S.W. Flynn, «Where Is YHWH in Isaiah 57,14-15?», Vol. 87 (2006) 358-370
This study suggests a reading of Isaiah 57, 14-15 in the Hebrew Bible which goes
against the theological Tendenz of some Versions and the interpretation of some
contemporary scholars. It explores how both the Versions and contemporary
scholarship have interpreted the passage, draws a parallel between the two
interpretations, and suggests that their either/or distinction of what the passage
means may not reflect the complex nature of sacred space and Divine Presence in
the BH. This study suggests that the text holds two meanings that are
complementary. Yet these meanings are placed in a respective foreground and
background which reveals their levels of emphasis intended by the
author/redactor of Trito-Isaiah.
Where Is YHWH in Isaiah 57,14-15? 359
and modern interpretation. Below we will explore how the Tendenz in
multiple Versions can alert us to some assumptions in modern
scholarship regarding their either/or interpretation of where YHWH
can dwell. However, such distinctions tend to ignore other possibilities
in reading; in this case, since YHWH is viewed as transcendent any
implication of an immanent YHWH in the temple is not imagined. But
what if the intention of Trito-Isaiah is more multifaceted than the
Versions or contemporary scholars have recognized? Through
observing the context of the passage and an analysis of key terms in
the text, we propose that an either/or interpretation may not be the
most accurate and that an earthly temple is another possibility in the
outlook of this text.
1. Interpretive Difficulties: Ancient and Modern
a) What the Versions say
These questions call for answers, as there seem to be some early
interpretive difficulties concerning what ‘dwelling’ really meant. Let
us look at how the Versions approach this problem in Isa 57,15 (4).
First, we notice in the MT that the dwelling is somehow related to
the marginalized group, yet that relationship is unclear. Syntactically,
the ˆwkva “I will dwell†relates to God dwelling on high; the ‘atnah
appears with the verb and indicates that the dwelling relates to the
statement before it vwdqw µwrm (5). But also, the preposition ta, “withâ€
preceded by the waw conjunction — to be taken as an adjunctive
“also†— makes the dwelling do double duty and relate to the clause
concerning the jwrAlpvw akd “contrite and poor of spiritâ€. Furthermore,
no matter which way we take the preposition ta, — as accompaniment
or locative — the verb and the preposition are directed towards the
marginalized and crushed groups.
(4) The Versions are agreed on the reading of v. 14. Yet there are some minor
differences. The LXX has e;rousin “and they will say†while the MT has the third
masculine singular. Finally, the relevant Dead Sea Scrolls in IQIsaa and 1QIsad are
generally in agreement with the MT. Also, I use the categorization of “changesâ€
in the following discussion carefully and for convenience of study use the MT as
a base text, yet in no way do I assert that it is superior to the LXX or other
Versions.
(5) Blenkinsopp is right to point out that 1QIsaa and 4QIsad represent the third
person instead of the MT’s “I will dwell†(J. BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 56–66. A New
Translation and Commentary [AB 19B; New York 2003]) 167. Yet the question
of who the speaker is does not change the reality of dealing with how that
dwelling relates to the marginalized.