CONTENTS
5. The Relationship between 40-55 and 56-66
One of the significant reasons why some commentators separate these chapters (often called Trito-Isaiah) from chaps. 40-55 is that sometimes when they quote or allude to ideas in chaps. 40-55 (and 1- 39), the tone, style, or perspective changes, thus betraying a different prophet in a different setting promoting a slightly different message.149 But such arguments can be slippery and quite subjective.
It would not be hard to imagine that even on the very same day a prophet would likely modify or change his tone and style if he were
addressing humble believers who agreed with the prophet on one occasion and an unjust and syncretistic Israelite that needed to repent on another occasion. In fact, it would be possible for a prophet to change his tone and style when addressing the same group a week later because circumstances have changed.150 It is sometimes suggested that in chaps. 40-55 Isaiah looked forward to God's saving act of returning the people from exile, while in chaps. 56-66 the people had already returned from exile and were disillusioned. Some believe that their earlier optimism has now turned into pessimism because of unfulfilled expectations, but is this the case?
In contrast to this evaluation, this commentary will not interpret most of chaps. 56-66 as overly pessimistic, for 56:1-8; 60-62; 63:7-14;
65:17-25; 66:18-24 are full of the optimistic promises of what God will do in the future. A brief review of the book of Isaiah will show that there were several criticisms of the audience in 1-39; 40-48,151 as well as in 56-66, so criticism of the wicked (Hebrew or Gentile) is not something new to these chapters. There are also numerous examples of the prophet looking forward to God's eschatological salvation in 40-55 (40:1-11; 41:17-20; 44:1-5; 51:1-16; 52:1-10; 54:1-17); thus, messages of divine salvation and optimism exist throughout 1-39; 40- 55; and 56-66. In addition, when a pessimistic view of the present or the future is found in chaps. 56-66 it is often due to a specific set of sinful acts. Nevertheless, there is very little information that would identify the date and location of the sinful audience in 56-66.
Everyone can identify some differences between chaps. 40-55 and 56-66, including the emphasis on the singular servant in chaps. 40-55 and the plural servants in 56-66. Although differences surely do exist, it is highly questionable to suggest that (a) there is enough difference between the question in 50:2 “Was my arm too short to ransom you?”
and the statement in 59:1 “My arm is not too short to save” to prove that 59:1 was communicating a different message by a different
person. (b) Although one passage mentions chains and the others do not, is there really a major difference between the report that the wealth of the Gentile nations will come to Jerusalem in 45:14 or 49:22 and the similar report in 60:4-6,14? (c) It is true that the Gentiles are dealt with quite harshly in some earlier passage (chaps. 12-23; 34; 46- 47), but 60:12; 63:1-6; 66:15-17 are just as harsh, though the punishment is not described in as much detail. These and similar passages (54:1-3 and 66:6-7) are sufficiently similar in content and intention to be from the same mind; they do not contradict one another.
G. Emmerson argues that the unique aspects within chaps. 56-66 contrast so much with 40-55 that one must assume a different author (“Trito Isaiah”) is writing. But in examining her evidence it appears that both 46:13 and 56:1 announce that God's salvation will not be delayed. She argues that the stylistic difference between the direct address, “I will grant salvation to Zion,” in 46:13a is significantly different from the intransitive and passive statements in 56:1, “my salvation is close at hand and my righteousness will soon be revealed,” to indicate different authors. But certainly any author can express the same truth in one message in an active voice and in another message using a passive verb. In fact, in 46:13b the author uses the passive in the preceding parallel clause, “my salvation will not be delayed.”
In a second example Emmerson compares 40:9-10 and 62:11 because both refer to God coming and bringing his recompense with him. Emmerson finds that 40:9-10 is direct, sudden, and a dramatic, immanent intervention by God, while 62:11 is less direct and refers to more of a transformation.152 Yet what does 62:11 refer to other than the dramatic and sudden coming of God in 60:1-3? Chapter 62 does talk about the transformation of this world, but how can one read 40:9-11 without concluding that there will be a great transformation of Zion in that final day. Even if one concedes that 62:11 somewhat
softens 40:9-11 as some claim, the difference is hardly enough to require these two passages to be written by two different authors.
In light of the weaknesses of some of these arguments, new voices have arisen that question various aspects of the “Trito-Isaiah”
hypothesis. Among these newer contributions, the insights of B. S.
Childs are helpful, for he rejects the typical explanation that chaps.
56-66 abandon the hopes of earlier messages in Isaiah.153 Childs also rejects the notion that “Trito-Isaiah” is a prophetic person.154 Thus chaps. 56-66 are just a continuation of thoughts, similar to what is found in 40-55.
W. A. M. Beuken illustrated the continuity with earlier chapters in the book of Isaiah by connecting the reference to the “seed, offspring” of the Servant in 53:10 with the plural “servants” in 54:17, who become one of the main topics in chaps. 56-66.155 These servants are the “righteous” (45:25; 48:18) who faithfully do what is just, serve the Lord (56:1,6; 57:1; 59:21; 61:3), and do not follow the ways of wicked idolaters (57:3-21). God will eventually vindicate his servants (63:17; 65:8-16) when he establishes them in the new heavens and the new earth (65:17-25). R. E. Clements takes the theme of “a light to the nations” and illustrates how this theme operates in early chapters (2:5;
9:2; 10:17), the middle section of the book (42:6-7,16; 49:6; 50:10- 11), as well as this final series of chapters (60:1-3).156 W. A. M.
Beuken also finds chaps. 56-66 unifying 1-39 and 40-55 by means of its focus on mount Zion, the “Holy Mountain” (2:2; 4:5; 11:9; 25:6;
37:32; 40:9), which is the “nodal point in the artistic ordering of the book of Isaiah.”157
In contrast to those who make numerous divisions among different sources that were redacted over a long period of time, J.
Muilenburg recognizes the “integrity of chapters 40-66” because “the language and style are frequently similar, and there are numerous
resemblances in thought.”158 Although Muilenburg recognizes Trito- Isaiah and some differences in chaps. 56-66, he hypothesizes a noticeable level of unity because Isaiah's disciples carried on his thoughts. Childs focused attention on the canonical formation of the book of Isaiah by de-emphasizing the historical background differences between these sections and by emphasizing the theological relationship and function of each section within the book. Thus he concludes, “It is erroneous to treat First Isaiah as mainly preexilic oracles of the eighth-century prophet to which a bloc of exilic and postexilic material was later attached.”159 Instead, he finds all parts of the book theologically interconnected and does not find conflict between the ideas in 40-55 and 56-66. R. E. Clements observed that the theme of Israel's blindness (6:9-10; 32:1-8; 32:3; 35:5; 42:18-20;
43:8) is found in many places within the book of Isaiah, suggesting some level of theological interconnectedness. Thus he concludes that chaps. 56-66 “were intended to be understood, not as a fresh and entirely self-contained declaration from Yahweh to the postexilic community, but rather as a carrying-forward of the divine word” from chaps. 40-55.160 In addition, G. I. Davies found a plethora of negative and positive references to the destiny of the nations throughout Isaiah, R. Lack identified righteousness and justice as the “symbolic system”
of the whole book, and W. J. Dumbrell found the master unifying theme of Isaiah to be God's devotion to the city of Jerusalem.161
This emphasis on continuity naturally raises the question of whether it is any longer necessary to talk about this hypothetical person “Trito-Isaiah” or a section of the book called “Trito-Isaiah.”
After a careful consideration of several key themes, H. G. M.
Williamson concludes that, “there is little that is new in what we have seen of these chapters beyond the bare fact of the extension of the promise.”162 After reviewing K. Pauritsch's study of Isaiah 56-66, A.
Murtonen compares the frequency of words in chaps. 56-66 with selected earlier chapters in the book and concludes that “the result is
fully compatible with the assumption of a single author for all the chapters involved, i.e., the identity of ‘Third’ and ‘Second’ Isaiah.”163 Similarly, M. Haran found no significant break in chaps. 55-56 and attributes chaps. 56-66 to “Deutero-Isaiah.”164
W. L. Holladay believes that if one “subtracts a few redactional additions from chapters 56-66 one hears in the remainder the same individual that is heard in chapters 40-55.… This is to say, I reject the hypothesis of a Trito-Isaiah.”165 In addition, C. R. Seitz suggests that
“chapters 40-55 treat different aspects of the restoration of Zion than do chapters 56-66, … the sharp distinction drawn between these sections on historical grounds falls away. The distinction becomes thematic and theological.” In fact, W. A. M. Beuken finds such a little break between 55 and what follows that he concludes that chaps. 56- 57 are actually a commentary on chap. 55.166
What can one take from these studies to aid one in the analysis and synthesis of the message of 56-66? First, those interlinking connections with earlier themes in Isaiah should play a significant role in providing background for the theological messages in chaps. 56-66 because they enable one to judge the level of continuity/discontinuity with the past. Second, since 61:1-3 is related to earlier servant passages (chaps. 42 and 49), one should not conclude that a new prophetic figure (“Trito-Isaiah”) is introduced in 61:1-3. Third, the canonical form that preserved chaps. 56-66 together indicates that these chapters are a literary unit and their structure suggests a purposeful organization; thus, they should be interpreted as a united presentation of diverse genres that deal with the destiny of God's servants in their future setting in Zion. Fourth, the conflicts and different destinies of the righteous and wicked are not new thoughts introduced in chaps. 56-66, for the differences between these groups are inherent in many chapters throughout Isaiah, beginning with chap.
1.167 Fifth, there is very little evidence to justify the hypothesis that
there was a prophet who might be called “Trito-Isaiah.” The literary distinctions between the content and style of chaps. 40-55 and 56-66 is not sufficient to identify them as separate books written by different authors. Sixth, although some suggest that the place where the audience in chaps. 56-66 is located is in Jerusalem, in most cases this is actually the location of future eschatological events where all God's servants (from Israel and the nations) will gather (60:1-63:6; 66:18- 24). This future setting has little to do with the present location of the prophet and his immediate audience. Seventh, all the messages in chaps. 56-66 are eschatologically oriented, describing what people of all ages need to do if they want to enjoy the riches of God's glorious new kingdom and what they must avoid so they will not have to suffer under the wrath of God's judgment. This information identifies who will and will not enter God's glorious kingdom in the future.