether one is going to share in the expected future but
does not determine the expected future itself, which can even come
about in and through judgement. In line with Isaiah and inspired
by his Zion preaching, later prophecies embroidered further on this
apparent thread of salvific expectation with respect to Zion. The
seed of the said salvific expectation, however, is to be found in the
salvific deeds of yhwh with respect to Zion situated in the past as
uniquely expressed by Isaiah in the Zion text of 28:16.
3. The New Testament considers the Old Testament salvific expecta-
tion with respect to Zion to have come to fulfilment in Jesus Christ.
Just as the text from Ps. 118:22 in which the stone that had been
rejected becomes a cornerstone, one of the first stone texts to be
explained early in the Christian tradition (see 2.3.2.) and probably

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 363 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 364 appendix

likewise in the Jewish tradition (see 2.4.2.) in Messianic terms, so too

were the words of Isaiah concerning the stone in Zion from 28:16
related to the coming of Christ in the New Testament. Compared
with the preaching of Isaiah, this association is a new perspective.
The direct context within which the Zion text of 28:16 functions
in Isaiah itself does not occasion a Messianic interpretation of the
stone mentioned in the said text. Even though the Hebrew text
of 28:16 does not provide a direct occasion for the New Testament
preaching of Christ, however, this does not mean that the Zion text
in question does not provide some kind of anchor for the said preach-
ing. In the present instance, however, the movement clearly runs
in the opposite direction, not from the Old to the New Testament
but from the New to the Old.14 The explanation given by the New
Testament to Zion as the place that bears the secret of Christ goes
further than the words of Isaiah in 28:16, although it is not alien
to the salvation-historical perspective within which Isaiah made use
of the Zion tradition.
4. It is striking that the context within which Paul makes use of the Zion
text of Isa. 28:16 in Rom. 9:33 exhibits a degree of similarity with
the context within which the said Zion text functions in the book
of Isaiah. In both instances, the context in question is loaded with
words that bear the character of materialising judgement. In the case
of Isaiah, this has to do with an explicit complaint and announce-
ment of judgement addressed to the leaders of Jerusalem (28:1422).
The prophet detests their Egypt-oriented coalition politics, which he
considers doomed to failure, although the deepest motivation of his
announcement of judgement is rooted in their evident rejection of
yhwhs salvific deeds with respect to Zion (28:16). The rejection of
yhwhs salvific deeds is not only referred to in Isaiah 28, however,
but also in Romans 9. In the chapter in question, Paul reflects on
the mystery of his Jewish brothers rejection of Christ as the end
of the law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who
believes (Rom. 10:4). He observes that Israel is not open towards
righteousness by faith and that his brothers have stumbled against
the stumbling stone that God established in Zion. We noted in

14
One of the focal points of the study of De Jong 2002 is that, seen from the
perspective of the Old Testament as a whole, a movement from Old to New can also
be observed with respect to the theme Zion.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 364 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 isaiah 28:16 and the new testament 365

2.3.1. that by mixing his reference to Isa. 28:16 with the stone
text of 8:14, Paul gave the said Zion text the significance of an
announcement of judgement. In the context of Romans 911, the
mixture of allusions is intended to underline the said rejection of
Christ.15 The stumbling stone established in Zion was ultimately
placed there by God himself.16
While it is clear that Paul interpreted the Zion text of 28:16 as a
promise with respect to the future salvific deeds of God in Christ,
it would appear to function in Romans within the framework of a
rejection thereof of which Paul is sadly aware. The fact that Pauls
reflection on the mystery of this rejection makes appeal to the motif
of obduracy and explicitly refers thereby to the same segment of
the book of Isaiah (Isaiah 2833; Isa. 29:16 in Rom. 9:20 and Isa.
29:10 in Rom. 11:7; cf. Acts 28:2528), confirms that Paul had
accounted for the judgement context in which the Zion text of Isa.
28:16 originally resounded.17
5. In 1 Pet. 2:6, the Zion text of Isa. 28:16 functions in the context
of an invitation to come to Christ. In contrast to Rom. 9:33, the
Zion text of 28:16 is not mixed in 1 Peter with the words of Isaiah
from 8:14. It is thus presented in a more positive formulation as a
promise of salvation. The original judgement context of the Zion
text of 28:16 also continues to resound in the context of 1 Pet.
2:6, however, on account of the fact that reference is likewise made
to the stone texts of 8:14 and Ps. 118:22 directly following the
reference to 28:16. Furthermore, the notion of judgement is also
given expression in the statement that those who stumble against

15
See Koch 1986:161f: Erst die Einbeziehung von Jes 8,14b ergibt den Schrift-
beleg, den Paulus im Zusammenhang von Rm 9,3032 bentigt. (See also Koch
1980:179) Cf. Stanley 1992:120: Rather than extending the quotation several more
lines to include the negative pronouncements already present in Isa 28, Paul chose
to introduce words from a similar stone passage in Isa 8 that would make the same
point in clearer and more concise terms.
16
Cf. Hofius 1993:169: Hinsichtlich dessen, was in V. 32b+33a ber Israel gesagt
ist, darf nun allerdings auf keinen Fall bersehen werden, da dem Schriftwort zufolge
Gott selbst den Stein des Anstoens und Fels des Zu-Fall-Kommens in Zion gelegt
hat. Damit fhrt Paulus das Nein, mit dem die berwltigende Mehrheit Israels die
abweist, auf Gottes eigene Setzung zurck.
17
I am inclined to question the position maintained by Dodd 1952:83 in this regard,
which suggests that the Zion text of 28:16 is only employed to explain the prophecy
concerning the stumbling stone from 8:14, but does not seem to have been used as
a testimony in its own right, or related to its context.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 365 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 366 appendix

the stone established in Zion (read: Christ) are destined to do so

(1 Pet. 2:8). This statement is related in terms of content with Pauls
words concerning Israels obduracy in Romans 911.
Taking the observations outlined above into account, it is possible to
conclude that the Greek translation of Isa. 28:16 unmistakably influ-
enced the New Testament interpretation of this Zion text. At the same
time, however, the way in which the Zion text in question functions in
the New Testament preaching of Christ is not in itself completely at
odds with the Zion preaching of the prophet Isaiah as represented by
the Hebrew text of 28:16. The foundations of Zion are proclaimed
by Isaiah to be rock-solid. These foundations are rooted in yhwhs
decision to create a place of refuge in Zion for the unfortunate of his
people (14:32), and place of rest and a breathing space for the weary
(28:12). The rock-solid character of the foundations implies that yhwh,
even in and through judgement, will continue to maintain Zion and
the spiritual reality for which Zion stands (cf. Mt. 11:28).18 Continuity
between Isaiahs Zion preaching on the one hand and the New Testa-
ment preaching of Christ on the other is to be found in the reliability
of Gods salvific deeds with respect to Zion. The Zion text of Isa.
28:16 acquires its ongoing power of persuasion from the reliability of
the said salvific deeds, which ultimately call for a response of faith in
both the Old and the New Testaments. The persuasiveness of the New
Testament witness to Christ is likewise based on the reliability of the
same salvific deeds.

18
I borrow the latter formulation from De Jong 2002:42.

DEKKER_f9_354-366.indd 366 1/18/2007 1:37:27 PM

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackroyd, P.R., The Death of Hezekiah: A Pointer to the Future?. In: P.R. Ackroyd,
Studies in the Religious Tradition of the Old Testament, London 1987, 172180 (originally
published in: M. Carrez et al. (ed.), De la Trah au Messie. tudes dexgse et dhermneutique
biblique, Fs H. Cazelles, Paris 1981, 219226).
, The Biblical Interpretation of the Reigns of Ahaz and Hezekiah. In: P.R.
Ackroyd, Studies in the Religious Tradition of the Old Testament, London 1987, 181192
(originally published in: W.B. Barrick & J.R. Spencer (eds), In The Shelter of Elyon.
Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature, Fs G.W. Alhstrm, JSOT.S 31, Sheffield
1984, 247259).
Aharoni, Y., The Land of the Bible. A Historical Geography, London 1967.
Ahlstrm, G.W., The History of Ancient Palestine from the Palaeolithic Period to Alexanders
Conquest. With a contribution by G.O. Rollefson (ed. D. Edelman), JSOT.S 146,
Sheffield 1993.
Aitken, K.T., Hearing and Seeing: Metamorphoses of a Motif in Isaiah 139. In:
P.R. Davies & D.J.A. Clines (eds), Among the Prophets. Language, Image and Structure in
the Prophetic Writings, JSOT.S 144, Sheffield 1993, 1241.
Albertz, R., alp in THAT II (19792), 413420.
Albl, M.C., And Scripture Cannot be Broken. The Form and Function of the Early Christian
Testimonia Collections, NT.S 96, Leiden 1999.
Albrektson, B., Studies in the Text and Theology of the Book of Lamentations, STL 21, Lund
1963.
Alonso Schkel, L., A Manual of Hebrew Poetics, SubBi 11, Rome 1988.
Alt, A., Jerusalems Aufstieg, ZDMG 79 (1925), 119 (also published in: A. Alt, Kleine
Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel III (ed. M. Noth), Munich 1959, 243257).
Amsler, S., & Mury, O., Jahweh et la sagesse du paysan. Quelques remarques sur
Esae 28,2329, RHPhR 53 (1973), 15.
Amsler, S., wq in THAT II (19793), 635641.
Andr, G., qrz in TWAT II (1977), 686689.
Asen, B.A., The Garlands of Ephraim: Isaiah 28.16 and the Marz a , JSOT 71
(1996), 7387.
Auvray, P., Isae 139. Sources Biblique, Paris 1972.
Avemarie, F., bersetzung des Talmud Yerushalmi (ed. H.-J. Becker et al.), Band II/4: Yoma-
Vershnungstag, Tbingen 1995.
Barnard, L.W., The Use of Testimonies in the Early Church and in the Epistle of
Barnabas. In: L.W. Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers and their Background, Oxford
1966, 109135.
Barr, M.L., Of Lions and Birds: A Note on Isaiah 31.45. In: P.R. Davies & D.J.A.
Clines (eds), Among the Prophets. Language, Image and Structure in the Prophetic Writings,
JSOT.S 144, Sheffield 1993, 5559.
Barstad, H.M., Sheol lwav. In: DDD (1999), 768770.
Barth, Ch., rqb in TWAT I (1973), 745754.
, lvk in TWAT IV (1984), 367375.
, yl in TWAT IV (1984), 567572.
, g[l in TWAT IV (1984), 582586.
Barth, H., Die Jesaja-Worte in der Josiazeit. Israel und Assur als Thema einer produktiven Neu-
interpretation der Jesajaberlieferung, Neukirchen 1977.
Barth, J., fevo f/v, ZAW 33 (1913), 306307.
, Zu f/v Flut , ZAW 34 (1914), 69.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 367 1/17/2007 9:24:00 PM

 368 bibliography

Barthel, J., Prophetenwort und Geschichte. Die Jesajaberlieferung in Jes. 68 und 2831, FAT
19, Tbingen 1997.
Barthlemy, D., Critique Textuelle de lAncien Testament. Tome 2: Isae, Jrmie, Lamentations,
OBO 50/2, Gttingen 1986.
Barton, J., Looking back on the 20th Century: 2. Old Testament Studies, ET 110
(1999), 348351.
Bauckham, R., James, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude. In: D.A. Carson & H.G.M. Williamson
(eds), It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture, Fs B. Lindars, Cambridge 1988, 303317.
Beale, G.K., (ed.), The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old
Testament in the New, Grand Rapids 1994.
Becker, U., Jesajavon der Botschaft zum Buch. FRLANT 178, Gttingen 1997.
, Jesajaforschung ( Jes 139), ThR 64 (1999), 137 and 117152.
Becking, B.E.J.H., The Fall of Samaria: An Historical and Archaeological Study, SHANE 2,
Leiden 1992.
, Chronology: A Skeleton without Flesh? Sennacheribs Campaign as a Case-
Study. In: L.L. Grabbe (ed.), Like a Bird in a Cage. The Invasion of Sennacherib in
701 BCE, JSOT.S 363, Sheffield 2003, 4672.
Beentjes, P.C., Hezekiah and Isaiah: A Study on Ben Sira xlviii 1525. In: A.S. van
der Woude (ed.), New Avenues in the Study of the Old Testament, Fs OTW & M.J. Mulder,
OTS 25, Leiden 1989, 7788.
Begrich, J., Jesaja 14,2832, ZDMG 86 (1933), 6679. In: J. Begrich, Gesammelte Studien
zum Alten Testament (ed. W. Zimmerli), TB 21, Munich 1964, 121131.
Ben Zvi, E., Who Wrote the Speech of Rabshakeh and When?, JBL 109 (1990),
7992.
, Malleability and its Limits: Sennacheribs Campaign against Judah as a Case-
Study. In: L.L. Grabbe (ed.), Like a Bird in a Cage. The Invasion of Sennacherib in
701 BCE, JSOT.S 363, Sheffield 2003, 73105.
Berder, M., La Pierre Rejete par les Btisseurs: Psaume 118,2223 et son Emploi dans les
Traditions Juives et dans le Nouveau Testament, EB 31, Paris 1996.
Berger, U., Bohn, U., & Lffler, P., JerusalemSymbol und Wirklichkeit. Materialien zu einer
Stadt, VIKJ 1, Berlin 1976.
Berges, U., Das Buch Jesaja: Komposition und Endgestalt, HBS 16, Freiburg 1998.
, Sion als thema in het boek Jesaja. Nieuwe exegetische benadering en theolo-
gische gevolgen, TTh 39 (1999), 118138.
, Ich bin der Mann, der Elend sah (Klgl 3,1) Zionstheologie als Weg aus der
Krise, BZ 44 (2000), 120.
, Personifications and Prophetic Voices of Zion in Isaiah and Beyond. In: J.C.
de Moor (ed.), The Elusive Prophet. The Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character
and Anonymous Artist, OTS 45, Leiden 2001, 5482.
, Jesaja. In: J. Fokkelman & W. Weren (eds), De Bijbel Literair. Opbouw en gedachtegang
van de bijbelse geschriften en hun onderlinge relaties, Zoetermeer 2003, 203221.
Betz, O., Offenbarung und Schriftforschung in der Qumransekte, Tbingen 1960.
, Zungenreden und ser Wein. Zur eschatologischen Exegese von Jesaja 28
in Qumran und im Neuen Testament. In: Bibel und Qumran. Beitrge zur Erforschung
der Beziehungen zwischen Bibel- und Qumranwissenschaft, Fs H. Bardtke, Berlin 1968,
2036.
, Firmness in Faith: Hebrews 11:1 and Isaiah 28:16. In: B.P. Thompson, Scripture:
Meaning and Method, Fs A.T. Hanson, Hull University Press 1987, 92113.
Beuken, W.A.M., Jesaja 33 als Spiegeltext im Jesajabuch, EThL 67 (1991), 535.
, Isa 29,1524: Perversion Reverted. In: F. Garcia Martnez, The Scriptures and
the Scrolls, Fs A.S. van der Woude, Leiden 1992, 4364.
, Isaiah 28: Is It Only Schismatics That Drink Heavily? Beyond The Synchronic
Versus Diachronic Controversy. In: J.C. de Moor (ed.), Synchronic or Diachronic? A
Debate on Method in Old Testament Exegesis, OTS 34, Leiden 1995, 1538.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 368 1/17/2007 9:24:00 PM

 bibliography 369

, Isaiah 30: A Prophetic Oracle Transmitted in Two Succesive Paradigms. In:

C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an
Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 1, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 369397.
, Women and the Spirit, the Ox and the Ass. The First Binders of the Booklet
Isaiah 2832, EThL 74/1 (1998), 526.
, Isaiah II/2, HCOT, Leuven 2000.
, Jesaja 112, HthKAT, Freiburg 2003.
Beyse, K.-M., vwj in TWAT II (1977), 820822.
, hax in TWAT VI (1989), 856858.
, wq in TWAT VI (1989), 12231225.
Biblia Latina Cum Glossa Ordinaria, Facsimile Reprint of the Editio Princeps Adolph
Rusch of Strassburg 1480/81, Volume III, Brepols-Turnhout 1992.
Blau, J., Adverbia als psychologische und grammatische Subjekte/Praedikate im
Bibelhebrisch, VT 9 (1959), 130137.
Blenkinsopp, J., Isaiah 139: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AnB,
New York 2000 (A).
, Judahs Covenant with Death (Isaiah XXVIII 1422), VT 50 (2000 B),
472483.
Boehmer, J., Der Glaube und Jesaja. Zu Jes. 7,9 und 28,16, ZAW 41 (1923), 8493.
Boertien, M., Het joodse leerhuis, van 200 voor tot 200 na Christus, Kampen 1974.
Bhl, F., ber der Verhltnis von Shetija-Stein und Nabel der Welt in der Kosmogonie
der Rabbinen, ZDMG 124 (1974), 253270.
Borowski, O., Hezekiahs Reforms and the Revolt against Assyria, BA 58 (1995),
148155.
Botha, Ph., No King Like Him . . .: Royal Etiquette According to the Deuteron-
omistic Historian. In: J.C. de Moor & H.F. van Rooy (eds), Past, Present, Future: The
Deuteronomistic History and the Prophets, OTS 44, Leiden 2000, 3649.
Botterweck, G.J., Freedman, D.N., Lundbom, J., rj in TWAT III (1982), 230
234.
Botterweck, G.J., [dy in TWAT III (1982), 486512.
Branson, R.D., rsy in TWAT III (1982), 688697.
Braulik, G., Gottes RuheDas Land oder der Tempel? Zu Psalm 95,11. In: E. Haag
& F.-L. Hossfeld (eds), Freude an der Weisung des Herrn. Beitrge zur Theologie der Psalmen,
Fs H. Gro, SBB 13, Stuttgart 1986, 3344.
Brenton, L.C.L., The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament with an English Translation and
with Various Readings and Critical Notes, Grand Rapids 19757 (reprint; original edition:
1844).
Brongers, H.A., Some Remarks on the Biblical Participle hal . In: Remembering All
the Way . . . A Collection of Old Testament Studies Published on the Occasion of the Fortieth
Anniversary of the Oudtestamentische Werkgezelschap in Nederland, OTS 21, Leiden 1981,
177189.
Brooke, G.J., Isaiah in the Pesharim and Other Qumran Texts. In: C.C. Broyles &
C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpretive Tradi-
tion, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 609632.
Broyles, C.C., & Evans, C.A., (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an
Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 1 + 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997.
Bruce, F.F., New Wine in Old Wine Skins: III. The Cornerstone, ET 84 (1973),
231235.
Brueggemann, W., Isaiah 139, Westminster Bible Companion, Louisville-London
1998.
Bhlmann, W., & Scherer, K., Sprachliche Stilfiguren der Bibel. Von Assonanz bis Zahlenspruch.
Ein Nachschlagewerk, Giessen 19942.
Burden, J.J., The Use of a Parable in Isaiah 28:2329. In: W.C. van Wyk (ed.), Studies
in Isaiah, OTWSA 22 (1979) and 23 (1980), Pretoria 1981, 4252.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 369 1/17/2007 9:24:01 PM

 370 bibliography

Burns, J.B., The Mythology of Death in the Old Testament, SJT 26 (1973), 327
340.
Burrows, M., (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Marks Monastery. Vol. I: The Isaiah Manuscript
and the Habakkuk Commentary, New York 1950.
Cahill, M., Not a Cornerstone! Translating Ps 118,22 in the Jewish and Christian
Scriptures, RB 106 (1999), 345357.
Camp, L., Hiskija und Hiskijabild. Analyse und Interpretation von 2 Kn 1820, MThA 9,
Altenberge 1990.
Carroll, R.P., Blindsight and the Vision Thing: Blindness and Insight in the Book of
Isaiah. In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah.
Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 1, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 7993.
Childs, B.S., Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis, SBT II/3, London 1967.
, Isaiah, OTL, Louisville 2001.
, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture, Grand Rapids 2004.
Chilton, B.D., The Glory of Israel; the Theology and Provenience of the Isaiah Targum, JSOT.
S 23, Sheffield 1983.
, The Isaiah Targum. Introduction, Translation, Apparatus and Notes, The Aramaic Bible
Vol. II, Edinburgh 1987.
, Two in One: Renderings of the Book of Isaiah in Targum Jonathan. In:
C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an
Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 547562.
Clements, R.E., God and Temple. The Idea of the Divine Presence in Ancient Israel, Oxford
1965.
, Isaiah and the Deliverance of Jerusalem. A Study of the Interpretation of Prophecy in the
Old Testament, JSOT.S 13, Sheffield 1980 (A).
, Isaiah 139, NCBC, Grand Rapids 1980 (B).
, The Unity of the Book of Isaiah, Interp. 36 (1982), 117129.
, ym in TWAT IV (1984), 847865.
, rav in TWAT VII (1993), 933950.
, The Politics of Blasphemy. Zions God and the Threat of Imperialism. In:
I. Kottsieper et al. (ed.), Wer ist wie du, HERR, unter den Gttern? Studien zur Theologie
und Religionsgeschichte Israels, Fs O. Kaiser, Gttingen 1994, 231246.
, A Light to the Nations: A Central Theme of the Book of Isaiah. In: J.W. Watts
& P.R. House (eds), Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honour
of John D.W. Watts, JSOT.S 235, Sheffield 1996, 5769.
, Zion as Symbol and Political Reality: A Central Isaianic Quest. In: J. van
Ruiten & M. Vervenne (eds), Studies in the Book of Isaiah, Fs W.A.M. Beuken, BEThL
132, Leuven 1997, 317.
Clifford, R.J., The Cosmic Mountain in Canaan and the Old Testament, HSM 4, Cambridge
1972.
, Book of Isaiah (second Isaiah). In: Anchor Dictionary Bible, New York 1992, III
490501.
, The Unity of the Book of Isaiah and Its Cosmogonic Language, CBQ 55
(1993), 117.
Collins, T., Line-forms in Hebrew Poetry. A Grammatical Approach to the Stylistic Study of the
Hebrew Prophets, Studia Pohl: Series Maior. Dissertationes scientificae de rebus orientis
antiqui, Rome 1978.
Conrad, J., alp in TWAT VI (1989), 569583.
Conrad, E.W., Reading Isaiah, Minneapolis 1991.
Dalman, G., Jerusalem und sein Gelnde, SDPI 4, Gtersloh 1930.
Darr, K.P., Isaiahs Vision and the Family of God, Louisville 1994.
Day, J., Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Testament, Cambridge 1989.
Daut, R. le, Targum du Pentateuque, Tome II Exode et Lvitique (Sources Chrtiennes), Paris
1979.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 370 1/17/2007 9:24:01 PM

 bibliography 371

Deck, S., Die Gerichtsbotschaft Jesajas: Charakter und Begr ndung, FZB 67, Wrzburg
1991.
Deferrari, R.J., (ed.), The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Vol. 7, Writings of Saint
Augustine, City of God Books VIIIXVI (tr. G.G. Walsh & G. Monahan), Washington
1950.
, (ed.), The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, Vol. 24, Writings of Saint Augustine,
City of God Books XVIIXXII (tr. G.G. Walsh & D.J. Honan), Washington 1954.
Delitzsch, F., Commentar ber das Buch Jesaia, Leipzig 1889.
Dietrich, W., Jesaja und die Politik, BEvTh 74, Munich 1976.
Dillard, R.B., & Longman, T., An Introduction to the Old Testament, Grand Rapids 1994.
Dimant, D., 4QFlorilegium and the Idea of the Community as Temple. In: A. Caquot,
M. Hadas-Lebel, & J. Riaud (eds), Hellenica et Judaica. Hommage Valentin Nikiprowetzky,
Leuven-Paris 1986, 165189.
Doble, P., The Psalm in Luke-Acts. In: S. Moyise & M.J.J. Menken, The Psalms in
the New Testament, London-New York 2004, 83117.
Dodd, C.H., According to the Scriptures. The Sub-structure of New Testament Theology, London
1952.
, The Old Testament in the New. In: G.K. Beale (ed.), The Right Doctrine from
the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, Grand Rapids 1994,
167181 (originally published in 1963 as a summary of According to the Scriptures).
Dohmen, Ch., Zur Grndung der Gemeinde von Qumran (1QS VIIIIX), RdQ
11 (1982), 8196.
Dommershausen, W., hk in TWAT IV (1984), 6879.
, j,l, in TWAT IV (1984), 538547.
Donner, H., Israel unter den Vlkern. Die Stellung der klassischen Propheten des 8. Jahrhunderts
v. Chr. zur Aussenpolitik der Knige von Israel und Juda, VT.S 11, Leiden 1964.
, Der Felsen und der Tempel, ZDPV 93 (1977), 111.
, Geschichte des Volkes Israel und seiner Nachbarn in Grundzgen, Teil 2, GAT 4, Gt-
tingen 1987.
Doyle, R., Molek of Jerusalem? In: R.S. Hess & G.J. Wenham (eds), Zion, City of Our
God, Grand Rapids 1999, 171206.
Driver, G.R., Studies in the Vocabulary of the Old Testament II, JThS 32 (1931),
250257.
, Studies in the Vocabulary of the Old Testament V, JThS 34 (1933), 3344.
, Linguistic and Textual Problems: Isaiah IXXXIX, JThS 38 (1937), 3650.
, Semitic Writing from Pictograph to Alphabet. The Schweich Lectures of the British
Academy 1944, London 1948.
, Another Little DrinkIsaiah 28:122. In: P.R. Ackroyd & B. Lindars (eds),
Words and Meanings, Fs D.W. Thomas, London 1968, 4767.
Duhm, B., Der Prophet Jesaja, Gttingen 19143 (1st edition: 1892).
Dumortier, J., Jeanne Chrysostome, Commentaire sur Isae. Introduction, texte critique et notes,
Paris 1983.
Eaton, J., The Isaiah Tradition. In: R. Coggins, A. Phillips & M. Knibb (eds), Israels
Prophetic Heritage, Fs P.R. Ackroyd, Cambridge 1982, 5876.
Ehrman, B.D., The Apostolic Fathers, Vol. II, Epistle of Barnabas. Papias and Quadratus. Epistle
to Diognetus. The Shepherd of Hermas, Cambridge 2003.
Eichrodt, W., Der Herr der Geschichte. Jesaja 1323/2839, BAT, Stuttgart 1967.
Eifeldt, O., Jahwe Zebaoth. In: Kleine Schriften III, Tbingen 1966, 103123 (originally
published in: Miscellanea Academica Berolinensa, Berlin 1950, 128150).
, Silo und Jerusalem. In: Kleine Schriften III, Tbingen 1966, 417425 (originally
published in: Volume du Congrs Strasbourg 1956, VT.S 4, Leiden 1957, 138147).
Ellermeier, F., Das Verbum vwj in Koh. 2,25. Eine exegetische, auslegungsgeschichtliche
und semasiologische Untersuchung, ZAW 75 (1963), 197217.
Ellis, E.E., Pauls Use of the Old Testament, Edinburgh 1957.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 371 1/17/2007 9:24:01 PM

 372 bibliography

, How the New Testament uses the Old. In: I.H. Marshall (ed.), New Testament
Interpretation. Essays on Principles and Methods, Exeter 1985, 199219.
, The Old Testament in Early Christianity, Canon and Interpretation in the Light of Modern
Research, Tbingen 1991.
Enns, P., Apostolic Hermeneutic in the New Testament, WTJ 65 (2003), 263287.
Epstein, I., (ed.), Hebrew-English Edition of the Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, London-Jerusalem-
New York 1974.
Ernst, J., jlv in TWAT VIII (1994), 7179.
Etz, D.V., The Genealogical Relationships of Jehoram and Ahaziah, and of Ahaz
and Hezekiah, Kings of Judah, JSOT 71 (1996), 3953.
Evans, C.A., To See and Not Perceive: Isaiah 6.910 in Early Jewish and Christian Interpretation,
JSOT.S 64, Sheffield 1989.
, From Gospel to Gospel: The Function of Isaiah in the New Testament. In:
C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an
Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 651691.
, (ed.), From Prophecy to Testament. The Function of the Old Testament in the New,
Peabody 2004.
Evans, E., Tertullian Adversus Marcionem. Books 1 to 3, Oxford 1972.
Ewald, H., Die Propheten des Alten Bundes. Erster Band: Jesaja mit den brigen lteren Propheten,
Gttingen 18672.
Exum, J.C., Of Broken Pots, Fluttering Birds and Visions in the Night: Extended
Simile and Poetic Technique in Isaiah, CBQ 43 (1981), 331352.
, Whom Will He Teach Knowledge? A Literary Approach to Isaiah 28. In: D.J.A.
Clines, Art and Meaning. Rhetoric in Biblical Literature, Sheffield 1982, 108139.
Fabry, H.-J., rWx in TWAT VI (1989), 973983.
, j"zErm' in TWAT V (1986), 1116.
Fewell, D.N., Sennacheribs Defeat: Words at War in 2 Kings 18.1319.37, JSOT 34
(1986), 7990.
Fey, R., Amos und Jesaja. Abhngigkeit und Eigenstndigkeit des Jesaja, Neukirchen 1963.
Fischer, J., Das Buch Jesaias, bersetzt und erklrt, I. Teil: Kapitel 139. HSAT VII 1./1.,
Bonn 1937.
Fischer, I., Tora fr IsraelTora fr die Vlker. Das Konzept des Jesajabuches, SBS 164,
Stuttgart 1995.
Flint, P.W., The Isaiah Scrolls from the Judean Desert. In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans
(eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2,
VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 481489.
Flo, J.P., Biblische Theologie als Sprecherin der Gefhrlichen Erinnerung dargestellt
an Jes 28,712, BN 54 (1990), 6080.
Fohrer, G., Zu Jes 7,14 im Zusammenhang von Jes 7,1022, ZAW 68 (1956),
5456.
, Die Struktur der alttestamentlichen Eschatologie, ThLZ 85 (1960 A), 401
420.
, Das Buch Jesaja. Band I, ZBK, Zurich 1960 (B).
, Das Buch Jesaja. Band II, ZBK, Zurich 1962.
, A. Zion-Jerusalem im Alten Testament. In: TWNT VII (1964), 291
318.
, Zion-Jerusalem im Alten Testament. In: Studien zur alttestamentlichen Theologie
und Geschichte (19491966), BZAW 115, Berlin 1969, 195241.
, Wandlungen Jesajas. In: Studien zu alttestamentlichen Texten und Themen (1966
1972), BZAW 155, Berlin 1981, 1123 (originally published in Ein Dokument der
internationalen Forschung, Fs Eilers, Wiesbaden 1967, 5871).
Fokkelman, J., Dichtkunst in de bijbel. Een handleiding bij literair lezen, Zoetermeer 2000.
Fokkelman, J., & Weren, W., (eds), De Bijbel Literair. Opbouw en gedachtegang van de bijbelse
geschriften en hun onderlinge relaties, Zoetermeer 2003.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 372 1/17/2007 9:24:01 PM

 bibliography 373

Ford, J.M., The Jewel of Discernment (A Study of Stone Symbolism), BZ 11 (1967),

109116.
Frahm, E., Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften, AfO.B 26, Horn 1997.
Fuhs, H.F., vWD in TWAT II (1977), 195199.
, har in TWAT VII (1993), 225266.
Fullerton, K., The Stone of Foundation, AJSL 37 (1920/1), 150.
, Isaiahs Attitude in the Sennacherib Campaign, AJSL 42 (1925 A), 125.
, Isaiah 14:2832, AJSL 42 (1925 B), 86109.
Galil, G., The Chronology of the Kings of Israel and Judah, SHCANE 9, Leiden 1996.
Gallagher, W.R., Sennacheribs Campaign to Judah. New Studies, SHCANE 18, Leiden
1999.
Galling, K., Die Erwhlungstraditionen Israels, BZAW 48, Giessen 1928.
, Jerusalem. In: K. Galling, Biblisches Reallexicon, Tbingen 1937, 297307.
, Serubbabel und der Wiederaufbau des Tempels in Jerusalem. In: A. Kuschke,
Verbannung und Heimkehr, Fs W. Rudolph, Tbingen 1961, 6796.
Gamberoni, J., hsj in TWAT III (1982), 7183.
, wq in TWAT VI (1989), 12521274.
Garcia Martnez, F., & Tigchelaar, E.J.C., The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition. Volume One
1Q14Q273, Leiden 1997. Volume Two: 4Q27411Q31, Leiden 1998 (20002).
Gelston, A., The Foundation of the Second Temple, VT 16 (1966), 232235.
Gerleman, G., twm in THAT I (19783), 893897.
Gerstenberger, E., hba in THAT I (19783), 2025.
, hsj in THAT I (19783), 621623.
, llp in TWAT VI (1989), 606617.
Gese, H., Kleine Beitrge zum Verstndnis des Amosbuches, VT 12 (1962), 417
438.
, Der Davidsbund und die Zionserwhlung, ZThK 61 (1964), 1026 (also in:
H. Gese, Vom Sinai zum Zion. Alttestamentliche Beitrge zur biblischen Theologie, BEvTh
64, Munich 1974, 113129).
, Die strmende Geissel des Hadad und Jes. 28,15 und 18. In: A. Kuschke &
E. Kutsch, Archologie und Altes Testament, Fs K. Galling, Tbingen 1970, 127134.
, Der Messias. In: H. Gese, Zur biblischen Theologie. Alttestamentliche Vortrge, Munich
1977, 128151.
Giesebrecht, F., ber die Abfassungszeit der Psalmen, ZAW 1 (1881), 276332.
Gilula, M., ybix] in Isaiah 28,1A Head Ornament, TA 1 (1974), 128.
Goldberg, J., Two Assyrian Campaigns against Hezekiah and Later Eighth Century
Biblical Chronology, Bib. 80 (1999), 360390.
Gonalves, F.J., LExpdition de Sennachrib en Palestine dans la Littrature Hbraque Ancienne,
Paris 1986.
, The Isaiah Scroll. In: Anchor Dictionary Bible, New York 1992, III 470472.
Good, E.M., Irony in the Old Testament, Sheffield 1981.
Grg, M., Die Bildsprache in Jes 28,1, BN 3 (1977), 1723.
, Jesaja als Kinderlehrer? Beobachtungen zur Sprache und Semantik in Jes.
28,10 (13), BN 29 (1985), 1216.
Gosse, B., Isae 14,2832 et les traditions sur Isae dIsae 3639 et Isae 20,16,
BZ 35 (1991), 9798.
, Isae 2832 et la rdaction densemble du livre dIsae, SJOT 9 (1995),
7582.
Gowan, D.E., Eschatology in the Old Testament, Edinburgh 1986.
Grabbe, L.L., (ed.), Like a Bird in a Cage. The Invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BCE, JSOT.S
363, Sheffield 2003.
, Of Mice and Dead Men: Herodotus 2.141 and Sennacheribs Campaign in
701 BCE. In: L.L. Grabbe (ed.), Like a Bird in a Cage. The Invasion of Sennacherib in
701 BCE, JSOT.S 363, Sheffield 2003, 119140.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 373 1/17/2007 9:24:02 PM

 374 bibliography

Graffy, A., A Prophet Confronts His People. The Disputation Speech in the Prophets, Rome
1984.
, The Lord However Says This. The Prophetic Disputation Speech, ScrB 20 (1989),
28.
Gremann, H., Der Eckstein, PJ 6 (1910), 3845.
Grol, H.W.M. van, De versbouw in het klassieke Hebreeuws. Fundamentele verkenningen. Deel
Een: Metriek, Amsterdam 1986.
Gro, H., dkl in TWAT IV (1984), 573576.
, lvm II, TWAT V (1986), 7477.
Gruber, M.I., Lies ybzk. In: DDD (1999), 517518.
Guinot, J.-N., Thodoret de Cyrille, Commentaire sur Isae, introduction, texte critique, traduction
et notes, Sources Chrtiennes 276295315, Paris 19801984 (3 volumes).
Gunkel, H., Jesaja 33, eine prophetische Liturgie, ZAW 42 (1924), 177208.
, Einleitung in die Psalmen. Die Gattungen der religisen Lyrik Israels; zu Ende gefhrt von
Joachim Begrich, Gttingen 19662 (1st edition: 1933).
Haacker, K., Glaube II/2. Altes Testament, TRE 13, Berlin-New York 1984, 279
289.
Hagelia, H., Coram Deo. Spirituality in the Book of Isaiah, with Particular Attention to Faith in
Yahweh, CB.OT 49, Stockholm 2001.
Hallo, W.W., Isaiah 28,913 and the Ugaritic Abecedaries, JBL 77 (1958), 324
338.
, Jerusalem under Hezekiah: An Assyriological Perspective. In: L.I. Levine
(ed.), Jerusalem: Its Sanctity and Centrality to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, New York
1999, 3650.
Halpern, B., The Excremental Vision: The Doomed Priests of Doom in Isaiah 28,
HAR 10 (1986), 109121.
Hannah., D.D., Isaiah within Judaism of the Second Temple Period. In: S. Moyise &
M.J.J. Menken (eds), Isaiah in the New Testament, London-New York 2005, 733.
Hanson, A.T., The Living Utterances of God. The New Testament Exegesis of the Old, London
1983.
Hardmeier, C., Jesajaforschung im Umbruch, VF 31 (1986), 331.
, Prophetie im Streit vor dem Untergang Judas. Erzhlkommunikative Studien zur Entstehungs-
situation der Jesaja- und Jeremiaerzhlungen in II Reg 1820 und Jer 3740, BZAW 187,
Berlin 1990.
Harl, M., Dorival, G., Munnich, O., La Bible Grecque des Septante. Du judasme hellnistique
au christianisme ancien, Cerf 1988.
Harris, J.R., Lexicographical Studies in Ancient Egyptian Minerals, Berlin 1961.
Hartenstein, F., Die Unzugnglichkeit Gottes im Heiligtum: Jesaja 6 und der Wohnort JHWHS in
der Jerusalemer Kulttradition, WMANT 75, Neukirchen 1997.
, Tempelgrndung als fremdes Werk. Beobachtungen zum Ecksteinwort Jesaja
28,1617. In: M. Witte (ed.), Gott und Mensch im Dialog, Band I, FS O. Kaiser, BZAW
345/I, Berlin 2004.
Hasel, G.F., The Remnant. The History and Theology of the Remnant Idea from Genesis to
Isaiah, Michigan 1972.
, [y in TWAT III (1982), 710718.
Hausmann, J., Israels Rest. Studien zum Selbstverstndnis der nachexilischen Gemeinde, BWANT
124, Stuttgart 1987.
, yq in TWAT VII (1993), 2629.
Hayes, J.H., The Tradition of Zions Inviolability, JBL 82 (1963), 419426.
Hayes, J.H., & Irvine, S.A., Isaiah The Eighth-Century Prophet. His Times and His Preaching,
Nashville 1987.
Hays, R.B., Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul, New Haven-London 1989.
Hays, R.B., & Green, J.B., The Use of the Old Testament by New Testament Writers.
In: J.B. Green (ed.), Hearing the New Testament. Strategies for Interpretation, Grand Rapids-
Carlisle 1995, 222238.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 374 1/17/2007 9:24:02 PM

 bibliography 375

Hays, R.B., The Conversion of the Imagination. Paul as Interpreter of Israels Scripture, Grand
Rapids 2005.
Healey, J.F., Ancient Agriculture and the Old Testament (with Special Reference
to Isaiah xxviii 2329). In: J. Barton et al., Prophets, Worship and Theology. Studies in
Prophetism, Biblical Theology and Structural and Rhetorical Analysis and the Place of Music in
Worship, OTS 23 (1984), 108119.
, Mot twm. In: DDD (1999), 598603.
Heider, G.C., Molech lm. In: DDD (1999), 581585.
Heim, K.M., The Personification of Jerusalem and the Drama of Her Bereavement
in Lamentations. In: R.S. Hess & G.J. Wenham (eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand
Rapids 1999, 129169.
Hendel, R.S., The Date of the Siloam Inscription. A Rejoinder to Rogerson and
Davies, BA 59 (1996), 233247.
Herbert, A.S., The Book of the Prophet Isaiah. Chapters 139, CNEB, Cambridge 1973.
Hermisson, H.-J., Zukunftserwartung und Gegenwartskritik in der Verkndigung
Jesajas, EvTh 33 (1973), 5477.
, Die Frau Zion. In: J. van Ruiten & M. Vervenne (eds), Studies in the Book of
Isaiah, Fs W.A.M. Beuken, BEThL 132, Leuven 1997, 1939.
Herrmann, S., Die prophetischen Heilserwartungen im Alten Testament. Ursprung und Gestaltwandel,
BWANT 5, Stuttgart 1965.
, Hiskia, TRE 15, Berlin-New York 1986, 398404.
Hertzberg, H.W., Der heilige Fels und das Alte Testament, JPOS 12 (1932), 32
42.
Hess, R.S., & Wenham, G.J., (eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999.
Hess, R.S., Hezekiah and Sennacherib in 2 Kings 1820. In: R.S. Hess & G.J.
Wenham (eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999, 2341.
Hillers, D.R., Hy and Hy-Oracles: A Neglected Syntactic Aspect. In: C.L. Meyers
& M. OConnor (eds), The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Fs D.N. Freedman, Winona
Lake 1983, 185188.
Hffken, P., Grundfragen von Jesaja 7,117 im Spiegel neuerer Literatur, BZ 33
(1989), 2542.
, Das Buch Jesaja. Kapitel 139, NSKAT 18/1, Stuttgart 1993.
, Jesus Sirachs Darstellung der Interaktion des Knigs Hiskija und des Propheten
Jesaja (Sir 48:1725), JSJ 31 (2000), 162175.
, Jesaja. Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2004.
Hoffmann, H.W., Die Intention der Verkndigung Jesajas, BZAW 136, Berlin 1974.
Hofius, O., Zur Auslegung von Rmer 9,3033. In: J. Mertin et al. (ed.), Mit unsrer
Macht ist nichts getan, Fs D. Schellong, Frankfurt a.M. 1993, 163174 (also published
in: O. Hofius, Paulusstudien II, WUNT 143, Tbingen 2002, 155166).
Hgenhaven, J., The Prophet Isaiah and Judaean Foreign Policy under Ahaz and
Hezekiah, JNES 49 (1990), 351354.
Holladay, W.L., Isaiah: Scroll of a Prophetic Heritage, Grand Rapids 1978.
Honor, L.L., Sennacheribs Invasion of Palestine: A Critical Source Study, COHP 12, New
York 1926.
Hooke, S.H., The Cornerstone of Scripture. In: The Siege Perilous. Essays in Biblical
Anthropology and Kindred Subjects, London 1956, 235249.
Hooker, M.D., Beyond the Things That Are Written? Saint Pauls Use of Scripture.
In: G.K. Beale (ed.), The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old
Testament in the New, Grand Rapids 1994, 279294.
Hoop, R. de, The Colometry of Hebrew Verse and the Masoretic Accents: Evaluation
of a Recent Approach (Part I), JNWSL 26/1 (2000 A), 4773
, The Colometry of Hebrew Verse and the Masoretic Accents: Evaluation of a
Recent Approach (Part II), JNWSL 26/2 (2000 B), 65100.
Howe, F.R., Christ, the Building Stone, in Peters Theology, BS 157 (2000),
3543.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 375 1/17/2007 9:24:02 PM

 376 bibliography

Huber, F., Jahwe, Juda und die anderen Vlker beim Propheten Jesaja, BZAW 137, Berlin-New
York 1976.
Hbner, H., Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band 1. Prolegomena, Gttingen
1990.
, New Testament Interpretation of the Old Testament. In: M. Saeb (ed.), Hebrew
Bible/Old Testament. The History of Its Interpretation I/1, Gttingen 1996, 332372.
Hulst, A.R., [/ywg in THAT II (19792), 290325.
Humbert, P., La formule hbraque en hineni suivi dun participe. In: P. Humbert,
Opuscules dun Hbrasant, Mmoires de lUniversit de Neuchtel 26, 1958, 5459
(originally published in REJ 97 (1934), 5864).
, Note sur yasad et ses drivs. In: Hebrasche Wortforschung, VT.S 16, Fs W. Baum-
gartner, Leiden 1967, 135142.
Hutter, M., Hiskia Knig von Juda. Ein Beitrag zur judischen Geschichte in assyrischer Zeit,
GrTS 6, Graz 1982.
Irwin, W.A., The Exposition of Isaiah 14:2832, AJSL 44 (1927/8), 7387.
Irwin, W.H., Isaiah 2833. Translation with Philological Notes, BibOr 30, Rome 1977.
Israelstamm, J., & Slotki, J.J., Midrash Rabbah, Translated into English with Notes, Glossary
and Indices, Leviticus (eds H. Freedman & M. Simon), London 19613.
Jackson, J.J., Style in Isaiah 28 and a Drinking Bout of the Gods (RS 24.258). In:
J.J. Jackson & M. Kessler (eds), Rhetorical Criticism, Fs J. Muilenberg, PThMS 1,
Pittsburgh 1974, 8598.
Jacob, E., La pierre angulaire dEsae 28.16 et ses chos notestamentaires, RHPhR
75 (1995), 38.
Janowski, B., Keruben und Zion. Thesen zur Entstehung der Zionstradition. In:
D. Daniels et al. (ed.), Ernten, was man st, Fs K. Koch, Neukirchen 1991, 231254.
Janzen, W., Mourning Cry and Woe Oracle, BZAW 125, Berlin 1972.
Jenkins, A.K., Hezekiahs Fourteenth Year: A New Interpretation of 2 Kings xviii
13xix 37, VT 26 (1976), 284298.
Jenni, E., Das hebrische Pi el, Syntaktisch-semasiologische Untersuchung einer Verbalform im Alten
Testament, Zurich 1968.
, jb in THAT I (19783), 272275.
, lwdg in THAT I (19783), 402409.
, ywh in THAT I (19783), 474477.
, Die hebrischen Prpositionen. Band 1: Die Prposition Beth, Stuttgart 1992.
Jensen, J., Weal and Woe in Isaiah: Consistency and Continuity, CBQ 43 (1981),
167187.
Jeppesen, K., The Cornerstone (Isa 28:16) in Deutero-Isaianic Rereading of the
Message of Isaiah, StTh 38 (1984), 9399.
Jepsen, A., ma in TWAT I (1973), 313348.
, hzj in TWAT II (1977), 822835.
Jeremias, J. ( Johannes), Der Gottesberg. Ein Beitrag zum Verstndnis der biblischen Symbolsprache,
Gtersloh 1919.
Jeremias, J. ( Joachim), , ZNW 29 (1930), 264280.
, , in TWNT I (1933), 792793.
, EcksteinSchlustein, ZNW 36 (1937), 154157.
, , in TWNT IV (1942), 272283.
Jeremias, J. ( Jrg), Lade und Zion. In: H.W. Wolff (ed.), Probleme Biblischer Theologie,
Fs G. von Rad, Munich 1971, 183198.
, aybn in THAT II (19792), 726.
Jobes, K.H., & Silva, M., Invitation to the Septuagint, Grand Rapids, 2000.
Johnson, B., hba in TWAT I (1973), 2427.
, fpvm in TWAT V (1986), 93107.
, qdx in TWAT VI (1989), 903924.
Johnston, W.B., Calvins New Testament Commentaries. Hebrews and I and II Peter, Grand
Rapids 1963 (eds D.W. Torrance & Th.F. Torrance).

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 376 1/17/2007 9:24:03 PM

 bibliography 377

Jong, H. de, Van oud naar nieuw. De ontwikkelingsgang van het Oude naar het Nieuwe Testament,
Kampen 2002.
Joon, P., Une srie de beth essentiae mconnus, Bib. 4 (1923), 318320.
Juel, D., Messianic Exegesis: Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament in Early Christian-
ity, Philadelphia 1988.
Kaiser, O., Die Verkndigung des Propheten Jesaja im Jahre 701, ZAW 81 (1969),
304315.
, Der Prophet Jesaja. Kapitel 1339, ATD 18, Gttingen 19762 (1st edition: 1973).
, Das Buch des Propheten Jesaja. Kapitel 112, ATD 17, Gttingen 19815 (1st edition:
1960).
, Jesaja/Jesajabuch, TRE 16, Berlin-New York 1987, 636658.
Kedar-Kopfstein, B., wvl in TWAT IV (1984), 595605.
, hpc in TWAT VII (1993), 840849.
Kellermann, D., hag in TWAT I (1973), 878884.
, hlg:[} in TWAT V (1986), 10621066.
, rf[/hrf[ in TWAT VI (1989), 2131.
Kennett, R.H., Ancient Hebrew Social Life and Custom as Indicated in Law, Narrative and
Metaphor. Schweich Lectures 1931, London 1933.
Kilian, R., Jesaja 139, EdF 200, Darmstadt 1983.
, Jesaja II 1339, NEB, Wrzburg 1994.
Kissane, E.J., The Book of Isaiah, Translated From a Critically Revised Hebrew Text With
Commentary, Vol. I (IXXXIX), Dublin 19602 (1st edition: 1941).
Klopfenstein, M.A., Die Lge nach dem Alten Testament. Ihr Begriff, ihre Bedeutung und ihre
Beurteilung, Zurich 1964.
, bzk in THAT I (19783), 817823.
, rqv in THAT II (19792), 10101019.
Knibb, M.A., Isaianic Traditions in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. In: C.C.
Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpre-
tive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 633650.
Knierim, R., ggv in THAT II (19792), 869872.
Knijff, H.W. de, Sleutel en Slot. Beknopte geschiedenis van de bijbelse hermeneutiek, Kampen
19852.
Knipping, B., rbv in TWAT VII (1993), 10271040.
Knoppers, G.N., Jerusalem at War in Chronicles. In: R.S. Hess & G.J. Wenham
(eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999, 5776.
Koch, D.-A., Beobachtungen zum christologischen Schriftgebrauch in den vorpau-
linischen Gemeinden, ZNW 71 (1980), 174191.
, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums. Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verstndnis
der Schrift bei Paulus, BHTh 69, Tbingen 1986.
Koch, K., Zur Geschichte der Erwhlungsvorstellung in Israel, ZAW 67 (1955),
205226.
, Was ist Formgeschichte? Methoden der Bibelexegese, Neukirchen 19743.
, qdx in THAT II (19792), 507530.
Khler, L., Mitteilungen zu Jes. 28,15a und 18b, ZAW 48 (1930).
, Alttestamentliche Wortforschung. Zwei Fachwrter der Bausprache in Jes. 28,16,
TZ(W) 3 (1947), 390393.
Konkel, A.H., The Sources of the Story of Hezekiah in the Book of Isaiah, VT 43
(1993), 462482.
Kooij, A. van der, Die Septuaginta Jesajas als Dokument jdischer Exegese. Einige
Notizen zu LXX-Jes. 7. In: bersetzung und Deutung. Studien zu dem A.T. und seiner
Umwelt, Fs A.R. Hulst, Nijkerk 1977, 91102.
, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches. Ein Beitrag zur Textgeschichte des Alten Testaments,
OBO 35, Gttingen 1981.
, Das assyrische Heer vor den Mauern Jerusalems im Jahr 701 v. Chr., ZDPV
102 (1986), 93109.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 377 1/17/2007 9:24:03 PM

 378 bibliography

, The Septuagint of Isaiah: Translation and Interpretation. In: J. Vermeylen

(ed.), The Book of Isaiah, BEThL 81, Leuven 1989, 127133.
, Isaiah in the Septuagint. In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and
Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden
1997 (A), 513529.
, Zur Theologie des Jesajabuches in der Septuaginta. In: H.G. Reventlow
(ed.), Theologische Probleme der Septuaginta und der hellenistischen Hermeneutik, VWGT 11,
Gtersloh 1997 (B), 925.
, The Story of Hezekiah and Sennacherib (2 Kings 1819). In: J.C. de Moor
& H.F. van Rooy (eds), Past, Present, Future: The Deuteronomistic History and the Prophets,
OTS 44, Leiden 2000, 107119.
Korpel, M.C.A., & Moor, J.C. de, Fundamentals of Ugaritic and Hebrew Poetry. In:
W. van der Meer & J.C. de Moor (eds), The Structural Analysis of Biblical and Canaanite
Poetry, JSOT.S 74, Sheffield 1988, 161.
Korpel, M.C.A., Introduction to the Series Pericope. In: M.C.A. Korpel & J.M. Oesch
(eds), Delimitation Criticism. A New Tool in Biblical Scholarship, Pericope 1, Scripture as
Written and Read in Antiquity, Assen 2000.
Kosmala, H., rbg in TWAT I (1973), 901919.
Kraft, R.A., Barnabas Isaiah Text and the Testimony Book Hypothesis, JBL 79
(1960), 336350.
Kraus, H.-J., Die Knigsherrschaft Gottes im Alten Testament. Untersuchungen zu den Liedern von
Jahwes Thronbesteigung, BHTh 13, Tbingen 1951.
, Psalmen. 1. Teilband, BKAT XV/1, Neukirchen 1960 (A), 342345: Exkurs 5:
Die Verherrlichung der Gottesstadt.
, Psalmen. 2. Teilband, BKAT XV/2, Neukirchen 1960 (B), 879883: Exkurs 6:
Knigtum und Kultus in Jerusalem.
, Gottesdienst in Israel. Grundri einer alttestamentlichen Kultgeschichte, Munich 19622.
, Theologie der Psalmen, BKAT XV/3, Neukirchen 1979.
Krauss, S., Zion and Jerusalem. A Linguistic and Historical Study, PEQ 77 (1945),
1533.
Kronholm, T., [gr in TWAT VII (1993), 347350.
Kuriakos, L.M., Non-paradigmatical Form of Weak Verbs in Masoretic Hebrew, Kerala State
(India) 1973.
Kutsch, E., tyrb in THAT I (19783), 339352.
Laato, A., Hezekiah and the Assyrian Crisis in 701, SJOT 2 (1987), 4968.
, Who is Immanuel? The Rise and Foundering of Isaiahs Messianic Expectations, bo
1988.
, Assyrian Propaganda and the Falsification of History in the Royal Inscriptions
of Sennacherib, VT 45 (1995), 198226.
, About Zion I will not be silent: The Book of Isaiah as an Ideological Unity, CB.OT
44, Stockholm 1998.
Laberge, L., La Septante dIsae 2833: Etude de tradition textuelle, Ottawa 1978.
, The Woe-Oracles of Isaiah 2833, EeT 13 (1982), 157190.
Labuschagne, C.J., The Particles he and hNEhi. In: C.J. Labuschagne et al. (ed.), Syntax
and Meaning. Studies in Hebrew Syntax and Biblical Exegesis, OTS 18 (1973), 114.
Landy, F., Tracing the Voice of the Other: Isaiah 28 and the Covenant with Death.
In: J.C. Exum & D.J.A. Clines, The New Literary Criticism and the Hebrew Bible, JSOT.
S 143, Sheffield 1993, 140162.
Lang, B., rpk in TWAT IV (1984), 303318.
, rkn in TWAT V (1986), 454462.
LeBas, E.E., Zechariahs Enigmatic Contribution to the Cornerstone, PEQ 82 (1950),
102122.
, Zechariahs Climax to the Career of the Cornerstone, PEQ 83 (1951), 139
155.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 378 1/17/2007 9:24:03 PM

 bibliography 379

Leeuwen, C. van, Sanhrib devant Jrusalem, OTS 14, Leiden 1965, 245272.
, Amos, POT, Nijkerk 1985.
Levenson, J.D., Sinai and Zion. An Entry Into the Jewish Bible, Minneapolis 1985.
, Zion Traditions. In Anchor Dictionary Bible, New York 1992, VI 10981102.
Lewis, T.J., Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit, HSM 39, Atlanta 1989.
Liedke, G., & Petersen, C., hrwt in THAT II (19792), 10321043.
Lindars, B., The Place of the Old Testament in the Formation of New Testament
Theology: Prolegomena. In: G.K. Beale (ed.), The Right Doctrine from the Wrong
Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, Grand Rapids 1994, 137145
(originally published in NTS 23 (1976), 5966).
Lindblom, J., Der Eckstein in Jes. 28,16. In: Interpretationes ad Vetus Testamentum pertinentes
S. Mowinckel septuagenario missae, Oslo 1955, 123132.
Lindemann, A., & Paulsen, H., (eds), Die Apostolischen Vter. Griechisch-Deutsche Paral-
lelausgabe, Tbingen 1992.
Lipiski, E., [ in TWAT IV (1984), 177194.
Liwak, R., Die Rettung Jerusalems im Jahre 701 v.Chr. Zum Verhltnis und Verstndnis
historischer und theologischer Aussagen, ZThK 83 (1986), 137166.
Loader, J.A., Was Isaiah a quietist?. In: W.C. van Wyk (ed.), Studies in Isaiah, OTWSA
22 (1979) and 23 (1980), Pretoria 1981, 130142.
Lhr, M., Jesaja-Studien III. Schluwort: Zur Komposition der Kapp. 2831, ZAW
37 (191718), 7376.
Lohse, E., B. Zion-Jerusalem im nachbiblischen Judentum/C. Zion-Jerusalem
im Neuen Testament. In: TWNT VII (1964), 318338.
Lorenz, B., Bemerkungen zum Totenkult im Alten Testament, VT 32 (1982),
229234.
Loretz, O., Das Prophetenwort ber das Ende der Knigstadt Samaria ( Jes. 28:14),
UF 9 (1977), 361363.
Ludwig, T.M., The Traditions of the Establishing of the Earth in Deutero-Isaiah,
JBL 92 (1973), 345357.
Lund, N.W., The Presence of Chiasmus in the O.T., AJSL 46 (1930), 112113.
Lutz, H.M., Jahwe, Jerusalem und die Vlker: Zur Vorgeschichte von Sach 12,18 und 14,15,
WMANT 27, Neukirchen 1968.
Maass, F., rpk in THAT I (19783), 842857.
Machinist, P., Assyria and its Image in the First Isaiah, JAOS 103 (1983), 719737.
Madl, H., ybx in TWAT VI (1989), 893898.
Maiburg, U., Christus der Eckstein. Ps. 118,22 und Jes. 28,16 im Neuen Testament
und bei den lateinischen Vtern. In: Vivarium, Fs T. Klauser, Mnster 1984,
247256.
Maisler, B., Das vordavidische Jerusalem, JPOS 10 (1930), 181191.
Manross, L.N., Bth Essentiae, JBL 73 (1954), 238239.
Marbck, J., rxqII in TWAT VII (1993), 112117.
Mare, W.H., Zion. In: Anchor Dictionary Bible, New York 1992, VI 10961097.
Marti, K., Jesaja, KHC, Tbingen 1900.
Martin-Achard, R., rz in THAT I (19783), 520522.
, rkn in THAT II (19792), 6668.
Maurer, Chr., , in TWNT VIII (1969), 152170.
Mayer, W., Sennacheribs Campaign of 701 BCE: The Assyrian View. In: L.L.
Grabbe (ed.), Like a Bird in a Cage. The Invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BCE, JSOT.S
363, Sheffield 2003, 168200.
McCarthy, D.J., The Uses of w ehinnh in Biblical Hebrew, Bib. 61 (1980), 330342.
McHugh, J., The Date of Hezekiahs Birth, VT 14 (1964), 446453.
McKelvey, R.J., Christ the Cornerstone, NTS 8 (1962), 352359.
McLaughlin, J.L., The Marza in the Prophetic Literature. References and Allusions in Light of
the Extra-Biblical Evidence, VT.S 86, Leiden 2001.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 379 1/17/2007 9:24:03 PM

 380 bibliography

McMichael, S.J., Did Isaiah Foretell Jewish Blindness and Suffering for not Accepting
Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah? A Medieval Perspective, BTB 26 (1996), 144151.
Meinhold, J., JomaDer Vershnungstag. Text, bersetzung und Erklrung. Nebst einem textkri-
tischen Anhang (G. Beer & O. Holtzmann, eds, Die Mischna. Text, bersetzung und aus-
fhrliche Erklrung mit eingehenden geschichtlichen und sprachlichen Einleitungen und textkritischen
Anhngen), Giessen 1913.
Melugin, R.F., The Conventional and the Creative in Isaiahs Judgment Oracles,
CBQ 36 (1974), 301311.
Melugin, R.F., & Sweeney, M.A., (eds), New Visions of Isaiah, JSOT.S 214, Sheffield
1996.
Melugin, R.F., The Book of Isaiah and the Construction of Meaning. In: C.C. Broyles
& C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpretive
Tradition, Vol. 1, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 3955.
Merklein, H., Das kirchliche Amt nach dem Epheserbrief, StANT 33, Munich 1973.
Mettinger, T.N.D., The Dethronement of Sabaoth. Studies in the Shem and Kabod Theologies,
CB.OT 18, Lund 1982.
, The Name and the Glory: the Zion-Sabaoth Theology and Its Exilic Successors,
JNWSL 24 (1998), 124.
Millard, A.R., Sennacheribs Attack on Hezekiah, TynB 36 (1985), 6177.
Miller, J.M., & Hayes, J.H., A History of Ancient Israel and Judah, Philadelphia 1986.
Miscall, P.D., Isaiah, RNBC, Sheffield 1993.
Mittmann, S., Hiskia und die Philister, JNWSL 16 (1990), 91106.
Mller, H., Abwgen zweier bersetzungen von Jes. 28,19b, ZAW 96 (1984), 272
274.
Monson, J.M., The Temple of Solomon: Heart of Jerusalem. In: R.S. Hess & G.J.
Wenham (eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999, 122.
Montgomery, J.A., Notes on the Old Testament, JBL 31 (1912), 140146.
Moor, J.C. de, & Watson, W.G.E., Verse in Ancient Near Eastern Prose, AOAT 42, Neu-
kirchen 1993.
Morrison, A.W., Calvins New Testament Commentaries. A Harmony of the Gospels, Grand
Rapids 1972 (eds D.W. Torrance & Th.F. Torrance).
Mosca, P.G., Jes. 28:12e. A response to J.J.M. Roberts, HThR 77 (1984), 113117.
Mosis, R., ld'g: in TWAT I (1973), 927956.
, dsy in TWAT III (1981), 668682.
, bzk TWAT IV (1982), 111130.
, bvq in TWAT VII (1993), 197205.
Motyer, J.A., The Prophecy of Isaiah, Leicester 1993.
Moyise, S., Does the New Testament Quote the Old Testament out of Context?,
Anvil 11 (1994), 133143.
, (ed.), The Old Testament in the New Testament, Fs J.L. North, JSNT.S 189, Sheffield
2000.
, Intertextuality and the Study of the Old Testament in the New Testament.
In: S. Moyise (ed.), The Old Testament in the New Testament, Fs J.L. North, JSNT.S 189,
Sheffield 2000, 1441.
, The Old Testament in the New. An Introduction, London-New York 2001.
, Intertextuality and Biblical Studies: A Review, Verbum et Ecclesia 23 (2002),
418431 (A).
, Can We Use the New Testament the Way the New Testament Authors used
the Old Testament?, IDS 36 (2002), 643660 (B).
Moyise, S., & Van Rensburg, F.J., Isaiah in 1 Peter 2:410. Applying Intertextual-
ity to the Study of the Old Testament in the New, Ekklesistikos Pharos 84 (2002),
1230 (C).
Moyise, S., Die Ou Testament in die Nuwe Testament: interpretasiemodelle, IDS
37 (2003), 131142.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 380 1/17/2007 9:24:04 PM

 bibliography 381

Moyise, S., & Menken, M.J.J., (eds), Isaiah in the New Testament, London-New York
2005.
Moyise, S., Isaiah in 1 Peter. In: S. Moyise & M.J.J. Menken (eds), Isaiah in the New
Testament, London-New York 2005, 175188.
Mller, H.-P., Die Konstruktionen mit hinn siehe und ihr sprachgeschichtlicher
Hintergrund, ZAH 2 (1989), 4576.
, mh in TWAT II (1977), 449454.
, aybn in TWAT V (1986), 140163.
, Chemosh vwmk. In: DDD (1999), 186189.
Muller, K., Ansto und Gericht. Eine Studie zum jdischen Hintergrund des paulinischen Skandalon-
Begriffs, StANT 19, Munich 1969.
Mnderlein, G., llg in TWAT II (1977), 2124.
Muraoka, T., Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew, Leiden 1985.
Muszynski, H., Fundament, Bild und Metapher in den Handschriften aus Qumran. Studie zur
Vorgeschichte des ntl. Begriffs EMELIOS, AnBib 61, Rome 1975.
Na aman, N., Sennacheribs Letter to God on His Campaign to Judah, BASOR 214
(1974), 2539.
, Sennacheribs Campaign to Judah and the Date of the lmlk Stamps, VT 29
(1979), 6186.
, Hezekiah and the Kings of Assyria, TA 21 (1994), 235254.
, The Debated Historicity of Hezekiahs Reform in the Light of Historical and
Archaeological Research, ZAW 107 (1995), 179195.
, New Light on Hezekiahs Second Prophetic Story (2 Kgs 19,9b35), Bib. 81
(2000), 393402.
, Updating the Messages: Hezekiahs Second Prophetic Story (2 Kings 19.9b35)
and the Community of Babylonian Deportees. In: L.L. Grabbe (ed.), Like a
Bird in a Cage. The Invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BCE, JSOT.S 363, Sheffield 2003,
201220.
Nicholson, P.T., & Shaw, I., (eds), Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, Cambridge
2000.
Nicole, R., The New Testaments Use of the Old Testament. In: G.K. Beale (ed.),
The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New,
Grand Rapids 1994, 1328 (originally published in C.F.H. Henry (ed.), Revelation
and the Bible, Grand Rapids 1958, 135151).
Niehr, H., Bedeutung und Funktion kanaanischer Traditionselemente in der Sozial-
kritik Jesajas, BZ 28 (1984), 6981.
, vrP in TWAT VI (1989), 782787.
Noordegraaf, A., Psalm 118:22,23 in het Nieuwe Testament, TR 30 (1987), 244
263.
Norin, S., The Age of the Siloam Inscription and Hezekiahs Tunnel, VT 48 (1998),
3748.
Noth, M., Jerusalem und die israelitische Tradition. In: Gesammelte Studien zum Alten
Testament (ed. H.W. Wolff ), TB 6, Munich 1957, 172187 (originally published in
ATS 8 (1950), 2846).
OConnell, R.H., Concentricity and Continuity. The Literary Structure of Isaiah, JSOT.S 188,
Sheffield 1994.
Oded, B., History vis--vis Propaganda in the Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, VT 48
(1998), 423425.
Oeming, M., hnp in TWAT VI (1989), 626629.
, lqv in TWAT VIII (1994), 454458.
Ohmann, H.M., Een woord gesproken op zijn tijd. Hoe lezen wij Jesaja 139, Franeker s.d.
OKane, M., Isaiah: A Prophet in the Footsteps of Moses, JSOT 69 (1996), 2951.
Ollenburger, B.C., Zion, the City of the Great King. A Theological Symbol of the Jerusalem Cult,
JSOT.S 41, Sheffield 1987.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 381 1/17/2007 9:24:04 PM

 382 bibliography

, Zion. In: The Oxford Companion to the Bible, Oxford 1993, 830.
Olley, J.W., Notes on Isaiah XXXII 1, XLV 19, 23 and LXIII 1, VT 33 (1983),
446453.
, Hear the Word of Yahweh: The Structure of the Book of Isaiah in 1QIsaa,
VT 43 (1993), 1949.
, Trust in the Lord: Hezekiah, Kings and Isaiah, TynB 50 (1999), 5977.
Oss, D.A., The Interpretation of the Stone Passages by Peter and Paul: A Compara-
tive Study, JETS 32 (1989), 181200.
Oswalt, J.N., The Book of Isaiah. Chapters 139. NIC, Grand Rapids 1986.
, The Kerygmatic Structure of the Book of Isaiah. In: J.E. Coleson & V.H.
Matthews (eds), Go to the Land I Will Show You, Fs D.W. Young, Winona Lake
1996, 143158.
Otto, E., Jerusalemdie Geschichte der Heiligen Stadt. Von den Anfngen bis zur Kreuzfahrerzeit,
Stuttgart 1980 (A).
, El und jhwh in Jerusalem: Historische und theologische Aspekte einer Reli-
gionsintegration, VT 30 (1980 B), 316329.
, wyx in TWAT VI (1989), 9941028.
Otzen, B., Some Text-problems in 1QS, StTh 11 (1957), 8998.
, Israel under the Assyrians. Reflections on Imperial Policy in Palestine. In: Annual
of the Swedish Theological Institute, Vol. XI, Fs G. Gerleman, Leiden 1978, 96110.
Peels, H.G.L., The Vengeance of God. The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of
the NQM-Texts in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament, OTS 31, Leiden
1995.
Perdue, L.G., The Collapse of History, Minneapolis 1994.
Person, R.F., II Kings 1820 and Isaiah 3639: A Text Critical Case Study in the
Redaction History of the Book of Isaiah, ZAW 111 (1999), 373379.
Petersen, D.L., Isaiah 28, A Redaction Critical Study. In: P.J. Achtemeier (ed.), SBL.
SPS 1979 vol. 2, Missoula, 101122.
Petersen, D.L., Richards, K.H., Interpreting Hebrew Poetry, Minneapolis 1992.
Pfeiffer, G., Entwhnung und Entwhnungsfest im Alten Testament: der Schlssel zu
Jesaja 28,713?, ZAW 84 (1972), 341347.
Polman, A.D.R., Het Woord Gods bij Augustinus, Kampen 1955.
Pope, M.H., The Cult of the Dead at Ugarit. In: G.D. Young (ed.), Ugarit in Retrospect,
Fifty Years of Ugarit and Ugaritic, Winona Lake 1981, 159179.
Porter, S.E., & Pearson, B.W.R., Isaiah through Greek Eyes: The Septuagint of Isaiah.
In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of
an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 531546.
Porter, S.E., The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament. In: C.A. Evans
& J.A. Sanders (eds), Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel, JSNT.S 148,
Sheffield 1997, 7996.
Porteous, N.W., Jerusalem-Zion: The Growth of a Symbol. In: A. Kuschke, Verban-
nung und Heimkehr, Fs W. Rudolph, Tbingen 1961, 235252.
Poznanski, S., Zu fevo f/v, ZAW 36 (1916), 119120.
Preu, H.D., j/n/hjwnm in TWAT V (1986), 297307.
, Theologie des Alten Testaments. Band 2 (Israels Weg mit jhwh), Stuttgart 1992.
Pringle, W., J. Calvin, Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, Translated From the Original
Latin, and Collated with the Latest French Version, Vol. II, Grand Rapids 1948.
Procksch, O., Jesaia I, KAT, Leipzig 1930 (A).
, Das Jerusalem Jesajas, PJ 26 (1930 B), 1240.
Prostmeier, F.R., Der Barnabasbrief, Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vtern, Achter
Band, Gttingen 1999.
Provan, I.W., Hezekiah and the Books of Kings. A Contribution to the Debate about the Composi-
tion of the Deuteronomic History, BZAW 172, Berlin 1988.
Puech, E., Milcom klm. In: DDD (1999), 575576.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 382 1/17/2007 9:24:04 PM

 bibliography 383

Pulikottil, P., Transmission of Biblical Texts in Qumran. The Case of the Large Isaiah Scroll
1QIsaa, JSP.S 34, Sheffield 2001.
Rabbinowitz, J., Midrash Rabbah, Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices,
Deuteronomy (eds H. Freedman & M. Simon), London 19613.
Rad, G. von, Die Stadt auf dem Berge, EvTh 9 (1948/1949), 439447.
, Das Werk Jahwes. In: Studia Biblica et Semitica, Fs Th.C. Vriezen, Wageningen
1966, 290298.
, Theologie des Alten Testaments. Band 1: Die Theologie der geschichtlichen berlieferungen
Israels, Munich 19787.
, Theologie des Alten Testaments. Band 2: Die Theologie der prophetischen berlieferungen
Israels, Munich 19807.
Reider, J., Etymological Studies in Biblical Hebrew, VT 2 (1952), 113130.
Rendtorff, R., Zur Komposition des Buches Jesaja, VT 34 (1984), 295320.
, The Book of Isaiah: A Complex Unity, Synchronic and Diachronic Readings.
In: E.H. Lovering (ed.), SBL.SPS 1991, Atlanta, 820 (also published in: R.F. Melugin
& M.A. Sweeney (eds), New Visions of Isaiah, JSOT.S 214, Sheffield 1996, 3249).
, Theologie des Alten Testaments. Ein kanonischer Entwurf. Band 1: Kanonische Grundlegung,
Neukirchen 1999.
, Israels Rest. Unabgeschlossene berlegungen zu einem schwierigen Thema
der alttestamentlichen Theologie. In: A. Graupner et al. (ed.), Verbindungslinien, Fs
W.H. Schmidt, Neukirchen 2000, 265279.
, Theologie des Alten Testaments. Ein kanonischer Entwurf. Band 2: Thematische Entfaltung,
Neukirchen 2001.
Renz, Th., The Use of the Zion Tradition in the Book of Ezekiel. In: R.S. Hess &
G.J. Wenham (eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999, 77103.
Ridderbos, J., Jesaja I, KVHS, Kampen 1922.
Ridderbos, N.H., Enkele beschouwingen naar aanleiding van ta aminu in Jes. 7:9. In:
Schrift en Uitleg, Fs W.H. Gispen, Kampen 1970, 167178.
Ringgren, H., vqy in TWAT III (1982), 866868.
, db[ in TWAT V (1986), 982997.
, hc[ in TWAT VI (1989), 413432.
, WP in TWAT VI (1989), 544547.
, ayq in TWAT VII (1993), 1819.
Rise, G., Isa 28:122 and the New English Bible, JRT 30 (1973/1974), 1317.
Roberts, B.J., The Second Isaiah Scroll from Qumran (1QIsb), BJRL 42 (1959/
1960), 132144.
Roberts, J.J.M., The Davidic Origin of the Zion Tradition, JBL 92 (1973), 329
344.
, Myth Versus History, CBQ 38 (1976 A), 113.
, Zion Tradition. In: The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible Suppl., Nashville
1976 (B), 985987.
, A Note on Isa. 28:12, HThR 73 (1980), 4951.
, Zion in the Theology of the Davidic-Solomonic Empire. In: T. Ishida (ed.),
Studies in the Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays, Tokyo-Winona Lake 1982
(A), 93108.
, Isaiah in Old Testament Theology, Interp. 36 (1982 B), 131143.
, The Divine King and the Human Community in Isaiahs Vision of the Future.
In: H.B. Huffmon, F.A. Spina & A.R.W. Green (eds), The Quest for the Kingdom of God,
Fs G.E. Mendenhall, Winona Lake 1983 (A), 127136.
, Isaiah 33: An Isaianic Elaboration of the Zion Tradition. In: C.L. Meyers &
M. OConnor, The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Fs D.N. Freedman, Winona Lake
1983 (B), 1525.
, Yahwehs Foundation in Zion (Isa 28:16), JBL 106/1 (1987), 2745.
, Double Entendre in First Isaiah, CBQ 54 (1992), 3948.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 383 1/17/2007 9:24:05 PM

 384 bibliography

Rogerson, J., & Davies, P.R., Was the Siloam Tunnel built by Hezekiah?, BA 59
(1996), 138149.
Rohland, E., Die Bedeutung der Erwhlungstraditionen Israels fr die Eschatologie der alttesta-
mentlichen Propheten, diss. Heidelberg, 1956.
Rost, L., Die berlieferung von der Thronnachfolge Davids, BWANT III 6, Stuttgart 1926.
, Mitteilungen zu Jesaja 28,1ff , ZAW 53 (1935), 292.
Routledge, R.L., The Siege and Deliverance of the City of David in Isaiah 29,18,
TynB 43 (1992), 181190.
Rowley, H.H., Hezekiahs Reform and Rebellion, BJRL 44 (1961/1962), 395431.
Rudman, D., Is the Rabshakeh also Among the Prophets? A Rhetorical Study of 2
Kings xviii 1735, VT 50 (2000), 100110.
Ruiten, J. van, & Vervenne, M., (eds), Studies in the Book of Isaiah, Fs W.A.M. Beuken,
BEThL 132, Leuven 1997.
Ruppert, L., ['y: in TWAT III (1982), 718751.
Rterswrden, U., [mv in TWAT VIII (1994), 255279.
Sabottka, L., Is 30,2733: Ein Uebersetzungsvorschlag, BZ 12 (1968), 241245.
Saeb, M., rsy in THAT I (19783), 738742.
, ry[x in TWAT VI (1989), 10831087.
Satterthwaite, Ph E., Zion in the Songs of Ascents. In: R.S. Hess & G.J. Wenham
(eds), Zion, City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999, 105128.
Sawyer, J.F.A., h[t in THAT II (19792), 10551057.
, The Fifth Gospel. Isaiah in the History of Christianity, Cambridge 1996.
Schmid, H., Jahwe und die Kulttraditionen von Jerusalem, ZAW 67 (1955), 168
197.
Schmidt, B.B., Israels Beneficent Dead. Ancestor Cult and Necromancy in Ancient Israelite Religion
and Tradition, Winona Lake 1996 (reprint of Tbingen 1994).
Schmidt, H. (Hans), Die groen Propheten (Jesaja), SAT 2,2, Gttingen 19232.
, Der Heilige Fels in Jerusalem. Eine archologische und religionsgeschichtliche Studie, Tbin-
gen 1933.
Schmidt, H. (Helmut), Israel, Zion und die Vlker, Eine motivgeschichtliche Untersuchung zum
Verstndnis des Universalismus im Alten Testament, Marburg 1968.
Schmidt, W.H., Jerusalemer El-Traditionen bei Jesaja. Ein religionsgeschichtlicher
Vergleich zum Vorstellungskreis des gttlichen Knigtums, ZRGG 16 (1964),
302313.
, dsy in THAT I (19783), 736738.
Schmitt, J.J., Isaiah and His Interpreters, New York 1986.
, Samaria in the Books of the Eighth-Century Prophets. In: S.W. Holloway
& L.K. Handy, The Pitcher Is Broken. Memorial Essays for G.W. Ahlstrm, JSOT.S 190,
Sheffield 1995, 355367.
, The City as Woman in Isaiah 139. In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds),
Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 1, VT.S
52, Leiden 1997, 95119.
Schmoldt, H., qt[ in TWAT VI (1989), 487489.
Schneider, D., Der Prophet Jesaja, 139, WStB, Wuppertal 1988.
Schoors, A., Jesaja, BOT, Roermond 1972.
, Historical Information in Isaiah 139. In: J. van Ruiten & M. Vervenne (eds),
Studies in the Book of Isaiah, Fs W.A.M. Beuken, BEThL 132, Leuven 1997, 7593.
, Die Knigreiche Israel und Juda im 8. und 7. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Die assyrische Krise,
Biblische Enzyklopdie Band 5 (eds W. Dietrich & W. Stegemann), Stuttgart 1998.
Schottroff, W., [dy in THAT I (19783), 682701.
, bvq in THAT II (19793), 684689.
Schreiner, J., Sion-Jerusalem. Jahwes Knigssitz. Theologie der Heiligen Stadt im Alten Testament,
StANT 7, Munich 1963.
Schrten, J., Entstehung, Komposition und Wirkungsgeschichte des 118. Psalms, BBB 95,
Weinheim 1995.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 384 1/17/2007 9:24:05 PM

 bibliography 385

Schuman, N.A., Jesaja 28:2329: Een boerengelijkenis als politieke profetie. Ook een
manier van exegetiseren. In: T. Baarda et al. (ed.), Segmenten: Studie op het gebied van
de theologie, VU Amsterdam 1981, 83141.
Schpphaus, J., [lb in TWAT I (1973), 658661.
Schwemer, A.M., Zum Verhltnis von Diatheke und Nomos in den Schriften der
jdischen Diaspora gyptens in hellenistisch-rmischer Zeit. In: F. Avemarie &
H. Lichtenberger (eds), Bund und Tora: Zur theologischen Begriffsgeschichte in alttestamentlicher,
frhjdischer und urchristlicher Tradition, WUNT 92, Tbingen 1996, 67109.
Scobie, C.H.H., Israel and the Nations: An Essay in Biblical Theology, TynB 43.2
(1992), 283305.
Sedlmeier, F., Wer glaubt, der wird nicht weichen ( Jesaja 28,16), TTZ 109 (2000),
3853.
Seebass, H., Beyerle, S., & Grnwaldt, K., rqv in TWAT VIII (1994), 466472.
Seeligmann, I.L., The Septuagint Version of Isaiah. A Discussion of Its Problems, Mededelin-
gen en Verhandelingen no. 9 van het Voor-aziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap Ex
Oriente Lux, Leiden 1948.
Seidl, Th., hgv/ggv in TWAT VIII (1994), 10581065.
Seitz, C.R., Zions Final Destiny. The Development of the Book of Isaiah. A Reassessment of
Isaiah 3639, Minneapolis 1991.
, Book of Isaiah (first Isaiah). In: Anchor Dictionary Bible, New York 1992, III
472488.
, Book of Isaiah (third Isaiah). In: Anchor Dictionary Bible, New York 1992, III
501507.
, On the Question of Divisions Internal to the Book of Isaiah. In: E.H. Lover-
ing (ed.), SBL. SPS 1993 (A), Atlanta, 260266.
, Account A and the Annals of Sennacherib: A Reassessment, JSOT 58 (1993
B), 4757.
, Isaiah 139. IntBCTP, Louisville 1993 (C).
Selman, M.J., Jerusalem in Chronicles. In: R.S. Hess & G.J. Wenham (eds), Zion,
City of Our God, Grand Rapids 1999, 4356.
Selms, A. van, Isaiah 28,913: An Attempt to Give a New Interpretation, ZAW 85
(1973), 332339.
Seybold, K., lmg in TWAT II (1977), 2435.
Shea, W.H., Sennacheribs Second Palestinian Campaign, JBL 104 (1985), 401
418.
Simian-Yofre, H., Fabry, H.-J., hF,m' in TWAT IV (1984), 818826.
Skarsaune, O., Scriptural Interpretation in the Second and Third Centuries. In:
M. Saeb (ed.), Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. The History of Its Interpretation I/1, Gttingen
1996, 373450.
Smelik, K.A.D., Zegt toch tot Hizkia; een voorbeeld van prophetische geschiedschrij-
ving. In: K.A. Deurloo et al. (ed.), ACEBT 2, Kampen 1981, 5067.
, Distortion of Old Testament Prophecy: The Purpose of Isaiah xxxvi and
xxxvii. In: J.C. de Moor et al., Crises and Perspectives. Studies in Ancient Near Eastern
Polytheism, Biblical Theology, Palestinian Archaeology and International Literature, OTS 24,
Leiden 1986, 7093.
, King Hezekiah Advocates True Prophecy. Remarks on Isaiah xxxvi and xxxvii
// II Kings xviii and xix. In: K.A.D. Smelik, Converting the Past, Studies in Ancient
Israelite and Moabite Historiography, OTS 28, Leiden 1992, 93128.
Smith, J.Z., Jerusalem: The City as Place. In: P.S. Hawkins (ed.), Civitas. Religious
Interpretations of the City, Atlanta 1986, 2538.
Snijders, L.A., Jesaja I, POT, Nijkerk 1969.
, rwz/rz in TWAT II (1977), 556564.
Snodgrass, K.R., I Peter II.110: Its Formation and Literary Affinities, NTS 24
(1977), 97106.
, The Use of the Old Testament in the New. In: G.K. Beale (ed.), The Right

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 385 1/17/2007 9:24:05 PM

 386 bibliography

Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, Grand
Rapids 1994, 2951 (originally published in D.A. Black & D.S. Dockery, New Testa-
ment Criticism and Interpretation, Grand Rapids 1991).
Soggin, J.A., lvm, THAT I (19783), 930933.
, An Introduction to the History of Israel and Judah. Second, completely revised and
updated edition, London 1993.
Sperber, A., The Bible in Aramaic, Vol. III: The Latter Prophets According to Targum Jonathan,
Leiden 1962.
, A Historical Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. A Presentation of Problems with Suggestions to
Their Solution, Leiden 1966.
Spieckermann, H., Juda unter Assur in der Sargonidenzeit, Gttingen 1982.
, Stadtgott und Gottesstadt. Beobachtungen im Alten Orient und im Alten
Testament, Bib. 73 (1992), 131.
Sthli, H.-P., hag in THAT I (19783), 379382.
, [y in THAT I (19783), 748753.
Stanley, C.D., Paul and the Language of Scripture. Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and
Contemporary Literature, Cambridge 1992.
, Arguing with Scripture. The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul, New York-
London 2004.
Stansell, G., Isaiah 32: Creative Redaction in the Isaiah Tradition. In: K.H. Richards
(ed.), SBL.SPS 1983, Chico, 112.
, Isaiah 2833: Blest Be the Tie that Binds (Isaiah Together). In: R.F. Melugin
& M.A. Sweeney (eds), New Visions of Isaiah, JSOT.S 214, Sheffield 1996, 68103.
Steck, O.H., Jerusalemer Vorstellungen vom Frieden und ihre Abwandlungen in der
Prophetie des alten Israels. In: G. Liedke (ed.), FriedenBibelKirche, Stuttgart-
Munich 1972 (A), 7595.
, Friedensvorstellungen im alten Jerusalem. Psalmen. Jesaja. Deutero-jesaja, ThSt 111, Zurich
1972 (B).
, Strmungen theologischer Tradition im Alten Israel. In: O.H. Steck, Wahrneh-
mungen Gottes im Alten Testament. Gesammelte Studien, TB 70, Munich 1982, 291317.
, Zion als Gelnde und Gestalt. berlegungen zur Wahrnehmung Jerusalems als
Stadt und Frau im Alten Testaments, ZThK 86 (1989), 261281.
, Die erste Jesajarolle von Qumran (1QIsa). Schreibweise als Leseanleitung fr ein Prophetenbuch,
SBS 173/1 and 173/2 (Textheft), Stuttgart 1998.
Stegemann, U., Der Restgedanke bei Isaias, BZ 13 (1969), 163186.
Steins, G., yx in TWAT VI (1989), 10281034.
Stemberger, G., Exegetical Contacts between Christians and Jews in the Roman
Empire. In: M. Saeb (ed.), Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. The History of Its Interpretation
I/1, Gttingen 1996, 569486.
Stenning, J.F., The Targum of Isaiah. Edited with a Translation, Oxford 1949.
Stewart, A.C., The Covenant with Death in Isaiah 28, ET 100 (1988), 375377.
Stinespring, W.F., Daughter of Zion. In: The Interpreters Dictionary of the BibleSuppl.,
Nashville 1976, 985.
Stolz, F., mh in THAT I (19783), 502504.
, wyx in THAT II (19792), 543551.
, jwn in THAT II (19792), 4346.
, Strukturen und Figuren im Kult von Jerusalem. Studien zur altorientalischen, vor- und frh-
israelitischen Religion, BZAW 118, Berlin 1970.
, Der Streit um die Wirklichkeit in der Sdreichsprophetie des 8. Jahrhunderts,
WuD 12 (1973), 930.
Stuhlmacher, P., Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band 2. Von der Paulusschule bis zur
Johannesoffenbarung. Der Kanon und seine Auslegung, Gttingen 1999.
Sweeney, M.A., The Book of Isaiah in Recent Research, CRBS 1 (1993A), 141
162.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 386 1/17/2007 9:24:06 PM

 bibliography 387

, On Multiple Settings in the Book of Isaiah. In: E.H. Lovering Jr. (ed.), SBL.
SPS 1993, Atlanta 1993 (B), 267273.
, Isaiah 139. With an Introduction to Prophetic Literature, FOTL 16, Grand Rapids
1996.
Talmon, S., The Biblical Concept of Jerusalem, JES 8 (1971), 300316.
Talstra, E., Oude en Nieuwe Lezers. Een inleiding in de methoden van uitleg van het Oude Testa-
ment, Ontwerpen deel II, Kampen 2002.
, Zou er ook wetenschap zijn bij de Allerhoogste? (Psalm 73:11), inaugural address,
Amsterdam 2003.
Tan, K.H., The Zion Traditions and the Aims of Jesus, MSSNTS 91, Cambridge 1997.
Tanghe, V., Dichtung und Ekel in Jesaja XXVIII 713, VT 43 (1993), 235260.
Tate, M.E., The Book of Isaiah in Recent Study. In: J.W. Watts & P.R. House (eds),
Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve, Fs J.D.W. Watts, JSOT.S 235,
Sheffield 1996, 2256.
Thexton, S.C., A Note on Isaiah XXVIII 25 and 28, VT 2 (1952), 8183.
Thomas Aquinas, Expositio Super Isaiam Ad Litteram. In: Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae De
Aquino, Iussu Leonis XIII P.M. Edita, Tomus XXVIII, Rome 1974.
Toorn, K. van der, Echoes of Judaean Necromancy in Isaiah 28,722, ZAW 100
(1988), 199217.
, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel. Continuity and Change in the Forms of
Religious Life, SHCANE 7, Leiden 1996.
Tov, E., The Text of Isaiah at Qumran. In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writ-
ing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT-S 52,
Leiden 1997, 491511.
Trnkle, H., Q.S.F. Tertulliani Adversus Iudaeos. Mit Einleitung und kritischem Kommentar,
Wiesbaden 1964.
Tromp, N.J., Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Nether World in the Old Testament, Rome
1969.
Tropper, J., Nekromantie: Totenbefragung im Alten Orient und im Alten Testament, Neukirchen-
Vluyn 1989.
Tsevat, M., jb in TWAT I (1973), 588592.
Ulrich, E., An Index to the Contents of the Isaiah Manuscripts from the Judean
Desert. In: C.C. Broyles & C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah.
Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, Vol. 2, VT.S 52, Leiden 1997, 477480.
Vanoni, G., zgr in TWAT VII (1993), 326330.
Veenhof, K.R., Geschichte des Alten Orients bis zur Zeit Alexanders des Groen, GAT 11,
Gttingen 2001.
Vermeylen, J., Du prophte Isae lApocalyptique: Isae, IXXXV, miroir dun demi-millnaire
dexprience religieuse en Isral I, Paris 1977.
, (ed.), The Book of Isaiah. Le livre dIsae. Les oracles et leurs relectures. Unit et complexit
de louvrage, Leuven 1989.
, Hypothses sur lOrigine dIsae 3639. In: J. van Ruiten & M. Vervenne
(eds), Studies in the Book of Isaiah, Fs W.A.M. Beuken, BEThL 132, Leuven 1997,
95118.
Versteeg, J.P., Het gebruik van het Oude Testament door het Nieuwe Testament,
met name in het evangelie naar Matthes. In: J.P. Versteeg, Geest, ambt en uitzicht.
Theologische opstellen, Kampen 1989, 3242.
Vetter, D., hnh, THAT I (19783), 504507.
, hzj in THAT I (19783), 533537.
, har in THAT II (19792), 692701.
Vogt, E., Der Aufstand Hiskias und die Belagerung Jerusalems 701 v. Chr., AnBib 106, Rome
1986.
Vollmer, J., Geschichtliche Rckblicke und Motive in der Prophetie des Amos, Hosea und Jesaja,
BZAW 119, Berlin 1971.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 387 1/17/2007 9:24:06 PM

 388 bibliography

, hc[ in THAT II (19792), 359370.

Vonk, C., Jesaja, VL, Barendrecht 1980.
Voorwinde, S., Old Testament Quotations in Peters Epistle, VR 49 (1987), 316.
Vries, S.J. de, From Old Revelation to New. A Tradition-Historical and Redaction-Critical Study
of Temporal Transitions in Prophetic Prediction, Grand Rapids 1995.
Vriezen, Th.C., Jahwe en zijn stad, Amsterdam 1962 (A).
, Essentials of the Theology of Isaiah. In: B.W. Anderson (ed.), Israels Prophetic
Heritage, Fs J. Muilenberg, New York 1962 (B), 128146.
Waard, J. de, A Handbook on Isaiah. Textual Criticism and the Translator, Vol. 1, Winona
Lake 1997.
Wagner, J.R., Heralds of the Good News. Isaiah and Paul In Concert in the Letter to the Romans,
NT.S 101, Leiden 2002.
, Isaiah in Romans and Galatians. In: S. Moyise & M.J.J. Menken (eds), Isaiah
in the New Testament, London-New York 2005, 117132.
Wagner, S., rqy in TWAT III (1982), 855865.
, hryIII in TWAT III (1982), 920930.
, rts in TWAT V (1986), 967977.
Wanke, G., Die Zionstheologie der Korachiten in ihrem traditionsgeschichtlichen Zusammenhang,
BZAW 97, Berlin 1966.
Waschke, G., smr in TWAT VII (1993), 532534.
, fwv in TWAT VII (1993), 11821187.
Watson, W.G.E., Review of W.H. Irwin, Isaiah 2833: Translation with Philological Notes,
Bib. 59 (1978), 132134.
, Gender-Matched Synonymous Parallelism in the Old Testament, JBL 99
(1980), 321341.
, Classical Hebrew Poetry, A Guide to Its Techniques, JSOT.S 26, Sheffield 1984.
, Traditional Techniques in Classical Hebrew Verse, JSOT.S 170, Sheffield
1994.
Watts, J.D.W., Isaiah 133, WBC, Waco 1985.
, Isaiah 3466, WBC, Waco 1987.
Watts, J.W., & House, P.R., (eds), Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve,
Fs J.D.W. Watts, JSOT.S 235, Sheffield 1996.
Webb, B.G., Zion in Transformation. A Literary Approach to Isaiah. In: D.J.A. Clines,
S.E. Fowl & S.E. Porter, The Bible in Three Dimensions. Essays in Celebration of Forty Years
of Biblical Studies in the University of Sheffield, JSOT.S 87, Sheffield 1990.
Webb, B., The Message of Isaiah: On Eagles Wings, TBST, Leicester 1996.
Wehmeier, G., rts in THAT II (19783), 173181.
Weinfeld, M., tyrb in TWAT I (1973), 781808.
, Zion and Jerusalem as Religious and Political Capital: Ideology and Utopia.
In: R.E. Friedmann (ed.), The Poet and the Historian: Essays in Literary and Historical
Biblical Criticism, Chicago 1983, 75115.
Wernberg-Mller, P., Reflections on the Biblical Material in the Manual of Discipline,
StTh 9 (1955), 4066.
, Studies in the Defective Spellings in the Isaiah-Scroll of St. Marks Monastery,
JSSt 3 (1958), 244264.
, Observations on the Hebrew Participle, ZAW 71 (1959), 5467.
Werner, W., Eschatologische Texte in Jes 139. Messias, Heiliger Rest, Vlker, FZB 46, Wrz-
burg 1982.
Westermann, C., Grundformen Prophetischer Rede, BEvTh 31, Munich 19683 (1st edition:
1960).
, db[ in THAT II (19792), 182200.
Westphal, G, Jahwes Wohnsttten nach den Anschauungen der alten Hebrer. Eine alttestamentliche
Untersuchung, BZAW 15, Giessen 1908.
Whedbee, J.W., Isaiah and Wisdom, Nashville-New York 1971.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 388 1/17/2007 9:24:06 PM

 bibliography 389

Wildberger, H., Die Vlkerwallfahrt zum Zion. Jes. ii 15, VT 7 (1957), 6281.
, Jesajas Verstndnis der Geschichte. In: Congress Volume Bonn 1962, VT.S 9,
Leiden 1963, 83117.
, Jesaja 112, BKAT X/1, Neukirchen 1972.
, ma in THAT I (19783), 177209.
, rav in THAT II (19792), 844855.
, Jesaja 2839, BKAT X/3, Neukirchen 1982.
Wilk, F., Die Bedeutung des Jesajabuches fr Paulus, FRLANT 179, Gttingen 1998.
Williams, J.G., The Alas-Oracles of the Eighth Century Prophets, HUCA 38 (1967),
7591.
Williamson, H.G.M., Hezekiah and the Temple. In: M.V. Fox et al. (ed.), Texts, Temples,
and Traditions. A Tribute to Menahem Haran, Winona Lake 1996, 4752.
Willis, J.T., David and Zion in the Theology of the Deuteronomistic History: Theo-
logical Ideas in 2 Samuel 57. In: B.F. Batto & K.L. Roberts (eds), David and Zion,
Fs J.J.M. Roberts, Winona Lake 2004, 125140.
Wilson, R.R., The City in the OT. In: P.S. Hawkins (ed.), Civitas. Religious Interpreta-
tions of the City, Atlanta 1986, 313.
Woan, S., The Psalms in 1 Peter. In: S. Moyise & M.J.J. Menken, The Psalms in the
New Testament, London-New York 2004, 213229.
Wolff, H.W., Die Begrndungen der prophetischen Heils- und Unheilssprche. In:
Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament, Munich (19733), 935 (originally published in
ZAW 52 (1934), 122).
, Das Zitat im Prophetenspruch. Eine Studie zur prophetischen Verkndigungs-
weise. In: Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament, Munich (19733), 36129 (originally
published in: Beiheft 4 zu Evangelische Theologie, Munich 1937).
, Dodekapropheton 1: Hosea, BKAT XIV/1, Neukirchen 1961.
, Dodekapropheton 2: Joel und Amos, BKAT XIV/2, Neukirchen 1969.
Wong, G.C.I., On Visits and Visions in Isaiah XXIX 67, VT 45 (1995),
370376.
, Isaiahs Opposition to Egypt in Isaiah XXXI 13, VT 46 (1996), 392401.
Woude, A.S. van der, rWx in THAT II (19792), 538543.
, Zion as Primeval Stone in Zechariah 3 and 4. In: W. Claassen, Text and Con-
text. Old Testament and Semitic Studies, Fs F.C. Fensham, JSOT.S 48, Sheffield 1988,
237248.
Younger, K.L., Ancient Conquest Accounts. A Study in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical History
Writing, JSOT.S 98, Sheffield 1990.
Yurco, F.J., The Shabaka-Shebitku Coregency and the Supposed Second Campaign
of Sennacherib against Judah: A Critical Assessment, JBL 110/1 (1991), 3545.
Ziegler, J., Septuaginta auctoritate Societas litterarum Gottingensis editum Vol. XIV Isaias, Gt-
tingen 1939.
, Isaias, EB, Wrzburg 1948.
, Isaias, Septuaginta 14, Gttingen 1967.
, Eusebius Werke, Band IX: Der Jesajakommentar, Berlin 1975.
Zimmerli, W., Jesaja und Hiskia. In: H. Gese & H.P. Rger, Wort und Geschichte,
Fs K. Elliger, AOAT 18, Neukirchen 1973, 199208.
Zobel, H.-J., ywh in TWAT II (1977), 382388.
, rfm in TWAT IV (1984), 827842.
, fb,ve in TWAT VII (1993), 966974.
Zwickel, W., Die Wirtschaftsreform des Hiskia und die Sozialkritik der Propheten des
8. Jahrhunderts, EvTh 59 (1999), 356377.

DEKKER_f10_367-389.indd 389 1/17/2007 9:24:06 PM

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 390 1/17/2007 9:24:22 PM
 INDEX OF AUTHORS

Ackroyd, P.R. 108
Ahlstrm, G.W. 91, 94, 95, 96, 98, 100
Albertz, R. 231
Albl, M.C. 23, 37
Albrektson, B. 300
Alonso Schkel, L. 113, 154, 178, 185
Alt, A. 284, 291
Amsler, S. 161
Andr, G. 222
Asen, B.A. 206, 208, 212, 214
Augustine, A. 34, 4045, 46, 48, 53,
62, 341
Auvray, P. 122, 222
Avemarie, F. 31
Barnard, L.W. 36
Barstad, H.M. 170
Barth, Ch. 114, 155, 190, 196
Barth, H. 245, 248, 323, 333
Barth, J. 117
Barthel, J. 116, 119, 123, 150, 179,
184, 192, 196, 201, 206, 207, 211,
216, 221, 227, 228, 229, 232, 240,
245, 246, 248
Barthlemy, D. 223, 228
Barton, J. 3
Bauckham, R. 19
Baumgartner, W. (HALAT) 114, 120,
134, 136, 143, 153, 179, 187, 222, 227
Baumgartner, W. (KBL) 120, 134, 136,
143, 151, 153, 179, 186, 222, 227
Beale, G.K. 356
Becker, U. 1, 3, 4, 85, 192, 193, 243,
245, 327
Becking, B.E.J.H. 75, 91, 97, 98, 100
Bentzen, A. 59, 74, 88
Ben Zvi, E. 102, 103
Berder, M. 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 29
Berges, U. 3, 56, 101, 244, 245, 246,
247, 248, 258, 260, 261, 269, 328,
330, 336, 357
Betz, O. 17, 27, 28, 131, 137
Beuken, W.A.M. x, 75, 76, 81, 83, 84,
119, 126, 129, 130, 135, 138, 140,
142, 143, 144, 145, 147, 150, 151,
152, 153, 156, 157, 158, 163, 164,
165, 178, 180, 185, 186, 191, 192,
193, 196, 200, 205, 207, 208, 209,
213, 220, 221, 228, 229, 234, 240,
241, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250,
252, 253, 257, 323, 327, 329, 336, 337
Beyerle, S. 150
Beyse, K.-M. 142, 143, 145
Billerbeck, P. (StrB) 28, 29, 30, 58
Blenkinsopp, J. 82, 117, 119, 120, 121,
125, 130, 170, 171, 176
Boehmer, J. 82, 134
Boertien, M. 359
Bhl, F. 30, 31
Borowski, O. 95, 96
Botterweck, G.J. 184, 230
Branson, R.D. 223
Braulik, G. 193
Bright, J. 90
Brongers, H.A. 221
Brooke, G.J. 25, 26, 27, 114
Brueggemann, W. 5, 122, 161, 187,
250
Buber, M. 291
Buhl, F.P.W. 56, 120
Bhlmann, W. 113, 133
Burden, J.J. 233
Burns, J.B. 123
Burrows, M. 25
Cahill, M. 20, 23, 138
Calvin, J. 6, 10, 5153, 55, 63, 184,
327, 341
Carroll, R.P. 251
Cheyne, T.K. 54, 127, 234
Childs, B.S. 4, 73, 82, 83, 84, 97, 101,
125, 126, 129, 230, 241, 244, 247,
249, 257, 258, 325, 329, 335, 337
Chilton, B.D. 28, 268
Clements, R.E. 57, 76, 77, 79, 80, 83,
94, 103, 115, 122, 136, 147, 156, 157,
159, 161, 166, 178, 187, 193, 196,
201, 202, 209, 221, 222, 226, 231,
233, 234, 240, 244, 253, 314315,
318, 333, 334
Clifford, R.J. 315
Clines, D.J.A. (DCH) 113, 137, 140,
143, 153, 179
Conrad, E.W. 4
Conrad, J. 231
Cyprian 34, 3739, 40, 43, 47, 62, 340

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 391 1/17/2007 9:24:22 PM

 392 index of authors

Cyril of Alexandria 34, 4547, 48, 62, Fey, R. 82, 84, 88, 89, 148
340 Fishbane, M. 360
Fischer, B. ix
Davies, P.R. 96 Fischer, J. 54
Day, J. 121, 170, 171 Flint, P.W. 25
Daut, R. le 30 Flo, J.P. 188
Deck, S. 184, 206 Fohrer, G. 57, 60, 75, 76, 77, 114, 120,
Deferrari, R.J. 44, 45 122, 125, 128, 136, 147, 157, 162,
Delitzsch, F. 54, 60, 74, 85, 125, 128, 187, 191, 202, 222, 227, 228, 233,
152, 216, 226, 233 234, 240, 246, 250, 308, 318, 320,
Dietrich, W. 76, 77, 79, 80, 115, 117, 325, 335, 349
134, 136, 152, 162, 178, 181, 187, Fokkelman, J. 3, 140, 145
192, 201, 240, 333, 335 Frahm, E. 98
Dimant, D. 26 Freedman, D.N. 230
Doble, P. 21 Fuhs, H.F. 179
Dodd, C.H. 23, 359, 365 Fullerton, K. 115, 117, 125, 127, 134,
Dohmen, Ch. 27, 131 136, 142, 148, 151, 152, 158
Dommershausen, W. 179, 226
Donner, H. 56, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 114, Galil, G. 75, 92, 94
134, 136, 142, 146, 149, 160, 166, Gallagher, W.R. 97, 98, 99, 100, 102,
178, 192, 194, 196, 201, 202, 207, 106
210, 211 Galling, K. 120, 122, 137, 284, 291,
Doyle, B. xi 293
Doyle, R. 170 Gamberoni, J. 123, 161
Driver, G.R. 54, 75, 120, 122, 125, Garcia Martnez, F. 26, 27
136, 143, 151, 155, 186, 187, 188, Gerleman, G. 170
207, 208, 210, 212 Gerstenberger, E. 180, 195, 205
Duhm, B. 3, 56, 60, 76, 78, 80, 113, Gese, H. 58, 117, 168, 225, 288,
118, 120, 122, 125, 134, 150, 152, 297298, 348
153, 165, 179, 185, 186, 207, 211, Gilula, M. 206
221, 222, 226, 227, 228, 240, 245, Goldberg, J. 94, 95, 97, 99, 100
246, 285 Gonalves, F.J. 76, 80, 82, 90, 91, 95,
Dumortier, J. 46 96, 97, 98, 101, 114, 116, 122, 123,
126, 130, 134, 137, 140, 144, 178,
Ehrman, B.D. 35, 36 184, 185, 187, 192, 193, 198, 200,
Ehrlich, E.L. 228 201, 258, 334
Eichrodt, W. 56, 57, 60, 75, 77, 82, Good, E.M. 122
83, 114, 118, 122, 141, 157, 202, 222, Grg, M. 188, 206
226, 228, 233 Gowan, D.E. 319, 320
Eiler, D.L. 310 Grabbe, L.L. 98, 100
Eifeldt, O. 288289, 303, 349 Graffy, A. 57, 111, 116, 117, 119, 156
Ellis, E.E. 18, 23, 356, 358, 360, 361 Gremann, H. 292
Enns, P. 358 Gro, H. 114, 169, 196
Epstein, I. 31 Gruber, M.I. 171
Ernst, J. 181 Grnwaldt, K. 150
Eusebius of Caesarea 41, 46 Guindon, R. 49
Evans, C.A. 327, 356 Gunkel, H. 284285, 289, 292, 294,
Evans, E. 37, 38 295
Ewald, H. 59 Guthe, F.W.L.H. 80
Exum, J.C. 76, 77, 114, 136, 149, 153,
161, 164, 184, 185, 195, 196, 209, Hagelia, H. 141, 142
212, 217, 240, 253 Hallo, W.W. 187
Halpern, B. 114, 174, 184, 188
Fabry, H.-J. 174 Hardmeier, C. 3, 86, 102, 335
Fewell, D.N. 103, 105, 106 Harl, M. 132

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 392 1/17/2007 9:24:23 PM

 index of authors 393

Harris, J.R. 23, 137 Jong, H. de xi, 193, 364, 366

Hartenstein, F. 118, 135, 143 Joon, P. ( J-M) 60, 115, 124, 126, 139,
Hasel, G.F. 200 140, 151, 161, 164, 211, 212, 221,
Hausmann, J. 212 225, 228
Hayes, J.H. 87, 88, 89, 95, 96,
300301, 312, 348 Kaiser, O. 58, 76, 77, 80, 85, 114, 117,
Hays, R.B. 356, 360 126, 147, 149, 152, 159, 161, 178,
Healey, J.F. 169, 220, 226 187, 193, 196, 202, 207, 210, 220,
Heider, G.C. 170 221, 222, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228,
Hendel, R.S. 96 231, 233, 234, 243, 245, 246, 326327
Herbert, A.S. 57, 187, 208 Kautzsch, E. (GKG) 124, 125, 126,
Hermisson, H.-J. 85 127, 135, 138, 139, 140, 151, 160,
Herrmann, S. 82, 86, 90, 320 161, 164, 180, 189, 190, 194, 195,
Hess, R.S. 102 207, 210, 211, 227, 228
Hillers, D.R. 205 Kedar-Kopfstein, B. 190
Hitzig, F. 60 Kellermann, D. 206, 225, 229
Hffken, P. 3, 101, 128, 215, 234, 243, Kennet, R.H. 187, 188
244, 245, 326 Kilian, R. 76, 79, 85, 86, 114, 126,
Hoffmann, H.-D. 95 162, 166, 178, 187, 193, 226, 234,
Hoffmann, H.W. 325326, 328 326, 328, 335
Hoftijzer, J. xi Kimchi, D. 138
Hofius, O. 365 Kissane, E.J. 60, 74, 88, 152, 186, 202,
Holladay, W.L. 114 207, 210, 212, 226, 227
Honan, D.J. 45 Kitchen, K.A. 98
Hoop, R. de 66 Klopfenstein, M.A. 122, 136, 150, 172
Huber, F. 60, 114, 121, 126, 136, 140, Knibb, M.A. 25
322, 335 Knijff, H.W. de 49, 50
Hbner, H. 356 Knipping, B. 196
Hulst, A.R. 115 Knobel, A. 60
Humbert, P. 124 Koch, D.-A. 15, 22, 356, 365
Hutter, M. 90, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 100 Koch, K. 305
Khler, L. 120, 136, 137, 139
Ibn Ezra 138 Khler, L. (HALAT) 114, 120, 134,
Irvine, S.A. 87, 88, 89 136, 143, 153, 179, 187, 222, 227
Irwin, W.H. 60, 85, 114, 125, 140, 159, Khler, L. (KBL) 120, 134, 136, 143,
164, 173, 187, 221, 223, 227, 228 151, 153, 179, 186, 222, 227
Israelstamm, J. 32 Knig, F.E. 127
Konkel, A.H. 101
Jackson, J.J. 174, 187 Kooij, A. van der 12, 97, 100, 102,
Janowski, B. 316 132, 188, 267, 270
Janzen, W. 204, 205 Korpel, M.C.A. 66, 67, 68, 125, 134
Jenni, E. 126, 136, 140, 205 Kosmala, H. 216
Jeppesen, K. 59, 84, 85 Kraft, R.A. 35
Jepsen, A. 141 Krtzschmar, O.R. 120
Jeremias, J. ( Joachim) 13, 23, 28, 29, Kraus, H.-J. 29, 54, 289291, 293, 296,
135, 138 297, 299, 312, 317, 348
Jeremias, J. ( Johannes) 286 Krauss, S. 139, 215
Jeremias, J. ( Jrg) 179, 300, 310312, Kronholm, T. 194
316, 349, 350 Kutsch, E. 120
Jerome ix, 34, 4045, 46, 48, 49, 53,
62, 341, 356 Laato, A. 97, 98, 100, 101, 314, 318,
Jobes, K.H. 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17 323, 335
John Chrysostom 45, 46 Laberge, L. 127, 207, 208, 210, 212,
Johnson, B. 146 246
Johnston, W.B. 53 Landy, F. 210

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 393 1/17/2007 9:24:23 PM

 394 index of authors

Lang, B. 151, 163 Muller, K. 14, 16, 17, 19

LeBas, E.E. 137 Mnderlein, G. 229
Leeuwen, C. van 97, 172 Muraoka, T. ( J-M) 60, 115, 124, 126,
Lettinga, J.P. xi, 210, 212, 228 139, 140, 151, 161, 164, 211, 212,
Levenson, J.D. 315, 316, 319 221, 225, 228
Lewis, T.J. 174, 176 Muszynski, H. 27, 131
Liedke, G. 184
Lindars, B. 23 Naaman, N. 90, 95, 98, 100, 101
Lindblom, J. 2, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 74, Nicholson, P.T. 137
82, 88, 89, 202 Niehr, H. 229
Lipiski, E. 115 Noordegraaf, A. 22
Loretz, O. 207 Norin, S. 96
Lundbom, J. 230 Noth, M. 286288, 289, 290, 293, 296,
Luther, M. 6, 10, 5153, 62, 63, 158, 303, 310, 348, 349
341
Lutz, H.M. 312 OConnell, R.H. 243, 244
Oeming, M. 138
Maass, F. 151, 288 Ohmann, H.M. 54
Maiburg, U. 29, 40, 41 OKane, M.J. 245
Marbck, J. 159 Ollenburger, B.C. 299, 302, 310, 314,
Mare, W.H. 54 315317, 318, 319, 321, 322, 323,
Marti, K. 56, 75, 76, 77, 79, 118, 120, 331, 332, 333, 335
125, 127, 133, 150, 153, 162, 185, Olley, J.W. 73, 75, 77, 103, 108, 124
187, 207, 211, 221, 222, 226, 228, Oosterhoff, B.J. x, 92
234, 295 Oss, D.A. 12, 16, 20, 22
Martin-Achard, R. 163 Oswalt, J.N. 57, 58, 76, 115, 118, 122,
Maurer, Chr. 14 135, 143, 156, 160, 161, 181, 193,
McKelvey, R.J. 23 194, 208
McLaughlin, J.L. 174, 175, 176, 181, Otto, E. 266, 314, 318, 336
182, 206 Otzen, B. 137
McMichael, S.J. 49
Meinhold, J. 30, 31 Peels, H.G.L. x, 247
Melugin, R.F. 82, 83, 85, 128, 157 Perdue, L.G. 5
Menken, M.J.J. 356 Peter Chrysologus of Revenna 41
Merklein, H. 23, 27, 138 Petersen, C. 184
Mettinger, T.N.D. 319 Petersen, D.L. 80, 126, 136, 147, 149,
Meyer, R. (HAHAT) 120, 134, 137, 161, 178, 184, 187, 213
143, 151, 179, 227 Pfeiffer, G. 187
Millard, A.R. 101 Polman, A.D.R. 43
Miller, J.M. 95, 96 Pope, M.H. 174
Mittmann, S. 94, 97, 98, 100 Poznanski, S. 117
Mller, H. 158 Preu, H.D. 193, 314, 336
Monahan, G. 44 Pringle, W. 52, 53
Montgomery, J.A. 187 Procksch, O. 54, 57, 74, 75, 76, 79,
Montgomery Hitchcock, F.R. 143 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 114, 117, 120, 124,
Moor, J.C. de 66, 68, 125, 134, 154, 125, 127, 134, 142, 151, 155, 157,
155 165, 179, 187, 194, 201, 202, 207,
Morrison, A.W. 53 210, 211, 212, 221, 222, 225, 226,
Mosis, R. 126, 150, 172, 219 227, 231, 233, 240, 335
Motyer, J.A. 60, 233 Prostmeier, F.R. 36
Moyise, S. 23, 356, 358 Puech, E. 173
Mowinckel, S. 56, 289, 290, 291, 292 Pulikottil, P. 25, 131, 132, 150, 268
Mulder, M.C. x
Mller, H.-P. 179, 229 Quodvultdeus of Carthage 42

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 394 1/17/2007 9:24:23 PM

 index of authors
Rabbinowitz, J. 32
Rad, G. von 146, 162, 180, 285286,
289, 292, 295296, 297, 299, 309,
310, 312, 325, 327, 328
Rashi 138
Rendtorff, R. 4, 5, 271, 273, 327, 330
Ridderbos, J. 54, 186, 202
Ridderbos, N.H. 141
Ringgren, H. 162, 196, 222
Rise, G. 186
Roberts, J.J.M. 2, 28, 58, 76, 78, 83,
85, 114, 125, 126, 127, 135, 136, 137,
138, 140, 143, 194, 312314, 315,
316, 319, 320, 324, 332, 336, 337, 350
Rogerson, J. 96
Rohland, E. 57, 77, 79, 80, 120, 126,
134, 152, 283, 292295, 296, 297,
299, 302, 308, 309, 310, 312, 313,
320, 348
Rost, L. 208, 303
Rudman, D. 103, 104, 105
Rger, H.P. 288
Ruppert, L. 232
Rterswrden, U. 113, 184
Saeb, M. 189, 223
Sawyer, J.F.A. ix, 49, 178
Scharbert, J. 74
Schelkle, K.H. 12
Scherer, K. 113, 133
Schmid, H. 291292, 296, 312
Schmidt, B.B. 171, 174, 181
Schmidt, H. (Hans) 29, 30, 32, 56, 57,
60, 87, 117, 122, 188, 202, 306
Schmidt, W.H. 131, 301, 312
Schmoldt, H. 186
Schneider, D. 76, 114, 147, 161, 202
Schoors, A. 56, 57, 75, 76, 78, 91, 95,
159, 187, 202, 222, 226, 228, 233,
234, 250
Schottroff, W. 184
Schreiner, J. 126, 158, 303308, 312,
333, 349
Schrten, J. 20, 21, 29
Schuman, N.A. 223, 225, 226, 227,
229, 230, 231, 233
Schpphaus, J. 212
Schwemer, A.M. 124
Sedlmeier, F. 141
Seebass, H. 150
Seeligmann, I.L. 126, 132, 133, 142
Seidl, Th. 178
Seierstad, I.P. 186
Seitz, C.R. 97, 99, 245
DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 395
395
Sellheim, R. 288
Sellin, E. 54, 292
Selms, A. van 185, 187
Seybold, K. 186
Shea, W.H. 97
Shaw, I. 137
Silva, M. 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17
Simian-Yofre, H. 230, 240
Skarsaune, O. 23, 34
Slotki, J.J. 32
Smelik, K.A.D. 101, 102, 104, 106, 107
Snodgrass, K.R. 13, 17, 22, 23, 48, 358
Snijders, L.A. 56, 75, 76, 77, 128, 159,
163, 187, 233, 234, 327
Soggin, J.A. 114, 169
Spieckermann, H. 95
Sthli, H.-P. 206, 232
Stamm, J. (HALAT) 114, 120, 134,
136, 143, 153, 179, 187, 222, 227
Stanley, C.D. 12, 15, 16, 18, 20, 356,
357, 358, 361, 365
Stansell, G. 245, 247, 248, 249, 251,
252, 253
Steck, O.H. 130, 131, 301302
Steins, G. 206, 211
Stemberger, G. 127
Stewart, A.C. 76, 166177, 345
Stinespring, W.F. 269
Stolz, F. 229, 266, 301, 302, 311, 312,
348
Stuhlmacher, P. 356, 358
Sweeney, M.A. 3, 75, 76, 117, 188,
233, 243, 245, 248, 327, 337
Tadmor, H. 90
Talstra, E. 5, 9, 357
Tan, K.H. 27
Tanghe, V. 76, 77, 181, 189, 190
Tate, M.E. 3, 4, 244
Tertullian 34, 3739, 47, 62, 340
Theodore of Mopsuestia 45, 46
Theodoret of Cyrus 34, 4547, 48, 62,
341
Thexton, S.C. 226
Thiele, E.R. 90
Thomas Aquinas 10, 4950, 62, 341
Tigchelaar, E.J.C. 26, 27
Toorn, K. van der 76, 166177, 187,
191, 345
Tov, E. 130
Trnkle, H. 37
Tromp, N.J. 173
Tropper, J. 169
Tsevat, M. 57, 136, 137, 143
1/17/2007 9:24:23 PM
 396 index of authors

Ulrich, E. 25 Wernberg-Mller, P. 137

Werner, W. 326, 335
Vanoni, G. 161, 162 Westermann, C. 77, 162, 205
Veenhof, K.R. x, 87, 94, 98 Whedbee, J.W. 84, 205, 220, 221, 223,
Virgulin, S. 54 230, 232, 233, 239
Vermeylen, J. 85, 101, 245 Wheelock, J.H. 113
Versteeg, J.P. 361 Wildberger, H. 28, 54, 58, 59, 60, 63,
Vetter, D. 179 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 114,
Vogt, E. 94, 98, 206 117, 120, 121, 126, 128, 129, 130,
Vollmer, J. 162, 163 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 141, 142,
Vonk, C. 54 143, 147, 151, 152, 154, 156, 157,
Voorwinde, S. 18 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 166, 170,
Vries, S.J. de 213 171, 178, 179, 180, 184, 186, 187,
Vriezen, Th.C. 292 190, 192, 193, 194, 196, 202, 206,
207, 209, 210, 211, 222, 224, 225,
Waard, J. de 208, 222, 229 226, 227, 228, 231, 232, 233, 240,
Wagner, J.R. 14, 15, 17, 356, 359, 361 246, 250, 310, 313, 314, 320, 323,
Wagner, S. 139, 184, 223 325, 335
Walsh, G.G. 44, 45 Wilk, F. 14, 16, 356, 361
Wanke, G. 308310, 311, 312, 313, Williams, J.G. 205, 207
318, 320, 349 Woan, S. 20
Waschke, G. 117, 153, 210 Wolff, H.W. 119, 122, 142, 169, 205,
Watson, W.G.E. 113, 114, 115, 120, 219, 326
125, 133, 135, 140, 144, 145, 148, Woude, A.S. van der 29
149, 154, 155, 159, 164, 178, 187,
221, 223 Yurco, F.J. 97
Watts, J.D.W. 4, 58, 227, 228, 233, 244,
245, 258, 264, 327 Ziegler, J. 12, 41, 46, 54, 75, 114, 162,
Weinfeld, M. 120 212, 226, 233
Weiser, A. 292 Zobel, H.-J. 205, 209
Wellhausen, J. 76, 95, 295 Zwickel, W. 96
Weren, W. 3

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 396 1/17/2007 9:24:23 PM

 INDEX OF BIBLICAL TEXTS

Genesis 23:14 181

2:4 31 24:13 146
3:22b 36 27:8 39
4:23 73, 219, 220 28:25 83, 157
11 191 28:49 191
14:1824 291 28:52 103
14:1820 310 30:15 106
28:18 30, 33, 39, 43 32:1 73, 219
41:17 126 32:4 29
41:54 226 32:89 313
49:2 73, 219 32:15,18 29
49:10 289 32:21 172
49:24 29 32:30,31 29
34:10 315
Exodus
3:21 115 Joshua
5:22 115 1:69 208
9:32 222 10 161
14:24 229 10:1014 161
14:25 225, 229 10:10 229
15:14 21 10:11 161
15:1718 292 10:24 195
15:17 193 24 292
17:12 39 24:24 292
19:12,23 308 24:513 292
24:911 120 24:1428 292
28:9,17 42 24:2627 39
28:30 30
28:36 206 Judges
35:3035 223 1:21 284
4:15 229
Leviticus 5:3 73, 219
10:811 179 8:7 225
14:42 32 9:815 233
21:18 160 9:26 103
22:23 160 20:36 103
20:37 143
Numbers
10:33 193 Ruth
24:16 313 2:23 222

Deuteronomy 1 Samuel
4:24 257 1:3,11 288
6:25 146 2:2 29
8:8 222 2:25 180
10:1 32, 58 46 303
12:9 193 4 319
21:11 138 4:4 288

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 397 1/17/2007 9:24:23 PM

 398 index of biblical texts

4:7f 308 2 Kings

5:11 304 4:8 156
6:7 225 7:17,20 153
6:14 39 9:33 153
7:12 39, 40 13:7 225
12:24 231 16:2 91
14:44 125 16:3 170
17:49 39 16:8 99, 107
18:14 95 16:20 91
22:3,32,47 29 17:3 99
23:3 29 17:1723 76
1819 6, 65, 93,
2 Samuel 101108, 310
5 162 18:12 93
5:6 312 18:1 90, 91, 92, 93
5:7 267, 303 18:2 90, 91, 92, 94
5:1725 161, 314 18:3 95
5:25 162 18:4 95
67 297 18:56 95
6 290, 297, 303, 18:5 107, 108
305, 306 18:7a 95
6:2 307 18:8 97
6:3 225 18:9 99
6:11 304 18:10 90, 91, 92
7 26, 290, 297, 298, 18:1316 101
305, 306, 323 18:13 90, 92, 94, 97,
7:16 141, 323 99, 105
12:14 233 18:1416 95, 99, 107
12:30 138 18:14 99
17:28 222 18:1516 93, 107
22:43 226 18:1719:37 101
24 298, 303, 305, 18:1719:9a 101
306 18:17ff 99, 100
24:1517 100 18:17 99, 104
18:1920 103
1 Kings 18:19 104
5:31 138, 139, 307 18:20 104
6:31 125 18:21 103
7:911 138, 139, 307 18:22 103
7:10 139 18:25 104
7:23 145 18:28 104
8 307 18:29 103, 104
8:6 304 18:3132 106
8:16 290 18:31 104
8:56 193 18:32 103, 104
10:2,10,11 138 18:3335 103
11:2939 293 19:1 106
11:36 287 19:4 106
12:120 293 19:67 105
12:16 324 19:6 104
12:2631 293 19:10 103, 105
14:118 287, 293 19:1419 106
15:11 95 19:14 106

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 398 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 index of biblical texts 399

19:19b35 101 Ezra

19:2034 105 3:11 135, 139
19:21 270
19:2228 105 Job
19:29 106 2:9 186
19:31 269, 272 6:56 221
19:3233 100 8:11 221
19:35 100 8:13 230
19:3637 101 9:23 117
20 93, 99 13:17 73, 219
20:111 96 14:10 142
20:6 90, 92, 93, 94 17:13 159
20:1221 96 18:21 230
20:12 94, 96 20:29 230
20:13 93 22:7 194
20:1718 93 27:13 230
21:6 170 31:5 143
21:13 145, 146 31:40 222
22:2 95 33:1 73, 219
23:25 95 34:2 73, 219
37:6 31
1 Chronicles 38:46 145
11:5 267 38:6 31, 138
14:817 161 38:38 31
14:16 162 39:10 220
20:2 138
23:25 194 Psalms
28:16 180 2 290, 306, 314
29:2 138 2:3 164
2:6 269, 294, 298
2 Chronicles 3:5 269, 274
2:9,14 222 9:1213 331
3:6 138 9:12 274
4:2 145 10:6 331
4:8,19 180 11:3 30
8:16 139 13 329
9:1,9,10 138 14:6 123
17:3 95 14:7 274
20:19 294 15:1 269
20:20 141 18:3 29
24:27 126 18:13 209
27:5 222 18:32,47 29
28:21 99, 107 19:15 29
29:3 95 20:3 274, 306
29:8 83, 157 22:20 142
32:123 102 24 288
32:4 96 24:5 146
32:23 93, 99 27:5 83
32:25 93 28:1 29
32:27 138 29:6 142
32:30 96 29:9 284
32:31 93 31:4 29

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 399 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 400 index of biblical texts

33:5 146 73:11 184

34:5 19 73:26 29
34:9 18, 19 74:1 228
38:23 142 74:2 267, 269
40:14 142 74:10,19 228
42:10 29 75:3f 285
43:3 269 76 284, 285, 290, 294,
44:24 228 295, 296, 300, 308,
46 284, 285, 290, 294, 322
295, 296, 300, 308, 76:3 274
310, 322 76:4,6f 294
46:2 123, 331 76:7 294
46:3 294 77:9 228
46:5 274, 294 77:19 229
46:6 294 78 294, 305
46:7 294 78:1 73, 219
46:10 225 78:35 29
46:11 285 78:6572 290
47 289 78:68f 284
47:3 44, 104 78:68 267, 269, 274
47:6 291 78:69 307
47:9 290 79:5 228
48 284, 285, 290, 294, 84 274, 284, 290
295, 296, 300, 308, 84:7f 285
322 84:8 274
48:1 274 87 284, 290
48:2 269 87:1f 307
48:3f 294 87:2 274, 305
48:3 269, 274 87:3 274
48:57 294 89 290
48:6 294 89:27 29
48:9 274 89:47 228
48:12 269 92:16 29
48:13 274 93 289
49:2 73, 219 93:1 206
49:14 230 93:5 284
50:12 31 94:22 29
50:2 274 95:1 29
53:7 274 95:3 104
55:5 142 95:11 193
55:9 143 96 287
62:3,7,8 29 96:6 284
62:9 172 97 287
62:10 172 99 287
65 274 99:2 274
65:2 274 99:9 269
68:16f 284 101:8 274, 306
68:17 267 103:6 146
68:23 285 103:9 228
68:30 274 104:14 226
70:2,6 142 107:14 164
71:3 29 110 306
71:12 142 110:2 274
72 290 110:45 295, 312

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 400 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 index of biblical texts 401

111 44 13:1 113

116:16 164 15:12 113
118:24 21 15:27 146
118:1718 21 19:21 152
118:22ff 39 19:22 146
118:2223 22 20:26 225, 229
118:22 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 20:28 146
28, 29, 30, 33, 36, 21:11 113
37, 40, 41, 42, 44, 21:21 146
47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 23:35 207
52, 53, 61, 132, 25:1 178
138, 340, 355, 29:8 113, 114
363, 365 30:12 181
118:23 21 31:28 146
122 284, 290
125:1 269 Qohelet
126:2,3 231 Qoh. 3:5 32, 58
128:5 274 Qoh. 8:6 223
129:3 220, 224 Qoh. 10:1617 205
129:5 274 Qoh. 10:17 216
132 193, 274, 284, Qoh. 10:20 159
290, 293, 294,
297, 298, 299, Song of Songs
305, 306, 313 3:11 273
132:25 298
132:5 274 Isaiah
132:6 298 166 337
132:7 274 139 3, 7, 243, 258,
132:8 193, 274 265, 266275,
132:9 293 282, 326,
132:1112 293, 298 347348, 352
132:13 274, 294, 298, 135 213
306, 317 112 237, 244, 245,
132:14 193, 274 252, 253
132:16 293 1:1 179
133:3 269 1:23 251
134:3 40, 274 1:2 73, 219
135:21 274 1:2a 67
137:3 274, 284 1:2b 67
139:15 173 1:3 329
141:1 142 1:49 336
144:1 29 1:48 334
1:4 249
Proverbs 1:8 267, 269
1:19 230 1:9 272
1:22 113, 114 1:1017 57
3:3 146 1:10 73, 77, 112, 113,
3:34 113 114, 219
4:1,20 73, 219 1:14 268
5:1 73, 219 1:1920 195
6:2728 221 1:2126 86, 146, 323, 336
7:24 73, 219 1:21 267, 271
9:8 113 1:2428 337
10:22 125 1:24 84

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 401 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 402 index of biblical texts

1:26 271 6:910 325, 326, 328, 330

1:27f 336 6:9 115, 191
1:27 146, 147, 267, 271 6:10 191
2:14 286 6:11 240, 328, 329
2:1 179 6:12 328
2:25 268 6:13 330
2:24 287, 314, 336 6:13a 328
2:2 268, 269, 273 7 53, 88, 128, 129, 323
2:3 53, 131, 132, 223, 7:117 336
267, 268, 269, 273 7:19 326
2:5 273 7:2 323
2:622 332 7:3ff 325
2:619(22) 333 7:39 129
2:12ff 218 7:3 214
2:12 214 7:49 141, 323
2:19,21 161 7:4 128, 129
3:1 84, 229 7:67 141
3:3 38 7:6 323
3:7 229 7:79 128, 129, 324
3:1011 205 7:7 124, 152, 323
3:12 179 7:8 56
3:15 12, 84 7:9 57, 104, 141, 142,
3:1617 273, 336 143, 206, 324, 351
3:16,17 267 7:9b 129, 323
4:1 229, 241 7:1017 129
4:26 75, 215, 218, 336 7:13 128, 323
4:24 213 7:14 85, 92, 128, 129,
4:23 75, 212, 213 141, 323
4:2 28, 238 7:1516 128
4:3 215, 267, 272 7:16 128, 129
4:4 181, 215, 267, 273 7:17 129
4:5 267, 268 7:24 165
4:6 123 7:25 153
5 261 8 365
5:17 21, 146, 163, 233, 8:2 92
330 8:58 118, 149, 256, 336
5:5 153 8:6 115, 192
5:1213 329 8:78 209, 218
5:12 84, 160 8:8 117
5:16 147 8:910 323, 324, 333, 335,
5:19 84, 142, 143, 160, 352
232, 239 8:10 46, 152
5:28 229 8:1118 144
6 5, 252, 301, 8:1115 328, 336
327330, 352 8:11 115, 192, 223
6:111 326, 328 8:12 192
6:15 249 8:13 17
6:1 328, 336 8:14 14, 15, 16, 17, 19,
6:3 165 20, 22, 23, 24, 28,
6:4 328 29, 36, 37, 38, 47,
6:5 328, 336 51, 61, 340, 355, 365
6:7 151, 249, 330 8:14b 365
6:8 328 8:15 195, 196
6:912 16 8:1618 330

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 402 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 index of biblical texts 403

8:17 17, 329 14:5 114, 169, 225

8:18 140, 147, 231, 267, 14:7 165
336, 344 14:22 161, 214
8:19 119, 168, 171 14:2427 334
8:2123 16 14:24 152
9 53 14:25 325
9:5f 28 14:2627 232
9:5 231 14:26 165, 230
9:6 147 14:2832 91, 321
9:10 267, 268 14:29 118, 164, 225
9:14 179, 223 14:29b 28
9:15 179, 192 14:32 59, 60, 123, 140,
10:5ff 218, 230 143, 147, 176, 193,
10:534 334 194, 267, 274, 278,
10:519 106 286, 299, 307,
10:515 209, 334 320322, 323, 331,
10:5 104, 225 336, 350, 351, 362,
10:6 153 366
10:7 104 14:32b 125, 127, 139, 276,
10:811 106 277, 344
10:12 84, 160, 267, 268, 16:1 28, 114, 169, 267,
334, 336 270
10:14 165 16:3 180
10:15 225 16:4 123
10:1619 334 16:5 28, 147
10:16 84 16:14 214
10:19 214 17:3 214
10:2023 215 17:10 29
10:2223 84 17:12ff 325
10:22 165 17:1214 323, 333, 335, 352
10:2324 84 17:1213 209, 218
10:23 80, 83, 165 17:13 117
10:2427a 336 18 87
10:24 124, 225, 267, 272 18:16 87, 94, 334
10:26 225 18:7 267, 269, 336
10:26a 116, 117 19:3 119, 168
10:27b32 336 19:4 84
10:32 267, 268, 270, 324 19:11 232
10:33 84 19:14 180
11 53 19:17 232
11:1ff 75 19:25 84, 160
11:1 28 20 87, 94
11:2 104, 216 20:5 12
11:35 147 21 30 46
11:4 225 21:110 97
11:8 186 21:10 165, 225
11:9 184, 269 21:14 229
11:10 193 21:16 124
11:1116 215 21:17 214
12:5 206 22:114 97, 334
12:6 267, 272 22:1 267, 269
1327 244 22:4 194, 270
1323 245, 261 22:5 84, 267, 269
13:5 165 22:7 216

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 403 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 404 index of biblical texts

22:1214 201 213, 214, 217, 234,

22:12 84 236, 246, 251, 257,
22:1415 84 259, 260, 261, 281,
22:14 151, 326 346, 347
22:15 124 28:2ff 235
23:12 267, 269 28:24 204, 208, 260
23:13 137, 138 28:23 69, 149, 208210
2427 245 28:2 117, 118, 149, 162,
24:5 152 164, 176, 207, 209,
24:6 181 213, 235, 236, 239,
24:23 267, 268 254, 255, 256
25:1 231, 232 28:3 153, 206, 211, 236
25:4 121, 123 28:4 69, 118, 123, 179,
25:5 267 207, 210212, 214,
25:7 159 236
25:8 165 28:529 75
25:10 225 28:58 176
26:4 29 28:56 69, 75, 204,
26:6 152 212217, 218, 238,
26:10 206 247, 249, 250, 251,
27:9 151 253, 259
27:12 225 28:5 28, 75, 123, 206,
27:13 268, 269, 272 237, 238, 249
2835 244, 245, 258 28:6 160, 223, 237, 238,
2833 6, 75, 87, 88, 121, 249
202, 237, 243264, 28:729:24 248
265, 266, 281, 282, 28:722 74, 75, 76, 166, 169,
324, 346347, 351, 171, 175, 176, 247,
365 345
2832 245, 246, 248 28:718 176
2831 246, 248, 252, 254, 28:713 74, 76, 77, 78, 79,
260, 327, 336 82, 86, 87, 109, 110,
28 1, 2, 6, 28, 65108, 112, 128, 166, 169,
109241, 258264, 177197, 197203,
280, 281, 323, 332, 204, 206, 213, 217,
342, 346347, 364, 234241, 251, 253,
365 258, 259, 261, 262,
28:122 74, 75, 76, 7889 263, 264, 278280,
28:113 76 281, 322, 335, 342,
28:16 76, 203, 204218, 344, 345, 346
237, 238, 248, 251, 28:710 177, 197, 234
252, 258 28:78 69, 76, 167, 175,
28:14(6) 74, 76, 78, 109, 177, 177182, 183, 185,
234241, 259, 342, 255
346 28:7 74, 75, 76, 77, 166,
28:14 74, 75, 76, 88, 178, 167, 169, 173, 178,
185, 204, 205, 206, 179, 180, 183, 184,
212, 213, 214, 217, 185, 191, 199, 236,
233, 234241, 247, 238, 252, 253, 259,
249, 256, 258, 261, 280
280, 281 28:7a 75, 178, 180, 187,
28:13 255 236, 259, 280, 342
28:1 68, 74, 178, 28:7b10 189
205208, 210, 211, 28:7b8 187

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 404 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 index of biblical texts 405

28:7b 178, 179, 180, 184, 163, 165, 166, 169,

187, 188, 196 176, 192, 197, 198,
28:8 172, 180, 181, 183, 199, 237, 239, 259,
185, 188 280, 342
28:8a 188, 189 28:15ff 254
28:8b 189 28:15 6, 49, 50, 70, 74, 77,
28:922 76 79, 82, 83, 87, 109,
28:913 185 111, 112, 115123,
28:911 167 130, 139, 140, 143,
28:910 69, 177, 182189, 148, 149, 150, 151,
197, 198, 278 153, 154, 156, 160,
28:9 79, 83, 144, 157, 166177, 182, 184,
158, 166, 168, 223, 197, 198, 199, 236,
237, 251 237, 254, 255, 256,
28:10 123, 166, 167, 173, 259, 260, 278, 280,
175, 192, 237 345
28:1113 77, 176, 177, 28:1622 197
189197, 223, 235 28:1617 248, 336
28:1112 70, 130 28:1617a 53, 57, 81, 82, 83,
28:11 115, 167, 173, 174, 84, 85, 86, 111, 145,
199, 235, 237, 254, 157, 176, 203, 343
260, 263, 279 28:16 ix, x, xi, 1, 2, 6, 7,
28:12 82, 84, 112, 129, 964, 65108, 109,
173, 177, 198, 200, 111, 112, 123,
203, 217, 235, 237, 124144, 145, 146,
251, 253, 259, 261, 147, 162, 176, 192,
278, 280, 320322, 198, 199, 200, 202,
323, 325, 331, 333, 203, 218, 235, 237,
336, 344, 350, 362, 260, 261, 263, 264,
366 265337, 339345,
28:13 70, 77, 78, 81, 123, 346, 347, 348, 350,
166, 167, 173, 185, 351, 352, 353,
211, 237 355366
28:13a 79 28:1719 260
28:13b 149 28:17 50, 82, 117, 123,
28:14ff 50 136, 139, 140, 150,
28:1422 6, 74, 76, 77, 7889, 151, 161, 166, 172,
90, 109, 110177, 176, 209, 218, 223,
197203, 204, 217, 236, 237, 253, 255,
234241, 243264, 256
265, 275, 277, 28:17a 71, 82, 84, 112, 136,
278280, 281, 322, 144147, 148, 155,
335, 342, 343, 344, 203, 277
346347, 351, 362, 28:17b22 74, 81, 111, 235
363, 364 28:17b18 71, 73, 79, 112,
28:1419 82, 111, 116 147153, 154, 161,
28:1418 79, 80, 154, 192, 235
202, 217 28:17b 82, 111, 118, 122
28:1415 74, 77, 81, 110, 112, 28:18 6, 73, 74, 79, 80,
112123, 197, 234, 109, 112, 117, 120,
276 121, 123, 147153,
28:14 25, 70, 74, 76, 77, 154, 156, 166177,
78, 81, 88, 109, 182, 199, 210, 236,
112115, 133, 157, 255, 256, 280, 345

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 405 1/17/2007 9:24:24 PM

 406 index of biblical texts

28:1922 79, 80, 81, 83, 154, 29:17(8) 335

202, 240, 342 29:16 250, 256
28:1921 74, 80, 112, 153163 29:14 247, 269, 336
28:19b21 80 29:1 246, 256, 257, 260,
28:19 71, 74, 79, 80, 83, 261, 281, 346
123, 158, 166, 168, 29:2 256
184, 237, 251 29:3 255
28:19a 79, 80, 154156 29:4 119, 168, 211
28:19b20 159 29:58 247, 334
28:19b 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 29:6 117, 231, 256, 257,
155, 156158, 160, 273
165, 199, 263 29:78 250, 255
28:2022 80 29:7 256
28:2021 80 29:8 267, 336
28:20 71, 79, 81, 84, 157, 29:914 247, 252
158160 29:9 255
28:21 71, 73, 74, 79, 81, 29:10 365
84, 130, 157, 158, 29:13 115, 192
160163, 199, 231, 29:14 114, 125, 126, 192,
232, 235, 239, 241, 231, 232, 239, 240
259, 263, 280, 337 29:14b 333
28:22 71, 73, 74, 77, 79, 29:1516 247
80, 81, 83, 111, 112, 29:15 181, 246, 254, 257,
154, 163166, 236, 260, 261, 281, 346
237 29:16 365
28:22a 81 29:1724 247, 252, 253
28:22b 81, 83, 84, 343 29:18 252
28:2329 73, 78, 109, 203, 29:1921 253
204, 218234, 29:20 113
234241, 247, 248, 29:21 253
251, 255, 259, 260, 29:22 12, 142
280, 281, 342, 346 29:23 84, 160
28:23 71, 73, 219220, 29:24 252
224, 237, 239 30 75, 248
28:2426 218, 224 30:117 247
28:2425 220 30:17 107
28:24 72, 220221, 224, 30:15 12, 87, 121, 201,
225, 227, 228 254, 333
28:25 72, 221223, 224, 30:1 121, 159, 181, 246,
226, 237 257, 260, 261, 281,
28:25b 225, 226 346
28:26 72, 164, 184, 223, 30:23 123
231, 234, 237, 251 30:2 121, 142, 143
28:2729 218, 220, 224 30:3 120, 121
28:27 72, 223225, 226, 30:5 254
227, 228, 229, 234 30:67 88, 254
28:28 72, 162, 196, 30:6 254
226230, 234, 239, 30:811 253
240, 255 30:911 252
28:28a 223 30:9 194, 195
28:29 72, 73, 162, 30:10 179
230232, 234, 237, 30:11 252
239, 241, 281 30:1214 118, 212, 217, 253
29 75 30:14 194

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 406 1/17/2007 9:24:25 PM

 index of biblical texts 407

30:1517 128, 130, 192, 198, 32:914 246, 247, 248, 250,
333 252
30:15 84, 123, 130, 194, 32:9 73, 219, 220, 252
198, 200, 252, 325 32:10 255
30:16 198 32:11f 252
30:1826 247, 250, 253 32:12 255
30:1821 253 32:14 137, 138
30:18 251, 253 32:1520 247, 251
30:19 266, 267, 272 32:1516 215
30:2021 252 32:1617 253
30:20 229 32:16 147
30:23 226, 229 32:19 149, 256
30:26 194 33 75, 246, 247, 281,
30:2734 248 336, 337
30:2733 255, 256, 334, 335 33:16 336
30:27 257 33:1 246, 247, 248, 255,
30:28 256 257, 260, 281, 346
30:29 29, 269 33:224 247, 251
30:3031 252 33:2 251
30:30 149, 209, 256, 257, 33:34 255
273 33:3 251
30:31 142 33:5 147, 249, 251, 258,
30:3132 225 267, 271
30:32 139, 152 33:716 336
30:33 257 33:8 152
3132 75 33:10 161, 251
31 257 33:11 257
31:132:8 248 33:12 255
31:14 247 33:1416 254
31:13 87, 107, 253, 254, 33:14 257, 267, 273
333 33:15 253
31:1 229, 246, 257, 260, 33:16 229
261, 281, 336, 346 33:1724 252, 336
31:2 161, 232, 240, 253, 33:17 249, 252, 258
336 33:19 173, 190, 255
31:3 246, 254, 336 33:2024 251
31:49 335 33:2021 336
31:45 250 33:20 249, 252, 267, 268,
31:4 267, 269, 270, 273, 271
336 33:21 117, 251, 256
31:58 247 33:22 249
31:5 334 33:24 247, 249
31:6 181 3439 245
31:89 255, 334 3435 245, 247
31:9 253, 257, 267, 273 34 248, 257
3233 247, 248, 253, 258 34:1 73, 219
32 248 34:8 267, 272
32:18 247, 249, 252, 253, 34:11,17 145
254 35 248, 257
32:1 147, 216, 253 35:110 336
32:2 123, 254, 267 35:10 267, 272
32:34 252 3639 103, 244, 245, 247,
32:58 253 327
32:920 248 3637 101

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 407 1/17/2007 9:24:25 PM

 408 index of biblical texts

36:12 181 54:4 12

36:17 229 54:5 165
37:2 179 54:10 142
37:7 11, 124 54:1112 26
37:22 267, 270 54:11 41, 42, 275
37:27 159 54:12 136
37:32 267, 268, 269, 5666 3, 243, 244, 245
272 56:1 147
38:1 179 56:7 269
38:5 125, 126 57:8b9 176
38:8 124 57:9 170
39:3 179 57:13 269
39:5 77 57:16 228, 230
40ff 247 59:1 159
4055 3, 243, 245 59:16 146
4048 244 60:14 272, 274
40 245 60:19 214
40:12 249 60:22 142, 143
40:9 271 62:3 214, 215
41:15 225, 226 62:11 270
41:25 153 63:3 153
41:27 271 64:9 274
42:1 215 64:10 271
43:10 28 65:11,25 269
44:8 29 66:5 77, 113
44:13 145 66:20 269
44:28 275 66:24 251
45:19 173
46:1011 232 Jeremiah
46:13 272 2:8 179
48:2 274 2:20 164
48:13 275 2:21 163
4955 244 2:26 179
49:1 73, 219 3:15 184
49:7 114, 169 3:1617 310
49:14 271 5:5 164
50:1f 30 5:15 191
50:2 159 6:13 179
50:68 36 6:16 194
50:7 14, 36 7:12 288, 307
51:3 272 8:10 179
51:4 73, 219 10:14f 172
51:11 272 12:5 221
51:13 275 14:17 270
51:16 271, 272, 275 14:18 179
52:1 267, 274 15:4 83, 157
52:2 164, 270 16:5 174, 175, 182
52:710 290 16:19 172
52:8 272, 274 18:13 270
52:1353:12 45 18:18 179
52:13 28 18:18b 232
53:23 37 23:11,33 179
53:10 28 24:9 83, 157
54 46 27:2 164
54:15 45 28 93

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 408 1/17/2007 9:24:25 PM

 index of biblical texts 409

28:15 119 2:34 30, 33, 37

29:15 115 9:26 81, 83, 165
29:18 83, 157 9:27 81, 83, 165
29:20 163 11:36 81, 83, 165
29:31 119 11:38 138
30:8 164
31:4,21 270 Hosea
31:25 194 1:1011 45
31:39 145 2:20 122
32:32 179 4:6 184
34:17 83, 157 4:1619 182
41:5 287 5:1 73, 219
41:8 222 8:2 122
47:3 229 10:11 220
48:26 180 12:2 119
49:14 184
51:26 138, 140 Joel
51:33 224 1:11 222
2:21 231
Lamentations 2:32 269
1:4 274 3:5 15
1:9 231 3:13 224
1:15 270
2:8 145 Amos
2:13 270 1:3 225
2:15 270 2:4 167, 171, 172
5:18 269 4:1 182
5:20 228 5:2 270
5:14 122
Ezekiel 6:1,37 182
3:56 191 6:12 221
4:9 222 7:78 146
4:12 181 9:13 220
7:7,10 214
17:1121 99 Obadiah
23:24 229 1:1 184
23:42 206 1:17,21 269
23:46 83, 157
25:7 125, 126, 127 Micah
26:10 229 2:10 193
26:11 153 3:11 122, 319
27:22 138 4:4 104
28:13 42, 138 4:7 269
29:1720 182 4:8 270
34:19 153 4:13 225, 226
3839 309 6:9 232
40:3943 180 7:10 153
40:42 42
41:8 139 Nahum
45:13 222 1:13 164
47:3 145 3:2 225, 229
3:14 153
Daniel
2 47 Habakkuk
2:3135 39, 41 1:12 29

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 409 1/17/2007 9:24:25 PM

 410 index of biblical texts

2:3 50 Luke
2:4b 28 8:17 329
3:10 209 17:12 41
3:12 224, 225 20:919 21
20:17 23, 61, 340
Zephaniah
3:14 270 John
1:52 43
Zechariah 12:42 330
1:16 145
3:89 39, 42 Acts
3:10 104 4:812 39
4:7 28, 30, 33 4:11 21, 22, 23, 61,
4:10 30, 33 138, 340
9:9 270 28:24 330
10:4 28 28:2528 365
12:29 309
13:9 136 Romans
14:13 309 3:16 194
14:1011 42 911 365, 366
14:1215 309 9 364
9:20 365
Malachi 9:3032 52, 365
1:14 104 9:32b33 ix, 2, 10, 1317,
20, 22, 61, 127,
Sirach 339, 365
14:12 124 9:33 12, 14, 15, 17, 18,
19, 20, 22, 23, 24,
4 Ezra 35, 38, 52, 61,
13:2336 30 141, 277, 355,
356, 360, 362,
Wisdom of Solomon 364, 365
1:13 123 10:4 364
1:16 123 10:9 15
10:11 ix, 2, 10, 12,
Matthew 1317, 19, 24, 61,
5:3 331 127, 141, 277,
11:28 366 339, 355, 360
13:12 329 10:13 15
13:1315 329 11:7 365
13:52 ix, 358
16:18 41 1 Corinthians
21:117 95 1 37
21:3346 21 23 38
21:4244 51 3:1011 41
21:42 22, 61, 340 3:11 47
14:21 191
Mark
1:11 22 Ephesians
4:12 329 2:1422 42, 44, 45, 46, 48,
9:7 22 49, 53, 62, 63,
12:112 21, 22 341
12:1011 22, 61, 340 2:14 47
12:10 23, 138 2:1922 44

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 410 1/17/2007 9:24:25 PM

 index of biblical texts 411

2:2021 42 2:6 ix, 2, 10, 12, 14,

2:20 23, 37, 41, 42, 45, 1722, 23, 24,
48, 138 35, 53, 61, 127,
138, 141, 277,
1 Timothy 339, 355, 356,
1:16 24 362, 365
2:7 20, 23, 138
Hebrews 2:8 19, 20, 366
11:10 42 2:9 24
12:29 257 3:812 19
3:1015 147
1 Peter
2:34 19 2 Peter
2:48 1722, 23, 27, 33, 1:2021 x
36, 61, 62, 340
2:46 44 Revelation
2:5 24, 42 21:1920 42
22:11 329

DEKKER_Index_390-411.indd 411 1/17/2007 9:24:25 PM