(OS 064) Leene (Ed.) - Newness in Old Testament Prophecy - An Intertextual Study 2013 PDF

Newness
in Old Testament Prophecy

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 64
The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/ots

Newness
in Old Testament Prophecy
An Intertextual Study
By
Henk Leene
LEIDEN BOSTON
2014
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Leene, Henk.
Newness in Old Testament prophecy : an intertextual study / by Henk Leene.
pages cm. (Oudtestamentische studin = Old Testament studies, ISSN 0169-7226 ; VOLUME
64)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-26308-6 (hardback : alk. paper) ISBN 978-90-04-26309-3 (e-book)
1. Bible. Old TestamentProphecies. 2. Bible. Old TestamentCriticism, interpretation, etc. I.
Title.
BS1198.L38 2013
221.1'5dc23
2013033365
This publication has been typeset in the multilingual Brill typeface. With over 5,100
characters covering Latin, IPA, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for
use in the humanities. For more information, please see www.brill.com/brill-typeface.
ISSN 0169-7226
ISBN 978-90-04-26308-6 (hardback)
ISBN 978-90-04-26309-3 (e-book)
Copyright 2014 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
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 Koninklijke Brill NV
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.
This book is printed on acid-free paper.

For Hansje
CONTENTS
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 What is New in Prophecy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Intertextuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II Newness in the Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship, Deutero- and

Trito-Isaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.0 Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.1 A New Song: Psalms 96 and 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.1 Psalm 96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1.2 Psalm 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.1.3 Contextual Embedding of Psalms 96 and 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.1.3.1 Complementary Natures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.1.3.2 Diachronic Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.1.4 Enthronement According to Psalms 93100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.1.5 Enthronement and Eschatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Deutero-Isaiah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.2 New and Hidden Things: Isaiah 4055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.2.1 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.2.2 Isaiah 41:1416 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.2.3 Isaiah 42:59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
2.2.4 Isaiah 42:1013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
2.2.5 Isaiah 43:1621 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.2.6 Isaiah 48:111 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2.2.7 A Synchronic Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.2.7.1 Dramatic Progression in Isaiah 4055 . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.2.7.2 First-Last-Coming-New in Isaiah 4148 . . . . . . . . . 62
2.2.8 A Diachronic Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.2.8.1 Redaction-Critical Theories on Isaiah 4055 . . . 70
2.2.8.2 First-New: Relations with Isaiah 139? . . . . . . . . . . 74
viii contents
2.2.8.3 Relations with Psalms 96 and 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

2.2.8.4 In Search of the Hidden Structure:
Deutero-Isaiah in Dialogue with Psalms
93100 on Yhwhs Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
2.2.8.5 Isaiah 4055 as a Dramatic Retrospective . . . . . . 96
2.2.9 The Servant as Present Time Eschatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Trito-Isaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
2.3 A New Heaven and a New Earth: Isaiah 65 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
2.3.1 Structure of Isaiah 65 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
2.3.2 Isaiah 65 Set in Its Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
2.3.3 Diachronic Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
2.3.3.1 Redaction-Critical Deliberations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
2.3.3.2 Relative and Absolute Dating of Deutero- and
Trito-Isaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
2.3.3.3 Relations with Isaiah 4055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
2.3.4 The Dawn of Apocalyptic? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
III Newness in Ezekiel and Jeremiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

3.0 Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Ezekiel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
3.1 A New Heart and a New Spirit: Ezekiel 18 and 36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
3.1.1 Ezekiel 18:2132 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
3.1.2 Ezekiel 36:1638 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
3.1.3 The Embedding of Ezekiel 18 and 36 in the Book . . . . . . . 165
3.1.4.1 Papyrus 967 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
3.1.4.2 Stratification of Ezekiel 36:1638? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
3.1.4.3 Ezekiels Newness Passages in Diachronic
Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
3.1.4.4 A Comparison between Ezekiel 36 and Psalm
51 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Jeremiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
3.2 A New Creation and a New Covenant: Jeremiah 3031 . . . . . . . . . 200
3.2.1 Jeremiah 31:2122, 2326 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
3.2.2 Jeremiah 31:2730, 3134 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
3.2.3 Literary Structure of Jeremiah 3031 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
3.2.4 The Embedding of Jeremiah 3031: A Few Aspects . . . . . . 215
contents ix

3.2.5.1 Redaction-Critical Theories on Jeremiah
3031. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
3.2.5.2 Jeremiahs Promises in Diachronic Perspective 240
3.2.5.3 Diachronic Relations between Jeremiah and
Ezekiel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
3.2.5.4 Golah-Orientated Redaction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
IV New at the Crossroads of Two Prophetic Traditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281

4.0 Retrospect and Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
4.1 Relations between Ezekiel and Isaiah 4055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
4.2 Relations between Isaiah and Jeremiah 3031 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
4.2.1 Linguistic, Generic and Compositional Agreements . . . . 287
4.2.2 Diachronic Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
4.2.3 The Promise of the New in Isaiah and Jeremiah. . . . . . . . . 314
V The New as Scenario and Programme: Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323

5.1 Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
5.2 Intertextual Dialogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
5.2.1 Yhwh-Kingship Psalms, Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah . . . . . . 329
5.2.2 Ezekiel and Jeremiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
5.2.3 Ezekiel and Isaiah, Isaiah and Jeremiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
5.3 Eschatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350
Selected Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359

Index of Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
Index of Biblical Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
PREFACE
We celebrated the hundredth birthday of Gerhard von Rad in a sunlit Heidel-

berg during October 2001. Undisputedly for me the highlight of the congress
was the short speech delivered by the 101 year old Hans-Georg Gadamer. He
told about their walks together from home to university, which were mostly
completed without a word being spoken, and he recalled die wunderbare
Stille die diesen Mensch umgab.
After the congress this walk continued in my head. I knew at once exactly
how I should start the book that I had been planning for so long, a book
on prophetic eschatology: by referring to these two great teachers from the
previous century. Gerhard von Rad, who forever aroused my interest for
newness in prophecy; and Hans-Georg Gadamer, who like no other, led us
to see how scholarly questions that are posed to a delivered text serve the
question which the text asks of us.
A short time later I became seriously ill and it seemed that the whole
project, for which substantial material had already been collected, would
terminate prematurely. But fortunately shadows can withdraw themselves,
as it once happened for Hezekiah on the dial of Ahaz (Isa. 38:8). I was
granted time to complete the book. This would have been impossible with-
out the encouragement of many. Old friends from the Isaiah Workshop saw
with frowns how I strayed to the stores of other prophets, but luckily kept
me in their eye.
Whom I wish to mention by name are my four daughters, Josje, Saskia,
Merel and Anneke. They supported and encouraged me throughout the dif-
ferent phases of the writing process: from critically reading the first drafts,
to controlling final details in the university library and preparing the manu-
script for publication. And all this accompanied by continuously recurring
discussions on the books theme: On what does hope base itself? How do we
take courage from it? Our bonds were strengthened hereby. For the English
translation I wish to thank the dedication and patience of Dr Petrus Maritz.
And then there is the name of Hansje, my beloved, who is never too old
to sing another new song. Could I dedicate this book to her? I asked her and
she agreed.
Henk Leene
Halfweg, July 2013
ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations of series, handbooks and journals in this volume are accord-

ing to S.M. Schwertner, Theologische Realenzyklopdie: Abkrzungsverzeich-
nis, Berlin 21994. In addition the following abbreviations were used:
B/R M. Buber, F. Rosenzweig, Bcher der Kndung
DI Deutero-Isaiah
E Die Bibel: Einheitsbersetzung der Heiligen Schrift
G Greek Translation
JPS Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures: The New JPS Translation According to the Tra-
ditional Hebrew Text
NBG Bijbel: vertaling Nederlands Bijbelgenootschap 1951
NBS La nouvelle Bible Segond
NBV De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling
NEB The New English Bible
NIV The Holy Bible: New International Version
NRSV The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version
OG Old Greek Translation
PI Proto-Isaiah
REB Die Bibel: Elberfelder bersetzung, revidierter Fassung
RSV The Bible: Revised Standard Version
SESB Stuttgart Electronic Study Bible
TI Trito-Isaiah
TOB Traduction Oecumnique de la Bible
WV De Bijbel: Willibrordvertaling 1995
chapter one
INTRODUCTION
1.1. What is New in Prophecy1
The word new appears more frequently in studies on prophetic eschatology

than in the texts on which the studies were based. While identifying a shift
in orientation from the past to the future, Gerhard von Rad used new as a
keyword to describe what he considered to be prophecys most substantial
contribution to Israels expectations. During the pre-prophetic period Israel
found security and a rationale for its existence in Yhwhs deeds from the
past, but during the international crises in the eighth and sixth centuries
bce, the realisation grew that these former deeds had lost their salvatory
force. Only future, yet unheard-of deeds of Yhwh would be able to provide
Israel with a stable foundation. The predictions made by the prophets, then,
concentrated on such deeds set in the future. Von Rad heard the expression
of Israels salvation definitively and fundamentally transformed from a past
orientation to a future perspective in the word new.2
The prophets, according to von Rad, portrayed the new in analogy to
what had taken place previously. However, precisely this typological sub-
stantiation using what had happened in the past underlines the lost impetus
and reduced influence of these former deeds of Yhwh. This point of view is
echoed repeatedly where von Rad discusses the new in his Old Testament
Theology (noticeable in the subjects index). Thus, one reads about a new
Exodus or a new Covenant; a new Moses, a new David, or a new Zion.
This view on Israels prophets has influenced several systematic the-
ologians over the last half century, traceable for example in the biblical-
theological considerations made by Jrgen Moltmann in his Theology of
Hope.3 Moltmann appears to be following von Rads perspective on various
1 On the double meaning in the heading, see R.G. Kratz, Das Neue in der Prophetie des
Alten Testaments, in: I. Fischer et al. (eds), Prophetie in Israel, Mnster 2003, 122; H. Leene,
Das Neue in der Prophetie: Antwort an Reinhard G. Kratz, in: Fischer, Prophetie, 2329.
2 G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1960 (91987).
3 J. Moltmann, Theologie der Hoffnung, Mnchen 51966; idem, Antwort auf die Kritik der
Theologie der Hoffnung, in: W.-D. Marsch (ed.), Diskussion ber die Theologie der Hoffnung,
Mnchen 1967, 201238.
2 chapter one
points, even when taking their different accents into account. For Molt-
mann, the principal emphasis on the new can be found in the general
promise-structure expressing Israels relationship to God, reaching back to
the nomadic era of the patriarchs. In this way he subsumes all the Old Testa-
ments future expectations under the category novum, and therefore, unlike
von Rad, does not give prominence to the prophets in this respect.
At most, the prophetic expectations can be distinguished from the Old
Testament corpus in their growing awareness of ultimate boundaries. The
first boundary non plus ultra is about humanity and the cosmos, the second
concerns the finality of human life. According to Moltmann these eschato-
logical boundaries had not been touched previously in the history of Israel.
The prophetic expectations drew these outlines, reached, and on occasion
even crossed them (the resurrection from the dead!) in what could be called
an universalisation and intensification of Israels existing perspectives on
the future.
This represents taking a step further than the approach advocated by
von Rad. Though, Moltmann also reasons that the biblical new signifies
what has been anticipated about the future; and which cannot be extrapo-
lated from either the past or the present.4 He uses two Latin terms, futurum
and adventus, to explain the different perspectives: Die alttestamentlichen
Propheten extrapolieren nicht ein futurum aus den Eingeweiden der
Gegenwart, sondern sie bringen die Zukunft Gottes zum Gericht und zum
Heil worthaft antizipierend in die Gegenwart hinein.5 This focus on the
expected as advent, which is deemed characteristic of Israels expectation in
general and, under its influence, of the Christian hope, would be expressed
most clearly in the prophets. Whatever the prophets hoped for cannot be
derived from their presentquite the contrary: the way they experience
the present is a derivative of what they hope. Following Moltmanns line of
argument, the word new is an exemplary means of appropriately explain-
ing Israels prophetic message.6
4 Formulated concisely in Moltmann, Antwort, 209.

5 Moltmann, Antwort, 212.
6 Two quotations from W. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dis-
pute, Advocacy, Minneapolis 1997 illustrate the influence of von Rads and Moltmanns views:
The substance of the promises is derived from old memories, but the power to generate the
newly promised reality is rooted not in what is old, but in what is fresh and alive about Yah-
weh (638); The oracles of promise are originary utterances without antecedent, certainly
not rooted in or derived from the data or circumstances at hand, but rooted in Yahwehs
circumstance-defying capacity to work newness (646).
introduction 3
Against the background of such broad theological vistas this study must
start with a negative observation. Compared to our modern usage, the word
, new, occurs infrequently in the Hebrew Bible. Even the prophetic
literature uses the word rarely, whatever the studies above may suggest.
The only expectation texts that have are found in Isaiah 4048; Isaiah
6566; Jeremiah 3031; and Ezekiel 11 and 36. The expectations concerned
envisage something new or new things, a new heaven and a new earth, a
new covenant, and a new heart and a new spirit. Our study on newness in
the Old Testament prophecies will concentrate on these texts, seen in their
broader context certainly, but without including high expectations that are
not explicitly expressed with help of the word , such as a new Moses, a
new David or a new Zion.
Furthermore, this study has two premises at its base. On the one hand,
it is highly improbable that the meaning of , occurring so infrequently
in the texts and appearing in such a wide range of literary corpora, can be
captured, reduced and simplified to formulas like replacing the grounds of
salvation or anticipation versus extrapolation. On the other hand, there
are clear indications that the abovementioned texts on newness are inter-
related. It is impossible to ignore the evident intertextual relations between
these texts. This point on intertextuality marks a methodological distinction
between our study and the works of von Rad and his contemporaries. Their
comparisons between the prophetic texts were dominated principally by
one tradition-critical question: How do these texts, with their origins set in
the depressive and destitute prophetic period, deal with Israels source tradi-
tions? Old Testament scholars have become increasingly interested in inter-
textual studies especially since the nineties, making more detailed com-
parisons between prophetic texts possible. The second part of this chap-
ter explains how we will apply this intertextual approach to the texts on
newness. Naturally the valuable insights from previous form- and tradition-
critical approaches must be honoured. The advocated intertextual approach
focuses on the similarities on the surface level of the text (thus, in this
respect, it is less speculative than the form- and tradition-critical methods).
In order to present a more complete picture of the network of prophetic
texts on newness, with their deeper connections, relations and communal-
ity, the new song in Psalms will be included in our intertextual analysis from
the onset.
Where this first chapter introduces the subject newness in relation to
previous scholarship and offers some methodological considerations, the
second chapter deals with newness in the Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship, Deu-
tero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah. The third chapter looks at the new in Ezekiel
4 chapter one
and Jeremiah. A straightforward programme is followed in these chapters:

the synchronic description of a passage precedes its diachronic analysis.
The diachronic analyses consider the passages origins as far as they can
be determined, but moreover, their possible interdependence. This division
over the long chapters two and three contains a preliminary conclusion
in itself, namely that the prophetic texts on newness are best considered
in two distinguishable groups: (1) the Psalms, Deutero-Isaiah, Trito-Isaiah;
and (2) Ezekiel, Jeremiah. While there are sufficient reasons for treating
the two groups separately, the impression remains that various influences
and borrowings are also traceable between these two groups. The fourth
chapter analyses this deeper interrelatedness of what may be called cosmic
and anthropological newness respectively. The main lines of the study are
brought together and the central conclusions are drawn in the fifth chap-
ter. In short, we wish to suggest that an intertextual reading promotes our
understanding of the newness texts in the prophetic literature, compared to
more comprehensive vistas such as presented by Moltmann and von Rad.
1.2. Intertextuality
Intertextuality refers to the ability of texts to be connected to other texts

and in this way to be drawn into the quasi world of literature. It is possi-
ble to see this in action wherever it can be indicated clearly that one text
carries reminders of another text. Concepts and terminology occurring fre-
quently in intertextual studies include: point of connection (Berhrung);
influence; borrowing; reference; allusion; echo; and citation.7 Point of con-
nection is the most neutral, and citation the most inclusive indication of
the intended communality. Though intertextuality can be understood syn-
chronically, the majority of these terms have a diachronic component. Texts
have an influence on readersreaders who in turn can become authors of
new texts in which this influence is apparent. Strictly speaking, it is not
the new text per se but the author that is influenced by the source text in
such a case. The author allows his or her language to be moulded by the
source. The concept borrowing also first reflects on the authors role and the
manner in which the work was constructed. For the sake of clarity, in this
study we will attempt to reserve the term borrowing to indicate the authors
7 We have not included a general overview of the literature, and besides the integral
chapter 4, refer to the relevant literature in the sections below where they deal specifically
with intertextual studies [ 2.2.8.24; 2.3.3.3; 3.1.4.4; 3.2.5.3].
introduction 5
activity and allusion to what the text does. Not every borrowing automati-
cally implies that the reader was meant to recognise it, apparent for example
in the case of modern plagiarism. This study will uncover a complex combi-
nation of concealment and disclosure, seen in the almost general silence on
the name of the cited prophet while his words are undeniably cited. We may
assume that the reader is nevertheless expected to recognise the citations
source and to transfer its authority to the new text. The author thus wishes
for his new text to share in the aura of the source text. The intertextual rela-
tion between the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel is a good example of this
authority sharing [ 3.2.5.3].
The term allusion is always associated with the concept recognition.
Three or four steps have been identified to help indicate how a reader or
listener recognises an allusion, namely: (1) the observation that a reference
has been made; (2) the identification of the line(s) in the source being
referred to; (3) the determination of the referring texts new interpretation
in light of the source line(s); and (4) the integration of further passages or
related aspects of the source text in the interpretation of the text making
the reference.8 In this regard, an echo can be best defined as a reference
that complies with the first two steps in the recognition process. A true
allusion always contributes to the meaning of the alluding text. Recognis-
ing the allusion enriches the interpretation. This does not take away that
texts contain allusions on different levels ranging from the superficial to the
profound. These differences have been described as differences in volume.
Compared to the modern literary world in which allusion has become an
established feature, in young scribal traditions like the Old Testament writ-
ings using allusions was not that clearly defined. Still, it remains a useful
term to describe how older texts have been integrated into newer Old Testa-
ment passagesas long as these borrowings match the criteria detailing the
intended readers recognition and more or less lead to the meaningful acti-
vation of the passages from which they were borrowed. Our limited knowl-
edge about the original readers therefore does not become an absolute
restriction, though knowing more would have been an advantage. Rather,
the opposite is true: the literary phenomenon of allusion and other referenc-
ing techniques in the Old Testament indicate that the authors then already
made provision for, assumed and wrote for attentive readers or listeners.9
8 Cf. Z. Ben-Porat, The Poetics of Literary Allusion, A Journal for Descriptive Poetics and
Theory of Literature 1 (1976), 105128.

9 The intertextual examination of this study will verify the following observation by
6 chapter one
A crucial issue that we believe has still not received due attention in
intertextual comparisons of the prophetic literature concerns the direc-
tion of influence or sourcing. In this light, the concept analogy represents
a welcome addition to the arsenal of terminology detailing the nature of
intertextuality. The concept refers to similar syntactic patterns existing in
clauses, besides their agreements in vocabulary.10 Without a substantial
analogy, it becomes virtually impossible to determine the direction of influ-
ence between texts. In other words, it remains questionable whether there
are sufficient grounds to speak of borrowing between texts when their com-
monality is restricted to their mere vocabulary. The term analogy is used for
both the similarity of patterns and the actual clauses that share these pat-
terns.
Here, the relationship between literature and linguistics comes into play.
The concept analogy with its inclusive system of gradations is interesting
for two reasons. First, there are points of contact between the texts that are
restricted to only common language or jargon. These features do not make
them literary yet, on their own they are too weak to connect one unique
literary work to another. Not every analogy is an allusion. The connections,
not with a unique work, but with a particular genre, or the idiom of a
particular school, may be located somewhere in the border regions between
the literary and the linguistic. Second, each true literary reference, every
deliberate citation in whatever form, requires a clear analogy at its base.
The modern researchers disadvantage compared to the original reader is
evident. In many cases, the historical sequence of texts may have posed
no problems to the original reader. Whoever would like to understand an
allusion would need to know the chronological order of the texts involved.
It is therefore far more difficult for modern researchers to indicate allusions
in ancient texts correctly. Even so: for all readers and listeners, (an) allusion
is based on (an) analogy. Analogy forms the essential linguistic basis of this
literary phenomenon.
K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, Cambridge, MA 2007,
51: Scribes wrote scrolls (rather than books) for the benefit of other scribes (rather than
for private readers). Even so, certain citations when read would have been recognisable
by a broader audience. The recognition of other citations would have required a topical
memory of the source text. In this light comparisons may be drawn between the more visual
Ezekielan citations in Jeremiah [ 3.2.5.3] and the more auditory Ezekielan citations in DI
[ 4.1].
10 For a fundamental study in this regard, see A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, Analogies in Isaiah,
Amsterdam 1993.
introduction 7
Besides these linguistic and literary dimensions, intertextuality carries

a hermeneutical aspect. This hermeneutical aspect eludes the method-
ological rigour linguistic and literary investigations areor should be
subjected to, but it may provide the underlying motive for greater precision
in these investigations. An allusion implies that the alluding text, hermeneu-
tically speaking, becomes involved in the source texts communication. Allu-
sions in prophetic texts help substantiate the authority of the source texts
and allow the texts making the allusions to share in this authority. They indi-
cate the relevance of the source texts by recalling the topics these texts were
addressing. Furthermore, they sometimes attempt to dissolve obvious ten-
sions between sources, or between older texts and the new situation of the
reader.
This still represents a relatively formal approach to establishing the her-
meneutical relationship between prophetic texts. In order to describe our
intentions better, we have adopted the dictum that Gadamer borrowed from
the English historical philosopher Collingwood: every text is an answer to
a question. If this dictum were applied to intertextual analysis, it could be
rephrased: every text answers the question of another text. The adapted
dictum holds clear advantages for understanding texts containing definite
allusions. To illustrate its significance we will examine Gadamers exposition
on the question in hermeneutics.11 The process of understanding starts with
the question being posed to us by the text. This process is clearly evident, for
example, when reading the following text: Do not remember the first things
(Isa. 43:18). The text in turn can be asked questions such as: What is meant
with remember? What do first things refer to? While all such questions
in fact belong to historical interpretation, they are asked to determine the
question to which the text itself might be an answer. This third stage in the
process of understanding might involve, in the chosen example, the valid-
ity of the tradition and its limitationsa tradition that, for all its relevance,
appears not to be able to really change the reader [ 2.2.5]. The question
posed to us by the text is thus elevated by these probing formulations of our
own exegetical interrogation. This is exactly the way in which the assumed
question behind the text in die Frage bergeht, die die berlieferung fr uns
ist.12 This main question remains the point of departure and returns when
the preliminary end point in our understanding effort has been reached.
11 H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode, Tbingen 61990, 375384.

12 Gadamer, Wahrheit, 380.
8 chapter one
Furthermore, the role of the reader can be identified along these lines.
The question that the text may be answering cannot possibly remain a
distant historical reconstruction. For its proper formulation it is equally
dependent on the (modern) readers own horizon. Understanding a ques-
tion means that one has somehow assimilated it and can pose it as ones
own. The same holds true when someone attempts to understand an allud-
ing text as an answer to a question asked by the source text. For example, it
can be argued that the new thing promised in Isa. 43:19 necessarily had to
lead to a dualistic promise like the new heavens and a new earth promised
in Isa. 65:17 [ 2.3.4]. A reader needs to surpass the historical horizon of a
specific text in order to explain the bonds connecting its questions and pos-
sible answers. In other words, we are dealing here with scholarly insights
that should be translated in reverse, back into the totality of human experi-
ence from which the questions were derived.
The purpose of this study, then, is to describe the literary relations between
texts dealing with newness in the prophetic tradition in order to understand
their relationship as the realisation of an intertextual dialogue. One of the
ways to initiate or continue a lively interaction with the greater texts of the
tradition is to allow oneself to be involved in the communication between
these texts.
The subtitle of this book reads an intertextual study. What could have
been an alternative? A study in the history of Israels religion? A biblical-
theological study? History of religions might see texts as windows into for-
eign religious worlds that might eventually remain obscured behind the
texts. In comparison, intertextual studies expose texts on a platform of con-
tinuous dialogue. Here one could think of the difference between the dated
recording of a song, and its score. A score is meant to be replayed. Also in bib-
lical theology the real music must still be played, which it does freshly and
anew each time, even if, as a discipline, it is conducted by a confessional
or systematic interest that an intertextual approach, as undertaken in this
study, per se lacks.
In this regard, the terms eschatology and apocalyptic need to be ex-
plained as they are understood in the following chapters. It is impossible
to circumvent these terms due to the attention they have received in com-
mentaries on the newness texts. Their inclusion in this study helps illus-
trate the negative and positive roles that prejudice unavoidably plays in our
understandingboth blinding and enabling. It is clear that it is unfeasible
to read these Old Testament psalms and prophets without making compar-
isons to later Jewish, Christian and Islamic expectations with which we have
become acquainted in varying degrees. We will, however, resist against any
introduction 9
intentions commentaries may have had of linking these texts as variable

solutions to a standard problem in theology or the history of religions. This
method discredits expositions on the eschatological or apocalyptic nature
of biblical texts. It leaves the impression that at most new answers are find-
able but no new questions. And how could this be true, since the constantly
renewing horizon of questioning has been the driving force behind the his-
tory of interpretation?
chapter two
NEWNESS IN THE PSALMS ON YHWHS KINGSHIP,

DEUTERO- AND TRITO-ISAIAH
2.0. Perspective
The central focus in this chapter must fall on the new things in Deutero-
Isaiah. In the lead-up, two versions of the new song for Yhwh, Ps. 96
[ 2.1.1] and Ps. 98 [ 2.1.2], are discussed. During the previous century
the view was generally accepted that the fourth book of Psalms had been
influenced strongly by prophetic conceptions. Thus, Ps. 96 and 98 could be
labelled Deutero-Isaian in some commentaries. We will first analyse these
psalms separately from Isa. 4055 to avoid pre-empting questions on priori-
ties. In a sense, the opening sections of this study on the prophetic newness
texts are propaedeutic: here intertextuality is still an internal issue within
the fourth book of Psalms itself.
The following aspects are treated: the mutual agreements and differ-
ences between Ps. 96 and 98, considering their placements in the compo-
sition Ps. 93100 [ 2.1.3.1]; their most probable diachronic interrelation
[ 2.1.3.2]; their contribution to the double perspective on Yhwhs enthrone-
ment [ 2.1.4]; and in light of these varied mythical representations of God,
the eschatological bias with which these songs tend to be read in modern
exegesis [ 2.1.5].
We then turn to the new things in Deutero-Isaiah. On the one hand,
the meaning of the term new, which occurs in a semantic domain that
also contains the terms former, latter, and coming, is determined; and
on the other, an attempt is made to describe the role of this unique domain
(former-latter-coming-new) in structuring Deutero-Isaiahs dramatic com-
position and conceptual world. In line with the research programme
set for the two psalms, the exegesis of the newness texts in Isa. 41
48 [ 2.2.16] is followed by synchronic [ 2.2.7] and diachronic examina-
tions [ 2.2.8], detailing their contextual imbedding and interrelated-
ness.
The intertextual relations between Deutero-Isaiah and Ps. 96 and 98
are discussed in the scope of this diachronic approach. The first major
results of our inquiry will be formulated at this point. By placing the widely
12 chapter two
discussed connection between Isa. 139 and 4055 [ 2.2.8.2] alongside and
against the connection between Ps. 93100 and Isa. 4055 [ 2.2.8.35], we
wish to give the latter the special emphasis it deserves. The proposal will
be made that this cycle of Yhwh-Kingship psalms should be considered
the most insightful guide to reading the drama of Isa. 4055 properly. In
addition, these first findings of our intertextual inquiry are used to chal-
lenge an assortment of modern eschatological dilemmas, which may either
assist or restrict our understanding of Deutero-Isaiahs promise of the new
[ 2.2.9]. After all, most hermeneutical prejudices are recognised as such
only in retrospect.
The second chapter closes with Isa. 65. In other words, on the following
pages, after a long and adventurous journey and using the new song for
Yhwh as point of departure, we will eventually reach the vision of a new
heaven and a new earth with which the book Isaiah concludes. How does
this dualistic concept unfold within the literary structure of Isa. 65 [ 2.3.1]?
How does it fit into the corpus of Trito-Isaiah as a whole [ 2.3.2]? And to
what extent is the scope of Deutero-Isaiahs orientation of time, which we
propose is so closely related to the concept of time in the fourth book of
Psalms, still applicable in this eventual promise of a brand new creation
[ 2.3.3]?
Answering this line of questioning thoroughly could possibly change the
course of the discussion on the relationship between eschatology and the
apocalyptic in the history of Israels religion [ 2.3.4]. Whilst an intertextual
approach naturally cannot do without religio-historical insights (for exam-
ple, concerning divine enthronement in the Psalms), it is shown that religio-
historical conclusions would equally benefit from a reconsidered intertex-
tual approach.
Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship
2.1. A New Song: Psalms 96 and 98
Arranged in a descending linguistic analogy, these are all the clauses in the
Old Testament containing the term new song:
Isa. 42:10
Ps. 96:1
Ps. 98:1
Ps. 149:1
Ps. 33:3
newness in the psalms on yhwhs kingship 13
Ps. 144:9
Ps. 40:4
The term new song probably occurred first in the individual hymn of
thanksgiving (cf. Ps. 40:4). Yhwh had offered deliverance and therefore the
supplicant raises a new song, encouraging others to join. Here, new says
nothing about the originality of the text, but characterises the song as
an answer to Gods amazing intervention. In the same line of thought,
Ps. 98 could use new in response to Israels deliverance [on the relation to
Ps. 96 2.1.3]. The fundamental division of roles in the individual hymn of
thanksgiving (the supplicant and the onlookers) also has a function in Ps. 98.
From the time of the exile, individual psalm genres helped shape collective
experience.
New song is probably not an original terminus technicus for enthrone-
ment psalm or eschatological song.1 Though, based on Ps. 96 and 98 the term
could have been bestowed such connotations. For example, as a new song,
Ps. 33 also celebrates Yhwhs kingship, and the same can be said for the much
younger Ps. 149.2 We will pay further attention to this issue when treating the
composition of Ps. 93100 below [ 2.1.4].
In the following sections, Ps. 96 and 98 are explored in a first reading.
Their affinity to Deutero-Isaiah is touched upon briefly, but we will postpone
the crucial question on the direction of dependence [ 2.2.8.3]. An initial
observation will suffice for the moment: In Ps. 96 and 98 only the song is
called new and not the divine intervention it answers.
2.1.1. Psalm 96
1 Sing to Yhwh a new song,
sing to Yhwh, oh all the earth.
1 Cf. S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien, Bd. 2, Kristiania 1922 [Amsterdam 1961], 3: Dem
neuen Knige gebhrt ein neues Lied; cf. 46, 66, 199; A. Weiser, Die Psalmen (ATD, 1415),
Bd. 2, Gttingen 61963, 436: Angesichts des grossen Neuwerdens, das mit dem Advent Gottes
hereinbricht, gengen die alten Lieder nicht mehr; der Erneuerung des Gottesbundes fr das
neue Jahr () muss auch ein neues Lied entsprechen; J.H. Eaton, Psalms of the Way and the
Kingdom: A Conference with the Commentators (JSOT.S, 199), Sheffield 1995, 117 mentions a
new song for a new era. According to T. Longman, Psalm 98: A Divine Warrior Victor Song,
JETS 27 (1984), 267274 a new song is a song celebrating a military victory (269).
2 Ps. 33:13 contains a few clauses that are analogous to clauses in Ps. 98; for an overview
see H. Leene, Psalm 98 and Deutero-Isaiah: Linguistic Analogies and Literary Affinity, in:
R.-F. Poswick (ed.), Actes du Quatrime Colloque International Bible et Informatique: Matriel
et Matire (Amsterdam 1994), Paris 1995, 313340. Ps. 149, like Ps. 98, uses the title for
Yhwh.
14 chapter two
2 Sing to Yhwh, bless his name,

proclaim his liberation day by day.
3 Declare among the nations his glory,
among all the peoples his marvellous deeds.
4 For great is Yhwh and most worthy of praise,
Fearful is he above all the gods.
5 For all the gods of the peoples are idols,
but Yhwh made the heavens.
6 Splendour and majesty are before him,
strength and glory are in his sanctuary.
7 Give to Yhwh, oh families of the peoples,
give to Yhwh glory and strength.
8 Give to Yhwh the glory of his name,
bring an offering and come into his courts.
9 Bow before Yhwh in [his] holy majesty,
writhe before him, oh all the earth.
10 Say among the nations: Yhwh is king,
the world is firmly established, it cannot be shaken;
he will judge the peoples in equity.
11 Let the heavens be glad and the earth rejoice,
let the sea thunder, and whatever fills it.
12 Let the fields be jubilant, and all that is on it,
then let all the trees of the forest cry out for joy
13 before the face of Yhwh, for he has come,
for he has come to rule the earth.
He will rule the world in righteousness
and the peoples in his faithfulness.
The psalm consists of two strophes of three lines each and two strophes of
four lines each: vv. 13, 46, 710 and 1113. These strophes are grouped in
two stanzas of equal proportions, vv. 16 and 713. In this manner the three-
fold in v. 7 and v. 8 reflects the threefold in v. 1 and v. 2. Furthermore,
declare among the nations in v. 3 corresponds with say among the nations
in v. 10. The stanzas have imperative verses in their first strophe and moti-
vational -sentences in their second.
On the division we follow, see e.g. C. Petersen, Mythos im Alten Testament (BZAW,
157), Berlin 1982, 183184. Many commentaries assume two strophes 16 | 713,
which are subdivided into smaller segments; e.g. H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen (BKAT, 15),
Neukirchen-Vluyn 51978, 834838; A.A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms (NCB), vol. 2,
London 1972, 681; M.E. Tate, Psalms 51100 (WBC, 20), Waco, TX 1990, 514; Th. Booij,
Psalmen (POT), dl. 3, Nijkerk 1994, 153155. The main question is whether a caesura
should be made after or before v. 10; see for the latter, e.g. J. Ridderbos, De Psalmen
(COT), dl. 2, Kampen 1958, 445. A division into three parts has also been advo-
cated: 16 | 710 | 1113 [R. Kittel, Die Psalmen (KAT, 13), Leipzig 5 61929, 315317;
J.P.M. van der Ploeg, Psalmen (BOT, 7B), dl. 2, Roermond 1974, 147; K. Koenen, Jahwe
wird kommen, zu herrschen ber die Erde: Ps 90110 als Komposition (BBB, 101), Wein-
heim 1995, 67; F.-L. Hossfeld, E. Zenger, Psalmen 51100 (HThKAT), Freiburg 32000,
666667] or 16 | 79 | 1013 [H. Schmidt, Die Psalmen (HAT, 1/15), Tbingen 1934,
178179].
13. Singing the new song proclaims Yhwhs liberation and relates his mar-
vellous deeds. There are no reasons for assuming addresses before the im-
peratives in v. 2 and v. 3 other than the address in v. 1, even though it sounds
illogical that all the earth must tell something among the nations. We find
the same transition in v. 9 and v. 10; some commentaries reason that v. 3 and
v. 10 are addressed to Israel, but within the confines of the psalm this possi-
bility is less likely.3
Between the worldwide spatial dimensions of vv. 1 and 3, a prominent
indication of time is provided in v. 2: the message must be proclaimed
day by day. The two parallel series, his namehis liberation (2) and
his gloryhis marvellous deeds (3), convey the content of the message.
What liberating intervention and which remarkable deeds of Yhwh are
meant?
In the associated Ps. 98 these words imply a historical experience [ 2.1.2].
The same could be accounted for in Ps. 96.4 Though, three reservations can
be made: (a) In the first stanza of Ps. 96 the motivation to sing is based on
Yhwhs acts of creation, differently to Ps. 98. (b) Israels historical liberation
is not articulated in Ps. 96:13 as clearly as it is in Ps. 98:13. (c) With
one thinks less of a singular act in this first song; although day by
day is formally connected to spreading the message, this provision readily
extends to encompass the liberation itself, as it can be experienced over a
longer period of time.5
3 So too E. Zenger, Das Weltenknigtum des Gottes Israel (Ps 90106), in: N. Lohfink,
E. Zenger (eds), Der Gott Israels und die Vlker: Untersuchungen zum Jesajabuch und zu den
Psalmen (SBS, 154), Stuttgart 1994, 151178, esp. 161: Sagt unter den Vlkern (zueinander): ;
alternatively Hossfeld-Zenger, Psalmen, 667. A further question is whether the address to
Israel may be accepted once Ps. 96 is read as the intended continuation of Ps. 95 [ 2.1.3.1].
4 According to H.L. Ginsberg, A Strand in the Cord of Hebraic Hymnody, ErIs 9 (1969),
4550, esp. 46 both terms in Ps. 96 indicate Yhwhs salvation for the whole world. According
to Anderson, Psalms, 682, in Ps. 96:3 can indicate both acts of creation and salvation.
Koenen, Komposition, 72 applies the word in Ps. 96 to Yhwhs acts as creator, in Ps. 98 in
contrast to his acts of salvation [further 2.1.3.1].
5 It is unlikely that is aimed at the ber mehrere Tage sich erstreckenden
Kultfeier (Weiser, Psalmen, 430).

16 chapter two
46. Yhwhs elevation above the gods provides the motivation for the pre-
ceding calls. The two verses commencing with are arranged in a chiasm,
with the scheme Yhwhall the godsall the godsYhwh. The motivation
starts with nominal clauses and then refers to creation in a verbal clause.
That the whole earth must sing to Yhwh (v. 1), answers the assertion that he
was the sole creator of the heavens (v. 5). Heaven displays Yhwhs splendour
and majesty, strength and glory. Here a poetic personification of divine char-
acteristics may be considered. It is they, and not the gods of the nations, that
keep Yhwh company in his dwelling. The sanctuary, with which the strophe
ends, could thus be identified with the heaven just mentioned;6 but it could
simultaneously refer to Yhwhs earthly sanctuary, providing the clue for the
remainder of the song.
710. The third strophe reminds of the first, not only in the use of imperatives
at the start of the verses, but also in the recurring words peoples (vv. 7
and 10), all the earth (v. 9) and nations (v. 10). Two sub-strophes can be
distinguished, vv. 78 and vv. 910. The whole suggests a procession in which
the nations, like Israel, are making their way to Jerusalem, according to
their families, bearing gifts. Once in the temple of Jerusalem they receive
the instruction to proclaim the kingship of Yhwh across the world. The
exclamation [ 2.1.4] as such only means that Yhwh is or has become
king. Though, since this sovereignty must now be made known everywhere,
the psalm equally intimates that Yhwh accepts his kingship openly on this
very occasion. Given that Yhwh has just revealed himself as king, there are
no further reasons for the nations to doubt the worlds stability. The direct
speech in v. 10, which starts with , runs through to the end of the
verse. Yhwh will act as a just judge over the nations, and this everyone ought
to know.
1113. In the prosody, a weak caesura occurs after v. 12 even though v. 13

continues text-grammatically without a break. The jussive clauses in vv. 11
12 evoke heavens and earth, the sea, fields and trees to participate in the
joy of Yhwhs inauguration as king. The keywords heavens and earth are
taken up from earlier in the psalm (v. 11, cf. vv. 1, 5 and 9). However, the
6 In this respect the psalmist does not differ in opinion from the cultic sceptic whom
we will encounter in Isa. 66:12, discussed at the end of this chapter [ 2.3.2]. See also
H. Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart: Eine Theologie der Psalmen (FRLANT, 148), Gttingen 1989,
222 on Ps. 29: Ragte der irdische Tempel nicht in die himmlische Sphre hinein, wre er fr
die ihm zugedachte Funktion auf Erden untauglich.
exegetical discussion on v. 13 concentrates mainly on whether the repeated

form should be understood as a participle or perfect.7 One would first
expect the perfect tense in a motivational -sentence within a song of
thanksgiving. The action of Yhwhs coming and his public accession to the
divine kingship then coincide according to the psalm.
This statement in the perfect, accepting it as such for the moment, stands
in temporal opposition to the next clauses in the imperfect, which deal with
Yhwhs judgement and governance (v. 10 and v. 13). These clauses carry
a futurist orientation within the psalms dimensionality of time. Thus two
things must be spread among the nations: first, the truth that has been estab-
lished now (redemption in line with creation, Yhwhs newly proclaimed
kingship, the action of his coming as a fait accompli), and second, what the
world might expect will be realised from hence forward (a just rule). A text
like Isa. 2:4 offers insight into the possible meaning of such a rule: when
there is a case of unrest between the nations Yhwh will pass judgement, as
it is expected of a king. Thoughwhile the clause itself may allow
for such an interpretation, the broader literary context rather implicates the
wicked in general as the recipients of the divine verdict [ 2.1.3.1]; also see
Ps. 9:611. The clause ( v. 13) therefore suggests something in the
line that Yhwh will set things straight in the human world, in the broadest
sense of the word.
The sequencing in vv. 710 and 1113 reveals a climactic movement.8 In v. 9
and v. 10 the kingship of Yhwh is still presented as something ominous: the
world must shrink before his appearance. The joy on his coming dominates
vv. 1113. This is a cosmic joy, an exuberance in which everything that has
been created is involved. The adverbial phrase in equity, which modifies
the announced judgement (v. 10), is surpassed by the two adverbials in the
conclusion: in righteousness and in his faithfulness (v. 13). The concept
of righteousness hints at the world order that is insinuated by the firm
establishment in v. 10. To maintain this order Yhwh will offer justice; but
7 Most think of a participle, see e.g. F. Delitzsch, Biblischer Kommentar ber die Psalmen,
Leipzig 51894, 616; Tate, Psalms, 511; D.M. Howard, The Structure of Psalms 93100, Winona Lake
1997, 64. Alternatively, e.g. C.A. Briggs, E.G. Briggs, The Book of Psalms (ICC), vol. 2, Edinburgh
1907, 313; E.J. Kissane, The Book of Psalms, vol. 2, Dublin 1954, 125; Weiser, Psalmen, 430;
J. Jeremias, Das Knigtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem kanaanischen
Mythos in den Jahwe-Knig-Psalmen (FRLANT, 141), Gttingen 1987, 130131; Eaton, Kingdom,
121; cf. Booij, Psalmen, 159 n. 24, all think of a perfectum.
8 Perhaps one could speak of a tension between the writhing and the crying out for joy
of the earth in Ps. 96. This tension would then only be absolved at the end of the psalm cycles
dramatic movement, in Ps. 100 [ 2.1.3.1].
18 chapter two
he will always do this in his faithfulness. In other words, he will conduct

affairs in accordance to the positive relationssimilar to his bond with
Israelwhich he has entered with the other nations.
2.1.2. Psalm 98
1 A psalm.
Sing to Yhwh a new song,
for he has done marvellous deeds.
His right hand has brought him liberation,
his own holy arm.
2 Yhwh has made his liberation known,
before the eyes of the nations he has revealed his righteousness.
3 He has remembered his kindness and faithfulness
to the house of Israel.
All the ends of the earth have seen
the liberation of our God.
4 Shout for joy to Yhwh, oh all the earth,
break forth and cry out and sing.
5 Sing to Yhwh with the lyre,
with the lyre and the sound of singing.
6 With trumpets and the sound of the horn,
shout for joy before the king, Yhwh.
7 Let the sea thunder, and whatever fills it,
the world and those who live on it.
8 Let the rivers clap with their hands,
the mountains together cry out
9 before the face of Yhwh, for he has come
to rule the earth.
He will rule the world in righteousness
and the peoples in equity.
After the heading, the psalm can be divided into two stanzas, 13 and 49.
Each stanza consists of two strophes: 1 and 23; respectively 46 and 79.
The division into two stanzas reminds of Ps. 96.9
9 The division of Ps. 98 into two (13, 49) or three strophes (13, 46, 79) is open
to discussion. For an overview of the possibilities, see P. Auffret, la face du roi YHWH:
tude structurelle du psaume 98, in: Idem, Merveilles nos yeux: tude structurelle de vingt
psaumes dont celui de 1 Ch 16:836 (BZAW, 235), Berlin 1995, 7076, esp. 70. Though both
stanzas carry a movement from invitoire to motif (75), this does not correspond precisely
with the subdivision into strophes.
1. The first strophe contains a call to sing a new song and is followed by
a motivation: the liberation was achieved through Yhwhs own handwork.
The most difficult question in the exposition of Ps. 98 is how to under-
stand this liberation. Schematically three opinions can be determined in
the exegetical literature, namely: (1) the cultic; (2) the future eschatologi-
cal; and (3) the historical point of view. The last group is subdividable into
what could be called the specific historical (3a), and the general historical
view (3b).
(1) The cultic view argues that the narrated liberation merely evokes what
is experienced in the cult. This view is inadequate on logical grounds.
If it could be assumed that the songs performance had been accompa-
nied by a cultic action, then the song would have expressed what this
cultic action referred toand not vice versa. Cultic interpretations do
not relieve us from the obligation of indicating which reality the action
might intend.10
(2) The future-eschatological point of view amounts to the following:
though the liberation had been accomplished within the imaginary
world of the text, in reality it still has to come.11 The reader must weigh
this opinion against the alternative: that what he himself might be
inclined to think still lies in the future, is a given fact according to the
text. The decisive criterion in this dilemma appears to be the imperati-
val form of the hymn. The urgent calls for praise and recognition reveal
a tension between the readers own inclination and what he ought to
see according to the text. In a futurist standpoint on the sung salvation,
this tension would fall away.
(3a) Many commentaries consider the historical experience of Israels re-
turn from exile as the psalms subject. This view directly opposes Mo-
winckels categorical statement that die Thronbesteigungspsalmen
keine zeitgeschichtliche Anspielungen enthalten.12 According to Mo-
winckel, who rejected the idea that Ps. 98 could be dependent on Isa.
4055, the arm of Yhwh in v. 1 refers to the creation struggle;13 but this
is unlikely, even when not accounting for the diachronic relation to
Deutero-Isaiah [ 2.2.8.3]. The text of the psalm makes unambiguous
10 Thus Weiser, Psalmen, 435438 speaks of a cultic representation of Yhwhs previous and
future salvation.
11 See e.g. W.O.E. Oesterly, The Psalms, London 1939, 426.
12 Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien, 38.
13 Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien, 50.
20 chapter two
historical references in its use of the house of Israel and the nations
as actants. However, we must concede that a specific, non-figurative
indication of the end of the exile is indeed absent from Ps. 98.14
(3b) The last may lead to points of view such as that held by Tate: Ps. 98
has no specific historical reference () and should not be forced into
the mould of the exodus or the restoration from exile, or any other
specific historical context. The psalm encompasses the whole range
of Yahwehs victories.15 The choice between the specific-historical (3a)
and this more general-historical interpretation (3b) depends on the
context in which Ps. 98 is read; the psalm itself offers no definite clue.
At most it can be said that Ps. 98 rather presents the liberation as one
resounding victory than as a series of victories. We will return to this
point in 2.1.3.1.
23. The motivation from the first strophe, which different to Ps. 96 uses just
the perfect tense, is elaborated in the second strophe. The theme of deliver-
ance forms the most important bridge with the first strophe, represented by
the root . A new element is found in the being made known. The centre
line expresses Yhwhs kindness and faithfulness to the house of Israel, and
is enclosed by lines revealing how the nations have seen his liberation take
effect before their eyes. The expression He has remembered for the sake of
his and his , does not appear elsewhere in the Old Testament
(see too Ps. 25:6), but is comparable to He has remembered for the sake of
his ( Ps. 106:45; cf. Lev. 26:45). Both expressions remind of Yhwhs lib-
erating intervention set in the extension of a previous history of salvation.
The idea that this intervention reveals a beneficial world order rests in the
word that accompanies in v. 2: .
46. The second half of the song repeats the movement from calling to moti-
vation. This time the calling consists of a series of imperatives directed at
the (inhabitants of) the whole world. They are invited to sing for joy under
the accompaniment of musical instruments and to cheer Yhwh as king. The
( v. 6) is also used in 2Kgs 9:13 as an instrument at the inauguration
of a king. The link between this and the previous strophe suggests that
with the realisation of his act of liberationYhwh has accepted his divine
14 The only psalm that explicitly deals with the return from exile is Ps. 126; implicitly
perhaps Ps. 85.

15 Tate, Psalms, 524.
kingship. According to the psalm the two go hand in hand. Ever since the
nations have had to witness Israels liberation, nothing remains for them
but to acknowledge Yhwh as king.
79. Jussive sentences express the wish that the sea and the continent, rivers
and mountains, must contribute to the celebrations at the inaugural feast.
The clapping of hands, here resounding in the clatter of rivers, character-
istically accompanies enthronements in the world of the Old Testament.
The motivation to invite, not only all the inhabitants of the world but more-
over the totality of the created reality, to this royal inauguration, follows in
v. 9, and is formulated in line with Ps. 96:13. Israels liberation denotes Yhwhs
accession to the divine kingship, and this accession marks the beginning of
his righteous rule over the nations.16 As king, Yhwh will pass judgement in
all fairness, and in this way, with Israels deliverance as main orientation, he
will bring about a peaceful world order.
In this and the previous section we have seen that it is not easy to explain
either Ps. 96 or 98 without aligning them side by side. Therefore, they
are compared in greater detail in the next section, where it will also be
determined to what extent the literary environment of the fourth book of
Psalms (Ps. 90106) can guide us further with their interpretation.
2.1.3. Contextual Embedding of Psalms 96 and 98

2.1.3.1. Complementary Natures
Prominent differences are detectable between Ps. 96 and 98 along with the
noted agreements.17 These distinctions are evident in the patterns of the
psalms actants, vocabulary, and poetic structures, which in unison help
modify the psalms presentations. An overview of the major actants may
serve as an illustration. At first glance it is noticeable that the house of Israel
is not included in Ps. 96, and the gods are absent from Ps. 98. The cosmic
players in the drama show a certain complementarity: the fields and trees
in Ps. 96 contrast the rivers and mountains in Ps. 98.
16 Yhwhs coming in Ps. 98 reminds of his victorious return to the temple in Ps. 24:7, 9, but
due to the judicial aspect, the portrayal of the theophany in Ps. 50:3 also comes to mind.
17 For the similarities, see e.g. Howard, Psalms 93100, 144149.
22 chapter two
Ps. 96 Ps. 98
Yhwh Yhwh
gods
peoples peoples
house of Israel
temple
heaven
earth earth
sea sea
fields
trees
rivers
mountains
We will refrain from drawing further summarising comparisons, and will

instead concentrate on how the prominent contrasts, which appear on all
the text levels, collaborate.
(a) Ps. 96 is addressed more explicitly to the peoples than Ps. 98. All the earth
is invited to sing a new song at the start of Ps. 96, while in Ps. 98 the first
call to the whole world is made in v. 4. An invitation to the families of the
peoples (96:7), to approach the courts of the sanctuary bearing gifts, cannot
be found in Ps. 98. In addition, Ps. 96 strikes a more universal note than Ps. 98
by applying the word to all the peoples (96:13) and not restricting it to
Israel (98:3). At the end of Ps. 96, Yhwh promises faithfulness towards all the
nations.
(b) According to Albertz, the nouns of the root were first used to indi-
cate Yhwhs Rettungstaten in the Old Testament and gradually the meaning
expanded to cover all Gods acts, soda pl schlielich auch das Schp-
fungshandeln mit umfassen kann.18 Both psalms use the words and
side by side. Though, Ps. 96 especially elaborates the concept ,
notably to encompass creation and indicate the difference between Yhwh
and the gods in this creational context; while Ps. 98 rather connects to
the word and focuses on the liberation of Israel more strongly. In
this regard, attention is drawn to the alternative sequences
18 R. Albertz, Art. , in: THAT, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1978, 413420, esp. 418; in the same spirit,
J. Conrad, Art. , in: TWAT, Bd. 6, Stuttgart 1989, 569583, esp. 576577. On in Ps. 96
and 98 see also K. Koenen, Jahwe wird kommen, zu herrschen ber die Erde: Ps 90110 als
Komposition (BBB, 101), Weinheim 1995, 72.
(Ps. 96) and ( Ps. 98), each being at home within the structure
of the respective psalm.
(c) Both psalms proclaim Yhwhs coming as king, but with one noticeable
difference between their perspectives. Ps. 98 suggests that Yhwhs enthrone-
ment is taking place at this very moment. This immediacy can be seen in
the joyous shouting (), blowing the horn, and the clapping of hands.19
The festive homage reaches a climax in Ps. 98 compared to Ps. 96. Alterna-
tively, Ps. 96 projects Yhwhs present kingship back to the very beginning
of creation by connecting it retrospectively to the firm establishment of
the world. This comes close to Ps. 96 and 98 contradicting each other. The
unbiased reader may ask: Has Yhwh been king from time immemorial, or
must he still become king today? In any case, here the two songs are com-
plementary. We will explore this unmistakable tension further in the next
sections.
(d) Many of the differences mentioned above should be seen in relation to

the following observations. Ps. 96 shares many features with Ps. 29 that are
not present in Ps. 98.20 Thus there are no passages in Ps. 98 that compare to
Ps. 96:79; cf. 29:12. The so-called climactic parallelism of Ps. 29 is reflected
in the structure of Ps. 96:12, but has left no traces at the beginning of Ps. 98.
The repetition of , through which 96:13 differs from 98:9,21 on its part
causes the staircase rhythm that reminds strongly of Ps. 29. Ps. 96 shares
terms with Ps. 29 (, , , , ), which are absent from Ps. 98. An
exception is , which could be a reminiscent of Ps. 29:3 in 96:11 as well
as in 98:7. The mentioned heavens, gods, and trees, along with the clearer
references to the creation myth in general as compared to Ps. 98,22 might
equally be linked up due to the close affinity between Ps. 96 and Ps. 29. The
quotation from Ps. 93:1 in 96:10 [ ] strengthens
this archaic-mythical orientation [for the dating of Ps. 93 2.1.3.2].
We can now attempt to understand the differences and similarities between

Ps. 96 and 98 in light of the overall arrangement of the fourth book of Psalms.
19 M.Z. Brettler, God is King: Understanding an Israelite Metaphor (JSOT.S, 76), Sheffield
1989, 133, 152.

20 Besides the commentaries, see esp. Jeremias, Knigtum, 125, who considers Ps. 96:19
as eine moderne Exegese von Ps 29,1f.

21 Different from the LXX in Codex Alexandrinus.
22 Jeremias, Knigtum, 133.
24 chapter two
Recent studies have shown that these two songs are embedded within a
larger composition.23 How, considering their complementary natures, do
they fit in the greater whole? A few methodological principles require clar-
ification as an introduction to our contextual observations. When can a
psalms placement in a collection contribute berhaupt to its meaning?
This may be possible if a psalm (a) shares common vocabulary with other
psalms in its vicinity. From a readers point of view, such repetitions across
psalm borders represent a minimal requirement for the establishment of
contextual cohesion. Their cohesive effects escalate (b) where communal
phrases or entire analogous clauses can be indicated; or (c) if several word
repetitions support each other in connecting the two psalms. Such repeti-
tions can lead a reader to identify (d) a common theme, the rhetorical devel-
opment of an argument, or the progression of an action within the sequence
of a psalm collection. The sequence can be called dramatic if the reader has
the impression that the connected psalms carry him through a succession
of actions. Word repetitions that are not supported by neighbouring word
repetitions and do not signal communality in theme, rhetorical strategy or
action, hold little significance, or even escape the readers attention.
In a panoramic view from Ps. 96 and 98 over the psalms in the direct
vicinity, the truly meaningful contextual links stretch back no further than
Ps. 93 and forward no further than Ps. 100.24
23 Koenen, Komposition, 3035 offers summaries of the proposals by Goulder, Howard,
Tate, Zenger, Millard and Koch. Howard, Psalms 93100, 419 provides an instructive overview
of studies on structure and redaction history of the Psalms since the 1970s. E. Beaucamp,
Le Psautier, vol. 2, Paris 1979, 136 speaks of Ps. 100 as the doxological finale of the collection
Ps. 91100. According to M.E. Tate, Psalms 51100 (WBC, 20), Waco, TX 1990, 508509, Ps. 96
99 consists of two twin-psalms, 9697 and 9899, which together form an ABAB pattern due
to their parallel content. P. Auffret, Yahv regne: tude structurelle du psaulme 93, ZAW 103
(1991), 101109, esp. 101 views Ps. 93101 as a structured unit. E. Zenger, Israel und die Kirche im
gemeinsamen Gottesbund: Beobachtungen zum theologischen Programm des 4. Psalmen-
buchs, in: M. Marcus et al. (eds), Israel und Kirche heute: Beitrge zum christlich-jdischen
Gesprch. Fs. E.L. Ehrlich, Freiburg 1991, 238257, esp. 240242 sees a 7+1 pattern in Ps. 93100;
see also F.-L. Hossfeld, E. Zenger, Psalmen 51100 (HThKAT), Freiburg 32000, 707709 on the
concluding function of Ps. 100. Koenen himself attempts to demonstrate that the composition
stretches over Ps. 90110. K.A. Deurloo, ist Knig geworden geschichtlich verstanden
(Ps. 90100), in: H. Pavlincov, D. Papouek (eds), The Bible in Cultural Context, Brno 1994,
8186 limits it to Ps. 90100. Other authors are sceptical about the planned arrangements
of larger groups of psalms; see e.g. N. Whybray, Reading the Psalms as a Book (JSOT.S, 222),
Sheffield 1996.
24 This is not to say, for example, that Ps. 93 cannot have connections with Ps. 9092. The
cycle 93100 could gradually have expanded.

Ps. 96 and Ps. 93 are connected by three consecutive clauses in 96:10 taken
from 93:1: Yhwh is king, the world is firmly established, it cannot be shaken.
Their recurrence causes a dramatic effect: what dates back to primeval ages
and has been confirmed to Israel through Yhwhs torah and temple, must
nowaccording to 96:10be openly acknowledged by all the peoples. In
this light, the repetition of strength in 96:6 from 93:1 may be observed as
an additional link.25
Little effort is required to make sense of the word connections between
Ps. 94:2 and 96:13. The phrasing that Yhwh has come to rule the earth can be
understood as a response to the petition presented earlier to the ruler of the
earth to rise up against the wicked.26 Here too, a dramatic progression can be
observed: a passionate plea precedes the divine answer. The call for judicial
intervention in Ps. 94 follows the declaration of Yhwhs eternal kingship in
Ps. 93, which in turn agrees with the sequence of the two themes (Yhwh
as king and judge) in Ps. 96. Furthermore, these relations guide us in our
interpretation of Ps. 96:13: ruling the world, in light of Ps. 94, means silencing
the wicked in their arrogance.
Ps. 95 and 96 are also related to each other. The terms great and above all
gods, used in connection with Yhwh in Ps. 95:3 and Ps. 96:4, deepen the con-
sonance between these two psalms. The same can be said for the connection
via come and bow before in 95:6 and 96:89. The sequence between the
two psalms allows for the invitation presented within a we-group (Israel
as cult community) to precede a similar invitation to all the peoples. The
main effect of this sequential arrangement is that it brings the new song
Ps. 96 into clear historical perspective. After remembering Israels journey
through the wilderness in Ps. 95 (Massah and Meribah!), the new song Ps. 96
encourages viewing a new phase in the history of salvation. Based on its own
historical experiences (Ps. 95), Israel could recognise the kingship of Yhwh
25 Cf. E. Zenger, Das Weltenknigtum des Gottes Israel (Ps 90106), in: N. Lohfink, E.
Zenger (eds), Der Gott Israels und die Vlker: Untersuchungen zum Jesajabuch und zu den
Psalmen (SBS, 154), Stuttgart 1994, 151178, esp. 158.
26 Cf. Koenen, Komposition, 6970. Compare the relation between Ps. 93 (waters of the
chaos) and 94 (the wicked) with Isa. 57:20: the wicked are like the tossing sea. On the close
relation between Ps. 93 and 94 see also Howard, Psalms 93100, 105109; in summary 173.
However, it is surprising that Howard does not pay any attention to the question-answer
relations between Ps. 94 and 9698. In this regard the single word field, to which hif.
(94:1), with Yhwh as subject (96:13; 98:9), and ( 97:3) belong, is important. They
also appear as typical terms of the theophany in Ps. 50:2, 3. The question-answer relation
that determines the structure of the whole cycle is formulated as a theme in Ps. 99:6.
26 chapter two
long before the time of recognition that has now come for the entire family
of mankind (Ps. 96).
Many words and phrases from Ps. 96 return in Ps. 97.27 They can be
arranged as follows:
(a) all the earth, the peoples, the world;
(b) be glad, rejoice; praise;
(c) the earth that trembles, and this before the face of Yhwh;
(d) the association between the heavens and the glory of Yhwh;
(e) all the gods, that are mere idols and must bow before Yhwh who is
king and thus elevated above all the gods.
Especially the indicated word connections in (c) suggest a communal ac-
tion: Yhwhs theophany in Ps. 97:26 is a visual portrayal of his coming to rule
the earth in Ps. 96:13. Understood in this way, the reading of as a per-
fect clause in 96:13 [ 2.1.1] finds support in Ps. 97, where the world has
seen Yhwh appearing as ruler (v. 4), just as Zion has heard his judgments
(v. 8).
The threads from Ps. 97 continue in Ps. 98. The righteousness that has
been revealed before the eyes of the nations reminds of the righteousness
in 97:1112, and the kindness and faithfulness he showed to the house
of Israel (98:3) reflects on the faithful in 97:10.28 As the true Israel, these
faithful and righteous ones are the very beneficiaries of Yhwhs liberating
arrival as king and judge; which in turn answers the earlier plea in Ps. 94
for Yhwhs righteous intervention. The liberation through Yhwhs holy arm
(98:1) can be understood, using this model of interpretation, as the righteous
being delivered from the hand of the wicked (97:10).
In this way, two aspects of the divine intervention are emphasised
through the dramatic sequence in Ps. 96-97-98. These aspects are arranged
in the same sequence in Deutero-Isaiah, as we will demonstrate later in this
chapter [ 2.2.8.4]: first the shaming of the wicked (Ps. 96 and 97a) and sec-
ond the liberation of Yhwhs devotees (97b and 98).
Due to its placement in the cycle, Ps. 99 suggests that the verdict over the
idolaters has now been carried out. Thus, once more peoples are spoken
of, as are Yhwhs kingship, his greatness and formidability, and his being
27 Cf. Koenen, Komposition, 73. Howard, Psalms 93100, 143: () Psalms 96 and 97 are
unique among Psalms 93100 in sharing so many terms that are not used elsewhere in the
group.
28 Compare also // in 97:11 with // in 98:9.
elevated above all peoples. In Ps. 99, the role of the idols and their devotees
(cf. 96:4; 97:7) however appears to have ceased.29 Furthermore, the combina-
tion between strength (cf. 96:6, 7) and justice (cf. 97:2, 8) is interesting in
99:4: The strength of the king loves justice. The term equity connects anew
to Ps. 96 and 98. In this way, the justice and righteousness you have done in
Jacob (99:4b) refer back to the previous psalms, especially Ps. 98, reminding
of the redemption which the reader had witnessed a few moments ago. In
all, the trisagion in Ps. 99 establishes Yhwhs presence in the temple, follow-
ing the action of his coming in Ps. 9698.30
Ps. 100 takes up the invitation directed at all the earth in Ps. 96 to come
before him with joyful songs and to bless the name of Yhwhalbeit with
a different accent. What appears to have fallen away since Ps. 96 is the call
to all the earth to tremble before the face of Yhwh. This confirms that the
sentencing of the idolaters has taken place in the meanwhile (97:7), and is
now a closed episode in the drama. Ps. 100 can be understood as following:
all the earth is eventually involved in the liberation of Israel, without reserve.
Anyone from anywhere in the world who recognises Yhwh as God, may
like Israel belong to the sheep of his pasture.31 The reoccurrence of the
term , faithfulness, in 100:5 from 96:13 is a prominent signal. Yhwhs
faithfulness towards the peoples stated by Ps. 96 in a coherence, which is
still full of tension due to their potential allegiance to other gods, is freed
from whatever restrictions at the close of Ps. 100.
The impression of a continuous action in Ps. 93100 is thus clear. It is
created whenever the reader feels that he is witnessing an event that has
not yet taken place earlier in the cycle, particularly Yhwhs coming to rule
the earth. This coming is stated as a fact in Ps. 96 and 98, and in Ps. 97 it
is portrayed in detail. Yhwhs arrival coincides firstly with the shaming of
the worshippers of idols in Ps. 96, and secondly with the liberation of Israel
in Ps. 98. The preceding prayer in Ps. 94 looks eagerly forward to it. The
following trisagion in Ps. 99 looks back on it thankfully. If the earth were
beseeched to shudder before Yhwh in Ps. 96, in Ps. 100 she cannot but shout
for joy at Yhwhs universal goodness and faithfulness.
When we reconsider the term liberation in Ps. 96 and 98, it is clear from
the surrounding cycle of psalms that its exposition tends towards a historical
29 Cf. Deurloo, Knig, 8485.

30 This sequencing corresponds to historical texts in which sitting on the throne was one
of the concluding rites of the coronation ritual (Brettler, King, 135).
31 See esp. Zenger, Weltenknigtum, 165170.
28 chapter two
and not a future-eschatological orientation. Only in this way is it possible

for this liberation to offer a new opportunity after Massah and Meribah,
where Israel experienced Gods hand at work (Ps. 95:89). The motivation
to implore Yhwh today as he had been petitioned previously by Moses,
Aaron and Samuel (Ps. 99:6) rests in what Yhwh has just done to Jacob.
The cantata places the sung liberation in a historical sphere. The portrayal
of the theophany in Ps. 97 fits in this framework. It does not ponder on a
distant, eschatological future, but reflects on precisely what is happening
in the present. The text is rather an evocation, and can be understood as a
literary dramatisation, in handed down presentations, of what was reality
for Yhwhs devoteesin their presentin the deepest sense.32 It follows
then that Yhwhs coming to rule the earth in Ps. 96 and 98 could be called
the reality of their experienced redemption.
Do these contextual indications, it may be asked [ 2.1.2], point us to-
wards a specific or a general historical interpretation of Ps. 98? The cycle
does not specifically mention the return from exilethis must be granted
to Mowinckel. While the liberation here cannot be associated directly with
the military overthrow of Babylon, as we have seen, it instead conveys the
end of the suppression of the just under the power of the wicked in gen-
eral terms (Ps. 97:10; cf. 94:3, 13). Though, since this liberation is presented
as one spectacular deed of faithfulness to Israel, not only in Ps. 98 but also
in the literary environment (see Ps. 97:8; 99:4), the establishment of the (sec-
ond) temple itself might be proposed as a plausible historical alternative. In
no other occasion was liberation within the post-exilic Judean community
experienced as intensively, nowhere else is their regained freedom articu-
lated as clearly as in this joyous event.
On the building of the second temple, see Isa. 44:28; Hag.Zech. 8 and Ezra 16.
According to the data provided by resp. Zech. 7:1 and Ezra 6:15, it was completed
either in the 4th year of Darius (518517bce), or on the 3rd day of the 12th month of
the 6th year of Darius (spring 515). This data could be determined by a more general
or a more specific calculation of 70 years from after the destruction of the temple
in 586. For a discussion in this regard, see D. Edelman, The Origins of the Second
Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem, London 2005. Her
hypothesis is that the rebuilding in reality took place during the reign of Artaxerxes,
32 Th. Booij, Psalmen (POT), dl. 3, Nijkerk 1994, 161 (our translation); contra F. Delitzsch,
Biblischer Kommentar ber die Psalmen, Leipzig 51894, 658 and many others. On the cycle
as a whole see also Deurloo, Knig, 86: Die Dramatik, die man in dieser Reihe von Liedern
wahrnehmen kann, bringt ein historisches Thema auf liturgische Weise zum Ausdruck.
Koenen, Komposition interprets the cycle eschatologically, see e.g. 70.
not long before the appearance of Nehemiah in the 5th century. Whatever the case,
the text of Ps. 98 possibly brings us close to the second temples inauguration as
such.
In anticipation of the diachronic relationship to Isa. 4055 [ 2.2.8.3] the fol-
lowing preliminary remarks are offered on the historic vagueness in this cycle of
psalms. The Persian liberation had not yet become crystallised into the historical
picture as suggested by DI and esp. Ezra 16. On the contrary, the cycles inclusion
of Ps. 98 reflects its sustained vagueness or impetus for generalisation. The move-
ment from Ps. 98 via DI to Ezra 16 seems to travel in the opposite direction, i.e. to
historical anchoring of this immediate cultic experience. Songs of liberation in our
own culture still precede the detailing of the liberation narrative. Within the cycle,
the most concrete expression of the liberation is the temple itself, as representing
the place of Gods advent and full presence. But as mentioned above, our proof for
this possible development is kept in trust.
It cannot be a coincidence that Ps. 96 is associated with the (first resp.
second) temple in 1Chron. 16 and the heading of the LXX-version. The
temple of Jerusalem is exceptionally prominent in the cycle Ps. 93100 (see
93:5; 95:2, 6; 96:6, 8; 98, 56; 99:5, 9; 100:4). Similar to a liberation monument
in our modern world, this temple signified to Israel its coming to rest, after
experiencing a turbulent past.33 This might explain why no need was felt for
any further historical references in this cantata.
2.1.3.2. Diachronic Aspects

Two subjects require attention in this section, the scribal production of
Ps. 96 and 98 as such, and their diachronic placement in the cycle Ps. 93
100, particularly in relation to Ps. 93. The following strong statement by
Spieckermann on the time difference between Ps. 93 and the other Yhwh-
Kingship songs may serve as an enticing challenge to the second theme:
Keines von ihnen ist alter als die Exilszeit und damit wahrscheinlich um
Jahrhunderte von Ps. 93 entfernt.34
Certain texts find their internal cohesion precisely when they are under-
stood in relation to a larger literary context. Ps. 96 is a schoolbook example,
33 According to G. Braulik, 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 Theolo-
gie der Psalmen. Fs H. Gro, Stuttgart 1987, 3344 Ps. 95:11 reminds of Deut. 12:9, but does
already indicate the place where Yhwh will establish his sanctuary in Deut. 12:9?
Regardless, it is clear that my rest at the close of Ps. 95 implicates the temple as the place of
Yhwhs unique presence (cf. Isa. 66:1), and in the cycle this forms a deliberate bridge to the
next psalm.
34 H. Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart: Eine Theologie der Psalmen (FRLANT, 148), Gttingen
1989, 185; italics HL.

30 chapter two
where v. 5 is considered a later addition because it speaks about the rela-

tion between Yhwh and the gods in less traditional terms than v. 4.35 The
regular structure of the psalm (2 strophes of 3 and 2 strophes of 4 lines) sug-
gests reading v. 5 as an authentic element. So too, v. 10a (the world is firmly
established and cannot be shaken) is often seen as an addition taken from
Ps. 93:1;36 but this colon fits perfectly in the creation-theological presenta-
tion that binds the psalm together. Rather v. 5 and v. 10 indicate that Ps. 96
had been forged into the unique song it is, in light of the cycle 93100.
We will return to the remarkable redactional title of Ps. 98 below. The
phrase in v. 2 is often seen as an addition from Isa. 52:10:37 the
verse breaks the psalms consistent 3+2 meter with a 3 + 2 + 2 pattern. Kraus
has asked whether a whole colon could not have fallen from the verse.38 This
issue sheds no light on the diachronic relationship between Ps. 96 and 98.
Compared to Ps. 96, Ps. 98 makes a homogeneous impression.
Older and younger psalms are included in the cycle Ps. 93100.39 The
weight of the evidence supports Ps. 96 being written for its current posi-
tion in the cycle and being modelled on an already existing Ps. 98.40 The
synchronic order differs here from the diachronic: the second song was com-
posed first. The poet of Ps. 96 then kept Ps. 98 in mind when he made no
more than a brief reference to Israels historical liberation. So too he could
have envisaged families of the peoples in 96:7 aligning with the house of
35 Cf. J. Jeremias, Das Knigtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem kanaa-
nischen Mythos in den Jahwe-Knig-Psalmen (FRLANT, 141), Gttingen 1987, 122, who refers
to Stolz and Loretz.
36 See e.g. BHK and BHS; C. Petersen, Mythos im Alten Testament (BZAW, 157), Berlin 1982,
184; Zenger, Weltenknigtum, 159; Howard, Psalms 93100, 113.

37 Cf. BHS; Jeremias, Knigtum, 132133. We see no grounds to think of two original
independent psalms in Ps. 98:13, 47 as done by H. Gunkel, Die Psalmen (HK, 2/2), Gttin-
gen 41926 and O. Loretz, Ugarit-Texte und Thronbesteigungspsalmen: Die Metamorphose des
Regenspenders Baal-Jahwe (Ps. 24,710; 29; 47; 93; 95100; sowie Ps. 77,1720; 114) (UBL, 7), Mn-
ster 1988.
38 H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen (BKAT, 15), Neukirchen-Vluyn 51978, 846.
39 So too Zenger, Weltenknigtum, 158165.
40 Cf. Booij, Psalmen, 154, 167. He mentions (169 n. 1) a selection of older commentaries in
support of this diachronic order. Jeremias, Knigtum, 135 tends towards seeing Ps. 98 as the
oldest, even though he insists elsewhere that the question of dependence cannot be solved
(131). D.M. Howard, The Structure of Psalms 93100, Winona Lake 1997, 150 also sees Ps. 98 as
the elder. In comparison, H.L. Ginsberg, A Strand in the Cord of Hebraic Hymnody, ErIs 9
(1969), 4550 says of Ps. 98: at first sight it looks like an abridgment of 96 (47). A. Weiser,
Die Psalmen (ATD, 1415), Bd. 2, Gttingen 61963, 436 argues that the one psalm need not be
modelled on the other, because they share the same cultic situation and are bound to the
same liturgical formulas that sufficiently explain the similarities.
Israel in 98:3.41 If indeed it is plausible to understand Ps. 96 as a younger

variant of Ps. 98, then this variant has also consulted Ps. 93 and 29, texts that
are anchored more firmly than Ps. 98 in the pre-exilic celebration of Yhwhs
kingship. Together Ps. 29 and 93 have left their mark on Ps. 96, though it
borrowed its basic poetic pattern from Ps. 98.
Did Ps. 96 and 98 (in this order) belong to the cycle Ps. 93100 before Ps. 97
took its position between them as trait dunion? Considering the careful
alignment of the three songs [ 2.1.3.1], this is difficult to accept.42 Instead,
we maintain that the triptych Ps. 96-97-98 formed the dramatic kernel of
the cycle from the onset. Without the theophany on the central panel, so it
appears to us, the outer two panels would remain floating in the air.
It is possible to determine the direction of dependence between texts
with a reasonable degree of certainty, as this study will demonstrate regu-
larly. On the other hand, it is rarely possible to connect absolute dates to the
relative timetables that such determinations may deliver. Ps. 98 is a post-
exilic text, we may agree with the majority of the commentaries. Therefore,
the same must be said of Ps. 96 and 97, which are obviously dependent on
it. So too probably, most of the psalms in this cycle belong to this post-exilic
period.43 Is Ps. 93, which Spieckermann placed without hesitation in the pre-
vious centuries, the proverbial exception to the rule?
The dating of Ps. 93 is discussed often but without consensus. Those who
insist on an indivisible psalm text,44 base their arguments strongly on the
word your testimonies in v. 5. In its usual meaning, the word indicates
the torah (cf. Ps. 19:8). The idea that one experiences something of the stead-
fastness of the world in the combination torah and temple signifies post-
exilic theology.45 Other interpretations of v. 5 come across as forced.46 An
41 only appears three times in the Psalms. In Ps. 22:28 is parallel to
. See Zech. 14:17 for a comparison with Ps. 96 regarding .

42 Pace Zenger, Weltenknigtum, 163164; Hossfeld-Zenger, Psalmen, 709 refer to an Ora-
torium for cultic use, consisting of Ps. 93, 95, 96, 98 and 100, which was expanded later with
Ps. 94, 97 and 99 for a more realistic sense. Our discussion tends towards the point of view
that also in other respects, it is not easy to differentiate between these layers.
43 For an extensive discussion on the dating of Ps. 9699, see e.g. Tate, Psalms, 505507;
he also leans towards a post-exilic dating.

44 Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart, 330 does not differentiate any diachronic layers in Ps. 93
(while this is his programme in the remainder of the psalms he discusses, except Ps. 114).
45 See e.g. H. Irsigler, Thronbesteigung in Psalm 93?, in: W. Gro (ed.), Text, Methode und
Grammatik. Fs W. Richter, St. Ottilien 1991, 155190, esp. 158.

46 Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart, 185 on thinks of a (doch wohl priesterlich ver-
mittelten) Wort als Gebot, Gebet(sformular) oder Orakel. Such a solution is necessary when
32 chapter two
alternative approach reasons that the verse is a later addition to an already

existing psalm. Against this reasoning counts first that the combination of
chaos battle, divine kingship and temple is deeply rooted in the mythical
tradition,47 and second that the psalm would have difficulty maintaining
itself poetically without a fermata as provided in its current conclusion.
With the acceptance of further redactional additions, distinction from the
view that ancient themes and lines of thought are taken up in a relatively
young Ps. 93, becomes vague.48 This last point of view appears to be the most
plausible.49
It does not alter the fact that the two views of Yhwhs kingship in Ps. 93 and
98 must have had different roots. With this in mind, it becomes understand-
able why these two views had to be aligned in the way we have illustrated
earlier, via Ps. 96. In this sense, the genetic history of the cycle Ps. 93100
can be understood as a dialogue between two views of Yhwhs kingship. We
will pay further attention to this aspect in the next section [ 2.1.4].
Another discussion concerns the inclusion of these songs of praise cel-
ebrating Yhwhs kingship in a cycle that aims at teaching the devout. It
raises questions about the relationship between the collective liberation of
the house of Israel (Ps. 98:3) and the more specific, personal redemption
with which it is apparently associated by the supplicant, the redemption
of Yhwhs devotees from the hand of the wicked (Ps. 97:10). A preliminary
answer can perhaps be found in the remarkable heading above Ps. 98.
Ps. 98 and 100 are the only two psalms out of eight that have headings.50
A possible explanation is that Ps. 97 and 99 are for their part the only two
one insists on holding onto both the psalms textual unity and superior age, but this is not
evident.
47 See in particular KTU 1.24; the Song of the Sea in Ex. 15; Ps. 74:1217 in a complaint about
the destroyed temple; Isa. 44:2728. Conclusively on this tripartite mythopoetic pattern,
see T.N.D. Mettinger, In Search of the Hidden Structure: YHWH as King in Isaiah 4055,
in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an
Interpretive Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 142154, esp. 144145.
48 O. Loretz, Ugarit und die Bibel: Kanaanische Gtter und Religion im Alten Testament,
Darmstadt 1990, 50 sees redactional additions in Ps. 93:1a, 1b2, 5; cf. Loretz, Ugarit-Texte,
274303. The idea that the tricola on their own indicate the superior age is contested by
Ps. 100. Hossfeld-Zenger, Psalmen, 646 sees only v. 5 as exilic or post-exilic addition in order
to actualise a pre-exilic temple song vv. 14.
49 The pre-exilic dating of Ps. 29, often mentioned in one breath with Ps. 93, is sometimes
also questioned, see e.g. S. Kreuzer, Gottesherrschaft und Knigtum Gottes, SVT 61 (1995),
145161, esp. 149 n. 11 (lit.).
50 Ps. 9397 and Ps. 146150 form the longest series of psalms without title, besides
Ps. 111119.
psalms in the cycle that implore the righteous to praise Yhwh in their closing
verses. The adjacent heading, then, informs that this call could be answered
by singing the song that follows. An inconspicuous unique for the
Psalmssuffices for this purpose above Ps. 98. All that is added to in
the heading above Ps. 100 is the forward pointing ( cf. v. 4). In Ps. 98,
via its root points to the triple in vv. 45 (elsewhere in the cycle
only in Ps. 95:2).
This function of the headings as redactional links would mean that they
provide no indication of an original liturgical usage of Ps. 98 and 100.51 These
headings only serve to indicate the very devotee introduced in the preceding
verses as the one who is entitled to sing the new song, because he has
actually acknowledged the coming of Yhwh as a reality in his personal life.
The devotee is the cycles implied singer.52
Was it not the same devotee, who sought divine righteousness on behalf
of the widows and orphans at the beginning of the cycle (Ps. 94)? And is
it not the same devotee, who following closely in the footsteps of Moses,
Aaron and Samuel, knows Yhwh as the God that answers those who call
his name (Ps. 99)? From this it becomes clear that the entire dramatic
question-answer structure of the cycle Ps. 93100 correlates with personal
piety, the same piety that is hinted at by the headings just mentioned. This
point of view will have an effect upon our discussion on the eschatological
character of the songs in question [ 2.1.5].
2.1.4. Enthronement According to Psalms 93100

Since Gunkel, the group of enthronement psalms is usually limited to this
core group: 47, 93, (95,) 96, 97, 98, 99. Characteristic sayings in this group
include:
51 Correction to H. Leene, The Coming of YHWH as King: The Complementary Character
of Psalms 96 and 98, in: J.W. Dyk et al. (eds), Unless Some One Guide Me Fs K.A. Deurloo
(ACEBT.S, 2), Maastricht 2001, 211228, esp. 227. According to Hossfeld-Zenger, Psalmen, 687,
in MT might indicate a small caesura in Ps. 93100. Our proposal suggests the precise
opposite of a caesura.
52 Compare this to the harsh transition between Ps. 95:11 and 96:1: while Israels stubborn
desert generation may not enter Yhwhs rest, in Ps. 96 nota bene all the families of the
peoples are invited to enter his sanctuary! One could argue that Ps. 93100 not only offers
post-cultic meditation, but actually also evokes one to go to the temple. However, it is likely
that the songs that were composed specifically for the cycle, like Ps. 96 and 100, do not avoid
a certain idealising of the temple worship.
34 chapter two
Ps. 47:9
cf. Isa. 52:7
Isa. 24:23
Mic. 4:7
Ps. 146:10
Ps. 93:1
Ps. 96:10
cf. 1Chron. 16:31
Ps. 97:1
Ps. 99:1
cf. Ex. 15:18
That the qatal-x form of this utterance differs in meaning from the x-qatal
form has been shown to be a fruitful working hypothesis. The qatal-x form
(for example, Ps. 47:9) emphasises the action, the x-qatal form (for example,
Ps. 93:1) makes a statement about the person who has completed the action,
and indicates that this action has signified him hence forth: It is Yhwh, who
is (has become) king. The meaning is not affected whether one describes
the clause as a compound nominal clause,53 or a pendens clause;54 but it is
less accurate to call it a static clause, as if every reference to an action would
have disappeared from it.55
Apart from what they mean, the functions of the two types of clauses have
been discussed. Do they concern acclamation and proclamation formulas
associated specifically with enthronements; or could a kings subjects have
raised the exclamation repeatedly during his reign, such as after military
victories? The first suggestion seems to apply to the qatal-x form, which is
known from non-theological usage as proclamation (2 Sam. 15:10 Absalom;
53 See e.g. D. Michel, Studien zu den sogenannten Thronbesteigungspsalmen, in: Idem,
Studien zur berlieferungsgeschichte alttestamentlicher Texte (TB, 93), Gtersloh 1997, 125
153, esp. 136137; W. Schneider, Grammatik des Biblischen Hebrisch: Ein Lehrbuch, Mnchen
2001, 44.4.
54 See e.g. B. Janowski, Das Knigtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Bemerkungen zu einem
neuen Gesamtentwurf, ZThK 86 (1989) 389454, esp. 420 n. 108.

55 Jeremias, Knigtum, 158159; Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart, 180 n. 1 also prefers a
stative point of view. For a survey of the discussion of , see e.g. W.S. Prinsloo, Psalm
93: Jahwe is van altyd af Koning over alles en almal, NGTT 34 (1993), 248261, esp. 250 n. 13.
He does not reject the inchoative aspect in Ps. 93:1, even though he reasons that the psalm as
a whole emphasises the stable and permanent nature of Yhwhs kingship (258). J.H. Eaton,
Psalms of the Way and the Kingdom: A Conference with the Commentators (JSOT.S, 199),
Sheffield 1995 places the accent differently: But granted that the order subject-verb conveys
an emphasis on Yahweh as king, rather than his rivals, the contexts remain firm ground for
finding in an event-laden proclamation (117). Eaton underlines the contemporary
theological importance of recognising the inchoative character of the utterance (124).
2 Kgs 9:13 Jehu). The second is more likely applicable to the x-qatal form,
which then served as a call to celebrate, and could have been used directly
after the enthronement or equally well during other festive occasions.56
To avoid the interpretation being anticipated terminologically, many
commentators prefer the neutral designation Yhwh-Kingship psalms.
These could be divided into two groups: (a) 93, 97 and 99, thematic psalms,
to use a term of D. Michel; (b) 47, 96 and 98, psalms following the pattern of
the imperative hymns. One disadvantage associated with the term thematic
psalms is that it (unintentionally) suggests that these songs are mere med-
itations. The main question in this section is to what extent enthronement
remains a useful concept when explaining Ps. 93100.
To begin, an observation that we have not encountered anywhere else.
According to the exhaustive overview above, all the other instances with
are literarily dependent on Ps. 93:1. The formula has been identi-
fied readily as a remerging characteristic of the Gattung by form criticism;
though its being repeated should be seen foremost as a stylistic feature
within this unique cycle, as we have learned from recent research [ 2.1.3].
If reminds of a pre-exilic New-Years ritual, then its traces should be
detectable in especially Ps. 93:1. In this sense, Ps. 96:10 (cf. 1 Chron. 16:31), 97:1
and 99:1, can be viewed as reprisals and/or reinterpretations of a liturgical
formula that has retained most of its original couleur locale in Ps. 93:1.
Did Israel have an enthronement feast of Yhwh? Before answering this
question we will first inquire about the dating of Yhwhs presentation as
king.57 Three prominent arguments suggest that this imagery indeed be-
longed to the theology of Jerusalems temple during the Judean monar-
chy. These arguments are based on certain Old Testament passages, data
from the Canaanite Umwelt, and the unquestioned acceptance of the royal
imagery in large parts of the post-exilic literature. Texts like Isa. 6, Ps. 24 and
48 are widely regarded as pre-exilic. It is difficult to fathom how Yhwh could
have established or maintained his cult in Jerusalem without measuring up
to the royal features of El and Baal. Retrospectively a prophetic discussion
evolved whether Yhwhs kingship guaranteed Jerusalems unassailability,
but not about the notion of his kingship as such. Unmistakable reserves in
priestly circles could have been a post-exilic reaction to the eschatological
56 Cf. Jeremias, Knigtum, 160161.

57 For a summary, see R. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period,
vol. 1, London 1994, 132138; literature 126127; S. Petry, Die Entgrenzung JHWHs: Monolatrie,
Bilderverbot und Monotheismus im Deuteronomium, in Deuterojesaja und im Ezechielbuch
(FAT, 27), Tbingen 2007, 112125.
36 chapter two
implications which were broadly elaborated in some of the later prophets.

A form of cultic celebration of Yhwhs kingship during the pre-exilic New
Years festival is therefore probable, though we know very little about it.58
Such a celebration could be called an enthronement festival (instead of, for
example, a Yhwh-Kingship festival) if Yhwhs accession to the divine king-
ship had remained its central focus. It is increasingly recognised that there
does not have to be a fundamental irreconcilability between the Israelite
conception of God and the periodic nature of such a cultic accession rite. In
this regard, an important viewpoint is that liturgy only presents eternal truth
effectively if a divine action is visualised in the ritual and accompanying
text.59 The presentation of Yhwhs enthronement has not faded completely
from Ps. 93:1, since it refers to the inauguration and royal regalia, even if the
majority of commentators argue that this active moment has been forced
back in the wording of the psalm.
Questions on the unstable basis of human existence linger in the back-
ground of Ps. 93. The psalm recognises stability in the sanctuary, in its build-
ing construction that v. 5 mentions in nearly amorous terms,60 and in the
reassuring rules of life that this sanctuary sends out. These testify reliably
to the steadfastness of the world, which in turn rests in the kingship of
Yhwh. The arrangement of the verses leads us in the opposite direction,
from Yhwhs kingship, via the worlds system, to the temple giving its guide-
lines. The system is continuously threatened by evil forces, but Yhwh no
longer needs to defeat them to establish his kingship. His throne antedates
the sound and the fury of chaos. At this point departure is taken from the
Canaanite myth detailing the battle between Baal and Yam,61 which is clearly
reflected in vv. 34. Even where Yhwhs sovereignty is not always experi-
enced, one may appeal to Yhwh as eternal king, as the vocatives in this hymn
illustrate profoundly.62 In this manner Ps. 93 praises a divine kingship that
truly stands in the beginning and does not need other foundations.63
58 For the post-exilic celebration of Yhwhs kingship on the Feast of Tabernacles, see Zech.
14:1617.
59 In this regard, E. Otto, Mythos und Geschichte im Alten Testament: Zur Diskussion
einer neuen Arbeit von Jrg Jeremias, BN 42 (1988), 93102 and Janowski, Knigtum, reacting
against Jeremias, Knigtum.
60 Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart, 185.
61 KTU 1.2; on the problem of the distance in time between Ugarit and the OT, see Petry,
Entgrenzung, 115116.
62 Cf. E. Talstra, Oude en nieuwe lezers: Een inleiding in de methoden van uitleg van het Oude
Testament, Kampen 2002, 296.

63 Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart, 182 removes each element of action from vv. 12 and
Thine throne was established long ago

Thou art from all eternity
Here we come across a difference from Ps. 29, which is often mentioned in
the same breath as Ps. 93 due to its mythical connotations. In his study on
Gods conflict with the sea, John Day notes that Ps. 29, whilst not concerned
with ultimate origins, seems to locate the Chaoskampf in nature rather than
in history (cf. vv. 3, 10).64 Combined, these observations suggest a causal rela-
tion. Where there are no direct associations between the myth known to us
from Ugarit, and Israels historical experience, as in Ps. 29, the need falls away
to fix the divine enthronement to a date that would precede history. This
theme of precedence plays a decisive role in Ps. 93. Here possibly Days ques-
tion why the Baal myth did not associate the victory over Yam with creation
is answered in retrospect.65 The salient point is then not that this victory
would be repeated annually. The annual repetition of Baals enthronement
in Ugarit, as often suggested in religio-historical studies, appears to be based
on a confusion between the time of the calendar and the time of the myth,
as confirmed in the concise statement of F. Heiler: Das Alltgliche und
Alljhrige wird als einmalig gefat.66 The myth is therefore not a reflection
of the changing of seasons, but the changing of seasonsaccording to the
mythis the annual reflection of a divine act that has taken place, once and
for always, in another dimension of time. But even if these perceptions ring
true and Baals enthronement took place just once,67 like Yhwhs enthrone-
ment singulire in Ps. 93, this does not imply that it was necessarily set in
an ultimate beginning. Without excluding the possibility that this fixation
could have been influenced by an integration of elements from Baal and the
speaks of the pedestal of the anfangslos ( )emporragenden Gottesthrones. The point here
does not appear to us to be that Yhwhs kingship is anfangslos, but that its commencement
precedes all experience and remembrance.
64 J. Day, Gods Conflict with the dragon and the sea: Echoes of a Canaanite myth in the Old
Testament, Cambridge 1985, 3.

65 Cf. Day, Conflict, 718. Day himself searches for a possible solution by drawing a dis-
tinction between Baals battle with Yam on the one hand, and Baal and Anats battle against
Leviathan, Yam, Ar, and other powers on the other (KTU 1.3 and 5), the latter of which could
be associated with the creation of the world (1213). Day does not consider whether several
variants of the same mythical motif may be involved. Loretz, Kanaanische Gtter, 158 under
certain conditions sees die Mglichkeit, das Wirken Baals als ein wahres, sekundres Schp-
fungsgeschehen zu verstehen.
66 Cited by J.C. de Moor, The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Balu, Neukirchen-
Vluyn 1971, 55.

67 See also Petersen, Mythos, 30.
38 chapter two
creator god El-Elyon, as seen in Yhwhs presentation in Jerusalem, the his-

toricising of the myth still offers us the most satisfactory explanation of this
primeval dating of Yhwhs enthronement.68
Although Ps. 93 contains no explicit references to Israels salvation his-
tory, it cannot therefore be concluded that the psalm is void of historical
reflection. Precisely the chronological order in which the psalm presents
divine kingship and chaos battle enables an association between this bat-
tle and recent political and social experiences. This possibility is directly
utilised in Ps. 94, by identifying the waters of chaos from Ps. 93 with human
wickedness and social suppression [ 2.1.3.1]. Yhwhs inauguration as king
itself, however, is deemed to precede such contemporaneous threats and
thus he reigns sovereign over them.
The next step in our argument will now be taken. The accession to
the divine kingship may have preceded history, but may also signify the
acknowledgment that follows the course of historyor even coincide with
the historical course itself, as it is understood today in the deepest sense of
its meaning. The new song confronts us in Ps. 98, as we have seen before,
with this alternative approach towards Yhwhs enthronement.69 If we take
the remaining enthronement formulas cited above into account (predom-
inantly with the imperfect and/or reversed word order), then these two
approaches to Yhwhs enthronement can also be indicated elsewhere in the
Old Testament. It took place at the beginning and belongs to the origin myth:
see Ps. 93, compare Ex 15:18 and Ps. 74:1217. It coincides with the univer-
sal recognition of Yhwh that must answer his current liberation of Israel: see
Ps. 98, compare Ps. 47:9; Isa. 24:23; 52:7; Mic. 4:7; Zech. 14:9; Ps. 146:10. The sec-
ond approach is presumably post-exilic, the first is pre-exilic or at least has
strong pre-exilic roots.70 As a matter of fact, the second approach can hardly
be found completely separate from the first. The first is assumed by the
68 On El as the creator in the Ugaritic pantheon, see Day, Conflict, 1718; Loretz, Kanaan-
ische Gtter, 155. Here it must be emphasised that Ps. 93 only speaks of the creation in terms
of a fundamental order, and not of creation as cosmogony as seen in Ps. 95:5; 96:5.
69 Blowing the horn and the clapping of hands are viewed as evident enthronement
motives, even if Ps. 98 mentions Yhwhs kingship in only one nominal phrase (v. 6).
70 Naturally the discussion on the dating of many of the mentioned texts is more extensive
than can be mentioned here. The strongest support for a pre-exilic date (of the basis text) of
the Song of the Sea is found in DI and exilic psalms referring/alluding to it (see e.g. Spiecker-
mann, Heilsgegenwart, 113). Ps. 47 virtually relates Israels entire history to Yhwhs ascension
as king and thus goes one step further than Ps. 98. Regardless of whether Ps. 47 indeed uses
certain formulations from the monarchical temple liturgy (see e.g. Loretz, Kanaanische Gt-
ter, 104105), it essentially remains a post-exilic song.
second anyway. There is also the noteworthy phenomenon that the further
the primordial mythical battle fades from the picture, its colours reappear
portraying Yhwhs battle for his eventual, eschatological kingshipas if the
demythologising of the beginning gave licence to more exuberant, mytho-
logical colouring at the end.71 But the presence in the Old Testament of this
twofold perspective on Yhwhs becoming king is undeniable.72
In Ps. 96 we see these opposing views fused together, as under laboratory
conditions [ 2.1.3.2]. Especially from this psalm it becomes clear how they
form the two theological pillars of the dramatic cycle Ps. 93100. In the for-
mula in 97:1 and 99:1, the two perspectives on Yhwh becoming king
amalgamate. In other words, distinguishing inauguration from celebration
no longer has a point in these thematic songs. But, let us ponder once more
on the newness of the new song itself.
Sing to Yhwh a new song
Previously we established that new song need not have originated as a

loaded theological term [ 2.1]. Yet semantic overtones reverberate once the
phrases and in Ps. 93:2 and the term in Ps. 96:1 and 98:1 are
associated with each other along the lines sketched in the section above. The
new song finally acknowledges Yhwhs kingship, which simultaneously reaches
back to the very beginning of the world. The question here is not whether the
psalms poets and editors were as conscious about using this remarkable
time terminology as we are in retrospectwhat is important is how easy
former and new disclose this overflow of meaning once we are reminded
of these terms by the occurrence of a very similar semantic opposition in
Deutero-Isaiah [ 2.2].
2.1.5. Enthronement and Eschatology

Of all the Yhwh-Kingship psalms, Ps. 98 occurs the most frequently in New
Testament quotations and allusions. These are found especially in the
71 This occurs on a small scale in the cycle itself: no battle in Ps. 93:1, then a battle in Ps. 98:1.
72 For M.Z. Brettler, God is King: Understanding an Israelite Metaphor (JSOT.S, 76), Shef-
field 1989, the double vision on Yhwhs kingship in Ps. 93, 96 and 98 is especially a matter of
perspective: there is ambiguity as to whether the psalmist is envisaging God as becom-
ing king, or as king, depending on whether the perspective is from the nations, who are only
now seeing the great extent of Gods sovereignty, or from the Israelites, who always knew that
God is sovereign (153). In that sense, from the foreigners perspective, God is becoming king
(157). Though, the point appears to us that the singers or readers of the cycle are invited to
place themselves alternately in both perspectives.
40 chapter two
hymns of the Lucan birth narrative of Jesus and in the book of Revelation.73
More generally, the coming of Gods Kingdom is seen within Christianity as
the summary of what eschatology focuses on. The eschatological interpre-
tation of Ps. 98 and similar songs cannot be detached from Christian expec-
tations.
When a central concept from a religious tradition is affected extensively
by the effective history (Wirkungsgeschichte) of particular texts, it remains
good practice to reassess such a concept from time to time in an up-to-
date interpretation of these texts. This counts for eschatology too. Is the
concept still hermeneutically helpful, and if so, in what sense? Or does it
instead restrict our understanding and should rather be abandoned from
the interpretation? These are the questions that Mowinckel asked himself
in his 1922 study on Yhwhs enthronement festival and the origin of escha-
tology. He knew that he was not free from Christian preconceptions when
he attempted connecting the two, and therefore he endeavoured to retain
his own cultic interpretation of the specific psalms, not only against the his-
torical but also against the future-eschatological interpretations he found in
the commentaries of the day.74
Since then, reviews have distinguished mostly between theological, his-
torical, eschatological and cultic interpretations in explaining the Yhwh-
Kingship psalms.75 Under a theological interpretation is understood: the
psalms verbalise the theologoumenon of Gods (eternal) lordship. Historical
interpretations connect them to historical events like the return from exile,
orto mention another spectacular episode from Israels historythe mil-
itary victories of the Maccabees in the second century bce. In eschatological
interpretations these psalms would predict the revelation of Gods kingship
in the end times. Cultic interpretations, such as proposed by Mowinckel,
assume that the divine enthronement is dramatised by reciting mythical
texts during a ritual of the new years festival, and that the psalms in ques-
tionperhaps not in their current form but certainly as a genremust be
traced back to such annual festivities. We have illustrated some of these
approaches when discussing Ps. 98 [ 2.1.2].
Such a classification, though, is far too schematic. In older commen-
taries the explanations already differed from psalm to psalm. Especially in
the last decennia, the boundaries between these types of expositions have
73 See a.o. Lk. 1:54; 2:30; Rev. 14:3; 15:4; 19:11.

74 S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien, Bd. 2, Kristiania 1922 [Amsterdam 1961], 1016.
75 See the still to be surpassed overview of E. Lipiski, Les psaumes de la royaut de Yahw
dans l exgse moderne, in: R. de Langhe (ed.), Le Psautier, Louvain 1962, 133272.
become less harsh. The relation between the myth as represented within the
cult and Israels historical experience is reflected on more thoroughly. This
reflection is expressed when formulations such as historicising the myth
and mythologising the history are used.76 Newer definitions of the concept
eschatology in Christian theology have also resulted in cultic and escha-
tological interpretations not necessarily excluding each other. Rather than
having to choose between a cultic, historical, or eschatological explanation,
we can attempt to grasp the relation between cult, history and the universal
recognition of Yhwhs kingship according to the psalm as it lies before us at
a particular moment.77
Under the mythologising of history is understood: the interpretation of
historical remembrance or experience in terms of the myth, more particu-
larly, the myth of the divine battle. In a broader sense one could call every
reference to God in a historical narrative a mythologising of history, but
the term is not meant in this sense in relation to these psalms. The mythic
conflict being deployed by them provides the language with which mean-
ing is given to history. Sometimes the inverted phrase, historicising of the
myth, is used, but a formulation in which the myth takes the front posi-
tion seems to describe the matter the most accurately. It is the myth that
determines which memory or which experience is selected for being of his-
torical significance: just those memories or experiences thataccording to
the psalmistdisclose the very base of existence itself.
76 See esp. J. Jeremias, Das Knigtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem
kanaanischen Mythos in den Jahwe-Knig-Psalmen (FRLANT, 141), Gttingen 1987; Otto,

Mythos; Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart; Janowski, Knigtum; M.A. Klopfenstein, Wenn
der Schpfer die Chaosmchte anherrscht und so das Leben schtzt: Zu einem wenig
beachteten Aspekt des Zorns Gottes im Alten Testament, ThZ 53 (1997), 3343. In Mowinckel,
Psalmenstudien the differentiation between myth and history is still unclear: Der Mythos
ist die lteste Form der Geschichte. Dem primitiven Denken ist Mythos Geschichte und
Geschichte Mythos (24). From the discussion with Sellin: vieles von dem, was ich oben
Mythos genannt habe, wird er vermutlich Heilsgeschichte nennen (228 n. 1).
77 Eaton, Kingdom, 119126 disputes the earlier eschatological exposition of the enthrone-
ment psalms (in case Ps. 93, 97 and 99) in favour of a cultic interpretation in the line of
Mowinckel, but he thereby recognises their eschatological dimension in a slightly different
sense: As a vivid encounter with Yahweh, it was a coming face to face with the ultimate. In
this sense the festal psalms had an eschatological force (122). Elsewhere he speaks of realized
eschatology or eschatology beginning to be realized (126). See e.g. also Th. Booij, Psalmen
(POT), dl. 3, Nijkerk 1994, 169 in his commentary on Ps. 98: At the point when all of creation
is called to recognise Yhwh as Judge, his coming can hardly belong to a distant eschatological
end-time. Our psalm though creates the impression that this coming, as a result of the acts
towards Israel (v. 13), brings with it the finalisation of salvation and the beginning of a new
situation (cf. Ps. 82:8; Isa. 51:5) (our translation).
42 chapter two
The question now is whether the mythologising of Israels history in the

temple cult has automatically led to something like eschatology. It should
be noted beforehand that the temple cult paid little attention as such to
the concrete events of national importance in the period prior to the exile.
The song of Moses at the Sea of Reeds in Ex. 15 is seen by some as the
only preserved pre-exilic psalm that clearly deals with Israels history, and
then namely in an identification of the forces of chaos defeated at Yhwhs
enthronement with the armies of Egypt. Whether one considers Ex. 15
eschatological remains mainly a question of semantics. If the eschaton is
defined as the view point from which history is understood in its ultimate
meaning, then that old temple song at least brings us into eschatologys
immediate vicinity. In this definition, the futurist perspective does not be-
long to the essence of the concept. It might well be that cult is inherently at
odds with futuristic eschatology,78 but for presentic eschatology this is no
longer the case. On the other hand, it must be conceded that the theme
of the universal recognition of Yhwhs kingship is greatly overlooked in Ex.
15.79 This is also the case in Ps. 93, which we discussed in the previous sec-
tion.
Ps. 96 and 98 differ from Ex. 15 and Ps. 93 in their associating Israels sal-
vation history, not (only) with the first, but (also) with the second becoming
king of Yhwh. As the long expected breaking of Yhwhs royal incognito, this
second accession to the throne is imagined to coincide with Israels present
experience of liberation. The universal significance of Israels historical lib-
eration could not have been emphasised stronger than in this way. Is it not
in Israels liberation that the meaning of creation itself has become visible
to the world? This is what Ps. 96 and 98 express. Their eschatological nature
is thereby intensified compared to other Yhwh-Kingship psalms; an intensi-
fication which at most Ps. 47 might surpass.80
78 Cf. Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart, 222 responding to the Song of the Sea: Tempel-
theologie ist berhaupt nicht eschatologisch orientiert. Vielmehr hat Jahwes Kmpfen und
Siegen jedesmal endgltigen Charakter, weil es sein Kmpfen und Siegen ist.
79 Ex. 15:1416 mentions the impact of Yhwh victory in Philistia, Edom and Moab, but is
possibly a later addition to the original song.

80 As such mythologising and universalising of history are naturally not an exclusive
Israelite phenomenon, see the Mesopotamian parallels, e.g. in J.B. White, Universalization
of History in Deutero-Isaiah, in: C.D. Evans et al. (eds), Scripture in Context: Essays on the
Comparative Method (PTMS, 34), Pittsburgh 1980, 179195. The singular universalistic mythol-
ogising of precisely this liberation history of Israel is remarkable, understood as a unity, within
the monotheistic context of the OT.
It remains difficult to judge how strongly the original singers experienced

an element of anticipation in these eschatological formulations. Supposing
that Ps. 98 once functioned separately from the present cycle in the temple
cult, did the awareness to anticipate the events lie concealed already within
the imperatives and jussives by which the psalm encourages one to praise?
Did that realisation perhaps lie concealed in the image of the worlds judge-
ment, a prospect that is developed in the psalms conclusion as a further
reaching goal of Yhwhs historical coming? Or was this judgement experi-
enced above all in the cultic celebration itselfas for example in Ps. 73:17,
however differently it may be expressed there? At this point we as readers
need to detach ourselves from later Jewish or Christian expectations of the
future. At least it would be helpful to sharpen our terminological distinc-
tions: not only between presentic and futuristic, but also between presentic
and anticipatory eschatology. The anticipatory aspect need not be the obvi-
ous implication of the presentic aspect.81
A different conclusion will be reached as soon as we read Ps. 98, in con-
junction with 96, as part of the complete cycle Ps. 93100. Though the temple
within this context still presents itself as the place where the pious may
find rest today (cf. Ps. 95:11), the same pious individual now sees his own
temple visit as a precursor of a worldwide pilgrimage (Ps. 96, cf. Ps. 100).
And during his visit he will realise all too well that with a cultic celebra-
tion of Yhwhs kingship alone, not every widow and orphan is helped (cf.
Ps. 94:6). Social responses to this festive occasion are still to be expected (cf.
Ps. 99:8). Only within the context of the complete cycle it appears, with all
desirable clarity, that present eschatology should be understood as antici-
pating eschatology.82
81 Incidentally those that had celebrated the revelation of Yhwhs kingship as presentic
reality, would have done this with a sense of pretence. This aspect of the cult as play has been
described convincingly by J. Huizinga, Homo ludens: Proeve ener bepaling van het spel-element
der cultuur, Haarlem 21940, 3334 (our translation): Apart from its formal features and its
orientation of joy, an essential characteristic is inextricably associated with real play: the
awareness, however much it is pushed into the background, that one just acts. Even the
holy action performed with dedication goes hand in hand with this awareness according to
Huizinga.
82 This approach deviates from Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien on three points. (1) Mo-
winckel does not distinguish clearly between myth and history [see above]. (2) With escha-
tology he was still thinking of end-time expectations, different from the hope-on-short-term,
which he found was typical of the enthronement festival as such. (3) According to him, escha-
tology came into being out of the growing tension between the exalted cultic experience
and the disappointing reality on the outside. To explain why the disappointment did not
lead to Israel eventually abandoning the hope as elsewhere, the extraordinary vitality and
44 chapter two
Modern philosophical discussions have reinforced the notion that a point

of view from which one could possibly survey history in its ultimate sense,
cannot be achieved within history. Every position from which one would
look, after all, is historically conditioned and relative. For that reason a
future eschaton is only conceivable in a virtual sense. However, there are
experiences where one feels that their significance claims the broadest
acceptance. A striking example from our own culture is the National Libera-
tion Day,83 which has the compelling tendency of integrating new liberation
experiences within its remembrance and evoking far more acts of liberation
the world over. The paradox of such a commemoration is that apparently it
cannot be celebrated only nationally, indeed there are certain individuals
that even desire to involve the defeated enemy in the festivities. In other
words, sometimes we participate in private events that apparently signify
greater, ultimate and universal truths.
The inquiry to what extent the Jewish-Christian roots of our culture have
contributed to such realisations is important, but we do not need to answer
it here. One fact is clear, no other text expresses the universal and cosmic
significance of a historical experience as concisely as Ps. 98. The effective
history of this new and continuously renewed song demonstrates how an
Israelitic invention could resound through the ages.
Deutero-Isaiah
2.2. New and Hidden Things: Isaiah 4055
2.2.1. Methodology
Views on the first and the new in Deutero-Isaiah developed along different
lines in the twentieth century. The diversity can be attributed to different
insights on the literary horizon in which the key texts are believed to be
given meaning. Is the interpretative framework the small, form-critically
defined literary unit? Does it consist of a larger group of units? Or should
one above all attempt to understand the texts within the composition of
Isa. 4048 or 4055 as a whole?
strmische[n] Glaubensmut of the people is highlighted (323). In S. Mowinckel, He that

comes, Oxford 1956 eschatology is reserved as an indication of the dualistic expectation of a
future aeon.
83 Celebrated in the Netherlands on 5 May, in remembrance of the end of W.W. II.
newness in deutero-isaiah 45
See H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam 1987.

An overview on pp. 111 presents the main approaches used to explain the opposi-
tion first-new in DI. In general approaches to first or former, the emphasis may be
placed on the exodus from Egypt (A. Bentzen, On the Ideas of the Old and the
New in Deutero-Isaiah, StTh 1 (1948), 183187, G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testa-
ments, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1960 (91987), W. Zimmerli, Grundriss der alttestamentlichen
Theologie, Stuttgart 21975), on Israels guilt and exile (H.E. von Waldow, Anlass und
Hintergrund der Verkndigung des Deuterojesaja, Bonn 1953), or on Cyrus (A. Con-
damin, Les prdictions nouvelles du chap. XLVIII dIsae, RB 19 (1910), 200216,
M. Buber, Der Glaube der Propheten, in: Idem, Werke, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1964, 131
484). Studies of greater detail on the theme, such as C.R. North, The Former Things
and the New Things in Deutero-Isaiah, in: H.H. Rowley (ed.), Studies in Old Tes-
tament Prophecy. Fs Th.H. Robinson, Edinburgh 1950, 111126 and A. Schoors, Les
choses antrieures et les choses nouvelles dans les oracles deutro-isaens, EThL 40
(1964), 1947 let the interpretations of the first, and thus too of the new, shift from
place to place.
A few views from the last decades that supplement the above approaches can be
indicated. C. Hardmeier, Geschwiegen habe ich seit langem wie die Gebrende
schreie ich jetzt: Zur Komposition und Geschichtstheologie von Jes 42,1444,23,
WuD 20 (1989), 155179, esp. 177 applies the first things in 43:18 to Israels guilty
past, and thus follows in the footsteps of von Waldow. H.-J. Hermisson, Deuteroje-
saja (BKAT, 11/2), Neukirchen-Vluyn 2003, 227 applies the first things in 48:3 auf den
der Gesamtgeschichte Israels bis zu ihrem im Untergang Jerusalems erfahre-
nen Ende; see also Idem, Deuterojesaja und Eschatologie, in: F. Postma et al.
(eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S,
3), Maastricht 2002, 89105, esp. 97 n. 14: the earlier activities of Cyrus might pos-
sibly only be included in the redactional addition 42:9. For M. Wischnowsky, Das
Buch DeuterojesajaKomposition und Wachstum in Jes 4055, BN 69 (1993), 87
96, esp. 93 the first things incorporate both the earlier salvation history and the
punishment of the exile as the fulfilment of earlier predictions. C. Franke, Isaiah
46, 47, 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Biblical and Judaic Studies, 3), Winona
Lake 1994 applies the first things in 46:9 to creation and former salvation his-
tory (57), she considers a precise identification in 48:3 impossible (178). K. Baltzer,
Deutero-Jesaja (KAT, 10/2), Gtersloh 1999 generally makes no attempt to inter-
connect DIs sayings on the first things; thus in 42:9 they indicate what has hap-
pened from the beginning of creation (182), in 48:3 the fall of Judea and Jerusalem
as announced by Jeremiah (364). M. Albani, Der eine Gott und die himmlischen
Heerscharen: Zur Begrndung des Monotheismus bei Deuterojesaja im Horizont der
Astralisierung des Gottesverstndnisses im Alten Orient (ABG, 1), Leipzig 2000, 93,
238 adopts Kochs view (discussed in Leene, Vroegere, 54) that DI saw the hymn to
the sun in Ps. 19A as a prediction of Cyrus, in the context of his creation-theological
substantiation of DIs monotheism. R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Lit-
erature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003 only touches the question
on the former, but finds the new in the calling of Darius as new urgent message
(418). Most of these points of view are in fact variants of the main approaches
outlined above. Especially the extensive discussion of Hermisson, Deuterojesaja,
225228 reveals how ones preference in this regard may be correlated with a total
46 chapter two
vision on the redaction history of Isa. 4055 [ 2.2.8.1]. U. Berges, Jesaja 4048
(HThKAT), Freiburg 2008 agrees on the essential points with the view defended in
Leene, Vroegere, which we are attempting to place in a broader context with this
study.
To commence we will offer a summary of the assumptions that have risen
from our previous study on the subject. At this point they do not yet describe
the concepts first and new, their meanings or references, but only the meth-
odological principles that may guide their inquiries.
(a) Mostly, the literary units that make up Isa. 4055 cannot stand on their
own in their current format. They are geared towards the literary environ-
ment and require this environment for their expositions. This is also crucial
for the terminology of time under discussion.
(b) The word first occurs in three oppositions in Deutero-Isaiah: namely,

contrasting last (41:4; 44:6; 46:10; 48:12), coming (41:2223; cf. 44:7; 46:911)
and new (42:9; cf. 43:9; 43:1819; 48:311). This state of affairs does not imply
(as repeatedly assumed in the history of interpretation) the existence of a
global synonymy of the terms used for last, coming, and new, but indicates
an adjustment in meaning of first depending on the opposition in which it
is placed. Where new stands opposite first, first includes what will come (or
has come). Where what will come or has come stands opposite first, first
includes last. In a simplified scheme:
first last
first [incl. last] coming
first [incl. coming] new
(c) Within the arrangement of the units in Isa. 4048, the semantic field first-
last-coming-new, along with other factors, has a dominant function. The
following represents a pattern that is often repeated in different variations: a
unit dealing with the relation between first and last is trailed by a unit about
what is coming and/or a unit on the new. The composition thus contains a
sequence of cycles, where each cycle appears to be organised, more or less,
according to the pattern first-last-coming-new.
(d) An essential aspect of the arrangement of these units or poems further-

more is that a continuous action emerges in their sequencing. One could
speak of a dramatic action, because this action is usually not narrated, but
presents itself to the reader without the intervention of a narrator, and
seems to take place contemporaneously to the reading.84 This continuous

dramatic action interferes with the cyclic pattern first-last-coming-new (see
c) to such an extent that much of what is still to come in a cycle of units
placed earlier, may appear to have come in a later cycle.
(e) These observations apply to the text of Deutero-Isaiah in its current

form and thus belong to a synchronic analysis. They leave the question open
whether the composition reveals signs of textual development in addition,
signs that may lead to diachronic deliberations. However, it does not appear
that the texts production has in any way led to significant changes in mean-
ing and reference of the terms for first and new. This indicates that the writ-
ing process of the work did not extend over many generations. The genesis
of Deutero-Isaiah we believe can be better described using a project model
than a growth model.85 We must be dealing with a thoroughly planned com-
position.
These conjectures will be explained and tested in the following sections. In

2.2.26 the units in which the terms and occur will be dis-
cussed separately, namely Isa. 41:1416; 42:59; 42:1013; 43:1621 and 48:111.
In this discussion it will become clear that the horizon of a unit is in itself
too limited to determine satisfactorily what new means in Deutero-Isaiah.
As in the previous sections on the Psalms, we will gradually increase the
circle of attention around the relevant texts in Deutero-Isaiah. After posting
a few observations on the dramatic structure of Isa. 4055 [ 2.2.7.1], we will
demonstrate how the episodes 41:142:17; 42:1844:23 and 48:122 are each
structured according to the pattern first-last-coming-new and how these
broader literary structures determine the meaning and reference of the new
with ever increasing clarity [ 2.2.7.2].
Following these observations, a number of recent redaction-critical the-
ories on Isa. 4055 will be discussed in 2.2.8.1. The next section examines
the extent to which Deutero-Isaiahs opposition first-new could help deter-
mine the relation between Isa. 4055 and 139 [ 2.2.8.2]. The diachronic
relationship between Isa. 4055 and Ps. 93100 is subsequently treated [
2.2.8.3], after which we will monitor as closely as possible the intertextual
dialogue between these two compositions on Yhwhs kingship in 2.2.8.4.
84 For an overview on the secondary literature treating the dramaturgic approach to DI,
see Berges, Jesaja 4048, 64.

85 H. Leene, Auf der Suche nach einem redaktionskritischen Modell fr Jesaja 4055,
ThLZ 121 (1996), 803818.

48 chapter two
One could call this section the initial climax in this studyif a scholarly
work may itself also employ a few dramatic techniques. It will lead us to an
unorthodox proposal regarding the time in which Isa. 4055 originated [
2.2.8.5]. A reflection on history and eschatology in Deutero-Isaiah draws this
second part of the chapter to a close [ 2.2.9].
2.2.2. Isaiah 41:1416

14 Do not fear, you worm Jacob,
you maggot Israel,
it is I who help you, declares Yhwh,
and your redeemer is the Holy One of Israel.
15 I hereby make you into a sharp threshing sledge,
new, full of teeth,
you will thresh mountains and crush them
and make hills like chaff.
16 You will winnow them and the wind will take them up
and the storm will scatter them,
but you will rejoice in Yhwh
and in the Holy One of Israel you will glory.
In this translation the poem has been divided into three strophes, in which
the imagery of respectively worm, threshing sledge and winnow set the tone.
The first strophe (v. 14) encourages the worm Jacob not to be afraid, and
is followed by (compound) nominal clauses that motivate this encourage-
ment: it is I who help you.
The second strophe (v. 15) commences with a beginning qatal clause,
which is interpreted as a performative utterance in the translation: I hereby
make you into a This means that an action is invoked, which is supposed
to take place the precise moment that one hears or reads this line. As
the first, Elliger convincingly applied this performative view to Isa. 41:15a
in his commentary.86 There are more such performative moments in Isa.
4055moments that, in their chronology, definitively contribute towards
creating the impression of dramatic progression in the text as a whole [
2.2.7.1]. A temporal opposition thus exists in strophe II between the act
through which the worm Jacob is transformed into a new threshing sledge
(now) and the act with which it, thus equipped, will thresh and grind
mountains (not now but soon). The first act is indicated with a performative
qatal clause, the second with predicting yiqtol clauses.
86 K. Elliger, Deuterojesaja (BKAT, 11/1), Neukirchen 1978, 152.

The yiqtol clauses continue in the third strophe (v. 16). It is built on the
contrast between what will happen to the mountains and hills that are
turned to chaff and what Israel itself will do: rejoice in Yhwh. With the name
Holy One of Israel, the end of strophe III grasps back to the end of strophe I.
It is a much-debated question whether these mountains and hills symbol-
ise concrete enemies of Israel.87 There against, elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah
the mountains and hills are seen as more abstract barriers obstructing the
pathway of the return, an interpretation that is supported by the direct con-
text of 41:1416. Totally different terms are used for Israels human opponents
in 41:813. The imagery of 41:1416 should rather be seen as a preparation for
1720. The association between the immense obstacles that are to be cleared
and the revelation of Yhwhs glory in the desert (cf. 40:35) seems to be the
decisive factor in linking 41:1416 to its immediate sequel.
From these observations it can be determined that any interpretation of
the unit becomes stranded in superficiality as long as the literary vicinity is
left out of view. The oracles of salvation 41:813 and 1416 are often seen as
a diptych. However, there is a remarkable difference between 41:813 and
1416 regarding their dimensions of time. In its preamble 41:813 places
heavy emphasis on the correlation between Abrahams earlier election,
what Israel is currently experiencing and may expect will happen shortly;
this seems to be a continuation of the correlation between first and last,
over which 41:4 speaks in so many words in connection to Cyrus. What
41:813 adds to this first-last is the announcement of things to come: the
fall of Israels current opponents, who give the impression that they possess
divine powers but are in reality merely humans. Therefore, within 41:113 the
whole range of first-last is completed to include coming things for the first
timewe will return to this point in greater detail below. In 41:1416, the
topic is quite different, namely, the contrast between what Israel is at the
moment (a worm) and what it nevertheless may become (a new threshing
sledge) through Yhwhs word of salvation, here expressed with performative
power. The agreement in genre with the previous section 41:813 cannot
disguise this dramatic leap.
first-last 41,0107
coming 41,0813
new 41:1416
87 For this view see once more Baltzer, Deutero-Jesaja, 147.

50 chapter two
Thus it appears that the word new in 41:15 provides us with a first hint, a
first key we can reach, intended for the drama that will follow. New directly
receives a far deeper meaning in this semantic network than a fleeting
reading of the poem might suggest. One can hear too much in texts, but
also too little. The provisionally indicated relations with the neighbouring
poems will be discussed more systematically in 2.2.7.2.
2.2.3. Isaiah 42:59

5 Thus says the God Yhwh,
who created the heavens and stretched them out,
who spread out the earth and what comes up from it,
who gave breath to the people who live upon it
and spirit to those who walk on it:
6 I am Yhwh,
I have called you in righteousness
and take hold of your hand
and I protect you and give you
as a covenant with the people,
as a light for the nations,
7 to open blind eyes,
to bring captives out of the dungeon,
out of the prison those who sit in darkness.
8 I am Yhwh, that is my name,
and my honour I give to no other,
nor my praise to the idols.
9 The first things, see, they have come
and new things I am now announcing,
before they show themselves I make you hear of them.
In this tripartite poem the first strophe, as a development of the messenger
formula, prepares for the words of salvation in the second and third stro-
phes. The first strophe recalls Yhwhs creation of heaven, earth and human-
ity. The third like the second strophe commences with the self-introductory
formula .
The second and third strophes have tricola arrangements. A noticeable
difference is that the second strophe addresses a you-singular and the third
a you-plural. Within the texts current constellation, the you-singular can
only imply the anonymous servant introduced in 42:14. Three weyiqtol
forms determine the tense in v. 6, whereby it is said that Yhwh holds this
servant by the hand, will protect him, and will prepare him for the functions
he must fulfil. These weyiqtol forms are preceded by a retrospective qatal
clause, which relates the calling of the servant in the past. This calling took
place ( v. 6), which is to say, in accordance with the entire creational
order (set out in strophe I). The servants task, namely to embody Gods
covenant with the people and to shine as a light for the nations, stretches
out into the future as it is described by the three infinitive sentences of
v. 7.
The third strophe clarifies for the you-plural addressed readers how
Yhwhs honour is at stake in the fulfilling of this task by the servant. In this
connection, the new things Yhwh is announcing (v. 9) cannot possibly refer
to anything else than to the work of the servant. Without vv. 67 the term
in vv. 89 would lack a clear point of reference within this poem.
What more is meant precisely with these new things? The new does not aim
at the person of the servant himself, but at the salvation that he will mediate
through his actions.
Within the confines of the agreed synchronic approach, we have to grasp
further back into the preceding context to find the reference of the first
things that have already come.
In Isa. 41:4 Yhwh asks who could be behind Cyruss rise to power: I,
Yhwh, am the first and with the last I am the same. He who had called the
generations from the beginning is the one who has now stirred up Cyrus.
What Israels tradition narrates about the beginning of history is not without
relevance for the meaning of what is happening on the world stage today.
On the contrary, the two are matched, according to Deutero-Isaiah. They
converge as first and last.
They are associated in a somewhat different formulation based on the
same roots as first things relating to their result; they relate as to their
. Yhwh based the proof of his divinity on their coordination, which,
from 41:14, he presented in a trial scene with the nations. In a subsequent
trial scene an identical proof of divinity is requested from the other party,
the idols as reduced to their makers: The first things, what were they? Tell
us so that we may consider them and know their final outcome (41:2223).
Hereby the same opposition between first and last is intended that governs
41:4. Can the makers of idols, the focus is here on them, establish their own
first-last actions against the first-last actions of Yhwh?
In 41:2223 we see this first opposition (- ;cf. -
41:4) being subordinated to a second opposition, setting the outcome of
these former actions over and against things yet to come, or :
or declare to us the things to come, tell us what the future holds, so we may
know that you are gods. These things to come apparently comprise further
events on the world stage. In 41:25 they are likewise associated with Cyrus,
52 chapter two
fearsomely approaching with his armies (, , chiastically linked with

the previous participles and ).
Here several terms from the semantic domain first-last-coming-new,
characteristic for Isa. 4048, are thus placeable in the preceding context of
42:59. We must pay attention to some particulars. It has appeared neces-
sary in this review to account for the subtle semantic distinction between
last and coming in Deutero-Isaiah, a distinction that continually plays a
role in the course of these chapters. Where does the distinction lie? What,
at this moment, in the dramatic present of the text, the reader has already
seen of Cyrus is related to Israels tradition as the last is to the first. Cyruss
actions that currently lie in the future are the things that will come. But
through the dramatic movement of the text, these things come about at a
rapid pace. Once the coming things have been reached and these too have
been proven to be in line with the tradition, the conclusion can be drawn:
The first things, see, they have come; in which everything that has been men-
tioned up to this point (the tradition and its contemporaneous confirmation
in the resolute progression of Cyrus) is included: Cyrus provides the van-
ishing point of the entire history of redemption seen in Deutero-Isaiahs
perspective.
We hear a summary of the outcome of history in Isa. 42:9, where these
things in turn form part of a third opposition, the most crucial of the whole
drama: The first things, see, they have come , and new things I am now
announcing, before they show themselves I make you hear of them. The first
things that have come indicate Cyrus; the new things that will sprout are
apparently to be related to the servant of Yhwh. This servant is introduced
to us at the beginning of Isa. 42 in shrouded and mysterious language: See,
my servant he will bring justice to the nations. Thus the first things
that have come and the new things that are being announced here can be
described roughly as: Cyrus and the servant. Though, as we have noticed,
the servant himself is less necessarily new than the salvation he will let
the addressees share in. Completely different imagery will describe this
newness in the units that follow directly: Yhwhs marching out like a hero
(42:13) and the miraculous journey of the returnees through the desert
(42:1417).
At this point we are able to replace the terms in our formulaic summary
of the opposition first [incl. last/coming/has come] new [ 2.2.1] with their
referents: Israels tradition [incl. its confirmation by Cyruss staged advance]
the salvation mediated by the servant. This formula needlessly to say is a
crude oversimplification of what we actually read in the text, but as a reading
guide it serves a good purpose. As a guideline it will also offer assistance with
our understanding of the remaining occurrences of , , ,

, , , and , in: 42:10; 43:9; 43:1819; 44:67;
45:11; 46:910; 48:3; 48:6; 48:12. When we examine these occurrences, they
do not appear to enforce substantial changes to our outlined holistic view
of Deutero-Isaiahs conception of the time dimensions related to Yhwhs
actions. As it may be, one always needs to establish which of the three
oppositions (first-last, first-coming, first-new) are active in each of these
occurrences, in order to establish an explanation that is truly clarifying
within the greater dramatic coherence.
2.2.4. Isaiah 42:1013

10 Sing to Yhwh a new song,
his praise from the end of the earth,
you who put out to sea, and whatever fills it,
the coastlands and their inhabitants.
11 Let the desert and its towns raise their voice,
the settlements that Kedar inhabits,
let the inhabitants of Sela cry out for joy,
let them shout from the top of the mountains.
12 Let them give honour to Yhwh
and proclaim his praise as far as in the coastlands.
13 It is Yhwh, who marches out like a hero,
like a warrior rousing himself to fury,
he roars, he raises the battle cry,
he performs heroically against his enemies.
This poem consists of three strophes: v. 10 makes an appeal to the inhab-

itants on the outskirts of the world to sing a new song to Yhwh; vv. 1112
contains jussive sentences that inform how the praise must reach these
coastlands from the desert via the top of the mountains; v. 13 tells the reasons
and content of the song of praise: Yhwhs marching out as victor.
This retrograde movement is evidently determined by the presentation in
which Yhwhs action commences in the desert. The desert and its cities and
the settlements that Kedar inhabits are then the first witnesses of his victory
march. The inhabitants of Sela live in the mountain ranges that border this
wilderness directly; there they can take over the song first hand and let
it be heard in full glory from their high vantage point, so loud that it can
be heard in the outer reaches of the far off coastland. From there, even the
seafarers can lift it up over the edges of the world. But in essence this new,
far-reaching song is nothing but the echo of Yhwhs own victory cry from
the desert. In addition to these suggestive spatial dimensions, especially the
54 chapter two
auditory terminology (, , , , , )keeps the strophes of Isa.

42:1013 together.
How does this new song function in the broader context? It apparently
responds to the new things that Yhwh announced in 42:59. This means that
Yhwhs marching out as victor and the servants labour announced in 42:59
must be understood as images that refer to the same reality. It must be due
to the appointment and equipping of the servantthis is how the reader
understands itthat Yhwh will eventually triumph. Do the portrayals of the
humble servant and Yhwh as the passionate warrior in Isa. 42 still form an
outright paradoxical combination? Later in the drama we will see these two
incongruent images merge: the servant knows himself as the arrow from
Yhwhs quiver (49:2). Others too will conclusively confess that it was he
in whom Yhwh revealed his holy arm in the sight of all the nations (53:1;
cf. 52:10), almost ironically a metaphor containing warlike associations in
contrast to the vulnerable and unsightly figure of the servant.
In Isa. 42 we are still at the beginning of this dramatic course that runs
through to Isa. 53 [ 2.2.7.1]. Yhwh marches out, he encourages himself and
prepares himself for the battlewhereby it must be clear to the reader, not
in a short while but from the onset, he will emerge as victor.
2.2.5. Isaiah 43:1621

16 Thus says Yhwh,
who gave a way in the sea
and in mighty waters a path,
17 who led out chariot and horse,
a mighty army together
they lie down, they cannot rise,
they are extinguished, quenched like a wick:
18 Do not remember the first things,
and do not heed what happened in primeval times.
19 I am about to make something new,
now it shall show itself, do you not recognise it?
Yea, I will make a way in the desert,
rivers in the wilderness,
20 The animals of the field will honour me,
jackals and ostriches,
because I give water in the desert,
rivers in the wilderness,
to give drink to my people, my chosen one.
21 The people that I have formed for myself,
they will tell my praise.
Apart from the emphatic closing line this proclamation of salvation has a
perfect concentric structure. The thematically contrasting strophes vv. 1617
and vv. 19b20 are arranged around the central strophe vv. 1819a, which
details the first and new things. Across from the road through the sea we
find the road through the desert, across from the mighty waters of the sea
the rivers in the wilderness, across from the exhausted horses the revering
plaintive animals, which will precede the people that Yhwh has formed in
praise and worship.
This contrast (between 1617 and 19b20) offers an unambiguous expla-
nation of the terms first things and something new within the horizon of
the poem. The first things refer to what precedes in the poem, something
new refers to what will follow in the poem. The suggestion made by sev-
eral commentators that the doom of Judeas downfall is meant with the first
things that should no longer be remembered [ 2.2.1; 2.2.8.2], takes too lit-
tle account of the poems own concentric structure.
The first things therefore first of all indicate Israels exodus from Egypt,
recalled in vv. 1617. With this, not everything has been said about them
in light of the broader context. In 43:9 Yhwh is asking about first things,
ancient traditions that would have to be confirmed in current, liberating
experiences. Yhwh is the only one who can boast of them and appeal to
his servant Israel who has witnessed them. The work Yhwh undertakes with
Cyrus, he has announced far in the past. Thus nobody can prevent this
work. In 43:14 Yhwh performatively declares that he hereby sends Cyrus
to Babylon. In this way Yhwh sets all thein 43:9 still assembled for the
trialnations to flight, including the Chaldeans in their proud ships.
The text in 43:16 leaps associatively from these Chaldean vessels over onto
the Sea of Reeds and Egypts military power. When it is told to forget the
former things, they expressly concern former history that first manifested
its actuality in the contemporaneous world events. The same holds true
in 43:18 as we have determined in 42:9: where the first things contrast
the new, these first things automatically include what happened last: their
actual confirmation in the present. Do not dwell on Egypts former defeat,
regardless how intensely history replays before your eyes, brought on by the
humiliating downfall of the Chaldeans.
The new that is about to show itself in 43:19in 42:9 there was just the
announcement of the new things before they show themselvesis iden-
tified as a road, and above all as water in the desert, an image of a com-
plete creational metamorphosis. The newness in Deutero-Isaiah is no longer
directly related to Cyrus and the fall of Babylon, but refers to something far
more incredible. The most tangible explanation, apart from the imagery, is
56 chapter two
to say that this new will finally bring Israel to its destination: praising Yhwh.
As in the previous passages on the new things (42:89 and 42:1013), hon-
ouring and praising Yhwh form the goal of the action in 43:1921.
How does Deutero-Isaiah develop further after this announcement of
newness? In several places between Isa. 43 and 48 we will encounter other
terms from the domain first-last-coming-new. It remains noteworthy, how-
ever, that the root is not used in this intervening section. In 44:67 the
attention falls on the opposition first-last and the opposition first-coming,
which is also the case in 46:911. These passages will then not be discussed
in further detail in this study on newness.88 For the ensuing argument, the
observation may suffice that Isa. 4447 draws the attention to the con-
temporary world events, the shaming of the idol makers, to Cyrus as he is
understood in light of Israels tradition and ultimately in light of the entire
creational order. The things to come concerning my children, which one
may safely inquire Yhwh about according to 45:11, also relate to what Yhwh
will accomplish through Cyrus. New things are not on the agenda in Isa. 45,
equally not in Isa. 46 and 47.
We must wait until Isa. 48 for the next occurrence of the opposition first-
new, and then until the chapters conclusion to re-encounter the revitalising
vision of the water in the desert, which we have retained since Isa. 43 as the
most characteristic metaphor of the new.
2.2.6. Isaiah 48:111

1 Hear this, house of Jacob
who call themselves by the name of Israel
and went forth from the waters of Judah,
who swear by the name of Yhwh
and invoke the God of Israel
not in truth and not in righteousness;
2 let alone that they call themselves from the holy city
and lean on the God of Israel,
Yhwh Almighty is his name:
3 The first things I announced long ago,
they went forth from my mouth and I made them heard,
then suddenly I realised (them) and they came.
88 In this regard: H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam
1987, 192202.
4 Because I knew that you are hard

and your neck is an iron muscle
and you forehead bronze,
5 I announced it long ago,
before it came I made you hear it,
lest you could say: my piece of work realised them,
my graven and molten image commanded them.
6 You have heardobserve all of it,
and you, would you not announce it in turn?
I make you hear new things from now on,
hidden things, that you have not known.
7 They are created now and not long ago
and before today you have not heard of them,
lest you could say: I already knew them.
8 You have neither heard nor known,
nor has it opened your ear since long ago,
for I knew how disloyal you are
and you are called a rebel from the womb.
9 For my names sake I delay my anger
and for the sake of my praise I restrain it so as not to cut you off.
10 See, I smelt you, but not for silver,
I hereby choose you, in the furnace of affliction.
11 For my own sake, for my own sake I will realise it,
and my honourhow should it be injured
I will give to no other.
Isa. 48:111 differs from the previous literary units we have discussed in
its being an extended speech, an announcement of redemption that is
peppered with reproachful and admonishing justifications.
The exposition commences in vv. 12 with an appeal to the house of
Israel to listen, followed by a detailed profiling of the addressees. They call
themselves Israel and indeed originated from Judea, but do not identify
themselves with the holy city. They make oaths in the name of Yhwh and
confess Israels God, but one cannot therefore say that they truly trust in
him.
In vv. 36a Yhwh speaks about the first things. He has announced them
long ago and now they have come suddenly. Though it is not clear from
Isa. 48 itself what events are implied, we can deduce them from the pre-
ceding context: the term , suddenly, in v. 3 refers to the song mocking
Babylons downfall (47:11). A comparison with the closest related passage on
the first things opposing the new [ 2.2.3] also supports relating these first
things directly with the activities of Cyrushere thus more concretely with
58 chapter two
the calamity that Cyrus has brought down in the meantime on the city
of Babylon self. With the earlier predictions of this event, in line with the
previous chapters, one should not think of prophecies in the restricted sense
of the word. Once again, the first things are related to the totality of Israels
earlier history of redemption in its predictive power. It is these former things
that have come to their historical fulfilment in the fall of Babylon.89
As justification for the early announcement of Babylons fall, the fla-
grant disobedience of Israel is mentioned. Would this people, without this
announcement from the beginning, not have been hasty to ascribe Baby-
lons fall to their idols? Isa. 48 takes up a theme that was touched upon in
thein essence directed at Israelpolemics of idolatry presented in Isa.
44 and 46. The coming of the former things has resulted for Deutero-Isaiah
in Israels own unmasking as idolater. Nothing less but also nothing more is
achieved through this fulfilment by Yhwh, due to the religious attitude of
the historical Israel. In their convergence, tradition and experience do not
have the ability to effect real change in people. History verifies that Yhwh is
right, but how painful for Israel is its own thus attested wrong.
In vv. 6b11 Yhwh reveals the new things. Only at this moment are they
created. Yet again they were not that new, we could see them glimmer
through, as hidden things, deep in the delves of the preceding drama.
According to the text the new things, too, are associated with Israels rebel-
lious nature since it was in the womb, but then in the sense that there will
now resolutely come an end to this rebelliousness when the new is created.
This takes place in the remarkable metathetic statement in Isa. 48:10.
One would expect this to read: I choose you, but not for silver, I smelt you
in the furnace of affliction. By exchanging the phrases between the colons,
the lines receive unprecedented emphasis in which the direct link between
oppression and election comes to the fore: I smelt you, but not for silver,
I choose you, in the furnace of affliction. But, in this illogical verse there is
something else. It contains a performative utterance, with all its features:
Hereby I choose you. The construction + qatalti has been used in this
89 Cf. M. Albani, Der eine Gott und die himmlischen Heerscharen: Zur Begrndung des
Monotheismus bei Deuterojesaja im Horizont der Astralisierung des Gottesverstndnisses im

Alten Orient (ABG, 1), Leipzig 2000, 115 on Isa. 47:1013: JHWH [tut] seinen Willen unvorse-
hbar und unberechenbar seinen auserwhlten Propheten kund, und greift ebenso ber-
raschenderweise in die Geschichte ein. Indeed surprising for the Babylonian astrologers, but
not a surprise in light of the unique foresaying, represented by Israels narrative tradition. For
DI this remains the monotheistic main argument, against which the Marduk theology has no
equivalent response.
manner previously in Deutero-Isaiah; one can refer to Isa. 41:15, the verse
relating Israels transformation into a new threshing sledge [ 2.2.2].
The reader is therefore encouraged to envision Yhwhs statement in 48:10
realising the purifying change to Israel at this precise dramatic moment.
Surrounding this performative utterance we find statements in v. 9 and v. 11
about Yhwhs praise and honour. They remind strongly of 42:89, see also
43:21. It is the new that truly empowers Israel to be recreated, so that Yhwh
can finally receive the recognition due to him as God from his people.
Does Isa. 48 also speak of the servant of Yhwh? In Isa. 42 the redemption
mediated by the servant was indicated as the new. To answer this question
we need to explore the remainder of the chapter. Interpreters have long
surmised that it must be the same servant of Yhwh from Isa. 42 that speaks
for the first time in Isa. 48:16b: And now the Lord Yhwh has sent me with
his Spirit.90 If one follows this explanation, the direct relation between that
verse and the realised change in Isa. 48:10 is obvious. In this regard the
corresponding positioning of v. 10 and v. 16 in the parallel structure of Isa.
48 is important, which we will analyse in more detail below [ 2.2.7.2].
With all respect to the mysteriousness of the text we see no other plausible
alternative than that it must be the one that Yhwh has sent in v. 16, in
whom so to say the purified Israel stands before us. He, who still refrained from
speaking in Isa. 42, makes himself known for the first time as the servant of
the Lord in Isa. 48. In this manner he personifies the transformed Israel, and
calls, with the power of Yhwhs Spirit, the readers in vv. 1719 to adopt a new
way of life.91
Like Isa. 48 began with the audience refusing to identify themselves with
the holy city, it ends in vv. 2022 with a call to them personally to finally
depart from Babylon. In the sequel to this calling, as in 43:19, they must
journey through the wilderness. Between Isa. 43 and 48 such a compelling
imagery of a creation-like change was not encountered. Here too, a close
connection with previous statements on the new things can be established
that offers our interpretation extra support. Those that take the instruction
of the servant to heart and so accept the ostensible hardships of the return,
will have to acknowledge in retrospect that they did not thirst when Yhwh
led them through the deserts.
90 A convincing exposition of this view can be found in U. Berges, Jesaja 4048 (HThKAT),
Freiburg 2008, 537.

91 See 2.3.3.3 sub c for the possible social background of DIs secret language.
60 chapter two
With this we see all the lines related to the new things from the preceding
part of the drama come together in Isa. 48.
2.2.7. A Synchronic Approach

2.2.7.1. Dramatic Progression in Isaiah 4055
Lines that come together in Isa. 48with what type of intertextual relation-
ship are we dealing here? Interpreters have been struck by the architectonic
features of Isa. 4055. They highlight aspects such as the division between
redeeming words to Jacob-Israel and Zion-Jerusalem over 4048 and 49
55. So too the alignments between the prologue in Isa. 40 and the epilogue
in Isa. 55, which together emphasise the creational power of Yhwhs word,
are presented as an argument supporting a thoroughly planned macro-
structure.
Still, one can go one step too far when indicating such alignments and
symmetries,92 and therewithespeciallyallow oneself to get carried away
with static metaphors derived from architecture. The most important factor
behind the cohesion of the constituent parts from which Deutero-Isaiah has
been constructed as a literary work, is their communal participation in a
single line of eventstheir dramatic action.
In this way the performative words of redemption in Isa. 4148 addressed
to the servant Jacob-Israel (e.g. 41:15 and 48:10) culminate in this servant
being transformed and, in that quality, speaking to the reader from Isa. 48
onwards. From Isa. 49 Zion-Jerusalem stands centre stage. The returning
children whom she welcomes as an overwhelmed mother, are none other
than those for whom this servant has become a covenant and a light. These
dynamics are the most decisive determinant in the cohesion of the whole.
The question of the Servant of the Lord cannot be discussed exhaustively in this
study. Recent research has focused on the following dilemma: (a) some form of
identification of the servant from the songs with the prophet Deutero-Isaiah, or (b)
idem ditto with the servant Jacob-Israel from the remainder of the book. For a clear
overview of the problem, see e.g. P. Wilcox, D. Paton-Williams, The Servant Songs
in Deutero-Isaiah, JSOT 42 (1988), 79102. It is obvious that the servant displays
prophetic characteristics in the second and third song of the servant. Probably
92 See e.g. A. Laato, The Composition of Isaiah 4055, JBL 109 (1990), 207228. He subdi-
vides Isa. 4053 according to a chiastic scheme ABABA. The cycles are: 40:12 prologue;
40:342:17; 42:14(!)44:8; 44:946:2; 46:348:21; 48:20(!)52:12; 52:1353:12 epilogue. The very
fact that Laatos main caesuras are often placed differently to where they are usually assumed
shows to what extent a top-down procedure has contributed to the scheme. The impression
is made on several occasions that the scheme has been imposed on the text rather than being
deduced from it. Laato sees Isa. 5455 as a summary.
the voice of the servant can already be heard through the prophetic question in
the prologue: What shall I cry? (40:6). On the other hand the dramatic action
of the book compels identifying him with the servant Jacob-Israel. In the servant
of the songs according to Deutero-Isaiah, Yhwh realises his creational word to his
people. This word would have returned void to Yhwh (cf. 55:11) if the transformed
Israel had not stood before us in this servant. Israel himself is thus the prophet
of the drama. One could counter with the argument that the identification of the
servant (a or b) depends on whether he is being discussed in either a synchronic or
a diachronic approach to Isa. 4055; even if one were to conclude synchronically
with one servant figure, a diachronic analysis would expose the different literary
ingredients with which it is composed. This is correct. Though, diachronically
isolated servant texts provide little ground to make biographic deductions of the
servant as Deutero-Isaiah. We shall also see that the image of the prophet Jeremiah
was more likely influenced by the servant of the Lord than the other way around [
4.2.2].
For an oversimplified dismissal of the problems of the Servant Songs, see H.M.
Barstad, The Future of the Servant Songs: Some Reflections on the Relationship
of Biblical Scholarship to Its Own Tradition, in: S.E. Balentine, J. Barton (eds), Lan-
guage, Theology, and The Bible. Fs J. Barr, Oxford 1994, 261270. For the servant as his-
torical founder of a sect: J. Blenkinsopp, A Jewish Sect of the Persian Period, CBQ 52
(1990), 520. On the servant as a motif rather than a specific character: P.R. Davies,
God of Cyrus, God of Israel: Some Religio-Historical Reflections on Isaiah 4055,
in: J. Davies et al. (eds), Words Remembered, Texts Renewed. Fs J.F.A. Sawyer (JSOT.S,
195), Sheffield 1995, 207225, esp. 218. On the identity of worm (41:14), blind servant,
suffering servant: P.D. Stern, The Blind Servant Imagery of Deutero-Isaiah and its
Implications, Bibl 75 (1994), 224232. For a renewed petition for the servant as a sec-
ond Moses: K. Baltzer, Deutero-Jesaja (KAT, 10/2), Gtersloh 1999, 4447. The view
of Berges, Jesaja 4048 on the servant as the transformed Israel agrees with ours.
On the identification of the servant and Zion-Jerusalem, see: H.J.M. van der Woude,
Geschiedenis van de terugkeer: De rol van Jesaja 40,111 in het drama van Jesaja 4055,
Maastricht 2005, 219228 (critically); K.D. Jenner, Jerusalem, Zion and the Unique
Servant of Yhwh in the New Heaven and the New Earth: A Study on Recovering
Identity versus Lamenting Faded Glory (Isaiah 15 and 6566), in: A.L.H.M. van
Wieringen, A. van der Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent: The City as Uni-
fying Theme in Isaiah (OTS, 58), Leiden 2011, 169189 (in agreement): two different
roles of one and the same personification of Jerusalem (184). In our approach, Zion-
Jerusalem and the servant represent two different roles, while Jacob-Israel and the
servant play one developing role in the drama.
The alignment between Isa. 4148 and 4954 is thus more dramatic than
thematic in nature. The most prominent link is carried in the singular action
that extends over the parts. The role changing of the two queens, Babylon
(Isa. 47) and Zion (Isa. 51) can be understood in this light. The concept of
changing roles itself indicates to what extent dynamic and dramatic cate-
gories can contribute towards describing the relations between passages in a
work like this. At the end of the next section, limiting ourselves to Isa. 4148,
62 chapter two
we will pay attention on a smaller scale to further chronological details of

this overall dramatic movement.93
There are, however, also cyclic patterns identifiable in the arrangements
of the literary units, as we have noted above. The most important cyclic pat-
tern in Isa. 4148 is the regularly recurring sequence first-last-coming-new.
This fourfold formula has been used in the previous sections to describe a
semantic domain. From here onwards, it will also serve as summary of a
compositional scheme. We have provisionally illustrated this idea regarding
Isa. 41 [ 2.2.2].
Each cycle of units that is demarcated in this fashion, first focuses on the
convergence of first and last, then on the forthcoming or recently come in
the interim, and finally on the new. Since the angle from which the predicted
or experienced events are viewed moves on in time per cycle, one could
regard the cycles as the sequenced episodes of a drama. Within the concept
episode, one could say, our observation of the cyclic repetitions merges with
the identification of a linear dramatic progression.
Does each dramatic episode really end, as in a provisional climax, with an
outlook on the new that Yhwh is on the verge of realising? Then this cyclic
structure must lead to a more complete picture of what Deutero-Isaiah
wants us to understand with new things, the main subject of this study.
2.2.7.2. First-Last-Coming-New in Isaiah 4148

The following episodes more or less display the pattern first-last-coming-
new: 41:120; 41:2142:17; 43:821; 44:623; 48:111; 48:1222.
(1) 41:120; 41:2142:17. The literary units in the complex 41:120 are closely
linked by word repetitions and semantic isotopies, as several researchers
over the past decades have demonstrated. These units cannot possibly stand
on their own. It would appear that especially the terms used for first, last,
93 For an overview of the characteristics of Isa. 4055 as a dramatic text, see Leene,
Vroegere, 3037 and 181183 (lit.); Berges, Jesaja 4048, 6473 (lit.). Baltzer, Deutero-Jesaja, 29
38 compares Isa. 4055 to liturgical dramas from Babylon, Egypt, Greece and the Hellenistic-
Jewish world, and does differentiate between the category dramatic text and the sub-
category drama in its strict sense. Concerning the latter, it is not as much a question whether
Isa. 4055 is adaptable for the stage (Baltzer Deutero-Jesaja, 38: Mit 23 Darstellern ist
auszukommen), but whether there are sufficient concrete indications that its maker(s) had
such a performance in mind. This is doubtful. Here one may consider the required signs of
plurimediality (M. Pfister, Das Drama (UTB, 580), Mnchen 41984, 2425). In this regard,
see also H.J.M. van der Woude, What is new in Isaiah 41:1420? On the Drama Theories of
Klaus Baltzer and Henk Leene, in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old
Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht 2002, 261267.
coming and new (or more precisely: the semantic isotopies that are repre-
sented by these terms), besides other factors, play a crucial role in linking
these four or five units together.
With the terms and in the trial speech of 41:15, Yhwh
stresses the correlation between the calling of the generations in the past
and the stirring up of Cyrus in the present. The beginning of the oracle of
salvation in 41:813 takes up these time dimensions through the explicit
reference to Abraham. As the calling of the generations relates to the rise
of Cyrus in the present, the calling of Abraham relates to the help and
the strength that Yhwh currently promises to Jacob-Israel. The announcing
part of 41:813 emphasises that Israels opponents, despite the divine powers
they as idol makers claim to possess (cf. 41:67), are mere humans and
with all their seeming bravado will come to naught. This announcement
of annihilation, as we shall see, brings us into the political realm of what
later in the drama will be ascribed to either what will come or has come.
In the oracle of salvation in 41:1416 Yhwh turns Jacob-Israel into his
instrument to remove insurmountable barriers [ 2.2.2]. Subsequently the
proclamation of salvation in 41:1720 hints on Yhwhs miracles that will
benefit the poor and needy. These miracles will happen in a place of
drought and hardship. Thus the penetrating imagery from Deutero-Isaiahs
prologue is reflected in the sequence of 41:1416 and 1720: obstacles that
must be cleared so that Yhwhs glory can be manifested in the wilderness
(cf. 40:35). These images deal with the events that later in the drama will
be referred to as new things. The casually placed word in 41:15 then
appears to be less accidental than one might think at first glance. Isa. 41:15 is
ignored in most of the studies on the first and new things in Deutero-Isaiah.
For us new threshing sledge does not seem to be the least important marker
of a pattern. The whole cycle first-last-coming-new is run through exactly
one time in the complex 41:120. It is the first time, we must add, because in
the episodes that follow, the same pattern will be repeated constantly.
Even as the complex 41:2142:17 introduces some unexpected generic
units causing form-critical differences, in this aspect (regarding the pattern
first-last-coming-new) it runs conspicuously parallel to 41:120. A variety of
connecting word repetitions and isotopies also occur here, but once again
the mentioned dimensions of time appear to be the most crucial for the
episodes structure.
The oppositions first-last and first-coming successively determine 41:21
29. This trial speech not only reminds of 41:17, but also 41:813; especially
the term and the opposition connect the trial speech in
41:2129 with the oracle of salvation 41:813. These two units are deeply inte-
64 chapter two
grated: the trial scene in 41:2129 dramatically follows on the trial scene
in 41:17, but is also clearly offset against the intervening oracle 41:813.
In 41:2129 we see that the just announced coming to naught of Israels
opponents has virtually been accomplished. Their announced disappear-
ance here begins to be a fact. Thus the coming things receive their first
historical contours in 41:2526, and then in the ever growing threat of Cyruss
approach.
first
41:0107 41:2129
last (= now)
)
Cyrus 41:0813
coming/has come

transformation of the 41:1416 42:0104
servant Jacob-Israel 42:0509

new
wonderful path 41:1720 42:1013

through the wilderness 42:1417
The appointment of Jacob-Israel as the new threshing sledge in 41:15 finds

a similar compositional counterpart within the second round of this dou-
ble cycle (41:2142:17), cast as the servant of the Lord in 42:1. The parallelism
carries the suggestion for the first time that in this mysterious servant fig-
ure, Israel made through Yhwh to be his instrument stands before us.94 Also
towards the end, the parallelism between 41:120 and 41:2142:17 continues,
set in the metaphors relating a transformation in the wildernesswhere
the first paths are mentioned explicitly in 42:1417. The table above pro-
vides a schematic overview of these observations.
On the most striking tour de force that is accomplished here, namely, the
dramas incorporation of the anonymous servant (42:14) as the Israel who
has been transformed through Yhwhs word (41:15), we will go into deeper
detail in 2.2.9 sub 5.
(2) 43:821; 44:623. The same pattern, first-last-coming-new, is repeated

more or less in 43:821 and 44:623. Both these complexes commence with
94 Stern, Blind Servant, 226 even sees in 41:14 an allusion to the blindness of the
servant. But worms are not associated with blindness anywhere else in the OT.
a trial speech in which the correspondence between first and last has a cen-
tral position (43:813; 44:68). The sending of someone to Babylon (43:1415)
and the shaming of the idol makers (44:920) are similarly interconnected
and belong to the realm of what is called the things to come or have come
in 41:2223 and 42:9; no wonder that precisely these two units (43:1415
and 44:920) must carry literary building blocks in advance for the mag-
nificent satirical song on Babylon that will follow in Isa. 47. New things
are mentioned again in 43:1621 (the way in the wilderness), while 44:21
23 (sweeping away the offences in a performative assurance of redemption
to the servant Jacob-Israel) likewise refers to the unstoppable breakthrough
of the new.
Israels destitution and offences 42:1825 43:2228
creation completion 43:0107 44:0105
first
43:0813 44:0608
last (= now) Babylons fall

=
coming/has come
shaming of the 43:1415
44:0922
idol makers

transformation of the 44:2123
servant Jacob-Israel

new
wonderful path 43:1621

through the wilderness
A special feature of this episode 42:1844:23, compared to the previously

discussed 41:142:17, is that here the complexes 43:821 and 44:623 (both
arranged according to the pattern first-last-coming-new) are each preceded
by a diptych judicial speech/oracle of salvation. The judicial speeches relate
Israels distress and offences respectively (42:1825 and 43:2228), whereas
in the oracles of salvation Yhwh presents himself as creator, designer and
completer of his people (43:17 and 44:15). Despite the horrific predica-
ment Israel allowed itself to fall in, the God that created this people will
bring it to perfection.
The diptychs 42:1825/43:17 and 43:2228/44:15 thus each indicate the
encompassing programme by which the first and last things, the coming and
66 chapter two
the new are framed as divine actions. They show Yhwhs ultimate intentions
with Israel, despite the physical and spiritual crisis it currently finds itself in.
In this manner it is made compositionally clear that it is precisely Yhwhs
creational goal with Israel that he will achieve through the new things.
Compared to these new things, the correspondence between first and last is
relativised to something penultimate in this episode; see the famous verse
Isa. 43:18. Certainly, tradition and experience together demonstrate that
Yhwh alone reigns over history. Their alignment forms the proof of divinity
which is restated in the parallel trial speeches in 43:813 and 44:68, and
which opens the visors to what the ongoing drama still holds in store: the
fall of Babylon and the definitive shaming of the makers of idols. However,
only the new implies Israels asserted change to praising and worshipping
Yhwh. Only therein will this people receive what even the most spectacular
proof of divinity from history cannot impress on them. Concluding promises
announce these new things in each cycle.
(3) 48:111; 48:1222. The tempo in the dramatic development is seen to

decrease after 44:23. Where 41:144:23 was built up with smaller, relatively
independent literary units, from here onwards the literary compositions are
longer and more integrated. The shift in focus from first-last via coming to
new also moves in a slower swell from this point on.
Isa. 45 wants to make it clear that the actions of Cyrus are not obscure
and chaotic, but orderly in line with the creation of a habitable earth and as
such should be transparent to everyone, in light of Israels foretelling tradi-
tion. This emphasis on the correspondence between first and last continues
in Isa. 46, where, once more, stress is also placed on the coming of Cyrus as
conqueror. In Isa. 47 catastrophe strikes Babylon, after which the most unex-
pected climax is reached in Isa. 48. After a long lapse this chapter picks up
the theme of the new things again, indeed allows these new things finally
to appear from their hiddenness, as if in the first dramatic dnouement of
Isa. 4055. Even for those who are cautious about textual passages being
forced into tight straitjackets, the pattern first-last-coming-new, seen this
way, offers some assistance in clarifying the overall movement of Isa. 45
48. In any event, the detected structure supports our conviction that it is
exegetically incorrect to include Cyrus and the fall of Babylon with the new
things, as done in many of the older commentaries.95 No, what is new is what
95 On this point, after the commentary of W.A.M. Beuken, Jesaja (POT), dl. 2A, Nijkerk
1979, Berges, Jesaja 4048, also embarks on a new direction: Mit der Erweckung der Perser als
must follow as an answer to this historical manifestation of Yhwhs primeval

kingship through the actions of Cyrus.
first
last (= now) 48:0105 48:1215

)
Cyrus
coming/has come

transformation of the 48:0611 48:1619
servant Jacob-Israel

new
wonderful path 48:2022

through the wilderness
Isa. 48 lends itself more accurately to be read against the grid that has
been devised and drawn for previous episodes.96 Here it is of special inter-
est that the chapter follows the same double movement we have become
familiar with above and, in this way, draws our attention to the correspon-
dence between 48:10 (performative purification of Israel) and 48:16 (the first
speech by the servant). These decisive events in Isa. 48 allow the dramas
reader participate directly in the new.
(4) These compositional patterns (whether the authors consciously pursued

them everywhere is beside the point) confirm and concretise in all clarity
what we are able to understand under first, last, coming and new in Isa.
4048.97 The first things indicate Israels history of redemption (Abraham,
the exodus from Egypt) in its ability to foretell the future from the past.98
neuer Weltmacht und der damit eingehenden Ablsung Babels vollziehen sich nicht etwa die
neuen Dinge, sondern kommen die frheren Dinge zu einem vorlufigen Abschluss (243).
96 On the parallelism between the two sections 48:111 and 1222, see also C. Franke, Isaiah
46, 47, 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Biblical and Judaic Studies, 3), Winona Lake 1994,
240261. According to her count (261) the two sections agree approximately in the number
of syllables (304316 resp. 304313) and stresses (117118 resp. 119122).
97 Such patterns may lead one to reflect on the notorious philological rule of Schleier-
macher which teaches einen Schriftsteller besser zu verstehen, als er sich selber verstanden
habe. For a comprehensive discussion, see H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode, Tbin-
gen 61990, 195201: the rule applies to a texts means of expression, even if one aspires to war
against it wholeheartedly with regard to the cause the text is presenting.
98 On the implication that this view of the salvation history has for the dating of Isa. 4144,
68 chapter two
The last things refer to Cyruss actions as the outcome or result of this
former redemption history. Did Yhwh not foretell about Cyrus in the past
through Israels tradition? Indeed, in as far as the creational order itself is
reflected in this historical coherence of first and last (see esp. Isa. 45:1819)
one must agree that this tradition of foretelling reaches back to the very
founding of the world (Isa. 40:21; 48:13).99 It is essential for the first things
in Deutero-Isaiah that they touch upon the primeval beginningswhile
they are also clearly made manifest in their present fulfilment. What is
coming/has come is then contained in what gradually unfolds on the worlds
stage, in the line of this fulfilling/fulfilled redemption history, before the eyes
of the dramas reader. What, then, is the new? The new in Deutero-Isaiah
can best be described as the adequate human answer to the totality of this
historical, indeed reaching back to creation proof of divinity. The central
metaphor for the new in Isa. 4048 is a wilderness that has been turned into
an oasis, to be gratefully received by the exiles as their miraculous highway
of return to Zion. Simultaneously the new is what truly begins in the figure of
Yhwhs servant, to be identified as Jacob-Israel transformed by Yhwhs word.
In this servant figure, the new is present in its anticipation.
(5) We indicated in the previous section that the cyclic movement in Isa.
4148 is carried by the linear progression of one dramatic action. In this way
the point of view from which the first things are seen always remains Cyrus,
but with the texts progression this contemporaneous viewpoint shifts as it
were along the successive stages of Cyruss advance: his stirring up in the
east (41:2) and in the north (41:25), his campaign to Babylon (43:14), the
disclosure of his name (44:28), the humiliating retreat of Bel and Nebo (46:1),
2.2.8.5. Different from Abraham and the Exodus, the journey through the desert and the
Sinai covenant are not included in DIs presentation of the first things, which in addition do
not refer to the history of David or the election of Zion either. Though certain images of the
new, such as the water from the rock in 48:21, recall the wilderness tradition.
99 The answer to the question whether DIs monotheism depends on belief in creation
(M. Albani, Der eine Gott und die himmlischen Heerscharen: Zur Begrndung des Monotheis-
mus bei Deuterojesaja im Horizont der Astralisierung des Gottesverstndnisses im Alten Orient
(ABG, 1), Leipzig 2000, 123124) or notably on historic experience (R. Albertz, Israel in Exile:
The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 440) should be
sought in these environs. Yhwhs power to create (i.e. his primordial kingship) is only provable
within history. Where such historical proof is given, the primordial order shimmers through
the recount. Thus the right of Yhwh as it is confirmed in the legal battle over Cyrus becomes
merged with the order of creation of an inhabitable earth through the concept ( see esp.
Isa. 45:19). The petition of Albani is orientated too strongly on Isa. 40:1231, which relates as
expositio (cf. Pfister, Drama, 124126) to the actual Cyrus-drama, Isa. 4148.
and in the finale the de facto fall of the city Babylon itself (47) as the most
spectacular result of Cyruss activities.
On this level it may be possible to indicate other subtle signs of chronolog-
ical sequencing in the text. Thus it appears that the same nations that are all
assembled for the judicial inquiry in 43:9 (and in all likelihood without inter-
ruption from 41:5!) are all set to flight in 43:14including the Chaldeans on
their proud ships. Therefore these nations are no longer able to participate
fully in the trial of 44:68 and consequently the idol makers that remain
alone on the scene must bear the brunt of the scorn: the placement of 44:9
20 after 68 appears to be dramaturgically thoroughly thought out.
So too 43:3 and 45:1314 may be compared regarding their dramatic pro-
gression.100 This comparison has led us to the proposal that the nations,
which Yhwh had first offered in exchange for Israel (43:3), are subsequently
delivered unto the returning exiles by Cyrus, because the conqueror has no
wish to lay claim to such a generous ransom (45:13). The synchronic reading
of the text evidently relies on the reader being continuously sensitive for
this type of dramatic time shifts. Needless to say, Deutero-Isaiahs drama-
tised history does not correspond with the real course of events in every
detail, as we understand them today from our modern history books.
The dramatic changes that the personage Jacob-Israel undergoes, which
constantly open the prospect on the new things in the literary structure of
Isa. 4148, appear to be arranged according to a similar relative chronol-
ogy. The made through Yhwh to serve as his new instrument Israel (41:15)
is presented as the servant that will establish justice on earth through his
teachings (42:14). Although this servant for the time being is blind and deaf
to what can be heard and seen (42:1920), he is called by Yhwh to stand wit-
ness to his own, just realised liberation (43:913) and, in the next episode,
even sees his transgressions erased through Yhwhs command (43:25; 44:22).
After differentiating between the servant Jacob-Israel and the more empiri-
cal house of Israel (cf. 46:3; 48:1), the drama presents Israels purification in
48:10, and finally places the servant in the spotlight as speaker in 48:16. His
first performance as torah-teacher is the dnouement of what was already
announced in the shrouded language of 42:14, and for which Yhwh kept his
servant ready since 42:6. In the servants inspired words, the new and hidden
things are now truly brought to light, as flowers in the desert.
100 If truth be told, during the 1970s this issue of the ransom provided me the first clue in
detecting a substantial dramatic arrangement in Isa. 4055, cf. H. Leene, Universalism or

Nationalism? Isaiah XLV 913 and its Context, Bijdr. 35 (1974), 309334, esp. 325.
70 chapter two
2.2.8. A Diachronic Approach

2.2.8.1. Redaction-Critical Theories on Isaiah 4055
Even thoroughly planned compositions have difficulty concealing the traces
of their genesis. It is remarkable though how the diachronic paradigm of Isa.
4055 has shifted over half a centurythe active years of a biblical exegete.
Initially, attention was focused on the question to what degree the generic
independence of the smaller literary units could be established. Later, espe-
cially in German speaking parts, the attention turned to looking for a cohe-
sive basic text of Deutero-Isaiah.101 This Grundschrift was presented as an
original collection or composition of literary units, which was gradually sup-
plemented and expanded in a series of redactional rewritings, until what lies
before us today was reached.
A discussion developed on the extent of such an original text. Would
it be limited to the Israel texts from what is now Isa. 4148 (Kiesow, van
Oorschot), or could a selection of Zion texts from the current Isa. 4954
already have been part of it (Hermisson)? Or could an intermediate position
be suggested: the original collection of Israel texts was framed from the
onset by passages currently in Isa. 40 and 52, with Jerusalem as the final
destination of the return (Steck, Kratz)?102
The common denominator in these models is that they all allow the share
of the younger material to increase as the text of Isa. 4055 progresses,
regardless of the smaller or larger scope of the kernel document one pro-
poses as point of departure. In our opinion it is better to use a project
model to explain this gradual increase than a growth model, on which such
hypotheses are based. Our concern is that the idea of a final text as gewach-
sene Einheit (grown entity) is too dominant therein. It appears more likely
101 Cf. K. Kiesow, Exodustexte im Jesajabuch: Literarkritische und motivgeschichtliche Ana-
lysen (OBO, 24), Gttingen 1979; H.-J. Hermisson, Einheit und Komplexitt Deuterojesajas:
Probleme der Redaktionsgeschichte von Jes 4055, in: J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of Isa-
iah (BEThL, 81), Leuven 1989, 287312; R.G. Kratz, Kyros im Deuterojesaja-Buch: Redaktions-
geschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Entstehung und Theologie von Jes 4055 (FAT, 1), Tbin-
gen 1991; O.H. Steck, Gottesknecht und Sion: Gesammelte Aufstze zu Deuterojesaja (FAT, 4),
Tbingen 1992; J. van Oorschot, Von Babel zum Zion: Eine literarkritische und redaktions-
geschichtliche Untersuchung (BZAW, 206), Berlin 1993. For a discussion on the topic, see:
H. Leene, Auf der Suche nach einem redaktionskritischen Modell fr Jesaja 4055, ThLZ 121
(1996), 803818. Werlitz, J., Redaktion und Komposition: Zur Rckfrage hinter die Endgestalt
von Jesaja 4055 (BBB, 122), Berlin 1999 offers a comprehensive evaluation of this redaction-
critical research.
102 The redaction-critical hypothesis of Steck and Kratz is followed in broad outlines by
M. Wischnowsky, Das Buch DeuterojesajaKomposition und Wachstum in Jes 4055, BN

69 (1993), 8796.
that Isa. 4055 came into being because a scribe or a guild of scribes con-
ceived the plan to compose such a work.
This does not mean that the text in its complexity does not display text-
genetic traces. Such traces were mainly caused when unforeseen compli-
cations in the planned drama required adjustments in what had already
been written. This explains why the younger material appears mostly fur-
ther down in the work, while additions are observable only sporadically in
the initial parts. A more or less rounded off Grundschrift or older edition
then never existed. A text that was intended for further elaboration was
developed over time.103 The most suitable comparison is not with a city that
spreads randomly, but rather with a cathedral that, even though it had risen
in phases, was clearly built according to a plan.104
This diachronic approach is well illustratable when applied to the pas-
sages on the first and last, coming and new things in Isa. 4048. The follow-
ing passages are considered part of the oldest collection or Grundschrift by
Hermisson, Kratz and van Oorschot: 41:4; 41:15; 41:2223; 43:9; 43:1819; and
46:911. What are the thoughts on the other passages?
The passage 42:89 belongs to the basic collection according to Hermis-
son,105 but Kratz counts it in his secondary Ebed-Israel-Schicht (Ebed Israel
layer); in other words to the layer in which the servant of 42:14, who was
identified previously with the Persian conqueror through 57 as Kyros-
Ergnzung (Cyrus supplement), is reinterpreted as Israel.106 Van Oorschot
reasons that the whole 42:59 belongs to a Naherwartungsschicht (layer of
imminent expectation), which announces the new before it sprouts.107 The
passage 44:68, according to van Oorschot, should also have belonged to this
secondary layer.108 Hermisson and Kratz include 44:68 in the basic collec-
tion, along with the other trial speeches. On in 45:11 the three authors
follow an amendment of MT.109
103 On the basic idea behind the structure of Isa. 4055 as a whole, 2.2.8.4.
104 With an apology for the architectonic metaphor. A longer period of time is indicated
by the fact that Isa. 5666 appears to be related closer to Isa. 4955 in its word choice and
imagery than to Isa. 4048 [ 2.3.3.3].
105 Hermisson, Einheit, 311; though see H.-J. Hermisson, Deuterojesaja und Eschatolo-
gie , in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy. Fs
H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht 2002, 89105, esp. 97 n. 14.
106 Kratz, Kyros, 217 (overview).
107 Van Oorschot, Babel, 233.
109 The amendment of Isa. 45:11 MT was welcomed in Leene, Universalism, 315316, but
again rejected in H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam 1987,
194.
72 chapter two
Isa. 48:111 along with 42:89 forms part of the Ebed-Israel-Schicht in

Kratzs hypothesis.110 In van Oorschots view, 48:111 would be one of the
very last redactional additions to the corpus, which could be summarised
thematically as Gehorsam und Segen (obedience and blessing).111 Hermis-
son also reasons that the text is young, based on the presupposed layer of
idol polemics seen therein.112 According to Hermisson and van Oorschot, we
again find the Naherwartungsschicht in 48:1215,113 and according to Kratz
the Kyros-Ergnzungsschicht, which would have preceded the Ebed-Israel-
Schicht in time.114 From these diverse diachronic proposals, we are able to
determine the following:
(a) All three the oppositions, first-last, first-coming and first-new, are
represented in the texts usually ascribed to the basic material. A remark-
able consensus between the divergent views: how easy would it have been
to suggest the idea that this semantic variation (such as between first-last
in 41:15 and first-new in 43:1621) could be explained as a redactional lay-
ering; but wisely none of the mentioned authors find satisfactory evidence
for this.115
(b) Previously we established the links between 42:89 and 48:111 [ 2.2.6]
and there are sufficient reasons to agree with Kratz in explaining these
passages as a somewhat later phase in the text production. Without affecting
the semantic opposition itself, these passages hint at a subtle terminological
shift compared to the other discussed texts: in the expression the first things
they have come the aspect of prediction seems to overshadow the aspect
of historical event in the word seen in texts like 41:22; 43:9, 18 and
46:9. Yet in all the relevant texts, whether dated older or younger, the same
topic is addressed with first things, namely Israels history of redemption in
its foresaying capacity. Something similar applies mutatis mutandis to the
new things: they have to do with Israels internal change on all possible text
levels.

112 Hermisson, Einheit, 310.
113 Hermisson, Einheit, 311 (with a question mark); Van Oorschot, Babel, 227228.
115 Werlitz, Redaktion, 104 thinks in this direction: Die und \knnen in
Jes 4048 nmlich kaum auf einen synchronen Nenner gebracht werden. With our discussion
in the previous section and here, we want to show that this, with a little qualifying, is certainly
possible.
(c) We grant Kratz that redemption mediated by the servant of 42:14 is

implied in the new things of 42:89 and 48:111, and that this servant is iden-
tified in 42:89 as Israel. This identification is however also suggested in
42:1s position parallel to 41:15 in the double structure of 41:142:17 [ 2.2.7.2].
The Servant Song originally being applied to Cyrus, as Kratz advocates,116
appears to us difficult to defend considering this compositional perspective.
The conclusion seems inevitable that nothing changed substantially during
the process of text production pertaining to the first things (ending in Cyrus)
and the new things (starting with the transformation of the servant Jacob-
Israel as dramatic personage). In our view there is no indication whatsoever
of a redactional phase in which the new things still referred to the military
conquests of Cyrus or his successors.117
(d) It is quite possible that a preliminary version of Isa. 4142 was reworked
and supplemented when the writing of the linear text had advanced to Isa.
48. This intervention, then, would have been necessary once this chapter
had presented the purified Israel in the figure of the torah-teacher of v. 16b.
Possibly this dramatic climax formed the very reason for writing the first
Servant Song, a text many assume was written outside the context of the
book, but in our view, relies strongly on such a dnouement within Deutero-
Isaiahs present composition.118 Whatever the case, any modifications to Isa.
116 For a synchronic Cyrus interpretation of the first Servant Song, see J.P. Walsh, The
Case for the Prosecution: Isa 41:2142:17, in: E. Follis (ed.), Directions in Biblical Hebrew Poetry
(JSOT.S, 40), Sheffield 1987, 101118, esp. 116; compare also J. Blenkinsopp, The Servant and the
Servants in Isaiah and the Formation of the Book, in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing
and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretative Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden
1997, 155175, esp. 164; A. Labahn, Wort Gottes und Schuld Israels: Untersuchungen zu Motiven
deuteronomistischer Theologie im Deuterojesajabuch mit einem Ausblick auf das Verhltnis von
Jes 4055 zum Deuteronomismus (BZAW, 143), Stuttgart 1999, 186189.
117 This is, to mention a more recent study, for example the scope in C. Hardmeier, Ge-
schwiegen habe ich seit langem wie die Gebrende schreie ich jetzt: Zur Komposition und
Geschichtstheologie von Jes 42,1444,23, WuD 20 (1989), 155179, esp. 177. See also Albertz,
Exile, who applies 42:14 to Israel but suspects an oracle meant for Darius in 42:59. This
leads him to interpret the term in DI simply as an indication of time: the Darius ora-
cles [] are describing something totally new, just beginning in the redactors day (42:9, 10;
48:6b7a, 16a). This observation points to a time shortly after Darius usurped the throne from
the magus Gautama in September 522 (400).
118 This is the best explanation for the Leerstellen (vacancies) in Isa. 42:14; cf. H. Schwei-
zer, Prdikationen und Leerstellen im I. Gottesknechtslied (Jes 42:14), BZ 26 (1982), 251

258. In the German redaction-critical tradition 48:16b is generally seen as a gloss. Werlitz,
Redaktion, 332 thinks of a great-Isaianic addition, like 40:68 and 50:1011. Here against
there are indications of congenial interrelatedness with the context of DI. Without 48:16b the
74 chapter two
42 must have been made with the utmost sensitivity for the existing tex-
ture, as one is wont to do in a work where one knows responsibility as (co-)
author.
(e) If 42:89 indeed belongs to a somewhat younger text level (which ap-
pears plausible), then the clause before they (the new things) show them-
selves should align this passage chronologically to 43:19 now it (something
new) shall show itself. The temporal indication before offers no grounds for
assigning 42:89 to a so-called Naherwartungsschicht (van Oorschot), but
renews the opportunity to appreciate to what extent such a younger sup-
plement keeps the dramatic movement of the work in mind, so to say, to
bind it together from the first draft to the last stroke of the brush. Gener-
ally it needs to be said that such diachronic observations may give us some
insight into the evolvement of Isa. 4055, but are better for not resulting in
detailed reconstructions, which are unable to transcend subjectivity.
2.2.8.2. First-New: Relations with Isaiah 139?

There is a large degree of agreement in recent Isaiah research that various
passages in Isa. 139 are younger than Isa. 4055. Many of these passages
were undoubtedly prepared to help align 139 with 4055 and/or 5666. For
our study the question is important, are there indications that the redactors
were led by any conception of Deutero-Isaiahs opposition first-new when
they were aligning the main parts of their book scroll? We will return to this
redactional point at the end of the section.
A difference of opinion is notable on the relationship between Isa. 4055
(DI) and the older parts of Isa. 139 (PI*), indicated as the literary deposit of
Isaiah of Jerusalem (Williamson). Theoretically several degrees of intertex-
tual affinity are conceivable. The points of contact may be more linguistic
or more literary. Linguistic similarities could indicate that the authors of
PI* and DI came from the same language circle.119 They could also indicate
transition between 16a and 17 is difficult to comprehend. The servants labour in vain of 49:4
is explained satisfactorily by a previous explicit reference to his torah-instruction. Termino-
logically 48:16b reminds of 42:1 through the word spirit, and of 42:19 through the word send.
119 G.I. Davies, The Destiny of the Nations in the Book of Isaiah, in: J. Vermeylen (ed.),
The Book of Isaiah (BEThL, 81), Leuven 1989, 93120 finds sufficient evidence in the shared
cultic tradition of Jerusalem for the linguistic and thematic connections between Isa. 139
and 4055. The titles for Yhwh, Holy one of Israel and King, specifically come to mind here.
On Zion-Jerusalem as connecting theme in the book, see A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, A. van der
Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent: The City as Unifying Theme in Isaiah (OTS, 58),
Leiden 2011.
certain influences the authors of DI would have undergone when reading

PI*, without such readings necessarily leading to distinct literary borrow-
ing. Where the latter indeed appears to be the case, we enter the terrain
of echoes and allusions. Though, here too difference in their valuation is
possible. Allusions in Isa. 4055 to passages from the Pentateuch or Lamen-
tations do not prompt anyone to see DI as a sequel to these workslet alone
consider these works as an introduction to DI. According to some, the con-
nections between PI* and DI are so striking that DI cannot stand on its own.
In such a view Isa. 4055 would have been composed as part of one or other
book of Isaiah. This raises a prospect less likely with weaker forms of inter-
textual connection, namely that the first things in DI were never intended
to refer to anything else than the prophecies of Isaiah.120 Note: not the redac-
tional interpretation, but the original meaning of this crucial term is
brought into contention here.
Sommer indicates 16 definite and 8 highly probable places in Isa. 139
to which Isa. 4066 could be alluding.121 Of these instances he finds that 12
respectively 3 could be the sources of allusion in Isa. 4055. It is interesting
to compare Sommers list to the findings of Williamson.122 If we set aside
the most basic linguistic and terminological connections he indicates, we
arrive at a relatively comparable list of 13 places, which appears to overlap
with Sommers results in about half the cases. The list of Williamson on its
part is a substantial expansion of the series of passages previously noted by
120 D.R. Jones, The Traditio of the Oracles of Isaiah of Jerusalem, ZAW 67 (1955), 226246
is known as one of the first representatives of this view in modern research. See further
the literature overviews in H.G.M. Williamson, The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiahs Role
in Composition and Redaction, Oxford 1994, 113 n. 46; E. Bosshard-Nepustil, Jesaja 139 und
das Zwlfprophetenbuch in exilischer und frhnachexilischer Zeit: Redaktionsgeschichtliche
Untersuchungen zur literarischen Vernetzung der Prophetenbcher, Zrich 1995, 427 n. 1;
B.D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 4066, Stanford, CA 1998, 254
n. 70. Mostly, Isaiahs judgement announcements are thought of regarding the first things
(discussed in this section), but M. Buber, Der Glaube der Propheten, in: Idem, Werke, Bd.
2, Mnchen 1964, 131484, esp. 469 connects it precisely to Isaiahs salvation prophecy in
9:34, and R. Albertz, Das Deuterojesaja-Buch als Fortschreibung der Jesaja-Prophetie, in:
E. Blum et al. (eds), Die Hebrische Bibel und ihre zweifache Nachgeschichte. Fs R. Rendtorff,
Neukirchen-Vluyn 1990, 241256 generally to the plan of Yhwh in Isaiah. In this vein see also
C.R. Seitz, How Is the Prophet Isaiah Present in the Latter Half of the Book? The Logic of
Chapters 4066 within the Book of Isaiah, JBL 115 (1996), 219240, esp. 234: In the opening
chapters (4048) Isaiah is present through his word once spoken, which is cited along with
further testimony of old (former things) to establish Gods sovereignty and Israels election.
121 Sommer, Prophet, in summary 106. His overview in n. 95 counts 17 resp. 6 places.
122 Williamson, Book.
76 chapter two
Clements in this regard.123 In a few cases the differences between the lists
could be associated with the discussion on the direction of dependence,
but predominantly they have resulted from the limited volume of many
of the supposed allusions.124 Theme and word usage correspondences as
such do not offer sufficient grounds to speak of an allusion or echo. Willey,
unlike Williamson and Sommer, detecting no or hardly any references to Isa.
139 in Deutero-Isaiah,125 is not only due to the focus of her study falling on
chapters 4955, but is the result of employing the strict criteria that ought
to apply here. We wish to add that even a plausible allusion in Isa. 4055 to
a random passage from 139 naturally does not have to mean that the whole
message of Isaiah must resound in it.
The discussion in this section will be restricted to intertextual relations
in which a leading role appears to be reserved for (parts of) the seman-
tic domain first-last-coming-new, and/or intertextual relations that could
determine the relation between Proto- and Deutero-Isaiah as a whole. All
this seems to be promised by the relation with which we wish to com-
mencebut will the promise be fulfilled? Isa. 8:23b in the RSV reads as
follows:
In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the
land of Naphtali, but in the latter time he will make glorious the way of the
sea, the land beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.
Although Williamson is unresolved on the original meaning of this difficult
verse, he believes that in a later interpretation the words and impli-
cated periods of calamity and prosperity, and and were seen
as names for Yhwh. Deutero-Isaiah would then have deliberately invoked
terms known from Isa. 8:23b.126 How should this suggestion be assessed?
The word pair / appears 51 in the Old Testament. Its frequency
alone reduces its suitability as a link between Isaiah I and II. Admittedly
the rare occurrence of the words as divine names would increase their dis-
tinctiveness, but how is it possible to associate Isa. 8:23b with divine names
123 R.E. Clements, Beyond Tradition-History: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First Isa-
iahs Themes, JSOT 31 (1985), 95113.

124 It is for example clear that Sommer sees little in the theme of deafness and blindness of
Isa. 6:910 returning in Isa. 4243, which is strongly emphasised by Clements and Williamson.
125 P.T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second
Isaiah, Atlanta, GA 1997, 3543.

126 H.G.M. Williamson, First and Last in Isaiah, in: H.A. McKay et al. (eds), Of Prophets
Visions and the Wisdom of Sages. Fs R.N. Whybray (JSOT.S, 163), Sheffield 1993, 95108; Idem,
Book, 6777.
without first having read Deutero-Isaiah? There the words are mostly used
as predicative and not as subject,127 which is to say: they claim to offer new
information. From Isa. 41:4; 44:6 and 48:12, the oldest is presumably 41:4. This
means that the formula in Deutero-Isaiah developed in stages: I who am the
first and with the last I am the same (41:4) evolves into I am the first and
I am (also) the last (44:6; 48:12). These statements are surely not appeal-
ing to an already known correlation, but to what is playing out before the
eyes of the reader: the actions of Cyrus. These actions are claimed to be the
outcome of earlier predictions, or in terms of Deutero-Isaiah: the of
the orchestrated by Yhwh (cf. 41:22). The two divine predicates flow
from this line of thought. They are not the presupposition but the conclu-
sion of Yhwhs argument. Another objection against Williamsons proposal
is his application of in Isa. 8:23b to former calamity while Deutero-
Isaiah speaks about former hope by recalling the first thingsdrawing in
Israels history of salvation in its capacity to foretell. In our view, here neither
allusion, nor borrowing, nor any other influencing is detectable.128
This contrasts Isa. 37:26 where we indeed come across temporal terminol-
ogy typical of Deutero-Isaiah. A close translation, which is based on 1QIsaa
and is usually advocated by commentaries, reads as follows:
Have you not heard
that I have made it long ago,
that I have planned it in the days of old?
Now I have let it come,
that you should destroy into ruined heaps
fortified cities.
The Masoretic punctuation leads to this alternative version, in the footsteps
of the KJV (1611):
Have you not heard it long ago
that I have made it,
in the days of old, that I have planned it?
Now I have let it come,
that you should destroy into ruined heaps
fortified cities.
127 The only exception is Isa. 41:27: The first (says) to Zion: Behold, here they are, and to
Jerusalem I give a messenger of good tidings; but this verse seems to belong to a later phase
in the texts production; cf. Leene, Suche, 813814.
128 Williamsons indication of in Isa. 30:8 for this kind of language (111) rather
weakens than strengthens his suggested influence of 8:23b on DI. Both references are
omitted from Sommers list.
78 chapter two
A series of arguments may tilt the scale in favour of the alternative: (a)
the collocation of and is fairly common, that of and
appears nowhere else; (b) in the vicinity of we find that consis-
tently indicates what is being realised, and not what intends to be realised;
(c) interpreting ][ as an elliptic clause, (have you not heard it) in
the days of old, explains the conjunctive ww (absent in 1QIsaa), which the
MT places after it; (d) word usage and syntax support the Masoretic punc-
tuation on the mentioned points; (e) 3+2 is a dominant metrical theme in
the poem of 37:2229; and (f) the context appears to ask for a hint along
which way the addressed Sennacherib could have learned about Yhwhs
plan: through ancient divine combat motifs (Isa. 37:24; cf. Ps. 29:56). Have
you not heard it long ago then wants to say something like: have you forgot-
ten the old myths?
More traces of Deutero-Isaiah are detectable in the story of Hezekiah and
Sennacherib.129 In 37:26 the following Deutero-Isaianic elements are active.
The rhetorical question at the beginning, , is analogous to
][ in 40:21. Forms of the verbs , and hif. with
Yhwh as subject and feminine suffixes indicating an event, return in 46:11.
This verse also shares the root with 37:26; further see the word in
46:10 and in the comparable 45:21. The suffixes in 46:11 indicate the actions
of Cyrus, and in 37:26 that of Sennacherib. Both warlords are presented as
instruments through which Yhwh carries out long standing commitments. A
noticeable difference is that the typical Deutero-Isaian theme of foretelling,
which Yhwh has used since the primeval times to announce his intentions,
is developed weaker in 37:26 (though slightly stronger according to MT than
1QIsaa). This is the main indication of the direction of dependence: the
priority arguably lies with Deutero-Isaiah.130
Meanwhile the question remains whether Isa. 37:26 may still be called an
allusion taking note of the strict sense that, in the mind of the reader, the
activation of the source text should contribute something substantial to the
primary meaning. The fact that Isa. 37 precedes Isa. 46 in the books reading
sequence, might counter the petition for seeing such an allusion here. Apart
129 S. de Jong, Het verhaal van Hizkia en Sanherib: Een synchronische en diachronische
analyse van II Kon. 18,1319,37 (par. Jes. 3637), Amsterdam 1992, 181 mentions Isa. 37:23a-b,
24a-27, 32 as texts that are distinguished in their use of Deutero-Isaian language.
130 So too Williamson, Book, 78 considers this direction of dependence plausible, against
C.R. Seitz, The Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of Isaiah,
JBL 109 (1990), 229247, esp. 242243.
from this, these chapters do not exhibit anything that would emphasise
the contrast between Sennacherib and Cyrus. Positively their comparison
teaches that Yhwh made things happen on more than one occasion accord-
ing to his plans in the distant past. The effect is that through this echo
Cyrus loses something of the unique position Deutero-Isaiah assigns to him:
a second indication that in origin Isa. 37:26 must be secondary to Isa. 46.
Thus the verse rather implies a certain degree of relativisation of Cyrus
than it is commending a new vision on Sennacherib in the light of Deutero-
Isaiah.
Different to Isa. 8:23b, we come across a real connection with Deutero-
Isaiah in 37:26, but it does not defend the direction of dependence PI*
DI we are inquiring about in this section. As Williamsons conclusion
demonstrates, he himself sets the reference to Isaiah as servant in 44:26
and Deutero-Isaiahs apprenticeship after 8:1618 and 30:89 in 50:4 along-
side the former-latter of Isa. 8:23b as decisive evidence that Deutero-Isaiah
wanted to incorporate the work of his predecessor into his own.
If my reasoning up to this point is generally sound, then it seems to me that
we can no longer rest content with talking merely about the influence of
First Isaiah on Second. The manner in which Deutero-Isaiah makes use of
the theme of the former things, the way in which he interprets his ministry
as an opening of a book long sealed up, and the cumulative effect of minor
allusions to a body of earlier material, such as that noted at 44:26, together
demand that from the outset he deliberately included the earlier work in his
own.131
This other evidence is therefore also merited some attention. Whoever
wanted to relate Isa. 44:26 to the prophecy of Isaiah of Jerusalemthus
to the first things in the spirit of Williamson and otherswould find it
difficult to appeal to the literary device of allusion or echo:
Who carries out the word of his servant
and fulfils the prediction of his messengers,
who says of Jerusalem: It shall be inhabited,
and of the towns of Judah: They shall be built
and I will raise up their ruins.
An interpretation of this verse is generally searched within the context of
Isa. 4055, which is justified by the agreements with 40:89 [, , ,
]and 42:19 [, ]. It seems to be the same servant in 44:26 who
131 Williamson, Book, 112113.

80 chapter two
is called Yhwhs messenger in 42:19. The reader expects him to proclaim

the word of God that will surely be established according to the prologue
of Deutero-Isaiah, and will result in a message of peace for Jerusalem and
Judah. A recognisable reference to former prophecies of doom in Isa. 139
would expect word in 44:26 to mean word of condemnation, and this is
certainly not the case.132
We have trouble seeing another servant in Isa. 44:26 than the one in 50:4,
who counts himself among Yhwhs disciples []. Could this finally be
the place, then, where Deutero-Isaiah is negotiating with Proto-Isaian texts
that would have been known to his readers?
The Lord Yhwh has given me
the tongue of those who are taught
to know how to speak to the weary
a word that wakens:
morning by morning it wakens my ear
to listen like those who are taught.
Could the purpose of these lines be to recall Isa. 8:1618 and 30:89? While
8:16 speaks of the prophet Isaiahs disciples, in 50:4 and 54:13 the disciples
of Yhwh are meant. A degree of communality in the semantic domain (dis-
ciple, obedience, restiveness) is not foreign to these four places, but is this
sufficient? Does it produce an allusion with such far-reaching consequences
for the relationship PI*-DI as Williamson claims: Deutero-Isaiah opens the
sealed book of Isaiah? This is unlikely.133
Without taking all the weaker echoes (and their potential cumulative evi-
dence) into account, we venture to draw a conclusion. Isa. 4055 presumably
contains no allusions or references that decisively determine the relationship
between the work of Deutero-Isaiah and Isaiahs literary heritage as a whole.134
132 Cf. P. Lugtigheid, The Notion of the City in Isaiah 44:2146:13, in: A.L.H.M. van Wierin-
gen, A. van der Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent: The City as Unifying Theme in
Isaiah, Leiden 2011, 121158, who associates the word of his servant in Isa. 44:26 with the
message that Jerusalem must be inhabited (136).
133 Willey, Remember, 214 also remains sceptical on this point. R. Albertz, Israel in Exile:
The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 380 in contrast
falls in with Williamson.
134 This conclusion corresponds to H.-J. Hermisson, Einheit und Komplexitt Deuteroje-
sajas: Probleme der Redaktionsgeschichte von Jes 4055, in: J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of
Isaiah (BEThL, 81), Leuven 1989, 287312, esp. 299. Sometimes great-Isaianic additions are
thought of, with the intention to claim in hindsight Isaiah as the author of Isa. 4055. In this
line Werlitz, J., Redaktion und Komposition: Zur Rckfrage hinter die Endgestalt von Jesaja 40
55 (BBB, 122), Berlin 1999, 326332 exposes Isa. 40:68; 48:16b; and 50:1011, as a secondary
interpretation of the third Servant Song. Here, convincing arguments are difficult to find.
Assuredly Deutero-Isaiahs sayings on the first things do not qualify in this

regard. Where such utterances are concretised, they implicate Abraham
(see the connection between 41:14 and 813) or the exodus from Egypt
(see the connection between 43:913 and 1621). Not past guilt and for-
mer judgement,135 but precisely the ancient, salvific historical foresayings
on Cyruss acts of liberation constitute the references of in Deutero-
Isaiah. We refer back to the previous sections.136
At most it may be asked whether the redactors in hindsight gave a new
meaning to the opposition first-new by applying it to the composition of
the whole book; but this could not have been its original meaning.137 More
assertively, the obvious sense of first and new in Isa. 4048 is a substantial
argument against seeing this part of the book being written as a sequel to
Isa. 139. Evidently, with the first things the author(s) of Isa. 4048 was
(were) not thinking of Isaiah from Jerusalem at all. And herewith the whole
argument boomerangs back against the persistent notion of Isa. 4055 as
continuation of 139*. In fact, one would definitely have expected a refer-
ence to Isaiahs doom oracles in such a continuation and indeedwhat
better overarching term than first would lean itself to establishing the link?
Isa. 4048 using the root and its derivatives for completely different
purposes is the clearest indication that these chapters saw the light of day
separate from Isa. 139*.
With this view we follow in the steps of R. Rendtorff, Zur Komposition des Buches
Jesaja, VT 34 (1984), 295320. Also according to J. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 139: A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 19), New York 2000, 80 Isa. 4055
was originally an independent writing.
135 Seitz, Council, 243.

136 B.D. Sommer, Allusions and Illusions: The Unity of the Book of Isaiah in Light of
Deutero-Isaiahs Use of Prophetic Tradition, in: R.F. Melugin, M.A. Sweeney (eds), New Visions
of Isaiah (JSOT.S, 214), Sheffield 1996, 156186, esp. 184 rejects the opposition first-new as an
argument for the alignment of PI* and DI, because the first things a.o. in 42:9 and 48:3 would
imply older prophecies in general, not those of Isaiah in particular; cf. Sommer, Prophet, 97.
Isa. 43:18 shows that DI anyway does not deal with prophecies in the limited sense of the word,
but with the history of redemption in its capacity to foretell. The answer to questions like
Who announced it from the beginning? should equally be sought in foresayings by Israels
(earliest) history of redemption.
137 In this light see as summary P. Hffken, Jesaja: Der Stand der theologischen Diskus-
sion, Darmstadt 2004, 112: Es ist kaum so, dass dieser Aussagezusammenhang [Frheres
Erstes/KommendesNeues] von vornherein konstruiert ist als Einbindung in ein PJ-Buch
(). Erst beim Anschluss von DJ an PJ drfte eine solche Relecture der Rede von frheren/
spteren Dingen mglich sein.
82 chapter two
Many of the objections against seeing DI following PI* also counter DI com-
ing after Jeremiah, as argued by R.G. Kratz, Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes
40,1f. und seine literarischen Horizonte, ZAW 105 (1993), 400419; Idem, Der Anfang
des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes 40,1f. und das Jeremiabuch, ZAW 106 (1994), 243261;
Bosshard-Nepustil, Jesaja 139, 427432; cf. K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremia-
buches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im
Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1996, 316. That in DI
refers to Jeremiah, is found in many; see e.g. W. Tannert, Jeremia und Deuteroje-
saja: Eine Untersuchung zur Frage ihres literarischen und theologischen Zusammen-
hanges, Leipzig 1956, 95: Das innerhalb des Frheren [in Jes. 48:111] der jeremiani-
schen Botschaft eine besondere Bedeutung zukommt, ist sehr wahrscheinlich. Es
ist zu vermuten dass Deuterojesaja direkt auf die Exilsdrohung Jeremias anspielt.
On the intertextual relations Jeremiah-DI 4.2. Jer. 5051 is a passage we will not
discuss but which often serves as candidate for the foresaying as intended by DIs
first things. It contains ca. 12 contact points with the book of Isaiah, of which the
following are sufficiently substantial to include in a discussion on the direction
of dependence: Jer. 50:2/Isa. 46:1; 48:20; Jer. 50:8/Isa. 48:20; Jer. 51:6/Isa. 48:20; Jer.
51:45/Isa. 52:11; Jer. 51:48/Isa. 44:23; 49:13. The priority of DI is defendable on all
these instances, as demonstrated e.g. by U. Cassuto, On the Formal and Stylistic
Relationship between Deutero-Isaiah and Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem,
Biblical and Oriental Studies, vol. 1, Jerusalem 1973, 141177, esp. 152155. The rela-
tion between DIs word field first-last-coming-new and Jer. 50:12 [], 17 [,
]on the contrary is superficial (pace Bosshard-Nepustil, Jesaja 139, 429 n. 5).
The idea that first-new reflects on the holistic relationship between PI*
and DI-TI in a redactional sense is not so far-fetched, although even this
perspective requires nuancing. The redactional link between PI* and DI-TI
was established in various ways. Like the banks of the Seine in Paris, the
two parts of Isaiah are connected with bridges of divergent construction.
Several passages come to mind: Isa. 33 as mirror text (Beuken); Isa. 3435
and 3639 indicating a discursive and narrative connection between what
precedes and what follows in the book; the Babylonian prophecies in Isa.
1314 and 21, anticipating post-Isaian developments; and the framing of
the book through Isa. 12 and 6566. The sequenced historical trajectory
of Judahs subjection by Assyria, Babylon, and Persia, which is presented
in the order of the chapters, is another unifying factor that should not be
overlooked. Thus not one single compelling viewpoint can be indicated that
fully controls the connection between PI* and DI-TI in all its redactional
stages. As a matter of fact, judgement and salvation play a role in many of
the bridges mentioned above (see for example Isa. 34 contrasting 35, but
also 33 and 3639). Since Isa. 65 eventually applies the opposition first-new
to this very judgement-salvation scheme [ 2.3.3.3], through this connection
one may briefly toy with the idea of projecting the same opposition first-new
onto the whole book of Isaiah.138 But it is not likely that the end redaction
had allowed itself to be led as definitively as such a simplifying view suggests.
Globally and in certain details, particularly the framing of Isa. 112 and the
proto-apocalyptic close of the foreign-nation prophecies in Isa. 2427 point
at the ethical and temporal dualism of Isa. 6566.
One suggestion that definitely must be dismissed is that a deliberate blur-
ring of the original reference of first and new in Isa. 4055 had to open the
way to enable a redactional reinterpretation of the key texts in the frame-
work of the whole book of Isaiah. With a careful contextual interpretation,
Deutero-Isaiahs first-new texts lose their alleged vagueness in advance.
2.2.8.3. Relations with Psalms 96 and 98

(1) We examined the common traits between Ps. 96 and 98 in 2.1.3.1, and it
was established that Ps. 98 must be the elder of the two in 2.1.3.2. Now we
wish to map the relations between these songs and Deutero-Isaiah in order
to determine, here too, where the priority probably lies. There have been
divergent thoughts in the history of research on the relation between Isa.
4055 and the Psalter.139 Gunkel held the prophets responsible for various
psalmodic elements, including those presenting the future; though he was
also aware that the prophets made use of cultic forms. Begrich, his pupil,
138 Cf. H. Leene, Een nieuwe hemel en een nieuwe aarde: Slotakkoord van het boek Jesaja,
Amsterdam 2002, 10.

139 For an overview on the discussion on the relation between DI and the Psalms, see:
P.T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isa-
iah, Atlanta, GA 1997, 4447, 9599. She sees points of contact with (1) the Davidic psalms
72 and 89; (2) the Zion psalm 46; (3) the lamenting psalms 44, 74, 77 and 89, and (4) the
enthronement psalms 93 and 98. Concerning Ps. 96 and 98 ist die Frage der Prioritt mit
hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit zugunsten DtJess zu treffen (J. Jeremias, Das Knigtum Gottes in
den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem kanaanischen Mythos in den Jahwe-Knig-Psalmen
(FRLANT, 141), Gttingen 1987, 127). In this vein also B. Gosse, Le Psaume 98 et la rdaction
densemble du livre d Isae, BN 86 (1997), 2930. Especially in the case of Ps. 98, accord-
ing to Jeremias there can be no doubt; because the similarities are found here in typical
Deutero-Isaianic formulations ist eine grundstzlich denkbare Prioritt auf Seiten von Ps. 98
ausgeschlossen (ibid. 133). As dissenting voice Jeremias mentions H.L. Ginsberg, A Strand in
de Cord of Hebraic Hymnody, ErIs 9 (1969), 4550, esp. 4748. Ginsberg himself finds sup-
port in S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien, Bd. 2, Kristiania 1922 and Y. Kaufmann, History of the
Religion of Israel, vol. 2, New York 1977 [Hebrew edition 1960], 99. A. Maillot, A. Lelivre, Les
Psaumes, vol. 2, Paris 1961, belong to those claiming DIs dependence on Ps. 96. Priority of the
psalms is also assumed by A.R. Johnson, The Psalms, in: H.H. Rowley (ed.), The Old Testament
and Modern Study, Oxford 21956, 162209, esp. 194; R.C. Culley, Oral Formulaic Language in
the Biblical Psalms, Toronto 1967, 108; J. Becker, Messiaserwartung im Alten Testament (SBS,
83), Stuttgart 1977, 46; F. Matheus, Singt dem Herrn ein neues Lied: Die Hymnen Deuterojesajas
(SBS, 141), Stuttgart 1990, 49; Willey, Remember, 120125.
84 chapter two
was one of the first to show convincingly how deeply Deutero-Isaiah is

rooted in the language and imagery of the Psalms. How should Ps. 96 and
98 be situated in this regard? The matter is decisive for the question on the
tributaries of Deutero-Isaiahs eschatology.
The dominant stance in the previous century was that Deutero-Isaiah
had influenced both psalms. In its conclusion this section will support the
opposite position. Possible points of contact with Isa. 4055 are underlined
in the arrangement of Ps. 98 and 96 below; the relevant places are mentioned
in the margin. If a point of contact concerns a (group of) word(s) or clause
that is also found in the other psalm, it is marked with a double underlining.
The relations involve only a few linguistic analogies in the strict sense of the
term.140
Psalm 96
Isa. 42:10 1
Isa. 40:9; 41:27; 52:7 2
Isa. 42:12 3
4
5
6
Isa. 42:12 7
Isa. 42:12 8
9
Isa. 52:7; 40:20 10

Isa. 49:13; 42:10 11
Isa. 44:23; 55:12 12
13
Isa. 51:5
140 For a discussion on the methodology, see H. Leene, Psalm 98 and Deutero-Isaiah: Lin-
guistic Analogies and Literary Affinity, in: R.-F. Poswick (ed.), Actes du Quatrime Colloque
International Bible et Informatique: Matriel et Matire (Amsterdam 1994), Paris 1995, 313340.
This and the next section form a summarised reworking of H. Leene, History and Eschatol-
ogy in Deutero-Isaiah, in: J. van Ruiten, M. Vervenne (eds), Studies in the Book of Isaiah. Fs
W.A.M. Beuken (BEThL, 132), Leuven 1997, 223249. There the analogies are discussed indi-
vidually taking into consideration the occurrence of the clauses or word-(group)s in the
remainder of the OT.
Psalm 98
1
Isa. 42:10
Isa. 52:10
Isa. 52:10; 53:1 2
3
Isa. 45:22; 52:10
Isa. 44:23; 49:13; 52:9 4
Isa. 51:3 5
Isa. 44:23; 52:7 6
Isa. 42:10 7
Isa. 55:12; 44:23; 8
49:13
9
Isa. 51:5
(2) Along with the similarities, the differences with Deutero-Isaiah are rele-
vant to the question on dependence. Words in Ps. 98 that do not appear in
Isa. 4055 are: ( 1; the root: Isa. 51:3), ( 3), ( 5, 5), ( 6),
( 6), ( 7), ( 7, 9) and the root ( 1). The use of in 98:3 is not
Deutero-Isaianic: with Yhwh as subject occurs in Deutero-Isaiah only in
43:25, for not remembering Israels transgressions. In the context of Isa. 40
55, has a slightly reproachful sound (46:3; cf. 46:3; 48:1). As
object of Yhwhs act of salvation, the house is not mentioned but the servant
Jacob-Israel. It is evident from these details that it is a step too far to ascribe
the psalm and (parts of) Isa. 4055 to the same author.141
Ps. 96 likewise contains many words that do not occur in Isa. 4055:
( 5), ( 6), ( 6), ( 7), ( 7, 8), ( 9; cf. Ps. 29:2),
( 10.13), ( 11), ( 12), ( 13) and the root ( 3). The sayings
that appear to contradict Deutero-Isaiahs diction and/or theology are even
more striking. Deutero-Isaiah does not use for the praising of the Yhwh
(Ps. 96:2). Instead of ( Ps. 96:5) he would have said ( cf.
Isa. 42:5; 45:18), ( cf. Isa. 40:22; 42:5; 51:13) or ( cf. Isa. 48:13).
Deutero-Isaiah denies the existence of any god besides Yhwh (cf. 41:23; 44:6;
141 M. Buttenweiser, The Psalms, Chicago 1938, 317343 saw DI as the author of Ps. 93, 96,
97, 98.
86 chapter two
45:5, 14, 21) and one can thus claim that his monotheism is more developed
than in Ps. 96:45. The originality of Ps. 96:5 is questioned in 2.1.3.2; but
even without v. 5, v. 4b does not sound Deutero-Isaianic.
(3) If we were to take stock, we could say that the relation with Isa. 4055
affects particularly Ps. 98, as long as we set aside the analogies shared by the
two psalms. But the relation between Ps. 96 and Isa. 4055 is not channelled
exclusively via Ps. 98: the rejoicing of the earth and the trees crying out for
joy in Ps. 96:1112 come to mind. It is noticeable that the latter motif is found
only in Ps. 96, the psalm that contrasts Yhwh against other gods. Presumably
intentional idol polemics resound in the trees jubilations; compare the
relation between Isa. 44:1320 and 23. There are no (wooden) idols and no
trees in Ps. 98.
The most apparent similarity between Isa. 4055 and Ps. 96 is set in Isa.
40:20, cf. Ps. 96:10. The verse Yhwh is king, the world is firmly established,
it cannot be shaken looks like a citation from Ps. 93:1 and so Isa. 40:2122
possibly connects directly with that older psalm. Inversely, the word glory
in Ps. 96 reminds stronger of Ps. 29 than of Deutero-Isaiah.142
(4) Is Ps. 98 dependent on Isa. 4055?143 In order to understand in

Ps. 98:1 and 96:1 it is not necessary to be familiar with the pregnant use of
the root in Deutero-Isaiah. In the psalm, has no specific Deutero-
Isaian connotations.144 The term has retained its original colour better in the
psalms than in Isa. 42:1013 [ 2.2.4]. Presumably the term was derived from
the individual lamentation and thanksgiving (see Ps. 40). Traces of this genre
are detectable especially in Ps. 98 [ 2.1].
The most pertinent analogies between Ps. 98 and Deutero-Isaiah are in
Ps. 98:13 and Isa. 52:10. They could offer proof that the priority lies with the
prophetic text. In Isa. 52:10 forms a neat
chiastic parallel with ; in comparison
the contextual anchoring of Ps. 98:3 is less binding. The assessment is com-
plicated due to text-critical doubts on the originality of Ps. 98:2 [ 2.1.3.2].
142 The relation between Isa. 4055 and Ps. 96 could rest auf gemeinsame Beziehungen
zum Festkult; thus A. Weiser, Die Psalmen (ATD, 1415), Bd. 2, Gttingen 61963, 430; see also
M. Dahood, Psalms (AB), vol. 2, New York 1968, 357.
143 So e.g. F. Delitzsch, Biblischer Kommentar ber die Psalmen, Leipzig 51894, 619: Anfang
und Schluss sind aus Ps. 96. Dazwischen ist fast alles aus Jes. II (= Isa. 4066, HL). The last
statement is an exaggeration, see above.
144 Against e.g. A.A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms (NCB), vol. 2, London 1972, 691, who
explains the term new song in Ps. 98:1 in light of the new exodus.
Without taking this point into consideration, regarding a presumed influ-

ence from Isa. 52, it remains noteworthy that terms like and ( cf. 52:9),
characteristic theological terms in Deutero-Isaiah, were not taken over in
the psalm.145
If there is a relation of dependence between Isa. 45:22 and Ps. 98:3, the
priority rests with the psalm verse rather than the reverse. Being liberated
is theologically advanced compared to having seen the liberation. Peoples
participating in Israels redemption as spectators fits in the tradition of the
thanksgiving song and is not Deutero-Isaianic: the bystanders are witnesses
of what was done to the supplicant (Ps. 40:4).146 It is improbable that the
making of music in Ps. 98:5 was derived from Isa. 51:3: rather, here too
Deutero-Isaiah is liturgically indebted.147 Ps. 98:7 and 96:11 (1 Chron. 16:32)
are unlikely dependent on Isa. 42:10 . The last expres-
sion creates disconcert. It can only be grasped in relation to Isa. 42:1013
emphasising that specifically human, and not cosmic singers are called to
sing a new song [ 2.2.4]. As such it is the only passage in Isa. 4055 in which
attention is given, apart from to the desert, to the residents of the desert and
their settlements.148 Once again the most probable direction of dependence
is the other way around: from the sea the attention shifts deliberately to the
seafarers. In 42:1013 Deutero-Isaiah wants to extend the circle of singers as
far as possible, allowing the song so to speak till over the outer edges of the
world. In this way the new song naturally becomes a mariners song.
Generally it is held that the clapping of hands is associated with the
coronation of a king. If this is true (see 2Kgs 11:12!) the expression in Ps. 98:8
stands in a more original setting than in Isa. 55:12. The context of Isa. 55:12
pays no further attention to Yhwhs kingship.
145 Ginsberg, Strand, 48 believes he has proven the influencing on DI by Ps. 98 beyond
the shadow of a doubt, which might be going too far. His argument that DIs identification of
arm, justice and salvation presupposes the psalm is not that convincing. K. Koenen, Jahwe
wird kommen, zu herrschen ber die Erde: Ps 90110 als Komposition (BBB, 101), Weinheim 1995
agrees with Jeremias view that DI must have the priority and indicates the changed tenses
of Isa. 52:10b in Ps. 98:3b (72 n. 69). But, this change in tense could have taken place in the
reverse direction ( ) and may depend on a modification of the sequence of the action
in Isa. 52, where the returnees must still depart from there (v. 11). S. Petry, Die Entgrenzung
JHWHs: Monolatrie, Bilderverbot und Monotheismus im Deuteronomium, in Deuterojesaja und
im Ezechielbuch (FAT, 27), Tbingen 2007, 113 sees Ps. 98:3b as a citation from Isa. 52:10b,
although he recognises that the proclamation Yhwh is king must be older than DI.
146 Pace Jeremias, Knigtum, 134.
147 Pace Delitzsch, Psalmen, 619.
148 There is thus no reason to modify ;see the discussion of the proposals in J. Koole,
Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 1: Isaiah 4048, Kampen 1997, 244245.

88 chapter two
Taking everything into account, one must conclude that the priority in
this exceptionally close relation of dependence is rather with Ps. 98 and not
Isa. 4055 norfor those wishing to hold on to itis it with the one or other
Grundschrift of this work.
(5) Concerning the direction of dependence with Ps. 96, the findings are
about the same. It is true that the relation Ps. 96 Isa. 4055 is more
complicated to substantiate than in the previous case, but the inverted
relation Isa. 4055 Ps. 96 is downright unlikely. With in Ps. 96:2 one
could briefly think: this word implies the image of the messenger of peace
in Deutero-Isaiah149 which is then reduced to everyday proclamation in the
psalm. But on closer inspection such a view is found wanting. The prophet
speaks of a messenger to Zion-Jerusalem (41:27; 52:7) and of a message
Zion-Jerusalem herself must pass on the cities of Judah (40:9).150 Ps. 96:2
gives the idea that many (cf. Ps. 68:12) must spread the message of Israels
redemption amongst the nations; exactly like an individual supplicant, who
has been redeemed by Yhwh, makes it known in a large community. In this
regard Ps. 40:10 should be drawn into the comparison and notation taken of
other similarities between Ps. 96 and Ps. 40: in 4, in 6,
in 11, in 17.
(6) To answer the dependence question, one more point of view deserves
attention alongside these detailed observations. The correspondences with
the psalms are almost all localised in a limited number of passages spread
over the corpus of Isa. 4055, and then in the so-called eschatological
hymns or in other final, climactic passages. Isa. 51:5 (cf. Ps. 96:13) forms one
exception; but the theme of Yhwh as is so prominent in the psalms (see
e.g. Ps. 75 and 82) that here Ps. 96 does not require Deutero-Isaiahs support.
Note should also be taken of the term , for which Isa. 40:23
according to many commentaries is dependent on existing hymnic utter-
149 Cf. Delitzsch, Psalmen, 614. Also Gosse, Psaume 98, 29 reckons that Ps. 96 is older
than DI.
150 For a recent discussion on whether Isa. 40:9 is followed by a gen. explicativus
or an objectivus, see H.J.M. van der Woude, Geschiedenis van de terugkeer: De rol van Jesaja
40,111 in het drama van Jesaja 4055, Maastricht 2005, 7576 (the first); R.H. Oosting, Walls
of Zion and Ruins of Jerusalem: A Corpus-Linguistic View on the Participant Zion/Jerusalem
in Isaiah 4055, Amsterdam 2011, 7476 (the second). The text productive sequence of the
texts could be: [Nah. 1:15 ] Isa. 52:7 41:27 40:9; cf. H. Leene, Auf der Suche nach
einem redaktionskritischen Modell fr Jesaja 4055, ThLZ 121 (1996), 803818, esp. 814.
ances on Yhwhs kingship. In all other cases it would have been necessary
for the psalmists to have had modern form-critical insights to lift such final
hymnic passages (e.g. Isa. 42:1013; 44:23 and 49:13) from their literary con-
text and ignore the rest as inspiration source. The opposite is more likely:
the makers of Isa. 4055 borrowed the hinge texts of their dramatic com-
position from an existing hymnal tradition,151 or even from these particular
songs, handed down to us in Ps. 93100.
In this way it becomes understandable how these psalms could use such
plain wording to express Yhwhs act of salvation. Deutero-Isaian images
such as the levelling of mountains, a way in the wilderness, irrigation and
abundant plant growth, are entirely missing from Ps. 98. Here the act of
salvation is formulated using general terminology of thanksgiving. If the
priority were with Isa. 4055, this would have remained unexplained.
(7) It is therefore difficult to avoid the impression that there was bias in the
lengthily held answer to the priority question. This bias, then, involved two
points, (a) the dating of Deutero-Isaiahs prophecies before the fall of Baby-
lon in 539bce, and (b) the rejection of any notion of Yhwhs enthronement
before the exile, which made Deutero-Isaiahs eschatology seem indispens-
able as a missing link in the religio-historical explanation of the two psalms.
Regarding the first point, the early dating of Deutero-Isaiahs prophecies
has lost much of its impetus due to newer redaction-critical hypotheses.
Thus, van Oorschot ascribes the hymnic passages from Isa. 4055 discussed
above mainly to redactional layers that were added around 520/521 and
500bce.152 In such a diachronic model, the psalms may look back at the
historical liberation and at the same time be older than these redactional
layers. For our part, we find it plausible that Isa. 4055 originated after
515bce even in its initial stage.153 A Deutero-Isaian basic text would not be
reconstructable if it did not include the semantic field first-last-coming-new,
151 T.N.D. Mettinger, In Search of the Hidden Structure: YHWH as King in Isaiah 4055,
in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an
Interpretive Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 142154, esp. 152 formulates a cautious
position: the texts involved seem to have as their minimum prerequisite that the Prophet of
Consolation drew from the same tradition as the YHWH mlak psalms.
152 J. van Oorschot, Von Babel zum Zion: Eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtliche
Untersuchung (BZAW, 206), Berlin 1993, 166242.

153 The date of the second temples inauguration is doubted, see D. Edelman, The Origins
of the Second Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem, London 2005.
Her view was mentioned above 2.1.3.1 and will be discussed further in 2.2.8.5.
90 chapter two
which assuredly answers a post-exilic problem: Yhwh has proven his being
God through the convergence of first and last in Cyrus, but in order to bring
Israel to respond with acknowledgement and praise, something totally new
is required. Thus Isa. 4055 must have originated from after the establish-
ment of the second temple. The priority of Ps. 98 and 96 is at most an extra
argument supporting this view. In 2.2.8.5 we will return to this dating prob-
lem in greater detail.
That Deutero-Isaiah would be required to explain or even to justify
Yhwhs enthronement in Ps. 98 and 96, we find sharply worded in Kraus.154
However, as we have argued above [ 2.1.4], the cultic celebration of Yhwhs
kingship presumably existed in one or other form long before the exile.155
Here the missing link is not Deutero-Isaiah, but Ps. 98 represents the histor-
ical linkage between such a celebration and Deutero-Isaiahs eschatological
prophecy.
(8) How can we summarise our conclusion on the diachronic? Stemmatolo-

gists warn us to be cautious with such issues of dependence. They correctly
remind that account must be kept with possible unknown intermediaries.
It is clear that Deutero-Isaiah is not meticulously dependent on the psalm
cycle Ps. 93100. The opposite is also implausible: the cycle and Isa. 40
55 display a formal similarity in their dramatic structure [ 2.1.3.1; 2.2.7.1],
but without suggesting strict imitation by either of the parties involved.156
Though, we may conclude safely: influence from Ps. 98 (and presumably also
93 and 96) on texts of Deutero-Isaiah is by far more likely than the reverse.
Here it looks as if we have traced the most important source of inspiration
for Deutero-Isaiahs eschatology: the Yhwh-Kingship psalms.157 This much is
now clear in any case, besides this source, the earlier discussed influencing
PI* DI pales in significance.
154 H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen (BKAT, 15), Bd. 2, Neukirchen-Vluyn 51978, 834835, 846847.
155 The section Petry, Entgrenzung, 112125 dedicates to this issue has the same bearing.
P.T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah,
Atlanta, GA 1997, 120125 convincingly defends the priority of Ps. 98 regarding DI, with the
added argument that Isa. 52:712 is composed with a combination of citations from Nahum,
Lamentations, the Psalter and the Pentateuch. It is not necessary, however, to agree with her
on seeing the psalm as a pre-exilic text (103).
156 The affinity involves especially the dramatic sequencing of (a) the polemics against the
gods on primordial kingship, cf. Ps. 96, and (b) Yhwhs becoming king in the present-day when
he reveals his liberating arm, cf. Ps. 98. On this sequence, see the next section.
157 In this sense also Mettinger, Hidden Structure.
2.2.8.4. In Search of the Hidden Structure: Deutero-Isaiah in Dialogue with

Psalms 93100 on Yhwhs Kingship
The first part of this sections title has been taken over from an article
of Mettinger,158 in which he convincingly interprets Isa. 51:952:12 and a
few more passages from Isa. 4055 using the tripartite pattern battle-
kingship-palace, which we recognised previously in Ps. 93 [ 2.1.3.2]. Where
Mettinger concentrated on a general mythopoetic pattern, an intertextual
study like ours should inquire about Deutero-Isaiahs negotiating strategy
regarding concrete literary texts, which he would have assumed were known
to his readers. We presume that Isa. 4055 not only takes Ps. 93 and Ps. 98
as known, but also counts on the recognition of the composition scheme
shared with Ps. 93100*, without committing ourselves on the exact
form in which Deutero-Isaiah found this cycle.159 At least as important as
the authors cultic source of inspiration is the readers own sensitiv-
ity to the possibilities and restrictions of liturgical language on interpret-
ing what is happening in the world. It is our intention to clarify not
some but all the Yhwh-Kingship passages in Isa. 4055 against this back-
ground.160
How will a comparison between Isa. 4055 and Ps. 93100 help the read-
er? The comparison helps identify the coming of Yhwh as the most promi-
nent dramatic act in Isa. 4055. In terms of an actantial analysis, this com-
ing involves the main programme to which all other activity in Deutero-
Isaiahs drama is subordinated as supporting programmes.161 The compar-
ison enables the reader to make an insightful deconstruction, which strips
Isa. 4055 for a moment from all details in order to expose its essence.
The comparison immediately alerts one of a striking difference. Yhwhs
coming to his temple from the psalm cycle emerges in Deutero-Isaiah as
158 Mettinger, Hidden Structure.

159 It may rightly be asked whether our hypothesis on the diachronic relation to Isa. 4055
does not lead to a too early dating of Ps. 93100 as composition. According to F.-L. Hossfeld,
E. Zenger, Psalmen 51100 (HThKAT), Freiburg 32000, 2627 the origin of the Teilsammlungen
within Ps. 51100 should be placed in the exile and came to completion between 200 and
150 bce. Apparently it is impossible to refine the dating of either collection. The question,
though, may be reversed. Generally seen, Isa. 4055 stems from circles of psalm composers.
Could it be postulated that they had attempted such a literary project like Isa. 4055 without
first experimenting with the dramatic structuring of related psalms?
160 On the literary units to which the king-titles in 41:21; 43:15 and 44:6 belong, Mettinger
notes: Genre and contents in these passages contribute little to our understanding of the
kingship of YHWH in Isaiah 4055 (Hidden Structure, 144). This we venture to doubt.
161 On an actantial analysis of DI, see: Van der Woude, Geschiedenis, 5057.
92 chapter two
Yhwhs coming to Zion.162 The temple has a relatively minor role in Isa. 40
55, and then in the prelude to the Cyrus oracle (44:28).163 The rebuilding of
the temple is important to Deutero-Isaiah as a sign that Cyrus praises the
name of Yhwh, but subsequently diminishes into the shadow of the city
of Jerusalem being rebuilt. This concentration on Zion is undoubtedly due
to Deutero-Isaiah wanting to present the coming of Yhwh as an answer to
Zions suffering as it was portrayed in Lamentations.164 It is thus in com-
bination with Lamentations that Ps. 93100 offers us the main reference
to understand the central action in Deutero-Isaiahs dramatic masterwork:
Yhwhs coming as king is a comfort for Zion-Jerusalem.
All this is made more remarkable because neither Ps. 93100 nor Lamen-
tations offer any solace as a frame of reference when the element that makes
Isa. 4055 a prophetic book is being dealt with: the divine word. Later in this
study we will return to Deutero-Isaiahs intertextual relations with prophetic
162 Cf. U. Berges, Zion and the Kingship of Yhwh in Isaiah 4055, in: A.L.H.M. van Wierin-
gen, A. van der Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent: The City as Unifying Theme in Isaiah
(OTS, 58), Leiden 2011, 95119, esp. 111: In the restoration programme of Deutero-Isaiah, the
emphasis lies not on the temple but on Zion/Jerusalem as Gods firm foundation where his
people finds refuge and security.
163 Working syntactically, Oosting, Walls, 93 advocates the translation of Isa. 44:28 as and
to say to Jerusalem, She will be rebuilt / and she will be founded as a temple, and con-
nects these lines to Jerusalem being indicated as holy city (48:2; 52:1). This proposal does
not affect our argument. The mythopoetic pattern battle-kingship-palace that Isa. 44:27
28 shares with Ps. 93 makes it unappealing to see 44:28b as an erratic addition (J. Wer-
litz, Redaktion und Komposition: Zur Rckfrage hinter die Endgestalt von Jesaja 4055 (BBB,
122), Berlin 1999, 184). So too 41:25, one who calls my name, already creates the impres-
sion of being a veiled allusion to Cyruss cultic interests in Jerusalem. Indeed the read-
ing is text-critically not completely certain, but the uncertainty may relate to
41:2527 linking Cyrus with Zion-Jerusalem for the first time. The theme of temple is pre-
sumably also in the background of 45:14. Thematically the verse reminds of the pilgrim-
age in Ps. 96. Confronted by the alternatives whether the association Cyrus temple in
Isa. 4055 should be seen as a secondary text element, or whether it rather forms the core
of DIs admiration for the Persian king, we are inclined towards the latter point of view.
According to Werlitz, Isa. 44:28, which he sees as a later addition, could be dependent on
Ezra; R.G. Kratz, Kyros im Deuterojesaja-Buch: Redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu
Entstehung und Theologie von Jes 4055 (FAT, 1), Tbingen 1991, 102 has similar thoughts
on Isa. 45:13. Edelman, Second Temple, holds the opposite view, the information on Cyrus
as the founder of the second temple in Ezra 16 was derived from Isa. 44:28 and 52:11.
The current state of the debate on the Cyrus-edict (for a summary see Werlitz, Redaktion,
180184) offers little reason to seek a basic text of Isa. 45:18 originating in the 6th cen-
tury.
164 Cf. Willey, Remember. On the relation between the opening and close of Isa. 4055* and
Lamentations, see U. Berges, Jesaja 4048 (HThKAT), Freiburg 2008, 41.

literature [ 4.1]. We can already note, however, that everything Deutero-

Isaiah took over from prophetic predecessors is given a place in the frame
of this central act: Yhwhs coming as king, which must have been borrowed
from liturgical texts. All that the word of Yhwh has achieved or will achieve,
is subordinate and subservient to this divine coming to Zion in the dramas
actantial hierarchy.
Subsequently the comparison with Ps. 93100 helps the reader to distin-
guish two moments in this coming of Yhwh. The first moment is the shaming:
Yhwhs coming confirms his primordial kingship against the claims of other
gods. This moment is central in Ps. 96 and Isa. 4048. The second moment
is the liberation: through his coming Yhwh orchestrates his universal recog-
nition as compassionate liberator. This moment is central in Ps. 98 and Isa.
4955. The relationship between the twin psalms within the cycle Ps. 93100
is of the same order that we find between the two consecutive movements of
Deutero-Isaiahs dramatic composition.165
We may attempt relocating ourselves as an imaginary reader who would
be trying to connect Ps. 93100 with the concrete political reality of his
times. How does such a reader go to work? He needs to choose which of
the two moments of Yhwhs coming he will adopt as orientation for such
a political actualisation. For Deutero-Isaiah as a creative psalm reader, it
appears to have been not the moment in Ps. 98, but that depicted liturgically
in Ps. 96. It is the moment confirming Yhwhs primordial kingship against
claims by other gods, which is developed dramatically in Isa. 4048 through
the actions of Cyrus as set in a legal process encompassing the world. The
idol polemic in Ps. 96 comes to mind, as does the role of the nations who
approach bearing giftsthemes missing from Isa. 4955 but amply present
in Isa. 4048. Naturally Ps. 96 should not be viewed offering a summary of
Isa. 4048, but the contrary: Isa. 4048 as the worldwide political realisation
of a vision on Yhwhs coming that in all likelihood had previously received a
concise liturgical form in Ps. 96. Alternatively, we may note that the arm of
Yhwh from Ps. 98 is not applied world politically by Deutero-Isaiah, but in the
165 This division reminds of the differentiated cosmic scenario (Ps. 93) and historical
scenario (Ps. 47, 98) in the Yhwh-Kingship psalms according to J.L. Mays, The Centre of
the Psalms, in: S.E. Balentine, J. Barton (eds), Language, Theology, and The Bible. Fs J. Barr,
Oxford 1994, 231246; but with the understanding that DI connects the first scenario with
history (Cyrus) and the second with eschatology (Servant of Yhwh). This definition of the
dichotomy Isa. 4048/4955 does not make labels such as Jacob-Israel/Zion-Jerusalem or
journey/arrival redundant, but wants to engage in its deeper meaning.
94 chapter two
composition of Isa. 4955 is explained as referring to the far less spectacular

actions of Yhwh through his Servant.166
We will summarise the foregoing from the angle of the Yhwh-Kingship
texts that were examined by Mettinger. Deutero-Isaiah refers to Yhwhs king-
ship in two ways. Firstly he mentions it as a kingship that has existed since
creation and is confirmed by actual political experience. The application of
the royal title in the matrix of the legal battle over Yhwhs being God and/or
regarding Cyrus (41:21; 43:15; 44:6) should be understood in this light. No
more than in can the nomen rectum in / have been
intended restrictively. The God of Israel calls himself king in comparison to
the false claims of divinity by anything or anyone else in the world.167 Idol
polemics in the immediate vicinity of this title seem to be essential and orig-
inal elements of the literary composition.168 Secondly, Deutero-Isaiah refers
to Yhwhs kingship as something that will only be realised fully when it has
received ultimate universal recognition. This is the thrust of the call
in 52:7 and previous passages in the drama that offer previews of this
eventual enthronement act, 40:911 and 42:1013.169 Deutero-Isaiahs drama,
like the cycle Ps. 93100, is thus based as a whole on two presentations of
Yhwhs becoming king. At first glance these presentations are at odds. The
first is comprehendible as an expression of an (always fragmentary) experi-
ence of order in history, an awareness of being carried by ancient traditions
in the present, compared to being burdened by fake gods as embarrass-
ing alternative. The second presentation rather expresses a contested faith,
trusting in God that all will be well in the end. Typically in this second pre-
sentation the imagery alternates between Yhwhs triumphant arm and his
suffering Servant (51:9; 52:10; 53:1). Deutero-Isaiah apparently sees the final
victory of Yhwh present paradoxically in the Servants trust (anticipated in
166 From this point on, Servant will be written with a capital if the word implies a
distinction from the servant Jacob-Israel or the servants of Yhwh as historical entities.
167 This point is not taken into account in the statement that Yhwhs kingship in DI immer
an Israel gebunden bleibt (Petry, Entgrenzung, 112). The coupling / indeed

implies a linguistic difference from the Yhwh-Kingship psalms, but does not indicate Yhwhs
kingship over Israel, such as in Judg. 8:23 and 1 Sam. 8:7. The title in Zeph 3:15 seems to be
dependent on DI.
168 Pace Petry, Entgrenzung, 178. The indispensability of Isa. 40:1820; 41:67; 44:920 and
46:57 within their context is argued in H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deutero-
jesaja, Amsterdam 1987, 175 et passim. See further K. Holter, Second-Isaiahs Idol-Fabrication
Passages (BET, 28), Frankfurt 1995, other authors mentioned in P. Hffken, Jesaja: Der Stand
der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2004, 102 and Berges, Jesaja 4048, 5455.
169 Cf. Mettinger, Hidden Structure, 150.
42:113 and 50:111). This paradoxical manner of speaking belongs to the sec-
ond and not the first presentation of Yhwhs kingship.170
One could say that Deutero-Isaiah has elaborated the integration further
than the cycle Ps. 93100, which has left the two enthronement presenta-
tions of Ps. 93 and 98 (besides the signalled mediation in Ps. 96) greatly
uncoordinated alongside each other. That is completely different from the
final disclosure of Yhwhs redemptive arm, seen in Isa. 51:952:12 as a direct
reprise of what has gone before in antiquity: Awake, awake, clothe yourself
with strength, o arm of Yhwh! Awake as in the days gone by, of the genera-
tions of old (51:9). The price Deutero-Isaiah pays for this integration is the
loss of coordination on another point, namely between the ancient tradition
as an argument in the historical proof of divinity (Isa. 4048) and the ancient
tradition as an eschatological ground of prayer (Isa. 4955). We observe that
Deutero-Isaiah connects this ancient tradition with the opposition first-new
only in the former context and not in the latter. In the latter context the
mythical traces of this tradition are outlined stronger, but at the same time
lead us further way from the political realm.
Although we had other intentions with the deconstruction above than
elaborating on a diachronic analysis, it cannot conceal a critical attitude
towards persistent attempts to find the oldest layer of Isa. 4055 in histori-
cal reports from the period before the invasion of Babylon in 539 bce. On the
contrary it implies that the oldest core of the work, or basic idea, originated
in texts from the temple liturgy in Jerusalem. Herewith we return to our
previous discussion on the German redaction criticism [ 2.2.8.1]. We ask
ourselves, what hinders us from understanding Deutero-Isaiahs reference
to Cyrus and Babylon as an effort to politically apply liturgical texts from
170 This observation clashes with the redaction-critical view that the fourth Servant Song
is a secondary supplement to the book edition Isa. 4052*; for a summary see Werlitz, Redak-
tion, 282. In the exposition of 42:1013 [ 2.2.4] we indicated the paradoxical relation between
the Servants vulnerability and the imagery of Yhwh as warrior. The relation is explicated in
49:2 and 52:10/53:1. The Servant Song 52:1353:12 reminds of the Servant Song 42:14, not only
in the related opening words but also in the message of peace for Zion-Jerusalem in the pre-
ceding context (41:27; 52:7). The connection between 52:712 and 52:1353:12 is exceptionally
strong. Apart from the arm of Yhwh (52:10; 53:1) it is the paradox of seeing the salvation and
the hideousness of the Servant (52:8, 10, 14, 15; 53:2), which crafts the fourth Servant Song as
a key to DIs theology. Fear of contamination connects 52:11 to 53:4, 8 as a semantic isotopy.
While the vessels in 52:11 seem to allude to the restoration of the priestly sacrificial worship
in Jerusalem, it actually acts as a stepping stone to a song on the Servants sacrifice. The idea
that 52:710 is the provisional end of the book leans too one-sidedly on the argument per-
taining to the concluding function of DIs hymnic passages. Certain hymnic passages do not
have this function (e.g. 42:1013) or barely (e.g. 45:8).
96 chapter two
the second temple, texts as we have come across in the discussed Yhwh-
Kingship psalms in their purest form?
Certainly, the absolute dating of Isa. 4055 is a complicated affair. Still
we see sufficient grounds to suggest an alternative dating proposal, which is
offered schematically below for the readers consideration.171
2.2.8.5. Isaiah 4055 as a Dramatic Retrospective

(1) The trial speeches in which Deutero-Isaiah introduces the Persian king
are not disconnected from each other or their direct literary contexts. Not
only are they connected as sequenced scenes of the same lawsuit, they
are also thoroughly interwoven with the adjacent words of redemption,
and are thus interchangeable equally little as the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.
They are literarily interdependent and therefore the units cannot be dated
separately. From the outset the Cyrus texts are embedded in the scheme
first-last-coming-new that structures the composition Isa. 4144 decisively
and appears to be essentially inspired by the collection of Yhwh-Kingship
psalms. Cyrus texts that would have preceded such a scheme (or still com-
plied with the partial scheme first-last) presumably never existed. Since the
scheme first-last-coming-new answers a typically post-exilic problem, it can
hardly be otherwise than the Cyrus texts themselves originated after the
exile.
(2) Historically it is more probable that Cyrus owed his biblical reputation
to hisexaggerated or realrole in the rebuilding of the temple than that
this role was derived from other benefits such as granting the exiles permis-
sion to return home. The image of Cyrus in the Old Testament presupposes the
second temple. So too then, Deutero-Isaiahs admiration for the Persian king
must be dated to at least after 515bce. Incidentally, we have spoken above
about the doubt on this precise inauguration date of the temple in connec-
tion with Ps. 98 [ 2.1.3.1].
(3) Alongside these positive indications, a number of negative arguments

support placing the whole development of Isa. 4055 in the period subse-
quent to the building of the temple, or the rebuilding of Jerusalem as the
171 On the post-exilic dating of Isa. 4055, see further: H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe
dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam 1987, 32; Idem, Suche, 818 n. 47; P.R. Davies, God of
Cyrus, God of Israel: Some Religio-Historical Reflections on Isaiah 4055, in: J. Davies et
al. (eds), Words Remembered, Texts Renewed. Fs J.F.A. Sawyer (JSOT.S, 195), Sheffield 1995,
207225; K. Baltzer, Deutero-Jesaja (KAT, 10/2), Gtersloh 1999, 57.
temple city.172 The strongest negative argument claims that a dating of the
Cyrus texts before 539 relies on the disputable supposition that the simul-
taneity suggested in these texts must indicate their emergence at the time
the events took place, instead of considering a dramatic presentation of these
events as a stylistic device. Nobody concludes from Shakespeares Richard III
that the author himself lived in the 15th century.173
(4) The discrepancy between the historical course and its representation
recalled in biblical texts continues to be raised as an argument support-
ing the dating of the Cyrus and Babylon texts to before 539.174 An alternative
explanation for this discrepancy could reason that a substantial time had
passed after 539 before the texts were written, enabling a deliberate con-
trast between Babylons fall and the expected elevation of Zion-Jerusalem.
Such an explanation relieves us from needing to search an answer to the
vexing question why a later, better informed redaction of Isa. 4055 did not
correct its supposed exilic heritage more radically based on the facts then
known.175 The proposed solution is simple: retrospectively in a dramatisa-
tion, Deutero-Isaiah sketched a global, but not inaccurate depiction of the
Babylonian empires fall.176
(5) At least as important for the dating of Isa. 4055 is asking oneself
whether a cohesive story on Israels origin is already assumed in it.177 Such a
172 Cf. Oosting, Walls, 93.

173 We share the dramatic view on Isa. 4055 with W.A.M. Beuken, Jesaja (POT), dl. 2A2B,
Nijkerk 19791983 and Berges, Jesaja 4048. Berges attempts to combine this view with a
perspective on the Cyrus texts being a contemporaneous report, which seems problematic.
In his commentary Beuken did not commit himself extensively on the historical placement of
Isa. 4055. The historical times the prophet worked in do not have to concur with the faithful
drama his oracles unfold, but need not necessarily be disconnected from it (Beuken, Jesaja
2A, 10, our translation). The question then remains: for which eye witness or contemporary
does history present itself as a well-rounded drama?
174 See e.g. Werlitz, Redaktion, 162.
175 Werlitz, Redaktion, 177178 says that Isa. 45:18 has been corrected on the grounds of
the events in 539 (see also R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth
Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 413), and he sees signs of disappointment over Cyrus
in the redrafting of 42:67 as an original Cyrus text made to indicate the servant of the Lord
(thus following Kratz), who takes over the role of Cyrus completely from Isa. 49 onwards.
We do not understand 42:67 as an original Cyrus text [ 2.2.8.1 sub c], whereas Cyrus and
the servant in DI are anyway not comparable as rivals. The Cyrus oracle 45:18 depicts the
conqueror having the same decisive but limited significance as in the rest of the drama.
176 On the quite undramatic historical account of Babylons fall, see Albertz, Exile, 191.
177 Cf. R.G. Kratz, Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes 40,1f. und seine literarischen
Horizonte, ZAW 105 (1993), 400419, esp. 416417.

98 chapter two
cohesive story appears to be necessary given the term . The appeal to

the first things in Isa. 4144 suggests that the calling of Abraham and the exo-
dus from Egypt were previously included (in this chronological sequence) in
the history of salvation and each has the ability to represent it pars pro toto
on a similar level of importance. [ 2.2.7.2 sub 4]. This is just one indication
that these chapters could not have originated at the same time as, or in the
close vicinity to the Patriarchal History (Gen. 1250*). If the exilic period
is accepted for the origin of PH,178 then it is reasonable to accept a later ori-
gin for Isa. 4055. These first things were simply not available previously
as convincing counters against the predictive power of Babylonian mantics
and astrology.
(6) Marduk theology did not cease in 539 bce. One may assume it was
still well known in the next century under the repatriated Judeans that
grew up in Babylon. History of religions in its nature offers no support
to date (the Grundschrift of) Isa. 4055 to within a decade or a quarter
of a century.179 The influence of astral Marduk theology on Deutero-Isaiah
is undeniable, but is equally identifiable in Ps. 96, a post-exilic song that
presumably predates Isa. 4055 [ 2.2.8.3]. Several more indications support
a later time of origin than is generally accepted. Many scholars rightly have
difficulty with the prisons and dungeons as contemporanious image of the
conditions the Judean exiles experienced in Babylon (Isa. 42:22; cf. 47:6).180
This discussion on the time of origin is closely linked to that on the place of
origin.181 Texts with a clear Palestinian focalisation (to borrow a term from
narratology) occur even in the oldest parts of Deutero-Isaiahs composition.
That Abraham was beckoned from the ends of the world (Isa. 41:89) is
difficult to reconcile with a Mesopotamian point of view. So too, Israels
gathering from the four directions of wind (Isa. 43:56) is arguably focalised
from an understood Palestinian gathering point.
178 So e.g. Albertz, Exile, 246271 following Blum, Van Seters and others.
179 This is the impression created by M. Albani, Der eine Gott und die himmlischen Heer-
scharen: Zur Begrndung des Monotheismus bei Deuterojesaja im Horizont der Astralisierung
des Gottesverstndnisses im Alten Orient (ABG, 1), Leipzig 2000 in this important study on the
religio-historical placing of DI.
180 See e.g. H. Donner, Geschichte des Volkes Israel und seiner Nachbarn in Grundzgen, Bd.
2, Gttingen 21994, 416.

181 Against the Babylonian placement: H.M. Barstad, The Babylonian Captivity of the Book
of Isaiah: Exilic Judah and the Provenance of Isaiah 4055, Oslo 1997.
(7) There are no reasons for connecting the difference in perspective be-
tween Isa. 4048 and 4955 with a distinction in place and time of origin,
as the difference in perspective between Ps. 96 and Ps. 98 illustrates sufficiently.
Where Isa. 4955 contains younger texts than Isa. 4048 it is more a case of
the writing process progressing than the difference in place and time of the
author(s). The return of the exiles does not create a diachronic incision in
Isa. 4055, but until the epilogue notably remains a prospect, cf. 55:1213.182
There is no reason to assume that such a view would have been incongru-
ous in 5th century Judea. The canonical picture of a phased but surveyable
repatriation must have grown only gradually.
(8) Without offering extensive arguments here, we assume that Ezra 16 pro-
vides no information on the role of Cyrus in the return from Babylon and
the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem that has not been taken over from
Isa. 4055.183 The compiler of Ezra 16 is attempting to harmonise this infor-
mation with Hag.Zech. 8, the chronicle of the temple rebuilding during
the reign of Darius I.184 It is improbable that the Cyrus decree in Ezra 1:24
and its free copy in Ezra 6:25 are based on other historical sources out-
side Isa. 4055 and Ezek. 4048.185 According to Isa. 4055 Cyrus embodies
182 This is also the case with a hypothetical edition which is said to end with Isa. 52:1112. A
collective interpretation would like to see the golah returning from Babylon in the servant of
Isa. 49:17, but the text rather presents him as someone who has been calling in vain for the
return. The metaphoric connotations that the departure from Babylon has in DI come to
mind. This agrees fully with Ezras use of to indicate a religious group, separate from
the question whether they actually came from Babylon (cf. B. Schramm, The Opponents of
Third Isaiah: Reconstructing the Cultic History of the Restoration (JSOT.S, 193), Sheffield 1995,
61). We see no reason for restricting the exodus promise of Isa. 55:12 to Yhwh-followers
belonging to the nations (U. Berges, Das Buch Jesaja: Komposition und Endgestalt (HBS, 16),
Freiburg 1998, 332).
183 Following D. Edelman, The Origins of the Second Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and
the Rebuilding of Jerusalem, London 2005.

184 We doubt that this chronicle contains contemporaneous information on the building
of the temple. According to W.A.M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 18: Studien zur berlieferungs-
geschichte der frhnachexilischen Prophetie, Assen 1967 the chronistic school is responsible
for the redaction of Haggai-Zechariah. According to G. Fischer, Jeremia: Der Stand der theolo-
gischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2007, 141 the prophecies of Zechariah were dependent on the
book Jeremiah, which he dates to the fourth century. It is noteworthy that Haggai-Zechariah
does not seem to have any knowledge of a command by Cyrus to build the temple.
185 Edelman, Second Temple, 179180 suspects (alongside references to Isa. 44:28 and 52:11
in the edict) an allusion to Ezek. 40:57 in Ezra 6:3. The second text, like the first, must
originally have spoken over 6 and not 60 el. These are measurements for a wall and not
a building, explaining why alone height and width are mentioned. A later copyist of Ezra
6:3 missed the prophetic allusion, applied the measurements to the whole building and
100 chapter two
the Persian empire, whereby the destruction of Babylon and the conquest of
Egypt (actually accomplished by Cambyses in 525522!), as well as laying the
foundations of the temple and the rebuilding of Jerusalem, are all accredited
to him. More or less like David in the Old Testament represents the whole
dynasty of Judah, Cyrus epitomises the Persian dynasty for Deutero-Isaiah.
Not before Ezra 16 did Cyrus become historicised as an ordinary Persian
king in line with his successors, Darius, Xerxes and Artaxerxes.186 In Isa.
44:28 and 52:11 the vague recollection of Cyruss claim of restoring famous
Mesopotamian temples possibly plays a role; but first-hand knowledge of
the Cyrus cylinder (in which we hear Cyrus praising Bel and Nabu amongst
others!) could hardly have inspired Deutero-Isaiah to apply his Yahwistic
vision to the Persian king.187 In any event such a vision would not have
been credible to the Jewish contemporaries of Cyruss government. And is
not Deutero-Isaiahs monotheistic proof all about credibility? We cannot
exclude that the authors of Isa. 4055 lacked any detailed information on the
temples restoration, because this restoration took place before their own
lifetime. Thereby the terminus post quem for Isa. 4055 would move far into
the 5th century bce.188 This creates sufficient historical room for the relevant
temple songs and their drama-like bundling, on which Isa. 4055 apparently
continues. A plausible terminus ante quem for Isa. 4055 is Egypts successful
revolt against the Persian empire around 400 bce.
We have found no convincing historical arguments in favour of dating the

existence of a Cyrus expectation in Jewish golah-circles as early as the
mid 6th century.189 In our approach liturgy makes the eyepiece through
multiplied it by 10. The original reading suggests that Cyrus also envisaged the rest of the
building according to Ezekiels vision.
186 Cyrus is called king of the Persians in Dan. 10:1; cf. 6:29 [Aram.]; Ezra 1:1, 1, 2, 8; 3:7; 4:3,
5; 2 Chron. 36:22, 22, 23; Darius in Ezra 4:5, 24 [Aram.]; cf. Neh. 12:22; Artaxerxes in Ezra 4:7;
6:14 [Aram.]; 7:1. Cyrus not being called king of the Persians anywhere in DI must be because
Yhwh subjects all of humanity to him (see e.g. Isa. 43:34).
187 Pace Edelman, Second Temple, 185: DI knew the cylinder and hoped that Cyrus might
yet also apply this policy to Yehud. See also the questionable assertion of D.E. Gowan,
Theology of the Prophetic Books: The Death and Resurrection of Israel, Louisville 1998, 145 that
DIs image of Cyrus corresponds very well with Cyruss own publicity about himself.
188 Practically this amounts to the dating of Isa. 4055 by P.R. Davies, In Search of Ancient
Israel (JSOT.S, 148), Sheffield 1992 and Baltzer, Deutero-Jesaja, 5759, who indicates a Cyrus-
renaissance taking place simultaneously in Greece. Comparisons could be drawn with the
central position Cyrus takes in the Histories of Herodotus (ca. 485425/420).
189 Werlitz, Redaktion, 176, bases his arguments on the correspondence in the Cyrus expec-
tations between the Babylonian priests of Marduk and the Judean exiles, and sees the last as a
reaction on the first. Is this a convincing historical explanation? Human experience teaches
which Deutero-Isaiah evaluates the Persian rule, with Cyrus as its ideal
representative. As with Ps. 93100 we will have to spiral down until at
least after the establishment of the second temple for this world political
application. Doubts on the exact date of this temple establishment we take
for granted. The suggested contemporaneousness between the texts and
Cyruss advance, according to our view, cannot be more than a literary
technique in service of the dramatic design of the work.
Isa. 4055 shares its dramatic character with the psalm cycle Ps. 93100,
which is rooted in liturgical practice. This is an ambitious insight consid-
ering the undeniable differences between the two compositions. For the
moment we must break off our diachronic surveillance with this observa-
tion. The most prominent difference between Isa. 4055 and Ps. 93100 is
that the psalm cycle mainly still presents the eschaton in a tangible, physi-
cal, cultic environment [ 2.1.5]. While we could see the focus in the psalm
cycle shifting cautiously from the liturgy of feasts to the sombre life of the
righteous, for whom nonetheless light is sown (Ps. 97:11), all the empha-
sis there still lies on the exultant celebration of Yhwhs enthronement in
the temples songs of praise. The temple no longer plays this dominant role
in Deutero-Isaiah. Indeed, Deutero-Isaiahs composition is inspired litur-
gically, but it is no longer a liturgical text itself. Present time eschatology
develops in Deutero-Isaiah from a cultic experience to what is accomplished
proleptically in the life of the suffering Servant, as a prototype of the post-
exilic pious.
2.2.9. The Servant as Present Time Eschatology

Where we inquired earlier on what the term eschatology could mean in
light of the Yhwh-Kingship psalms [ 2.1.5], here we wish to pose the same
differently: our enemy fostering high expectations on someone, makes him suspect in our
eyesand this certainly holds true if the person in question responds to such hostile expec-
tations, as was the case with Cyrus as the conqueror of Babylon. The Cyrus-claim of Yhwh
in Isa. 4048 is not contrasted with the Cyrus-claim of Marduk. The issue in Isa. 4048 is
not whether Cyrus was perhaps given powers by another god than Yhwh, but whether other
deities had in any way accomplished a comparable feat. It is therefore doubtful that the reli-
gious political debate under Nabonidus (555539) provides a clarifying contemporaneous
background for DIs theology (pace Albani, Monotheismus, 96; Berges, Jesaja 4048, 4445).
That a degree of commonality does not necessarily imply simultaneity, is clear from the sim-
ilarities between DIs salvation oracles and New-Assyrian texts [cf. M. Weippert, Ich bin
JahweIch bin Itar von Arbela: Deuterojesaja im Lichte der neuassyrischen Prophetie, in:
B. Huwyler et al. (eds), Prophetie und Psalmen. Fs K. Seybold (AOAT, 280), Mnster 2001, 3159;
see also Albani, Monotheismus, 87 on affinities between DI and the Asarhaddon inscription].
102 chapter two
question regarding Deutero-Isaiah. We continue to see eschatology as a

conceptual tool that must be tested and honed in dialogue with the texts
as such. A number of dilemmas arising from the secondary literature will
now be discussed.
The following general treatments on eschatology are referred to in this section:
J. Lindblom, Gibt es eine Eschatologie bei den alttestamentlichen Propheten?, in:
H.D. Preuss (ed.), Eschatologie im Alten Testament (WdF, 480), Darmstadt 1978, 31
72; Th.C. Vriezen, Prophecy and Eschatology, VT.S 1, Leiden 1953, 199229; G. Fohrer,
Die Struktur der alttestamentlichen Eschatologie, in: Preuss, Eschatologie, 147
180; H.P. Mller, Mythos und Transzendenz, in: Preuss, Eschatologie, 415443; K.-
D. Schunck, Die Eschatologie der Propheten des alten Testaments und ihre Wand-
lung in exilisch-nachexilischer Zeit, in: Preuss, Eschatologie, 462480; G. Habets,
EschatologieEschatologisches, in: H.-J. Fabry (ed.), Bausteine biblischer Theolo-
gie. Fs G.J. Botterweck (BBB, 50), Kln 1977, 351369; J. Schreiner, Eschatologie im
Alten Testament, in: M. Schmaus et al. (eds), Handbuch der Dogmengeschichte, Bd.
4, Freiburg 1986, 131. For an overview of suggestions on the structure of Deutero-
Isaiahs eschatology, see: A. Richter, Hauptlinien der Deuterojesaja-Forschung von
19641979, in: C. Westermann, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas
(CTM, 11), Stuttgart 1981, 89131, esp. 114116. For a series of questions comparable to
ours, posed to DIs expectation of salvation, see: H.-J. Hermisson, Deuterojesaja
und Eschatologie, in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old
Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht 2002, 89105; Hffken,
Diskussion, 26.
(1) The expectation of definitive salvation or eschatology. A factor that plays a
role in some rejecting the term eschatology for Isa. 4055 is their neglecting
the difference in meaning between the terms last, coming/come and new.
The actions of Cyrus, as we have seen in the previous sections, are not
included under the new things. These actions are presented as the outcome
of the first things or as what will come, but they do not belong to the new
[ 2.2.7.2]. In other words, the observation that it would be better not to call
Deutero-Isaiahs Cyrus expectation eschatological,190 is not yet an answer to
the question on the eschatological nature of Deutero-Isaiahs vision of the
future.
190 A. Schoors, Leschatologie dans les prophties du Deutro-Isae, Rech Bibl 8 (1967), 107
128, esp. 115. For a short summary of his vision of DIs expectation of the future, see A. Schoors,
I Am God Your Saviour: A Form-Critical Study of the Main Genres in Is. XLLV (VT.S, 24), Leiden
1973, 304305. Also in Elligers characterisation of DIs message as non-eschatological, his not
drawing a distinction between Cyrus and the new things is a main factor, e.g. in his exposi-
tion of Isa. 42:1013: Yhwh manifests himself as warrior in the victory of the Persian army
(K. Elliger, Deuterojesaja (BKAT, 11/1), Neukirchen 1978, 252). See further D. Michel, Deutero-
jesaja, in: TRE, Bd. 8, Berlin 1981, 510530.
Can the use of the term be restricted, as it has been advocated, by reserv-
ing eschatological for the expectation of a decisive act of God? The difficulty
is evident in Deutero-Isaiahs vision of Cyrus. The coming of Cyrus as the
outcome of the first things is decisive for the question whether Yhwh may
be called in the encounter with the gods (cf. 41:26; 43:9; 45:21), but not
for the general acceptance of this judgement. On this the new must decide.
The term decisive act, therefore, does not yield a clear dividing line
between eschatological and non-eschatological presentations.191 To sharpen
the definition we need to look elsewhere. Eschatology presumes that God
has a purpose with humanity and the world. Presentations on the decisive
act of God helping him achieve this goal are eschatological. In his well-
known article, Vriezen argues for a broad definition of Old Testament escha-
tology, in which the definitive nature of the Yhwhs expected intervention is
important. In the prophetic texts, are there any elements in which a defini-
tive, decisive expectation regarding the future of the world is expressed?192
Then again the close relation that Vriezen establishes between eschatology
and Israels election (see below) shows that the purposefulness of Yhwhs
acting is at least an as equally important perspective in his approach.
In eschatology it is not about what the future may bring, but whether
Yhwh is successful in achieving his goal. The issue is whether the immense
obstacles en route to the goal will be overcome. Eschatology is in the first
place a response to a problem, and only thereafter an elaborated presen-
tation. According to Schunck the eschaton should be seen in conjunction
with the idea, essential to faith in Yhwh, that God wants to lead his peo-
ple zu einem unverrckbar feststehenden Ziel.193 This goal is that Yhwh
will be acknowledged as the only God. Die Anerkennung Jahwes und die
Befolgung seines Willens konstituieren das Eschaton, unabhngig von
Zeitfaktoren.194 With this last thought not everyone will be happy, even
though Schunck does break an eminent point with it. Still it seems better to
insist that the term also involves concrete images, visualisations from which
categories of time are not easily abolished. The assurance that the future has
become a reality now already, is itself based on such categories, and is only
comprehendible as a paradoxical statement.
191 Similar problems to those created by the concept decisive action are instigated by
concepts like Endgltigkeit and Neubeginn, which Hermisson, Eschatologie, 8992 argues
should be also defined more accurately to be usable in a definition of eschatology.
192 Vriezen, Eschatologie, 203.
193 Schunck, Eschatologie, 467.
194 Schunck, Eschatologie, 473.
104 chapter two
But indeed: no goal no eschatology. In terms of Deutero-Isaiah, Yhwhs

eventual goal is: his worldwide recognition as creator-God (cf. 41:20; 42:59),
being praised by the people he had formed (cf. 43:21), his glorification
in and through Israel (cf. 44:23), the universal unveiling of his kingship
(cf. 42:1013; 52:710).195 Yhwh accomplishes this goal with the new things he
creates. The outcome of the first things (Cyrus) determines whether Yhwh,
in comparison to the other gods, is justified the predicate God; but only
the new resolves whether Yhwh will actually receive the acknowledgement
owed to him as God.
(2) Continuity and discontinuity. Usually descriptions of what is understood

by eschatology in the Old Testament emphasise the break with the existing.
Thus for example Lindblom: Wenn die Propheten von einer Zukunft reden,
die nicht nur eine Fortsetzung der in dieser Welt waltenden Verhltnisse
bedeutet, sondern etwas Neues und ganz anderes mit sich bringt, da haben
wir das Recht, den Terminus Eschatologie zu verwenden.196 According to
Lindblom, who, based on a stricter definition, had rejected the eschatolog-
ical nature of Isa. 4055 in a previous publication, there is no doubt that
Deutero-Isaiahs message can be called eschatological in this sense.
In contrast Schoors underlines that Deutero-Isaiah precisely stresses the
continuity of the salvation history more than a radical change of the histor-
ical situation. The message of the prophet is not this: See I make all things
new. See I realise a definite renewal. For Schoors the following paraphrase
is more appropriate: Yhwh will not leave you. He has made you his people
eternally, and He remains faithful to the special relation that connects Him
to you. And therefore Schoors finds the term eschatology out of place with
this prophecy.197
What is said here about the focus on Yhwhs faithfulness to Israel is pos-
itively correct. It is a fundamental motif in Deutero-Isaiahs message. But is
it also a valid argument against its eschatological scope? That Yhwh truly
achieves his goal with Israel (and through Israel with humanity), accord-
ing to Deutero-Isaiah is an event that had not been demonstrated before.
Exactly this surprising change becomes visible in the new things that now
show themselves. This is what makes the new really new. When eschatol-
195 Cf. Hermisson, Eschatologie, 104: Damit kommt die Geschichte an ihr Ziel: Ein ge-
schichtlicher Umbruch, der das Ergebnis wieder in Frage stellte, ist nicht denkbar.
196 Lindblom, Eschatologie, 42.
197 Schoors, L eschatologie, 127 (our translation).
ogy is defined in terms of a goal that must be achieved, a goal that Yhwh
stays committed to under all circumstances, no tensions need to be detected
between eschatology and continuity.
Particularly Vriezen indicates a good line of thought in his formulations
here. For him the core of the eschatological expectation of the Old Testa-
ment lies in the trust that God is faithful to Israel, despite the empirical. That
is why the prophets (and not Deutero-Isaiah alone) distinguish between
two Israel-types: Israel as the empirical people that perishes, and Israel as
the people of God, which exists and remains, visible only to the eye of
faith.198 Only if we bear in mind the double meaning of the name Israel can
we follow the prophets, especially Deutero-Isaiah.199 Deutero-Isaiah indeed
emphasises the election of Israel (41:89; 42:1; 43:10; 44:12; 45:4; 48:10; 49:7).
Even more notably we see the unity of salvation history and eschatology
expressed in the confession of Yhwh as creator, designer and completer of
Israel (, , ). The second dramatic episode of Deutero-Isaiahs
book (42:1844:23) is completely marked by this confession (cf. 43:1; 44:2).
This episode, which brings the contrast first-new strongest to the fore in Isa.
43:1819, simultaneously presents the unity of Yhwhs salvation plan. What
Yhwh will realise through the new, coincides with the completion of his cre-
ational purpose with Israel (cf. 43:21; 44:23). The discontinuity (first-new) is
embedded in this continuity (creation-completion). The response of Israel,
the new that sprouts, is not found straightforwardly in the extension of the
history up and until Cyrus, not in the mere extension of first and last
even after this proof of divinity the question remains whether such a faithful
response will indeed follow; but it is certainly extant in the line that Yhwh
planned for his people from the very beginning.200
In exegesis it appeared to be tempting to honour this point of view by
downplaying Deutero-Isaiahs opposition first-new. However, we have seen
that first-new unmistakably articulates a contrast. Unlike the opposition
first-last, it is not meant to indicate an analogy. This is the main reason
why the term new Exodus does not work: it suggests a typological relation

200 On the relationship between continuity and discontinuity, see also Hermisson, Escha-
tologie, 9697. His view based on 43:1617 follows these lines: Israels history of salvation
begins with the exodus from Egypt and comes to completion in 587 (cf. G. von Rad); Israels
election in comparison begins with Abraham and as character indelebilis is permanent. In
our exposition DIs focus on Israels history of redemption in Isa. 4244 is not concentrated
as much on its terminus ad quem as on its actual confirmationnot that much on the fall of
Jerusalem than on Cyruss mission to Babylon.
106 chapter two
between the first and the new that Deutero-Isaiah reserves for the first and
the last; apart from the fact that the term new Exodus leans strongly on the
image of the desert journey painted by the Pentateuch.201 Nevertheless, even
this powerful opposition first-new is enclosed in Deutero-Isaiahs drama by
continuity; one need only analyse the structure of Isa. 42:1844:23 [ 2.2.7.2
sub 2]. The creation terminology applied to Jacob-Israel is a primary means
of expressing this continuity: created mysteriously, formed with an intention
and now brought to completion by Yhwh himself.202
(3) Historical or suprahistorical? To clarify this question we quote Vriezen

on Deutero-Isaiah once more: From various terms and images used by the
prophet it appears that for him salvation he expected and probably still saw
enacted in part, far transcended what may be called a historical event.203
What is taking place here, Vriezen notes in his discussion with Lindblom,
takes place within the historical framework of the world, but it is something
that definitely changes this world.204
What is a historical event? As for eschatology, the Old Testament does
not have a term for history. It has been suggested that work of God in Isaiah
is a start to approaching such a summarising concept.205 We wish to propose
the following description of history in the Old Testament: the movement of
peoples and empires, seen in relation to the national existence of Israel. The
decisive national and political events within Israel itself assume this world-
wide historical framework. According to the Old Testament view, Yhwh is
the auctor of this history. If we use this description as point of departure,
then the coming, like first and last, are historical concepts in Deutero-Isaiah.
They indeed refer to historical eventsbut not the new.
Deutero-Isaiahs interest in history is determinable in this point of view:
history decides on the being God of Yhwh (41:15; 41:2129; 43:913; 44:68).
History displays Gods righteousness (45:2021). It accomplishes this in the
correspondence of beginning and end, tradition and contemporary expe-
201 For a highly critical approach of the concept new Exodus see also: H.M. Barstad, A Way
in the Wilderness: The Second Exodus in the Message of Second Isaiah (JSSM, 12), Manchester
1989.
202 Tradition-historically the theme of the creation of heaven and earth (cf. Isa. 40; 45) and
the theme of the creation of Israel have different origins: the latter stems from the sphere of
family religion (Albertz, Exile, 136).
205 Cf. K. Elliger, Der Begriff Geschichte bei Deuterojesaja, in: Idem, Kleine Schriften zum
Alten Testament (TB, 32), Mnchen 1966, 199210, esp. 204.

rience. This orderliness of history enables the order of creation to shine

through (40:2124; 45:1819). History thus promises a habitable world for all
people, despite its chaotic aspect. History allows one to see that Yhwh did
not create the earth a chaos. With this, Deutero-Isaiah does not provide an
objective view of the historical reality. History that is presented as evidence
in a trial demands an assessment and counts on its observer being prepared
to appreciate this meaningful coherence in world events.206
The new things, however, do not belong to what we have here called
history. At the same time the new does not make the historical irrelevant; it
actually wants people to accept history as proof of Yhwhs divinity. But in all
the just order that history may sometimes expose, it appears to be incapable
of making Israel comply inwardly (see especially Isa. 46 and 48:36a). Yhwh
promises to accomplish this positive response through the new he creates.
In this sense it is possible to agree with Vriezen that according to Deutero-
Isaiah the new things are fulfilled within the frame of history. In any case the
new is not the end of history. The new provides an adequate human reaction
to what history has manifested distinctly on God and his salvation plan.
The question whether the new things in Deutero-Isaiah should be in-
cluded in history, can also be assessed with another definition of the con-
cept. A historical event is not only caused, but in own right is a cause with
consequences; and essentially these consequences are what makes it a his-
torical event.207 This is exactly where Deutero-Isaiahs concept of newness
breaks through the pattern of expectation. The way through the wilderness
barely borrows its significance from the fact that it leads to Jerusalem, but
rather points directly towards Yhwh. The way in itself instigates praising
God (see especially 43:1921). The metamorphosis of the landscape with the
return becomes an everlasting sign (55:13). In this manner the way func-
tions pars pro toto, and then both in time (the arrival in Zion is incorporated)
and space (on the roadsides the whole of creation is blossoming).208
206 In modern philosophical terms one could call DIs proof of foresaying an argument-
based opinion, to explain that the provision of evidence in a scientific sense is not involved,
but also not an assertion that lacks reasonable grounds. An opinion (I think that it is true)
differs from a value judgement (I find). That Cyrus is the God sent redeemer, is presented to
us by DI as an opinion, for which the claim of truth rests in the convergent evidence provided
by tradition and experience.
207 See the description of Rankes views on history in H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Me-
thode, Tbingen 61990, 207: an action is historical, wenn sie Geschichte macht, das heit,
wenn sie eine Wirkung hat, die ihr dauernde geschichtliche Bedeutung verleiht.
208 In this regard it is interesting that IsaLXX 35 has understood the blossoming desert as a
metaphor for Zion, cf. A. van der Kooij, Rejoice, o Thirsty Desert: On Zion in the Septuagint
108 chapter two
Indeed, a certain narrative chronology is not missing, meaning that the

new things can give the impression of taking place against the backdrop
of a historical account. But we believe it to be less correct to say that the
new things will result in the world changing. A stronger formulation than
proposed by Vriezen arises: the new itself is the change of the world.
Later in this study we will compare Deutero-Isaiahs presentation with
the exposition of the new heart and spirit in Ezek. 36 [ 3.1] and the new
covenant in Jer. 31 [ 3.2]. We will see them situated historically after Israels
return to its homeland. Apparently these innovations are required to ensure
Israels permanent residence in the land; or they are necessary to allow
Israels history to continue unhindered among the nations. In Deutero-
Isaiah the return itself is an eternal sign of the new that God creates. What
is called new in Ezekiel and Jeremiah is not a response to world history as
a whole, as it is in Deutero-Isaiah, and therefore does not call for a similar
cosmic resonance.
The most crucial point for us is that Deutero-Isaiahs history and escha-
tology do not merge. History proves (sometimes, almost) that Yhwh is right.
Eschatology promises that Yhwh will also be acknowledged to be right.209
(4) Unity of time or two aeons? With the return of the exiles and the return
of the Lord to Zion, a new era dawns, says Schreiner, eine Heilszeit, die
nie mehr enden soll (Is 54,710). Das ist noch nicht der kommende, von
dieser Weltzeit getrennte Aion der Apokalyptik, aber vielleicht eine erste
Anregung zu dieser Sicht.210 In this regard the expectation of the new heaven
and the new earth in Isa. 65:17 is indicated, which will be treated in the next
section [ 2.3]. In the interim the citation warns that even here in Isa. 4055
we should look out for proto-apocalyptic signals.
In Isa. 50:9 it is said of the enemies of the Servant of the Lord: See, they
will all wear out like a garment, the moth will eat them up. In 51:18 the
prophet turns his attention to those that with the Servant pursue righteous-
ness. According to 51:8, their opponents too, the moth will eat them up like
a garment; and in 51:6 the imagery is extended to cover the whole of the cre-
ated reality: the heavens will vanish like smoke, the earth will wear out like
of Isaiah, in: A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, A. van der Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent:
The City as Unifying Theme in Isaiah (OTS, 58), Leiden 2011, 1120.
209 In a slightly different sense of the word one could call history as such, in DIs vision,
eschatological, namely in as far as it asks for an eventual response.

210 Schreiner, Eschatologie, 7.
a garment and its inhabitants die like flies. It is beyond doubt that echoes
resound between 51:18 and the preceding third Servants Song. The ques-
tion has been raised whether Isa. 51:6 perhaps treats the fleeting nature of
the sublunary only in a hypothetical sense.211 It seems to us that this sponta-
neous comparison between the end of the Servants suffering and the end of
the existing world assuredly introduces a dualistic motif. A similar feature is
noticeable in the transition between Isa. 53 and 54. The many righteous that
were brought to insight by the Servant, are the many children that the once
infertile mother city will offer a shelter. His suffering and death mark the
beginning of a period of everlasting love and compassion for her, the city;
the former introducing the latter in an almost temporal sense.
The apocalyptic awareness that is formulated far more distinctly in Trito-
Isaiah starts surfacing herethe awareness that a totally new dispensation
is required, would an end come to the suppression of the righteous.
Isa. 4955 thus contains recognisable dualistic motifs. They are concen-
trated on the moment the suffering of the Servant ends and thereby the
suffering of everyone who take on his likeness in their desire for righteous-
ness. These proto-apocalyptic suggestives are however limited to Isa. 4955
and have nothing whatsoever to do with how the terms first and new are
used in Isa. 4048. In Deutero-Isaiah first and new do not refer to different
periods. Isa. 48 offers a prominent illustration. Also after the first things have
come with the fall of Babylon, history continues its course: Cyrus will pros-
per in his way (48:15). And even before the new things began being realised
in the first speech of the Servant (48:16b), they were already mysteriously
present in preceding dramatic episodes. New is not yet an apocalyptic term
in Deutero-Isaiah, only an eschatological term.
We will pay more attention to the concept apocalypticism in the dis-
cussion of Isa. 65 below. We will assert, following the same pattern as in
this section on eschatology, not to define apocalypticism principally as a
complex of images, but as the response to a question. Just as eschatology
in Deutero-Isaiah answers the question on how Yhwh will eventually be
triumphant, apocalypticism answers the question on the suffering of his
servants, that is to say: the suffering of everyone who in their faith grant
Yhwh his eventual triumph now already, in spite of all opposition. Based on
211 Cf. W.A.M. Beuken, Jesaja (POT), dl. 2B, Nijkerk 1983, 115116; Hermisson, Eschatologie,
102 on 51:6: Das ist hnlich wie in 54:10 wohl als steigernder Vergleich und hypothetisch
gemeint (selbst wenn ), aber darin klingt schon das sptere Motiv vom Untergang dieser
Welt und einem neuen Himmel und einer neuen Erde an.
110 chapter two
such a definition the abovementioned apocalyptic elements in Isa. 4955

are easily identifiable.212
(5) Realised eschatology? Broadly when speaking about salvation expected

in Deutero-Isaiah, one comes across realised eschatology, present escha-
tology, actualised eschatology or actualising eschatology.213 Vriezen, for
example, refers to the message of Deutero-Isaiah as actualising-eschato-
logical, and describes it as: the kingdom of God is not only seen coming
in visions but it is experienced as coming.214
If one asks how this impression of actualising in Deutero-Isaiah comes
about literarily, the answer is transparent: through the dramatic nature of
the text. This dramatic nature has two important effects: firstly it ensures
that we follow the military advance of Cyrus in successive stages. The drama
takes its readers step by step through a series of trial scenes in a chronology
in which Yhwh demonstrates his kingship in increasingly sharper terms.
Where this movement itself may not yet be called eschatological, it certainly
raises the tensions as a request for an eschatological answer.
Secondly, the text involves the reader in the new things. Although
Deutero-Isaiahs announcement of salvation presents the new as something
that is yet to happen, this future perspective becomes a reality in the here
and now through the performative words Yhwh speaks: the promise of salva-
tion to the servant Jacob-Israel. At this point we are reminded of the manner
in which the literary macro-structure of Isa. 4048 connected the servants
transformation and the wonderful way through the wilderness with recur-
rent regularity [ 2.2.7.2].
As a result of these performative utterances we see the servant under-
going a series of changes during the dramatic development of Isa. 4048
(cf. 41:15; 44:22; 48:10). The creative performativity of Yhwhs word of salva-
tion is apparently so realistic to Deutero-Isaiahs sentience that this word
increasingly takes shape in the servant being spoken to (42:1; 48:16; etc.). This
is our shortest answer to the question on the integration of the in
the whole of Deutero-Isaiahs dramatic-theological design.215
212 According to Hermisson, Eschatologie, 105 Isa. 51:48 and 54:1117 fall outside DIs
universalistic concept of eschatology. It is our view that DI and TI connect here more fluently
than is generally recognised. We will return to this point [ 2.3.4].
213 Cf. Preuss, Eschatologie, 13.
215 Diachronically, the identification of the servant from the Servant Songs with the servant
Jacob-Israel is a literary construction. As this construction is difficult for modern readers to

The new may be called eschatological in the sense that it announces a

future in which Yhwh will accomplish his goal: the human response to his-
tory; without this newness history would develop into a grandiose unmask-
ing and for Israel too it would end in pain and disgrace. But this future
response is not futuristic. It is anticipated in the dramatic figure of the trans-
formed servant.
In this manner this servant embodies Yhwhs covenant with his people
(42:6; 49:8) and at a given moment he allows his torah to reach out, not
only to the lost sheep from the house of Israel, but also to all the nations
(49:1; cf. 42:4). This is not an expected realityit takes place in and through
this dramatic text. And especially in this pregnant sense, in view of the new
things in Deutero-Isaiah, we may rightly speak of actualising or presentic
eschatology.
(6) Conditional or unconditional offer of salvation. With this, finally, we face

the dilemma that Fohrer raised in the discussion on Deutero-Isaiahs escha-
tology: pertaining to conditional or unconditional salvation. In classical
prophecy Fohrer sees the offer of salvation as conditioned. It makes an
appeal on the listeners choice. In Deutero-Isaiah this petition lies in the
past and the only remaining possibility is the redeeming future.216
Fohrers description of Deutero-Isaiahs message was made in the time
when little attention was paid to the dramatic nature of Deutero-Isaiahs
text. The fact that Deutero-Isaiahs book does not offer us a reportage on
the future, but a drama that makes the readerwith each reading anew
participate in the crucial changes, serves as an indication that this reader
(or listener) is ascribed a far more central role in the action than Fohrer
conceive, it was difficult for the authors to set out. The most prominent devices that facilitate
the identification in Isa. 4149 are the placement of 42:19 across from the salvation oracle
to Israel 41:1416 in the dual structure of 41:142:17 [ 2.2.7.2 sub 1]; the integration of 42:14
in the judgment speech to Israel 42:1825 (cf. H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij
Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam 1987, 139141); the placement of 48:16b in the dual structure of Isa.
48 [ 2.2.7.2 sub 3]; and the forked division of 44:23b for Yhwh has redeemed Jacob and he
displays his glory in Israel into 48:20 and 49:3. It is possible that these devices, like the texts
involved, do not all come from the same phase of the texts production [ 2.2.8.1] implying
that the intended identification was keyed more than once. Even then the literary effect
seems constant throughout: the Servant from the songs is not only the ideal representative,
but is also the alter ego of the servant Jacob-Israel.
216 G. Fohrer, Die Struktur der alttestamentlichen Eschatologie, in: Preuss, Eschatologie,
147180. For a summary of his view of DIs eschatology, see: G. Fohrer, Das Buch Jesaja (ZBK),
Bd. 3, Zrich 21966, 710.
112 chapter two
accommodated. The Servant, who as Israel changed by Yhwhs word opens

the way to the new things, retains his appeal towards the listener or reader
of the book.
In an equally negative assessment of Deutero-Isaiahs salvation promise,
H.P. Mller writes: vom Dialog zwischen Gott und seinem Volk hngt es
ab, ob zuknftige Wirklichkeit erffnet oder verschlossen, gegeben oder ver-
weigert wird.217 This seems to usunintentionallya fortunate description
of the Servants meaning as covenant of the people in Deutero-Isaiah. This
Servant represents precisely the dialogue that Mller has in mind. The ques-
tion whether one wants to accept the Servant in his role, has an influence
on whether the future will open or stay closed. Only by listening to the voice
of the servant (Isa. 50:10) and by following in his footsteps (51:18), does the
listener or reader of this dramatic text share in the new.
The difference between 44:22 and 55:7 may serve as an illustration. The
return to me of 44:22 is directed at the servant Jacob-Israel as dramatic per-
sonage and means, as creational imperative, his inevitable return to Yhwh.
The placement and function of this imperative is comparable to the fear
not in the performative salvation oracle. As that fear not removes fear, this
return to me effectuates the turning-around of Jacob-Israel. What has been
realised in the Servant through the course of the drama, in 55:7 becomes
an encouragement to the individual listener: let the wicked forsake his way
let him return to Yhwh for he will abundantly pardon. A real tension
between these statements need not exist.218
The trouble with Fohrers view is evident when he speaks about collective
or corporate participation in the salvation.219 It seems to be a misunder-
standing that whole nations will turn to Yhwh en bloc according to Deutero-
Isaiahs universalism. All the ends of the world are invited to participate
217 Mller, Mythos, 431432.

218 Remarkably B. Scheuer, The Return to YHWH: The Tension between Deliverance and
Repentance in Isaiah 4055 (BZAW, 377), Berlin 2008 does not differentiate in essence between
the two key texts in her study on repentance and deliverance in DI, Isa. 44:2122 and 55:67.
On the one hand she rejects that repentance serves as a condition in either text, and on
the other she distances herself from a view in which Gods deliverance denies people all
freedom of choice. In our view DI makes no attempt to solve this dilemma logically. At most
the dilemma finds a unique literary form in DI seen in the distinction between the changed
servant and his followers who still have to change. Precisely when one opts with Scheuer not
to divide 44:2122 and 55:67 (like Fohrer and many others) over different redactional layers,
it is important not to lose sight of their distribution over different moments in the dramatic
progression.
219 Fohrer, Eschatologie, 170.
newness in trito-isaiah 113
in Israels history of liberation, but each earthling must decide individually

whether or not he wants to belong to the seed of Israel (45:2225; cf. 44:5).
This opens the way for proselytes. On the other hand, Israelites by birth,
those that see themselves as Israels historical residual (46:3), are found
far from righteousness (46:12). They too must become seed of the Servant
(48:1719) by listening to his voice. Theologically speaking, the distinction
between Israel and non-Israel falls away with this, in the presence of the
unique Servant. The core of the whole Ebed problem in Deutero-Isaiah must
lie in the fact that Israel becomes transformed step by step from a histor-
ical to an eschatological entity. With the latter the servant retains little of
an empirical peopleone is reminded of Vriezens terminology. Inversely
in equal measure to Deutero-Isaiahs universalism we find the intensifying
concentration of salvation in this single dramatic figure seen as Israel given
by Yhwh (49:3), the suffering Servant who will justify the many by allow-
ing them to share in his knowledge (53:11). One thus sees the servant in
Deutero-Isaiah developing slowly but surely from a reference to the his-
torical Israel in the prototype of the post-exilic pious, whose faithful trust
now already brings the eschaton close by. It is difficult to accommodate
Deutero-Isaiahs eschatological conception within the dilemma of either-
or or before-after (Fohrer, Mller). At most one must conclude that every
chronological arrangement of an eschaton as intended by Isa. 4055, as a
presentation cannot be anything but deficient. The new has already com-
menced, but it must still start in everyone who is roused by the text.
Trito-Isaiah
2.3. A New Heaven and a New Earth: Isaiah 65
Mostly at this point in religio-historical studies there would be not just

a new section, but a completely new chapter. The presumed watershed
between Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah is captured in conceptual pairs such
as actualising/transcending (Vriezen 1953), historical/mythical (Hanson
1975), or salvatory prophecy/eschatological prophecy (Albertz 1992). The
conspicuous difference in meaning between the terms used for first and new
indeed suggests a substantial shift in attention between Isa. 4048 and Isa.
65 [ 2.3.3.3].
For such a religio-historical watershed it could be postulated that wir-
kungsgeschichtlich Isa. 65 forms the starting point of a development that
continues into the inter-testament literature as well as the New Testament.
114 chapter two
Although this study has not planned to investigate the reception history of
the prophetic newness texts systematically, we will make an exception for
the new heaven and the new earth in Isa. 65, because a nuanced descrip-
tion of the dualistic characteristics of this eschatological presentation is only
possible in light of its literary influence, without underestimating or exag-
gerating them [ 2.3.4].
Even so the two directions from which Isa. 65 is viewedfrom the pre-
vious history and from the reception historymust lead to the strongest
stress being placed on the deep cohesion between Deutero- and Trito-
Isaiahs vision of the future. The final conclusion of the intertextual surveil-
lance in this second chapter will be that, outside the direct sphere of litur-
gical celebration (Ps. 98 etc.), presentic eschatology (Deutero-Isaiah) is not
properly conceivable without apocalyptic implications (Trito-Isaiah) in the
world of the Old Testament. Apocalypticism and presentic eschatology ap-
pear to be tightly interwoven in this crucial phase of their Old Testament
genesis. Even the mysterious language of the Servant Songs themselves in
retrospect might perhaps be seen having something to do with the subver-
sive aspects of apocalyptic discourse.
But before we commence with such considerations, we first present an
analysis of the text [ 2.3.1], the context [ 2.3.2] and the supposed literary
development [ 2.3.3.1] of Isa. 65.
2.3.1. Structure of Isaiah 65

1 I am approachable by those who do not ask for me,
ready to be found by those who do not seek me.
I say: Here I am, here I am,
to a nation that does not call on my name.220
2 I hold out my hands all day long
to an obstinate people,
who walk in a way that is not good,
following their own thoughts.
3 A people who provoke me
to my face, continually,
220 Usually perf. qal is read instead of perf. pual, cf. the versiones antiquae; the part. qal
could also work, cf. 1QIsaa and see part. . According to D. Barthlemy, Critique textuelle
de l Ancien Testament, vol. 2, Fribourg 1986, MT was influenced by reading as referring to
proselytes. The pual of with does not appear elsewhere in the OT. Holding out the
hands (v. 2a) is used elsewhere to indicate human crying out to God. The people not calling
out the name of Yhwh (the active understanding of v. 1b) fits well into the whole context.
sacrificing in gardens
and offering incense on bricks;
4 who sit inside graves
and spend the night in secret places;
who eat the flesh of pigs
and whose pots hold broth of unclean meat;
5 who say: Keep to yourself,
dont come near me, for I am too holy for you
these are smoke in my nostrils,
a fire that keeps burning all day long.
6 See, it stands written before me,
I will not keep silent221 unless I have repaid it
and I will repay it into their laps.
7 Your iniquities and the iniquities of your fathers together,
says Yhwh,
who offered incense on the mountains
and defied me on the hills
firstly I will measure their payment
into their laps.
8 Thus says Yhwh:
As when juice is found in a cluster of grapes
and they say: Dont destroy it,
for there is a blessing in it,
so I will do for my servants sake
by not destroying them all.
9 And I will bring forth a seed from Jacob
and from Judah an inheritor of my mountains
and my chosen ones will inherit it
and my servants will settle there.
10 And Sharon will become a pasture for flocks
and the valley of Achor a resting place for herds,
for my people who approached me.
11 But as for you, who forsake Yhwh,
who forget my holy mountain,
who spread a table for Gad (Fortune)
and fill bowls of mixed wine for Meni (Destiny),
12 I will destine you for the sword,
and you will all bend down for the slaughter,
because I called but you did not answer,
spoke but you did not hear
and you did evil before my eyes
and chose what displeases me.
221 Against L we read the commonly accepted ( cf. Isa. 64:11).

116 chapter two
13 Therefore thus says the Lord Yhwh:

See, my servants will eat,
but you will be hungry;
see, my servants will drink,
but you will be thirsty;
see, my servants will rejoice,
but you will be put to shame.
14 See, my servants will sing out of the gladness of their heart,
but you will cry from anguish of heart,
and wail in brokenness of spirit.
15 And you will leave your name to my chosen ones as a curse:
the Lord Yhwh may put you to death;222
but to his servants he will give another name,
16 so whoever invokes a blessing on earth
will bless himself in the God of Amen
and whoever takes an oath on earth
will swear by the God of Amen.
For the first troubles are forgotten,
for they are hidden from my eyes.
*
17 For I am about to create new heavens
and a new earth
and the first things shall not be remembered
nor will they come to mind.
18 But be glad and rejoice forever
in what I am creating,
for I am about to create Jerusalem as a joy,
and its people as a delight.
19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem,
and delight in my people;
and no more will be heard in it
the sound of weeping and the sound of crying.
20 There will be no baby anymore, living but a few days,
or an old man, not completing his life span,
for a youth will die at a hundred years
and he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.
21 They will build houses and dwell,
they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit.
22 They will not build and others dwell,
or plant and others eat,
222 is read as a curse formulation, the same as in v. 16 refers to a formula

of blessing.
for as the days of a tree, so will be the days of my people

and my chosen ones will enjoy the works of their hands.
23 They will not labour in vain
or bear children for calamity,
for they will be a seed blessed by Yhwh,
they and their descendants with them.
24 It will be like this: before they call I will answer,
while they are still speaking I will hear.
25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together
and the lion will eat straw like the ox,
but the serpentits food shall be dust;
they will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain, says Yhwh.
Isa. 65 is a cohesive poem consisting of four to six line sub-stanzas, which
are grouped in four stanzas: 12 | 35 | 67 810 | 1112 1314 | 1516
1718 | 1920 | 2123 | 2425. The main caesura lies between vv. 16 and 17.
The second and third stanzas are pronounced by their introductions; resp.
Thus says Yhwh (8) and Therefore thus says the Lord Yhwh (13); whilst
Yhwh continues as speaker until the poems close (cf. 25). These messenger
formulas also seem to have determined the division into parashot: MT has
placed a before v. 1 and after v. 25, and a after v. 12.223
In the first stanza Yhwh portrays himself as someone who is always
approachable and whose hands continuously reach out to his people, even
without the members of this people taking the initiative to call upon him
(12). In the next breath the cultic practices with which they offend Yhwh
all day long are summarised (35) and he announces that he is determined
to repay the debt which they and their fathers have accumulated (67).
The contrast between Yhwhs availability (here I am, here I am) and the
unavailability of his people, who for their part resist being approached in
their religious seclusion (dont come near me), is decisive in this opening
stanza.224
The second stanza juxtaposes the servants (810) and foresakers of Yhwh
(1112). While the impression was created in the preceding that all the
223 Sometimes Isa. 65:166:4 is seen as a cohesive poem, see e.g. O.H. Steck, Studien zu
Tritojesaja (BZAW, 203), Berlin 1991, 217228. But Isa. 66:12. introduces a new theme in
relation to Isa. 65 with the building of the temple.
224 E.C. Webster, The Rhetoric of Isaiah 6365, JSOT 47 (1990), 89102, esp. 97 indicates
the play on the letters in I am holy and fire that burns. On the taboo about
touching, which plays a positive role in Ezek. 42:14; 44:19; 46:20, see L. Ruszkowski, Volk und
Gemeinde im Wandel: Eine Untersuchung zu Jesaja 5666, Gttingen 2000, 95.
118 chapter two
people had shunned Yhwh, there are nonetheless hints a future has been
reserved for Israel through Yhwhs servants or elect. It is not completely
clear whether the text envisages them as a well-defined social group. The
text could also be keen to help constitute this group of Yhwh servants.225
This part of the poem, to be sure, formally addresses the forsakers of Yhwh;
but the implied reader is naturally expected to distance himself from these
forsakers.
The servants or elect resemble the juice left over, for whom an at first
glance unsightly bunch of grapes remains valuable. As the true seed of Jacob
they will inherit Yhwhs mountains along with the neighbouring plains of
Sharon and the valley of Achor. Those who forsake Yhwh, on the contrary,
will not avoid their due punishment. At this point the poem inverts the
letters of spread to form bend down. Just as these forsakers spread
a meal before Gad, the god of fortune, they will have to bend down to be
served as sacrifice. Yhwh destining ( )them for the sword creates a second
talionic counterbalance: this judgement is a play on the name of Meni, the
god of destiny to whom they dedicated their libations. Even ancient readers
would have been shocked by the aggressiveness of these lines.
The third stanza builds the contrast up to a climax. Servants and forsak-
ers are no longer spread over the two sub-stanzas, but are set over half the
lines. The lines of the first sub-stanza (1314) place the servants in promi-
nence: See, my servants , but you ; the series ends in a tricolon. The
second sub-stanza (1516) commences with a tricolon in which the order is
reversed: And you will leave your name to my chosen ones as a curse but
to his servants he will give another name.226 The text that continues sug-
gests this other name will be Amen, or at least will contain the element
amen. Elsewhere in Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, the Servant and servants
are portrayed as those who, despite all opposition, call amen to the word
of Yhwhmaking Amen an appropriate name for them.227 The people will
bestow blessings on each other (no longer in the name of the God of Israel
but) in the name of the God of Amen, the God whose servants amen him.
225 Cf. W.A.M. Beuken, The Main Theme of Trito-Isaiah, JSOT 47 (1990), 6787, esp. 81.
226 Compare to the new name in Isa. 62:2.
227 Cf. J. Blenkinsopp, A Jewish Sect of the Persian Period, CBQ 52 (1990), 520, esp. 10
n. 21: That the name of the opponents will be used as a curse suggests that the elect will
be named after the God Amen, and that they will therefore be the Amen people, that is,
a people that says Yes to God. See also K. Koenen, Ethik und Eschatologie im Tritojesajabuch:
Eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtliche Studie (WMANT, 62), Tbingen 1990, 180;
Beuken, Main Theme, 79.
The close of the third stanza forms the conclusion to the first part of the
poem: For the first troubles are forgotten, for they are hidden from my eyes
(16). The opposition first-new establishes the main bridge to the sequel.
This follow-up lacks the dialogical nature of the preceding and alone in
the imperatives of v. 18 be glad and rejoice allows an address to shimmer
through: the nascent servant community.228 The fourth stanza starts with a
more or less concentric structure:
17 For I am about to create new heavens A
and a new earth
and the first things shall not be remembered B
nor will they come to mind.
18 But be glad and rejoice forever B
in what I am creating,
for I am about to create Jerusalem as a joy, A
and its people as a delight.
In this sub-stanza, the beginning of v. 17, For I am about to create new
heavens, corresponds to the close of v. 18, for I am about to create Jerusalem
as a joy. The close of v. 17 and the beginning of v. 18 are linked through
the contrast between past [ ]and future [] .229 Syntactically the
conjunction in v. 18a supports the connection between the two verses.
Through the weqatal forms, v. 19 continues directly from the particip-
ial clause in v. 18; but prosodically this verse is a new start seen in the
emphasised renominalisations Jerusalem and people. This offers sufficient
grounds to mark 1920 as a next sub-stanza.230 The reason for Yhwhs per-
sonal joy over the city and his people is contained in the second line of v. 19
228 According to Steck, Tritojesaja the imperatives of 18a are an aufbauwidrige[n] Vern-
derung (218) and all 1325 is Gottesrede an die Frevler (228). In this spirit also M.A. Sweeney,
Prophetic Exegesis in Isaiah 6566, in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading
the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretative Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 455
474, esp. 459 maintaining 18a MT (cf. 471). The assumption that the forsakers continue to be
addressed after v. 16 seems to us to be insufficiently grounded.
229 The imperatives of 65:18a should be compared to the prohibitives of 43:18, which
presumably underlie 65:17b [ 2.3.3.3].

230 Cf. W.A.M. Beuken, Jesaja (POT), dl. 3B, Nijkerk 1989, 62 who, differently, places the
caesura between 18a and 18b; so too J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten, Een begin zonder einde: De door-
werking van Jesaja 65:17 in de intertestamentaire literatuur en het Nieuwe Testament, Amster-
dam 1990, 46. It is difficult to establish objective criteria to segment 1723. Our proposal
(1718 | 1920 | 2123 | 2425) is based principally on syntactic and thematic perspectives, and
on the level of the strophes is supported by the Masoretic versification. The many repetitions
then determine the concatenation of strophes and sub-stanzas, not their inner cohesion.
The suggested structure is followed by Webster, Rhetoric, 99.
120 chapter two
and in v. 20. The negative clauses at the end of the one verse and beginning of
the other create a chiastic effect. The acute contrast between a life spanning
days and a life of a hundred years tells sharply of the radical change which,
due to Yhwhs new act of creation, may be looked forward to.
The third sub-stanza (2123) ends at about the same point as the second,
in the absence of premature death. This time it involves the promise that
not others, but Yhwhs chosen and their descendants will have all the time
in the world to enjoy what they have planted and built up. The construction
of houses and the planting of vineyards form the central theme of this unit.
After the introductory v. 21, parallel patterns are displayed in vv. 22 and 23:
They will not , for The conclusion recalls the words seed and blessing
that were introduced in vv. 9 and 16: for they will be a seed blessed by Yhwh,
they and their descendants with them (23). Other words from the first part
of the poem that reoccur in this unit include my people (10, 19, 22), my
chosen ones (9, 15, 22), and eat (in v. 4 regarding the cultic meal, in vv. 13,
21, 22 as future salvation, in v. 25 for the lion that will eat straw).
There is one even stronger link between the final sub-stanza and the
first part of the poem. In all the cultic misconduct mentioned, the main
complaint was that the people made it impossible for Yhwh to approach
them. The following passages can be compared (where it is significant
that v. 12 picks up the theme of vv. 12, Yhwhs carelessly unrecognised
availability):
12 I will destine you for the sword,
and you will all bend down for the slaughter,
because I called but you did not answer,
spoke but you did not listen
and you did evil before my eyes
and chose what displeases me.
24 It will be like this: before they call I will answer,
while they are still speaking I will hear.
25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together
and the lion will eat straw like the ox,
but the serpentits food shall be dust;
they will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain, says Yhwh.
Not only have God and man exchanged roles between vv. 12 and 24 in
calling/speaking and answering/listening, an added dimension is that in this
new dispensation, the divine answering and listening will precede human
calling and speaking. This link is strengthened by the manner in which the
theme of evil or harm from v. 12 returns in v. 25 through the root . Similarly,
the repetition of my holy mountain bridges this distance in the poem (11,
25)the term that announces the location of Jerusalem in 116 (cf. 18, 19),
as opposed to the mountains and hills on which the people defiantly offer
incense (7, cf. 9). The main lines in the structure of Isa. 65, then, may be
represented as follows:
0107 The obstinate people

0102 Yhwh reaches out to them in vain
0305 Accusation of impure religion
0607 Decision to exact retribution
0812 Those who have forsaken Yhwh stand against his servants
0810 Prosperity for the servants
1112 Punishment for the forsakers
1316 Curse and blessing
1314 My servants but you
1516 You but my servants
1725 The new creation
1718 A new heaven and a new earth
1920 Rejoice for Jerusalem
2123 Building and planting
2425 No evil on Yhwhs holy mountain
To conclude this synchronic survey we will pay attention to three places that
have an interest for this study due to their indications of time, vv. 7b, 16b and
17.
The word does not first appear in vv. 16b and 17, as it already
occurs in v. 7b. Whether there is a connection with that verse depends on
the syntactic interpretation of v. 7b. Should be read as (1) adjective,
their former payment, that is to say the repayment for their former deeds;
or as (2) adverb, firstly I will measure their payment (where they refers to
the fathers in contrast to those addressed in v. 7a, or to both)?231 This last
231 Beuken, Jesaja, 60 along with Alexander, Daniels a.o. opt for solution 1. See also Web-
ster, Rhetoric, 98: payment for the former way. F. Delitzsch, Commentar ber das Buch Jesaia
(BC), Leipzig 41889, 617 like Ewald, Ngelsbach, Orelli, Bredenkamp, Kissane and Whybray
prefers solution 2, whereby first (cf. Jer. 16:18) apparently means that this retribution pre-
cedes the salvation of the servants in vv. 810; they thus indicates the addressees and their
fathers together. See also Koenen, Ethik, 160: zuerst das Gericht und dann das Heil; E.U. Dim,
The Eschatological Implications of Isa 65 and 66 as the Conclusion of the Book of Isaiah, Bern
2005, 77.
122 chapter two
view is the more probable. Thus taken, a connection is fixed between the
ends of stanza I (17) and III (1316), in accordance to the correspondence
we identified between the ends of stanza II (812) and IV (1725). The
periodisation that is made evident in v. 16b is then primed terminologically
in v. 7b. First there is the retribution of the rebellious (including fathers and
sons, bringing closure to a whole history of rebellion) and subsequently a
time of prosperity will dawn for the servants. This aspect is important for
the anchoring of the temporal dualism in the poem as a whole [ 2.3.3.1].
In the first troubles of v. 16b one could well contemplate the suppression
the servants experienced under the forsakers of Yhwh, but the direct context
offers little support to this interpretation. The context mentions in vv. 1315
what the forsakers may expect: hunger, thirst, shame and deathdoom that
likewise holds a tangible threat for the servants (8; cf. 1923). If these are the
troubles that will be forgotten, to such a degree that they will be removed
from Yhwhs sight, the definitive nature of this line being drawn under the
past is given extra stress.
The opposition open-hidden has a prominent role in the foregoing verses.
The rebellious people practised their deceit in secretive places (4), though
Yhwh nonetheless views these as an open insult (3); but from Yhwhs point
of view, this whole episode will soon be as concealed as a closed chapter.
Subsequently, still keeping the evaluation of the dualism in focus, one
could ask why the creation of a new heaven and a new earth is promised (17),
when at first sight it seems to implicate nothing more than the recreation of
Jerusalem and a people that orientates itself on this city (18). It is unlikely,
however, that the text lets these two creational deeds merge completely.
Yhwh creates Jerusalem as a joy, by creating above and around her a new
heaven and a new earth. In this promise there is an objective aspect, then,
alongside the subjective. Jerusalem will have all the objective reasons to be
joyous.232
It is noticeable that Isa. 65 does not speak further in worldwide terms
about the new.233 The paradisiac regions stretching out over the entire holy
mountain (25), is seen as sufficient expos to satisfy the spatial interests
of the reader. These spatial dimensions may be set in a different light only
232 B. Schramm, The Opponents of Third Isaiah: Reconstructing the Cultic History of the
Restoration (JSOT.S, 193) Sheffield 1995, 160: the two creation statements are not mutually
exclusive but rather complementary and perhaps even synonymous. They may be comple-
mentary, in our view, but not synonymous.
233 Thus correctly Van Ruiten, Begin, 60, where he remarks (in a somewhat one-sided
formulation) that in Isa. 65:1718 the interest lies not so much in a new cosmos, but much
rather in a recreated Jerusalem (our translation).
within the broader context [ 2.3.2]. This chapter as such ensures that
new creation evokes less spatial-universal, and more temporal associations:
Yhwh will bring about change for his servants, equally radical as his original
creation of heaven and earth. But this does not mean that the new creation
in Isa. 65 is merely a poetic hyperbole indicating Jerusalems joy.
The majority of commentaries pose the question whether a new heaven
and a new earth are really expected in Isa. 65:17, a question that naturally
does not enable a good answer in this formulation. The exposition must
distinguish between the image raised by the words and the reality this
image is attempting to define. To say that the image has little more to
say than the renewal of the existing heaven and earth, would be a too
prosaic approach.234 But it is truethe suggested cosmic transformation
is not treated extensively in Isa. 65, and thus a too developed, descriptive
articulation of this new creation would quickly lead to logical tensions. And
therefore the break in the preconditions of Yhwhs servants is understood
here more metaphorically than literally, as a creational change, being as
unimaginable and at the same time as durable as the creation of heaven
and earth in the beginning.
2.3.2. Isaiah 65 Set in Its Context

What light does the contextual imbedding of Isa. 65 cast on the contrast
between servants and forsakers of the Lord and on the unprecedented
announcement of a new heaven and a new earth?
Together Isa. 65 and 66 form the corrective response to the penitential
prayer in Isa. 63:764:11. It is precisely the theme that comes to the fore so
emphatically in Isa. 65, that is, the theme of call and response (see also 66:4)
that has received a dramatic form in the sequencing of prayer and divine
answer in the books closing chapters.235
234 It is interesting to see how LXX has softened Isa. 65:17 in this respect; cf. Van Ruiten,
Begin, 116122 [ 2.3.4]. For the Hebrew the remark by W. Gro Erneuerter oder Neuer
Bund? Wortlaut und Aussageintention in Jer 31,3134, in: F. Avemarie, H. Lichtenberger (eds),
Bund und Tora: Zur theologischen Begriffsgeschichte in alttestamentlicher, frhjdischer und
urchristlicher Tradition, Tbingen 1996, 4166, esp. 51 on the avoidance of the verb in Jer.
31:31 is relevant: Statt dessen wurde hier die nominale Ausdrucksweise gewhlt, die die neue
Gre sprachlich als eigene Entitt behandelt. Dim, Implications, 104105 on the other hand,
again speaks of a renewed instead of a new creation.
235 Cf. Steck, Tritojesaja, 217228 and 229265. But even if one decides against accepting
Stecks view that Isa. 6566 follows the foregoing prayer Schritt fr Schritt (223), he indicated
convincingly the extent of the connections between these passages. Dim, Implications, 369
sees Isa. 6566 not as an answer, but, as an explanation of why the usual and expected
124 chapter two
The possession of the land is an important notion in both the prayer

(63:18) and its answer (65:9). In 63:17 a call is made: Return for the sake
of your servants, the tribes of your inheritance. Yhwh replies in 65:8, 9 that
he, like a winegrower saving a cluster of grapes, will do so on behalf of my
servants, not to destroy them all. And I will bring forth [] from Judah an
inheritor of my mountains.
On the other hand the veiled claim of the one praying, as if he were
representing all the people (64:8; cf. 63:8), is rejected by Yhwh. Here the
term corrective comes into its own. When asked whether Yhwh will remain
silent (64:11), the reply rings that he assuredly will not remain silent until
he has paid back for their unrighteousness (65:6). We should not overlook
that the prayer is not completely consistent here in how it purports itself,
when it confesses simultaneously: no one calls on your name (64:6), an
outcry to which Yhwhs response is able to link in the affirmative (65:1). The
answer also recognises the anguish expressed in the prayer (63:9, 18; 64:1).
An end will come to this anxiety, even if only for the servants of the Lord
(65:16). The corresponding images of foliage that wilts (64:5) and the long
lifespan of trees (65:22) strengthen this positive report between grievance
and promise. However, we once more come across a sharp contrast, as a
correction, between the holiness of Yhwh and his people according to the
prayer (63:10, 11, 15, 18; 64:9, 10; cf. 65:11, 25), and the religious isolation of
those who, according to the reply, had cut themselves off from Yhwhs word
(65:5).
This empathetic but corrective response is continued in Isa. 66.236 The
penitential prayer concludes with a reference to the destroyed temple,
which would have made the divine reaction incomplete without 66:1, 2. The
wording of these verses, Heaven is my throne [] and these I esteem: the
contrite, the lowly in spirit, and they who tremble at my word reminds of
63:15, Look down from heaven and see from the dwelling of your holiness
and your glory. In 64:10, contrasting the pronouns your, the petitioner still
spoke of the house of our holiness and our glory. In this way the prayer dif-
answer is not forthcoming. The difference between a correcting and an unexpected answer
does not seem that large. In some modern translations Isa. 63:19b64:11 is numbered as
64:112, influenced by the Vulg.; here the numbering is followed that is based on the Masoretic
versification.
236 Ruszkowski, Volk, 81 rejects Stecks view that Isa. 66 continues the response of Isa. 65
on the prayer in 6364. The parallelism between Isa. 65 and 66 emphasised by Ruszkowski
(104106) does not contradict the possibility that Isa. 65 was planned to be complemented in
this way from the outset. Complementary parallelism is a common literary phenomenon in
the book of Isaiah; see in this regard 2.2.7.2.
ferentiated subtly between the earthly temple and Yhwhs heavenly home, a
distinction that 66:12 carries forward. There are more associations between
Isa. 66 and the prayer of Isa. 6364, seen in various themes such as the name
of Yhwh (63:12, 14, 16, 19; 64:1, 6; 66:5), enmity (63:10; 66:6, 14) and the fire of
judgement (64:1; 66:15, 15, 16, 24).
An echo is also noticeable between 64:3: Since ancient times they have
not heard, they have not given ear, an eye has not seen any God besides you,
who acts on behalf of those who wait for him, and the birth of the new
people of God in 66:8: Who has ever heard of such a thing, who has ever seen
such things? In this regard it could be asked whether the motherhood of
Zion (66:711; via 66:13 an imagery eventually depicting Gods own motherly
compassion!) should not be seen in connection to Yhwhs fatherhood. Was
it not this fatherhood that the preceding prayer appealed to so passionately
(63:16; 64:7)? In any event the theme of the nations of the world (64:1), which
Isa. 65:166:4 allowed to rest, is emphatically taken up once more in 66:12,
18, 19, 20.
What does this broad compositional embedding contribute to the mean-
ing and scope of the new creation in Isa. 65? As we inquired earlier, it is insuf-
ficient to type this new creation as a hyperbolic expression of Jerusalems
joy.237 Within this network of relations Jerusalem swells to become the cen-
tre of the world. The reverence of the nations will stream to her (66:12), and
from her Yhwhs glory will be proclaimed amongst the nations (66:19). And
not alone the earth, heaven co-determines the spatial dimensions in which
the recreated Jerusalem is placed by these chapters (63:19; 66:1). Jerusalem
is where heaven touches the earth. In Isa. 65:17 it is therefore not a case of
accidental and fleeting hyperbole, but of metaphorical language that closely
melds prayer and response. In this light the prayers cry for the rending of
heaven (63:19) seems to become a call for a genuine cosmic intervention,
which is then resolved with the announcement of a new heaven and a new
earth, never heard before.238 Be as it may, together the new heaven and the
new earth will form the immeasurable space in which everything that lives
will come to Jerusalem to bow before Yhwh (66:2223).
When we look further back in the book, it appears that chapters 6566
form the counterbalance of 5657 in the concentric structure of Trito-Isaiah
237 See e.g. Koenen, Ethik, 221: the creation of a new heaven and a new heaven in Isa. 65:17
means nothing else als da man in Jerusalem in einer besseren, aber vllig diesseitigen Welt
leben wird. P.A. Smith, Rhetoric and Redaction in Trito-Isaiah: The Structure, Growth, and
Authorship of Isaiah 5666 (VT.S, 62), Leiden 1995, 147 too talks in this vein.
238 Thus Steck, Tritojesaja, 254.
126 chapter two
built around Isa. 6062. Like the servants of Yhwh in Isa. 65 contrast the
forsakers of Yhwh, in 56:957:13 the men of stand against the sons of a
sorceress.
The term servants appears 10 in Trito-Isaiah, namely 7 in Isa. 65 and
then in 56:6; 63:17 and 66:14. Who may belong to this group of people, is told
in Isa. 5666 using various other names such as righteous (57:1; cf. 60:21)
and devout (57:1), as those who make their refuge with Yhwh (57:13), the
contrite and lowly in spirit (57:15), broken hearted (61:1), those who grieve
in Zion (61:3; cf. 57:18; 66:10), as watchmen posted on Zions walls (62:6),
and finally also as the ones who tremble for Yhwhs word (66:2, 5). This
is the group that Yhwhlike the singular Servant in Deutero-Isaiahhas
filled with his spirit and in whose mouths he has placed his words (59:21;
cf. 51:16).
Remarkably, it seems that Trito-Isaiah avoids the designation servants
of Yhwh for them, exactly in the places where the despair of these Yhwh-
loyalists remind the strongest of the suffering Servant figure from Isa. 53.
They are just called by this name servants once it is told what blessings
await themwhere their existence is viewed in the glorious future perspec-
tive that the Servant of Isa. 53 has prepared for them.
In a synchronic approach the absence of the term servants in the mid-
section of Isa. 5666 could therefore be typed as a meaningful aposiopesis,
a significant suppression that is only broken near the end.239 The closing
chapters bring the contrast between the Yhwh-loyalists and the others to
a dramatic crescendo and the presupposition is justified that an essential
connection exists between this ethical-religious dualism and the tempo-
ral dualism of first and new. Similar to the contrast servants-forsakers, the
contrast between the present and the future world was touched upon before
(see esp. 60:1920), but also regarding this second theme, it may be said that
Isa. 65 strengthens the dualism and builds it up to a climax.
The literary horizon of this eschatological perspective reaches further
back in the book. A section below will analyse the relations between Isa. 65
and Deutero-Isaiah in detail [ 2.3.3.3]. Proto-Isaiah resonates in the para-
disiacal final verse of Isa. 65 with the wolf and the lamb (cf. 11:6), and thus
it does not sound out of order to read Isa. 65:17 also in relation to represen-
tations of the passing of heaven and earth in more remote areas of the book
239 Cf. Beuken, Main Theme, 69, 76. In this regard he draws attention to the occurrence
of the terms justice and seed, which have been closely associated with the theme of the
Servant since Isa. 53.
(Isa. 13:910, 13; 24:4, 1819; 34:24; cf. 51:6). Although such connections are
not supported by evident allusions in Isa. 65 and one is left to speculate on
the intentions of the redactors of Isaiah on this point, a reader-oriented or
canonical approach to the book will certainly be interested in them.
Observations by Liebreich on the framing function of Isa. 1 and 6566
have found wide support in Isaiah research.240 It is noteworthy that the most
striking connection with Isa. 65 is found in Isa. 11:6, resulting in both the
beginning and close of Isa. 112 emerging with possible links to the end
redaction of the whole book. The beginning of Isa. 112 then anticipates par-
ticularly the ethical-religious dualism (righteousness/apostasy); the close
anticipates mainly the temporal dualism in an image of entirely new cre-
ational conditions.241 In the so-called Isaiah Apocalypse, chapters 2427, the
ethical-religious dualism receives a strong universal accent and seems to
spread from Israel over all of humanity. The vision of the nations pilgrimage
in Isa. 2:15 is often involved in the correspondence between the beginning
and close of the book Isaiah.
2.3.3. Diachronic Questions

2.3.3.1. Redaction-Critical Deliberations
Is it possible to differentiate diachronic layers in Isa. 65 and how could this
contribute to our understanding of the redaction history of 63:766:24 as a
whole?
(1) Isa. 65 is evidently the result of borrowing scribal activity [ 2.3.3.3],

but this does not affect the homogeneous impression of the final text. Even
v. 25, which stands out as a building block because it occurs elsewhere in
the book (cf. 11:69), through the themes holy mountain (cf. v. 11) and evil
(cf. v. 12) looks like it is firmly anchored in the context [ 2.3.1].242 Rather
than disconnecting the sharp ethical dualism (servants-forsakers) and the
sharp temporal dualism (new heavens and new earth contrasting former
240 L.J. Liebreich, The Compilation of the Book of Isaiah, JQR 46 (1955/6), 259277; 47
(1956/7), 114138; for further literature see P. Hffken, Jesaja: Der Stand der Theologischen
Diskussion, Darmstadt 2004, 51; Dim, Implications, 2223.
241 Whether Isa. 1:2 (Hear, o heavens) should be seen as a disguised reference to the books
dnouement (see e.g. Sweeney, Exegesis, 472) is doubtful on account of the frequency of
heaven-earth (20 ) in Isaiah. If followed, it would give new an extra connotation in Isa.
6566: a heaven and an earth that no longer were witnesses of Israels apostasy.
242 For the discussion on the direction of dependence between Isa. 65:25 and 11:69, see
Hffken, Diskussion, 38. The allusion to Gen. 3:14 supports Isa. 65:25 as the borrowing party.
128 chapter two
distress) and distributing them over diachronically distinct layers, it seems

more feasible to view the essential correlation of these two concepts, delib-
erately combined to bring the book of Isaiah to completion.243
(2) Against a stratification of Isa. 65 rests the argument that this whole
chapter is aligned with the foregoing prayer. The exile has often been taken
as the prayers time of origin.244 The redactors of Trito-Isaiah would have
included an existing communal prayer into their composition. The divine
response, which offers corrections to the prayer on numerous points, would
then have been added afterwards. These presuppositions raise questions.
Usage of Isaian phrases argues against the supposition that the prayer came
into being outside the context of the book.245 Correction of the prayer by
the response could signal a difference in time of origin, but a necessary
implication it is not: perhaps one should differentiate in 63:764:11 between
243 As an example of a well-formulated redaction-critical hypothesis, K. Koenen, Ethik
und Eschatologie im Tritojesajabuch: Eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtliche Studie

(WMANT, 62), Tbingen 1990 may be mentioned. He asserts one should distinguish in
Isa. 5666 between texts of TI and texts of an editor. In Isa. 65 he ascribes 65:16b24 to
the Grundschrift of TI and calculates its date to between 520 and 515. Isa. 65:17*, 815*,
16a* would have its origin with an editor from the second half of the 5th century; the
remainder, including Isa. 65:25, are glosses. According to Koenen, TI answers the question
when the salvation will eventually arrive; the editor, to whom it will arrive. In our view the
redaction-critical disengagement of ethical-religious antagonism and temporal dualism is
nowhere more dubious than in Isa. 65. It cannot be coincidental that the two meet in this
chapter. Later in the apocalyptic tradition these two dualisms, answering the to whom and
the when, also appear to be inextricably connected [ 2.3.4]; so too the study of modern
millennial groups has shown to what extent these questions belong together in religious
experience. We take the sharp contrast between the servants and the forsakers of Yhwh
on the one hand, and the contrast between the current and new heaven and earth on
the other (irrespective whether one views the latter metaphorically or more literally), and
see them forming a package deal in apocalyptic discourse. Koenens presumption that TI,
like his teacher DI (and quite different from his eventual editor), would exclusively have
proclaimed unconditional salvation, in itself is unsustainable. Isa. 4055 similarly does not
disconnect the question on the future salvation from the question on the true Israel, as we
have seen [ 2.2.9 sub 6]. For redaction-critical analyses fragmenting the text of Isa. 65,
see e.g. E. Sehmsdorf, Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte von Jesaja 5666, ZAW 84 (1972),
517576; J. Vermeylen, Du prophte Isae l apocalyptique, vol. 2, Paris 1987; and S. Sekine,
Die Tritojesajanische Sammlung ( Jes 5666) redaktionsgeschichtlich untersucht (BZAW, 175),
Berlin 1989. The unity of the chapter is defended among others by Beuken, Jesaja 3B, 5796;
E.C. Webster, The Rhetoric of Isaiah 6365, JSOT 47 (1990), 89102; O.H. Steck, Studien zu
Tritojesaja (BZAW, 203), Berlin 1991, 217228 and Smith, Rhetoric, 128132.
244 This interpretation is also followed by R. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion in the Old
Testament Period, vol. 2, London 1994, 401; Idem, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of
the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 146147: close of the exilic period.
245 Cf. Steck, Tritojesaja, 241.
the intentions of the we-supplicant and the author who deliberately placed
these words in the supplicants mouth. Specific tensions within the prayer
itself [ 2.3.2] suggest that the prayer presumes a correctional response from
Yhwh in advance. Was there then no compositional planning involved, for
example, when the supplicant naively seems to apply the title servants in
Isa. 63:17 to the nation as a whole?
(3) An important argument supporting an early dating of the prayer has

always been the temples state of collapse according to Isa. 64:10. Countering
this view, having concluded that the prayer could only have originated
when the book of Isaiah was almost completed, Steck reasons that the verse
implicates the destruction of Jerusalem by Ptolomy I Soter in 301 bce.246 But,
is it unthinkable that the prayer, setting the genuine time of origin one side,
wishes to transfer us to a time when the temple had still not been properly
restored since the destruction of 586, indeed that the temples completion
is projected here dramatically into the future as happens elsewhere with
the real return to Zion? Could return and temple building, according to this
prophetic book, have been realised at all for mourners who are expecting
the revelation of Yhwhs glory? Whether the author antedated his text in a
pseudepigraphical manner, or only wished to consider contrition of spirit
as temple building in the true sense of the word (Isa. 66:2)such options
make it near impossible to base a date of writing on Isa. 64:10. Not the
historical, but the literary and theological framework must have determined
the content of the prayer and its response.247
(4) All this does not affect Stecks reasonable suggestion that with Isa. 65
66 we find ourselves in an advanced stage of the redaction history of the
book Isaiah. Regarding the issue of dates we must keep account of plau-
sible periods for this redaction history. An early post-exilic dating of Isa.
65:17 to around 520bce conflicts the fact that this text is dependent on Isa.
4055 [ 2.3.3.3], of which even the oldest literary layers in our opinion can-
not be dated convincingly before the year 515 [ 2.2.8.5].248 The tensions
246 Cf. Steck, Tritojesaja, 229.

247 Steck, Tritojesaja, is in two minds about the matter, when for one thing he contemplates
whether the redaction might have wanted to attribute the prayer to Isaiah (232), and
for another holds the historical events of 301 bce, which als Wiederkehr von 587 v. Chr.
verstanden wurde (241), as determining factor for the prayers content.
248 For a handy overview on the dating of Isa. 65, see Schramm, Opponents, 1620. In the
footsteps of Elliger he assumes the latter part of the sixth century bce for the greater share
130 chapter two
between the servants and the forsakers have often been connected to the
measures taken by Nehemiah and Ezra in the fifth century. According to a
number of scholars, Trito-Isaiahs servants of Yhwh would have belonged to
the same universalistic group that Nehemiah and Ezra excommunicated.249
This view presupposes a structural tension between legalistic-theocratic
and prophetic-visionary groups in post-exilic Judea,250 a supposition that has
been castigated from different quarters in the last decades as being far too
simplistic.251 In the rebound, the servants in Trito-Isaiah, from being Ezras
opponents, could be renamed Ezras supporters by these critics. Thus Blenk-
insopp draws attention to the expression who tremble at the word/com-
mandment of God in Isa. 66:2, 5 and Ezra 9:4; 10:3.252 In these instances the
same group of people could be implicated. If this identification is correct,
we come across the group in Ezra at a later phase of its development than
in Trito-Isaiaha phase in which these tremblers or quakers, with moral
and material support from Persia, would have regained much of their social
standing in Judean society.253 Yet there are several reasons to compare the
of Isa. 6566 (34). Smith, Rhetoric, 188 includes Isa. 65:166:17 in his TI2 layer, for which he
takes 515 as terminus ante quem. Such dates seem far too early. J. Werlitz, Redaktion und
Komposition: Zur Rckfrage hinter die Endgestalt von Jesaja 4055 (BBB, 122), Berlin 1999, 127,
offers an overview of dating propositions for the whole TI, including Volz, Westermann,
Fohrer, Vermeylen and Koenen. The earliest proposition (6th and 5th century) is found
in Koenen, Ethik. Vermeylen on average sets the date one century later. Volz probes the
Hellenistic period for Isa. 6566.
249 So a.o. Koenen, Ethik, 223 (with literature reference).
250 See esp. P.D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of
Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology, Philadelphia 21979; for a summary: Idem, Alttestamentliche

Apokalyptik in neuer Sicht, in: K. Koch, J.M. Schmidt (eds), Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982,
440470.
251 See in particular S.L. Cook, Prophecy and Apocalypticism: The Postexilic Social Set-
ting, Minneapolis 1995, who defends the idea that proto-apocalyptic concepts originated in
groups allied with or identical to the priests at the center of restoration society (2). Whereas
Cook has based his view on comparative studies in recent millennial groups, Schramm, Oppo-
nents questions among other things Hansons view that TIs criticism of syncretic practices
was in fact directed against the official priestly religion of the OT. In this regard see also Smith,
Rhetoric, 193.
252 Cf. J. Blenkinsopp, A Jewish Sect of the Persian Period, CBQ 52 (1990), 520. Concerning
the development of this group he sees Malachi as a link between TI and Ezra-Nehemiah. For
this chronological order TI Ezra-Nehemiah, see also Schramm, Opponents, 6162.
253 Cf. Smith, Rhetoric, 201: [] it is very uncertain whether we can draw any lines of
continuity between the group that has been tentatively identified in Isa. 5666 and Ezra 910
and these later groups [] referred to as the Hasidim. But is this not also the case for the lines
between Isa. 5666 and Ezra 910? An important consideration would be that in the framing
of the book Isaiah through Isa. 1 and 6566 [ 2.3.2] the antagonism between the forsakers
postulated dating of Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah in an even broader context.

This will be discussed in the upcoming section.
2.3.3.2. Relative and Absolute Dating of Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah

Isa. 6062 is generally accepted as the compositional centre of Isa. 5666. It
is plausible that the oldest texts of Trito-Isaiah are located in this kernel. At
places in the text where Isa. 6062 shows affinity with Deutero-Isaiah, bor-
rowings by Trito-Isaiah are easier to reason out than borrowings by Deutero-
Isaiah.254 A similar situation applies for the majority of other substantial
analogies between Isa. 4055 and 5666.255 Granting that Isa. 6062 came
into being in dependence on Deutero-Isaian texts, this does not automati-
cally mean that Isa. 6062 was intended as a continuation of Deutero-Isaiah
from the onset. Isa. 6062 becomes a literary sequence to Deutero-Isaiah
only due to the relatively younger framing of Trito-Isaiahs composition.
To complicate the picture, Isa. 4955 contains several passages that are
related to Isa. 5666 so strongly, that they are sometimes ascribed to Trito-
Isaiah.256 The impression is created that Isa. 4055 as a bit older and Isa.
5666 as a bit younger work more or less came to bear strongly on each
other in their later redactional stages. An important additional perspective
is that the socio-religious group which Trito-Isaiah refers to as servants
must be historically older than the Servant in Deutero-Isaiah as the literary
prototype of this group. A genealogical connection between the Servant and
the servants (the last as offspring of the first) is not verbalised in Trito-Isaiah
but in Deutero-Isaiah, and this by means of literary connections between
Isa. 53 and 54 [ 2.3.3.3].
A lacuna in the research therefore seems to be that Trito-Isaiah is usu-
ally positioned in light of Deutero-Isaiah, but Deutero-Isaiah not (or not
carefully enough) in light of Trito-Isaiah. In so doing attention should not
and the servants of Yhwh is essentially projected back into the time of the prophet. The
religious conflict in which the books redactors were engaged is thus understood as the
conflict experienced by no one less than Isaiah himself. We may see this as an important
development in the groups attempted emancipation.
254 For a rationale of the last mentioned direction of dependence, see K. Baltzer, Deutero-
Jesaja (KAT, 10/2), Gtersloh 1999, 14; J.L. Koole, Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 3: Isaiah 5666, Leuven
2001, 2425.
255 See A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, Analogies in Isaiah, vol. B: Analogies between Isaiah 5666
and Isaiah 4066, Amsterdam 1993 for the most objective presentation of the relevant mate-
rial.
256 See e.g. H.-J. Hermisson, Deuterojesaja und Eschatologie, in: F. Postma et al. (eds),
The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht
2002, 89105, esp. 105discussed 2.2.9 sub 4.
132 chapter two
only be given to the texts, but also to the underlying questions behind the
texts. In the figure of the Servant, Deutero-Isaiah answers the question how
the group pointed out by Trito-Isaiah as servants, relates to the historical
Israel.257 In this sense Deutero-Isaiah is in fact younger than Trito-Isaiah. This
is the element of truth in their relative dating such as proposed by Koole.258
The comparatively small difference in time between the formation of
Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah should also be taken carefully into account when
determining the relation between presentic and apocalyptic eschatology.
See on this 2.3.4. The argument of these sections and eventually this whole
chapter is centred on this point.
Details that play a role in research on the absolute dating of Trito-Isaiah
include: the destruction of the temple according to Isa. 64; the cultic rituals
condemned in Isa. 65 and 66; the practice of fasting according to Isa. 58
compared to Zech. 78; the trembling at Yhwhs word etc. according to
Isa. 66 and Ezra, already mentioned; the assumed allusion to members
of the house of David in Isa. 56;259 and the close connection between the
ethic-religious dualism in Isa. 6566 and the final redaction of the book
Isaiah.
On closer inspection the majority of these details offer little succour.
The dynastic allusion through the eunuchs of Isa. 56:34 (Ruszkowski) is
speculative. It is not immediately clear what Isa. 64:10 means with the
temple destruction; a reference to a specific event from 301 bce, as we have
seen, is not obvious [ 2.3.3.1 sub 3]. Other texts in Trito-Isaiah presume a
well-functioning temple cult (56:5, 7; 60:7, 13; 62:9; 66:1, 6, 20). It is historically
the most probable that after the exile the temple was rebuilt and taken into
use in phases, and that Haggai and Zechariah have left us with a rather
stylised and ideologically tinted portrayal of these events. Criticism against
fasting practices must have become a stereotype theme in the post-exilic
homiletics and therefore is a dubious dating anchor. The absolute dating of
Zech. 78 is not less uncertain than that of Isa. 58.
The identification of the tremblers from Isa. 66:2, 5 with those in Ezra
9:4; 10:3 (Blenkinsopp, Schramm) is convincing, but does not compel us
to accept the conclusion that Trito-Isaiah reflects the actual situation of
257 The development of the people of Yhwh to an Entscheidungsgemeinschaft is not first
found in Isa. 5666 (thus L. Ruszkowski, Volk und Gemeinde im Wandel: Eine Untersuchung zu
Jesaja 5666, Gttingen 2000, in conclusion 173), but as a line of questioning simultaneously
forms the background of Isa. 4055.
258 See the first footnote of this section.
259 Cf. Ruszkowski, Volk, 146151.
the Judean devotees on the eve of Ezras feats.260 It is plausible that Ezra
was received with open arms by such marginalised in Jerusalem, but it
might well be that the designation tremblers for this group originated
from a fourth century narrator, which is credibly the situation for other
elements from the narrative of Ezra 910.261 The cultic rituals condemned in
Isa. 6566 (chthonic veneration of pigs and dogs, worship of Gad and Meni)
at first sight are the most promising dating anchors, but in comparative
religio-historical research have not yet led to any definitive conclusions.
There is a widely held intuition that the Hellenistic period cannot be too
far away, but assured it decidedly is not. In any event Isa. 6566 brings the
final redaction of the book Isaiah into view.
Whoever accepts a fifth or early fourth century dating for Isa. 6566,262
and in addition calculates the distance between them and the oldest texts
of Isa. 4055 in terms of decennia rather than centuries [ 2.3.3.3], is faced
once more with the conclusion that the conventional late-exilic or early
post-exilic dating of Deutero-Isaiah does not tally. Earlier in this chapter
it was argued that one should probably descend to after 515 bce, or more
precisely to a point in time later than Ps. 93100* as a coherent dramatic
composition from the second temple period [ 2.2.8.5] in order to situate
the so-called Prophet of the Exile. Winding back from Ezra-Nehemiah
260 Cf. Ruszkowski, Volk, 155159. The fact that Ezra 9:4 and 10:3 do not cite from Isa.
66:2, 5 (see also the slight differences in the naming: /

compared to / ) , strengthens the impression that these texts
have the same group in mind, but sketch it in different colours. Those who tremble in Isaiah
for the prophetic word, tremble in Ezra for the law of God in the sense of Deuteronomy. The
same or an associated group are called in Mal. 3:16.
261 Even if for the circumstances described in Ezra, one wishes not to contemplate the time
of the Hasmoneans but still prefers the Persian period, reliable historical information on Ezra
is rare in comparison to Nehemiah; see e.g. W.H. Schmidt, Einleitung in das Alte Testament,
Berlin 51995, 172. At most it can be established that, in the eyes of a later author, in Jerusalem
Ezra found support in devotees who distinguished themselves as a group from priests,
levites, and the whole nation Israel, even where the latter showed remorse. The objectifying
designation tremblers at the words of the God of Israel / at the law of our God could have
been derived from a more inclusively intended noun of address as formulated in Isa. 66:2, 5.
The reverse direction of dependence is not to be considered seriouslythe semantic relation
does not differ from that between the apostolic salutation Col. 1:2 and Brethren in Christ as
a name for a (American) church denomination. In Isa. 66:5 these tremblers are grouped
against those that hate them; in Ezra 910 the hatred seems to have dissipated but the group
still exists. A certain distance may thus be deduced between TI and this possible fourth
century view of the historical reality, as formulated in Ezra. According to J. Pakkala, Ezra the
Scribe: The Development of Ezra 710 and Nehemia 8 (BZAW, 347), Berlin 2004, 292293 Ezra
9:4; 10:3a are Gola additions from the early fourth century to the basic story over Ezra.
262 In 4.2.2 we will discuss the dating of Isa. 6566 in relation to the book of Jeremiah.
134 chapter two
through Isa. 6566, for Isa. 4055, one then once again ends up somewhere
in the second half of the fifth century.
2.3.3.3. Relations with Isaiah 4055

Italics in the overview below indicate the analogous clauses in Isa. 65, which
will form the point of departure for the more detailed comparison with
Deutero-Isaiah in this section. Underlining signals the common vocabulary
within the analogous clauses and occasionally there beyond. The text range
under examination is Isa. 4066.263
01 I am approachable a by |
who do not ask (for me) |
ready to be found b by | a+b 55:6
who do not seek me |
I say | same sequence of
here I am | analogous clauses 58:9
here I am |
to a nation |
that does not call on my name | analogous clause 64:6
02 I hold out my hands all day long to an obstinate people |
who walk in a way a | analogous clause 48:17
that is not good |
following their own thoughts b | a+b 55:7264
[]
04 who sit inside graves |
and spend the night in secret places |
who eat the flesh of pigs | analogous clause 66:17
and broth of unclean meat is (in) their pots |
[]
06 See it stands written before me |
I will not keep silent | analogous clause 64:11
unless I have repaid |
and I will repay (it) into their laps |
[]
08 Thus says Yhwh |
As when juice is found in a cluster of grapes |
and they say |
Dont destroy it |
263 Following Van Wieringen, Analogies, vol. B, 357461.

264 In the OT, sing. and pl. appear together only in Isa. 55:7 and 65:2.
for there is a blessing in it |

so I will do for the sake of my servants | analogous clause 48:11
by not destroying them all |
09 And I will bring forth a seed from Jacob |
and from Judah an inheritor of my mountains |
and my chosen ones a will inherit it |
and my servants b will settle there | a+b 42:1; 45:4265
[]
12 I will destine you for the sword |
and you will all bend down for the slaughter |
because I called | analogous sequence of
and you did not answer | clauses 50:2
I spoke a |
and you did not hear b | a+b 50:4
and you did evil before my eyes |
and what does not please me | analogous sequence of
you chose | 7 clauses 66:4
[]
15 And you will leave your name to my chosen ones a as a curse |
and the Lord Yhwh may put you to death | a+b see in 65:9
but to his servants b
he will call another name | analogous clause 62:2266
16 So whoever invokes a blessing on earth |
will bless himself in the God of Amen |
and whoever takes an oath on earth |
will swear by the God of Amen | 48:1267
for the first troubles are forgotten |
for they are hidden from my eyes | 64:6
17 For I am about to create
new heavens and a new earth | analogous clause 66:22
and the first things
will not be remembered a | analogous clause 43:18
and will not come to mind b | a+b 57:11
18 But be glad |
and rejoice forever in |
what I am creating | analogous clause 66:22
for I am about to create Jerusalem as a joy |
and its people as a delight |
265 In TI elsewhere only 65:15. See also servant and choose: 41:8, 9; 43:10; 44:1, 2; 49:7.
266 Isa. 62:2 and you will be called by a new name: besides Isa. 65:17; 66:22 the only
occurrence in TI of the adjective .
267 who swear by the name of Yhwh [] not in truth . Cf. 49:7 .
136 chapter two
19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem a |

and I will delight in my people b | a+b 40:12
and no more will be heard in it
the sound of weeping and the sound of crying |
[]
23 They will not labour in vain | analogous clause 49:4
and will not bear children for calamity |
for they will be a seed of blessed by Yhwh |
and their descendants with them |
24 And it will be |
before they call |
I will answer | analogous clause 41:17
still they are speaking | analogous sequence of
and I will hear | clauses, see in 65:12
Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah share the opposition first-new, whichapart

from an initial impetus in the fourth Psalm book [ 2.1.4]does not occur
elsewhere in the Old Testament. In Trito-Isaiah it appears in Isa. 61:4 and
65:1617 (cf. 7). In 66:22 the term is wanting, but with
this verse refers back to 65:17, where heaven and earth are not
yet defined by anaphoric articles. What similarities and differences regard-
ing first and new can be identified between Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah?
While the development of the opposition in Isa. 4048 is traceable in the
texts progression, Trito-Isaiah is able to fall back on established formula-
tions. More in particular, in 65:17 the author seems to have been influenced
by 43:18, cf. resp. and . This last verse
again is related to the positive appeal in 46:9. Additionally one recognises
affinity with 43:19a in the construction
65:17a.268 A linguistic divergence is that Deutero-Isaiah almost
invariably uses the adjectives and independently,269 while Trito-
Isaiah combines them with substantives: ruins, troubles, heavens, earth.
With this, terms that were still groping for their meaning in Isa. 4048,
268 The verb is also used in relation to new things in Isa. 48:7. The theme of the
creation of heaven and earth in 42:5 introduces sayings on the first and new things in 42:9.
There appear to be no traces of allusion to these places in Isa. 65. On the theme of joy and
praise in the context of 43:1819 and 65:17, see J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten, Een begin zonder einde:
De doorwerking van Jesaja 65:17 in de intertestamentaire literatuur en het Nieuwe Testament,
Amsterdam 1990, 58. From the results of his research on the unicity of 65:17 the similarity
between this verse and 43:1819 comes to the fore (8289).
269 Exceptions are Isa. 41:15 and 43:27.
become well-defined; but not only that: this definition also brings about a
considerable change in tenor.
In Deutero-Isaiah, with Israels former history of salvation had to
be understood as it found confirmation in the fall of Babylon. Diachronic
development did not cause substantial change to this dominant meaning
of the first or former things within Isa. 4048 [ 2.2.8.1]. In Trito-Isaiah
indicates former troubles, cf. 65:16. The current calamitous situation
is thought of within the context of Isa. 65, which for the servants precedes
the new age of prosperity; see also the previously stated former ruins in 61:4.
Any connection between and the history of salvation thus disappears
from sight. Salvation history is broached in Trito-Isaiah (see e.g. 63:79),
but without the word first having a say in it. Perhaps the allusion betrays
that the author of 65:16, 17 understood his source text 43:18 differently and
there already applied the first things on Yhwhs judgement (as some modern
commentaries still do); but this then would have contradicted the original
intention of that exhortation [ 2.2.5].270 Neither can it be excluded that the
opposition in this way came to play a role in the redaction of the whole book
of Isaiah, but then just as secondary interpretation of the Deutero-Isaian
opposition first-new, namely in view of judgement and salvation [ 2.2.8.2].
This all indicates distance in time between Isa. 4048 and 65. According
to modern standards of comprehension, Isa. 43 was misunderstood by the
author of Isa. 65regardless how much he persists in associating the new
things with Yhwhs incomparable power to create.271 If one draws Isa. 4955
into the comparison alongside 4048, however, the distance DI-TI is reduced
remarkably. In these chapters the following connecting links deserve atten-
tion:
(a) The theme of call and answer, speaking and hearing connects Isa. 65 with
Isa. 50.
270 This is a comely illustration from the following observation of B.D. Sommer, A Prophet
Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 4066, Stanford, CA 1998, 29: When a later author refers
to an earlier text and changes some ideas in it, readers may debate whether the later author
means to argue against the earlier text, to rewrite it with appropriate changes, or to claim that
the earlier text really meant to say what he is saying more clearly now. Incidentally Sommer
ascribes Isa. 4066 to the same author or group of authors.
271 According to B.S. Childs, Isaiah (OTL), Louisville 2001, 447 the new things in DI in light
of TI are only an illustration, a foretaste, of Gods promise. In our view the new things in DI
and TI refer to the same new reality created by Yhwh, but with different perspectives, that is
as human response to history and as divine response to the suffering of the pious [ 2.3.4].
138 chapter two
Isa. 50:2 When I called, why was there no one to answer?

Isa. 50:4 (free rendering) Yhwhs speaking is heard by the Servant
every morning272
Isa. 65:12 Because I called but you did not answer,
spoke but you did not hear
Isa. 65:24 Before they call I will answer,
while they are still speaking I will hear
Isa. 66:4 Because I called and there was no one to answer,
I spoke and they did not hear
These word pairs are not exclusively Isaian. Several places in Jeremiah also
deal with the call of God that is not answered and his speech that goes
unheard.
Jer. 7:13 And I spoke to you again and again and you did not hear
and I called you and you did not answer
Jer. 7:27 When you speak all these words to them,
they will not hear to you
and you will call to them and they will not answer you
Jer. 35:17 Because I spoke to them and they did not hear
and I called to them and they did not answer
It is noticeable that where Isaiah prioritises calling and answering, Jeremiah

has speaking and hearing in the front position.273 Thus from all the citations,
Isa. 50:24 and 66:4 have the strongest analogy.
(b) This evident connection between Isa. 50 and 66 does not alter the fact
that clear, direct echoes from the so-called Servant Songs are missing in
Trito-Isaiah. Various signals in the text of Isa. 5666 suggest a resemblance
between the servants and the Servant [ 2.3.2], but therewith still not a gen-
erative relation. It is well to realise that this generative relation is established
not by Trito-Isaiah, but by Deutero-Isaiah.274 The servants (plural) are first
introduced in Isa. 54:17, and are hence understood as the offspring of the Ser-
vant announced in 53:10also in light of the other connections between Isa.
272 See the noun and the verb . As counterparts of and in 50:2 they establish
a meaningful link between the third Servant Song and the foregoing context (cf. H. Leene, De
stem van de knecht als metafoor: Beschouwingen over de compositie van Jesaja 50, Kampen 1980,
20).
273 In 4.2.2 it will be argued that Jeremiah borrowed the expression from Isaiah.
274 The words and in TI usually indicate the seed and the descendants that are
promised to the servants, but nowhere these servants themselves as offspring of the Servant.
53 and 54. Even if Deutero-Isaiah as a literary composition preceded Trito-

Isaiah, as a social phenomenon Trito-Isaiahs servants undoubtedly antedate
Deutero-Isaiahs Servant. Theological questions that were raised in light of
the challenged existence of this pious group, namely whether they could
persist seeing themselves as the continuation of the people of Israel, are
answered by Deutero-Isaiahs drama through the prototypical figure of the
Servant.
servant Jacob-Israel Servant servants
Could one then argue that historically the Servant comes after the servants,
theologically speaking the servants follow him, as the seed that he will see
(53:10). The servants are the offspring of the Servant representing the servant
Jacob-Israel who is transformed by Yhwhs creational word.275
(c) Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah therefore do not presuppose a substan-

tially different socio-religious milieu, which is aptly illustrated by the liter-
ary affinity between Isa. 50 and 6566. The enigmatic language in which
Deutero-Isaiah mostly speaks about the Servant, is reminiscent of the secret
code used by marginalised religious groups to defend themselves against
the majority view. Nowhere else in the whole book of Isaiah does one
275 Also J. Blenkinsopp, The Servant and the Servants in Isaiah and the Formation of the
Book, in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of
an Interpretative Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 155175 uses the terms servant
and servants in Isa. 4066 to describe the shift of focus from the community as a whole
to a collectivity within it which claims, in effect, to be the nucleus of the true Israel (168).
The article emphasises the distinction between the collective servant from 4048 and
the individual servant from 4955. Partially due to Blenkinsopp reading 42:19 in light of
Cyrus (164), 4048 and 4955 become disconnected in his argument as far as their servant
interpretations are concerned. In the servant of 4955 he sees a real historical figure, albeit
unknown to us (173), whose followers, as servants, tremblers or mourners of Zion, formed
the sect in 5666 that was responsible for the redaction of the book Isaiah. In our view the
servant in Isa. 42 and 4955 displays all the traits of a fictional figure, whose primary function
is to offer a theological response to the shift of focus of which Blenkinsopp describes the
historical course magnificently. As we see it, the Servant as linkage between the historical
Israel and the Trito-Isaian pious community is not a retrospective literary modelling of the
view according to which the golah binds the pre- and post-exilic Israel together. Instead
we find in DI and TI the earliest stages of what will become a historical standard image in
Chronicles. In other words: the theological triad, servant Jacob-Israel Servant servants,
precedes the historical triad, pre-exilic Israel Babylonian golah post-exilic Israel. To call
the Servant a personification of the Babylonian golah, in our view, is reversing the issue. On
the golah see further 3.2.5.4.
140 chapter two
come across instances where the antagonists of the pious are threatened
with grievous calamity as they are in Isa. 50:11 and 65:1116.276 This, like
the previous points, shows both literary affinity and historical proximity.
We may assume that something of the gradualbut not less organised
development process of Isa. 4055 is reflected in the apparent difference
between Isa. 4048 and 4955 concerning their distance in time from Isa.
65 [ 2.2.8.1].
(d) Previously we pointed out elements of temporal dualism in Isa. 4955,

which in these passages had not yet combined with the terms first and
new, but in their conceptual world were clearly heading towards the prayer
in Isa. 6364 and the answer in Isa. 6566 [ 2.2.9 sub 4].
The points of view presented above make it feasible to reconsider the rela-
tion between Deutero-Isaiahs presentic eschatology and Trito-Isaiahs
dawning apocalyptics. We ask ourselves whether this relation is understood
correctly in current research. But before we investigate this question more
thoroughly, we will weave a short sketch of the reception history of Isa. 65:17
into the argument. Without this reception history the incorporation of the
term apocalyptics in our exposition would not be justifiable.
2.3.4. The Dawn of Apocalyptic?

Isa. 65:17 owes its characterisation as (proto-) apocalyptic text to its recep-
tion history in inter-testamentary and New Testament literature. Based on
the study of Van Ruiten, we will first offer a sketch of the most relevant
data.277
The LXX translates MT Isa. 65:17a as
following: .278 In the absence of
articles, the adjectives should be read predicatively: because the heaven will
be new and the earth new. The translation presumably does not depend
on another Hebrew Vorlage, even though it does not contain a reference to
276 Speech to these antagonists in the 2nd person plural is found elsewhere in Isa. 1:2831.
On the relation between 50:1011 and 6566, see also Blenkinsopp, Servant, 173.
277 Van Ruiten, Begin. Apart from the influences in 1 En. 91:16; 2Pet. 3:13 and Rev. 21:15b
he discusses, other places have been identified to be reminiscent of Isa. 65:17: 1 En. 45:45;
72:1; Jub. 1:29; 2 Bar. 32:6: 4 Ezra 7:75; Apoc. Abr. 9:9; 17:14; Apoc. Elijah 5:38; 2Cor. 5:17 and Gal.
6:15. The question is whether there is genuine literary dependence in all these instances. For
a summary on this matter, see Van Ruiten, Begin, 108111.
278 Van Ruiten, Begin, 113123.
a creational action by God. This is all the more striking because the LXX
translates the creation of Jerusalem in 18a almost verbatim:
. Apparently the LXX wishes to focus all the attention
on the creation of Jerusalem, and avoid the idea of a new cosmos replacing
the existing one. This is an exception within the whole scope of the texts
reception history, as will be shown below.279
Elements of Isa. 65:17 (a new heaven, the first things) emerge in 1 En.
91:16.280 The verse forms part of the Apocalypse of Ten Weeks and reads as
follows: the first heaven will vanish in it (that is the tenth week) and [a new]
heaven [will appear, and all the powers] of the heavens will shine and make
light for ever, [sevenfold]. This last adverb could be an allusion to Isa. 30:26:
the light of the glowing sun will be seven times brighter, like the light of
seven full days. No mention is made of a new earth in 1 En. 91, although the
judgement over the earth is dealt with in the eighth and ninth week. The
presentation of the new heaven is far more detailed here than in Isa. 65:17,
resulting in the vanishing of the first heaven being announced in as many
words (but see already Isa. 51:6 and 63:19).
Rev. 21:18 contains many allusions to texts from the Old Testament. They
include prominent resemblances with Isa. 65:1720. The phrase -
in Rev. 21:1a is a translation of from
Isa. 65:17a. The term in Isa. 65:17 finds equivalents in Rev. 21:1b as
and ( ; cf. Rev.
21:4d ). In both passages, Jerusalem is mentioned in
the direct vicinity of the opposition first-new: Isa. 65:18b and Rev. 21:2a. A
thematic similarity between them is the absence of calamity in the new Jeru-
salem.281
Nothing is said in Rev. 21 on the creation of a new heaven and a new earth,
or a new Jerusalem. The chapter in truth does not announce the emergence
of these new things, but describes them in visionary terms as a reality that
already exists. Rev. 21:4d could equally be set aside Isa.
42:9 and 48:3: The first things have come.282 In this instance Revelation
has interpreted the Deutero-Isaian expression in the spirit of Trito-Isaiah,
by not applying it to the salvation history but to former judgement.
279 For a possible de-apocalypticising reception of Isa. 65:17 within the Hebrew bible, see
in the upcoming conclusions, especially 4.2.3.

281 Cf. Van Ruiten, Begin, 151.
282 Cf. Van Ruiten, Begin, 155.
142 chapter two
Another important allusion to Isa. 43:19a is seen in Rev.

21:5b , See, I am making everything new. It is noticeable
that Revelation is associating diverse texts that had a bearing on each other
in their genesis [ 2.3.3.3]. Where Deutero-Isaiah connected the new in Isa.
43 to the way through the desert, Revelation applies it to everything, thus
to the universe as it was indicated before with the terms new heaven and
new earth. Finally, in relation to this semantic domain, note should be taken
of the opposition first-last in Rev. 21:6d borrowed from Isa. 41:4; 44:6 and
48:12.283
Like Isa. 65 and 1 En., Rev. 21 links the expectation of a new heaven and
a new earth with the distinction between the faithful and the wicked.284
A characteristic of this apocalyptic expectation is apparently that it offers
a solution to problems which believers experience as unbearable in their
present situation: the continued coexistence of the righteous and the evil,
and the dominion of death.
Isa. 65:17 also comes through in 2Pet. 3:13.285 About the new heavens and
the new earth, as it is proclaimed here, we now hear with extra emphasis
that their appearance will follow the destruction of the present heaven
and earth. The passage draws a comparison between the passing away of
the previous world under water and its expected destruction by fire. This
expectation is again connected to the cohabitation of the righteous and
the wicked, and thus the postponement of the worlds end is presented
as a sign of the Lords compassion; he does not want anyone to be lost
but that everyone will be converted. 2Pet. 3 does not speak of a creation
of new heavens and a new earth as in Isa. 65:17, nor does the creation of
Jerusalem play a role. Still, the chapter places a strong stress on the fact that
the expectation of a new heaven and a new earth is based upon a divine
promise (v. 13; cf. 4, 9). The claim of 2Pet. 3:13 that righteousness will be
at home there ( ), could be an allusion to Isa. 32:16
(LXX ).
The presentations of the new heavens and a new earth in these citations
thus more explicitly than in Isa. 65 lead to the conclusion that the heavens
and earth of the present dispensation will vanish (1 En. 91:16 the heaven
alone; Rev. 21:1; worked out most thoroughly in 2 Pet. 3:10). LXX Isa. 65:17
is one exception, where it is said that the (existing) heaven and earth will
283 Van Ruiten discusses several more OT allusions in his detailed analysis of Rev 21:15b
(141187).
become new. The creation of new heavens and a new earth in contrast is not
spoken about in these texts, though 2Pet. 3:4 refers in passing to the creation
in the beginning. It does not seem necessary to strain the differences by
saying that the new heavens and new earth in Isa. 65:17 are nothing more
than a casual metaphor for total change,286 while this metaphorical language
is no longer comprehended properly in the citations. Apocalyptic language
can only exist in metaphors, even if the original images naturally fossilise in
it, the longer the lapse in time the deeper the stereotyping, and therewith
even more extensive the presentations.
In this regard, a certain sharpening of the periodisation is detectable in
the three places discussed compared to the source text Isa. 65:17.287 Attention
is also drawn to Rev. 21 which is the only text to adopt the close relation
between the new heaven and new earth, and a new Jerusalem. 1 En. 91 and
2 Pet. 3 do not do this.
In retrospect, it becomes clear once more how essential for Jewish and
Christian readers of Isa. 65 the relation must have been between the conflict
of faithful and wicked on the one hand, and the expectation of a new heaven
and a new earth on the other, which, with the disappearance of the wicked,
would remove this unresolved conflict once and for all from the world. This
motif plays a central role in 1 En. 91 as well as in Rev. 21 and 2 Pet. 3.
What consequences are we able to draw from all this for the apocalyptic
character of Isa. 65? Recent literature rightly distinguishes between apoca-
lypse (as literary genre), apocalyptic eschatology (as conceptual world) and
apocalypticism (as a socio-religious phenomenon, also known as millen-
nialism).288 Eschatological portrayals in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic
286 See e.g. E. Jenni, Eschatology of the OT, in: IDB, vol. 2, New York 1962, 126133, esp. 131:
The creation of a new heaven and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22) is aimed at first only at
the wonderful transformation of the present conditions at the time of salvation (cf. 65:18ff.),
not, as yet, at the cosmologically anchored apocalyptic doctrine of the destruction of the old
world and the coming of the new aeon (Enoch 91:1617; Jub. 1:29; cf. Rev. 21:1).
287 Van Ruiten, Begin, 212: In conclusion we can state that the contrast between the former
things and the new things is developed in the loci into a periodization of history that is
more precise than it is the case in Isa. 65:17 (concentration). Isa. 65:17 is about the contrast
between the former suppression and the new salvation for Zion, in the loci about the contrast
between the first, evil world and the new, righteous world (our translation).
288 On the complicated relation between these three concepts, see in particular: P.R.
Davies, The Social World of Apocalyptic Writings, in: R.E. Clements (ed.), The World of
Ancient Israel: Sociological, Anthropological and Political Perspectives, Cambridge 1989, 251
271. He emphasises the fact that eschatology forms just one segment of an extensive apoca-
lyptic conceptual world (254). For this reason we expressly limit ourselves in this section to
apocalyptic eschatology.
144 chapter two
literature since the second century bce until the second century ce include
the following elements: (a) the present time is the final time; (b) resurrec-
tion, judgement of the world, and a new aeon are at hand; (c) the closeness of
the end encourages personal conversion; (d) history consists of a succession
of brutal world empires; (e) time is arranged according to a doctrine of peri-
ods; (f) the worlds stage mirrors the action of a parallel history in heaven.289
Where an Old Testament passage carries one or more facets of this set of
ideas, (proto-) apocalyptic traces may be identified.
It is directly noticeable how many elements from the inventory are still
absent from Isa. 65.290 In light of the subsequent developments, here the
cosmic metaphor has retained some of its sketch-like and fleeting quali-
ties. Still, with its expectation of a new heaven and a new earth, the book
of Isaiah unmistakably touches on the elements listed under a-c.291 Our ini-
tial conclusion from this reception history is that apocalyptic eschatology
deals essentially with the question how the righteous and the wicked could
ever coexist peacefully. The righteous understand themselves as those who
already recognise Yhwhs kingship but for the time being must pay for it with
pain and suffering, because the majority of their fellow people, in spite of a
communal historical experience and a shared religious tradition, offer resis-
tance precisely against this decisive insight. The new dispensation, which
the righteous anticipate, should bring an end to this situation of cognitive
dissonance. In line with our previous description of eschatology as offering
an answer to the question on the eventual vindication of God, apocalyp-
tic eschatology bends this questioning to implicate the eventual vindication
of those who believe in God and are today anxiously waiting for his salva-
tion.
289 Cf. K. Koch, Einleitung, in: K. Koch, J.M. Schmidt (eds), Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982,
129.
290 For E.U. Dim, The Eschatological Implications of Isa 65 and 66 as the Conclusion of the
Book of Isaiah, Bern 2005, 261265 this is a reason to reject using the designation apocalyptics
or apocalyptic eschatology for Isa. 6566. Especially the fact that the announced changes are
not removed from the historical settings of this present historical world (263), seen amongst
others in the prevailing dominion of death, leads Dim to this conclusion.
291 Cf. P. Vielhauer, Apokalypsen und Verwandtes [31971], in: K. Koch, J.H. Schmidt (eds),
Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982, 403439, esp. 405: Dieser eschatologische Dualismus der zwei
onen ist das wesentlichste inhaltliche Merkmal der Apokalyptik []. Dieser Dualismus ist
kein absoluter, metaphysischer, sondern ein zeitlicher, und er ist dadurch von dem Dualismus
der Gnosis unterschieden. On the influence of Vielhauers characterisation, see e.g. M.C. de
Boer, Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology, in: B.J. McGinn, J.J. Collins, S.J. Stein (eds), The
Continuum History of Apocalypticism, New York/London 2003, 166194, spec. 168 and the
literature mentioned there.
In light of the just described reception history, a religio-historical gap is

generally seen between Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, but in our view this is
based on a misunderstanding. In reality Trito-Isaiahs apocalyptic dawn can
hardly exist without servants of the Lord, who now already represent the
eschaton through their faith, just as Deutero-Isaiahs presentic eschatology
is not able to subsist without an expectation with dualistic traits. Even if
a certain distance may be observable between the times Isa. 4055 and
5666 originated in as literary compositions [ 2.3.3.3], the theological
differences must be relativised strongly. They are better not described in
terms of a progressive or accelerated religio-historical development, but
are best understood in terms of a change in genre or a deliberate shift in
theological focus.
A well-known illustration of this shift is seen in the use of the root ,
applied in Isa. 4055 mainly to the order created by Yhwh and in Isa. 5666
mainly to righteous human behaviour reflecting this order. This shift nat-
urally does not imply a more recent developmentthe altered focus after
Isa. 55 must have been chosen intentionally, that is all. An important con-
sequence of the generic change is that Isa. 5666 is no longer grafted in
countless expressions on the book of Psalms and as a composition is no
longer modelled on the cultic drama. On the contrary, the intensification
of apocalyptic traits rather seems to be the result of an increased distance
from the temple as a place of personal celebration (see esp. Isa. 66) and
consequently, it seems, of a decreased interest in the temple as immediate
source of inspiration. Incidentally, we have determined that Isa. 4055 nei-
ther offers an original cultic drama, while presentic eschatology in its purest
form is only sustainable as a direct cultic experience. As soon as the Old Tes-
tament begins to carry this presentic eschatology over from the celebration
to the actual life of the righteous, which does not first happen in Trito-Isaiah
as it occurs in Deutero-Isaiah in an equally impressive manner,292 it seems
that processing a painful ethical-religious antagonism is no longer avoid-
able. And this ethical-religious antagonism carries the temporal dualism as
an implication.
In the wake of these considerations, one point requires further clarifi-
cation, namely Trito-Isaiahs widely discussed relation to the temple cult.
Various researchers have suspected the existence of a contrast between a
hierocratic and a prophetic-visionary group behind Isa. 6566. Particularly
292 In truth already in the Trito-Isaian verse Ps. 97:11: Light is sown for the righteous.
146 chapter two
the name of Hanson is associated with this point of view.293 It involves a com-
plicated issue. We believe it is clear that the forsakers of the Lord in Isa. 65
more than anything made themselves guilty of religious syncretism in the
eyes of Trito-Isaiah. That is the essence of Trito-Isaiahs reproach against
them; the accusation has nothing to do with what Hanson calls traditional
rhetoric. But an element of truth underlies Hansons view. This syncretism
apparently did not leave the priests who controlled the temple cult unaf-
fected. It counted adherents in the highest priestly circles. Therefore this
conflict over true faith in Yhwh must have become intermingled with a
conflict for control over the temple. The servants in Trito-Isaiah, through
Deutero-Isaiah, must have been connected to the former group of profes-
sional temple singers. In Trito-Isaiah they not only declare themselves to
be in solidarity with all sorts of the socially marginalised, but concerning
their own devalued role in the official liturgy, also see themselves being
marginalised. The primary conflict over syncretism must then have added
to the natural tensions between sacrificial priests and temple singers.
The implicit criticism of Isa. 65 on Gen. 1 is relevant in this regard. The
expectation of a new heaven and a new earth is certainly in tension with this
priestly creation narrative. On the other hand, it is hardly likely, contrary
to Hansons proposition, that the priests in this conflict found support from
Ezekiel. In its dismissal of syncretism the book of Ezekiel does not yield its
honour to Trito-Isaiah. Later we shall see that Deutero-Isaiah too sides with
Ezekiel on important issues [ 4.1]. Precisely this realistic social complexity,
in which the lines are fused between the battle for pure Yahwism, control
over the temple, and perhaps also the rivalry between the repatriated and
established Judeans, encourages taking Isa. 6566 seriously as a historical
source. In all, the temple is not rejected, but a vast detachment is perceptible
from temple cult as it actually appears to function. In this light we see little
difference from Ps. 51, the psalm that views the brokenness of the heart as the
true offer, but nevertheless holds on to the prospect of an ideal temple cult
in a rebuilt Zion [ 3.1.4.4]. A verbal reminder to the enthronement ritual
that was so important to Deutero-Isaiah, in Isa. 5666 is found only in Isa.
66:1: The heaven is my throne . It is in this increased remoteness from the
functioning liturgy that we see a definitive feature of Trito-Isaiahs emerging
apocalyptics.
293 P.D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish
Apocalyptic Eschatology, Philadelphia 21979.

We draw our exploration in the Yhwh-Kingship psalms, Deutero-Isaiah and

Trito-Isaiah to a close with these findings, for the time being. To a certain
extent the journey has been like a collection of exegetical investigations
in which each reconnaissance has operated independently. Even so, the
main focus has fallen on the intertextual relations between the analysed
passages, and on the discussion in which they seem to involve us through
their dialogues.
To indicate how this discussion continuously requires new reconstruc-
tions, in conclusion we will compare our findings with certain influential
religio-historical expositions from the previous half century. In his schema-
tisation of the prophetic eschatology, Vriezen placed Deutero-Isaiah in the
third phase, the actualising eschatology.294 With Trito-Isaiah we would find
ourselves in a fourth phase, which is more of a transcendental eschatol-
ogy, elsewhere termed apocalyptic eschatology by Vriezen. He describes the
dualism in it as the dismantling of the unity of place, time and action, which
had been so characteristic of previous forms of Old Testament expectation.
Causes that are identified include the disappointed expectancy, experienc-
ing a growing separation between divine and human realities, and influence
from Persian religion.
According to Hanson, the Old Testament demonstrates a constant ten-
sion between a mythical and a historical presentation of Gods actions.295 If
the classical prophets held the historical and the mythical, the realistic and
the visionary in equilibrium, in apocalyptic eschatology the balance is seri-
ously disturbed, at the expense of the focus on the earthly reality. The dawn
of these apocalyptics breaks in Trito-Isaiah. They still have Old Testament
prophecy and not Persian dualism as background. But unfortunately the
post-exilic descendants of the prophets appeared incapable of withstanding
the temptation to forsake the integration of their message in the political-
historical context of the day. For Hanson this fell with the marginalising of
the social groups to which these descendants would have belonged. Apoca-
lyptic eschatology is then essentially, as it seems Hanson is trying to say, a
form of resignation and evidence of a poor sense of reality.296
294 Th.C. Vriezen, Prophecy and Eschatology, VT.S 1, Leiden 1953, 199229.
295 Hanson, Dawn; Idem, Alttestamentliche Apokalyptik in neuer Sicht, in: K. Koch, J.M.
Schmidt (eds), Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982, 440470. See also P.D. Hanson, Isaiah 4066
(Interpr.), Louisville 1995, 185193.
296 That an apocalyptic vision can lead to a sense of reality even today, is described by
Hanson in his commentary on Isa. 65: Mother Teresa maintained her ministry to the outcasts
of Calcutta not out of programs designed on the basis of human pragmatics but out of a vision
148 chapter two
Many elements from Hansons argument return in Albertzs History of

Israelite Religion. This book contains instructive schemes and in one of them
we find a gulf that spans the distance between the salvation prophecy of
Deutero-Isaiah and the eschatological prophecy of Trito-Isaiah.297 Albertz
belongs to those Old Testament scholars who insist on limiting the use of
the term eschatology in the Old Testament as much as possible, and if they
were pressed might reserve its application to what others have called proto-
apocalyptics. As we see in Vriezen, for Albertz the deep disappointment
underlying the origin of this eschatology plays a prominent role. In the line
of Hanson he also sees in it a subversive Oppositionstheologie of Unter-
schichtsgruppen within post-exilic Judean society.
If, like Vriezen, Albertz and many others, one takes disappointment as the
motivation behind Trito-Isaiahs concept of the future, it actually also forms
the starting point of Deutero-Isaiahs drama. In this regard we have estab-
lished the inadequacy of history according to Deutero-Isaiah as a means
to bring about real change in Israel [ 2.2.9 sub 3]. The question then is
whether disappointment is the most appropriate term to capture a realis-
tic insight with which an author might have worked from the outset. The
relations between history and myth previously came to the fore in our expo-
sition of Ps. 96 and 98 [ 2.1.5]. A more concrete example of mythologising
history in the Old Testament than Deutero-Isaiahs version of the actions of
Cyrus seems to us difficult to find. In this regard we beg to differ from Han-
sons view. Even though political history does not receive extensive attention
in Trito-Isaiah anymore, this is no reason to adjudicate in it an indifferent
attitude towards the Persian Empire.298 But in our view the emphasis should
be placed on another point. Political history in the book of Isaiah is essen-
tially etwas Vorletztes, something penultimateand that no doubt already
from Isa. 4048!
We share the view with Hanson that the promise of Isa. 65:17 does not
have to be traced to Persian dualism. But we do not see its prehistory
in Old Testament prophecy in general, rather we place it in the unique
of a world in which they shall not labor in vain, or bear children for calamity (v. 23) (Hanson,
Isaiah 4066, 246).
297 R. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period, vol. 2, London 1994,
442.
298 Broadly speaking one may note a degree of generalising history in the proto-apoca-
lyptic texts of the OT, in which intertextuality has replaced direct historical referencing, see
H. Leene, Isaiah 27:79 as a Bridge between Vineyard and City, in: H.J. Bosman et al. (eds),
Studies in Isaiah 2427 (OTS, 43), Leiden 2000, 199225, esp. 223225.
tradition line that is traceable back to the Yhwh-Kingship psalms through

Deutero-Isaiah. Once the revelation of Yhwhs kingship is taken seriously
outside the boundaries of liturgical celebration, it encourages one to await
eagerly a new heaven and a new earth.
chapter three
NEWNESS IN EZEKIEL AND JEREMIAH
3.0. Perspective
We temporarily set aside the cosmic dimensions to which the word new
has led us as we followed the route Psalms Deutero-Isaiah Trito-Isaiah,
and we will now immerse ourselves in the anthropological conceptions to
which Ezekiel and Jeremiah connect the wordconceptions that stand
at the cradle of the evidently alluring idea of the new man. A compar-
ison between these anthropological and cosmological lines will be more
meaningful once we have gained a clear picture of the relation between
Ezekiels and Jeremiahs relevant passages. If one takes into account how
many issues this relation raises in itself, it quickly becomes clear that our
third chapter forms an essential intermediate trajectory en route to the
cosmic-anthropological comparison which has been set in the programme
for chapter four.
Besides the exhortation in Ezek. 18:2132 that the addressed should ac-
quire themselves a new heart and a new spirit, Ezekiel carries the promise
in Ezek. 36:1638 that on his part Yhwh will provide a new heart and a
new spirit to those Israelites that were scattered among the nations when
he reinstates them in the land. The discussion of the exhortation [ 3.1.1]
and the promise [ 3.1.2] gives rise to a description of their connections
with a number of other passages from Ezekiel [ 3.1.3]. The central ques-
tion resounds, what significance does the promise of newness hold within
Ezekiels restitution perspective as a whole? Even though it is unfeasible
for our purposes to undertake a comprehensive discussion on the recent
redaction-critical research of this book, we will not dismiss an opportu-
nity to modestly attempt a relative dating of the texts, partly in light of
the deviating textual form represented in papyrus 967 [ 3.1.4.13]. The
diachronic question whether Ezekiels portrayal of a new heart and a new
spirit reaches back to cultic motifs, brings it into confrontation with Ps. 51
[ 3.1.4.4].
Jer. 3031 uses the term new in two instances, first in view of a new
creation [ 3.2.1] and second in view of a new covenant [ 3.2.2]. Sub-
sequent to the discussion of these passages and their positioning within
152 chapter three
the structure of the so-called Booklet of Comfort [ 3.2.3], comparisons

are made with other promises of return and internal change in the book
of Jeremiah [ 3.2.4]. As for Ezekiel, we will attempt to determine the
diachronic, text-genetic relationships between the pericopes in Jeremiah as
best possible without too many external interferences, both within Jer. 3031
itself [ 3.2.5.1] and between Jer. 24, 29, 3031 and 32 [ 3.2.5.2].
These steps are preparatory for a comparison between the two prophetic
books pertaining to their newness utterances. This chapters journey will
reach its final destination in this comparison. In the course of the twentieth
century there have been several attempts to reduce similar prophetic expec-
tations to a communal generic pattern, but these endeavours have failed in
offering deep insight into the relationship between Jeremiah and Ezekiel.1
Our intertextual approach, as in the previous chapter, will be based on the
hypothesis of direct literary borrowings, which has been proven to be fruit-
ful in more recent research [ 3.2.5.34].
One more comment needs to be made before presenting the translations
of the Hebrew passages. In biblical Hebrew there are no sharp distinctions
between prose and poetry. For obvious poetic texts in Jeremiah, colometric
and/or strophic reconstructions such as those in the Psalms and Isaiah will
be followed. The remaining translated passages from Jeremiah and Ezekiel
are divided according to the Masoretic punctuation system. Thus, after the
atnh the second verse half shifts back against the margin, et cetera. A
third type of translation is already known from the preceding chapter: it is
arranged according to the grammatical clauses (or clause-atoms) in Hebrew
to help make linguistic analogies visible. Other clause-wise translations are
segmented hierarchically using brackets, thus offering graphic support to a
passages text-grammatical analysis.
1 Cf. P. Buis, Les Formulaires d Alliance, VT 16 (1966), 396411; Idem, La nouvelle Al-
liance, VT 18 (1968), 115; T.M. Raitt, A Theology of Exile: Judgment/Deliverance in Jeremiah and
Ezekiel, Philadelphia 1977. For an evaluation, see H. Leene, Ezekiel and Jeremiah: Promises
of Inner Renewal in Diachronic Perspective, in: J.C. de Moor, H.F. van Rooy (eds), Past, Present,
Future: The Deuteronomic History and the Prophets (OTS, 44), Leiden 2000, 150175, esp. 165
166.
newness in ezekiel 153
Ezekiel
3.1. A New Heart and a New Spirit: Ezekiel 18 and 36
3.1.1. Ezekiel 18:2132

21 But the wicked
if he turns away from all the sins that he has committed
and keeps all my statutes
and does what is lawful and right,
he will surely live, he will not die.
22 None of the offences that he has committed
will be remembered against him,
because of the righteousness that he has done he will live.
23 Would I really take pleasure in the death of the wicked,
declares the Lord Yhwh,
not rather in that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 And when the righteous turns from his righteousness and commits injustice
doing the same detestable things that the wicked does,
will he live?
None of the righteous deeds that he has done will be remembered,
because of the unfaithfulness he has shown
and because of the sin he has committed,
he will die.
25 Yet you say,
The way of the Lord is not just.
Hear now, house of Israel,
is my way not just?
Is it not your ways that are not just?
26 When the righteous turns from his righteousness and commits injustice
and thereupon dies,
it is because of the injustice he has committed, that he dies.
27 But when the wicked
turns away from the wickedness that he has done
and does what is lawful and right,
it is he who keeps himself alive.
28 Since he came to see and turned away
from all the offences that he had committed,
he will surely live, he will not die.
29 Yet the house of Israel says,
The way of the Lord is not just.
Are my ways not just, house of Israel?
Is it not your ways that are not just?
30 Therefore I will judge you, each one according to his ways, house of Israel,
declares the Lord Yhwh.
154 chapter three
Repent and turn away from all your offences,

otherwise it will become for you a stumbling block of guilt.
31 Cast away from you all the offences by which you have offended
and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit,
why then would you die, house of Israel?
32 For I take no pleasure in the death of who must die,
so turn away and live!
Where Ezek. 18 ends with a call to make oneself a new heart and a new
spirit (31), it opens by rejecting a proverb: Fathers eat unripe fruit and the
teeth of the children become dull (2).2 How does the argument develop from
this point of departure to that conclusion? The word of Yhwh to Ezekiel in
18:232 has two parts. The first part, vv. 220, literarily speaking, forms the
proverbs direct sphere of influence. It is, as it were, itself provoked by the
formulation of the saying.
0204 The proverb of the unripe fruit should not be used forthwith.
0509 Whoever walks in the statutes of Yhwh is righteous and will live.
1013 If the son of such a righteous man displays adverse behaviour, his
blood will be on his own head.
1418 His son in turn, if he walks in Yhwhs statutes, will live and his father
will die for his own transgressions.
1920 In this way the righteousness of the righteous and the wickedness of
the wicked will be their own responsibility.
The first and last segments of this part of the discourse are linked by the
refrain-like clause the person who sins will die (4, 20). The conclusion
reaches back to the proverb at the opening (2) with a summary: a son will
not share in bearing the guilt of his father and a father will not share in
bearing the guilt of his son (20). In this manner the theme of fathers and
sons, which was introduced into the discourse through the proverb, comes
to a formal closure. The same theme does not reoccur in the second part of
the chapter.
A translation of the second part, vv. 2132, is presented above. It corre-
sponds to the first part, but treats another aspect of human individualisa-
tion, the possibility of personal change. The words righteous and wicked
in v. 20 form the main bridge between the previous and this new section. It
is structured like this:
2 This section is a partial reworking of: H. Leene, Unripe fruit and dull teeth (Jer 31,29;
Ez 18,2), in: E. Talstra (ed.), Narrative and Comment. Fs W. Schneider, Amsterdam 1995, 8298.
2123 The wicked man who leaves his sinful ways will live.
24 The righteous man who departs from his righteousness will die.
2528 First reaction against Israels objection: Yhwhs way is not unjust.
26 If the righteous man dies because of his diversion, it is his
own fault.
2728 If the wicked man lives, it is because of his newly
acquired insight.
2932 Second reaction against Israels objection: Israels own ways are
unjust.
3032 Call to conversion and renewal of heart and spirit.
The near verbatim repetition of v. 25 in v. 29 is not aimed at framing the text

in between, but marks a new opening. This new opening should provide
the in v. 30 with a point of suspension which precedes it directly; see the
similar function of the corresponding clause in Ezek. 33:20a. Since v. 29 is the
only verse in Ezek. 18:232 that is not talking to the Israelites but over them,
this verse breaks the continuity.3 It prepares us for the final conclusion. The
announcement in v. 30a that Yhwh will judge every Israelite according to his
ways, has no independent significance in this textual segmentation, but is
an argument subordinated to the conversion call that follows it.
This second part of the discourse also has a framing motif. The first
segment ends with the rhetorical question would I really take pleasure in
the death of the wicked, declares the Lord Yhwh (23); the last segment ends
with the assurance for I take no pleasure in the death of who must die,
declares the Lord Yhwh (32). This connection reveals that, from the very
beginning, this part works towards the call to conversion with which it ends.
So too the chiastic sequence conversion of the wicked (2123), apostasy of
the righteous (24), apostasy of the righteous (26), conversion of the wicked
(2728), appears to have been deliberately placed in order to prepare for the
call to conversion in vv. 3032 effectively.
One element in this description of the text must still be analysed closer
to establish a connection between the point of departure and the conclu-
sion: the observation that the prophetic discussion on the proverb strictly
speaking does not continue after v. 20. From this verse onwards indeed there
are no more fathers or sons, and above all a new keyword is introduced:
qal, now used to indicate turning away from ones own former way of
3 Here the segmenting deviates from the majority of commentaries which place a caesura
between vv. 29 and 30. W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel (BKAT, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969, 392 sees a
pause between v. 30a and b. Since those being addressed in v. 30b are not introduced through
a new vocative, a close connection with the foregoing seems more plausible.
156 chapter three
life.4 How the reader connects this new theme to the foregoing depends on
how the intentions are interpreted of those being addressed as youlet us
name them Ezekiels interlocutors. Do they mean the cited ironically,
as a critique on divine acting that seems to confirm its mere truth? Or do
they accept the life experience expressed by the proverb, and is their criti-
cism rather directed towards the fact that Yhwh does not keep to this tried
and tested rule of wisdom? The last view is defended by Schenker, against
nearly the entire exegetical tradition.5
Schenkers strongest trump is v. 19: Yet you say, Why should the son
not share in bearing the guilt of the father? Apparently the interlocutors
would have found such a collective submergence in iniquity acceptable.6
If one assumes that they would not have changed their position half way
through the discussion, then this way of thinking hides behind their appeal
to the proverb in the first partand must still be hidden behind the main
reproach of the second part, The ways of Yhwh are not just (or: unpre-
dictable, irrational). In other words: for these interlocutors it would have
been self-evident if Yhwh had not disturbed the effect of someones deeds
in his own later life and in the next generation. As the proverb says, they
find, so muss es sein.7
4 Cf. qal in 18:21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 30. Hif.-forms of the verb occurred previously in
18:7, 8, 12, 17, but in a different sense; hif.-forms in 18:30, 32 continue the meaning of qal
in the second part of the chapter.
5 A. Schenker, Saure Trauben ohne stumpfe Zaehne: Bedeutung und Tragweite von Ez
18 und 33.1020 oder ein Kapitel alttestamentlicher Moraltheologie, in: P. Casetti et al. (eds),
Mlanges Dominique Barthlemy (OBO, 38), Fribourg 1981, 449470 for his views links to
F. Hitzig, Der Prophet Ezechiel (KEH, 8), Leipzig 1847 and is followed by H.F. Fuhs, Ezechiel
124 (NEB, 7), Wrzburg 1984, 9495. For an overview of the interpretations of the proverb,
see the Forschungsbericht of N. Kilpp, Eine frhe Interpretation der Katastrophe von 587,
ZAW 97 (1985), 210220, esp. 210 n. 2.
6 The idea that Ezekiel is reducing the line of thought of his adversaries ad absurdum (cf.
Kilpp, Interpretation, 212) does not give the impression of being free of prejudice concerning
their likely position.
7 Schenker, Saure Trauben, 458. K.-F. Pohlmann, Ezechielstudien: Zur Redaktions-
geschichte des Buches und zur Frage nach den ltesten Texten (BZAW, 202), Berlin 1992, 238
interprets the proverb as the Infragestellen of an Ordnungsgefge (questioning an ordered
structure). One objection against this view is that common proverbs are not meant to cast
doubts, nor in any way phrase personal and subjective points of view. Vllig aussichtslos ist
es natrlich, das Verstndnis der Sentenzen von der Subjektivitt ihrer Verfasser her angehen
zu wollen (G. von Rad, Weisheit in Israel, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1970, 4950). See also E.F. Davis,
Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiels Prophecy (JSOT, 78),
Sheffield 1989, 88: Proverbs are a popular, oral form of archival speech; because they articu-
late both the present consensus of the community and the wisdom of all the ancients (Sir.
39.1), it is particular difficult to refute the values they express.
If we follow this view of Schenker, the citation from Ezek. 18:2 still has
a shrouded role in vv. 2132. The order that is carried in the cited proverb
appears to be precisely not the order of Yhwh. In this way Ezekiels rejection
of the proverb is able to contribute towards opening the way for the call to
convert in vv. 3032.8
In the framework of our study, the focus of attention falls especially on
the wording of Ezek. 18:31 itself. A difference in connotation between new
heart and new spirit cannot be determined from either this verse or the
direct vicinity. These anthropological terms do not create the impression
that they wish to introduce heavily loaded theological concepts. But the
context explains clearly enough where a new heart and a new spirit will lead.
They will lead to the observance of Yhwhs statutes and to accomplishing
what is lawful and right (cf. vv. 21, 27). New then indicates a complete
change from old ways of behaving, which were characterised by offences
and detestable acts. It is definitely possible for someone to turn away from
such ways as an individual, in freedom, not hampered by family relations
or a former way of life. Whoever makes a new heart and a new spirit for
himself, assuredly is not taking a small step. As if by magic he transforms
himself from being wicked to being righteous. This is the way to newness
opened in Ezek. 18 by Yhwhs irrational order.
3.1.2. Ezekiel 36:1638

16 Again the word of Yhwh came to me, saying:
17 Son of man,
when the people of Israel were living on their own soil,
they defiled it
by their way and their deeds;
like a womans monthly uncleanness
was their way in my sight.
18 So I poured out my wrath on them
because of the blood they had shed on the earth
and because they had defiled it with their idols.
8 This does not deny that vv. 2122 is no longer attached to the concrete formulation
and theme of the . This is insufficiently accounted for in the segmenting of R.M. Hals,
Ezekiel (FOTL, 19), Grand Rapids 1989, 118122: 1 | 24 | 529 | 3032. M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 120
(AncB, 22), Garden City, NY 1983, 333 sees the relation between vv. 2132 and the foregoing as
follows: if a person is able to free himself from his own past, he has less reason to be weighed
down with his fathers guilt. In this way the argument is made subservient to invalidating
the proverb, while in our view the proverbs invalidation rather serves the broader aim of the
argument.
158 chapter three
19 I dispersed them among the nations

and they were scattered through the countries;
according to their way and their deeds I judged them.
20 And when they went to the nations, wherever they went,
they profaned my holy name,
in that it was said of them:
These are the people of Yhwh
and they had to leave his land.
21 And I had pity for my holy name,
which the house of Israel had profaned
among the nations, wherever they went.
22 Therefore say to the house of Israel:
Thus says the Lord Yhwh,
It is not for your sake, house of Israel, that I am going to do this,
but for the sake of my holy name,
which you have profaned
among the nations, wherever you went.
23 I will uphold the holiness of my great name,
which has been profaned among the nations,
which you have profaned in the midst of them;
and the nations will know that I am Yhwh,
when I show myself holy through you before their eyes.
24 I will take you out of the nations
and gather you from all the countries
and I will bring you into your own land.
25 And I will sprinkle clean water on you and you will be clean,
from all your uncleanness and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
26 And I will give you a new heart
and put a new spirit within you;
I will remove the heart of stone out of your flesh
and give you a heart of flesh.
27 And my own spirit I will put within you
and make
that you walk in my statutes
and keep my rules and do them.
28 And you will live in the land
that I gave to your fathers;
and you will be my people
and I will be your God.
29 I will save you
from all your uncleanness;
and I will summon the grain and increase it
and not bring famine upon you.
30 And I will increase the fruit of the trees
and the crops of the field,
in order that
you will never again suffer the disgrace of famine among the nations.
31 And you will remember your evil ways
and your deeds that were not good;
and you shall loathe yourselves for your iniquities
and for your detestable deeds.
32 It is not for your sake that I will do this,
let that be known to you;
be ashamed and feel humiliated about your ways, house of Israel.
33 Thus says the Lord Yhwh:
On the day that I cleanse you
from all your iniquities,
I will cause the towns to be inhabited,
and the waste places shall be built.
34 And the desolate land will be tilled
instead of lying desolate
in the sight of all who passes by.
35 And they will say,
This land that was desolate
has become like the garden of Eden;
and the waste and desolate and ruined towns
are now fortified and inhabited.
36 And the nations will know,
those that are left around you,
that I, Yhwh,
have built what was ruined and planted what was desolate;
I, Yhwh, have spoken and I will do it.
37 Thus says the Lord Yhwh:
Besides
I will grant the plea of the house of Israel and do this for them:
I will make their people as numerous as a flock.
38 Like the flock for sacrifices,
like the flock of Jerusalem on her high feast days,
so the ruined towns
will be filled with a flock of people;
and they will know that I am Yhwh.
For us to see the promise of inner change in vv. 2627 within its proper
context, we must first immerse ourselves in the structure and line of thought
of Ezek. 36:1638 as a whole.
The narrative introduction is followed in vv. 1738 by the divine word
given to the prophet. In this divine word is embedded what Ezekiel must
convey as a promise to the scattered house of Israel. The promise consists of
three messenger speeches: vv. 2232, 3336 and 3738. A command heralds
160 chapter three
the first of the three: Therefore say to the house of Israel (22a), and in
the preceding retrospection Ezekiel is reminded of the tragic background
(1721).9
16 Narrative introduction
1738 Word of Yhwh
1721 Background story (I)
22a Messenger command
22b32 1st Messenger speech (II)
3336 2nd Messenger speech announcement (III)
3738 3rd Messenger speech (IV)
How are the units I, II, III and IV interwoven thematically? The background
story (I) ends thus:
And when they went to the nations, wherever they went,
they profaned my holy name,
in that it was said of them:
These are the people of Yhwh
and they had to leave his land.
And I had pity for my holy name,
which the house of Israel had profaned
among the nations, wherever they went. (vv. 2021)
The next text block (II), the first and most comprehensive of the three
messenger speeches, is perfectly linked to this narrative summarising the
previous history. Since the scattering of Israel has led to their God receiving
a bad name amongst the nations, Yhwh is motivated to intervene:
Therefore say to the house of Israel:
Thus says the Lord Yhwh,
It is not for your sake, house of Israel, that I am going to do this,
but for the sake of my holy name,
which you have profaned
among the nations, wherever you went.
I will uphold the holiness of my great name,
which has been profaned among the nations,
which you have profaned in the midst of them;
and the nations will know that I am Yhwh (vv. 2223)
Thereupon gathering and homecoming, cleansing and renewal are an-
nounced. What we do not hear yet is how Yhwh will thereby gain his recog-
nition (the recognition over which everything started, see vv. 2021). At most
9 This main division correlates largely with the Masoretic division in pryt setmt.
the first messenger speech indicates this negatively, and then in the promise
that Israel will in future be spared reproach by the nations (v. 30). For the
rest, this segment does not go beyond Israels recognition of his own guilt
(vv. 3132).
The expression not for your sake from v. 22 thus finds an echo,10 but for
the sake of my holy name still calls for a follow-up in the divine speech. The
inclusion formed by v. 22 and v. 32 suggests a provisional finishing, but the
prospect of Yhwhs regained credibility still requires further elaboration. It
finally resounds only after the announcement is made in vv. 3334 that the
Israelite cities will be restored and agriculture will be resumed:
And they will say,
This land that was desolate
has become like the garden of Eden;
and the waste and desolate and ruined towns
are now fortified and inhabited.
And the nations will know (vv. 3536)
And the finale is not reached until the third and last messenger speech (IV),
promising Israels massive population growth, concludes concisely:
and they will know that I am Yhwh. (v. 38)
This really closes the circle of reasoning. As the citation from v. 35 (This
land that was desolate, has become like the garden of Eden) may be seen
counterbalancing the citation from v. 20 at the end of unit I (These are
the people of Yhwh and they had to leave his land.), similarly v. 38 repeats
verbatim the recognition formula of v. 23 from the beginning of unit II.
Strictly speaking, this time the grammatical subject in the formula is the
house of Israel itself (not the nations), but all the emphasis is now placed
on the festive recognition as such. From the perspective of Yhwhs motif of
taking action, vv. 3336 and 3738 are not mere appendages, as it has been
suggested,11 but they complete the course of the argument logically.
The most salient connection between vv. 1721, 2232, 3336 and 3738
indeed lies in this theme: sanctifying the name of Yhwh and his worldwide
recognition. The cohesion is reinforced by the theme of defilement and
cleansing in units I, II and III. It was this defilement that, as the actual cause
of Israels dispersion from the land, led to the desecration of Yhwhs name:
10 For the theme of the shame after undeserved redemption, see also Ezek. 16:54, 63; 20:43.
11 E.g. by Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 872873; further 3.1.4.2.
162 chapter three
Son of man,
when the people of Israel were living on their own soil,
they defiled it
by their way and their deeds;
like a womans monthly uncleanness
was their way in my sight
()
and because they had defiled it (the earth/the land)
with their idols. (vv. 1718)
This diagnosis from the first unit is answered by the following promise from
the second unit:
And I will sprinkle clean water on you and you will be clean,
from all your uncleanness and from all your idols I will cleanse you. (v. 25)
And the way of Israels deplorable conduct in unit I is recollected in the same
manner through the following passage from unit II:
and I will make
that you walk in my statutes (v. 27)
We thus stumble across an important clue to the place and meaning of the
new heart and new spirit in the passages reasoning. Why are these gifts so
vital? They are vital to prevent a new contamination of the soil (see also
v. 29) and thereby to guarantee Israel a permanent residence in the land.
This theme of cleansing comes to the fore once more at the beginning of
III, the unit that will end with the recognition formula as we saw:
On the day that I cleanse you
from all your iniquities (v. 33)
It is noteworthy that Israels purification and the sanctification of Yhwhs

name under the nations are not directly connected with each other in this
divine discoursethey are only connected through the theme of inhabiting
the land. Cleansing is needed to enable Israel to live purified in their land
of origin, where they would otherwise suffer under famine or once more
would be forced to relocate. The cleansing has as a natural consequence,
the rebuilding of towns, a positive agriculture and population growth, and
these alterations in turn will lead to the nations eventually acknowledging
Yhwh. That is how the reasoning develops.
It is alone in this chapter that Ezekiel makes a direct link between Israels
uncleanness and the defilement of the soil. Apparently the idea lingers in
the background that a defiled land is infertile (cf. Jer. 2:7) and will no longer
bear its inhabitants and labourers (cf. Lev. 18:28).
Which existential questions are answered in this way by the balanced

divine discourse? If it were true that Yhwh had scattered Israel amongst
the nations due to it contaminating the land, what would motivate him
to persist with granting his people a future in that very land? Yhwh finds
his incentive not in Israel, but in his own name as God of Israel (cf. v. 20:
These are the people of Yhwh). Yhwh will permit Israel a second chance
in the land given to their fathers solely to glorify his name amongst the
nations. Not compassion for Israel but divine self-pity has coerced Yhwh
to take action.12 Hope for restoration has apparently nothing else to base
itself on. Faced with such a divine motivation, all that Israel is able to do
is show humility and repent. But, the next question resounds (a question
that had not yet been answered in Ezek. 20:4144, like the previous one!),
will Israel not contaminate the land with new bloodshed, forcing Yhwh to
scatter his people once more? No, because he will sanitise Israel and change
it to such a degree that forthwith it will truly live according to his ordinances.
This radical measure is anyway essential to make permanent residence
in the land conceivable. Israels gathering and homecoming as such offer
insufficient perspectivesomething far more fundamental must happen
with these people. Otherwise, as the argument assumes, the well-known
story of defilement, scattering and desecration will merely repeat itself.
Hope for a future in the land is not consistent without hope for inner change.
Having completed this analysis we are sufficiently prepared to turn our

attention to the promise of change itself. The hierarchy of clauses is impor-
tant for the interpretation of vv. 2627, which exhibits the following rela-
tions:
a And I will give you a new heart
b and put a new spirit within you
c and I will remove the heart of stone out of your flesh
d and give you a heart of flesh
e and my own spirit I will put within you
f and make
g that you walk in my statutes
h and keep my rules
i and do them
12 LXX has softened this bold assertion in v. 21: but I spared them ( ) for
the sake of my holy name.

164 chapter three
Clause a tells about the gift of a new heart, clause b about the gift of a new
spirit. What continues may be summarised thus, clauses cd develop clause
a on the heart, while clauses ei develop what clause b says concisely on the
spirit.
With new spirit the same must be meant as with my spirit in clause e. A
third phase in the promised transformation, following the phases of cleans-
ing and inner renewal, is not implied in ei, which instead offers a more pre-
cise description of the second phase.13 The similar formulation in clauses b
and e supports this perspective. What anthropological preconceptions form
the background?
In the book of Ezekiel, the image of the stone heart recalls the hearts
hardness spoken of in Ezek. 2:4 [ ]and 3:7 []. This hardness
meant that people were not prepared to listen to Yhwh. The heart, which,
as the centre of emotion and critical insight in the Old Testament, may
encapsulate every aspect of human reality orientation,14 functions here as
the organ that one uses to listen internally. A heart of stone is a heart that is
hard of hearing. A new heart then means, to use modern terms, becoming
receptive to external information once more.15 Does this specifically involve
insight into world history?16 This would mean that one could only come
to recognise Yhwh by undergoing inner change; but in such a case, how
could it be possible that the nations did not require this inner change to
recognise Yhwh? Heart in Ezekiel therefore rather means the listeningby
Israelto Yhwhs statutes and rules [ 3.1.1], and in this book there is no
torah, revealed by the course of events as such (cf. Isa. 42:2021).
How does the verse determine the relation between heart and spirit?
These words do not have the same connotations,17 even though they are
used freely as synonymous anthropological terms since after Ezekiel. In this
book is often replaceable with ( see e.g. 11:5; 20:32). Originally, however,
was not a constituent of human beings akin to , but rather an external
force that took hold of a person, and henceforth could also control him from
within.
13 Differently Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 879, see also 99*.

14 F. Stolz, Art. , in: THAT, Bd. 1, Mnchen 1971, 861867, esp. 863.
15 Differently D. Baltzer, Ezechiel und Deuterojesaja: Berhrungen in der Heilserwartung
der beiden groen Exilspropheten (BZAW, 121), Berlin 1971, 76 n. 25: of stone = dead, of flesh =
alive.
16 See K. Koch, Die Profeten, Bd. 2: Babylonisch-persische Zeit (UTB, 281), Stuttgart 1980, 116.
17 R. Albertz, C. Westermann, Art. , in: THAT, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1976, 726753, esp. 738
739.
Here the difference between the terms seems visible in the effortless
progression from a new spirit (clause b) to my spirit (clause e); a similar
mental jump from a new heart into a direct relationship with God is more
difficult to make. In Ezek. 37 the spirit that revives the dead Israel (5, 810) is
also identified as the spirit of Yhwh (14), which does not deny the conceptual
differences between the two chapters: in Ezek. 36 the spirit is not so much
the breath of life ( )than it is the driving power that directs man ethi-
cally in a particular direction. Superbly visualised we see the spirit portrayed
as movement in the vision of the mobile throne in Ezek. 1:12, 2021 and 10:17.
Similarly according to Ezek. 36 it is especially the spirit that will move one to
follow in Yhwhs ordinances (in this regard, 11:1920 is less precise). As new
heart emphasises that the addressees should become receptive and listen
again, new spirit emphasises an inner impulse to change their way of life.
It is now quite clear that this moving force in Ezek. 36 has not been
objectified to something that distinguishes itself as a gift from its benefactor,
but as my spirit should guarantee the lasting bond between Yhwh and every
member of his people. As a result of this bond the house of Israel, through
those belonging to it, will be able to follow the good way, with due national,
physical and material consequences resulting.
What remains to be inquired in the next section, is how extensive this
promise of the new heart and the new spirit correlates with the negative
depiction of Israels history up to this point, as it is portrayed in shrilling
colours elsewhere in this prophets book.
3.1.3. The Embedding of Ezekiel 18 and 36 in the Book

How does the promise of the new heart and the new spirit relate to the
restitution programme as a whole that unfolds in Ezek. 3348?18 The six
speeches introduced by The word of Yhwh came to me in Ezek. 33:2333;
34:131; 35:136:15; 36:1638 together with the vision 37:114; 37:1528; and
38:139:29, according to the books chronological scheme could all have
been received by Ezekiel on or shortly after the date mentioned in 33:21: in
the twelfth year calculated from the deportation of Jehoiachin, on the fifth
day of the tenth month (051012). As a time frame this is not so absurd, in
a book part that takes approximately an hour to read aloud, and therewith
offers the listener extra encouragement to find its internal coherence. A new
18 Terms such as restitution perspective and restitution programme are used here and
below for the sake of convenience. It reality Ezekiels salvation prophecy comprises of more
than just the restitution of an earlier state.
166 chapter three
date (100125) next appears in 40:1 with the temple vision, which transposes
the prophet with more than twelve years in time.
Ezek. 34 deals with the good shepherdship of Yhwh and his monarch.
Even more than the upcoming depictions of the future, as the first step on
the way to restoration, the image of the shepherd emphasises the gathering
of the scattered people. In this light it makes sense for Ezek. 34 to precede
3536. The future welfare of the people appears not yet to be determined
by the personal change of every Israelite, but by the appointment of my
servant David (v. 23). Ezek. 34 shares the theme of fertility with the adjoining
salvation prophecies. Thereby no famine will scourge the land and Israel will
not have to endure the scorn of the nations (v. 29).
Instead of the people, the mountains of Seir resp. of Israel are addressees
of the double prophecy 35:136:15. Fertility will make Israels mountains hab-
itable for their new inhabitants. But you, mountains of Israel, will shoot out
your branches, and yield your fruit to my people Israel, for they will soon
come home (36:8). The idea of a logistic preparation for Israels homecom-
ing determines its placement prior to 36:1638.
The keyword spirit provides the link between Ezek. 36:1638 and the
vision that follows. Israels hopeless situation is depicted in this vision as
a valley of bones.19 The exposition of the vision in 37:1114 agrees with
36:1638 on the announced sequence of events: return, gift of Yhwhs spirit,
inhabiting the land.
In Ezek. 37:1528 the prophet must perform a symbolic act that demon-
strates the future reunion between Judah and Joseph. The information pur-
ports the following sequence of events: gathering and return to the land;
union as one nation under one king; redemption from apostasy and cleans-
ing; observation of Yhwhs statutes and regulations; living in the land forever
with the sanctuary as centre. In this series, inner change is not mentioned
explicitly, but it is probably incorporated in the cleansing rite. General obe-
dience comes after Davids appointment and good example.
Ezek. 3839 foresees the attack and defeat of Gog, the chief prince of
Meshech and Tubal. This event is coordinated with the preceding salvation
prophecy in such a way that it is expected to take place after Israels home-
coming. An indication that this homecoming also encompasses the inner
renewal is evident from the retrospective final sentence Ezek. 39:29: And I
will never again hide my face from them, when I have poured out my spirit
upon the house of Israel, says the Lord Yhwh.
19 On the bones as an image of despair, compare especially to Ps. 141:7.

As verification that Israels historical collapse was indeed the conse-

quence of its own impurity and not Yhwhs impotence, a failed onslaught
of the nations on the cleansed Israel is the most logical test case. By so
doing, under modified conditions this repetition of history involuntarily lets
one think of the famous psychological fantasy of the unlived life. For Israel
the Gog episode with its exhibition of power not only represents Yhwhs
ultimate proof of divinity, as for the nations, but moreover guarantees in
absolute terms that its history of unfaithfulness now truly belongs to the
past.
Ezek. 4048, a good twelve years later, continues with the visionary proj-
ect of a new temple. Precisely this vision forming the closure of the salva-
tion promise corresponds with a chronology indicated at the end of Ezek.
37:1528: And the nations will know that I, Yhwh, sanctify Israel, when my
sanctuary is among them forever. In this way Yhwhs dwelling between his
people models the climax of the salvation promised to Ezekiel. The vision
of the temple is not aligned meticulously with the previously announced
gift of a new heart and a new spirit. Stricter sacrifice regulations (46:20;
cf. 45:20) imply that in future Israel will not be exempted automatically from
their debt and sins. From this correlation it is clear that Ezekiel sees no ten-
sion between charismatic and institutional mediation of redemption: they
are not mutually exclusive. The priests will be reinstated in their concil-
iatory function and a link too narrow between palace and temple should
be avoided. That would indeed lead to the old abuses. The house of Israel
also requires permanent priestly instruction in distinguishing between
pure and impure (Ezek. 44:23). Below we will signal a considerable shift
in emphasis on this point with the book of Jeremiahs design of the
future, where the function of the priestly education is curbed solidly
[ 3.2.2].
The chronological angle thus played a significant role in the structuring of
the salvation prophecies in Ezek. 3348; but on the other hand, they remain
relatively independent divine sayings, which afford each other ample free-
dom. Irregularities in the overall picture are not always smoothed over. In
the restitution programme, the David redivivus has relevance for both the
shepherd-like gathering (Ezek. 34) and the political unification (Ezek. 37).
The gift of the spirit also transpires outside Ezek. 36 as a decisive moment
between return and permanent residence in the land (37:1114; 39:29). Other
salvation prophecies do not mention this gift explicitly, or do not take it into
account.
Particular relations with passages from the first part of the book are
also maintained by Ezek. 36:1638. While keeping the theme inner change
168 chapter three
in focus, we will concentrate on the relations with 11:1421; 18:132; and

20:144.20
Ezek. 11:1421 responds to the opinion of Jerusalems inhabitants that the
victims of the first deportation have lost their land rights. These deportees
are indicated in the alternating direction of speech as they and you. The
promise of salvation in Ezek. 11 signifies the ensuing sequence of events:
gathering; gift of the land Israel to those that were scattered, who will
remove its horrors and atrocities; gift of one heart and a new spirit, so
that they may walk according to Yhwhs statutes etc.; solidarity of God and
people; and their own ways coming down on the heads of those who had
devoted (?) their heart to their abominable and detestable things. The sec-
tion as a whole feels less homogenised than 36:1638, with which it runs
parallel in vv. 1920. It might appear from Ezek. 11 as if those that were scat-
tered, due to their readiness to change, have more right to the land of Israel
than those that had remained behind, but on the other hand, specifically
these displaced Israelites are said to have a heart of stone requiring replace-
ment. The one heart that is promised (instead of a new heart) could indicate
a contrast between the future unity of the people and the actual tension
between those scattered and the remnants (cf. 11:15), but it could equally
well be a veiled allusion to the national reunification of Israel as it will be
announced in 37:1528.
The new spirit in Ezek. 11 is not explained expressly as the spirit of Yhwh
like in Ezek. 36. Still, it seems within the rhetorical progression of the book
that Ezek. 11 rather anticipates Ezek. 36 than that Ezek. 36 is grasping back at
Ezek. 11.21 The prospect of Jerusalems fall only becomes bearable for Ezekiel
(and his readers) once the anticipated revelation is made that Yhwh has
another option prepared beforehand: the gathering of those scattered, the
cleansing of the land and the inner change of the repatriated. We will return
to the redaction-critical considerations related to these observations [
3.1.4.3]. The issue of the land claim in 11:15 will also be raised in 33:2426.
20 Attention to other themes brings further relations between Ezek. 36 and Ezek. 124 to
light. Thus 36:1718 and 22:116 share analogous clauses carried with the words , shed
blood, , defile, , idols and , menstruation; 36:19b is relatively close to 24:14b,
in a context that contains the opposition , defile and cleanse. Apart from 11:1421
and 20:3244, dispersed salvific words occur in 6:810; 14:11 (covenant formula!); 16:5963;
and 17:2224. In as far as inner change is spoken of in these passages, it is restricted to the
crushing of the adulterous heart by Yhwh (6:9) and being ashamed and disgusted over earlier
behaviour.
21 Cf. T. Renz, The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel (VT.S, 76), Leiden 1999, 62.
While Ezek. 11 prepares for Ezek. 3337 thematically, seen in escaping ones
fate (the death of Pelatiah, Yhwh-sets-free), landownership, inner renewal,
reunificationit also, more or less, anticipates the sequence of events that
will be developed further in the later restitution programme.
Ezek. 18:232, as we have seen [ 3.1.1], must be characterised as a warn-
ing, not as a foresaying. Against the notion that a son shares in his fathers
guilt, it is emphasised that righteousness or wickedness comes to rest only
on the individual that has aspired towards it. Every member of the people
will be judged according to his own life. Change, either for the good or for the
bad, is always an option. Ezek. 18:31 introduces the precise terms that 36:26
will pick up: Cast away from you all the offences by which you have offended
and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. A difference in connota-
tion between heart and spirit is still undeterminable in the former verse.
Together heart and spirit qualify the renewal as a total change in the direc-
tion of life. Ezek. 36 links to this anthropological vision. For an impression of
what exactly should be understood under Yhwhs statutes and regulations,
in Ezek. 36 one must think back to Ezek. 18. There they were shown encom-
passing both cultic procedures and rules for social behaviour.
The books course leaves the call from Ezek. 18:31 unanswered or hardly
noticed by the inhabitants of the land Israel, amongst whom according to
21:8 (rather inconsistently) the righteous as well as the wicked will be struck
by the sword. Ezek. 18 offered one last chance, which according to chapters
2124 those in Jerusalem ignored. In Ezek. 22:612, 2331 the guidelines
mentioned in Ezek. 18 function as a catalogue of sins. For the books readers,
however, the call to conversion continues to be unchanged in force.
That the editors of the book did not see the promise of inner renewal
contradicting the encouragement to inner renewal, is evident in Ezekiels
appointment as watcher at the onset of the restitution programme. Ezek.
33:1020 actually repeats the argument of Ezek. 18 on the personal responsi-
bility and the ensuing call for conversion. As a consequence, the promise of
salvation in Ezek. 36 is also set in this key. Ezek. 36 apparently does not make
the call to turn superfluous, but insists that Yhwh will himself give what he
asks. It is impossible to receive the promise passively. As argued promise [
3.1.2] it appeals to insight, the very insight that has the heart as its seat. The
metaphor of the new heart includes the theological reflection to which the
text of Ezek. 36 itself extends an invitation. Thus the new spirit too should
not be separated from what this text desires to install as a source of inspi-
ration stimulating a change of behaviour. The invention of the number x
is explained as follows in the history of mathematics: facilitating the solu-
tion by acting as if the solution has already been achieved. The new heart
170 chapter three
and the new spirit as prophetic promises are more or less comparable with
this mathematical invention. They are the solution that has been provided
but simultaneously must still be found. In any case, the promise relies on a
receptive reading attitude, in which there is no room for either intellectual
or moral passiveness.22
The tension between Ezek. 18 and 36 that has been signalled by many is
largely dissipated when the books intention is taken into account, which
wants to bring about Israels change through both warnings and promises.
We therefore agree with the interpreters that do not have a problem with
the indicatives of Ezek. 11:19 and 36:26 alongside the imperative of Ezek.
18:31. At most a shift in the line of questioning has led here to a different
form of discourse. In opposition to the fatalism of collective guilt, Ezek.
18 suggests the possibility of personal change and renewal. The deepest
grounds for having hope are pursued in Ezek. 36, against the background
of a history of desecration: these grounds are to be found alone in Yhwh
and not in Israel. An unconditional compared to a conditional salvation
however this is not. Ezek. 36 says that it is Yhwhs gift that remorseful
Israelites may meet the absolute prerequisites to live permanently in the
land; but thereby the prerequisite remains a prerequisite. The promise does
not weaken the encouragement in the slightest, and so it is understandable,
in the composition of the book, that the introduction to the part containing
the salvation prophecy emphasises this encouragement emphatically: see
Ezek. 33:1020.
22 This deviates from the thesis of A. Mein, Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile (OTM), Oxford
2001, for a summary 262: () the new note of hope in Ezekiels prophecy is accompanied by
an equally dramatic shift from moral responsibility to moral passivity on the part of the peo-
ple, a shift that coincides with the actual social circumstances of the exiles, who have been
transported from positions of power and influence in Jerusalem to become small-time ser-
vants of Babylonian agricultural policy. Mein has correctly shown that in Ezekiels design of
the future, the political has largely made way for personal ethics, which could equally well be
a reflection of social circumstances in post-exilic Judah as in Babylonia. But since according
to Mein exactly the same social group is envisaged in Ezek. 14 and 18, it is difficult to explain
the transfer from a call for change to a promise for change through the terms responsibility
and passivity. Israels passivity is also emphasised strongly in J. Unterman, From Repen-
tance to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 170: Ezekiel
would have followed Jeremiah in the third phase of his message, in which a passive Israel is
redeemed by YHWH. On this point one is better off following Baltzer, Ezechiel, 79: Die logisch
sich ausschlieenden, im Wortgebrauch z.T. gleichlautenden Aussagen von Ez 11 19f. 36 26f.
einerseits und Ez 18 31 f. andererseits zeugen von hartnckigen Festhalten Ezechiels am Gebot
gerade in dem Aussagenfeld, das dieses vertiefend zu entschrfen scheint. Es wre deshalb
unzulssig, von Ez 11 19 f. 36 26 f. her die Mahnung Jahwes zum Gehorsam abzuschwchen.
The confrontation with Ezek. 18 draws attention particularly to the indi-

vidualising trait which is similarly prominent in the expectation of Ezek. 36.
The future habitation of the house of Israel in the land will only be based on
the personal receptiveness and motivation of each member of the house.
When the elders come to him in Ezek. 20:144 for a consultation with
Yhwh, Ezekiel is instructed to make the horrors of their fathers known to
them. As early as in Egypt, where Yhwh dedicated himself to the Israelites
under oath, they were disobedient. Yhwh leading them out nonetheless,
and not obliterating them in the wilderness, came down him protecting
his name as God in the sight of the nations. Still, Yhwh made the decision
during the wilderness years to have his people scattered. He thus gave them
statutes that were not good.23 The presumptuous life in the land of promise
then degenerated into a long history of cultic desecration. Now that Israels
dispersion has become a fact, Yhwh decides to lead them out once more
and take them to the wilderness of nations. There a sifting will take place,
and from there Yhwh will eventually bring his people home to the promised
land, where they will serve him remorsefully.
Ezek. 20 and 36 are close in scope and cross-interpret each other at
several points. Different to Hosea and Jeremiah, Ezekiel does not disclose
a harmonious start to the relation between Yhwh and Israel, but projects
Israels idolatry back even into the land of Egypt. This negative vision on the
past is presupposed by the promise of a new heart and a new spirit in Ezek.
36. A total turnaround in behaviour is deemed essential precisely against
this background. Despite the persistent failures of the past, Yhwh still yearns
to achieve his goal with Israel.
The promise of the new heart and the new spirit thus correlates fully
with the extreme negative depiction of Israels history according to the book
of Ezekiel. Another aspect that connects Ezek. 20 and 36 is their strong
emphasis on the fact that Yhwh only acted and takes action for the sake
of his own name. Since from the time of Egypt he is known everywhere as
the God of Israel, everything that befalls Israel is associated with Yhwhs
namefrom this perspective Ezekiel beholds both Israels history and its
future dnouement.
Ezek. 36 is therefore connected to the first part of the book with many
threads. Ezek. 11:1421 points at Ezek. 36:1638 in its promise of the one heart
and the new spirit. The call to make oneself a new heart and a new spirit, in
23 Presumably the provisions on first-borns are being targeted, which could be misinter-
preted as an encouragement to make child sacrifices.

172 chapter three
which Ezek. 18:132 spools, does not in essence contradict the promise of the
new heart and the new spirit as a gift of Yhwh. On the contrary, the promise
underscores the lasting validity of the encouragement. Promise and encour-
agement both emphasise personal freedomfreedom from a burdensome
past. The promise thus also correlates with the extremely critical view of
Israels history arising from Ezek. 20:144, the prophecy that along with Ezek.
36:1638 places the stress on the deepest motivation behind Yhwhs actions:
for my names sake. Moral indignity and hope for change can be traced to
one source in the book of Ezekiel, which is the divine self-respect. The same
self-respect that drives Yhwh to make an end of Israel (cf. 20:17), draws him
to gather them into a unity. The scope of this astonishing presentation of
the divine appears to be that if moral indignation and moral grievance are
probed deeply enough, one must also touch upon the only true grounds of
hope.24

3.1.4.1. Papyrus 967
Papyrus 967 belongs to a group of papyri purchased in 1931 by Chester Beatty
in Egypt, and with additional fragments is currently spread between col-
lections in London, Princeton, Cologne, Barcelona and Madrid. The Greek
manuscript, which includes the text of Ezekiel from 11:25, dates from the
end of the second or beginning of the third century ce, and is the oldest wit-
ness of EzekG. The most notable omission is Ezek. 36:23b-38.25 Ever since its
publication the possibility has been contemplated that the papyrus could go
back to a shorter Hebrew Vorlage,26 and the missing passage has even been
labelled as the youngest addition to the Old Testament.27 A date in the Chris-
tian era has become unsupportable since the discovery in Masada of Hebrew
24 A more general problem of the prophecies of condemnation in the OT for the modern
reader is the apparent ease with which the Assyrian and Babylonian expansionism is trans-
lated as criticism against ones own society. Though, the search for a relation between fate and
guilt is of all times. Moreover the problem of innocent suffering (as experienced by Ezekiel
himself) would not have developed as a theological theme if this relation between fate and
guilt had not bothered people.
25 The missing section commences with the words in v. 23b.
26 E.H. Kase in A.Ch. Johnson et al. (eds), The John A. Scheide Biblical Papyri: Ezekiel (PUSP,
3), Princeton 1938, 10.

27 W.A. Irwin, The Problem of Ezekiel, Chicago 1943, 6264; in this vein also J. Lust, De
samenhang van Ez. 3640: Theologische relevantie van het ontbreken van Ez. 36,23c38
in enkele handschriften, TTh 20 (1980), 2639; Idem, Ezekiel 3640 in the Oldest Greek
Manuscript, CBQ 43 (1981), 517533.
fragments of Ezekiel from the first century bce, which were published in
1996.28 Besides the extensive omission, the deviant sequence is striking: 36:1
23b; 3839; 37. This sequence is supported by the Vetus Latina text of the
fifth century Wrzburg palimpsest.29 Since codex Wirceburgensis (W ) has
not preserved Ezek. 35:537:19, it cannot be established with absolute cer-
tainty whether the codex has omitted 36:23b-38, but the suspicion that this
is the case is well argued.
Papyrus 967 and 968 are also the only surviving bearers of the original
Greek version of the book of Daniel, which was replaced in later manuscripts
by a more accurate translation, possibly prepared by Theodotion.30 In Daniel
too, the papyrus presents a different sequence: 14; 78; 56; 912, which in
turn is supported by several Old Latin witnesses.31
Parablepsis occasioned by homoioteleuton might offer an explanation for
the omission of Ezek. 12:2628 and 33:2526 as well as a few smaller text
shortenings in papyrus 967. Various authors also found parablepsis to be a
suitable explanation for the omission of 36:23b-38.32 One objection in this
case is the relatively large body of text, approximately 15 verses according to
the MT, which is difficult to ignore; and this combined with the problem of
the divergent order. It is not likely that the difference in sequence and the
shortening or lengthening of the text developed independently.
Long before the discovery of the papyrus, it was noticed through its
vocabulary that the passage in the LXX stands out contextually. Tackeray
identified different translations for EzekLXX, (Ezek. 127), (Ezek. 2839)
and (Ezek. 4048), where and would share characteristics indicat-
ing the same translators hand. This theory was challenged, but not the
observation of the distinctive translation of EzekLXX 36:2438, associated
with the Greek of Theodotion, which Tackeray named .33 This distinctive
28 On this MasEzek (Mas 10432220), see S. Talmon, Fragments of an Ezekiel Scroll from
Masada (Ezek. 35:1138:14), OLoP 27 (1996), 2949.

29 E. Ranke (ed.), Par Palimpsestorum Wirceburgensium antiquissimae Veteris Testamenti
Latinae Fragmentae codd. rescriptus eruit edidit explicuit, Vindobonae [Vienna] 1871; cf. John-
son, Scheide Papyri, 12 n. 6; P.-M. Bogaert, Le tmoignage de la Vetus Latina dans ltude de
la tradition des Septante: zchiel et Daniel dans le Papyrus 967, Bibl 59 (1978), 384395,
esp. 387.
30 Cf. E. Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Minneapolis 1992, 138.
31 Bogaert, Vetus Latina.
32 See e.g. Johnson, Scheide Papyri; F.V. Filson, The Omission of Ezek. 12:2628 and 36:23b
38 in Codex 967, JBL 62 (1943), 2732, esp. 31; J. Ziegler (ed.), Ezechiel (SVTG, 16), Gttingen
1952, 10; J.W. Wevers, Ezekiel (CB), London 1969 [21971], 273.
33 H.S.J. Tackeray, Notes and Studies: The Greek Translators of Ezekiel, JTS 4 (1903),
174 chapter three
translation he and others related to the pericopes usage in the liturgy

of the synagogue. It could, however, also indicate a correctional supple-
ment to the shorter prehexaplaric text tradition as witnessed by papyrus
967.
Spottorno explained that the omission and alternative chapter arrange-
ment in papyrus 967 was caused by a folio (ca. 1500 letters) falling out, and a
few unnumbered folios becoming mixed up in a Vorlage of the manuscript.34
This solution based on bookbinding technique is creative but cannot be
accepted as it depends on random assumptions.35 What the Theodotian
addition in the larger LXX manuscripts anyway suggests, indirectly sup-
ported by W, is that the shorter text of papyrus 967 in Ezek. 36 should not
be seen as an incidental mistake; but rather that it represents the prevalent
Old Greek translation (OG).36
Is this translation then a more reliable version of the Hebrew Urtext
than the MT? Since the 1980s, Lust has defended this point of view in
many publications.37 His argument has been taken up in the monographs of
Schwagmeier and Crane.38 Like Lust, these authors regard EzekMT 3639 as a
theologically motivated correction to a text form that was more originally
preserved by papyrus 967. It is noteworthy that Schwagmeier and Crane
398411, esp. 399; Idem, The Septuagint and Jewish Worship: A Study in Origins (The Schweich
Lectures 1920), London 1921, 125.
34 V. Spottorno, La omisin de Ez. 36,23b38 y la transposicin de captulos en el papiro
967, EM 50 (1982), 9398.

35 Cf. P. Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen zu Textgeschichte und Entstehung des Ezechiel-
buches in masoretischer und griechischer berlieferung, Zrich 2004, 184. S. Ohnesorge, Jahwe
gestaltet sein Volk neu: Zur Sicht der Zukunft Israels nach Ez 11,1421; 20,144; 36,1638; 37,114.15
28 (FzB, 64), Wrzburg 1991, 206 adds war circumstances to the list of plausible situations that
could have led to the switching and loss of pages.
36 It is conceivable that the text form of Ezek. 3639 represented in p967 is presumed
by Rev. 2021 and Targ. Ps.-J. Num. 11:26; cf. A.S. Crane, Israels Restauration: A Textual-
Comparative Exploration of Ezekiel 3639 (VT.S, 122), Leiden 2008, 246248. On Ezek. 36:16
23b as a lectionary pericope in a Coptic-Sahidic codex, see M.N. van der Meer, A New
Spirit in an Old Corpus? Text-Critical, Literary-Critical and Linguistic Observations regard-
ing Ezekiel 36:1638, in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament
Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht 2002, 147158, esp. 148 n. 5.
37 See amongst others, Lust, Samenhang; Idem, Ezekiel 3640; Idem, The Final Text
and Textual Criticism: Ez 39,28, in: J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book (BEThL, 74), Leuven
1986, 4854; Idem, The Spirit of the Lord, or the Wrath of the Lord? Ez 39,29, EThL 78 (2002),
148155; Idem, Major Divergences Between LXX and MT in Ezekiel, in: A. Schenker (ed.), The
Earliest Text of the Hebrew Bible: The Relationship between the Masoretic Text and the Hebrew
Base of the Septuagint Reconsidered (SCSt, 52), Atlanta 2003, 8392.
38 Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen; Crane, Restauration.
defend two diametrically contrasting viewpoints on the motivation under-

lying such a MT correction.
According to Schwagmeier, the consonantal text of EzekMT represents the
reworking of an older book that formed the Vorlage of the Greek papyrus
967. This reworking consisted primarily of adding words, clauses and verse
parts in support of the already existing cohesion of the book. The majority
of these additions do not contradict the scope of the original text. Although,
some additions do exactly this. Small amendments in Ezek. 34:25 and possi-
bly in 34:29 suggest the idea of a personal, physical return of David sometime
in the future. The most extensive addition, 36:23b-38, is associated with the
interchange of chapters 3839, 37 and in this combination proposes a com-
pletely new interpretation of the vision of the bones, 37:114. Through this
revised arrangement of the text, the whole house of Israel in 37:11 implicates
all the Israelites from across the centuries that will be resurrected along with
the historical David. The main purpose behind this addition and transposi-
tion is to develop the proclaimed restitution programme with the element
of a genuine recreation of Israel, which the older book of Ezekiel did not
contain in this literal sense. A second purpose is to sharpen the closure
of the divine judgement compared to the book of Jeremiah, which has left
deep traces in Ezek. 36:23b-38. Compared with the older form of the book
witnessed in papyrus 967 and W, EzekMT represents an unrealistic, utopian
image of Israels future salvation. The textual modifications that led to such
a utopian image must have been made in the third or at the beginning of the
second century bce.
Similarly Crane finds that EzekMT offers a correction in these chapters, but
their purpose would be to carry a more realistic vision of the future. This is
the view of Lust, which Crane largely takes for his credit.39 EzekMT precisely
has the goal of arming Israel mentally against the hostile forces of either
the Seleucid Empire or the Romans. To this end the Gog episode had to be
stripped of its horrific futuristic-apocalyptic features, not so much through
amendments to the text in this episode itself, as by its fresh embedding
in the literary context. It was in effect practical demands of moral purity
and militancy that must have led to the compiler of EzekMT expanding and
rearranging the text of Ezekiel.
39 The proposal of Lust, Ezekiel 3640, 531532 to connect this realistic vision of the future
with the Pharisees has not been taken over by Crane. Later Lust himself abandoned the idea
(Textual Criticism of the Old and New Testaments: Stepbrothers? in: A. Denaux (ed.), New
Testament Textual Criticism and Exegesis, Leuven 2002, 1531, esp. 30).
176 chapter three
The detailed explanations that bring these Septuagint experts to their

divergent conclusions command respect, but all the same give rise to critical
questions. In the scope of this study not all the details are attainable as we
limit ourselves to the key points of the discussion.
(a) The epexegetical relation between Ezek. 36:23b-38 and 36:811 is typ-
ical of the book Ezekiel, and resembles, to mention one example, the rela-
tionship between Ezek. 36*37 and 34. The three authors emphasise the lex-
ical and thematic reminiscences in Ezek. 36:23b-38 to the book of Jeremiah
in general and to Jer. 31 specifically, but in light of numerous other connec-
tions between the two prophetic books, it is arduous to name this a clearly
distinguishing feature.40 The least one can determine from these observa-
tions is that they do not promote the objective assessment of the hypoth-
esis on Ezek. 36:23b-38 as a secondary supplement. Formally this passage
does not distinguish itself from other Ezekiel passages. Words occurring only
once in Ezekiel are not restricted to this passage, as the feature is spread
throughout the whole book.41 Sometimes a rare construction is linked to the
subject. The clause containing in Ezek. 36:27 is grammatically
correct, but expresses a specific idea for which Hebrew offers limited other
means to verbalise, namely that God himself accomplishes what he asks of
men (cf. Isa. 26:12).42
(b) For Schwagmeier the assumption that MT in Ezek. 3639 represents

a younger text form than papyrus 967 rests mainly on the argument that
the vision of the dry bones is converted by its placement between the text
not yet present in the papyrus, 36:23b-38, and the Gog episode, cp. 38
40 Besides the covenant formula Ezek. 36:23b-38 shares hardly any analogous clauses
with Jeremiah and therefore compares rather more negatively than positively with many
other passages in Ezekiel. Further 3.2.5.3.
41 To stay with words starting with an alef: hitp. (turn around?) 21:21; ( entrance)
40:15; ( feverish) 16:30; ( ankles) 47:3; ( fast) 27:24. That no arguments can be
based on the Hebrew from Ezek. 36:23b38 for the late addition of this passage to the book,
is carefully argued by Van der Meer, New Spirit, 145158.
42 According to Van der Meer, New Spirit, 153 a construction with hif. in 36:27 would
not have been a good alternative construction in light of in 36:22, 32. On the
presumed signals for the later inclusion of 36:23b-38 in 36:23 MT, LXXA and in 37:1 LXX, see
Crane, Restauration, 223224. An oracle formula that (as in Ezek. 36:23) leads from a finite
clause to a prepositional infinite clause occurs more often in the book: 16:30; 43:19. LXX also
adds the adjective in Num. 19:18 (as in Ezek. 37:1), where confusion with animal
bones is out of question. It is therefore highly speculative to see as a signal for the
secondary link between Ezek. 37 and the preceding flock of sheep.
39, to become an announcement of a physical resurrection of the historical

Israel. The new link between Ezek. 36 and 37 is then established through
the theme of multiplication. As the ruined cities will be overwhelmed by
former generations of Israelites, their population will resemble the flocks
of sheep during a festival. The association between the words flock in
36:3738 and bones in 37:114 would be prompted by the allegory
of the boiling pot in Ezek. 24, where these words are also linked, albeit in
completely different imagery.43 This argument is debatable. The supposed
relocation of 37:114 did not lead to a new wording, which might have per-
suaded the reader to understand the vision non-symbolically.44 Understood
as symbolic announcement of a mass return from the diaspora (cf. v. 12b),
the vision ties in with the theme of multiplication at the close of Ezek. 36
without disparity. The most prominent connection between the two chap-
ters continues to be the gift of the spirit. If 37:114 is read as an extension
of this gift promised in 36:2627, the idea is strengthened that the vision
more than anything is aimed at Israels spiritual renewal. This is precisely the
intention of EzekMT according to Lust and Crane. Schwagmeier argues that
the announcement of the David redivivus in 34:2324 and 37:2425 offers
additional support to the non-symbolic interpretation of 37:114,45 but this is
improbable. The differences in these passages between MT and papyrus 967
are too slight to determine whether or not a bodily return of this former king
is implied.46 In 37:25 MT as in the Greek translation, the Davidic promise dif-
ferentiates unmistakably between those who currently live in the land and
their fathers who previously inhabited it. According to Schwagmeier a new,
non-symbolic interpretation of the texts led to their rearrangement, but why
then, one may ask, does the rearrangement not impose this new interpreta-
tion less ambiguously on the reader?47
43 Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 174.

44 The supplementation in 37:114 MT compared to 37:114 G according to p967 is min-
imal. Perhaps 37:10 G does not assume a double . If EzekMT is secondary here (a very,
very big army), it rather points at the general tendency to duplicate such adverbs than an
apocalyptic increasing of the scale of the army in question. Other occurrences of in
EzekMT include 9:9 (G: ) and 16:13 (G: ); see also the frequent duplication
of in EzekMT 4048. In essence the repositioning of 37:114 has left no clear traces in the
wording of this vision.
46 Concerning Davids personal return, see especially the contradicting signals in 34:23
25: 2 in MT (23), entering the covenant in G (25). So too in Jer. 30:9 and Hos.
3:5 the future leader is simply named David, without thereby insinuating anything like rein-
carnation.
47 On closer inspection the modification of the vision, according to Schwagmeier, is not
178 chapter three
For Lust and Crane the relocation of Ezek. 37 means exactly the opposite,
a symbolic interpretation. When Ezek. 37 still followed 3839, the revival of
the dry bones could have been understood realistically, but the relocation
wants to make such a realistic view impossible. This version of the texts
history raises new questions. How might the sequence of Ezek. 3839, 37 be
viewed logically, if the house of Israel has to first bury its enemies (39:12) and
thereupon rise from the grave in the flesh? And how should it be explained
in this sequence that the theme of the bones impurity, which is central to
Ezek. 39, suddenly has no significance in Ezek. 37? In other words, does the
sequence Ezek. 3839, 37 not also tend towards a symbolic, non-physical
interpretation of the resurrection vision?
According to Crane small amendments compared to the Hebrew Vorlage
of the Greek translation clearly indicate the relocation of Ezek. 37 in MT.
These amendments were meant to prepare Israel against Gog, read: against
the advancing Seleucides or Romans. In this manner EzekLXX 37:10 uses
as a translation of , which is replaced in MT by .48 Similarly
in EzekMT 37:22, 24, replaces , which LXX correctly translated with
.49 What would Israel start out against their superior enemy without a
strong army [ ]and without a strong leader [ ?]An objection against
this line of reasoning is that Gogs defeat was not at all orchestrated by
earthly powers, as every competent compiler of Ezek. 3639 would have
confessed.50 For the two modifications to the text, other explanations are
possible.51
found so much in its transposition as in its receiving a new introduction Ezek. 36B. A logical
follow-up question could be: Why not simply include a passage comparable with Ezek. 36B
between Ezek. 3839 and 37? The whole relocation of the chapter was thus unnecessary. With
such a perfect linking between Ezek. 36A and 3839 as Schwagmeier detects in p967 [see
under (c)] this sequel question resounds all the more.
48 Crane, Restauration, 100103.
49 Crane, Restauration, 119, 126.
50 Tradition-critically Ezek. 3839 should be connected with the motif of the coalition
that is rising against Zion (Ps. 2; 48; 76; Isa. 29:18; Zech. 12; 14). The incredible defeat thereby
remains the point.
51 The term in 37:22 persists as a strong argument for the originality of the title .
The union of the two kingdoms cannot be expressed better than by appointing one king over
both. The Greek translators could then easily have set Davids titles on an equal footing in
34:24; 37:22, 24, 25. On the other hand and do not exclude military connotations.
In 37:10, setting aside every contextual embedding of the chapter, there is a logical association
between spirit and power (cf. Zech. 4:6). could then have been the original reading, for
the translator to water down.
(c) Another difficulty remains the fragmentary nature of 36:1623b in the

short Greek version. Schwagmeier and Crane countered this objection by
pointing at the continuation in Ezek. 3839. According to them, not for your
sake I will do it (36:22) originally signalled the rise and fall of Gog as pre-
dicted in those chapters. Following in the footsteps of Lust they have spared
no effort to show that with the sanctification of Yhwhs name in 36:2223,
papyrus 967 wants to direct towards 38:16, 23; but to the question what the
crucial phrase, not for your sake, would mean in that context, they pay
insufficient attention.52 At this point doubt culminates on the sustainabil-
ity of their theories. This is in fact a reaction to a question that
is no longer an issue in Ezek. 3839, the question whether Israel deserved
Yhwhs redemptive intervention seeing its transgressions. The rise of Gog
presupposes that Israel has settled peacefully in its homeland after the dias-
pora and has abandoned its former wheeling and dealings. Illustrating this is
how the defilement of the land is singly caused by the corpses of the enemy
soldiers (39:1116) and no longer by Israels own misdemeanour, which is
treated so extensively in Ezek. 36. As motive for Yhwhs action, the not for
your sake would have remained hanging in the air, if the Gog episode was
implied with this action. The vindication that 36:32 MT offers this motive,
namely that at the moment of its homecoming and inner change, Israel
should be brought to shame for its own former ways, is the only vindication
that really satisfies in the context of the book (cf. 20:4344).53
(d) Similar to Ezek. 36:1623 appearing to expect a continuation in the way

that MT develops it, there are indications that the broader context depends
52 Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 293; Crane, Restauration, 250.

53 The scope of 36:20 is also important in the evaluation of the fragmentary nature of
36:1623b. According to Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 278 this verse means that Yhwh
wanted to annihilate Israels defilement through the scattering (cf. 22:15), but that this strat-
egy failed. Instead, the scope looks to be that Yhwh indeed removed Israel from the defiled
land, but that this scattering caused doubt on Yhwhs power and thus anew, be it in a dif-
ferent way, tarnished his name under the nations. Therefore all that can follow 36:1623 is
the announcement that a gathering will take place on Israelite soilwhich the Gog episode
presupposes as a given fact! This could be a reason, as suggested by K.-F. Pohlmann, Ezechiel:
Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2008, 126, to see 39:2529* as the origi-
nal sequel to 36:1623b, but this solution is equally unconvincing. It denies that 39:2529
arranges inhabiting the land (26), bringing the people back from the nations (27) and pour-
ing out the spirit (29) in syntactically subordinate clauses, which assuredly must reflect back
at their forgoing announcement. Further, Pohlmanns solution raises the question how I will
have compassion on all the people of Israel (39:25) would function in such a direct link with
not for your sake (36:22).
180 chapter three
on this continuation. One such indication is found in the linking of defile-

ment and cleansing in 37:23. In light of the core problem sketched in 36:16
21, it would be most peculiar if 37:23 stood completely alone with this link-
ing of defilement and cleansing within the restitution perspective of Ezek.
3339.54 Something comparable counts for cherishing and obeying Yhwhs
rules and regulations in 37:24. That this ever was the first and only refer-
ence to Israels moral change of behaviour within Ezek. 3339, is difficult to
fathom.55 It looks far more likely that the Davidic promise here intentionally
combines elements from Ezek. 34 and 36:23b-38.56
(e) The fact that the ending of Ezek. 37:28 ( when my sanctuary is among
them forever) forms an excellent bridge to Ezek. 4048,57 is not a strong
indication that the two sections were initially adjoined. Such connections
between neighbouring pericopes, using an anticipating closing sentence, is
uncommon in the book of Ezekiel. The link between Ezek. 37:28 and Ezek.
40 could also have the intention of marking the Gog episode as an interlude,
roughly comparable to how the link between 24:27 and 33:21 frames the
prophecies against the nations.
(f) In addition to these positive arguments in favour of the originality of

EzekMT, there are also indications that the Greek translator deliberately
changed the sequence in Ezek. 3639. For example, the word in 39:29 G
renders the word seen in MT. According to Lust, Schwagmeier and Crane,
one of the Hebrew words for wrath underlies this , which are translated
54 Root in Ezek. 3339: 33:26; 36:17, 17, 18, 25, 29; 37:23; 39:24; root in Ezek. 3339:
36:25, 33; 37:23; 39:12, 14, 16. The italics indicate their collocations.
55 See the analogous clauses in 36:27 and 37:24 containing a notable inversion of
and . E.F. Davis, Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiels
Prophecy (JSOT, 78), Sheffield 1989, 63 offers other examples of inversion in Ezekiel (following
R. Weiss); often such a chiasm reinforces the referential, citing function of what could
otherwise be seen as a pointless repetition. Besides 11:20 / and are not used
elsewhere in Ezekiel as part of a promise. Similarly C. Levin, Die Verheiung des neuen Bundes
in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Zusammenhang ausgelegt (FRLANT, 137), Gttingen 1985,
214216 demonstrates that 37:2125a repeats 36:1628* in wesentlichen Zgen.
56 Compare to the following escape clause in Schwagmeiers own methodological expla-
nation: Nur wenn sich zeigen liee, da der im Sinne der Theorie als lter anzusetzende
Kontext die entsprechend als jnger eingestuften Einschbe fraglos voraussetzt, wre ein
Krzungsmodell angemessen. Unless the bar is set out of reach with fraglos, this rule applies
to the mentioned passages none withstanding.
that way elsewhere in EzekG.58 The replacement of such a Hebrew word with
in the premasoretic phase, however, is a far less logical explanation than
seeing as a tendentious translation for . In the context of the book
Ezekiel, it would have been difficult for my spirit to mean anything else than
my salvation bringing spirit, and this gives rise to the question what could
have led the translator to make his wilful rendering? It must have been his
wish to bring closure to the judgement section of the book.59 This tendency is
also observable in the evident omission of 39:28b MT in G (see below) and in
the conspicuous space between Ezek. 39 and 37 in papyrus 967 as a graphic
borderline between judgement and salvation.60 The translation of for
raises doubt on the presupposition that this concerns a development in
the history of the Hebrew and not the Greek text. Should the omission of
36:23b-38 MT not also be understood in this light? Did the Greek tradents
perhaps see this passage as a superfluous and premature anticipation of the
promise of salvation in Ezek. 37a salvation promise which they deemed
could not be correctly placed before the end of the Gog episode?
(g) It is evident that substantial omissions occur less readily in textual his-
tory than additions. A copyist or translator that deliberately omits some-
thing important requires a justification. Probable justifications in the case
of Ezek. 36:23b-38 could have been that the passage anticipates Ezek. 37
and repeats Ezek. 11 in its central promise. This earlier chapter has not been
preserved in papyrus 967 and W, but as long as the contrary has not been
proven it is reasonable to accept their rough correspondence in Ezek. 11 with
the current LXX.
(h) With Schwagmeier we believe that many smaller pluses of MT compared

to G are explainable as supplements supporting the books coherence, in a
production phase that followed the Vorlage of EzekG and the premasoretic
text of Ezekiel parting ways. If we call this production phase X and indicate
the transposition and addition or omission in Ezek. 3639 as Y, then it is
important to envisage how X and Y could relate in time. If Y preceded X
58 Pace Lust, Final Text, 53; Idem, Spirit, 153; Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 295; Crane,
Restauration, 169200. Apart from what may follow after Ezek. 39, a reference to the wrath of
Yhwh is not expected at the end of this prophecy of salvation.
59 According to Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 294 EzekG 39:29 grasps back at 36:18 with
. In our view the translator is rather aiming at the ultimate outpouring of

divine wrath that takes place with the arrival of Gog.
60 On this space, see Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 197; Crane, Restauration, 200.
182 chapter three
or coincided with X, additions would have been expected which support

the new arrangement. Substantial pluses in EzekMT 3639 compared to G
(besides 36:23b-38) are found in 36:11; 36:18; 37:23; 37:25; 39:28.61 The theme
of defilement through idols transpires too frequently to mark 36:18 MT as a
unique parallel to 37:23; cf. 20:7, 18, 31; 22:3, 4; 23:7, 30. Schwagmeier views
the verse as a reference back to 22:3, 4.62 Indeed he associates 36:11
in a forward pointing sense with the resurrection vision of 37:114,63 but
nothing prohibits the reader from thinking of Israels natural growth with
this verbal combination, which as natural growth receives an extra stress by
the plus in 37:25 MT. The only substantial plus that could have been involved
directly in the transposition, is 39:28
. That is, however, given the relation with the tendentious translation
of ( as nif.!) with and with in 39:2829 (see above),
rather a case of omission by the Greek translator than an addition.64 There
is thus no clear indication that X followed Y. On the contrary, nothing
counters the argument that the rearrangement in Ezek. 3639 took place
after the branching induced by X, and then on the prehexaplaric and not
the premasoretic line of the texts transmission. Likewise this must have
been the case with the omission of 36:23b-38 from the text represented by
papyrus 967 and W, but eventually corrected by LXX. We thus come across a
crucial observation. That MT represents a younger text form than G in many
minor pluses, does not necessarily imply that this must also be the case for
the large plus Ezek. 36:23b-38.
On our research route the deliberations above open the way for a balanced
assessment of the dating questions on the promise of renewal in Ezek. 36.
Text-critical arguments that would force us in advance to view this promise
61 In 36:18; 37:23, 25, LXXA shares the pluses of MT compared to other LXX MSS; cf. Crane,
Restauration, 202.
64 This is not to deny that the plus (with the Late-Hebrew verb , cf. 22:21) could
have belonged to an expansion of the Gog pericope in a redaction-critical sense. In the

prehexaplaric line something is then omitted to enable the rearrangement of and . In
39:23, is translated correctly with . The Gog episode is concluded in 39:2229
with a general recollection of the history of deportation and gathering in a safe homeland.
Yhwh keeping his face from view was a direct consequence of Israels betrayal (23), defilement
and rebellious actions (24). Yhwh now revealing his face requires a new motivation: pouring
his spirit out over the house of Israel (29). In this retrospective context nothing is more
obvious than seeing a reference to 37:114 through this gift of the spirit. As the end of EzekMT
37 anticipates 4048, the end of EzekMT 3839 recalls 37.
as younger than Ezek. 11 [ 3.1.4.3] or Jer. 31 [ 3.2.5.3] are absent. Formally

the challenged passage 36:23b-38 is not essentially different from other
passages in the book of Ezekiel. The non-symbolic interpretation of the
revival vision and the Davidic promise is not promoted by EzekMT 3639
to such an extent that this complex presents itself as a rearranged text
with this goal specially in mind. Placing Ezek. 37 either before or after
3839 changes little to the symbolic meaning of the revival vision on a
first reading. The passage forgoing 36:23b-38 demands such a continuation
(chiefly through the clause, not for your sake I will do it, v. 22), which in turn
seems presupposed by the recapulating promise of Israels cleansing and
changed behaviour under Davids kingship in 37:2324. The link between
Ezek. 37:28 and Ezek. 40 does not attest their original adjacency, but could
as easily have been intended as an interlude marker for the Gog episode. On
the other hand there are indications that the Greek translation represented
by papyrus 967 modified the order in Ezek. 3639. The interchange between
Ezek. 37 and 3839, which may carry the shortening of Ezek. 36 as a form of
collateral damage, seems more appropriately prompted by the desire to let
the judgement of the nations precede the age of salvation.65 Be as it may, not
the Hebrew text represented by MT, but papyrus 967 representing the Old
Greek text has made the Gog episode an apocalyptic closing act, which were
not the books original intentions. According to the final verses 39:2229
MT, the primary aim of this episode is to emphasise the inviolability of the
salvation that Yhwh has promised a spiritually renewed Israel in its own
land. And exactly in these verses the Greek translator applied some artificial
trickery to promote his own version of the future, obviously against the
original line of thought.66
3.1.4.2. Stratification of Ezekiel 36:1638?

In one respect the proponents of papyrus 967 have provided unexpected
support for a more holistic approach to the text: their concept contains
little tolerance for theories on the redactional history of Ezek. 36:1638.67
65 In this line also J. Garscha, Studien zum Ezechielbuch: Eine redaktionskritische Unter-
suchung von Ez 139 (EHS.T, 23), Bern 1974, 122 n. 349 (eine dogmatische Korrektur: Der
Ansturm der Vlker mu erst erfolgt sein, ehe die Heilszeit beginnen kann) and T. Krger,
Geschichtskonzepte im Ezechielbuch (BZAW, 180), Berlin 1989, 446.
66 We will be in a better position to formulate the most obvious explanation for the
rearrangement of EzekMT 3639 to EzekOG 3639 once we have drawn conclusions on other
relevant chronologies in this study [ 5.1 sub 9].
67 Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 325 defends the unity of 36:23b38 against the
184 chapter three
For that matter redaction-critical study has long since detected the same
text-productive signals within this Masoretic plus as they occur consistently
throughout the book of Ezekiel.
Zimmerli suspected that Ezek. 36:1632 was expanded at a later point
with 3336 and 3738. He found evidence in the typical redactional open-
ing formulas in vv. 33 and 37, in the deviating language that sometimes
reminds of Jeremiah (building-planting), and in the second person address
to Israel not being maintained consequently until the end. On the other
hand, the acknowledgement by the nations in v. 36 as the completion of
the foregoing argument is difficult to oversee [ 3.1.2]. The point is that
vv. 3336, stronger than the preceding section, includes various elements
from Ezek. 36:115 in its depiction of the future, such as the theme of the
remnants of the nations and the fortification of the cities; but attention
to these details one could expect equally well from a redactor as from a
composition conscious author, who, towards the end of the passage, recon-
nects with his initial intentions regarding the greater literary framework of
the discourse. It is most unlikely that Ezek. 36:1638 was conceived with-
out any awareness for a more comprehensive restitution programme [
3.1.3].
Strictly speaking, it may well be said that Ezek. 36:3738 (Israel as flock
of people) does not flow directly from the questioning that controls the
preceding line of reasoning: the sanctification of Yhwhs name under the
nations [ 3.1.2]. But whoever was responsible for writing these verses must
have realised this digression himself, so much so that he introduces the
promised multiplication of the population with a distinct prayer of the
renewed Israel: Besides, I will grant the plea of the house of Israel and
do this for them (37).68 Another important aspect to consider here is the
intended run-up to the vision of the bones, as we have discussed in the
previous paragraph. Garscha agrees with Zimmerli on the identification of
stratification of Levin, Verheiung, 209214 (original text 36:1617a, 18a, 19a, 20ab, 22, 24
25*, 26ab28 which was reworked repeatedly) and S. Ohnesorge, Jahwe gestaltet sein Volk
neu: Zur Sicht der Zukunft Israels nach Ez 11,1421; 20,144; 36,1638; 37,114.1528 (FzB, 64),
Wrzburg 1991, 203282 (original text 36:16, 17a, 18a, 19a, 20, 21, 22, 24 plus 5 larger and 6
smaller modifications; see below).
68 Maybe the use of should be contrasted with the usage in Ezek. 20 (cf. vv. 1, 3, 3, 31,
31), on which 36:1638 is dependent [ 3.1.4.3]. So too the construction in 20:27 and
36:37 fits into this alignment. It is not necessarily a Nachtragformel (W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel
(BKAT, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969, 872, 882) but could equally well be a means to introduce
a climax, as in 23:38.
these redactional stages.69 Simian, Hossfeld and Ohnesorge go further and

also subject vv. 1632 to a detailed diachronic analysis.70
Simian sees vv. 16, 17, 18a, 1922, 24, 25ab, 31 and 32a (without the
last two words) as the original text. The omission of vv. 23 and 2628 from
this reconstruction is noticeable. Verse 23 is seen by Simian as a premature
summary. Der Charakter theologischer Lehre fr Israel, den das Wort hatte,
wird durch diesen Vers zu einem Erweiswort fr die Vlker abgewandelt.71
Verses 2628 would have formed an additional theological commentary on
the motif of Israels cleansing. Simian infers their fragmentary nature from
the absence of an address and from the artificial resumption of the argument
in v. 29a. For him, there is friction between the promise of a new heart and a
new spirit on the one hand, and the theocentric scope of the original piece
on the other: Jahwe kmmerte sich wohl um die Sache Israels, aber nur um
seinen heiligen Namen vor einer Entweihung zu bewahren.72
A weakness in this analysis is that it does not differentiate between the
aims of the text and the intentions of Yhwh, seen in the way the text presents
him as a personage. The text wishes to provide an answer to the question on
how Israel might base its hope for gathering and restoration: not on its own
behaviour, but on Yhwhs self-respect. Yhwhs pursuit for the nations recog-
nition is not at odds with this line of questioning, but is actually a crucial
theological helpline supporting the message of salvation. The only reason
Israel may be assured of having a future in its fatherland is because Yhwh
does not wish for his name to become desecrated amongst the nations. It is
in this connection that Israels inner renewal has to prevent a new expulsion
from that land, with all the humiliating repercussions for Yhwhs namea
perfectly logical step in the development of the argument.73
69 Garscha, Studien, 216217; see also R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of
the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 354, normally an advocate of the books literary
homogeneity.
70 H. Simian, Die theologische Nachgeschichte der Prophetie Ezechiels: Form- und tradi-
tionskritische Untersuchung zu Ez 6; 35; 36 (FzB, 14), Wrzburg 1974, 88103; F.-L. Hossfeld,
Untersuchungen zu Komposition und Theologie des Ezechielbuches (FzB, 20), Wrzburg 1977
[21983], 287340; Ohnesorge, Zukunft Israels, 203282.
71 Simian, Nachgeschichte, 100.
72 Simian, Nachgeschichte, 216.
73 For whom this soteriological connection becomes detached, Yhwh according to Ezekiel
is merely consumed by a narcissistic obsession with the honor of His name (K. Carley,
From Harshness to Hope: The Implications for Earth of Hierarchy in Ezekiel, in: S.L. Cook,
C.L. Patton (eds), Ezekiels Hierarchical World: Wrestling with a Tiered Reality (SBL Symposium
Series, 31), Leiden 2004, 109125, esp. 122).
186 chapter three
A stylistic argument in Simians analysis is the repetition of v. 25 in v. 29

( from all your uncleanness), but we see no reason why an original author
could not equally well have used such a stylistic device. An address is missed
by vv. 2628 only after the text is isolated from its contextand therefore
does not provide an effective argument in the diachronic discussion.
Hossfeld distinguishes between six literary layers in the books passages
he examined. He finds the layers IIIVI represented in Ezek. 36:1638 as fol-
lows: vv. 1622 (layer III), with as later insertion 18a-b and as later addition
23ab; vv. 23b-32 (layer IV), with as later insertion 2930 (belonging to
layer V); vv. 3336 (layer V); vv. 3738 (layer VI). The syntactic and semantic
arguments offered in support of this diachronic analysis are not convincing.
The sequence in v. 23, provision of proof, divine oracle formula and prepo-
sitional infinitive clause, falls within the normal syntactic means available
to the author.74 This likewise counts for the chain of participle + we-qatal in
vv. 2223; the focus here does not shift from present to future, as Hossfeld
suggests,75 but stays fixed on the same immanent intervention by Yhwh. The
semantic shift from my holy name to my great name in 23ab76 is deter-
mined by the fact that the root has already been used for the verb, and
thus cannot serve here as a credible diachronic signal.
It is impossible to discuss all the textual seams discovered by Hossfeld.
Our greatest objection lies in the disassembly of layers III and IV. Verses 17
21 establish a connection between Israels conduct, the defilement of the
soil, the scattering, the nations reaction to it, and the desecration of Yhwhs
name. Just the last element (with at most a glimpse of the first) is incorpo-
rated in v. 22. As an introduction to v. 22 as it is, vv. 1721 is therefore an over-
loaded passage not balanced by its continuation. The themes of defilement
and inhabiting the land in essence count on a sequel like we find in vv. 2332.
Here we come across a more general objection against an approach such as
Hossfelds, namely that the diachronic observations are not foregone by an
independent synchronic analysis in which such rhetorical coherences are
first heeded within the given text. Similarly vv. 3336, which accentuates
the new fertility and the expected reaction from the nations, does not cre-
74 Cf. Hossfeld, Untersuchungen, 289. The formula ( 85 in Ezekiel) follows
6 a provision of evidence (15:8; 20:44; 25:14; 34:30; 36:23; 37:14) and is followed 3 by an
infinitive sentence with ( 16:30; 18:23; 36:23). The combination of the two in 36:23 is thus
certainly unique but not ungrammatical. The formula of acknowledgement has numerous
variations and has no fixed text-grammatical function in Ezekiel.
75 Hossfeld, Untersuchungen, 293.
ate the impression of being an illogical development of the line of thought

introduced in vv. 1721. Granted, the spectacular population growth envis-
aged in vv. 3738 is indeed not prepared thematically in vv. 1721; here, a
secondary elaboration of the future perspective possibly played a role.
Hossfelds attempts to profile the different layers by connecting them
with other parts of the Old Testament do not appear to have succeeded for
Ezek. 36:1638. The relation established in vv. 2332 between Israels obe-
dience and inhabiting the land, which Hossfeld considers to be typical for
Jeremiah-D,77 already forms the premise of vv. 1720. Another example: the
most noticeable similarities in diction with Deutero-Isaiah [ 4.1] are not
found in vv. 3738, as it is suggested,78 but actually in vv. 22 and 32 (not
for your sake).79 In fact Hossfeld himself admits repeatedly that his lay-
ers are difficult to distinguish theologically and presumably arose not long
after each other. According to him one should not expect large redaction-
historical distances in time in Ezekiel as one finds in some other prophetic
books.
Diachronic hypotheses are particularly intriguing when they open the
discussion on the questions underlying a text fragment. In his attempt to
formulate the question that 36:2627 is reacting to with the promise of inner
change, Ohnesorge finds words that hardly differ from our own effort above
[ 3.1.2]; even though he ascribes the answer to a later hand, who could
have drawn from Ezek. 11 and the book of Jeremiah: Dem Urheber () stellte
sich in dem von ihm erweiterten Text 36:1624* offensichtlich die Frage, wie
verhindert werden kann, da das Haus Israel, bei dem nach 36:1624* selbst
keinerlei Vernderung zu beobachten ist, nach seiner Rckkehr ins Land
sein Fehlverhalten fortsetzt, so da Jahwe es wieder richten und so seinen
heiligen Namen der Fortgesetzten Entweihung unter den Vlkern aussetzen
mte.80 Certainly, but the very point is that the answer to this questioning
fits nowhere as seamlessly as in the context of Ezek. 36.81
The Ezekielian basic text 36:1624* that has been identified by Ohnesorge
labours under similar rhetorical imbalances as the basic text of Hossfeld
(and to a lesser degree that of Simian). A prophetic writer who would be
content to stand with the restitution promise of vv. 22 and 24, would most

79 Cf. Levin, Verheiung, 213.
80 Ohnesorge, Zukunft Israels, 267.
81 Later we will see that in Jeremiah the connection between inhabiting the land and inner
change is significantly more open [ 3.2.5.3 conclusion].

188 chapter three
surely not have it preceded with a comprehensive and nuanced description

of the situation as we find in vv. 1721.
Ohnesorge too sees v. 23 as a later addition, and then in two phases. Such
a view is hardly convincing unless this verses focus on the nations and what
will be accomplished in their midst (and not yet in the land of Israel as
stated from v. 24b) is overlooked. For the collocation of the roots and
see also Ezek. 38:23 where the weight on Yhwhs greatness appears to
correlate with the multitude of the nations as spatial perspective (before
their eyes). The point of v. 23 then is that the greatness of Yhwhs name will
now be manifestedin a worldwide gathering actionon the same scale as
the desecration brought about by the displacement of Israel.82 Redundantly
repetitive the verse becomes (similarly as later addition) after one has first
deleted v. 23a, b.83
It is assertively the intention of vv. 1721 to emphasise that Yhwh had all
the reasons to disperse Israel amongst the nations, even though it would
discredit him in their eyes. Precisely the additions presumed by Ohnesorge
in 17b and 19b contribute to the portrayal of the impossible dilemma Yhwh
has placed himself in through Israels scattering: persisting desecration of
his name among the nations or a renewed defilement of Israels homeland?
Text-grammatically the inversive clause at the end of v. 17 offers a hinge
in its last prenominal suffix for a change of subject: in my sight. So I
poured .84 In this way the narrative forces us to see the dead end of Israels
history from Yhwhs point of view.85 Also quite apart from the process of text
production, one will have to acknowledge that only the promise of inner
change in vv. 2532 really addresses the dilemma into which vv. 1721 draws
the reader so empathetically. Gathering and repatriation on their own are
82 For the special connection between Yhwhs display of his own holiness before the
eyes of the nations and Israels gathering, see also 20:41; 28:25; 39:27. Recognition of Yhwh
based on Israels restoration in their own land according to 36:36 lies more on the way of the
neighbouring nations left around you.
83 Cf. Ohnesorge, Zukunft Israels, 213.
84 The plus of MT compared to LXX in v. 18ab is generally viewed by commentaries as
a redactional addition. occurs 11 in Ezekiel and is here completely harmonious

with as talionic reaction in this self-justifying claim of Yhwh. The Greek translator
could have dropped the sentence because, for example, his free rendering in v. 17 (
) had sufficiently described the reasons of Yhwhs
intervention. Of the 18 clauses in vv. 17a221 just 7 carry the narrative with a wayyiqtol-form,
so that their being interrupted is not really a criterion for indicating a redactional addition.
85 This reminds of the statement of D.E. Gowan, Theology of the Prophetic Books: The Death
and Resurrection of Israel, Louisville 1998, 129: Divine freedom is a major part of what Ezekiel
needs to affirm about God, but it stands in tension with a certain vulnerability.
unable to cope with the core problem of this prophecy. Regarding vv. 3336
and 3738 Ohnesorge agrees with Zimmerli.
In conclusion our observations of these redaction-critical reconstruc-
tions on Ezek. 36:1638 can be summarised as follows:
(a) Unambiguous syntactical signals indicating diachronic stratification are

lacking. The reconstructed fragments are too small to distinguish them-
selves through word usage and diction. Attempts to relate them to other
Old Testament passages (Jeremiah-D, Deutero-Isaiah, etc.) make a forced
impression.86
(b) There is general agreement over the fact that many of the texts from the
book of Ezekiel are the result of profound theological reflection. Such texts
may answer more than one question simultaneouslywhich is not a reason
to think of stratification. Obvious inconsistencies in the argument are not
present. Ezek. 36:1638 offers a closely related set of questions and answers.
(c) As the divine oration progresses, themes are touched upon that indeed
are less directly connected to the central issue. This could be the result of a
tendency in the compiler to complement the portrayal of the future and to
bend back the argument harmoniously to the wider context, namely Ezek.
36:115.
(d) The units 3336 and 3738 are introduced with typical connecting for-
mulations. They could indicate a redactors hand, though an original author
could have made use of the same writing technique. Such concerns are
better discussed under text productionwhere the producer is left unde-
cidedthan under redaction versus authorship.87
(e) The main conclusion: it is possible that Ezek. 36:1638 developed in

phases, but it is impossible to reconstruct the exact process. Particularly the
segment vv. 2627 on the new heart and the new spirit cannot be separated
from the argument in a literary-critical sense, to connect it with questions
86 We return to the debatable arguments on the presumed dependence Jeremiah
Ezekiel in 3.2.5.3.
87 Cf. K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, Cambridge, MA
2007, 109: The traditional distinction between authors, editors and editorship is misleading
because it obfuscates the fact that authorship and editorship were aspects of the scribal
profession.
190 chapter three
different from precisely that raised clearly in the immediate context,

namely: the impossible dilemma of Yhwh. The prophecy in its current
form apparently presumes the promise addressed to the land in 36:115 and
counts on embedding in a book.
3.1.4.3. Ezekiels Newness Passages in Diachronic Perspective

The book of Ezekiel is structured within a first person narrative frame.88 This
framework suffices to a large degree with the recurring phrase the word of
Yhwh came to me or he said to me as an introduction to a divine saying. The
narrative becomes more detailed in the description of Ezekiels visionary
experiences. The dates that sometimes accompany these sayings and visions
help establish the books chronological plot. On a few occasions details are
offered about what led to the divine word being given, for example, elders
consulting the prophet. Elsewhere the prophet portrays himself as suppli-
cant to God or as performer of a sign-act on Gods command. Nonethe-
less this all remains narrative framing in service of the divine words, which
account for the larger part of the book by far and constitute the actual con-
tent of the book.
It is hermeneutically significant that the outcome of the words of doom
is related in the book but not the outcome of the words of salvation, even if
only by leaving the reader with the picture of a disappointed prophet. The
story does not lead to any narrative conclusion. The last time that Ezekiel
appears in the book he is depicted as a wanderer along the temple river of
his own vision (Ezek. 47:612). Nowhere else is it more obvious that the book
was not intended to document history, but to continue the past in a text that
keeps on being contemporary to ever new readers. After centuries of textual
transmission, we could say, the book brings us no further than the threshold
of Israels gathering and renewal. Apparently it wishes to effectuate this
gathering by itself and to evoke the promised spirit of renewal through its
own inspired words: Come from the four winds, o Spirit (Ezek. 37:9).
Informed by the diachronic analysis of Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, one
may marvel why the theme of the unfulfilled promise has not played a
more prominent role in modern redaction criticism of Ezekiel. Suspected
redactional additions in Ezekiel research are seldom explained from the
perspective that the original expectations were dropped.89 On the other
88 Exception Ezek. 1:3.

89 When the prophecies against Tyre (Ezek. 2628) did not realise after a 13 years siege
by Nebuchadnezzar, a new promise was formulated as compensation: the conquest of Egypt
hand, Ezekiel does not, like the Yhwh-Kingship psalms or Deutero-Isaiah,

usher us through a drama in which the decisive changes occur during the
reading experience itself. In fact it was precisely the denial of the dramatic
character that led to the redaction criticism in Deutero-Isaiah clasping at the
interpretive model of the unfulfilled promiseconsider the questionable
idea of a so-called layer of imminent expectation [ 2.2.8.1]. In the same
way the two reverse observations in Ezekiel (no dramatic form, and thus no
perceived fulfilment problem) seem to correlate. A salvation prophecy may
leave its fulfilment undisclosed just to keep it current.
Above we indicated briefly what seems to be the most prominent bene-
fit of recent redaction-critical research. This benefit consists of the insight
that the narrative frame of the book supports the prophecies, and that
these prophecies do not serve as mere illustrations in Ezekiels historic
biographythe intended or unintended suggestion of many older com-
mentaries.
In the rest of this section we will focus on the diachronic relation between
the newness passages in Ezek. 11, 18, 20 and 36. In what direction do these
passages suppose each other? To what extent for a proper understanding
does one passage rely on another and/or on the broader context of the book?
Where does the concept of the new heart and the new spirit present itself in
the oldest form still retrievable through diachronic analysis? The views on
the genesis of the book Ezekiel and on whether it could be reconstructed in
detail are far too diverse to take a widely shared position as point of depar-
ture for this study; but this is not required in a pragmatic approach like
ours.90 The hermeneutical premise of this approach is an intertextual dia-
logue: older texts pose questions or leave questions open, which are picked
(29:1721). This example clearly illustrates that it was not taken for granted to correct prom-
ises ex eventu.
90 Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen, 38 offers this spitting image of the state of research: Die
Forschungssituation zum Ezechielbuch stellt sich heute, gut zwanzig Jahre nach Erscheinen
der 2.Auflage von Zimmerlis bahnbrechendem Kommentar, komplex, weil uneinheitlich,
wie schon lange nich mehr dar. Vertretern grundstzlicher literarischer Einheitlichkeit wie
Greenberg [1983, 1997] und J. Becker [1971], ihrerseits grundverschieden, stehen redaktions-
geschichtliche Entstehungsmodelle unterschiedlicher Komplexitt gegenber, einerseits
eine tendenzorientierte, literarkritisch gemssigte Richtung, wie sie sich in den Arbeiten
von Allen [1990, 1994] und Krger [1989] findet, andererseits eine literarkritisch recht radikal
vorgehende, wie sie etwa in den Arbeiten Pohlmanns [u.a. 1992] begegnet. To this we would
add that, in the line of Krger, Albertz, Exile, 345376 also depicts a moderate (and appealing)
view of the books origin.
192 chapter three
up in younger texts. This dialogue can also take place between diachronic
layers of the same passage, though it is easier to trace between separate
passages, or between a passage and its eventual embedding in the book as a
whole.
Ezek. 18 must be the oldest of the four pericopes. It is unlikely that the
author already knew of a promise of heart and spirit, or assumed his readers
knew such a perspective as in Ezek. 11 and 36, when he wrote Ezek. 18. Inter-
nally the chapter makes a relatively homogenous impression. The address to
the golah, suggested by the embedding in the book between the data 0506
06 (cf. 8:1) and 100507 (cf. 20:1) calculated from Jehoiachins deportation, is
in tension with the content, which is geared towards inhabitants of the land
Israel (cf. 18:2, 6, 11, 15). This raises the question whether Ezek. 18 may orig-
inally have been intended for a different chronological setting: one could
well imagine this.
It would seem as if Ezek. 20 has taken over the rationale of Ezek. 18 in
the way it makes the generations of Israel individually responsible. The
discussion on the internal stratification of the chapter culminates in the
question about the relation between condemnation and the announcement
of salvation.91 The deeper their interplay within the chapter, the deeper the
correlation between the chapters origin and the composition of the book.
Different to Ezek. 18, the structure of Ezek. 20 reflects the book of Ezekiel as
a whole.
The promise of inner change in Ezek. 36 is younger than the call for
inner change in Ezek. 18. Seen from a text production angle the promise
must have been a modification to the call.92 Theologically Ezek. 36 answers
the pressing question that Ezek. 20 leaves open: How will Israel reach the
change of behaviour that appeared to be so unattainable in the past? This
complementary relation between Ezek. 20 and 36 suggests a deliberate
coordination on the level of the books redaction.93
91 See e.g. K.-F. Pohlmann, Ezechiel: Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt
2008, who in discussion with F. Sedlmeier, Studien zu Komposition und Theologie von Ezechiel
20 (SBB, 21), Stuttgart 1990 and S. Ohnesorge, Jahwe gestaltet sein Volk neu: Zur Sicht der
Zukunft Israels nach Ez 11,1421; 20,144; 36,1638; 37,114.1528 (FzB, 64), Wrzburg 1991 regard-
ing Ezek. 20:131* and 3944* pleads for eine durchdachte einheitliche Textkonzeption (151).
92 That 18:31 die Verheiung in den Befehl umkehrt [C. Levin, Die Verheiung des neuen
Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Zusammenhang ausgelegt (FRLANT, 137), Gttingen

1985, 211] is a presumption that is not consistent with the general thrust of Ezekiels message
of salvation.
93 Cf. R. Rendtorff, Ez. 20 und 36,16ff im Rahmen der Komposition des Buches Ezechiel, in:
J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book. (BEThL, 74), Leuven 1986, 260265, esp. 262: Der Abschnitt
Ezek. 811 leaves the suspicion of a complicated development. Generally

the redaction-critical inquiry perceives tensions between Ezek. 11:213, 1421
and the surrounding text in Ezek. 811. According to Pohlmann it originated
because only as a visionary experience could a performance of Ezekiel, orig-
inally situated in Jerusalem, be reconciled with the prophets simultaneous
residence among the exiles in Babylon. The golah-orientated redaction sup-
ported this visionary interpretation by providing 11:221 with an introduc-
tion that reminds of 37:1 and by placing some genuine visions in front of it,
through which the current Ezek. 811 came into being.94
Regarding the promise of inner change there are at least three arguments
for the dependence direction Ezek. 36 Ezek. 11. (1) In light of Ezek. 18, one
heart and a new spirit must have originated as a modification to a new heart
and a new spirit.95 (2) The promise answers a question that could be raised
only after Ezek. 20 in the reading direction of the book (see above), and to
which Ezek. 11 seems to react prematurely. (3) On the other hand, the author
of Ezek. 11 is certainly already so familiar with the phrasing of the promise
of inner change that he is able to concentrate on the follow-up question: For
whom exactly is this promise intended? Not for those who stayed behind but
for the scattered!96
36:16ff kann m.E. nur als bewute Fortsetzung und Weiterfhrung von Kap. 20 verstanden
werden. Besides the promise of change, Ezek. 20 is void of the restoration of the cities, and
the population growth, themes that are meant to allow 36:1638 to connect with the direct
context.
94 Pohlmann, Ezechiel, 145146.
95 Text-critically, , one, in 11:19 is preferable to , LXX , another (cf. 1Sam.
10:9). That the formulation in a text productional sense must be secondary to is

evident from 19b, which explains not the single but the new heart through the imagery of
substitution. Ezek. 11:1920 creates the impression of being an excerpt from 36:2628, though
even in this shortened form with 19a (and a new spirit etc.) it carries an element that hardly
functions in the context of 11:1421. Levin, Verheiung, 207 and Ohnesorge, Zukunft Israels,
4748 therefore see 19a as a later supplement to the promise, but this is debatable seen
in light of the consistent parallelism maintained in 1920. Another legitimate question is
whether the word in 19 would have had the same stress without the opposition with
( cf. H.-J. Fabry, Art. , in: TWAT, Bd. 7, Stuttgart 1993, 382425, esp. 400).
96 Within 11:1421 either vv. 18 and 21 [G. Fohrer, Ezechiel (HAT I, 13), Tbingen 1955,
61; Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 251; cf. R. Liwak, berlieferungsgeschichtliche Probleme des Ezechiel-
buches: Eine Studie zu postezechielischen Interpretationen und Kompositionen, Bochum 1976,
110113; D. Baltzer, Literarkritische und literarhistorische Anmerkungen zur Heilsprophetie
im Ezechielbuch, in: J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book (BEThL, 74), Leuven 1986, 166181,
esp. 169], or vv. 1920 [B. Lang, Ezechiel (EdF, 153), Darmstadt 1981, 25; cf. C. Westermann,
Prophetische Heilsworte im Alten Testament (FRLANT, 145), Gttingen 1987, 137] are often
taken as redactional additions. The latter seems the more probable proposition. Perhaps
the word in v. 21 forms the textual hinge. For Ohnesorge, Zukunft Israels, 14, vv. 1920*
194 chapter three
This all suggests that literarily speaking Ezek. 11 reaches forward and
not the reverse of Ezek. 36 prying the readers recollection. Our previous
conclusion that it is difficult to fathom Ezek. 36:23b-38 as a final footnote
to the book is thus confirmed [ 3.1.4.1]. The existence of this passage as an
integrated part of the restitution programme seems to be presumed by Ezek.
11.97
Pohlmann assumes an older form of the promise of change underlies
Ezek. 11, which was not yet addressed to the scattered Israelites in general
but to the golah. Exactly what this promise looked like in this initial address-
ing, according to him one may nur noch ahnen.98 In our view this counts
equally well for other salvation promises in Ezekiel, because not one of them
is exclusively directed to the Babylonian golah on any text level. In this light
the whole criterion of golah- or diaspora-orientation in the diachronic anal-
ysis of Ezekiels salvific words has become problematic.99 This point of view
is one of many additions to the basic text 11:14, 15ab*, 16. T. Krger, Geschichtskonzepte im
Ezechielbuch (BZAW, 180), Berlin 1989, 321 adjudicates the whole passage as redaktionelle
Kompilation; so too F. Sedlmeier, Deine Brder, deine Brder : Die Beziehung von Ez
11,1421 zur dtn-dtr Theologie, in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und die deuteronomistische Bewe-
gung (BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 297312, esp. 297 n. 1: eine Art Florilegium from the rest of
the book.
97 Levin, Verheiung, 212 offers the dependence Jer. 32 Ezek. 11 as his only argument
for the dependence Ezek. 11 36. Besides the logical weakness (in theory Ezek. 11 may have
borrowed elements from both Jer. 32 and Ezek. 36) this argument is methodologically dubi-
ous. Where questions on a books internal and external diachrony become entangled, the
former should be treated preferentially. So too for S. Petry, Die Entgrenzung JHWHs: Monola-
trie, Bilderverbot und Monotheismus im Deuteronomium, in Deuterojesaja und im Ezechielbuch
(FAT, 27), Tbingen 2007, 257258 (Ezek. 11 36) the relationship with Jeremiah plays a role;
on this further 3.2.5.3. Ohnesorge, Zukunft Israels, 233 defends the dependence 11:1720
36:2428* with the argument that die Abfolge der Aussagen in 36:2428 strker systema-
tisiert ist als in 11:1720. However, on a text lacking homogeneity one cannot randomly argue
first for and then against relative originality.
98 Pohlmann, Ezechiel, 147 n. 142. This golah-orientated guess is criticised by R. Albertz,
Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003,
350 n. 630. In this regard see also Krger, Geschichtskonzepte, 323: In enger Anlehnung an
Ansagen und Formulierungen des von ihr verarbeiteten Materials favorisiert sie [11:1420]
in Auseinandersetzung mit Ansprchen der im Lande Verbliebenendie babylonische Gola
als Boden und Ausgangsgruppe der Neukonstituierung Israels. Besides 11:2425, in the nar-
rative ending, the promise itself does not provide a reason to see the Babylonian diaspora
especially as the core of the new Israel.
99 Differently Pohlmann, Ezechiel, in summary 95. It is theoretically conceivable that
a diaspora-orientated redaction would have had an interest in the processing of Israelic

prophecies, not just that prophecies against Egypt required a comparative secondary adjust-
ment (cf. 29:1213; 30:23, 26). Exactly here the impression is confirmed that the diaspora-
orientation is engrained far deeper in the book than Krger and Pohlmann would like to
acknowledge.
therefore does not affect the diachronic sequence Ezek. 18 20 36 11 as

the main conclusion of this section.
Here we may return to where we left off in the opening paragraphs. Where
the golah- and diaspora-orientation in Ezekiel at first sight seem to be dis-
tinguishable, they respectively concern the narrative framework and the
framed prophecies. The framework situates the activities of the priest-
prophet under the exiles in Babylon. But it is precisely the detailed topo-
graphical location of these exiles that suggests the intended readers of the
book are to be sought elsewhere! Like the seven years between the start of
Ezekiels activities and the fall of Jerusalem create a theological time-frame
for announcement and fulfilment, so the precisely described location of
the Babylonian golah creates a safe vantage from which the reader, through
Ezekiel as intermediary, is able to witness the unfolding of Yhwhs condem-
nation over Jerusalem.100 Only in this role of distant observer does the golah
group represent the readership. It is plausible that the exilic location is also
reminiscent of the place where the historical Ezekiel actually lived,101 but
our interest for the moment rests with its literary function in the book. In
any case we doubt whether these topographical data justify any conclusions
being drawn on the golah having an advantaged position in Yhwhs plan of
salvation.
100 Cf. K. Schpflin, Theologie als Biographie im Ezechilbuch: Ein Beitrag zur Konzep-
tion alttestamentlicher Prophetie (FAT, 36), Tbingen 2002, 354: Aus der Position im Exil ist
Ezechielbei aller denkbaren innerlichen Verbundenheit mit Jerusalemein distanzierter
Beobachter, ganz wie die Leser, die ggf. nicht nur rumlich, sondern in jedem Falle auch
zeitlich von den im Buch historisch Bedeutsamen Ereignissen getrennt sind. Sie kennen die
historischen Ablafe, die im Hintergrund stehen, und vermgen so der kompositorischen
Strategie des Buches zu folgen. Das babylonische Exil im Ezechielbuch mag also nicht allein
eine Chiffre fr die jdische Diaspora generell sein, es ist im jedem Fall ein Ausdruck fr die
Distanz zu dem Geschehen in Jerusalem um 587/6.
101 Even though there are hardly any grounds to support the classical view that Ezekiel
himself was the author of (sections of) the book that carries his name, it is a step too far
to just see a programme in this name (so Schpflin, Biographie, 345: ein programmatischer
Personennahme). Usage of the root in the book of Ezekiel does not supply a clearer
indication for that than how the root is used in the book of Isaiah (see esp. Isa. 12:23). It
is improbable that prophetic books like this would have presumed an unspoken agreement
with the reader that these are fictional personages, as if they were modern novels. The
freedom to ascribe sayings to a person known from memory or tradition, should not be
confused with the freedom to just create such a person out of thin air. On the presumed
analogy with Malachi, see: E.F. Davis, Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of
Discourse in Ezekiels Prophecy (JSOT.S, 78), Sheffield 1989, 138.
196 chapter three
The chronological framework of the book, related to Jehoiachins en-

thronement and deportation, offers little support for such a view. The prom-
ise of salvation in Ezekiel remains focused on gathering and homecoming,
and the restored Davidic kingship is depicted in the same imagery of gath-
ering (17:23; cf. 37:24). After deducting the diaspora-orientated elements,
no exclusive golah-promise is left over, which a diaspora-redaction could
have provoked to react against. We just do not see any signs of diachronic
stratification at this point. The golah-elements (in the indications of time
and place) and the diaspora-elements (in the promise of salvation) are too
dissimilar in form and scope to justify such a diachronic view. In Ezekiels
restitution perspective the golah are tacitly included in the diaspora. Eze-
kiels promise of renewal addresses both diaspora and golah simultaneously
[further 3.2.5.4].
As a matter of fact, for the inhabitants of these waste places in the
land of Israel (Ezek. 33:24) it would have made little difference whether
their exclusive land claims were being contested either by the Babylonian
golah or by other returning Jews. It remains most plausible that the book of
Ezekiel originated on Israelite soil and then in a priestly repatriation milieu,
long before a neatly arranged picture of post-exilic immigration waves from
Mesopotamia had been formed, a picture that we are first offered, more or
less, by Ezra-Nehemiah.102
3.1.4.4. A Comparison between Ezekiel 36 and Psalm 51

The image of the purification with water in Ezek. 36:25 undoubtedly has a rit-
ual background and could, respecting the analysis above, lead to the counter
102 Also Albertz, Exile, 352 sees Palestine as the place of origin of the greater part of the
composition. As terminus ante quem, in light of Ezek. 4048, he opts for 515bce, the inaugural
year of the second temple. It remains a question (1) whether this year, calculated on the basis
of Zech. 7:17 and Ezra 6:15, is as steadfast as it is generally accepted [ 2.1.3.1; 2.2.8.5]; and
moreover (2) whether Ezekiels blueprint was set aside after Zerubbabels poor edifice was
seen: How could this be the promised temple? And how about Zerubbabels building initiative
itself? Is it in agreement with the modest role that Ezek. 46 ascribes to the monarch [?]
With this the main argument to Albertzs closing date seems to fall away. He also refers to
Zech. 3, the dirty clothes of the high priest, a vision that shares a concern with Ezek. 44 for the
purity of priesthood. But, answering the question on dependence here is complex. It could be
that Zech. 3 retrospectively summarises a process of sacral purification which in factunder
influence of Ezekielstretched out over a longer period of time. Thus, figuratively speaking,
Joshuas dirty linen has not lost its actuality in Isa. 6566 (end 5th century?). It is obvious
that the Ezekiel group could exert their influence only gradually in the post-exilic Judah. The
books impact would initially have been limited to the priestly circle (see in particular H =
Lev. 1726). Later in this study we will have an opportunity to view in that light the staged
increase in the number of citations from Ezekiel on the line DI-Jeremiah.
question whether the promise of Ezek. 36 is not, rather than the outcome
of abstract anthropological and theological considerations, entrenched in a
tangible ritual, which, besides purification,103 would also have portrayed the
renewal of heart and spirit. The Sitz im Leben of Ps. 51, the classical song
of penance, has often been sought in such a ritual,104 and it is against this
background that we will finally explore the relationship between Ezek. 36
and Ps. 51.
More or less obvious linguistic analogies with clauses from Ps. 51 cannot
be found in Ezekiel. The correspondence is limited to the bare vocabulary.
The following overview shows collocations of substantial words that occur
within the same verse in both Ezekiel and the psalm. Other places in the Old
Testament where the collocation occurs are placed between brackets.
Ps. 51:4 + ) ( or .
Ezek. 36:33 On the day that I cleanse you from all your iniquities, I will cause the
towns to be inhabited, and the waste places shall be built (Josh.
22:17; Jer. 33:8).
Ezek. 37:23 I will save them from all their apostasies (?) with which they have
sinned, and I will cleanse them (Lev. 12:8; 16:30; Num. 8:7; Jer. 33:8;
Prov. 20:9).
The theme of purification of sins or iniquities appears to occur throughout

the Tanakh. The fact that Ezek. 36:33 like Ps. 51:2021 speaks of cities being
rebuilt (though not specially of Jerusalem) in this connection indicates a
general similarity between the worlds of Ezekiel and the psalm. It shows
that the link between cleansing from sins and the rebuilding of cities is
not foreign to Old Testament thought. So too in the context of Jer. 33:8,
which deals with the purification from sins, the rebuilding of Jerusalem is
suggested.
Ps. 51:12 + .
Considering this collocations frequency it elicits no particular connection

with the book of Ezekiel. The next summary collates places where heart
103 On the purification water see esp. Lev. 14:7, 52; Num. 19. In Num. 19:13, 20, is linked
to the verb , sprinkle, as in Ezek. 36:25.

104 E.S. Gerstenberger, Psalms (FOT, 14), Grand Rapids 1988, 214: the mention of the cultic
plant hysop () proves the cultic setting of the psalm; cf. M.E. Tate, Psalms 51100 (WBC, 20),
Waco, TX 1990, 1112.
198 chapter three
and spirit stand relatively parallel: Ex. 28:3; 35:21; Deut. 2:30; Josh. 2:11; 5:1;
Isa. 57:15; 65:14; Ezek. 11:19; 18:31; 21:12 (in a longer series); 36:26; Ps. 34:19; 51:12,
19; 77:7; 78:8; 143:4; Prov. 15:13; 17:22; Dan. 5:20.
Ps. 51:12 + and/or .

Ezek. 11:19 And I will give them one heart
and put a new spirit within them;
I will remove the heart of stone out of their flesh
and give them a heart of flesh.
Ezek. 18:31 and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit,
why then would you die, house of Israel?
Ezek. 36:26 And I will give you a new heart
and put a new spirit within you;
I will remove the heart of stone out of your flesh
and give you a heart of flesh.
Other instances that formally comply with the search criteria are not inter-
esting as comparative material.105 The spirit being located in the interior
( )is a regular concept in the Old Testament and is not viable for estab-
lishing a special link between psalm and prophecy.106
The syntactic similarities between Ps. 51:12 and Ezek. 11:19; 36:26 are slight;
semantically we could conclude from the information above that the rela-
tion goes deeper.107 Words that recur are heart, spirit, interior and (re)-
new. Both and are frequently used combinations. With-
out the root one would not be specially reminded of Ezekiel in Ps. 51.
Thematically these passages display great disparity and little resemblance.
In both contexts it is suggested that a cleansing should precede inner
change: Ps. 51:9 and Ezek. 36:25 ( ;not in Ezek. 11). The two instances
similarly involve a purification of blood (Ezek. 36:18; Ps. 51:16). One differ-
ence is that cleansing and change in Ezek. 36 are separate actions,108 while
they unite as a single action in the psalm. This is expressed in the term
105 Isa. 65:17; Ps. 104:30; 2 Chron. 24:4.

106 Isa. 19:3, 14; 26:9; 63:11; Ezek. 11:19; 36:26, 27; Hos. 5:4; Hab. 2:19; Zech. 12:1; Ps. 51:12.
107 It is concerting that no mention is made of the creation of another heart in Ezek. 36;
cf. D. Baltzer, Ezechiel und Deuterojesaja: Berhrungen in der Heilserwartung der beiden groen
Exilspropheten (BZAW, 121), Berlin 1971, 7678, though he may draw too many conclusions
from it by suggesting a connection with Ezekiels emphasis on human responsibility.
108 We postulated in 3.1.3 that inner change may also form part of purification in Ezek.
37:23.
clean heart, possibly derived from the language of Wisdom ( + , Prov.

20:9; 22:11; cf. 2Chron. 30:19; elsewhere in the Psalms we come across ,
Ps. 24:4; 73:1). No deeper human purification by chokmatic standards, than
through the creation of a clean heart. Conversely, the opposition heart of
stone heart of flesh from Ezek. 11 and 36 (= disobedience obedience)
has no role in Ps. 51.109
A correspondence is detectable in the transference from spirit as anthro-
pological term to the Spirit of God, compare my Spirit (Ezek. 36:27; not in
Ezek. 11) and your holy Spirit (Ps. 51:13). But an essential difference is that
the supplicant of Ps. 51 has already received Gods Spirit, still promised in
Ezekiel, and is afraid of losing it.110 Likewise with the opposition steadfast
spirit broken spirit (Ps. 51:12, 19) we definitely depart from the sphere of
Ezek. 36.111
As we have seen [ 3.1.2], Ezekiels promise of inner renewal is harmo-
nious with the logic of the prophecy: it should prevent a new desecration
of Yhwhs name like in the past (cf. Ezek. 20). This promise was previously
formulated in the book as a command (Ezek. 18:31). This makes it all the
more improbable that its formulation is indebted anything to Ps. 51, to other
lost liturgical texts or to a communal ritual background.112 The idea that the
prophet has influenced the psalmist,113 which implies that the song would
have required the imagery of Ezekiel as a frame of reference, is equally
unfounded. In addition to all the other differences, we cannot establish any
reference in Ps. 51 to Israels gathering or return. That Yhwh finds pleasure
(, , )in burnt offerings, sacrifices or offer-bearersor precisely
notis a recurrent theme in the Old Testament, so too in Ezek. 43:27. The
109 Pace A.A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms (NCB), vol. 2, London 1972, 402: Contrite
heart, lit. crushed heart is perhaps the opposite of stony heart (cf. Ezek. 11:19; 36:26). At
variation with the negative assessment of these comparisons we find the strong association
between Ps. 51 and TI; cf. H. Leene, Personal Penitence and the Rebuilding of Zion: The Unity
of Psalm 51, in: J. Dyk (ed.), Give Ear to My Words: Psalms and other Poetry in and around the
Hebrew Bible. Fs N.A. van Uchelen, Amsterdam 1996, 6177, esp. 7477.
110 Pace L. Neve, Realized Eschatology in Psalm 51, ExpT 80 (1968/69), 264266, esp. 265.
111 and often occur together in the OT. Someone whose heart is fixed or affirmed
is assured of the direction of his life; he knows what he wants, he has no doubt that he is
following the right way. In the parallellismus membrorum of Ps. 51:12 the attribute of heart
has apparently been transferred to spirit; and are not found elsewhere in collocation.
112 The absence of an allusion to Ps. 51 in Ezek. 36:23b-38 could at most play a role as
argumentum e silentio in the discussion on the date of papyrus 967 [ 3.1.4.1].

113 Pace Levin, Verheiung, 211, who finds support in the Psalm commentaries of Duhm
(Ps. 51:1214 is deutliche Anspielung auf Hes 11,19 oder 36,26) and Gunkel.
200 chapter three
collocation ( cf. broken heart) also occurs in Ezek. 6:9, but not yet
as a calibrated term for self-abasement. These superficial points of contact
with Ps. 51:1819 do not influence our overall assessment.
Conclusion: the similarities between the psalm and Ezekiel are far less
striking than is sometimes suggested and than one might have wished for
in a tradition-historical clarification of the renewal promise. The sprinkling
with pure water from Ezek. 36:25 was undoubtedly recognisable as a ritual
act to the Israelite reader, but that the renewal of heart and spirit in vv. 2627
would similarly have reminded him of the one or other well-known motif
from Jerusalems temple liturgy, is improbable in light of this intertextual
comparison.
Jeremiah
3.2. A New Creation and a New Covenant: Jeremiah 3031
3.2.1. Jeremiah 31:2122, 2326114

Jer. 31:2122 ends with the most puzzling line in the book of Jeremiah:
, translated in La Traduction oecumnique
de la Bible 1977 as: Le SEIGNEUR cre du nouveau sur la terre: la femme
fait la cour lhomme. A line that offers welcome material for hermeneutic
reflection, since there is no agreement in sight on the authors original
meaning. At most one can determine what the line means in this or that
context, in the one or other literary postulation.115
114 This section is a reworking of: H. Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326 and the Redaction of the
Book of Comfort, ZAW 104 (1992), 349364.

115 Cf. F. van Dijk-Hemmes, Betekenissen van Jeremia 31:22b, in: B. Becking et al. (eds),
Door het oog van de Profeten. Fs C. van Leeuwen, Utrecht 1989, 3140. She compares inter-
pretations using 31:1522 as decisive context (Anderson, Trible) with interpretations that
emphasise the recurrence of 30:6 in 31:22 and thus elect (the basic text of) 30:531:22 as
decisive context (Holladay, Lohfink). There are many more overviews of the verses inter-
pretations, see e.g. B.A. Bozak, Life Anew: A Literary-Theological Study of Jer. 3031 (AnBib,
122), Rome 1991, 103104 (short but informative); A. Bauer, Gender in the Book of Jeremiah:
A Feminist-Literary Reading, New York 1999, 137145 (comprehensive). Some of the modern
translations think of a marriage metaphor as expression of the new relationship between
Yhwh and Israel (e.g. TOB, NBV), one of them prefers to hold onto protection, e.g. Israel
over Ephraim (E; cf. A. Schenker, Der nie aufgehobene Bund: Exegetische Beobachtungen
zu Jer 31,3134, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden
newness in jeremiah 201
21 Set up waymarks for yourself,

make yourself guideposts,
set your mind on the highway,
the road by which you are going.
Return, maiden Israel,
return to these your cities.
22 How long will you waver,
turnable daughter?
For Yhwh has created something new on earth:
a woman surrounds a man.116
23 Thus says Yhwh Almighty, the God of Israel:
Again they will say this word
in the land of Judah and his cities
when I turn their fortunes:
Yhwh bless you, Righteous Pasture,
Holy Mountain.
24 And Judah and all his cities will dwell in her together,
the farmers and those who move about with the flocks.
25 For I will satisfy the weary soul
and every languishing soul I will replenish.
26 Thereupon I awoke and looked
and my sleep had been pleasant to me.
If one were to accept the autonomy of the poem 2122, much can be said
for the cited French translation: the woman is courting the man. This then
is an image for the new relationship between Yhwh and Israel. But perhaps
this approach to the work as a well-rounded whole (in which the woman of
v. 22 must be the girl that is spoken to through the poem) is too modernin
Testamente (QD 146), Freiburg 1993, 85112, esp. 105); the majority refrain from making a
choice, stress their doubt in a note or offer alternative translations [for our own intertextual
interpretation, 4.2.2].
116 Because LXX did not comprehend in 21 and some Mss renders it as , a link
develops in this version already within 31(38):2122 between Zion and the maiden Israel
(another, possibly older Greek reading is ; cf. B. Becking, Between Fear and Freedom:
Essays on the Interpretation of Jeremiah 3031 (OTS, 51), Leiden 2004, 25). The rendering of
22b, For the Lord creates salvation as a new planting, in which salvation people will wander,
then, could already indicate the blessed region in which farmers and shepherds will find
themselves according to 24 MT (see our exposition below). An association is also possible
between this salvific planting (, ) and Yhwhs planting in Zion according to
Isa. 60:21; 61:3 (; cf. Isa. 60:18 ). For an interpretation of Jer. 31:22 following
this line, 4.2.2. Schenker, Jer 31,3134, 9293 sees in JerLXX 38:2122 a play on the schism
of 1 Kgs 12 and applies the wandering in a new plantation to the co-inhabitation of the land
by Israelites and Judeans and their movements to and from Zion.
202 chapter three
any case this view does not convince every interpreter. Must we conclude by
saying: it is the meaning of Jer. 31:22 that it poses us a riddle?
In the current context, however, Jer. 31:2122 is explained through 31:23
26. This is not only carried in evidently connecting word repetitions be-
tween the two poems (see below), but also by a number of syntactic features
in Jer. 31:2326 itself.
The Hebrew word for earth, land, , and similarly the names of coun-
tries are feminine, but v. 23 uses a masculine suffix. Thus it
is advisable not to translate in the land of Judah and in its cities (cf. NRSV,
NIV), but in the land of Judah and in his cities; namely the land and the
cities of the man Judah, or the Judeans represented by this male personage.117
Likewise the suffix remains masculine in v. 24, .
These finesses could easily be overlooked,118 were it not for the reverse
to also occur. In this way v. 24 will dwell in her ( )reflects back to the
righteous pasture and holy mountain using a feminine suffix, even though
mountain and abode, pasture-ground are grammatically masculine
words.119 The explanation might rest in a cited blessing offered by pilgrims
to Zion, characterised here as a female personage.120
This portrait of the promised salvation then arises: The whole of Judah
(masculine) will be enclosed by Mount Zion (feminine). Beneficial to this
cause is the word : And Judah and all his cities will dwell in her together.
If in her only modifies Judah, as many exegetes claim, it remains to be
asked, is it not expected that the land of Judah would include all the Judean
cities? The promise, however, says something else: the whole of Judah is
incorporated in the holy regionthe sole mountain, the sole grazing field
of Zion as the blessed inclusio of all Judean cities together. In this manner
117 Cf. F.E. Knig, Historisch-kritisches Lehrgebude der hebrischen Sprache, Bd. 3, Hildes-
heim 1979 (Leipzig 1897), 248b n. 3; 249b!

118 References to feminine nouns by masculine suffixes are not uncommon, cf. Ges-K
135o; cases involving are relatively seldom, cf. Knig, Lehrgebude, 249a. In Zech. 2:4
reference is made to using a feminine suffix.
119 Cf. in this text the suffix 2 pers. masc. in .
120 For the conventional grammatical explanation of such gender-shifts, see O. Glanz, Who
is speaking? Who is addressed? A critical study into the conditions of exegetical method and
its consequences for the interpretation of participant reference-shifts in the book of Jeremiah,
Amsterdam 2010, 2326. Authors who associate with Zion: A. van Selms, Jeremia (POT),
dl. 3, Nijkerk 1974, 77; J. Schreiner, Jeremia (NEB, 9), Bd. 2, Wrzburg 1984, 186; Schenker, Jer
31,3134, 103. K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches. Untersuchungen zur Redaktions-
und Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996,
178 is correct that the depiction of Zion as a woman cannot be old (contra Leene, Jeremiah
31,2326), though the relative age for the first reader naturally depends on the dating of
31:2326 itself [ 4.2.2].
the word is no longer redundant: it touches the point of what is being

anticipated.121
Alongside this unusual depiction we find connecting word repetitions
between 31:2122 and 2326, suggesting that the second poem should indeed
help interpret the first. Remarkably towns, cities does not occur in Jer.
3031 outside of these two poems; we find only the singular in 30:18 and
31:38. The word appears 9 in these chapters, but just in 31:22 and 23
with preposition: . The combination the land of Judah and his cities is
unique in the Old Testament; the more conventional in the cities of Judah
would in itself have been sufficient here.122 Therefore it is plausible that the
author of 31:2326 chose the distinctive combination in the land of Judah
and his cities deliberately to echo these your cities and Yhwh has created
something new in the land.123
On its own, sufficient grounds that 31:2326 indeed provides us an inter-
pretation to 31:22b: lady Zion embraces the population of Judahtruly this
is the new thing that, according to this exposition, is created by Yhwh! Even
those who move about with their flocks need not find themselves outside
the safe boundaries of Zions grassy common: the woman embraces the
man.124
An even clearer sign of coherence is found in v. 22b when we read not
, woman, female, but (contrary the original intention) , a nif.
participle of the verb , [to] curse. Could this alternative reading perhaps
already be presumed by the greeting in v. 23: Yhwh bless you? Is it the cursed
from v. 22b who will be blessed once more, blessed to such an extent that all
of Judah will feel safe in her embrace?125
121 Similarly P. Volz, Der Prophet Jeremia (KAT, 10), Leipzig 21928, 282, although he applies
the suffix of syntactically to the land Judah, which actually in der Zukunft als ein grosses
Heiligtum gedacht ist; cf. F. Ntscher, Das Buch Jeremia (HSAT, 7/2), Bonn 1934, 232. Tradition-
historically the image is related to Isa. 11:9 (= 65:25); Zech. 2:8, 16; see too the land expansion
in Isa. 54:13.
122 According to Lisowsky appears 49 , amongst which many occurrences as
complement of or ( ca. 15 ; cf. Jer. 11:12), of ( 6 in Jer.), or

/( 3 in Jer.). In Jer. 31:2326 the name Zion/Jerusalem is absent, still this
location must also be the unpronounced complement here.
123 This makes it understandable why the author of 31:2326 underlines Judah and his
cities stylistically by repeating it. To modify the text on this point (W.H. Holladay, Jeremiah
(Hermeneia), vol. 2, Philadelphia 1989, 154) there is no just cause.
124 It is remarkable, but might be coincidental, that the only other occurrence of in Jer.
3031 has to do with the curving of the city wall: 31:39.

125 For the opposition see further Num. 22:1112; 23:11; 24:10; Prov. 11:26. For the
proposal, besides other alterations in 31:22b, to read as or , see A. Bruno,

Jeremia: Eine rythmische Untersuchung, Stockholm 1954, 26; W. Rudolph, Jeremia (HAT 1/12),
204 chapter three
If the two poems really offer us a riddle (31:22) and its solution (31:2325),
then this hermeneutical connection could also help clarify v. 26. Here the
prophet presents himself as a sleeper who is granted dreams.126 Whereas the
main emphasis of the verse unquestionably rests on the relief of Jeremiahs
dream experience, an additional factor could be that a dream requires an
interpreter. We are reminded of the nightly visions of Zechariah, which
also had to be supplied with decoding interpretations.127 In this way the
relationship between 31:22 and 31:2325 as proposed above may find indirect
confirmation in this closing verse.
3.2.2. Jeremiah 31:2730, 3134

The units Jer. 31:2730 and 3134 both begin with the formula Behold days
are coming, declares Yhwh, and thematically each is largely complete in
itself. Jer. 31:2730 treats the social restoration of the house of Israel and
the house of Judah after the return to the land of the fathers. Jer. 31:3134
deals with the new covenant that, subsequently, Yhwh will enter with the
two houses.
27 Behold days are coming, declares Yhwh,
when I will sow
the house of Israel and the house of Judah
with the seed of humans and the seed of animals.
28 And it will be, just as I have watched over them
to uproot, to tear down, to overthrow, to destroy and to bring evil,
so I will watch over them to build and to plant, declares Yhwh.
29 In those days
they will no longer say:
The fathers have eaten unripe fruit,
and the teeth of the children become dull.
Tbingen 31968, 199, cf. BHS. We do not see it as the original intention of the text, but as what
an editor could have read into retrospectively.
126 Applying the verse to the awakening of Yhwh (see e.g. G. Fischer, Das Trostbchlein:
Text, Komposition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB, 26), Stuttgart 1993, 101, 124) does not lead
to a comprehensive whole.
127 M. Sister, Die Typen der prophetischen Visionen in der Bibel, MGWJ 78 (1934),
399430 distinguishes as third type Visionen in der Form eines Traumes, dessen Inhalt ein
Bild ist, das gedeutet werden muss (425). In this type he includes Am. 7:79; 8:13; Jer. 1:11
12; 1:1316; 24 and the majority of visions in Zechariah (428429). Only in Zechariah are they
pertinently visions seen in the night. For more recent literature on the dream as form of revela-
tion, see Becking, Jeremiah 3031, 72. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 217 sees other links between Jer.
3031 and Zechariah, esp. in Zech. 814, which leads him to formulate the possible direction
of dependence cautiously; differently G. Fischer, Jeremia: Der Stand der theologischen Diskus-
sion, Darmstadt 2007, 141. An evident analogy is ( pf. cons.), which appears only in Jer.
31:24; 50:39 and Zech. 14:11.
30 But for his own iniquity a man will die,

everyone who eats unripe fruit, his teeth become dull.
31 Behold days are coming, declares Yhwh,
when I will make
with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new covenant.
32 Not like the covenant
that I made with their fathers
on the day when I took hold of their hand
to lead them out of the land of Egypt,
my covenant that they broke,
though I was master over them, declares Yhwh.
33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, declares Yhwh,
I will put my law within them
and I will write it on their heart
and I will be their God
and they will be my people.
34 And no longer will they teach
a man his neighbour and a man his brother, saying:
Know Yhwh,
but they will all know me
from the smallest to the greatest of them, declares Yhwh,
for I will forgive their iniquity
and not remember their sin anymore.
Within each of these units the dichotomy continues. Jer. 31:2730 consists
of two segments, 2728 and 2930. According to the first segment Yhwh will
sow his people in the land anew, and will stay watchful over them to build
and to plant. The second segment announces that the proverb of the dull
teeth will not be valid in future. Thus people will no longer need to suffer
the burden of their forebears sins. In the times to come a person will be
judged on only his own account. A restoration of society in the fatherland is
possible under this condition.
Jer. 31:3134 proposes a new covenant to replace Yhwhs covenant with
Israel at the exodus from Egypt. The new covenant does not differ from the
old in its stipulations: both covenants insist on the human covenantal part-
ner obeying the torah. Just this time Yhwh will write his torah on their hearts,
so that everyone will be attuned to it. With the closing of Jer. 31:2730 the
peoples sins from the past will be redeemeda precondition for the soci-
etys restoration; whereas with the closing of Jer. 31:3134 every member will
receive individual forgivenessa basis for their personal relationships with
God. These two promises do not contradict each other, but are sequenced
steps in Yhwhs salvation plan. In their parallelism, Jer. 31:2730 and 3134
206 chapter three
carry a single continuous course of actions, as the textual comparison below

will show.128
As in Jer. 31:2930, two segments are identifiable in Jer. 31:3134, which are
3133 and 34. The following overview indicates to what degree the two units
are structurally interrelated:
27 31

28 32
29 33
34

30

After the identical opening formulas there is a strong agreement between I

will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah and I will make with
the house of Israel and the house of Judah . Both units carry a comparison,
respectively just as so and not like the covenant . Similarly they will
no longer say is echoed in they will no longer teach . In the same
way the forgiveness of guilt at the close of the second unit corresponds as
a superlative with the close of the first units death caused by own guilt.
Within this pattern of repetition, in those days in v. 29 and after those
days in v. 33 are clearly linked. This is important for the interpretation of
v. 33. After those days does not place the action there in relation to the
exodus from Egypt, which is the topic of v. 32, but in relation to the days
to come in which the proverb will lose its value. After those days is not
understood within the horizon of Jer. 31:3134 alone; instead the horizon of
128 The next paragraphs are a reworking from a section of H. Leene, Unripe fruit and
dull teeth (Jer 31,29; Ez 18,2), in: E. Talstra (ed.), Narrative and Comment. Fs W. Schneider,
Amsterdam 1995, 8298. Although there will be good reason in our subsequent expositions
[ 3.2.4 sub 5; 4.2.3] to emphasise the element obligation in the meaning of ( cf. Kutsch,
Perlitt), we retain its modern translation as covenant (Bund, alliance). The closeness of the
term and the so-called covenant formula in Jer. 11, 31 and 32 (cf. Lev. 26, Ezek. 37) is one of
the indications that in Jeremiah the word also encompasses the relationship between Yhwh
and Israel. An extensive overview of the 20th century discussion on this theme is provided by
E. Zenger, Die Bundestheologieein derzeit vernachlssigtes Thema der Bibelwissenschaft
und ein wichtiges Thema fr das Verhltnis IsraelKirche, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue Bund
im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD, 146), Freiburg 1993, 1349.
the whole 31:2734 provides this exceptional time phrase with meaningful
significance.129
And no longer will they teach
a man his neighbour
and a man his brother
saying
Know Yhwh
but they will all know me from the smallest to the greatest of them
declares Yhwh
for I will forgive their iniquity
and not remember their sin anymore
A few aspects from this analysis may be open to discussion. Thus it was
doubted whether the two last clauses of 31:34 directly continue the fore-
going. Should they not far rather motivate 30:13 + 31:2734 as a whole?130
Syntactically and exegetically this is improbable, likewise the direct linking
of v. 34b, across two verses, with the promise of the new covenant in v. 31.131
In Jeremiah there are a further four instances where a yiqtol-clause and its
associated -clause are separated by the formula : 6:1213; 30:17; 42:11
and 50:1011. In 50:11 the -clause is concessive; elsewhere it offers a motiva-
tion to the foregoing yiqtol-clause. This is also the most probable connection
within the clausal hierarchy of 31:34 [see the scheme above].
129 Interpreters that emphasise this phasing are e.g. A. Weiser, Das Buch des Propheten
Jeremia (ATD, 2021), Gttingen 41960, 288; L. Perlitt, Bundestheologie im Alten Testament
(WMANT, 36), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969, 180; R.P. Carroll, The Book of Jeremiah (OTL), Lon-
don 1986, 610; J. Untermann, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transi-
tion (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 97 (with reference to Abarbanel); Schmid, Buchgestalten,
79. is prominent because it occurs nowhere else. Some take it as an equiv-
alent to behold days are coming; others concede that this should have required in those
days. The time phrase has also been related to the days of the covenant breaking (see e.g.
W. Gro, Erneuerter oder Neuer Bund? Wortlaut und Aussageintention in Jer 31,3134, in:
F. Avemarie, H. Lichtenberger (eds), Bund und Tora: Zur theologischen Begriffsgeschichte in
alttestamentlicher, frhjdischer und urchristlicher Tradition, Tbingen 1996, 4166, esp. 57).
N. Riemersma, JHWH sluit een nieuw verbond (Jeremia 31,3134), NTT 65 (2011), 137148,
esp. 141 wants to anticipate etc., seen by him as a relative clause. As an
objection against the view we follow, he maintains that precisely that which has replaced
the proverb is invalidated in 31:3133 (our translation). This objection falls away if 31:30 and
34 are divided over two phases. Fittingly after those days answers how 31:30 and 34 are com-
patible: by spreading them out over time. First limiting the debt to personal debt, thereafter
pardoning this debt in a personal relationship with God.
130 So Schmid, Buchgestalten, 72, 79 following Lohfink.
131 Pace Gro, Bund, 50.
208 chapter three
Their iniquity and their sin, then, does not recollect the iniquity and sin
of the fathers, but the iniquity and sin of the great and small just mentioned.
Correspondingly the final -clause of Jer. 50:20 involves the forgiveness of
the remnant that survived the judgement. How can we then best interpret
the parallelism between vv. 2930 and 34? The clause in vv. 2930 with they
will no longer say is followed by an adversative -clause: no longer will
they A, but B (i.e. what has been denied by A) is now in effect. Similarly this is
the relation between they will no longer teach and the personal knowl-
edge of God in the first -clause of v. 34. A second, motivating -clause,
parallel to v. 30, is required to round off the theme of guilt. How do the
two -clauses in v. 34 relate to each other? Iniquity and sin will be erased
making it possible to know God (= have a personal relation with God). The
book of Jeremiah uses with three times for forgiveness of the sinner
(5:1, 7; 50:20) and three times for the forgiveness of the sin (31:34; 33:8; 36:3).
In 36:3 conversion is a precondition (cf. 5:1, 7). According to 31:34 and 33:8
Yhwh forgives unconditionally (or provides himself in the set condition,
through gifted obedience). The question here is not how forgiveness is pos-
sible, but where it leads. According to 33:8 forgiveness reaches deeper than
cleansing: even rebellion against Yhwh is erased thereby. Further remem-
brance of iniquity and visiting of sins in Jeremiah may be seen in 14:10.
The only Old Testament occurrences of the direct sequence , and
are found in Isa. 43:25 and Jer. 31:34 ;
there are no other noticeable analogies to these two clauses [ 4.2.1].
appears 7 in the Old Testament: Ex. 5:2; Judg. 2:10; 1 Sam. 2:12; 3:7; Jer.
31:34; Hos. 2:22; 6:3; for knowing God see Job 18:21; 1 Chron. 28:9; knowing
me (= Yhwh) Isa. 45:4, 5; Jer. 2:8; 4:22; 9:2, 5, 23; 22:16; 24:7; 31:34; Ezek. 38:16;
Ps. 87:4; knowing you (= Yhwh) Jer. 10:25; Hos. 8:2; Ps. 36:11; 79:6; knowing
him (= Yhwh) Job 24:1; Prov. 3:6; knowledge of Yhwh Isa. 11:2, 9; knowledge
of God Hos. 4:1; Prov. 2:5. Significant is the contrast between Jer. 31:3334
and 2:8: those who (professionally) handle the torah (// the priests) do not
know me.132 The new covenant means that for the torah (which according
to 7:23 places its essence in the command obey my voice and thus envis-
ages a personal relationship with Yhwh; see in 31:33 my torah) one is no
132 With C. Maier, Jeremia als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale Gebote des Deuteronomiums in Fort-
schreibungen des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 196), Gttingen 2002, 193194, in Jer.

2:8 should not be seen as priests, who provided oral instruction (cf. 18:18), but as interpreters
of the written torah, scribes. Cf. K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew
Bible, Cambridge, MA 2007, 80: scholars of scripture.
longer dependent on instruction given by religious authorities.133 Through

from the smallest to the greatest of them, one is reminded of the story of the
young Samuel who did not yet know Yhwh (1Sam. 3:7). Though a difference
in social status (cf. 5:45 contrasting )could also be intended
here, the expression mostly involves the entire community arranged by age.
Knowing God as such is not new, but the fact that everyone will equally share
in this knowledge, without requiring any encouragement or mediation by
others. Scribe, neighbour and brother need not intercede. The one Israelite
will not be closer to God than another.
The difficulty that Jer. 31:34 causes modern readers must derive mainly
from confusion between a torah that God himself has written upon the heart
and mechanical programming, which would result in a static state of sinless-
ness. One need only imagine a future Israelite who no longer has the ability
to identify with the Jacob, Zion, Rachel or Ephraim of Jer. 3031 because he
or she no longer has personal experience of divine pardonreflecting on
what pitfalls readers may become entangled with such interpretations.134
The newness of Jer. 31 is therefore not so much an internalising of the
torah itself as it will in fact be accessible to everyone in the future Israel. The
depiction of Yhwhs law being carried on the heart is older and more general
than the idea that Yhwh inscribed it there with his own hand.135 Gaining
knowledge of God is the goal of obeying the law, which to a certain extent
is relativised by this higher goal. It will be up to each Israelite individually,
under the new covenant, to decide which interpretation of the law will
133 Differently in Ezekiel, 3.1.3.

134 On this see esp. Weiser, Jeremia, 288: Ob jedoch Jeremiah damit sagen will, da die
Menschen des neuen Bundes nicht mehr in Snde fallen knnen (so Rudolph []), scheint
mir fraglich. It is not exclusively a Christian theme. An interpretation in the Jewish tradition
that leans strongly in the other direction is given by Unterman, Repentance, 102: writing the
torah on the heart will lead to absolute obedience which will close out any possibility of sin;
177: Jeremiah abandons the principle of free will. Possibly better is a description as offered by
Fischer, Trostbchlein, 262263, da der Mensch frei, aus innerer berzeugung das tut, was
das gttliche Gesetz besagt; though this formulation still creates the impression that the text
is reacting more to a philosophical problem than an existential question. Nowhere else in the
OT does carrying the torah on the heart (cf. Isa. 51:7) and knowledge of Yhwh evoke the idea of
total sinlessness. Israels future existence is not made dependent on a sinless life in the book
of Jeremiah, but on a relation with Yhwh in which both obedience to the law and forgiveness
of sins play a role. Jer. 50:20 bares the difference between static sinlessness and sins of which,
due to divine pardon, none will be found.
135 If Ps. 37:31; 40:9 and Isa. 51:7 are deemed dependent on Jer. 31:33 (sceptical: Gro, Bund,
61), the question should be answered how these places handle Jer. 31 as a promise. Further
4.2.2 on the more likely dependence direction Isa. 51:7 Jer. 31:33.
210 chapter three
lead him or her to knowing God. The notion that my torah simply means
the Pentateuch as it is fixed in writing contradicts the freedom that the
very book of Jeremiah allows itself towards the letter of the Pentateuch
(7:22!). If God writes something upon my heart, it also wants to say that I
understand what has been written in its deepest sense, and am able to adapt
my thoughts and actions accordingly.136
The question that the promise of the new covenant desires to answer
above all else, is how to find a type of relationship between Yhwh and
Israel that is no longer sanctioned by a collective judgement. What is new
to the new covenant is not that it contains new commandments, nor that
these commandments are carried on the heart, finally making it possible to
have a personal relationship with God (this possibility was always there, see
Samuels coming of age), but that this personal relationship will determine
the entire structure of religious life in Israel, so that a breakdown, with such
catastrophic consequences as were experienced in 587bce, is excluded from
the future.137 What is truly new to the new covenant is its indissolubility. To
this all other characteristics (individualising, laicisation) are subject. This
is also the case with the forgiveness of sins in Jer. 31:34. The cherished
idea in Christian dogma of a non posse peccare presumably falls outside
the questioning horizon of Jeremiahs promise itself. This promise confines
itself to saying that Yhwh will no longer hold the whole of Israel accountable
for the sins of individual Israelites, but commits himself to pardon everyone,
big or small, who hopes for forgiveness. A covenant with the house of Israel
and Judah that rests in personal pardon cannot be broken collectively. Such
a promise offers the reader a practical perspective: it is anti-utopian rather
than utopian.138
136 Collocation of and ( maximum distance of 10 words) occurs in 39 places in the
OT, sometimes in relation to the Decalogue or Deuteronomy, certainly not always with a view
to the Pentateuch. In any case here it is about the commandments in their essence, the will
of God expressed in it. On in Jeremiah, 3.2.4 sub 6.
137 In light of Jer. 11:10 (the house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken the covenant
I made with their fathers) it is unlikely that alone the fathers present at Sinai are implicated
with they in 31:32 (my covenant that they broke), as proposed by A. Schenker, Der nie
aufgehobene Bund: Exegetische Beobachtungen zu Jer 31,3134, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue
Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD 146), Freiburg 1993, 85112,
esp. 109.
138 For the opposite point of view, see Carroll, Jeremiah, 612. Similarly speaking of an
innergeschichtlich nie erreichbare Flle der Gotteserkenntnis als Mitte und Ziel des aus
seinem Innersten neuen Gottesbundes (Zenger, Bundestheologie, 49) diverts too easily
from a promise that further on, and still in strong anti-dualistic terms, involves the historical
survival of Israel (31:3537). The future of a prophetic promise is the future as it has an effect
3.2.3. Literary Structure of Jeremiah 3031139

With Jer. 31:2126 [ 3.2.1] the poetic midsection of Jer. 3031 comes to a
close. It is hemmed in by the prose texts of 30:14 and 31:2734 [ 3.2.2]. Seen
from this framework, 30:531:26 contains all the words (30:2) that Jeremiah
was instructed to write down concerning a hopeful future for Israel and
Judah.
The difference between prose and poetry in Jer. 3031 is relative.140 The
principally poetic midsection for example includes a more or less prosaic
fragment like 30:89, while 31:3537 as a continuation of the prosaic frame
in turn displays poetic traits. Fischer calls 31:2326 a mixture of poetry and
prose.141 If the decision is made to assign this unit to the midsection, it
is therefore not just a matter of stylistics, but accords with the view we
defended above that the unit interprets 31:2122 and concludes the booklet
starting in 30:5 with a personal note from the prophet in 31:26. This last verse
thus functions as a type of colophon at the end of the booklet in the book.142
on the current reader. The criticised commentaries see the promise too descriptively and too
little in its perlocutionary intention (Austin).
139 Cf. Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326, 349364; Idem, Unripe fruit, 8298. Here and in
the subsequent sections we follow JerMT 3031 compared to JerLXX 3738. Besides some
smaller differences, which we will discuss as required, a version of MT 30:1011; 30:15 and
30:22 is absent from LXX. Regarding the last two verses both addition or omission may
be argued. Jer. 30:1011 reoccurs nearly identical in 46:2728 (LXX 26:2728) and could
thus have been left out of the Greek sequence to avoid repetition. This would involve
a culturally determined correction on the reuse of filing notes by the Hebrew authors
as literary production technique. Jer. 30:1011 seems to be anchored deeply in the direct
context (cf. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 6162; B. Becking, Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on
the Interpretation of Jeremiah 3031 (OTS, 51), Leiden 2004, 18) and moreover is functional in
the dramatic structure of Jer. 30:531:26 [ 4.2.1].
140 On the prosaic and poetic characteristics of the separate segments, see Fischer, Trost-
bchlein, 85; on the flowing transition between prose and poetry in general, see Becking,
Jeremiah 3031, 60. On the other hand, the most evident differences could be made too incon-
spicuous through a uniform presentation of the text according to the Masoretic verse format
and accentuation.
141 Fischer, Trostbchlein, 86: ein gemischter bergang.
142 According to Becking, Jeremiah 3031, 72 Jer. 31:26 corresponds like an envelope with
30:4. It is however unlikely that the prophet himself is saying 30:4. Fischer, Trostbchlein,
124 sees a correspondence between the I-clause in 31:26 and the we-clause of 30:5 and
understands both as utterances of Yhwh. Note the correspondence between 31:26 and the
postscript of the Mesopotamian Song of Erra, ca. 800 bce (cited by Van der Toorn, Scribal
Culture, 211212): In the middle of the night He (i.e., the god) revealed it to him, And exactly
as He had spoken during the morning slumber, He (the author) did not skip a single line, nor
did he add one to it. When Erra heard it, he approved.
212 chapter three
Still, 30:14 and 31:2740 on the one hand, and 30:531:26 on the other,
exhibit universal characteristics of prose and poetry: speaking-about con-
trasting speaking-to, direct statements contrasting metaphors, argumenta-
tion contrasting evocation, programme contrasting scenario. The ability of
Jer. 3031 to combine scenario and programme, as mutually supportive ways
to talk about the future, will provide us later on with a convenient point
of reference to consider the relation between the salvation prophecies of
Ezekiel, Deutero-Isaiah and Jeremiah from a hermeneutical point of view
[ 4.2.3].
With this variation in style a second structural factor comes into play. Jer.
3031 enables the readers attention to sway between the time periods, in a
manner that is unique to prophetic literature: the moment when Jeremiah
receives his dream visions; the moment when Yhwh instructs him to set
these visions down on paper; the immediacy of the narrator who is recount-
ing all this; and finally the period of the coming days, which in turn display a
remarkable phasing on their own [ 3.2.2]. This phasing enables the reader
to relate the promise to what has started alreadyor at least allows him to
ask to what extent these things might be taking place in his own lifetime.
The days that will come are indeed futurist from the prophetic perspective
of Jeremiah, but there is no need to separate them from the here and now of
the reader.143 On the other hand, the past perspective of the prophet contin-
ues to be as meaningful as the readers present. Just as a has the ability
to bridge spatial distances (29:1; 51:60), it is able to bridge time. This must be
the intention with the writing assignment in 30:2 (see also 32:14). Especially
the notion of remoteness evoked through the word remoteness from
a peaceful future beyond the catastrophemanifests for the reader the vast
difference between Jeremiahs prophecy of salvation and the peace peace
of the false prophets.144 For their untimely promise no written document was
needed.
143 The formula behold days are coming occurs 21 in the OT, of which 15 in Jer. (includ-
ing 31:38 Qere; 14 followed by declares Yhwh). The distribution over curses against Israel,
curses against another nation and blessings for Israel is resp. 3, 4 and 8. It is clear from
most of the curses that they have already been fulfilled from a readers point of view. Behold
days are coming as such is therefore not an eschatological formula, not even in the broadest
sense of the word. On this important point our interpretation counters the view, such as
that of Maier, Lehrer, 352, that the promise of Jer. 31:3134 is destined fr eine nicht nher
bestimmte, ferne Zukunft, meaning that the reader of today would still have to resort to the
written torah (= the Pentateuch).
144 Cf. H. Leene, Blowing the Same Shofar: An Intertextual Comparison of Representations
The whole complex culminates in two concluding oracles, which are

arranged according to the covenantal formula, on the assuredness of the
decrees in favour of Israel (31:3537) and on the future demarcation of the
region dedicated to Yhwh (31:3840). The structure of the whole complex
may be schematised as follows:
30:01 Narrative A
02 Yhwhs instruction to Jeremiah to record words B
in a book
03 Motivation: because B
days to comereturn
04 Narrative A
30:0531:26 Jeremiahs booklet C
31:2730 days to comerestoration B
3134 days to comeinner change B
31:3540 Concluding oracles C?
First of all this scheme offers an overview of the domains of communica-

tion: (A) narrator to reader (30:1, 4); (B) Yhwh to Jeremiah (instruction to
write plus motivation 30:23 and 31:2734); (C) Jeremiah to reader (content
of the booklet 30:531:26). Domain C contains various subdomains, such as
Yhwh addressing Jacob, Zion, Ephraim, etc. Similar to many other places
in Jeremiah, the domain divisions in Jer. 3031 are not noticeably conse-
quent. This especially regards 31:3537, which as a poem would best restore
under domain C, while it is formally not part of the booklet but, along with
31:3840, continues the accompanying explanation; in this manner things
are often quite confusing. On its own it would have been conceivable to read
the motivated writing assignment as part of the pamphlet that Jeremiah
should compose; a counter argument is that Jer. 36 and 5051 equally distin-
guish between the act of writing, ancillary considerations, and the content
of the Prophetic Role in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in: J.C. de Moor (ed.), The Elusive Prophet: The
Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous Artist (OTS, 45), Leiden
2001, 175198, esp. 184. This is an argument against the suggestion of Carroll, Jeremiah, 568
that precisely the writing of the book in Jer. 3031 was meant as a magical gesture. See in this
regard how terror and no peace in 30:5 alludes critically to 6:14; 8:11 [ 3.2.5.3]. H. Knobloch,
Die nachexilische Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12), Wiesbaden 2009, 160: Im
Gegensatz zu Jer 36 wird [in Jer 30] nun explizit die Verschriftungsttigkeit allein Jeremia
angeordnet, wobei die Stellvertretung des Propheten durch die Trostrolle [] nun auch den
temporalen Aspekt umfasst.
214 chapter three
of what is written itself.145 But in any case, we may maintain irrespective of

all the complications that Jer. 3031 forms a single literary construction, and
that the booklet and its framing communicate their message only through
their interaction.
The scheme above further demonstrates how the motivation behind the
writing assignment in Jer. 30:3 is continued in 31:2734. This motivation
concentrates on three consecutive actions: return, restoration and inner
change. Yhwh makes the promise that the people will return, will be restored
and will be renewed; and now to supply this threefold promise with extra
impetus, Jeremiahs poetic words in 30:531:26 had to be written down
for future generations. This seems to be the most logical way to read the
complexity as a whole. Thus through the framing, the central vision is made
subservient to a further reaching purpose.
How odd is it that this motivational triad is broken sharply, to be retaken
after the result of the writing assignment has been worded in the interim?
On closer inspection it appears that the point of the interruption has been
chosen carefully. Above all, 30:531:26 deals with the return. Following on
30:3, I will bring them back, Jeremiahs poetic dream vision culminates in
the portrayal of Israels glorious journey home. At the very end of this inter-
mezzo a single image refers to the peaceful life of farmers and shepherds
in Judah (31:2326),146 and the next prosaic motivations connect with this
image smoothly, referring to social restoration and inner change.147 In this
way the composition organises the booklets motivational embedding quite
artistically.
Of the passages discussed above that have new as their keyword, the
first (31:2122, 2326) belongs to the poetic midsection, and the second
(31:2730, 3134) belongs to the argumentative prose text, which introduces
and concludes the poetry. The first passage then forms part of the scenario,
the second of the programme of Jer. 3031. One of the intriguing questions
of this study regards the relation between the newness concepts that these
145 K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und
Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, 10
even considers whether the of 30:2 could at any stage of the books genesis have encom-
passed the whole of Jer. 3033. In light of the new word reception formula in 32:1 this is
unlikely.
146 See also the vineyards in 31:5.
147 LXX attempts to facilitate the connection between 38:27 (= 31:27 MT) and the foregoing
by repeating with which v. 26 commenced: Therefore, days will come On the

triad return-restoration-change, see the analysis of Jer. 24 [ 3.2.4 sub 1].
two distinctive domains, as possible (but not necessary) diachronic strata,

represent. There are few prophetic texts in the Old Testament that have
challenged scholars alone by their inbuilt ladder of time so strongly, leading
to similar speculations on their literary history as in this case; but that
text-genetic aspect we can let lie until 3.2.5.1. The short sketch above may
suffice as a first orientation to the multi-layered and perspectival world of
imagination in which the reader sees himself involved by Jeremiahs Booklet
of Comfort.
3.2.4. The Embedding of Jeremiah 3031: A Few Aspects

The relationship between Jer. 3031 and the rest of the book of Jeremiah has
been analysed from different points of view. The most detailed examina-
tions focus on analogous clauses and mutual phrases.148 More generally it is
asked where else words of salvation occur in the book, to subject these to a
comparison with the Booklet of Comfort.149 Likewise how Jer. 3031 is posi-
tioned in the book, where it precedes the narration on Jerusalems downfall,
has been taken into consideration.
The orientation in this section links with the terms defined above: resti-
tution scenario and restitution programme. Jer. 3031, as we have seen, is
a unique combination of the two. Although the many scenes of Jer. 30:4
31:26 remind us of individual texts occurring elsewhere in the book, as sce-
nario it remains an exceptional phenomenon. This is not the case with the
programme with its sequenced return-restoration-renewal from the prose
frame, Jer. 30:13+31:2734. This comparative section will concentrate on
the programme. We will return to the scenario in relation to the drama of
Deutero-Isaiah [ 4.2].
Due to their restitution programme, Jer. 24:57; 29:1014 and 32:3741 are
ideal passages for a comparison with Jer. 3031. Special attention will be
given to the sequence of actions announced in these promises, and their
unconditionality. The inquiry in this section is synchronic, though it will be
unavoidable to make occasional diachronic digressions. To conclude we will
reflect on the (un)conditional return in a few other texts in Jeremiah, as well
148 See G. Fischer, Das Trostbchlein: Text, Komposition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB,
26), Stuttgart 1993, 140185. For a modest sample in this regard, see the presentation of Jer.
31:3134 towards the end of this section.
149 Words with a salvific perspective in Jeremiah include: 3:64:2; 5:1819; 12:1417; 15:1921;
16:1415; 17:2426; 22:24; 23:38; 24:47; 25:1114; 27:22; 29; 3031; 32; 33; 35:1819; 39:1518;
42:1013; 45; 4651.
216 chapter three
as consider the themes of the covenant and the torah as seen within in the
context of the whole book.
(1) Jer. 24:57. A text-grammatical segmentation of Jer. 24 provides the fol-

lowing subdivisions: vv. 12, 3, 410. The last segment contains an extensive
direct speech, which is made up of two parts: vv. 57 and 810. In vv. 1
2 Jeremiah describes the vision that he received after the deportation of
Jehoiachin and a group of Judeans in 597: one basket with good figs and
one with bad figs have been placed before the temple of Jerusalem. As it
is customary the dating of the story is provided in the first textual domain
(Jeremiahs narrative), but due to its notable position in v. 1 it equally dates
the historical situation that is depicted in the second domain (the prophetic
vision). After a short dialogue between Yhwh and Jeremiah and after the
fixed formula that introduces the actual prophecy, the divine explanation of
the vision follows in vv. 510. This divine explanation forms the pericopes
central focus.
In vv. 57 the good figs are treated: they signify those people that were
carried away to Babylon under Jehoiachin. Yhwh will show favour and bring
them back home, build and plant them once more in the land and give them
a knowing heart.
In vv. 810 it is the turn of the bad figs: they indicate those that will share
in the fall of Jerusalem in 587 with Zedekiah. Their lot will not end happily,
of both those who will remain behind in the land and those that will flee to
Egypt; so unhappily that they will become a horrifying warning for all the
kingdoms of the world. Sword, famine and plague will ravage them, until
they are entirely vanquished from the homeland soil.
To briefly anticipate the diachronic analysis [ 3.2.5.2], the pericope
could only have come into existence a good length of time after Judahs
political downfall. The readers must have understood the text in this way:
there is hope for restoration and renewal, but then under the condition
that Judahs fall is first accepted as Yhwhs just punishment. Without this
acceptance there is no hope. In Jer. 24, Zedekiah cum suis represent those
who want to continue resisting Yhwhs righteous judgement to the bitter
end. Thus they find themselves in a dead end. On the other hand, the hope
for restoration should not be based on any moral superiority, as the reader
should realise from the need for a new heart exactly for those that have been
carried away to Babylon under Jehoiachin.
The good and bad figs thus do not represent good and bad Judeans, but
they indicate how the Judeans behaviour may give rise to either salvation
or condemnation according to their reaction (enforced or not) to the pun-
ishing actions of Yhwh. We will return to this ideal-typical character of the

two groups in later sections.
The scheme below depicts the text-grammatical structure of Jer. 24:5
7, the passage in which the perspective of hope for those deported is de-
veloped.150
05 a Thus says Yhwh the God of Israel [5] |
b Like these good figs [2] |
c so I will regard the deported from Judah [7] |
d whom I have sent away from this place
to the land of the Chaldeans for (its) good [1] |
06 a and I will set my eye upon them for (their) good [5] |
b and I will have them return to this land [2] |
c and I will build them |
d and not tear down [5] |
e and I will plant them |
f and not uproot [1] |
07 a and I will give them a heart |
b to know me [7] |
c that I am Yhwh [5] |
d and they will be my people [5] |
e and I [5] will be their God [2] |
f for they will return to me with all their heart [1] |
According to the Masoretic accents, is not the resumption of Jer. 24:5c,
so I will regard the deported from Judah for (their) good, but continues 5d,
whom I have sent away from this place to the land of the Chaldeans for (its)
good.151 A possible objection against this delineation could be that sending
for good is too unique a combination for such a subordinate clause.152 In its
defence one could argue that it prevents 6a, and I will set my eye upon them
for (their) good, becoming an unnecessary repetition, whereas sending for
150 For a comparison, see the dividing accents of the Masorah.

151 JerLXX 24:5 connects with the sending away.
152 and do not appear elsewhere in collocation. K.-F. Pohlmann, Studien zum
Jeremiabuch: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der Entstehung des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 118),
Gttingen 1978, 20, 22, 185 reads them together. K.A.D. Smelik, Het gezicht van de twee vijgen-
korven: De plaats van hoofdstuk 24 in het boek Jeremia, Kampen 1991, 18 discusses the problem
and reads with ;this is also the choice of all the modern translations taken up in
the SESB.
218 chapter three
(its) good is able to anticipate the theme of the Judeans beneficial presence
in Babylon according to Jer. 29:7. This leads us to connect for good in 5d with
I have sent.
The steps in the segmenting of Jer. 24:6 are: linking the weqatal-clauses a
and b; connecting the we--yiqtol clauses d and f with resp. c and e; and
linking cd and e-f on the grounds of their formal parallelism. It is less
evident to link the segments a-b and c-f directly with each other.
Establishing the hierarchy in Jer. 24:7 requires precision from those who
wish to determine the place of the heart in the promise. The connections
between a, b and c speak for themselves. Concerning d, e and f: here the
coupling of d and e, based on the x-yiqtol pattern of e, which otherwise
stands parallel to d, precedes the connection of f to this unit. This means that
f is neither dependent on a-c, nor on just e. The -yiqtol-clause motivates
the whole d-e: because those who were deported will return to Yhwh with
their whole heart, the relationship of solidarity formulated in d-e will arise.153
Literarily Jer. 24:7 forms a chiasm, especially through the placement of the
word at the beginning and at the end:
And I will give them a heart
to know me,
that I am Yhwh;
153 Smelik argues for a temporal view of the -clause, but converted into a translation it
continues to make a conditional impression. The majority of modern translations interpret

the -clause as a causative. NBS translates it conditionally, but provides the causative alter-
native in a note: parce quils reviendront. The strong conditional version of the NBV is unique:
I give them the insight that I am the LORD; if they return to me with their whole heart, they
will be my people and I will be their God (our translation). In this way God gifts a heart
(= insight) which might not be used: difficult to place in OT anthropology. The possibil-
ity that Deut. 30:10 is being cited should not be the determining factor in the question on
the (un)conditionality; see below on Jer. 29:13. According to Schmid, Buchgestalten, 255 the
conditional conclusion of 24:7 does not accord frictionlessly (reibungslos) with the gift of a
new heart. The point is that, diachronically, the text here seems to reveal something of a pre-
vious dialogue (with Deuteronomy) on the conditionality of the promise, but syntactically
suppresses this conditionality in the eventual formulation. J. Unterman, From Repentance
to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 81 on the one
hand emphasises the unconditionality, but on the other, resists the deterministic concep-
tion that the gift of the heart will forcibly bring about the return of the people to YHWH. In
this spirit also B. Scheuer, The Return to YHWH: The Tension between Deliverance and Repen-
tance in Isaiah 4055 (BZAW, 377), Berlin 2008, 114: mutual co-operation between Yhwh and
Israel, according to Jer. 24:7, is needed to assure future salvation. In our view, deterministic
misunderstandings in interpreting Jeremiah are avoidable by not allowing the conversion
as a gift and the conversion as a command to diminish each other; see below in this sec-
tion.
and they will be my people

and I will be their God,
for they will return to me with all their heart.
When the segments vv. 5be, 6ab, 6cf and 7 are viewed in their mutual
relationship, then the most prominent caesura lies between 6b and c.
Through the semantic isotopy in regard and in my eye, the correspondence
between land of the Chaldeans and this land as well as the repetition of
the prepositional phrase for good, 5be and 6ab are closely associated and
together form one segment, contrary to what the versification may suggest.
Subsequently, when 6cf (restoration) and 7 (inner renewal) are connected,
two textual units stand out, each ending with return: the return to the land
(6b) and the return to Yhwh (7f).
If we now compare Jer. 24:57 with 30:13+ 31:2734 we come across
a deep rooted similarity in the sequence of actions. The triad return
restoration inner change is marked sharply in both. The most prominent
caesura in 24:57 is found exactly where in Jer. 3031 the poetic midsection
interrupts the prose frames sequence of actions, that is: between return
and restoration. The restoration is announced in these passages using the
same terms of planting and building.154 The gift of a knowing heart in 24:7
corresponds with the writing of the torah on the heart in 31:33, equally
resulting in knowledge of Yhwh. In both instances the covenant formula
describes the new relation between God and his people.
However there is one noticeable difference. The promise of Jer. 24:57 will
apply to the galut of Judah, the deportees of 597 in contrast to those that
experienced the destruction of Jerusalem in 587. In Jer. 3031 that division
is no longer under discussion. Here return, restoration and inner change are
offered to the entire house of Israel and Judah. Later we shall see that what
seems to be a tension disappears to a large extent in an ideal-typical view of
the galut in Jer. 24 [ 3.2.5.4].
(2) Jer. 29:1014. This promise forms part of Jeremiahs letter to the exiles,
which is dated between the deportation of Jehoiachin (597) and the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem (587) by the narrative, like the vision of the figs. After an
expansive introduction detailing the address, time and means of dispatch-
ment (13) follows the letters body, which reveals this structure:
154 For the series planting-building etc. see Jer. 1:10; 24:6; 31:28; 42:10; 45:4.
220 chapter three
47 Poetic nucleus of the letter:

Build houses, plant gardens, etc.
89 Misleading prophecy
1014 Positive perspective for the deportees
15 Objection of the deportees
1619 Negative perspective for the people left behind
2023 Lot of the prophets Ahab and Zedekiah
The coordination between vv. 1014 and 1619, indicated by the innermost
bracket, is similar to the coordination between Jer. 24:57 and 810; the letter
creates this coordination through word repetitions and communal layers of
meaning. For the exiles Yhwh will fulfil his good word (10) because he has no
bad thoughts about them (11); those left behind on the contrary will turn into
vile figs, too bad to be eaten (17). The exiles Yhwh will gather from all the
nations where I have driven you (14), but those left behind will become a
reproach among all the nations where I have driven them (18).
The concentric pattern ABCBA is completed by vv. 89 (A) and
vv. 2023 (A). These passages concern salvation preachers operating among
the deportees. The judgement in v. 9, they prophesy a lie to you in my name,
which is passed on prophets, diviners and dreamers in Babylon, is directed
at the prophets Ahab and Zedekiah in v. 21. In the motivation at the close
we find the terms in my name and lie repeated once more: because they
have spoken a word in my name which is a lie (23).
The assertiveness with which Yhwh distances himself from their word
(I know and I am witness, v. 23) balances the assertiveness with which he
had underlined his own good word (I myself know the thoughts I think
about you, v. 11). It is noteworthy that the letter ignores the actual content
of the false prophecy. It seems as if the reader is expected to know Jer. 27
28, where similar misleading announcements are reported from Jerusalem:
underestimating the seriousness of the situation, unwilling to see Yhwhs
hand in the actions of Babylon, and foretelling the exiles speedy return
under Jehoiachin. To this profile, Jer. 29 has nothing more to add.
As in Jer. 24:57, it is primarily the syntax that decides about the condi-
tioned or unconditioned character of the promise in 29:1014. Interpreters
and translators weigh three possible segmentings of v. 13:
(a) The first segmentation keeps to the versification of MT. It is followed

by the NIV, NBS, NBG and NBV. The translation of the -clause may vary
between being weak conditional (NIV, NBG) or strong conditional (NBV) to
clearly causal (NBS).
a And you will seek me |

b and find [2] |
c for you will ask for me with all your heart [1] |
This causal translation of the -clause appears to be the most obvious in
light of its syntactic variance with Deut. 4:29:
a And there you will seek Yhwh your God |
b and you will find [2] |
c if you ask for him [5] with all your heart and with all your soul [1]
Here b and c correspond through their number in the verbal forms, 2nd
person singular compared to 2nd person plural in a: an invitation to first
link c with b and thereafter segment b-c with a. In Jer. 29:13 this difference
in number has disappeared, resulting in a natural connection between a and
b. The effect is that in v. 13c is not properly translated as if: this sentence
no longer provides the condition for finding, but the reason why the search
must lead irrevocably to the sought.
(b) Another possibility is to deviate from the versification of MT and place

the sp pasq behind the first clause(s) of v. 14:
13 a And you will seek me |
b and find [2] |
c if you ask for me with all your heart [1] |
14 a I will let myself be found by you |
b declares Yhwh [3] |
This solution (cf. Rudolph in BHS) is employed for example by WV. A pause
is then created between 13b and c, which automatically leads to a condi-
tional reading of the -clause. In this interpretation the concluding
disturbs somewhat, since a transitional oracle formula seems more in
line with the rhetorical movement of the passage.
(c) A third option is to move the sp pasq forward, resulting in 13c becom-
ing the protasis of v. 14. This segmentation is followed by B/R, E, REB and
(with a strong conditional translation of 13c) NRSV:
b and find [2] |
c If you will ask for me with all your heart [1] |
14 a I will let myself be found by you |
c and I will turn your fortunes [7] |
222 chapter three
Compared to these solutions it is clear that the MT did not want to

sharpen the conditional character of 13c. The course of the argument behind
the promise as a whole provides no reason for such conditionality. The
logic in the MT-versification is that after the seeking-finding-asking of Israel
in v. 13, Yhwhs letting be found in v. 14 must introduce his own actions:
turning-gathering-having return.
10 a For thus says Yhwh [5] |
b When seventy years are completed for Babylon |
c I will visit you [2] |
d and I will fulfil for you my good word [5] |

e to have you return [5] to this place [1] |
11 a For I myself know the thoughts [7] |

b that I think about you |
c declares Yhwh [2] |
d thoughts of peace and not of evil [5] |

e to give you a future and a hope [1] |
12 a And you will call upon me |

b and go [5] |
c and pray to me [2] |
d and I will hear you [1] |

b and find [2] |
c for you will ask for me with all your heart [1] |
14 a And I will let myself be found by you |

c and I will turn your fortunes [7] |
d and I will gather you from all the nations and

from all the places [7] |
e where I have driven you |
f declares Yhwh [2] |
g and I will have you return [5] to the place [5] |

h from which I have deported you [1] |
Where the shorter brackets in this scheme are thus more or less enforced
by the syntax, the longer brackets result from an exegetical balancing of
syntactic and semantic perspectives:
10 After 70 years of Babylonian rule, Yhwh will fulfil his good word.
1112 His thoughts of peace will be welcomed by the exiles by way of
prayer (cf. 29:7).
13 The exiles will seek and find him.
14 Yhwh will let himself be found and have the exiles return to
Jerusalem.
This sequence of actions differs from that in Jer. 24 and Jer. 3031, return
restoration inner change. The difference, however, can be explained to
a large extent from the specific interest of Jer. 29. This does not concern
the exiles situation after their repatriation, but the implications of their
semi-permanent residence in Babylon. Already in Babylon a call is made
to build and plant and not to become distracted from it by misleading
prophecies. In the same Babylon where they have to pray for the citys
peace, after 70 years they will pray to return home. And still, even if this
search for God according to the letter precedes the return chronologically,
one cannot claim the promise to return has, therefore, been conditioned
by it. Precisely the subtle syntactic variation from related statements in
Deuteronomy makes it clear that this future search itself has been included
in the fulfilment of the promise. Thereby the difference vis--vis Jer. 24 and
3031 has become more a question of literary shaping than of theological
controversy.155
(3) Jer. 32:3741. The story of Jeremiahs purchase of a field in ch. 32 is built
up with the following components:
0105 Introduction
0615 Purchase of the field and preservation of the contract
1625 Prayer of Jeremiah
2644 Yhwhs answer
155 One truth is that in its focus on the situation of the exiles and scattered people, Jer.
29 connects closely to Deut. 4:29; 30:2 and 1 Kgs 8:4748. Concerning the conditionality
of the promise, Jer. 29 deviates from these texts. For other accents, see e.g. K. Schmid,
Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches. Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte
von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, 241.
224 chapter three
The prayer and the answer are closely related. Together they tie in with
the commission given to the prophet on the eve of Judahs political and
social collapse to do something that suggests the survival of his own fam-
ily and the future welfare of his native village Anathoth. The strength of the
narrative, which reminds of a classic drama in its theatrical unity of time,
place and action, is found in the promise of salvations deep integration in
Jeremiahs eventful biography.156 Return, change and restoration are compo-
nents of Yhwhs answer, which is structured as follows:
27 Nothing is too wonderful

2835 Catastrophe
2829 Announcement: Surrender of the city to the Chaldeans
3035 Motivation:
3032 The city of Jerusalem as insulting construction
3335 Account of the transgressions
3644 Salvation
3741 Announcement: Gathering and return: Israels
fear and Yhwhs mercy
4244 Motivation:
4243 Salvation is as certain as calamity
44 Future purchasing of fields
The particularity of this answer compared to Jer. 24 and 29 lies in it not

spreading calamity and salvation over different groups anymore, but unfold-
ing them for the whole Judean community as successive phases in Yhwhs
wonderful plan. Where this divine answer ends with a promise about the
sale of fields and thus links closely with the storys starting point, this con-
crete conclusion of Jer. 32 is preceded by a more general promise of salvation,
the structure of which we will now analyse more closely.
The clause that draws the most attention syntactically is 40d: and the
fear of me I will give in their heart. If a we-x-yiqtol clause cannot be con-
nected directly to an immediately foregoing weqatal-clause (as for example
in v. 38b), such an inversion usually introduces a new movement. The only
directly comparable instances in Jeremiah and Ezekiel have + noun fol-
lowed by yiqtol at the beginning of a verse: Jer. 34:21 and Ezek. 36:27. The
156 Cf. J. Applegate, Peace, peace, when there is no peace: Redactional Integration of
Prophecy of Peace into the Judgement of Jeremia, in: A.H.W. Curtis, T. Rmer (eds), The Book
of Jeremiah and its Reception (BEThL, 128), Leuven 1997, 5190, esp. 83.
content of the promise in vv. 3941 is determined by the infinitives, which

alternately describe the behaviour of the returnees and God:
39b to fear me (subj. the people)

40c to do good to them (subj. Yhwh)
40e not to turn away from me (subj. the people)
41b to do good to them (subj. Yhwh)
In unison these perspectives support a division of vv. 3941 over two parallel
segments, in which the movement progresses from fear to doing good:
39a40c and 40d41c. One could say that in each segment fear precedes
doing good as a prerequisite, even if it is Yhwh who will give the returnees
fear for him and thereby he himself will provide in the condition for his own
benefaction.
37 a Behold I will gather them
from all the countries [5] |
b where I drove them
in my anger and in my wrath and in great indignation [2]
c and I will have them return to this place [5] |

d and have them live in safety [1] |
38 a and they will be my people [2] |

b and I will be their God [1] |
39 a and I will give them one heart and one way [5] |
b to fear me all days [2] for their own good [5]
and that of their children after them [1] |
40 a and I will make with them an everlasting covenant [5] |

b that I will not turn away from them [5] |
c to do good to them [2] |
d and the fear of me I will give in their heart [5] |

e not to turn away from me [1] |
41 a and I will rejoice over them |

b to do good to them [2] |
c and I will plant them in this land in faithfulness [5]
with all my heart and all my soul [1] |
Within vv. 39a40c the indications of time correspond, all days in v. 39b and
everlasting in v. 40a; here one could also associate Israels way in v. 39a and
Yhwhs never turning away from them in v. 40c. The segment vv. 40d41c
226 chapter three
has a less rounded structure, even as the heart of Israel in 40d corresponds
with the heart of Yhwh in 41c; to this enduring relation with Yhwh, Israels
permanent planting in the land connects itself.
It seems as if the second segment should form a climax in relation to the
first segment. Besides giving a heart to fear, Yhwh gives the returnees the
fear itself in their heart. And Yhwhs benefaction out of self-commitment in
the final instance appears to be a benefaction resulting from his joy over the
new Israel, accompanied by reflections on what his benevolence will consist
of concretely.
Our segmentation does not agree with the Masoretic versification which
is followed in the modern translations.157 At first glance these translations
attach due significance to the correspondenceincidentally in different
tensesbetween Yhwhs I will not turn away in 40b and Israels not to
turn away from me in 40e. The two negations, however, could equally be
understood as a chiastic element in the illustrated parallelism 39a40c //
40d41c: because of what they will do, I do not ; because of what they will
not do, I do The handed down versification makes it more difficult to grasp
the structure of vv. 3941 as a whole.
An agreement with Jer. 24:57 and Jer. 3031 (prose framing) is that
these promises similarly contain the elements return, restoration and inner
change. The difference lies in their sequences: in Jer. 32:3741, inner change
precedes the social restoration. Here the narrative framework of Jer. 32 must
have been decisive: if Yhwhs answer wishes to retake the theme with which
the whole story commenced, the sale of fields, then the end of vv. 3741
should contain a stepping stone to this themewhich the word plant (41c)
provides satisfactorily.158
The three passages also share the covenant formula. What stands out in
Jer. 32 is the use of terminology in the formulas extensive explanation that
reminds strongly of Deuteronomy (see esp. Deut. 5:29 Oh that they had such
a heart to fear me that it might go well [ ]with them and with their
children for ever).159 A noticeable difference from Jer. 3031 is that in Jer.
157 Though the German translations B/R, E and REB place a full stop after 40ac against
their convention; possibly it is reasoned that the fear gifted by Yhwh cannot belong here to
his eternal covenant.
158 In 3.2.5.3 we will discuss the relations with Ezekiel, which could have played an
additional role in the sequence of the restitution programme in Jer. 32.

159 Other similar occurrences include Deut. 4:40; 12:25 (that it may go well with you, and
with your children after you); as a contrast, see the citation from Deut. 29:27 (in anger and in
32 covenant does not implicate Israels obligation to obey, but only Yhwhs
own commitment to do good. Further on in this section this diverse usage
of the concept covenant in Jeremiah will be discussed.
As far as structure is concerned, Jer. 32:3741 is the furthest from 29:1014.
The covenant formula with its notion of attained destination apparently is
less well suited to that Babylonian interim residence. On the other hand,
32:3738 reminds strongly of 29:14dh and I will gather you from all the
nations and from all the places where I have driven you, declares Yhwh, and I
will have you return to the place from which I have deported you. Along with
Jer. 23:3 these are the only instances in the Old Testament where gathering,
driving and having return appear in collocation.
(4) Unconditional return. Certainly, the three discussed passages are not the
only examples in the book of Jeremiah that exhibit an underlying discussion
on the conditionality of salvation, as for instance can be seen in a compar-
ison between the following places dealing with the return or conversion to
Yhwh:
03:22
04:01
15:19
31:18
Where agreement is easily reached on Jer. 3:22 (Return, turnable children, I

will heal your turnings), this is not the case regarding the scope of the other
three places. The examples below indicate how the discussion on condition-
ality in each instance is continued between the modern translators:
04:01 Wenn du umkehren willst, Israel Spruch des Herrn , darfst du zu mir
zurckkehren; (E)
Wenn du umkehrst, Israel, spricht der HERR, zu mir umkehrst (REB)
If you return, O Israel, says the Lord, if you return to me, (NRSV)
If you will return, O Israel, return to me, declares the Lord. (NIV)
Isral, si tu reviens, si tu reviens moi, dclaration du Seigneur (NBS)
Si tu reviens, Isral oracle du Seigneur , cest moi que tu dois revenir.
(TOB)
wrath and in great indignation) in Jer. 32:37 (cf. 21:5). What is striking in this Deuteronomic
context is that the covenant formula in Jer. 32:38 (type C) reminds of Ezekiel and not
Deuteronomy [ 3.2.5.3].
228 chapter three
15:19 Wenn du umkehrst, lasse ich dich umkehren, dann darfst du wieder vor mir
stehen. (E)
Wenn du umkehrst, will ich dich umkehren lassen, da du vor mir stehst
(REB)
If you turn back, I will take you back, and you shall stand before me (NRSV)
If you repent, I will restore you | that you may serve me; (NIV)
Si tu reviens, je te ramnerai et tu te tiendras ton poste devant moi; (NBS)
Si tu reviens, moi te faisant revenir, tu te tiendras devant moi. (TOB)
31:18 Fhr mich zurck, umkehren will ich; denn du bist der Herr, mein Gott.
(E)
La mich umkehren, da ich umkehre, denn du, HERR, bist mein Gott.
(REB)
Bring me back, let me come back, for you are the Lord my God. (NRSV)
Restore me, and I will return, because you are the Lord my God. (NIV)
ramne-moi, et je reviendrai, car tu es le Seigneur (YHWH), mon Dieu.
(NBS)
fais-moi revenir, que je puisse revenir, car toi, Seigneur, tu es mon Dieu.
(TOB)
The problem is that sometimes indicates a change for the better as
behaviour (a), and sometimes a change for the better as fate or gift (b). In
addition, on one occasion a may serve as condition for b, and on another
occasion as the effect of b. The first is probably the intention of 15:19 (if a, then
b; differently TOB), the second the intention of 31:18 (if b, then a; differently
NRSV). In the second verbal clause of 4:1 [] , some see a continuation
of the protasis (REB, NRSV, NBS, NIV, TOB), in contrast others take it as a first
apodosis (E). A comparison with 15:19 and 31:18 encourages accepting a
similar protasis-apodosis construction in 4:1a, resulting in an interpretation
that activates the two meanings of return (if a, then b). Thus the view we
reach is not far from the E: If you will return, Israel , you may return to
me (= I will take you under my care again, cf. 15:19).160 The verse concludes
the second part of the books prologue (3:14:2), which encircles the concept
return from beginning to end.161 One may rightly claim that 4:1 and 15:19
emphasise the conditionality of the salvation, but it is incorrect to say that
31:18 sets unconditionality as its diametrical contrast. As a prayer 31:18b itself
is a turn towards Yhwh, and thereby transcends the dilemma; and within the
160 Cf. J. Unterman, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition
(JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 34: In other words, if the people repent, God will take them back.
161 Jer. 3:14:2 counts 11 occurrences of the verb , 5 of the noun and 2 of the
adjective . The noun and adjective indicate the peoples turning away from Yhwh, the
verb always carries the turning towards him (with as exception the first occurrence, in 3:1).
context of Jer. 3031, this prayer forms part of a promise. In this manner Jer.
31:18 illustrates, like no other proof text in the book, that the promise does
not revoke the call to conversion, but may encompass the answer to this call
in its phrasing.162
(5) Covenant. We return to our comparison between Jer. 24:57; 29:1014;

32:3741 and the restitution programme of Jer. 3031. There is a noticeable
similarity between the promised sequences of action in Jer. 24 and 3031:
return restoration inner change. In Jer. 29 the sequence is: restora-
tion (already in Babylon) inner change return, where the change is
certainly not a resolutive condition in the promise, but owes its middle
position to the particular interest shown by Jeremiahs letter in the Babylo-
nian residence. In Jer. 32: return inner change restorationa sequence
that makes it possible for the promise to result in the future sale of fields,
but which does not indicate a Deuteronomic conditionality.163 It is clear
that here the interpretation is wrestling somewhat with the concept condi-
tional. An unconditional promise may contain conditional elements. God
himself may have to provide for the inner change of Israel that makes exter-
nal restoration possible (see previously Ezekiel). Just in Jer. 24 and 3031, as
the very last step of the programme, inner change is completely detached
from any such subordinate relation.
The promised change is described as a knowing heart (Jer. 24), or as
asking for Yhwh with all the heart (Jer. 29), as torah written on the heart
(Jer. 3031), or as fear in the heart given by Yhwh himself (Jer. 32). With the
exception of the letter in Jer. 29, the promise is always accompanied by the
covenant formula. A striking difference lies in the addressees. In Jer. 24 and
29: those carried away in captivity under Jehoiachin, contrasting those that
stayed behind under Zedekiah. In Jer. 32: the inhabitants of Jerusalem, after
their own deportation under Zedekiah! In Jer. 3031: the house of Israel and
the house of Judah as a whole. Whether these addressings oppose each other
162 Cf. Unterman, Repentance, 52: There is no way to determine with any degree of cer-
tainty whether Israels contrition precedes Gods mercies or not. One senses that, although
redemption is conditional upon Israels repentance, YHWHs mercies are the more signifi-
cant factor. Here Unterman is avoiding the impression he gives elsewhere, i.e. that the call
to convert in Jeremiah is eventually cancelled by the promise of salvation. In our view, this is
not the case.
163 Calamity and salvation according to Jer. 32 can only be considered together from the
perspective of Yhwhs wonderful dealing. Return as a precondition would make the relation
between judgement and promise comprehensible, while precisely this comprehensibility is
emphatically denied in Jer. 32.
230 chapter three
so firmly that a redaction-critical theory alone might offer a solution is a

question for later [ 3.2.5.2].
For one more important difference we have to return to the term cove-
nant [ 3.2.2]. The term is absent from the programmes of Jer. 24 and 29,
and though it belongs to the programme of Jer. 32, it has a different con-
tent there in comparison to Jer. 3031. The word occurs 24 times in
Jeremiah. In 9 instances references are made to the covenant that Yhwh orig-
inally entered with (the fathers of) Israel: 11:2, 3, 6, 8, 10; 14:21; 22:9; 31:32, 32;
one could include 3:16 in this series, where is the nomen rectum in the
designation the ark of the covenant. This former covenant (itself nowhere
qualified by the adjective )is contrasted to Yhwhs new covenant with
Israel according to 31:3134. The contrast with former does not play a role
in the everlasting covenant of 32:40 and 50:5naturally it does through the
broader context but not as a component of the concept itself. The same may
be said for Yhwhs covenant with David (33:21), which will appear to be just
as unbreakable as Yhwhs covenant with day and night (33:20, 20, 25). In Jer.
34 the word is used for the agreement reached between the Judeans and
Zedekiah on setting slaves free (34:8, 10, 15, 18, 18) according to the received
rule (34:13).
This brings us to the special relation between Jer. 31 and Jer. 11. To give
it the necessary relief and environment, an overview is provided of all the
analogies between 31:3134 and the rest of the book of Jeremiah. Underlining
indicates a shared group of words, italics a comparative syntactic pattern.
31 Behold days are coming | an. cl. 7:32 etc.164

declares Yhwh | same seq. of an. cl. 7:32 etc.165
when I will make with the house of Israel and the house of Judah
a new covenant | 11:10 etc.166
32 Not like the covenant |
that I made with their fathers on the day | analogous clause 11:10167
when I took hold of their hand |168
164 15 in the book; to introduce disaster befalling Israel 3, salvation for Israel 8, disaster
coming to pass over other nations 4 .

165 The same sequence 14 in the book.
166 Clauses with and occur 10 in Jer., 6 with Yhwh as subject: 11:10; 31:31, 32, 33;
32:40; 34:13.
167 The closest sequence of clauses is offered by 11:10: the house of Israel and the house of
Judah have broken my covenant which I made with their fathers.

168 Just as we find occurring 5 in Ex. and 4 in Deut., the escorting from Egypt in Jer. 32:21
is associated with the of Yhwh. The coupling occurs 7, in the proximity of

also Isa. 42:6.
to lead them out of the land of Egypt | analogous clause 7:22; 11:4; 32:21;
34:13169
my covenant that they broke | 11:10 etc.170
though I was master over them | analogous clause 3:14
declares Yhwh |
33 But this is the covenant |
that I will make with the house of Israel after those days171 |
declares Yhwh | 11:10 etc.
I will put my law within them172 |
and I will write it on their heart |
and I will be their God | an. cl. 7:23; 11:4; (13:11;) 24:7; 30:22;
and they shall be my people | 31:1; 32:38 [in same seq. 7:23; 31:1]
34 And no longer will they teach | an. cl. 3:16 etc.173
a man his neighbour |
and a man his brother | an. cl. 23:35; cf. 34:17174
saying |
Know Yhwh175 |
for they shall all know me a from the smallest to the greatest of them b |
declares Yhwh | a 9:5, 23; 22:16; 24:7; cf. 2:8; b 6:13;
cf. 16:6176
for I will forgive their iniquity | 33:8; 36:3177
and not remember their sin anymore | cf. 14:10
Against the background of this intertwinement, the connection between Jer.

31 and Jer. 11 catches the eye. To these references one may add the use of in
11:8 and 31:33; as well as the clause 11:13, 17 contrasting
31:32. Although the book counts as many as 14 instances mentioning Baal,
169 Generally there is an association with the day on which it took place, the same day
on which Israel (as a manner of speaking) received the commandments (7:22; 11:4; 34:13);
forefathers are mentioned in the direct contexts (the same places).
170 Clauses with and occur 5 in Jer.: 11:10; 14:21; 31:32; 33:20, 22.
171 After those days further not in Jer., nor elsewhere in the OT.
172 My law 6 in Jer.: 6:19; 9:12; 16:11; 26:4; 31:33; 44:10; in the interior 8 with pronominal
suffix, of which 4 in anthropological sense: 4:14; 9:7; 23:9; 31:33.

173 In 7:32; 16:14; 23:7; 31:29, no longer will they say or no longer it will be said along with
coming days in the same or preceding clausea combination unique to the OT. The general
pattern + yiqtol + occurs 19 in Jer., including 31:34, 34, 40.
174 Elsewhere in the OT only Isa. 19:2.
175 imp. 7 in Jer., but here alone with Yhwh/God as object. For / see
also 1 Sam. 2:12; 3:7; Hos. 2:22; 6:3; 1 Chron. 28:9 (imp.!); with negation Ex. 5:2; Judg. 2:10. The
most tangible illustration of small and great in the promise of Jer. 31:34 is found in the story
of the young Samuel.
176 See also the collocation of and in 5:4, 5.
177 + followed by the person: 5:1, 7; 50:20.
232 chapter three
at this point the new covenant presumably also depends on a consonance

with Jer. 11, because a reference to the observance of other gods is conspic-
uously absent in Jer. 3031.178 We will return to the terms in
11:10 and in 31:31 later [ 4.2, n. 97]. This Deutero-Isaian contrast
(due to the adjectives) could strengthen the bond between the two chapters,
even if the large distance between them in Jeremiah dissuades from restor-
ing entire parts of the book under a compositional scheme first-new.179
The most important elucidation created by a comparison between Jer. 11
and 31 is that the promise seems to will away the doom, which (in the vision
of the book Jeremiah) was associated with the relation between Yhwh and
Israel from the days of old. An important keyword in Jer. 11 is , carrying
the meaning of calamity, disaster (vv. 11, 12, 14, 15, 23; in ethical sense v. 17).
This ordeal was a collective sanction for breaking the covenant. The new
covenant cannot be broken and no longer knows of such a sanction. Thereby
the new covenant transcends the narrow question how Israel will have a
right to regain the land, butfar more comprehensivelyexplains how a
future will be possible at all without the persistent threat of this collective
doom hanging over Israel and humanity.180 In this connection, one should
realise that the disaster befalling Jerusalem in the book of Jeremiah is seen
as a bode of the worlds judgement. Within Jer. 3031, it is not without
purpose that the great day of Yhwhs judgement forms the actual point of
departure of Jeremiahs dream vision (cf. 30:57). The very nightmare of this
178 For in a thematically related context, see Jer. 3:14. Here too the contrast
highlights the worshipping of strangers in the previous verse.

179 So Schmid, Buchgestalten, 301: section on disaster Jer. 125, section on salvation starting
with Jer. 3031. Lev. 26:45 has the expression , covenant with the ancestors,
but there are no grounds substantiating that either Jer. 11:10 or 31:31 are alluding to it. For
the connections between Jer. 11 and 31 see also T. Rmer, Les anciens pres (Jr 11,10) et la
nouvelle alliance (Jr 31,31), BN 59 (1991), 2327; C. Maier, Jeremia als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale
Gebote des Deuteronomiums in Fortschreibungen des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 196), Gttingen
2002, 193197. H. Knobloch, Die nachexilische Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12),
Wiesbaden 2009, 294 sees the system of headings in Jer. 7:1; 11:1; 18:1 and 30:1 as proof of the
topical cohesion between the units they introduce.
180 G. Fischer, Das Trostbchlein: Text, Komposition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB, 26),
Stuttgart 1993, 155157 experiments with what may be called the question-answer model to
describe the embedding of Jer. 3031 in the book as a whole. The model appears to be the
most applicable to the relation between Jer. 11 and 31:3134. Without chapter 31, chapter 11
would not have been able to stand in the book in this way: a prophet risks his life calling
the disaster that will befall Jerusalem a penalty for breaching the first covenant. Here the
answer is equally geared towards the question as the question is to the answer. Accepting
this calamitous past is essential to escape from it through a new covenantbut the reverse
is also valid: that precisely the promise makes this uncomfortable view on the past bearable.
judgement, through the new covenant, one may safely leave behind forever,
in a sphere of forgiveness and personal interaction with God.
(6) Law. The word occurs 11 times in the book of Jeremiah.181 It is usually
related to Yhwh through either a genitive or a suffix, with Jer. 18:18 as the
most prominent exception.182 In a synchronic reading a primary task is to
associate Jer. 8:8; 26:4 and 31:33 as torah-statements in a meaningful mutual
relationship. With this understanding, the promise of the inner law is at
stake.
Jer. 26:45 If you will not listen to me, to walk in my torah which I
have set before you (in writing), to listen to the words of my servants the
prophets are important lines in the books progression. They introduce
the sanction that appears to be coupled to Yhwhs commandments on
the day of Jerusalems fall. This is the sanction that the promise of Jer.
31:3234 wants to overcome. Just as Jer. 26:4 is best understood in light
of Jer. 31:33, so Jer. 8:8 is best understood in light of Jer. 26:4. The torah
becomes the product of a lying pen once it is isolated from the interpretation
expressed by the prophetic word (cf. 8:9). Apart from this prophetic word,
as Jeremiah would formulate it in the temple discourse of Jer. 26, on its
own the torah remains a deceptive source of misplaced security. The words
of the prophet therefore form an essential reinforcement of the torah, but
towards the reader it always means a reinforcement benefitting the promise.
Therefore with Jer. 31:33 intends more than just Deuteronomy or the
Pentateuch;183 it must implicate the torah in its ideal form, the torah as
perfect expression of Yhwhs will. The book of Jeremiah encourages the
pursuit of this expression by persisting in reading the torah in light of the
prophets and vice versa. This will be shown to be an important eye-opener
in our concluding intertextual considerations [ 4.2.3].
Thus accepting the promise of the new covenant equally involves accep-
tance of the prophets message of coming disaster. In this it becomes dif-
ficult to assert that this promise makes Jeremiahs role as torah-teacher
181 This and the next paragraphs are a reflection on Maier, Lehrer.
182 This exception is an additional argument to see Jer. 18:18 as a citation from Ez. 7:26,
cf. H. Leene, Blowing the Same Shofar: An Intertextual Comparison of Representations of
the Prophetic Role in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in: J.C. de Moor (ed.), The Elusive Prophet: The
Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous Artist (OTS, 45), Leiden
2001, 175198, esp. 194.
183 Maier, Lehrer shows how the interpretation of the law in Jeremiahs prose-discourses
are essentially summaries of social rules from Deuteronomy, with personal touches like the
Sabbath commandment in Jer. 17 as Summe und Zentrum der Tora (224).
234 chapter three
redundant.184 As long as the torah is treated as a source of misplaced assur-

ance and is disconnected from prophecy, one also remains deprived of
what Jer. 31:3134 proclaims with so much hope for the future. This passage
does not want to be read as an objective account of future events, but as a
promise, which, understood within the context of the book, may bring about
a definite change in the reader. In this converted reader, for the book, rests
the success or failure of Israels survival. With this reader, each professional
torah-instruction ends (cf. Jer. 2:8), and with him the immediate knowledge
of God commences, as it is assured by the promise.
With this survey over the restitution programmes of Jer. 24, 29 and 32, fol-
lowed by paragraphs detailing the return to Yhwh as promise and command
in Jer. 3, 4 and 15, conveying the new covenant as answer to Jer. 11 and illumi-
nating the torah in relation to Yhwhs word spoken by the prophet, Jer. 3031
has received ample relief within the book of Jeremiah as a whole and we are
now in a position to pay attention to a few diachronic points of view. How
did these texts of Jeremiah relate to each other in time?

3.2.5.1. Redaction-Critical Theories on Jeremiah 3031
In all their variations, hypotheses on the origin of Jer. 3031 circle around
two constants: (1) the poetic midsection 30:531:26 is (largely) older than the
surrounding text and (2) this midsection itself is a development of an even
older basis collection or composition of poems. Thus in at least two stages
this original core would have been supplemented with younger material,
first until *30:531:26 and thereafter up to Jer. 3031 as we have it today.
Most details of this theory, which we at first supported in broad outlines but
now see being subjected to an increase in questions, we will leave at that.
This section will concentrate on the two main pillars in redaction-critical
reasoning.185
184 Pace Maier, Lehrer, 372: Mit Jer 31:3134 scheint die Rolle des Toralehrers [= Jeremia]
obsolet zu werden.
185 For our own variant of the theory [developed in discussion with S. Bhmer, Heimkehr
und neuer Bund: Studien zu Jeremia 3031 (GTA, 5), Gttingen 1976; N. Lohfink, Der junge
Jeremia als Propagandist und Prophet: Zum Grundstock von Jer 3031, in: P.-M. Bogaert (ed.),
Le Livre de Jrmie (BEThL, 54), Leuven 1981, 351368; Idem, Die Gotteswortverschachtelung
in Jer 3031, in: L. Ruppert et al. (eds), Knder des Wortes: Beitrge zur Theologie der Propheten.
Fs J. Schreiner, Wrzburg 1982, 105119; U. Schrter, Jeremias Botschaft fr das Nordreich, zu
N. Lohfinks berlegungen zum Grundbestand von Jeremia XXXXXXI, VT 35 (1985), 312329;
The question posed by the compilers of Jer. 3031 presumably was not:
how do we find a suitable context for our handed-down salvific texts, which
are traceable to the historical Jeremiah or are ascribed to him; but far
rather: in light of our well-known prophecies of salvation (Ezekiel, Isaiah,
the Twelve), how do we find an authoritative prophetic vision that will sup-
port the restitution programme of the book of Jeremiah the most effectively?
If this was the question underlying the texts genesis, then the redaction-
critical point of departure, reasoning that the composition 30:531:26 must
be older than its prosaic framing, becomes obsolete. The context and the
contextualised then developed reciprocally. The dream vision in Jer. 30:5
31:26 was then compiled in this form with such an application in mind.186
Another basic insight concerns the relations between Jer. 30:531:26 and
the small units that form its building blocks. It is concluded correctly from
the numerous borrowings in these blocks that they are not oral proclama-
tion units. The units were written to serve as parts of a composition. The fact
that the one unit is orientated especially on the narrative of the patriarchs,
and the other on Amos or Hosea and so forth, indicates a process of text
production in which the phase of writing the separate units and the phase
of their being arranged can be differentiated. The scribal procedure behind
the dream vision may best be compared with the making of a modern text
using filing notes. A procedure like that explains how some units, mostly
with small contextual modifications, could have been inserted in more than
one location in the book of Jeremiah. Which brings us back neatly to the
question on the purpose of the composition 30:531:26 as a whole. Assum-
ing that the units were intended for a written composition from the outset,
what was the purpose of this composition? Certainly not to be circulated
T. Odashima, Heilsworte im Jeremiabuch: Untersuchungen zu ihrer vordeuteronomistischen

Bearbeitung (BWANT, 125), Stuttgart 1989] see: H. Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326 and the Redac-
tion of the Book of Comfort, ZAW 104 (1992), 349364; Idem, Ezekiel and Jeremiah: Promises
of Inner Renewal in Diachronic Perspective, in: J.C. de Moor, H.F. van Rooy (eds), Past, Present,
Future: The Deuteronomic History and the Prophets (OTS, 44), Leiden 2000, 150175, esp. 163
164. Points of uncertainty then already were the unclear status of the oldest poetic layer
(collection or composition?) and the redactional prose fragments 30:89; 30:21b22 and 31:1
(formally and conceptually associated with the prose frame but simultaneously essential to
their immediate context!).
186 Here it is necessary for us to anticipate our conclusions in 4.2.3 regarding the nature
and meaning of literary borrowing in Jeremiah. The thesis with which this study will end
is: citations in the book of Jeremiah do not serve as legitimations of an original Jeremian
tradition with the help of canonical literature, but they serve to legitimate the diverse
components of this literature (Pentateuch, the Twelve, Ezekiel, Isaiah) in relation to each
other, on the playing ground of the book of Jeremiah.
236 chapter three
anonymously,187 but far rather as Jeremiahs proclamation of salvation to

form part of a book called words of Jeremiah. With the help of texts alluding
to authoritative religious literature, an equally authoritative proclamation
of salvation had to be ascribed to this prophet. The whole process of the
texts genesis presumably had this goal in mind. Even though it is possible
to point out signs of layering in 30:531:26, most of the shifts in style and
vocabulary are caused by the orientation on different literary sources, might
even be under the influence of specialisation within the scribal school that
produced the book, but are most probably not caused by editions separated
through large distances in time. In order to test this global picture we will
analyse the presumed diachronic layers more thoroughly.
The oldest layer of Jer. 30:431:26 is seen by Konrad Schmid in the fol-
lowing units: 30:4, 57, 1217, *1821; 31:45, 1522.188 Besides the frame 30:4;
31:26, the layer consists of the Jacob and Rachel texts 30:57, * 1821 and
31:1520, and texts addressed to a female personage (Zion, maiden Israel)
30:1217; 31:45, 2122. Various mutual agreements exist between these pas-
sages. Correctly Schmid notes that the dissimilar depictions of Jacob and
Rachel are compensated by the allusion of Jer. 31:15 on Gen. 37:35: Jacob
refuses to be comforted, namely on the loss of Joseph.189 Within the Jacob
texts themselves, the tents of Jacob (30:18) may contain a deliberate patri-
archal echo (cf. Gen. 25:27). Schmid calls the lack of any return, other than
within the geographical borders of Palestine, the most prominent character-
istic of this basic composition. The return from exile or diaspora, so central
to Jer. 3031 as we know it now, would not have played a role in this first
stage of development. Thus the conclusion of 31:16 they will return from
the land of the enemy has to be read as a secondary addition. Is this plau-
sible? Does the allusion to the Joseph novella in this section not already
indicate an international horizon in itself? Similarly it is difficult to imagine
187 This view was formulated sharply by R.P. Carroll, The Book of Jeremiah (OTL), London
1986, 569: Jer. 3031 must essentially be ascribed to the anonymous circles during and after
the exile which cherished expectations of restoration.
188 K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches. Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und
Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, for
a conclusion 185187. The series agrees partially with that of Bhmer, Heimkehr (taken over
by Odashima, Heilsworte): 30:1215, 2324; 31:26, 1517, 1820; Lohfink, Propagandist, Idem,
Gotteswortverschachtelung: 30:57, 1215, 1821a; (31:1?) 31:26, 1517, 1820, 2122; Schrter,
Botschaft: the same series minus 30:1821a; Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326, Idem, Promises:
30:57, 1215, 1821a, 2324; 31:26, 1517, 1820, 2122.
189 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 135; this reacting against the objection that Jacob hardly takes
shape (Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326, 358) in comparison to Rachel.

that a highway marked with sign posts like that of 31:21 ( )would have
been devised for domestic migration.190 Texts from Am. 5 and Hos. 11 from
which this layer particularly in 31:45 and 1820 has borrowed, deal equally
with deportation. And interestingly, Schmid himself indicates a possible link
between 31:15 and 40:1: Ramah as the collection point for the deportation to
Babylon.191
In the formal structure of the reconstructed layer, according to Schmid, a
rigid parallelism between 30:57, 1217, 1821; 31:45 and 31:15, 1617, 1820,
2122 would have been sought.192 But it is difficult to grasp how a single word
such as have compassion ( )could draw dissimilar poems like 30:1821
and 31:1820 into balance, or how the relations between 30:57 and 1217
are mirrored in the relations between 31:15 and 1617; not even taking the
paradox into consideration that the whole reconstruction would have been
superfluous if later editors had not ignored or overlooked its balanced result.
Therefore, the layer in its content and form cannot be detached from its
surroundings clearly enough to be truly credible as a basic composition.
So too the assumed relation between beginning and end of the composi-
tion raises doubts. The reappearance of the word 30:6 in 31:22 is certainly
worth noting and in combination with \even unique in the Old Tes-
tament. Still, it cannot be recognised as a compositional framing as long as
we do not know what 31:22 should mean in this regard. The mere inversion
of roles between men and women would form an anticlimax rather than
a revelatory statement after the weighty theological announcement, Yhwh
has created something new on earth.193
A second diachronic layer is identified by Schmid in the units 30:89, 10
11; 31:6, 79, 1014, 16b, 3537. The main characteristic is the layers strong
orientation on Isa. 4055, particularly through the units 30:1011; 31:79, 10
14, 3537. Our next chapter will trace these intertextual relations in greater
190 One could draw a contrast between the one main road carrying the returnees and the
many ways of the unfaithful from Jer. 3:2; but still even then the image is at odds with an
inland migration.
191 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 132. According to Schmid this oldest layer belongs to a form
of the book that also includes Jer. * 223 and * 4651 (overview 434). In the present text Jer.
4651 knows of exiles from Egypt (46:19), Moab (48:7, 11) and Ammon (49:3), apart from calls
to flee from Babylon addressed to Judean deportees (50:8; 51:6, 45). One needs to think away
all these elements to make the absence of the theme exile in Jer. *3031 attractive within the
book outline suggested by Schmid.
192 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 150.
193 For this interpretation, see e.g. W.H. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), vol. 2, Philadel-
phia 1989, 157, 192.

238 chapter three
detail [ 4.2.12]. A noteworthy proposal is Schmids diachronic dissection

of 31:26, a unit still taken to be part of the oldest layer in earlier redaction-
critical designs. A fact is that in 31:6 this unit shares an important feature
with the Deutero-Isaian layer, namely the text-genetic presupposition of
already existing units, in this case 31:1820 with its description of Ephraim
as Yhwhs dear son. This difference of scholarly opinion, however, could
be an indication that the whole diachronic theory falls short. We may ask
ourselves whether there are indeed such fixed intermediate stations dis-
tinguishable in the development of 30:431:26 as it is broadly accepted in
redaction criticism. It is true that the units summarised here contribute
more significantly to the cohesion of the final composition than the units
of layer I, but such a phenomenon need not indicate a large difference in
the time of origin.194
Schmid accounts 31:2325 and 31:3840 to a third redactional treatment,
under the heading Heiligkeit von Land und Stadt als Interpretationen des
Neuen.195 In our view the new explained in 31:2325 does not indicate as
much the holiness as it does the embracement [ 3.2.1]. Within 30:431:26
this unit shares features with the connecting layer 30:1011; 31:(6)79, 10
14.196 The focus then falls on the as the seat of human yearning, the deep
desire for eventual rest; a common theme that overshadows the superfi-
cial points of contact between 31:2325 and 31:3840. Schmid agrees with
our view that 31:2325 solves the riddle of 31:22b.197 The question remains
whether we should see the solution as an amending reinterpretation, or as
the refinement of an interpretation that is more or less implied by 31:2122.
There have been attempts to explain the imagery of this unit, in line with Jer.
23, as referring to Israels eventual initiative to embrace Yhwh. However,
this spiritual interpretation seems to be at odds with the strong geographic
connotation in the call return to these your cities. In other words: also 31:21
22 in itself could be applied to a woman who embraces her children like a
mother.198 All that 31:2325 then adds to this is that the maiden Israel now
194 Herewith we maintain our previous text-genetic observation that these units cannot
have existed independently of those in layer I, but were composed to provide this older
material with a connecting and interpreting frame (Leene, Promises, 164); but now we
consider more pertinently the possibility that no other phases are involved than we find in
the making of any complex text.
196 See the overview of shared terms in Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326, 359.
198 Cf. B. Becking, Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of Jeremiah 3031
gels with lady Zion and is eternalised in a comprehensive holy mountain.

This is indeed the way one personage in a dream can simply assume the
appearance of another. It would offer a welcome answer to the question
how the reader might assimilate the foregoing images of 30:1217 (Zion) and
31:26 (maiden Israel) into a single portraiture. In these closing chords it is
no longer about a population that is returning to its motherland, but about
the motherland that has turned to face its estranged inhabitants.199
Schmid shows convincingly how 30:2324 with its judgement over the
wicked not only retakes a theme from the foregoing units (30:11, 16, 20), but
also offers a point of reference for typing Israel as the people who survived
the sword (31:2). Within the current book of Jeremiah, this sword reminds
the reader of the world judgement in 25:27, 29, 31. This is the world judge-
ment that Israel has escaped narrowly in 31:2.200 Without 30:2324 as a clos-
ing to 30:424 it would have been impossible to commence in 31:226 with
this unique typing of Israel. Actually 30:2324 thereby marks the complete
dual structure of Jeremiahs dream vision. With such a tight anchorage of
30:2324 in the composition of the poetic midsection, it iswe think
improbable that it was added, along with 31:13, only after the framing of
this midsection through 30:13; 31:2730, 3134.201 On this point Schmids
proposal is unconvincing. The world judgement that he views as a feature
of the very last addition (30:2324+31:13) to the Booklet of Comfort, also
(OTS, 51), Leiden 2004, 225; though it remains a reality that the verb , turn away (Jer.
31:22; Cant. 5:6; cf. Cant. 7:2) suggests an erotic register.
199 The imagery of the dream (31:26) implies a recognition that the sequence of the units
does not respect normal narrative rationality. According to the activation-synthesis theory
of Hobson and McCarley (cf. J.A. Hobson, The Dreaming Brain, New York 1988) during the
so-called REM sleep, recognised by Rapid Eye Movement, sections of the brain are activated
that are usually only active during the state of being awake when external visual impressions
are received. This leads to a chaotic stream of (especially visual) experiences from which the
rational brain attempts to form a cohesive story. A dream is thus an attempt to synthesise
unstructured brain activity. In this way the theory explains the most noticeable character-
istics of dreams, including the morphing of one person into another and the muddling of
different spaces and places. Jer. 30:431:26 refers to this dream experience as a literary means
to combine images from contrasting sources and natures into a single dramatic composi-
tion. One more aspect of dream imagery concerns text and interpretation. Hermes, whose
name is preserved in the word hermeneutic, is known as the god of dreams. Does 31:26 only
type the hermeneutical relation between 31:2122 and 2325 (Leene, Jeremiah 31,2326, 355)
or also between the whole of 30:431:26 and its prosaic context?
200 This interpretation implies that 31:23 is not about The love of God for his people in
the past (Becking, Jeremiah 3031, 130), but deals with his affections for those who have just
escaped the calamity of 30:524.
240 chapter three
forms the background to the time of distress (30:7), which Schmid sees as a
core element of his layer I.202 As far as we are concerned, with his diachronic
dissection of 31:26 Schmid has illustrated precisely the interwoveness of
this unit with the whole compositionthe retrospective and forward look-
ing function in its overarching drama. Conversely, though not dependent on
it text-genetically (cf. 23:1920), one could say that 30:2324 forms an indis-
pensable cornerstone of the present literary context.
Preliminary conclusion: certainly an intriguing literary history, but with-
out fixed intermediate stations; no editions intended for changing histor-
ical circumstances; no clear indications for large distances in the time of
text production. The framing cannot be without the midsection, so too vice
versa: the midsection cannot be without the framing. It is exactly in this
remarkable combination of two types of sayings on the future (midsection:
restitution scenario, framing: restitution programme) that deliberate inten-
tion, it could not have been else, was in play. Fundamental discussions in
Jeremiahs Booklet of Comfort are not to be found between diachronic layers of
diverse theological scopes, but between this booklet and various other parts of
the Old Testament.203
3.2.5.2. Jeremiahs Promises in Diachronic Perspective

In the previous chapter the genesis of a text and its intertextual relations
were discussed in separate steps; such a clean methodology is difficult to
maintain in Jeremiah due to their constant interaction. Thus to help clarify
our position here we will make a peak view ahead to where we discuss the
relation Jeremiah-Ezekiel: the authors of Jeremiah were thoroughly familiar
with the book of Ezekiel and borrowed freely from it [ 3.2.5.3]. Similarly,
a few other literary borrowings will be debated here as required to help
clarify the argument. On the other hand, it will serve our purposes better
to postpone until after that crucial intertextual section another issue that
has been dominant in recent analyses of Jer. 2432: the issue of the so-called
202 Schmid, Buchgestalten (overview 434435) dates the oldest layer of Jer. 3031 in the
late-exilic era, the youngest at the end of the fourth centurya trajectory of two centuries.
203 For scepticism on the diachronic layering of Jer. 3031 see researchers such as Carroll,
Jeremiah; B.A. Bozak, Life Anew: A Literary-Theological Study of Jer. 3031 (AnBib, 122), Rome
1991; J.W. Mazurel, De vraag naar de verloren broeder: Terugkeer en herstel in de boeken
Jeremia en Ezechil, Amsterdam 1992; Fischer, Trostbchlein; and Becking, Jeremiah 3031.
A distinction still needs to be drawn between the layering as such and the (im)possibility
to reconstruct and anchor it historically with precision. In addition, inquiries like that of
Schmid, Buchgestalten provide details on various relations within the book which would have
been overseen quite easily in an exclusively synchronic approach.
golah-orientated redaction [ 3.2.5.4]. Following the same pattern as above

in the synchronic approach, in the present section attention will be paid
to the relations between Jer. 3031 and 24, 29, 32, to the (un)conditionality
of the return, to the new covenant and to the torah; but now seen from a
diachronic, text-productional point of view.
(1) More and more the plausible view of Hyatt and Thiel on the genesis of
Jer. 24 is being followed today. They see the chapter as a homogeneous text
that does not conceal an older stratum.204 Linguistic peculiarities, on which
literary-critical differentiation had been based, all remain within the range
of normal clausal and text-syntactical possibilities. At the same time, Jer. 24
is a prime example of a writing technique in which the learned scribes of
Jeremiah excelled: the compilation of a story from a wide array of elements
picked up from the existing written tradition.
Thus the storys frame stems from the book of Amos. The beginning takes
its inspiration from Am. 7:1, 4, 7; 8:1: This is what the Lord Yhwh has showed
me, and behold . The question what do you see, Jeremiah (cf. Jer. 1:11, 13)
recalls the same question in Am. 7:8; 8:2. We may speak of a bold allusion
where the story clearly involves itself in the dialogue on the topic from the
cited text. This is what happens in Jer. 24 regarding the fourth vision of Amos,
where he is shown a basket of ripe fruit: The end (, cf. , ripe fruit) has
come to my people Israel (Am. 8:2; see also the word in 8:3!). Jer. 24
answers that the end has indeed dawned, even if for just a portion of the
people. This gives rise to the splitting of yet another citation from Amos: I
will set my eye upon them for evil and not for good (Am. 9:4; cf. Jer. 24:6).
The wording from Am. 9:15 (And I will plant them and they will never
again be uprooted from their soil) is divided in the same manner between
two contrasting perspectives on the future in Jer. 24:6, 10.205
The elaboration of the vision of the two baskets boils down to a drama-
tised dialogue between the books of Deuteronomy and Ezekiel. As we have
said, the dependence of Jer. 24 in relation to Ezek. 11 and 33 will be discussed
204 J.P. Hyatt, The Deuteronomic Edition of Jeremiah, in: L.G. Redrue, B.W. Kovacs (eds),
A Prophet to the Nations, Winona Lake 1984 (first published in 1951), 247267, esp. 258;
W. Thiel, Die deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 125 (WMANT, 41), Neukirchen 1973,
253261; differently e.g. E.W. Nicholson, The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah, Ch. 125 (CNEB),
Cambridge 1973, 205; R.E. Clements, Jeremiah (Intp), Atlanta 1988, 146; N. Kilpp, Niederreien
und aufbauen: Das Verhltnis von Heilsverheiung und Unheilsverkndigung bei Jeremia und
im Jeremiabuch (BThS, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1990, 2131.
205 On these relations with Amos, see esp. W. Beyerlin, Reflexe der Amosvisionen im Jere-
miabuch (OBO, 93), Fribourg 1989.

242 chapter three
later in broader outlines. The dependence of Jer. 24 on Deut. 2833 deals

specifically with colouring in the positive and the negative expectations in
Jer. 24:57 and 810. Just as Jer. 21:8 links to the way of life and the way of
death in Deut. 30:1516, 1920, these two ways have been concretised as it
were in the fate of two groups of people in Jer. 24. Blessing and curse thereby
no longer appear to be a dilemma for Israel as a wholebut that initial
impression will at most endure with readers who insist on understanding
the two groups as historical and not above all as ideal-typical.206 The influ-
ence of Ezekiels prophecy would not only have been the determining factor
in this ideal-typical dichotomy, but also in the nuancing of the salvific per-
spective itself. In Deuteronomy keeping the commandments still counted as
a strict condition for possession of the land. As a result of Ezekiels interven-
tion (we will return to this in greater detail), complying to the Deuteronomic
condition now becomes a gift itself, included in the promise of return. This is
the most surprising outcome of the meeting between Amos, Deuteronomy
and Ezekiel as arranged, so to say, by the author of Jer. 24.
(2) How does Jer. 29 link into this concept? Jer. 29 raises the suspects of
a more complicated genetic history. Here, the most prominent dilemmas
seen in recent research are the following: (a) Does the current text go back
to a basis story, and if so, what was its scope? Would it contain alone
the poetic portion of Jeremiahs letter and its introduction (vv. * 17), or
would the reaction of Shemaiah (vv. *2432) also belong to it?207 (b) How
homogeneous is the (deuteronomistic) layer of additions to this presumed
basis story and in what phases did this layer originate?208 Especially Jer.
29:1014, so it is usually thought, stands in tension with vv. 17. The original
letter would not yet have taken the return from Babylon into account,
which is announced by Yhwh in vv. 1014. Similarly the false prophets are
considered a secondary addition to the letter.
206 See further on this the issue of the golah-orientated redaction in 3.2.5.4.
207 The last is the view of C. Rietzschel, Das Problem der Urrolle: Ein Beitrag zur Redaktions-
geschichte des Jeremiabuches, Gtersloh 1966, 117118; G. Wanke, Untersuchungen zur soge-
nannten Baruchschrift (BZAW, 122), Berlin 1971, 5859 (more or less); W. Thiel, Die deuterono-
mistische Redaktion von Jeremia 2645 (WMANT, 52), Neukirchen 1981, 1113; Kilpp, Nieder-
reien, 4367. The first is thought by E.W. Nicholson, Preaching to the Exiles: A Study of the
Prose Tradition in the Book of Jeremiah, Oxford 1970, 98100.
208 T. Seidl, Texte und Einheiten in Jeremia 2729: Literaturwissenschaftliche Studie (ATS, 5),
Bd. 1, St. Ottilien 1977 (for a summary 141142) thinks on the origin of Jer. 29 not in terms of
a basis text and redactional addition(s), but as the compilation of six independent units, of
which vv. * 17 must be the oldest.
The greatest weakness in such hypotheses is the presumed intent of the

basis story. Is a letter of Jeremiah plausible as a story topic without any
reference to the one or other reason for its writing? And could that reason
be anything else thanevoked by prophets or other manticshope for
a swift return? More important still: was the purpose of this basis story
really to encourage the exiles to settle in Babylon (with as a hardly credible
motivation, for example, the elimination of fear for the impure land), or did
it rather serve as a retrospective approval for their prolonged stay there? In
the latter instance vv. 17 prepares the way for a potential return,209 and were
it particularly the returnees or returned that had an interest in what Jer. 29
tells. Against the reproach that they had disqualified themselves as Israelites
due to their successful integration in Babylon, they could now indeed point
at Jeremiahs personal encouragement! The letters intent should therefore
not be confused with the intent of the story about the letter. In our view this
insight casts severe doubts on the postulated age of the oldest layer of the
composition.
Naturally this does not obliterate the assembled character of the current
epistle Jer. 29:423. Its core vv. 47 differentiates itself from what follows
through the poetic form. The details in vv. 2123 on the prophets Ahab
and Zedekiah could be based on unknown narrative material. Such stories
could equally have served as a boost to the golahs reputation: at least it had
not been a lawless mess in Babylon! The section sandwiched in between
contains elements of various origins. But ultimately these blocks link up to
form a well-balanced composition.
On the relative diachrony of Jer. 29:123 in relation to the literary context,
the following observations can be made. The composition presumes Jer.
2728 and possibly also Jer. 26. This is especially determinable by the fact
that Jer. 29 no longer needs to explain the content of the false prophecy
(speedy return from Babylon) to the readers: after Hananiahs performance
209 Thus Jer. 29:28 , it will be a long time, as Shemaiahs summary of Jeremiahs
letter, also implies the return. Considering the play of the name Shemaiah the Nehelamite on
the motivation do not listen [ ]to your dreams you cause to be dreamed [( ]8), the
mirror narrative in 2431 already presumes a more extensive version of Jeremiahs letter than
47. While the prophets Ahab and Zedekiah are preoccupied with women (23), the dreamer
Shemaiah will have no man in the future Israel (32). But between the lines, the poetic core
of the letter already seems to be anticipating a future judgement over Babylon. With seaking
peace and intercessory prayer the OT always thinks of avoiding or postponing a threatening
disaster. The golah enjoying an unlimited residence in Babylon thus presumably falls outside
Jeremiahs field of vision.
244 chapter three
in Jerusalem this was no longer required. The harmonisation could further

be built on redactional adaptations within the foregoing chapters, for exam-
ple where allusions to the future care of Yhwh (27:22) and the fulfilment of
his word (28:6) precede the promise in Jer. 29:10.
The most important source for Jer. 29 remains Jer. 24. Besides their com-
mon vocabulary and formulations, Jer. 29 also runs compositionally parallel
to Jer. 24:
Perspective for good: 24:57 29:1014

Perspective for evil: 24:810 29:1619210
The increasing complexity seen in the reading order of the two composi-
tions creates the impression that Jer. 24 was mainly the giving and Jer. 29
mainly the receiving text. However, Jer. 24:57 silently assumes the accep-
tance of fate for which Jer. 29 still needs to call the golah, and perhaps
the expression sending for good was placed with a sequel about Babylons
welfare in mind; but this does not take away from the dominant direction
of dependence Jer. 24 Jer. 29. For example, the theme of the deceptive
prophecy, which encloses the view on salvation and doom like a passe-
partout (vv. 89 and 2023), is still lacking from Jer. 24.211
From the above considerations it follows that it is improbable that the
harmonisations in Jer. 29 on Jer. 2728 and these on Jer. 24 stem from
completely different phases of development. For this the themes residence
in Babylon, false prophecy, promise of return and evil for those staying
behind are too strongly interwoven with each other. Better than describing
the genesis of Jer. 29 in terms of a clearly phased redactional history, it makes
210 The omission of 29:1619 in LXX could have been caused by the deviant sequence in
JerLXX, in which Jer. 29 different to Jer. 24 belongs to the salvation part of the book (K. Schmid,
Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches. Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte
von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, 242). A strong argu-
ment in favour of 1619 as a premasoretic addition remains its text-grammatical rounding
off (cf. H.-J. Stipp, Probleme des redaktionsgeschichtlichen Modells der Entstehung des Jere-
miabuches, in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und die deuteronomistische Bewegung (BBB, 98), Wein-
heim 1995, 225262, esp. 246).
211 In 3.2.4 we concluded that there are no essential differences between 24:57 and
29:1014 on the point of the unconditionality of the promise; this against Schmid, Buchgestal-
ten, 240241 who views 29:1014 as the older text due to its associations with Deut. 30:110.
It is clear that Jer. 29 constantly keeps the question on conditionality in the background in
its dialogue with Deut., but it is also clear that the answer subtly turns out as in Jer. 24: it is
Yhwh himself who will orchestrate the search for him and his finding.
sense to understand it as a (less time consuming) process of text production,

in which the preceding chapters are fully drawn upon.212
Correctly it has been noted that within the books current format, Jer. 29
forms a bridge between Jer. 2728 and 3031. The announcement of return
and change in the letter to Babylon is elaborated in Jeremiahs Booklet (or
Letter?) of Comfort. Indeed Jer. 3031 speaks of a return from the scattering
and not from the exile, but so too the Babylonian exiles hear themselves in
Jer. 29:14 (MT) addressed as representatives of the total diaspora. Thus in its
present form Jer. 29 takes not alone Jer. 24 and 2728 as prequel into account,
but also Jer. 3031 as sequel. On its part Jer. 3031 carries a few smaller
allusions to 2429,213 but the most prominent connection is undoubtedly the
scheme return-restoration-change in the prose framing, which reminds of
24:57.
It is possible to hesitate about the diachronic relation between Jer. 24
and this prose framework. To a certain extent the vision of the two baskets
wishes to be read as a programmatic introduction to the whole salvific
and ominous perspective of Jer. 29/3033 resp. 3744.214 Just as one may
write an introduction after completing the greater work, also 24:57 could
have been prepared after the prose framework of 3031 being ready. Still
the short text here does not betray any verbal dependence on the longer
text and in its formulations stands much closer to Deuteronomy.215 If the
restitution programme of Jer. 32 indeed takes a text-genetic intermediate
position between the programmes of Jer. 24 and 3031, as we will argue
carefully below, then this would fix the sequence of origin as 24 32
3031.216
212 The story of Shemaiah the Nehelamite in Jer. 29:2432 in its current form does not build
solely on Jer. 2728 but also assumes Jer. 29:123, see above.
213 See esp. the yoke in 30:8 (cf. 28:117); the fierce anger in 30:24 (cf. 25:3738) and the
sword in 31:2 (cf. 25:31).

214 Cf. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 255.
215 See the observation by A. Schenker, Der nie aufgehobene Bund: Exegetische Beobach-
tungen zu Jer 31,3134, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der
beiden Testamente (QD 146), Freiburg 1993, 85112, esp. 87 that 31:3134, apart from the so-
called covenant formula, keine einzige spezifische deuteronomische oder deuteronomisti-
sche Formulierung aufweist.
216 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 70 seems to hold the opinion that 24:7, with its combination of
heart and divine knowledge, is dependent on 31:3334. But the combination is too natural
to draw this conclusion, e.g. considering DI. See also the general connotations of heart
as an anthropological concept: Zu den geistigen Funktionen des lb gehrt zunchst die
Erkenntnis (F. Stolz, Art. , in: THAT, Bd. 1, Mnchen 1971, 861867, esp. 862).
246 chapter three
(3) In Jer. 32 the relation to the other passages that we have treated is the
most complicated. Diachronic theories on this chapter usually isolate a
core story 615 around the sign-act: Jeremiah drawing up a contract of pur-
chase in prison. This core story would have been expanded in one or more
stages with a short introduction and a long retrospective reflection, con-
sisting of a prayer by the prophet and the answer by Yhwh. The fact that
the unique location of the purchase (in prison, in a besieged Jerusalem)
only acquires significance due to the so-called expansions deserves partic-
ular attention. Place and time of action have no clear function in the core
story as such. Thus there is no simple procedure to help disentangle story
and application.217 In this case once again, we feel sceptical about literary-
critical attempts to recover an authentic reportage of what took place in
the year 587bce.218 On the other hand, the shift in the interpretation of
the sign-act between vv. 15 and 44, for example, shows an unquestionable
literary development. Whether this development started with a real his-
torical recollection, and whether it stretched out across the years, decades,
or generationswho knows? However: is an elongated literary growth not
intrinsically unattractive? Fortunately such questions do not take away from
what counts as one of the most beautiful and meaningful stories in the
book.219
We will concentrate on Jer. 32:3641 as a component of Yhwhs answer
to Jeremiahs prayer. Sometimes this passage is seen as an expansion on the
expansion.220 Certain literary critical interventions are then required in the
217 See e.g. Thiel, Jeremia 2645; indicating as core story vv. 2, 615: C. Hardmeier, Probleme
der Textsyntax, der Redeeinbettung und der Abschnittgliederung in Jer 32 mit ihren kom-
positionsgeschichtlichen Konsequenzen, in: H. Irsigler (ed.), Syntax und Text: Beitrge zur
22. Internationalen kumenischen Hebrisch-Dozenten-Konferenz 1993 in Bamberg (ATS, 40),
St. Ottilien 1993, 4979; Idem, Jeremia 32,213* als Erffnung der Erzhlung von der Gefan-
genschaft und Befreiung Jeremias in Jer 34,7; 37,340,6*, in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und die
deuteronomistische Bewegung (BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 187214, esp. 199; for more elabo-
rate diachronic segmentations: Schmid, Buchgestalten, 9599.
218 See e.g. in Kilpp, Niederreien, 75.
219 In the core story, the purchase contract, the witnesses and the seal underline the
trustworthiness and durability of the promise. According to the closing divine statement, the
purchase contract and the witnesses themselves will form part of the fulfilment. It seems as if
it had to wait for this later editor to notice the significance of the detained Jeremiahs freedom
of movement: a reference to free trade in the future. Less convincing is the historicising
explanation of Schmid, Buchgestalten, 96, 99 n. 224 (referring to Wanke), who sees 32:15 as a
revision of the original promise, which would only have implicated restitution to the original
owners. Here the text does not appear to be the guideline, but the burning desire to trace an
as old as possible stratum in it.
preceding section, because it is not easy to imagine that Yhwhs address

as it lies before us was ever followed by a restitution promise without any
reference to Israels moral change.
Jer. 32:3641 shows affinity with Ezekiel mainly in its vocabulary. This
affinity does not only concern the gathering of the dispersed people, but also
the one heart promised to them in 32:39; cf. Ezek. 11:19.221 On all these points
it is most likely that the priority lies with the book of Ezekiel.222 With this
direction of dependence (Ezekiel Jeremiah), having the single way joined
to the single heart in 32:39, one could discern a critical allusion to Ezek. 11:21
I will bring their way on their own heads. In other words: it appears as if Jer.
32 has employed exactly these terms heart and way to soften the perceived
discriminatory gist of Ezek. 11the division between the saved and the
punished which Jer. 24 and 29, holding onto the Ezekielian tradition, still
seem to follow. This softening in Jer. 32 is balanced by painful descriptions
of Jerusalems abominations, which, compared to similar descriptions in
the book of Ezekiel, yield in nothing. So too, ah Lord Yhwh, with which
Jeremiahs prayer begins, reminds of Ezek. 11:13.223 But in his promise Yhwh
no longer differentiates between two groups of people and magnanimously
he steps over all the offences of the past.224 For him, after all, nothing is too
wonderful.
These observations lead us to draw one or two preliminary diachronic
conclusions: (a) It is impossible to harmonise the history portrayals in the
book of Jeremiah (here Jer. 2429 and 32) in all their respects. (b) These
tensions are presumably not caused by opposing group interests but by
scribes granting each other room to reach different theological solutions
221 Within Ezekiel, it could be argued that 11:19 anticipates the reunion between Judah
and Joseph in Ezek. 37, with which Jer. 32, amongst others, shares the concept everlasting
covenant; cf. Ezek. 37:26 and Jer. 32:40.
222 Against C. Levin, Die Verheiung des neuen Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen
Zusammenhang ausgelegt (FRLANT, 137), Gttingen 1985, 205206. Further 3.2.5.3.

223 This prayer salutation resounds 4 in Ezekiel and 4 in Jeremiah, further alone in Josh.
7:7 and Judg. 6:22.

224 According to 32:42 it is the same people that are struck by the tragedy and now appear
to be the focus of benefaction: As I have brought all this great evil to this people, so I will bring
upon them all the good that I now promise them. Exactly the use here of the terms good and
evil (see also 32:23, 30, 32, 3941) that differs markedly from the perspectives for good and
for evil in Jer. 24 and 29, suggests a hint of criticism on those earlier passages. One could
describe the difference between Jer. 24 and 32 as follows: Jer. 24 sees the disaster befalling
Jerusalem from an outsiders point of view borrowed from Ezek. 11, while Jer. 32 chooses the
view point of an eyewitness experiencing the disaster from within. This enables the reader
to notice the greatest paradox of Jer. 24 in retrospect: the prophet finds himself in the wrong
group!
248 chapter three
on the same issue. (c) Such internal differences within Jeremiah are only
comprehensible if a large distance in time is assumed between the texts
and the events they narrate, and they are inextricably linked to the scribal
discussion on the externalcontinuous discussion between the Jeremian
scribes about the intent and authority of the written tradition, here thinking
specifically of Ezekiel, in light of Deuteronomy.225
From this line of thought it flows that it may be better to date Jer. 32:3641
after rather than before Jer. 2429. How should Jer. 31:3134 be dated in
relation to such a sequence? The current reading order of Jer. 3031 and
3233A is not without sense. Jer. 33A is complementary to Jer. 32, which
indeed promises the future purchase of houses, fields and vineyards, but
as a story confines itself to a single fieldsparing the houses for Jer. 33A.
A global shift between Jer. 3031 and 3233A moves the central focus from
return to social restoration. Additionally this reading sequence makes it
possible to understand the exposition on the duplicated purchase contract
in 32:11 as a reflection on the booklet of 30:2. As a posthumously published
dream vision this booklet could leave room for the question whether it truly
contains Jeremiahs own words. Not until the sign-act of Jer. 32 presented in
the presence of witnesses is the prophecy of salvation anchored firmly in the
life of the prophet.
This does not necessarily mean that Jer. 3031 and 3233 were set on
paper in the same sequence as this flowing reading order may suggest.
According to Schmid, Jer. 32:3741 must be older than 30:13; 31:2734.226
225 Compare the following comments of G. Fischer, Jeremia: Der Stand der theologischen
Diskussion, Darmstadt 2007, 107 on the study of H.-J. Stipp, Jeremia im Parteienstreit: Studien
zur Textentwicklung von Jer 26, 3643 und 45 als Beitrag zur Geschichte Jeremias, seines Buches
und judischer Parteien im 6. Jahrhundert (BBB, 82), Frankfurt a.M. 1992 about the struggle
between the parties: Sicherlich sind in Jer unterschiedliche Standpunkte vertreten, und
STIPP geht ihnen aufmerksam nach. Fraglich ist jedoch, ob dafr mehrere Gruppen bzw.
Autoren anzunehmen sind, und wer auf welche Weise die kontrastierenden Standpunkte
dann dennoch in einem Buch zusammengefhrt hat. For us this distinction between views
of groups and views of authors carries much weight. The first represent interests, the second
theological solutions. Such views of authors always carry a sense of learnedness and even
when dealing with serious subjects have an element of creative play. They are thereby
easier to blend in a book. It is not asked of the reader to choose party, but to think along
with the written tradition. Thus, besides the difference between Stipp, Parteienstreit, who
proposes party conflicts from Jeremiahs own time, and e.g. H. Knobloch, Die nachexilische
Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12), Wiesbaden 2009, who thinks of conflicts from
a much later period, the nature of the dispute is crucial for the interpretation.
226 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 80; overview 110; cf. G. Fischer, Das Trostbchlein: Text, Kompo-
sition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB, 26), Stuttgart 1993, 184.
He bases this assertion mainly on the concept new covenant (31:31) being
a more recent development than the concept eternal covenant (32:40).
Considering the broad distribution of the latter concept (16 in the Old
Testament, in Jeremiah further in 50:5), this is a reasonable hypothe-
sis.227
As counter argument one could point out that theological concepts do
not always arrange themselves on a singular development trajectory. The
fact remains that the action sphere of the concept covenant is smaller in Jer.
32, in the sense that at this stage it includes alone the future of hope and
not yet the disastrous past. By contrasting the terms new covenant and
covenant with the fathers, Jer. 31 is the first to succeed in subsuming the
total existence of Israel, past and future, under the single concept covenant.
This indeed seems to be a big step forwards theologically speaking. Jer. 3031
also contains the highest concentration of connections with other passages
from the book of Jeremiah. Moreover Jer. 3031 misses the anecdotal charac-
ter of Jer. 24, 29 and 32. Here there is no placement in the prophets biography
that could distract from the literary placement in the book. This powerful
intertwining with the book as a whole, along with the even greater com-
plexity and the advanced synthesis of the salvation history under the single
concept covenant, could be seen as a plausible indication of a somewhat
later emergence.
(4) The diachronic relationship between Jer. 3031 and 3:14:2 is the next
interesting issue. Previously we dealt with their mutual relations when
discussing the concept return. There are various indications that 3:14:2 has
been based on (a certain form of) 3031* and not the other way around. Jer.
31:18 is presumably a direct citation from Lam. 5:21. In turn, Jer. 31:18 now
appears to have been the source of inspiration for Jer. 3:22 (see especially
the clause , for you are Yhwh our God). An instance of
dependence in the direct vicinity is found between 31:15 and 3:21 (
, a voice is heard on the barren heights). In other words: Jer. 3
has combined lines from Jer. 31 that have little bearing on each other in the
latter settingnormally a reliable pointer at the direction of borrowing.228
227 For Schmid, Buchgestalten, 8283 it is important that Ezek. 11:19 appears to know Jer.
32:39 (so Levin), but not yet 31:3134. In our overall view of the direction of dependence [
3.2.5.3] this argument falls by the wayside.
228 Other analogies on Jer. 3031 in Jer. 3 concern the prose framework: 3:14 cf. 31:32; 3:16
cf. 31:29.
250 chapter three
Schmid suggests that 3:14:2 corrects the unconditionality of the promise

in Jeremiahs Booklet of Comfort in retrospect.229 This is unlikely for several
reasons. For example, Jer. 3:22 reveals that apart from being a command to
Israel, turning around is also a gift of God. Thereby the impression is created
that it is Yhwh who will place words of repentance in the mouth of his people
(compare 3:2225 and 31:1819!). So too the carefree allusions to Hosea and
Ezekiel show that the compilers of 3:14:2 had no problems with prophetic
promises of salvation in unconditional form.230 Everything indicates that
they saw conditionality-unconditionality as a false dilemma in relation to
this subject.
But why, then, would they allow 3:14:2 to culminate in such a powerful
exhortation as 4:12? The solution must have something to do with the
period of Jeremiahs activity in which the books reading sequence situates
this prologue. Placing the events in the time of king Josiah (3:6) created room
for a progressive action, in which the promise still to come in the time of king
Zedekiah (Jer. 2433) would be able to form a real climax after the preceding
episodes. This is what an accomplished author achieves in a prologue, even
if it is written in retrospect. But a correction?not at all.231
229 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 289: Nicht durch die Einsicht in die Bosheit menschlichen
Denkens und Tuns eines besseren belehrt, hat eine Neubearbeitung im Jeremiabuch die
Bedingung der Umkehr aus Jer 3 fallen gelassen und das Heil, in gewissem Sinne resignativ,
allein auf Jhwhs neuerlicher Zuwendung zu seinem Volk gegrndet sein lassen, sondern
umgekehrt ist aufgrund beobachtbarer Heilsverzgerung nach neuen Grnden fr diese
gesucht worden. For such a resigned view one could e.g. cite J. Unterman, From Repentance
to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 116: Jeremiahs
prophecies failed to arouse the people to return to YHWH of their own free will. Finally,
Jeremiah became convinced that Israel was not capable of repentanceleading to the
difference between Jer. 3 on the one hand, and Jer. 31:2737; 32:3644 on the other. An
essentially conditional view of the relation between repentance and deliverance in Jer. 3 is
nuanced with terms such as interaction and interdependence by B. Scheuer, B., The Return
to YHWH: The Tension between Deliverance and Repentance in Isaiah 4055 (BZAW, 377), Berlin
2008, 107112.
230 See Hos. 14:2 alongside Hos. 14:5 . Further the reworking of
Ezek. 23 in Jer. 3:613 and the allusion to Ezek. 11:18 in Jer. 4:2.
231 The suggestion that 3:15 and 3:1920 would wish to bring to an end the usage of the
man-woman metaphor for the relationship Yhwh-Israel in favour of the father-son metaphor
(Schmid, Buchgestalten, 282) and thus would contradict 31:34 and perhaps also 31:22, is
too venturesome. See e.g. R. Abma, Bonds of Love: Methodic Studies of Prophetic Texts with
Marriage Imagery (Isaiah 50:13 and 54:110, Hosea 13, Jeremiah 23) (SSN, 40), Assen 1999,
231 on Jer. 3:19: The image is that of a mother proudly seated amidst her children. Therewith
a father-son metaphor would no longer be present in that verse.
(5) Jer. 11 and 31 are so closely interrelated that they are mostly placed
in the same diachronic layer.232 One important inquiry is how this layer
relates time-wise to the layer of the world judgement. According to Schmid
the universalised depiction of the judgement in Jer. 125, 4651 requires
an answer to the question wie denn dieses knftige Heil, das Jeremia
ja nach Jer 3033 verkndet hat, zum Weltgericht in Beziehung zu setzen
sei.233 Schmids apparent supposition here is that the promise of the new
covenant already existed before the conception of a worldwide judgement
emerged in Jeremiah. Here against we propose that the judgement over
Zion, the judgement over individual nations, and the judgement over the
world in Jeremiah were not spread over an extended time trajectory in
their genesis, but together form the coherent background of the promise.
Thus it seems forced to let a cornerstone of Jeremiahs dream vision like Jer.
30:2324 (Yhwhs sweeping storm over the )text-genetically follow the
formulation of Jer. 31:3134 [ 3.2.5.1]. Here, major exegetical decisions are
to be made. For the extent of the promise within the canonical final text it
might not have an impact anymore, but for the intricacies of the dialogue
Jeremiah draws us into herethe new covenant as the only way out from a
traumatically experienced realityit does indeed.
For the torah-texts discussed above we see no significant differences in
their time of origin that could still be made plausible or would be essential
for their meaning.234 Generally speaking the trajectory on the books origin
232 See e.g. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 295300. He also includes Jer. 7 in this stratum, in which
Jer. 7 and 11 close 46 and 810 as collections of indictments and judgements respectively.
C. Maier, Jeremia als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale Gebote des Deuteronomiums in Fortschreibungen
des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 196), Gttingen 2002, 193197 (summary 362) ascribes the (most)
connections between Jer. 11 and 31 to a redactional revision of Jer. 11. It remains doubtful,
however, whether the concept of the sanctioned, disregarded covenant and the concept of
the new covenant are anyhow diachronically distinguishable in Jeremiah. In light of the
relations between Jer. 3031 and the book of Isaiah [detailed in 4.2], it is remarkable that
Jer. 11:15 (belonging to the oldest layer of the chapter according to Maier) already shows a
Isaian connection [cf. U. Wendel, Jesaja und Jeremia: Worte, Motive und Einsichten Jesajas in
der Verkndigung Jeremias (BThSt, 25), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1995, 215].
234 According to Maier, Lehrer, 354 (summary) Jer. 26:4 is an exilic text, 2:8 a late-exilic, 8:8
a post-exilic, and 18:18 like 31:33 a late post-exilic text. Alone in 31:33 does she consider the
identification of torah with the Pentateuch, because its parts were only assembled during
the course of the Persian period (351). We see no book-internal arguments to link 31:33
to the Pentateuch. K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible,
Cambridge, MA 2007, 222225 in turn defends the classic position of Marti and Duhm that
the early oracle Jer. 8:89 unmasks the Deuteronomy scroll found during Josiahs reign as
pious fraud. But is it historically plausible that the authority of the written torah was already
252 chapter three
appears to be shorter than the stretched out centuries presumed by Schmid

and others. Do Jer. 24, 29 and 32 still contain historical recollections about
the prophet? For Jer. 24 such reminiscence is virtually excluded, for Jer. 29
and 32 it seems highly doubtful.235 In comparison to these chapters, Jer. 3031
would have been prepared in an even more advanced stage of the books
genesis. Just as we have reduced the origin-trajectory of Jer. 3031 in our
exposition above, we lean towards doing the same for the book as a whole
and certainly for the passages treated in this section.236 The central question
of this study draws our main attention to how their dating compares to
Ezekiel. The long awaited moment to discuss this relative dating in a more
orderly fashion has dawned.
3.2.5.3. Diachronic Relations between Jeremiah and Ezekiel

Someone who wants to capture the starting point of a thought or an idea,
almost always arrives too late. Literary history makes us feel like newly
entered visitors who are joining a long conversation. Thus there is no text
in which we might press our finger on the origin of hope. All we are able to
do is trace how particular expressions of hope followed on from each other
and how the one prophetic vision incited another.
Points of contact between the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel have long
been a subject of exegetical inquiry. Literary dependence, equivalent assess-
being discussed before it had been firmly established? The adjacent passage 8:1012 and the
related passage 18:18 both cite from the book of Ezekiel and thus suggest a much later date of
origin.
235 On the relation between Jeremiah as a historical figure and a fictional personage, see
e.g. S. Herrmann, Jeremia: der Prophet und das Buch (EdF, 271), Darmstadt 1990, 137; Fischer,
Diskussion, 115130. The position of R.P. Carroll, The Book of Jeremiah (OTL), London 1986 on
this point is often called over-critical, but finds more support than refutation in the scribal
texts of Jeremiah we have investigated (so too Knobloch, Prophetentheorie concerning Jer. 26
and 36). According to Maier, Lehrer, 47 particularly Jer. 3744 provides einen historisch plau-
siblen Einblick in die politischen Wirren whrend und kurz nach der Belagerung Jerusalems
durch die Neubabylonier. Something that sounds historically plausible, however, need not be
a factual account. Thus the verbatim citations from the Joseph novella in the story of Jeremiah
in the pit (Jer. 38:6, 13; cf. Gen. 37:24, 28) confirm the impression of fictiveness. The histori-
cal importance of Jeremiah continues to be that his biography allows later readers to truly
experience the historical fall of Jerusalem ca. 600 bce from inside.
236 Embedding of the sequence of origin defended in this section (Jer. 24 29 32
11 + 3031 34) within a redactional-critical theory on the whole book of Jeremiah falls
outside the constraints of this study. We rest with the recognition that such theories have
led to completely different arrangements, thus e.g. in R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History
and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 321: Jer. 34; 11 (JerD1) 29*
(JerD2) 3031*; 32 (JerD3) 24 (late Dtr addition).
ments of the historical situation, contemporaneous language usage, a com-

mon tradition and a levelling editorial redaction are explanation models
chosen between, or from which a cocktail was prepared. Regarding the
first explanation, one direction of dependence has enjoyed the predomi-
nant support: Jeremiah influenced Ezekiel.237 That Ezekiel, his school or
his book, could have left traces in the book of Jeremiah has been considered
a possibility in one or two cases, but has not been seen as a major option.
This stance has only been really challenged in the last few years.238
In this section the attention falls on the diachronic relationship between
the two books promises of renewal.239 In order to strengthen a sense of
continuity, our analysis will concentrate on points of contact with Ezekiel
found in the Jeremian passages which we discussed above: 3:14:2; 24; 29;
3031; 32. To a large extent, whether there are indeed substantial grounds
for assuming literary dependence must be decided by analogous clauses.
Discussion of the analogies within the two contexts is required to track
down the direction of dependence.
Jer. 3:7 , cf. Ezek. 23:11 ; Jer. 3:8

, cf. Ezek. 23:13 . Literary kinship between Jer. 3:613 and the allegory
of the two sisters in Ezek. 23 is beyond dispute. Particularly the clauses that
are cited indicate direct dependence. The analogy that catches the eye the
most occurs between Jer. 3:7 [and Bagodah her sister, Judah, saw (it)] and
Ezek. 23:11 [and her sister Oholibah saw (it)]. In both pericopes this clause
links the scenes of the two sisters. The combination of sister and see within
the same clause is unique in the Old Testament.240 Similarly the other string
237 For this point of view, see the comprehensive studies of J.W. Miller, Das Verhltnis
Jeremias und Hesekiels sprachlich und theologisch untersucht: mit besonderer Bercksichti-
gung der Prosareden Jeremias, Assen 1955 and esp. D. Vieweger, Die literarische Beziehungen
zwischen den Bchern Jeremia und Ezechiel (BEAT, 26), Frankfurt a.M. 1993 (history of research
415). The influence of Jeremiah on Ezekiels redemption passages is defended by Unterman,
Repentance, 167170.
238 Cf. Fischer, Diskussion, 143.
239 For a previous attempt, here supplemented and revised on many points, see H. Leene,
Ezekiel and Jeremiah: Promises of Inner Renewal in Diachronic Perspective, in: J.C. de Moor,
H.F. van Rooy (eds), Past, Present, Future: The Deuteronomic History and the Prophets (OTS,
44), Leiden 2000, 150175.
240 In addition, see the word in Jer. 3:8, 10 and Ezek. 23:4, 18. ][her sister occurs
elsewhere only in Gen. 30:1, referring to Rachels sister Leah, and in Judg. 15:2, referring to the
younger sister of Samsons wife; disregarding the expression ][one to another
in Ex. 26:3, 3, 5, 6, 17; Lev. 18:18; Ezek. 1:9, 23; 3:13. with suff. sing. fem., your sister,
occurs in Ezek. 16:45, 46, 46, 48, 49, 51 (Q dual), 52, 52, 56; 23:3133 (in many of these cases
254 chapter three
of words, and I saw that , identical in both versions, occurs nowhere else.241
The two pericopes present these analogies in the same order and in close
proximity to each other. Besides the multiple use of to indicate sexual
relationships outside of marriage (Jer. 3:6, 8; Ezek. 23:3, 3, 5, 19, 30, 43; see
also the derivatives in Jer. 3:9 and Ezek. 23:7, 8, 8, 11, 11, 14, 1719, 27, 29, 29, 35,
43), we see in Jer. 3:11 as in Ezek. 16:5152 the notable occurrence of + ,
to confine ourselves to similarities on word and clause level.
To establish the direction of dependence we need to pay attention to the
difference in tenor between the two versions and the degree to which they
succeed in embedding the analogies in light of this difference. Each ver-
sion commences with an allegorical history of Israel. The historical account
in Ezek. 23 makes up the Scheltwort, that is, in form-critical terms, the
accusing part of the oracle of judgement. The judgement itself, the Droh-
wort, is directed at the younger sister: Therefore, Oholibah, thus says the
Lord Yhwh: I will rouse against you your lovers to whom you have got an
aversion, and I will bring them against you from every side (Ezek. 23:22);
et cetera, announcing the humiliating downfall of Jerusalem. In Jer. 3:613
the historical account develops completely differently, and introduces a call
to conversion addressed to the elder sister. Go, says God to the prophet,
proclaim these words toward the north: return, Meshubah Israel, declares
Yhwh, I will frown on you no longer, for I am merciful, declares Yhwh, I will
not be angry forever (Jer. 3:12). Thereby the two arguments, even with their
common imagery, are at odds with each other. Ezek. 23: the younger sister
deserves humiliation, because she behaved comparatively worse. Jer. 3: the
elder sister deserves a new beginning, because comparatively she behaved
less badly.
The foundations for this surprising twist in the Jeremian version are laid
in the choice of words of the preceding sentences.242 The allegory in Ezekiel
BHS proposes the dual); dual with suff. sing. fem., your two sisters, occurs in Ezek.
16:55, 61. By the way, the uniqueness of an analogy should be treated with caution as an
argument in favour of literary dependence, see A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, Analogies in Isaiah,
vol. A, Amsterdam 1993, 177178.
241 In lengthened form, is found in Judg. 12:3. In contrast see the frequent occur-
rence of have you seen: 1 Kgs 20:13 (God speaking to Ahab); 21:29 (to Elijah); Jer. 3:6;
Ezek. 8:12, 15, 17; 47:6. Some LXX-manuscripts and the Syriaca read in Jer. 3:8 and she saw,
which is followed by RSV, NEB and Carroll, Jeremiah, 144. MT however gives the lectio dif-
ficilior and is difficult to explain as a secondary adaptation to Ezek. 23:13. On the complex
construction of Jer. 3:8, see further below.
242 This conflicts the division of Jer. 3:613 into two original units 611 and 1213 (Carroll,
Jeremiah, 144148); 611 is not an independent piece, but in its essence connected to the
depicts the adultery of the two sisters without restraint. The drawn out
images contribute towards the extensive length of Ezek. 23. In contrast Jer.
3 deals with the adultery short and to the point.243 In this version Yhwh
appears to be less concerned about the sisters infidelity than about the
absence of repentance over these misdemeanours. Here we are confronted
with a remarkable friction, which asks for clarification. The opening words
of Jeremiahs oracle claim that it was received in the days of king Josiah; Ezek.
23 is dated on the eve of Jerusalems downfall, which would become a reality
in the next chapter of the book. But while Jer. 3 is placed far before Ezek. 23
in this biblical chronology, it takes the readers to a later stage on the road of
salvation: from contrition to conversion.
This is a first indication on the direction of dependence Ezekiel Jere-
miah. How much easier is it not to picture an oracle of doom transforming
into a call to repent than the other way around. But now seen in this light,
secondly, there are details on clause level that indeed confirm the priority
of Ezekiels version.
Let us concentrate on the clause and Bagodah her sister, Judah, saw.
What exactly did the younger sister see? According to Ezek. 23 she saw her
elder sister being murdered by her former lovers, in other words: Jerusalem
saw the historical end of Samaria as a political power. This is a logical
step in the narratives development. But in Jer. 3 the elder sister is not
killed; nor can she be, because she is needed at the end to hear the call to
repent. And therefore Bagodah must see something completely different.
She sees Yhwh waiting in vain for Meshubahs conversion. Disregarding the
vagueness of this imagethe inevitable conclusion seems to be that the
version of Ezekiel rather than the version of Jeremiah has preserved this
clause in its more original setting.
It is evidently a similar situation with the embedding of the unique word
string and I (Yhwh) saw that . Here too, the cohesion in Ezekiel leaves an
impression of clarity. In Jeremiah the construction is so complicated that the
dependence Ezekiel Jeremiah offers a welcome explanation on its origin.
verses that follow. So too the demarcation of 610 as a separate parable, with as directive
that sister Judah is not to follow the negative example set by sister Israel (Abma, Bonds of
Love, 250), is dubious. Meshubahs justification in v. 11 is based on the fact that Bagodah has
already followed her example, and outdone her.
243 The verb and its derivatives for desire, lust, lewdness, are used frequently in
Ezekiel, but are absent from Jer. 3:613. ( except in Ezek. 16:37 em.) occurs 6 in Ezek.
23 (5, 7, 9, 12, 16, 20); the noun occurs in Ezek. 23:11; in Jer. 4:30 and Ezek. 33:31, 32.
256 chapter three
Ezekiel 23
13 And I saw |
that she [Oholibah] defiled herself |
they both took the same way |
Jeremiah 3
8 And I saw |
that because of all this |
namely that Meshubah Israel had committed adultery |
I had sent her away |
and had given her letter of divorce to her |
but that Bogedah Judah, her sister, did not fear |

and went |
and also played the whore |
The writing strategy behind Jer. 3 may be postulated as follows. On the one
hand, the author wanted to use the narrative structure of Ezek. 23 built
around the pivotal clauses and she saw it, and I saw that. On the other
hand, he wanted to retain the strict scheme whorishness-impenitence for
each of the sisters. Consequently Bagodah had to see Meshubahs lack of
repentance, and her being sent away (depicting Israels deportation) had
to be caught in a rather cumbersome sentence, which boils down to Yhwh
having to discover exactly the same behaviour in sister no. 2 as he did in
sister no. 1.
Similarly, on the comparison between Jer. 3:11 and Ezek. 16:5152, the
question should be raised: Which of the two texts explains the origin of the
other best? In Ezek. 16:5152 Jerusalem justifies ( pi.) Sodom and Samaria
by behaving so atrociously that their perverse behaviour is righteous in
comparison ( qal + ). Here the younger sister is the subject of the
justification, and the statement is meant to incriminate her. In Jer. 3:11,
the elder sister is the subject. It is she that has justified her soul ( pi.
+ )in comparison to her younger sister, an exonerating fact that opens
prospects for her return. The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from
these observations text-genetically would be: The author adapted a motif
from Ezek. 16 and combined it with the allegory of Ezek. 23. Borrowing in
the other direction is virtually impossible.
And then there is the argument of the implicit double marriage. Terms
in Jer. 3 such as commit adultery (8, 9) and letter of divorce (8) are crystal
clear suggestions that Yhwh is married simultaneously to the two sisters.
But a direct reference to such a double wedlock is not made here,244 an

omission which is all the more strange, because until this point Jer. 23 has
only known one bride of Yhwh.245 What Ezek. 23:4 tells about the sisters,
namely that Yhwh married the two of them (they became mine, cf. Ezek.
16:8), must be assumed by the readers of Jer. 3. Such a tacit postulation is
an approved signal of literary dependence. What is known from elsewhere,
need not be repeated.
Our arguments in favour of the direction of dependence Ezek. 23 (cf. 16)
Jer. 3 may now be recapitulated: (a) the priority of a doom oracle over a
call to repent, (b) the relatively awkward embedding of several analogous
clauses in Jer. 3, (c) the inversion of the justification motif from Ezek. 16
in Jer. 3, and (d) the tacitly assumed double marriage in Jer. 3.246 What
could interpreters possibly have seen to make them draw the opposite
conclusion?247 How can Zimmerli claim here, as he does elsewhere, that
Ezekiel stands auf den Schultern Jeremias?248 A probable explanation lies in
the canonical chronology of the biblical narrative itself, in which the period
of Jeremiahs activity largely precedes that of Ezekiel. In this special case
there is a supposed broadening of Jeremiahs horizons in Ezekiel. Ezekiel
would have been the first to apply the imagery of adultery to international
244 Abma, Bonds of Love, 249.

245 Cf. Jer. 2:23, 1719, 2022, 2325, 3237; 3:15; again in 3:20.
246 The argument that the suggestive names Oholah and Oholibah (tent girls) should
enjoy priority over the explicitly reproachful names of Meshubah and Bogedah we set aside,
so too the question whether Ezek. 23 in turn has been based on mythological motifs. On the
latter see W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel (BKAT, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969, 538539. A. Fitzgerald,
The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as a Queen and False
Worship as Adultery in the OT, CBQ 34 (1972), 403416; Idem, BTWLT and BT as Titles for
Capital Cities, CBQ 37 (1975), 167183 suggests that texts portraying Yhwh as the husband of
a city (Jerusalem or Samaria) represent the more original form of wedding imagery, while
the presentation of the people of Israel as Yhwhs spouse should be considered a secondary
development. According to D.E. Gowan, Theology of the Prophetic Books: The Death and
Resurrection of Israel, Louisville 1998, 44, Hos. 2:4 concerns Yhwhs betrothal to the land of
Canaan. For a discussion on this matter, see Abma, Bonds of Love, 2025.
247 See e.g. B.J. Oosterhoff, Jeremia (COT), dl. 1, Kampen 1990, 142 on Jer. 3:613 (our
translation): Later Ezekiel embroiders further on this image (Ezek. 16:46ff.; 23:1ff.). Miller,
Verhltnis, 91: Die Tatsache, dass Hes. 23:1ff. sehr lange und ausgesponnen im Vergleich mit
Jer. 3:611 erscheint, zeigt schon auf das Original [= Jer.] hin. Vieweger, Beziehungen, 26: Der
traditionsgeschichtliche Weg der Rede von der Ehe Jahwes mit seinem Volk fhrt () im
Alten Testament vom Propheten Hosea ber Jer 3,613 zu Ez 23,127+. According to Duhm
and Skinner (cited by Unterman, Repentance, 25), Jer. 3:613 has been influenced precisely
by Ezek. 16 and 23. Carroll, Jeremiah, 145 identifies Ezek. 16 as the source.
248 Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 539.
258 chapter three
politics. The lovers in Jeremiah are foreign gods (3:13) and then, as it is often
asserted, gods of Canaanite origin. In Ezekiel the lovers evolved into political
and military powers: Egyptians, Assyrians and Chaldeans. Their gods are
mentioned just once in Ezek. 23:127, and even this could be a secondary
addition (in v. 7).249
This is a line of reasoning in which the conclusion seems to be pre-
sumed. Thus, for example, worshipping of wood and stone (cf. Jer. 3:9) in
the Deuteronomistic literature is not an exclusive indication of the Canaan-
ite cult.250 In the context of Jer. 3:613, Egypt and Assyria are also named as
questionable associates (2:18, 36). The real point is, that the implicit read-
ers of Jer. 3 are not political leaders but ordinary Israelites concerned with
their personal religious responsibility: not the leaders but they must turn
away from the foreign gods and hear the voice of Yhwh. The conclusion that
international politics is not an issue yet in Jer. 3 has no foundations. Rather,
international politics is old news, no longer an actuality as it may still have
been to Ezek. 23.251
This comparison between Ezek. 23 and Jer. 3 confirms the perception that
has risen from other intertextual comparisons between the two books, and
which we will elaborate more thoroughly regarding the promise of renewal
later on in this section. In advance it should be pointed out that the Jeremian
text we have just discussed is not based on the knowledge of an isolated
passage from Ezekiel, but on familiarity with such a passage within the
context of the book of Ezekiel, disregarding the books exact format. This
is not only illustratable in just Jer. 3:613, which borrowed from Ezek. 16
as well as Ezek. 23, but likewise in the surrounding compositions Jer. 24A
and 4B6. The shepherds after my own heart in Jer. 3:15 presume Ezek.
34.252 The wording of Jer. 4:30, in which Jerusalem is depicted as a woman
who is being intimidated by her former lovers, raises the suspicion anew
249 Cf. Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 544: the addition distorts the political-military imagery.
250 See Deut. 4:28; 28:36, 64; 29:16; furthermore 2 Kgs 19:18 = Isa. 37:19; Ezek. 20:32.
251 It is interesting to see how the political-military dimension falls into the background
in the presumed Fortschreibungen of Ezek. 23:127. Assyrians, Chaldeans and Egyptians are
no longer specified, but instead the nations (30, cf. 40) and their idols are mentioned (30,
cf. 37, 39, 49). Also within Ezekiel itself, the fading away of the political-military dimension
in favour of the cultic thus appears to be a later development.
252 Thematically and through the verbs , shepherd, , have insight, , become
many, and , bear fruit, Jer. 3:1418 is connected to Jer. 23:18, a passage that is dependent
on Ezek. 34 according to recent research; cf. R. Kuyvenhoven, Jeremiah 23:18: Shepherds in
Diachronic Perspective, in: A.A. den Hollander et al. (eds), Paratext and Metatext as Channels
of Jewish and Christian Traditions, Leiden 2003, 136.
that Ezek. 16 and 23 witnessed its birth.253 The expression they say peace
peace, and there is no peace in Jer. 6:14 has been borrowed from Ezek. 13.254
The pericope about the prophet as watchman, Jer. 6:1621, presumes Ezek.
33:19.255 A passage which, just like Jer. 3:11 and 4:30, assumes knowledge
of Ezek. 16, is Jer. 23:1314; here the prophets from Jerusalem, and certainly
not in their favour, are compared with those from Samaria.256 The complete
pericope on the prophets, Jer. 23:932, moreover is dependent on Ezek.
13.257 It is improbable that these spread-out texts from Ezekiel could have
exerted their influence (other than in the closed circle of a scribal school)
before they were included in a cohesive book and thus had established their
authority.258 This would lead us to the last quarter of the sixth century as
the earliest possible terminus post quem for the Jeremiah texts borrowed
from Ezekiel. Deliberations below will let us move this time limit down even
further.
Jer. 24:7 , cf. Jer. 32:39 ; Ezek. 11:19

, ; Ezek. 36:26 , .
Comparable combinations in syntactic pattern and vocabulary are searched
in vain. Characteristic too is the close proximity of a covenant formula, see
Jer. 24:7; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 36:28. It is logical to assume that this covenant
formula has caught a lift with the borrowed text, if the cited analogies
indeed resulted from borrowing.
In this regard, the wording of the formula in Jer. 24:7 deserves attention:
. Starting with the 14 occurrences displaying
the most comparable pattern,259 5 the Yhwh-clause stands in front and 9
253 Besides the corresponding imagery of a woman intimidated by her former lovers, the
common vocabulary is striking between Jer. 4:30 and Ezek. 16:1013:

;so too Ezek. 23:40: .
254 Cf. H. Leene, Blowing the Same Shofar: An Intertextual Comparison of Representations
of the Prophetic Role in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in: J.C. de Moor (ed.), The Elusive Prophet:
The Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous Artist (OTS, 45), Leiden
2001, 175198, esp. 177187.
255 Cf. Leene, Blowing, 187192.
256 This is the only place in Jeremiah where the names of Samaria and Jerusalem appear in
collocation, and where Sodom (Ezek. 16!) and Gomorrah are mentioned. Jer. 23:14 is related
to 3:10 through the collocation of and .
257 Cf. Leene, Blowing, 177187.
258 For a possible influence of Ezek. 3839 on Jer. 46, further 5.1 sub 9.
259 Along with R. Rendtorff, The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investiga-
tion, Edinburgh 1998 one could distinguish in the covenant formulas between type A, I will be
God for you, type B, you will be a people for me, and type C combining A and B, with several
260 chapter three
the Israel-clause. The rule for such binary formulations states that a pronoun
always occurs in the second leg and never in the first. Both Ezekiel and
Jeremiah use or in the Yhwh-clause. It seems that is preferred in
covenant formulae in which Yhwh addresses Israel. Similarly when the other
clauses with and are included in the comparison (both 9
in the Old Testament), the first never, and the second always is addressed
with a you, Jer. 24:7 being the only exception! Thus not Ezek. 36:28 with
its is linguistically deviant (as it is repeatedly claimed in arguments
insisting on the verses derivative nature), but Jer. 24:7. The highlighted
feature falls in line with a more general tendency in how and are
used. Of all the 1st pers. sing. pronouns in the Old Testament, 29 % have the
longer form. For 1st pers. sing. pronouns followed directly by a verb, noun or
preposition with 2nd pers. suffix, this ratio goes up to 52 %.
In the question on the direction of borrowing, particular attention is
placed on the relationship between Jer. 24 and Ezek. 11. The cited analogies
are imbedded in structural similarities between these passages as a whole.
Two groups are contrasted, those remaining behind in Judah and those who
had to leave the land and now find themselves in the land of the Chaldeans
(Jeremiah) or in the countries to which they were scattered (Ezekiel). Both
texts envisage a promising future for the displaced group, but do not esteem
it morally and religiously higher. On the contrary, the promise of another
heart or a changed heart, which is directed at this displaced group, would
then have been unnecessary.
The period in which it is told that Jeremiah and Ezekiel received their
identical prophecies lies between the first and the second deportation.
variants. Rendtorff counts 9, 8 and 18 places in the OT resp. for A, B and C. Of the 18 places that
have the binary formula, the majority are in Jeremiah and Ezekiel: Jer. 7:23; 11:4; 24:7; 30:22;
31:1, 33; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 14:11; 36:28; 37:23, 27. These are characterised by the pattern weqatal-
clause we-pronoun yiqtol-clause, which elsewhere only occurs in the covenant formulas of
Lev. 26:12 and Zech. 8:8 (together 14 ; more freely 2 Sam. 7:24), thus offering another indica-
tion of the close affinity between Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Rendtorff states (contra W. Thiel, Die
deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 125 (WMANT, 41), Neukirchen 1973, 256) that the
binary formula in Jer. 24:7 cannot be called a D-element, because the formula in Deuteron-
omy and the Dtr literature is not characterised by this pattern (33 n. 63). This would make it
possible to see Ezekiel as the primary source for the covenant formula in Jeremiah. Ezekiel
uses it solely in the promise of salvation, but because the judicial speeches in Jer. 7 and 11
presuppose Jer. 31 [ 3.2.5.2 sub 5], in their formulation Jer. 7:23 and 11:4 could also be indi-
rectly dependent on Ezekiel. Jer. 13:11 with its formula B, on the other hand, is an allusion to
Deut. 26:19. For a detailed discussion of Ezekiels usage of the covenant formula, see S. Petry,
Die Entgrenzung JHWHs: Monolatrie, Bilderverbot und Monotheismus im Deuteronomium, in
Deuterojesaja und im Ezechielbuch (FAT, 27), Tbingen 2007, 242272.
Content, formulation, addressing and placement of the promise, are thus all
included in the same intertextual correspondence. Here, certainly literary
borrowing must have taken placebut in which direction?
The difference must decide on this. The difference is that only Ezekiel
hints at a historical cause. The remnants no longer see room for those that
were forced to depart: to us this land is given for a possession (Ezek. 11:15).
Concrete claims of landownership are audible in the background of Ezek.
11.260 Jer. 24 is void of such references. The theological reflection in Jeremiah
seems to have dissociated itself from any actual conflict of interests; one
no longer feels the heat of looming legal debates, as in Ezekiel. There-
fore Ezekiel literarily influencing Jeremiah is the most probable option,
based even on this single casus.261 Herewith the advance taken during our
diachronic analysis of Jer. 24 has been replenished [ 3.2.5.2 sub 1]. The bor-
rowing from Ezek. 11 fits completely in the scribal procedure in which the
author of Jer. 24, as pointed out above, also incorporated texts from Amos
and Deuteronomy. Ezekiels most important contribution to this intertex-
tual conversation now turns out to be the gift of the heart. Yhwh promises
that this gift will be received after the return to the land.262
260 See also Ezek. 33:2329. K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches. Untersuchungen
zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72),
Neukirchen 1996, 264 provides the similarities in word usage with Jer. 24:810.
261 Jer. 32 does refer to property rights, but then again not to contrasting groups of people:
another indication that the two themes are unrelated in Jeremiah. This perspective on the
direction of dependence (Ezek. 11 Jer. 24) counters the point of view expressed eloquently
by C. Levin, Die Verheiung des neuen Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Zusammen-
hang ausgelegt (FRLANT, 137), Gttingen 1985, 209: Ezek. 11:1421* ist das Tor, durch welches
die Bundesverheiung aus der jeremianischen Eingang in die ezechielische Tradition gefun-
den hat; see also Miller, Verhltnis, 9697 (voicing some doubts) and Vieweger, Beziehungen,
9498.
262 Deuteronomy mentions a changing of the heart, but preceding the return and not as
a gift (Deut. 4:29; 30:2; cf. 1 Kgs 8:4748). Deut. 30:6 moreover promises a circumcision of
the heart by Yhwh after the return, but in a formulation not reminiscent of Ezekiel. Some
translate Jer. 24:7a ( cf. 9:23) as if it were an Ezekielian recognition formula,
neglecting the direct object in the main clause: see E, NRSV, NBS, WV, NBV. Comparisons
with Jer. 2:8; 9:5, 23; 22:16; 31:34 make it clear that Yhwh is the object of knowledge in 24:7a.
The additional object clause (pace J. Unterman, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs
Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 79: causal clause) is probably traceable
to Ezekiels influence. Jeremiah reads only in 9:23 and 24:7 compared to the 70
instances in Ezekiel; Jer. 16:21 and 28:9 also remind of Ezekiels recognition formula. With
the unique construction in 24:7a, Jeremiah seals, as it were, DIs association of the themes
acknowledgement and inner change, which are still disconnected in Ezekiel [ 4.1]. Using
R.L. Kohn, A New Heart and a New Soul: Ezekiel, the Exile and the Torah (JSOT.S, 358), Sheffield
262 chapter three
Jer. 29:14
. On this occasion no specific
borrowing will be discussed, but a stereotypical formulation in Ezekiel and
Jeremiah that has been studied by Lust will receive attention.263 In this
formula Ezekiel prefers to speak about a homecoming and not a return of
Israel, according to Lust because this prophet does not base himself on a
successful Landnahme in the past.264 Practically all the texts in Ezekiel in
which Yhwh announces Israels home bringing from the scattering, comply
with the following scheme:
a1) I will gather you/them from the peoples
a2) I will assemble you/them from the countries where you/they have been
scattered
b) I will bring you/them into
Ezek. 11:17 has just one variant in b: I will give you the soil of Israel, a mod-
ification of the theme on landownership in the context. Ezek. 20:3435 has
bring out in a1, gather in a2; prepositional adjuncts follow the established
pattern, while the relative clause in a2 has been developed. The same tri-
partite scheme is discernible in 20:41. Ezek. 28:25 joins a1 and a2 to form one
sentence with a relative clause, and to accommodate the change divides ele-
ment b into two. The same counts for Ezek. 29:1314, with the provision that
the binary element b has been given a special form here, which sometimes
also occurs in Jeremiah: And I will turn the fortunes of Egypt [
/ ] and will have them return to . Ezek. 36:24 has take from the
nations in a1, gather from all the countries in a2; in this instance the rela-
tive clause has become redundant after the account of Israels scattering in
v. 19. Equally the promise of revival in Ezek. 37:12 carries the triad a1-a2-b, even
though the a-clauses refer to the graves. Ezek. 37:21 has take in a1, gather
in a2, and bring in b, where the relative clause is subordinated to a1 and not
to a2, and the prepositional adjuncts deviate slightly. Ezek. 39:27 reads have
return from [ pil.!] in element a1; position b here is occupied by I will
show myself holy , cf. 20:41; 28:25. On the sequence of the prepositional
adjuncts it is noticeable that they persistently let from the peoples/nations
precede from the countries.
2002, 93 one may establish that the relation between Ezekiel and Deuteronomy concerning
the heart as a place of human moral response is more a matter of theme than formulation.
263 J. Lust, Gathering and Return in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in: P.-M. Bogaert (ed.), Le Livre
de Jrmie (BEThL, 54), Leuven 1981, 119142, 428430.

264 See also Ezek. 11:17: and I will give you the soil of Israel (not: give back).
The book of Ezekiel therefore indeed has a fixed pattern here, with ex-
plainable variants. Lusts approach deviates from that of Hossfeld, who lets
the formula in Ezekiel refer to a new Exodus. This is only possible if Ezek.
20:3435 (cf. 20:41; 34:13) is taken as a prototype for the other occurrences:
11:17; 28:25; 29:13; 36:24; 37:12; 37:21; 39:27.265 With bring out-gather-bring into,
however, Ezek. 20:3435 offers a contextually determined variant to the
more general a1-a2-b pattern. In support, Lusts observation holds true that
the most constant element in the formulation is the verb , which falls
back on the imagery of scattering and certainly not the exodus tradition.
We therefore see no reason in Ezek. 36:24, for example, to speak of a new
Exodus.
What now about the corresponding promises in Jeremiah? There the
variations all at once appear far greater. The only real constant element
is, I will have you/them return to ; with Ezekiels scepticism towards
bringing back, the book of Jeremiah is not troubled. Because another action
of Yhwh usually precedes him having them returned, one may consider an
a-b scheme.
a)
b) I will have you/them etc. return to
Nowhere, however, is the first element divided into parallel members a1 and
a2. Sometimes such an element deals with Yhwhs changed attitude, as in Jer.
12:15 I will have compassion on them (cf. 42:12) and 24:6 I will set my eye
upon them for (their) good. In Jer. 30:3 element a (or if one wishes, b1, cf.
Ezek. 29:14) is formed by the clause I will turn their fortunes.
There are just three instances where the form and content of the a-clause
reminds more strongly of Ezekiel: Jer. 23:3 I will gather the remnant of my
flock out of all the lands where I have driven them; 29:14 I will gather you
from all the nations and from all the places where I have driven you [cited
in Hebrew above] and 32:37 behold, I am going to gather them from all
the countries where I have driven them etc. So too the a-clause in Jer. 16:15
(= 23:8) may contain a variation: who brought up the children of Israel
from the land of the north and from all the countries where I have driven
them; within the framework of the Exodus comparison, the conventional
verb gather has been replaced here by bring up.266 However it is notably
265 F.-L. Hossfeld, Untersuchungen zu Komposition und Theologie des Ezechielbuches (FzB,
20), Wrzburg 1977, 309.

266 For a discussion of these texts from Jeremiah, see also Schmid, Buchgestalten, 270.
264 chapter three
the relative clause in these four examples and the repeated prepositional
adjunct in Jer. 29:14 (from all the nations and from all the places; cf. 16:15
from the land of the North and from all the countries ) that positively
remind us of element a in Ezekiels formulation.
Searching for an explanation for these traces of a pattern in Jeremiah, the
only feasible option is that Jeremiah was influenced by Ezekiel on this point
as well. The diachronic hypothesis then looks like this: the Jeremiah tradi-
tion became familiar with the theme of return (Jer. 28) and the concrete
promise of a return from Babylon (Jer. 12:15; cf. 42:1012 etc.; from the land of
the enemy Jer. 31:1517) from other sources than Ezekiel. But this promise
was developed in certain instances with the help of Ezekiels promise of
gathering.267 Dependence in the opposite direction (Jeremiah Ezekiel)
appears difficult to defend. For example, Jeremiah does not have a formu-
lation I will gather and I will have return, from which Ezekiels formulation
could have been derived easily by substituting have return with bring into.
The book of Jeremiah makes a far too varied impression to justify claims
it is responsible for the emergence of the stereotypical pattern in Ezekiel.
Matters must be the other way around: the book of Jeremiah lacks a fixed
formula, but underwent some influence from the fixed formulation found
in Ezekiel.268
This stance is shared by several scholars regarding the four texts cited
above. These texts, then, are mostly ascribed to a distinct, diaspora orien-
tated editorial redaction that the book of Jeremiah received in the course
of its genesis.269 In 3.2.5.4 we will return to the issue of the golah- and
diaspora-orientations. In any case we are already in a position to determine
that Jer. 23:3 and 8 are integral to a chapter that as a whole clearly depends on
Ezekiel, namely Ezek. 34.270 Its being borrowed from Ezekiel should not serve
267 Furthermore gather in Jeremiah occurs in the poetic passages in Jer. 3031 that are
associated with DI but display few formal affinities with the promise in Ezekiel.
268 The expression / qal/hif has no effect on the outlined picture. The core
meaning appears to be the restoration of a former state of things (J.F.A. Sawyer, Art. , in:
THAT, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1976, 884891, esp. 887). It is then not surprising that Ezekiel uses this
expression alone before the for him rare ( Ezek. 29:14; cf. 39:25). There is no reason to
assume literary influence by the Jeremiah tradition, in which the expression is common.
269 C.R. Seitz, Theology in Conflict: Reactions to the Exile in the Book of Jeremiah (BZAW, 176),
Berlin 1989, 295: The final form of the Book of Jeremiah reflects significant redactional inter-
vention carried out under the influence of Ezekiel traditions; N. Mendecki, Ezechielische
Redaktion des Buches Jeremia? BZ 35 (1991), 242247, esp. 247; Schmid, Buchgestalten, 254:
Jeremiah fell in the hands of people in Babylon who wanted to edit the book in the spirit of
Ezekiel in favour of the golah.
270 Cf. Kuyvenhoven, Jeremiah 23:18, 136.
as an argument to lift an incidental Jeremian passage redaction-critically

from its context. We will point out below how knowledge of Ezekiel seems
already to be presupposed by texts that are usually considered belonging to
the oldest core of Jeremiah.
Jer. 30:5 , Jer. 6:14 = 8:11 ; Ezek. 13:10, 16

. The other four occurrences all have the string ( with pre-
fixed ww nowhere else in the Old Testament) preceded by , which is
replaced here by the contrasting . Thus terror and no peace appears to
be the variant of an expression traceable back to Ezek. 13;271 this would con-
firm our hypothesis that Jeremiahs dream vision indeed wishes to contrast
premature salvation oracles [ 3.2.3]. In this way Jer. 30:5 demonstrates that
Jeremiahs allusions to Ezekiel are not limited to late redactional layers, or
rather: that theories of layering cannot be based on familiarity or unfamil-
iarity with the other prophetic book as criterion.
Further possible points of contact between Jer. 30:431:26 and Ezekiel
have been inventoried by Fischer.272 In the most cases the analogies are
too weak to draw definite diachronic conclusions.273 Actually, this poetic
environment is not the most favourable biotope for prosaic Ezekielian cita-
tions.274
Jer. 30:11 , cf. Ezek. 29:13 ; 34:12 . This

is the other instance in the dream vision we wish to pay some attention. A
relative clause containing a form of does not occur elsewhere
in the Old Testament. Dependence is probable; as with Jer. 29:14 discussed
earlier, Ezekiel could have served as the source of inspiration for 30:11. While
271 Leene, Blowing, 177187; see also G. Fischer, Das Trostbchlein: Text, Komposition und
Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB, 26), Stuttgart 1993, 213. See for further collocations of and
Deut. 2:2526; Jer. 33:9; Ps. 35:2736:2; Job 15:21; 21:9; 25:2. For without see
Isa. 48:22; 57:21; Jer. 12:12; Zech. 8:10; Ps. 38:4; 2 Chron. 15:5. Particularly the analogy with texts
from Isa. 4066 is relatively weak (pace U. Cassuto, On the Formal and Stylistic Relationship
between Deutero-Isaiah and Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem, Biblical and Oriental
Studies, vol. 1, Jerusalem 1973, 141177, esp. 149).
272 Fischer, Trostbchlein, 212214.
273 See e.g. Jer. 30:17 , cf. Ezek. 34:6 ; Ps. 142:5 . The
dependence on Ezekiel is uncertain despite the words and in Jer. 30:17 and Ezek. 34:4.
274 We note further that the covenant formula in Jer. 30:22 (different to 31:1 but just like 11:4)
is perfectly identical to that in Ezek. 36:28. This is a new argument in favour of the theory that
the covenant formula caught a lift with the promise of salvation, and from there spread out
through the book of Jeremiah. On the literary correlation between the two covenants in Jer.
11 and 3031, 3.2.4 sub 5.
266 chapter three
a certain affinity with Ezek. 34:12 is also visible in Jer. 31:10 through shepherd
and gather, to draw solid conclusions this analogy once more is too weak.
More generally one could maintain, however, that a synthetic saying like he
who scattered Israel will gather it does not precede the thought world of
Ezekiel comfortably. The author of Ezek. 36 could have saved himself the
trouble of much theological reasoning [ 3.1.2], if such a straightforward
promise had already been available to him.
Jer. 31:29 , cf. Ezek. 18:2

. With this borrowing we move on from the dream vision and
arrive in the prose framework of Jer. 3031. It is here that the most important
rulings for the argument of this chapter will be made. Evidence for direct
dependence Ezek. 18:2 Jer. 31:29 includes:275 (a) The widely held view that
Jeremiah and Ezekiel cited an existing proverb independently from each
other, ricochets off with the observation that the analogy concerns not only
the saying itself but also its prophetic application in a question on life and
death.276 (b) In Ezekiel the proverb follows the conventional bicolic pattern
by using the imperfect twice compared to perfect + imperfect in Jeremiah.
The modification of into is linked to the historical connotations
attached to the fathers in the context of Jer. 3031, cf. 30:3; 31:32. Such his-
275 For an elaboration of these arguments, see H. Leene, Unripe fruit and dull teeth (Jer
31,29; Ez 18,2), in: E. Talstra (ed.), Narrative and Comment. Fs W. Schneider, Amsterdam 1995,
8298.
276 J.W. Miller, Das Verhltnis Jeremias und Hesekiels sprachlich und theologisch untersucht:
mit besonderer Bercksichtigung der Prosareden Jeremias, Assen 1955, 99100 sees an indi-
cation in Ezekiels greater detailing that Jeremiah went before; the possibility of summaries
in Jeremiah (cf. 3:613) is not considered. D. Vieweger, Die literarische Beziehungen zwischen
den Bchern Jeremia und Ezechiel (BEAT, 26), Frankfurt a.M. 1993, 77 mentions eine tradi-
tionsgeschichtliche Abhngigkeit der beiden Abschnitte. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 214 eventu-
ally grants Ezekiel priority regarding the proverb, even though he remains generally uncer-
tain about the direction of dependence between Ezekiel and Jeremiahs Booklet of Comfort
(different G. Fischer, Jeremia: Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2007). R.L.
Schultz, The Search for Quotation: Verbal Parallels in the Prophets (JSOT.S, 180), Sheffield 1999,
224 in turn names Jer. 31:29 and Ezek. 18:2 examples of parallels that display close corre-
spondence which () are not quotations but are rather formulaic, idiomatic or proverbial
in origin. P. Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen zu Textgeschichte und Entstehung des Ezechiel-
buches in masoretischer und griechischer berlieferung, Zrich 2004, 321 sees Ezek. 18:2 as the
Spendertext. B. Becking, Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of Jeremiah
3031 (OTS, 51), Leiden 2004, 239241 narrows down the dependence problem (the chicken
and the egg) to the question whether 31:2930 could have been inserted later into the present
context. We hold that the text could equally be a citation from Ezekiel, being well integrated
in what Becking considers as the 8th sub-canto of the Booklet of Comfort (31:2730).
torical connotations are absent from Ezek. 18. (c) The difference between
and is in line with this: Ezekiel speaks of (random) fathers and
their sons, Jeremiah of the fathers and the sons as representing two periods
of Israels history. The most obvious explanation is that a proverb borrowed
from Ezek. 18:2 has been tailored to the context of Jer. 31:29. (d) This is further
supported by the for Jeremiah unfamiliar, but for Ezekiel typical manner in
which Jer. 31:30 speaks about death, as well as by the merging of image and
reality in the verse.277 (e) Jeremiah announces that in the future the proverb
will no longer be used, Ezekiel prohibits its being used today. This is an addi-
tional argument in support of the indicated direction of dependence. The
tenor of the predictions in Ezekiel and Jeremiah remains that promises are
derived from commandments and not vice versa. Whatever Yhwh demands,
he will gift to Israel.278
In their succession Jer. 31:2730 and 3134 portray two phases of a future
progression of events [ 3.2.2]. First Yhwh will relieve the house of Israel and
the house of Judah from the burdens of the past, thereupon he will write the
law on the hearts of everyone and no longer remember personal transgres-
sions. This sequence agrees with the sequence of Ezek. 18:220 and 2132
[ 3.1.1], on the understanding that Ezekiels exhortation to inner renewal
(Ezek. 18:31), like the proverb ban, has again been converted into a promise
in Jeremiah. The author of Jeremiah did not borrow just the rejection of
the proverb from Ezek. 18, but permitted himself to be influenced by the
whole course of the chapters argument: from collective pardon to personal
change. Here we have certainly come across scribal skills of the highest
quality.279
277 The most analogous clause to 31:30 is 2 Kgs 14:6 . The parallel verse,
2Chron. 25:4 keeps more closely to the rule these clauses refer to, Deut.
24:16 . The expressions and [ ]both occur in Ezekiel, resp.
3:18, 19; 18:17, 18; 33:8, 9 and 3:20; 18:24, but in light of the uneven distribution, in Jer. 31:30
could well be an adaptation of the citation from Kings to Ezekiel. In any case, Jer. 31:2930
illustrates the scribal procedure beautifully, where widely spread canonical texts are drawn
together.
278 How the rejection of the proverb relates to personal identification with the history
of ones own people, through evocative imagery of e.g. Jacob, Rachel and Ephraim in the
preceding dream vision, is an interesting issue. But the same question may be posed when
comparing Ezek. 18 to Ezek. 16 and 23. A possible answer could be that one might recognise
ones own portrait in ones national past without having to be party to its guilt. Personal
engagement is essential to all forms of history writing.
279 Vieweger, Beziehungen, 112 (summarising scheme) believes that Ezek. 18 is dependent
on Jer. 18:710 besides 31:29. However, the points of contact with this passage are not concrete
enough to warrant such a conclusion. So too for Unterman, Repentance, 168 the relation
268 chapter three
Jer. 31:33 , cf. Ezek. 11:19 ; 36:26

idem; 36:27 . The analogy is conspicuous.280 It lets one
suspect dependence, but offers no clarity in which direction. No further
analogous clauses with Ezekiel are found in Jer. 31:3134. Therefore our case
for the priority of Ezek. 36 to a great extent rests on indirect arguments. But
first we will account for the arguments that have been used in favour of the
opposite point of view: Ezek. 36 presupposes Jeremiah.281 (a) occurs in
Ezekiel (against 169 )alone in 36:28, which would indicate dependence
on Jer. 11:4; 24:7; 30:22. The point has already been discussed in relation
to 24:7: is preferred in covenant formulas in which Yhwh addresses
Israel; not Ezek. 36:28 but Jer. 24:7 then forms the exception to the rule. This
raises words of caution on how such seemingly attractive statistics should
be handled. (b) the land that I gave to your fathers: in Ezekiel alone in
36:28 compared to 6 in Jeremiah: 7:7; 16:15; 24:10; 25:5; 30:3; 35:15. However,
the formulation is exactly identical only in Jer. 7:7 and Ezek. 36:28. The gift of
the land to the fathers is also mentioned in Ezek. 20:42; 47:14; to Jacob Ezek.
28:25; 37:25. (c) build, plant and tear down in Ezek. 36:3536
together remind of prominent terminology from the book of Jeremiah: 1:10;
18:7, 9; 31:28; 42:10; 45:4. The combination of plant and build is common in
the Old Testament. On it may be added that according to Ezekiel, Yhwh
specifically does not say what he says according to Jeremiah, namely that
he himself uproots and plants, tears down and builds, and that singularly
by accepting the first as fact the second could be received as a promise.282
This reflection is typical for the book of Jeremiah and is easier to grasp
as a later theological development. (d) strikes a lone figure in Ezek.
36:31 in light of the eight places where Ezekiel prefers , and reminds of
Jeremiahs vocabulary. However, besides the general objection against such
between Ezek. 18 and Jer. 31 is not limited to the proverb, even though he differs 180 on the
direction of dependence: Ezekiel 18 is not only influenced by Jer. 31.2930, but also by Jer.
31.3233, as witnessed by Ezek. 18.31.
280 Alone in Deut. 21:8 is there another clause containing the verb and , without
thematic relations with the cited texts. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 79 considers translating Jer.
31:33a along the lines of (our version): I gave my law (once) in their midst and (now) I
shall write it in their heart (see also H. Tita, Ich hatte meine Tora in ihre Mitte gegeben:
Das Gewicht einer nicht bercksichtigte Perfektform in Jer. xxxi 33, VT 52 (2002), 551556),
but (besides objections raised by Schmid self) this is conflicted by a comparison with the
corresponding promises in Ezek. 11 and 36.
281 The arguments are conveniently summarised e.g. by Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen,
318.
282 qal with Yhwh as subject is only used in Ezekiel to indicate the pulling down of
walls that are plastered by prophets (Ezek. 13:14).

appealing to individual words in questions on dependence: the word choice

in 36:31 could be a matter of preferential collocation. appears 24 in
the Old Testament, 41; of which is preceded by the conjunction
8, never. In this way the sentence construction
could have led naturally to the chosen vocabulary.283
The strongest indirect evidence that Ezek. 36 forewent Jer. 31 as a promise,
is found in the closely proximated connections Ezek. 11 Jer. 24 and Ezek.
18:2 Jer. 31:29, which were discussed above. We recall our earlier finding:
far more likely than the Jeremiah-author having knowledge of just isolated
texts of Ezekiel, he knew such texts in the sequence of an extensive book
scroll. Jer. 31:3134 may therefore be read as theological commentary on
Ezek. 36:1638, the essence of which we will summarise at the end of this
section.284
Jer. 32:39 , cf. Jer. 24:7 ; Ezek. 11:19

, ; Ezek. 36:26 ,
. The analogy has been discussed above under Jer. 24:7. Apart from
in Ezek. 11:19, the expression occurs in 1Chron. 12:39; 2 Chron. 30:12.
The expression appears in a metaphorical sense elsewhere alone in
Ezek. 23:13.285 Traces of the gathering formula from Ezekiel in Jer. 32:37 were
treated above under Jer. 29:14. There are 16 occurrences of in the
Old Testament. For these prophetic books they include: Jer. 32:40; 50:5 and
Ezek. 16:60; 37:26; as direct object of besides Jer. 32:40 (cf. Ezek. 37:26)
only in Isa. 55:3; 61:8. The manner in which is used in Jer. 32:40 links
with Ezek. 16:60 and 37:26 in this respect that there too, the word envisages
283 Question marks may also be placed behind the Jeremian character of certain other
words and expressions in Ezekiel. The combination of / with / occurs

5 in Jeremiah and 4 or 5 in Ezekiel (Jer. 7:7; 11:5; 16:15; 30:3; 32:22; Ezek. 20:2728; 20:42;
36:28; 47:14; cf. 37:25). The adjective occurs 2 in both (Jer. 33:10, 12; Ezek. 36:35, 38). The
combination of and occurs in Jer. 33:8a and Ezek. 36:33a (cleansing of all their/your
unrighteousness). The strong analogy between these last clauses could indicate dependence.
However the priority must then rest with Ezekiel due to the strict order of cleansing and
restoration, which is not maintained in the text of Jeremiah. M.N. van der Meer, A New
Spirit in an Old Corpus? Text-Critical, Literary-Critical and Linguistic Observations regarding
Ezekiel 36:1638, in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament
Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht 2002, 147158, esp. 157 similarly argues that
these and other points of contact do not necessarily indicate the priority of Jeremiah.
284 Regarding the structural correspondence between the newness promises in Ezekiel and
Jeremiah, attention is further drawn to the fact that the forgiveness of sins in Jer. 31:34 and
the cleansing in Ezek. 36:25 agree in their relationship to inner change. On the combination
of cleansing and forgiveness, see Jer. 33:8.
285 Not metaphorical: Deut. 28:7, 25; 1 Kgs 18:6, 6.
270 chapter three
future acts of grace to which Yhwh has committed himself, without implying
a former covenant as point of reference. Just as the everlasting covenant
in Jer. 32 seems to precede the new covenant within the book genesis of
Jeremiah [ 3.2.5.2], this sequential order stays undiminished in force when
we expand our line of question to the occurrences in Ezekiel.286 Not until Jer.
50:5 is Israels obedience included more or less in the concept everlasting
covenant.
In all, 32:3741 is best understood as a kind of midrash on Ezekiel and
Deuteronomy, as suggested above [ 3.2.4; 3.2.5.2]. Complicated hypotheses
in which Jer. 32 first influenced Ezek. 11, thereupon Ezek. 11 in turn Jer.
24,287 are not convincing. The one heart in Ezek. 11 has no need for Jer. 32
as an explanation [ 3.1.3], and Jer. 32 is easier to understand as a later
development compared to Jer. 24 than the reverse. On the chronological
order between Ezekiel and the basic story of Jer. 32 there is actually very
little to say, even though the question remains intriguing whether Ezek. 13:9
may be assumed tacitly by this remarkable story: the right of a true prophet
to landownership in Israel.288
This is a good opportunity for a running assessment on the progression

in this third chapter. The relationship between the newness promises, as
they are found in Jeremiah and in Ezekiel, was formulated at the onset as
our main research goal. In this inquiry the central focus had to fall on the
theological dialogue, but therewith naturally too, on the question which of
the interlocutors spoke first. As preparatory steps we brought the diachronic
relations within each of the two books into scope. We concluded that the
286 Due to the absence of analogous clauses, Ezek. 16:5963 cannot be alluding to Jer.
31:3134, but in any case this would go against the most likely direction of dependence; pace
Schmid, Buchgestalten, 84. H.-W. Jngling, Eid und Bund in Ez 1617, in: E. Zenger (ed.),
Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD, 146), Freiburg 1993,
113148, esp. 138148 defends convincingly against Levin and Renaud that Ezek. 16 deviates
in its covenantal theology from Jer. 31: Ezek. 16:5963 spricht nicht von einem neuen Bund
(148).
287 See e.g. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 8283.
288 According to Levin, Verheiung, 206 Ezek. 11:15 is only understandable
against the background of Jer. 32:78 (other occurrences of are Lev. 25:2452 and Ruth
4:67). W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel (BKAT, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969, 248 as explanation cites
Horst: der Kreis derer, von denen man zur Sippenhilfe, zumal bei den Rechtsinstitut des
Loskaufes, aufgerufen werden konnte. The focus then falls on those who should have asserted
the rights of Ezekiel and his fellow exiles, but are now keen to take possession of the derelict
land themselves. Jer. 32 is not required as an explanation; stronger, the theme of property
release falls less out of the blue in Ezek. 11 than in Jer. 32.
Greek papyrus 967 does not represent a text form of Ezekiel that is older than
the Masoretic text form. This opened the way for an unbiased inquiry on the
book-genetic relation between Ezek. 11, 18 and 36, leading to the following
scheme as the most probable order: 18 36 11. A comparable scheme
for the book of Jeremiah (admittedly: with more speculation) turned out
as follows: 24 32 3031 3. What deductions could be drawn from
these two schemes? Even on their own they are difficult to reconcile with
Levins proposal of seeing Jer. 24/Ezek. 11 as the literary hatchway from
Jeremiah to Ezekiel. Jer. 24 would then have to stand at the end and Ezek.
11 at the beginning of book internal developmentsthe schemes point
out the contrary. As a more important objection we regard the harvest
of this intertextual section: it is difficult to speak of a singular mediation
point between the two books considering the many points of contact we
established.
Of these contact points, those between Ezek. 23 and Jer. 3 stood the fur-
thest from our subject, newness, but they suitably lent themselves as a
methodological test case, in which they allowed us to reason out a direc-
tion of dependence orientated on the analogous clauses via their contextual
embedding. We further applied this approach as far as possible to the points
of contact in Jer. 24, 29, 3031 and 32, consistently reaching the same results:
the book of Jeremiah borrowed from the book of Ezekiel. In this regard it
made no difference whether a text usually ascribed to one of the younger or
one of the older layers in the book of Jeremiah was on the table; see resp.
Jer. 3:613 and 30:57. Likewise on the giving end of the relationship persis-
tently a whole book appears to be entailedat least not loose passages from
Ezekiel which the authors of Jeremiah accidentally hit upon. Even if our
analysis in this section touched on a small portion of all the available com-
parative material, the conclusion that the book of Ezekiel served as a model
for the book of Jeremiah no longer appears so speculative anymore: two
prophetic books covering approximately the same time of action, in which
the place of action shifts from Babylon to Jerusalem. The perspective from
outside on the great disaster makes room in Jeremiah for a perspective from
within, and time is needed to effect a turn like this. Nothing takes longer
than looking at a catastrophe directly in the eye.289 On the chronological
289 Pace H.-J. Stipp, Jeremia im Parteienstreit: Studien zur Textentwicklung von Jer 26, 36
43 und 45 als Beitrag zur Geschichte Jeremias, seines Buches und judischer Parteien im 6.
Jahrhundert (BBB, 82), Frankfurt a.M. 1992, 294: Anscheinend hat die besonders schreckliche
272 chapter three
order of the two books, Levin noted concisely: Jeremiah fifth century, Ezekiel
fourth century; but in the meantime Fischer has reversed this chronological
rule of thumb, which made it seem much closer to the truth.
How does Jeremiah involve himself in the dialogue on the new heart and
the new spirit seen in Ezekiel? He agrees wholeheartedly with the promise of
inner change as a gift of God. As in Ezekiel, here in Jeremiah there is no real
tension between change as gift and change as command (Ezek. 18; Jer. 3; see
esp. Jer. 31:18). Jeremiah certainly corrects Ezekiels presentation of a radical
replacement of the heart, probably as a concession to the book of Deuteron-
omy, which had already given the change of heart its central place in biblical
anthropology, be it still as a mere exhortation to love God with all your heart
and with all your soul and with all your strength.290 Some researchers have
seen Ezekiels idea of substitution as a later harshening, but the direction of
dependence defended above makes it impossible for us to share this view.
As a consequence of Jeremiahs concession to Deuteronomy, the adjective
new is dropped before heart in the promise of change in Jer. 24 and 32,
and becomes available in Jer. 31 to emphasise a totally different opposition:
the promised covenant compared to Yhwhs covenant with the fathers. We
use the negative formulationbecomes availabledeliberately, because
the concept new in could only have received its positive con-
notation after interacting with Deutero-Isaiah. The next chapter will return
to this crucial Deutero-Isaianic contribution to the theology of Jer. 3031
[ 4.2.3].
What Jeremiah also does leave out from the promise of change is the con-
cept spirit. It is therefore not without reason that there is spoken of an anti-
schwrmerische reaction by the book of Jeremiah on the book of Ezekiel.291
Only on a few occasions in Jeremiah is related to anthropology (10:14 =
51:17; 51:1, 11), but without any reminder of the prominent anthropological
Ausmalung der Katastrophe erst nach lngerem Anlauf in sptexilischer Zeit ihren Hhe-
punkt erreichtthus dating it a considerable time after the relatively sober first-hand
accounts by the authors of Jer. 26, 3643 and 45. Precisely the sobriety of these reports, how-
ever, might indicate greater historical distance.
290 On the links between commandment, heart and obedience in Jeremiah as in line with
Deuteronomy, see C. Maier, Jeremia als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale Gebote des Deuteronomiums
in Fortschreibungen des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 196), Gttingen 2002, 346.
291 Cf. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 8284. Note the difference from G. von Rad, Theologie des
Alten Testaments, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1960 (91987), 227: Mit alledem spricht Jeremia auf seine
Weise von einer zuknftigen Ausgieung des gttlichen Geistes, denn er meint nichts ande-
res als ein pneumatisches Wissen und Befolgen des Gotteswillens. Miller, Verhltnis, 182 n. 1
surmises that the appeal to the spirit by false prophets underlies Jeremiahs avoidance of the
term.
and theological usage of the word in Ezekiel. No trace remains in Jeremiah

of the leading role the spirit had in either Ezekiels own prophetic actions
or in the future life of Israel. Schwrmer has been used to denote groups of
Protestants from the sixteenth century that favoured mystical contempla-
tion above the word-theology of Luther, and had themselves baptised anew.
In a broader sense one associates schwrmerisch with religious groups that
claim special spiritual gifts. That in days to come Israelites will have no rea-
son to boast to one another of their more intimate relation with Yhwh, has
become an exceptionally important part of Jeremiahs promise of salvation.
According to this promise, individualisation and laicisation will form the
kernel features of the new covenant.
As a matter of fact, the promise of the spirit does not deserve the qualifi-
cation schwrmerisch in Ezekiel itselfhere it concerns the entire future
people of God. But the use of for example in Isaian circles (Isa. 59:21 etc.;
see also Ps. 51) could have contributed towards the Jeremiah-authors prefer-
ring to circumvent the promise of the spirit to avoid misunderstandings of
particularism. How could such a synthetic vision on Israels future as pre-
sented by the book of Jeremiah ever leave room for the spirit as a sectarian
group characteristic? In any way, in Jeremiahs formulation of the promise,
the personal relationship with God has been moved resolutely from my
spirit (Ezek. 36:27) to my torah (Jer. 31:33). Even if the promise of change
in both Jeremiah and Ezekiel leads to obedience of the law, according to
Jeremiah no further incentive is required apart from Yhwhs rules and reg-
ulations. The motivation is already contained in the torah itself, written on
the heart in Yhwhs own hand.
In our comparison between the texts in Jeremiah dealing with change,
we paid particular attention to the order of the restitution programmes
[ 3.2.4]. The greatest marked difference seen in Jer. 24 and 3031 compared
to the restitution programme of Ezek. 36 is: here, return social restora-
tion inner change, over against there, return (or rather: coming home)
inner change social restoration. For Ezekiel, a future residence in the
land of Israel is unthinkable without a new heart and a new spirit as pre-
ceding divine gift. How could the soil of the fatherland carry this people
anew, unless the precondition of a total religious and moral turn-around was
first fulfilled? Such a direct link between conversion and landownership has
fallen away in Jeremiah. We should probably view this as a realistic reflection
of the much later historical situation in which the book originated: settle-
ment on the land by ever new groups of repatriates had proved possible.
Indeed, dispensing with the burden of the past is essential for Jeremiah to
ensure social restoration, but Yhwhs new covenant with Israel and Judah
274 chapter three
will be made after those days (Jer. 31:33), which is to say: only after Israel
had been sown and taken root in the land once more (Jer. 31:2730). The
new covenant no longer serves Israels reconciliation with the land; instead
it serves Israels very survival as a people, set in a world filled with calamity
and judgement.
3.2.5.4. Golah-Orientated Redaction?

A partisan revision of the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel is implied with the
term golah-orientated redaction. This editorial activity would have aspired
to highlight one specific Judean population group as representative of true
Israel and as carrier of the promise, namely the group that was exiled to
Babylon along with Jehoiachin in 597bce. In the texts this group is known
as or ; in the exposition they are usually indicated as the first
golah, distinguishing them from the second golah, carried away to Babylon
when the Chaldean infantry destroyed Jerusalem in 587.292 The promise that
this redaction would have intended exclusively for the golah of 597, would
only become applicable to all the scattered peoples outside Judahs borders
later, after it was revised. The golah-editors would have aimed at countering
the claims of the group that remained behind after the catastrophe of 587.293
The postulated golah-editions would thus distinguish themselves on two
fronts: towards Judeans not displaced, and towards displaced Judeans who
ended up elsewhere other than (with Jehoiachin) in Babylon. Giving such
an impression of affairs leads logically to questions being raised from the
crucial texts involved.
(1) In the book of Ezekiel no promises are reserved exclusively for the exiles
in Babylon. Indeed the narration places the prophet in Babylon, similarly
292 The noun is used 20 , the noun 8 in the OT for the deportation or deportees
of 597. For the deportation or deportees of 587, is not used at all, alone in Jer. 40:1.
Descendants of both groups would be implied in the of Ezra-Nehemiah. The verb II,
take into exile, is used for both deportations.
293 See esp. K.-F. Pohlmann, Studien zum Jeremiabuch: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der
Entstehung des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 118), Gttingen 1978, who ascribes Jer. 21:110, Jer.
24 and the revision of Jer. 3744 to this redaction. For a summary of Pohlmanns view on
the golah-orientated redaction of Ezekiel, see Idem, Ezechiel: Der Stand der theologischen
Diskussion, Darmstadt 2008, 95. Likewise the conflict that C.R. Seitz, Theology in Conflict:
Reactions to the Exile in the Book of Jeremiah (BZAW, 176), Berlin 1989 indicates, would become
apparent in the changes brought about by an exilic, or Golah-redaction (5), namely in Jer.
2145, but also elsewhere in the book, which according to him were influenced by Ezekiel
and directed against the personal views of the historical Jeremiah.
the dialogue partners who accompany him, but in Ezekiels promise of salva-
tion these dialogue partners are unremittingly addressed as representatives
of all those scattered [ 3.1.4.3].294
(2) It seems there is a special promise in Jer. 24:57 intended for the golah.
The relation between Jer. 24 and Ezek. 11 is so strong that literary depen-
dence must be surmised [ 3.2.5.3]. Everything indicates the priority of Ezek.
11. The direction of dependence between these passages is one suggestion
that the golah-promise must be younger than the promise made to dislo-
cated Judeans in general. The probable literary development could then be
understood as follows: the particular application of the diaspora-promise
on the Babylonian golah within the framework of the Ezekiel narrative (see
Ezek. 811) led naturally to a more explicit golah-promise in the book of
Jeremiah, which embroidered further on this special narrative of Ezekiel.295
The diaspora-promise came first, the golah-promise followed diligently.
(3) This development is substantiated by the dependence of Jer. 24 regarding

Deuteronomy. This dependence not only explains the original conditional
nature of the promise, which still simmers through as a substratum in Jer.
24:57, but it also confirms that a diaspora-address preceded the golah-
address. Thus according to Deut. 30:13 not the Babylonian exiles yet, but
those driven off and scattered in general, wherever they had landed on for-
eign soil, should turn to Yhwh.296
294 The distinction golah/diaspora is far less essential for Ezekiel than the distinction
between the Zadokite priests (the prophet was one) and the people that strayed, including
the other Levites, see Ezek. 44:431. There is even a certain tension between the idea of Israels
total impurity (36:25; see also 22:26) and the exclusive position claimed for the Zadokites as
a divine reward for their former loyalty (44:15). Of a so-called lineage-control [F. Fechter,
Priesthood in Exile according to the Book of Ezekiel, in: S.L. Cook, C.L. Patton (eds), Ezekiels
Hierarchical World: Wrestling with a Tiered Reality (SBL Symposium Series, 31), Leiden 2004,
2741, esp. 39] concerning the golah in Ezekiel there is no evidence at all.
295 In light of Ezek. 811 as a whole it is not difficult to see Jeremiahs letter correspondence
in Jer. 29 as the modern response to Ezekiels telekinetic bridging of the distance Babylon-
Jerusalem. On this point the antischwrmerische trait of the book of Jeremiah could have
played a role [ 3.2.5.3].
296 So too Schmid, Buchgestalten, 265 reasons that the dependence Deut. 30 Jer. 24
implies that the golah-orientation (Jer. 24) assumes a diaspora perspective (Deut. 30:3), even
if this does not mean according to him that the golah-promise is prinzipiell jnger than
the diaspora-promise. Several objections may be raised, however, against the progression
diaspora-perspective golah-redaction diaspora-correction, which Schmid sketches in the
line of Pohlmann; see below.
276 chapter three
(4) It is improbable that the diaspora-promise was derived from the judge-
ment of scattering passed on the evil figs in Jer. 24:9 and 29:18.297 There this
judgement is not so much the scattering, as it details the woes that will over-
come the scattered where ever they find themselves. Genetically these texts
appear to presume the diaspora-promise, suggesting a reading like this: I
will not gather them from all the places where I have scattered/driven them,
but make them a horror there etc. This agrees with the abovementioned
reference to Deut. 2830 in Jer. 24, particularly Deut. 30:13. Jeremiah and
Ezekiel have the word string / // / in 13 places:
Jer. 8:3; 16:15; 23:3, 8; 24:9; 29:14, 18; 30:11; 32:37; 40:12; 43:5; 46:28; Ezek. 34:12;
without in 6 places: Ezek. 4:13; 11:17; 20:34, 41; 28:25; 29:13. Besides Ezek.
4:13; Jer. 8:3; 24:9 and 29:18, they always concern the promise of gathering,
which thereby proves to be the primary context of the stereotyped indi-
cation of place. Further occurrences appear only in Deut. 30:1, 3 (promise)
and Dan. 9:7 (prayer). Even though the collection-promise as such naturally
requires as background a foregoing condition of being scattered (Deut. 4:27;
28:64), we maintain that Jer. 24:9 and 29:18 cannot be directly linked to a
condition like that, but at most through the promise of gathering as inter-
mediate step.298
(5) In Jer. 29 Yhwh speaks to the exiles in Babylon as representatives of the

diaspora. In Jer. 32 a general diaspora-promise is formulated, including those
who witnessed the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. This con-
cerns (apart from the dichotomy saved-punished that Jer. 32 circumvents)
not a completely new development compared to Jer. 24, but a link to the
same book of Ezekiel that influenced the former chapter.
(6) Attention is now drawn to the gist of the golah-promise itself. Against
whom is the golah-group positioned in the vision of Jer. 24? Who form the
contrast? Not the Judeans who were transported away into exile earlier or
later, but only the group under Zedekiah, who headed for disaster with their
eyes openincluding those who would end up fleeing to Egypt and whose
historical fate is described in Jer. 4144. In Jer. 24:810 they serve as an exam-
ple for everyone who against all odds persist in resisting the idea of a divine
297 Cf. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 270271.

298 On the relations between Israels scattering [ ]according to Ezek. and Deut., see
R.L. Kohn, A New Heart and a New Soul: Ezekiel, the Exile and the Torah (JSOT.S, 358), Sheffield
2002, 88.
judgement over Jerusalem. For people that have such an attitude to life,
according to the book of Jeremiah there is no future. A future is reserved for
only those who subject themselves to Yhwhs plans, throughout the terror of
judgement. Thereby the two groups in Jer. 24 as well as in Jer. 29 characterise
ideal-typical groups. Ideal type is a term derived from sociology used to indi-
cate a non-empirical model of sociological or historical phenomena, but in a
broader sense may also be used for schematisations in a historical narrative,
meant to give readers the choice between action alternatives. Such schema-
tisations assume a large distance in time between these readers and what is
being told.299 Jeremiah does not require the appropriate genealogical papers
from him or her (could my own forebears possibly be members of the 597
deportation?), but rather a choice for a proper religious attitude set against
the shadow of such a devastating past.300
(7) Only on an initial glance and with a wrong approach, would a tension
therefore exist between the promise of salvation to the whole house of Israel
and Judea in Jer. 3033 and its being reserved for a historical elite in Jer.
24 and 29. This tension dissolves for those who realise that Jer. 24 does not
promote one league of the post-exilic community at the cost of another, but
299 The problematic of Thiels exilic dating of Jer. 24 is exposed, for example, in this
consideration: Ihre Hoffnung setzt D auf die babylonische Golah. Hier knnte die Deutung
des Exils als einer Luterung und Bewhrung im Hintergrund stehen, doch lsst der Text
dies nicht deutlich erkennen (W. Thiel, Die deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 125
(WMANT, 41), Neukirchen 1973, 261). More emphatically, the text contradicts it outright. The
text does not base hope on exilic purification, but on an inner renewal that Yhwh will offer
as a gift after the returnthat the golah are implicated in the scheme as the recipients
of this gift, historically speaking must be called a vaticinium ex eventu. A post-exilic, or
even late post-exilic dating of Jer. 24 has already been opted by B. Duhm, Das Buch Jeremia
(KHC, 11), Tbingen 1901; H.G. May, Towards an Objective Approach to the Book of Jeremiah:
The Biographer, JBL 61 (1942), 139155; cf. Pohlmann, Jeremiabuch, 2930, 190; R. Albertz,
Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003,
321. The fact that the sharp contrast between the dual future in Jer. 24 is anchored in the
whole composition of Jer. 2124 [see also J. Applegate, Peace, peace, when there is no
peace: Redactional Integration of Prophecy of Peace into the Judgement of Jeremia, in:
A.H.W. Curtis, T. Rmer (eds), The Book of Jeremiah and its Reception (BEThL, 128), Leuven
1997, 5190, esp. 66], indicates the advanced stage of reflection in the chapter. Deut. 30, one
of the most important literary sources of Jer. 2124, is usually included in the youngest edition
of Deuteronomy.
300 Of a written proof of lineage as found in Ezra 2:62; Neh. 7:64 there is no question here. It
must be added that the genealogical lists in Ezra-Nehemiah appear to be partially artificial.
Thus they could include descendants of those deported by the Assyrians, and Judeans that
joined the galt shortly after its return (Albertz, Exile, 106, 127). The genealogy indeed serves
the group identity, but in no way is it intended as a means to exclude.
278 chapter three
wishes to paint, as per example, the correlation between the acceptance of

the divine judgement and future salvation. The first part of Jeremiahs dream
vision in Jer. 3031 refers to precisely the same divine judgement, dubbed a
nightmare earlier in this chapter.
(8) Besides in Jer. 24 and 29, the exiles in Babylon are referred to in Jer. 5051.
Here they are encouraged, if the plan of Yhwh would have developed thus
far, to flee from Babylon on time. This is one of the many indications that
Jeremiahs prophecy on Babylon must be dependent on Deutero-Isaiah.301
Here we need to anticipate what will be substantiated in the next chapter
[ 4.2.2]. Further influence from Deutero-Isaiah on Jeremiah is presumed
where Nebuchadnezzar takes on some traits of Cyrus. As we have argued
above, the reputation of Cyrus under the Jews could only have risen to
Deutero-Isaian heights during the century following 515. For a depiction of
Nebuchadnezzar that in turn appears to be partly based on the portrayal of
Cyrus, one would have to advance still further in time.302 This could advocate
the stronger profiling of the golah in Jer. 24 and 29 in relation to Ezekiel being
equally inspired by Deutero-Isaian texts and depictions.303
301 So too U. Cassuto, On the Formal and Stylistic Relationship between Deutero-Isaiah
and Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem, Biblical and Oriental Studies, vol. 1, Jerusalem
1973, 141177, esp. 152155 deems Jer. 5051 dependent on Isa. 4066, following Budde and
against Cassutos own view on Jer. 10 and 3031.
302 The most striking analogy in this regard is that between Isa. 45:12 and Jer. 27:5 (cf.
B.D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 4066, Stanford, CA 1998, 60). See
( elsewhere not in the OT) resp. followed by and , with in the
continuation. Concerning the direction of dependence: it is not plausible that the surprising
inclusion of Cyrus in the order of creation [ 2.2.7.2 sub 4] was preceded by that of Nebuchad-
nezzar. The fact that according to Jer. 27:11 Nebuchadnezzar looks just like Cyrus by exercising
Persian politics and acting as an agent of Yhwhs plan (it is the same case for the Assyrian
king in Isa. 37:26 [ 2.2.8.2]), is a clear indication of the large distance in time between the
narrative and the narrated.
303 J. Unterman, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition (JSOT.S,
54), Sheffield 1987, 86 and Sommer, Prophet, 5051 speak of influence from Jer. 29:1014
on Isa. 55:69, noting allusion in the second passage to the first; according to S. Bhmer,
Heimkehr und neuer Bund: Studien zu Jeremia 3031 (GTA, 5), Gttingen 1976, 34 the direction
of influence is the exact opposite. There is thematic agreement, supported by a few words:
for Gods thoughts (2 in both places), for the salvation of the return, and
nif. for God allowing himself to be found by those who seek him [ ]and call him
[]. For a convincing argument on the direction of influence this is too weak. On the
possible connections between Jer. 29:5, 28 and Isa. 65:21 (cf. Cassuto, Relationship, 160 n. 66;
Sommer, Prophet, 42), 4.2.2. In any case it is most likely that the depiction of the empty
land, according to Pohlmann a characteristic of the golah-redaction in Jeremiah, is promoted
strongly by DIs metaphor of Zion as a mother bereft of her children.
Whoever, figuratively speaking, escapes the Chaldeans by the skin of his

teeth, displays the image of the true Israelite (Isa. 48:20). But this should
not lead to a misconception: a favouritised ethnic group, the returnees from
Babylon still do not become.304
In our view, a partisan, golah-orientated redaction of Jeremiahs promise of

salvation is not present. At most one may speak of a combination of literary
impulses (Ezekiel, Deutero-Isaiah) that developed the first golah eventually
into the ideal-typical representatives of scattered Israel as presented in Jer.
24 and 29. But because it is impossible that a divinely favouredin the time
of the reader still pinpointableJudean population group is at stake, there
is no need for a diaspora-correction to follow up this golah-orientation
after any passage of time. The oldest promise of return is a diaspora-promise
and nowhere can we sight an instance where it was traded for an exclusivis-
tically reserved golah-promise.305 Of a rivalry or a conflict of interests after
the ritorno in patria there may be traces in Ezek. 11 and 33, but in a fourth
centurys book of Jeremiah the historical distance would have become far
too great for that.306
304 In Ezra those who tremble at the words of God [ 2.3.3.2] dissociate themselves
from the golah because of their faithlessness (Ezra 9:4; cf. 10:6). Also where the golah
are mentioned as a population group in post-exilic Judea, according to Ezra they do not
automatically become identified with the true Israel.
305 It is noteworthy that similarly in DI the call to depart from Babylon (Isa. 48:20) is not just
expanded to the diaspora and/or the peoples (cf. U. Berges, Das Buch Jesaja: Komposition und
Endgestalt (HBS, 16), Freiburg 1998, 332), but is also foregone by a worldwide call: I say to the
North: Give, and to the South: Do not keep back (43:6). Thus there are no instances in any of
the prophets where a golah-promise is not embedded in a promise with a far broader address.
306 The Chronistic portrayal of the Babylonian golah as the historical link between pre- and
post-exilic Israel (cf. Albertz, Exile, 14) appears to be an even later development in the line of
Ezekiel Deutero-Isaiah Jeremiah Ezra-Nehemiah.
chapter four
NEW AT THE CROSSROADS OF TWO PROPHETIC TRADITIONS
4.0. Retrospect and Perspective
In chapter two we asked how the newness concepts in the Yhwh-Kingship

psalms, Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah are related. The same procedure
was followed in chapter three for the books of Ezekiel and Jeremiah. In our
findings we could establish two lines of influence: roughly the one encom-
passes a cosmic-universal and the other an anthropological understanding
of the change that was hoped for after Israels exile. In this chapter the focus
will fall on a comparison between these two lines.
Rather than the cosmic new and the anthropological new being strangers
to each other, they have a vital affinity, as we have already noted time
and again in the preceding chapters. How could the universal kingship of
Yhwh reveal itself without receptive human hearts? However, here too we
will work methodically and, as far possible, based on linguistic analogies
inquire whether the relevant passages on the line Psalms Deutero-Isaiah
Trito-Isaiah indeed refer to relevant passages on the line Ezekiel Jeremiah;
or rather in the opposite direction. The most relevant passages in this regard
are those that themselves contain the sporadic term new, or became topical
in this study as immediate context of such passages.
In 4.1 Isa. 4055 will be compared to Ezekiel, in 4.2 Jer. 3031 to Isaiah.
From this choice selection in a broad research field, it may be observed that
there are ample texts which in fact have little to do with each other, either in
form or content. Consider, for example, the distance between the language
of the hymn and the language of Ezekiels blueprint for a future temple. Once
more we will try to avoid suggesting that there is more harmony between
cultic and prophetic voices than there is actually present. But on quite a few
points, this chapter will show, the intertextual references are so conspicuous
and the borrowed motifs so evident that they should not be allowed to
escape us.
282 chapter four
4.1. Relations between Ezekiel and Isaiah 4055
For practical reasons our first intertextual comparison in this chapter will
commence with texts from Isa. 4055 that remind of Ezekiel. We hardly
find Ezekielisms in Deutero-Isaiah that are based on a linguistic analogy
between clauses, which would make up the most solid argument for liter-
ary dependence. In the isolated cases, all the signals point at the priority of
Ezekiel. We will first provide an overview of the cases and will then focus
more pertinently on the analogies which could involve readers in a theolog-
ical dialogue between Deutero-Isaiah and Ezekiel.
Isa. 40:5 And all flesh will see together that ; cf. Ezek. 21:4; Isa. 49:26
And all flesh will know that I, Yhwh ; cf. Ezek. 21:10. The string \
[ ][ ] does not occur elsewhere in the Old Testament, which
in total counts 91 instances of a form of followed by [ ][ ]:
10 in Ex.; 1 in Deut.; 2 in 1Kgs; 3 in DI; 1 in TI; 2 in Jer.; 71 in Ezek.; and 1 in
Joel. Form-critically they represent the so-called acknowledgment formula,
which knows several more free forms [ 3.1.2]; see for example Isa. 41:20: so
that they may see and know, may consider and understand together, that
the hand of Yhwh has made this and the Holy One of Israel has created it.
See below.
Isa. 42:25 So he poured upon him the wrath of his anger. The combina-
tion of + and/or also occurs in Jer. 6:11; 10:25; Ezek. 7:8; 9:8; 14:19;
16:38; 20:8, 13, 21, 3334; 22:22; 30:15; 36:18; Zeph. 3:8; Ps. 69:25; 79:6; Lam. 2:4;
4:11. The subject of the clause remains Yhwh, who may pour or has poured
his anger. See below.
Isa. 43:28 Therefore I profaned the officials of the sanctuary. In combi-
nation with the noun the verb is found in the following places: Ex.
31:14; Lev. 19:8; 20:3; 21:6; 22:2, 15, 32; Num. 18:32; Ezek. 20:39; 22:8, 26; 36:20,
21, 22, 23; 39:7; Am. 2:7; Zeph. 3:4; Mal. 2:11. Only in Isa. 43:28 is Yhwh himself
the subject of the profanation, a perspective searched in vain in Ezekiel.
Isa. 47:3 Your nakedness will be exposed, yes, your disgrace will be seen.
The verbs and occur regularly with as object, thus for example
in 21 places in Lev. 18 and 20; in Ezek. 16:3637 and 23:10, 18, 29 these
terms are used to describe immoral behaviour and the resulting humiliating
punishment, in Isa. 47:3 just the humiliation.1
1 As in Isa. 47:3, in Ezek. 25:14, 17 there is also mention of Yhwhs wrath; cf. Jer. 46:10; 50:15;
51:6, 11 et al. Striking analogies are not implied.

new at the crossroads of two prophetic traditions 283
Isa. 48:4 Because I knew that you are stubborn and your forehead
bronze. For the stubbornness see Ezek. 2:4 [ ;]3:7 [, ;]for the
hard forehead Ezek. 3:7. Without containing analogous clauses, these verses
show affinity in presentation, supported by one or two common words.
Isa. 48:9 for my names sake, cf. Ezek. 20:9, 14, 22, 44. occurs in
2 Kgs 19:34; 20:6; Isa. 37:35; 43:25; 48:11; always relates to the name of
Yhwh and occurs in 1Kgs 8:41; Isa. 48:9; 66:5; Jer 14:7, 21; Ezek. 20:9, 14, 22, 44;
Ps. 23:3; 25:11; 31:4; 79:9; 106:8; 109:21; 143:11; 2Chron. 6:32. Ezekiel is thought
of in Isa. 48:11 especially because of the direct combination of with the
verbs , make, realise, and , profane. We will also return to this.2
Where the similarities between Ezekiel and Deutero-Isaiah are easily
explained as the result of direct influencing, the probable priority lies with
Ezekiel. Thus the points of contact with Ezekiel in Isa. 42:1825 and 48:111
belong to the same, clearly distinguishable production phase of Isa. 4055
[ 2.2.8.1]. Nothing more than isolated words, word combinations or fixed
formulas is usually implied. Of a literary allusion in the one work to the other
can hardly be spoken. Rather stereotypical language, jargon used in circles
in which the book of Ezekiel originated or found attentive readers, comes to
mind.
Some points of contact invite a comparison of Ezekiel and Deutero-
Isaiahs broader mindset; and on this level, now, the impression is strength-
ened that Ezekiel must have been the donor and that Deutero-Isaiah rep-
resents a more advanced stage of theological reflection. Two points in par-
ticular draw attention, (a) the place of the prediction proof in Ezekiel and
Deutero-Isaiah and (b) their emphasis on Yhwhs name as the only basis for
the promise of cleansing and change. We will pay attention to these points
in good order.
(a) If there were indeed a meaningful analogy between Isa. 42:25 and Ezek.
22:22, one would have to conclude that Ezekiel takes the recognition of Gods
2 On these Ezekielisms see further: H.-J. Hermisson, Einheit und Komplexitt Deutero-
jesajas: Probleme der Redaktionsgeschichte von Jes 4055, in: J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of
Isaiah (BEThl, 81), Leuven 1989, 287312, esp. 296299. A few more possible points of contact,
mentioned there, are based on not more than single words. U. Cassuto, On the Formal and
Stylistic Relationship between Deutero-Isaiah and Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem,
Biblical and Oriental Studies, vol. 1, Jerusalem 1973, 141177, esp. 167 concludes: the style and
form of the prophecies of Deutero-Isaiah are not at all dependent on Ezekiel, or only to a very
small extent. Of the four direct points of contact he identifies in Isa. 4055, we have already
cited three (40:5; 48:11; 49:26). The fourth is based on the supposed priority of 52:10 (cf. Ezek.
5:8 etc.) over Ps. 98:2 (166 n. 94), which we have countered above [ 2.2.8.3].
284 chapter four
acting less seriously than Deutero-Isaiah. Ezek. 22:22 and you will know, that
I Yhwh have poured my wrath upon you; Isa. 42:25 he poured upon them the
wrath of his anger but they did not take it at heart. Let us try to understand
this striking difference with the help of Zimmerlis exposition on Yhwhs
Wahrheitserweis in the two prophets.
Zimmerli indicates that Ezekiels characteristic Erweiswort also occurs
in Deutero-Isaiah. As examples he mentions Isa. 49:2223, 2426; 45:17
and 41:1720. Similar to how proof is provided in Ezekiel these passages
conclude with a recognition formula (see the summary above). The most
prominent equivalent of this formula in Deutero-Isaiah, according to Zim-
merli, is found in the Gerichtsreden of Yhwh directed at the nations and
their gods. From a form-critical point of view this equivalence is the clear-
est in Isa. 41:2129.3 We agree with this observation and wish to add that
the tight bond between recognition formula and trial speech is also iden-
tifiable composition-critically: Isa. 41:1720 and 2129 are linked through
the keywords [ ]and in v. 20 and vv. 22, 23, 26.4 In any event,
Yhwhs announcement in Ezekiel, I have spoken and will do it (Ezek. 17:24;
22:14; 24:14; 36:36; cf. 37:14), receives a specifically concrete focus in Deutero-
Isaiahs trial speech, and this in the argument that the triumph of Cyrus was
the outcome of earlier predictions. For both Ezekiel and Deutero-Isaiah this
observation is valid: Wort Jahwes ist, was vom nachfolgenden geschicht-
lichen Geschehnis eingelst wird und so vor aller Augen seinen Wirklich-
keits- und Geschehnisgehalt erweist.5
Zimmerli does not discuss the question of dependence explicitly and
points out that Deutero-Isaiah was similarly influenced by the language of
the Psalms and by hymnic calls to the nations to recognise Yhwh. We saw
earlier that Deutero-Isaiahs proof of divinity is embedded in a frame of refer-
ence borrowed from the Yhwh-Kingship psalms [ 2.2.8.4]. Only against this
background does it become comprehensible why Deutero-Isaiah involves
the creational order in his argumentation from history, as seen in Isa. 45:18
19; cf. 40:2124.6 In the book of Ezekiel, the theme of creation plays no role.
3 W. Zimmerli, Der Wahrheitserweis Jahwes nach der Botschaft der beiden Exilspro-
pheten, in: E. Wrthwein, O. Kaiser (eds), Tradition und Situation: Studien zur alttestament-
lichen Prophetie. Fs A. Weiser, Gttingen 1963, 133151.
4 Cf. H. Leene, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam 1987, 85, 229.
5 Zimmerli, Wahrheitserweis, 140.
6 Zimmerli, Wahrheitserweis, 149 sees this differently: Im Beweisverfahren gegen die
Gtter wird nirgends unverhllt auf die Schpfung zurckgewiesen. Here it is not taken
sufficiently into account that, according to DI, Yhwh must prove in history that he is the
creator.
If Ezekiels proof-sayings have indeed influenced Deutero-Isaiah, then this

prophet was certainly not his only source on the subject. As it is, Zimmerli
has no doubt that the implicated texts of Ezekiel preceded those of Deutero-
Isaiah.
This last point deserves further attention. According to Deutero-Isaiah
the Cyrus evidence does not eventually lead to the recognition that Yhwh
would expect from Israel. Notably Isa. 48:36 shows that the outcome of the
first things in the fall of Babylon at most highlighted Israels stubbornness
[ 2.2.6]. Real recognition and praise of Yhwh would only be possible once
Yhwh had created the new things, implicating Israels inner change. The
spun out recognition formula in Isa. 41:20 does not purposelessly conclude
an announcement of salvation that talks of exuberant tree growth in the
desert, a metaphoric reference to what will be called the new things a bit
further in the drama, cf. 43:1921.
Yhwhs recognition by the nations of the world also becomes more prob-
lematic in Deutero-Isaiah than in Ezekiel. That the hidden treasures of true
knowledge of God are revealed to Cyrus according to Isa. 45:17, and that the
chained people in Isa. 45:15 confess Yhwh to be the hidden saviour, means
that this recognition by the nations in Isa. 45 is thematised as a separate
question. Nothing of the kind is found in Ezekiel. Ezekiel has not yet become
aware of a noetic barrier here.
In this connection it is noticeable how the recognition formula in Isa.
49:23 finds a contextual echo in the statement of faith by the Servant of
Yhwh in Isa. 50:7. Where Yhwh had said to Zion: And you will know that
I am Yhwh and that those who wait for me, will not be put to shame, the
Servant leads the response when confessing: I know that I will not be put to
shame. This Servant embodies the changed Israel. It is difficult to deny the
impression that the theological reflection is far more advanced here than
in Ezekiels proof-sayingssayings that sound comparatively nave in their
confidence that recognition of God will be easily realised. Here one could
read Deutero-Isaiah as a critical commentary on Ezekiel.7
(b) The most prominent of the analogies summarised at the beginning of

this section remains the expression for my names sake in combination with
the theme of profanation. Therein Isa. 48:911 is clearly linked to Ezek. 36.
The idea they share is that Yhwh finds no grounds in Israel why he should see
7 On the connection between inner change and acknowledging God, see also the relevant
note on Jer. 24:7 [ 3.2.5.3, n. 262].

286 chapter four
them as his people. With this negative perspective on the past, a prospect
on cleansing and change, despite everything, is correlated in both passages.
Yhwh acting for his names sake is then the common theological helpline.
According to Ezekiel the change will consist in the gift of a new heart and
a new spirit to every Israelite. In Deutero-Isaiah the change is visualised
dramatically in the Servant of the Lord, who, guided by Gods spirit, speaks
for the first time in Isa. 48:16.8
One difference is seen in the fact that for Deutero-Isaiah, the negative
past extends up and till the political end of the exilic period, and in Isa. 48
also includes Israels lukewarm response to Babylons downfall. Another tan-
gible difference is, while inner change and the recognition of Yhwh are still
independent themes in Ezekiel, in Deutero-Isaiah they merge to become inter-
locked. Without inner change genuine recognition of Yhwh is not possible.
The Servant, as the other Israel, leads the readers of Deutero-Isaiahs drama
in showing this recognition.
All this brings us to the conclusion that, even in the absence of watertight
evidence, it is most probable that literary and theological influence from the
book of Ezekiel, or from its readers, was exercised on the circle in which
Isa. 4055 originated. This influence concerns a most crucial element in
Deutero-Isaiahs drama, an element that we have not yet been able to fully
place in the line of the Yhwh-Kingship psalms [ 2.2.8.34]: the element
of Israels inner change. The special way in which this theme has been
revised in Deutero-Isaiah reflects, in respect of Ezekiel, an undeniably later
historical point of view.9
8 D. Baltzer, Ezechiel und Deuterojesaja: Berhrungen in der Heilserwartung der beiden
groen Exilspropheten (BZAW, 121), Berlin 1971, 7399 is correct when he notes that the term
new functions completely differently in Ez. and DI. This should not draw the attention away
from the structural similarities in the two promises of change. The similarities in the other
themes described by Baltzer, such as exodus, Jerusalem and the temple, the return of Yhwh,
the Davidic-messianic expectation and the peaceful time of salvation, are so general that it
is not easy to determine the direction of their possible influence.
9 Inner change in DI has also been reflected on more deeply in this respect: the changed
person suffers under a yet unchanged environment. In TI, large tensions become visible
between the circle of priests in which the book Ezekiel was written and the milieu of temple
singers suspected of being behind the book of Isaiah. Compare e.g. Isa. 56:18 and Ezek. 44:9
on the admittance of foreigners to the sanctuary.
4.2. Relations between Isaiah and Jeremiah 3031
4.2.1. Linguistic, Generic and Compositional Agreements

We will spread our discussion on the relation between Jer. 3031 and the
book of Isaiah over three rounds, roughly cast as linguistic, literary and
hermeneutic. This first section contains an inventorial description of the
points of contact. The next section will focus on the question of literary
borrowing and therewith on the direction of borrowing. When borrowing is
mentioned, diachrony is implicated; and thus various diachronic relations
will come up for discussion anew [ 3.2.5] or for the first time. A third
section makes up the balance, when attempting to describe the dialogue
in which the borrowing text draws us in through its allusions.
For the inventorised items we will be relying extensively on the work
of researchers such as Cassuto, Tannert, Fischer, Willey and Sommer.10 The
overview below adds only a few own observations and is at most stricter
in its criteria. Only communal syntactic patterns and shared word colloca-
tions (internal or external to these patterns) are included, indicated with
respectively italics and underlining. Isolated words have not been counted,
unless they provide extra support to a point of contact meeting the criteria.
Details on comparable points of contact in other parts of the Old Testament
are sometimes added in a footnote, whereby we acknowledge that unique-
ness depends on the available corpus and therefore cannot be assumed for
whichever reading circle. The overview could otherwise offer a distorted
picture, because Jer. 3031 does not remind exclusively of the book of Isa-
iah (note the previously discussed citations from Ezekiel). Further points
of contact have not been included to keep the overview concise, excepting
where they are closely interwoven with the points of contact with Isaiah.11
An important addition may compensate for these restrictions: occasionally
similarities seen at the clause level collaborate to such a degree that intertex-
tual affinity spreads naturally over wider generic and compositional textual
structures. The overview also reflects on these.12
10 Cf. Cassuto, Relationship, 149152; W. Tannert, Jeremia und Deuterojesaja: Eine Unter-
suchung zur Frage ihres literarischen und theologischen Zusammenhanges, Leipzig 1956; G.
Fischer, Das Trostbchlein: Text, Komposition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB, 26), Stuttgart
1993, 209212; P.T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in
Second Isaiah, Atlanta, GA 1997; B.D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah
4066, Stanford, CA 1998, 3272.
11 References to frequent formulas such as thus says Yhwh and declares Yhwh are
omitted from the overview.

12 The overview follows the MT. Where they could have an influence on the intertextual
288 chapter four
Jeremiah 30
01 The word |
that came to Jeremiah from Yhwh |
saying |
02 Thus says Yhwh the God of Israel |
Write for you all the words |
that I have spoken to you |
in a book |
03 For behold days are coming | an. cl. Isa. 39:613
declares Yhwh |
when I will turn the fortunes of my people Israel and Judah |
says Yhwh |
and I will have them return to the land |
that I gave to their fathers |
and they will possess it |
04 And these are the words |
that Yhwh spoke concerning Israel and Judah |
05 Thus says Yhwh |
We have heard a cry of panic |
terror and no peace | Isa. 48:22; 57:2114
06 Ask now |
and see |
whether a man gives birth |
Why then do I see every hero |
his hands on his hips like a woman giving birth |
and are all faces changed |
turned into paleness?15 |
07 For that day is great |
there is none like it |
it is a time a of distress b for Jacob |
yet he will be saved c from it | Isa. 33:216
observations, variant readings of the Greek translation have been indicated in the notes. On
the difference between JerMT 3031 and JerLXX 3738, 3.2.3, n. 139.
13 Apart from 15 in Jeremiah: 1 Sam. 2:31; 2 Kgs 20:17 = Isa. 39:6; Am. 4:2; 8:11; 9:13.
14 Cassuto, Relationship, 149 mentions this agreement, but of a substantial analogy as
with Ezekiel [ 3.2.5.3] one cannot speak.

15 The translation, supported by LXX , follows the emendation for with
transposition of the sp psq, cf. BHS.

16 a + b Jer. 14:8; 15:11; with Dan. 12:1 as the only other occurrence outside a prepositional
phrase; a + b + c Judg. 10:14; Neh. 9:27; cf. Isa. 33:2 and Ps. 37:39. K. Schmid, Buchgestalten
des Jeremiabuches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033
im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, 119 finds the relation with Isa. 33:2
important; according to Fischer, Trostbchlein, 188 eine engere Berhrung with that place
cannot be determined.
08 And it will happen on that day |

declares Yhwh Almighty |
that I will break a his yoke b from your neck c | b+c Isa. 10:2717
and I will burst your bonds |
and strangers will no more make a servant of him |
09 But they will serve Yhwh their God and David their king |
whom I will raise up for them |
Compare Deutero-Isaiah for
the genre of 30:1011
the connection 30:59/1011
10 And you, fear not | same seq. of an. cl. Isa. 41:8,
my servant Jacob | 10, 13; 43:1, 5; 44:1, 2
declares Yhwh |
and be not dismayed | idem Isa. 51:718
Israel |
for I am about to save you from afar a | a+b Isa. 43:5, 6
and your seed b from the land of their captivity |
and Jacob will return |
and be in rest |
and have quiet |
and no one will make him afraid |
11 For I am with you | an. cl. Isa. 41:10; 43:519
declares Yhwh |
to save you | cf. Isa. 43:3
though I may completely destroy all the nations |
among whom I scattered you |
I will not completely destroy you |
but chasten you in just measure | Isa. 28:2620
and by no means leave you unpunished |
the sequence distress sin in 30:517
17 a + b Lev. 26:13; Jer. 28:2, 4, 11; Ezek. 34:27; b + c 11 in OT. Literally ( ull
mal awwrek) occurs elsewhere in Gen. 27:40 and Isa. 10:27, which also commences with
and it will happen on that day. The borrowing from it according to Fischer, Trostbchlein,
188 would explain the 2nd pers. in Jer. 30:8. The alternation between direct speech and
indirected speech (B. Becking, Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of
Jeremiah 3031 (OTS, 51), Leiden 2004, 149150) in 30:89 offers no contextual solution in itself
for the antecedent of his yoke.
18 The same sequence of analogous clauses with and . Further occurrences are
Deut. 1:21; Josh. 8:1; 10:25 (plur.); Ezek. 2:6 and 5 in Chron.
19 Virtually identical constructions with an infinitive clause in Jer. 1:8, 19; 15:20; 42:11. On
the sequence fear not, for I am with you, see Gen. 26:24; Jer. 1:8; 42:11; Isa. 41:10; 43:5.
20 Willey, Remember, 274 notes that followed by ( Jer. 10:24: )only occurs
in these places. However there is a large difference in meaning.

290 chapter four
12 For thus says Yhwh |

(You are) incurable a because of b your hurt c | a+d Isa. 17:11
and your wound e is grievous d | c+e Isa. 30:2621
13 There is none to uphold your cause because of your boil |
there is no medicine for you to heal |
14 All your lovers have forgotten you |
they do not ask for you |
for I have wounded you with the wound of an enemy |
with the chastening of a cruel one |
because of the greatness of your guilt |
your sins being numerous |
15 Why do you cry out over your hurt |
and is your pain so grievous? | Isa. 17:1122
Because of the greatness of your guilt |
your sins being numerous |
I have done these things to you |
16 Therefore all who devour you will be devoured23 |
and all your foes |
all of them will go into captivity | Isa. 46:224
and those who despoil you will become a spoil |
and all who prey on you I will make a prey | Isa. 17:14; 42:22, 2425
17 For I will restore health to you |
and your wounds I will heal |
declares Yhwh |
because they have called you an outcast | an. cl. Isa. 60:14;
Zion | 62:4,1226
whom no one asks for | Isa. 62:1227
21 a + e Mic. 1:9; c + d Am. 6:6; b + c + d + e Nah. 3:19; d+e Deut. 29:21. That terms from the
domain illness and injury (see also 30:15) have a widespread occurrence in the OT, is nor-
mal and on its own does not prove literary relations (pace U. Wendel, Jesaja und Jeremia:
Worte, Motive und Einsichten Jesajas in der Verkndigung Jeremias (BThSt, 25), Neukirchen-
Vluyn 1995, 214). This is different for the analogy with Nah. 3:19. The phrase is better
suited in Nahum, from which Jeremiah thus possibly borrowed here and in 15:18; cf. Fischer,
Trostbchlein, 190, 216.
22 See the previous note.
23 Cassuto, Relationship, 150 sees a relation between LXX and Isa.
49:26.
24 Occurrences Deut. 28:41; Isa. 46:2; 4 in Jer.; 3 in Ez.; Am. 9:4; Nah. 3:10; Lam. 1:18.
25 2 Kgs 21:14 also contains a collocation of the roots and /.
26 These are the analogous clauses with naming Zion-Jerusalem; noted by Cassuto,
Relationship, 150; see also Sommer, Prophet, Ch. 2 n. 25.

27 Outside Isa. 62:12 and Jer. 30:14, 17 does not occur in the OT with Zion as object. For
analogies to the whole clause, see Ezek. 34:6; Ps. 142:5. The words and earlier in this
verse could reflect Ezek. 34:4.
18 Thus says Yhwh |

I am about to turn the fortunes of the tents a of Jacob b |
and have compassion on his dwellings c | a+c Isa. 54:228
and the city will be rebuilt upon its ruins |
and the palace |
it will stand in its proper place |
19 And out of them will come thanksgiving
and the sound of merrymakers | Isa. 51:3
and I will make them numerous |
so they will not be few |
and I will bring them honour |
so they will not be insignificant |
20 And his sons will be as of old |
and his assembly will be established before me |
and I will punish all his oppressors |
21 And his leader will be one of his own |
and his ruler will arise from his midst |
and I will make him draw near |
so he will come close to me |
For who is he |
who devotes his heart |
to come close to me? |
declares Yhwh |
22 And you will be a people to me |
and I will be a God to you |
23 Behold the storm of Yhwh |
wrath has gone forth |
a sweeping storm |
it will fall upon the head of the wicked |
24 The fierce anger of Yhwh will not turn back29 |
until he has executed |
and until he has accomplished the intents of his heart |
in the latter days you will understand it |
28 a + b + c Num. 24:5; a + b Mal. 2:12. These agreements become insignificant when com-
pared to the shared words between Jer. 10:20 and Isa. 54:12, notably tent, cord,
tent-curtain, stretch out and son, childan exceptionally dense shared collo-
cation for the OT.
29 The relation with Isa. 55:11 signalled by Cassuto, Relationship, 150 depends on little
more than the verb and the termination: not until.

292 chapter four
Jeremiah 31
the entire 30:524 31:126 as diptych
01 At that time |
declares Yhwh |
I will be a God to all the families of Israel |
and they will be a people to me |
02 Thus says Yhwh |
The people who survived the sword found grace in the desert |
going |
to give rest to it (to the sword?)30 |
Israel |
03 Yhwh appeared to me from afar |
I have loved you with an everlasting love |
therefore I have drawn you in loving-kindness |
04 Again I will build you |
and you shall be built |
maiden Israel |
again you will adorn yourself with tambourines |
and go forth in the dance of the merrymakers |
05 Again you will plant vineyards on the mountains of Samaria |
the planters will plant |
and enjoy the fruit |
06 For there will be a day |
when watchmen will call on the mountain of Ephraim |
Arise |
and let us go up to Zion | analogous clause Isa. 2:331
to Yhwh our God |
the genre of 31:79
the sequence of 30:1011 31:79: promised and realised salvation
07 For thus says Yhwh |
Cry out a with joy for Jacob | a+b Isa. 12:6; 24:14; 54:132
and shout b for the chief c of the nations d |
30 So too in Jer. 47:6 and 50:3435 sword and the verb rest appear in close vicinity;
the translation however remains uncertain.

31 occurs 7 in the OT, where Isa. 2:3 and Mic. 4:2 are thematically the closest due to
Zion as the journeys destination.

32 c + d 2 Sam. 22:44; Ps. 18:44. There the title, without the article before nations, refers
to David. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 195: Jer. 31:7 bernimmt und bertrgt die Wendung auf
Jakob/Israel. This would place the verse in line with Isa. 55:5. It has been suggested to read
instead of , as in Isa. 42:11; cf. BHS txt cr. app. The history of the text does
not support the proposal.
make hear |
praise | same seq. of an. clauses
and say | Isa. 48:2033
Yhwh has saved his people34 |
the remnant of Israel |
08 I am about to bring them from the north country |
and I will gather them from the remotest parts of the earth |
among them the blind and the lame | Isa. 35:5635
women with child and in travail together |
a great company will return here |
09 With weeping they will come |
and with supplications I will lead them back |
I will make them walk by brooks of water | Isa. 48:21; 49:10, 11; etc.36
in a straight way |
in which they will not stumble |
for I am a father to Israel |
and Ephraim |
he is my first-born |
the generic traits of 31:1014
the sequence 30:1011 31:1014
10 Hear a the word of Yhwh |
nations | a+c+d Isa. 49:137
and proclaim b in the coastlands c afar off d | b+c Isa. 42:12
and say |
He who scattered Israel will gather e him |
and will keep him |
as a shepherd f does his flock g | an. cl. Isa. 40:1138
33 Apart from the analogous string make hear and say in Isa. 48:20, see also Jer. 4:5; Am.
3:9.
34 The translation of this clause is based on LXX and Targ.; see below in this section.
35 For this collocation see further Lev. 21:18; Deut. 15:21; 2Sam 5:6, 8, 8; Mal. 1:8; Job 29:15.
Sommer, Prophet, 162 sees a relation between the whole of Jer. 31:79 and Isa. 35:49, but there
is no support for this other than a few isolated words such as , , , and . For
a comparison between Jer. 31:79 and Isa. 35:310, see also J. Unterman, From Repentance to
Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 44: at least fifteen
similar usages of language, and in near identical order.
36 These echoes are mainly thematic, because as expressions, brooks of water reminds
of Deut. 8:7; 10:7; and straight way of Proverbs among others. For water along the way of the
return, see also Isa. 35:68; 43:1920.
37 In addition, the imperative creates a syntactic analogy with Isa. 49:1. This verse features
prominently in the discussion on the relation between Jer. 1:5 and DI, see e.g. Tannert, Jeremia,
89 [ 4.2.2].
38 This is a combination of syntactic and lexical agreements, resulting in analogous
294 chapter four
11 For Yhwh a has ransomed b Jacob c | an. cl. Isa. 44:23; 48:20
and redeemed d him from e the hand | a+c+d Isa. 44:23; 48:20
of him who is stronger f than g he | b+d Isa. 35:9, 10;
12 And they will come a | an. cl. Isa. 35:10; 51:11
and cry out b on the height of Zion c | a+b+c Isa. 35:10; 51:1139
and they will flow d to the goodness of Yhwh | c+d cf. Isa. 2:240
for wheat and for wine and for oil and for sheep and cattle |
and their soul will be like a saturated garden | an. cl. Isa. 58:11
and they will languish no more |
13 Then will the maiden rejoice in the dance |
young men and old men together |
and I will turn their mourning into gladness |
and I will comfort them |
and make them rejoice for their sorrow | Isa. 35:10; 51:11, 1241
14 And I will saturate a the soul b of the priests with fatness c |
and my people will be satisfied d with my goodness e |
declares Yhwh | b+c+d+e Isa. 55:242
the connection 31:1014/1517
15 Thus says Yhwh |
Hear |
on the Height43 lamentation is heard |
bitter weeping |
Rachel weeping for her sons |
refusing |
to be comforted for her sons |
because they are no more |
16 Thus says Yhwh |
Refrain your voice from weeping |
and your eyes from tears |
clauses. See further Ezek. 34:12 (e + f + g); Nah. 3:18 (e+f) and Mic. 2:12 (e+g). The relation
with Ezekiel has been discussed in 3.2.5.3.
39 On in 31:12 as a preparation for in 31:15: 4.2.2. For , see also
Ps. 126:6.
40 Cf. Mic. 4:1. See above Jer. 31:6 for another link with that passage. For some is
derived from a verb that means shine (cf. Aquila ), which occurs further in
Isa. 60:5 and Ps. 34:6; cf. HALAT s.v. II. In these places however this shining is associated
with seeing, a notion that is missing in Jer. 31:12; the preposition indicates that I flow
was rather intended. For another application of the same metaphor, see Isa. 66:12.
41 See the note on and they will come in 31:12. Incidentally, these reminiscences are
interwoven with those of Am. 8:10 and Lam. 5:15.

42 This connection is relativised by those with Ps. 36:9 (a+c); 63:6 (b+c+d) and Prov. 11:25
(a + b + c).
43 On this translation: 4.2.2.
for there is a reward for your effort | Isa. 40:10; 62:1144

declares Yhwh |
and they will return from the land of the enemy |
17 And there is hope for your future |
declares Yhwh |
and your sons will return to their country |
18 I have surely heard |
how Ephraim bemoans himself |
You have chastened me |
and I let myself be chastened like a calf |
that is untrained |
make me return |
and I will return |
for you are Yhwh my God |
19 For after my turning I repented |
and after I came to recognise |
I smote upon my thigh |
I am a shame |
and also feel ashamed | Isa. 41:11; 45:161745
for I bear the disgrace of my youth | Isa. 54:4, 646
20 Is Ephraim my dear son |
or is he my darling child? |
44 On this lexical link with Isaiah (interesting due to the relation Rachel-Zion) there
is difference of opinion. U. Cassuto, On the Formal and Stylistic Relationship between
Deutero-Isaiah and Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem, Biblical and Oriental Studies,
vol. 1, Jerusalem 1973, 141177, esp. 151; S. Paul, Literary and Ideological Echoes of Jeremiah in
Deutero-Isaiah, in: P. Peli (ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies (1969),
vol. 1, Jerusalem 1971, 102120, esp. 105; C. Mielgo, Jr 3031: Contactos literarios, EstAg 18 (1982),
175210, esp. 205 and Sommer, Prophet, 68, 239 find it important. N. Kilpp, Niederreien und
aufbauen: Das Verhltnis von Heilsverheiung und Unheilsverkndigung bei Jeremia und im
Jeremiabuch (BThS, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1990, 149; W.H. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia),
vol. 2, Philadelphia 1989, 188 and Schmid, Buchgestalten, 130131 see nothing in it, or are
doubtful. The real analogies are not found in Isaiah but in Eccl. 4:9 and 2Chron. 15:7. They
offer little support to Pauls proposed translation in Jer. 31:16: a reward for compensating you
(cf. Ezek. 29:1920). A further question is whether the focus in Isa. 40:10 and 62:11 falls on the
compensation that Yhwh deserves or grants. Based on the suffix the former is often assumed.
In ancient Jewish exegesis and under a number of newer exegetes, Isa. 40:10 is related to the
reward that Yhwh grants, the reward and recompense to the cities of Judah (JPS); so too
J.L. Koole, Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 1: Isaiah 4048, Kampen 1997, 76. In 62:11 the line indeed
appears to have been understood in this sense.
45 Isa. 45:16 offers the clearest parallel in . Jer. 6:15 has before both verbs,
which occur 16 together in the OT, and thus as a fixed pair do not draw the attention to any
particular passage. One such instance is Isa. 54:4, to which the next note refers.
46 The expression reminds of Isa. 54:4 , see also the
word in Isa. 54:6 (cf. Tannert, Jeremia, 43; Willey, Remember, 245); however compare
Ps. 25:7 , possibly an established idiom.
296 chapter four
For as often as I speak against him |

I do remember him still |
therefore my bowels rumble for him |
I will surely have compassion on him | Isa. 63:1547
declares Yhwh |
21 Set up waymarks for yourself |
make yourself guideposts |
set your mind on the highway |
the road | Isa. 40:3; 49:11; 62:1048
by which you are going |
return |
maiden Israel |
return to these your cities |
22 How long will you waver |
turnable daughter? |
For Yhwh has created an. cl. Isa. 43:19; 48:7;
something new on earth | 65:1749
a woman surrounds a man |
23 Thus says Yhwh Almighty, the God of Israel |
again they will say this word
in the land of Judah and his cities | an. cl. Isa. 49:2050
when I turn their fortunes |
Yhwh bless you |
righteous pasture |
holy mountain | Isa. 27:1351
47 Besides the collocation of the three underlined words (Isa. 63:15 ) , see
the father-son imagery in the context (signalled by Paul, Echoes, 118). For + see
further Isa. 16:11; Jer. 4:19; Song 5:4. The striking agreement with Hos. 11:89 (signalled by
Schmid, Buchgestalten, 12, 129, 139), besides the name Ephraim, is only thematic.
48 On the collocation see further 1 Sam. 6:12; Isa. 59:78; Joel 2:78; Prov. 16:17. The places
Isa. 40:3; 49:11; 62:10 deal with the road of the return from exile and in their portrayals are thus
related to Jer. 31:21. See also Isa. 35:8 . The association with DIs eschatologische
Wunderstrasse is strengthened when one keeps to the K ( hlakt) in Jer. 31:21 and
applies this form to Yhwh (cf. Becking, Jeremiah 3031, 220). It may still be asked, however,
why waymarks and guideposts are necessary if it would be Yhwh himself that is returning
with Rachels children.
49 does not occur elsewhere in Jeremiah. One could speak of more or less analogous
clauses in Isa. 43:19 (verb ;)48:6, 7 (object )and 65:17 (object

). See further Num. 16:30: If Yhwh will create something new (litt. a creation). Still the
line retains a unique character, also due to its syntactic pattern [ 4.2.2].
50 The analogy concerns the pattern + yiqtol, cf. Jer. 32:15; 33:1213. The combination
occurs elsewhere only in Isa. 49:20. For the negative variant, see Jer. 3:16; 23:7; 31:29. The
phrase occurs elsewhere in Jer. 23:38; cf. 13:12; 14:17. The OT does not know
this word as a direct object of say elsewhere; more frequent is speak according to this word.
51 The third reference for is Zech. 8:3. Mountain(s) of (my, your, his) holiness
24 And Judah and all his cities will dwell in her together |
the farmers and those |
who move about with the flocks |
25 For I will satisfy the weary soul |
and every languishing soul I will replenish |
26 Thereupon I awoke | Isa. 29:852
and looked |
and my sleep had been pleasant to me |
27 Behold days are coming | see on 30:3
declares Yhwh |
when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah
with the seed of humans and the seed of animals |
28 And it will be |
just as I have watched over them |
to uproot |
and to tear down |
and to overthrow |
and to destroy |
and to bring evil |
so I will watch over them | Isa. 52:141553
to build |
and to plant |
declares Yhwh |
29 In those days they will no longer say |
the fathers have eaten unripe fruit |
and the teeth of the children become dull |
30 But for his own iniquity a man will die |
everyone |
who eats unripe fruit |
his teeth become dull |
31 Behold days are coming | see on 30:3
declares Yhwh |
when I will make with the house of Israel
and the house of Judah a new covenant54 |
occurs 21 in the OT, of which Cassuto, Relationship, 151 links the 5 occurrences in Isa. 5666
with Jer. 31:23.
52 G. Fischer, Das Trostbchlein: Text, Komposition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB, 26),
Stuttgart 1993, 201 considers an inversion of Isa. 29:8 based on the collocation of awake, soul
and weary.
53 This highly frequent construction just as so (ca. 61) is used in Isa. 52:1415; Jer.
32:42; Zech. 8:1315 for a comparison between doom and salvation.

54 Here an annotation is required to what many see as an important point of contact with
DI but as a matter of fact does not comply with the criteria of this overview, i.e. the term
. According to Isa. 42:6 Yhwhs Servant is appointed to be ( see also 49:8) and
298 chapter four
32 Not like the covenant |

that I made with their fathers on the day |
when I took hold of their hand | an. cl. Isa. 42:655
to lead them out of the land of Egypt |
my covenant that they broke |
though I was master over them |
declares Yhwh |
33 But this is the covenant56 |
that I will make with the house of Israel after those days |
declares Yhwh |
I will put my law within them |
and I will write it on their heart | Isa. 51:757
in Isa. 42:9 (cf. 10) are mentioned [ 2.2.3]. The covenant embodied by the Servant
appears to have a distant echo in Isa. 59:21. Many commentaries on Isa. 42:6 and 49:8 indeed
associate the expression covenant for the people with Jer. 31:3134. In this association the
priority of Jeremiah is usually taken for granted. Thus Koole, Isaiah III, vol. 1, 231 concludes
his expansive exposition of the history of interpretation as follows: [In Is. 49:8] mankind
is invited to and incorporated in the people of the new covenant, Jer. 31:31ff., through the
work and the person of the Servant. Analogous clauses would have been required to make
such a relation of dependence (in either direction) plausible. Moreover, a direct connection
of new and covenant implies the idea of a break in the covenant [ 4.2.3], which plays no
role whatsoever in DI. See also A. Labahn, Wort Gottes und Schuld Israels: Untersuchungen
zu Motiven deuteronomistischer Theologie im Deuterojesajabuch mit einem Ausblick auf das
Verhltnis von Jes 4055 zum Deuteronomismus (BZAW, 143), Stuttgart 1999, 184: Es ist []
nicht anzunehmen, da in Jes 49:8 berhaupt ein Einflu der dtr Bundesvorstellung vorliegt,
da [] die sprachlichen und theologischen Indizien nicht ausreichend sind. Presumably
was not an established theological term to DI, but a neologism that had to express
concisely in what sense Servant and people were identical: through him Yhwh meets his
commitment to Israel. The Servant is Israel because Yhwh fulfils for the people what he fulfils
for the Servant.
55 As in the 5 instances in Ex. and the 4 instances in Deut., the exodus from Egypt in Jer.
32:21 is associated with the of Yhwh. The combination occurs 7 (6 hif., 1

pi.), in the vicinity of further just in Isa. 42:6. In that verse Yhwh is the subject of the
action like in Jer. 31:32 and Job 8:20. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 259 suspects borrowing from DI,
comparable to Jer. 31:34 borrowing from Isa. 43:25. Similarly B.D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads
Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 4066, Stanford, CA 1998, 47 sees a correspondence between Jer.
31:3134 and Isa. 42:59.
56 Unterman, Repentance, 172 sees a relation between and Isa. 59:21 ,
while noting the occurrence of the words and in 31:36 from the same verse. However
compare to Gen. 17:10: This is my covenant that . The OT counts 12 analogous clauses
with . The agreement between Jer. 31:3336 and Isa. 59:21 is too slight to draw
conclusions on influencing.
57 The relation with Isa. 51:7 is evident for Cassuto, Relationship, 151 and
W. Tannert, Jeremia und Deuterojesaja: Eine Untersuchung zur Frage ihres literarischen und
theologischen Zusammenhanges, Leipzig 1956, 44; cf. Sommer, Prophet, Ch. 2 n. 91. However
see also Ps. 37:31 ; Ps. 40:9 ; Prov. 3:3; 7:3 (on parental laws
and torah) . We may presume that the conception of the law in the heart is
and I will be their God |

and they shall be my people |
34 And no longer will they teach58 |
a man his neighbour |
and a man his brother |
saying |
know Yhwh |
for they shall all know me from the smallest to the greatest of them |
declares Yhwh |
for I will forgive their iniquity |
and not remember their sin anymore | an. cl. Isa. 43:2559
35 Thus says Yhwh |
who gives the sun for light by day | Isa. 60:1960
and the fixed orders of the moon and the stars for light by night |
who calms the sea |
even though its waves roar | same seq. of an. clauses
Yhwh Almighty is his name | Isa. 51:1561
36 If these fixed orders were to depart from before me |
declares Yhwh |
then also the seed of Israel would cease | Isa. 45:2562
to be a nation before me all the days |
already presupposed in the depiction of Yhwh writing it there himself. Differently K. Schmid,
Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte
von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, 8384; H. Knobloch, Die
nachexilische Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12), Wiesbaden 2009, 158.
58 Tannert, Jeremia, 44 and Sommer, Prophet, 47 suggest there is a link between Jer. 31:34
and Isa. 54:13 , but the analogy is too weak (see also Isa.
50:4) to make borrowing plausible at this point.
59 See also Ps. 25:7. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 203, 259 (like Cassuto, Relationship, 151; Tan-
nert, Jeremia, 44) attaches significance to the agreement with Isa. 43:25, even if the sentence
is constructed slightly differently: . Remembering [ ]is found 5 in the
OT.
60 Jer. 31:35 will be discussed in 4.2.2.
61 JerLXX 38:36 (= JerMT 30:35) has and therefore probably reads
instead of , which is backed by IsaLXX 51:15 . Contrasting the more conven-

tional who sweeps up the sea, there is support for the translation who calms the sea, as
argued by P.T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Sec-
ond Isaiah, Atlanta, GA 1997, 138 n. 25 and J.L. Koole, Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 2: Isaiah 4955,
Kampen 1998 (on Isa. 51:15). See also Job 26:12 . As the longest and most verbal
agreement with DI, the three italicised clauses form an excellent point of departure for a
discussion on the question of dependence [ 4.2.2].
62 occurs elsewhere in Neh. 9:2; 1 Chron. 16:13; preceded by in 2Kgs 17:20; Isa.
45:25; Jer. 31:37 and Ps. 22:24. In Jer. 31:37 the expression reminds especially of 2Kgs 17:20 (cf.
Fischer, Trostbchlein, 204).
300 chapter four
37 Thus says Yhwh |

if the heavens above can be measured | Isa. 40:1263
and the foundations of the earth below Isa. 24:18; 40:2164
be searched out |
I will also reject all the seed of Israel | Isa. 45:2565
because of all they have done |
declares Yhwh |
38 Behold days [are coming] | see on 30:3
declares Yhwh |
when the city will be rebuilt for Yhwh
from the tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate |
39 And the measuring line shall go out farther straight to the hill Gareb |
and then turn to Goah |
40 The whole valley of the dead bodies and the ashes
and all terraces as far as the brook Kidron
to the corner of the Horse Gate toward the east |
will be holy to Yhwh |
It will not be uprooted | same seq. of an. clauses
and not be overthrown anymore for ever | Isa. 23:1866
Many of the points of contact on clausal level that have been marked above
contribute towards similarities on the level of textual macrostructure, as
shown in the subheadings of the translation. Which overarching agreements
are involved?
Jer. 30:1011 (= 46:2728) is included in the (priestly) salvation oracles
along with Isa. 41:813, 1416; 43:14, 58; 44:15; 54:46.67 Where precisely
the characteristics of the genre end and the individual traits of a literary unit
commence has been discussed extensively within the research on Deutero-
Isaiah. Form criticism is therefore not a proper way to avoid the question
63 The only other collocation of and is found in Jer. 33:22.

64 Fischer, Trostbchlein, 204 considers an allusion to Isa. 40:21, even when that verse does
not read ( ][ see also Mic. 6:2; Ps. 82:5 and Prov. 8:29) but . Common
themes with DI are undeniable, noting also the measuring of heaven in Isa. 40:12.
65 See in the previous verse.
66 occurs 18 in the OT, but Isa. 23:18 like Jer. 31:40 has two clauses of negation
following it (cf. Fischer, Trostbchlein, 209). On the other hand, there is a degree of self-
evidence in the idea that something shall or will not happen to those things consecrated
to God, see e.g. also Ex. 12:16; Lev. 27:33.
67 Cf. C. Westermann, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas, in: Idem,
Gesammelte Studien (TB, 24), Mnchen 1964, 92170, esp. 117120; cf. Idem, Prophetische
Heilsworte im Alten Testament (FRLANT, 145), Gttingen 1987, 107; A. Schoors, I Am God Your
Saviour: A Form-Critical Study of the Main Genres in Is. XLLV (VT.S, 24), Leiden 1973, 3840.
on literary dependence in Jer. 30:1011 [ 4.2.2]. This is equally valid for the
generic patterns still to be treated below.
Some New-Assyrian prophecies for Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal (sev-
enth century bce) and other Assyrian, Aramaic and Ugaritic texts contain
the formula fear not (Akk. la tapallah, Ug. al.tln) followed by commit-
ments of assistance, support and protection.68 However, there is far stronger
communality between Jer. 30:1011 and the salvation oracles of Deutero-
Isaiah than between these biblical texts and their Assyrian, Aramaic and
Ugaritic counterparts. Thus the Old Testament oracles do not share just the
Gattung, but also their being addressed to my servant Jacob/Israel. The
words and expressions in Jer. 30:1011 that are un-deutero-isaianic do not
hinder this striking agreement. It is obvious that literarily related texts also
contain differences, seen for example in our earlier comparison between Isa.
4055 and the Yhwh-Kingship psalms [ 2.2.8.3]. Since text A differs from
text B to the exact same measure as text B differs from text A, the difference
as such does not yet indicate the direction of influence.
Jer. 31:79 is related generically to Isa. 48:2021 and other eschatological
hymns from Isa. 4055.69 In this regard the MT reading of Jer. 31:7 forms a
special point of attention. Against the majority of interpreters, who based
on LXX and Targ. make of v. 7b a perfect clause Yhwh has saved his peo-
ple, Odashima defends the Masoretic text: Save, Yhwh, your people.70 In this
way he ignores the fact that as a genre the call to praise requires a motivation
in the perfect, whereas the closer context (31:2, 11) equally uses the perfect to
express Israels liberation. The unit becomes a futuristic announcement of
salvation only from v. 8. Whichever way, the lexical and text grammatical
resemblance to Isa. 48:2021 is undeniable. In Jer. 31:1014 too, the intro-
ductory wording shows agreements with Deutero-Isaiahs hymns, see in
particular Isa. 42:12. The sequel, if we set aside the perfectic motivation in
68 Cf. R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL,
3), Atlanta 2003, 170171; B. Becking, Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of
Jeremiah 3031 (OTS, 51), Leiden 2004, 155. For the association of these Assyrian texts and DI,
see M. Weippert, Ich bin JahweIch bin Itar von Arbela: Deuterojesaja im Lichte der
neuassyrischen Prophetie, in: B. Huwyler et al. (eds), Prophetie und Psalmen. Fs K. Seybold
(AOAT, 280), Mnster 2001, 3159.
69 Westermann, Sprache, 157163; he later abandoned the generic identification escha-
tological songs of praise, cf. Idem, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas (CTM,
11), Stuttgart 1981, 7. F. Matheus, Singt dem Herrn ein neues Lied: Die Hymnen Deuterojesajas
(SBS, 141), Stuttgart 1990, 53 disputes that DIs hymns belong to a special Gattung.
70 T. Odashima, Heilsworte im Jeremiabuch: Untersuchungen zu ihrer vordeuteronomis-
tischen Bearbeitung (BWANT, 125), Stuttgart 1989, 235237.

302 chapter four
v. 11, reminds us the strongest of the proclamation of salvation, as it is clearly

distinguished from the oracle of salvation in Isa. 4055.71
Thus in conclusion these three poems, Jer. 30:1011; 31:79 and 31:1014
remind strongly of Deutero-Isaiah. In addition to this affinity per unit, there
are striking correspondences in the units interconnections and sequencing.
Thus the connection Jer. 30:57(89)/1011 reminds of the connection Isa.
41:15(67)/813. In the two cases the oracle of salvation to Jacob-Israel
follows a state of fear and desperation, in Deutero-Isaiah as a result of the
acts of Cyrus, in Jeremiah as a result of Yhwhs day of judgement. Just as in
Isa. 4144, the attention in Jer. 30:517 shifts from the distress to the sin of
the people whom Yhwh wishes to save. Earlier in this study we came across
a similar relation between Isa. 42:1825 (distress) and 43:2228 (sin) within
the diptych structure of 42:1844:23 [ 2.2.7.2].
Jer. 30:1011 exhibits agreements with especially (in this order) Isa. 41:813
and 43:18; and 31:714 especially with (in this order) Isa. 48:2021 and Isa.
49. Hereby lines start to be drawn of an overarching dramatic sequence of
action that reminds of Isa. 4055. The step from promised to materialised
redemption in both Isa. 4055 and Jer. 30:531:26 is conspicuous. That only
a promise is involved in Jer. 30:1011 and not yet the act of liberation itself,
is evident in the chastisement announced at the end. This chastisement
is dramatised in vv. 1215; in 31:79 it clearly belongs to the dramatic past.
There is further resemblance between the connection Jer. 31:1014/1517 and
the connection Isa. 49:813/1426. As with mother Rachel in Jer. 31:1517,
where she is not yet ready to receive comfort and surrender to the joy
of her childrens return, we find the same is true for mother Zion in Isa.
49:1421. Is it coincidental, after all these isomorphic traits, that Isa. 4055
and Jer. 30:531:26 both end in imagery of territorial expansion, saturation
and refreshment? In this respect compare Isa. 54:13 and Jer. 31:24 as well as
Isa. 55:13 and Jer. 31:25.
Thus we see that the Booklet of Comfort (without framing: Jer. 30:5
31:26) reminds of the Book of Comfort (Isa. 4055) in more than one way.72
Firstly there is agreement in form and formulation between a number of
71 Westermann, Heilsworte, 109. The form-critical distinction between oracle of salvation
and announcement of salvation stems from Westermann.

72 It helps to remember that the term Trstungsbchlein, presumably introduced by
B. Duhm, Das Buch Jeremia (KHC, 11), Tbingen 1901, 237, itself implies a comparison with
DI. The rendering Trostbchlein is ascribed to P. Volz, Der Prophet Jeremia (KAT, 10), Leipzig
21928, 287.
separate units, esp. 30:1011; 30:1617; 31:79 and 31:1014. Secondly paral-
lelism is in evidence where units follow each other up. A dramatic move-
ment over two rounds is the result for both compositions.73 As the first round
of the small composition, Jer. 30:524 revolves around the promise of sal-
vation despite Jacobs despair (30:57) and Zions sin (30:1215); not until
the second round do return and change dominate the stage. While the first
round results in Yhwhs judgement over the wicked, the second ends with
Zions territorial expansion as refreshing and replenishing salvation. We
recall that as the first round of the large composition, Isa. 4048 culminates
in Babylons downfall, where the intriguing question was who would be able
to escape from it in time. Here the nations of the world are not implied as
much as the wicked in the circles of the readers themselves (cf. Isa. 48:22).
This theme is reflected in the conclusion of the small composition, Jer. 30:5
24. In the same way, Isa. 4955 and Jer. 31:126 become counterparts, now
not because of the calamity but due to the salvation with which they close.
In Isa. 54 the matriarchal city is invited to enlarge her tent for the countless
inhabitants, in Isa. 55 the reader is invited to find nourishment and quench
his thirst on this prospect, and in Jer. 31:2326 these themes unite to form a
single dream vision. Hereby, in the structure of Jeremiahs Booklet of Com-
fort, vague outlines are still visible of the pattern shaming-liberating, which
we could trace back to the drama of the fourth book of Psalms in our analysis
of Deutero-Isaiah [ 2.2.8.4].
4.2.2. Diachronic Approach

Isaiah read Jeremiah, Jeremiah read Isaiah: in essence, free of closer preci-
sions, this encompasses the spectrum of diachronic explanations in which
we wish to take a position in this section.
Views on the diachronic relation between Jer. 3031 and Isa. 4055 can be rubricated
as follows. A. DI is the author of Jer. 3031 or has provided important additions to
this writing. Thus in the 19th century Movers, De Wette and Hitzig; for an overview
of their views, see S. Bhmer, Heimkehr und neuer Bund: Studien zu Jeremia 3031
(GTA, 5), Gttingen 1976, 1112. B. There is literary dependence, in which DI has
the priority and influenced certain passages or layers of Jer. 3031 to a greater or
lesser extent. Thus Duhm, Jeremia, 239246; C.H. Cornill, Das Buch Jeremia, Leipzig
1905, 328346; J.P. Hyatt, The Book of Jeremiah (IB, 5), Nashville 1956, 1022; Mielgo,
Contactos, 188189; J. Schreiner, Jeremia (NEB, 9), Bd. 2, Wrzburg 1984, 173186;
73 Schmid, Buchgestalten, 155 too sees Jer. 30:531:26, in a certain phase of its redactional
growth, hnlich zweigeteilt wie das Deuterojesajabuch.

304 chapter four
R.P. Carroll, The Book of Jeremiah (OTL), London 1986, 569; N. Mendecki, Czy Jr 31,7
9 jest pokrewny oredziu Deuteroizajasza? [Has Jer. 31:79 points of contact with the
message of Deutero-Isaiah?] Collectanea Theologica 56 (1986), 4453; Idem, Stammt
Jer 31,1014 aus der Schule Deuterojesajas? in: K.-D. Schunck, M. Augustin (eds),
Goldene pfel in silbernen Schalen, Frankfurt 1992, 5767; Westermann, Heilsworte,
107109; Fischer, Trostbchlein, 211; K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches:
Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext
des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996; Albertz, Exile, 317. C. There is liter-
ary dependence, in which Jer. 3031 or a layer in it has priority and influenced DI.
Thus Volz, Jeremia, 280, 302 (DI hat mit Lust darin gelesen und manches Wort
und manche Gedanken daraus geschpft); Tannert, Jeremia; Paul, Echoes, 102
120; U. Cassuto, On the Formal and Stylistic Relationship between Deutero-Isaiah
and Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem, Biblical and Oriental Studies, vol. 1,
Jerusalem 1973, 141177, esp. 149152; A. van Selms, Jeremia (POT), dl. 3, Nijkerk 1974,
65, 72, 82; G. Fohrer, Der Israel-Prophet in Jeremia 3031, in: A. Caquot, M.I. Delcor
(eds), Mlanges bibliques et orientaux. Fs H. Cazelles (AOAT, 212), Neukirchen-Vluyn
1981, 135148, esp. 136; J. Unterman, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs
Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 171175; cf. B. Becking, I Will
Break his Yoke from off your Neck: Remarks on Jeremia xxx 411, OTS 25 (1989), 63
76, esp. 71; Willey, Remember; Sommer, Prophet, 3272. D. W.H. Holladay, Jeremiah
(Hermeneia), vol. 2, Philadelphia 1989, holds a remarkable position between B and
C. Thus he sees pertinently in 30:1011; 31:79a; and 31:1014 strong agreements with
DI and TI. The poems 30:1011 and 31:79a, made by Jeremiah between the summers
of 588 and 587, have influenced DI; in turn DI influenced 31:1014, that most prob-
ably stems from the 5th century. The tight, two-way relation between 31:79 and
31:1014 is in conflict with such a solution. E. There are no reasons why literary
dependence should be contemplated, making use of the same genres and the cor-
responding situations offer sufficient explanations for the points of contact. Thus
W. Rudolph, Jeremia (HAT, 1/12), Tbingen 31968, 191, 196; B.N. Wambacq, Jeremias
/ Klaagliederen / Baruch / Brief van Jeremias (BOT), Roermond 1957, 201, 208209;
A. Weiser, Das Buch des Propheten Jeremia (ATD, 2021), Gttingen 51966, 270, 278
n. 1, 5.
Some of the points of contact inventoried in the previous section do not
rise above linguistic agreements. In this category we include: Jer. 30:3; 31:27,
31, 38/Isa. 39:6; Jer. 30:5/Isa. 48:22; 57:21; Jer. 30:12, 15/Isa. 17:11; 30:26; Jer.
30:16/Isa. 46:2; Jer. 30:18/Isa. 54:2; Jer. 31:8/Isa. 35:56; Jer. 31:23/Isa. 27:13; Jer.
31:23/Isa. 49:20; Jer. 31:2526/Isa. 29:8; Jer. 31:28/Isa. 52:1415; Jer. 31:3637/Isa.
45:25; Jer. 31:40/Isa. 23:18. They lack the ability to establish independent
references between the two literary works. A second category is formed by
points of contact that, despite their containing this referential potential
for contemporaries, have too little volume to clearly indicate this or that
direction of borrowing by themselves. In this respect they disadvantage
the historian compared to the books first readers. If we did not know
whether Stravinsky cited Schubert or the other way around, the significance
of the citation would have eluded us.74 This section is particularly interested
in a third category: points of contact that have sufficient volume to enable
a scholarly discussion on the direction of dependence. In this category we
include (in the order of the discussion below): Jer. 31:35/Isa. 51:15 (cf. 60:19);
Jer. 31:12/Isa. 58:11; Jer. 30:1011/Isa. 41:813; 43:18; 44:15; Jer. 31:79/Isa.
48:2021; Jer. 31:1014/Isa. 48:2049:1; and Jer. 31:22/Isa. 43:19; 48:7; 65:17. Of
the estimated 145 points of contact between Isaiah and Jeremiah outside of
Jer. 3031 that comply with minimal linguistic criteria, no more than 30 are
restorable in this third category. To a large extent these will have to be out of
the equation, even though we will not hesitate to draw such a more remote
point of contact in the discussion if need be.
Jer. 31:35 ; cf. Isa. 51:15
. This series of identical
clauses belongs to the longest, most substantial overlapping between the
two prophetic books.75 The third person in cannot be a
decisive factor concerning the priority: it involves a fixed liturgical formula,
and compares for example with the hymnic I-speech of Yhwh in Isa. 44:26:
who carries out the word of his servant and fulfils the prediction of his
messengers.76 The three clauses sit comfortably in Isa. 51:916, which shares
the terms , , and with Job 26:1213. There are also related texts
within the book of Jeremiah (see 5:22; 6:23), but the chaos battle mythology
there appears to have moved to the background compared to Deutero-Isaiah
and Job. The sea no longer needs to be contested, but abides within the
eternal laws. Jer. 31:36 includes the calming of the sea under ,
these fixed orders. Thus Isa. 51:15 is the most likely candidate as source
text of the allusion.77 Suppressing the chaos myth and rejecting Trito-Isaiahs
74 Stravinsky cites Schuberts Militrische Marsch No. 1 in Circus Polka (1942).

75 Jer. 48:4344/Isa. 24:1718 also belongs to this category.
76 So too in Isa. 48:2 accompanies Yhwhs speech in the I-form. See
further within Jer. 3031 Yhwh their God in the I-discourse of 30:9. Cf. O. Glanz, Who is
Speaking? Who is Addressed? A Critical Study into the Conditions of Exegetical Method and
its Consequences for the Interpretation of Participant Reference-Shifts in the Book of Jeremiah,
Amsterdam 2010, 151: it is a normal phenomenon and part of Hebrew pragmatics that an
attributive clause dissociates from the previous 1P participant which it describes.
77 Pace U. Cassuto, Relationship, 151; Unterman, Repentance, 93; Sommer, Prophet, 323;
Schmid, Buchgestalten, 174 n. 592; Willey, Remember, 138 n. 25, 276. Even if one were to con-
template gemeinsame Abhngigkeit von geformter hymnischer Tradition (Tannert, Jeremia,
19; similarly Fischer, Trostbchlein, 203 considers this option as an alternative for Isa. 51 Jer.
31), the embedding of this tradition in Isa. 51 remains the most authentic. Schreiner, Jeremia,
189 and H. Knobloch, Die nachexilische Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12), Wies-
baden 2009, 207 share this view.
306 chapter four
apocalyptic dualism go hand in hand in Jer. 31: the indissolubility of Yhwhs

relation with Israel rests in the indissolubility of the existing cosmic order.78
Jer. 31:12 ; cf. Isa. 58:11 ; the word com-
bination only occurs in these two places. The clauses display a strong
analogy. The imagery fits in completely with the barren regions and spring
waters of Isa. 58. In comparison, the combination of wine, oil and irrigated
garden in Jer. 31 creates an eclectic, patchwork-like impression. To search
for an explanation in a standard expression would be to deny the theme in
common between the passages, the restoration of Zion. Presumably Jer. 31:12
then carries a direct citation from Isa. 58:11.79
Jer. 30:10 ; cf. Isa. 41:8, 10
; 43:1 ; 44:1, 2
. The agreement with Isa. 41:8, 10 is the most
striking, especially due to the opening . For as continuance
of , compare for example: Isa. 51:7. Jer. 30:10
;cf. Isa. 43:5, 6 . Jer. 30:11 ; cf. Isa.
43:3, 5 ; analogous clause also in 41:10. The first
signals indicating the priority of Deutero-Isaiah are the word order in
and the paraphrasing construction . The vocative
my servant Jacob (30:10; 46:2728) attracts attention because the book of
Jeremiah lets my servant follow proper names (Nebuchadnezzar, David)
elsewhere; Deutero-Isaiah has both Jacob/Israel my servant (Isa. 41:8; 44:1)
and my servant Jacob (44:2; 45:4). The typical phrasing of the promise in
Jeremiah, I am with you to save you (cf. Jer. 1:8, 19; 15:20; 42:11), implies
78 Compare Jer. 31:35a to Isa. 60:19, which is based on the same string fol-
lowed by , but is corrected by Jeremiahs different perspective on the future: The sun will
no more be your light by day, nor will the brightness of the moon shine on you; but Yhwh will
be your everlasting light and your God will be your glory. On such traces directed against TI,
also in Jer. 33:1426, see Schmid, Buchgestalten, 60 (referring to Steck). Unterman, Repen-
tance, 103106 has reason to see Gen. 13:16 as the source of the pattern followed by
in Jer. 31:36; 33:2526 (cf. 33:22), where the existence of Israel is compared to the exis-
tence of natural phenomena (103). His conclusion is however less convincing that Isa. 40:15,
25; 51:6, 8; 54:10 and 66:22 must be dated later than these Jeremian texts, because the relation
between Israel and God is presented by Jeremiah as more stable than the existence of nature.
This conclusion does not take the essential correlation between temporal and ethical dual-
ism in DI and TI into account [ 2.3.4], nor the possibility that the book of Jeremiah wants
to oppose precisely such an ethical division in Israel.
79 Fischer, Trostbchlein, 211 also agrees that the image in Isaiah is besser im Kontext
verankert. Borrowing in the other direction is contemplated by Cassuto, Relationship, 151;

Schmid, Buchgestalten, 159. To formally cover more complicated relations of dependence one
would have to say: Isa. 58:11 is closest to the stemmatological point of suspension. We will set
this nuance aside, though it is also valid for several other borrowings in Jer. 3031.
a weakening in performativity compared to Deutero-Isaiah, for whom the

corresponding utterance itself is the dramatic performance of an act of
salvation. The clearest argument for the secondary character of Jer. 30:1011
is found in the chastisement at the end, an element foreign to this originally
cultic genre.80
This view on the diachronic relation between Jer. 30:1011 and Deutero-
Isaiah raises questions on the promises made to the prophet Jeremiah in
1:8, 19 and 15:20. If these promises were demonstrably older than Deutero-
Isaiah, it would have been easier to source Jer. 30:1011 from an indepen-
dent Jeremian tradition. However, on a closer inspection it appears that the
points of contact between Jer. 1:5/Isa. 49:1 and Jer. 11:19/Isa. 53:7, 8 also pro-
vide strong arguments that Jeremiah borrowed from Deutero-Isaiah. They
invite a comparison between the calling and fate of the prophet and the
calling and fate of the Servant of the Lord. Shared words in Isa. 44:2, 24; 49:5
and Jer. 1:5 are and , which do not occur together elsewhere in the
Old Testament. The last word also occurs in Isa. 49:1, where the Servant, in
line with Jer. 1:5, addresses the nations. The difference between already in
the womb he called me and before I formed you in the womb is easier to
explain as an overcall in Jeremiah than as a toning down in Deutero-Isaiah.
One further illuminating analogy between prophet and Servant, as a lamb or
a sheep led to the slaughter, is proffered in the mirrored clauses for he was
cut off from the land of the living (Isa. 53:8) and let us cut him off from the
land of the living (Jer. 11:19). Replacing a rare word with one more conven-
tional, here replaced by for to cut, is usually a reliable signal for the
direction of borrowing. Moreover the original expression rather refers to the
fate that overcomes someone passively (by divine providence), than to what
people do to each other.81 In this network of allusions the divine promise to
80 That serves no contextual function in Jer. 30:10 is seen by Albertz, Exile, 172 as a
petrified genre characteristicfor us an additional indication that DI is cited.

81 Willey, Remember, 218 sees a link between Isa. 53:8 and Lam. 3:54 I am cut off
(from life). Equally comparable is Ps. 52:7. For the significance of these analogies between
Jeremiah and the Servant (from the perspective of DI), see Tannert, Jeremia, 96104, who
like Cassuto considers influencing from Jeremiah and is followed in this by Willey and Som-
mer. See also E. Bosshard-Nepustil, Jesaja 139 und das Zwlfprophetenbuch in exilischer
und frhnachexilischer Zeit: Redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur literarischen Ver-
netzung der Prophetenbcher, Zrich 1995, 428, who argues that one can hardly deny the
relation between the Servant Songs and Jeremiahs calling and confessions den Charakter
einer literarischen Abhngigkeit sicherlich auf seiten von IIJes. In the by us assumed reversed
order of origin, something remarkable happens to Jeremiah: here participation in the suffer-
ing of the righteous develops into compassion for a historical figure. A similar development
is traceable in the addition of historicising headings above psalms of lamentation.
308 chapter four
Jeremiah, fear not for I am with you, would fit very well as a reminder of
Deutero-Isaiahs oracle of salvation.
Jer. 31:7 ; cf. Isa. 48:20
. Jer. 31:8
; see for in a comparative setting: Isa. 35:5 (alongside e.g.
;)42:16; a thematic link is discernible with Isa. 40:11. Jer. 31:9
; cf. Isa. 48:21
; 49:10, 11 ; mention of
water along the road of return is also found in Isa. 35:68; 43:1920. The
strongest argument for the secondary nature of Jer. 31:79 is seen in the
fusion of eschatological hymn and proclamation of salvation, which are
still distinguishable as separate genres in Deutero-Isaiah.
A similar admixture of genres is arguably located in Jer. 31:1014 in rela-
tion to Isa. 48:2049:1 and other passages in the book of Isaiah. One detail
that has diachronic implications is the analogy between 31:12
and Isa. 35:10 = 51:11 . The relation between these clauses
is confirmed by the sequence of , , , [], and in the
context.82 The unique for the Old Testament is best explained as a
preparation for in 31:15.83 Due to the absence of an article in , the
Masoretes read on the height, similar to LXX S and A .84 Although
modern Bible translations in German, English, French, Dutch, Norwegian,
Danish and Greek are unanimous in opting for the place name Ramah,85
some interpreters still prefer the Masoretic view.86 Perhaps differentiation
should be drawn for the Hebrew between the original meaning in Ramah
and a redactional harmonisation between 31:12 and 15 , under-
stood as on the Height, by the scribe who afterwards linked the two poems
together. Was the intention of this harmonisation to displace the wailing
Rachel from Ramah to Jerusalem (a distance of a few kilometres) to let her
82 Cf. Willey, Remember, 152153.

83 The replacement of height by a more conventional term indicates that JerLXX 38:12
is secondary compared to the MT; cf. Becking, Jeremiah 3031, 35.
84 LXX B , so too Mt. 2:18; Aquila , Targ. . According to Becking,
Jeremiah 3031, 195 the Greek in JerLXX 38:15 must refer to heaven: Rachels lamenting
does not go unnoticed by God. The feminine form however is not used as a reference to
heaven; both cultic heights (in LXX) and heaven (in Heb. 1:3) are indicated as . The
more conventional word for height = heaven in the NT is .
85 Cf. SESB.
86 Cf. Holladay, Jeremiah, 153, 187; B.A. Bozak, Life Anew: A Literary-Theological Study of Jer.
3031 (AnBib, 122), Rome 1991, 94; J.W. Mazurel, De vraag naar de verloren broeder: Terugkeer
en herstel in de boeken Jeremia en Ezechil, Amsterdam 1992, 7173. Compare also Jer. 3:21.
take over the role of mother Zion from Isa. 49 on the same location?87 In any
case the longer version with in this way reveals the borrowing party in
the connection Jer. 31:12/Isa. 35:10 = 51:11.
Earlier in this study we paused at Jer. 31:22 to consider the content of the
riddle: lady Zion will enfold the population of Judah in a blessed embrace
[ 3.2.1]. It might well be an interpretation that Jer. 31:2325 applied retro-
spectively to the riddle (thus a similar rlecture as has just been suggested
for Jer. 31:15: Ramah or Height) but it could also explicate a meaning already
enclosed in the words of Jer. 31:2122 themselves [ 3.2.5.1]. Here we will pay
attention to the intertextual relations of the striking creation statement that
introduces the riddle.
Jer. 31:22 ; cf. Isa. 43:19 ; occurrences
of in Deutero-Isaiah are Isa. 42:9 and 48:6; in Isa. 48:6, 7 as subject of
nif.;88 Isa. 65:17 does not use independently, but similarly alongside
. This verb occurs 48 times in the Old Testament, with the earth as object
in Gen. 1:1; Isa. 45:18; 65:17 (new earth) or as subject of the nif. in Gen. 2:4. Of
the 6 times that the -clause has a locational phrase, on 4 occasions it
concerns the earth: Ex. 34:10 [ ;] Deut. 4:32 [;]
Isa. 45:12 [ ]and Jer. 31:22 []. The verb does not occur elsewhere
in Jeremiah. The words and recall strong associations with
in Gen. 1:27. In this way they furnish something new in Jer. 31:22 with
the meaning: something that equals the marvel of Gen. 1 in wonderfulness.
Compared to Deutero-Isaiah, Jer. 31:22 sides with Trito-Isaiah by clearly
measuring the new that Yhwh creates against Gen 1. In Jer. 31, however, this
creation does not bring about a new earth, but something new on earth. Both
Isa. 65 and Jer. 31 assume Gen. 1but in what manner do they presume each
87 The point of contact Jer. 2:32/Isa. 49:15 is decisive for the question whether the authors
of Jeremiah knew Isa. 49. Nowhere else is the object of forget (102) a utensil and rarely
is it concrete (Deut. 24:19). Compared to Isa. 49:15 the question posed by Jer. 2:32 makes
an artificial impression, in which it is important to note that the only other collocation of
jewellery, to girdle and bride is found in Isa. 49:18. A strong objection against
the direction of borrowing Jer. 2 Isa. 49 (defended amongst others by Willey, Remember,
197200) is the accusation that Isa. 49:15 as an allusion to Jer. 2:32 would conceal (namely
by reminding Zion that she had previously forgotten her jewel Yhwh). This is inconsistent
with the scope of Isa. 49:1450:3 which does not accuse Zion herself but only her children of
infidelity.
88 Jer. 33:3 is included as one of the points of contact between Isa. 48:6 and the book of
Jeremiah. This concerns resp. unsearchable things you did not know and hidden things you
did not know as object of divine announcement. In a part of the text tradition (cf. Targ.) Jer.
33:3 is aligned even closer to Isa. 48:6. Text-genetically Jer. 33:3 seems to be a levelling of the
announcement of the new things in Isa. 48:6 [ 2.2.6].
310 chapter four
other? Anti-dualistic overtones are audible when we set Jer. 31 alongside Isa.
65, and we suspect that Jer. 31 indeed relies on the consonance. The broader
context has a pronounced anti-dualistic tenor in Jer. 31:36: if these fixed
orders (of heaven and earth) were to depart At the same time Jer. 31:2125
like Isa. 65 establishes an essential link between Yhwhs new creation and
Jerusalems holy mountain. The author of Jer. 31 thus fully honours Isa. 65,
but perhaps wishes to determine a subtle midcourse between a new wonder
of creation and that what he must have seen as a dualistic misconception.
It appears to us that the conclusion of Jeremiahs dream vision was not
inspired only by Isa. 54 [ 4.2.1], but also by Isa. 65.89
An answer to the question whether Jeremiah was indeed acquainted
with Isa. 65:17, requires an overview of the other points of contact between
this book and Isa. 6566: Jer. 3:16/Isa. 65:17; Jer. 4:13/Isa. 66:15; Jer. 6:7/Isa. 65:3;
Jer. 7:13, 27; 35:17/Isa. 50:2, 4; 65:12; 66:4; Jer. 16:18/Isa. 65:7; Jer. 25:3133/Isa.
66:16; Jer. 29:5, 28/Isa. 65:21; Jer. 32:18/Isa. 65:6; Jer. 46:9/Isa. 66:19.90 The points
of contact that have been italicised in this summary offer sufficient material
for a meaningful discussion on the direction of borrowing. Confirming the
borrowing Isa. 66 Jer. 4 we find the classical theophany in which Yhwh
himself appears as the chariot rider.91 Against this background, Jer. 4 appears
to be a development in the direction of demythologising: the heavenly char-
iots become earthly chariots from the North. Jer. 4:13 retains Yhwh as first
subject and answers with a citation from Isa. 66 on the relation between
the northern invaders and divine judgement; see also the root in Isa.
66:16 and Jer. 4:12.92 The difference in order between speaking-hearing and
89 According to Schmid, Buchgestalten, 80 something new in the land in Jer. 31:22 should
contrast something new underway, that is, the new exodus according to DI; but for this
opposition we find no intertextual clue. For a possible allusion of JerLXX 38(= 31):22 to TI,
3.2.1.
90 For a more expansive selection, see Cassuto, Relationship, 143160. E.U. Dim, The
Eschatological Implications of Isa 65 and 66 as the Conclusion of the Book of Isaiah, Bern 2005,
107 sees in Isa. 65:19 a deliberate contradiction with Jer. 7:34; 16:9; 25:10. The analogy is far
too weak to support such a conclusion.
91 Cf. W.B. Barrick, H. Ringgren, Art. , in: TWAT, Bd. 7, Stuttgart 1993, 508515, esp. 511
512; see also the comprehensive documentation in W.A.M. Beuken, Jesaja (POT), dl. 3B,
Nijkerk 1989, 128129 on Isa. 66:15. R. Liwak, Der Prophet und die Geschichte: Eine literar-
historische Untersuchung zum Jeremiabuch (BWANT, 121), Stuttgart 1987, 234 does not say
anything on the direction of dependence, but acknowledges the vague terminology of the
theophany in Jer. 4:13 compared to Isa. 66:15.
92 It is important that in Jer. 4:2326 the Rckfall zum Chaos als Umkehr des Schp-
fungswirkens JHWHs (Knobloch, Prophetentheorie, 289) does not go that far that it neces-
sitates the creation of a new heaven and a new earth. Even here Jeremiah keeps a distance
from the dualism of TI.
calling-answering in Jer. 7 and 35 compared to Isa. 50, 65 and 66 is equally

noteworthy [ 2.3.3.3]. Concerning the book of Jeremiah these are the only
instances that Yhwh is the subject of , contrasting the 12 instances in the
book of Isaiah. This may offer grounds to see Jer. 7:13 and 35:17 as citations,
where the primary position is taken over by as the most appropriate
term for Gods speech according to this younger prophetic book.93 The build-
ing and planting in Jer. 29 and Isa. 65 may not be thought of in terms of
direct literary borrowing, but instead as a familiar proverbial expression,
a popular saying.94 However even in this case the gardens, as Babylonian
couleur locale, are undoubtedly secondary in relation to the vineyards of the
Judean homeland, meaning: the Isaiah-version here remains the closest to
the stemmatological point of suspension in the tree of dependency. And
in any way the other indications do not contradict our hypothesis that the
authors of the book of Jeremiah knew Isa. 6566.
From the selection of observations made above, the following diachronic
conclusions on Jer. 3031 can be drawn:
(a) Where borrowings have sufficient volume to allow an assessment of

the direction of borrowing, Isaiah is consistently indicated as the source
text.95 In short: Jeremiah read Isaiah. Naturally, in theory a cross-pollination
between the two traditions would have been possible, to continue the bo-
tanical imagery. Literary influence could have come in one case from Isaiah,
in another from Jeremiah. We would have been open to such a varying
result, even though it might not have accorded well with our global impres-
sion of the ancient scribal culture. For a book scroll to be alluded to, it had to
reach a certain authoritative status. However this may be, the case studies
above set all the arrows in the same direction: Isaiah Jeremiah.
93 See Knobloch, Prophetentheorie, 78 on the root as an axis of the book of Jeremiah.
We realise the far reaching consequences of our hypothesis. According to C. Maier, Jeremia
als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale Gebote des Deuteronomiums in Fortschreibungen des Jeremiabuches
(FRLANT, 196), Gttingen 2002, 8990 the temple speech Jer. 7:115 indeed contains no
Jeremian Grundschicht, but 7:13 (different to the late post-exilic, absent from the LXX,
verses 7:27 and 35:17) belongs to the oldest exilic layer of the speech. If our theory is correct
it would have to be at least a century younger.
94 Cassuto, Relationship, 160 n. 66. Further references to the building of houses and the
planting of vineyards are found in Ezek. 28:26; Zeph. 1:13. Besides Jer. 29 the planting of a
garden [ ]is found elsewhere only in Gen. 2:8. Usually a garden is made [ ]and a vineyard
planted []. For thematically related word usage, see also Am. 9:14; Eccl. 2:4.
95 Moreover, the idea of Jer. 30:531:26 as a type of preliminary study for DI is difficult
to accommodate with our earlier findings concerning the origin of Isa. 4055 as political
application of cultishly inspired dramaturgy [ 2.2.8.4].
312 chapter four
(b) If we grant ourselves the freedom to be led by this univocal result, there
are at once several more texts in Jer. 3031 that could be considered as
possible allusions to or echoes of the book of Isaiah. The following come to
mind: Jer. 30:7/Isa. 33:2(?); Jer. 30:8/Isa. 10:27(?); Jer. 30:16/Isa. 17:14; 42:22, 24;
Jer. 30:17/Isa. 60:14; 62:4, 12; Jer. 30:19/Isa. 51:3(?); Jer. 31:6/Isa. 2:3; Jer. 31:9/Isa.
49:1011; Jer. 31:10/Isa. 40:11; Jer. 31:1112/Isa. 35:910; 51:11; Jer. 31:12/Isa. 2:2(?);
Jer. 31:13/Isa. 35:10; 51:1112; Jer. 31:14/Isa. 55:2(?); Jer. 31:16/Isa. 40:10; 62:11(?);
Jer. 31:19/Isa. 54:4, 6(?); Jer. 31:20/Isa. 63:15; Jer. 31:21/Isa. 40:3; 49:11; 62:10;
Jer. 31:32/Isa. 42:6(?); Jer. 31:33/Isa. 51:7;96 Jer. 31:34/Isa. 43:25;97 Jer. 31:37/Isa.
40:12, 21. For details see the notes on the working translation above in
4.2.1.
(c) The citations do not stem alone from Isa. 4055 but also from other parts
of Isaiah, and certainly from Isa. 5666. This indicates that the authors of
Jer. 3031 did not dispose of Isa. 4055 as an independent work, but as a
prominent part of a more comprehensive prophetic book scroll.98
(d) Combinations of expressions from different books of the Tanakh show

that the authors of Jer. 3031 knew whole sections from it by heart. Without
96 Although A. Labahn, Wort Gottes und Schuld Israels: Untersuchungen zu Motiven deute-
ronomistischer Theologie im Deuterojesajabuch mit einem Ausblick auf das Verhltnis von Jes
4055 zum Deuteronomismus (BZAW, 143), Stuttgart 1999, 119120 starts out with the order
Jer. 31:33 Isa. 51:7, according to her there cannot be spoken of direct dependence. Weil das
Motiv aus Jer. 31:33 bruchstckhaft (isoliert von der Bundestheologie) in Jes 51:7a Verwen-
dung gefunden hat, legt sich die Vermutung nahe, da das Motivgut aus Jer. 31:33 sich spter
verselbstndigt hat und dann in Jes 51:7 rezipiert wurde. In our proposition Isa. 51:7 rather
links to the torah-piety of Ps. 37:31; 40:9 and in turn Jer. 31:33 could be dependent on Isa. 51:7.
The antagonistic address people in whose heart my law is, is then understood in hindsight
as an inclusive promise for the whole people of Israel.
97 For the allusion of Jer. 31:34 to Isa. 43:25 it is also relevant that Jer. 11:10 is
a possible echo from Isa. 43:27 ( nowhere else in the OT), while it is difficult to
explain the denial of the laws on sacrifice in Jer. 7:22 without the authority of Isa. 43:23. The
cited texts are all in close proximity to the well-known announcement of the new things
in Isa. 43:19; cf. Schmid, Buchgestalten, 296 n. 465. So too the offering terminology in Jer.
17:26 could have been influenced by Isa. 43:23, resp. Jer. 6:20 by Isa. 43:24. Jer. 7:21 add your
burnt offerings to your sacrifices could be dependent on the thematically related analogous
clause in Isa. 29:1; cf. U. Wendel, Jesaja und Jeremia: Worte, Motive und Einsichten Jesajas in der
Verkndigung Jeremias (BThSt, 25), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1995, 186191.
98 Our impression is that Jeremiah displays far more points of contact with Isa. 4066
than with Isa. 139, where an exception must perhaps be made for Isa. 1 (cf. Wendel, Jesaja,
256). Based on the fact that Isa. 1 and 6566 are represented relatively strongly in the book
of Jeremiah, it may be argued that the Jeremiah-authors were acquainted with the book of
Isaiah as a whole.
this readily available knowledge an anthological composition such as this

Booklet of Comfort would have been impossible. This sometimes results in
what keeps the equilibrium between literary reference and mere linguistic
agreement: the use of a holy language that does not always mean deliber-
ate allusion, but globally recalls the literary world the scribe had become
acquainted with through intensive reading. This is how evident borrowings
should be understood that hardly activate the original context in the mind
of the reader (e.g. Jer. 30:12/Nah. 3:19). It does not alter the fact that every
type of borrowing, irrespective of how it is indicated, should be determined
by strict criteria. Whoever exaggerates the number of points of contact, or
places too much emphasis on their uniqueness, creates the impression that
no written or spoken Hebrew is thought to have existed for the authors or
first readers outside of the texts known to us.99
(e) The Isaian citations are certainly not restricted to a singular diachronic
layer in Jer. 3031. In other words: as a result of their distribution, no theory
on layering these chapters [ 3.2.5.1] is supportable. The fact that certain
parts of Jer. 30:431:26 display exceptional Deutero-Isaian traits, which have
an effect on the dramatic structure of the whole poetic composition, says
nothing of their time of origin in relation to other parts, or in relation to the
prose framing, Jer. 30:13 and 31:2740. At most it tells something about the
difference between casual allusion and deliberate literary imitation, in this
case the imitation of Isa. 4055 as a schoolbook example of dramatic salvific
prophecy.
When we pay particular attention to the macrostructural aspects, the poetic

midsection of Jer. 3031 reminds the strongest of Deutero-Isaiah, and the
prose frame the strongest of Ezekiel [ 3.2.5.3]. However the midsection
also counts on having knowledge of Ezekiel, and the framing counts on a
thorough knowledge of Deutero-Isaiah. Especially this last point will receive
attention in the closing section of this fourth chapter.
99 Cf. O. Loretz, Ugarit und die Bibel: Kanaanische Gtter und Religion im Alten Testament,
Darmstadt 1990, 54: Die biblischen Schreiber und Gelehrten arbeiteten schroff mit Zitaten.
Aus diesen ersehen wir, da ihnen ein reiches Repertoire an Texten zur Verfgung stand,
das fr uns verloren sein drfte. Es ist uns deshalb kaum mehr mglich, den Umfang der
Intertextualitt, der Anspielungen usw. in den biblischen Schriften noch voll zu erfassen.
314 chapter four
4.2.3. The Promise of the New in Isaiah and Jeremiah

In anthropology the transition between child play (which requires no spec-
tators) and theatrical play has been described as the disappearance of the
fourth wall. In this approach, the cultic play is still on the side of child
play, because ideally it involves the whole community: outsiders are not
required.100 Using this imagery of a fourth wall that gradually becomes trans-
parent or disappears, we are able to describe the literary development that
starts with a liturgical song like Ps. 98, is carried through the reading dra-
mas of Ps. 93100 and Isa. 4055, and settles in the dramatic dream vision
written down in Jer. 30:531:26. Different to Deutero-Isaiah, Jer. 3031 has
withdrawn itself from the direct cultic-dramatic sphere of influence of the
Yhwh-Kingship psalms.
In what manner does Jer. 3031 draw the reader into dialogue with the
book of Isaiah on the new? To begin, by changing Deutero-Isaiahs perfor-
mative prophecy of salvation from a drama that more or less permits playing
along into a vision that needs to be applied in retrospect. From the narrated
point of view of the prophet Jeremiah, the prose framing of Jer. 3031 pro-
vides a motivation to record his vision in a booklet for days to come, but for
the reader it is precisely the opposite. For the reader the centre of the action
lies in the very framingin the programme of returning home, rebuilding
and unconstrained knowledge of God that this frame unfolds. The prophets
dream scenario wants to motivate the reader to accept the programme. In
this way, Jer. 3031 not only provides a practical reading guide to the specta-
cle that it contains in its own midsection, but also to all other prophecies of
salvation that resound therein due to the many allusions. How should any
such highly tuned dramatic visions (Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, etc.) be managed?
In the literature on prophetic intertextuality, major emphasis is placed on
the authority that the new text borrows from the old by citing from it, but
equally as important is the service the new text renders to the old: to show
how it is applicable to the present life.
If we wish to concentrate on Jer. 3031 as an application of the new from
the book of Isaiah, then we should first pay attention to an idea that seems
to flow automatically from the redaction-critical model of Fortschreibung,
which we discussed earlierthe idea that the new things in Deutero-Isaiah
receive a first interpretation in Jer. 31:22, which in turn is reworked in a
later stage of the texts genesis into the promise of a new covenant.101 After
100 Cf. H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode, Tbingen 61990, 114.
101 Cf. K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und
a reading and a rereading, it has to be admitted that something does not

feel right: Jer. 31:3134 is in no way a reworking of Jer. 31:22! In spite of all
the Deutero-Isaian traits, Jer. 30:531:26 does not contain a direct allusion
to Deutero-Isaiahs promise of change. This is a further indication that the
dream vision and framing in Jer. 3031 were intended to be complementary
texts from the onset [ 3.2.5.1], in which the most important theological
contribution of Deutero-Isaiah is simply saved for the framework. The most
significant change for Jeremiah is in the dramas application and no longer in
the drama itself. In order to establish a feasible relation between Jer. 31:22 (a)
and 31:3134 (b), the following line of thought may be suggested: what could
have better prepared the way for this anti-utopian variant to Deutero-Isaiahs
promise of change (b), than this anti-dualistic variation to the Jerusalem
promise of Isa. 65 (a)?
But how compelling is the conclusion that the promise of the new cove-
nant should be understood as an application of Deutero-Isaiah? Before
answering this question it is necessary to reconsider the term
briefly. Like elsewhere in the Old Testament, a distinction can be drawn in
Jeremiah between as divine self-commitment and as an obliga-
tion imposed on Israel. Some commentators, in conjunction with the more
general critique on as a relationship term, are inclined to semantically
water down Israels breaking of the covenant to covenantal transgression.102
But even though it might be going too far to say that with such a transgres-
sion the obligation automatically also lapseswhen such heavy sanctions
are laid against the transgression as announced in Jer. 11, it would effectively
imply the end of salvation history according to this prophetic book.103 The
promise of a can only be understood in this light. It means that
the representation of as an obligation lain on Israel by Yhwh certainly
allows a Gegenber (Kutsch) of two different covenants: the perspective of
Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukirchen 1996, 80.
We must admit that in previous publications we ourselves were swayed by this diachronic
approach [ 3.2.5.1].
102 See already in JerLXX 38:31 , they do not stay in my
covenant.
103 Regarding this point on breaking the covenant, see the discussion between Zenger and
others on the one hand, and Gro on the other, in which Gro correctly emphasises that the
break according to Jer. 11:10 (differently to e.g. Lev. 26) emphatically means the annulment of
the covenant that Yhwh had originally closed with Israel (cf. W. Gro, Erneuerter oder Neuer
Bund? Wortlaut und Aussageintention in Jer 31,3134, in: F. Avemarie, H. Lichtenberger (eds),
Bund und Tora: Zur theologischen Begriffsgeschichte in alttestamentlicher, frhjdischer und
urchristlicher Tradition, Tbingen 1996, 4166, esp. 5356).
316 chapter four
a different obligation than the obligation currently in force, but shown to be

unachievable in practice.
Meanwhile, with alone such a semantic clarification we have not yet
understood this possibility as a theological necessity. Thus for example
Deut. 30:6 knows a promise of inner change within the framework of Deute-
ronomic covenant theology, in which there is not a single suggestion of
a new covenant.104 Additionally the restitution programmes of Jer. 24 and
32 show that the authors of Jeremiah were quite capable of adapting a
promise of change borrowed from Ezekiel without needing to tamper with
the covenantal ideas of Deuteronomy [ 3.2.5.3]. On this detail we believe
that the obstinate persistence of seeking a place for Jer. 31 within Deutero-
nomism comes to naught: apparently the adaptation could easily have been
effected differently, see Jer. 24 and 32.
It is certainly justified to ask what makes the new covenant new, and in
the answer to emphasise that it is not all that different from the covenant
with the fathers. But to reason as if Jer. 31 does not speak of two covenants,
is going too far.105 That the new covenant depends on forgiveness, exactly
like the Sinai covenant according to Ex. 1934, is not saying that the authors
of Jeremiah are merely repeating the book of Exodus. Jeremiah not only
depicts the new in contrast to the former (Jer. 31), but also depictsand this
is the major differencethe former in contrast to the new (Jer. 11). When
the book of Jeremiah speaks of the covenant of the exodus, it assuredly does
not contemplate a renewal of the covenant as the one following the history
of the golden calf in Ex. 34. That the idea in Jeremiah 31 is here already
given anticipatory form seems difficult to maintain.106 The old covenant as
104 This also applies if Deut. 30:110 would have been influenced by Jeremiah, as insisted
by M. Brettler, Predestination in Deuteronomy 30.110, in: L.S. Schearing, S.L. McKenzie

(eds), Those Elusive Deuteronomists: The Phenomenon of Pan-Deuteronomism (JSOT.S, 268),
Sheffield 1999, 171188: in this case the term new covenant is not be seen suitable in the
framework of the book of Deuteronomy. We fail to see how an ongoing development of
Deuteromistic theology in three subsequent Jeremiah-redactions on its own could explain
the origin of the concept new covenant in Jer. 31:3134, as R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History
and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 344 n. 603 seems to reply to
Schmid, Buchgestalten, 302304. In our view Schmids judgement in this controversy stands
steadfast: beyond the possibilities of Deuteronomism.
105 The argument of e.g. A. Schenker, Der nie aufgehobene Bund: Exegetische Beobach-
tungen zu Jer 31,3134, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der
beiden Testamente (QD, 146), Freiburg 1993, 85112, esp. 112 tends in this direction: Der neue
Bund ist der alte, aber der gegen den Bruch gefeite Bund. We prefer to endorse his note on Jer.
31:22 (LXX 38:22): So ist auch die neue Bundesschlieung ein schpferisches Werk JHWHs
(96).
106 R. Rendtorff, The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation,
new covenant must be relegated to a conceptional world different from that

presented in the book of Jeremiah.107 The fact that elsewhere in the Old
Testament Yhwh persists on holding fast to the once closed covenant, even
where it was violated or broken by Israel (Ex. 34; Lev. 26; Ezek. 16), may not
entice explanations of Jer. 31 using the same familiar terms once more. It
shows all the sharper that something extraordinary is happening in Jer. 31.
Even if the promise insists on Yhwhs torah as the permanent substance
of the covenant, it is stated explicitly that this covenant is not equal to the
covenant with the fathers.108
This all means that Jer. 31:3134 cannot be properly understood without
assuming the decisive influence of Deutero-Isaiah. Not alone the restitution
scenario but also the restitution programme of Jeremiahs Booklet of Com-
fort is orientated on Deutero-Isaiahnot only the dramaturgy of the dream
vision itself but equally its application in the promise of the new covenant
requires this Deutero-Isaian background as explanation. As an explanatory
framework, the old Book of the Covenant fails to sufficiently support this
passage. Similarly the comparison with Jer. 24 and 32 shows that the author
of Jer. 31 was not satisfied with only balancing another theological agree-
ment between Deuteronomy and Ezekiel, but also wanted to engage the
book of Isaiah in his final version of the promise of change. What does it
entail, engaging the book of Isaiah in the promise this way? Far more than
just the inclusion of an individual citation (Jer. 31:34/Isa. 43:25). It concerns
the essence of the new as Yhwhs act of creation. Essential components bor-
rowed from Isa. 4055 include: the all-embracing nature of the opposition
first-new regarding history, and moreover the deficiency of the first or former
as a means to effect change. In Deutero-Isaiah these first things refer to the
narrative tradition of the Pentateuch, which foretold the downfall of Baby-
lon [ 2.2.7.2 sub 4]. In Jeremiah it is the legal tradition of the Pentateuch
that resulted in the downfall of Jerusalem as the irreversible bode of Yhwhs
world judgement. The idea they have in common is that tradition, whether
Edinburgh 1998, 72. Such conclusions are part of the negative effects of the otherwise use-
ful canonical approach advocated by Rendtorff. On the reception of Ex. 3234 in Jer. 26
and 38, see H. Knobloch, Die nachexilische Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12),
Wiesbaden 2009, 152227. If Ex. 3234 indeed delivers the Grundgrammatik of Jeremiahs
prophecy of doom (where one may differ on the details with Knobloch), it is all the less likely
that Jeremiahs prophecy of salvation in Jer. 31 would come down to being merely a repetition
of Ex. 3234.
107 C. Dohmen, Der Sinaibund als Neuer Bund nach Ex 1934, in: Zenger, Neue Bund, 5189.
108 This meaning of is visible in Deut. 11:10; 32:31; 2 Kgs 3:2; 14:3; 17:2; Jer. 10:16; 51:19.
318 chapter four
embodied in stories or in laws, on its own does not lead to the anticipated
change.
Thus we establish a peculiar discrepancy between the tendency in twenti-
eth century exegesis to curtail the word new in Jer. 31:31 as much as possible,
and these astounding authors of Jeremiah, who must have painstakingly
tested the outer-regions of their theological flexibility to dare find a way how
to integrate even Deutero-Isaiahs perspective of the future as their greatest
challenge.109 To a degree it has the feeling as if an acrobat is performing a
daredevil feat and the spectators say that actually there is nothing clever in
it.
What was the source of this tendency? There were interpreters that rel-
ativised the newness of the new covenant based on historical-critical argu-
ments, as we have seen. If the new covenant is not itself considered as a
deuteronomic or deuteronomistic concept, then it is taken as a natural con-
tinuation on this line of thought. There were also interpreters for whom an
actual and respectable theological motif played a role: the dialogue between
Judaism and Christianity that would not be well served with the idea of
two distinct covenants, or with a too strongly emphasised distance between
an old and a new version of the one covenant of Yhwh. And thus it had
to be made clear that the Sinai covenant itself was already a sort of new
covenant, to which Jeremiahs promise had little to add. However, this posi-
tion is exegetically unsustainable. It is also theologically dubious. If Chris-
tian readers would only realise that Jer. 3031 declares not them but the
house of Israel and the house of Judah as people of the new covenant; thus
meaning that people of the old covenant can no longer be, ever since the
book of Jeremiah.
Without Deutero-Isaiahs as background, the promise of the
in Jeremiah holds something incomprehensiblea promise with the
shocking sound of a contradictio in terminis. At the same time the authors of
Jer. 31 indicate the limitations of the prophetic tradition they hereby engage
and attempt to integrate. In the book of Isaiah there is a threat that the new
109 The Deutero- and Trito-Isaian opposition first-new possibly reverberates in a few other
places in Jeremiah. Thus attention has been drawn to the verbal agreement between Jer. 3:16
it (the ark of the covenant) shall not come to mind nor will it be remembered, and Isa. 65:17
the first things shall not be remembered nor will they come to mind. Reverse dependence
is suspected here by J. Unterman, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in
Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, 172, as with B.D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture:
Allusion in Isaiah 4066, Stanford, CA 1998, 319 regarding Jer. 16:14 (= 23:7) and Isa. 43:18: the
exodus from Egypt as outdated grounds of salvation. In our view, in all these cases Isaiah
could have been the source of inspiration.
could become buried in group thought. Yhwh himself, or so Isa. 6566 could
be taken as suggesting, is made a party in a torah dispute.110 When someone
has completed reading Isaiah and opens the book of Jeremiah, he will be
amazed at the far more inclusivist tone of the message of salvation. Under
the new, Jeremiah understands something that, as a gift of God, is within
reach of every Israelite, large or small (Jer. 31:34). How would it have been
possible for later readers to combine Isaiah and Ezekiels theology of hope
had the mediating book of Jeremiah remained unwritten?111
In hindsight it was not an unlucky shot to close this study at Jeremiah. What
purpose, speaking hermeneutically, do the countless citations serve in this
prophetic book? Generally citations serve as legitimatisation. An author
uses the citations power of expression to gain an entrance in the readership
for his or her own message. But what is there to legitimise in this case? Even
where the historicity of Jeremiah as person is maintained formally in recent
research, often little remains of his original message in exegetical practice.
So what was there to legitimise? A call to repent behind the teaching of
the law? A tiding of doom behind the call to repent? An elusive historical
minimum?
The findings of this study send us in another direction. The citations in
the book of Jeremiah are not intended to legitimate the historical prophet.
Nor do they serve as a legitimatisation of a group of tradents that stood up
for the unique message of their admired teacher. The many citations rather
serve to have the Pentateuch and the Prophetsto have Moses, Ezekiel and
Isaiah legitimate themselves in front of each other, via the columns of the
present prophetic book scroll. Hinsichtlich der Autoritt beider Gren,
Tora und Prophetie, ist [in Jeremia] also eine Verflechtung und wechselsei-
tige Autorisierung festzustellen.112 Without holding her responsible for our
own intertextual elaboration, we are grateful to Christl Maier for this illumi-
nating insight.
110 W. Brueggemann, Isaiah 4066, Louisville 1998, 242 on Isa. 65:810.

111 There must be internal cohesion between the antischwrmerische tendency discussed
above in the comparison between Ezekiel and Jeremiah [ 3.2.5.3] and the anti-dualistic
tendency that offsets Jeremiahs promise against TI.
112 C. Maier, Jeremia als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale Gebote des Deuteronomiums in Fortschrei-
bungen des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 196), Gttingen 2002, 365. Here the following obser-
vation of K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, Cambridge,
MA 2007, 141 applies: By writing a work that integrated documents with different ideas and
perspectives, the scribes were creating a national written heritage that transcended earlier
divisions.
320 chapter four
Sometimes, with this reciprocal authorisation, the book of Jeremiah dis-

tances itself from the Pentateuch or parts thereof by appealing to prophetic
texts, and therefore possibly also from the group of people that based their
privileged position in Persian Judah on the Pentateuch. In this regard the
most critical confrontation with the torah is Jer. 8:8: the lying pen of the
scribes has made it into a lie [ 3.2.4 sub 6]. But generally speaking Jeremiah
is looking for an agreement. Here too the main focus of the interpretation
should not be lost in the dissonance of background noises behind the text,
to signs of conflicting factions [ 3.2.5.2 sub 3], but should remain con-
centrated on the symphony of which the book apparently was intended to
become the score. Just as the Pentateuch itself mediates between different
visions that were prevalent in post-exilic Israel, the book of Jeremiah is a
mediator between the Pentateuch and prophecy. In this mediation it was
not only the Pentateuch that had to surrender some of its authority, but
prophecy too, namely in its charismatic, proto-apocalyptic, in short Isaian
accentuation. The greatest concession, however, appears to be that Jeremiah
more or less rivals Moses in his role as teacher of the torah.
This is not saying that the authors of Jeremiah wished to make a stand
against Exodus and Deuteronomy. One can read Deut. 34:1012 as a state-
ment on the closing of the revelation after the death of Moses;113 one can, in
light of the law on prophets in Deut. 18, also read this passage differently. The
point is that Jeremiah further strengthens Moses call to obey the torah. Not
intercession (Ex. 34) but conversion (Jer. 26) might have convinced Yhwh to
refrain from punishing the people. The book of Jeremiah is an intensifica-
tion of the Pentateuch in its function as prosecutor. But exactly in this way
a credible link could be established between the Pentateuch and prophe-
cies of salvation as borrowed from Ezekiel respectively Isaiah. If the book
of Jeremiah did indeed not come into existence without prior knowledge
of the books of Ezekiel and Isaiah, then the prophetic promise of salvation
is presupposed in it from the very beginning, even in Jeremiahs words of
judgement. Then, for example, Jer. 26:4 (If you will not listen to me ) was
written with Jer. 31:3134 already in mind. Indeed, was it not precisely to
connect this salvific perspective convincingly to the torah, that Jeremiahs
message had first to be presented as more mosaic than Moses himself?
The main purpose of the book of Jeremiah must have been to unite torah
and prophecy in an acceptable mutual relationship. The numerous citations
thus do not serve as a legitimatisation of Jeremiah as true prophet in the eyes
113 Cf. Knobloch, Prophetentheorie, 10 et passim.

of the reader, but to allow torah (the Pentateuch) and prophecy (Ezekiel and
Isaiah, and similarly some of the Twelve) to justify themselves in relation
to each other within the literary framework of Jeremiahs biography. Every
text holds an answer to a question. Every text holds an answer to a question
posed by another text [ 1.2]. The book of Jeremiah answers questions that
torah and prophecy exchange. With this approach the focal point of the book
does not rest in the disputes between groups that might be hidden beneath
here or there, but in the dialogue on faith that it initiates.
Could the identified citations from Ezekiel and Isaiah not rather have
been intended to neutralise these other prophets, indeed to drive them as
challengers of the tradents own protagonist from the canonical stage? This
is more or less Knoblochs description of how Jeremiah relates to Moses, as
based on citations from the Pentateuch in Jer. 26 and 36. Should we perhaps
regard Jeremiah not just as bessere[n] Ersatz fr Mose,114 but additionally as
a better Ezekiel and a better Isaiah (or even: a better Servant of the Lord)?
Why is neither Isaiah nor Ezekiel mentioned by name anywhere in the book
of Jeremiah?115 Have we not, in other words, regarded the intertextual dia-
logue as being too friendly? Texts also have the ability to foil each other, for
certain. Still, even a critical dialogue remains a dialogue. Eventually a bold
and creative interaction with the written tradition will serve to strengthen
its authority. The new covenant as the mutual authorisation of Deuteronomy
and Deutero-Isaiah, in short summarises the conclusion of this chapter.
On the original relation between DI and the dtn/dtr tradition, see A. Labahn,
Wort Gottes und Schuld Israels: Untersuchungen zu Motiven deuteronomistischer
Theologie im Deuterojesajabuch mit einem Ausblick auf das Verhltnis von Jes 4055
zum Deuteronomismus (BZAW, 143), Stuttgart 1999. She sees a few traces of dtr
language and theology in the younger layers of Isa. 4055, but according to her in
the basic text there is keine Gemeinsamkeit mit der dtn/dtr Theologie festzustellen
(260). This leads her to ask warum die Deuteronomisten ihre literarische Ttigkeit
nicht auf die berlieferungen Dtjes ausgedehnt haben, wie sie entsprechend mit
dem jeremianischen oder ezechielischen Traditionsgut umgegangen sind (279).
We would have formulated this question differently. The dtn/dtr influence on
DI would rather be stronger than weaker in comparison to that on Ezekiel. This is
certainly the case when one refrains from restoring DI to a Grundschrift with a
limited scope [ 2.2.8.1]. Thus for example the theme of conditionality of salvation
114 Knobloch, Prophetentheorie, 285. As a matter of fact, the depiction of Jeremiah as
second Moses becomes relativised by Ezekiels mosaic role as initiator of post-exilic sacrificial
worship according to Ez. 43:1827.
115 The question posed in the introductory chapter on borrowing as plagiarism comes to
mind [ 1.2]. As contrast see the name and epithet of Micah in Jer. 26:18.
322 chapter four
is anchored far deeper in DIs drama than Labahn allows room for. The theological
differences between Ezekiel, DI and Deuteronomy are presumably linked with
the difference between the backgrounds of the respective scribal groups: priests,
temple singers and (perhaps) aristocratic circles from which the civil servants
were recruited. Between these groups there certainly always would have been an
exchange of ideas, but the need for an in-depth theological accord only became
urgent once their writings became publicwhere public says as much as: an
individual knows a text (by heart) and knows that others know the same text (cf.
N. Lohfink, Gab es eine deuteronomistische Bewegung? in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia
und die deuteronomistische Bewegung (BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 313382, esp. 346).
The book of Jeremiah tries to satisfy this urgent need for an accord. Especially the
integration of cultic-mythically inspired expectations in a more programmatically
structured vision of society could count as the books central task.
Thus we would not only have formulated the above question differently, but
also find that this study brings us to a different answer. According to Labahn the
deuteronomists withheld themselves from thoroughly revising the book of Isaiah
due to a total lack in affinity. We believe they certainly attempted precisely this, in
a sense, namely through the book of Jeremiah, which (at least for the greater part
of its genesis) could fall back on Deuteronomy as well as Ezekiel and Isaiah.
chapter five
THE NEW AS SCENARIO AND PROGRAMME: CONCLUSION
5.1. Chronology
It was not only because they share the word new [ ]that this study
has brought together passages from Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the book
of Psalms, but also because it is suspected that they have a deeper bond.
This suspicion permeates the history of interpretation. Their relations may
be described in various ways: they treat the same topic, they expose a
comparative perspective on the future, they are reacting against the same
tradition orthe most tangible agreementthe one passage refers to the
other using the same vocabulary and formulations. They turn up in the
range of each others intertextuality. Whether and to what extent this applies
to the passages brought together has been the key question of our study.
A derived question has inquired on the order in which the texts proba-
bly came into being. There is a view of intertextuality that disregards the
historical dimension. Perhaps it suffices with literature where no problems
are caused by the datingan Old Testament scholar cannot permit such
a view. In Old Testament research, the concept intertextuality is of little
value unless it incorporates the question whether one text truly presupposes
another and builds on it. Therefore, we provide an overview of a few conclu-
sions on the chronology at the start of our final chapter.
(1) For the most psalms, a distinction must be drawn between the time of
origin and the time of inclusion in the (sub-)collection. This also holds true
for the liturgical song Ps. 98. The distinction appears not to be relevant for
Ps. 96, a song that, different to Ps. 98, must have been especially composed
for the cycle Ps. 93100. Within this cycle Ps. 96 seeks a compromise between
two views of Yhwhs kingship. This kingship reaches back to the beginning
of the world (Ps. 93), even though it only now stands on the point of being
manifested worldwide (Ps. 98). In this light, against the order of the fourth
book of Psalms, as a compromise text Ps. 96 seems to be younger than
Ps. 98. As terminus post quem for the origin of Ps. 98, along with many,
we opt for the consecration of the second temple in Jerusalem. Here we
have the most certain historical anchor in the study, even if its biblical
324 chapter five
calculation at 515bce is perhaps symbolically determined: seventy years

after the destruction. A probable date later than this important event at
the beginning of the Persian era may be ascertained, not alone for the
psalm composition in question, of which the triptych Ps. 96-97-98 forms
the dramatic centre, but also for the prophetic newness texts that we have
analysed.
(2) For the origin of Isa. 4055 we have argued for a project model over
against the growth model that underlies the redaction-critical theories of
German scholars. That is to say, the unmistakable signs of text genetics in
these chapters do not support an externally determined enlargement of a
Grundschrift to form perpetually new editions. Models in which the texts
layering would reflect the historical fate of the so-called Deutero-Isaian
group on a one-to-one base are hardly convincing. At most the ongoing
scribal process, consistently retaining the works dramatic design, may have
caused redactional adaptations of what had already been written. Such
adaptations however did not lead to substantial changes in the meaning
of the terms first and new. The sense in which Deutero-Isaiah uses these
terms forms the strongest argument that Isa. 4055 did not arise as a sequel
to Isa. 139 or parts thereof, and equally not as a sequel to the book of
Jeremiah, as some scholars assume. Isa. 4055 is younger than Ps. 98 and
presumably also younger than Ps. 96 and the composition Ps. 93100*, in
which these songs are embedded as pivotal texts. This insight led us to
dating Isa. 4055 fairly far from the abovementioned 515 bce. The Persian
king Cyrus earned his reputation in Judah through the second temple, the
establishment of which was attributed to his initiative in so many words.
His significance for the return of the exiles and the fall of Babylon is inferred
from this cultic role: I [Yhwh] stirred up from the north, and he came, from
the rising of the sun who will call on my name (Isa. 41:25). The origin of Isa.
4055 assumedly does not rest in historical recollections that stretch back to
the eve of 539bce, the year in which the priests of Marduk welcomed Cyrus
into Babylon. The exilic or early post-exilic dating of Deutero-Isaiah appears
to be based on an unstable precept.1 Isa. 4055 is not redactional rush work
that was cobbled together midst practical fretting during a repatriation. Far
rather, this work is a carefully planned dramatisation that reflects on the
1 Cyrus half-hearted interest in a remote province (R. Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History
and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3), Atlanta 2003, 124) is all that remains of this
fundament, even in the most optimistic historical reconstruction.
the new as scenario and programme: conclusion 325
end of the exile, using a cultic pattern of shaming and liberating, which
similarly underlies the composition Ps. 93100, and which must have its
origin and development in the direct environs of the new temple. Both
historical affirmation and the opposition experienced by exiles after their
return to Judah are dramatically processed in Isa. 4055. Essentially Isa.
4055 is an answer to a post-exilic problematic. A trajectory for this dramas
origin in the course of the fifth century may be determined from this line of
thought. The terminus ante quem is the origin of Isa. 5666, which in turn is
bounded in time by the relatively younger texts in Ezra-Nehemiah.
(3) Those that tremble at the word of Yhwh and according to Isa. 66:5 are
threatened by their brothers, appear to have become an influential group
within the Judean community in the days of Ezra. This picture becomes
complicated by the fact that the Ezra narrative could be offering us an
idealised recollection from the fourth century, while, on the other hand, one
should understand the end redaction of the book of Isaiah as an indication
of the successful emancipation of an apparently marginalised group of
Judeans. Isaiah may thus present the social position of these quakers less
favourably than what they have become due to this book, Ezra-Nehemiah
in contrast too favourably. All in all these details are best assimilated in
a trajectory placing the origin of Isa. 5666 in the fifth century. That this
trajectory would then run partially concurrently with the trajectory on the
origin of Isa. 4055, we do not see as an objection. This research brought us
to draw these two compositions far closer to each other than is customary.
The distance between Isa. 4048 and 5666 (amongst others visible in
the varied usage of the opposition first-new) is greater than the distance
between Isa. 4955 and 5666. An important chronological insight in this
regard is that the figure of the Servant of the Lord in Isa. 4055 as literary
prototype of the post-exilic pious, presumes the existence of the servants of
the Lord from Isa. 5666 as historical entity.
(4) The absence of Ezek. 36:23b-38 from the Greek papyrus 967 does not
seem a convincing argument in support of the statement that the Hebrew
text of this chapter had been supplemented with the promise of a new heart
and a new spirit at a very late stage, and that influence from Jeremiahs
promise of a new covenant on this supplement would thus be obvious. Our
inquiry on the relation between Ezek. 11, 18 and 36 shows that the promise of
change in Ezek. 36 is prepared by the call make yourselves a new heart and a
new spirit in Ezek. 18:31, and that Ezek. 11 as literary anticipation of Ezek. 36,
text-genetically must have been borrowed from that chapter (thus: Ezek. 18
326 chapter five
Ezek. 36 Ezek. 11). A dating of the whole book should, on the one hand,
keep account with first experiences of repatriating Jews that show through
(see especially the discussions on property in Ezek. 11 and 33), and on the
other hand with a restitution programme that so emphatically prioritises
inner change as desideratum that social reconstruction still appears to lie
on the far horizon. All that we were able to add to this rough historical
positioning is a relative dating of Ezekiel prior to Deutero-Isaiah and in
particular: prior to Jeremiah (see below).
(5) This study defends the point of view that there are two things in Jer.
3031 that should not be confused: on the one side the complex communica-
tional structure and on the other side the redaction history. The midsection
starting with, These are the words that Yhwh spoke concerning Israel and
Judah (Jer. 30:4), and ending with, Thereupon I awoke and looked and my
sleep had been pleasant to me (Jer. 31:26), may be distinguished from the
surrounding passages as a separate literary domain; but this does not neces-
sarily imply that these surrounding passages must have come into being at
a much later date. If someone wishes to explain the booklet mentioned in
Jer. 30:2 to modern readers, he might best use a comparison with a letter
in a historical novel. Such a letter does not bring us closer to what actu-
ally took place than the story in which it lies embeddedeven though the
constituent elements and structural model that were used to compose the
embedded letter remain an interesting text-genetic question. It may also be
asked whether a division of tasks could have taken place in the making of
Jeremiahs story-with-letter, like what happened in the studio of Rembrandt.
Using Jer. 3031 as an orientating point of departure for the rest of the book
of Jeremiah, we went in search of the closest restitution programmes. These
appeared to be in Jer. 24, 29 and 32. A diachronic comparison showed that
Jer. 3031 is presumably younger than these chapters, being less integrated
with the prophets biography, but incorporated far deeper literarily in the
current book of Jeremiah as a whole.
(6) In view of the strong agreements between the restitution programmes,

of all the diachronic comparisons in this study, a comparison between
Jeremiah and Ezekiel was the first to be considered. An intertextual anal-
ysis based on Jer. 3, 24, 29, 3031 and 32 confirmed our view that the book
of Jeremiah borrows consistently from the book of Ezekiel. This conclusion
is contrary to a long history of interpretation, but perhaps makes the devel-
opment and dynamics of Old Testament expectations more accessible for
modern readers (see below).
(7) Consequent to these preparatory steps the two diachronic trajectories

Ps. 93100 Isa. 4055 Isa. 5666 and Ezekiel Jeremiah needed to
be coordinated. Genuine literary allusions to Ezekiel in Isa. 4055 are not
present, but there are a few remarkable agreements in language usage and
theological vision. These unambiguously indicate the priority of Ezekiel and
thereby suit our picture of a book of Ezekiel coming from the late sixth or
early fifth century and a Deutero-Isaian drama composed later in the fifth
century.
(8) Far more detailed research will be required into the relation between the
books of Isaiah and Jeremiah. This study concentrated principally on Jer.
3031 seen from this viewpoint, although here and there other texts from
Jeremiah were drawn into the discussion. The conclusion is that Jer. 3031
presumes Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah. This makes it more than probable that
Jer. 3031 did not originate earlier than in the fourth century bce. Hereby the
following overall picture on the chronology of the key passages in this study
is formed, which only leaves the sequence between the Yhwh-Kingship
psalms and Ezekiel somewhere in the middle:2 Ps. 98 Ps. 96 (Ezek. 36
Ezek. 11 ) Isa. 4055 Isa. 65 Jer. 24 Jer. 3031.
(9) At the end of these preliminary conclusions on the chronology, it will be

meaningful to reflect once more on the two preserved text forms of Ezek.
3639 [ 3.1.4.1]. Sometimes the impression is created in the discussion on
the relative dating of these text forms that there are no valid arguments for
the textual transformation EzekMT EzekOG.3 One needs to remember, how-
ever, how sharply the restitution programme of Ezekiel stood out against
the restitution programme of Jeremiah (for its part influenced by Deutero-
and Trito-Isaiah) already since the fourth century bce. We will offer a sum-
2 See in this regard the correct summary of D. Baltzer, Ezechiel und Deuterojesaja: Berh-
rungen in der Heilserwartung der beiden groen Exilspropheten (BZAW, 121), Berlin 1971, 180:
Die bei Ezechiel nur verbal stilisierte Knigsprdikation Jahwes [Ezek. 20:33] will seinen
Herrschafts- und Machtsanspruch ber Israel anzeigen. Die Knigsprdikationen Jahwes bei
Deuterojesaja zielen demgegenber mehr auf Jahwes Herrschaftsanspruch ber Babels Gt-
ter. Albertz, Exile, 367 sees Ezek. 20:33 as a reaction to DI, but this is unlikely because of
the variation in the royal predication and because the deuteronomistic imagery of the strong
hand and the stretched out arm in that verse does not refer to DI.
3 Cf. A.S. Crane, Israels Restauration: A Textual-Comparative Exploration of Ezekiel 3639
(VT.S, 122), Leiden 2008, 257: Finally, it is difficult to establish a reason why the text would
have been changed from the received chapter order, and its inserted pericope, to that found
in G967.
328 chapter five
mary of these differences in the next section. The new covenant in Jeremiah
without reserve signifies the end of Yhwhs judgement over Israel. In this
light some must have found the invasion of Gog (Ezek. 3839) as follow-up
to Israels inner renewal (Ezek. 36) and spiritual resurrection (Ezek. 37) an
unfathomable prospect. This could explain the reasoning behind the order
of chapters preserved by papyrus 967. Whether this order originated in the
Hebrew or first in the Old Greek text traditionsit is then in any way sec-
ondary. It indeed had to do with shifting eschatological theologies,4 but
then with a shift away from a more original theological design represented
by EzekMT. Here Gogs invasion was meant as test on Israels renewal, a test
that in light of Jeremiahs promise could no longer be grasped by everyone,
indeed offending to such an extent that a rigorous intervention in Ezekiels
text was deemed essential by some. The change to the order in the Old Greek
translation in this light is more or less comparable to the transposition of
the foe from the north from Ezek. 3839 to Jer. 46.5 Is it not reasonable
that the Jeremiah-authors wished to transfer a mythological enemy that
had its origin in Ezekiels prospect of hope over to the judgement part of
their book? Other allusions to Ezekiel in Jer. 46 come to mind [ 3.2.5.3].
Behind Jer. 46 and papyrus 967, then, comparative motives lie concealed.
The resurrection (physical or moral?) was not the real theological obstacle
for the tradents of Ezek. 3639, but the unorthodox order of salvation and
damnation in Ezekiels view on the future. Jeremiah did not influence EzekMT
(here the direction of dependence is the precise opposite!), but through his
restitution programme Jeremiah may have influenced EzekOG.
A few more general remarks need to be made at the end of these diachronic
observations. The relative dates above were not set as presuppositions,
but are conclusions from the intertextual inquiry. This study reconstructed
intertextual dialogues based on a chronological order (who poses the ques-
tion and who provides the answer?) that had to be determined from the
course of the dialogues themselves. It was not our intention to reject prevail-
ing insights, even if some results may be quite surprising. It was even less in
the objective to design the profile of a complete history of prophetic litera-
ture. Seventeenth century cartographers withstood the temptation to colour
in unknown territories and thereby give their fantasies free rein. Often they
4 Crane, Restauration, 235.

5 For the literary points of contact, see D. Vieweger, Die literarische Beziehungen zwischen
den Bchern Jeremia und Ezechiel (BEAT, 26), Frankfurt a.M. 1993, 4650, 67. However, there
influencing in the opposite direction is advocated, in the line of Zimmerli and others.
sufficed with a single coastline or the course of a single river, because alone
these were substantiated by eyewitness reports. The rest laid blank, terra
incognita, in order not to throw dust in the eyes of the sailors using their
maps. Something similar has been the guiding light in this study. Diachronic
conclusions were consistently easier to draw on the relation between books,
than between hypothetical layers of a specific book. Thus it was hardly
possible to differentiate between layers based on their positive or negative
dependence on an external source. This observation is of importance, par-
ticularly for the much discussed redaction history of Jer. 3031. Finally one
more aspect needs to be addressed to set in perspective our diachronic view
of intertextuality. Modern man places historical texts in a historical frame
and along that way becomes engaged in their chronologically arranged con-
versation. At the same time one should realise that texts with different dates
of birth live on together and, like siblings from a family, begin asking each
other questions back and forth, the younger children to the older, but equally
the reverse.6
5.2. Intertextual Dialogue
5.2.1. Yhwh-Kingship Psalms, Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah

Such an exchange of questions already begins in Ps. 93100. Whether first-
new indeed plays a role in this composition of psalms only becomes relevant
after Deutero-Isaiah has been read. First-new is an unusual contrast as it is.
One would expect old and new, or first and last, but not first and new. In
Isa. 4055 we find the opposition carefully developed, and only with this
knowledge in mind are its first vague contours detectable in Ps. 93100. A
similar tension between Yhwhs being king from the foundation of the world
(, Ps. 93:2) and his eschatological becoming king, celebrated today
in the temple with new songs ( Ps. 96:1; 98:1), is tangible in this psalm
cycle.
6 The application of such a perspective however should not go so far that we come
to see the interpretation of the canonical end text as the actual exegetical assignment
(as e.g. R. Rendtorff, The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation,
Edinburgh 1998, 8). The hypothetical nature of our historical reconstructions does not offer
it a valid argument. The point is that these reconstructions (as conscientious possible,
as modest necessary) also belong to our continuous dialogue with the texts and form an
unrelinquishable aspect thereof. The canonical end text has its own historical horizon, which
equally depends on hypothetical reconstruction.
330 chapter five
When Ps. 93100 is not read as a loose collection of cultic texts but as
a cohesive poetic work (freely translated: as a cantata), a single dramatic
action portrayed in it may be discovered, culminating in the theophany of
Ps. 97. The invocation of Ps. 94, Rise up, o Judge of the world, looks forward
to this culmination point; the Holy, holy, holy of Ps. 99 looks back on it.
Yhwhs glorious arrival, which Ps. 97 describes accompanied with thunder
and lightning, motivates the new song on Yhwhs established kingship in
96:13 and 98:9 as a fait accompli (for he has come). Thus Ps. 96 and 98 flank
the central event like the side panels of a triptych. Within this triptych the
dramatic course lets the shaming of the idolaters (Ps. 96 and 97A) precede
the liberation of Yhwhs faithful subjects (Ps. 97B and 98). Shaming and
liberation are presented here as the successive effects of Yhwhs coming as
king and judge. In hindsight Ps. 93100 would appear to be an eye-opener
for the hidden structure of Isa. 4055, not only in its dramatic movement as
such, but also due to this remarkable spreading of shaming and liberation
over two dramatic episodes.
Different to the psalm cycle, Deutero-Isaiah presents the new things as
a developed concept. There are three factors that seem to be important for
its definition and implementation. Firstly, the semantic relations within the
domain first-last-coming-new, which we have analysed in the exegesis of a
number of passages. Secondly in the dramatic movement in the sequence of
the poems in Isa. 4048, where the point from which the past and the future
are viewed progresses over the time of reading. Thirdly, a compositional
pattern that constantly repeats itself, in which a poem that balances first
and last is followed by a poem on coming and/or a poem on the new. It
seems as if these three factors (word semantics, dramatics, cyclic pattern)
wish to impress on the reader with combined forces what is meant with the
new and especially: what not.
The semantic relations were schematised as follows:
first last
first [incl. last] coming
first [incl. coming] new
The analysis of Isa. 41:1416 dwelt on the performative nature of v. 15 I hereby

make you into a sharp threshing sledge, new, full of teeth and the signal
effect of the word , new, within the broader context of this salvation
oracle [ 2.2.2]. Further on, it would turn out that anticipations of the new
continually unfold in such performative moments of Deutero-Isaiahs text.
These moments link the new to Yhwhs creative word and, in so doing, also
to the figure of Jacob-Israel himself, whom, in ever increasing clearness

throughout the drama, we see being transformed into Yhwhs obedient
servant due to this creative word.
The interpretation of Isa. 42:59 concentrated mainly upon v. 9: The first
things, see, they have come and new things I am now announcing, before
they show themselves I make you hear of them [ 2.2.3]. To say that the
first things have come, seems to mean here that Israels former history of
salvation is confirmed in the actions of Cyrus as from Isa. 41:1. This confirma-
tion is contrasted by the new things which Yhwh is announcing now. These
new things indicate the salvation that will be mediated from this point forth
by the servant introduced in Isa. 42:14. This interpretation is based on the
understanding that Isa. 42:59 is only properly grasped in light of what pre-
cedes in the current Isa. 4142. When we, according to this interpretation,
replace first [incl. last/coming/come] new in the scheme above with their
referents, the following picture results: Israels tradition [incl. its confirma-
tion in the phased advance of Cyrus] the salvation mediated by the servant.
Decoded in this fashion the scheme would also help us with the remaining
instances in Isa. 4048 where the oppositions first-last, first-coming and/or
first-new play a role: 42:10; 43:9; 43:1819; 44:67; 45:11; 46:910; 48:3; 48:6;
48:12.
According to Isa. 42:1013, Yhwhs own victory cry in the wilderness will
be propagated in a song to beyond the far edges of the earth: Sing to Yhwh a
new song, his praise from the end of the earth, you who put out to sea, and
whatever fills it [ 2.2.4]. In the context, this new song answers the new
things that have just been announced, the salvation to be mediated by the
servant. Thus the image of this screaming God and the image of a servant
keeping his silence refer paradoxically to the same issue, as later warlike
metaphors in Isa. 49:2 (the servant as an arrow in Yhwhs quiver) and Isa.
53:1 (the servant as Yhwhs liberating arm) will confirm in hindsight.
Do not remember the first things,
and do not heed what happened in primeval times.
I am about to make something new,
now it shall show itself, do you not recognise it?
While these lines from Isa. 43:1621 make a call to not remember the first
things, the same first things had proven their current actuality in what went
before [ 2.2.5]. This observation appeared to be crucial for the interpreta-
tion of the whole drama of Isa. 4055. Where Deutero-Isaiah opposes the
first and the new, the first always includes the last (that is: the present out-
come and confirmation of the first). Do not commemorate the defeat of the
332 chapter five
Egyptian army in the Sea of Reeds, even if that very history is repeating itself
today in the fate of Chaldean boat refugees. The new that is beginning to
sprout in Isa. 43:19, however, will be from a completely different order. The
new is the wondrous way which is going to lead Israel to its destination:
praising Yhwh.
That the first has come, according to Isa. 48:111 wants to say that Yhwh
has paid off the promise of all Israels salvation history with the downfall
of Babylon [ 2.2.6]. This convergence of tradition and experience does
not yield anything more in itself than the unmasking of Israel as a born
idolater, if we may believe this chapter. The new that Yhwh creates, however,
is Israels purification. This purification is accomplished dramatically in
Yhwhs performative statement in Isa. 48:10: See, I smelt you, but not for
silver, I hereby choose you, in the furnace of affliction. The thus changed
Israel then appears to have been taken up in the servant of Yhwh, just as he
breaks the silence of Isa. 42:14 for the very first time in Isa. 48:16b. To allow
oneself to be persuaded by the word of this servant, according to Isa. 48 is
the same as a spiritual return to Zion. Whoever departs along this way of
faithful obedience from Babylon will suffer no thirst in the wilderness.
The relation between Isa. 4148 and 4954 is not so much thematic as it
is a matter of dramatic progression [ 2.2.7.1]. The decisive link is found in
the action sequence that spans both parts of Deutero-Isaiahs work. Simi-
larly over shorter distances the dramatic chronology seems to be the most
prominent factor coordinating the literary units. Another important factor
in the first part of the composition is the recurring pattern first-last-coming-
new [ 2.2.7.2].
This pattern is more or less clearer in the following cycles: 41:120; 41:21
42:17; 43:821; 44:623; 48:111; 48:1222. In this way, what is understood
in Isa. 4048 under first, last, coming and new, finds an expression in the
arrangement of the poems. The first stands for Israels salvation history
(Abraham, exodus from Egypt) in its predicting power. The last refers to the
actions of Cyrus as the outcome of this salvation history. In the final analy-
sis, this correspondence of first and last reflects the order of creation, as Isa.
40 and 45 indicate in all clarity. Yhwh proves in history that he alone is the
creator. Through Cyrus it may be determined that Yhwh did not create the
earth a chaos (45:18). What is coming/has come is the gradual unfolding of
these world events, ending in the fall of Babylon as the shaming of every-
one that place their trust in idols. The new cannot be confused with all this.
The new distinguishes itself from the outcome of the first as the adequate
human answer to this entire historical proof of divinity, an answer eventu-
ally provided by God himself. The wilderness recreated as an oasis, which
is accepted in praise as the way of return from Babylon, serves as the cen-
tral metaphor for the new things in Deutero-Isaiah. The new is a compelling
invitation to the hearer and reader to allow himself to be taken along with
this movement in the first place. At the same time it is the adequate answer
that begins with the figure of Yhwhs servant, who is the Israel transformed
by Yhwhs performative word and brought to speech in the here and now of
this dramatic text.
How might Isa. 4055 be understood intertextually as reacting to ques-
tions posed by Ps. 93100? According to Ps. 93100 two aspects of Yhwhs
kingship should be differentiated: it grasps back to the primal beginning but
remains incognito until salvation triumphs forever. The first question that
Isa. 4055 addresses is in which sphere of experience this divine kingship
of old proves itself: in the world history that culminates with Cyrus. Accord-
ing to Deutero-Isaiah, Israels tradition of Abraham and the Exodus may be
understood as a striking typological prediction of what has happened on a
world scale in Cyrus; and this correspondence of tradition and experience in
turn confirms the basic order of the world. In such manner it proves Yhwh
right and unmasks all the other gods as pitiful handiwork, indeed as car-
icatures of creation itself. Showing the creation order in history and idol
polemics are the two sides of the same coin. Still, Yhwh will achieve his
eventual enthronement as king only in his personal return to Zion, which
should coincide with the faithful homecoming of all Zions children. Yhwhs
kingship is incomplete without human recognition and it is this recognition,
expressed in Ps. 93100 as the new song, that is now developed dramatically
by Deutero-Isaiah to form the new thing that Yhwh himself creates. This
new is seen paradoxically in the unmoved trust of the righteous Servant:
to whom has the arm of Yhwh been revealed? He grew up before him like
a root out of dry ground (Isa. 53:12).
Isa. 4055 thus involves itself in the dialogue on Yhwhs kingship by
applying the liturgical, mythically inspired theology of the fourth book of
Psalms as concretely as possible, on the one hand to the political reality of
the Persian Empire (cf. Ps. 96), and on the other, to the challenged faith of
the post-exilic devout, who see Yhwhs saving arm revealed in the Servant
(cf. Ps. 98). It is difficult material for modern readers, because the idea of a
cosmic order has practically disappeared from the cultural baggage of the
majority of us. On the other hand Deutero-Isaiah is once more recognisable
in its emphasis on personal human engagement, in which such a cosmic
order needs to resound to be credible.
How does Isa. 65 link to this line of thought? The opposition first-new
has unquestionably received another meaning here than in Isa. 4048. An
334 chapter five
even greater difference lies in the shift compared to Deutero-Isaiahs line

of questioning. In Trito-Isaiah this no longer runs as follows: how should
Yhwh find the acclamation due to him as creator-king, but rather: how will
his loyal servants find compensation for the suffering they have still to bear
in this world? On the other hand, it is precisely this shift that shows a closely
bound nexus. The point is that Isa. 65 does not discuss a question that Isa.
4045 could possibly raise with later readers, but a question that reasonably
speaking should not remain unanswered after the drama of Isa. 4055, a
question that already announces itself there in all clarity, because it refuses
to be supressed.
The time frame of Isa. 65 is characterised by dualism [ 2.3.1]. This dual-
ism is introduced in v. 7b: firstly retribution will be exacted from the disobe-
dient, thereafter the new age will dawn for the servants of the Lord. The first
troubles that will be forgotten according to v. 16b, include hunger, thirst,
shame and death just as they will become the allotment of the forsakers
of Yhwh, but under which the servants have to suffer today. The creation
of a new heaven and a new earth in v. 17 is not exactly equivalent to the
creation of Jerusalem leading to jubilation in v. 18, but indicates an objec-
tive change, to which the people will respond subjectively. The new heaven
and the new earth in Isa. 65 do not raise so much spatial-universal asso-
ciations as they do temporal. Yhwh will establish change for his servants,
equally drastic and durable as the creation of heaven and earth in the very
beginning. The promise hence does not speak only about a renewal of the
existing, but raises the idea of a totally new reality, a reality that is deemed
will replace the existing disorder and let it be forgotten. Even if this inter-
vention has to be taken figuratively and not literally in Isa. 65, it will be so
radical that alone the creation at the beginning of the world can be com-
pared to it.
Just as the theme of the answer is central within Isa. 65, along with Isa.
66 it forms the correcting answer to the penitential prayer of Isa. 63:764:11
[ 2.3.2]. This divine answer is addressed to the same servants who for their
part had answered Yhwhs call in the footsteps of the one Servant, whose
offspring they are. In this we see the most tangible connection between
Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah exposed.
5.2.2. Ezekiel and Jeremiah

For this study, the new heart and the new spirit in Ezekiel meant a new
beginning, more or less like a novel carrying a second storyline, which, who
knows, may become entwined with the first storyline only on the last pages.
Ezekiel introduces these concepts at the end of an admonishing divine

discourse: Cast away from you all the offences by which you have offended
and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit, why then would you
die, house of Israel? (Ezek. 18:31). Alone a new heart and a new spirit could
lead to the observance of Yhwhs ordinances and doing what is right and
just. Here new misses the heavy charge we became accustomed to in the
Psalms and Isaiahnothing more than the difference with the old pattern
of behaviour and the old way of thinking is emphasised. One may choose a
new way of life in freedom, not shackled by family history (Ezek. 18:220) or
own former conduct (2132) [ 3.1.1]. The imperative is given in the plural,
but the true renewal of Israel will have to be accomplished through the
personal renewal of every reader.
Subsequently the terms are found in Ezekiel in a divine promise: I will
give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will remove the heart
of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And my own spirit I
will put within you and make that you walk in my statutes and keep my rules
and do them (Ezek. 36:2627). Even more than in its content, this promise is
prominent due to the argument in which it forms a definitive link [ 3.1.2].
If the defilement of its homeland were the reason why Yhwh scattered Israel
amongst the nations, then why would he ever want to give this land back to
Israel? Yhwh is unable to find a single reason in Israel, just in his own name
as God of Israel. To uphold his name amongst the nations Yhwh will allow
his people to come home. Not compassion with Israel but holy self-pity is
his encouragement. This is the only foundation of hope for a restoration,
and this explains why the promise of renewal is included in this impressive
divine speech (Ezek. 36:1638). Precisely in light of Yhwhs deepest motive,
Israels gathering and homecoming are insufficient on their own: something
far more fundamental must first take place with this people. Otherwise, as
the argument goes, the old story of defilement, scattering and desecration
would merely repeat itself. Otherwise Yhwhs name would be drawn through
the mud once more.
All this leads to the elaborate definition of the concept new that is still
missing from the admonishment of Ezek. 18. A heart of stone is a hard hear-
ing heart, which must be replaced. Spirit is what sets one in motion and
propels one along. Like new heart means a new openness and responsive-
ness, new spirit emphasises the moving power to follow the way of Yhwhs
ordinances. This moving power is not objectified by the promise as some-
thing that separates itself like a gift from the one giving. It exists exactly in
the dynamic bond between every Israelite and Yhwh: My spirit I will put
within you.
336 chapter five
Narrative chronology played a role in the arrangement of the salvation

prophecies in Ezek. 3348. On the other hand they stay independent ora-
tions, which are not bound by a uniform restitution programme [ 3.1.3].
Unevenness in the overall picture has not been smoothed over everywhere.
References to the gift of the spirit as the key moment between return and
permanent residence are also made outside of Ezek. 36 (37:1114; 39:29).
Other salvation prophecies either leave this future gift unmentioned or do
not take it into account.
Ezek. 36 is also connected to the first part of the book, which contains
predominantly prophecies of doom. Amidst these, Ezek. 11:1421 looks for-
ward to Ezek. 36 with its promise of one heart and a new spirit. The former
chapter, speaking text-genetically, refers to the latter in a free citation. That
the promise of renewal would originally have applied only to the Babylonian
exiles in Ezekiels direct vicinity and only later applied to all scattered and
displaced Judeans, has been found to be without foundation in this study.
Nor is the promise of a new heart and a new spirit as a divine gift in ten-
sion with the call to make for oneself a new heart and a new spirit, in which
the concrete rules of life in Ezek. 18:232 resulted. Far rather the promise
presumes and confirms the lasting validity of the admonishing call that pre-
cedes it. If a theological discussion is shimmering through at this point, it
must have been a discussion in which the scribes of Ezekiel could easily have
reached an agreement. The promise of the book does not bring the admoni-
tion down in hindsighton the contrary. The emphatic call to repent right
at the onset of the books hopeful part (Ezek. 33:120) would otherwise not
have been understandable. And not in the last place, the promise of renewal
should be seen as the logical corollary of the intensely critical portrayal of
the national history, as depicted in Ezek. 20:144. The close link between
Ezek. 20 and 36 is expressed in their jointly stressing the deepest motiva-
tion of Yhwhs acts with Israel, as described above: for the sake of my holy
name.
Purge me with hyssop, and I will be clean Create in me a clean heart, o
God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Even if there are no restrictions
to placing these lines of prayer from Ps. 51 alongside the promise from Ezek.
36 for liturgical reasons or meditation, in this study the comparison has led
to a negative illustration on the intertextuality we aimed at [ 3.1.4.4]. The
correspondence between psalm and prophecy here is more superficial than
is often suggested, and than someone may have hoped for in a tradition-
historical clarification of Ezekiels promise. The renewal of heart and spirit
is certainly not a standard motif from Jerusalems temple liturgy, unlike the
sprinkling with pure water. The song of penance Ps. 51 expresses a type of
devotion that reminds far more of Trito-Isaiah than Ezekiel. The fact that
the promise of renewal in Ezek. 36 rises from a relatively uncomplicated eth-
ical exhortation earlier in the book and a crystal clear theological argument
in the chapter itself, makes any additional explanation of its literary source
seem redundant. With this conclusion we have set the book of Ezekiel to the
side, to pick it up once more in later intertextual comparisons.
Ezekiels older contemporary under the prophets was Jeremiah, accord-
ing to the same biblical tradition that allotted the activities of one to Baby-
lon and the other to Jerusalem. The adjective new appears in Jeremiahs
promise of salvation in two pericopes. But while this seems minimal, they
involved us in the intertextual dialogue on the new as future perspective
to such an extent that of all the pericopes analysed in this study, these two
appear to have captured the most attention. New occurs as a substantive
in Yhwh has created something new on earth (Jer. 31:22), and a little later
as an attributive in the unique and challenging term new covenant (Jer.
31:31). Here we already note the crucial difference between these two texts
regarding their position in the communicational structure of Jer. 3031. After
surveying Jer. 31:2126 and 31:2734 as their primary literary horizon, the
scope broadened in steps, first within the book of Jeremiah but eventually
far beyond its borders.
Jer. 31:2122 and 2326 relate more or less as text and interpretation [
3.2.1]. Through their gender, the pronominal suffixes in vv. 2326 suggest this
presentation of the promised salvation: once all of Judah (masculine) will
be embraced by Mount Zion (feminine). With the word combination in the
land of Judah and his cities, vv. 2326 links with return to these your cities
and Yhwh has created something new in the land in vv. 2122. If one were to
vocalise a woman surrounds a man in Hebrew as a cursed surrounds a man,
this reading would serve as an additional stepping stone to Yhwh bless you,
Righteous Pasture . But even without this possible association between
curse and blessing, vv. 2326 solves the riddle of v. 22b. The woman that
surrounds the man is Zion, who will cherish the entire Judean population in
her sacred territorial embrace. Just like Zechariah after his nocturnal vision,
according to v. 26 Jeremiah awakes refreshed, now that the secret of the new
creation has been revealed to him in such clarity.
The structural parallelism between Jer. 31:2730 and 3134 carries a con-
tinuous action [ 3.2.2]. The continuation implies a phasing of the future
salvation for Israel and Judea according to the promise. The phase of social
restoration, in which the proverb of the dull teeth will be made obsolete
and the present generation will no longer be held accountable for the trans-
gressions of the forebears, is followed by a phase in which forgiveness may
338 chapter five
be expected for everyones personal transgressions and they will be attuned

to Yhwhs torah from the largest to the smallest. Abolishing the proverb
appears to be no more than a step en route to a far more radical change
in the relations between Yhwh and his people: the new covenant. What is
so new to this covenant? Its indissolubility. Other features, such as individ-
ualisation and laicisation, jointly serve this single goal. They belong to the
new covenant making this indissolubility possible, to provide this unbreak-
able nature with a concrete and practical front. Later movements along the
hermeneutic circlefrom pericope to book and backwould not bring us
to another conclusion on this crucial point, the question on what is new in
the new covenant.
We have now arrived at the communicational structure of the whole com-
position. Of the pericopes under discussion, the first, Jer. 31:2126, belongs
to the poetic midsection and the second, Jer. 31:2734, to the prose frame of
Jeremiahs Booklet of Comfort [ 3.2.3]. How should the relation between
these communicative domains in Jer. 3031 be described? The prose frame
wants to motivate why the prophet had to record the poetic midsection
for future days. This framing motivation draws attention to three sequen-
tial actions: return, restoration and inner change. Yhwh promises that the
people will return (30:3), will be outwardly restored (31:2730) and inwardly
changed (31:3134); and it is specifically in order to enforce this triad of
promises, that Jeremiahs visionary words should then be laid down in a
letter or a pamphletthus the rudimentary supporting story. Later on we
formulated an alternative description of the same communicative relation:
from the readers point of view the frame offers an application of Jeremiahs
poetic document.
Regarding this applicative nature of the frame, the coming days in which
return, restoration and inner change are projected, require special attention.
This temporal adjunct regards the prophet and his former point of view, not
that of the (current) reader. The reader (implied by the text) would have
to think on these coming days: is this not what is happening now, is this not
what I myself have been involved in today? In other words: what the prophet
saw long ago in his dream vision (for example on the new creation of a
woman who embraces her man), should be translated by me as a reader in
concrete actions of return, restoration, and inner obedience. This actuality
of the future is an essential hermeneutic aspect in the promise of the new
covenant. A promise of inner change does not tolerate long-term fulfilment
very well. Change is implicated for whoever accepts it as a promise at this
moment. In our view, the usual interpretation leans too strongly towards the
prophet, historising, and heeds the envisaged reader too little.
We used the terms restitution scenario and restitution programme in a

contrasting sense for the first time when discussing the structure of Jer.
3031. They would eventually come to play a main role in the intertextual
conclusions of this study. No clear parallels for the scenario of Jer. 30:531:26
(the written document) are found elsewhere in the book of Jeremiah or,
for that matter, in the book of Ezekiel; in contrast a whole assortment of
clarifying comparative material for the programme of 30:14 and 31:2734
(the application) is available.
Passages within Jeremiah that offer relevant comparisons to Jer. 3031 due
to their restitution programmes include Jer. 24:57; 29:1014 and 32:3741.
They occur respectively in the story of the baskets with figs, in the letter to
those in exile, and in the story of the agreement of purchase in the prison.
In general language usage the term programme refers to a summary of
activities that have to be completed according to a plan. In the prophetic
vision of the future this programme concerns acts of God, which always
expect human acts to respond. The divine promise naturally includes a
command, even if it is merely an instruction to accept it.7 Especially this last
aspect may be emphasised under the term programme. A scenario is made
up of scenes that can be viewed; a programme contains actions in which
it is expected the reader will participate. Israel will return, it will restore
the material damage in the land and/or engage in a new type of interaction
with Yhwh. The order in which the promise arranges these actions tells
something about their urgency and their possible conditional interrelation.
What must take place first to allow the other actions to happen? In the book
of Deuteronomy conversion is set as a prerequisite for the gathering from
the scattering. In Ezekiel an enduring residence in the land is unthinkable
without a prior replacement of heart and spirit, even though it is Yhwh that
will ensure that Israel will meet this condition. In search of similar relations
we also compared the restitution programmes in Jeremiah. The programme
return restoration inner change, as well as the programmes restoration
inner change return, and return inner change restoration occur
in Jeremiahs promise of salvation. Nevertheless it seems that a middle
position (cf. Jer. 29:1014; 32:2734) does not enforce inner change as a
7 Some authors, including J. Unterman, From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs
Thought in Transition (JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987, summarised on 176179, tend towards a
view of Jeremiah and Ezekiels prophecy of salvation in which divine and human activities
are balanced as concurrent units. We have resisted such a perspective on various occasions in
this study. Even so-called unconditional prophecy of salvation is meant to remove the feeling
of being paralysed and encourage human activity.
340 chapter five
precondition for the next step. Most prominently inner change is relieved
of its conditional function where it is set as the very last action in the
programme (cf. Jer. 24:57; cp. 3031).
The promised change itself is described in Jeremiahs restitution pro-
grammes as a knowing heart (Jer. 24), as one asking after Yhwh with heart
and soul (Jer. 29), as torah written on the heart (Jer. 3031), or as fear in the
heart gifted by Yhwh himself (Jer. 32). Apart from the letter to the exiles we
come across the covenantal formula in the direct vicinity of the promise
of change: they will be my people and I will be their God (or the other
way round). The term covenant (24 in Jeremiah) resounds exclusively in
the programmes of Jer. 3031 and 32, and then with a different meaning. I
will make with them an everlasting covenant in Jer. 32:40 points alone at
the benefits Yhwh commits himself to in favour of Israel. Unlike the new
covenant, the everlasting covenant does not include Israels obligations
and the contrast with the past plays no role in it.
Jer. 3031 is thus on its own in speaking of a new covenant, regardless
how much it reminds of Jer. 24, 29 and 32 on various points through its prose
frame. The content of the new covenant is determined predominantly by
the coordination of Jer. 31 on the words of doom in Jer. 11. The other pro-
grammes that we analysed are void of these large scale anchors in the book.
The words of calamity in Jer. 11 describe the disaster that befell Jerusalem
as a collective sanction for breaking the covenant that Yhwh closed with
Israels fathers. The new covenant no longer knows such a sanction. The
link between inner change and possessing the land receives less attention
in Jeremiah than in Ezekiel, as the alternative order of the relevant restitu-
tion programmes in Jeremiah reveals. The question that Jer. 3031 eventually
answers is how a future could be possible for Israel and Judea without the
persistent threat of this collective doom hanging over their existence (even
supposing that the native soil was prepared to carry them if need be). In
this light it comes to mind that the disaster that overcame Jerusalem in
the book of Jeremiah has become a premonition of the world judgement,
retaining its potential peril for constantly new readers. It is not for noth-
ing that the world judgementwithin the scenario of Jer. 3031forms
the actual point of departure of Jeremiahs dream vision (cf. 30:57). At
this point Jer. 3031 perhaps demonstrates the most tangible connection
between the restitution programme and the restitution scenario it wishes
to apply. Could it not be exactly this terrible nightmare of the great dooms-
day that the reader may thankfully set aside forever due to Yhwhs new
covenant?
What happens between the diachronic layers of a literary work is in prin-

ciple comparable with an intertextual dialogue. Particularly this perspective
influenced us to pay attention to the redaction criticism of Jer. 3031 [
3.2.5.1]. We chose Konrad Schmid as representative of a redaction-critical
approach that we ourselves have defended in previous publications. Our
present study also remained open for possible diachronic signals in Jer. 30
31. It appeared to be arduous, however, to maintain the usual intermediate
stations on the supposed trajectory of the Booklet of Comforts origin. We
became more and more convinced that the midsection and the frame are
literarily interdependent. The frame needs the midsection as much as the
midsection needs the framing. Thus an intertextual question-answer rela-
tion cannot be established between these domainsthe two must be direct
textual complements. As an advance on research steps to come, we formu-
lated a preliminary conclusion on this finding: essential discussions are not
taking place between diachronic layers of different theological tenor within
Jeremiahs Booklet of Comfort, but between this booklet and various other parts
of the Old Testament.
Similarly we came to suspect a shorter trajectory on the origin of the book
of Jeremiah as a whole than is generally accepted by redaction criticism,
even if we limited our inquiry to passages that are associated with Jer. 3031
[ 3.2.5.2]. A defendable order of their development seems to be Jer. 24
Jer. 29 Jer. 32 Jer. 11 + Jer. 3031 Jer. 34. It is unlikely that stories
such as in Jer. 24, 29 and 32 are based on reliable historical memories, let
alone the idea that their lasting authority would be governed by such a
form of authenticity. Tensions between these stories, seen for example in
the varied addressing of Jeremiahs message of salvation, are not traceable
to actual group conflicts in Israel. Instead, they express different theological
solutions to the same problem, solutions that would be difficult to reconcile
in the same prophetic book without this more or less academic nature.
Such differences would not have been acceptable to the original readers
without a significant historical distance between the time of the telling and
the time being told about. The diachronic relation between Jer. 3031 and Jer.
34 seems to reflect the general rule that one writes the introduction after
completing the whole work. This is not to say that the call to penance in Jer.
34 should be viewed as a correction of Jer. 3031. Jeremiah continuously
exposes the choice between conditional and unconditional salvation as
a religious non-dilemma, seen in apparently contradictory texts such as,
Return, turnable children, I will heal your turnings (3:22); If you return,
I will let you return (15:19); andfrom the mouth of Ephraim, Yhwhs
favourite sonLet me return, and I will return (31:18).
342 chapter five
After undertaking these reconnaissances separately in the books of Eze-

kiel and Jeremiah we focused on the dialogue taking place between the two
books about the promise of renewal [ 3.2.5.3]. Our general conclusion on
the direction of dependence (Ezekiel Jeremiah) was briefly formulated at
the start of this final chapter. The explanations presented in this study on
specific analogies are partly summaries or further developments on what
we have published previously. Once more we were tracing out contours on
a map full of blank spots, considering the limited subject of this study.
The allegory of the two sisters Meshubah and Bagodah in Jer. 3:613
is dependent on the allegory of Oholah and Oholibah in Ezek. 23. The
reorientation of a word of judgement in a call to penance as well as the
contextual integration of several details on clausal level prove, in our view,
this direction of dependence. The two allegories are not directly linked
with the promise of change, but they did serve as a methodological school
example: strong analogous clauses are required to make literary dependence
plausible; and alone a detailed analysis of their context could then perhaps
establish its direction.
Jer. 24:7 and I will give them a heart reminds of Ezek. 11:19 and I will
give them one heart. That these promises are embedded in stories which
play off in the same time framebetween the first and second deportations
to Babylonand importantly correspond in their division of salvation and
doom over two population groups, indicates direct literary dependence. The
leading argument for the priority of Ezek. 11 is that it mentions the claim
for landownership in Israel as a concrete reason for the prophecy, while
the issue no longer plays a role in Jer. 24. Moreover this last pericope is
dependent on texts in Amos and Deuteronomy. In this light Jer. 24 seems
to draw us into a multifaceted intertextual conversation, in which Amos
(ripe fruit), Deuteronomy (blessing and curse) and Ezekiel (the other heart
as divine gift) each have something to say.
Jer. 29:14 and I will gather you from all the nations and from all the
places where I have driven you, declares Yhwh, and I will have you return
to the place from which I have deported you. This promise from Jeremiahs
letter to the exiles, like Jer. 16:15 (= 23:8); 23:3 and 32:37, has been influenced
by a stereotypical, tripartite collection formula of Ezekiel, which has been
studied by Lust.8
8 On the relation between Jer. 29 and the book of Ezekiel it could be said in more general
terms that such an explicit conversion of Babylon to a place of waiting (D.E. Gowan, Theology
of the Prophetic Books: The Death and Resurrection of Israel, Louisville 1998, 116) can only really
be understood as a later theological development.
As possible allusions to Ezekiel, a few texts from the poetic midsection of

Jer. 3031 were discussed: terror and no peace (30:5) and all the nations
among which I scattered you (30:11). We used these to demonstrate our
doubt on the suggestions made by some that Ezekiel left a few stray tracks
only in a late redaction of the book of Jeremiah. A bit further this poetic mid-
section would involve us mainly in another discussion: with Deutero-Isaiah.
On Ezekiels contribution to the Booklet of Comfort we found the stron-
gest evidence in the prose frame of Jer. 3031. A complete series of arguments
support reading the proverb in Jer. 31:29, The fathers have eaten unripe fruit
and the teeth of the children become dull, as a citation from Ezek. 18:2. Not
only with this citation, but also through the entire course of its argument
(from collective exemption to personal renewal), Ezek. 18 must have influ-
enced Jer. 31.
A conspicuous analogy was identified between I will give my torah within
them (Jer. 31:33) and I will give my spirit within you (Ezek. 36:27). Regular
arguments supporting the book of Jeremiahs priority over Ezek. 36 were
weighed and found wanting. The connections laying close at hand, Ezek. 11
Jer. 24 and Ezek. 18 Jer. 31, are indeed indirect, but still sufficient evidence
that, to the contrary, Jer. 31:3134 must be dependent on Ezek. 36.
The promise of change of Jer. 32:3741 wishes to be understood in a more
direct sense as midrash on texts from Ezekiel and Deuteronomy. With some-
what hesitance we asked whether even the basis story on Jeremiahs contract
of purchase could perhaps have been pinned on Ezekiels speculation on the
property of the false prophet in Israel that will be disowned (Ezek. 13:9).
The spotlight fell on the intertextual comparisons between Ezekiel and
Jeremiah, discreet as they were in number, to confirm time and again the
premise of an overall picture. This overall picture shows that we are not
dealing with isolated literary borrowings, but with a form of influencing
in which the salvation promise of one prophetic book, Ezekiel, served as a
model for the salvation promise of another prophetic book, Jeremiah. The
older colleague according to the canonical tradition in our view has shown
itself to be mainly a younger literary creation. The promise in Jeremiah is
strongly dependent on the promise in Ezekiel especially in its programmatic
design. When we read the promise in Jeremiah as a commentary on the
promise in Ezekiel (as the first readers of Jeremiah would have done), then
the following features may be determined:
(a) The promised replacement of the heart in Ezekiel is watered down by

Jeremiah to a changing of the heart: presumably a concession to the theol-
ogy of the book of Deuteronomy. The word new, no longer being required
344 chapter five
as an adjective with heart and spirit, is thus released for another, theolog-
ically far more fundamental opposition (see below).
(b) The word spirit has disappeared from the promise in Jeremiah. This
follows the anti-schwrmerisch tendency of this prophetic book, which
should be understood as a reaction against the habit of post-exilic Judean
groups to elevate themselves against others based on their unique spiritual
gift. The absence of the word spirit from Jeremiahs description of the new
covenant must be aligned with its egalitarian character. The new covenant
does not acknowledge gradations of piety within future Israel.
(c) Unlike in Ezekiel, inner change in Jer. 31 does not necessarily precede
social change, but follows it as the great climax of the promise of salvation.
Thereby it no longer serves specially the reconciliation with the land, but
as the core of the new covenant stands as guarantor for the very survival
of Israel as a people, midst a world full of catastrophe and divine judge-
ment.
As a matter of course, as a negative trial of the sum after the exposition

above, one should properly introduce an imaginary dialogue en scne, where
not Ezekiel but Jeremiah is granted the first word. Such a dialogue however
would be doomed to remain historically incredible.
A critical excursion on the so-called golah-orientated redaction of Ezekiel
and Jeremiah [ 3.2.5.4] subsequently marked a bridge to the next chapter
of this study. The book of Ezekiel is unaware of any exclusive promise for
the exiles in Babylon. The relations of dependence Ezek. 11 Jer. 24 and
Deut. 30 Jer. 24 show that the golah-promise in Jer. 24 was based on the
diaspora-promise. The diaspora-promise is therefore not an inversion of the
scattering judgement that flanks the golah-promise in Jer. 24 and Jer. 29. For
its promise to the scattered, Jer. 32 is able to rely directly on the book of
Ezekiel. The groups contrasted in Jer. 24 and Jer. 29 should be understood
ideal-typically. The prospect of return, restoration and change opened for
the exiles under Jehoiachin, is thus valid for every reader of Jeremiah that
has accepted the judgement of Yhwh as historical reality. This divine gift
does not ask of the reader the right birth certificate, but the right religious
attitude in the shadow of history. It is the same attitude that is required by
Jeremiahs dream vision (Jer. 30:531:26), with its onset commencing in the
middle of Gods judgement over the world: terror and no peace. Besides
Ezekiel, also Deutero-Isaiah must have contributed to the literary profile of
the Babylonian golah in the book of Jeremiah (see especially Jer. 5051).
5.2.3. Ezekiel and Isaiah, Isaiah and Jeremiah

With this last suggestion we have arrived at what we called earlier in this
summary, the entwinement of storylines. What interaction is traceable, via
the analysed texts, between the cosmic-universal and the anthropologi-
cal view of the change promised by Yhwh, which are connectable respec-
tively on the line PsalmsDeutero-IsaiahTrito-Isaiah and the line Ezekiel
Jeremiah through the word new?
Points of contact between Ezekiel and Isa. 4055 are mainly reliant on
individual words/word groups or combinations thereof [ 4.1]. Genuine lit-
erary allusions in the one to the other are not present. Where there might
be thoughts of influencing, this must have come unilaterally from the circle
in which Ezekiel originated or was read. One such indication is the clearly
identifiable production phase to which most of the Ezekielisms in Deutero-
Isaiah belong. Some points of contact encourage a comparison between
Ezekiels and Deutero-Isaiahs theological thinking. These concern (a) the
historical proof of divinity and (b) Yhwhs name as basis for the promise of
cleansing and change. Deutero-Isaiah is less nave than Ezekiel about the
human possibility of acknowledging Yhwh. The new envisages a changing
of Israel in both, but alone in Deutero-Isaiah is this change a way of bring-
ing Israeland all who join itto beneficially recognising Yhwh. Renewal
and recognition, still separate themes in Ezekiel, fuse to form a single theme
in Deutero-Isaiah. Thus the impression is created that Deutero-Isaiah must
represent a later phase in development on a theological level besides their
linguistic relation.
In this summarising retrospection, the Yhwh-Kingship psalms, Lamen-
tations and Ezekiel may be indicated as the main sources of inspiration
behind Deutero-Isaiahs mindset.9 The Psalms were responsible for the dou-
ble approach to Yhwhs kingship: founded from eternity, revealed in new-
ness; as well as for the dramatic arrangement of shaming and liberation,
which defines the dual structure of Isa. 4055. Deutero-Isaiah presumably
owes the replacement of the temple with Zion-Jerusalem as final destina-
tion of Yhwhs coming to Lamentations. It is Yhwhs coming as king that
will offer comfort to the inconsolable Zion. A third inspiration source in
the form of Ezekiel would complete the picture. The order of creation that
rests in Yhwhs eternal kingship (Psalms) proves itself in the fulfilment of
9 We leave the Pentateuch traditions outside the equation for the moment.
346 chapter five
the prophetic word (Ezekiel). And thus it is the proven strength of this word
that exposes mans self-made gods as a deadly tiring burden (see especially
Isa. 46). Similarly on the deepest ground of new hope, Deutero-Isaiah and
Ezekiel find something of a theological agreement: Alone for his names sake
is Yhwh going to change both Israel and the world.
In our comparison between Jer. 3031 and the book of Isaiah we distin-
guished between points of contact (in clauses as well as generic and com-
positional), borrowings (not every point of contact has to be a borrowing),
and the dialogue in which the borrowing text involves the reader through
its allusions. The premonition that this studys most important hermeneu-
tic decisions would be covered here, brought us to making this scrupulous
distinction between the methodological steps in the final segment of our
research.
Points of contact with Jer. 3031 occur throughout Isaiah, though they are
most frequent in Isa. 4055 [ 4.2.1]. Jeremiahs Trostbchlein reminds of
Deutero-Isaiahs Trostbuch in more than one way. Under Trostbchlein we
now take the liberty to understand what Jeremiah himself according to Jer.
30:2 had to record from God in a : 30:531:26. This colourful pamphlet
agrees with the great Trostbuch in the form and phrasing of certain poems
(especially 30:1011; 30:1617; 31:79; 31:1014), but there is more to this.
Sometimes there are striking parallelisms in the sequencing of the poems.
The texts that follow the promised return in Jer. 31:1014 and Isa. 49:813 are
cited here as illustration:
Thus says Yhwh:
Hear, on the Height lamentation is heard,
bitter weeping:
RACHEL, weeping for her sons,
refusing to be comforted
for her sons, because they are no more (Jer. 31:1517)
But ZION says: Yhwh has forsaken me,

the Lord has forgotten me (Isa. 49:1421)
The result of all this communality (also in sequences like need sin, sal-
vation as commitment salvation as realisation) appeared to be a corre-
sponding dramatic movement set over two rounds. Both Jer. 30:524 and Isa.
4048 lead into Yhwhs judgement over the wicked; equally Jer. 31:126 and
Isa. 4955 lead into images of quenched yearning and Zion as affectionate
mother city. A scenario that stands on its own in Jeremiah, and feels for-
eign alongside Ezekiels visions, has a clear literary counterpart in Isaiah.
The recognition of patterns is often typed as the seeing of camels, weasels,
and whales in clouds as they drift by,10 but in this case there is certainly more
to it.
Not every point of contact is a borrowing, and not every borrowing has
sufficient volume to help identify the direction of borrowing. We found
sufficient volume in the following analogous clauses or analogous clause
combinations [ 4.2.2]: Jer. 31:35 Thus says Yhwh, who () calms the sea
even though its waves roar, Yhwh Almighty is his name, cf. Isa. 51:15 And
I am Yhwh your God, who calms the sea even though its waves roar, Yhwh
Almighty is his name; Jer. 31:12 and their soul will be like a saturated garden,
cf. Isa. 58:11 your soul (), and you will be like a saturated garden; Jer. 30:10
And you, fear not, my servant Jacob, (), cf. Isa. 41:8, 10 And you, Israel
my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen (), fear not, 43:1 Jacob () Israel,
fear not, 44:1, 2 Jacob my servant and Israel (), fear not, my servant Jacob
and Jeshurun; Jer. 30:10 () from afar and your seed from the land of their
captivity, cf. Isa. 43:5, 6 your seed () from afar; Jer. 30:11 For I am with you
() to save you, cf. Isa. 43:3, 5 your saviour (); fear not, for I am with you.
Jer. 31:7 Cry out with joy for Jacob (), make hear, praise and say: Yhwh has
saved his people, cf. Isa. 48:20 Declare with a cry of joy, make hear this (),
say: Yhwh has redeemed his servant Jacob; Jer. 31:8 among them the blind
and the lame, cf. Isa. 35:5, 6 the blind () the lame; Jer. 31:9 I will make them
walk by brooks of water in a straight way, in which they will not stumble, cf.
Isa. 48:21 they did not thirst when he led them through the deserts, he made
water flow for them from the rock, 49:10, 11 by springs of water he will guide
them; I will turn all my mountains into a road; Jer. 31:12 And they will come
and cry out on the height of Zion, cf. Isa. 35:10; 51:11 and they will come to
Zion with joyous cries. Borrowing seems plausible in all these cases and we
found factual arguments to name not Jeremiah but Isaiah as the source text.
Once in a while there was just cause to implicate other Jeremian passages
in this diachronic inquiry. It thus appeared that the points of contact Jer.
1:5/Isa. 49:1 and Jer. 11:19/Isa. 53:78 provide new indications supporting
the priority of Deutero-Isaiah. They create the impression that Jeremiah
did not influence the portraiture of the suffering Servant of the Lord, but
that the suffering Servant influenced the portraiture of Jeremiah. In this
light the promise of salvation to Jeremiah in Jer. 1:8, 19 and 15:20 with its
reduced performativity may have derived from Deutero-Isaiahs promise
of salvation, and thus these texts do not need to assume an independent
Jeremian tradition behind the oracle of salvation Jer. 30:1011 = 46:2728.
10 An allusion to Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III Scene II.

348 chapter five
What the comparison between Jer. 30:531:26 and Isaiah showed further,
concerns the intertextual position of Jer. 31:22 For Yhwh has created some-
thing new on earth . The verse reminds of Isa. 43:19 (strongest analogy),
48:67 and 65:17 through the terms create/make and new. In the remain-
der of Jer. 31:22 this new is described as follows: a woman surrounds a
man. In these words we find an association with the creation of man as
male and female in Gen 1:27. The designation something new is thereby
furnished with the connotation: something that equals the wonder of Gen.
1 in wonderfulness. Just as in Isa. 65 the new is compared here to the first cre-
ation. In this study we asked ourselves how Jer. 31:22 would have sounded to
someone that had previously taken heed of Isa. 65. The similarity lies in the
theme of the new creation as correction to Gen. 1, and also in the fact that
this new creation is applied to Zion in both prophetic passages: for I am
about to create Jerusalem as a joy, and its people as a delight (Isa. 65:18).
As we explained earlier, within its own literary context Jer. 31:22 like Isa. 65
seems to point at the salvation with which Zions holy mountain protects its
inhabitants [ 3.2.1].
A creation text such as Jer. 31:22 that has inspired so many creative exeget-
ical solutions, may guard its deepest secret even against these speculations.
Still, it is fascinating how texts sound different when they are read in a dif-
ferent orderin this case Jer. 31 not before but after Isa. 65. Using the points
of contact Jer. 4:13/Isa. 66:15 (Yhwh as chariot rider), Jer. 7:13, 27; 35:17/Isa.
50:2, 4; 65:12; 66:4 (speaking-hearing, calling-answering); and Jer. 29:5, 28/Isa.
65:21 (the planting of gardens or vineyards) we have considered the likeli-
hood that the scribes of Jeremiah indeed could have read Isa. 6566. Once
Isa. 65 echoes in Jer. 31 the result involuntarily releases anti-apocalyptic over-
tones. Not a new heaven and a new earth, but something new on earth is the
wonder that Yhwh will create according to Jeremiahs Booklet of Comfort.
How, with all this, does Jer. 3031 involve itself in the discussion on
Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah as promise texts? How does it engage with ques-
tions on the new, critical questions that the book of Isaiah might raise in
the mind of an attentive reader? A summary is provided of the section con-
cerned [ 4.2.3], also in light of other conclusions drawn in this final chapter:
(a) Formally Jer. 3031 answers the question how one might apply a dramatic
text like that of Deutero-Isaiah in social practice. The development of Ps. 98
as liturgical song via the reading dramas Ps. 93100 and Isa. 4055 to Jer.
30:531:26 as dramatic dream vision has been described using imagery from
drama theory as the gradual disappearance of the fourth wall. The drama
in which one participates, changes step by step into a vision that needs to
be applied. The restitution scenario of the promise gradually evolves into

something that is no longer complete without a restitution programme as
frame. Scenario and programme in Jer. 3031 we found could not be sepa-
rated redaction-critically; they have become complementary components
of a single text. Indirectly Jer. 3031 may provide the reader of the Tanakh
with a welcome reading guide to all the more or less dramaturgically styled
salvation prophecies. What to do with them in daily life?
(b) In Deutero-Isaiah the new is accomplished within the drama, in the

Servant of the Lord, so to say substituting for change in the reader himself.
The new in Jer. 3031 is also aimed at effecting change in the reader, but
this change is shifted from the drama over to its application. Largely shifted,
we should say, because naturally Jeremiahs drama offers the reader various
options of identification, seen for example in Ephraims prayer: Let me
return, and I will return (Jer. 31:18). But the main focus now comes to rest
for the reader in the change that Jer. 31:3134 announces directly after the
drama as the new covenant.
(c) This application combines (in the framework of Jeremiahs Booklet of

Comfort) a concept of the covenant borrowed from Deuteronomy with a
restitution programme in the style of Ezekiel, which seems to have added
the opposition first-new as dominating conceptual scheme under influence
of Deutero-Isaiah. Without this characteristic Deutero-Isaian opposition first-
new (with its earliest point of departure in the Yhwh-Kingship psalms), the
birth of the concept new covenant in Jeremiah can hardly be grasped prop-
erly, regardless how this new covenant may differ from Deutero-Isaiahs new
things in its further elaboration.
(d) In this way the scribes of Jer. 3031, seen in retrospect, had truly accepted
the challenge to connect the two lines in the prophetic expectation where
the word new plays such a crucial role. This connection implicated, among
other things, that early-apocalyptic elements from the book of Isaiah were
visibly supressed. In the interpretation of Isa. 65 we observed the close rela-
tion between temporal dualism in the expectation for the future and ethical
antagonism in the view on society. As its mirror image, a similar close rela-
tion may be presumed in Jer. 3031 between the anti-apocalyptic tendency
of 31:22, 36 and the anti-schwrmerisch tendency of 31:3134. The promise
of Jeremiah draws no further distinctions within the houses of Israel and
Judah, but addresses everyone personally. Besides its indissolubility, the new
covenant exhibits inclusivity as an inherent feature. Large or smallYhwh
350 chapter five
will write his torah in their heart. Just like Jer. 3031 joins various texts, it also
wishes (citing Georg Fischer) to unite people. And for this purpose it truly
does not refer to a far off, unreachable utopian future. Are the coming days
of Jeremiah not to begin with the lifetime of the current reader?
5.3. Eschatology
The term eschatology was first documented in the seventeenth century,11

but during the nineteenth century became the usual designation for the
Christian doctrine of the last things. In this way eschatology expanded to
cover biblical expectations on the future, in both the New and the Old
Testament. When determining which of the Old Testament depictions of
the future should be included, the etymology of the word continued to play
a role. The Greek word means extremities and according to some
this should be a reason to restrict its usage to indicating matters that have
to do with the end of the existing world.
Regarding the Old Testament, other scholars differentiate between escha-
tology in a broader and a stricter sense. The criterion that the end of the
world must be at stake is then only valid for the latter use of the word. In a
stricter sense the concept overlaps more or less with what is also known as
(early) apocalypticism or apocalyptic eschatology.
From the discussion on Old Testament eschatology in its broader sense,
we wish to highlight two main points. First, it is important to note that for
those who work with it, even this broader rendering does not cover all the
forms of Old Testament expectations on the future.12 The term would indeed
lose its distinctive meaning if every divine promise was included. A historical
narrative may also answer questions about the present and the future, but
this simple fact does not make it eschatological. In the context of this study,
we are reminded of the political expectations associated with Cyrus and
the Persian Empire. On their own such expectations are not eschatological.
One could take it one step further and wonder whether there is any sense
at calling the prophetic promise of Israels return and restoration, taken
as such, an eschatological promise. Even regarding the so-called covenant
11 Cf. F. Nierlinck, l Origine du terme Eschatologie: une rectification, EThL 56 (1980),
414416.
12 One illustration is found in the term pre-eschatological, which is employed by Th.C.
Vriezen, Prophecy and Eschatology, VT.S 1, Leiden 1953, 199229, esp. 225 to express the
national hope that would be audible in JE as source of the Pentateuch.
formula as recapitulating promise to Israel as the people of God, this seems

to be problematic.13
A second point is the fact that those seeking a broader understanding
of eschatology in the Old Testament, nevertheless usually choose a spe-
cific centre in the concept. Apparently its essence is found to be of impor-
tance, besides its demarcation. These scholars are keen to pinpoint a certain
core in the eschatological expectation of the Old Testament, around which
eschatology would anchor as expectation.14 One may ask whether such a
core presents itself objectively. Like the Old Testament as a whole does not
have a centre loose from the viewers own position, there is no centre to be
identified in Old Testament eschatology that is not equally determined by
the presumptions with which the texts are read. This need not be an objec-
tion, as long as such hermeneutic presumptions are acknowledged.
Compared to the primary objectives of this study, the theme of eschatol-
ogy found itself on the periphery of the argument. However, when under
the continued influence of Mowinckel and as a result of the newness texts
which we have discussed, we could not resist indicating the Yhwh-Kingship
psalms as the centre of Old Testament eschatology, this should be seen in
conjunction with Christian expectations of the Kingdom of God as our guid-
ing bias. Thereby we could have implicated the Zion tradition, were it not
that newness is not such an explicit feature in it.15 The undeniable paral-
lel meanwhile is that the Zion tradition connects myth, liturgy, history and
expectation more or less in the same way as the depiction of Yhwhs kingship
does. In a concentration like this, eschatology has to do with the mytholo-
gising of history, that is to say, with identifying those historical experiences
that, according to the texts, reveal the very meaning of creation and thus
make the final goal of history visible [ 2.1.5]. Not the hopeful historical
narrative or the prophetic promise as such, but its mythical intensifica-
tion and deepening then forms the essence of what may be called escha-
tology. In such an approach Old Testament eschatology may be described
with the help of intertextual dialogues that are evoked directly or indirectly
by these Yhwh-Kingship psalms. Sometimes these dialogues may show a
counter-movement: not heightening but rather playing down, promoting an
13 Differently R. Rendtorff, The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investi-
gation, Edinburgh 1998, 90.

14 E. Jenni, Eschatology of the OT, in: IDB, vol. 2, New York 1962, 126133, esp. 127 thus
sees the central idea in the coming of Yhwh. According to D.E. Gowan, Eschatology in the Old
Testament, Edinburgh 1987, 519 Zion-Jerusalem stands at the centre of OT eschatology.
15 However see Isa. 65:17 and Jer. 31:22!
352 chapter five
expectation with a more practical touchin which however the eschatolog-

ical keynote is set by the mythical point of departure. So too this counter-
movement (think of Jeremiah!) in our view must fall under the heading
eschatology in the broader sense. One of the characteristics of discussions is
that they do not run systematically making it difficult to draw their bound-
aries with precision, even if there is a centre. In this way the eschatological
dialogue also raises viewpoints that are entertained to a greater extent in
the Jewish tradition than in Christianity.
In light of the above we will make one last tour through the discussed
texts. In commentaries on Ps. 98 one comes across both the verdict that
eschatological end times are totally out of the question, and the assurance
that the song goes to the heart of what eschatology should be about. Inter-
pretations move between these extreme positions, on the one hand carrying
Jewish or Christian language, but on the other also prepared to calibrate
their perspectives against the texts themselves. Ps. 98 may be called an
eschatological hymn because, and as far as, it sings about the liberation
of Israel as the ultimate revelation of Yhwhs kingship, and therewith dis-
closes the meaning of creation itself. The worlds existence is set in the same
divine kingship which here and now is dawning so gloriously in Israels lib-
eration. Because this manifestation is celebrated in the cult as a given fact,
one may speak of a presentic eschatology. It becomes clear especially in
the context of the whole cantata Ps. 93100, however, that Ps. 98 has also a
futurist view, anticipating something that one hopes for oneself and others:
worldwide righteousness, from generation to generation. Such a reorienta-
tion from presentic to anticipating eschatology is typical of the connection
between liturgy and history in Israel.
Due to hermeneutic presumptions a number of related questions and
dilemmas were discussed that play a role in the interpretation of Isa. 4055
[ 2.2.9]: decisive expectation of salvation or eschatology, continuity or dis-
continuity, historical or supernatural, unity of time or two aeons, realised
eschatology and if so, in what sense, conditional or unconditional salva-
tion? We determined that the term eschatology is out of place regarding
the expectation of the coming things (Cyrus), but applicable regarding the
expectation of the new and hidden things Deutero-Isaiah speaks about. The
term then expresses that Yhwh will reach his final goal with Israel through
these new things. In this way the new means an unprecedented break with
the past, in which nothing of the sort had been revealed before. But at the
same time first and new are enveloped by continuity. Yhwh protects his cre-
ational intentions with Israel in the new and through this new finally brings
his people to completion.
To the idea from the psalm cycle of eschatology as an answer, the idea
of eschatology as completion thus links itselfbut the second not at a
loss of the first, which becomes evident when one zooms in closer on the
relation between eschatology and history. The new in Isa. 4048 itself does
not restore under what is usually called history; however Yhwh uses it to
provide the adequate human answer to what he has just proven through
world history. In this way the new things remain deeply related to historical
events and appear to have a historical decor as backdrop.
Deutero-Isaiah has a few dualistic motifs in Isa. 4955, but these are not
yet linked with the opposition first-new. This connection must wait for Isa.
65. The emphasis in Deutero-Isaiah is placed fully on the fact that the new
is realised now. That we accepted the terms actualising and presentic to
describe Deutero-Isaiahs eschatology, was influenced by this eschatology
definitively presenting the future promised by Yhwh in the Servant of the
Lord. One could say that according to Deutero-Isaiah, Yhwh has achieved
his eschatological goal in principle through the faithful trust of this Servant
as the embodiment of another Israel. This invalidates the dilemma between
conditional and unconditional salvation. The appointment of the Servant
as covenant and light (Isa. 42:6; 49:8) strengthens rather than weakens the
appeal this drama of salvation makes on the reader. Listening to the voice of
the Servant becomes decisive in the question on who personally has part of
the new future and who does not (Isa. 50:10).
Isa. 4055 shares its dramatic character with the psalm cycle Ps. 93100,
which is ultimately rooted in the liturgical experience itself. The main differ-
ence is that the psalm cycle still proposes the eschaton as cultically present.
While we see the emphasis in some of these songs already shifting from
liturgy to the dark life of the righteous, for whom nonetheless light is sown
(Ps. 97:11), all the attention in the psalm cycle still fell on the exuberant
celebration of Yhwhs enthronement in the second temples song of praise.
Only a minor role is left for this temple in Deutero-Isaiah, as the building
project of Cyrus. Indeed Deutero-Isaiahs dramatic composition is liturgi-
cally inspired, but a true liturgical text it is certainly no more. Presentic
eschatology has dissociated itself from the temple and is linked instead to
the life of the suffering Servant as prototype of the post-exilic pious.
To what extent are we dealing with an apocalyptic presentation in Isa.
65, and to what extent would this imply a break from the forgoing prophetic
eschatology? It is too simplistic to use the distinctions between metaphoric
and literal to demark Isa. 65:17 from its influence on Jewish and early
Christian apocalyptic texts [ 2.3.4]. At most these later influences indi-
cate a sharpening of the dualistic periodisation, seen for example in their
354 chapter five
bigger talk on the passing of the present heaven and earth. There against
we also find a common continuation from source text to its influencing:
the direct linkage between expecting a new heaven and a new earth and
the coexistence of the faithful and the apostates in the current world. Is it
not the case that these apostates hinder the dawn of Gods light and sal-
vation? Whoever sees the essence of apocalyptic thinking in the temporal
dualism as an answer to the coexistential problem, cannot but title the
presentation of Isa. 65 apocalyptic. Meanwhile, on this point there is no
religio-historical gap between Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah. Presentic eschatol-
ogy without a perspective on the future is a modern theological invention.
Deutero-Isaiahs presentic eschatology displays unmistakable traces of tem-
poral dualism, and conversely Trito-Isaiahs apocalypticism assumes that in
their faithful trust, the servants of the Lord actually represent the eschaton
now already. The most significant shift in this respect has taken place earlier,
that is, between the psalm cycle and Deutero-Isaiah: from an eschatology
that becomes actualised in the cultic celebration to an eschatology that is
actualised in the embattled life of the faithful. Apparently this last form of
eschatology cannot be maintained in the world of the Old Testament with-
out obtaining dualistic traces.
In theological thinking on the future we thus see a gradual development
that runs from the Yhwh-Kingship psalms via Deutero-Isaiah to Trito-Isaiah.
This development must have something to do with the decreasing involve-
ment of certain poets and singers in the temple liturgywith an increased
physical and mental distance, which according to the book of Isaiah, even
resulted in excommunication (Isa. 66:5). We could not fully explore this
socio-historical background in the context of this study.16 As it is, where the
embattled life of the faithful becomes a central issue in thinking about the
future, eschatology apparently develops into apocalypticism.
To the influences that later Jewish and Christian apocalypse have re-
worked, we may also include the book of Ezekiel. However, while under-
standing the presentation of the two aeons as the most characteristic apoc-
alyptic trait, it is difficult to call Ezekiels vision of the future apocalyptic.
The situation might have been different if we were obliged to view the Greek
papyrus 967 as a witness of the more original text form, as some insist. The
promise of salvation of Ezek. 36 is largely absent from the papyrus, and the
16 One aspect of this socio-historical background must have been the rivalry between
scribes and priests in the period of the second temple (K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and
the Making of the Hebrew Bible, Cambridge, MA 2007, 107).
order of Ezek. 37 and 3839 is inverted. In this arrangement the time of sal-
vation first begins after the Gog episode, which would thereby acquire the
character of an apocalyptic day of reckoning. However, in this study we were
able to substantiate the opposite view using a whole series of arguments [
3.1.4.1]: not papyrus 967 but the Masora preserved the older text form. In this
Ezek. 3839 is definitely not a final act, but merely a world-immanent test on
the sum of the foregoing promise of permanent restoration. The Gog episode
allows influence from the Zion tradition to simmer through and in this way
participates in the matrix mythliturgyhistoryfuture expectation, which
we treated above, but it remains especially Israels dream of the unlived life:
How different could the national history have been, had our people behaved
properly in the past like people of God.
We next found that there is nothing to find in Ezekiels promise of sal-
vation of what characterises its cultic-dramatic styling in Deutero-Isaiah
[ 3.1.4.3]. The distinction in terminology between restitution scenario and
restitution programme was employed to voice this difference concretely.
However, Ezekiels restitution programme should not be confused with an
objectifying prediction of Israels future history. The enduring consonance
of Ezek. 18 and 36 makes it clear that prophecy promising inner change, still
remains an encouragement. Exhortation and promise, promise and exhor-
tation flow smoothly into each other in Ezekielmore or less like one says
alternatingly in an educational role, something should and will succeed.17
It is noticeable how sporadic terms like eschatology and eschatologic are
encountered in exegetical literature on Ezek. 36, certainly in comparison to
that on the texts of the Psalms and Isaiah. The purposefulness of Yhwhs acts
finds expression in Ezekiels words of evidence and formula of recognition
(so that they/you will know that I am Yhwh), but we have seen that the
argument of Ezek. 36 links recognition and renewal at most in an indirect
way, differently from Deutero-Isaiah. Thus also from this angle we find no
reason to label the promise of a new heart and a new spirit in Ezekiel with
the term eschatological.18
17 In conventional biblical interpretation texts are mainly discussed according to their
descriptive meaning. A still relevant correction to this remains Austins differentiation be-
tween language utterances as locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts. Prophet-
ic promises like these of Ezekiel should also be judged on their intended perlocutionary
effect: change they wish to effect in the reader (cf. J. Lyons, Semantics, Cambridge 1977, 731).
18 The fact that the recognition formula in Ezekiel is not only connected with Yhwhs
future acts but also with what he has done and is doing, shows that the purpose of recog-
nition, to use a spatial image, stands at right angles to history rather than being its contin-
uation. In the line of Ps. 2; 48; 76; Isa. 29:18; cf. Zech. 12; 14, we see Ezek. 3839 as a futurised
356 chapter five
Not until Jer. 3031 is this promise of Ezekiel fused with the eschatology of
Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, and then in the concept new covenant. Striking
in this daring intertextual undertaking, however, is the de-apocalypticising
tendency. A new heaven and a new earth are no longer mentioned in Jer.
31:3537, like at the end of the book of Isaiah, but the existing ordinances of
creation are declared by God to be permanent guarantees for the continued
existence of Israel. According to Jer. 31:22 Yhwh will not create a new earth,
but something new on earth: an embracement of all Judeas inhabitants
by Zions holy mountain. The same anti-apocalyptic motive could be at
play in this enigmatic verse, as we have argued. The book of Jeremiah
thus illustrates that a non-dualistic reading of Isaiahs expectation on the
future also belongs to the historical possibilities. Presumably there is a close
connection between this down-to-earth mode of reading and the inclusivity
that characterises the new covenant according to Jer. 31:3134 more than
anything else. Just like with the blessed mother city that will create room
for every farmer and shepherd, it will be for the new covenant. The book of
Jeremiah seems hesitant to resign itself to a separation between the faithful
and the apostates in Israel, and therefore it need not resign itself to a dividing
line between the present and the coming age.19
Thus older and younger texts continue asking each other questions back
and forth. It is interesting to see how the reception history of Jeremiah,
which had to remain outside our discussion, in turn integrated the new
covenant in an apocalyptic scheme. The concept new covenant thereby
received a polemical spire in the New Testament which is altogether lacking
in Jer. 31. This led to the new covenant marking a partition between believ-
ers, even in the naming of the Scriptures themselves, which in our view is
difficult to reconcile with the inclusive tenor of Jer. 31:3134. If the literary-
historical order between the books of Isaiah and Jeremiah indeed accords
cultic experience. Indeed here too that what the psalms spoke of in the present tense has now
been projected into the future, according to D.E. Gowan, Theology of the Prophetic Books: The
Death and Resurrection of Israel, Louisville 1998, 56 one of the earliest stages in the devel-
opment of Old Testament eschatology. However even in this approach it is clear that inner
renewal (Ezek. 36) and eschatology (Ezek. 3839) are two separate things in Ezekiel. It hardly
seems a clarification to call every divine promise, every promise of restoration, every promise
of change eschatological.
19 On the relation between the piety of Jeremiahs confessions (Jer. 11:1812:6; 15:1020;
17:1418; 18:1823; 20:718) and that of the early apocalyptic texts in Isaiah, see K.-F. Pohlmann,
Die Ferne GottesStudien zum Jeremiabuch: Beitrge zu den Konfessionen im Jeremiabuch
und ein Versuch zur Frage nach den Anfngen der Jeremiatradition (BZAW, 179), Berlin 1989,
105106. The distance to TIs dualism, however, is all the more notable in light of this relation.
with this studys findings, this would imply a critical question being posed
to Christian theology.
For a discussion on eschatology as either extrapolation or anticipation,
the future as futurum or adventus [ 1.1], the most obvious leads are found
in the drama of Deutero-Isaiah. It is certainly possible to draw lines from the
past to the present and to infer justified expectations from them regarding
the progression of history as futurum. Cyrus will prosper in his way. The
world keeps turning and history continues. It is difficult to base a theology
on the prophetic texts we have discussed in which history and historical
tradition close the door and no longer have a perspective on the future
to offer. However this is not the intention of the promise of the new. The
new things are founded in God alone andparadoxically enoughin what
people yet know partially of him, his true Name, his still not completely
revealed Kingship. This seems to us to be the unanimous adventic scope of
the diverse newness promises that this study has analysed. At the same time
this does not make them promises in the long term, but promises that yearn
to bring about change in the current reader who accepts them.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abma, R., Bonds of Love: Methodic Studies of Prophetic Texts with Marriage Imagery
(Isaiah 50:13 and 54:110, Hosea 13, Jeremiah 23) (SSN, 40), Assen 1999
Albani, M., Der eine Gott und die himmlischen Heerscharen: Zur Begrndung des
Monotheismus bei Deuterojesaja im Horizont der Astralisierung des Gottesver-
stndnisses im Alten Orient (ABG, 1), Leipzig 2000
Albertz, R., A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period, vol. 1, London
1994 [German edition 1992]
, A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period, vol. 2, London 1994
[German edition 1992]
, Das Deuterojesaja-Buch als Fortschreibung der Jesaja-Prophetie, in: E. Blum
et al. (eds), Die Hebrische Bibel und ihre zweifache Nachgeschichte. Fs R. Rend-
torff, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1990, 241256
, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (SBL, 3),
Atlanta 2003
Allen, L.C., Ezekiel 119 (WBC, 28), Dallas 1994
, Ezekiel 2048 (WBC, 29), Dallas 1990
Anderson, A.A., The Book of Psalms (NCB), vol. 2, London 1972
Applegate, J., Peace, peace, when there is no peace: Redactional Integration of
Prophecy of Peace into the Judgement of Jeremia, in: A.H.W. Curtis, T. Rmer
(eds), The Book of Jeremiah and its Reception (BEThL, 128), Leuven 1997, 51
90
Auffret, P., la face du roi YHWH: tude structurelle du psaume 98, in: Idem,
Merveilles nos yeux: tude structurelle de vingt psaumes dont celui de 1Ch 16,836
(BZAW, 235), Berlin 1995, 7076
, Yahv regne: tude structurelle du psaulme 93, ZAW 103 (1991), 101109
Baltzer, D., Ezechiel und Deuterojesaja: Berhrungen in der Heilserwartung der beiden
groen Exilspropheten (BZAW, 121), Berlin 1971
, Literarkritische und literarhistorische Anmerkungen zur Heilsprophetie im
Ezechielbuch, in: J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book (BEThL, 74), Leuven 1986,
166181
Baltzer, K., Deutero-Jesaja (KAT, 10/2), Gtersloh 1999
Barstad, H.M., A Way in the Wilderness: The Second Exodus in the Message of Second
Isaiah (JSSM, 12), Manchester 1989
, The Future of the Servant Songs: Some Reflections on the Relationship
of Biblical Scholarship to Its Own Tradition, in: S.E. Balentine, J. Barton (eds),
Language, Theology, and The Bible. Fs J. Barr, Oxford 1994, 261270
Beaucamp, E., Le Psautier, vol. 2, Paris 1979
Becker, J., Der priesterliche Prophet: Das Buch Ezechiel (SKKAT, 12), Stuttgart 1971
, Messiaserwartung im Alten Testament (SBS, 83), Stuttgart 1977
Becking, B., Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of Jeremiah 3031
(OTS, 51), Leiden 2004
360 selected bibliography
, I Will Break his Yoke from off your Neck. Remarks on Jeremia xxx 411, OTS
25 (1989), 6376
Ben-Porat, Z., The Poetics of Literary Allusion, A Journal for Descriptive Poetics and
Theory of Literature 1 (1976), 105128
Bentzen, A., On the Ideas of the Old and the New in Deutero-Isaiah, StTh 1 (1948),
183187
Berges, U., Das Buch Jesaja: Komposition und Endgestalt (HBS, 16), Freiburg 1998
, Jesaja 4048 (HThKAT), Freiburg 2008
, Zion and the Kingship of Yhwh in Isaiah 4055, in: A.L.H.M. van Wieringen,
A. van der Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent: The City as Unifying Theme
in Isaiah (OTS, 58), Leiden 2011, 95119
Beuken, W.A.M., Haggai-Sacharja 18: Studien zur berlieferungsgeschichte der frh-
nachexilischen Prophetie, Assen 1967
, Jesaja (POT), dl. 2A, Nijkerk 1979
, Jesaja (POT), dl. 2B, Nijkerk 1983
, Jesaja (POT), dl. 3B, Nijkerk 1989
, The Main Theme of Trito-Isaiah, JSOT 47 (1990), 6787
Beyerlin, W., Reflexe der Amosvisionen im Jeremiabuch (OBO, 93), Fribourg 1989
Blenkinsopp, J., A Jewish Sect of the Persian Period, CBQ 52 (1990), 520
, Isaiah 139: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 19),
New York 2000
, The Servant and the Servants in Isaiah and the Formation of the Book, in:
C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of
an Interpretative Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 155175
Bogaert, P.-M. (ed.), Le Livre de Jrmie (BEThL, 54), Leuven 1981 [21997]
, Le tmoignage de la Vetus Latina dans ltude de la tradition des Septante:
zchiel et Daniel dans le Papyrus 967, Biblica 59 (1978), 384395
Bhmer, S., Heimkehr und neuer Bund: Studien zu Jeremia 3031 (GTA, 5), Gttingen
1976
Booij, Th., Psalmen (POT), dl. 3, Nijkerk 1994
Bosshard-Nepustil, E., Jesaja 139 und das Zwlfprophetenbuch in exilischer und
frhnachexilischer Zeit: Redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur literari-
schen Vernetzung der Prophetenbcher, Zrich 1995
Bozak, B.A., Life Anew: A Literary-Theological Study of Jer. 30-31 (AnBib, 122), Rome
1991
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, Stuttgart 1987, 3344
Brettler, M.Z., God is King: Understanding an Israelite Metaphor (JSOT.S, 76), Shef-
field 1989
, Predestination in Deuteronomy 30.110, in: L.S. Schearing, S.L. McKenzie
(eds), Those Elusive Deuteronomists: The Phenomenon of Pan-Deuteronomism
(JSOT.S, 268), Sheffield 1999, 171188
Brueggemann, W., Isaiah 4066, Louisville 1998
, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy, Minneapolis
1997
Bruno, A., Jeremia: Eine rythmische Untersuchung, Stockholm 1954
selected bibliography 361
Buber, M., Der Glaube der Propheten, in: Idem, Werke, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1964, 131
484
Buis, P., La nouvelle Alliance, VT 18 (1968), 115
, Les Formulaires dAlliance, VT 16 (1966), 396411
Carroll, R.P., The Book of Jeremiah (OTL), London 1986
Cassuto, U., On the Formal and Stylistic Relationship between Deutero-Isaiah and
Other Biblical Writers (191113), in: Idem, Biblical and Oriental Studies, vol. 1,
Jerusalem 1973, 141177
Clements, R.E., Beyond Tradition-History: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First
Isaiahs Themes, JSOT 31 (1985), 95113
, Jeremiah (Intp), Atlanta 1988
Condamin, A., Les prdictions nouvelles du chap. XLVIII dIsae, RB 19 (1910),
200216
Cook, S.L., Prophecy and Apocalypticism: The Postexilic Social Setting, Minneapolis
1995
Crane, A.S., Israels Restauration: A Textual-Comparative Exploration of Ezekiel 3639
(VT.S, 122), Leiden 2008
Davies, G.I., The Destiny of the Nations in the Book of Isaiah, in: J. Vermeylen (ed.),
The Book of Isaiah (BEThL, 81), Leuven 1989, 93120
Davies, P.R., God of Cyrus, God of Israel: Some Religio-Historical Reflections on
Isaiah 4055, in: J. Davies et al. (eds), Words Remembered, Texts Renewed. Fs
J.F.A. Sawyer (JSOT.S, 195), Sheffield 1995, 207225
, In Search of Ancient Israel (JSOT.S, 148), Sheffield 1992
, The Social World of Apocalyptic Writings, in: R.E. Clements (ed.), The
World of Ancient Israel: Sociological, Anthropological and Political Perspectives,
Cambridge 1989, 251271
Davis, E.F., Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiels
Prophecy (JSOT, 78), Sheffield 1989
Day, J., Gods Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea: Echoes of a Canaanite myth in the
Old Testament, Cambridge 1985
Deurloo, K.A., ist Knig geworden geschichtlich verstanden (Ps. 90100),
in: H. Pavlincov, D. Papouek (eds), The Bible in Cultural Context, Brno 1994,
8186
Dijk-Hemmes, F. van, Betekenissen van Jeremia 31:22b, in: B. Becking et al. (eds),
Door het oog van de Profeten. Fs C. van Leeuwen, Utrecht 1989, 3140
Dim, E.U., The Eschatological Implications of Isa 65 and 66 as the Conclusion of the
Book of Isaiah, Bern 2005
Dohmen, C., Der Sinaibund als Neuer Bund nach Ex 1934, in: E. Zenger (ed.),
Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD, 146),
Freiburg 1993, 5189
Eaton, J.H., Psalms of the Way and the Kingdom: A Conference with the Commentators
(JSOT.S, 199), Sheffield 1995
Edelman, D. The Origins of the Second Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the
Rebuilding of Jerusalem, London 2005
Elliger, K., Der Begriff Geschichte bei Deuterojesaja, in: Idem, Kleine Schriften zum
Alten Testament (TB, 32), Mnchen 1966, 199210
, Deuterojesaja (BKAT, 11/1), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1978
Fechter, F., Priesthood in Exile according to the Book of Ezekiel, in: S.L. Cook,
C.L. Patton (eds), Ezekiels Hierarchical World: Wrestling with a Tiered Reality (SBL
Symposium Series, 31), Leiden 2004, 2741
Filson, F.V., The Omission of Ezek. 12:2628 and 36:23b38 in Codex 967, JBL 62
(1943), 2732
Fischer, G., Das Trostbchlein: Text, Komposition und Theologie von Jer 3031 (SBB,
26), Stuttgart 1993
, Jeremia: Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2007
Fitzgerald, A., BTWLT and BT as Titles for Capital Cities, CBQ 37 (1975), 167183
, The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as a Queen
and False Worship as Adultery in the OT, CBQ 34 (1972), 403416
Fohrer, G., Das Buch Jesaja (ZBK), Bd. 3, Zrich 21966
, Der Israel-Prophet in Jeremia 3031, in: A. Caquot, M.I. Delcor (eds), M-
langes bibliques et orientaux. Fs H. Cazelles (AOAT, 212), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1981,
135148
, Die Struktur der alttestamentlichen Eschatologie, in: H.D. Preuss (ed.),
Eschatologie im Alten Testament (WdF, 480), Darmstadt 1978, 147180
, Ezechiel (HAT I, 13), Tbingen 1955
Franke, C., Isaiah 46, 47, 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Biblical and Judaic
Studies, 3), Winona Lake 1994
Fuhs, H.F., Ezechiel 124 (NEB, 7), Wrzburg 1984
Gadamer, H.-G., Wahrheit und Methode, Tbingen 61990
Garscha, J., Studien zum Ezechielbuch: Eine redaktionskritische Untersuchung von Ez
139 (EHS.T, 23), Bern 1974
Ginsberg, H.L., A Strand in the Cord of Hebraic Hymnody, ErIs 9 (1969), 4550
Gosse, B., Le Psaume 98 et la rdaction densemble du livre dIsae, BN 86 (1997),
2930
Gowan, D.E., Eschatology in the Old Testament, Edinburgh 1987
, Theology of the Prophetic Books: The Death and Resurrection of Israel, Louis-
ville 1998
Greenberg, M., Ezekiel 120 (AncB, 22), Garden City, NY 1983
Gro, W., Erneuerter oder Neuer Bund? Wortlaut und Aussageintention in Jer 31,31
34, in: F. Avemarie, H. Lichtenberger (eds), Bund und Tora: Zur theologischen
Begriffsgeschichte in alttestamentlicher, frhjdischer und urchristlicher Tradi-
tion, Tbingen 1996, 4166
Gunkel, H., Die Psalmen (HK, 2/2), Gttingen 41926
Habets, G., EschatologieEschatologisches, in: H.-J. Fabry (ed.), Bausteine biblis-
cher Theologie. Fs G.J. Botterweck (BBB, 50), Kln 1977, 351369
Hals, R.M., Ezekiel (FOTL, 19), Grand Rapids 1989
Hanson, P.D., Alttestamentliche Apokalyptik in neuer Sicht, in: K. Koch, J.M.
Schmidt (eds), Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982, 440470
, Isaiah 4066 (Interpr.), Louisville 1995
, The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apoc-
alyptic Eschatology, Philadelphia 21979
Hardmeier, C., Geschwiegen habe ich seit langem wie die Gebrende schreie
ich jetzt: Zur Komposition und Geschichtstheologie von Jes 42,1444,23, WuD
20 (1989), 155179
, Jeremia 32,213* als Erffnung der Erzhlung von der Gefangenschaft und
Befreiung Jeremias in Jer 34,7; 37,340,6*, in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und die
deuteronomistische Bewegung (BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 187214
, Probleme der Textsyntax, der Redeeinbettung und der Abschnittgliederung
in Jer 32 mit ihren kompositionsgeschichtlichen Konsequenzen, in: H. Irsigler
(ed.), Syntax und Text: Beitrge zur 22. Internationalen kumenischen Hebrisch-
Dozenten-Konferenz 1993 in Bamberg (ATS, 40), St. Ottilien 1993, 4979
Hermisson, H.-J., Deuterojesaja (BKAT, 11/2), Neukirchen-Vluyn 2003
, Deuterojesaja und Eschatologie, in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New
Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maas-
tricht 2002, 89105
, Einheit und Komplexitt Deuterojesajas: Probleme der Redaktionsgeschich-
te von Jes 4055, in: J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of Isaiah (BEThL, 81), Leuven
1989, 287312
Herrmann, S., Jeremia: der Prophet und das Buch (EdF, 271), Darmstadt 1990
Hobson, J.A., The Dreaming Brain, New York 1988
Hffken, P., Jesaja: Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2004
Holladay, W.H., Jeremiah (Hermeneia), vol. 2, Philadelphia 1989
Holter, K., Second-Isaiahs Idol-Fabrication Passages (BET, 28), Frankfurt 1995
Hossfeld, F.-L., Untersuchungen zu Komposition und Theologie des Ezechielbuches
(FzB, 20), Wrzburg 1977 [21983]
, E. Zenger, Psalmen 51100 (HThKAT), Freiburg 32000
Howard, D.M., The Structure of Psalms 93100, Winona Lake 1997
Hyatt, J.P., The Book of Jeremiah (IB, 5), Nashville 1956
, The Deuteronomic Edition of Jeremiah, in: L.G. Redrue, B.W. Kovacs (eds),
A Prophet to the Nations, Winona Lake 1984, 247267
Irsigler, H., Thronbesteigung in Psalm 93?, in: W. Gro (ed.), Text, Methode und
Grammatik. Fs W. Richter, St. Ottilien 1991, 155190
Irwin, W.A., The Problem of Ezekiel, Chicago 1943
Janowski, B., Das Knigtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Bemerkungen zu einem neuen
Gesamtentwurf, ZThK 86 (1989) 389454
Jenner, K.D., Jerusalem, Zion and the Unique Servant of Yhwh in the New Heaven
and the New Earth: A Study on Recovering Identity versus Lamenting Faded
Glory (Isaiah 15 and 6566), in: A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, A. van der Woude
(eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent: The City as Unifying Theme in Isaiah (OTS,
58), Leiden 2011, 169189
Jenni, E., Eschatology of the OT, in: IDB, vol. 2, New York 1962, 126133
Jeremias, J., Das Knigtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem kana-
anischen Mythos in den Jahwe-Knig-Psalmen (FRLANT, 141), Gttingen 1987
Johnson, A.Ch., et al. (eds), The John A. Scheide Biblical Papyri: Ezekiel (PUSP, 3),
Princeton 1938
Johnson, A.R., The Psalms, in: H.H. Rowley (ed.), The Old Testament and Modern
Study, Oxford 21956, 162209
Jones, D.R., The Traditio of the Oracles of Isaiah of Jerusalem, ZAW 67 (1955),
226246
Jong, S. de, Het verhaal van Hizkia en Sanherib: Een synchronische en diachronische
analyse van II Kon. 18,1319,37 (par. Jes. 3637), Amsterdam 1992
Jngling, H.-W., Eid und Bund in Ez 1617, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue Bund
im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD, 146), Freiburg 1993,
113148
Kaufmann, Y., History of the Religion of Israel, vol. 2, New York 1977 [Hebrew edition
1960]
Kiesow, K., Exodustexte im Jesajabuch: Literarkritische und motivgeschichtliche Anal-
ysen (OBO, 24), Gttingen 1979
Kilpp, N., Eine frhe Interpretation der Katastrophe von 587, ZAW 97 (1985), 210
220
, Niederreien und aufbauen: Das Verhltnis von Heilsverheiung und Unheils-
verkndigung bei Jeremia und im Jeremiabuch (BThS, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn
1990
Kissane, E.J., The Book of Psalms, vol. 2, Dublin 1954
Klopfenstein, M.A., Wenn der Schpfer die Chaosmchte anherrscht und so das
Leben schtzt: Zu einem wenig beachteten Aspekt des Zorns Gottes im Alten
Testament, ThZ 53 (1997), 3343
Knobloch, H., Die nachexilische Prophetentheorie des Jeremiabuches (BZAR, 12),
Wiesbaden 2009
Koch, K., Die Profeten, Bd. 2: Babylonisch-persische Zeit (UTB, 281), Stuttgart
1980
, Einleitung, in: K. Koch, J.M. Schmidt (eds), Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982,
129
Koenen, K., Ethik und Eschatologie im Tritojesajabuch: Eine literarkritische und redak-
tionsgeschichtliche Studie (WMANT, 62), Tbingen 1990
, Jahwe wird kommen, zu herrschen ber die Erde: Ps 90110 als Komposition
(BBB, 101), Weinheim 1995
Kohn, R.L., A New Heart and a New Soul: Ezekiel, the Exile and the Torah (JSOT.S, 358),
Sheffield 2002
Kooij, A. van der, Rejoice, o Thirsty Desert: On Zion in the Septuagint of Isaiah, in:
A.L.H.M. van Wieringen, A. van der Woude (eds), Enlarge the Site of Your Tent:
The City as Unifying Theme in Isaiah (OTS, 58), Leiden 2011, 1120
Koole, J.L., Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 1: Isaiah 4048, Kampen 1997
, Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 2: Isaiah 4955, Kampen 1998
, Isaiah III (HCOT), vol. 3: Isaiah 5666, Leuven 2001
Kratz, R.G., Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes 40,1f. und das Jeremiabuch, ZAW
106 (1994), 243261
, Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja in Jes 40,1f. und seine literarischen Horizonte,
ZAW 105 (1993), 400419
, Kyros im Deuterojesaja-Buch: Redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu
Entstehung und Theologie von Jes 4055 (FAT, 1), Tbingen 1991
Kraus, H.-J., Psalmen (BKAT, 15), Bd. 1, Neukirchen-Vluyn 51978
Kreuzer, S., Gottesherrschaft und Knigtum Gottes, SVT 61 (1995), 145161
Krger, T., Geschichtskonzepte im Ezechielbuch (BZAW, 180), Berlin 1989
Kuyvenhoven, R., Jeremiah 23:18: Shepherds in Diachronic Perspective, in: A.A.
den Hollander et al. (eds), Paratext and Metatext as Channels of Jewish and
Christian Traditions, Leiden 2003, 136
Laato, A., The Composition of Isaiah 4055, JBL 109 (1990), 207228
Labahn, A., Wort Gottes und Schuld Israels: Untersuchungen zu Motiven deuterono-
mistischer Theologie im Deuterojesajabuch mit einem Ausblick auf das Verhltnis
von Jes 4055 zum Deuteronomismus (BZAW, 143), Stuttgart 1999
Lang, B., Ezechiel (EdF, 153), Darmstadt 1981
Leene, H., Auf der Suche nach einem redaktionskritischen Modell fr Jesaja 4055,
ThLZ 121 (1996), 803818
, Blowing the Same Shofar: An Intertextual Comparison of Representations
of the Prophetic Role in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in: J.C. de Moor (ed.), The Elusive
Prophet: The Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous
Artist (OTS, 45), Leiden 2001, 175198
, De stem van de knecht als metafoor: Beschouwingen over de compositie van
Jesaja 50, Kampen 1980
, De vroegere en de nieuwe dingen bij Deuterojesaja, Amsterdam 1987
, Een nieuwe hemel en een nieuwe aarde: Slotakkoord van het boek Jesaja, Ams-
terdam 2002
, Ezekiel and Jeremiah: Promises of Inner Renewal in Diachronic Perspective,
in: J.C. de Moor, H.F. van Rooy (eds), Past, Present, Future: The Deuteronomic
History and the Prophets (OTS, 44), Leiden 2000, 150175
, History and Eschatology in Deutero-Isaiah, in: J. van Ruiten, M. Vervenne
(eds), Studies in the Book of Isaiah. Fs W.A.M. Beuken (BEThL, 132), Leuven 1997,
223249
, Isaiah 27:79 as a Bridge between Vineyard and City, in: H.J. Bosman et al.
(eds), Studies in Isaiah 2427 (OTS, 43), Leiden 2000, 199225
, Jeremiah 31,2326 and the Redaction of the Book of Comfort, ZAW 104 (1992),
349364
, Personal Penitence and the Rebuilding of Zion: The Unity of Psalm 51, in:
J. Dyk (ed.), Give Ear to My Words: Psalms and other Poetry in and around the
Hebrew Bible. Fs N.A. van Uchelen, Amsterdam 1996, 6177
, Psalm 98 and Deutero-Isaiah: Linguistic Analogies and Literary Affinity, in:
R.-F. Poswick (ed.), Actes du Quatrime Colloque International Bible et Informa-
tique: Matriel et Matire (Amsterdam 1994), Paris 1995, 313340
, The Coming of YHWH as King: The Complementary Character of Psalms
96 and 98, in: J.W. Dyk et al. (eds), Unless Some One Guide Me Fs K.A. Deurloo
(ACEBT.S, 2), Maastricht 2001, 211228
, Universalism or Nationalism? Isaiah XLV 913 and its Context, Bijdr. 35
(1974), 309334
, Unripe fruit and dull teeth (Jer 31,29; Ez 18,2), in: E. Talstra (ed.), Narrative
and Comment. Fs W. Schneider, Amsterdam 1995, 8298
Levin, C., Die Verheiung des neuen Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Zusam-
menhang ausgelegt (FRLANT, 137), Gttingen 1985
Liebreich, L.J., The Compilation of the Book of Isaiah, JQR 46 (1955/6), 259277; 47
(1956/7), 114138
Lindblom, J., Gibt es eine Eschatologie bei den alttestamentlichen Propheten?, in:
H.D. Preuss (ed.), Eschatologie im Alten Testament (WdF, 480), Darmstadt 1978,
3172
Lipiski, E., Les psaumes de la royaut de Yahw dans lexgse moderne, in: R. de
Langhe (ed.), Le Psautier, Louvain 1962, 133272
Liwak, R., Der Prophet und die Geschichte: Eine literar-historische Untersuchung zum
Jeremiabuch (BWANT, 121), Stuttgart 1987
Liwak, R., berlieferungsgeschichtliche Probleme des Ezechielbuches: Eine Studie zu
postezechielischen Interpretationen und Kompositionen, Bochum 1976
Lohfink, N., Der junge Jeremia als Propagandist und Prophet: Zum Grundstock von
Jer 3031, in: P.-M. Bogaert (ed.), Le Livre de Jrmie (BEThL, 54), Leuven 1981,
351368
, Die Gotteswortverschachtelung in Jer 3031, in: L. Ruppert et al. (eds),
Knder des Wortes: Beitrge zur Theologie der Propheten. Fs J. Schreiner, Wrzburg
1982, 105119
, Gab es eine deuteronomistische Bewegung? in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und
die deuteronomistische Bewegung (BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 313382
Longman, T., Psalm 98: A Divine Warrior Victor Song, JETS 27 (1984), 267274
Loretz, O., Ugarit und die Bibel: Kanaanische Gtter und Religion im Alten Testa-
ment, Darmstadt 1990
, Ugarit-Texte und Thronbesteigungspsalmen: Die Metamorphose des Regen-
spenders Baal-Jahwe (Ps. 24,710; 29; 47; 93; 95100; sowie Ps. 77,1720; 114) (UBL,
7), Mnster 1988
Lust, J., Gathering and Return in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in: P.-M. Bogaert (ed.), Le
Livre de Jrmie (BEThL, 54), Leuven 1981, 119142, 428430
, De samenhang van Ez. 3640: Theologische relevantie van het ontbreken
van Ez. 36,23c38 in enkele handschriften, TTh 20 (1980), 2639
, Ezekiel 3640 in the Oldest Greek Manuscript, CBQ 43 (1981), 517533
, Major Divergences Between LXX and MT in Ezekiel, in: A. Schenker (ed.),
The Earliest Text of the Hebrew Bible: The Relationship between the Masoretic Text
and the Hebrew Base of the Septuagint Reconsidered (SCSt, 52), Atlanta 2003,
8392
, Textual Criticism of the Old and New Testaments: Stepbrothers? in: A.
Denaux (ed.), New Testament Textual Criticism and Exegesis, Leuven 2002, 15
31
, The Final Text and Textual Criticism: Ez 39,28, in: J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and
His Book (BEThL, 74), Leuven 1986, 4854
, The Spirit of the Lord, or the Wrath of the Lord? Ez 39,29, EThL 78 (2002),
148155
Maier, C., Jeremia als Lehrer der Tora: Soziale Gebote des Deuteronomiums in Fort-
schreibungen des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 196), Gttingen 2002
Matheus, F., Singt dem Herrn ein neues Lied: Die Hymnen Deuterojesajas (SBS, 141),
Stuttgart 1990
Mays, J.L., The Centre of the Psalms, in: S.E. Balentine, J. Barton (eds), Language,
Theology, and The Bible. Fs J. Barr, Oxford 1994, 231246
Mazurel, J.W., De vraag naar de verloren broeder: Terugkeer en herstel in de boeken
Jeremia en Ezechil, Amsterdam 1992
Meer, M.N. van der, A New Spirit in an Old Corpus? Text-Critical, Literary-Critical
and Linguistic Observations regarding Ezekiel 36:1638, in: F. Postma et al. (eds),
The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3),
Maastricht 2002, 147158
Mein, A., Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile (OTM), Oxford 2001
Mendecki, N., Czy Jr 31,79 jest pokrewny oredziu Deuteroizajasza? Collectanea

Theologica 56 (1986), 4453
, Ezechielische Redaktion des Buches Jeremia? BZ 35 (1991), 242247
, Stammt Jer 31,1014 aus der Schule Deuterojesajas? in: K.-D. Schunck, M.
Augustin (eds), Goldene pfel in silbernen Schalen, Frankfurt 1992, 5767
Mettinger, T.N.D., In Search of the Hidden Structure: YHWH as King in Isaiah 4055,
in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies
of an Interpretive Tradition, vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 142154
Michel, D., Deuterojesaja, in: TRE, Bd. 8, 1981, 510530
Michel, D., Studien zu den sogenannten Thronbesteigungspsalmen, in: Idem, Stu-
dien zur berlieferungsgeschichte alttestamentlicher Texte (TB, 93), Gtersloh
1997, 125153
Mielgo, C., Jr 3031: Contactos literarios, EstAg 18 (1982), 175210
Miller, J.W., Das Verhltnis Jeremias und Hesekiels sprachlich und theologisch unter-
sucht: mit besonderer Bercksichtigung der Prosareden Jeremias, Assen 1955
Moor, J.C. de, The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Balu, Neukirchen-Vluyn
1971
Mowinckel, S., He that comes, Oxford 1956
, Psalmenstudien, Bd. 2, Kristiania 1922 (Amsterdam 1961)
Mller, H.P., Mythos und Transzendenz, in: H.D. Preuss (ed.), Eschatologie im Alten
Testament (WdF, 480), Darmstadt 1978, 415443
Neve, L., Realized Eschatology in Psalm 51, ExpT 80 (1968/69), 264266
Nicholson, E.W., Preaching to the Exiles: A Study of the Prose Tradition in the Book of
Jeremiah, Oxford 1970
, The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah, Ch. 125 (CNEB), Cambridge 1973
Nierlinck, F., lOrigine du terme Eschatologie: une rectification, EThL 56 (1980),
414416
North, C.R., The Former Things and the New Things in Deutero-Isaiah, in:
H.H. Rowley (ed.), Studies in Old Testament Prophecy. Fs Th.H. Robinson, Edin-
burgh 1950, 111126
Odashima, T., Heilsworte im Jeremiabuch: Untersuchungen zu ihrer vordeuteronomis-
tischen Bearbeitung (BWANT, 125), Stuttgart 1989
Ohnesorge, S., Jahwe gestaltet sein Volk neu: Zur Sicht der Zukunft Israels nach Ez
11,1421; 20,144; 36,1638; 37,114.1528 (FzB, 64), Wrzburg 1991
Oorschot, J. van, Von Babel zum Zion: Eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtli-
che Untersuchung (BZAW, 206), Berlin 1993
Oosting, R.H., Walls of Zion and Ruins of Jerusalem: A Corpus-Linguistic View on the
Participant Zion/Jerusalem in Isaiah 40-55, Amsterdam 2011
Otto, E., Mythos und Geschichte im Alten Testament: Zur Diskussion einer neuen
Arbeit von Jrg Jeremias, BN 42 (1988), 93102
Paul, S., Literary and Ideological Echoes of Jeremiah in Deutero-Isaiah, in: P. Peli
(ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies (1969), vol. 1, Jeru-
salem 1971, 102220
Perlitt, L., Bundestheologie im Alten Testament (WMANT, 36), Neukirchen-Vluyn
1969
Petersen, C., Mythos im Alten Testament (BZAW, 157), Berlin 1982
Petry, S., Die Entgrenzung JHWHs: Monolatrie, Bilderverbot und Monotheismus im
Deuteronomium, in Deuterojesaja und im Ezechielbuch (FAT, 27), Tbingen

2007
Pfister, M., Das Drama (UTB, 580), Mnchen 41984
Pohlmann, K.-F., Die Ferne GottesStudien zum Jeremiabuch: Beitrge zu den Kon-
fessionen im Jeremiabuch und ein Versuch zur Frage nach den Anfngen der
Jeremiatradition (BZAW, 179), Berlin 1989
, Ezechiel: Der Stand der theologischen Diskussion, Darmstadt 2008
, Ezechielstudien: Zur Redaktionsgeschichte des Buches und zur Frage nach den
ltesten Texten (BZAW, 202), Berlin 1992
, Studien zum Jeremiabuch: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der Entstehung des
Jeremiabuches (FRLANT, 118), Gttingen 1978
Preuss, H.D. (ed.), Eschatologie im Alten Testament (WdF, 480), Darmstadt 1978
Prinsloo, W.S., Psalm 93: Jahwe is van altyd af Koning over alles en almal, NGTT 34
(1993), 248261
Rad, G. von, Theologie des Alten Testaments, Bd. 2, Mnchen 1960 (91987)
, Weisheit in Israel, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1970
Raitt, T.M., A Theology of Exile: Judgment/Deliverance in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Phila-
delphia 1977
Ranke, E. (ed.), Par Palimpsestorum Wirceburgensium antiquissimae Veteris Tes-
tamenti Latinae Fragmentae codd. rescriptus eruit edidit explicuit, Vindobonae
[Vienna] 1871
Rendtorff, R., Ez. 20 und 36,16ff. im Rahmen der Komposition des Buches Ezechiel,
in: J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book (BEThL, 74), Leuven 1986, 260265
, The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation, Edin-
burgh 1998
, Zur Komposition des Buches Jesaja, VT 34 (1984), 295320
Renz, T., The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel (VT.S, 76), Leiden 1999
Rietzschel, C., Das Problem der Urrolle: Ein Beitrag zur Redaktionsgeschichte des
Jeremiabuches, Gtersloh 1966
Rmer, T., Les anciens pres (Jr 11,10) et la nouvelle alliance (Jr 31,31), BN 59
(1991), 2327
Rudolph, W., Jeremia (HAT, 1/12), Tbingen 31968
Ruiten, J.T.A.G.M. van, Een begin zonder einde: De doorwerking van Jesaja 65:17 in de
intertestamentaire literatuur en het Nieuwe Testament, Amsterdam 1990
Ruszkowski, L., Volk und Gemeinde im Wandel: Eine Untersuchung zu Jesaja 5666,
Gttingen 2000
Schenker, A., Der nie aufgehobene Bund: Exegetische Beobachtungen zu Jer 31,31
34, in: E. Zenger (ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden
Testamente (QD, 146), Freiburg 1993, 85112
, Saure Trauben ohne stumpfe Zaehne: Bedeutung und Tragweite von Ez 18
und 33.1020 oder ein Kapitel alttestamentlicher Moraltheologie, in: P. Caset-
ti et al. (eds), Mlanges Dominique Barthlemy (OBO, 38), Fribourg 1981, 449
470
Schmid, K., Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und
Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 3033 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT, 72), Neukir-
chen-Vluyn 1996
Schneider, W., Grammatik des Biblischen Hebrisch: Ein Lehrbuch, Mnchen 2001
Schoors, A., I Am God Your Saviour: A Form-Critical Study of the Main Genres in Is.
XLLV (VT.S, 24), Leiden 1973
, Leschatologie dans les prophties du Deutro-Isae, Rech Bibl 8 (1967),
107128
, Les choses antrieures et les choses nouvelles dans les oracles deutro-
isaens, EThL 40 (1964), 1947
Schpflin, K., Theologie als Biographie im Ezechilbuch: Ein Beitrag zur Konzeption
alttestamentlicher Prophetie (FAT, 36), Tbingen 2002
Schramm, B., The Opponents of Third Isaiah: Reconstructing the Cultic History of the
Restoration (JSOT.S, 193), Sheffield 1995
Schreiner, J., Eschatologie im Alten Testament, in: M. Schmaus et al. (eds), Hand-
buch der Dogmengeschichte, Bd. 4, Freiburg 1986, 131
, Jeremia (NEB, 9), Bd. 2, Wrzburg 1984
Schrter, U., Jeremias Botschaft fr das Nordreich, zu N. Lohfinks berlegungen
zum Grundbestand von Jeremia XXXXXXI, VT 35 (1985), 312329
Schultz, R.L, The Search for Quotation: Verbal Parallels in the Prophets (JSOT.S, 180),
Sheffield 1999
Schunck, K.-D., Die Eschatologie der Propheten des alten Testaments und ihre
Wandlung in exilisch-nachexilischer Zeit, in: H.D. Preuss (ed.), Eschatologie im
Alten Testament (WdF, 480), Darmstadt 1978, 462480
Schwagmeier, P., Untersuchungen zu Textgeschichte und Entstehung des Ezechiel-
buches in masoretischer und griechischer berlieferung, Zrich 2004
Schweizer, H., Prdikationen und Leerstellen im I. Gottesknechtslied (Jes 42:14),
BZ 26 (1982), 251258
Sedlmeier, F., Deine Brder, deine Brder : Die Beziehung von Ez 11,1421 zur
dtn-dtr Theologie, in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und die deuteronomistische Bewe-
gung (BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 297312
, Studien zu Komposition und Theologie von Ezechiel 20 (SBB, 21), Stuttgart 1990
Seidl, T., Texte und Einheiten in Jeremia 2729: Literaturwissenschaftliche Studie (ATS,
5), Bd. 1, St. Ottilien 1977
Seitz, C.R., How Is the Prophet Isaiah Present in the Latter Half of the Book? The
Logic of Chapters 4066 within the Book of Isaiah, JBL 115 (1996), 219240
, The Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of
Isaiah, JBL 109 (1990), 229247
, Theology in Conflict: Reactions to the Exile in the Book of Jeremiah (BZAW, 176),
Berlin 1989
Sekine, S., Die Tritojesajanische Sammlung ( Jes 5666) redaktionsgeschichtlich unter-
sucht (BZAW, 175), Berlin 1989
Selms, A. van, Jeremia (POT), dl. 3, Nijkerk 1974
Simian, H., Die theologische Nachgeschichte der Prophetie Ezechiels: Form- und tra-
ditionskritische Untersuchung zu Ez 6; 35; 36 (FzB, 14), Wrzburg 1974
Sister, M., Die Typen der prophetischen Visionen in der Bibel, MGWJ 78 (1934),
399430
Smelik, K.A.D., Het gezicht van de twee vijgenkorven: De plaats van hoofdstuk 24 in het
boek Jeremia, Kampen 1991
Smith, P.A., Rhetoric and Redaction in Trito-Isaiah: The Structure, Growth, and Au-
thorship of Isaiah 5666 (VT.S, 62), Leiden 1995
Sommer, B.D., Allusions and Illusions: The Unity of the Book of Isaiah in Light
of Deutero-Isaiahs Use of Prophetic Tradition, in: R.F. Melugin, M.A. Sweeney
(eds), New Visions of Isaiah (JSOT.S, 214), Sheffield 1996, 156186
, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 4066, Stanford, CA 1998
Spieckermann, H., Heilsgegenwart: Eine Theologie der Psalmen (FRLANT, 148), Gt-
tingen 1989
Spottorno, V., La omisin de Ez. 36,23b38y la transposicin de captulos en el
papiro 967, EM 50 (1982), 9398
Steck, O.H., Gottesknecht und Sion: Gesammelte Aufstze zu Deuterojesaja (FAT, 4),
Tbingen 1992
, Studien zu Tritojesaja (BZAW, 203), Berlin 1991
Stern, P.D., The Blind Servant Imagery of Deutero-Isaiah and its Implications, Bibl
75 (1994), 224232
Stipp, H.-J., Jeremia im Parteienstreit: Studien zur Textentwicklung von Jer 26, 3643
und 45 als Beitrag zur Geschichte Jeremias, seines Buches und judischer Parteien
im 6. Jahrhundert (BBB, 82), Frankfurt a.M. 1992
, Probleme des redaktionsgeschichtlichen Modells der Entstehung des Jere-
miabuches, in: W. Gro (ed.), Jeremia und die deuteronomistische Bewegung
(BBB, 98), Weinheim 1995, 225262
Sweeney, M.A., Prophetic Exegesis in Isaiah 6566, in: C.C. Broyles, C.A. Evans (eds),
Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretative Tradition,
vol. 1 (VT.S, 70/1), Leiden 1997, 455474
Tackeray, H.S.J., Notes and Studies: The Greek Translators of Ezekiel, JTS 4 (1903),
398411
, The Septuagint and Jewish Worship: A Study in Origins (The Schweich Lec-
tures 1920), London 1921
Talmon, S., Fragments of an Ezekiel Scroll from Masada (Ezek. 35:1138:14), OLoP 27
(1996), 2949
Tannert, W., Jeremia und Deuterojesaja: Eine Untersuchung zur Frage ihres liter-
arischen und theologischen Zusammenhanges, Leipzig 1956
Tate, M.E., Psalms 51100 (WBC, 20), Waco, TX 1990
Thiel, W., Die deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 125 (WMANT, 41), Neukir-
chen-Vluyn 1973
, Die deuteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 2645 (WMANT, 52), Neukir-
chen-Vluyn 1981
Tita, H., Ich hatte meine Tora in ihre Mitte gegeben: Das Gewicht einer nicht
bercksichtigte Perfektform in Jer. xxxi 33, VT 52 (2002), 551556
Toorn, K. van der, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, Cambridge,
MA 2007
Tov, E., Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Minneapolis 1992
Unterman, J., From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiahs Thought in Transition
(JSOT.S, 54), Sheffield 1987
Vermeylen, J., Du prophte Isae lapocalyptique, vol. 2, Paris 1987
Vielhauer, P., Apokalypsen und Verwandtes [31971], in: K. Koch, J.H. Schmidt (eds),
Apokalyptik, Darmstadt 1982, 403439
Vieweger, D., Die literarische Beziehungen zwischen den Bchern Jeremia und Ezechiel
(BEAT, 26), Frankfurt a.M. 1993
Volz, P., Der Prophet Jeremia (KAT, 10), Leipzig 21928

Volz, P., Die Eschatologie der jdischen Gemeinde im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter,
Tbingen 21934
Vriezen, Th.C., Prophecy and Eschatology, VT.S 1, Leiden 1953, 199229
Waldow, H.E. von, Anlass und Hintergrund der Verkndigung des Deuterojesaja,
Bonn 1953
Walsh, J.P., The Case for the Prosecution: Isa 41:2142:17, in: E. Follis (ed.), Directions
in Biblical Hebrew Poetry (JSOT.S, 40), Sheffield 1987, 101118
Wanke, G., Untersuchungen zur sogenannten Baruchschrift (BZAW, 122), Berlin
1971
Webster, E.C., The Rhetoric of Isaiah 6365, JSOT 47 (1990), 89102
Weippert, M., Ich bin JahweIch bin Itar von Arbela: Deuterojesaja im Lichte
der neuassyrischen Prophetie, in: B. Huwyler et al. (eds), Prophetie und Psalmen.
Fs K. Seybold (AOAT 280), Mnster 2001, 3159
Weiser, A., Das Buch des Propheten Jeremia (ATD, 2021), Gttingen 51966
, Die Psalmen (ATD, 1415), Bd. 2, Gttingen 61963
Wendel, U., Jesaja und Jeremia: Worte, Motive und Einsichten Jesajas in der Verkndi-
gung Jeremias (BThSt, 25), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1995
Werlitz, J., Redaktion und Komposition: Zur Rckfrage hinter die Endgestalt von Jesaja
4055 (BBB, 122), Berlin 1999
Westermann, C., Prophetische Heilsworte im Alten Testament (FRLANT, 145), Gttin-
gen 1987
, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas (CTM, 11), Stuttgart 1981
, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas, in: Idem, Gesammelte
Studien (TB, 24), Mnchen 1964, 92170
Wevers, J.W., Ezekiel (CB), London 1969 [21971]
White, J.B., Universalization of History in Deutero-Isaiah, in: C.D. Evans et al. (eds),
Scripture in Context: Essays on the Comparative Method (PTMS, 34), Pittsburgh
1980, 179195
Whybray, N., Reading the Psalms as a Book (JSOT.S, 222), Sheffield 1996
Wieringen, A.L.H.M. van, Analogies in Isaiah, vol. A: Computerized Concordance of
Parallel Texts between Isaiah 5666 and Isaiah 4066; vol. B: Analogies between
Isaiah 5666 and Isaiah 4066, Amsterdam 1993
Wilcox, P., D. Paton-Williams, The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah, JSOT 42 (1988),
79102
Willey, P.T., Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second
Isaiah, Atlanta, GA 1997
Williamson, H.G.M., First and Last in Isaiah, in: H.A. McKay et al. (eds), Of Prophets
Visions and the Wisdom of Sages. Fs R.N. Whybray (JSOT.S, 163), Sheffield 1993,
95108
, The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiahs Role in Composition and Redaction,
Oxford 1994
Wischnowsky, M., Das Buch DeuterojesajaKomposition und Wachstum in Jes
4055, BN 69 (1993), 8796
Woude, H.J.M. van der, Geschiedenis van de terugkeer: De rol van Jesaja 40,111 in het
drama van Jesaja 4055, Maastricht 2005
, What is new in Isaiah 41:1420? On the Drama Theories of Klaus Baltzer
and Henk Leene, in: F. Postma et al. (eds), The New Things: Eschatology in Old
Testament Prophecy. Fs H. Leene (ACEBT.S, 3), Maastricht 2002, 261267
Zenger, E., Das Weltenknigtum des Gottes Israel (Ps 90106), in: N. Lohfink, E. Zen-
ger (eds), Der Gott Israels und die Vlker: Untersuchungen zum Jesajabuch und zu
den Psalmen (SBS, 154), Stuttgart 1994, 151178
(ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente
(QD, 146), Freiburg 1993
, Die Bundestheologieein derzeit vernachlssigtes Thema der Bibelwis-
senschaft und ein wichtiges Thema fr das Verhltnis IsraelKirche, in: E. Zen-
ger (ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente
(QD, 146), Freiburg 1993, 1349
, Israel und die Kirche im gemeinsamen Gottesbund: Beobachtungen zum
theologischen Programm des 4. Psalmenbuchs, in: M. Marcus et al. (eds), Israel
und Kirche heute: Beitrge zum christlich-jdischen Gesprch. Fs. E.L. Ehrlich,
Freiburg 1991, 238257
Ziegler, J. (ed.), Ezechiel (SVTG, 16), Gttingen 1952
Zimmerli, W., Der Wahrheitserweis Jahwes nach der Botschaft der beiden Exil-
spropheten, in: E. Wrthwein, O. Kaiser (eds), Tradition und Situation: Studien
zur alttestamentlichen Prophetie. Fs A. Weiser, Gttingen 1963, 133151
, Ezechiel (BKAT, 13), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969
, Grundriss der alttestamentlichen Theologie, Stuttgart 21975
INDEX OF AUTHORS
Abarbanel, I., 207 Bruno, A., 203

Abma, R., 250, 255, 257 Buber, M., 45, 75
Albani, M., 45, 58, 68, 98, 101 Budde, K., 278
Albertz, R., 22, 35, 45, 68, 73, 75, 80, 9798, Buis, P., 152
106, 113, 128, 148, 164, 185, 191, 194, 196, Buttenweiser, M., 85
252, 277, 279, 301, 304, 307, 316, 324,
327 Carley, K., 185
Allen, L.C., 191 Carroll, R.P., 210, 213, 236, 240, 252, 254, 257,
Anderson, A.A., 1415, 86, 199 304
Anderson, B.W., 200 Cassuto, U., 82, 265, 278, 283, 287288,
Applegate, J., 224, 277 290291, 295, 297299, 304307, 310311
Auffret, P., 18, 24 Childs, B.S., 137
Austin, J.L., 211, 355 Clements, R.E., 76, 241
Collingwood, R.G., 7
Baltzer, D., 164, 170, 193, 198, 286, 327 Condamin, A., 45
Baltzer, K., 45, 49, 6162, 96, 100, 131 Conrad, J., 22
Barrick, W.B., 310 Cook, S.L., 130
Barstad, H.M., 61, 98, 106 Cornill, C.H., 303
Barthlemy, D., 114 Crane, A.S., 174182, 327328
Bauer, A., 200 Culley, R.C., 83
Beaucamp, E., 24
Becker, J., 83, 191 Dahood, M., 86
Becking, B., 201, 204, 211, 238240, 266, 289, Davies, G.I., 74
296, 301, 304, 308 Davies, P.R., 61, 96, 100, 143
Begrich, J., 83 Davis, E.F., 156, 180, 195
Ben-Porat, Z., 5 Day, J., 37
Bentzen, A., 45 Delitzsch, F., 17, 28, 8688, 121
Berges, U., 4647, 59, 6162, 66, 92, 94, 97, Deurloo, K.A., 24, 27, 28
99, 101, 279 Dijk-Hemmes, F. van, 200
Beuken, W.A.M., 66, 82, 97, 99, 109 118119, Dim, E.U., 121, 123, 127, 144, 310
121, 126, 128, 310 Dohmen, C., 317
Beyerlin, W., 241 Donner, H., 98
Blenkinsopp, J., 61, 73, 81, 118, 130, 132, Duhm, B., 199, 251, 257, 277, 302303
139140
Blum, E., 98 Eaton, J.H., 13, 17, 34, 41
Bogaert, P.-M., 173 Edelman, D., 28, 89, 92, 99100
Bhmer, S., 234, 236, 278, 303 Elliger, K., 48, 102, 106, 130
Booij, Th., 14, 17, 28, 30, 41 Ewald, H., 121
Bosshard-Nepustil, E., 75, 82, 307
Bozak, B.A., 200, 240, 308 Fechter, F., 275
Braulik, G., 29 Filson, F.V., 173
Bredenkamp, C.J., 121 Fischer, G., 99, 204, 209, 211, 215, 232, 240,
Brettler, M.Z., 23, 27, 39, 316 248, 252253, 265266, 272, 287290, 292,
Briggs, C.A., 17 297300, 304306, 350
Briggs, E.G., 17 Fitzgerald, A., 257
Brueggemann, W., 2, 319 Fohrer, G., 102, 111113, 130, 193, 304
374 index of authors
Franke, C., 45, 67 Knobloch, H., 213, 232, 248, 252, 299, 305,
Fuhs, H.F., 156 310311, 317, 320321
Koch, K., 24, 45, 144, 164
Gadamer, H.-G., 7, 67, 107, 314 Koenen, K., 15, 22, 2426, 28, 87, 118, 121, 125,
Garscha, J., 183185 128, 130
Gerstenberger, E.S., 197 Kohn, R.L., 261, 276
Ginsberg, H.L., 15, 30, 83, 87 Knig, F.E., 202
Glanz, O., 202, 305 Kooij, A. van der, 107
Gosse, B., 83, 88 Koole, J.L., 87, 131132, 295, 298299
Goulder, M.D., 24 Kratz, R.G., 1, 7073, 82, 92, 97
Gowan, D.E., 100, 188, 257, 342, 351, 356 Kraus, H.J., 14, 30, 90
Greenberg, M., 157, 191 Kreuzer, S., 32
Gro, W., 123, 207, 209, 315 Krger, T., 183, 191, 194
Gunkel, H., 30, 33, 83, 199 Kutsch, E., 206, 315
Kuyvenhoven, R., 258, 264
Habets, G., 102
Hals, R.M., 157 Laato, A., 60
Hanson, P.D., 113, 130, 146148 Labahn, A., 73, 298, 312, 321322
Hardmeier, C., 45, 73, 246 Lang, B., 193
Hermisson, H.-J., 45, 7072, 80, 102105, Leene, H., 1, 13, 33, 4547, 56, 62, 6971, 77,
109110, 131, 283 83, 84, 88, 94, 96, 111, 138, 148, 152, 154,
Herrmann, S., 252 199200, 202, 206, 211212, 233, 235236,
Hitzig, F., 156, 303 238239, 253, 259, 265266, 284
Hobson, J.A., 239 Lelivre, A., 83
Hffken, P., 81, 94, 102, 127 Levin, C., 180, 184, 187, 192194, 199, 247, 249,
Holladay, W.H., 200, 203, 237, 295, 304, 308 261, 270272
Holter, K., 94 Liebreich, L.J., 127
Hossfeld, F.-L., 15, 24, 3133, 91, 185187, 263 Lindblom, J., 102, 104, 106
Howard, D.M., 17, 21, 2426, 30 Lipiski, E., 40
Huizinga, J., 43 Lisowsky, G., 203
Hyatt, J.P., 241, 303 Liwak, R., 193, 310
Lohfink, N., 200, 207, 234, 236, 322
Irsigler, H., 31 Longman, T., 13
Irwin, W.A., 127 Loretz, O., 30, 32, 3738, 313
Lugtigheid, P., 80
Janowski, B., 34, 36, 41 Lust, J., 172, 174175, 177180, 262263, 342
Jenner, K.D., 61 Lyons, J., 355
Jenni, E., 143, 351
Jeremias, J., 17, 23, 30, 3436, 41, 83, 87 Maier, C., 208, 212, 232234, 251252, 272, 311,
Johnson, A.C., 172173 319
Johnson, A.R., 83 Maillot, A., 83
Jones, D.R., 75 Marti, K., 251
Jong, S. de, 78 Matheus, F., 83, 301
Jngling, H.-W., 270 May, H.G., 277
Mays, J.L., 93
Kase, E.H., 172 Mazurel, J.W., 240, 308
Kaufmann, Y., 83 McCarley, R.W., 239
Kiesow, K., 70 Meer, M.N. van der, 174, 176, 269
Kilpp, N., 156, 241242, 246, 295 Mein, A., 170
Kissane, E.J., 17, 121 Mendecki, N., 264, 304
Kittel, R., 14 Mettinger, T.N.D., 32, 8991, 94
Klopfenstein, M.A., 41 Michel, D., 34, 35, 102
index of authors 375
Mielgo, C., 295, 303 Ruiten, J.T.A.G.M. van, 119, 122123, 136,
Millard, M., 24 140143
Miller, J.W., 253, 257, 261, 266, 272 Ruszkowski, L., 117, 124, 132133
Moor, J.C. de, 37
Movers, F.K., 303 Sawyer, J.F.A., 264
Mowinckel, S., 13, 19, 28, 4041, 43, 44, 83, Schenker, A., 156, 157, 200202, 210, 245, 316
351 Schmid, K., 82, 202, 207, 214, 218, 223,
Mller, H.P., 102, 112113 236240, 244246, 248, 250252,
261, 264, 268, 270, 272, 275276, 288,
Ngelsbach, C.F., 121 295, 296, 299, 303306, 312, 314, 316,
Neve, L., 199 341
Nicholson, E.W., 241242 Schmidt, H., 15
Nierlinck, F., 350 Schmidt, W.H., 133
North, C.R., 45 Schneider, W., 34
Ntscher, F., 203 Schoors, A., 45, 102, 104, 300
Schpflin, K., 195
Odashima, T., 235236, 301 Schramm, B., 99, 122, 129130, 132
Oesterly, W.O.E., 19 Schreiner, J., 102, 108, 202, 303305
Ohnesorge, S., 174, 184185, 187189, 192194 Schrter, U., 234, 236
Oorschot, J. van, 7072, 74, 89 Schultz, R.L., 266
Oosterhoff, B.J., 257 Schunck, K.-D., 102103
Oosting, R.H., 88, 92, 97 Schwagmeier, P., 174183, 191, 266, 268
Orelli, C., 121 Schweizer, H., 73
Otto, E., 36, 41 Sedlmeier, F., 192, 194
Sehmsdorf, E., 128
Pakkala, J., 133 Seidl, T., 242
Paton-Williams, D., 60 Seitz, C.R., 75, 78, 81, 264, 274
Paul, S., 295296, 304 Sekine, S., 128
Perlitt, L., 206207 Selms, A. van, 202, 304
Petersen, C., 14, 30, 37 Shakespeare, W., 97, 347
Petry, S., 3536, 87, 90, 94, 194, 260 Simian, H., 185187
Pfister, M., 62, 68 Sister, M., 204
Ploeg, J.P.M. van der, 15 Smelik, K.A.D., 217218
Pohlmann, K.-F., 156, 179, 191194, 217, Smith, P.A., 125, 128, 130
274275, 277278, 356 Sommer, B.D., 7577, 81, 137, 278, 287, 290,
Preuss, H.D., 110 293, 295, 298299, 304305, 307, 318
Prinsloo, W.S., 34 Spieckermann, H., 16, 29, 31, 34, 36, 38,
4142
Rad, G. von, 14, 45, 105, 156 Spottorno, V., 174
Raitt, T.M., 152 Steck, O.H., 70, 117, 119, 123125, 128129, 306
Ranke, E., 107 Stern, P.D., 61, 64
Ranke, L., 173 Stipp, H.-J., 244, 248, 271
Renaud, B., 270 Stolz, F., 30, 164, 245
Rendtorff, R., 81, 192, 259260, 316317, 329, Sweeney, M.A., 119, 127
351
Renz, T., 168 Tackeray, H.S.J., 173
Ridderbos, J., 14 Talmon, S., 173
Riemersma, N., 207 Talstra, E., 36
Rietzschel, C., 242 Tannert, W., 82, 287, 293, 295, 298299,
Ringgren, H., 310 304305, 307
Rmer, T., 232 Tate, M.E., 14, 17, 20, 24, 31, 197
Rudolph, W., 203, 209, 221, 304 Thiel, W., 241242, 246, 260, 277
376 index of authors
Tita, H., 268 Weippert, M., 101, 301

Toorn, K. van der, 6, 189, 208, 211, 251, 319, 354 Weiser, A., 13, 15, 17, 19, 30, 86, 207, 209, 304
Tov, E., 173 Wendel, U., 251, 290, 312
Trible, P., 200 Werlitz, J., 70, 7273, 80, 92, 95, 97, 100, 130
Westermann, C., 130, 164, 193, 300302, 304
Unterman, J., 170, 207, 209, 218, 228229, 250, Wette, W.M.L. de, 303
253, 257, 261, 267, 278, 293, 298, 304306, Wevers, J.W., 173
318, 339 White, J.B., 42
Whybray, N., 24, 121
Van Seters, J., 98 Wieringen, A.L.H.M. van, 6, 74, 131, 134, 254
Vermeylen, J., 128, 130 Wilcox, P., 60
Vielhauer, P., 144 Willey, P.T., 76, 80, 83, 90, 92, 287, 289, 295,
Vieweger, D., 253, 257, 261, 266267, 328 299, 304305, 307309
Volz, P., 130, 203, 302, 304 Williamson, H.G.M., 7480
Vriezen, Th.C., 102103, 105108, 110, 113, Wischnowsky, M., 45, 70
147148, 350 Woude, H.J.M. van der, 6162, 88, 91
Waldow, H.E. von, 45 Zenger, E., 15, 2425, 27, 3033, 91, 206, 210,
Walsh, J.P., 73 315
Wambacq, B.N., 304 Ziegler, J., 173
Wanke, G., 242, 246 Zimmerli, W., 45, 155, 161, 164, 184, 189, 191,
Webster, E.C., 117, 119, 121, 128 193, 257258, 270, 284285, 328
INDEX OF BIBLICAL TEXTS
Genesis 30 277, 344

1 146 30:110 316
1:27 309, 348 30:13 275276
3:14 127 30:2 223, 261
1250 98 30:6 261, 316
13:16 306 30:10 218
17:10 298 30:1520 242
25:27 236 34:1012 320
37:24 252
37:28 252 Joshua
37:35 236 7:7 247
Exodus Judges
15 32, 42 6:22 247
15:1416 42 8:23 94
15:18 34, 38
1934 316 1 Samuel
34 317, 320 3:7 209
8:7 94
Leviticus 10:9 193
14:7 197
14:52 197 2 Samuel
1726 196 15:10 34
18:28 162 22:44 292
25:2452 270
26 317 1 Kings
26:45 20, 232 8:4748 223, 261
14:6 267
Numbers
16:30 296 2 Kings
19:13 197 9:13 20, 35
19:18 176 11:12 87
19:20 197
Isaiah
Deuteronomy 139 7483, 324
4:27 276 112 83, 127
4:29 221, 223, 261 12 82
4:40 226 1 127, 312
5:25 226 1:2 127
12:9 29 1:2831 140
12:29 226 2:15 127
18 320 2:2 294
24:16 267 2:3 292
24:19 309 2:4 17
28:64 267 6 35
29:27 226 6:910 76
378 index of biblical texts
Isaiah (cont.) 40:6 61

8:1618 79 40:89 79
8:23 7677 40:911 94
9:34 75 40:9 84, 88
10:27 289 40:10 295
11:69 126127 40:11 293, 308
11:9 203 40:1231 68
12:23 195 40:12 300
12:6 292 40:1820 94
1314 82 40:20 84
13:913 127 40:2124 107, 284
17:11 290 40:21 68, 78, 300
17:14 290 41:142:17 6264
21 82 41:120 332
23:18 300 41:17 49
2427 83, 127 41:15 72, 106
24:4 127 41:14 81
24:14 292 41:2 68
24:1718 305 41:4 46, 49, 51, 71, 77, 142
24:1819 127 41:5 69
24:18 300 41:67 94
24:23 34, 38 41:813 49, 81
26:12 176 41:89 98, 105
27:13 296 41:8 289, 306, 347
28:26 289 41:10 289, 306
29:18 178, 355 41:11 295
29:1 312 41:13 289
29:8 297 41:1416 4850, 111, 330331
30:89 79 41:14 61, 64
30:8 77 41:15 5960, 6364, 69, 71, 73,
30:26 141, 290 110, 136
32:16 142 41:1720 49, 284
33 82 41:20 104, 282, 285
33:2 288 41:2142:17 332
3435 82 41:2129 106, 284
34:24 127 41:21 94
35 107 41:2223 46, 51, 65, 71
35:56 293, 347 41:22 72, 77
35:5 308 41:25 51, 68, 92, 324
35:910 294 41:26 103
35:10 308309, 347 41:27 77, 84, 88, 95
3639 82 42:113 95
37:24 78 42:19 111, 139
37:26 7779, 278 42:14 5051, 64, 69, 71, 73, 95,
39:6 288 111, 331332
4055 19, 314, 324325, 327, 42:1 7374, 105, 110
329330, 348, 352353 42:4 111
4048 303, 325, 330 42:59 5054, 71, 73, 104, 331
40:35 49, 63 42:57 71
40:3 296 42:67 97
40:5 282283 42:6 69, 111, 297298, 353
40:68 73, 80 42:89 56, 59, 7174
index of biblical texts 379
42:9 4546, 55, 65, 81, 141, 44:920 69, 94

298, 309 44:22 69, 110, 112
42:1013 5354, 56, 9495, 104, 44:23 8485, 105, 111, 294
331 44:26 7980
42:10 12, 8485 44:2728 32
42:12 84, 293 44:28 28, 68, 92, 99100
42:13 52 4547 56, 66
42:1417 52 45:18 97
42:16 308 45:17 285
42:1844:23 105106 45:4 105
42:1843:7 65 45:8 95
42:1825 111, 283 45:11 56, 71
42:1920 69 45:12 278
42:19 74, 7980 45:1314 69
42:2021 164 45:13 69, 92
42:22 98, 290 45:14 92
42:24 290 45:15 285
42:25 282283 45:1617 295
43:1 105, 289, 306, 347 45:1819 68, 107, 284
43:34 100, 347 45:18 332
43:3 69, 289, 306 45:2021 106
43:56 98, 289, 306, 347 45:21 78, 103
43:5 306 45:2225 113
43:6 279 45:22 85
43:844:23 6466 45:25 299300
43:821 332 46 107, 346
43:913 69, 81, 106 46:1 68
43:9 46, 55, 69, 7172, 103 46:2 290
43:10 105 46:3 69, 113
43:14 55, 6869 46:57 94
43:15 94 46:911 46, 56, 71
43:1621 5456, 72, 81, 331332 46:9 45, 72, 136
43:1617 105 46:10 46
43:1819 46, 71, 105 46:11 78
43:18 7, 45, 66, 72, 81, 136, 318 46:12 113
43:1921 107, 285 47 61, 65, 69
43:19 8, 59, 74, 136, 141, 296, 47:3 282
309, 332, 348 47:6 98, 292
43:21 59, 105 47:1013 58
43:2244:5 65 47:11 57
43:23 312 48 6667
43:24 312 48:111 5660, 7273, 283, 332
43:25 69, 208, 299, 312, 317 48:1 69
43:27 136, 312 48:2 92
43:28 282 48:311 46
44:12 105, 289, 306, 347 48:36 107, 285
44:5 113 48:3 45, 81, 141
44:623 332 48:4 283
44:68 69, 71, 106 48:67 309, 348
44:67 56 48:6 309
44:6 46, 77, 94, 142 48:7 136, 296
44:7 46 48:911 285
Isaiah (cont.) 52:1 92

48:9 283 52:712 95
48:10 5860, 67, 69, 105, 110, 52:710 104
332 52:7 34, 38, 8485, 88, 9495
48:1222 332 52:9 85
48:1215 72 52:10 30, 54, 85, 9495, 283
48:12 46, 77, 142 52:1112 99
48:13 68 52:11 92, 99100
48:15 109 52:1353:12 95
48:16 59, 67, 69, 7374, 80, 52:1415 297
109111, 286, 332 5354 109, 131
48:1719 113 53 126
48:2049:1 308 53:12 333
48:20 111, 279, 293294, 308, 53:1 54, 85, 9495, 331
347 53:78 307, 347
48:21 68, 293, 308, 347 53:10 138139
48:22 288 53:11 113
4955 303, 325, 353 54:13 203, 302
49:1 111, 293, 307, 347 54:1 292
49:2 54, 95, 331 54:2 291
49:3 111, 113 54:4 295
49:4 74 54:6 295
49:7 105 54:710 108
49:8 111, 297, 353 54:10 109
49:1011 293, 308, 347 54:1117 110
49:11 296 54:13 80
49:13 8485 54:17 138
49:1421 302, 346 55:13 302
49:15 309 55:2 294
49:18 309 55:5 292
49:20 296 55:69 278
49:23 285 55:7 112
49:26 282 55:11 61
50:111 95 55:1213 99
50:24 138, 310, 348 55:12 8485, 87, 99
50:4 7980 55:13 107
50:7 285 5666 325, 327
50:9 108 56:18 286
50:1011 73, 80, 112, 140, 353 56:34 132
51 61 56:957:13 126
51:18 112 57:20 25
51:3 85, 291 57:21 288
51:48 110 58 132
51:5 41, 8485 58:11 294, 306, 347
51:6 108109, 127, 141 59:21 273, 298
51:7 209, 289, 298, 306, 312 60:14 290
51:8 108 60:18 201
51:952:12 91, 95 60:1920 126
51:9 94 60:19 299, 306
51:1112 294 60:21 201
51:11 308309, 347 61:3 201
51:15 299, 305306, 347 61:4 136137
62:2 118 66:15 310, 348

62:4 290 66:16 310
62:10 296 66:19 125
62:11 295 66:2223 125
62:12 290 66:22 136
63:764:11 123, 334
63:79 137 Jeremiah
63:89 124 1:5 293, 307, 347
63:15 124, 296 1:8 306307, 347
63:16 125 1:1113 241
63:17 124, 129 1:19 306307, 347
63:18 124 2:7 162
63:19 125, 141 2:8 208, 234, 251
64:1 124 2:32 309
64:5 124 3 271272, 326, 341
64:6 124 3:14:2 228, 249250
64:7 125 3:15 250
64:8 124 3:2 237
64:10 124, 129, 132 3:613 250, 253258, 271, 342
64:11 115, 124 3:6 250
6566 8283, 127, 196, 312 3:7 253, 255
65:166:4 117 3:8 253, 256, 320
65 114123, 134136, 315, 3:11 254, 256, 259
327, 333334, 349, 3:1418 258
353354 3:14 232, 249
65:1 124 3:15 258
65:5 124 3:16 230, 249, 318
65:6 124 3:1920 250
65:7 334 3:21 249, 308
65:810 319 3:2225 250
65:89 124 3:22 227, 249, 305, 341
65:1116 140 46 328
65:12 138, 310, 348 4:1 227229
65:1617 136137 4:2 250
65:16 124, 334 4:12 310
65:17 8, 108, 140144, 296, 4:13 310, 348
309310, 318, 334, 348, 4:2326 310
351 4:30 255, 258259
65:18 141, 348 5:22 305
65:21 278, 310, 348 6:14 213, 259, 265
65:22 124 6:1621 259
65:24 138 6:20 312
65:25 203 6:23 305
66 145 7 251
66:12 16, 117, 124125 7:7 268
66:1 29, 125, 146 7:13 138, 310311, 348
66:2 129130, 132133 7:21 312
66:4 123, 138, 310, 348 7:22 210, 312
66:5 130, 132133, 325, 354 7:23 208
66:711 125 7:27 138, 310, 348
66:12 125, 294 8:8 233, 251, 320
66:13 125 8:11 213, 265
Jeremiah (cont.) 29:28 243, 310, 348

9:23 261 3031 211215, 271, 273,
10:14 272 288300, 326327,
11 230233, 251, 315316, 329, 340, 348350,
340341 356
11:10 210, 312, 315 30:14 339
11:15 251 30:2 212, 214, 248, 326
11:19 307, 347 30:4 326
15:19 227229, 341 30:531:26 234240, 314315, 339,
15:20 306307, 347 344, 346, 348
16:14 318 30:524 303
16:15 263, 342 30:511 302
16:18 121 30:57 232, 271, 340
17 233 30:5 213, 265, 343
17:26 312 30:9 177
18:18 208, 233, 251 30:1011 211, 300, 302, 307, 347
2124 277 30:10 306307, 347
21:5 227 30:11 265, 306, 343, 347
23:18 258 30:12 313
23:3 227, 263264, 342 30:15 211
23:7 318 30:22 211, 265
23:8 263264, 342 30:2324 251
23:932 259 31 108, 176, 183
23:1314 259 31:126 303
23:1920 240 31:714 302
24 241242, 252, 259261, 31:79 301
271, 273, 277, 279, 31:7 308, 347
316317, 326327, 341, 31:8 308, 347
344 31:9 308, 347
24:57 216219, 275, 339 31:1014 301, 308
24:7 245, 259, 269, 342 31:12 306, 308309, 347
24:810 276 31:1517 302, 346
24:9 276 31:15 249, 308
25:2731 239 31:16 236
26 272, 320321 31:1819 250
26:4 233, 251, 320 31:18 227229, 249, 272, 341,
26:18 321 349
2728 220 31:2126 200204, 337338
27:5 278 31:22 237239, 309310,
27:11 278 314315, 337, 348349,
27:22 244 351, 356
28:6 244 31:2325 238
29 242245, 252, 275, 31:24 204, 302
277, 279, 326, 341342, 31:25 302
344 31:26 239, 326
29:1 212 31:2734 204210, 337339
29:5 310, 348 31:29 249, 266267, 343
29:7 218 31:30 267
29:1014 219223, 278, 339 31:3134 230, 268269, 315, 317,
29:14 262263, 342 320, 343, 348, 356
29:1619 244 31:31 249, 318, 337
29:18 276 31:32 249
31:33 233, 251, 268, 273274, 312 3:7 164, 283

31:34 208, 269, 312, 317, 319 5:8 283
31:3537 210, 356 6:810 168
31:35 305306, 347 6:9 200
31:36 305306, 349 7:26 233
31:39 203 811 193, 275
32 194, 246249, 252, 261, 10:17 165
270271, 316317, 326, 11 183, 194, 259261, 271,
344 279, 325326, 344
32:1 214 11:221 193
32:78 270 11:5 164
32:11 248 11:13 247
32:14 212 11:1421 168, 193
32:15 246 11:15 261, 270
32:3741 223227, 339, 343 11:1920 165, 193
32:37 263, 269, 342 11:18 250
32:39 259, 269 11:19 170, 247, 259, 268269,
32:40 230, 249, 269, 340 342
32:42 247 11:21 247
33:3 309 11:25 172
33:8 269 12:2628 173
33:20 230 13 259
33:22 300, 306 13:9 270, 343
33:2526 306 13:10 265
33:25 230 13:16 265
34 230 14:11 168
35:17 138, 310311, 348 16 259, 267, 317
3643 272 16:8 257
36 321 16:1013 259
38:6 252 16:30 176
38:13 252 16:5152 254, 256
40:1 237 16:5963 168, 270
4144 276 16:60 269
42:11 306 17:2224 168
45 272 17:23 196
46:2728 211, 300, 306 17:24 284
48:4344 305 18 169, 192, 267, 271272,
5051 82, 278, 344 325, 336, 355
50:5 230, 249, 269270 18:220 154
50:12 82 18:2 157, 266267, 343
50:20 208209 18:2132 153157
50:3435 292 18:31 170, 192, 325, 335
50:39 204 20:144 171, 192193, 336
51:1 272 20:9 283
51:11 272 20:14 283
51:17 272 20:17 172
51:60 212 20:22 283
20:32 164
Ezekiel 20:33 327
1:12 165 20:4144 163
1:2021 165 20:4344 179
2:4 164, 283 20:44 283
Ezekiel (cont.) 36:26 170, 259, 268269

21:4 282 36:27 176, 180, 268, 273, 343
21:8 169 36:28 260, 265, 268
21:10 282 36:31 268269
22:116 168 36:32 179, 187
22:612 169 36:3536 268
22:14 284 36:36 188, 284
22:22 283 36:37 184
22:2331 169 37 165166, 328, 355
23 250, 253258, 267, 342 37:1 176, 193
23:4 257 37:114 175
23:11 253, 255 37:9 190
23:13 253, 256, 269 37:10 178
23:40 259 37:1114 167, 336
24:14 168 37:14 284
29:1213 194 37:1528 166
29:13 265 37:2125 180
29:14 264 37:2224 178
29:1721 191 37:22 178
30:23 194 37:23 180, 182
30:26 194 37:2425 177
33 279, 326 37:24 178, 180, 196
33:120 336 37:26 247, 269
33:19 259 37:28 180
33:1020 169170 3839 166, 328, 355356
33:20 155 39:1116 176
33:2329 261 39:12 178
33:2426 168 39:2229 182
33:24 196 39:2529 179
33:2526 173 39:25 264
34 166, 258, 264 39:28 181182
34:12 265 39:29 166167, 180181, 336
34:2324 177 4048 196
34:25 175 40:1 166
34:29 175 40:57 99
35:136:15 166 42:14 117
3639 174, 327328 43:1827 321
36 108, 192, 271, 273, 285, 43:19 176
325, 328, 343, 355356 44 196
36:115 184 44:431 275
36:11 182 44:9 286
36:1638 157165, 183190, 269 44:19 117
36:1718 168 44:23 167
36:17 188 45:20 167
36:18 182 46:20 117, 167
36:19 168 47:612 190
36:20 179
36:22 179, 187 Hosea
36:2338 172183, 325 2:4 257
36:23 186, 188 3:5 177
36:25 196, 269 11 237
36:2627 187, 189, 335 14:25 250
Amos 47 38, 42, 93

5 237 47:9 34, 38
7:17 241 48 35, 178, 355
8:13 241 50:23 25
9:4 241 50:3 21
9:15 241 51 146, 196200, 273,
336337
Micah 52:7 307
4:7 34, 38 68:12 88
73:17 43
Nahum 74:1217 32, 38
1:15 88 76 178, 355
3:19 290, 313 82:8 41
85 20
Zephaniah 93100 2427, 39, 9196, 314,
3:15 94 323325, 327, 329330,
333, 348, 352353
Zechariah 9397 32
2:4 202 93 29, 31, 3638, 42, 91, 323
2:8 203 93:1 23, 30, 3436, 39
2:16 203 93:2 39, 329
3 196 94 38, 330
4:6 178 94:6 43
78 132 95:5 38
7:17 196 95:11 29, 33, 43
7:1 28 96 1318, 2931, 39, 42,
12 178, 355 8390, 323324, 327,
14 178, 355 330, 333
14:9 38 96:1 12, 33, 39, 329
14:11 204 96:5 38
14:17 31 96:7 30
96:10 23, 3435, 330
Malachi 96:13 21
3:16 133 97 31, 330
97:1 3435, 39
Psalms 97:11 32, 101, 353
2 178, 355 98 15, 1821, 3839, 4243,
9:611 17 8390, 314, 323324,
18:44 292 327, 330, 333, 348, 352
19 45 98:1 12, 3233, 39, 329
19:8 31 98:2 283
22:28 31 98:3 3132
24 35 98:6 38
24:79 21 98:9 330
25:6 20 99 330
29 16, 23, 3132, 37 99:1 3435, 39
29:56 78 99:8 43
33:13 1213 100 17
37:31 209, 298, 312 100:1 3233
40 88 106:45 20
40:4 13 111119 32
40:9 207, 298, 312 126 20
Psalms (cont.) 6:15 28, 196

141:7 166 9:4 130, 132133, 279
144:9 13 10:3 130, 132133
146150 32 10:6 279
146:10 34, 38
149:1 12 Nehemiah
7:64 277
Job
26:1213 305 1 Chronicles
26:12 299 16 29
16:31 3435
Proverbs
3:3 298 2 Chronicles
7:3 298 25:4 267
20:9 199 30:19 199
22:11 199
Sirach
Ruth 39:1 156
4:67 270
Matthew
Song of Songs 2:18 308
5:6 239
7:2 239 Luke
1:54 40
Lamentations 2:30 40
3:54 307
5:21 249 2 Peter
3:4 143
Daniel 3:10 142
9:7 276 3:13 142
Ezra Revelation
16 2829, 92, 99 14:3 40
1:24 99 15:4 40
2:62 277 19:11 40
6:25 99 2021 174
6:3 99 21:18 141142

(OS 064) Leene (Ed.) - Newness in Old Testament Prophecy - An Intertextual Study 2013 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

(OS 064) Leene (Ed.) - Newness in Old Testament Prophecy - An Intertextual Study 2013 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Newness

in Old Testament Prophecy

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/ots

Copyright 2014 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

II Newness in the Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship, Deutero- and

Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.2.8.3 Relations with Psalms 96 and 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

III Newness in Ezekiel and Jeremiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

3.2.5 Diachronic Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234

IV New at the Crossroads of Two Prophetic Traditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281

V The New as Scenario and Programme: Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323

Selected Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359

We celebrated the hundredth birthday of Gerhard von Rad in a sunlit Heidel-

Abbreviations of series, handbooks and journals in this volume are accord-

1.1. What is New in Prophecy1

The word new appears more frequently in studies on prophetic eschatology

4 Formulated concisely in Moltmann, Antwort, 209.

and Jeremiah. A straightforward programme is followed in these chapters:

Intertextuality refers to the ability of texts to be connected to other texts

Theory of Literature 1 (1976), 105128.

Besides these linguistic and literary dimensions, intertextuality carries

11 H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode, Tbingen 61990, 375384.

intentions commentaries may have had of linking these texts as variable

NEWNESS IN THE PSALMS ON YHWHS KINGSHIP,

Psalms on Yhwhs Kingship

2.1. A New Song: Psalms 96 and 98

1 Cf. S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien, Bd. 2, Kristiania 1922 [Amsterdam 1961], 3: Dem

2 Sing to Yhwh, bless his name,

Kultfeier (Weiser, Psalmen, 430).

1113. In the prosody, a weak caesura occurs after v. 12 even though v. 13

exegetical discussion on v. 13 concentrates mainly on whether the repeated

he will always do this in his faithfulness. In other words, he will conduct

perhaps Ps. 85.

2.1.3. Contextual Embedding of Psalms 96 and 98

We will refrain from drawing further summarising comparisons, and will

(d) Many of the differences mentioned above should be seen in relation to

We can now attempt to understand the differences and similarities between

1989, 133, 152.

as eine moderne Exegese von Ps 29,1f.

23 Koenen, Komposition, 3035 offers summaries of the proposals by Goulder, Howard,

cycle 93100 could gradually have expanded.

29 Cf. Deurloo, Knig, 8485.

and not a future-eschatological orientation. Only in this way is it possible

2.1.3.2. Diachronic Aspects

1989, 185; italics HL.

where v. 5 is considered a later addition because it speaks about the rela-

184; Zenger, Weltenknigtum, 159; Howard, Psalms 93100, 113.

Israel in 98:3.41 If indeed it is plausible to understand Ps. 96 as a younger

41 only appears three times in the Psalms. In Ps. 22:28 is parallel to

. See Zech. 14:17 for a comparison with Ps. 96 regarding .

he also leans towards a post-exilic dating.

Grammatik. Fs W. Richter, St. Ottilien 1991, 155190, esp. 158.

alternative approach reasons that the verse is a later addition to an already

2.1.4. Enthronement According to Psalms 93100

51 Correction to H. Leene, The Coming of YHWH as King: The Complementary Character

53 See e.g. D. Michel, Studien zu den sogenannten Thronbesteigungspsalmen, in: Idem,

neuen Gesamtentwurf, ZThK 86 (1989) 389454, esp. 420 n. 108.

56 Cf. Jeremias, Knigtum, 160161.

implications which were broadly elaborated in some of the later prophets.

Testament, Kampen 2002, 296.

Thine throne was established long ago

Testament, Cambridge 1985, 3.