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.
360 S.W. Flynn
The other Versions, possibly being confused by the place of the
verb and the use of the ta,, seem to emphasize YHWH’s transcendence
rather than dwelling with this marginalized group and any possible
implication of an immanent YHWH in an earthly temple. The LXX
takes an interesting position by omitting taw ˆwkva “I will dwell and
withâ€. Rather, the LXX uses a series of participles to say that YHWH
will do these things for the people, and that YHWH dwells
(anapauomeno"), but not that he will dwell taw “with†them. Thus, it
[ v
seems the LXX does not imply a YHWH immanent in the earthly
temple (6). Not only is the taw absent, but the lack of the verbal form
deemphasizes YHWH’s desire about his dwelling. Furthermore,
instead of the noun µwrm possibly implying a tangible place (Isa 37,24,
2 Kgs 19,23; Isa 22,16) the LXX has an adjective describing the Lord
as the Most High. For the LXX, YHWH is holy, high and will do these
things but without a reference to where the action will come from.
Thus, the text of the LXX understands YHWH as transcendent and
clearly departs from the possibility of YHWH dwelling “with†the
marginalized.
Likewise, the changes in Tg. Ps.-J. more explicitly reinforce the
idea that YHWH is transcendent. It reads aymvb yrvd “dwelling in the
heavens†instead of “dwelling forever â€.
Then, Tg. Ps.-J. deals with the problem of the MT vwdqw µwrm
akdAtaw ˆwkva by stating “On High He dwells (yrv amwrb) and holy is
His Shekhinahâ€. While the LXX removes the problem of where
YHWH dwells by taking it out of the equation, Tg. Ps.-J gives YHWH
a clear place in heaven. Tg. Ps.-J places the Shekhinah on high in
heaven, supporting a transcendent YHWH and showing that the
author/translator was not thinking of an earthly Temple.
The Peshitta follows the changes of its predecessors that support a
more transcendent reading. The first major difference is that the
Peshitta does not have references to high and lifted up; it only has
)LQ$Mw “the honored/exalted one†rather than acnw µr. But more
(6) Our theory of the LXX representing the situation differently could be
complicated if the variant is explained as an unintentional error or a case of simple
parablepsis. This is unlikely given the multiple differences between the MT and
the LXX. The differences increase the likelihood of a different Vorlage, yet even
if this is the case the fact remains that we have two separate texts interpreting
differently the idea of where YHWH dwells. For a discussion of the cautions that
must be taken when studying the Septuagint as a text of exegesis, see J. JOOSTEN,
“Exegesis in the Septuagint Version of Hoseaâ€, Intertextuality in Ugarit and
Israel (ed. J.C. DE MOOR) (Leiden 1998) 62-85.