MIQRA Institute of Biblical Studies
Reading Scripture, Hearing God
Brueggemann, W. Isaiah. WBC. 2 Vols. Westminster John Knox, 1998 (577 pp.). Many will find B to be the most readable of the commentaries reviewed here. His may also be the most readily conducive to sermon preparation; B has a flair for the poetic and a knack for putting it memorably. In fact, the commentary itself often reads like a homily. But this sometimes has a downside. While B is a seasoned scholar and a good exegete, the poetical prose of his theological reflection is not always the most cautious or exacting. Its (laudable) intent is to initiate fresh reflection under the conviction that the book of Isaiah does have a word to say to modern men and women–and it does this well. It is important to have the freedom to formulate provocatively, but the reader will want to check the math here and there. High marks for readability and for rendering a very complex book into a manageable conceptuality.
Blenkinsopp, J. Isaiah 1-39; 40-55; 56-66. AB. 3 Vols. Doubleday, 2000, 2000, 2003 (983 pp.). The token critical contribution among the commentaries reviewed here, B’s commentary is immensely learned, and there is an enormous amount of information packed into three volumes. This doesn’t mean that he’s got all the right ideas about everything (the textual discussion is not as careful as in Oswalt), but it is by far (Childs notwithstanding) the most academically informative treatment of Isaiah reviewed here. Not surprisingly, the commentary is directed toward the research student. Striking is how much space B devotes to introducing Isaiah 40-55. See Seitz’s penetrating reflections on this practice in the introduction to his NIB commentary. A number of the introductory discussions in each of B’s commentaries will be superfluous for the pastor or Bible study leader, but as a general resource for getting right into the trade discussions in Isaiah study, it is quite helpful.
Childs, B. S. Isaiah. OTL. Westminster John Knox, 2001 (555 pp.). C’s commentary is committed to approaching the book exegetically from a certain theological standpoint: that the vision of Isaiah witnesses to God’s ways with his people Israel, and that this witness has been received now by the church for its own instruction. As such, C’s commentary consistently addresses historical and critical issues as penultimate (a departure from Blenkinsopp), demonstrating in his exegesis how a reading should move beyond these in the way the church, historically, has done (cf. also C’s The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture [Eerdmans, 2004] in which he points to a family resemblance in the church’s generational interpretation of the book). As usual, C’s contribution is impeccably researched; while Blenkinsopp outdoes him in terms of the volume of information offered, C is unparalleled in his command of the secondary literature. And, given his theological orientation, this puts C, in my view, near the top of this Sepharim.
Goldingay, J. Isaiah. NIBC. Hendrickson, 2001 (397 pp.). G’s commentary operates under the conviction that the disciple(s) of 8:16 are responsible for the structure of the book as we have it, as well as for a vocal presence in it (e.g., narration about the prophet Isaiah in the third person). On this note, G includes an interesting discussion of the four different “voices” in the book which may help to disentangle for the reader some of the variety in the book’s presentation. G also introduces and explains other more general themes one meets in reading the book, such as Israel, the world, and a proper kind of spirituality, and addresses other introductory issues such as the historical “picture” of the book and textual and linguistic issues in Isaiah (including an interesting section on poetic meter). A strength of the commentary is G’s ability to explain translational and grammatical issues relative to the NIV for those without Hebrew. While not as technical as other treatments (Oswalt, Blenkinsopp) nor as theologically replete (Childs, Seitz) nor as socially or politically far-reaching (Brueggemann), it is clearly in touch with important interpretive issues in Isaiah study and lays out the material in a readable manner.
Oswalt, J. N. The Book of Isaiah. 2 Vols. NICOT. Eerdmans, 1986/1998 (1501 pp.). Perhaps the finest textual discussion among the commentaries reviewed by a conservative scholar who has spent his life in the book. At times, the conservative, prophecy-as-prediction angle from which O operates appears to drive and constrict the exegesis; it is still important for O that exclusive referents can be specified both for the identity of the book’s author as well as the book’s central “servant” character(s). However, O’s understanding of the primary servant’s mission–that the salvation to be accomplished is not centrally a personal affair, but a societal and even creational one–is laudable and argued convincingly. But the real strength of the commentary is in its textual discussion, precisely where Brueggemann’s treatment stands to be well-served. The two complement each other beautifully on this score: O’s treatment operates conscious of Isaiah’s societal and creational implications, but not to the extent of Brueggemann’s, while Brueggemann’s commentary is clearly riveted to the text, though with less detail than in O. [For another similarly conservative treatment–perhaps more accessible than O’s and in a single volume–see Alec Motyer’s commentary (InterVarsity, 1993).]
Seitz, C. R. Isaiah 1-39. Interpretation. John Knox, 1993 (271 pp.); “Isaiah 40-66.” NIB VI. Abingdon, 2001 (1612 pp.; 309-552). Here is a productive mind thinking carefully about the way the book of Isaiah should shape the church’s conception of God. In this sense it is a truly theological reading of the book in which scholarly preoccupations with temporal and cultural distinction (Isaiah was a long time ago) and historical reconstruction (but we can recreate the scene) are at best penultimate concerns. S’s work is exegetically more considered than Brueggemann, giving it a somewhat more technical tone. This, coupled with his capacity for fresh and energetic formulation, in which he develops ideas quickly–if perhaps too “smoothly”–requires one, at times, to hang quite close to the reading. S’s command of the material emerges with even more acuity in his treatment of chs. 40-66 in the NIB series, where a greater freedom of movement theologically translates into a more dynamic conception of the servant and Zion than in Oswalt. Well worth the effort, but perhaps best as a second read (e.g., following Goldingay or Brueggemann).
