Deutero-Isaiah: A commentary on Isaiah 40-55 / Isaiah II. Vol. 2. Isaiah 28-39

Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40-55. By Klaus Baltzer. Translated by M. Kohl. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001, 597 pp., $78.00; Isaiah II. Vol. 2: Isaiah 28-39. By Willem A. M. Beuken. Leuven: Peeters, 2000, 420 pp., $45.00 paper.

Baltzer's commentary is the most thorough exposition of Isaiah 40-55 currently available; in it the book of Isaiah is presented as "liturgical drama." One of the earliest modern scholars to identify the Book of Isaiah as "drama" was John D. W. Watts (Isaiah 1-33; Isaiah 34-66 [WBC]). While this view has not been readily accepted by other modern scholars, it is significantly more reasonable to understand Isaiah 40-55 as drama for two reasons: (1) speakers suddenly appear in the book with little introduction; and (2) events in the future are alluded to with few historical references. Baltzer's suggestions are interesting, but a definitive identification of Isaiah 40-55 as a liturgical drama still lacks important elements, such as introductions to set the stage or situation, introductions of the speakers, and intermissions or breaks in the narrative to clarify the scenes.

While Baltzer admits that there is no longer consensus concerning "Third" (or Trito-) Isaiah (Isaiah 56-66) (p. 1), he follows current scholarly thinking concerning the division of the book of Isaiah into a "Second" (or Deutero-) Isaiah (Isaiah 40-55), as argued by J. C. Doderlein, J. G. Eichhorn, and B. Duhm. Without any further elaboration, Baltzer merely restates what is currently offered as evidence for Deutero-Isaiah: (1) the historical events that form the background for each section are different (Isaiah's enemies are the Assyrians; Deutero-Isaiah's are the Babylonians); (2) Deutero-Isaiah presupposes the exile (598/597 BC) and the fall of Jerusalem (587/586 BC); (3) the Persian King, Cyrus II (559-530 BC) is mentioned; (4) there are differences in literary styles and genres (Isaiah's theology is primarily judgment, whereas Deutero-Isaiah proclaims salvation and a new beginning (p. 1). It is questionable whether this evidence is sufficient to argue for such a late date of Isaiah 40-55. However, this later date is important to Baltzer's arguments concerning its structure: the possibility of a structure borrowed from the Attic Greeks is more plausible if written in the sixth or fifth century BC and less plausible if written in the eighth or seventh century BC.

Baltzer's commentary makes several contributions to Isaiah research. First, his bibliography on Isaiah 40-55 is extensive and selects in-depth works on Isaiah 40-55. Second, while his argument that Isaiah 40-55 is a liturgical drama is not entirely convincing, it is an interesting understanding of this section of the book. Third, Baltzer makes an intriguing statement relative to the collection of Scripture (p. 25): "One continual problem for me is the immense knowledge of Scripture that these texts demonstrate. They presuppose a library. Completeness cannot be shown, but important parts of the Pentateuch are known, as well as Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. It is striking, for example, that a number of sayings about Babylon are taken over. Were there anthologies or concordances?" We believe that it is possible to argue even further that at some point OT works were written down and retained as authoritative revelation from God.

Serious questions can be raised regarding Baltzer's interpretation of the identity of the Servant in the Servant Songs as Moses. He argues that there was a reticence to mention the name Moses, citing as evidence Hos 12:14 [MT 13] and Psalm 78. But, there is ample evidence on the other side in the Psalms (e.g. 77:20; 99:6; 103:7; 105:26) and the prophets (Isa 63:11, 12; Jer 15:1; Dan 9:11, 13; Mic 6:4; Mal 4:4). Several verses in the Servant Songs do not favor Moses. For example, in Isa 42:1 it is hard to see how Moses brings justice to the nations (to Israel perhaps, but not to the nations); it is also unlikely that in 42:4 Moses would establish justice in the earth. In Isa 42:6 the servant is said literally to be "given as a covenant to the people"; Moses brought a covenant, but was not a covenant himself. The darkness of prison and house of imprisonment in Isa 42:7 makes more sense as Babylon than Egypt. References in Isaiah 52-53 do not reflect Moses' life: (1) When was Moses' appearance marred more than any man (52:14)? (2) How could Moses be said to have sprinkled many nations (52:15) and be offered as a guilt offering (53:10)? (3) The person of Isa 53:2 "had no form or majesty," and yet Moses was raised in the household of an Egyptian pharaoh. (4) When was Moses pierced for the people (53:5)? (5) Isaiah 53:9 speaks of his grave being with the rich, but tradition says that Moses was taken up into heaven and hence had no grave.

Beuken agrees with modern scholarship in understanding the book of Isaiah as having a core of Isaianic material from the eighth century prophet with later redactions added to shape the book and make it relevant for each new generation. One of the more questionable points of this debate is whether there is an Assyrian or Josianic redaction sometime shortly before the exile, before a later postexilic redaction. Beuken clearly agrees with such a redaction (pp. x-xi):