Mixing Metaphors: God as Mother and Father in Deutero-Isaiah (JSOT Supplement Series)

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT SUPPLEMENT SERIES

398 Founding Editors

David J. A. Clines, Philip R. Davies and David M. Gunn Executive Editor Andrew Mein

Editorial Board

Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, J. Cheryl Exum, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon, Norman K. Gottwald, John Jarick, Andrew D. H. Mayes, Carol Meyers, Patrick D. Miller

GENDER, CULTURE, THEORY

13 Editor J. Cheryl Exum

This page intentionally left blank

Mixing Metaphors God as Mother and Father in Deutero-Isaiah

Sarah J. Dille

T8.T CLARK INTERNATIONAL A Continuum imprint LONDON

•

NEW YORK

Copyright © 2004 T&T Clark International A Continuum imprint Published by T&T Clark International The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX 15 East 26th Street, Suite 1703, New York, NY 10010 www.tandtclark.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress Typeset by TMW Typesetting, Sheffield Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by CPI Bath

ISBN 0-8264-7156-0

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments Abbreviations

xi xii

Chapter 1 UNDERSTANDING METAPHOR 1. Introduction The Goals of this Study Metaphoric Coherence Associated Commonplaces Understanding Metaphor 2.1. A. Richards 3. Max Black The Interactive View of Metaphor The System of Associated Commonplaces Emphasis and Suppression (or Filtering) 4. Lakoff and Johnson Metaphor as Conceptual Structure Entailments Highlighting, Hiding, and Downplaying Metaphoric Extension Coherence (vs Consistency) The Experiential Dimension of Metaphor 5. Conclusion

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 6 6 7 7 8 8 10 11 12 14 16 17

Chapter 2 KINSHIP AND BIRTH IN DEUTERO-ISAIAH AND ANCIENT ISRAEL 1. Deutero-Isaiah and the Rhetoric of Family Offspring Child-bearing and Child-rearing Begetting Marriage and Zion Extended Family Conclusion 2. The Associated Commonplaces of Kinship Associated Commonplaces of Childbirth Associated Commonplaces of the Father of the Family 3. Father and Mother as Metaphors

21 21 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 25 29 32

vi

Mixing Metaphors Ancestors Covenant: Loyalty and Love The Priest Master of the Guild Other Positions of Leadership 4. The Deity as Father and Mother in the Ancient Near East 5. YHWH as a Father and a Mother The Pentateuch The Prophets The Psalms and Proverbs The Deuteronomistic History YHWH as a Father in Israelite Names 6. Conclusion

Chapter 3 LIKE A WOMAN IN LABOR: ISAIAH 42.8-17 Translation 1. The Unit: Form and Structure 2. An Overview of 42.8-17 Verses 8-9, 17: New Things and Deutero-Isaiah's Anti-Idolatry Polemic Verses 10-12: The Hymn of Praise Verse 13: The Man of War Verse 14: A Woman Giving Birth Verses 15-16: Laying Waste; Darkness to Light Verse 17:1 Am YHWH 3. Interacting Metaphors: The Divine Warrior Metaphoric Coherence The Divine Warrior in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East The Divine Warrior in Deutero-Isaiah The Divine Warrior in Isaiah 42.8-17 4. The yoledah—One Who Is In Labor' Commonplaces of Birth The Literary Convention ki-yoledah The yoledah in Isaiah 42 5. Conclusion Chapter 4 YHWH ' s SONS AND DAUGHTERS : ISAIAH 43.1-7 1. Translation and Literary Structure 2. 7813, go"el (Redeemer): An Interacting Metaphor Overview of the ^NU go 'el A Redemption of the Hebrew Debt Slave Redemption of the Land Advocacy on Behalf of One's Kin in the Courts

32 33 33 34 34 34 35 35 37 38 39 39 40

41 41 42 44 44 46 46 47 47 48 48 48 48 50 50 52 52 56 67 72

74 75 78 78 79 82 83

Contents Honor Conclusion 3. Exposition of Isaiah 43.1-7 The Image of YHWH as Creator (vv. 1,7) 'Do not fear' (vv. Iba, 5a) The Metaphor of Name: Identity and Relationship (vv. 1,7) Passage or Movement (vv. 2, 5-6) YHWH's Self-predication (v. 3a) Redemption (vv. 3b; 4b) Precious, Loved, and Honored (v. 4) 4. YHWH as Father and Redeemer and the Journey through Water and Fire Tribulation Purification or Refinement Trial by Ordeal The New Exodus 5. Conclusion: The Literary Focal Point—Precious, Honored, Loved (v. 4a) Chapter 5 THE DIVINE ARTISAN: ISAIAH 45.9-13 Translation 1. Literary Context: The Cyrus Oracle Introduction: 44.24-28 Thesis: 45.1-7 Confirmation: 45.8 Epilogue: 45.9-13 2. An Interacting Metaphor: YHWH as an Artisan YHWH vs the Idols: Creator and Proclaimer of the Things to Come Divination and Power over the Future YHWH and the Babylonian Artisans YHWH as an Artisan in Isaiah 45.9-13 3. Exposition of Isaiah 45.9-13 Verse 9 Verse 10 Verse 11 Verses 12-13 4. Metaphoric Coherence: Artisan, Father, and Mother 5. Conclusions 6. Appendix: Textual Analysis Verse 9a Verse 9b Verse 10 Verse 11 Verses 12-13

vii 84 84 85 85 85 86 87 88 88 90 91 91 92 93 95 99

102 102 103 104 105 107 107 107 108 112 112 114 115 115 116 119 121 121 122 123 123 124 125 126 127

viii

Mixing Metaphors

Chapter 6 CAN A MOTHER FORGET? ISAIAH 49.13-23 1. Translation and Notes 2. The Two Sections of Deutero-Isaiah 3. The City Lament Features of the Mesopotamian City Lament The Israelite City Lament 4. Deutero-Isaiah and the Book of Lamentations 5. Mother of the Infant: Commonplaces 6. Exposition of Isaiah 49.13-21 Verse 13 Verse 14 Verses 15-16 Verses 17-18 Verses 19-20 Verse 21 7. YHWH as a Mother A Problematic Metaphor Zion as a Mother A Positive Metaphor 8. Conclusion

Chapter 7 DIVINE HUSBAND AND FATHER: ISAIAH 50.1-3 1. Introduction and Translation 2. YHWH as a Husband: A Structuring Metaphor YHWH as a Husband in Hosea 1-2 YHWH as a Husband in Jeremiah YHWH as a Husband in Ezekiel The Issue of the City as the Wife of the Deity in the Ancient Near East 3. Personified Zion The City as Goddess The Virgin City The City as a Mother 4. Interacting Metaphors: Husband/Wife and Mother in Isaiah 49-54 5. The City as a Negative Image 6. Exposition of Isaiah 50.1-3 Verse 1 Verse 2a Verse 2b Verses 2c-3 7. Conclusions

128 128 129 131 131 134 135 136 138 138 139 141 142 142 143 144 144 148 149 150

152 152 154 154 155 156 157 157 157 158 158 159 161 162 162 166 168 170 172

Contents Chapter 8 CONCLUSIONS 1. Literary Context 2. The Coherence of Commonplaces 3. God as a Father and a Mother in Deutero-Isaiah God as a Father God as a Mother 4. YHWH as Father and Mother and the Experiential Dimension of Metaphor 5. Implications for Biblical Studies 6. Implications for God-language Bibliography Index of References Index of Authors

ix

173 173 174 175 175 176 176 177 177 179 187 19 8

This page intentionally left blank

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I have been fortunate to have had many fine teachers of the Hebrew Bible over the years at St. Olaf College, Luther Seminary, and Emory University. I am grateful for the love of the Old Testament which my teachers instilled in me in college and seminary, and which led me to continue my studies at Emory. Thanks to my teachers at Emory for continuing to nurture this love of the text. This book originated as a doctoral dissertation. I wish to thank my doctoral advisor, Martin Buss, for the freedom he gives his students to find their own voice, and for his ever-socareful reading of the dissertation manuscript. I'd also like to thank my reader, Carol Newsom, who challenged me to clarify my thinking at every turn, resulting in an improved final draft. I wish to acknowledge my parents, Roland and Beth Dille, whose periodic financial support helped me through the lean years, and my father, a former English professor, for reading my dissertation and providing stylistic suggestions and a few grammatical points. I am grateful for the generosity of my friend Keith Golke, for his technical computer support (priceless to someone who went through seminary with a mere typewriter). Thanks to my friend and former colleague Susan Shapiro for her encouragement and prodding. I also wish to thank Ruth Spielmann for her fine proof-reading of the revised book manuscript and a few good observations about how a book should be different from a dissertation. Finally, while my husband, Daniel Stauffer, was spared the agony of the dissertation stage, I'd like to acknowledge his forbearance in the first four months of our marriage, listening to my mantra 'I have to finish my book revisions!' NOTE ON TRANSLATIONS All citations of the Bible in English are taken from the New Revised Standard Version (substituting 'YHWH' for 'LORD') with the exception of my translations of the five key texts from Deutero-Isaiah and where otherwise noted.

ABBREVIATIONS

A. Bibliographical Abbreviations

AB ABD AnBib AUSS BA BDB

BHS Bib BibOr BTB BZAW CBQ EBib HBC HBD HBT HTR HUCA IB IDE IDBS ITC JAAR JANESCU JBL JNES JPS JQR JR JSOT JSOTSS NCB NCBC NICOT OTL RB SBLDS SJOT SVTQ

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary Analecta Biblica Andrews University Seminary Studies Biblical Archaeologist Francis Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia Biblica Biblica et Orientalia Biblical Theology Bulletin Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Catholic Biblical Quarterly Etudes Bibliques Harper's Bible Commentary Harper's Bible Dictionary Horizons in Biblical Theology Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual Interpreter's Bible Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible Supplement International Theological Commentary Journal of the American Academy of Religion Journal of the Ancient Near East Society of Columbia University Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Near Eastern Studies Jewish Publication Society Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Religion Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament—Supplement Series New Century Bible New Century Bible Commentary The New International Commentary on the Old Testament Old Testament Library Revue Biblique Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly

Abbreviations TDNT TDOT TQ TynBul VT VTSup WBC WTJ ZAW

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament Theologische Quartalschrift Tyndale Bulletin Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum, Supplements Word Biblical Commentary Westminster Theological Journal Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

B. Other Abbreviations CH IQIsa KJV LSUr LU LXX MT NRSV P PN

YHWH

Code of Hammurabi An Isaiah scroll from Qumran King James Version Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur Lamentation over the Destruction of Ur Septuagint Masoretic Text New Revised Standard Version Priestly source Personal Noun The divine name, often rendered Yahweh

xiii

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 1 UNDERSTANDING METAPHOR

1. Introduction The Goals of this Study This study is an exploration of metaphors and their interactions with their literary and cultural contexts. This is approached through an examination of DeuteroIsaiah's use of parental imagery for God. There are five units in Deutero-Isaiah that will be examined: Isa. 42.8-17,43.1-7,45.9-13,49.13-21, and 50.1-3. The purpose is to illuminate selected texts in such a way that the mechanisms of metaphor and their rhetorical impact may be more deeply appreciated. Among Deutero-Isaiah's many metaphors for God are 'father' and 'mother'. Five pericopes clearly use one or both of these images. The parent imagery appears alongside, and interacts with, other metaphors for God. Thus, the implications of the images of father and mother vary greatly within Deutero-Isaiah depending on the literary context. Neither 'father' nor 'mother' constitutes a metaphor with a single meaning. Metaphors do not function in isolation. They exist in both a rhetorical context and a cultural context. Deutero-Isaiah's use of parental imagery can best be appreciated when attention is given to a) other metaphors with which parental imagery is interwoven ('metaphoric coherence'), andb) the common cultural views associated with these metaphors ('associated commonplaces'). George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's concept of 'metaphoric coherence' is useful for explaining the interactions of diverse metaphors.1 'Coherence' refers to the overlap of metaphors that are not 'consistent'. Two inconsistent metaphors interact 'coherently' by virtue of their shared entailments. Useful for understanding these is the concept of 'commonplaces'. This refers to the network of associations a metaphor evokes. 'Associated commonplaces' are the beliefs about something generally held to be true in a given culture. Interacting metaphors highlight shared commonplaces. Metaphoric Coherence. When two or more metaphors appear together within a literary unit, they interact rhetorically. We argue here that areas of commonality (coherence) are highlighted by their interaction. Thus, for example, when YHWH is portrayed in the same unit as a warrior and as a woman giving birth, the two images interact and what is common to both (the overlap between them) is

1. George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980).

2

Mixing Metaphors

highlighted. Their interaction has an impact on the interpretation of the metaphors and of the unit as a whole. Associated Commonplaces. An appreciation of the interaction of metaphors is dependent upon an understanding of the culturally specific ideas associated with the metaphors, that is, the 'associated commonplaces'. Thus, in order to appreciate the areas of overlap between the image of the warrior and the image of the birthing woman there must be an understanding of how these two figures are understood in their cultural setting. What are the culture's definitions and attitudes concerning warriors and childbirth? The five selected passages will be examined closely to demonstrate how attention to the rhetorical and cultural contexts illuminates Deutero-Isaiah's use of the images of father and mother for YHWH. These two images interact with various images: warrior, redeeming kinsman, artisan, and the city as a woman, wife, and mother. Specifically, in Isa. 42.8-17, the image of God as a woman in labor interacts with that of the Divine Warrior. Areas of overlap include 'crying out', anguish, courage, danger, inevitability, the hope of deliverance from death, life, and the literary convention of one facing a siege reacting 'like a woman in labor'. In Isa. 43.1-7, God as a father interacts with God as the redeeming kinsman who redeems his kin from slavery. This interaction highlights honor, identity, deliverance, protection, and the exodus tradition. In Isa. 45.9-13, the imagery of the begetting father and the laboring woman interact with the image of the artisan shaping the clay. The dominant area of coherence is the concept of creator. YHWH creates Israel's future salvation, and Israel's savior (Cyrus). In Isa. 49.13-26, the image of Zion as a mother bereaved of her children elicits the image of God as a nursing mother (who does not forget her children). Zion's forgetting contrasts with YHWH's remembrance. In Isa. 50.1-3, the image of God as a father is elicited from the interaction of the images of God as a husband and Zion as a mother. YHWH is the husband of Zion whose children have been sold. Understanding Metaphor Theologians have increasingly acknowledged the metaphorical nature of language and thought about God.2 Metaphorical theory also provides a fruitful approach to exploring the rhetoric of the Hebrew Bible. While Old Testament theologies of the past have dealt with biblical metaphors (e.g. 'covenant', 'redeemer', the kingship of God3), they have not dealt with these metaphors as metaphors to any great extent, that is, with attention to what a metaphor is and what it does. However, 2. Note especially the work of Sallie McFague: Metaphorical Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982), Models of God: Theology for an Ecological, Nuclear Age (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), The Body of God: An Ecological Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1993). 3. See, for example, Carroll Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-haiah (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970); Martin Buber, The Kingship of God (London: Humanities Press International, 1967).

1. Understanding Metaphor

3

increasing interest in the rhetoric of the text has led to a greater appreciation over the past ten to fifteen years of the importance of understanding metaphor in the Hebrew Bible.4 'Old Testament Theology' has often sought consistency in its understanding of the YHWH of the Hebrew Bible, seeking one overarching paradigm under which everything else may be subsumed (for example, 'covenant').5 But rather than seeking a single root metaphor, a more fruitful approach may be found in examining how diverse metaphors interact with one another to create various and often innovative characterizations of YHWH. This study draws on the analyses of metaphor in the works of I. A. Richards, Max Black, and (writing jointly) George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. Richards's work in the 1930s and Black's later work have been foundational for the ongoing discussion of metaphor. The most relevant contributions will be summarized below. Among scholars who have built on the work of Richards and Black are George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Mark Turner,6 Monroe Beardsley,7 Eva Kittay,8 and Paul Ricoeur.9 Of these, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson have proven especially helpful for the present study. Their concept of'metaphorical coherence' provides the method and language for dealing with the interaction of Deutero-Isaiah's multiple metaphors. Other theories are not expressly utilized here, partly in order not to conflate 4. James Muilenburg is credited with the rise of rhetorical criticism in Hebrew Bible studies, particularly with his commentary on Deutero-Isaiah (IB, V [New York: Abingdon, 1956], pp. 381773). Interest in metaphor is a more recent outgrowth of the rhetorical school. Recent treatments of Hebrew Bible metaphors for God range from those that give virtually no attention to methodology, to those with a cursory treatment of metaphorical theory, to a very few that conscientiously utilize metaphor theory in reading the biblical texts. Some recent examples of works on metaphors for God in the Hebrew Bible are Michael L. Brown, Israel's Divine Healer (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995); Tremper Longman and Daniel G. Reid, God is a Warrior (Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995); Gottfried Vanoni, 'Du bist dock unser Voter' (Jes 63, 16): Zur Gottesvorstellung des Ersten Testaments (Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1995); Johanna W. H. van Wijk-Bos, Reimagining God: The Case for Scriptural Diversity (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1995); Katheryn Pfisterer Darr, Isaiah's Vision and the Family of God (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994); Claudia V. Camp and Carol Fontaine (eds), Women, War and Metaphor (Semeia 61; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993); Tryggve Mettinger, In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988); Terence Fretheim, The Suffering of God, an Old Testament Perspective (Overtures to Biblical Theology 14; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984). 5. Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, I (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961). 6. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors; George Lakoff and Mark Turner, More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989). 7. Monroe C. Beardsley, 'The Metaphorical Twist', Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 22 (1962), pp. 293-307, reprinted in Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981), pp. 105-22. 8. Eva Feder Kittay, Metaphor: Its Cognitive Force and Linguistic Structure (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987). 9. Paul Ricoeur, The Rule of Metaphor (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977), and 'The Metaphorical Process as Cognition, Imagination, and Feeling', Critical Inquiry 5 (1978), pp. 143-59, reprinted in Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives, pp. 228-47 and in Sheldon Sacks (ed.), On Metaphor (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), pp. 141-57.

4

Mixing Metaphors

several approaches. Of course, a fuller analysis of metaphor may make use of these. Beardsley has concerned himself with the issues of how we know a metaphor when we see it, and what the actual mechanisms are that make a metaphor work. He speaks of a 'metaphorical twist'. Kittay has concerned herself with the issue of how metaphors convey meaning. Among Ricoeur's interests in metaphor are the role of the imagination and (an interest shared by Lakoff and Johnson) the role of metaphor in our imaginative construction of our world. Johnson refers to Ricoeur's work in metaphor and reality as addressing 'a fundamental ontological and epistemological issue'.10 All of these scholars make valuable contributions to the discussion. However, their questions about how we recognize a metaphor and by what mechanism metaphors actually work are beyond the scope of this study. What the heirs of Richards and Black have in common is a belief in the irreducibiliry of a metaphor to a literal paraphrase. Metaphors have cognitive content that exceeds any attempt to paraphrase. The purpose of this study is, therefore, not to fully explain the metaphors of Deutero-Isaiah, but rather to explore some of the potential meanings. 2.1. A. Richards I. A. Richards, lecturing and writing in 1936, established some foundational premises for the theory of language and metaphor, which continue to influence metaphor studies. Specifically, in The Philosophy of Rhetoric,11 he presented many of the propositions that are presupposed in the present study in biblical metaphor. His main points are as follows. First, he argues, one cannot access 'bare' ideas. One must deal with words.12 Second, a word does not have a particular or absolute meaning in isolation, 'independent of and controlling its use'.13 (He calls the belief he refutes the 'Proper Meaning Superstition'.) Rather, all discourse has a multiplicity of meanings.14 (He refutes the 'One and Only One True Meaning Superstition'.) Expect ambiguity— not as a fault but 'as an inevitable consequence of the powers of language...'.15 The reader must always guess the author's meaning.16 Richards argues that words are multivalent: 'so much misinterpretation comes from supposing that if a word works one way it cannot simultaneously work in another and have simultaneously another meaning' (Richards's emphasis).17 Essential to the present study is Richards's idea that words are 'interinanimated'. 10. Mark Johnson, 'Introduction: Metaphor in the Philosophical Tradition', in Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor, pp. 3-47 (41). 11. L A . Richards, The Philosophy of Rhetoric (London: Oxford University Press, 1936). (Unless otherwise noted, emphases in Richards's quotations have been added.) 12. Richards, Philosophy, pp. 5-6. 13. Richards, Philosophy, p. 11. 14. Richards, Philosophy, p. 39. 15. Richards, Philosophy, p. 119. 16. Richards, Philosophy, p. 55. 17. Richards, Philosophy, p. 119.

1. Understanding Metaphor

5

Meaning is determined within a literary context.18 (In prophetic speech, then, the words used by the prophet are uniquely transformed by the literary context in which they appear, since each literary context is unique.) Regarding metaphor, Richards argues that metaphor is 'the omnipresent principle' of language.19 Richards quotes Shelley: 'Language is vitally metaphorical; that is, it marks the before unapprehended relations of things and perpetuates their apprehension, until words, which represent them, become, through time, signs for portions of thought instead of pictures of integral thoughts...'.20 Richards defines metaphor as 'two thoughts of different things active together and supported by a single word, or phrase, whose meaning is a resultant of their interaction'.21 He designates the two parts of the metaphor as the vehicle and the tenor. The tenor is the 'underlying idea or principal subject which the vehicle or figure means'?2 By this definition, in the present study the primary tenor is YHWH (or the idea of YHWH) and the vehicles are those words that speak of YHWH as a 'parent', for example 'woman in labor', 'my sons', 'my daughters'. Tenor and vehicle interact. Their meanings are transformed by this interaction: the co-presence of the vehicle and tenor results in a meaning (to be clearly distinguished from the tenor) which is not attainable without their interaction. [The] vehicle is not normally a mere embellishment of a tenor which is otherwise unchanged by it, but... vehicle and tenor in co-operation give a meaning of more varied powers than can be ascribed to either. 23

Thus, Deutero-Isaiah does not simply say some things about YHWH, but uses metaphoric language to transform the very concept of who YHWH is. The relationship between tenor and vehicle is both one of resemblance and one of disparity or tension. 'The mind is a connecting organ, it works only by connecting and it can connect any two things in an indefinitely large number of different ways ... In all interpretation, we are filling in connections, and for poetry, of course, our freedom to fill in ... is a main source of its powers'.2* The force of the metaphor comes 'at least equally from the differences that resist and control the influences of their resemblances'.25 Richards argues that dead metaphors (metaphors that seem to have lost all vitality, for example, 'table leg') are easily awakened.26 This point is relevant for Hebrew poetry. For example, the term ^N~"l£T~n]I3 ('sons of Israel' or 'children of Israel') may be considered a dead metaphor, as is apparently assumed by 18. Richards, Philosophy, pp. 47-65. 19. Richards, Philosophy, p. 91. 20. Richards, Philosophy, pp. 90-91; source of Shelley citation not provided by Richards. 21. Richards, Philosophy, p. 93. 22. Richards, Philosophy, p. 97. 23. Richards, Philosophy, p. 100. 24. Richards, Philosophy, p. 125. Regarding disparity between tenor and vehicle, Richards states, 'In general, there are very few metaphors in which disparities between tenor and vehicle are not as much operative as the similarities' (127). 25. Richards, Philosophy, p. 127. 26. Richards, Philosophy, p. 101.

6

Mixing Metaphors

translators who render it 'Israelites'. But it may be re-animated. In Isa. 43.1-7, 'Israel' or 'Jacob' has offspring or 'seed' who are, in parallel verses, also referred to as YHWH'S 'sons' and 'daughters'. 3. Max Black In 1962 Max Black further developed some of the implications of Richards's work and contributed some new ideas. His analysis provides three categories that are especially relevant to the present study: the interactive view of metaphor; the system of associated commonplaces; and emphasis and suppression (orfiltering).21 The Interactive View of Metaphor Black describes three views of metaphor, the first two of which he rejects. First is a Substitution View which holds that 'metaphoric expression is used in place of some equivalent literal expression'.28 What the metaphor expresses could be expressed literally. For example, the metaphor 'Richard is a lion' could be expressed as 'Richard is brave'. Second is a Comparison View which holds that a 'metaphor consists in the presentation of the underlying analogy or similarity. (This is actually a "special case" of a substitution view—the metaphor could be expressed by a literal comparison.)'29 For example 'Richard is a lion' could be expressed as 'Richard is like a lion in being brave'. Black criticizes these two views, arguing that Metaphorical statement is not a substitute for a formal comparison or any other kind of literal statement, but has its own distinctive capacities and achievements ... It would be more illuminating in some of these cases to say that metaphor creates the similarity than to say that it formulates some similarity antecedently existing.30

The inadequacy of these two models is especially apparent in God-language. It is impossible to speak of God literally,31 and thus one cannot claim a literal equivalent for a metaphorical statement about God. Alternatively, Black proposes (following Richards) an Interaction View. Black cites Richards's definition of metaphor, by which Richards argues that the meaning 'is a resultant of the 'interaction' of tenor and vehicle.32 He cites Richards's

27. Max Black, Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1962), pp. 25-47. Unless otherwise noted, emphasis in quotations from this work are my own. 28. Black, Models, p. 31. 29. Black, Models, p. 35 (Black's emphasis). 30. Black, Models, p. 37. 31. This is presupposed by this study. All speech and even thought about God is necessarily either metaphorical or analogical. See the discussion by Janet Soskice, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), pp. 97-117. 32. For the sake of consistency, this summary of Black will use the terms 'tenor' and 'vehicle' even though they are not his preferred terms.

1. Understanding Metaphor

1

contention that 'the reader is forced to "connect" the two ideas'.33 Black further develops this Interaction View in conjunction with his categories of 'associated commonplaces' and 'filtering'. The System of Associated Commonplaces 'Commonplaces' are the beliefs about something generally held to be true in a given culture. Black describes these commonplaces in relation to the vehicle of a metaphor, for example, the term 'wolf in 'Man is a wolf. What is relevant is those beliefs that are generally associated with wolves. These commonplaces may or may not be true (i.e. true of wolves), but they are generally believed and 'readily and freely evoked'. In this investigation of parent imagery in Deutero-Isaiah, the commonplaces of father, mother, childbirth, etc. will be explored. Since commonplaces are culturally determined and culturally specific, attention must be given to the associated commonplaces of the ancient Near East, especially Israelite culture and neo-Babylonian culture, so far as this can be determined. Parenthood may be based on biological fact, but for human beings parenthood is also a social construct. The 'associated commonplaces' of parenthood and other utilized vehicles (i.e. other images) serve as a starting point for Deutero-Isaiah, though the vehicles are not limited to the commonplace, but are at times imaginatively 'extended' beyond what is commonplace (see the discussion of Lakoff and Johnson below). Emphasis and Suppression (or Filtering) Black's third relevant point is the mechanism of 'emphasis' and 'suppression'. Black's interactive approach and his system of commonplaces are integrally related. The 'commonplaces' that are associated with the vehicle 'organize' our view of the tenor. They 'filter and transform'. Black offers as an example the description of war in terms of a chess game. Chess language is used to speak of battle. Black points out that the vehicle of chess emphasizes (or highlights) some aspects of battle andfilters out (or hides) other aspects of battle. (For example, the chess imagery highlights strategy and hides bloodshed and human suffering.) Black summarizes, 'The metaphor selects, emphasizes, suppresses, and organizes features of the principal subject [the tenor, here 'battle'] by implying statements about it that normally apply to the subsidiary subject [the vehicle, here 'chess']'.34 An example of this in the Hebrew Bible can be clearly seen in the metaphor of God as a rock, common in the Psalms. The concept 'rock' highlights such characteristics as strength, protection, and dependability. It hides or suppresses characteristics attributed to God in other speech, such as relationality, personality (including emotion), and changeability. Black's mechanism of emphasis and suppression offers a partial explanation of Richards's interaction theory. However, while explaining how the vehicle transforms the tenor, Black merely hints at the transformation that the vehicle itself undergoes.

33. Black, Models, p. 39, citing Richards, Philosophy, p. 125. 34. Black, Models, p. 45.

8

Mixing Metaphors 4. Lakoff and Johnson

Approaching metaphor from the perspective of linguistics and philosophy, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's Metaphors We Live By provoked much discussion in the field of philosophy as well as in theology when it came out in 1980. While Metaphors We Live By occasionally shows up in bibliographies of Hebrew Bible metaphor studies, its contribution to an understanding of metaphor has not been widely utilized.35 However, aspects of their work are quite useful for the present study. Six points that are most helpful for the purposes of the present study are: metaphor as conceptual structure; entailments; highlighting, hiding, and downplaying', metaphoric extension', coherence (vs consistency)', and the experiential dimension of metaphor. Metaphor as Conceptual Structure The central premise of Lakoff and Johnson's book is that 'Our ordinary conceptual system ... is fundamentally metaphorical in nature'.36 They thus define metaphor as including thought and experience as well as speech. A metaphor is a concept that structures understanding and experience: 'The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another' ,37 All experience is thus filtered through these metaphoric structures. There is no raw, unmediated experience. Lakoff and Johnson's use of the term 'metaphor' to designate 'metaphorical concept'38 stands in contrast to the school of metaphor theory that defines metaphor strictly as a rhetorical event or a speech event.39 They argue that 'Our concepts structure what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how we relate to other people'.40 Conceptual metaphors structure our language. Thus, particular metaphorical statements point to the conceptual structures that shaped them.41 35. One exception is Camp and Fontaine (eds.), Women, War, and Metaphor. 36. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 3. 37. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 5. Unless otherwise noted, emphasis in quotations from this work are added. 38. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 6. 39. For example, Janet Soskice makes a distinction between metaphor and 'model': 'it should not be thought that metaphor is primarily a process or a mental act, and only secondarily its manifestation in language. Metaphor is by definition a figure of speech and not an "act", "fusion", or "perception". Were this not the case we should not know where to look for metaphor at all' (Soskice, Metaphor, 16). 40. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 5. 41. Many theorists give considerable weight to etymology in arguing that language is, in its origin, metaphorical. Soskice cautions against this, arguing that this supposition leads one to what she calls the 'metaphor-as-myth thesis'—'the idea that metaphors represent concealed myths in everyday speech' (Soskice, Metaphor, 78). Soskice cites Lakoff and Johnson's book as a recent version of this theory. She criticizes it thus: 'Carried to an extreme, it is in danger of falling into the fallacy, criticized by James Barr in The Semantics of Biblical Language, of confusing word derivation with word meaning' (81). Soskice's caution may be somewhat valid, but Lakoff and Johnson themselves show little interest in the etymologies of single words and are, rather, interested in the underlying roots of fuller expressions or systems of expression.

1. Understanding Metaphor

9

What others might call 'models' or 'paradigms', Lakoff and Johnson call 'structural metaphors'. It is important to keep in mind the distinction for Lakoff and Johnson between a 'metaphor' (as a concept) and a 'metaphorical statement'. Structural metaphors give rise to rhetorical expressions of the metaphor. Lakoff and Turner note that It is a prerequisite to any discussion of metaphor that we make a distinction between basic conceptual metaphors, which are cognitive in nature, and particular linguistic expressions of these conceptual metaphors. Thus, though a particular poetic passage may give a unique linguistic expression of a basic metaphor, the conceptual metaphor underlying it may nonetheless be extremely common.42

Lakoff and Johnson offer as an example of a structural metaphor 'Argument is War'. The structuring metaphor is reflected in our speech about argument: Your claims are indefensible. He attacked every weak point in my argument. I demolished his argument. I've never won an argument with him. If you use that strategy, he'll wipe you out. He shot down all of my arguments.43

The metaphor 'Argument is War' structures how we think about argument, speak of argument, and even how we experience argument. 'Argument is War' is our culture's primary metaphor for argument. Our speech does, however, reveal other metaphors for argument which function in our culture. For example: Argument is a Building We've got the framework for a solid argument. If you don't support your argument with solid facts, the whole thing will collapse. He is trying to buttress his argument with a lot of irrelevant facts, but it is still so shaky that it will easily fall apart under criticism. With the groundwork you've got, you can construct a pretty strong argument.44 Argument is a Journey So far, we haven't covered much ground. This is a roundabout argument. We need to go into this further in order to see clearly what's involved.45 Argument is a Container Your argument doesn't hold water. You have all the right ideas in your argument... Your argument is full of holes.46

Language reveals the structural metaphors that organize our thoughts and experiences. We may thus suggest that Deutero-Isaiah's major themes are expressed

42. 43. 44. 45. 46.

Lakoff and Turner, Reason, p. 50. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, see p. 4. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 98. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, pp. 90-91. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 92.

10

Mixing Metaphors

in language that reveals its (or its author's) structural metaphors. Some structural metaphors for YHWH that may be discerned in the language of Deutero-Isaiah are the redeeming kinsman, the husband of the city Zion, and a complex of creator metaphors—the artisan, the one who conquers the chaotic waters, and the source of fertility. These metaphors are identifiable not only through explicit use of central terms, for example, the term 7tW, gaol (redeem), and terms for create (N"Q, n&17, and ~liT), but also through the entailments of these metaphors. Entailments Entailments are those concepts that logically follow from a metaphor or a metaphoric statement. For example, Lakoff and Johnson explore the entailments of Michael Reddy's 'conduit' metaphor: 'Language as a Conduit':47 the LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS ARE CONTAINERS FOR MEANING aspect of the CONDUIT metaphor entails that words and sentences have meanings in themselves, independent of any context or speaker. THE MEANINGS ARE OBJECTS part of the metaphor, for example, entails that meanings have an existence independent of people and contexts. The part of the metaphor that says LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS ARE CONTAINERS FOR MEANING entails that words (and sentences) have meanings, 48 again independent of contexts and speakers.

As another example of entailment, Lakoff and Johnson compare two metaphors for time: 'Time is a Moving Object'49 and 'Time is Stationary and We Move Through It'.50 They argue: [These are] two subcases of 'Time Passes Us': in one case, we are moving and time is standing still; in the other, time is moving and we are standing still. What is in common is relative motion with respect to us, with the future in front and the past behind. That is, they are two subcases of the same metaphor . . . This is another way of saying that they have a major common entailment. Both metaphors entail that, from our point of view, time goes past us from front to back.51

An example of entailment in the Hebrew Bible is YHWH'S statement in Isa. 1.2, 'Children I have reared and raised'. This entails that God is a parent (father or mother). Another example of entailment is that if YHWH is the husband of the city (Jerusalem, an image used in Ezekiel), it follows that the city's (the citizens') worship of other gods is 'adultery' and that God can 'divorce' his city/wife (see Ezekiel 16 and 23). The concept of entailments works best with the systematic structural metaphors

47. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 10; Michael Reddy, 'The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in Our Language about Language', in A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 284-324. 48. Although Lakoff and Johnson use the conduit metaphor as an example of entailments, 'conduit' does not express their own understanding of language and meaning: see Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, 11. 49. e.g. 'The time will come when ...' and The time has long since gone when ...' 50. e.g. 'As we go through the years ...' and 'We're approaching the end of the year'. 51. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 44.

1. Understanding Metaphor

11

or 'conceptual metaphors' (or 'models' or 'paradigms'), which, Lakoff and Johnson argue, are the concepts that structure human thought and perception of reality. 'Metaphorical entailments play an essential role in linking all of the instances [i.e. expressions] of a single metaphorical structuring of a concept'.52 Entailments, then, provide the network of associations that characterize a metaphorical concept. The present study of metaphor in Deutero-Isaiah proceeds by identifying specific language that 'entails' the concept of 'parent'. Specifically, texts in Isaiah 40-55 that contain the implicit (non-explicit) structural metaphor 'God is a parent' will be examined. Highlighting, Hiding, and Downplaying The concepts of 'highlighting' and 'hiding', central to Lakoff and Johnson, are essentially Black's concepts of'emphasis' and 'suppression' (see above). 'Argument is War' highlights winning or losing and hides the cooperative aspects of arguing. Lakoff and Johnson use as an example the metaphor 'Love is a Collaborative Work of Art'. It entails such things as 'love is work', 'love requires cooperation', and 'love involves creativity'.53 This metaphor highlights the 'active side' of love and hides the emotional aspects of love, which are 'almost never viewed as being under the lovers' active control in our conventional conceptual system'. 54 In contrast, the dimension of 'lack of control' is highlighted in the metaphor 'Love is Madness' as expressed in such expressions as 'I'm crazy about her' and 'She's driving me wild'. They also cite the incompatibility of the metaphor 'Love is a Collaborative Work of Art' with the metaphor 'Love is War', as in 'She is my latest conquest' and 'He surrendered to her' (which hides cooperation). Lakoff and Johnson add to 'highlighting' and 'hiding' the term 'downplaying'. By 'downplaying' they mean that a given metaphor 'is consistent with, but does not focus on' certain aspects of the tenor.55 The difference between hiding and downplaying is that what are hidden are those aspects of the tenor that are inconsistent with the vehicle. The downplayed aspects are entailments of the vehicle or the tenor that are not inconsistent with the metaphor, but are not highlighted. Lakoff and Johnson explore 'downplaying' in the interrelationship between two metaphors for love, 'Love is a Collaborative Work of Art' and 'Love is a Physical Force'. The first metaphor downplays 'certain aspects of love experiences': In particular, it downplays those experiences that fit the LOVE IS A PHYSICAL FORCE metaphor. By 'downplaying', we mean that it is consistent with, but does not focus on, experiences of love that could be reasonably described by 'There is a magnetism between us', 'We felt sparks', etc.56 52. 53. 54. 55. 56.

Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors,

p. 96. p. 140. p. 141. p. 149. p. 149.

12

Mixing Metaphors

Their discussion of categories illustrates how highlighting and downplaying work. Lakoff and Johnson give four sentences used to describe one person, each sentence using a different category, thus either highlighting or downplaying aspects of the person: 1. I've 2. I've 3. I've 4. I've

invited invited invited invited

a sexy blonde to our dinner party. a renowned cellist to our dinner party. a Marxist to our dinner party. a lesbian to our dinner party.

They write, 'Though the same person may fit all of these descriptions, each description highlights different aspects of the person. Describing someone who you know has all of these properties as "a sexy blonde" is to downplay the fact that she is a renowned cellist and a Marxist and to hide her lesbianism'.57 In exploring language for God in Deutero-Isaiah the question is, then, what is being highlighted about God in this text? A given metaphor will highlight certain aspects of God and hide others. A given entailment will highlight aspects of the conceptual metaphor and downplay others. The categories of highlighting and downplaying are important in understanding Lakoff and Johnson's categories ofmetaphoric extension and coherence, as will now be shown. Metaphoric Extension Like Black's concept of 'associated commonplaces', entailments primarily function as a system of stereotypical associations, culturally defined. This system of associations may be 'extended'. Lakoff and Johnson describe 'extension' as the activation of previously 'unused' parts of a metaphor in a figurative or imaginative way.58 A rhetorical expression may extend the conventional network of associations that 'characterize' the conceptual metaphor by highlighting potential entailments that are normally not commonplace to transform the metaphor and create new meaning. Rhetorical extensions give new meaning to the conventional metaphor by highlighting what was previously downplayed. Julie Galambush explores this phenomenon in her study of the city as the wife of YHWH in Ezekiel.59 She cites what she identifies as a conventional ancient Near East concept of the city as a woman and the wife of the deity. This metaphor, she argues, is extended by Ezekiel to include the entailment of impurity—an entailment not previously used or highlighted in the metaphor of the city as a wife, yet a potential entailment of woman (thus not inconsistent with it). Impurity, in the ancient Near Eastern context, is an entailment that is consistent with the feminine imagery. Thus, impurity is not hidden in the city-as-wife metaphor, but had 57. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 163. The assumption that the term 'sexy blonde' hides 'lesbianism' reveals Lakoff and Johnson's own assumptions of a heterosexual male perspective as normative. 58. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, pp. 52-55. 59. Julie Galambush, Jerusalem in the Book of Ezekiel: The City as Yahweh 's Wife (SBLDS 130; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992).

1. Understanding Metaphor

13

previously been downplayed in the ancient Near Eastern use of this metaphor. The innovative rhetorical move by Ezekiel (writing from the priestly tradition), associating the feminine with uncleanness, now redefines the metaphor. Thus a conventional metaphor, the city as the wife of the deity, informs Ezekiel's use of the image, and Ezekiel's rhetorical expression, through extension of the metaphor, transforms and extends the previously conventional metaphor. The city is an unclean woman. The extension of a metaphor functions in this way: the particular, innovative rhetorical expression extends the older, general, structural metaphor. In Galambush's study, the general is the conventional structural metaphor of the city as the wife of the deity.60 The conventional metaphor of the city as wife highlights the covenant relationship between the city and the deity, the expectation of fidelity, and the characterization of infidelity as adultery. The structural metaphor is expressed in the particular rhetorical event, that is, Ezekiel's use of the image of the city as the unfaithful wife of YHWH. In turn, Ezekiel extends the metaphor to include the entailment of uncleanness or defilement. Galambush writes, 'Ezekiel recasts the adultery metaphor to focus on the pollution that precipitates Yahweh's abandonment of the Jerusalem temple'.61 She adds, Exploiting the commonplaces of pollution and 'otherness' associated with the female body, Ezekiel shapes his personification to highlight the woman's sexual pollution, which becomes a symbol of the pollution of the city's 'holy place'.62

She concludes, The metaphor of the city as Yahweh's wife, already powerful as employed by Hosea and Jeremiah, is reshaped by Ezekiel into a virtually obsessive investigation of Jerusalem's sexual impurity. Influenced both by his anguished revulsion at the pollution of Yahweh's temple, and by its quickly approaching destruction, Ezekiel rereads and retells the story of the woman Jerusalem as the story of female sexual pollution and of male disgust and revenge.63

Thus, the rhetorical event (i.e. Ezekiel's speech), through extension, redefines the structural metaphor.64 There are numerous examples of this rhetorical strategy in 60. Galambush, Jerusalem, pp. 20-21. While Galambush argues that this is a convention in the ancient Near East, it is actually a convention particular to Hebrew literature, so far as we can tell from the available evidence (see below, Chaps 6-7). Although I do not accept some of the particulars of her argument about the city as wife, her study is an excellent example of the application of the concept of'metaphoric extension'. 61. Galambush, Jerusalem, p. 78. 62. Galambush, Jerusalem, p. 89. 63. Galambush, Jerusalem, p. 124. 64. Ezekiel elsewhere uses the rhetorical tactic of starting with a conventional metaphor and then highlighting what is normally downplayed. The conventional metaphor of kings (including God) as shepherds usually highlights the king's function as a protector and a provider. Ezek. 34.3 accuses the shepherds (the leaders) of being bad shepherds: 'You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fallings; but you do not feed the sheep'. The practices of eating the sheep and wearing their wool are usually downplayed in the metaphor of the king as a

14

Mixing Metaphors

the prophetic literature of the Hebrew Bible, including Deutero-Isaiah. Coherence (vs Consistency) An important contribution of Lakoff and Johnson for the present study of DeuteroIsaiah is their category of coherence vs. consistency. They discuss coherence between seemingly inconsistent metaphors. Given that Hebrew poetry frequently interweaves and juxtaposes metaphors, the concept of metaphoric coherence is quite helpful. Rather than simply referring to the interweaving of metaphors as a 'mixed metaphor', Lakoff and Johnson enable us to see how multiple metaphors interact. The areas of overlap or coherence serve to highlight specific aspects of the metaphors. Lakoff and Johnson emphasize that a conceptual metaphor 'focuses on one aspect of the concept'.65 To highlight more than one aspect of the concept, two or more metaphors are needed. No single metaphor will do.66 Thus, to express multiple aspects of one's subject (e.g. God), multiple metaphors are needed. Multiple metaphors, however, are usually inconsistent. Lakoff and Johnson call two different metaphors 'consistent' if a 'single clearly delineated metaphor' can satisfactorily encompass both of them. However, 'complete consistency across metaphors is rare'.67 They propose, however, that inconsistent metaphors may be 'coherent'; that is, that there can be an overlap of entailments between two different metaphors. To demonstrate the mechanism of coherence, they use the following two examples of metaphors for 'argument': 1) 'An Argument is a Journey'68 and 2) 'An Argument is a Container'.69 While there is a logical inconsistency here, the metaphors are not incoherent. The term 'coherence' describes how these two (or more) metaphors can be shown to fit together by virtue of one or more shared entailments under a more general category that satisfies the purposes of the two metaphors. The shared entailment of these two metaphors for argument is 'more of a surface is created'. An Argument is a Journey: 'As we make a journey, more of a surface is created. Therefore, as we make an argument, more of a surface is created ...'. An Argument is a Container: 'As we make a container, more of a surface is created. Therefore, as we make an argument, more of a surface is created'.70 shepherd, even though these practices are entirely consistent with what shepherds do. Ezekiel drops these entailments in v. 11 when God is depicted as the good shepherd. 65. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 95. 66. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 95. 67. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 96. 68. ' We have setout to prove ...', 'We will proceed in & step-by-step fashion', and 'Our goal is to show that...' (Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 90). 69. 'Your argument doesn't have much content", 'Your argument won't hold water', etc. (Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 92). 70. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, pp. 93-94.

1. Understanding Metaphor

15

Lakoff and Johnson explain that It is this overlap of entailments between the two metaphors that defines the coherence between them and provides the link between the amount of ground the argument covers and the amount of content it has.71

Thus, when inconsistent metaphors share a major common entailment, they are coherent: 'When a concept is structured by more than one metaphor, the different metaphorical structurings usually fit together in a coherent fashion^2 The concept of coherence is especially helpful in dealing with multiple metaphors within a given unit. Hebrew poetry often seems to be inconsistent to the Western reader bent on logical consistency.73 However, even such a reader can intuitively accommodate inconsistencies as long as the text is coherent. Lakoff and Johnson argue that this coherence lends itself to logical analysis. Such an analysis can be fruitful for a study of Hebrew poetry. Deutero-Isaiah uses multiple metaphors; Lakoff and Johnson provide the language needed to speak about how these metaphors function together coherently. Deutero-Isaiah uses the language of the father, the mother, the artisan, the husband, the redeemer, the warrior, etc. Some of these terms fit consistently as expressions of a single metaphor. 'Father' and 'mother' come close to being consistent, as parallel expressions for 'parent' (Isa. 45.10). God as husband and God as father are consistent when the 'wife' is Zion and the 'children' are her people (Isa. 50.1-3). But not all the metaphorical language of Deutero-Isaiah can be forced into a single, consistent metaphor. Rather, there are multiple metaphors functioning here, inconsistent yet coherent metaphors, whose coherence is demonstrated by the agile interweaving of the separate strands into a single textual unit. By the interweaving of metaphors, the text creates coherences not previously evident. Each textual unit of Deutero-Isaiah has a unique combination of metaphors and what is highlighted is what overlaps. A good example of reading a text in light of coherence of inconsistent metaphors is Katheryn Darr's article on Isa. 42.10-17, in which she examines the metaphors 'YHWH is a Warrior' and 'YHWH is a Birthing Woman':74 13

YHWH goes forth like a soldier, like a warrior he stirs up his fury; he cries out, he shouts aloud, he shows himself mighty against all his foes. 14 'For a long time I have been silent, I have kept still and restrained myself; now I will cry out like a woman in labor, I will gasp and pant, I will lay waste mountains and hills ...' (Isa. 42.13-14, Darr's translation) 71. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 94. 72. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 86. 73. The effort to find a consistent figure to fit the Servant Songs of Deutero-Isaiah is a good example of such a bent. 74. Katheryn Pfisterer Darr,' Like Warrior, Like Woman: Destruction and Deliverance in Isaiah 42.10-17', CBQ 49 (1987), pp. 560-71.

16

Mixing Metaphors

Darr persuasively argues for the coherence of the inconsistent metaphors. The coherence is established by finding a common entailment of the metaphors. Danidentifies the shared entailment as crying out or noisiness: 'he cries out, he shouts aloud', 'now I will cry out... I will gasp and pant'. Other shared entailments also come to mind—danger, courage, blood, pain, the threat of death, the preservation of life. By juxtaposing these two inconsistent metaphors, the author highlights the entailments that they share and downplays aspects of the metaphors that are not shared.75 In Isa. 54.1-8, two metaphors are used together. Their coherence creates an extension of downplayed aspects of each metaphor. YHWH is the redeeming kinsman (5b: 'The Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer [7^13, gd^el]'). In most of Deutero-Isaiah this image highlights release from slavery, while the potential entailment of the 7^13, go'el (redeemer) as the levirate husband is downplayed. The other major metaphor in Isaiah 54 is Zion as the wife of YHWH (5a: 'For your Maker is your husband pin]'). In the Hebrew Bible this functions to express the deity's care for and protection of the city wife and to highlight the expectation of the city's fidelity to the deity. It can also highlight divine abandonment in the case of destruction of the city. Hosea, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel use the marriage metaphor to express infidelity. Isa. 54.1-8 uses the redeemer metaphor together with the metaphor of the city as abandoned wife, along with the term 'widow' (4b(3: 'the disgrace of your widowhood'). The metaphors are extended by virtue of their coherence to depict YHWH as the levirate husband who will marry widowed Zion and provide her with children (Ib: 'For the children of the desolate woman will be more than the children of her that is married'). The Experiential Dimension of Metaphor 1. Metaphor Structures Experience. Lakoff and Johnson argue that metaphors give structure to our experience. They argue further, 'It is by means of conceptualizing our experiences ... that we pick out the "important" aspects of an experience ... We can categorize the experience, understand it, and remember it'.76 Deutero-Isaiah's multiple metaphors are expressions of Israel's experience of exile. The rhetoric of Deutero-Isaiah gives structure and meaning to the chaotic experience of exile and possibly accomplishes that which Lakoff and Johnson argue metaphors can accomplish: 'New metaphors have the power to create a new reality'.77 Deutero-Isaiah's innovative use of metaphor functions to create a reality of hope in exile: See, the former things have come to pass, the new things I now declare (Isa. 42.9).

2. Experience Structures Conceptual Metaphors. Less relevant to this study, but worthy of mention, is Lakoff and Johnson's contention that many of our conceptual 75. For other examples consider Isaiah 1 (God as father and as master of an animal, coherent in the call to obedience); Malachi 1 (father and master of a slave); Isaiah 64 (father and potter, both creative). 76. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 83. 77. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 145.

1. Understanding Metaphor

17

metaphors are rooted in universal human experiences, such as the experience of being in a human body and the experience of gravity. Such universal human experiences shape very basic metaphors that employ such concepts as 'up' and 'down', and 'forward' and 'backward'.78 Lakoff and Johnson do, however, allow for the role of culture to interact with universal physical experience in shaping conceptual metaphors: It is hard to distinguish the physical from the cultural basis of a metaphor, since the choice of one physical basis from among many possible ones has to do with cultural coherence.79

An example of this for our purposes is the concept of childbirth. While this is a widely experienced life event across all cultures, the concept of childbirth is culturally shaped. Thus, a culture's concept of childbirth is derived from both certain universals of the childbirth process (pain, fluids, danger to mother and child, a baby born) and a culture's distinctive understanding of the process. 5. Conclusion In order to understand biblical metaphor it is important to go beyond a search for a single root metaphor for God to a recognition of the multiple metaphors for God in the Hebrew Bible. Isaiah 40-55 utilizes multiple metaphors in speaking of YHWH. A key to understanding the thought of Deutero-Isaiah is its metaphors and their interaction with one another. For such an understanding, the work of George Lakoff and Mark Johnson on metaphor is helpful. They offer a system, categories, and language useful for exploring the multiple metaphors of Deutero-Isaiah, especially for exploring how metaphors overlap and interact as they express beliefs about YHWH and YHWH'S acts. Included in Lakoff and Johnson's system are several useful components: the relationship of metaphor to experience, 'structural metaphors', 'metaphorical extension', 'entailment', 'highlighting, hiding, downplaying', and 'coherence'. In the present study of parental imagery for God, these categories are utilized in examining how Deutero-Isaiah's metaphors interact. Parental language can highlight a wide range of ideas about the deity: authority, punishment, emotional ties such as love, legal obligations, honor, inheritance, source of life, source of name, 78. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 4. 79. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 19. Mieke Bal provides the strongest critique of the supposition of a universal human experience. She argues that Lakoff and Johnson's failure to acknowledge gender as central to 'experience' is a serious flaw in their experientially based system. The categories of male and female, she argues, are more basic than the category of personhood. Acknowledgment of gender would strengthen Lakoff and Johnson's book, but feminist theorists themselves do not agree on the extent to which one's experience of the world as a male or a female is rooted in one's bodily experiences or in the cultural constructs by which we create gender. See Mieke Bal, 'Metaphors He Lives By', Semeia 61 (1993), pp. 185-207, esp. 18592. While this author agrees that Lakoff and Johnson's examples reveal a rather severe androcentrism, a limited range of examples is not fatal to the theory.

18

Mixing Metaphors

etc. In a given text that uses parental imagery, any entailment that is part of the network of associations (Black's 'associated commonplaces') of father or mother is implicitly present, but some of these associations are downplayed, while others are highlighted. Such highlighting is often activated by the interaction of the parental language with another metaphor. Chapter 2 will discuss the cultural commonplaces of parenthood and kinship that are most relevant for this study. In the subsequent chapters, each of the selected pericopes will be discussed, identifying the parental language of the unit and examining at least one other metaphor with which the parent image coherently interacts. The commonplaces of the other coherent metaphors will be explored. Finally, the implications of the interaction of metaphors will be examined, in order to identify those aspects of YHWH as a parent that are highlighted in the interplay of metaphors. The ongoing conversation on metaphor, what metaphor is and how it works, is far too extensive to survey here. Some general comments are, however, in order, in regard to this study's reliance on Black's analysis and Lakoff and Johnson's collaborative work. Discussions of metaphor usually deal with metaphor as language from one sphere being applied to something from another sphere. For example, Lakoff and Johnson write, 'The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another'.80 The discussion then centers on how the 'tenor' and the 'vehicle' interact. For example, in a metaphor such as 'Man is a wolf the interaction is between the meaning of 'man' and the meaning of 'wolf. Theorists deal with this interaction in various ways. But when the tenor is 'God', much of the discussion about the meaning of the tenor is irrelevant or even absurd. The literal meaning of 'God' is an unknown, apart from metaphor or analogy. (The dictionary may be able to provide a somewhat satisfactory definition of 'god', but 'God' is another matter.) Any supposition that the meaning of the tenor 'God' is already known (and simply being expanded upon by use of metaphor) must necessarily derive that meaning from already accepted, conventional metaphors and analogies. Thus the vehicle is not interacting with the literal sense of 'God' but with other metaphors about God. This situation renders the discussions of the interactions of literal meanings in metaphor completely irrelevant. Since the tenor 'God' is metaphorical and the vehicle is applied to God metaphorically, the meaning produced is not from the interaction of literal tenor and literal vehicle, but from the interaction of two metaphors—the immediately identifiable metaphor and the metaphors implied by 'God'. Thus, in DeuteroIsaiah, all metaphors for God known to the author and the audience are potentially present. Those metaphors that appear in the same unit as our identified metaphor (God as parent), and are themselves imaginatively used by Deutero-Isaiah, are the metaphors that are instrumental in defining the tenor 'God' in relation to the vehicle 'parent'. Lakoff and Johnson's concept of'metaphoric coherence' provides the means to talk about the interaction of these metaphors, or perhaps we should 80. Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors, p. 6.

1. Understanding Metaphor

19

say, the interaction of multiple vehicles that share the indefinable tenor 'God'. Most discussions of metaphor focus on the specific metaphoric utterance. The rhetorical 'event' is our starting point—identifying those specific statements in Deutero-Isaiah that apply the language of parenthood to God. However, a method is needed that will allow us to venture into the 'conceptual metaphors' in which these rhetorical utterances are grounded. Lakoff and Johnson provide the language and structure needed. Additionally, Black's 'system of associated commonplaces' enables us to look beyond the specific rhetorical utterance to the ideas, knowledge, and associations that are elicited by the rhetorical event, and draw on DeuteroIsaiah's cultural context. Another limitation of many discussions of metaphor is the supposition that metaphors are necessarily innovative and surprising. While Deutero-Isaiah's specific rhetorical strategies are innovative and imaginative, the metaphorical underpinnings, it will be shown, are quite conventional. In fact, Deutero-Isaiah's rhetoric about God is, while creative, rooted in Israel's conventional metaphors. What is needed for the purposes of this study is an approach to metaphor that does not ignore or discount the rhetorical importance of conventional metaphors. The works of Black and of Lakoff and Johnson provide this approach, particularly Lakoff and Johnsons' concept of 'entailment'. This category may be applied to DeuteroIsaiah's metaphor 'YHWH is a Redeeming Kinsman'. This entails that YHWH is kin to Israel and Israel is in need of redemption, that is, in need of a kinsman to act as an advocate and guarantor of the family honor, land, freedom, and offspring. The metaphor entails that YHWH has both the right and the responsibility to act as the redeeming kinsman. This role of 'redeemer' (yK"U, go "el) includes several possible functions: buying the debt slave out of bondage, providing offspring for a dead brother via the widow, acting as an advocate in the court of law, purchasing the land of impoverished relatives to keep it in the family, and exacting blood retribution on the murderer of one's kin. All of these share the major common entailment of the preservation of the family's honor. The metaphor entails that YHWH'S own honor as well as the honor of Israel is at stake. Reading DeuteroIsaiah in light of the historical context of exile in Babylon, one discerns the entailment that Israel's exile is understood in terms of debt slavery (e.g. 43.1-7) and Jerusalem's state of destruction and loss of population is understood in terms of widowhood and childlessness (e.g. 54.1-8). All of these are entailments of the metaphor 'YHWH is a Redeeming Kinsman' (7^13, go'el). In Isaiah 43 the metaphor of YHWH as the redeeming kinsman is expressed in some of the entailments of the 7^13, go'el when YHWH tells Israel, I give Egypt as your ransom, Ethiopia and Seba in exchange for you ... 1 give humanity in return for you, nations in exchange for your life. (3b, 4b; translation mine).

One may say that the metaphor of the redeemer entails that YHWH gives something in exchange for Israel's freedom from bondage. The language of exchange highlights one aspect of the vfcVU, go'el, metaphor (the purchase of freedom for the debt slave) and downplays others (the blood avenger, the levirate husband). The

20

Mixing Metaphors

term 'entailment' can express how various aspects of the metaphor relate to one another, for example, that YHWH purchases his kin's freedom entails that Israel is a debt slave. When this project began the expectation was that the images of father and mother would function fairly consistently throughout Deutero-Isaiah. It was expected that a careful examination of these images would reveal a consistent set of characteristics or associations evoked by the father image and the mother image. What was revealed instead was the extent to which Deutero-Isaiah's many images are not only interwoven, but interact in such a way that a given image cannot be understood in isolation. Deutero-Isaiah's use of the imagery of father and mother for God resists reduction to a consistent set of traits. Rather, every literary unit highlights a unique set of associations for these images as the father or mother imagery interacts with other images for God and Israel.

Chapter 2 KINSHIP AND BIRTH IN DEUTERO-ISAIAH AND ANCIENT ISRAEL 1. Deutero-Isaiah and the Rhetoric of Family The use of parental imagery in Isaiah 40-55 stems from Deutero-Isaiah's general use of the language of family (kinship and birth), rather than from a controlling theological model of God as a parent. This study began as an attempt to identify such a controlling root metaphor, but a careful examination of the texts suggests that a different mechanism is at work in Deutero-Isaiah. The great diversity and particularity of each of the five texts examined suggests that while their imagery draws from a common semantic field (the commonplaces of birth and parenting), they are not derived from a single paradigm for God. We thus need to consider Deutero-Isaiah's use of the semantic field and themes of kinship and birth. Deutero-Isaiah's favorite or central themes are these: • There is no god but YHWH. • YHWH is incomparable. • YHWH is the creator of all things and thus the determiner of Israel's destiny. • Therefore, YHWH is able to save Israel, return the people home, and restore Jerusalem. Deutero-Isaiah utilizes favorite terminologies and figures of speech to express these ideas. Specifically, a small number of semantic fields or word families are interwoven throughout Isaiah 40-55. They include language about vegetation, language about water, legal language, and the language of creation and of the work of artisans. Most relevant for the present study is the use of the semantic field of kinship, that is, family relationships and child-bearing. Sometimes semantic fields and conceptual fields overlap almost completely, that is, there is a fairly direct correlation between the types of words used and the concepts expressed. In Deutero-Isaiah, this is true of creation language. Words such as !"!t£>U ('make'), K"Q ('create'), and "IIP ('shape') generally describe the actions of YHWH the creator. i"It£JU ('make') and "liT ('shape') are also used to describe the work of artisans to make, create, and shape idols for worship. But even the references to idol-makers point to the conceptual metaphor of YHWH as creator, for Deutero-Isaiah uses the figure of the artisan to make the point that YHWH is the creator, not the creation (while the idols, that is, the Babylonian gods, are creations—see Chapter 5). The semantic field of kinship or family relationships, however, functions quite

22

Mixing Metaphors

differently from the language of creation. Deutero-Isaiah uses these kinship terms to express a variety of concepts rather than one central concept. When creation terms are used of YHWH, we can clearly connect them to the concept of YHWH as the creator. However, when parental language is used of YHWH we cannot simply say, 'This means YHWH is a parent'. Nor can we simply translate the metaphor of YHWH as a parent to express a single concept such as covenant or 'YHWH is a protector'. The family language is used with great variety by Deutero-Isaiah, sometimes in reference to YHWH and oftentimes not. Rhetorical units or pericopes that make use of family language for God vary from one another. Even within a given unit more than one concept may be conveyed. Family language in DeuteroIsaiah can be broken down into several categories: offspring,1 child-bearing (feminine), begetting (masculine), marriage, and extended family. Offspring In using the language of offspring, Deutero-Isaiah often shows a preference for live metaphors for offspring. There is no use of the phrase 7N"li£T~^!3, bene—yisrael ('children of Israel'), which is so conventional elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible that it is essentially a dead metaphor. As a dead metaphor the phrase 7N")CT~'']D, bene—yisrael fails to evoke a parent-child relationship (just as names such as 'Johnson' are no longer evocative of the son relationship). Instead, Deutero-Isaiah speaks of the 'seed of Israel' —a livelier phrase which freshly evokes the idea of family connections and procreation. Similarly, in 41.8 Jacob/Israel is 'the offspring (seed) of Abraham', and in 45.25 Deutero-Isaiah says, 'In YHWH all the offspring (seed) of Israel shall triumph and glory'. While Deutero-Isaiah does not use the phrase 7K'~]££71~''!Q, bene—yisra'el, 43.6 speaks of the 'sons' and the 'daughters' of YHWH, and 49. 22 of the 'sons' and 'daughters' of Zion. The language of 'sons' and 'daughters' here is a live metaphor. Deutero-Isaiah also uses a rather rare word to speak of offspring —D^UiMJiJ. In 44. 3b, God says to Jacob, 'I will pour my spirit upon your descendants (seed) and my blessing on your offspring (DTiJUiJ)' and in 48.19, 'your offspring (seed) would have been like the sand, and your descendants (DTHUii of your loins) like its grains; their name would never be cut off. Child-bearing and Child-rearing The second area of kinship language is child-bearing and child-rearing. DeuteroIsaiah frequently utilizes the highly feminine language of childbearing, using such terms as 'woman in labor' (if T7T, yoledd), 'give birth' ("IT), 'womb' (two Hebrew words: ]CDH, and DO"!), and language of nursing. In 51.2, Sarah is she 'who bore you' (DDT?1 !"!£"!). A number of times Deutero-Isaiah refers to God's relationship to Jacob being 'from the womb' (]C33Q). Some examples are: Thus says YHWH who made you, who formed you in the womb . . . (44.2; also 44.24) 1.

'seed' (£HT), 'sons', 'daughters', 'child' O'T), 'descendants'(sadfsgkjlg

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

23

For I knew ... that from birth (from the womb) you were called a rebel. (48.8) YHWH called me from the womb, from the inner parts of my mother he announced my name. (49.1, translation mine)

Much maternal imagery in Deutero-Isaiah is related to the motherhood of Jerusalem, or Zion. The ruined city is depicted in Deutero-Isaiah's later chapters as the mother of her exiled people. She is a mother who has been abandoned and has lost her children. In ch. 49 Zion says, 'I was bereaved and barren, exiled and put away—so who has reared these?' (49.21) This passage uses both the language of child-bearing and the language of child-rearing. Childless Zion will have an abundance of children; Jerusalem will have inhabitants. Begetting The third area of kinship language is begetting or fathering. Male parental terms used are 'beget' ("T7\ hi. 45.10) and 'seed'. In addition, 48.1 may speak of those 'who came forth from the loins (inner parts—D^UQ) of Judah' (a male figure). (This reading departs from the MT which reads 'waters'.) In 51.2 Abraham is called 'your father'. Marriage and Zion The fourth area of kinship language is marriage. The language of marriage appears primarily after 49.14 and is used exclusively to describe the relationship between YHWH and Jerusalem/Zion, and will thus be dealt with in Chapters 6 and 7. Zion is described as the wife of YHWH. Terms connected to the marriage relationship are: 'husband' (^IH, bad, 54.5), 'wife' (Tiefc, 54.6), 'widow' (TIDB^K, 47.8), 'widowhood' (fll^N, 54.4; JQ^K, 47.9), 'bride' (Tta, 49.18), and 'bill of divorce' (mrP"Q ISO, 50.1). The passage that most richly draws on the language of marriage is 54.1-8, in which Zion is addressed. Verses 4-6 read: 4

Do not fear, for you will not be ashamed; do not be discouraged, for you will not suffer disgrace; for you will forget the shame of your youth, and the disgrace of your widowhood you will remember no more. 5 For your Maker is your husband (7IO, ba^al), YHWH of hosts is his name; the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, The God of the whole earth he is called. 6 For YHWH has called you like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, like the wife of a man's youth when she is cast off, says your God.

Extended Family The fifth and last category of kinship language is the redeeming kinsman. This language is expressed by the term 7&VU, go'el. The term 7N13, generally translated 'redeemer', is different from IT1271Q, 'savior' (also used by Deutero-Isaiah), in that ^fcVU is a kinship term referring to the male next-of-kin, whereas IT^JIQ has a

24

Mixing Metaphors

more general use, but seems to refer to one who responds to a cry for help in the face of injustice.2 Conclusion Deutero-Isaiah uses the language of kinship in diverse ways. This language often refers to YHWH, but also appears in reference to Israel and to Zion. By acknowledging that this type of terminology is generally characteristic of this author, we are cautioned against treating kinship terms for God in isolation, or considering this terminology as uniquely significant for God. The liveliness of this language throughout Isaiah 40-55 also serves as a reminder that such phrases as 'my children' to refer to Israel are not dead metaphors, but alive and evocative. These observations concerning Deutero-Isaiah's semantic field of kinship terms are merely an introduction for our investigation into Deutero-Isaiah's lively use of structuring metaphors of kinship. Before investigating specific texts, the most relevant commonplaces of kinship and childbirth must be examined. 2. The Associated Commonplaces of Kinship Black, in his theory of associated commonplaces, notes that metaphors are dependent on cultural stereotypes. One's ability to appreciate the metaphor depends on one's familiarity with the cultural associations. We are here concerned with the cultural assumptions, constructions, and stereotypes about kinship and, more specifically, parenthood. Deutero-Isaiah uses both father imagery and mother imagery for YHWH, as well as parental language that is not explicitly either paternal or maternal. (It is worthwhile to note that a gender-neutral term such as 'parent' is not available in Hebrew to speak of a father or mother.3) Three passages in Deutero-Isaiah draw on the commonplaces of childbirth and early infancy. In 42.9-17, YHWH cries out like a woman in labor. 45.9-13 makes reference to the begetting father and the woman in labor, which is followed by YHWH'S reference to 'my children', or 'my son' 0^3). 49.13-21 compares YHWH to the nursing mother of an infant, the child of her womb. The entailments of conception, labor, and early infancy paint an image of YHWH as a mother and, in 45.10, as a begetting father. Two texts describe YHWH in terms suggestive of the father of older children or adults: 43.1-7 and 50.1-3. An appreciation of the implicit network of associations of family relationships will enhance our reading of the text. Thus, what follows is an exploration of the network of associations of childbirth and parenting in the context of Israel and the ancient Near East. In the present study, non-Israelite ancient Near East literary sources are utilized to shed light on the commonplaces of parental imagery, as well as on the images 2. Tryggve Mettinger, In Search of God (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), pp. 166-67. 3. The masc. pi. iTON may refer to all of one's ancestors, both male and female (as it is rendered in some translations as 'ancestors'); however, this is not certain. The Assyrian Dictionary cites the term abi-ummi as a term for 'parents' (The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, I [Chicago: The Oriental Institute; Gliickstadt, Germany: J. J. Augustin Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1964], s.v. 'abu\ pp. 68-76).

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

25

with which parental images interact. Thus, some comments are in order concerning how the non-biblical material is understood to be relevant. There is good reason to think that quite a few ancient Near East cultural characteristics were widespread. Israel shared certain religious traditions with its neighbors (e.g. the Divine Warrior; see Chapter 3). Israel also shared many legal and social traditions with its neighbors. Additionally, Israel and its neighbors shared certain literary forms (e.g. the city lament; see Chapter 6). Thus, gaps in information in the biblical material may be filled out (with some caution) using non-biblical sources. This approach is most helpful where the biblical text provides some hints at what is more explicit in the non-biblical material. Most of the non-biblical sources cited are understood in this context of a common cultural milieu. Some of the material in Deutero-Isaiah (especially the polemics against the Babylonian gods) suggests that the Judahites of Deutero-Isaiah's context were in close enough contact with Babylonian culture to be influenced by it. The author of Deutero-Isaiah certainly seems to be aware of some of the particulars of Babylonian religious practice. The exiles may well have become familiar with certain Babylonian traditions during the exile. What is not presupposed here is that the author of Deutero-Isaiah was specifically familiar with any of the particular Babylonian texts that will be cited below. What is suggested, rather, is a familiarity with the cultural traditions that those texts reveal. Associated Commonplaces of Childbirth Childbirth is an event that is experienced in every culture. There are certain objective realities about childbirth, that is, physical stages from conception to birth. But these universal experiences are overlaid with a cultural filter (e.g. is birth a simple and natural event, a medical emergency, or a magical occurrence?). Nancy Demand's observations in her work on childbirth in ancient Greece are applicable to a study of childbirth in Israel and the ancient Near East. She notes that Birth is a natural physiological process, but for human beings it is also a social event. Culture intervenes in countless ways to shape and structure the experience. We have a good illustration of this in our own society, where we have seen both the 'medicalization' of childbirth, with its emphasis on monitored and doctor-controlled delivery, and, in reaction, efforts to make the experience more 'natural', ranging from home birth attended by a midwife to hospital care in homelike birthing rooms with father-assisted delivery. Giving birth is not so much a 'natural' event as a 'cultural construction' ... As a consequence, the study of the way in which a particular society perceives and manages childbirth reveals fundamental aspects of its cultural and social values.4

4. Nancy Demand, Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994), p. 1. Katheryn Pfisterer Darr notes: 'there is a crucial distinction between recovering ancient Israelite society's stereotypical associations with women, and reconstructing the actual lives of Israelite women living at various periods in Israel and Judah's histories. Then, no less than now, one cannot simply equate widespread ideas about women and children with the realities of their lives' (Isaiah's Vision and the Family of God [Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994], p. 86).

26

Mixing Metaphors

To appreciate better these texts in Deutero-Isaiah, a survey of the 'associated commonplaces' of birth is provided here. A more detailed examination will be given to those commonplaces that are most relevant for the five central texts of the present study. 1. Fertility and Childlessness. Fertility was always a major concern in Israel and in the ancient Near East. A man's son was the heir who insured the continuation of his 'house' in a patriarchal and patrilineal society. For a woman, having children, in particular sons, would enhance her status in the family and in society.5 In addition to her increase in social status, a son would also provide support for his mother in her widowhood and old age.6 The importance of motherhood and one concern about childlessness are highlighted in Deutero-Isaiah. Childlessness is the central issue in 49.13-21 (analyzed in Chapter 6). In Deutero-Isaiah, Zion is one who has been bereaved of children (49.20 and 51.18-20), and she is the 'barren one' (54.1). She is given the promise of children (49.13-26 and 54.1-14). Given the above benefits of having children, childlessness was clearly a great misfortune: not simply pragmatic, but a misfortune to which society assigned great shame, to both men and women. Shame in childlessness is attested in Ps. 127.5, 'Happy is the man who has his quiver full [of sons/children]. He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate'. In Babylon a man with no heir was called a man 'whose hearth is extinguished'.7 This imagery is applied to the mother in 2 Sam. 14.7, where the wise woman of Tekoa pleads on behalf of 'her' son who murdered his brother: 'Thus they would quench my one remaining ember, and leave to my husband neither name nor remnant on the face of the earth'. For a woman, infertility was a source of shame and reproach.8 Infertility was often thought to be the will of the deity. The Hebrew Bible explicitly attributes fertility and barrenness to God (Gen. 29.31). When a woman conceives, it is because God 'remembers' or 'hears' her.9 Likewise it is God who 'closes the womb'(Gen. 16.2; 20.17-18; 30.2b; 1 Sam. 1.5).10 The Hebrew Bible's narratives portray women characters' responses to infertility as a reaction of great distress. 5. Darr, Isaiah's Vision, 98. See also Phyllis A. Bird, ABD, VI (1992), s.v. 'Women: Old Testament', pp. 951 -57 (952); Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961), p. 39; and Karel van der Toorn, From Her Cradle to Her Grave: The Role of Religion in the Life of the Israelite and the Babylonian Woman (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), 92. 6. Leo G. Perdue, 'The Israelite and Early Jewish Family', in Leo G. Purdue et al., Families in Ancient Israel (The Family, Religion and Culture; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1997), pp. 163-222(189-90). 7. Dating from the Old Babylonian Period; see J. N. Postgate, Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History (New York: Routledge, 1992), p. 83. 8. nsnn—Gen. 30.23; see also Isa. 4.1; 43.4. 9. For 'remember' in connection with pregnancy: 'YHWH remembered her' (1 Sam. 1.19); Then God remembered Rachel and God heeded her and opened her womb' (Gen. 30.22); 'And YHWH took note OpS) of Hannah' (1 Sam. 2.21). 10. In Gen. 16.2, Saraisays, 'YHWH has prevented me from bearing children'. 1 Sam. 1.5 says of Hannah, 'YHWH had closed her womb'.

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

27

Hannah's response to her childlessness is 'great anxiety and vexation' (1 Sam. 1.16) and she is 'deeply troubled' (1.15). Elkanah's other wife, Peninnah, would 'provoke her severely, to irritate her, because YHWH had closed her womb' (1 Sam. 1.6). In Gen. 29.32-33 Leah speaks of her former childlessness as 'affliction' and adds, 'Because YHWH has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also'. When Rachel becomes a mother she says, 'God has taken away my reproach' (Gen. 30.23). In the ancient Near East a woman's childlessness was grounds for divorce.11 In the ancient Near East, infertility is invoked as a covenant curse: May Belet-ili, the Lady of all creatures, put an end to birth giving in your land, so that the nurses among you shall miss the cry of babies in the streets.12

Hosea may be invoking an infertility curse in a covenant context in Hos. 9.11: 'Ephraim's glory shall fly away like a bird—no birth, no pregnancy, no conception'. Childlessness could result from a tragic loss of children later in life, as well as from infertility. Zech. 12.10 utilizes this image: 'They shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn'. Isaac faces the loss of his two grown sons (Gen. 27.45), and Jacob of some of his grown sons (Gen. 42.36 and 43.14). Hosea curses Ephraim's fertility, adding 'Even if they bring up children, I will bereave them until no one is left'. (Hos. 9.12). Samuel expresses a double-edged curse when he says to Agag, 'As your sword has made women childless, so your mother shall be childless among women' (1 Sam. 15.33). (Samuel then proceeds to hack Agag into pieces.) Isa. 47.9 describes Babylon as a woman who experiences both the loss of her children and widowhood. 2. Labor. The standard term for giving birth is \ ) ^ , yld, in the qal form. This root appears in two texts of the present study: Isa. 42.14 (qal) and 45.10 (hi.). The qal form most commonly refers to a woman or female animal giving birth, but is also used to refer to a man begetting.!3 The male begetting may also be expressed by the same root in the hiphil form, which can be interpreted to mean 'cause to give birth'. Only the hiphil form appears in Deutero-Isaiah for the male image (Isa. 45.10).14 11. De Vaux, Ancient Israel, 24, citing CH #138; Jean Bottero, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), 186, citing CH #144 and #170. CH #138 states: 'If a seignior wishes to divorce his wife who did not bear him children, he shall give her money to the full amount of her marriage-price and he shall also make good to her the dowry which she brought from her father's house and then he may divorce her' (James B. Pritchard (ed.), The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, I [trans. Theophile J. Meek; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958], p. 153). 12. 'The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon',1.437, trans. Albrecht Goetze, in Pritchard (ed.), The Ancient Near East, I, 63). 13. Prov. 23.22: 'your father who begot you', followed shortly by v. 25, 'her who bore you'. The qal form to refer to a male begetting is most common in Genesis, e.g. Gen. 4.18; 10.8, 13,15, 24, 26; 22.23. 14. Isa. 49.21 is ambiguous as to whether the qal form refers to a male or a female. The hiphil

28

Mixing Metaphors

When applied to a woman, the verb \)* ,yld, functions in two ways. On the one hand, it refers to actual labor and giving birth.15 On the other hand, it has a very general meaning of 'having a baby' or 'having children', thus referring to the whole experience, for example, in the formula 'she conceived and bore a son', which only implicitly refers to labor.16 Thus the term \)*,yld, sometimes refers specifically to labor, but not always (see Isa. 49.21).17 The term nTTT, yoledd ('she who is giving birth'), is used in one of this study's targeted texts: 42.14 (fern, qal ptc.). This participle means 'one (fern, sing.) who gives birth'. Another word that is used for giving birth is 7 n H, hyl. This is the term used to describe labor in Isa. 45.10 where (as elsewhere) it is used parallel to a masculine use of TT, yld. The term is used in two ways. First, it may mean 'be in labor', including the whole process of labor. As A. Baumann notes, 'The Hebrew word is in fact a comprehensive term for everything from the initial contractions to the birth itself.18 Second, 7"1!"!, hyl, may have a more figurative meaning of 'Fear or trembling, usually as a reaction to a distressing situation'. This is a figurative use 'in situations of anxiety or fear'.19 It is a metaphorical allusion to childbirth. Many texts that have this meaning explicitly connect it to childbirth, for example, 'tremble like a woman in labor'. Other texts combine this term with other terms that are also part of the semantic field of birthing, although not limited to that field (e.g. pTPf [hi. 'take hold'], THN [qal 'seize']). In yet other texts, the metaphorical sense is lost. If it is, indeed, a metaphor, at times it is a dead metaphor (as in Deut. 2.25; Exod. 15.14; Ps. 29.8-9; 96.9; 97.4; Job 26.5; Jer. 5.3, 22; 1 Chron. 16.30, etc.). In describing a situation of dismay, Baumann says, The physical effects are described: the loins are filled with chil (Isa. 21:3; cr. Nah. 2:11 [10]), the knees tremble (Nah. 2:11 [10]), the hands fall helpless (Jer. 6:24; Mic. 4:9), faces pale (Joel 2:6; Nah. 2:11[10]; cr. Isa. 13:8), groans (Jer. 4:31; 22:23; Mic. 4:10) and cries (Isa. 26:17; Jer. 4:3) are heard. These details give us a clear picture of what is meant by chil—involuntary and uncontrolled spasmodic movement, to which the body is surrendered, accompanied by a sense of weakness and heat. The symptoms described are almost exclusively external. At the same

is preferred to the qal in the genealogies of Chronicles. 15. Gen. 30.3; 35.15-16; 38.27; Exod. 1.19; Lev. 12.2; 1 Sam. 4.19; 1 Kgs 3.17-18; 19.3; Isa. 30.14; 26.17-18; 27.3; 66.7-8; Jer. 20.14; Mic. 5.2. Carol Meyers notes that when used in reference to giving birth the verb is intransitive (Discovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context [New York: Oxford University Press, 1988], p. 106). 16. Just as today a woman might indicate that she's pregnant by saying 'I'm having a baby' or even 'We're having a baby', referring to the whole process; or she might be said to be at the hospital because 'she's having the baby', meaning that she is actually giving birth. For this sense, see Gen. 4.1, 17; 21.22-25; 30.5-7, 17-19,23; 38.2-5; Exod. 2.2; Judg. 13.5-7; 1 Sam. 2.21; 2 Kgs 4.17; 1 Chron. 7.23; Isa. 7.14; 8.3; Hos. 1.3, 6, 8. Meyers notes that the verb is transitive when 'it refers to the status of parenthood' (Eve, p. 106). 17. Meyers, Eve, p. 106. 18. A. Baumann, '"TIT, TDOT, IV, pp. 344-47 (345). 19. Baumann, ''TIT, p. 345.

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

29

time, however, it is clear that the verb refers also to the inward state of the person in question: a state of trembling, panic, fear.20

When used in reference to God, the root 7Tf, hyl, usually alludes to the first meaning ('be in labor') rather than the second ('fear' or 'trembling').21 Thus, in Prov. 8.22-25, Wisdom speaks, 22

YHWH created me ... When there were no depths I was brought forth (Tl77in, from hyl), when there were no springs abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth (TITTin)... 24

God gives birth to creation in Ps. 90.2: Before the mountains were brought forth ("P"', yld), or ever you had formed (gave birth to—7/llim, polal, from hyl) the earth and the world ...

In Deut. 32.18, God gives birth to Israel: You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you ("P"1, yld) (or that begot you); you forgot the God (El) who gave you birth (~[7 vFIQ from hyl)?'2

Another use of this term in connection to God's activity is in Isa. 45.10, which will be discussed in Chapter 5. In Isa. 42.14, YHWH is said to cry out like one giving birth. The culture's network of associated commonplaces related to labor is thus associated with YHWH. Childbirth is almost always quite painful, even in the best of situations. Darr notes, 'Even normal deliveries were often preceded by lengthy, excruciating labor'.23 Because of the mortality rates of women of childbearing age, the life expectancy of women was around 30, while for men it was around 40.24 Acknowledgment of the danger is found in the culturally specific rhetoric of birth, as will be explored further in Chapter 3. Associated Commonplaces of the Father of the Family 1. Authority. The authority of the father is especially relevant in Isa. 50.1-3 (see Chapter 7). The father had authority over the rest of the household and family. He 20. Baumann, '7TT, p. 346. 21. Julia A. Foster identifies four texts in which this root refers to God's activity ('The Motherhood of God: The Use of hyl as God-language in the Hebrew Scriptures', in Lewis M. Hopfe (ed.), Uncovering Ancient Stones: Essays in Memory ofH. Neil Richardson [Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994], pp. 93-102). 22. Foster notes, 'This passage is the only one of the four examined that juxtaposes divine names and birth-words' (Foster, 'The use of hyl', p. 100). 23. Darr, Isaiah's Vision, p. 98. 24. Meyers, Eve, pp. 112-13. Darr describes the dangers: 'Many pregnancies ended in miscarriage or stillbirth. Maternal death was an all too frequent consequence of conception (e.g. Gen. 35.16-19). Severe hemorrhaging took many women's lives; a breech birth, or some other complication, could result in the deaths of both child and mother' (Isaiah's Vision, p. 98).

30

Mixing Metaphors

had authority over his daughters until they married (into another household) and over his sons into adulthood. A husband was the vlD, baal, master, of his wife.25 His authority included the power and responsibility to arrange for the marriages of his children, to punish disobedience in his children,26 to sell his children into slavery, to divorce his wife, to adopt as his heir a relative or someone from outside the family, and to legitimize or not to legitimize his children by a slave woman. Joseph Blenkinsopp notes, 'Great emphasis is placed on control, hierarchy, subordination to authority'.27 2. Naming. Children were often named by their fathers (Gen. 16.15; 17.19; Exod. 2.22), but also frequently by their mothers (see below). In addition to this given name, individuals were identified by their fathers' names.28 The common formula is 'PN, son of PN2'. (A woman was likewise identified as the daughter of her father until she was married and was then identified as 'PN! wife of PN2'.) 3. Protector and Provider. The importance of the father's (and husband's) role as protector and provider is clearest in its absence. The lot of the 'widow and orphan' is the lot of those with no means of economic support and no one to protect their interests in society.29 This explains Zion's lot in Isaiah 49-54. Women did make a substantial contribution to the household economy, but their ability to produce depended upon a father of the house to provide the household structure and the property that supported the family. Because of the lack of power of women and children in society and the inability of widows to inherit, they depended very much on the father of the house to provide the structure of support. When a young woman was left without a husband or a son to provide for her, the institution of levirate marriage provided her a place in a DN~STD ('father's house'), and the hope for a son to support her into her old age. 4. Inheritance (rnn3). The family inheritance, that is, land, was of utmost importance in the varied responsibilities of the family's father. Carol Meyers states: 25. Carol Meyers emphasizes the 'considerable level of authority' of both father and mother, even over adult children ('The Family in Early Israel', in Perdue et al, Families in Ancient Israel, pp. 1 -47 [31]). She notes that: 'The subordination of adult children to older adults is nearly always problematic; norms of respect for elders and even customary legal structures favoring the parents are not always able to contain intergenerational tensions or even outright hostility' (35). 26. Although the authority of the father to punish his son had some legal limits. See Deut. 21.18-21. 27. Joseph Blenkinsopp, 'The Family in First Temple Israel', in Perdue et al, Families in Ancient Israel, pp. 48-103 (83). Leo G. Perdue notes the following areas of authority 'of the senior male': 'assigning economic roles to family members, deciding on the male heir... judging family disputes ... arranging marriages ... handling the sale of children when the household was not economically viable, and having, at least for a time, the power of life and death over children and other household members judged in violation of certain laws' ('Jewish Family', p. 169). 28. Dana M. Pike, HBD (1985) s.v. 'Names', pp. 682-84 (683). 29. 2 Kgs 4.1; Ps. 94.6; Isa. 10.2; Mai. 3.5. Care for the widow and orphan is commanded throughout Deuteronomy, e.g. 14.29. See also Exod. 22.21; Isa. 1.17,23; Jer. 7.6; 22.3; Zech. 7.10.

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

31

Land, like labor, was a major feature of an Israelite family household. That the family's immovable or real property (land as well as whatever is more or less permanently built on it) is the sine qua non for the livelihood and survival of an agrarian family need hardly be mentioned. Yet the specific identification of each family household with its inherited domain (na 'alah, 'patrimony' or 'inheritance') was exceptionally strong; family land was to be held in perpetuity.30

The land was the basis for the family's survival. Alienation of the land from the family would be a disaster. Leo Perdue states the importance of the family land thus: Without land, it was impossible for the family as a social entity to exist, and the loss of land made it impossible for most households to survive intact. Insolvency, resulting eventually in the selling of land, usually led to the dissolution of the household. Without land, families fragmented and members dispersed .. .31

This observation is especially noteworthy in view of the historical setting of Deutero-Isaiah—the Babylonian exile. The exile to Babylon was a radical and complete loss of land. The loss of a homeland was a loss to the people's identity. Such a massive alienation from the land, not just national land but family land, would have created a crisis of kinship identity. It was the father's responsibility to maintain the family inheritance for the benefit of the next generation and future generations. Blenkinsopp notes the numerous threats to this inheritance: drought, high interest rates, and debts leading to debt slavery. These concerns were the father's responsibilities: It seems.. .that the head of the household held title to the patrimonial plot in the name of the entire kinship group and was responsible for passing it on intact to the next generation. This would not always have been easy.32

In the ancient Near East, inheritance is one of the primary commonplaces of the relationship between father and son. The primary concern of inheritance is the land, which was the household's economic foundation. Perdue argues: It is important to note that, theologically understood, the land is given [by YHWH] not to Israel's and Judah's kings or even to their temples and priests but rather to the children of Israel in general, and in particular to their households from the very beginning of the nation.33

Thus, Israel's concept of the land as an inheritance suggests a father-son relationship. In Isa. 43.1-7, YHWH calls for a return of his 'sons' and 'daughters' to the homeland. Thus YHWH acts as a responsible father to reverse the alienation of the inheritance that Israel has experienced (see Chapter 4). 5. The Father as Redeemer. The first-born was to be 'given' to God, whether a first-born animal or first-born child. However, the first-born child was to be 30. 31. 32. 33.

Meyers, 'The Family', p. 19. Perdue, 'Jewish Family', p. 169. Blenkinsopp, 'First Temple', p. 55. Perdue, 'Jewish Family', p. 237.

32

Mixing Metaphors

redeemed (T7~[S,/?<s%) by substituting an animal sacrifice (see Exod. 13.11-16), presumably offered by the father. The sons were, nevertheless, dedicated to YHWH after a fashion in the practice of circumcision, which was also performed by the father.34 6. The Father and Debt Slavery. Economic disparities between households and classes grew in Israel during the time of the monarchy.35 When the family was in dire financial straits, the father had the power to sell his children as debt slaves (Neh. 5.1-5). He could sell his daughter as a concubine (Exod. 21.7). Gregory Chirichigno describes how farmers would lose their land via loans, which often had high interest rates. This would result in the necessity of selling one's dependents: if their crop(s) failed or was below expectation, then the debtors would be hardpressed to pay back the loan. Therefore, many of these small landowners were likely to become insolvent, since they were able to engage only in subsistence farming. As a result of their insolvency farmers were forced to sell or surrender dependents into debt-slavery. Furthermore, they would eventually be forced to sell their land (means of production), themselves and their families. Although kinship groups attempted to prevent the sale of land by offering political or economic support, it is clear that such groups could not always prevent the sale of land on account of insolvency.. .in many cases debtors were unlikely to be able to redeem their dependents.36

The ability to sell his children ironically highlights both a father's power and his powerlessness. While he had the power to decide to sacrifice a child for the good of the rest of the family, the occasion for this would have been his inability to pay his debts. 3. Father and Mother as Metaphors Ancestors The terms 'father' and 'mother' were used to describe relationships other than literal fatherhood and motherhood. Closely linked to the literal meaning is the use of the term or concept 'father' to refer to one's ancestors. In this sense the Israelites are the 7N""lfer~<']3, bene—yisrael ('children of Israel'). Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel are all 'fathers' of the people (the D^D, that is, 'sons' or 'sons and daughters'). Abraham and Sarah were understood to be literally the ancestors of the Israelites. However, their portrayal as 'father' and 'mother' of the nation is metaphorical insofar as the generations are collapsed to make them the direct 34. De Vaux, Ancient Israel, p. 46. 35. Blenkinsopp, 'First Temple', pp. 86-87. 36. Gregory C. Chirichigno, Debt-Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East (JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), p. 51. See also Muhammad A. Dandamaev, Slavery in Babylonia: From Nabopolassar to Alexander the Great (626-331 BC) (DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 1984), pp. 179-80, 648.

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

33

parents. Abraham is the father of Israel and Sarah is the mother: 'Look to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you' (Isa. 51.2a). In Isa. 63.16, YHWH is called 'our father' in contrast to the former understanding of Abraham or Israel/Jacob as the father of the people: 'For you are our father, though Abraham does not know us and Israel does not acknowledge us'. Covenant: Loyalty and Love The terms 'father' and 'son' were used to describe a covenant relationship between two parties, along with the term 'love'.37 These terms express authority, obligation, and loyalty. Such covenantal formulae often describe the relationship between the overlord and the vassal as 'father' and 'son', and utilize the language of 'love' of the vassal for the overlord and (less frequently) the 'love' of the overlord for the vassal.38 Thus, YHWH 'loves' Israel (43.4). This may be the context of David calling Saul 'my father' as he declares loyalty to his 'lord and king' who seeks to kill him (1 Sam. 24.12).39 In 2 Kgs 16.7, Ahaz sends messengers to Tiglath-Pileser saying 'I am your servant and your son. Come up, and rescue me from the hand of the king of Aram and from the hand of the king of Israel who are attacking me'. F.C. Fensham notes that in covenantal language 'servant' and 'son' are virtually synonymous.40 One of Deutero-Isaiah's frequent terms for Israel is the 'servant' of YHWH. YHWH also loves Cyrus (48.14) as his servant. The Priest In Judg. 17.10, Micah says to a Levite of Bethlehem,' Stay with me, and be to me a father and a priest, and I will give you ten pieces of silver a year, a set of clothes, and your living' (see also 18.19). Although the priest here is a private employee, he has spiritual authority, especially in the power to discern (18.4) and the power to bless.41

37. See the following discussion in Catholic Biblical Quarterly: William L. Moran, 'The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of God in Deuteronomy', CBQ 25 (1963), pp. 7787; N. Lohfink, 'Hate and Love in Osee 9,15', CBQ 25 (1963), p. 417; and Dennis J. McCarthy, 'Notes on the Love of God in Deuteronomy and the Father-Son Relationship between Yahweh and Israel', CBQ 27 (1965), pp. 144-47. See also F. C. Fensham, 'Father and Son as Terminology for Treaty and Covenant', in Hans Goedicke (ed.), Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Press, 1971), pp. 121-35. 38. Moran provides several examples (Moran, 'Background'). 3 9. Eva Maria Lassen notes:' The essence of the patriarchal family structure used as a model in the government of Israel is illustrated by the fact that "father" was a metaphor and a kind of honorific title for elder or distinguished men, first and foremost priests, prophets, and scribes' ('Family as Metaphor: Family Images at the Time of the Old Testament and Early Judaism', SJOT 6 [1992], pp. 247-62 [249]). 40. '[I]n the ancient Near East as well as in the Old Testament "son" and "servant" are used interchangeably ... There is, if we take both words as covenant concepts, no difference whatsoever in meaning' (Fensham, 'Terminology', p. 132). 41. The narrative has a non-Yahwistic tone, referring to Micah's silver idol, and his gods (18.24), although the priest refers to 'YHWH' (18.6). Thus it is not clear whether the title of 'father' for a priest would have been Yahwistic, non-Yahwistic, or both.

34

Mixing Metaphors

Master of the Guild The terms 'father' and 'son' are also used in the ancient Near East to describe a master and a member in a guild. This includes the master of a guild of prophets, that is, the 'sons of the prophets' (2 Kgs 2.3, 15). Elisha calls Elijah 'Father, father!' as Elijah ascends into the whirlwind (2 Kgs 2.12). (It is unclear whether the guild is the context in which the king of Israel addresses Elisha as 'Father' in 2 Kgs 6.21, since the king is not a member of the guild.) The mother in the ancient Near East was the teacher of young children. But as the sons grew older they would be taught their vocations by their father. Sons followed in their fathers' vocation. Farmers begat fanners, herdsmen begat herdsmen, and artisans begat artisans. The artisan vocations encompassed whole kinship groups. The master craftsman was the 'father'.42 Given the kinship factor, the title 'father' may have been literal as well as figurative. Other Positions of Leadership The title 'father' appears again in Isa. 22.21, where Eliakim, son of Hilkiah 'shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah'. Eliakim is a royal official. The term conveys authority and responsibility. In Gen. 45.8, Joseph claims that God 'has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt'.43 This should probably be understood as 'a father of the people on behalf of Pharaoh', since Joseph is described as the highest authority in the land, next to Pharaoh. Deborah is described as a 'mother in Israel' in Judg. 5.7, apparently referring to her role as a leader. (See Chapters 6-7 for discussions of the city as a mother.) In Job 29.16, a father is anyone who cares for those less fortunate: 'I was a father to the needy, and I championed the cause of the stranger'. (See also Job 17.13-15; 28.8 for 'mother' used metaphorically.) 4. The Deity as Father and Mother in the Ancient Near East The term a-bu, 'father', is also used as a 'title of gods'.44 An individual may also speak of the deity in parental terms to convey a sense of personal relationship. Torkild Jacobsen associates this term with the 'personal god', that is, the household god which functions as the patron god of the family and is part of the inheritance.45 The Hebrew authors also identified foreign gods as the fathers of their people: Woe to you, O Moab! You are undone, O people of Chemosh! He has made his sons fugitives, 42. De Vaux, Ancient Israel, p. 22. 43. Gerhardt von Rad compares the use of the term 'father' here to its use in Isa. 22.21 as 'the title of a high court official' (Genesis, trans. John H. Marks [OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961], p. 394). 44. Assyrian Dictionary, I, s.v. 'abu\ p. 71. 45. Thorkild Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness: A History ofMesopotamian Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976), pp. 157-60.

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

35

and his daughters captives, to an Amorite king, Sihon. (Num. 21.29) Judah has profaned the sanctuary of YHWH and has married the daughter of a foreign god. (Mai. 2.1 Ib)

Jeremiah uses the term 'father' to describe the way one might address a deity as represented by an image or idol: 'who say to a tree "you are my father"' (Jer. 2.27). In the ancient Near East, gods and goddesses were said to be like both father and mother to the worshiper. Marduk is one whom people address as a father and mother (kima a-bi u umme); Nabu and Tasmetu showed mercy to Assurbanipal— 'whom they raised like a father and a mother' (kima a-bi ... u ummi urabbusu); Marduk's mercy is like that of a father; and Ishtar says 'I am your (masc. sing.) father and your (masc. sing.) mother', etc.46 In Canaanite literature, El is depicted as the father of the gods. The imagery appears in the Hebrew Bible in texts referring to the divine assembly as theD'iriHNrT'?]n ('sons of the gods' or 'sons of God', Job 1.6; Gen. 6.2) or theD^tr'n ('sons of gods', Ps. 29.1). 5. YHWH as a Father and a Mother41

Since the parental image of YHWH is not one of the dominant images of the Hebrew Bible, it is possible to survey briefly the texts in which this image appears. The Pentateuch In Exodus 4.22-23, after YHWH'S revelation to Moses at the burning bush, Moses starts back to Egypt with his family. YHWH instructs Moses to say to Pharaoh: Thus says the LORD: Israel is my firstborn son. I said to you, 'Let my son go that he may worship me'. But you refused to let him go; now I will kill your firstborn son.

This is, of course, what happens in the final plague. (However, the reference to Israel being YHWH'S son or first-born is not reiterated at the time of the destruction of the first-born of the Egyptians.) Too much should not be made of Israel being YHWH'S 'first-born' (as compared to latter-born). The use of the term 'first-born' (and even the use of the term 'son') is a rhetorical play on the 'first-born sons' of the Egyptians. In Num. 11.12-15, Moses asks YHWH,

46. Assyrian Dictionary, I, s.v. 'abu\ p. 69. 47. Bernard W. Anderson, 'God, Names of, IDE, II (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962), pp. 407-417. Anderson notes that 'Father' was not a common title for God in the OT, although it was used in personal names. He states: 'during the period of the monarchy father-son imagery was avoided, evidently because it suggested the pagan notion of an actual physical or natural relationship between the god and his people ... When used, it was redefined to mean sonship by adoption, as in Yahweh's gracious election of Israel (Exod. 4.22-23; Hos. 11.1-4), or his adoption of the king as his son (2 Sam. 7.14-15; Ps. 2.7)' (415).

36

Mixing Metaphors Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me, 'Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a sucking child', to the land that you promised on oath to their ancestors? Where am I to get meat to give to all this people? For they come weeping to me and say, 'Give us meat to eat!' I am not able to carry all this people alone, for they are too heavy for me.

This text will be dealt with further in Chapter 6. Briefly, the implication here is that YHWH is the mother who gave birth to Israel and should be responsible for feeding and carrying her small child. In Deut. 1.31, Moses reminds the Israelites: YHWH your God carried you, just as a man carries his son, all the way that you traveled until you reached this place, (translation mine)

Carrying is one of the commonplaces of the parental image. A parent carries a child. The image implies that the child is small enough to be carried; thus it is the image of a father of a small child.48 Deut. 8.5 highlights the father's authority to discipline his children. In admonishing the people to observe the law, Moses tells them: Know then in your heart that as a parent (father) disciplines a child (son) so the LORD your God disciplines you.

In Deut. 14.1 -2, in the midst of the law collection, the metaphor emphasizes that Israel's identity as God's children is the reason for certain laws, in conjunction with holiness and chosenness: You are the children of YHWH your God. You must not lacerate yourselves or shave your forelocks for the dead. For you are a people holy to YHWH your God; it is you YHWH has chosen out of all the people on earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

The Song of Moses, Deuteronomy 32, uses the parental image in conjunction with the title of 'Rock'. (The term 'Rock' seems to function as a title here. Imagery often associated with 'rock' is absent, e.g. strength, a solid foundation.) Is not he your father, who created you, who made you and established you? (32.6b) They are a perverse generation, children (or 'sons') in whom there is no faithfulness. (32.20b)

The parental imagery conveys a number of attributes of the parent: discipline, creation, maternal nurture, childbirth, protection. The most explicit expression of

48. Isa. 46.3-4 contains similar parental imagery: 'Listen to me, O house of Jacob ... who have been borne by me from your birth, carried from the womb; even to your old age I am he, even when you turn grey I will carry you. I have made, and I will bear (K&D); I will carry and will save'. This text has not been included as a focal text in this study since the entailment of carrying by itself has a relatively weak connection to parental imagery, without additional entailments of parenthood accompanying it. The parental connection is also weak because YHWH'S carrying of Israel is being contrasted to the idols of Babylon being carried on animals and by their worshipers.

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

37

parenthood is the question 'Is not he your father ...?' Such a direct statement that YHWH is a father is matched only in Isa. 63.16 and 64.8. The apparent function of the father image in Deuteronomy 32 is to remind the Israelites of their obligations to God, obligations to obey and to acknowledge. YHWH is also a birthing and nursing mother: he nursed him with honey from the crags, with oil from flinty rock. (32.13b) You were unmindful of the Rock that bore (1711, yld) you; you forgot the God who gave you birth (TH, hyl). (32.18)

In Deut. 32.11 the image of YHWH as a mother eagle is introduced, describing YHWH'S care for Jacob. Verse 13 adds feeding/nursing imagery (which is consistent with the motherhood of the eagle, but inconsistent with the species). The 'Rock' is then described as one who gives birth (32.18). The Prophets In Hos. 2.1 (Eng. 1.10), Hosea first uses the image of father in connection with the story of Gomer's children: ... in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people', it shall be said to them, 'Children of the living God'.

Hos. 11.1-4 speaks of Israel as a son. The imagery here could be evocative of either a mother or a father. The textual problems complicate the matter. The best translation of this verse is debatable, but what is clear is that God is speaking as a parent: 'When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son ... 3 Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk. I took them up in my arms: but they did not know (acknowledge) that I healed them.

In First Isaiah, the father imagery is used to highlight the rebellion of God's 'sons', thus highlighting the authority of the father by which rebellion is punished. Isa. 1.2-3 parallels the father-son relationship with the relationship between an animal's master and the animal. The reference to the 'crib' highlights the dependence on the superior party as the provider, and the expectation of acknowledgment: 'Hear, O heavens, and listen, O earth; for YHWH has spoken: I reared children (sons) and brought them up, but they have rebelled against me. 2 The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master's crib; but Israel does not know, my people do not understand.

Isa. 30.1, 9 likewise focuses on rebellion: 'Oh, rebellious children (sons), says YHWH, who carry out a plan, but not mine; who make an alliance, but against my will, adding sin to sin ... 9 For they are a rebellious people, faithless children, children who will not hear the instructions of YHWH.

Isaiah 63-64 (a communal lament) uses the images of the children of God (the father), the children of Abraham, and the children of Israel. Those who have been

38

Mixing Metaphors

rejected by the community (of Abraham and Israel) claim legitimacy and identity directly from God: For he said, 'Surely they are my people, children who will not deal falsely'; and he became their savior in all their distress. (63.8) For you are our father, though Abraham does not know us and Israel does not acknowledge us, you, O YHWH, are our father; our Redeemer from of old is your name. (63.16) Yet, O YHWH, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you are our potter; we are all the work of your hand. (64.8) In Isa. 66.13, God's portrayal as a mother comes in the context of Jerusalem being in labor, giving birth, and nursing her inhabitants. (A similar interplay of Zion as a mother and God as a mother occurs in Isaiah 49—see Chapter 6.) As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you; you shall be comforted in Jerusalem. (66.13) Jer. 3.19 uses the image of father and son to evoke a covenant relationship of 'love' and loyalty: I thought how I would set you among my children, and give you a pleasant land, the most beautiful heritage of all the nations. And I thought you would call me, 'My Father', and would not turn from following me. In Jer. 31.9c, the father/first-born image is here evocative of redemption: For I have become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn (son). Malachi 1.6 parallels the father-son relationship to the master-servant relationship. This highlights the father's authority and the expectation of obedience and respect. A son honors his father, and servants their master. If then I am a father, where is the honor due me? And if I am a master, where is the respect due me? In Mai. 2.10a the father image is linked with the idea of creation: Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us? The Psalms and Proverbs Several times the psalms depict God as a father or as father-like in terms of caring, providing, and protecting. Father of orphans and protector of widows is God in his holy habitation. (Ps. 68.5)49 49. This father role actually refers to the role of the king to protect the helpless of society. See

2. Kinship and Birth in Deutero-Isaiah and Ancient Israel

39

If my father and mother forsake me, YHWH will take me up. (Ps. 27.10) As a father has compassion (Dm, rhtri) for his children, so YHWH has compassion for those who fear him. (Ps. 103.13)

W. Eugene March argues, following Phyllis Trible, that this last line combines the masculine term with feminine imagery: 'Thus, we are invited by Psalm 103.13 to reflect upon our Father as one who ... extends to us the deeply-felt compassion often associated with a mother'.50 Prov. 3.12 can be added here as a father image which combines reproof and love: For YHWH reproves the one he loves, as a father the son in whom he delights.

The tradition of YHWH'S covenant with the Davidic king is referred to as a father-and-son relationship in the Psalms:51 He said to me, 'You are my son; today I have begotten you'. (Ps. 2.7b) He shall cry to me, 'You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation!' I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth. (Ps. 89.26-27)

The Deuteronomistic History Father-son language appears also in 2 Samuel 7 in the context of God's choice of the Davidic ruler and is also covenantal language, establishing God's covenant with David: 12

When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom ... 14I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. When he commits iniquity, I will punish him with a rod such as mortals use, with blows inflicted by human beings. 15But I will not take my steadfast love from him ... 16Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me; your throne shall be established forever.

YHWH as a Father in Israelite Names Finally, many Israelite names reflect the idea that God is a father: Abimelech ('my father [is] king'], Absalom ('father of peace'), Joab ('YHWH [is my] father'), Abijah ('my father is YHWH', 1 Sam. 8.2 and 2 Chron. 29.1), etc.

W. Eugene March, ' "Father" as a Metaphor of God in the Psalms', Austin Seminary Bulletin 97 (1981), 5-12. 50. March, '"Father"', p. 10. See Phyllis Trible, IDBS, s.v. 'God, nature of, in the OT', pp. 368-69 (368). 51. Gerald Cooke, 'The Problem of Divine Kingship: The Divine Sonship of the Hebrew King' (unpubl. diss., Yale University, 1958); see ch. 1 on Israel's sonship. For a discussion of the various interpretations of the king's divine sonship see Gerald Cooke, 'The Israelite King as Son of God', ZAW 73 (1961), pp. 202-25.

40

Mixing Metaphors

6. Conclusion The texts from Deutero-Isaiah that will be examined in this study will be interpreted in light of both their rhetorical and their cultural contexts. One aspect of the rhetorical context is Deutero-Isaiah's general use of the language and terminology of family relationships and child-bearing. Thus, the imaging of God as father or mother is consistent with Deutero-Isaiah's rhetorical context. The cultural context includes both the commonplaces of parenthood and the culture's metaphorical use of'father' and 'mother'. Reference to God as a father or mother evokes an entire system of associations, which are all potentially present in a metaphor, even though only some are highlighted in any particular text.

Chapter 3 LIKE A WOMAN IN LABOR: ISAIAH 42.8-17

Isaiah 42.8-17 interweaves the images of the woman in labor and the divine warrior. These two images are juxtaposed in vv. 13 and 14. It will be shown that the two images may function 'coherently' (see Chapter 1); that is, areas of over-lap exist between these seemingly contradictory images. The areas of overlap (common entailments) are highlighted by the interaction of the images within the literary unit. Each of these two images will be discussed and then the areas of coherence will be addressed. Translation 8

I am YHWH, that is my name. My glory I do not give to another, nor my praise to idols. 9 See, the former things have come; new things I am declaring; before they sprout I will announce them to you. 10 Sing to YHWH a new song, his praise from the end of the earth. Those who go down to the sea and its fullness, coastlands and their inhabitants. "Let [the] desert and its cities lift up [their voices],1 the villages which Kedar inhabits. Let those who dwell in Sela cry out,2 from the top of the mountains let them clamor. 12 They shall give glory to YHWH and in the coastlands they shall proclaim his praise.3 13 YHWH goes forth like a hero; like a man of war he rouses4 his jealous anger.

1. 'Their voices' is implied. 2. Or 'those who dwell in the rock'; that is, those who have fled the cities in time of war and defeat (see Jer. 48.28). 3. Some scholars omit v. 12 on metrical grounds. However, metrical uniformity is not an absolute requirement of Hebrew poetry. This verse also completes a nice inclusio with v. 8, encompassing the hymn. 4. This is a favorite word of Deutero-Isaiah. It refers to YHWH stirring up Cyrus (41.2, 25;

42

Mixing Metaphors He yells the war cry; and he shouts; against his foes he acts heroically.5 I4

I have been quiet for an eternity. I have been still and restrained myself.6 I will wail like a woman giving birth; I will both blow and gasp. 15 I will make mountains and hills a wasteland,7 and dry up all their grasses; I will turn the rivers into dry banks,8 and dry up the pools. l6 And I will bring the blind by a way they do not know, in paths that they do not know I will lead them. I will turn the darkness before them into light, and the rough ground to level. These are the things I will do, and I will not depart from them. 17

They shall be turned back, and be deeply ashamed, those who trust in the idol, who say to the cast image, 'You are our gods!'

1. The Unit: Form and Structure Verses 8-17 form a coherent unit. Most scholars have identified either one unit, vv. 10-17, or two separate units, w. 10-13 and 14-17.9 However, v. 17doesnotfit into the unit without v. 8. Beginning the unit with v. 8 provides a frame in vv. 8 45.13). It appears in qal in 51.9 and 52.1—'awake, awake'—and in hitpolel in 51.17—'awake, awake'. Here it is in the hiphil form, as in 50.4. 5. Hiphil form of "133, connected to "1133, 'hero', in the same verse. 6. Similar language is found in Isa. 64.11, where YHWH's silence and restraint is associated with punishment. 7. 3~1H (hi.) has connotations of drying. For this drying as judgment see Isa. 50.2b, 2 Kgs 19.24b/Isa. 37.25; Jer. 51.36; Nah. 1.4. 8. D"N—the same word as 'coastlands' in vv. 10 and 12. John D. W. Watts translates this 'sand-bars', which captures the meaning of dry land emerging from a formerly vital river as a result of drought (Isaiah 34-66 [WBC 25; Waco: Word Books, 1987], pp. 122, 125). 9. Only George Adam Smith also treats vv. 8-17 as a unit, although he does not give his reasons for including w. 8-9 (The Book of Isaiah, II [New York: Harper & Brothers, 1927], pp. 136-40). Among those who take vv. 10-17 as a unit are Joseph Blenkinsopp (Isaiah 40—55, A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 19A; New York: Doubleday, 2000], p. 212), J. L. McKenzie (SecondIsaiah [AB 29; New York/Garden City: Doubleday, 1968], p. 42), and Kathryn Pfisterer Darr, who offers an explicit argument against a division between verses 13 and 14 ('Like Warrior, Like Woman: Destruction and Deliverance in Isaiah 42.10-17', CBQ 49 [1987], pp. 560-71). Among those who see a break between verses 13 and 14 are Claus Westermann (Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament, trans. Keith Crim (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1991], pp. 43 and 52) and R. N. Whybray (Isaiah 40-66 [NCB; London: Marshal, Morgan & Scott, 1975], pp. 76-79).

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

43

and 17. Verses 8-9 function as a prologue to vv. 10-16, and v. 17 is an epilogue. The negative references to 'idols' in w. 8 and 17 frame a unit which is focused on the noisy activity of YHWH, in contrast to the idols, which elsewhere are silent and inactive (see 41.21-23, 26-28; 46.7). The 'new things' of v. 9 are the occasion for the 'new song' (v. 10), and consist of YHWH's activity (figuratively described in w. 13-16). The inclusion of vv. 8-9 in the unit is supported by a shift from second person singular in the preceding verses to second person plural in v. 9 (with no second person reference in v. 8). 'Glory' and 'praise' appear in parallel in both v. 8 and v. 12, supporting the inclusion of v. 8 in the unit. The unit follows one of the 'servant songs'. 42.1-4 speaks of YHWH'S 'servant' and vv. 5-7 address the servant, using the masculine singular. A shift occurs by v. 9, which uses masculine plural address.10 In v. 10 the imperative 'Sing!' is also masculine plural. In addition to the grammatical shift, there is a difference of focus. In vv. 1-7 the focus is on the 'servant' or on the 'you' who is YHWH'S instrument. In vv. 8-17 the focus is on YHWH, speaking in the first person in 8 and 9, spoken of in the third person in 1013, and speaking in the first person in 14-17. 42.18 begins a new unit with the focus returning to the 'servant'. The plural imperative is rhetorically directed to the peoples of the sea, the coastlands, the desert, etc. Verses 10-13 are a hymn of praise.11 These verses function as a subunit of vv. 8-17, which, as a whole, is an oracle of salvation. The genre shift between vv. 9 and 10 does not mark a new unit, but is a shift from prologue to hymn. Verse 13 is 'the substantiation of the summons to praise'.12 Further 'substantiation' follows in vv. 14-17, although in yet a different genre. In v. 14 there is a shift from third person to first person. The genre of vv. 14-16 is 'salvation oracle' in response to a communal lament.13 Genre shifts within units in prophetic discourse are not unusual. Identification of a division between vv. 13 and 14 is often made on the basis of the shift in person and on an assumption that the hymn (w. 10-13) forms an independent unit. However, vv. 10-14 are unified by the 10. Most scholars identify vv. 5-9 as a unit without addressing the shift from second person singular to second person plural. R. F. Melugin calls vv. 5-9 a 'commissioning oracle directed to the Servant', and identifies it as a subunit of 41.21-42.13 (The Formation of Isaiah 40-55 [BZAW; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1976], p. 98). 11. Westermann, Oracles, pp. 43 and 52. Verses 10-13 are called an 'eschatological hymn' (Melugin, Formation, 99, and Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, trans. David M. G. Stalker (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969, p. 102) and a 'doxology' (E. Beaucamp, Le livre de la consolation d'Israel: IsaieXL-LV[Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1991], p. 61). 12. Melugin, Formation, p. 99. 13. This is a response to a (here implied) rhetorical question regarding YHWH's silence, found in community laments. See Pss. 79.5; 85.6; 89.47; 74.1 (see Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, pp. 10506). Melugin identifies this form as a 'priestly salvation oracle' in answer to a communal lament— cf. Isa. 41.17-20; Ps. 12.6b (Formation, pp. 23, 102). Melugin's structure for vv. 14-17 is as follows: '(1) reference to the complaint (v. 14a), (2) statement of Yahweh's intervention, expressed in the imperfect (v. 14b), and (3) elaboration on the statement of Yahweh's intervention (vv. 1516), concluding with the summary statement, "These are the things I will do to them..."' (Formation, pp. 102-03, see also p. 23).

44

Mixing Metaphors

repeated use of verbs for the making of sounds: 'sing', 'raise (voice)', 'shout', 'cry out', 'gasp', 'pant'.14 In addition, a closer examination of the figure of the birthing woman will make it clear that v. 14 must be linked to v. 13. 2. An Overview of 42.8-17 Verses 8-9, 17: New Things and Deutero-Isaiah 's Anti-Idolatry Polemic Verse 8 provides a strong opening for a new unit. YHWH is identified in contrast to the idols (of Babylon)—a recurring theme in Deutero-Isaiah. The phrases 'I am YHWH' in v. 8 and 'You [idols] are our gods' in v. 17 begin and end the unit. The issue highlighted by the frame is the implicit question 'Who is your god?' Those in v. 17 who do not acknowledge that 'I am YHWH' are put to shame. Anti-idolatry polemics are characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah; indeed, this is one of the author's main themes. Israelite religion forbade the depiction of YHWH in the form of an idol. (Exod. 20.4-5a forbids any T>DS [image] or HDlDn [likeness]. See also Isa. 40.18-19; Exod. 20.23; 34.17; Lev. 19.4; 26.1; Deut. 4.15-19,25; 5.8.) The exiles were living in the Babylonian context, in which idols were a dominant focus of worship. The god was not identical to the idol, but he/she was closely identified with it. What the idol experienced, the god experienced. The 'opening of the mouth', or consecration ceremony, opened up the senses of the formerly dead object (statue) and enabled the god to smell the incense, taste the food, drink libations, and to see, hear and speak.15 'The image acquired all the senses and faculties of a living being; it became the personification of the god'.16 Here in v. 8, YHWH declares, 'My glory I do not give to another, nor my praise to idols'. The connection between glory and idols makes sense in light of the Babylonian understanding of the consecration of an idol, in which the god bestows his spirit, or his presence, upon the idol (see also 48. II). 17 Isaiah 42.8 is an Israelite response to the popular belief that a consecration ritual 'had the intrinsic power to induce the spirit of the gods to dwell in the image and thus identify itself with it'.18 YHWH does not do this. He does not give his spirit to an idol. The reference to 'my glory' synthesizes the rejection of idols in v. 8 with the

14. Darr identifies the 'auditory character' of v. 14, v. 13, and vv. 10-12 as the unifying element in the text ('Warrior', p. 567). 15. Jose Faur, 'The Biblical Idea of Idolatry', JQR 69 (1978), pp. 1-15 (7-8). See also Edward M. Curtis, 'Idol, Idolatry', ABD, III, pp. 376-81 (377); Michael B. Dick, 'Prophetic Parodies of Making the Cult Image', in Michael B. Dick (ed.), Born in Heaven, Made on Earth: The Making of the Cult Image in the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1999), pp. 1-53 (44); and Christopher Walker and Michael B. Dick, 'The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient Mesopotamia: The Mesopotamian mis pi Ritual', in Dick (ed.), Born in Heaven, pp. 55-121 (57). 16. Faur, 'Idolatry', p. 10. 17. Faur sees an example of this idea in the story of the golden calf (Exod. 32.1-8): 'inorderto have God make His glory dwell among them, the Israelites manufactured a bull, a replica of the heavenly bull of the Divine throne. Through the act of consecration, they expected to induce the spirit of God to dwell in the calf, His earthly throne, and identify with it' (Faur, 'Idolatry', p. 11). 18. Faur, 'Idolatry', p. 13.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

45

divine warrior image in v. 14. In pre-exilic Israel, YHWH'S presence was associated with the ark of the covenant, rather than with an idol. For Israel, the ark was 'the functional equivalent of a divine image among Israel's neighbors'.19 In the ark tradition, the ark is YHWH'S presence as divine warrior. P. D. Miller and J. J. M. Roberts describe this phenomenon in 1 Sam. 4.5-11: 'These verses [describe] the arrival of the ark as the coming of the Israelite god into battle' .20 This presence was understood to be the 'glory' of YHWH. When the ark was captured by the Philistines, the wife of Phinehas, on her death bed, named her newborn son 'Ichabod' meaning 'Where is glory?' (TOD"^). The narrative declares the name to mean, 'The glory has gone into exile from Israel' (1 Sam. 4.19-22). The reference to YHWH'S 'glory' in Isa. 42.8 resonates with the warrior image in v. 13, insofar as both are associated with the ark of the covenant. YHWH'S 'glory' is manifested in YHWH'S own activity as Israel's divine warrior. According to Deutero-Isaiah, YHWH is the divine warrior without a cult object. YHWH cries the war cry, in contrast to the idols, who are unable to speak (their mouths have not been opened). Thus, when YHWH says 'I do not give my glory to another, my praise to idols', YHWH stands in clear contrast to the Babylonian gods who, the Babylonians believed, would bestow their glory on idols. In v. 17, the unit returns to the issue of idols, framing the unit. While idols are mentioned only in vv. 8 and 17, this whole unit may be seen as a polemic against the idols. Who is the true god? A false god is silent. But YHWH has been shown to be very noisy, despite a period of silence. A false god is inactive. But YHWH is extremely active—as active as any warrior or any woman giving birth. YHWH'S period of apparent inactivity was only apparent and not actual. It is the idols who are truly unable to act, to speak, or to deliver. In 42.9, Deutero-Isaiah goes on to speak of former things and new things. The contrast of former things and new things (or sometimes 'things to come') is one of Deutero-Isaiah's central themes (e.g. 41.22; 43.9, 18-19; 44.7; 45.11; 46.9; 48.3, 6).21 The 'former things' in v. 9 have been variously identified as God's ancient acts, as prophetic predictions of exile, as the event of going into exile, as the rise of Cyrus, and even as the first stage of future events.22 In the context of this unit, a 19. P. D. Miller and J. J. M. Roberts, The Hand of the Lord: A Reassessment of the 'Ark Narrative' of 1 Samuel (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977), p. 9. 20. Miller and Roberts, Hand, p. 34. 21. Christopher R. Seitz, Zion's Final Destiny: The Development of the Book of Isaiah: A Reassessment of Isaiah 36-39 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991) asks this series of questions: 'Is there one fixed referent for the "former things" or the "things to come" or the "new thing"? How do the references function in the context of challenges to other deities and their representatives (43.8-13), or the futility of idols (41.5-9), or both (41.21-29; 45.20-21; 46.8-11)? Do the references to God as eternal (40.21-31; 48.12-13) or incomparable (44.6-8) belong within the same context?' (p. 200) He then argues that 'the "former things" are things of old, in so far as they involve YHWH'S "plan of old" from Isaiah's day. This plan involved destruction through the agency of foreign powers as chastisement for Israel's sins' (pp. 200-01). 22. Seitz summarizes the range of potential meanings: 'In sum, the "former things" as employed in Isa. 40—48 have no one fixed referent... they refer to Isaiah's proclamation involving YHWH's dispatching of nations for a task vis-a-vis Israel... [but] the "former things" can also refer

46

Mixing Metaphors

salvation oracle, the 'former things' are the 'penalty' of destruction and exile which has now been paid (40.2), making this the time for salvation. The 'new things' may be the rise of Cyrus or the eschatological coming of YHWH. This declaration concerning new things in v. 9 is related to the statements against idols in w. 8 and 17. Deutero-Isaiah's anti-idolatry polemic and the former/new things motif are connected. The context is 'a challenge put to God by other deities'.23 Deutero-Isaiah asserts YHWH'S unique omniscience and effectiveness. YHWH not only brings about events, but he also declares them in advance— something that the idols/gods are not able to do (see Chapter 5). The concept of 'new things' also relates to the imagery of birth in v. 14. The new things will 'sprout'. This is the language of fertility, thus related to the imagery of birth (v. 14). Verses 10-12: The Hymn of Praise Verses 10-12 are a hymnic praise of YHWH, employing the common rhetorical device of calling upon the whole world to praise God. Note the emphasis, not just on singing, but on crying out and shouting. This unit has many similarities to Psalm 107, in which people cry out for help—those in the desert and those who 'go down to the sea' (seafarers and merchants, etc.). But here they cry out in joy, as is made clear in w. lOa and 12.24 Those who give glory and praise to YHWH stand in stark contrast to those who worship idols (v. 17). The term 'new song' refers to a victory song (see below). Verse 13: The Man of War Verse 13 is evocative of Exod. 15.3. Both texts image YHWH as a warrior.25 Verse 13 is a continuation of the call to praise in w. 10-12, giving the reason for praise— YHWH'S heroic action. In vv. 10-12 the peoples of the coastlands and the desert have cried out in joy. Now YHWH cries out as a warrior. In v. 14, YHWH will also

to the call of Cyrus (45.21), as instrument of judgment, not against, but on behalf of Israel' (Zion 's, p. 201). Blenkinsopp renders 9a 'The events predicted have come to pass' (Isaiah 40-55, p. 208). 23. Seitz, Zion's, p. 200. He writes, 'The appeal to former things as things of great antiquity (43.18; 46.9; 48.3), together with YHWH'S self-declaration as first and last (41.4; 44.6), without peer (40.18; 40.25; 41.26-29; 43.10-13; 44.8; 46.5), and all knowing (41.26; 44.7; 45.20-21; 46.10), suggests that YHWH conceives of the former things as eternal decrees known by YHWH alone, and shared only with Israel, YHWH's witnesses (41.27; 43.10; 44.8; 44.26). As such, other gods and their peoples cannot declare them when challenged to do so (41.28-29; 43.9; 45.20-21)... No one can tell what God told "first to Zion" (41.27). Idols cannot speak; the gods they presume to represent are mute as well when it comes to telling the former things and their outcome (41.21 -22; 43.9; 44.7; 45.21). So much less can they say what will happen in the future, what YHWH is planning as a new thing (41.23)' (Seitz, Zion's, pp. 200-01). 24. To 'lift up' (the voice) is generally an expression of lament (Gen. 21.16; 27.38; 29.11; Num. 14.1; Judg. 2.4; 9.7; 21.2; Ruth 1.9,14; 1 Sam. 24.16; 30.4; 2 Sam. 3.32; 13.36; Jer. 7.16,29; 9.10, 18; 11.14; Job 2.12), but there are exceptions (e.g. Ps. 93.3; Isa. 24.14; 52.8). 25. One cannot, however, conclude from this similarity that Isa. 42.13 is a reference to the exodus from Egypt. The image of YHWH as a warrior is also found most explicitly in Pss. 24.5, 8; 78.65; Isa. 9.6; 10.21; 26.11; 37.32; Jer. 20.11; Zech. 14.3; Neh. 9.32.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

47

cry out like a woman in labor. The term translated 'yell the war cry' (ITT, hi.) is used predominantly in one of two contexts: for battle or attack and in psalms with the sense of'make a joyful noise'.26 In the former context, it is a shout of attack, a victory shout, or sometimes an alarm.27 In Mic. 4.9, however, it refers to a sound like a woman giving birth.28 YHWH acts as a champion on behalf of the oppressed Israelites, as well as the other nations who are oppressed by Babylon (the coastal and desert nations and even Edom [Sela and Kedar] as implied in w. 10-11).29 Verse 14: A Woman Giving Birth At v. 14 the language shifts from third person to first person speech. Now YHWH speaks: 'I have been quiet for an eternity'30 YHWH has been silent, but now will wail. In v. 14 'quiet' (HO"! hi.) conveys the ideas of silence (Ps. 39.3, Neh. 8.11), inactivity (Judg. 18.9; 1 Kgs 22.3), and delay (2 Kgs 7.9). The term 'still' (CTin hi.), like !~!O"I, may convey both silence and inactivity.31 'Blow and gasp' mean 'exhale and inhale'. The latter word can also mean 'crush' or 'trample upon', a meaning that does not fit the simile of PUTT ('one who is in labor or woman in labor', hereafter transliterated as yoledah) but the echoes of destruction resonate nevertheless (with v. 15). Verses 15-16: Laying Waste; Darkness to Light In Ps. 107.33-37 (cited above for its similarities to vv. 10-12), drying is associated with punishment and watering with mercy. While the language of 'drying up' may evoke the exodus through the Red Sea, it is also a rather conventional ancient Near East theme for the destruction of a city.32 The dryness is not so much a clearing of a path for the returning exiles as, its tone of destruction suggests, YHWH'S judgment on Babylon. YHWH'S breath withers also in Isa. 40.7-8 and 40.24. (In contrast, YHWH brings water to the desert [41.18; 43.19; 44.3]). YHWH'S turning the rough ground to level ground (v. 16) is also proclaimed in Isa. 40.4, where 'every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and hill be

26. The verb 'raise the war-cry' (n~lli) appears only here (hi.) and in Zeph. 1.14 (qal ptc.). 27. For the battle cry with trumpets, see Josh. 6.5, 10, 16, 20; Judg. 7.21; 2 Chron. 13.12, 15; Hos. 5.8; Joel 2.1. For the battle cry, see also Judg. 15.14; 1 Sam. 17.20, 52; Jer. 50.15. For a combination of joy and battle, see Pss. 47.2 (trumpet); 66.1; Zeph. 3.14; Zech. 9.9. 28. 'Now why do you [fem. sing.] cry aloud?' 29. James D. Smart misses the point of the hero or champion, stating 'The inclusion of v. 13 with vv. 10-12 is very unlikely, since the emphasis now is upon God's wrath against his enemies, whereas in vv. 10-12 the world was rejoicing at its deliverance' (History and Theology in Second Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 35, 40-66 [Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1965], p. 68). 30. DvlJJ appears 14 times in Isaiah 40-55. It sometimes refers to the former things (44.7; 46.9). In Isa. 57. lib, YHWH asks: 'Have I not been silent [qal], and for an eternity ...?' 57.11 may be referring back to 42.14. 31. The two terms appear together in Ps. 28.1 in the qal form. 32. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp notes that 'the disruption of agriculture and alteration of the water supply are motifs used commonly in the Mesopotamian laments to depict the city's destruction' (Weep, O Daughter ofZion: A Study of the City-lament Genre in the Hebrew Bible [BibOr 44; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1993], p. 103).

48

Mixing Metaphors

made low'. Here is the preparation of the way for the return to the homeland. The movement from darkness into light is the promise of an end to exile. (The resonance of this image with the image of birth will be explored further.) Verse 17:1 Am YHWH Verse 17 completes the frame with YHWH'S statement in v. 8, 'I am YHWH ... [I do not give] my praise to idols' (see discussion above under w. 8-9, 17). 3. Interacting Metaphors: The Divine Warrior Metaphoric Coherence Katheryn Darr argues that Isa. 42.13-14 presents two images, the warrior and the laboring woman, which interact by virtue of their shared entailments. Although they are expressed as similes, they will be treated here as metaphors.33 These similes of warrior andyoledah are developed in the language of'is' rather than 'is like': 'I have been silent', 'I will wail', 'I will both blow and gasp'. These images can be better understood by identifying the entailments that are explicitly highlighted.34 In addition, the implicit entailments, that is, hidden or submerged entailments that are present, will be identified. Black's concept of 'associated commonplaces' is useful here. The various entailments of the image of the woman giving birth provide a better understanding of how this 'filter' (yoledah) expresses something about YHWH and YHWH'S activity. These commonplaces may be categorized as: a) the conventional entailments of the term or image of the birthing woman; b) the more particular entailments of the phrase HIvVD, ki-yoledah ('like one who is in labor'—a conventional simile [see below]); and c) the entailments highlighted in Isa. 42.8-17, as the image of the birthing woman interacts with the image of the divine warrior and its associated commonplaces. We shall begin with a survey of the entailments of the primary interacting metaphor: the divine warrior. The Divine Warrior in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East The divine warrior is an ancient image for YHWH, found in some of the oldest poetry in the Hebrew Bible (e.g. Exodus 15 and Judges 5). This image is closely 33. Darr maintains that identifying the figures as similes is essential to understanding their function in the text. She writes, 'I suggest that we begin to understand the function of the travailing woman simile within its given poetic context only when we recognize that this gynomorphic image appears within a simile, not a metaphor. There is a subtle difference between simile and metaphor that we ignore to our peril' ('Warrior', pp. 564-65). However, Janet Soskice argues that the distinction between metaphor and simile is a minor grammatical technicality and should not be overly emphasized, since, in many cases, 'Metaphor and simile, while textually different, are functionally the same' (Metaphor and Religious Language [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985], p. 59). Soskice points out that when similes are characterized as weaker than metaphors the examples given compare weak similes to strong metaphors. A strong simile may be just as powerful as a strong metaphor and essentially functions in the same way (pp. 58-61). 34. Darr correctly emphasizes the importance of identifying the explicit entailments of this simile ('Warrior', p. 565).

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

49

linked to the ancient Near Eastern myths of Ba'al's conquest of Yamm/Sea and Marduk' s conquest of Tiamat (the latter being part of the creation myth). Although Deutero-Isaiah seems to draw more from the Canaanite language and mythology (51.9-11) than from the Babylonian, both cultural contexts are reflected in the Israelite divine warrior imagery associated with creation. Bernard Batto outlines the connection or non-connection between the cosmic battle with Sea and creation.35 He points out that the Canaanite story of the battle between Ba'al and Yamm is never connected to the creation of the world (or of humanity). The Ba'al myth is, rather, a precursor to the establishment of Ba'al's temple. The Babylonian myth, however, places the battle with Sea/Chaos in a creation account. In Israel, the 'P' author brings these together. Batto further argues that the correlation of the exodus to the myth of the cosmic defeat of the Sea is the last layer of the exodus narrative and attributes it to 'P', for which he accepts an exilic dating.36 Cross identifies two Israelite traditions depicting the warrior's battle with Sea. One tradition associates the cosmogonic battle with the exodus. The other tradition seems to have no connection to this 'historic' tradition: Ps. 89.10f; 93.1-4; Isa. 27.1; Job 7.12; 9.8; 26.12; 38.7-11; Nah. 1.4.37 Cross argues that DeuteroIsaiah combines the ahistorical myth with 'historical themes in order to formulate an eschatology, or a typology of "old things" and "new things" in the drama of salvation'.38 Cross identifies four stages of the ancient Canaanite mythic pattern of the divine warrior. In Israel the elements are historicized. However 'the mythic pattern ... was never wholly suppressed or submerged':39 1.

'The Divine Warrior goes forth to battle against chaos ...'—replaced in Israel by the exodus and conquest, the march from Egypt or Sinai. 2. 'Nature convulses (writhes) and languishes ...' 3. 'The warrior-god returns ... and is enthroned ...' 4. 'The Divine Warrior utters his voice from his temple, and Nature again responds [in joy and fertility]'.40 The divine warrior in the ancient Near East is generally the storm god. In Canaan this is Ba'al; in Sumeria, Enlil. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp describes Enlil's role in bringing the 'evil storm' upon the city, a storm which brings winds of destruction.41 He explicitly identifies Enlil and YHWH as equivalents—divine warrior storm gods: 'The storm ... is connected prototypically with Enlil... The functional equivalent of Enlil and the storm in Lamentations is Yahweh, the divine warrior 35. Bernard F. Batto, Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992). 36. Batto, Dragon, p. 74. 37. Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History and Religion of Israel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 135. 38. Cross, Myth, p. 136, referring to Isa. 51.9-11. 39. Cross, Myth, p. 163. 40. Cross, Myth, pp. 162-63. 41. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 50.

50

Mixing Metaphors

who goes into battle on the Day of Yahweh'.42 YHWH's power as the divine warrior is often depicted as a power of the storm: thunder, lightning, and wind. In Exodus 15 the storm winds of YHWH defeat Israel's enemies:43 At your nostrils the water piled up, the floods stood up in a heap. (15.8) You blew with your breath, sea covered them. (15.10)

The Divine Warrior in Deutero-Isaiah All of the above elements are present in Deutero-Isaiah, with the exception of YHWH'S voice from his temple. The building/rebuilding of the temple (the Canaanite element) is, however, included (44.28; and implicitly with the rebuilding of the city in 45.13; 49.16-17; 54.11-12 and in the return of the temple vessels in 52.11). Thus, the divine warrior image is discernible throughout Deutero-Isaiah, for example, 40.10; 42.25; 43.28; 49.26; 50.2; 51.9-11; 52.7-12. For DeuteroIsaiah, YHWH'S related role as creator is central. The Divine Warrior in Isaiah 42.8-17 Verse 13 clearly and explicitly depicts YHWH as the divine warrior. Furthermore, the whole unit is an expression of this image. 1. The Divine Warrior Goes Forth to Battle. One means by which YHWH'S creative power is expressed is through Deutero-Isaiah's utilization of the motif of the cosmic battle with Sea/River (43.14-17; 44.27; 51.9-11). Creation imagery is interwoven with the divine warrior imagery along with echoes of the exodus. 42.13 is the explicit portrayal of YHWH the warrior, who gives the battle cry. 2. Nature Convulses and Languishes. For Deutero-Isaiah to depict YHWH as the divine warrior who could dry up the 'rivers' is to depict YHWH as one who could defeat Babylon (40.7,24; 44.27; 50.2). But Deutero-Isaiah's imagery goes beyond power over Babylon. YHWH exerts power over the cosmos. Cross notes, 'The collapse of the cosmos in response to the battle of the divine warrior is well known in biblical lore' (the heavens, mountains, vegetation).44 The language of 42.15 echoes Cross's category of the destruction of nature. Verse 15 describes a general disruption of agriculture, although the drying up of the rivers may also echo the mythological battle with River/Sea. 3. The Warrior-God Returns. Cross emphasizes the royal procession as part of the warrior tradition. Speaking of Psalm 24, Cross says, 'the procession of the WarriorKing into his temple may be said to reenact the founding of the Temple (at the fall New Year) and the shrine of the Ark. This procession can represent the return of the warrior with his army following his victory'.45 Thus, Cross also identifies 42. 43. 44. 45.

Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 55. Cross writes of Exodus 15, 'the divine wind overthrows Pharaoh and his host' (Myth, 134). Cross, Myth, p. 150. Cross, Myth, p. 97.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

51

Deutero-Isaiah's divine procession imagery with the divine warrior (Isa. 40.3-6 and 52.7-12) in which 'YHWH returns to Zion'.46 42.16 describes a journey, led by YHWH, 'by a way they do not know', from darkness into light, in which the rough ground is made level. 4. Glory (42.8, 12) is an attribute of the divine warrior. As noted earlier, this is demonstrated in the ark narrative in 1 Samuel, which is central to the tradition of YHWH as the divine warrior, going into battle. The ark represented YHWH'S presence with the army (1 Sam. 4.3). It was brought to the front from Shiloh: 'When the ark of the covenant of YHWH came into the camp, all Israel gave a mighty shout, so that the earth resounded' (1 Sam. 4.5). Psalm 24 connects warrior imagery and the 'glory' of YHWH: 7

Lift up your heads, O gates! and be lifted up, O ancient doors! that the King of glory may come in. 8 Who is the King of glory? YHWH, strong and mighty, YHWH, mighty in battle ... 10 Who is this King of glory? YHWH of hosts (armies), he is the King of glory.

Psalm 29 also describes the divine warrior, 'the God of glory' (v. 2) who subdues nature with his voice (his storm—thunder, lightning, wind) so that all in his temple say 'Glory!' (v. 9) Cross translates v. 9 thus: 'In his temple (his) Glory appears! '47 Also, in Psalm 97, YHWH the king is the storm warrior and 'the peoples see his Glory' (v. 6). Thus, Isa. 40.5 may also be read as the proclamation of the coming of the divine warrior: 'Then the glory of YHWH shall be revealed ...' 42.8 and 42.12 may be read in this warrior context: 'I am YHWH ... My glory I do not give to another', and 'They shall give glory to YHWH'. 5. Edom has a traditional association with the divine warrior. Isaiah 42's references to Edom (Kedar, Sela) rejoicing would seem problematic, given the animosity expressed elsewhere towards Edom following the destruction of Jerusalem (e.g. Psalm 137). However, these references come in the context of a hymn proclaiming the coming of the divine warrior. Tradition points to the warrior marching from Edom: YHWH, when you went out from Seir, when you marched from the region of Edom ... (Judg. 5.4) YHWH came from Sinai, and dawned from Seir upon us; he shone forth from Mount Paran ... (Deut. 33.2)

46. Cross, Myth, pp. 106, 108-09. 47. Cross, Myth, p. 155.

52

Mixing Metaphors Who is this that comes from Edom, from Bozrah in garments stained crimson? (Isa. 63.la) God came from Teman, the Holy One from Mount Paran. (Hab. 3.3a)

(Habakkuk 3 also includes several other entailments of the divine warrior: glory, battle with Sea/river, spear, bow and arrows.) 6. The Victory Song is also a characteristic of the warrior. 42.10 begins a 'new song'. The term 'new song' appears in the Hebrew Bible only here and in the Psalms (40.3; 96.1; 98.1, 3; 144.9; 149.1). This seems to be 'a technical term for victory song'; that is, the context of victory in warfare. According to Tremper Longman and Daniel Reid, 'These songs celebrate the new situation brought about by God's warring activity'.48 Longman and Reid note, 'Music ceases from the earth during the warring activity of God (Isa. 24.4-13), but with victory music is renewed (Psalm 98)'.49 There is only silence ... but then sound is heard. Thus, the concept of a 'new song' serves to unify the image of the shouting warrior in v. 13 and the image of the woman in labor who is silent until the appropriate time comes for crying out. In conclusion, Isa. 42.8-17 is evocative of the divine warrior throughout, not just in v. 13. In addition to the explicit description in v. 13 the unit has the elements of nature (v. 15), procession (v. 16), glory (w. 8, 12), Edom (v. 11), and song (v. 10). We will explore how the image of the birthing woman interacts meaningfully with these elements, as Deutero-Isaiah creatively interweaves its images. 4. The yoledah— 'One Who Is in Labor' The image of the birthing woman draws meaning from the culture's understanding of childbirth. Some of the 'commonplaces' of childbirth have already been discussed above in Chapter 2. Additional commonplaces will be treated here—those that relate most directly to this particular text. As in Chapter 2, priority is given to Israelite literary evidence, and secondary information is gleaned from ancient Near Eastern sources. Additionally, the termyoledah (fern. sing, qal ptc. 'one who gives birth') is a literary convention, in particular the form PR^VD ('like one who gives birth', hereafter transliterated ki-yoledah). This convention merits further investigation later in this chapter. Commonplaces of Birth 1. Writhing or Trembling. The Hebrew Bible does not refer directly to a woman shaking in labor. However, metaphorical uses of the image of labor cite trembling or writhing as symptomatic of labor: 48. Tremper Longman III and Daniel G. Reid, God is a Warrior (Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), p. 45. See also T. Longman III, 'The Divine Warrior: The New Testament Use of an Old Testament Motif, WTJ 44 (1982), pp. 300-02. (The term 'new song' also appears in Rev. 5.5 and 14.3.) 49. Longman and Reid, Warrior, p. 45.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

53

Like a woman with child, who writhes and cries out in her pangs ... we were with child, we writhed ... (Isa. 26.17-18) trembling took hold of them there, pains as of a woman in labor. (Ps. 48.6) Writhe and groan, O daughter Zion, like a woman in labor. (Mic. 4.10)

As noted above in Chapter 2, the root 71 PI, hyl, meaning 'be in labor' is often used to metaphorically to describe fear and trembling.50 In a Babylonian birth incantation, 'A Cow of Sin', the first indication of the onset of labor (in a cow impregnated by the bull moon-god Sin) is 'trembling':51 When her days came to an end, her months were finished, the cow trembled (igtalif) ...

2. Crying Out. The Hebrew Bible makes use of the simile 'cry out like a woman in labor': a cry as of a woman in labor ... 'Woe is me!' (Jer. 4.31). Like a woman with child, who writhes and cries out in her pangs ... (Isa. 26.17) I will cry out like a woman in labor ... (Isa. 42.14)

Crying out is seen as characteristic of a woman in labor. Thus, the converse is also seen as true: one who cries out is like a woman in labor. This aspect of the birth experience is central to the culture's image of childbirth. The cries are cries of terror and pain, rather than cries of joy. Ancient Near Eastern texts also describe one in labor as crying out. 'A Cow of Sin' describes the crying of the cow: At her crying, at her screaming in labour, Nannaru [Sin] was downcast. Sin heard her screaming in heaven and lifted high his hand.52

What is especially striking is how the birth of the calf, which we are assured is a normal birth, is accompanied by crying, screaming, trembling, and terror. Other ancient Near Eastern texts also highlight this aspect of birth: The woman in labor has trouble giving birth ... Crying covers her mouth .. ,53

3. Expressions of Pain. The pain of childbirth is a consistent concern and theme. In the ancient Near East and the Hebrew Bible the painfulness of childbirth merits 50. See Darr, Isaiah's Vision and the Family of God (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994), p. 100. 51. Nick Veldhuis, A Cow of Sin (Groeningen: Styx Publications, 1991), p. 9. The incantation combines a mythological narrative and a supplication for divine help in childbirth. The narrative is about the moon-god Sin (portrayed as a bull) impregnating the cow Geme-Sm and her subsequent delivery, with divine help, of a calf. There is a subsequent supplication that a particular woman who is currently in labor will have a successful birth. The second half of the poem describes the mythological birth. This incantation is representative of several that shed light on conceptions about childbirth. 52. Veldhuis, Cow, p. 9. 53. Karel Van der Toorn, From Her Cradle to Her Grave: The Role of Religion in the Life of the Israelite and the Babylonian Woman (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), p. 89.

54

Mixing Metaphors

aetiologies. A need for an explanation was probably felt because of the seeming contradiction that such a desirable event was so difficult and painful. Gen. 3.16 explains that disobedience to God resulted in difficult labor for both man and woman—man in the field and woman in childbirth. God tells the first woman, 'In pain you shall give birth (17\ yld) to children'.54 The pain of childbirth is highlighted in the Hebrew Bible's use of childbirth pain as the pain to which all other severe pain may be compared: Pangs and agony will seize them; they will be in anguish like a woman in labor. (Isa. 13.8) Therefore my loins are filled with anguish; pangs have seized me, like the pangs of a woman in labor. (Isa. 21.3) Like a woman with child who ... cries out in her pangs ... (Isa. 26.17) anguish as of one bringing forth her first child. (Jer. 4.31) anguish has taken hold of us, pain as of a woman in labor. (Jer. 6.24) pangs

like those of a woman in labor. (Jer. 13.21)

when pangs come upon you, pain as of a woman in labor! (Jer. 22.23) anguish and sorrow have taken hold of her, as of a woman in labor. (Jer. 49.24) anguish seized him, pain like that of a woman in labor. (Jer. 50.43) The pangs of childbirth ... (Hos. 13.13) pangs have seized you like a woman in labor. (Mic. 4.9) pain as of a woman in labor. (Ps. 48.6) Clearly, pain is a major association of childbirth in the Hebrew Bible.

4. Expressions of Danger or Difficulty. In the Hebrew Bible 'no strength' describes birth difficulties. Isa. 37.3/2 Kgs 19.3 describes the conditions of Jerusalem under siege. Hezekiah sends this message to Isaiah: Thus says Hezekiah, 'This is a day of distress (iT"ll£), of rebuke, and of disgrace; children have come to the birth (womb-opening —~Q£)Q) and there is no strength to bring them forth (to give birth—IT/?)'.

Note the implicit comparison of a child stuck in the womb and Hezekiah stuck in the walled city. Death will result if there is no resolution. The moment for delivery 54. Carol Meyers, however, argues that a correct reading of the Hebrew text does not highlight pain (Discovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context [New York: Oxford University Press, 1988], pp. 101-105). A legend in Akkadian tells how Etana, the King of Kish, seeks to relieve his wife of distress in labor by obtaining the 'plant of birth' from Shamash. As instructed by the god, Etana rides an eagle up towards the heavens but crashes back down to earth before reaching the god and the plant of birth. This is the reason that women still have pain in childbirth. See Use Seibert, Women in the Ancient Near East (Leipzig; Edition Leipzig, 1974), p. 29.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

55

has come but there is 'no strength' (presumably in the mother) to deliver. This is clearly a life-threatening situation. A 'womb tied up' is another way of describing difficulties. In the myth of Atrahasis, Earth's womb rebelled, no plant came forth, grain pushed not through, Infirmity befell the people, the womb was tied up, could not speed the child out right.55

Note here how the birth problems of the people parallel fertility problems of the Earth, just as in Genesis 3. The death of the child or the mother was always a possibility. In Job 3.11, 16 Job asks 'Why did I not die at birth, come forth from the womb and expire? ... Or why was I not buried like a stillborn child, like an infant that never sees the light?' A successful birth was not taken for granted. When a mother died in childbirth there was naturally lamenting. Rachel's dying act was to name her newborn 'son of my sorrow'. And as noted earlier, the wife of Phinehas, on her deathbed, named her son 'Ichabod'; that is, 'Where is glory?' (1 Sam. 4.21).56 5. Darkness to Light. The passage from darkness to light is a commonplace metaphor for birth. Birth is a movement from darkness to light. The unborn child has not yet seen the light, and the miscarried child never sees the light. In Job 3.16 and Ps. 58.8(9) miscarriages are called 'infants that never see the light' and one 'that never sees the sun'. Two ancient Near East incantations end with the supplication that the child be born to see the light of day: Let the child come out rapidly and see the light of the sun!57 May the human creature come out, and behold the bright light!58

The child who remains in the darkness will die. The light is the realm of life.

55. Thorkild Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness: A History ofMesopotamian Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976), p. 199. 56. An ancient Near East lamentation written in honor of a woman who died in childbirth presents the mother's death from her own perspective: The day of my going into labor, my face became darkened; the day of my giving birth, my eyes became clouded. ... While I lived with him who was my lover, death came creeping into my bedroom. It drove me from my house, it tore me from my husband, and led me to a land from which I could not [come back]. (Toorn, Cradle, p. 90) 57. Veldhuis, Cow, pp. 14-15. 58. Toorn, Cradle, p. 89.

56

Mixing Metaphors

6. Battle. In the biblical material, one facing battle is sometimes described as being 'like a woman in labor' (see below). (Isa. 42.13-14 juxtaposes the warrior and the woman in labor.) What is absent from biblical material is an explicit description of a woman in labor as being like a warrior. But the biblical material hints that this ancient Near East commonplace may have also been a part of Israelite thought about childbirth. In ancient Near Eastern sources a woman in labor is compared to a warrior. Both of the following examples use the warrior image in connection with a difficult labor. The woman in labor has trouble giving birth ... She lies in her blood like a hero who has fought... 'Help me through your incantation, gracious Marduk! What confusion! I am encircled, break though! Pull out the sealed one, the creature of the gods! May the human creature come out, and behold the bright light!'59

Note how she lies in her blood 'like a hero'. The continuing attempt to deliver despite difficulties is also compared to the 'dust of battle': The woman in childbirth has pangs at delivery, At delivery she has pangs, the babe is stuck fast, The babe is stuck fast. The bolt is secure—to bring life to an end, ... the mother is enveloped in the dust of death. Like a chariot she is enveloped in the dust of battle... Like a warrior in the fray, she is cast down in her blood. ... She wears no veil and has no shame. Be present and [unintelligible], merciful Marduk. 'Now is the battle on, I am surrounded! Reach me!' Bring forth that sealed-up one, a creation of the gods, A creation of man. Let him come out to see the light.. .60

Battle imagery may be a commonplace of a difficult birth in particular rather than of all births. Births described in ancient Near East material are all depicted as innately difficult, but battle imagery may relate to situations of life-threatening difficulties. These examples suggest that the mother is a warrior valiantly fighting to save her baby who is surrounded (stuck); that is, under siege. The mother becomes the champion of the infant. She may die in her attempt to give life. This ancient Near East material helps explain the Hebrew literary convention ki-yoledah, which merits a full discussion. The Literary Convention ki-yoledah The phrase iTTTTD, ki-yoledah ('like one giving birth') is a conventional simile in the Hebrew Bible. (It is also found in a much earlier ancient Near East text, the Epic of Gilgamesh.) This image usually describes a city, a nation, or a people who 59. Toorn, Cradle, p. 89. 60. From a Middle Assyrian birth incantation, in W. G. Lambert, 'A Middle Assyrian Medical Text', Iraq 31 (1969), pp. 28-39 (32).

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

57

face potential destruction. It describes fear, pain, and panic. The expression kiyoledah appears 11 times in 10 texts in the Hebrew Bible.61 With the exception of Isaiah 42, it appears either in judgment oracles to describe those who face possible defeat, or in what might be called 'counter-judgment salvation oracles', which counteract an expectation of judgment with the good news of salvation (Jer. 30.5-6 and, possibly, Mic. 4.9-10). The simile highlights a particular set of characteristics that the termyoledah entails. Common Threads among the ki-yoledah Texts. The description of someone acting like a woman in labor is a 'widespread literary convention' that conventionally describes a 'reaction to bad news' ,62 Delbert R. Millers identifies the characteristics of the conventionalized reaction to bad news thus: ' 1) approach of the bad news or ... of the foe; 2) the hands falling helpless (HSI); 3) pains in the loins like labor pains; 4) melting of the heart' ,63 Five examples closely fit the convention: Jer. 6.2223; 50.43; 49.23; Isa. 13.7; and Ezek. 21.11-12.64 (The concern in this study is more precisely with the use of childbirth imagery; thus the selection of texts will differ from that of Millers.) Most of the ki-yoledah texts confirm Millers's interpretation of 'a reaction to bad news'. But we may be more specific in noting also that most of the examples are suggestive, not just of bad news in general, but of the bad news of impending or current siege. The context nearly always involves the threat of an oncoming army, enemy warriors. These five ki-yoledah texts utilize common terms, many associated with the semantic field of childbirth. In six of the ten texts the word 7TI, hyl, is used.65 The noun 7TI appears in Ps. 48.6-7; Jer. 6.24; 22.23; 50.43; and Mic. 4.9, and is sometimes translated 'pangs' or 'pains'. The verb appears in Isa. 13.8; 26.18; and Mic. 4.10, and may be trans lated 'travail', 'be in pain', or 'writhe', and in Jer. 4.31 as 'she who ...' (see Chapter 2). Other terms convey a meaning of trembling: mi?"! ('shaking', Ps. 48.7) and rn~in ('quaking', Jer. 30.5). The term HIK ('distress, straits', from~ni£) is used (Jer. 6.24; 49.24; 50.43; see also Jer. 4.31) to convey a sense of constriction, narrowness, or straits which, in a context using the language of childbirth, is evocative of the childbirth itself. The verb "lliJ ('besiege') appears in one of our 61. Ps. 48.5-8; Isa. 13.2-17; 21.2-10; 42.10-17; Jer. 6.22-26; 22.20-23; 30.5-6; 49.23-27; 50.4143; Mic. 4.9-13; see also Isa. 26.17-18; Jer. 4.29-31 for texts that use similar terminology. 62. Delbert R. Killers, 'A Convention in Hebrew Literature: The Reaction to Bad News', ZA W 77 (1965), pp. 86-90. 63. Killers, 'Convention', p. 88. Killers notes Ugaritic parallels that describe the pains in the loins, although none of his examples explicitly use birthing imagery. Although the phrase 'the loins break' as well as the Hebrew phrase 'all knees will run with water' (Ezek. 21.11-12) may be related to birthing, Killers translates the latter 'every man will wet himself. 64. Killers includes additional examples, which fit less perfectly: Jer. 30.5-6; Exod. 15.14-16; Jer. 4.9; 23.9; Ezek. 7.17; Ps. 48.6-7; Dan. 10.16; 2 Sam. 4.1; Deut. 2.25; Job 2.9; 5.1; Hab. 3.1 Isa. 21.3-4; and 'numerous passages in the Hodayof [Qumran psalms] ('Convention', p. 86). 65. The noun form is found in Jer. 6.24; 22.23; 50.43; Ps. 48.7; Mic. 4.9; the verbal form in Isa. 13.8; Mic. 4.10. ^TI, hyl, often appears in parallel with the verb "fT, yld, e.g. Isa. 45.10; 54 66.8. In Deut. 32.18, TT ,>>Wand 7TI, hyl, speak of God's maternal activity (see Ch. 2 above). In Isa. 23.4, these verbs speak of the activity of the Sea as a mother.

58

Mixing Metaphors

identified texts—Isa. 21.2-10. Although the terms !T"liJ and "ITU may or may not be related, their similarity may evoke certain associations between them. The term n~lH refers to one ki-yoledah ('like one who is giving birth') in situations of siege. Several texts refer to something taking hold of (pTM hi.) or seizing (THN qal) someone—anguish, trembling, or birth-pains.66 The term pTPI in the hiphil appears numerous times (Jer. 6.23,24; 49.24; 50.42,43; Mic. 4.9), possibly implying powerlessness or outside control, although the term may also imply strengthening or upholding (as in Isa. 42.6 and 45.1). THN more clearly conveys powerlessness and occurs in Ps. 48.6, Isa. 13.21; 21.3; Jer. 13.21; 49.24 (see also Exod. 15.14-15 and 2 Sam. 1.9). The term HSl ('limp') recurs, generally referring to hands (Isa. 13.7; Jer. 6.24; 13.7; 49.24; 50.43). Hands going limp may convey powerlessness or panic. Repeated references to noise appear in these texts. 7lp ('sound' or 'voice') occurs in Isa. 13.2,4; 30.19; Jer. 4.21,29, 31; 6.23; 49.21; 50.22,28,42,46—see also Isa. 40.3, 6, 9; 42.2; 48.20; 50.10: 51.3; 52.8. pUH ('cry out') appears in Isa. 26.17 and Jer. 22.20. Isa. 13.6 uses ^TM, /zy/y/('howl'). In three texts ^PD (ni., 'terrified') is used (Isa. 13.8; 21.3; Ps. 48.6). Other terms for fear or panic in these texts are HUNT ('anxiety') andftCD"!('panic') in Jer. 49.23,1PI53 ('terror') in Jer. 30.5, and "11KQ ('horror') in Jer. 6.25. In four texts 7DH ('labor-pains') is used (Jer. 22.23; 49.24; Isa. 13.8; 26.17). Isa. 13.8 also uses tTTiJ ('labor pains'), a synonym of 7Hn. In these texts the warrior mentioned and theyoledah are different figures, except for Micah 4 and Isaiah 42. Both Micah 4 and Deutero-Isaiah make use of this conventional expression in innovative ways, by identifying the one who is 'like a woman in labor' as also a warrior. This conventional simile clearly has a negative edge. It connotes pain, powerlessness, distress, and terror. It seems to suggest impending defeat. The questions raised then are: Why is this simile applied to YHWH in Isaiah 42? Is it entirely negative or is it negative in the sense that childbirth is negative—a distressing experience but usually with a positive result? These ki-yoledah texts also raise the question of why the image of a woman giving birth is used in these contexts of fear and destruction.67 An understanding of how this simile functions in other texts will illuminate how it functions in Isaiah 42. Note that, like Isaiah 42, these texts invariably associate birthing imagery with war imagery, although the relationship between the two sets of images varies. A Survey of the Texts. The following are texts in the Hebrew Bible that use the simile of a woman giving birth, either utilizing the term ki-yoledah or closely related language. Note that all of these come from poetic material and a disproportionate number come from Jeremiah.68 66. Jer. 6.24; 49.24; Isa. 21.3; Ps. 48.7; Mic. 4.9. 67. These texts are not necessarily literary sources for Deutero-Isaiah. Rather, they are cited here as the extant examples of what seems to have been a conventional expression, as one aspect of the network of associated commonplaces of theyoledah. 68. These texts have been translated to highlight common language, with some dependence on NRSV.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

59

Psalm 48.5-8 uses the simile to describe kings reacting with fear. They are seized by quaking; they writhe (/^H, hyl). Jer. 6.22-26 (a pre-exilic judgment oracle against Jerusalem) uses the simile to depict warfare—in particular, siege: 22

Thus says YHWH:

'See, a people is coming from the land of the north, a great nation is stirring69 from the farthest parts of the earth. 23 They seize (pTH) the bow and the javelin, they are cruel and have no mercy, their sound (71 p) is like the roaring sea; they ride on horses, equipped like a man for the battle, against you, O daughter Zion!' 24 'We have heard news of them, our hands are limp (^"1); anguish (ilHiJ) has seized (pTH) us, writhing (7nn, hyl) like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah). 25 Do not go forth70 [fern, sing.] into the field, or walk [fern, sing.] on the road; for the enemy has a sword, horror encircles'. 26 Daughter of my people, put on sackcloth, and roll in ashes; make mourning as for an only child, most bitter lamentation: for suddenly the destroyer will come upon us.

Like Isaiah 42, this text juxtaposes the similes of yoledah and warrior. It draws on the conventional associations of each. The 'man to battle' is associated with threat, strength, absence of mercy, stirring and noisiness (the latter two also occurring in Isaiah 42). The yoledah simile describes those who are under attack from the warriors and is associated with pain; the text states, 'anguish has seized us'.71 The statements 'Do not go forth' and 'horror encircles' are suggestive of a siege. Thus the term 'anguish' (!~ni£), describing constriction, fits both siege and childbirth. Just as the gates are locked in siege, the door is shut in childbirth until the child bursts forth. In Jer. 6.22-25, in contrast to Isaiah 42, the warrior and the yoledah refer to different figures. The 'warrior' is the threat and the yoledah is the threatened. The fear is that the warrior will be the victor and the yoledah (Zion, or the inhabitants of Zion) will be the defeated ones. The anguish is the anguish of possible defeat and death. Jer. 4.29-31 (a pre-exilic judgment oracle against Jerusalem) does not use the exact term ki-yoledah, but similar language:

69. Qal form of ~I1U, a root which appears in Isa. 42.13a (hiphil). 70. KIT piel. The hiphil form sometimes refers to giving birth; that is, 'bring forth'. The piel form appears in Isa. 42.13a in reference to YHWH as a warrior. 71. John A. Thompson says, 'Judah was as unequal to the encounter as a weak, defenseless woman in the pangs of childbirth before a powerful, fully equipped soldier' (The Book of Jeremiah [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980], p. 264).

60

Mixing Metaphors 29

At the noise (71p) of horseman and archer every town takes to flight; they enter thickets; they climb among rocks; all the towns are abandoned, and not a man lives in them. 30 And you, O desolate one ... Your lovers despise you; they seek your life. 31 For I heard a voice (71p) like she-who-is-giving-birth (H7in~!D); distress (i~ni£) like she-who-is-bearing-her-first-born (7TTDI1Q~I]), the voice of daughter Zion. She puffs. She stretches out her palms. 'Woe is me, for my life is faint before killers!' 2

This oracle is directed at Zion, warning of the coming of an invading army into Judah. The prophet paints a picture of the personified city's reaction to invading forces: her voice is heard, her anguish. Her breathing is altered. The use of the term 'she-who-is-bearing-her-first-born' (nTDDQ) draws on the greater difficulty and danger in the birth of the first-born. In addition, the first-born is the 'wombopener'. Just as the term 'virgin' in reference to a city may imply that the city has never been 'violated', so the idea of the first-born may also convey the idea of a city whose wall has never before been breached. Holladay sees this image as a standard image for 'the panic of a nation subjected to holy war'.73 While the simile describes anguish and panic, like labor, the outcome is not presupposed to be negative. Holladay sees the possibility of a positive outcome. As shown above, even in the case of a healthy and successful birth, labor is described in terms of terror and pain. Thus, the oracle functions as judgment against Jerusalem without necessarily suggesting that defeat or destruction is inevitable. Jeremiah 50.41-43, a judgment oracle against Babylon, is likely late exilic. This text is almost identical to 6.22-24. 50.43 differs slightly from 6.24. Either one is patterned on the other or they draw from a common source. The yoledah figure here is the king of Babylon and the warrior figure is possibly Persia. The king of Babylon heard news of them, and his hands were limp (*)""!); anguish (n™IU) seized (pTH) him, writhing (^TI, hyl) like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah) (50.43).

Jer. 49.23-27 (a judgment oracle against Damascus) is similar to Jeremiah 6: "Concerning Damascus: Hamath and Arpad are ashamed, for they have heard bad news; they are melted into the sea of anxiety (HT^l), it cannot be quiet (EDpCJTI). 24 Damascus has become limp (TTS3~1), she has turned to flee, and panic has seized (pTH) her; anguish (miJ) and birth-pains (D^DI"!) have taken hold (TPIN) of her, 72. Note that earlier in the larger unit is Jeremiah's statement of 4.19—'My belly, my belly (TO), I writhe (Tf^inN), the walls of my heart. My heart murmurs, I cannot be still (KJHnfc—Isa. 42.14), for I hear the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war. My life! The cry of war!' 73. William L. Holladay, Jeremiah, I (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), p. 148. He translates the noun i"Hl£ as 'appeal' (from "IIU), rather than 'anguish'. Thus, 'the woman in birth pangs cries out for help' (p. 171).

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

61

like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah). How the city of praise is not abandoned, the town of my joy! 26 Therefore her young men shall fall in her squares, and all her men of war shall be stilled (1ft""O m that day, says YHWH of hosts. 27 And I will kindle a fire at the wall of Damascus, and it shall devour the strongholds of Ben-hadad. 25

The threatened city, Damascus, is like a woman giving birth, seized by panic, anguish, and birth-pains. The warriors of the losing army are described as being 'silenced' or 'stilled' (DQ1 ni.). In view of the possible relationship in Isaiah 42 between vv. 13 and 14a, it should be noted that the cities cannot be 'quiet' for fear, yet stillness in a warrior is equated with defeat and death.74 Contrast the stillness of the defeated warriors here with the noisy divine warrior of Isa. 42.13. The inability to keep quiet parallels the simile of the woman giving birth, just as in Isa. 42.14. Jeremiah 22.20-23 is a judgment oracle against Lebanon, probably pre-exilic: 20

Go up (fern, sing.), O Lebanon, and cry out (pUi£); and in Bashan, give your voice (71p); Cry out (pUH) from Abarim, for all who love you are broken ... 23 Those who live in Lebanon, those who nest in the cedars, how you will groan when birth pains (D"1 vDPI) come upon you, writhing (7TI, hyl) as of a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah)\

Lebanon is commanded to 'cry out' and 'give your voice'. Here crying out is associated with fear or grief, consistent with the commonplaces of labor. There is also the sound, the groaning, ki-yoledah. Jeremiah 30.5-6 is a pre-exilic salvation oracle to Israel and Judah: 5 For thus says YHWH: We have heard the sound ( /lp) quaking (HI"!!"!), dread (IFIS) and there is no peace. 6 Ask now, and see, does a male give birth (TT, yld)! Why then do I see every man ("QJ) with his hands on his loins like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah)! Why has every face turned pale? Woe! for that day is so great there is none like it; it is a time of anguish (mil) for Jacob; yet he shall be saved from it.

Once again the phrase ki-yoledah is used to describe someone facing defeat. However, here the conventional simile is humorously enlivened by the use of irony and deconventionalized by asking the rhetorical question 'Can a male give birth?' (The simile is applied to the men of the city rather than to the city itself.)75 This

74. Holladay, following LXX, omits the phrase 'misery and pangs have seized her like a woman in labor' (Hermeneia; Jeremiah, II [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989], p. 379). 75. Robert P. Carroll sees the simile of childbirth as normally conveying 'awful terror' and 'no control over the pains' (Jeremiah: A Commentary [OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986], p. 574).

62

Mixing Metaphors

phenomenon of the disruption of the normal order of things (a male giving birth) is characteristic of the city lament (see Chapter 5 below), in which the destruction of the city is conventionally described in reports of reversals of the normal order of things (e.g. 'Slaves rule over us' in Lam. 5.8). The poem in Jeremiah includes the statement, 'but out of this he shall be saved'. Once again we are reminded of the commonplaces of childbirth. The emphasis on the terror and pain of labor does not presuppose a negative outcome.76 Isaiah 13.2-8, 17 is an exilic oracle concerning Babylon.77 Verses 2-5 describe YHWH'S mustering of his army for the day of YHWH: 6

Howl fV''Tn, hylyl, masc. pi.), for the day of YHWH is near, it will come like destruction from Shaddai; 7 Therefore every pair of hands will be limp (TTS31), and every heart of man will melt, 8 and they will be terrified (^PD). Pangs (D^Tli) and birth-pains (E^UITl) will seize (THIN) them; like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah) they will writhe (TTT, hyl). A man will look aghast at his neighbor; their faces will be faces of flame ... 17 See, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold ... This time, destruction comes in the 'day of YHWH'. The simile ki-yoledah functions conventionally to describe fear and defeat. Anguish and birth-pains seize them. Kaiser sees the silence in the men as they 'only stare at each other aghast in horror...' as standing in contrast with the expectation that 'a woman in labour , 70 cries . These examples utilize the image of a woman giving birth to describe a situation of anguish and fear. (See also Jer. 13.20-21; 48.40-43; and 49.22 for similar images in language other thanyoledah.79) The situation in the Hebrew Bible's examples is invariably warfare, most likely a siege. The present situation is distressing, but the outcome is not clear. The texts discussed above show the conventional entailments of the simile ki-yoledah. A number of texts, including Isa. 42.14, use this literary convention in innovative ways that transform the image. How are the conventional entailments of the expression ki-yoledah to inform the image of YHWH in Isa. 42.14? YHWH may be in anguish over the oppression of Israel. The context of siege is fitting—not for YHWH but for the people—trapped in 76. Again, the phrase ki-yoledah is not translated (is omitted) in LXX. Holladay omits it as a gloss (Jeremiah, II, p. 150). Carroll calls it a late gloss (Jeremiah, p. 574). But even without this particular term, birth imagery is explicit. Thompson suggests it may be a sarcastic remark, but acknowledges that it is ambiguous (Jeremiah, p. 99). 77. This appears to be a late-exilic oracle against Babylon, although R. E. Clements places vv. 2-5 in the 8th century BCE (in the context of the Babylonian revolt against Assyria in 722-720 or 705-702) and w. 6-8 c. 587 (Isaiah 1-39 [Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans, 1980], p. 134). Otto Kaiser suggests that an older prophecy is combined with a post-exilic prophecy concerning the Medes (Isaiah 13-39 [trans. John Bowden; OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1974], p. 9). 78. Kaiser, Isaiah 13-39, p. 16. 79. Exod. 15.14-16 is also similar but without the feminine imagery.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

63

Babylon, unable to venture forth. The overlap of siege with conventions of birth is suggestive. Labor is the time in which the infant is ready to come forth but has not yet accomplished that end. The need to come forth produces pain and anguish in she who labors. The distress will not end until the door is opened and the child is successfully brought forth. Perhaps for Deutero-Isaiah, YHWH anguishes over Israel, until the people are successfully brought forth into the light. The Image Transformed: Iconoclastic Texts. Alternate visions of the yoledah are also available. These visions add further insights to Isaiah 42. Isaiah 26.16-18 uses the simile to convey fruitlessness of effort, rather than distress: I6

O YHWH, in distress (~liJ) they sought you, they poured out a prayer when your chastening was on them, 17 Like a pregnant-woman (mil) when she approaches childbirth (TO; ;), she writhes/labors PTI, hyf), and she cries out (pUT) in her birth-pains (iTTQl"!), so we were because of you, YHWH; 18 we were pregnant, we writhed/labored (v n H, hyl), like we were giving birth ("1T, yld) to wind ... We have won no victories on the earth, and no one is born (vS"1) to inhabit the world.

This text's use of the simile is, in one respect, radically different from the preceding examples. As with them, the text describes crying out and birth-pains. However, here the component of actually giving birth to something is explicitly highlighted. The author has taken a conventional simile and enlivened it by reintroducing a normally downplayed element—something is born. Rather than emphasizing pain and anguish like that of childbirth, this text conveys fruitlessness of effort; the labors produce no fruit. What is produced is 'wind', signifying nothingness. All of the pain and anguish of labor is for naught. The people are unable to accomplish anything; they are powerless. The fruitlessness of labor stands in contrast to what labor normally produces—a child. Normally the pain and anguish would have been worthwhile. This example is helpful in our reading of Isa. 42.10-17. When the simile of the yoledah is applied to YHWH in Isaiah 42, is the entailment of giving birth to something or to someone present? Isaiah 26 demonstrates that even though this entailment is normally downplayed in the conventional use of the simile, it is easily revived. Thus questions are raised for Isaiah 42. Is YHWH giving birth to something? If so, what? Isaiah 21. 2-10 (a [late exilic?] judgment oracle [against Babylon?]) is likewise unconventional: 2

A hard vision is proclaimed to me, The betrayer betrays, the destroyer destroys. Go up, Elam; besiege ("IliJ), Media. All her sighing I will bring to an end.

64

Mixing Metaphors 3

Therefore my loins are filled with agony (7s 7TJ, hylyl). ° Pangs OTTJt) have taken hold (THR) of me, 81 like the pangs (ZTTli) of a woman-giving-birth (yoledah) . I am bent over (iTIU, ni.) from hearing, I am frightened (7113) from seeing. 4 My heart strays, shaking (mU7S) has terrified (T1I7D) me, I have desired dusk, it was made a shuddering (rn~lR) for me ... 9b 'Fallen, fallen is Babylon; and all the images of her gods are shattered to the ground'. 10 O my threshed one (fem. sing.), child of the threshing floor, what I have heard from YHWH Sabaoth the God of Israel, I announce to you.

This oracle perplexes commentators. The prophet is shown a vision that seems to depict the conquest of Babylon by Persia. Commentators note that the (presumably) Israelite prophet reacts with dismay, like a woman in labor, to what would be good news for the Judahites in Babylon. Kaiser asks, 'And why is the prophet-poet so horrified at what he sees in so fragmentary a form, although it is quite clearly an event bringing the salvation for which his people have longed for so many years?'82 The prophet's reaction may be a bit unexpected but not inexplicable. Millers has noted this simile as describing a reaction to bad news. However, as we have noted, the agonies of labor do not presuppose a negative outcome. In fact, a very fruitful outcome can often be expected (see also below on Micah 4). The description of anguish at the news is suggestive of impending siege. Although news of the fall of Babylon is good news for the Judahites (as is the news of a coming child), there may be great trials before the hoped-for end is achieved. Micah 4.9-10, 13 (a [pre-exilic?] judgment oracle to Zion) brings the figures of the warrior and the birthing woman together. It portrays Daughter Zion as simultaneously like a woman giving birth and a mighty warrior: 'Now why do you [fem. sing.] shout the war cry (T'Hn)?83 Is there not a king with you? Has your advisor perished? For writhing (7TT, hyl) has seized (pTH) you like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah). 10 Writhe (71 FT, hyl) and bring forth (Hrd), Daughter Zion, like a woman giving birth (ki-yoledah). For now you shall go forth (NIT) from the city84 and camp in the field, and (or) you shall go as far as Babylon.

80. 'TlTn, hylyl, 'agony', 'anguish'. See Nah. 2.11; Ezek. 30.4, 9. 81. This is not the precise form ki-yoledah (i"n7VD), but is equivalent. 82. Kaiser, Isaiah 13-39, p. 121. 83. James L. Mays renders this 'cry alarm'; see 42.13b (Micah, A Commentary [OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976], p. 104). 84. Charles Shaw renders this 'If now you go ...' (The Speeches of Micah: A RhetoricalHistorical Analysis [JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993], p. 150).

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

65

There you shall be rescued.85 There YHWH will redeem ( t W , g'l) you from the hand of your enemies [?] ... 13 Arise and thresh, O daughter Zion, for I will make your horn iron and your hoofs bronze; you shall beat in pieces many peoples, and shall devote their gain to YHWH, their wealth (TH, hyl) to the Lord of the whole earth.

This unit invites a variety of translations, datings, and interpretations that cannot be dealt with here in any depth. Three points are most relevant for this study: the association of labor imagery with siege, the interweaving of birthing and warrior imagery, and the positive outcome of the distress of labor. This unit applies the simile to Zion. Initially she is seized like a woman in labor. Those who would 'go forth' from the city (at the end of a siege or to escape the siege) are like one who is 'brought forth' in labor. Zion, the yoledah, is then called upon to 'Arise and thresh! ' Wolff notes, 'The double imperative, addressed to the daughter of Zion, is like the "summons to battle" called out by a prophet in Yahweh's war' ,86 Zion becomes the warrior who will 'devote' (DIH) her conquest to YHWH, according to the practices of holy war. Thus, for the author of this passage, the one who acts like a woman giving birth is not the victim of the warrior; she herself becomes the warrior. The labor ends with Zion's victory over her enemies. The yoledah, an image of distress, thus becomes an image of the fruitful labor of deliverance from the enemy. Charles Shaw describes the transformation of the simile: The use of the childbirth simile in an unexpected way commands the attention of the audience. The prophet first reproaches the people for allowing distress to overtake them so that they act 'like a woman in labor' . He then uses the childbirth imagery in an unexpected way by commanding his audience to 'labor and bring forth like a woman giving birth'. This latter command should probably be understood in a very positive sense. The prophet calls not for a labor of futility and panic, but a fruitful labor which 'brings forth ' victory. This masterful use of a simile in an unexpected way serves to negate the former simile which equates labor with despair. The prophet exhorts the audience to turn their fruitless labor into productive labor. This transformation of the metaphor of the woman in labor is unexpected and thus functions to capture the audience's C~ attention. 87

This passage in Micah has transformed the conventional simile by empowering the birth mother (Zion) as a holy warrior who will defeat her enemies. Micah 4 is an imaginative re-interpretation of the phrase ki-yoledah. Only here and in Isaiah 42 is the yoledah also a warrior. As in Isaiah 26, in Micah 4 the 85. Shaw reads this as a question (Shaw, Micah, p. 150). 86. Hans W. Wolff, Micah the Prophet (trans. Ralph D. Gehrke; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), p. 141. 87. Shaw, Micah, p. 151, emphasis added.

66

Mixing Metaphors

yoledah is one who can give birth ('bring forth', v. 10). Her writhing is not a symbol of powerlessness, but of power to bring forth victory. She who labors is she who shouts the war cry. Similarly, in Isa. 42.15 the destructive power of the deity who is ki-yoledah to wither and dry converges with the power of the divine warrior to devastate. The Epic of Gilgamesh uses the simile of the woman in labor to describe Ishtar, a deity: The gods were frightened by the deluge, And, shrinking back, they ascended to the heaven of Anu. The gods cowered like dogs Crouched against the outer wall. Ishtar cried out like a woman in travail, The sweet-voiced mistress of the [gods] moans aloud: 'The olden days are alas turned to clay, Because I bespoke evil in the Assembly of the gods. How could I bespeak evil in the Assembly of the gods, Ordering battle for the destruction of my people, When it is I myself who give birth to my people? Like the spawn of the fishes they fill the sea!' The Anunnaki gods weep with her, The gods, all humbled, sit and weep ... Six days and [six] nights Blows the flood wind, as the south-storm sweeps the land. When the seventh day arrived, The flood(-carrying) south-storm subsided in the battle, Which it had fought like an army. The sea grew quiet, the tempest was still, and ceased. I looked at the weather: stillness had set in, And all of mankind had returned to clay.88

In contrast to Hillers's characterization, Ishtar's reaction is not to 'bad news', but to the actual deluge. She is in distress, not for herself, but for her people. She apparently feels partially responsible for the disaster befalling the human race. She is like a woman in labor insofar as she 'cries out'. This text provides a good source of insight for Isaiah 42. It describes a deity crying out. This is explained in the text as being out of compassion for her people who are in distress. Like YHWH (in Deutero-Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel), Ishtar attributes the disaster to her own wrath. Unlike YHWH, Ishtar is unable to save her people. They are destroyed, returned to clay. The application of this simile to Ishtar demonstrates that it has entailments appropriate to a deity prior to Deutero-Isaiah's use of the simile. This sheds light on the application of the simile to YHWH in Isaiah 42. Like Ishtar, who weeps with the other gods, YHWH is distressed by the suffering of his people. The fact that YHWH himself has dictated this punishment does not mean that YHWH lacks compassion. However, unlike Ishtar who seems powerless to intervene, for Deutero-Isaiah YHWH is able to save the people. Unlike Ishtar, there is no deity more powerful than YHWH. 88. In Pritchard (ed.), The Ancient Near East, I (trans. E.A. Speiser), p. 69.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

67

The Yoledah in Isaiah 42 1. The Convention ki-yoledah. The conventional use of this simile exposes a profound anxiety about the event of labor. An enemy siege is compared to labor. Thus labor is seen as similar to an enemy siege, a time for fear and loss of control. Isaiah 42 makes innovative use of an old simile. Ki-yoledah does not qualify as a 'dead' simile (as is demonstrated by the rhetorical question in Jer. 30.6, 'Does a male give birth (TT, yld)T). It is, however, a conventional simile formulaically used in a particular context (judgment oracle) and highlighting a fairly consistent set of entailments. Those who are conventionally described as ki-yoledah are those at war, whether a city, a nation, the people of a city, or soldiers. Thus, a literal warrior may be described as being 'like a woman giving birth'. The application of this simile to YHWH seems strange at first glance. The simile often portrays fear, trembling, powerlessness, and likely defeat. A closer examination of the texts reveals, however, that these are not the only entailments. The entailment of distress may be distress on behalf of one's people, as Ishtar expresses. Deutero-Isaiah's repeated proclamation of YHWH's intended redemption of Israel implies YHWH'S desire to end their present oppression. It has also been shown that the pain and distress do not presuppose defeat. But then the conventional meaning of the simile is subverted in Isaiah 42 (as has been done elsewhere). The subversion is effected by three elements. First the interaction of the vehicle (yoledah) with the tenor (this is about YHWH, after all) functions to say something not only about YHWH, but about the figure of the yoledah as well. Second, the identification of the figure of the birthing woman with the warrior (by virtue of their common tenor, YHWH) affects the meaning of both. Third, the description in v. 15 of power over creation undermines any implications of ihe yoledah being a figure of powerlessness. Thus, some of the commonplace entailments of the yoledah are submerged (fear, panic, vulnerability), and previously hidden or downplayed entailments of a laboring woman are highlighted. The author retains, in particular, the conventional components of crying out. The earlier application of this component to Ishtar portrays divine compassion in describing the deity's distress on behalf of the dire straits of the people. Isaiah 26 and Micah 4 indicate that use of the conventional expression need not be limited to conventional entailments. The convention may be extended to include new or previously downplayed entailments and to downplay previously highlighted entailments. Thus, for Isaiah 42, the application of the simile to YHWH, the equation of the warrior with the yoledah, and the whole of the literary unit (42.1017) determine what is highlighted. These elements will be discussed more fully below. 2. Metaphoric Coherence between the yoledah and the Warrior. The cited texts associate the figure of the yoledah with a context of warfare. There are a number of 'associated commonplaces' that the yoledah shares with the figure of warrior or warfare. First, labor involves actual pain. Soldiers may well sustain wounds that cause physical pain. Second, labor involves blood, as does war. (The association of blood and childbirth is highlighted by the purification laws in Leviticus 12.) Third,

68

Mixing Metaphors

labor pains are apparently regarded in these texts as comparable to the inner pain of panic, such as a panic attack. Such a panic may also be experienced in battle (Judg. 4.15). Fourth, just as warfare always carried the threat of death, giving birth also carried the potential for the death of the mother and/or the child. Fifth, labor is an inevitable, unstoppable process. Once the labor pains start, birth cannot be stopped. So also, those who face war face events that they cannot stop. They are 'like a woman giving birth'. (YHWH's word of judgment may also be regarded as something that cannot return back, a factor in Isaiah 42.) Sixth, while a woman in labor is not weak, the time comes when her pains have so 'seized' her that she cannot do anything else and so might be seen as vulnerable to her external environment. The use of the terms 'seized' and 'taken hold of highlight the sense of vulnerability to powers beyond one's control. Seventh, the frequent use of the term 'distress' or 'anguish' (THIS) conveys a sense of constriction. A commonplace of labor is the imagery of a bolted door. Together these fit the context of a siege p1!£). In Isa. 42.13, YHWH is the hero who arrives to save the day. But v. 14 uses a simile that, while generally appropriate for a warrior, is appropriate specifically for a warrior experiencing fear in the face of enemy attack: 'I will wail like a woman giving birth'. Our investigation of the commonplaces of childbirth and the use of the simile elsewhere indicates that the one who is like a woman in labor is not necessarily one whofaces defeat. It is, rather, one who faces a distressing situation, the outcome of which could be negative or positive. Here in Deutero-Isaiah, the application of the simile of the woman in labor to the divine warrior seems shocking. It initially seems to suggest that YHWH panics, that YHWH is dismayed in the face of an overwhelming enemy. YHWH 'wails' like a woman giving birth, just as YHWH 'yells the war cry' and 'shouts' as a warrior. YHWH's crying out is expressed in contrast to a previous silence with its implications of ineffectiveness, death, and defeat (Jeremiah 6). YHWH'S wailing 'like a woman giving birth', in its juxtaposition with the yelling warrior, simultaneously manages to express pain and power. With the continuation of the literary unit in v. 15, it becomes clear that the theme of potential destruction has been turned upside down, as in Micah 4. Theyoledah is the destroyer rather than the destroyed. A conventional simile for fear and possible defeat has been turned on its head to describe YHWH's power.89 Darr says of Isa. 42.14: the poet proceeds to transform radically the meaning of the simile. Stripped of its conventional connotations, it ceases to be an image of fear and pain and becomes instead a new way of describing God's behavior and its awesome effects.90

89. Verse 15 simultaneously draws on both the simile of the warrior and the simile of the woman giving birth. It is, however, positioned directly after the figure of the birthing woman. The language of 'withering' is more suggestive of the language of breathing in v. 14 than of the entailments of the warrior in v. 13. 90. Darr, 'Warrior', p. 564.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

69

The interrelationship between the two similes of warrior and yoledah is an important interpretive key to the text. Lakoff and Johnson's mechanism of 'coherence' (see Chapter 1) highlights overlapping entailments of both images.91 3. 7 have been quiet for an eternity ... I will wail ...'. YHWH's admission of silence, stillness, and restraint introduces the simile. This stillness provides a literary respite and transition between YHWH'S yelling out as a warrior and crying out like a woman giving birth. YHWH'S admission of silence is, perhaps, a response to a question on the lips of the people in exile, 'How long, O YHWH? Will you be silent forever?'92 YHWH does not minimize the silence that the people have been experiencing. Rather, the silence is exaggerated: 'I have been quiet/or an eternity'. YHWH'S silence refers to the period of the exile. The Hebrew term for 'quiet' not only expresses silence, but also suggests inactivity. Now YHWH tells the people in exile that the time of silence is over: 'I will wail like a woman giving birth'. What has seemed to be a time of YHWH'S inactivity has actually been a period of gestation, as when a woman is preparing to give birth. As with a pregnancy, while the process is barely discernible to others, the mother is profoundly aware of the changes and growth within her. So also YHWH knows what is imperceptible to the captives. Although the exile indicates that YHWH'S silence is YHWH'S absence, things are not always what they seem. While the exile may be assumed to be a period of divine inactivity or passivity, awaiting the completion of the term of punishment (Isa. 40.2), the simile of the birthing woman suggests that what appeared to be inactivity was gestation—a hidden activity.93 4. 'I will both blow and gasp'. The language of breath is an important semantic field. Throughout Deutero-Isaiah, the prophet uses the language of breath, blowing, and withering (see 40.24). Breath, wind, spirit are manifestations of God's power, often destructive power, as the divine warrior/storm god. For a woman in labor also, breathing is very much a part of giving birth (see Jer. 4.31, cited above). The language here is quite concrete.94 For Darr, the breathing is the central entailment of this simile and the entailment that connects it with the preceding verses:

91. When reading the two similes together, there is a danger that the warrior image, a conventional image of YHWH, may swallow up the yoledah image, if the reader is resistant to feminine imagery for YHWH. 92. Psalm 13.1,3a: 'How long, O YHWH? Will you forget me forever? How long will you hide your face from me? ... Consider and answer me, O YHWH, my God'. See also Pss. 79.5; 89.47(46); 74.1; 85.6(5). 93. George A. F. Knight speaks of a period of gestation following the 'conception' of the exodus events (ITC; Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40-55 (New York : Abingdon Press, 1965), p. 79. 94. Mayer Gruber translates this passage 'I will inhale and I will exhale simultaneously' ('The Motherhood of God in Second Isaiah', RB 90 [1983], pp. 351-59 [354-55], repr. in Mayer I. Gruber, The Motherhood of God and Other Studies [South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism No. 57; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992], pp. 3-15).

70

Mixing Metaphors We hear Yahweh when Yahweh acts like a woman in labor, gasping and panting with a force that shatters the prolonged silence of the past ... I submit that the pronounced auditory character of the travailing woman simile is one key to its function within its context. The emphasis in v 14 upon the sound of God links the verse to what precedes it. In v 13, too, we hear Yahweh when Yahweh acts like a warrior and shrieks the battle cry.95

Thus the withering destruction of v. 15 is consistent with both iheyoledah image and the warrior. What this destructive wind does is 'dry up' the rivers and the vegetation. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, Ishtar cries out like a woman in labor because she cannot stop the deluge and save her people. Here YHWH cries out like a woman in labor, dries up the rivers, and saves his people. 5. From Darkness to Light. In v. 16 YHWH states, 'I will turn the darkness before them into light'. Movement from darkness to light can be a metaphor for birth. This movement or journey in v. 16 interacts with the birthing imagery of v. 14 to become the movement of a child being born. If a child remains in the womb, it will die. It must move into the light to receive life. The release of the Israelite captives is thus implicitly a release from the womb to a successful birth and new life. 6. The Inevitability and Timeliness of the New Things. The author enlivens a conventional simile by highlighting another entailment of pregnancy, the time element. The fruition of YHWH's period of apparent silence is as inevitable as labor. What has been germinating and gestating will come to birth. These are the 'new things' of v. 9. The fruits of God's laboring are expressed in v. 16, the liberation of the captives. Birth comes after a time, at the right time, and comes inevitably. There is 'a time to be born, and a time to die' (Eccl. 3.2a).96 This idea of the proper time is expressed in the Hebrew phrase which the NRSV translates 'at this season OUIQ1?), in due time (iTrmUD)' (2 Kgs 4.16a).97 This describes the promise of a child (here Elisha's prophecy to the Shunamite woman). These terms are also used in Gen. 18.10 and 14b, 'At the set time I will return to you, in due season Sarah shall have a son'. The association of childbirth with timeliness and inevitability is, ironically, illustrated by its converse in Hos. 13.13: The birth-pains of she who gives birth come for him. He is an unwise son; for at the proper time he does not appear at the place of the womb-opening of children.

95. Darr, 'Warrior', p. 567. 96. Nancy Demand notes the Greek use of the term Kcupov to refer to the need for a doctor at childbirth. She notes that in two Hippocratic passages 'the author includes childbirth and abortion among those situations in which the doctor must act at the opportune moment (kairos)' (Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994], p. 19). 97. William Holladay translates this phrase 'next year at this time' (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament [Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1971], pp. 287).

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

71

While Hosea 13 may seem to refute the inevitability of childbirth, it is apparent that the image of a child refusing to be born because he is 'unwise' is meant to convey an unnatural occurrence. The inevitability of birth is the 'commonplace'. The idea of the timeliness and inevitability of birth is also expressed in Mic. 5.1 -2a (Eng. w. 2-3a):98 'But you, Bethlehem of Ephrathah, being small among the clans of Judah, from you one comes forth for me to be a ruler in Israel. His coming forth is from of old, from ancient days. therefore he shall give them until the time when she who gives birth has delivered ...

These references demonstrate the concept that childbirth has its own inherent proper time. Birth should not come prematurely, and when the time comes (when she is 'due' as we say) it cannot be postponed. It is possible that the warrior image also conveys this idea of timeliness. 2 Sam. 11.1 speaks of 'the spring of the year, in the time when the kings go forth [to battle]'. Is there also a proper time for war? (Compare also Eccl. 3.8: 'a time of war, and a time of peace'.) Just as the warrior image interprets the image of the yoledah, so the yoledah image can highlight hidden entailments of the warrior image. The unit expresses the idea that there is a time for silence and a time to cry aloud. While the expression of quietness in v. 14 points primarily to the simile of the yoledah that follows, it also reflects a silence in the warrior, a silence that may have seemed to mean defeat but that, in this context, implies a time of preparation for battle. Warriors must surely keep silent before the attack so as not to give away their position or their numbers. But when the times comes, they shout the battle cry (and eventually the victory cry). 1. Is Something Being Born? Darr argues that Isaiah 42 'does not necessarily mean that Yahweh is giving birth, in a metaphorical sense, to anything'.99 Interaction with the warrior image downplays this dimension of labor. If the phrase ki-yoledah were being used in its conventional sense in Isaiah 42, then the implication that something is being born would be remote indeed (a hidden entailment), but never entirely absent. Note how easily it is revived in Isa. 26.17-18 (above). While the entailment of something being born may be hidden or downplayed in some uses of the simile, it remains a potentially live entailment. The literary context of Isaiah 42 highlights in three ways the entailment that something is being born: by association with YHWH who, for Deutero-Isaiah, is the creator of all things; in the immediate

98. Job 39.1-4 also expresses the idea of birth at the right time, although referring to animal births. The incantation The Cow of Sin highlights time as well, mentioning the completion of days and months: 'When her days came to an end, her months were finished, the cow trembled and terrified her herdsman [Sin]' (Veldhuis, Cow, p. 9). 99. Darr, 'Warrior', p. 565, emphasis hers.

72

Mixing Metaphors

literary unit which speaks of 'new things' sprouting (v. 9); and in the movement from darkness to light in v. 16 (something is coming into the light). Logically, a woman who gives birth is a mother, and every mother is a mother of someone. The literary unit as a whole suggests two meanings for that which is born (and we need not be compelled to choose between them). The reference to the 'new things' in v. 9 suggests that what is being born is an event or a new age.100 This theme of 'new things' being born is further developed in Isa. 45.9-11 ('the things to come'—see Chapter 5). The movement of'the blind' from darkness into light is also suggestive of YHWH giving birth (or rebirth) to those in exile. Perhaps this is the meaning of Isa. 26.19: Your dead shall live, their corpses shall rise. O dwellers in the dust, awake and sing for joy! For your dew is a radiant dew, and the earth will give birth to the shades.

Just as in Ezekiel 37 the exiles are depicted as the dead; the exiles may be the 'blind' dead who await rebirth. 5. Conclusion What is remarkable about the rhetoric of Isa. 42.8-17 is how it simultaneously applies the seemingly contradictory images of YHWH as a warrior and as a woman in labor. A warrior is a very masculine figure and destructive. Ayoledah is a very feminine figure, creative and life-giving. YHWH is both destructive and creative, both masculine and feminine. Yet the warrior is not only destructive; the warrior saves. Birth is not only creative, it is life-threatening. How very apt for the exiles is the ambiguity of destruction and creation, of salvation and bondage. YHWH dries up streams and makes streams in the desert—both signs of salvific power. YHWH destroys and creates. YHWH sends into exile and frees from bondage. The juxtaposition of the two images of warrior and yoledah brings meaning to each, by highlighting their shared entailments, the areas of coherence. The imagery invites our imaginations to discover these coherences and to understand both the warrior and the woman in labor in a new way. The idea of 'God as parent' initially defined the parameters of the present study. In view of the rhetorical finesse and particularity of this text, can we speak of this text in terms of 'God the mother?' Such a statement is overly reductionistic in light of the richness and nuances of this passage and the lively interaction of the womanin-labor image with that of the divine warrior. This language is not simply a 100. This is the most common interpretation (e.g. Smart, History, p. 89, and 'a new creation'— Luis Alonso Schokel,' Isaiah', in Robert Alter and Frank Kermode (eds), The Literary Guide to the Bible [Cambridge, MS: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1987], pp. 165-83 [178]). In later Jewish and early Christian literature the image of birth becomes a conventional image for the coming of the eschatonor an apocalyptic age (John 16.21-22; Rom. 8.22-23; Rev. 12.1-6). Knight states that 'new life is to spring just like the birth of a baby boy' (Deutero-Isaiah, p. 81). It is interesting that for Knight's image of birth the newborn is so gender-specific.

3. Like a Woman in Labor: Isaiah 42.8-17

73

derivation from a model of Mother God.101 Rather, the language arises from a distinctive rhetorical strategy, in which the language of war is expanded into the language of motherhood. The conventional expression ki-yoledah is transformed by identification with the divine warrior, YHWH. The life-giving aspect of the warrior is highlighted, as well as the powerfulness of the birthing woman. Through the interaction of images, this passage highlights the seeming silence of the period of exile, the timeliness of YHWH's salvation, the coming of a new age or new life for the exiles, and YHWH'S own passion or involvement with the situation of the people.

101. I disagree with John Schmitt' s claim that the image of God as mother is derived from Zion imagery ('The Motherhood of God and Zion as Mother', RB 92 (1985), pp. 557-69). The imagery here is the product of a very different rhetorical process than what Schmitt suggests.

Chapter 4 YHWH'S SONS AND DAUGHTERS: ISAIAH 43.1-7 Isaiah 43.1-7 is an oracle of salvation.1 This unit utilizes language and imagery, characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah, especially of chs. 40-46. Characteristic terms in 43.1-7 are 'create',2 'form',3 make',4 'do not fear',5 'redeem',6 'call by your name',7 'Holy One of Israel',8 'savior',9 'gather',10 and 'offspring'.11 Verses 5-6 refer to the scope of YHWH'S redemptive power as the east, west, north, and south, and to the ends of the earth, a typical theme of Deutero-Isaiah.12 Reference is made to ransom and to other nations, specifically (here as elsewhere) African nations.13 Water imagery is used (v. 2). Thus the passage might be said to be vintage DeuteroIsaiah. Most important for this study, this unit utilizes the language of kinship to speak o/YHWH and for YHWH. In the first half of the unit, YHWH is spoken of as a next-of-kin redeemer (7N1J, go'el) and then, in the second half, as a parent, 1. Or, according to Claus Westermann, 'the promise of salvation' which 'appears only in Deutero-Isaiah and in passages that borrow his style. Deutero-Isaiah himself developed this form by analogy to the oracle of salvation to the individual, and especially the oracle to the king as found in a large number of Assyrian texts' (Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament, trans. Keith Crim [Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991], p. 42). 2. N"O, 'create', is used 15 times in Deutero-Isaiah in the qal or niphal form: 40.26, 28; 41.20; 42.5; 43.1, 7, 15; 45. 7, 8, 12, 18; 54.16. It is used 10 times in Genesis 1-6 and 25 times elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. N"O is specifically characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah. 3. "liT, 'Form', is used 20 times by Deutero-Isaiah, usually in qal, and 41 times elsewhere. 4. ndU, 'Make', is used 30 times in qal and once in niphal, although this verb is also common throughout the Hebrew Bible. Note that at least two of the three terms N~n, "IIT, and H^U are used together in 41.20; 43.1,7; 44.2; 45.7, 9, 12, 18; 46.11. 5. 'Do not fear'appears in the masc. sing, in 41.10,13,14; 43.1,5; 44.2; in the plural in 51.7; and in the fem. sing, in 54.4 (with the form of N / rather than 7N). 6. The epithet (7813, go'el, 'redeemer') as a qal participle appears 10 times, always referring to YHWH. It appears in the qal active form 5 times, always referring to YHWH's actions. As a passive participle it appears in 51.10. 7. Or 'call by name' or'be called by name'. See 40.26; 43.1 ('your name'); 43.7 ('my name'); 44.5 ('name of Jacob'), 45.3-4 ('your name'—referring to Cyrus); and 48.1 ('name of Israel', ni.). 8. See 41.14,16,20; 43.3, 14, 15; 45.11; 47.4; 48.17; 49.7; 54.5; 55.5. This title is often used with the title ^W), go'el (in the same verse in 41.14; 43.14; 48.17; 49.7; 54.5). 9. U1271 hi. ptc., 'savior', in 43.3, 11; 45.15, 21; 47.15; 49.26. 10. f*3p, 'gather', is used 7 times. 11. I71T, 'offspring' or 'seed', is used 9 times. 12. See 41.9; 42.10; 43.5-6; 45.6; 48.20; 49.6, 12. 13. African nations are cited in 45.14 and 49.12. The 'nations' are cited 15 times.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

75

probably a father. The text also moves from the created people of God (Jacob/ Israel) to the created children of God (sons and daughters). There is movement from 'your name' to 'my name'. Thus, the movement of the text is towards a relationship of greater intimacy in the second half. Because most of the language of this unit is characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah, the uncharacteristic language is all the more striking. The unique element is the voice of YHWH speaking of 'my sons' and 'my daughters'. This is treated here as an interpretive key to the unit as a whole. Reference to 'sons' and 'daughters' interacts with elements 'that are characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah to create something new. In the Hebrew Bible as a whole, the language of YHWH'S 'sons' and 'daughters' appears only here and in Deut. 32.19. (In45.11 YHWHspeaksof'my sons' or 'my children', rather than 'sons and daughters', 49.22 refers to the 'sons' and 'daughters' of Zion, and 49.20, 25; 51.18; 54.13 [and possibly 49.17 and 54.1] mention the children or sons [Dn]D] of Zion.14 The children of Zion are implicitly the children of YHWH [see Chapter 7].)15 The explicit reference to YHWH'S sons and daughters (with the implications of the parent-child theme) is what makes this unit distinctive among the oracles of Deutero-Isaiah. The parent/child language interacts with other language and imagery in the passage in three ways. It interacts with the statements in vv. 1 and 7, which speak of calling by name and of creation. It also interacts with Deutero-Isaiah's designation of YHWH as a 7N13, go'el ('redeemer'), which appears in v. 1 (as an active verb) and is further expressed in the language of ransom in vv. 3-4. Finally, it interacts with the language of tribulation in v. 2. The focal point of the unit is v. 4a, which refers to Israel as 'precious', 'honored', and 'loved'. The parental language interacts with this center of the unit (see below for the unit's structure). The effect produced by the interweaving of these varied yet coherent elements will be examined in detail. As will be seen, the interaction of parental language with the other elements shapes the meaning of each of the elements and the unit as a whole. The various threads of this tapestry are interwoven to create a unique picture from a combination of conventional and unconventional elements. 1. Translation and Literary Structure Isaiah 43.1 -7 is a section of the larger passage 42.18 - 43.13. The beginning of the larger unit in ch. 42 sets up a context for the oracle of salvation by lamenting the situation of exile in terms of sin, bondage, destruction, and fire. 43.1 begins with the word nfll?! ('but now') which indicates both a connection and a contrast with what precedes.16 While 43.1-7 is a continuation of (specifically a response to) 14. Other uses of the term ] 3 ('son') are found in 51.12 and 52.14 as D~TK~] 3, and in 49.15 as |£33~|D ('son of the womb'). Elsewhere the term fQ ('daughter') is used as a city designation for Babylon or Zion in 47.1, 5 and 52.2 (and for 'daughters of the owl' in 43.20). 15. In Deutero-Isaiah when the exiles are referred to as the offspring of Israel, Jacob, or Abraham, the terms 'sons' and 'daughters' are never used. This pair of terms is used to refer to the offspring of either YHWH or Zion. 16. Westermann notes that it is the 1 adversative used here and in 41.8, 'which in a number of

76

Mixing Metaphors

42.18-25, it will be treated here as a distinct literary unit, characterized by a chiastic structure, and by a shift in 43.1 from third person speech about YHWH to first person speech by YHWH. The following translation format highlights its structure. AI. YHWH as Creator 'But now thus says YHWH, who created you, O Jacob, who shaped you, O Israel: Xi. Fear Not Do not fear, for I have redeemed you; BI. Name: Identity and Relationship I have called you by your name, you are mine. Cj. Passage or Movement 2 When you pass through waters, I am with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not scorch you. DI. YHWH's Self-predication 3 For I am YHWH your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior. EI. Redemption I give Egypt as your ransom. Cush and Seba in exchange for you, Fj. Precious, Loved 4 because you are precious in my sight, G. Honored and honored. ¥2- Precious, Loved and I love you. £2. Redemption I give humanity in return for you, nations in exchange for your life. X2. Fear Not 5 Do not fear, for I am with you, C2. Passage or Movement I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you; 6 I will say to the north, 'Give!' and to the south, 'Do not withhold!' Bring my sons from far away and my daughters from the ends of the earth—

psalms of lamentation indicates the change from distress to salvation in accordance with the oracle of salvation, or presupposing it' (Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary, trans. David M. G. Stalker; OTL [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969], p. 69).

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

77

62- Name: Identity and Relationship 7 everyone who is called by my name, A2. YHWH as Creator whom I created for my honor, whom I shaped, whom indeed I made.

The chiastic or concentric structure of the unit appears insofar as v. 7 mirrors v. 1, w. 5-6 mirror v. 2, and v. 4b mirrors v. 3. Verse 4a is then the focal midpoint of the passage. The first element of the chiasm is an inclusio formed by terms of creation: K"Q ('create', vv. 1, 7), "1H"1 ('shape' or 'form', w. 1, 7), and HtDU ('make', v. 7). The whole unit is framed with YHWH'S role as creator, one of Deutero-Isaiah's structuring metaphors. Verse la begins, 'But now thus says YHWH, who created you, O Jacob, who formed you, O Israel'. The unit concludes in v. 7 with the words (referring to Jacob/Israel) 'whom I created for my honor, ... whom I formed and made'. The unit is overlaid by another structure in the repeated phrase 'Do not fear' (a common formula in Deutero-Isaiah) in vv. 1 and 5.17 The structure of the unit conveys both unity and movement. The movement is from Deutero-Isaiah's characteristic kinship language (7&3, gd'al, 'redeem') after the first 'Do not fear' to intensified kinship language ('sons', 'daughters') after the second 'Do not fear', which expresses close familial ties, responsibility, and intimacy between YHWH and Israel. In a sequential reading the message unfolds as the reader moves through the text, from v. 1 to v. 7. There is movement and change. Verse 7 represents the destination of the journey begun in v. 1, a journey that has conceptually and emotionally relocated the reader. Form expresses content. The movement in structure conveys the movement in message—the passage from bondage and exile to freedom, repatriation, and restoration of relationship. The general theme of this salvation oracle is the redemption of Israel. This redemption is expressed in terms of movement—through water and fire, from the ends of the earth—and in terms of ransom, using the language of slave redemption.18 The parental language for God adds emotional intensity to DeuteroIsaiah's structuring metaphor, 7N"U, go'el ('redeemer'). In making the T'N'U, go^el (a kinsman) a parent, the emotional connection between the redeemer and the redeemed is heightened. Ironically, a negative implication is unavoidable; the enslavement of the children of a father implies either a failure of some sort or an intentional action on the part of the father. (That YHWH 'gave up Jacob to the pillager' is explicitly stated in the preceding unit in 42.24-25, which belongs with 43.1-7 as part of a larger unit.19) The parental language also acts, in conjunction with the language of naming, to express identity. Elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah, Israel is identified as God's 'servant'. Only here is Israel identified explicitly as

17. Westermann identifies this phrase as characteristic of the 'promise of salvation' borrowed from the 'oracle of salvation to the individual' {Oracles, p. 42). 18. While YHWH is often called 'redeemer' in Deutero-Isaiah, only here are the entailments of slave redemption explicitly spelled out in interaction with the root 7N3, ga'al. 19. See also Deut. 32.30, which says that YHWH 'sold' Israel.

78

Mixing Metaphors

God's sons and daughters, and called by the name of YHWH.20 While the naming dimension in w. 1 and 7 is literarily linked most closely to the language of creation, it expresses Israel's special 'kinship' relationship to YHWH. The language of 'sons' and 'daughters' expresses this kinship relationship, while the 'servant' language common elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah does not. 2. 7813, go'el (Redeemer): An Interacting Metaphor An Overview of the 7813, go'el One of the organizing structural metaphors of Deutero-Isaiah is the figure of the 7813, go* el, 'redeemer' or, more precisely, 'redeeming kinsman'. This epithet appears as a qal participle in 41. 14; 43.14; 44.6, 24; 47.4; 48.17; 49.7, 26; 54.5, 8, always referring to YHWH. It appears in the qal finite form in 43.1; 44.22, 23; 48.20; 52.9, always referring to YHWH'S actions. 7813, go'el, is one of DeuteroIsaiah's most important titles for YHWH.21 As one of Deutero-Isaiah 's structuring metaphors, it functions explicitly or implicitly throughout Isaiah 40-55, interacting with Deutero-Isaiah 's other metaphors. Thus, as a structuring metaphor it interacts with parental language for YHWH (the focus of this study). Isaiah 43. 1 -7 and 50. 1 -3 both use redemption language from the legal realm, interweaving it with father imagery for YHWH.22 The verb 783, gaal, is used in 43.1-7 with language of exchange and payment. The participle 7813, go'el, appears in 49.26, followed shortly by the parallel term iTIS, padd, in 50. 1-3 (in the form D1"7S) along with language appropriate to the 7813, go' el, image (debt language). Deutero-Isaiah 's uses of the term reflect several of the potential functions of the redeeming kinsman. Thus, a survey of the functions of the 7813, go'el, is essential. All of these functions may be subsumed under a general definition which encompasses all possible meanings: a 7813, go' el, is one who acts to ensure or restore family honor. Tryggve Mettinger compares the two terms 783, gaol, and Tl1^,pddd, both of which are often translated 'redeem'. While they appear several times in parallel (Isa. 35.9-10; 51.10; Jer. 31.11; Ps. 69.18; Hos. 13.14) and semantically overlap, they are not precisely synonymous. The term H"TS, padd, is often used to refer to the redemption of a sacrifice, such as the redemption of the first-born (Exod. 13.1116; 34.19-20; Num. 18.15-17). The term 7"83, gaal, refers more often to the redemption of the slave and the land, and emphasizes a flesh-and-blood relationship.23 Both terms appear in Deutero-Isaiah. However, it is 783, gaal, in the qal 20. Though see also 44.5 where Israel, the servant, is designated 'YHWH's'. 21. The centrality of this title and image in Deutero-Isaiah has been widely acknowledged by Stuhlmueller and others. See Carroll Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah (AnBib 45; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970), p. 99 and Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), pp. 16267. 22. The absence of explicit interaction with the 'mother' imagery for God makes sense when one considers that the realm of entailments of motherhood were generally biological and emotional rather than legal. 23. Mettinger, Search, p. 163.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

79

participle and finite forms that is especially characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah, functioning as one of its organizing, structuring metaphors. Mettinger asks why Deutero-Isaiah prefers the term 783, goal, to r\7*),pdda. He writes, One might express the difference [between the two terms] by saying that the verb padd places emphasis on the price to be paid in the course of a given transaction... whereas ga'al underlines the blood tie linking the redeemer and the redeemed.24

Thus the term 783, ga'al, emphasizes not the ransom, but that YHWH is blood kin (metaphorically speaking). The word 7813, go'el, may be translated 'next of kin' rather than 'redeemer'. The term 783, ga'al, comes from the legal context. It appears 21 times in Leviticus, only in chs. 25 and 27. Chapter 25 deals with the redemption of the land and the Hebrew debt slave, and ch. 27 with the redemption of consecrated items. 783, ga'al, also appears 7 times in Numbers 35 concerning the kinsman avenger of blood. It appears twice more in other legal material, in Deuteronomy 19, also referring to the avenger of blood.25 The term appears 18 times in the book of Ruth, mostly in chs. 3-4. Here its use seems to be related to the practice of levirate marriage in which the kinsman of a dead man marries the dead man's widow (2.20; 3.9-13; 4.1-8). It also refers to redemption of land (4.1-8). The use of the root 783, ga'al, in reference to God appears most frequently in Isaiah 40-66 (23 times). The Psalms use the term 11 times to refer to God's activity. In addition, the term appears in Exod. 6.6 and 15.13 with God as the subject. The overlap between God as 7813, go'el, in Exodus and God as 7813, go 'el, in Deutero-Isaiah will be shown below. A complete list of the functions of a 7813, go'el, in the biblical writings includes all of the following: redeemer of the debt slave, redeemer of land belonging to the kinship group, levirate husband (redemption of a dead man's lineage through his widow), blood avenger in the death of one's kin, legal advocate (on behalf of one's kin in a dispute—Prov. 23.10-11; Ps. 119.154; Lam. 3.58; Jer. 50.33-34), recipient of damages on behalf of a wronged party (kin, Num. 5.5-8), and redeemer of consecrated items (Lev. 27) (see discussion below for other textual references). The most relevant functions for Isa. 43.1-7 are the redeemer of the debt slave, the redeemer of land, and the advocate. Redemption of the Hebrew Debt Slave The redemption of the debt slave is the primary function of the 7813, go'el, in Deutero-Isaiah's use of the term. The exiles were not, in fact, debt slaves, but they are metaphorically depicted as such. In Deutero-Isaiah, Israel is implicitly understood to be enslaved by Babylon. Israel is primarily the debt slave in Deutero-Isaiah (as evoked by the use of the term 7813, go'el), quite possibly because this is the form of slavery that allows for a real possibility of redemption, 24. Mettinger, Search, p. 163. The implications of this distinction will also be explored in 50.1 3, in which some of the entailments of kin redemption are expressed in v. 1, but the root THS, padd, is used in v. 2. 25. See also Josh. 20.3, 5, 9.

80

Mixing Metaphors

and provides a framework for YHWH'S role as redeemer, a framework that entails kinship. The commonplaces of debt slave redemption can be discerned in relevant legal texts. Exodus 21 is generally regarded as the oldest of the laws dealing with the redemption of slaves. Verses 1-6 state the situation of a male Hebrew slave. He shall serve six years and in the seventh 'he shall go out a free person' (v. 2). Verses 7-11 deal with a female slave (TIDN) who has been sold by her father, apparently as a concubine. She does not have the automatic right to 'go out' from slavery after six years. However, if her master is unhappy with her, he shall let her be redeemed (rn£3, pada). If he does not treat her fairly, then she shall go out without a payment of money (compare Isa. 45.13). The emphasis is on the master's obligations, rather than on the rights and duties of kin. There is no mechanism for the redemption of the Hebrew male. The female slave may be redeemed under special circumstances. Who redeems her is unclear, although it may be her father, who sold her in the first place. The term for 'redeem' is n~13,padd. Deuteronomy 15.12-17, like Exodus 21, is concerned with the obligations of the slave owner, rather than with the slave's kin. It states that a Hebrew slave, male or female, shall be set free in the seventh year. After stipulating that male slaves shall receive provisions, the text adds what is either a rationale for freeing the slave, a rationale for providing for the slave, or both: 'Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and YHWH your God redeemed (HIS, pada) you' (v. 15). Then, in what seems to be an afterthought, it is stipulated, 'You shall do the same with regard to your female slave' (v. 17). As in Exodus, redemption is expressed by the root n"l^,pddd. Again, there is no emphasis on kinship. But the correlation made here between the freeing of the Hebrew slave and the exodus tradition is also significant for Isaiah 43, as will be shown. The jubilee laws of Leviticus 25 provide the background for the root 7^3, gaol, in reference to slave redemption. In this chapter the active verb T>N3, gd^al, and its noun form (!"T71fcW, 'redemption') are used to describe the redemption of the debt slave and of the family land.26 The laws regarding the debt slaves are in w. 39-55. Verses 39-46 deal with a situation in which someone must sell himself and, apparently, his children, to his own relative. In this circumstance, the relative who buys his own kin must treat him as a hired or bound laborer rather than as a slave, although the slave is still under the authority of purchaser until the jubilee. The 26. The dating of Leviticus 25, and the identification of its various layers, is a source of debate. It may be post-exilic. However, Norman Gottwald argues, 'Apart, perhaps, from the extremely questionable provision for release of debt in the year of Jubilee, the laws on the go'el in the Holiness Code of Leviticus seem to reflect old conditions' (The Tribes ofYahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel, 1250-1050 B.C.E. [Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1979], p. 264). Thus, Leviticus 25 can provide sociological background for ancient customs concerning the duties of a family member to act on behalf of another family member and on behalf of the family concerning land ownership. While the particulars of the 50th-year jubilee may well be post-exilic, the language of the redemption of kin would have likely been familiar at the time of the exile. (The proclamation of liberty and return to ancestral lands after 49 years in Lev. 25.10 does seem to be a post-exilic allusion to, or reflection on, the exile, which, if one dates it from the destruction of Jerusalem to the edict of Cyrus, is 49 years.)

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

81

assumption seems to be that the kinsman is doing the debt slave a service by sparing him from becoming enslaved to an outsider or alien, and by treating him as a free man. Note the connection again to the exodus from Egypt. The law adds in v. 42 (YHWH's voice), 'For they are my servants [or 'slaves'], whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves are sold'. Leviticus 25.47-55 deals with a situation in which a man has sold himself to an alien. Verses 48-49 say: after they have sold themselves they shall have the right of redemption; one of their brothers may redeem (7fcW, ga'al) them, or their uncle or their uncle's son may redeem them, or anyone of their family who is of their ownflesh may redeem them; or if they prosper they may redeem themselves.

There is no mention in Leviticus 25 of the father's right of redemption. Is the father ever the redeeming kinsman? Leviticus 25 suggests that he is not.27 What explains this absence? Three possible situations may apply. Perhaps the father is deceased (see 2 Kgs 4.1-2) or has no means. (A father with means would presumably have prevented the sale of his son for debts in the first place.) Or perhaps the father has means, but desires that the son be sold into slavery, for example as a punishment for failing to honor his father as required by law (maybe it was the father who sold the son)—but it is doubtful that in such a case a kinsman would redeem him. Were the Israelites slaves in Babylon? Muhammad Dandamaev argues that most of the exiles were probably not given actual slave status: Apparently ,.. not all persons taken to Babylonia were turned into slaves ... In 597 and 587 BC, about twelve thousand persons, not counting women and children, were deported from Jerusalem and sent to Babylonia. Among these prisoners were no less than a thousand craftsmen and seven thousand soldiers [2 Kings 24.14-16]... They cannot... be classified as slaves, and legally they were not considered to be such.28

Dandamaev cites the Assyrian exile of 27,000 Israelites in 722 BCE under Sargon II as a scenario for the status of the exiles in Babylon: Some of Ashurbanipal's prisoners of war were distributed among various Assyrian cities or included in the palace economy, but to most he allotted land to work independently, obliging them to pay the treasury a certain share of the harvest.29

The Assyrian precedent seems the most likely situation for many of the exiles in Babylon. Dandamaev argues that most agricultural work was done in Babylon by free laborers rather than by slaves, because of the difficulty of overseeing their work and the great frequency of escape in such situations. It was not practical for slaves to be used as field workers when free labor was cheap and tenant farming

27. Isaiah 63.16 (Trito-Isaiah), however, juxtaposes 'father' and 'redeemer': 'you, O YHWH, are our father; our Redeemer from of old is your name'. 28. Muhammad A. Dandamaev, Slavery in Babylonia: From Nabopolassar to Alexander the Great (626-331 BC) (DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 1984), p. 563. 29. Dandamaev, Slavery, p. 564, n. 7.

82

Mixing Metaphors

produced better results for the landowners.30 Gottwald envisions 'compact groups settled on deserted agricultural sites in Babylonia' which he calls 'detention camps'.31 Thus, many of the Judahites may have been tenant farmers. Many other exiles were likely put to work as wage laborers for state building projects. This does not exclude the possibility that some Judahites were made temple or royal slaves, especially if they had special skills as artisans that could be put to use. Gottwald speculates that over time 'a fair number may have been enlisted in NeoBabylonian governmental service'.32 Jon Berquist argues that the exiles were relocated in two major groups, the agricultural communities reflected in Ezekiel and those relocated in the city of Babylon. Berquist sees the exilic community reflected in Deutero-Isaiah as those relocated in the city of Babylon, and possibly working for the Babylonian temple itself.33 While the actual conditions and status of the exiles cannot be determined with any certainty, what can be determined to some extent is how they spoke of their own status. What paradigms were used to express their perception of their own situation? Jeremiah's metaphor of the good figs (ch. 24) and Ezekiel's image of the remnant with a new heart (11.14-25) are not picked up by Deutero-Isaiah. Rather, Deutero-Isaiah employs a 'prison' paradigm (42.6-7,22; 49.9; 43.14)34 along with the images of 'blindness', 'darkness', and 'deafness'.35 But most dominant in Deutero-Isaiah is the 'servant/slave' paradigm. While the term "QI7 ('servant/ slave') is quite broad in its sense, Deutero-Isaiah calls Israel YHWH'S "TDI7 ('servant/slave') and repeatedly states that YHWH is Israel's vKU, go'el, showing that since Israel is YHWH'S servant Israel is thus, implicitly, not to be Babylon's slave. Redemption of the Land Leviticus 25 also deals with the redemption of the land in the year of jubilee. Verse 25 stipulates, 'If anyone of your kin falls into difficulty and sells a piece of property, then the next of kin shall come and redeem what the relative has sold'. This land does not necessarily go to the original owner, but is kept in the family. This practice was known in the pre-exilic period, as indicated by Jeremiah 32. In 30. Dandamaev, Slavery, p. 564. 31. Norman Gottwald, The Hebrew Bible: A Socio-literary Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), pp. 425-26. 32. Gottwald, The Hebrew Bible, p. 426. 33. Jon Berquist, Judaism in Persia's Shadow: A Social and Historical Approach (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), p. 16. 34. This image is primarily metaphorical, since Babylon would hardly have housed thousands of Judahite prisoners of war in prisons (although 2 Kings reports that King Jehoiachin was placed in 'prison' when taken into exile and Jeremiah 52 reports that King Zedekiah was put in prison until his death [52.11]). 35. See Daniel L. Smith, Religion of the Landless: The Social Context of the Babylonian Exile (Bloomington, IN: Meyer Stone Books, 1989), pp. 171 -74. Smith observes, 'It is interesting to note that in Isa. 49.9 and Ps. 146.7c-8a, the combination of release from prison, with "opening eyes" or "sight to the blind" is common (cf. Zech. 9.12)' (171). He adds, 'The experience of exile was compared to prison, and liberation was seen as release from that prison, "opening the eyes of the imprisoned" ', (174).

4. YHWH 's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

83

Ruth 4, the nearest relative of Ruth's dead husband is given the first opportunity to buy the field of his dead kinsman (Ruth 4.1-6). Other references to land redemption are found in Hos. 13.14, Mic. 4.10, and Ezek. 11.15. It should be noted that debt slavery and loss of land are closely related. Gregory Chirichigno observes, 'free citizens could easily become semifree citizens if they lost their means of production (e.g. their land)'.36 Without land, a peasant was destined to become a debt slave. YHWH'S role as redeemer of the land is not explicit in Deutero-Isaiah. It is, however, implicit, first of all, in YHWH'S promises to return the people to the land in chs. 40-46, although the return emphasizes such things as the 'gathering' of the people, with little reference to the destination (43.6; 44.26,28; 45.13). Second, it is implicit in YHWH's role as Zion's redeemer, Zion representing both the people and a geographical area to which the people shall return (49.16-23; 54.1-3). Advocacy on Behalf of One's Kin in the Courts This function of the redeemer appears in Prov. 23.10-11: 'Do not remove an ancient landmark or encroach on the fields of orphans, for their redeemer (7K"U, go'el) is strong; he "willplead their cause against you'. In Ps. 119.154, Lam. 3.58, and Jer. 50.33-34, YHWH is clearly the TW3, go'el, who will plead the case of the oppressed: Plead my cause and redeem me; give me life according to your promise. (Ps. 119.154) You have taken up my cause, O Lord, you have redeemed my life ... (Lam. 3.58) Thus says YHWH of hosts: 'The people of Israel are oppressed, and so too are the people of Judah; all their captors have held them fast and refuse to let them go. Their Redeemer (/^13, go'e/) is strong; YHWH of hosts is his name. He will surely plead their cause, that he may give rest to the earth, but unrest to the inhabitants of Babylon. (Jer. 50.33-34)

In Deutero-Isaiah, there are also several examples of YHWH acting to defend Israel or Zion against accusers and oppressors: 41.11-14; 49.25-26; 50.7-9; and 51.22. Isa. 49.25-26 is the most explicit expression in Deutero-Isaiah of this advocacy function of the vK"U, go'el: But thus says YHWH.. .1 will contend with those who contend with you, and I will save your children... Then all flesh shall know that I am YHWH your Savior, and your Redeemer (TW3, go"el), the Mighty One of Jacob. (49.25-26)

Isa. 43.1-7 has echoes of advocacy as well. The references to water and fire in v. 2 arguably have implications of the judicial ordeal. Thus Israel is the accused whom YHWH acquits as their advocate (7N13, go'el), and as the one who brings them successfully through the ordeal, thus proclaiming them not guilty.

36. Gregory Chirichigno, Debt-Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East (JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), p. 50.

84

Mixing Metaphors

Honor A 7^13, go'el, is one who acts to ensure or restore family honor. Honor is the value or esteem of individuals or a group in the eyes of the larger society (other individuals and groups), according to the commonly accepted values of what is honored in society. Shame is the loss of honor in the eyes of society.37 As a culture in which identity was more corporate than individual, honor and shame in ancient Israel were social experiences of the group—family, clan, tribe, or nation. The 7N13, go"el, was a family member who acted in various roles to ensure that the honor of the family was maintained, or restored when diminished. This often involved restoring or defending the honor of individuals in the group, through actions as varied as redeeming the debt slave, providing children for a man who died childless (levirate marriage), or avenging a murder. Bruce Malina writes: Throughout the Bible, concern with 'redemption' is always about restoring and maintaining the honor of a family. Acts of redemption are rooted in a society concerned with honor, with the restoration of lost honor and the maintenance of regained honor ... the family member who restores the honor of the family head or of the family in general is called a 'redeemer' (Hebrew, go W).38

Throughout Deutero-Isaiah concerns about honor and shame are expressed. YHWH will put to shame Israel's enemies and their gods. Zion is portrayed as a woman shamed by loss of husband (e.g. 49.14; 50.1; 54.4, 8) and childlessness (e.g. 49.2; 51.18; 54.1). YHWH, her 7^13, go'el, must reverse her shame (49.26; 52.9; 54.5-8). The Servant of YHWH is one who has been put to shame (50.6-7; 53.2-4). In Isaiah 43.1-7 YHWH tells Israel 'y°u are honored' (v. 4—the center of the concentric structure). As Israel's kinsman and father, the restoration of honor to Israel is also for the honor of YHWH. YHWH must redeem Israel for his own name's sake (for his own honor; see 43:25; 48.10-11). Conclusion The redeemer of the slave is the most crucial meaning of the term ;>N13, go'el, in Deutero-Isaiah. Israel is enslaved by Babylon. In Isa. 43.1 YHWH proclaims 'I have redeemed you'. In 43.1-7, YHWH'S role as vN13, go'el, means that Israel is YHWH's kin (more specifically shown to be YHWH'S sons and daughters in v. 6). These sons and daughters are enslaved by Babylon. YHWH redeems Israel by 37. This definition draws on that of Julian Pitt-Rivers who defines honor as 'the value of a person in his own eyes, but also in the eyes of his society', ('Honour and Social Status', in J. G. Peristiany [ed.], Honour and Shame: The Values of Mediterranean Society [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966], pp. 19-77 [21]. Biblical scholars' attention to the categories of honor and shame in biblical studies owes much to Bruce Malina, especially his book The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural Anthropology (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981). For use of the categories of honor and shame in Hebrew Bible studies see Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin (eds.), Honor and Shame in the World of the Bible (Semeia 68; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature 1996). 38. Bruce J. Malina, Windows on the World of Jesus (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992), p. 6.

4. YHWH 's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

85

ransoming it. In w. 3-4 YHWH says, 'I give Egypt as your ransom, Ethiopia and Seba in exchange for you ... I give people in return for you, nations in exchange for your life'. YHWH acts as redeemer in restoring honor to Israel. Verse 4 proclaims 'you are precious in my sight, and honored'. These entailments of redemption thus expand on YHWH'S statement in 43.1, 'Do not fear, for I have redeemed you'. 3. Exposition of Isaiah 43.1-7 The Image of YHWH as Creator (w. 1, 7) (A,; A 2 ) Verses 1 and 7 frame the unit with creator language: who created you ... who shaped you ... (v. 1). whom I created, whom I shaped, whom indeed I made. (v. 7)

YHWH as creator is one of Deutero-Isaiah's structuring metaphors. This unit uses all three verbs that run through Deutero-Isaiah: N"Q ('create'); HtDl} ('make'); and ~liT ('shape'). The verb iVQ ('create') is especially characteristic of DeuteroIsaiah. In the Hebrew Bible this verb has only YHWH as the subject. The verb "liT ('shape') metaphorically depicts YHWH'S creative work as that of an artisan, although in ch. 43 the connection is not as explicit as elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah (see Chapter 5). The use of creation language is explicitly connected to the language of naming in v. 7. There is a shift from v. 1 to v. 7. The shift is from the third person and participle forms in v. la, to YHWH speaking in the first person active form in v. 7. The grammatical shift to the first person active makes v. 7 a rhetorically stronger statement of YHWH'S relationship to Israel as its creator. It is further intensified by the addition of a third term, H&U ('make'). The addition of another verb along with the intensifier *}& strengthens and intensifies the characterization of YHWH as Jacob's creator. The overlap of the creator image and the parent image will be explored more fully in Chapter 5. (See also Deut. 32.6; Isa. 64.8.) 'Do not fear' (w. Iba, 5 a) (Xl5 X2) Do not fear, for I have redeemed (7tW, ga'al) you ... (v. Iba) Do not fear, for I am with you ... (v. 5a).

YHWH'S speech begins with the words 'Do not fear, for I have redeemed you'.39 Verses 3-4 spell out the entailments of the kinsman who is buying his relative out of debt slavery and, perhaps, redeeming the family land. The language of'redeem' is expanded on in the concepts of ransom or exchange in vv. 3-4. Of the possible functions of the ^tVU, go'el, those that are highlighted here are the redemption of the debt slave, restoration of honor (w. 4, 7) and, implicitly, through the ingathering of the exiles, the restoration of the land inheritance.

39. 43.1-7 departs from Deutero-Isaiah's usual practice of using the participle vN13, go"el. Instead, the qal perfect verb 7N3, ga^al, is used.

86

Mixing Metaphors

Verse 5 begins, as does v. Ib, with the words 'Do not fear'. While this phrase in v. 1 is followed by the phrase 'for I have redeemed you', here it is followed by the phrase 'for I am with you', identical to 2aa (but prefixed by 3). There is no equivalent to the verb viW, ga'al (in v. 1) in v. 5a. The mirroring concept in the concentric structure is that YHWH is the father of his 'sons' and 'daughters' (v. 6). The kinship ties are intensified from the general next of kin, the 7813, go 'el, to the closer and more particular relationship, the father. The repetition of'Do not fear' in 5a introduces the whole second half of the unit with its father imagery. Verse 5a marks the transition from redemption language to parent-child language. Thus 'Do not fear, for I have redeemed you' (v. 1) introduces the section that uses ransom and exchange language. 'Do not fear, for I am with you' (v. 5) introduces the parent-child imagery. The Metaphor of Name: Identity and Relationship (vv. 1, 7) (Bi, B2) I have called you40 by your name, you41 are mine. (v. 1) .. .everyone who is called by my name ... (v. 7).

In 43.1, YHWH calls Jacob by Jacob's name, but note that in the mirroring passage (v. 7), YHWH refers to the Israelites as those 'who are called by my name'. The phrase in v. 1, 'I have called you by your name', is not a familial or kinship phrase per se. (The formula for a parent naming a child is 'I have called his/your name PN', without prepositions.42) The form here is 'to call PN by name' or 'to call PN by his name' and indicates familiarity (and recognition)—that YHWH knows Jacob by name. It is also connected to YHWH's status as creator. (See 40.26 for a similar form: he calls all of them by name.)43 The mirroring verse (v. 7) alters the form. Jacob is called by 'my' (YHWH's) name. The form is of someone (or something) being called by someone else's name, for example, 'O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel' (Isa. 48.1), where this form is related to parental 40. The second person masc. sing, suffix ('you') is not in the MT but is found in some versions. 41. The second person is masc. sing, throughout this unit. 42. The typical formula used in the Hebrew Bible by a parent in naming a child is 'PNj (parent) called the name of the child PN2', for example, 'She called his name Ben Oni' (Gen. 35.18). This is often followed by an explanation of the meaning of the name. This formula appears many times in Genesis as well as in Hosea 1. While there is some disagreement as to whether naming was a maternal or a paternal role, biblical examples themselves seem to support the primacy of the mother in naming. This form is also used with YHWH as the naming subject. In Gen. 5.2 YHWH calls 'their' name adam. See also Jer. 11.16: 'YHWH called your [Judah's] name, "A green olive tree" '. This formula also appears in connection with royal naming: Jer. 23.5-6; Isa. 9.6. 43. These formulae are used of Cyrus in 45.3: 'I called your name'. Cyrus is addressed: 'that you will know that it is I, YHWH, who call [you] by your name'. The next verse uses a similar formula: 'I call you by your name, I title you, though you do not know me'. See also Isa. 41.25, variant b in BHS, in which YHWH addresses Cyrus. Compare Exod. 31.2 and 35.20: 'I have called Bizalel by name'. This represents the calling of the temple artisan, Bizalel—the only one of the cult personnel to be 'called by name'. This form also appears in Est. 2.14, in which the girls of the harem had to be summoned by the king, 'called by name'. Cities are also called by name in Josh. 21.9. Related to this is the phrase that appears in Exod. 33.12 and 17, in which YHWH says to Moses, 'I have known you by name', and 'I know you by name'.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

87

language, adding (following an emended text) 'who came forth from the loins of Judah'. Isa. 44.5 speaks of the person 'who is called by the name of Jacob'.44 In Isa. 41.25 Cyrus (it seems) is 'called by my name' (although the MT is pointed 'who calls upon my name'). The move from 'your name' to 'my name' rhetorically intensifies the relationship between YHWH and Jacob. To be 'called by YHWH'S name' is, conventionally, to belong to YHWH in the sense of being a worshiper, that is, servant, of YHWH. However, the phrase 'called by my name' interacts with the language of the parent-child relationship in the preceding verse. Children are identified by their father's name.45 In 43.1-7 the SpIT"^ ('sons of Jacob') become the miT^n. ('sons of YHWH'). YHWH becomes the redeeming father, conveying a closer bond, and honor as well. Passage or Movement (vv. 2, 5-6) (Q, C2) When you pass through waters, I am with you, and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not scorch you. (v. 2) I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you; I will say to the north, 'Give!' and to the south, 'Do not withhold!' Bring my sons from far away and my daughters from the end of the earth ...' (vv. 5-6)

Verse 2 might metaphorically describe both the actual experience of exile in Babylon and the anticipated journey out of Babylon back to Judah. As will be shown, the former reading (the exile itself) is most strongly supported by the multiple layers of meaning in this verse. The experience of exile in Babylon is described in terms of water and fire. Israel is reassured that it will survive this ordeal. The language implies the crossing of boundaries. A full discussion of this verse, as it interacts with the unit's major metaphors, will be found in section 4 below. In v. 5 YHWH goes on to speak of the 'seed' or 'offspring' of Jacob. In using the language of offspring, Deutero-Isaiah generally shows a preference for the phrase 'seed of Jacob' or 'seed of Israel', instead of the much more conventional Hebrew phrase 7N"l&71~'1]n ('children of Israel'—possibly a dead metaphor).46 'Seed of Israel' or 'seed of Jacob' evokes the ideas of kinship and fertility, thus of the survival of the family. Verse 6 marks the important transition from Jacob's seed to YHWH's sons and daughters—the second part of the passage conveys a more intimate relationship. The ingathering is described as a future event. In 41.8-10 YHWH speaks in similar language of the past, how he had brought and called Israel, 44. The Masoretic pointing (qal) makes it unclear who is doing the calling. The text can be alternatively pointed as a passive (ni.). 45. Dana M. Pike, HBD (1985), s.v. 'Names', pp. 682-84 (683). 46. See Isa. 41.8; 44.3; 45.19, 25; 48.19; 53.10; 54.3.

88

Mixing Metaphors

the seed of Abraham, from the ends of the earth. Now in ch. 43 YHWH proclaims this to be a future event. If YHWH could do it before, YHWH can do it again.47 'Do not withhold' (N73) connotes imprisonment and is part of the semantic field of imprisonment terms which metaphorically refers to the exile.48 The noun form refers, with JTD, to the house of restraint, i.e. as prison, in Isa. 42.7 and 42.22. YHWH's Self-predication (v. 3a) (D) For I am YHWH your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior.

Verse 3 a is typical of Deutero-Isaiah in using self-predication to emphasize YHWH'S ability to save Israel. It functions here to convey that it is indeed within YHWH'S power and intent to enable Israel to cross this boundary, to survive this ordeal. It has no structurally mirroring element in the chiasm. However, when read as the concluding argument to v. 2, it explains how YHWH is able to bring about the successful boundary crossing. Its implicit mirroring image is the image of YHWH as Israel's father who is able to bring sons and daughters from north, south, east, and west. Redemption (vv. 3b, 4b) (E1} E2) I give Egypt as your ransom ("123, kpr), Cush and Seba in exchange (finn, tht) for you ... (3b) I give humanity in return for you (Tinn, tht), nations in exchange for (finn, tht) your life. (4b)

Verses 3b and 4b speak of exchange and ransom. A payment or a transaction is an entailment of kinsman redemption from slavery. YHWH's actions in the role of next of kin are thus delineated—he will purchase the freedom of Jacob. YHWH will buy Israel out of the state of slavery. The terms that speak of such a transaction individually carry even richer connotations and functions. The terms "ISIS, koper, andfinn, tht, are especially rich. "IS1D, koper, is often translated 'ransom'. Adrien Schenker explores the noun's uses to obtain a more exact definition.49 He notes that in Exod. 21.28-32 it is used with the term ]TH5J, pidyon ('ransom', from PHS, padd; see also Ps. 49.8 where 1S1ID, koper, and]"P"IS,;?/dy<5n, appear in parallel). Upon examining other biblical material, he concludes first of all that 1S1D, koper, and ] VIS, pidyon, have related meanings although they are not synonymous. The ]V1S3, pidyon, is a settlement paid for damages or the price of repurchase, perhaps best understood as a simple monetary transaction (e.g. the price of the life of a guilty party). Schenker writes, 'The pidyon is the amount [paid] regarded as the price for the redemption of the life of the guilty party who, without this price, 47. And wasn't Abraham called from Babylon, after all (according to one tradition)? (See Gen. 11.28,31; 15.7.) 48. Daniel L. Smith-Christopher, A Biblical Theology of Exile (Overtures to Biblical Theology; Minneapolis, Augsburg Fortress Press, 2002), p. 72. 49. Adrien Schenker, 'Kopher et expiation', Bib 63 (1982), pp. 32-46.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

89

would be condemned to die'.50 The word "12113, koper, is related to this but not synonymous with it. A "151ID, koper, provides for the restoration of relationship. The relationship has been broken or damaged by one (guilty) party who has wronged another (innocent) party. Schenker interprets "151D, koper, as the price of 'expiation' when there is 'rupture between two groups, that of the guilty party and that of the victim' .51 He says, further, that such an 'expiation' is 'for the purpose of reconciliation'.52 Thus, the use of "1213, koper in Isa. 43.3-4 suggests that YHWH is providing the means by which Israel may be reconciled to him. (Note that it is 'your ransom', not 'my ransom'. Israel is the guilty party for whom payment is made.) Israel's guilt was clearly stated in Isa. 42.24: Who gave up Jacob to the spoiler, and Israel to the robbers? Was it not YHWH, against whom we have sinned, in whose ways they would not walk, and whose law they would not obey?

The "1213, koper, in Isaiah 43, then, partially overlaps with the function of the 7N13, go'el, who is an advocate that seeks the vindication of his kinsman. Schenker cites especially Exod. 21.29-30, Gen. 32.21, and Prov. 16.14 to argue that the "1513, koper, averts violence by appeasing the rage of the wronged party and establishing calm and peace.53 Schenker's recognition of the role of the "1513, koper, in averting rage connects the use of "1513, koper, in 43.3 with Isa. 42.25: 'So he [YHWH] poured upon him [Israel] the heat of his anger'. Thus, it is YHWH'S own rage that is averted, it is the violence due Israel that is averted, and it is the relationship between Israel and YHWH that is restored. Schenker emphasizes that the "1513, koper, is a legal alternative to the death of a guilty party.54 There is,

50. 'Ispidyon considere la somme comme le prix du rachat de la vie de la personne coupable, qui sans ce prix serait condamnee a mort' (Schenker, 'Kopher', p. 45). 51. 'la rupture entre les deux groupes, celui du coupable et celui de la victime'. (Schenker, 'Kopher', p. 45). 52. 'en vue d'une reconciliation' (Schenker, 'Kopher', p. 45). 53. Schenker, 'Kopher', pp. 36-37: 'En Gen. 32,21 et Prov. 16,14 le verbe KPR signifie done 1'action par laquelle quelqu'un ... amene une personne en colere ... se calmer et a renoncer a une reaction violente a 1'egard d'une personne fautive'. ('In Gen. 32.21 and Prov. 16.14 the verb KPR signifies, then, an action by which someone ... gets an angry person ... to calm down and to relinquish any violent reaction towards a person in the wrong'.) 54. Schenker, 'Kopher', p. 37. See Exod. 21.30. Of Isa. 43.3 Schenker says, 'Dans la definition du koper proposee ci-dessus, nous comprenons que Dieu ne reculera devant aucune somme a payer afin d'obtenir pour Israel la paix ou ... la solution clemente, a la place du chatiment severe. L'image est celle d'un proces ou Israel, sur le bane de 1'accuse, risque d'encourir la peine de mort... C'est a ce moment du proces qu'intervient Dieu en prenant sur lui les frais de la solution de rechange (du koper), qui remplacera la sentence capitale par le paiement d'une somme'. ('According to the definition of the koper proposed above, we understand that God does not shrink from any amount of payment in order to obtain peace or a merciful resolution for Israel in place of severe punishment. The image is that of a trial in which Israel, on the bench of the accused, is at risk of the death penalty ... It is at this moment in the trial that God intervenes in taking on himself the costs of an alternative solution (by koper), which replaces the death sentence with the payment of a sum'; ('Kopher', p. 39.)

90

Mixing Metaphors

perhaps, a certain illogic to the proposition that YHWH provides the ransom to assuage his own anger, but the image of YHWH as both one who punishes and one who redeems must allow for this.55 finn, tht (three times in w. 3-4), may be translated simply 'instead of. But in Gen. 22.13 Abraham offers a ram as a burnt offering instead of (PI fin, tht) his son, Isaac. This ties the term in with the concept of the redemption (T\1^,padd) of the first-born from sacrifice (see Exod. 13.11-16). Schenker gives good reasons for thinking that Jinn, tht, means an exchange, not a substitute for ('au lieu de'), citing Gen. 30.15; Exod. 21.26; 1 Sam. 2.20; etc.. He conveys this in his translation of Isa. 43.3b: 'I give (or: I have given) Egypt as the price of appeasement for you, Cush and Seba in exchange for you (or: in compensation for you)'.56 The significance of this distinction is this: were the nations given in lieu of Israel, then Israel would be spared from any ordeal. However, if they are given in exchange, the implication is that Israel is in need of redemption from the midst of their ordeal. Specific nations are mentioned in v. 3b: Egypt, Cush, and Seba. Some scholars seek a historic anchor for the giving of Egypt to Persia to secure Israel's redemption.57 However, these nations are better understood by their literary associations. Egypt and Cush are often paired together in prophetic literature.58 They are depicted as having great military power and wealth.59 In Isa. 45.14 these three nations are identified with their wealth and merchandise. For Deutero-Isaiah the giving of these nations is thus the payment of a great price. Gen. 10.7-10 associates Seba, Babel, and Accad with Cush (the father of Nimrod). Thus, there is a traditional association of Seba and Cush with Babylon. The mirroring verse, 4b, shifts from specific nations to the more general terms DIN ('humanity')60 and ITQN ('nations'). Precious, Loved, and Honored (v. 4) (Fi, G, Fa) because you are precious in my sight, and honored, and I love you.

The center of the entire concentric unit is YHWH'S statement 'You are honored (ni.)' or 'You have been honored'. Placed between YHWH'S T statements ('You are precious in my eyes' and '/love you'), the implication is that Israel's honor 55. One accepted Christian understanding of atonement is that God provides the ransom to satisfy his own demands for a payment for sin. 56. '[J]e donne (ou: j'ai donne) en prix d'apaisement pour toi 1'Egypte, Koush et Seba en echange de toi (ou: en contrepartie pour toi)' (Schenker, 'Kopher', p. 40). 57. Namely, an anticipated conquest of those nations by Cyrus. See, for example, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55, A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 19A; New York: Doubleday, 2000), p. 222. 58. There are historical reasons for this, that is, periods of close alliance (see John H. Hayes and J. Maxwell Miller, A History of Ancient Israel and Judah [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986], pp. 366-68). 59. Job 28.19; Ezek. 30.4; Nah. 3.9; Dan. 12.43; 2 Chron. 16.8. 60. Which D. Winton Thomas (BHS, p. 741) suggests emending to mOTN ('lands').

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

91

comes from YHWH. YHWH (as viVU, go'el) has restored the honor of an Israel shamed by defeat, enslavement, and exile. 4. YHWH as Father and Redeemer and the Journey through Water and Fire The father imagery in Isaiah 43 has strong areas of coherence with the image of redeeming kinsman, both images expressing kinship relations. These two images also function together with the language of passage through water and fire to highlight additional areas of coherence. Verse 2 uses figurative language to describe the experience (either current or future) of tribulation: When you pass through waters, I am with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not scorch you.

The water and fire imagery, taken in isolation, may refer to any kind of trial or tribulation. It may also refer to purification, and it is additionally evocative of the practice of 'ordeal' in Israel and the ancient Near East, by which an accused person is either condemned or acquitted by the deity/deities. Furthermore, the fire imagery may be evocative of the ritual of sacrifice and dedication. The interaction of the water imagery with the redeemer and the parent-child images are evocative of the exodus from Egypt. These potential readings will be discussed more fully below. The significance of the water and fire need not be limited to a single referent. These images may resonate at multiple levels. Tribulation The simplest reading of 43.2 is that the exile itself is a tribulation—the water and fire—through which Israel must pass.61 Reading this as general tribulation makes no particular connection to parental imagery. The water imagery is also used in Isa. 47.2b to describe the tribulation that Babylon (personified as a woman) will experience as punishment for her evil:' Strip off your robe, uncover your legs, pass through the rivers. Your nakedness shall be uncovered, and your shame shall be seen'. Babylon will go through what she has put the exiles through (47.2b-31). Water is characteristic of Babylon—a land of great rivers and many canals. These physical characteristics find their way into literary conventions for Babylon and Assyria, for example Jer. 51.13a and Isa. 8.7-S.62 Water here signifies the exile in Babylon itself. Fire imagery is conventionally used to describe the bondage in Egypt in references to the 'furnace',63 and may be applied, by analogy, to Babylon. 61. Westermann says, 'Water and fire stand for dangers from any element, as in Ps. 66.12' (Isaiah 40-66, p. 118). 62. Jer. 51.13 addresses Babylon: 'You [fern, sing.] who live by mighty waters'. Isa. 8.7-8 says, 'therefore the Lord is bringing up against it [Judah] the mighty flood waters of the River, the king of Assyria and all his glory; it will rise above all its channels and overflow all its banks; it will sweep on into Judah as a flood, and, pouring over, it will reach up to the neck'. 63. Deut. 4.20; 1 Kgs 8.51; Jer. 11.4.

92

Mixing Metaphors

In the preceding unit (part of the same larger unit), however, fire imagery is linked to YHWH'S wrath (42.25). The use of fire (and associated terms) is common in the Hebrew Bible to describe YHWH'S wrath (e.g. Isa. 50.11). Water is also linked to destructive wrath (Exod. 15.1-12), especially through the word ^tO^ ('overwhelm').64 The combined imagery of the fire and the overwhelming stream is found in Isa. 30.27-28, where it describes the destroying wrath of YHWH. Thus, 43.2 may easily be read as tribulation suffered as a result of this wrath, that is, the exile ordained by YHWH in response to Israel's sin.65 YHWH affirms that the tribulation is real, and may even be divinely sent. But he assures the people that they will survive because 'I am with you'. Purification or Refinement At the same time, the exile experience is interpreted in the Hebrew Bible as having a greater significance than simply tribulation. The language here is evocative of a transforming experience (especially the verb "131?, 'abar, 'pass through'), in which the people are tested, purged, and strengthened as silver or gold is refined by fire and as metals captured as booty are purified. Ezekiel uses the refining fire as a metaphor for the judgment of Judah, the fire representing YHWH'S wrath in Ezek. 22.18-22. Deutero-Isaiah also uses this imagery in 48.8-11, clearly depicting the purification or refinement of Israel as YHWH'S response to Israel's rebellion (for his name's sake) and a restoration of YHWH'S honor: 8b3

. . .from birth you were called a rebel. For my name's sake I defer my anger, for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you, so that I may not cut you off. '°See, I have refined you, but not like silver; I have tested66 you in the furnace of adversity. "For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for why should my name be profaned? My glory [honor] I will not give to another. 9

The idea of refining is more explicitly stated in a similar text, Psalm 66, which sees either the exodus, that is, the journey out of Egypt, or the time of bondage as a purifying experience: 6

He turned the sea into dry land; they passed through the river on foot . . . 9b . . .[he] has not let our feet slip. w Foryou, O God, have tested us; you have tried us as silver is tried. "You brought us into the net; you laid burdens on our backs; 64. See 43.8; 54.8 (a variant form, ^HE); see BDB, p. 1 009). This term describes punishment in Isa. 28.2, 15, 17, 18. It describes invading armies in Isa. 8.8, Jer. 47.2, and Dan. 1 1.10, 22, 26, 40. 65. For references to Israel's sin see 40.2; 42.24; 43.22-28; 48.8-11; 50.1. 66. "1PQ; for silver in fire, see Prov. 10.20.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 4 3.1-7

93

12

you let people ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water; yet you have brought us out to a spacious place.

In Psalm 66 God's people go through fire and water. This passage is implicitly associated with the exodus (the journey out of Egypt) as well as with oppression (the bondage) itself.67 The purifying fire and water are also connected with ritual dedication in Num. 31.22-23, which speaks of the dedication ("QU, 'abar, hi.) of Midianite booty:68 gold, silver, bronze, iron, tin, and lead—everything that can withstand fire, shall be passed through fire, and it shall be clean. Nevertheless, it shall also be purified with the water for purification; and whatever cannot withstand fire, shall be passed through the water.

In this text, the purification of metal objects functions within the context of holy war, in which selected war booty is dedicated to YHWH through cleansing and everything else is dedicated to YHWH through destruction by fire.69 Passing through fire and water represents both purification and dedication to YHWH. Daniel Smith applies sociological data to exilic and post-exilic purity laws. He supports the view that the Priestly (P) material advocating 'separation' represents a response to life in exile. The elaboration of purity laws is a 'mechanism of survival' for the exiles. The purity laws are 'a creative, Priestly mechanism of social survival and maintenance' to provide for the maintenance of identity.10 Thus the concept of the exiles as a purified community is part of its survival strategy as the exiles struggle to preserve their identity and resist assimilation to Babylonian culture, religion, and identity. The reading of Isa. 43.2 as a refinement thus depicts the exile itself as a purifying experience. The sins and impurities of Israel have been burned away and washed away. YHWH gathers his now-purged children. Trial by Ordeal The image of fire and water is also evocative of the judicial ordeal. Karel van der Toorn defines a trial by ordeal as follows: 'In the ordeal, the accused is subjected to a physical test, the outcome of which decides his guilt or innocence' .71 The primary 67. See also Zech. 13.9, which speaks of the refinement of the Israelites as silver and gold are tested, and Mai. 3.2b-3, which applies this language to the purification (and rededication?) of the Levites. 68. This is the only place in the Hebrew Bible where the phrase W3 TDJJH, 'passing through fire', refers to objects rather than human beings. 69. Susan Niditch, however, argues that while Numbers 31 has many of the characteristics of the holy war ban (D~iri), it does not completely fit the category since the ban requires complete destruction, while in Numbers 31 the captured virgin girls are spared ('War, Women, and Defilement in Numbers 31', in Claudia V. Camp (ed.), Women, War and Metaphor [Semeia 61; 1993], pp. 39-57 [46-48]). 70. Daniel L. Smith, Religion of the Landless: The Social Context of the Babylonian Exile (Bloomington, IN: Meyer Stone, 1989), p. 149. 71. Karel van der Toorn, ABD, V, s.v. 'Ordeal', pp. 40-42 (40). T. S. Frymer defines ordeal as ' an appeal to divine judgment to decide otherwise insoluble cases that cannot be allowed to remain

94

Mixing Metaphors

example of trial by ordeal in the Hebrew Bible is the 'potion ordeal' of the alleged adulteress in Num. 5.11-31, in which a woman is tested by the drinking of 'bitter waters'. If she is innocent she will be unharmed. If guilty 'her belly will swell and her thigh will fall off. The 'drinking trial' in the ancient Near East may involve either water or wine. The wine trial is seen in the 'cup of wrath', which appears in biblical poetry.72 In these texts, van der Toorn argues, 'The ingestion of the potion resulted in the eliciting of a verdict, a proof of guilt, and the imposition of a penalty'.73 In Deutero-Isaiah Jerusalem (implicitly the estranged wife of YHWH) is said to have 'drunk at the hand of YHWH the cup of his wrath' (51.17). But YHWH says, 'See, I have taken from your hand the cup of staggering; you shall drink no more from the bowl of my wrath' (51.22b).74 While a trial by water is not directly attested in the Hebrew Bible, the river ordeal is well known in ancient Near Eastern sources. In the river ordeal 'the accused plunges into the river and is acquitted if he or she successfully floats or navigates the river'.75 T. S. Frymer cites this very passage from Deutero-Isaiah: 'The Bible may possibly be alluding to this practice in Isa. 43.2'.76 One example of this practice is in the Code of Hammurabi: If a seignior brought a charge of sorcery against a(nother) seignior, but has not proved it, the one against whom the charge of sorcery was brought, upon going to the river, shall throw himself into the river, and if the river has then overpowered him, his accuser shall take over his estate; if the river has shown that seignior to be innocent and he has accordingly come forth safe, the one who brought the charge of sorcery against him shall be put to death, while the one who threw himself into the river shall take over the estate of his accuser.77

Note that, as in Isa. 43.2, the expectation is that the accused will go into the river. The question of guilt or innocence is determined by whether or not the river overcomes him/her. If he/she is not overwhelmed, then he/she is vindicated.78

unresolved... An individual is subjected to a physical test and is adjudged loser or winner on the basis of a bodily response' (IDBS, s.v. 'Ordeal, Judicial', pp. 638-40 [639]). 72. Toorn ('Ordeal') lists Isa. 51.17-23; Jer. 25.15-29; 49.12; 51.7,39; Ezek. 23.31-34; Obad. 16; Hab. 2.15-16; 12.2; Pss. 60.3(5); 75.9; Lam. 4.21. See also Frymer: the ordeal of the alleged adulteress 'may be embedded in the prophetic images of the "cup" that Israel drinks' ('Ordeal, Judicial', p. 640). 73. Toorn, 'Ordeal', p. 41. 74. See also Karel van der Toorn, 'Ordeal Procedures in the Psalms and the Passover Meal', VT 36(1988), pp. 439-42. W. McKane rejects the interpretation of the cup as an ordeal ('Poison, Trial by Ordeal, and the Cup of Wrath', FT30 [1980], pp. 474-92). 75. Frymer, 'Ordeal, Judicial', p. 639. Frymer lists 'pre-Sargonic and classical Sumer, Old Babylonian Elam, Esnunna and Mari, in Nuzi, Assyria, Babylonia, and among the Hittites' (639). 76. Frymer, 'Ordeal, Judicial', pp. 639-40. 77. CH 2, in James B. Pritchard (ed.), The Ancient Near East, I, trans. Theophile J. Meek (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958), p. 139. Meek notes, 'The river (the Euphrates) as judge in the case was regarded as god' (p. 139, n. 2). 78. For the vindication of Israel see Isa. 49.17; 50.7-9. See also P. K. McCarter, 'The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature', HTR 66 (1973), pp. 403-12.

4. YHWH 's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

95

Frymer includes as forms of ordeal 'ordeals by heat'.79 Van der Toorn cites Daniel 3 (the story of the fiery furnace) as an example of the Persian trial by fire, which 'consisted of a passage through flames'.80 This was known in Babylonia in the Achaemenid period81 and may have been known earlier in the general ancient Near East milieu (and thus known to Deutero-Isaiah).82 Paul Hanson associates both the water and the fire in 43.2 with the ordeal: What we encounter here is the language familiar to ancient peoples describing ordeal, that is, the ancient judicial practice of casting the accused into the river or the fire to determine guilt or innocence.83

Frymer also assumes that Isa. 43.2 refers to ordeals of both fire and water, arguing that this verse 'also illustrates a familiarity with the ordeals by fire and by water' .84 The implication of reading 43.2 as an ordeal raises the question of Israel's guilt or innocence. The preceding unit states Israel's guilt quite clearly (42.24). However, it is within YHWH's power to acquit the guilty by granting them survival through the ordeal. Hanson notes,' [The people] could remain confident of final vindication ... The sole ground of Israel's confidence is stated clearly in v. 2. "I will be with you" '.85 As a father and a kinsman, YHWH'S honor is served by the restoration of Israel's honor through its vindication (v. 4).86 The New Exodus Many scholars have noted Deutero-Isaiah's use of exodus imagery.87 DeuteroIsaiah draws an analogy between the exodus out of Egypt and a hoped-for exodus out of Babylon (see, for example, 43.17-18; 51.9-11). In Isa. 43.1-7, the imagery of passing through water easily evokes the exodus passage through the Red Sea. Yet it is not the water imagery alone that supports this interpretation (especially considering the absence of the formulaic word 'sea'). Rather, this passage evokes various components of the Exodus tradition—the interaction of the water imagery with the fire imagery, the 7&13, go' el, imagery, and the parent-child imagery work together to recall the exodus from Egypt. The exodus imagery in 43.1 -7 is found in 79. Frymer, 'Ordeal, Judicial', p. 639. 80. Just how an ordeal by fire would actually work is not clear. If Daniel 3 describes an ordeal, then no one could survive it except by a miracle (as in this story). An unsurvivable ordeal could hardly function as a test of guilt or innocence. See also Prov. 6.27-28. 81. Toorn, 'Ordeal', p. 42. 82. Contacts between Persia and Babylon pre-date the Achaemenid period, although the extent of cultural exchange is difficult to determine. Both Elam and Media were allied with Babylon against Assyria in the late 7th century BCE. 83. Paul Hanson, Isaiah 40-66 (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1995), p. 63. 84. Tikva Frymer-Kensky, 'The Judicial Ordeal in the Ancient Near East', II (unpubl. diss., Yale University, 1977), p. 480, n. 8. 85. Hanson, Isaiah 40-66, p. 63. 86. See Isa. 48.10-11. This is Moses' argument in Exod. 32.7-14: the fate of Israel will reflect on YHWH's honor. 87. See, for example, Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55, pp. 112-13; Stuhlmueller, Redemption, pp. 59-94.

96

Mixing Metaphors

echoes of the larger exodus story, which includes the bondage itself, the redemption (THS, pada) of the first-born from the destroyer (Exod. 13.13-16), and the passage through the sea (Exodus 14-15).88 1. Passing through Waters. When you pass through (1HI7, 'abar) waters, I am with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you ...

The imagery of passing through water in 43.2, read in light of redeemer (7NU, go"el) imagery, evokes the exodus deliverance of Israel through the Red Sea (Exodus 14-15): But the Israelites walked on dry ground through the sea ... (Exod. 14.29)

Exod. 15.1-18 uses the verb vK3, ga'al, to describe YHWH'S actions in the exodus story as a whole, echoed in connection with Deutero-Isaiah's use of vJW, ga'al, in 43.1: In your steadfast love you led the people whom you redeemed (vtW, ga'al); you guided them by your strength to your holy abode. (Exod. 15.13)

Deutero-Isaiah's clearest reference to the exodus story is in 51.9-11: 10

Was it not you who dried up the sea, the waters of the great deep; who made the depths of the sea a way for the redeemed (DvlNJ) to cross over ("1317, 'dbar)7 11

So the ransomed (Tl~l£,padd) of YHWH shall return,

and come to Zion with singing ...

The verb "1317, 'abar ('pass through', used in 43.2) is associated with the exodus also in Psalm 136: ... who struck Egypt through their first-born ... and brought Israel out from among them ... with a strong hand and an outstretched arm ... who divided the Red Sea in two ... and made Israel pass through the midst of it... (w. 10-14)

Note especially that in 43.2 YHWH says, 'When you pass through waters, lam with you'. The image of YHWH making the passage with Israel recalls Psalm 77: Your way was through the sea, your path, through the mighty waters; yet your footprints were unseen. You led your people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron, (vv. 19-20)

88. In what form the exodus narrative was known to the exiles can only be speculated. JE documents are presupposed, as well as Deuteronomy and some psalms. The date of the P material, which contributed to the narrative's final form, is contested.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

97

2. Going through Fire and the Bondage as a Furnace. when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not scorch you.

The fire imagery of 43.2, in interaction with other elements of the unit, is also evocative of the exodus. While fire imagery is not a part of the exodus narrative in the book of Exodus, the experience of bondage in Egypt is spoken of as the furnace (I'D) in Deut. 4.20,1 Kgs 8.51, and Jer. 11.4 (where Egypt itself is the furnace). It is important to note that the fire imagery connects with exodus imagery at the point of the bondage experience itself, not at the point of the escape from bondage. The significance of this for Isa. 43.2 is that, on this point, the passage through the fire is equated with the experience of the Babylonian exile itself, from which Israel is to be redeemed (rather than with the journey home from exile). Ps. 66.6-12 speaks of the journey out of Egypt itself, through the sea and the river. Verse 12 refers to coming through water and fire (although it is not clear what exactly the fire refers to): I2 you let people ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water, yet you have brought us out to a spacious place.

3. Interaction with the Image ofYHWH as Father. There are three aspects of the exodus tradition that interact with the parental imagery of Isa. 43.6: Israel's designation as YHWH'S first-born son in Exodus 4, the redemption of the first-born sons (indeed all of Israel) at the Passover in Exodus 11-12, and the redemption of the first-born sons from sacrifice in Exodus 13 (which is part of the exodus tradition because the Exodus 13 narrative makes it so). In the larger exodus narrative, YHWH says to Moses: Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says YHWH: Israel is my first-born son. I said to you, "Let my son go that he may worship me." But you refused to let him go; now I will kill your first-born son.' (Exod. 4.22-23)

Israel is YHWH'S first-born son, enslaved by Egypt. In Exodus 12-13 YHWH will redeem his first-born, Israel, and the first-born sons of Israel as well, by sacrificing (killing) Egypt's first-born sons. This tradition may be evoked by Isa. 43.3 where YHWH says 'I give Egypt as your ransom'.90 This is mirrored by the language of parent and child in 43.6. The deaths of the first-born of Egypt and the sparing of Israel's first-born sons fulfill YHWH'S warning in Exod. 4.22-23. Two psalms (135.8 and 105.36-38) speak of the striking down of the Egyptian first-born sons even while omitting reference to the passage through the sea. Here is evidence of a tradition in which the death of 89. George A. F. Knight also makes this connection between Isa. 43.2 and Exodus 4 (Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40-55 [ITC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984], p. 92). 90. The word translated 'Ransom' islSlD. See Exod. 21.30; 30.12 (P);Num. 35.31-32 (P); 1 Sam. 12.3; Job 33.24; 36.18; Ps. 49.8; Prov. 13.8; 6.35; 21.18; Amos 5.12.

98

Mixing Metaphors

the first-born is more central than (and exists independently of) the passage through the sea as a description of the escape from Egypt. The echoes of this tradition in Isaiah 43 are relevant as the fulfillment of father YHWH'S warning in Exodus 4.2223. This tradition interacts with YHWH'S statement in Isa. 43.3, 'I give Egypt in exchange for you'. The exodus narrative in Exodus 13 connects two traditions to the redemption of the first-born: the tradition that' YHWH brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery', and YHWH'S killing of the first-born of Egypt. The reference to the deaths of Egypt's first-born in this context implies that they are a sacrifice—perhaps the sacrifice by which YHWH redeems his own first-born son, Israel: 12

... you shall set apart ("11317, 'abar) to YHWH all that first opens the womb. All the first-born of your livestock that are males shall be YHWH'S. ' 3 ... Every firstborn male among your children you shall redeem (TnS, padd). MWhen in the future your child asks you, 'What does this mean?' you shall answer, 'By strength of hand YHWH brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery. 15When Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, YHWH killed all the first-born in the land of Egypt, from human first-born to the first-born of animals. Therefore I sacrifice (TDT) to YHWH every male that first opens the womb, but every first-born of my sons I redeem (Til?],paddy. (Exod. 13.12-15)

In the exodus narrative Israel was redeemed (implicitly) by the substitution or exchange of Egypt's first-born sons. Exod. 13.12-15 is the part of the exodus narrative that strongly implies that the deaths of the Egyptian first-born are more than a punishment, they are YHWH'S sacrificial substitution by which Israel, his son, is redeemed.91 The point of Exod. 13.12-15 for the Israelite is that 'I sacrifice ... but I redeem ...' The passage through the sea in Exodus 14 is YHWH'S final act in the redemption of his first-born son. Isaiah 43 echoes Israel's exodus out of Egypt, including the redemption of the son (here 'sons' and 'daughters') and also echoes the giving of Egypt's first-born (implicitly an exchange). Thus the redeemer and father imagery interact with the passage through water to evoke the exodus and the sacrificial law of the first-born son. The redemption of the first-born in Exodus 13 is thus, implicitly, a remembrance of the redemption of the Israelite first-born from the destroyer, as well as the remembrance that YHWH brought Israel out from Egypt. The use of parental imagery in the second half of Isa. 43.1-7 interacts with the earlier passage through water and the reference to Egypt to evoke the memory of the significance of the first-borns in the exodus story, especially of Israel as YHWH'S first-born. 4. Redemption of the Debt Slave. In Isaiah 43, YHWH is the ;W3, go 'el, who frees the debt slave. As has been shown earlier, the slave redemption laws connect the manumission of the individual Hebrew slave to the exodus narrative. Deut. 15.1218 gives a rationale for the freeing of the Hebrew slave in the seventh year:

91. See also Jer. 46.10, which refers to Egypt's defeat at Carchemish as 'Yhwh's sacrifice

(mi)'.

4. YHWH's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 4 3.1-7

99

Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and YHWH your God redeemed (n~\^,padd) you ... (v. 15)

Lev. 25.42 likewise makes a connection to the exodus in directing the kinsman to redeem the debt slave: For they are my servants [slaves], whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves are sold.

In Isaiah 43, YHWH redeems his sons and daughters, just as in Exodus YHWH redeemed (15.13) his first-born (4.22-23), by bringing them through the water (and out of the fire—Deut. 4.20). Conclusion. Several elements in Isa. 43.1-7 interact to produce a strong evocation of the exodus tradition. The reference to passing through water is only one of several elements that recall the exodus narrative. The fire imagery also interacts with the exodus story. The parental imagery, in particular, interacts with aspects of the whole exodus narrative, including the killing of the Egyptian first-born and the redemption of the Israelite first-born from sacrifice. 5. Conclusion: The Literary Focal Point—Precious, Honored, Loved (v. 4a) The core of this unit, the center of the chiasm, is v. 4a, in which YHWH, kinsman and father, says to Israel, 'you are precious in my sight, and honored, and Hove you\ Israel is 'precious' and 'loved'—valued and held dear by YHWH. The term 'precious' is borrowed from the realm of precious metals or gems. Having been refined like silver and gold (through the fire), Israel is all the more precious. The term 'love' commonly interacts with father-son language in covenant formulae describing the relationship between overlord and vassal.92 But significant here is the presence of the term 'daughters'. This term never appears in covenantal formulae.93 Thus, the presence of the term 'daughter' interacts with 'love' and 92. William Moran, 'The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of God in Deuteronomy', CBQ 25 (1963), pp. 77-87, provides some examples. Father-son language often appears in the context of the god's choice of ruler and may be understood as covenantal language (e.g. the Davidic covenant in 2 Sam. 7.14; Ps. 2.7; Ps. 89.27). The term 'love' in connection to rulers 'may well be linked with the theory of the divine sonship of kings which came to be accepted in Israel' (Gottfried Quell, TDNT, I, s.v. 'ayaTtaco: Love in the OT', pp. 21-35 (30). See also F. Charles Fensham, 'Father and Son as Terminology for Treaty and Covenant', in Hans Goedicke (ed.), Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1971], pp. 121-35 [132]). Fensham notes, 'The concept "father" (DN) used for God is scarce in the Old Testament. A close scrutiny of its use shows that different concepts are used for God as father ... in a few instances the concept "father" is used for the Lord in a covenant meaning' (pp. 129-30). 93. While the pair'sons' and 'daughters' appears in Deut. 32.19, which is, as a whole, strongly covenantal, Fensham notes, 'In this case the combination of sons and daughters testifies against the possibility of a covenant meaning because nowhere in the Old Testament or the ancient Near East is "daughters" used as a covenant term' (Fensham, 'Father', p. 132).

100

Mixing Metaphors

'sons' to create a paradigm more intimate than covenant. These terms interact to depict YHWH'S love for Israel as that of a father for his beloved child, such as the 'love' of Isaac for Esau (his favorite son, Gen. 25.28), the 'love' of Rebekah for Jacob (her favorite son, Gen. 25.28), the 'love' of 'Israel' for Joseph (clearly his favorite son at the time, Gen. 37.2-4), and later the 'love' of Israel for Benjamin (his favorite at the time, Gen. 44:20). In the examples from Genesis, the love of the parent for the child portrays a relationship that may be described as endearment and favor, not simply the loyalty and obligation of covenant. The very center of the concentric structure is YHWH's declaration that Israel is 'honored' (~Q!D, ni.). ('Precious' ['valued'] may also serve here as a term of honor.) YHWH has declared in v. 1 that he is Israel's 7^13, go'el: 'I have redeemed you'. The 7813, go'el, protects or restores family honor. The 'honor' of Israel is the honor that the redeeming kinsman restores to the family as a whole. (Note how in w. 1 and 7 'redeem' and 'honor' mirror each other.) The language of ransom and exchange (w. 3, 4b) implies that the role that the redeeming kinsman is exercising here is the redemption of the slave. The strong family language subverts the alienation of enslavement—slaves have been stripped of their old identities and family ties and given an identity based on that of the master.94 Reclaiming kinship identity subverts the slave identity. Israel is ransomed from slavery, its kinship ties are restored, and honor is restored to Israel and to YHWH. YHWH'S 'love' for Israel affirms the relational dimension of Israel's redemption. The gathering of exiles, 'my sons' and 'my daughters', implies a return to the land, and thus redemption of land previously lost to the family. The statement in v. 7, 'whom I created for my honor', serves to highlight that YHWH'S honor is tied to Israel—they are his offspring and their honor or lack of honor reflects on the father. By assuring that Israel is honored, YHWH's own honor is also vindicated. Israel's honor as ascribed by kinship to YHWH is further emphasized in their designation as 'everyone who is called by my name'. Having a 'good name' means having honor. The family name here is YHWH'S own name (v. 7). The father and kinsman are two figures who have a responsibility to defend or restore the honor of the family. The dimensions of the family relationship in Isa. 43.1-7 are thus twofold. The TWI3, go'el, language and the 'sons' and 'daughters' terms both highlight the kinship ties between YHWH and Jacob. As the redeeming kinsman (7N13, go'el), YHWH is concerned with Israel's honor. As father, YHWH loves Israel, in the sense that Jacob loved Joseph and Benjamin. It is not a legally prescribed love, but a love from the heart. As the children of YHWH, the exiles are ascribed the honor of the head of the family, YHWH. 94. Orlando Patterson, Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982), p. 10. Patterson writes, 'Not only was the slave denied all claims on, and obligations to, his parents and living blood relations but, by extension, all such claims and obligations on his more remote ancestors and on his descendants ... Slaves ... were not allowed freely to integrate the experience of their ancestors into their lives, to inform their understanding of social reality with the inherited meanings of their natural forebears, or to anchor the living present in any conscious community of memory. That they reached back for the past, as they reached out for the related living, there can be no doubt' (5).

4. YHWH 's Sons and Daughters: Isaiah 43.1-7

101

The focal point of the passage conveys a strong message of hope in YHWH'S declaration of love for Israel and restoration of honor as God's family members. Love and honor are expressed in the images of the redeeming kinsman (;N*U, go'el), and in the image of the father. YHWH'S wrath is expected (Isa. 42.25) and has been experienced in Israel's exile. This experience of exile is evoked by the simple yet powerful images of water and fire, in their full range of associations. The experience itself cannot be denied. But despite the explicit and implicit accusations of the people that YHWH has sold them, sacrificed them, passed them over to the gods of Babylon, and relinquished them to death, the prophet proclaims, Thus says YHWH ... I am with you ... you will not be overwhelmed ... you will not be burned ... you are precious in my sight, and honored, and I love you ... I will gather my sons and my daughters ... who are called by my name.

Chapter 5 THE DIVINE ARTISAN: ISAIAH 45.9-13

Isaiah 45.9-13 interweaves the image of YHWH as an artisan of clay with the images of YHWH as a begetting father and a birthing mother. This unit is part of a larger unit (44.24^5.13) that focuses on YHWH'S election of Cyrus as his instrument of redemption. 45.9-13 portrays YHWH'S challenge to those who would question him and his work. Questioning YHWH is depicted as foolish. The issue of who is questioning YHWH and what is the nature of the questioning will be dealt with in this chapter. Two main concerns of this unit are Cyrus (as YHWH'S instrument and creation) and, implicitly, other gods (who are not to be given any credit for Cyrus's victories). The depiction of YHWH as an artisan (v. 9) stands implicitly in comparison and contrast to the Babylonian artisans who create idols. The depiction of YHWH as creator of all things (including Cyrus and the future of Israel, v. 12) is also implicitly contrasted to other gods who accomplish nothing and are not to be given credit for Cyrus's success. The emphasis on YHWH as creator (artisan, father, mother) serves to demonstrate YHWH'S absolute power over Israel's destiny. The interaction of the artisan and the parent imagery highlight Deutero-Isaiah's understanding of YHWH as creator, especially as one who shapes the future. The juxtaposition of images highlights begetting and birthing as primarily acts of creation. This is a textually difficult pericope, in particular w. 9 and 11. Textual analysis and translation are discussed in an appendix at the end of this chapter. Translation 9

Ha! He who contends with his shaper, earthenware with the artisans of earth! Does the clay say to its shaper, 'What are you making?', or, 'Your artifact has no hands'? 10

Ha! He who says to a father, 'What are you begetting?', or to a woman, 'With what are you in labor?' "Thus says YHWH, the holy one of Israel and shaper (for him) of the things to come, 'Question me about my son! Command me concerning the artifact of my hands! 12 '/made (the) earth, and created humanity upon it;

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

103

My hands stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host. I3 7have roused him in righteousness, and I will straighten all his roads. He shall build my city and release my exiles, not with a price and not with a bribe,' says YHWH of hosts.

1. Literary Context: The Cyrus Oracle 45.9-13 is part of a larger unit, 44.24-45.13, which deals primarily with Cyrus.1 While Cyrus is not named in 45.13, the text is clearly referring to him as the one who will rebuild the city and free the exiles.2 This reference to the rebuilding and to the liberation of the exiles connects 45.9-13 with 45.1-7, which is YHWH'S call or commissioning of Cyrus (a rhetorical commissioning for the benefit of DeuteroIsaiah's audience, the Judahite exiles). The naming of Cyrus in 44.28 suggests, in turn, that 45.1-7 belongs with the preceding unit which begins with 'Thus says YHWH' in 44.24. Yehoshua Gitay structures the unit into four parts: a) Introduction (44.24-28); b) Thesis (45.1-7); c) Confirmation (45.8); andd) Epilogue (45.9-13).3 The entire unit may be summarized as follows: a. Introduction (44.24-28). YHWH is the creator and shaper who confounds divination, proclaims restoration, confirms his messengers and Cyrus, and ensures the rebuilding of Jerusalem, Judah, and the temple. b. Thesis (45.1-7). YHWH calls and empowers Cyrus, his anointed, to conquer nations. He proclaims, 'I am YHWH'. There are no other gods—Cyrus's power comes from YHWH. c. Confirmation (45.8). A hymn of praise to YHWH the creator. d. Epilogue (45.9-13). Shame on those who question (the artisan, parents, YHWH); then the depiction of YHWH as creator, who empowers Cyrus—the city will be rebuilt, exiles freed. Given the unity of the section, a brief discussion of 44.24-45.7 and 45.8 is in order as a preface to a treatment of 45.9-13.

1. So also James Muilenberg, 'The Book of Isaiah', in George A. Buttrick et al. (eds), IB, V (New York: Abingdon, 1956), pp. 381-773 [526]; and Yehoshua Gitay, Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48 (Bonn: Linguistica Biblica, 1981), p. 177. 2. 45.9-13 is widely interpreted in relation to Cyrus. A few scholars regard 45.9-10 as an addition (because of the term ''in, hoy), but that view is not adopted here (see K. Elliger, Deuterojesaja in seinem Verhaltnis zu Tritojesaja [Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1933], p. 306, and Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, trans. David M. G. Stalker [OIL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969], pp. 165-66). 3. Gitay, Prophecy, p. 178.

104

Mixing Metaphors

Introduction: 44.24-28 The first subunit is 44.24-28. The structure of this unit (ABCD) roughly but imperfectly follows the structure of 45.9-13 (ACBD). A 44.24aa—YHWH is called 7813, go "el, the redeeming kinsman, one of DeuteroIsaiah's major metaphors (Chapter 4). This image is immediately interwoven with both artisan imagery and birth imagery: YHWH has 'shaped' or 'molded' ("liT, yasar) Jacob in the womb (v. 24a). This imagery parallels the two dominant images of 45.9-10 (artisan and birth). B 44.24a(3-24b—YHWH is the creator of all things who 'stretched out the heavens' and 'made the earth' (v. 24b). This creation language parallels 45.12 in which YHWH 'made the earth', 'stretched out the heavens', and created humanity. C 44.25-26a—YHWH 'invalidates the signs of idle talkers, makes fools of diviners, turns back the "wise" and makes a mockery of their "knowledge" ' (44.25). Instead of such Babylonian 'knowledge', YHWH 'confirms the word of his servant and fulfills the counsel of his messengers' (44.26). In contrast to the divination practices of the Babylonians, YHWH'S will is known only through his chosen messengers, the prophets. YHWH rejects challenges and cannot be manipulated. The people are to know YHWH'S plan through the prophets; perhaps especially through the prophet we call 'Deutero-Isaiah'.4 This section parallels 45.11, which challenges those who question YHWH'S plan. D 44.26b-38—Finally the restoration of the cities of Judah, including Jerusalem, is announced. The subunit shifts to the mythological language of YHWH'S power over the waters: the 'deep' (i"niH5) and the rivers (44.23). YHWH then calls Cyrus 'my shepherd', who will carry out 'my pleasure'.6 The subunit goes on to reiterate that Jerusalem will be restored and adds that the temple will also be rebuilt (v. 28). Some scholars regard the inclusion of the temple here as intrusive and thus as an addition.7 However, mention of the temple follows logically after the reference to 4. Curiously, there is no use here of any of the more conventional terms for prophet—N'Q], khl;lkjt^n. See Robert R. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), p. 257. Divination itself seems to be accepted in Judean circles in Isa. 3.2, Mic. 3.5-7, and Ezek. 22.28, despite criticisms of specific diviners. Thus the ^33 and the HTin are classed with diviners (see Mic. 3.5-7), which might explain why Deutero-Isaiah never uses fc^D] and uses min only negatively (for astrologers in 47.13). Wilson notes, 'This situation changes in the literature of the post-exilic period when Jerusalemite authors apparently followed the Deuteronomists in seeing divination only in a negative light (Isa. 44.25; 47.9,12; 57.3; Zech. 10.2)' (p. 257). 5. Apparently a variant form of nSlHO, 'depth, deep' (BDB,pp. 846-47). SeeExod. 14.4; Job 41.31; Ps. 68.22; 69.2, 15; 88.6; 107.24; Jon. 2.3; Mic. 7.19; 10.11; Neh. 9.11. 6. ""HSn—Isa. 46.10; 48.14; 53.10; also as a verb in Isa. 42.21. 7. See, for example, John L. McKenzie, Second Isaiah (AB 20; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968), 74; James D. Smart, History and Theology in Second Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 35, 40-66 (Interpretation; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1965), p. 119; and R. N. Whybray, Isaiah 40-66 (NCB; London: Marshal, Morgan & Scott, 1975), p. 104.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

105

the 'deep'. The conquest of the deep and the consequent building of a temple are themes that are linked in the Babylonian Enuma Elish, in the Canaanite myth of Ba'al's battle with Yamm, and in Exodus 15. In Enuma Elish, the creation of humans to serve the gods comes between the events of conquest and temple building.8 In Isaiah, it is Cyrus, God's agent, who comes between the events. Cyrus is YHWH'S creation, created and called to be YHWH'S servant. Thus the inclusion of the temple in v. 28 is not at all disruptive, but is anticipated by 'the deep' in v. 27. The declaration of Cyrus's role in rebuilding Jerusalem is paralleled in 45.13, where YHWH proclaims 'he shall build my city and set my exiles free'. Thus the units 44.24-28 and 45.9-13 proclaim together Cyrus's God-ordained task of restoring Jerusalem. These frame the heart of the larger section, 45.1-7, which proclaims YHWH'S commissioning of Cyrus. Thesis: 45.1-7 45.1-7 is the central unit of the three main units of 44.24 to 45.13. In this unit YHWH directly addresses Cyrus, his 'anointed one'. YHWH has called Cyrus to accomplish his purpose in defeating Babylon. He has called Cyrus, named and 'titled' him, presumably in giving him a throne name. All this YHWH does 'though you do not know me', that is, Cyrus does not know or acknowledge YHWH as God, the only god (there is no other). The language that Deutero-Isaiah applies to Cyrus is the language of the Davidic dynasty: ' YHWH'S anointed' (e.g. Ps. 2.2; 89.20), 'shepherd' (e.g. 2 Sam. 7.7; Ps. 78.70-71; Jer. 23.1-5; this is a general kingship image in the ancient Near East, but here in Isaiah 45 he is YHWH'S shepherd), and temple builder (see 2 Sam 7.13; 1 Kgs 5.5). Thus the context in which to understand 45.9-13 is also God's election of Cyrus. It would have been problematic for the exiles to regard Cyrus as YHWH'S anointed one. They would instead expect a son of the remnant of the Davidic family to receive this divine acknowledgment as Israel's savior. Deutero-Isaiah challenges convention by applying this imagery to Cyrus, a non-Israelite emperor. Westermann says that the oracle shocks Israel and makes a radical break with everything of which she had hitherto been persuaded, for it says that God makes Cyrus, a heathen king, his agent (anointed), through whom he intends to perform his work of setting Israel free.

A faction of Deutero-Isaiah's audience would arguably have had difficulty in accepting Cyrus, a pagan, as their deliverer. So why does YHWH call and name Cyrus and arm him (v. 5)? 'So that they may know ... that there is no one besides 8. See Bernard Batto, Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992), p. 35. The relationship of this section to ancient mythologies is also noted by Paul Hanson, Isaiah 40-66 (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1995), p. 100. 9. Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, p. 154. See also Gitay, Prophecy, p. 342, n. 13; Carroll Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970), p. 204; R. F. Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40-55 [BZAW 141; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1976], p. 121); Hendrik C. Spykerboer, The Structure and Composition of Deutero-Isaiah with Special Reference to the Polemics against Idolatry (Meppel: Krips Repro, 1976), p. 127.

106

Mixing Metaphors

me' (v. 6). The power and success of Cyrus is somehow a witness to the power of YHWH. This suggests another implicit problem posed by Deutero-Isaiah's proclamation of Cyrus as YHWH'S anointed. The problem is, 'Who (what god?) empowers Cyrus?' For those exiles who did indeed see their hope in Cyrus, this unit would call them to credit YHWH (not Marduk, not Cyrus's gods) with empowering Cyrus. This issue is reflected in the Cyrus cylinder (dating from shortly after the fall of Babylon, thus not long after Isaiah 44^5), in which Marduk is given credit for Cyrus's victory. This claim would have enabled the Marduk priesthood to hail the victory of Cyrus without undermining the sovereignty of Babylon's patron god, Marduk.10 Deutero-Isaiah likewise claims for YHlVHthe victories of Cyrus. John Watts thus emphasizes the purpose of the Cyrus references in Isaiah 44-45 as primarily crediting YHWH, rather than as an apologeticybr Cyrus: The announcement's climax mentions Cyrus, the Persian emperor who is entering Babylon. By this time every prophet in the city claimed responsibility for his success. But Yahweh yields nothing in the claim that Cyrus belongs to him. He is Yahweh's shepherd ... The emphasis here is on the pronoun my. Cyrus is Yahweh's protege who will fulfill his pleasure.

Watts adds, Traditionally, the ruler of Babylon took the hand of Bel in the New Year's festival. Assyrian rulers coveted this affirmation of their authority. Here Yahweh claims that he has seized Cyrus by the hand (42.6) ...' l

While this subunit and what follows (45.9-13) may be in part an apologetic for Cyrus, much of Deutero-Isaiah is an apologetic for YHWH (in opposition to the other gods, in particular Bel/Marduk). Deutero-Isaiah claims that Cyrus's successes come from YHWH, not from some other god. This is because YHWH is the creator of all things. YHWH is the creator of Cyrus, light and darkness, well-being (D'HE), shalom) and evil (1H), 'I, YHWH make all these things' (v. 7). Additionally, YHWH is the one who knows in advance what will happen (in contrast to other gods, who know nothing and predict nothing beforehand—see below). The fact that Cyrus does not acknowledge YHWH should not be taken by the exiles as evidence that some god other than YHWH is behind Cyrus's power. Twice in 45.1-7 it is

10. It is widely believed that the priesthood of Marduk supported the victories of Cyrus even before Cyrus entered the city of Babylon itself. This support came from opposition to Nabonidus, because of his primary patronage of the god Sin and his neglect of the cult of Marduk. (See M. A. Dandamaev,y4 Political History of the Achaemenid Empire [Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1989], p. 41.) This analysis is questioned by Amelie Kuhrt, who argues that anti-Nabonidus texts and texts that welcome Cyrus as Marduk's chosen instrument (including the Cyrus Cylinder) are pro-Cyrus propaganda that does not reflect the actual attitude of the Marduk priesthood in Babylon ('Nabonidus and the Babylonian Priesthood', in Mary Beard and John North (eds), Pagan Priests Religion and Power in the Ancient World [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1990], pp. 119-55, esp. 142-45). 11. John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 34-66 (WBC 25; Waco: Word Books, 1987), p. 156, emphasis his.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

107

acknowledged that Cyrus 'does not know' YHWH (w. 4b and 5b). This theme is interwoven with the declarations that there is no other god (therefore whomever Cyrus does acknowledge is not the true power behind the throne, and is, in fact, not a real god). Verses 4-6 emphasize, 'you do not know me. I am YHWH, and there is no other; besides me there is no god. I arm you, though you do not know me ... there is no one besides me; I am YHWH, and there is no other'. The point can hardly be missed. Confirmation: 45.8 At this point YHWH bursts into song, calling on the heavens and the earth to bring forth righteousness and salvation. He concludes, 'I YHWH have created him\ This is none other than Cyrus, the same 'him' referred to in 45.13.12 The issue is not Cyrus himself, but who takes credit for him. YHWH claims to be the creator of Cyrus, as he is the creator of all things. Epilogue: 45.9-13 Gitay calls 45.9-13 the 'epilogue'.13 It is clearly in continuity with what has preceded. Since this is our central text, a fuller discussion follows straight away. 2. An Interacting Metaphor: YHWH as an Artisan Isa. 45.9-13 juxtaposes the image of YHWH as an artisan of clay with the images of the expectant father and mother. The most obvious overlap (and interaction) of these images is in the theme of creative activity. As a whole, Deutero-Isaiah utilizes three metaphors to describe YHWH'S creative activity: the artisan, birth, and the divine warrior (see Chapter 3). The language of artisans and craftsmanship is pervasive throughout Isaiah 40^46, most commonly in connection with the creation of idols. The image of YHWH in 45.9 is not obviously that of the potter creating apot, as many translations assume. The language of 45.9 portrays YHWH as one who shapes clay, with no further specific information concerning what is being shaped, except that it should have 'hands'. YHWH is engaging in an activity analogous to that of the idol-maker. This creative activity is also analogous to, and reminiscent of, YHWH'S creative activity in Gen. 2.7, shaping a human from the dust of the ground. The artisan image functions in several ways. First, the artisan image shows that YHWH is the creator of Israel, of Cyrus, of all things, and thus also the creator of the future. In Deutero-Isaiah, YHWH is contrasted to the gods/idols themselves who create nothing, but are themselves creations. Second, in Deutero-Isaiah, YHWH is implicitly compared to the artisans who make the idols. The ironic comparison is 12. So Gitay (Prophecy, p. 178), in contrast to most scholars, who render the masculine suffix 'it'. Gitay points out that as a masculine singular suffix it does not refer to the heavens (masc. pi.) or the earth (fern, sing.) or righteousness (fern, sing.), and a reference back to 'salvation' is unlikely. Thus, it must refer to Cyrus. 13. Gitay, Prophecy, pp. 178-79.

108

Mixing Metaphors

that YHWH creates (real) humans, but humans create their (fake) gods (idols). Thus the other gods create nothing, and consequently have no power over unfolding events. The irony of the human-made quality of the idols is implicitly present in 45.9-11, where it is made clear that it is inappropriate for the creation to challenge or to command the creator. Thus, implicitly, it is silly for anyone to believe that the idols (the creation) which artisans have created have control over humans (the creators). Likewise it is silly for Israel to believe that it (the creation) can question YHWH (the creator) or dictate to YHWH what should happen (especially regarding Cyrus, YHWH'S creation). The gods do not command events. Israel does not command YHWH concerning events. The third function of the artisan imagery is in characterizing YHWH as a shaper (expressed through the clay imagery in 45.9). YHWH shapes all things, including human beings (both Israel and Cyrus). YHWH vs the Idols: Creator and Proclaimer of the Things to Come One of the primary themes of Deutero-Isaiah is YHWH'S ability to proclaim what will happen beforehand, the 'things to come'. Some texts focus strictly on divine foreknowledge, but others also state that the reason for this foreknowledge is that YHWH himself is the one who creates the future, the one who brings things to pass. An integral part of this claim is YHWH'S ability to bring things to pass through his agent Cyrus. Deutero-Isaiah highlights YHWH'S power concerning the future by contrasting it with the inability of the gods, the idols, the diviners, and others to likewise proclaim the things to come. The ultimate test of divinity (often in the form of a legal challenge) is precisely this power concerning the future. Thus, YHWH challenges the diviners in 44.25 and the questioners in 45.9-11. Only YHWH knows, determines, and proclaims the future as the 'shaper of the things to come (45.11)'. Christopher Seitz notes, in Second Isaiah the emphasis falls on YHWH's unique ability to fulfill what YHWH had earlier, in the divine council, planned and then revealed to Israel, YHWH's servant (41.27; 43.10; 44.8). No one can tell what God told 'first to Zion' (41.27). Idols cannot speak; the gods they presume to represent are mute as well when it comes to telling the former things and their outcome (41.21-22; 43.9; 44.7; 45.21). So much less can they say what will happen in the future, what YHWH is planning as a new thing (41.23).14

This explicit claim of YHWH's powers of foreknowledge and ability to shape the future is peculiar to Deutero-Isaiah. Other biblical texts presuppose that YHWH, through YHWH'S prophets, proclaims what will happen and makes things happen. However, these other proclamations concerning the future are of a different type. They are presented as YHWH's warnings and judgments (e.g. Amos 7.17; Jer. 7.3233) or as promises concerning YHWH'S intentions (e.g. Jer. 30.18). Deutero-Isaiah takes this presupposition concerning YHWH'S power over, and knowledge of, the future (YHWH's power to act as YHWH chooses) and moves it to a more explicit level; that is, YHWH can do something that no one or nothing else can do. Deutero14. Christopher R. Seitz, Zion's Final Destiny: The Development of the Book of Isaiah: A Reassessment of Isaiah 36-39 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), p. 201.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

109

Isaiah offers, as evidence of YHWH'S power of foreknowledge, past evidence of YHWH having proclaimed things ahead oftime (41.4,27-28; 44.7-8; 45.21; 46.1011): 3

The former things I declared long ago, they went out from my mouth and I made them known; then suddenly I did them and they came to pass. "Because I know that you are obstinate and your neck is an iron sinew and your forehead brass, 5 I declared them to you from long ago, before they came to pass I announced them to you, so that you would not say, 'My idol did them, my carved image and my cast image commanded them'. (48.3-5)

YHWH challenges the gods to prove their abilities to know the future: 2I Set forth your case, says YHWH; bring your proofs, says the King of Jacob. 22 Let them bring them, and tell us what is to happen. Tell us the former things, what they are, so that we may consider them, and that we may know their outcome; or declare to us the things to come (HI ft 3!"!). "Tell us what is to come hereafter (mTWT, the-things-to-come—see 44.7; 45.11), that we may know that you are gods; do good, or do harm, that we may be afraid and terrified. 24 You, indeed, are nothing and your work is nothing at all; whoever chooses you is an abomination. (41.21-24)

Deutero-Isaiah, of course, questions the whole notion of the idols having the spirit of a deity. The prophet offers an apologetic for Israel's aniconic theology. DeuteroIsaiah does not simply ridicule the Babylonian idols; he explains why YHWH does not have an idol. It is YHWH'S choice. YHWH will not lend his spirit to images (42.8; 48.11). No image is equal to YHWH. Deutero-Isaiah's proclamation that an idol cannot see (44.9) may be an allusion to the idea that the idol's eyes were opened in the 'opening of the mouth' ceremony, by which a newly created idol was imbued with a divine spirit.15 Deutero-Isaiah uses the inability of the idols to declare the future to highlight YHWH'S unique power to proclaim and create the future (48.5). In 41.25-29 Deutero-Isaiah proclaims: 15. Christopher Walker and Michael B. Dick, 'The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient Mesopotamia: The Mesopotamian nils pi Ritual', in Michael B. Dick (ed.), Born in Heaven, Made on Earth (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 55-121 (81). According to Babylonian belief, an idol was just a dead object, made with human hands, until it was enlivened by a ceremony they called 'the opening of the mouth'. The spirit of the deity was rirually invited to reside in the statue, so that it might be served by the priests and worshipers and participate in processions (Edward M. Curtis, ABD, III, s.v. 'Idol, Idolatry', pp. 376-81 [377]).

110

Mixing Metaphors 25

I stirred up one from the north, and he has come (iiriN—see 45.11 for ptc.), from the rising of the sun he was summoned by name.16 He shall trample on rulers as on mortar, as the potter (""!!£V, yoser, shaper) treads clay. 26 Who declared it from the beginning, so that we might know, and beforehand, so that we might say, 'He is right'? There was no one who declared it, none who proclaimed, none who heard your [masc. pi.) words. 27 I first have declared it to Zion, and I give to Jerusalem a herald of good tidings. 28 But when I look there is no one; among these there is no counselor, who, when I ask, gives an answer. 29 No, they are all a delusion; their works are nothing; their images are empty wind. (41.25-29)

One of Deutero-Isaiah's primary structuring concepts is the contrast between YHWH and the gods. This contrast is expressed in a variety of ways, in addition to including the aforementioned control over destiny: 1. YHWH knows the future (41.26; 44.6-8; 46.11; 48.5), but the idols don't know (44.9) and are blind (44.9). 2. YHWH can produce witnesses to his power ('You are my witness', 43.10); either the idols' witnesses cannot produce the right testimony (44.9-11) or there are no witnesses (40.28). 3. YHWH is the shaper (43.7,21; 44.2,24; 45.9); the idols are shaped by others (40.8-20; 46.6-7). 4. YHWH is mobile (he carries and leads his people, 40.11; 42.16; 46.3-4; 48.21; 49.10; 52.2); the idols cannot move themselves (46.6-7), but must be carried (45.20), are carried into captivity (46.1-2), and may topple if not fastened down (40.20; 41.7). 5. YHWH answers (49.8), but the idols do not answer (46.7-8). The bottom line of all of these comparisons is that the idols are nothing (41.24; 40.28), and that the idols cannot save (45.20; ch. 46). Only YHWH can save (45.21 22). Deutero-Isaiah goes on to ridicule those who worship the idols, those who make them, and those who pay to have them made:17 They shall be turned back and utterly put to shame— those who trust in carved images, who say to cast images, 'You are our gods' (42.17). 16. IQIsa and LXX: 'called by name'; MT: 'and he shall call on my name'. 17. Many scholars, beginning with Duhm, have argued that substantial portions of DeuteroIsaiah's polemics against the idols (and the idol-makers) are not authentic to Deutero-Isaiah, but represent later additions (e.g. Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, p. 29). This assumption is not, however, a consensus. In fact, these polemics appear to be an integral part of Deutero-Isaiah.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

111

All of them are put to shame and confounded, the makers of idols go in confusion together ... (45.16) 'All who make idols are nothing, and the things they delight in do not profit; their witnesses neither see nor know. And so they will be put to shame. 10 Who would fashion a god or cast an image that can do no good? "Look, all its devotees shall be put to shame; the artisans too are merely human. Let them all assemble, let them stand up; they shall be terrified, they shall all be put to shame (44.9-11). 20b

They have no knowledge—those who carry about their wooden idols, and keep on praying to a god that cannot save. 2 'Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, YHWH? There is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is no one besides me. (45.20-21) 'Bel bows down, Nebo stoops, their idols are on beasts and cattle; these things you carry are loaded as burdens on weary animals. 2 They stoop, they bow down together; they cannot save the burden, but themselves go into captivity ... 6 Those who lavish gold from the purse, and weigh out silver in the scales— they hire a goldsmith, who makes it into a god; then they fall down and worship! 7 They lift it to their shoulders, they carry it, they set it in its place, and it stands there; it cannot move from its place. If one cries out to it, it does not answer or save anyone from trouble. (46.1-7)

For Deutero-Isaiah, then, YHWH is unique, incomparable, the one who causes the future to come into being: 6b

l am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. Who is like me? Let them proclaim it... Who has announced from of old the things to come (m^^H)? Let them tell us what is yet to be (TTrrWl—see 41.23; 45.11). 8 .. .have I not told you from of old and declared it? You are my witnesses! Is there any god besides me? There is no other rock; I know not one. (44.6-8) 7

9

.. .for I am God (El), and there is no other; I am God (Elohim), and there is no one like me, '"declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, 'My purpose shall stand, and I will fulfill my intention', "calling a bird of prey from the east, the man for my purpose from a far country, I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have planned (HIT, yasar, shaped), and I will do it. (46.9-11).

112

Mixing Metaphors

Divination and Power over the Future Deutero-Isaiah's polemics against the idols and against divination are logical in a Babylonian context, a context in which divination played an important part in the belief system. Divination was practiced by the priests, the barus, and the sha 'ilus. Divination practices were understood not only to reveal the future, but also to give a person time to implement magic rituals to avert disaster, to alter fate.18 The Israelites had always had an interest in divining the future.19 Like Deuteronomy, Deutero-Isaiah rejects divination practices. (Deutero-Isaiah's own strong polemic against divination might be interpreted as evidence that some Judahites in Babylon were adopting Babylonian divination customs.) Deutero-Isaiah rejects them on the basis that only YHWH knows the future because only YHWH controls the future. YHWH will reveal the things to come only through YHWH'S chosen messengers. Nothing can be discerned from divination. And YHWH'S plan cannot be altered: 'I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have planned [shaped], and I will do it' (46.lib). It may be precisely the popularity of such divination practices that produced Deutero-Isaiah's explicit claims that only YHWH knows the future and only YHWH causes things to happen. It is YHWH 'who frustrates the omens of liars, and makes fools of diviners; who turns back the wise, and makes their knowledge foolish' (44.25). When YHWH proclaims judgment on daughter Babylon in ch. 47, among her crimes is the practice of divination (47.12-13). YHWH and the Babylonian Artisans The basis of YHWH'S ability to know the future and to make it happen lies in YHWH'S power as the creator of all things. On the issue of divine foreknowledge, Deutero-Isaiah contrasts YHWH to the gods/idols. However, on the issue of creative activity, YHWH'S actions are likened to those of an artisan. An implicit similarity exists between YHWH as an artisan and the artisans who create gods.20 Deutero-Isaiah describes the artisans who make gods:

18. Jean Bottero, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), pp. 122-23. R. I. Caplice furnishes an incantation that provided the means to avert disaster: 'If there was a misformed newborn creature in a man's house—whether (born) of cattle, sheep, ox, [goat], horse, dog, pig, or human being—in order to avert that evil, [that it may not approach] the man and his house (you perform the following ritual). [Ritual described.] 'Incantation: Shamash, judge of heaven and earth ... Shamash, I have approached you! Shamash, I have sought you out! Shamash, I have turned to you! Avert from me the evil of this misborn creature! May it not affect me! May its evil be far from my person' (R. I. Caplice, The Akkadian Namburbi Texts: An Introduction [Malibu, CA: Undena, 1974], p. 16). 19. Frederick H. Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel and its Near Eastern Environment: A Socio-Historical Investigation (JSOTSS; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994). Deuteronomy's condemnation of divination practices demonstrates this (18.9-14). Deuteronomy's rejection of such practices is based on the view that they are inherently pagan. 20. This is also noted and developed at length by Knut Holter, Second Isaiah's Idol Fabrication Passages (New York: Peter Lang, 1995). He describes the major thesis of his book as follows: 'what have to be—ironically!—likened to God in the idol fabrication passages are the idolfabricators, and not the idols or gods themselves' (p. 87), emphasis his.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

113

18 To whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him? 19 An idol?—A workman (ETIH, 'artisan') casts it, and a goldsmith overlays it with gold, and casts for it silver chains. 20 As a gift one chooses mulberry wood —wood that will not rot— then seeks out a skilled artisan to set up an image that will not topple. (40.18-20)

Through his many references, Deutero-Isaiah creates a picture of the work of the artisan. The artisan makes/shapes idols. YHWH is also one who creates and shapes. As noted earlier, there are three verbs used repeatedly to describe YHWH'S creative activity: N""Q ('create'), "liT ('shape'), and H^U ('make'). YHWH'S activity parallels and surpasses that of the idol-maker. Deutero-Isaiah sometimes uses detailed metaphorical language to speak of YHWH as an artisan: YHWH as a carpenter: Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand and marked off the heavens with a span, enclosed the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales and the hills in a balance? (40.12)

YHWH as a tool-maker or weapon-maker, whose implement will conquer the enemy: 25

Now, I will make of you a threshing sledge, sharp, new, and having teeth; you shall thresh the mountains and crush them, and you shall make the hills like chaff. 26 You shall winnow them and the wind shall carry them away, and the tempest shall scatter them. (41.15-16a; see also 49.2).

YHWH is a smith (48.10, and creator of the smith in 54.16), and a stonesetter who decorates Zion with precious stones (54.11). Deutero-Isaiah's depiction of YHWH as an artisan (whose activities compete with those of the idol-makers) is one of the structuring metaphors of DeuteroIsaiah. One of the entailments of this metaphor is that Israel itself is an artifact of an artisan, just as the idols are artifacts of artisans. In Deutero-Isaiah's anti-idol polemic, an interesting structure of relationships is apparent: YHWH shapes Israel. The artisan shapes the idol. In this polemic it is Israel, then (not only YHWH), that is compared to the idol. It is Israel that is created, shaped, carried (44.1-7). DeuteroIsaiah makes some explicit and implicit comparisons between Israel and the idols: 1. 2.

The idols are formed by artisans (46.1; 40.8-10); Israel is formed by YHWH (e.g. 43.1,7, 21; 44.12, 21). The idols are made by material 'chosen' (IfD) by the artisans (40.19-20); Israel is 'chosen' by YHWH (41.8).21

21. Michael B. Dick, 'Prophetic Parodies of Making the Cult Image', in Dick (ed.), Born, pp. 1-54(21).

114 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Mixing Metaphors The idols are carried by their worshipers (45.20; 46.1);22 Israel is carried by YHWH (46.3-4). The idols are carried into captivity (46.2); Israel was carried into captivity and will now go out from captivity (48.20). The gods (or their witnesses) potentially accuse YHWH (41.21); Israel accuses YHWH (43.26). The gods are blind (44.9); Israel is blind and deaf (43.8). The idols and Israel are both witnesses for their makers (idols: 44.9-11; Israel. 44.6-8; 43.10, 12). Both are formed of/like metal (idols: 41.7; Israel: 48.10). Both are hewn from stone (Israel, 51.1; idols are made of either wood or stone).23

These are entailments of a structuring metaphor in which YHWH is an artisan like the idol-makers and Israel is an artifact like the idols. These comparisons function primarily to make the point that the Babylonian gods are creations rather than creators. Humans make gods (in their image). (Deutero-Isaiah does not go as far as Gen. 1.27, which says that YHWH makes humans in his image.) The issue is power. The Babylonian artisans exert control over their building materials, but YHWH exerts control over all creation and all events. Cyrus is among YHWH'S creations and a part of YHWH'S unfolding plan. Thus Cyrus's successes are credited to YHWH. Israel's redemption is assured, because Israel is YHWH'S creation, and YHWH is the shaper of the things to come. YHWH as an Artisan in Isaiah 45.9-13 The image of YHWH as an artisan is not remarkable and is hardly unique to DeuteroIsaiah. Wherever YHWH is depicted as creator, artisan imagery is potentially present. At times, however, artisan language is explicit. In Genesis 2, YHWH 'shapes' piT, yasar—see Isa. 45.9, 11) the first human from the dust of the ground (v. 7) and 'builds' (TT]D) a woman from a rib (v. 22). The tradition that humans were molded from clay or dirt is found in both Israelite and Mesopotamian traditions. In the ancient Near East, human beings were understood to have been shaped by the gods from clay and blood or just from clay. The Epic of Gilgamesh describes how after the flood 'all of mankind had returned to clay'.24 YHWH'S shaping of an artifact from clay portrays a human artifact/creation. Here in Isa. 45.9-10 the work of a clay artisan is juxtaposed to the begetting and bearing of a child (see also Isa. 64.8). The Genesis and ancient Near Eastern traditions about the creation of humankind bring together the clay imagery in v. 9 and the birth imagery in v. 10.25 22. Though the Mesopotamian mis pi ritual stresses 'the statue's ability to "walk"' (Dick, 'Parodies', p. 19n. 9). 23. Deutero-Isaiah does not refer explicitly to the idols as being hewn from stone. However, a ^DS ('idol') is 'hewn from either wood or stone' (BDB, p. 820). 24. Pritchard (ed.), The Ancient Near East, I, p. 69,1. 134, trans. E. A. Speiser. 25. The tradition that humans are 'compacted with blood' is not found in the Hebrew Bible, but is found in the Wisdom of Solomon (7.2), and also in the Enuma Elish, where Marduk commands the creation of humans and Ea carries it out. Marduk says, 'Blood I will mass and cause bones to

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

115

In Isaiah 45, YHWH is the artisan who has created Cyrus (v. 8, 'I, YHWH, have created him'), the earth and humankind (v. 12, 'I made the earth and created humankind upon it'), the heavens (v. 12, 'it was my hands that stretched out the heavens'), and Israel (v. 9, 'the one who contends with his shaper'). The artisan image and the birth imagery interact to highlight the creation of human beings (YHWH'S servants—Israel and Cyrus.) 3. Exposition of Isaiah 45.9-13 Isa. 45.9-13, the last subunit of the larger unit, begins with the words of either the prophet or of YHWH. This unit is a "Hi"! (hoy) oracle, but also uses 'lawsuit' (1T~1) language ('he who contends'). YHWH, or the prophet, speaks, basically throwing the case out of court. Verse 9 Ha! He who contends with his shaper, earthenware with the artisans of earth! Does the clay say to its shaper, 'What are you making?', or, 'Your artifact has no hands'?

'Ha!' is the chosen translation of "Hif, hoy (rather than 'woe'), because the tone better matches 44.25, where those who believe in Babylonian omens are said to be made foolish and mocked by YHWH. 26 A mocking tone is appropriate here. Those who ask questions of the gods (diviners) are foolish. So also are those who question YHWH. The mocking tone also matches the question: Does the clay question the artisan? Such a silly idea! It is Deutero-Isaiah's style in the antiidolatry polemics to mock the confusion of roles between creator and creation. This

be. I will establish a savage, "man" shall be his name'. And so 'Out of [Kingu's] blood they fashioned mankind' (Pritchard [ed.], The Ancient Near East, I, pp. 36-37, trans. E. A. Speiser). 26. The common translation of the term H!"!, hoy, as 'woe' is not adopted here since 'woe' implies a lament form. (The lament genre for''in, hoy, is supported by W. Janzen, who suggests an origin in the funeral lament; see Mourning Cry and Woe Oracle [Berlin: De Gruyter, 1972], esp. pp. 20, 57, 90-91). Another option is Richard J. Clifford's translation of the term in 45.9-10 as 'fool' (Fair Spoken and Persuading: An Interpretation of Second Isaiah [New York: Paulist Press, 1984], 116; see also Clifford's article 'The Use of hoy in the Prophets', CBQ 38 [1966], pp. 45864). Clifford associates this use of the term with the mashal (proverb) tradition where it means 'foolish' or 'unlucky' (pp. 462-63). Stuhlmueller, following Clifford, translates the term in 45.9-10 as 'foolish' (Redemption, p. 200). The word 'foolish' would accurately portray what this author takes to be the tone of Deutero-Isaiah—derisive and, in v. 11, sarcastic. However, adoption of the term 'foolish' might imply a wisdom genre, which is not accepted here. Thus, the term 'ha' (which is still less than completely satisfactory) is used here, following Hillers's example in his translation of Isa. 10.1-3 (DelbertR. Killers, 'Hoy and Hoy-Oracles: A Neglected Synactic Aspect', in Carol L. Meyers and M. O'Conner (eds), The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth [Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983], pp. 185-88 [187]). Martin J. Buss notes the vocative function of nli~!, hoy, which conveys emotion 'determined by the context' ('The Idea of Sitz im Leben—History and Critique', ZAW90 [1978], pp. 157-70 [169, n. 65]).

116

Mixing Metaphors

image places YHWH in contrast to those who make idols: 'Humans make idols; Yahweh makes humans'.27 In w. 9-10, who is it that is questioning the artisan, who is questioning the father and the woman, and about what or whom are they questioning? Within the world of the metaphor, the artifact is questioning the artisan. About what? About itself or about another artifact? Someone is questioning the father, the mother. Is it the child about to be born asking about itself? Or is it someone else asking about the child to be born? On another level, who or what is signified by this metaphor? Is it Israel, the nations, or Cyrus? Scholars answer these questions in a variety of ways. Virtually all are agreed that Israel is the foolish artifact that questions the artisan (God) (v. 9a). Is, then, the artifact that has no hands (v. 9b) Israel itself, is it someone else (Cyrus) or something else (God's divine plan), or, following the LXX, is it God who is said to have no hands (i.e. no power)? The foolish earthenware must indeed be Jacob/Israel, who contends with his shaper YHWH. In the context of the larger unit, the bone of contention apparently is Cyrus, as well as YHWH'S whole plan of redemption which centers on Cyrus. Throughout DeuteroIsaiah, YHWH is barraged with the accusations of the people: Why are you silent? Why have you abandoned me? Why weren't you there when I called? Why have you sold us into exile? Here the implied question is, Why is Cyrus your anointed? The hubris of the clay in questioning the artisan is ludicrous. The question is 'What are you making?' (This could be rendered as an accusatory 'What do you think you're doing!') The explicit accusation is 'Your artifact has no hands!' The questioner (Israel) is not speaking of himself (there is no T language) but of another of the artisan's creations that is, Cyrus. Our initial reading suggests that a) the creation is incomplete and therefore inadequate, b) Cyrus is powerless (handless), or c) YHWH'S plan is ineffective. 'Hand' is a fairly common metaphor for power, especially when associated with a royal imperialist (e.g. 'into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar'—Jer. 21.7). The accusation that YHWH'S creation has no hands may thus well be an accusation of the powerlessness of Cyrus to save Israel. Verse 10 Ha! He who says to a father, 'What are you begetting (T7^,yld, hi.)?', or to a woman, 'With what are you in labor (TTI, hyl)T

1. Parent Imagery. The imagery now shifts to that of begetting father and birthing woman. 'Father' and 'woman' (or 'wife') seem like an unusual pair for parallel statements (rather than 'father' and 'mother'), but these clearly function as equivalent phrases. Who questions the father and mother? Is Israel, God's child, questioning its divine parent? Or are others (the nations) questioning God about God's child, Israel? Is Israel questioning God about the 'things to come' (v. 11), with which God is in labor? In 42.14 the process (pregnancy) has been portrayed as invisible and silent until the onset of labor. The people have been asking, 'How 27. Jon Berquist, describing Deutero-Isaiah's view of the idols and of YHWH as creator (Judaism in Persia's Shadow: A Social and Historical Approach [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995], p. 39).

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

117

long, O YHWH, will you be silent?' Here in 45.9-10 the process is visible. The artisan is clearly fashioning something. The woman is in labor ('writhing'—see Chapter 2). YHWH is not perceived as being silent or absent or inactive. Here the question being directed at YHWH is, 'Just what are you doing?' This questioning of YHWH is presented as both hubris and foolishness. Some scholars interpret the questioner as the child being born. However, as many others note, the text does not say 'his father' or 'his mother'. Just as the clay in v. 9 asks about another of the artisan's creations, so another is asking about the child to be born. Thus, this is not Israel asking about itself but Israel asking about something else. This child being born may represent YHWH'S plan in general, or, as the larger literary context suggests, Israel is questioning YHWH about Cyrus. The use of father language, appearing between the artisan figure and the mother figure, provides continuity between artisan and mother. 'Father' can parallel either the artisan or the mother figure. (See Isa. 64.8a: 'Yet, O YHWH, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you are our potter ("lUT, yoser, 'shaper...'.) The term 'father' can refer to an artisan, as a metaphor for the master of a guild (of artisans) whose members are the 'sons' (Gen. 4.20-21, see above, Chapter 2). The Akkadian cognate for 1 ;"*, yld—waladu—is common in texts concerning the making of idols.28 But Deutero-Isaiah's subsequent use of the terms 'woman' and 'labor' (7Tf, hyl) make the 'father' a parental figure. Reading the parent imagery of v. 9 in interaction with the artisan imagery highlights an aspect of the metaphor that is hidden when these are taken in isolation from each other. That aspect is the contrast between human artisans who make gods and YHWH who makes humans. In Deutero-Isaiah's cultural context, the physical making of an idol does not create a god. In Babylonian idol theology, the physical artifact must still be 'born' ,29 The combination of artisanship and birth represents the totality of heaven and earth, earthly shaping and heavenly birth.30 YHWH's artifacts too, Israel and Cyrus, are not only 'shaped' but also birthed, i.e. enlivened. The Babylonian idol was said to have a divine father (the river god Ea) and a divine mother (the birth goddess).31 For Deutero-Isaiah, YHWH is the one who gives Israel and Cyrus birth, the father and the mother who is above being questioned. 2. Verse 10 and Cyrus. Verse 10 is part of the context of the Cyrus oracle. The image of the questioning concerning a birth of a son (v. 10) in this literary context suggests it is Israel's questioning of YHWH'S commissioning of Cyrus. DeuteroIsaiah's description of Cyrus carries the entailments of the Davidic king. Cyrus is YHWH'S 'anointed', 'YHWH's shepherd', the temple-builder, and YHWH'S creation. Parent-child imagery is also consistent with the language of the Davidic tradition. One of the major traditions of the Davidic dynasty is that the anointed one is also 28. Walker and Dick, 'Induction', p. 116. 29. Dick, 'Parodies', pp. 26,41; Dick argues (p. 43) that Deutero-Isaiah was familiar with the Babylonian 'opening of the mouth' ritual described above (sect. 2). 30. Dick, 'Parodies', p. 44. 31. Dick,' Parodies', pp. 43 -44. Dick argues that the craftsmen function, then, as the midwives.

118

Mixing Metaphors

the 'son' of YHWH: I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me ... (2 Sam. 7.14) He shall cry to me, 'You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation!' I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth. (Ps. 89.26) ... You are my son; today I have begotten [given-birth-to] you. ("friTT—root

1L}\yld,qal)(Ps.2.7)

And possibly we may add: 6

For a child has been born for us, a son given to us ... ... and there shall be endless peace for the throne of David and his kingdom. He will establish and uphold it with justice and with righteousness ... (Isa. 9.6-7) 1

In Ps. 2.7 and Isa. 9.6, the anointed one is the newly begotten, newly born son of YHWH (using birth language to convey the divine adoption of the king). Ps. 2.7 (using the qal form of "T ;*, yld) conveys both father imagery and mother imagery. Here in Isa. 45.10 the father begets ( iT,yld; the hiphil form clearly refers to the role of a father) and the woman (mother) is in labor (vTT, hyl, clearly a mother's role—see Chapter 2). What is being born? That is the question which is foolish to ask. Nevertheless, Cyrus is the one of whom the questions are asked. Cyrus is YHWH'S anointed, YHWH'S shepherd, YHWH'S servant, YHWH'S son. 3. Verse 10 and the Questions Posed. In v. 9 the idea of a clay work questioning its shaper is obviously absurd. Thus, ''IPI, hoy, is translated there as derisive or mocking. Again in v. 10 the prophet (or YHWH) addresses the questioner with a derisive "Hi"!, hoy. The foolishness of inquiring about an imminent birth is not as self-evident here. What kinds of questions are these: 'What are you begetting?'; 'With what are you in labor?' Perhaps they are inappropriate questions because the answer is obvious: 'A baby, of course!' This reading would suggest, then, that YHWH'S use of Cyrus and plan to liberate Israel should be obvious, so it is silly to question it. Yet it is clearly not obvious. The prophet is compelled to make a case for this interpretation of events. Another possibility is the common question on people's minds at an imminent birth: 'A boy or a girl?' It is foolish because even the parents do not know until the child is actually born. A natural concern at birth would be whether labor will be a success and whether the child will be healthy. These are foolish questions because they are things the parents cannot answer in advance, before the child actually comes forth. However, anxious parents did have the means to ask for information concerning a child soon to be born. Just as Rebekah 'inquired of YHWH' concerning her difficult pregnancy (Gen. 25.22-23), so other women of the ancient Near East would have made their inquiries. In Mesopotamia, a childless woman might go to a baru (seer) or sha 'ilu (inquirer) to ask about the possibility of conceiving. Karel van der Toorn notes that some personal names imply that the parents had received

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

119

a birth oracle from a baru, for example, Ikun-pi-Adad, 'The-promise of Adad proved reliable', or Iqbi-ul-ini, 'He promised it and did not change his mind'.32 Deutero-Isaiah's "Hif, hoy, language reflects a condemnation of divination and the foolishness of those who attempt to discern the future through divination. With Cyrus's campaign under way, there must have been considerable interest in Babylon in divining the fate of the city, a fate that was understood to be in the hands of the gods. (While on the one hand, potential parents would inquire about a birth, on the other hand, an unusual birth could provide information about the future. For example, if a child was born with no hands it was a sign that the city would be conquered.33) For Deutero-Isaiah, one making such inquiries would certainly be a foolish person who must be put to shame; n in, hoy (Shame on you!), to the one who asks! Questioning YHWH about his plan concerning Cyrus and the liberation of Israel is tantamount to the foolish people bringing their questions about the future to the other gods. Divination is foolish not only because it seeks answers from those who cannot answer (46.7), but also because it seeks to manipulate the future (manipulate the gods). Questioning YHWH is foolish because he has already proclaimed the things-to-come through his messengers. He has already proclaimed his blessing on Cyrus and his promise of restoration. Verse 11 Thus says YHWH, the holy one of Israel and shaper (for him) of the things to come, 'Question me about my son! Command me concerning the artifact of my hands!'

'The things to come' translates an unusual Hebrew word (TinN qal act. ptc. fern, pi., 'come'). This participle appears two other times in Deutero-Isaiah (41.23 and 44.7), and the imperfect form appears in 41.5, 25.34 The occurrence here of this unusual word draws on its earlier appearances in Deutero-Isaiah. 41.23-29 is an earlier Cyrus oracle. Its context in 41.23 is YHWH'S sarcastic challenge to the gods to 'set forth a case' and 'declare to us the things to comer Then, in v. 25, it is Cyrus who 'comes' (HH^), summoned by name, trampling 'as the artisan pi£V, yoser) treads on clay'. YHWH speaks of'the things to come' again in 44.7, again in 32. Karel van der Toorn, From Her Cradle to Her Grave: The Role of Religion in the Life of the Israelite and the Babylonian Woman (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), p. 81. He notes, 'A number of divinatory omens concern predictions about birth. An explanation of a certain oil-omen reads, "The wife of the man shall bear a son". In the liver omina we come across the prediction that "the barren one shall give birth".' (p. 81). Bottero notes oracles addressing whether a man will have children, or whether 'one of his children will become a person of importance, or king, etc'. (Mesopotamia, p. 117). 33. Erie Leichty, The Omen Series Summa Izbu (Texts from Cuneiform Sources 4; Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin Publications, 1970), p. 59 (Tablet III, no. 50). Does Isa. 45.9-10 with its accusation of 'no hand' show an awareness of this Babylonian omen? The idea is tantalizing (enough to mention here), but difficult to substantiate. 34. The root appears only 16 times outside of Deutero-Isaiah, and the Aramaic root 16 times in Ezra and Daniel.

120

Mixing Metaphors

a sarcastic challenge to the gods of Babylon, asking, 'Who has announced from of old the things to comeT There is a progression in Deutero-Isaiah's use of this word/phrase, from challenging the gods to declare the things to come (41.23), to YHWH's claim to be the one who has declared (who knows) the things to come (44.7), and finally to YHWH'S claim in 45.11 that he is the very shaper of the things to come. Those who inquire of the gods seek to know the future, but only YHWH creates it. He is the creator of Israel's (and Babylon's) destiny. YHWH'S challenge which follows is, then, utterly sarcastic: 'Question me about my son! Command me concerning the artifact of my hands!'35 This statement completes an ABBA structure in w. 9-11: A Artisan: Artifact (with no hands) challenged (by clay) (9b). B Parent: Inquiries about child soon to be born (10). B Parent: Inquiries about YHWH'S son (1 Iba). A Artisan: Artifact (the work of YHWH's hands) challenged (1 lb|3).

Verse 11 is structured in such a way as to respond first to v. 10, with YHWH answering as the father/mother figure, and then to v. 9, with YHWH answering as the artisan. YHWH is Israel's 'shaper' (IRV, yoser), that is, artisan, and therefore, by parallel metaphor, father and mother. Just as YHWH has created all things, so YHWH gives birth to all things. The sarcastic challenge in 45.11 is once again related to YHWH'S disgust for divination in 44.25. Such foolishness deserves the sarcasm in which Deutero-Isaiah delights when it comes to Babylonian piety. What is the object of Israel's inquiring and commanding? It is YHWH'S 'son' and the 'artifact of my hand'. The unpointed "'DD, bny, could be either 'my children' (masc. pi.) or 'my son' (masc. sing.). YHWH'S 'children' or 'son' could logically be the Judahites in exile. They would then be asking about themselves. But the literary context points to a questioning concerning Cyrus and YHWH'S plan involving Cyrus. YHWH sarcastically invites his listeners to command him concerning Cyrus, his child and his creation. How directly does v. 11 refer to Cyrus? In 45.8, YHWH says, 'I, YHWH, created him [Cyrus]'.36 It has been argued above that the birth imagery in v. 10 is consistent with the Davidic language with which Deutero-Isaiah speaks of Cyrus. Now in v. 11 YHWH speaks of '^3, banay, 'my children'. A change in the pointing of the MT renders this "'ID, baniy, 'my son'. (The singular is grammatically parallel to 7I2S, 'artifact'.) While Stuhlmueller translates "'DD, bny, as 'children', he says, in reading v. 11 with w. 9-10, that Israel 'has challenged Yahweh's intention to treat Cyrus like herself as one of his own children (v 1 lb)'.37 In v. 12 YHWH goes on to speak of Cyrus—clearly Cyrus—even though he is not named. Thus, we translate v. 1 lb 'Question me about my son! Command me 35. A similar sarcastic imperative, spoken by YHWH, occurs in Amos 4.4-5: Come to Bethel—and transgress; to Gilgal—and multiply transgression; bring your sacrifices every morning, your tithes every three days; bring a thank offering of leavened bread, and proclaim freewill offerings, publish them; for so you love to do, O people of Israel! Says the Lord YHWH.

36. Following Gitay's reading (Prophecy, p. 178). 37. Stuhlmueller, Redemption, p. 202.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

121

concerning the artifact of my hand!' The artifact of v. 9 and the child of v. 10 are none other than Cyrus. The link between birthing/begetting (the 'son') and creation (the 'artifact') is made clear here in v. 11. Verses 12-13 12

7made (!"I2)U) (the) earth, and created (K~Q) humanity upon it; My hands stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host. 13 7 have roused him in righteousness, and I will straighten all his roads. He shall build my city and release my exiles, not with a price and not with a bribe,' says YHWH of hosts.

YHWH'S 'rousing' of Cyrus is spoken in the context of YHWH'S act of creating the earth, humankind, the heavens and their host. Cyrus too is YHWH'S creation, YHWH'S artifact, YHWH'S son. It is YHWH who 'commands' (in contrast to those who would try to command YHWH in v. 11). YHWH empowers Cyrus to rebuild and liberate, even though Cyrus is an artifact that looks wrong, that is, he is not an Israelite. Verses 12-13 (the final verses of the larger unit) parallel 44.24 (the beginning of the unit). In 44.24 YHWH has 'shaped you [Israel] from the womb'. Here, in 45.12-13, YHWH has created humankind (DTK, 'adarri). In both texts YHWH stretches out the heavens. YHWH'S power as creator and redeemer, proclaimed in 44.24, is now revealed in Cyrus. In 44.24, YHWH is the redeemer of the people; that is, the kinsman who purchases the freedom of the slave. Here, in 45.13, Cyrus will implement this release, and YHWH has so empowered him that he will free them without price. 4. Metaphoric Coherence: Artisan, Father, and Mother Among the 'associated commonplaces' of pregnancy is the idea of the child being molded in the womb. The development of the child in the womb is analogous to the work of the artisan in clay. YHWH shapes the child in the womb (Job 31.15; Ps. 139.13; Jer. 1.5). YHWH gives birth to creation (Job 38.28-29; Ps. 90.2). In the ancient Near East the 'personal god' was regarded by the ancient worshiper as both creator and begetter/birth-mother. The Babylonian 'called his personal god, "my creator" '.38 The personal god was called 'the god who "created" or "engendered" me' or 'the divine mother, who gave birth to me'.39 This is the concept that seems to be reflected in Jeremiah's condemnation of idol worshipers, 'who say to a tree [or 'piece of wood'], "You are my father", and to a stone, "You gave me birth"' (Jer. 2.27). In Isa. 45.9, 11, YHWH is the artisan who creates—Israel, Cyrus, the future. YHWH is also the divine parent (v. 11). It has already been shown how YHWH'S 38. Toorn, Cradle,?. 35. 39. Thorkild Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness: A History ofMesopotamian Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976), p. 158.

122

Mixing Metaphors

actions as artisan compare with those of the human artisans who create idols. Similarly, YHWH'S role as begetter and birth-mother has a parallel in the ancient Near Eastern understanding of the birth of an idol. An idol is born of a. divine father and divine mother. But YHWH gives birth as father and mother. Jacobsen argues that the 'opening of the mouth' ceremony 'was a cultic reenactment of the birth of the deity in heaven'.40 He describes part of the 'opening of the mouth' consecration ceremony. The consecration of the idols is its 'own coming to life and being born': the implications of the succession of ritual acts is clear. The waters from the river are the life-giving waters of the 'father', the river-god Ea, and represent his fructifying semen. The trough of tamarisk into which they are poured represents the womb of the 'mother', the wood, which is to conceive and to give birth to the cult statue ... it is placed on the 'brick of the birth-goddess', that is, on the primitive birth stool and block for cutting the umbilical cord that was her implement and emblem. Around it, as birth helpers, stand the other deities that are powers to form and shape the embryo, namely, the craftsmen-gods—she herself has as one of her names that of 'The Carpenter in the Womb'—and all the gods are called in to help and to witness the birth. Each is reminded in the repeated incantation of the sacred nature of the mother-to-be, the tamarisk, which, as mentioned, was the wood for divine images. The night is to see the birth of the deity whose statue has been made not on earth but in heaven among the assembled gods; it is to appear the next morning.41

Jacobsen's summary of the birth of an idol shows the close link of birth and artisanship. The mother goddess and the craftsmen gods work together to give life to the idol that human artisans have shaped. But for Deutero-Isaiah the idols have no life in them. It is YHWH who is mother, father, and artisan to Israel, and YHWH who is mother, father, and artisan to Cyrus, his agent of redemption, his anointed one, and his son. Unlike the idols, YHWH is not born, but is the one who gives birth. YHWH is not shaped, but is himself the shaper of all things. Cyrus becomes the counterpart to the idols, the artifact given life through divine birth. He is not a god, but is YHWH'S agent, and as such is more powerful than the gods/idols. The idols are created by human hands, but Cyrus is the work of YHWH'S hands (v. 11), who is the agent of redemption, God's anointed one. 5. Conclusions The juxtaposition in this passage of the artisan imagery and the parental imagery suggests that the images function in a somewhat similar manner. What connects these images is the creative process. Both the artisan language and the parental language highlight the role of YHWH as creator. The images of the artisan and the birthing woman point to creation as a process, a process not yet complete, with 40. Thorkild Jacobsen, 'The Graven Image', in P. D. Miller et al. (eds), Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), pp. 15-32, esp. 25-27. 41. Jacobsen, 'Graven Image', pp. 25-26.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

123

final results as yet unseen. This is consistent with the prophet's concern with past, present, and future, not as distinct entities, but as elements of a continuing process that is in YHWH'S hands. Destiny is being shaped and being born. YHWH has destined Israel for redemption through his agent Cyrus. The artisan language echoes Deutero-Isaiah's references elsewhere to artisans, that is, the anti-idol passages. Reading this unit in light of Deutero-Isaiah's polemics against the idols is quite illuminating. The Babylonian artisans created images which are powerless (one could say 'without hands'). But YHWH'S creation, Cyrus, is imbued with YHWH'S power in his assigned destiny to deliver Israel. The imagery of artisanship interacts with the imagery of birth in the Babylonian understanding of the creation of an idol as a sort of a birth. Thus also YHWH'S creative shaping of Israel and Cyrus is understood in terms of parent and offspring. Israel is YHWH'S offspring. Cyrus is YHWH'S son. One of the major issues of Isaiah 40^8 is the question of who determines destiny, the things to come. Deutero-Isaiah launches an assault on Babylonian religion in which the Babylonian gods, immanent in their idols, are thought to determine destiny, 'the things to come'. Knowledge of these things to come was thought to be available to human beings by means of divination, a practice that Deutero-Isaiah mocks in 44.25 and condemns in 47.12-13. Deutero-Isaiah cites, in contrast, the messengers of YHWH (including surely himself) as the source of knowledge about the things to come (44.26). YHWH alone is the creator and therefore YHWH alone is the determiner of the future. Not only does YHWH determine (i.e. create) the future, but YHWH cannot be manipulated through magical means, as can the Babylonian gods (according to Babylonian beliefs which Deutero-Isaiah mocks).42 In Deutero-Isaiah's view, just as it is foolish for the clay to contend with its shaper (v. 9) and for someone to question one who gives birth (v. 10), so also it is pointless to inquire about (to divine) the future or attempt to alter destiny (or to 'command' YHWH). YHWH is creating the redemption of Israel through Cyrus, whom YHWH empowers, who is YHWH'S servant, shepherd, anointed one, creation, and son. Israelites who question whether YHWH can indeed use Cyrus are foolish clay artifacts and foolish children. As the work of YHWH'S hands and as YHWH'S anointed son, Cyrus shall fulfill the destiny that YHWH has determined: to free the exiles and rebuild Jerusalem. 6. Appendix: Textual Analysis This is a textually difficult pericope, in particular vv. 9 and 11. Verse 9a. (translation mine): 9

Ha! He who contends with his shaper, earthenware (ETUI) with the artisans (n£Hri) of earth!

42. Is there really a qualitative difference between Babylonian practices designed to change the gods' minds, such as by 'magic', and Israelite practices with the same end in mind, that is, prayers and making vows? What matters here is that there is a difference in the mind of Deutero-Isaiah.

124

Mixing Metaphors

The MT reads as follows: Ha! He who contends with his shaper; earthenware (2Tin, masc. sing.) with (among) the earthenwares (1tD"in, masc. pi.) of earth!

A simple emendation of a & to a IZ) yields the reading that the earthenware contends with artisans (reading "'SJTl PI instead of"1^"!!"]) of earth. This emendation is widely accepted and 'artisan' provides a suitable parallel term for 'shaper' (~1UV, ydser). The Qumran scroll IQIsa provides the following variant reading (without pointing—thus without distinguishing between \D and 12)): V"~IHV DN D"l "'111 HQI^n '•ETIin riK tznn ('Ha! He who contends with his shapers [masc. pi.), earthenware with the artisans/ earthenwares of the earth.').43 Verse 9b The MT text of 9b is ambiguous:44

This may be translated in two ways: Does the clay say to its shaper, 'What are you making?', or, 'Your artifact has no hands?' Does the clay say to its shaper, 'What are you making?', or [does] your artifact [say], 'He has no hands?'

43. This differs from the MT in three significant ways: 1. 2. 3.

'Shapers' is plural, grammatically parallel to 'artisans' of the earth. The word 'earth' has an article and is the second term of a construct phrase with 'artisans', and grammatically preferable to the MT (without the article). The presence of the 1 in 'artisan' clearly renders it a participle. Algers Johns cites this as support for reading the word in IQIsa as "'UTTin ('artisans') rather than n 2mn ('earthenware'), since the latter root in a participle form is 'difficult, if not impossible to postulate' (Algers F. Johns, 'A Note on Isaiah 45.9', AUSS 1 [1963], 62-64 [62]).

44. Compare the MT and IQIsa: Verse 9b MT: Verse 9bIQIsa: Johns notes that the word DTK in IQIsa 'changes the MT thought considerably'. He translates the Qumran text of v. 9 thus: Woe to him who contends with his Shaper(s), a potsherd, with the Artisan(s) of the earth (soil). Woe to him who [being] clay, says to his Shaper, What art thou doing? Thy Maker is not a man (human being) having hands. (Johns emends by adding 'clay' in 9b.) His rationale for the meaning of the last line is that 'man' has hands, while God, in contrast, 'is not dependent on hands for his power' ('Note', p. 64). This is not at all convincing as an original reading for Deutero-Isaiah. YHWH has a 'hand' in vv. 11-12. 'Hand' is also a metaphor for power (e.g. 50.2), which is probably the point here.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

125

Should 'artifact' be read as the subject of the clay's statement (e.g. NRSV), or is 'artifact' the speaker, in parallel with 'clay' (e.g. KJV)? Either of these is a viable reading of the Hebrew. The second person suffix supports reading 'artifact' as part of a statement by the clay: 'Your artifact has no hands!'45 Two independent sources, LXX and Syriac, point to handless artisans.46 Scholars have proposed various other emendations. Many scholars are uncomfortable with the parallel juxtaposition of "HPI, hoy (MT, 9a and lOa) with the interrogative H (MT, 9b) and are inclined to emend the ^H, hoy, to H, ha, rather than the H, ha, to "Hi"!, hoy.47 While the argument for parallel syntax is attractive, the lack of an express subject is far too awkward, more awkward than the lack of parallel structure. The beginning of v. 9 is rather abrupt if it is a question. Verse 10 Ha! He who says to a father, 'What are you begetting' (T^lPl from l^T, yld, hi.)?', or to a woman, 'With what are you in labor?' ("p vTIH from /TI, hyl)?' 45. Many translations assume the artifact is a pot which has no handles (e.g. NRSV, Tanakh by JPS, RSV). There is no example in the Hebrew Bible of the word 'hands' referring to the handles of a pot. The term is used metaphorically for concrete objects in referring to pegs in the tabernacle (e.g. Exod. 36.22), and some kind of appendage on temple equipment (1 Kgs 7.32-36). Christopher R. North argues that 'handles' would be Pil^ (The Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation and Commentary to Chapters 40-55 [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964], p. 153). The dual form suggests literal 'hands'. Whybray says 'it is doubtful whether yadayim, literally, "hands", can mean "handles"' (Isaiah 40-66,108). M. Jastrow lists 'handles' as a primary meaning of "I11 along with 'hands' for rabbinic Hebrew. He also lists 'power' (A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, I [New York: E. Shapiro, Vallentine & Co., 1926], s.v. ' T', pp. 563-64). 46. The LXX and Syriac render 9b thus:

Does the clay say to its shaper/potter, 'What are you making?'? [Does] his artifact [say to the shaper], 'You have no hands!'? yr) epel b rrnXos TCO KEpapel Ti TTOIEIS, on OUK spya^ri ou8e EXEIS X E ^P a ?; (LXX) A reasonable explanation for this variant is that the LXX translators read the Hebrew text as ' [Does] your artifact [say], 'He has no hands!'?' (a reading consistent with the MT). This reading of the Hebrew text makes 'your artifact' part of the prophetic address rather than part of the quote. Since the rest of the address is in the third person, the shift to second person is disruptive. Also, if the artifact is addressing the artisan directly, why does it say 'he' instead of 'you'? The LXX translators appear to have solved the problem by transposing the second and third person suffixes on' artifact' and the preposition ;. If this explanation is correct, the LXX does not provide us with another Hebrew version but an emendation of a Hebrew version consistent with the MT. (IQIsa supports the MT on these suffixes.) 47. The latter option of H to "Hi! is in line with the Qumran text. While MT starts with 'Does the clay say to its shaper', IQIsa begins thus: 'Ha! He who says to his shaper', making the syntax directly parallel to the first line of v. 9. Johns argues that the Qumran reading of this phrase (with 1 lil instead of H) 'is probably original' (Johns, 'Note', p. 63). The term ""I!"!, hoy, is not characteristic of Deutero-lsaiah. Deutero-Isaiah is, as a whole, an oracle of salvation. ""I!"!, hoy (Ha!), with its derisive tone, would therefore not occur frequently. This emendation (changing n in to i~!) would make 9a parallel to 9b as an interrogative, 'Does he strive with his shaper?'

126

Mixing Metaphors

D. Winton Thomas suggests emending ''Til, hoy, to an interrogative (as in v. 9), rendering it 'Does one say to a father ...?'48 LXX renders 'woman' as 'mother'. Neither variation makes a significant difference to the meaning. Verse 11 Thus says YHWH, the holy one of Israel and shaper (for him) of the things to come, 'Question me about my son! Command me concerning the artifact of my hands!'

The MT as follows:

Our translation requires no emendation of unpointed text, only a change in line break. There are, however, a number of alternatives suggested by translators. 1. The Verb Forms in the Text and in Translation: 7NC? ('ask') andTl"]^ ('command'). The verb 7&£) is either an imperative (masc. pi.) with a first person suffix, or a perfect (third person, masc. pi.). The following verb, mU, is an imperfect (second person, masc. pi.). It seems reasonable to expect these verbs to agree. A number of interpreters emend 7K£) to a second person imperfect (masc. pi.) by moving the final H from the preceding word to the beginning of 7N2? and translating both verbs as unmarked interrogatives,49 thus, 'Will you ask me ...?' Such an emendation is, however, unnecessary if one reads the first verb as an imperative and the second verb as an imperfect with an imperative meaning.50 The emendation of the imperatives to interrogatives adopted by some resolves what seems to be a problematic use of the imperatives here. The imperative telling the audience to 'ask me' (i.e. YHWH) may be an acceptable idea, but 'command me' is unacceptable since it is the superior who commands the inferior. However, the imperatives can be—and, indeed, should be—read as sarcasm. The imperative should then be taken as a sarcastic remark, similar to the imperative remarks in Amos 4.4-5. A sarcastic tone would be consistent with the derisive "'IFT, hoy, with its sense of'Fool!' or 'Shame!' 2. The Term Hl'SH^ri ('the things to come'). Scholars who move the fl from nl'nfori to prefix bWD then emend nVP^H; either to "H^H ('will... me')51 or to DflNn ('will you'...).52 This resolves the awkward but not impossible placement of ni'nfcninllbintheMT:

48. D. Winton Thomas, BHS, p. 746. 49. Thomas, BHS, p. 746; Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, p. 164, n. b. Smart cites IQIsa support for 'Will you question me?' (History, p. 136). 50. Stuhlmueller renders it thus (Redemption, p. 201). 51. Thomas, BHS, p. 746, with no manuscript support cited. 52. Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, p. 164; Melugin, Formation, p. 37.

5. The Divine Artisan: Isaiah 45.9-13

127

Will you question me (about) the things to come, concerning my children, and concerning the artifact of my hands will you command me?

However, following LXX, we place the word n ' n n at the end of 1 la as the second term of a construct phrase with 'shaper' pUT, yoser).5Z This has the advantage of retaining the qal ptc. ni'Pl^n (the-things-to-come), which appears elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah (41.23 and 44.7), and seems to be tied to DeuteroIsaiah's concept of 'new things'. 3. The Term "'DH ('my children '/'my son '). The alternate pointing which renders 'my son' (instead of 'my children') has been discussed above. Verses 12-13 12

7 made (the) earth, and created humanity upon it; My hands stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host. 13 / have roused him in righteousness, and I will straighten all his roads. He shall build my city and release my exiles, not with a price and not with a bribe,' says YHWH of hosts.

This text is relatively clear. It is worth noting, however, that the first person pronouns at the beginning of each phrase in v. 12 and in v. 13a should be read as emphatic, since the Hebrew text adds the independent pronoun to each phrase (characteristic of YHWH's speech in Deutero-Isaiah). Likewise an emphatic 'he' is added to 13b (the person intended was named as Cyrus in 45.1).

53. So also Stuhlmueller, Redemption, p. 201; North, Second Isaiah, p. 153; and M. Bogaert, 'Les suffixes verbaux non accusatifs', Bib 45 (1964), pp. 220-47 (238).

Chapter 6 CAN A MOTHER FORGET? ISAIAH 49.13-21 1. Translation and Notes 13

Shout, O heavens, and rejoice, O earth! Break out into shouting, O mountains! For YHWH has comforted his people and will have compassion1 (DPR) on his afflicted ones.2 14

But Zion said, 'YHWH has abandoned me! Adonay has forgotten me!' 15 'Would a woman forget her nursing infant, or a mother the son of her womb (DPR)?' 'Even these will forget, but/will not forget you. 16 See, upon my palms I have engraved you; your walls are ever before me. 17 Your sons hasten; your destroyers and your desolators go out from you. I8 Lift up your eyes all around and see; all of them are gathered, they come to you.' 'As I live,' says YHWH, 'truly you shall wear all of them like an ornament and like a bride you shall tie them on. 1 'Truly your desolate places and your wastelands and your destroyed land— truly now you will be crowded with inhabitants, and those who devoured you will be far away. 20 The children of whom you are bereaved will yet say in your hearing, "The place is too constricted for me; make room for me and I will dwell." 2 "And you will say in your heart, "Who bore me these? I was bereaved of children and barren, exiled and turned away— so who has raised these? See, I was left all alone— where were these?"'

1. 2.

Isa. 49.15; 49.10; 54.8, 10; 55.7; 60.10; Lam. 3.32. Isa. 41.17; 51.21 (Zion); 54.11 (Zion).

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

129

Isa. 49.13-50.3 interweaves the images of mother, husband, and father to portray God as one who is in a personal relationship as Israel's redeemer. The unit is the first of Deutero-Isaiah's three Zion poems.3 Isaiah 49.13-21 is the first subunit of three in a Zion section that continues through 50.3. In this subunit the image of YHWH as a mother interacts with the image of Zion as a mother. The focus of this chapter is thus different from other chapters in this study. Elsewhere, an image of YHWH as a parent is explored in interaction with another image of YHWH, such as divine warrior, redeemer, artisan, or husband. The 'tenor' (YHWH) is the same for both images, but the 'vehicle' is different. Here the image of YHWH as a parent (mother) is explored in interaction with the same vehicle (mother) applied to a different tenor or referent (Zion). Thus, as in the other chapters of this study, metaphors interact, but in a different way. Conventional elements of the city lament genre are present here and significantly contribute to an understanding of this metaphoric interaction. Verses 14-15 are one of the few texts in the Hebrew Bible where God is imaged as a mother. The image of God as a mother is derived, in this unit, from the image of Zion as a mother.4 A personified, feminine Zion is the focus of this text. Reflections on the motherhood of God in this unit depend upon our interpretation of the figure of Zion herself. It will be shown that the compassionate and powerful motherhood of God is expressed in contrast to Zion's own shortcomings as the mother of the exiled people. Isaiah 49.13-26 will be read here in light of several conventions of the ancient Near Eastern city lament genre, conventions which include the abandoning deity, the breakdown of family, the weeping goddess, and the restoration of the city. Attention to this literary genre will shed light on the figures of Zion and YHWH. It will be shown that this unit also functions as a response to, and completion of, the Hebrew Bible's best example of the city lament, the book of Lamentations. 2. The Two Sections of Deutero-Isaiah The first step is to place this unit in its literary context within Deutero-Isaiah. After the prologue (40.1-11), Deutero-Isaiah has two main sections. Isa. 40.12-49.12, on the one hand, and 49.13-55.13 (or possibly 54.17) on the other, are distinguished from each other by various traits.5 There is a clear shift in subject matter between the two sections, yet many characteristics of style and language are so similar that common authorship is generally accepted. In the first section the message of redemption appears with two dominant themes. First, the God of Israel is contrasted 3. See also 51.17-52.12; 54.1-17. 4. John J. Schmitt, citing four texts in Isaiah 40-66, argues that the motherhood of God is derived from the motherhood of Zion in all four of these ('The Motherhood of God and Zion as Mother', RB 92 [1985], pp. 557-69). With regard to 49.14-15 and 66.13 Schmitt's insight is quite correct. However, the argument is less persuasive for 42.14 and 45.10. 5. Claus Westermann divides Isaiah 40-55 into three parts. He identifies 40.1-11 as a prologue, 40.12 as the beginning of the first large section and 49.14 as the beginning of the second (Isaiah 40-66, trans. David M. G. Stalker [OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969], p. 28).

130

Mixing Metaphors

with the gods or the idols of Babylon. YHWH alone is God, creator of all things, and thus the only one with the power to redeem. The idols are not gods and cannot redeem. Second, YHWH has chosen Cyrus, the king of Persia, to be the instrument of redemption as God's anointed servant. In this section 'Israel' and 'Jacob' are addressed in parallel 17 times. The second section sets aside these features and takes up the theme of the restoration of Zion and her children (along with two 'servant songs').6 Zion is the city of Jerusalem. Yet Zion, portrayed as a woman and her children, also signifies the former and future residents of Jerusalem, that is, the exiles in Babylon. God is still the redeemer but the focus has shifted from the redemption of'Jacob' and 'Israel' to the redemption of'Zion'. If we take the arrangement of Deutero-Isaiah as chronological, the change of emphasis can be easily explained. Chapter 47 speaks of the fall of Babylon, anticipated in the immediate future.7 This same situation appears to be implied in the call in 48.20 for the people to 'go out from Babylon, flee from Chaldea, declare this with a shout of joy'. Chapters 48-55 may have been written after the fall of Babylon to Cyrus. That would explain the disappearance of oracles concerning Cyrus after 49.12. Once Cyrus has fulfilled his mission against Babylon, the author loses interest. Such a sequential reading of Deutero-Isaiah would explain the shift of attention to Jerusalem (Zion). With the exception of two 'servant songs' (50.4-9 and 52.13 - 53.12), Zion dominates Isaiah 49-54. Just prior to the fall of Babylon, all eyes are on Cyrus. After the fall, Judean eyes turn to Judah, in anticipation of a return to the homeland. Although the first half of Deutero-Isaiah speaks hopefully of a return, the focus is not on the homeland but on the deliverance from exile and the journey.8 But beginning with 49.13 there is a new concern for and focus on the homeland itself, that is, for Jerusalem the city (54.2,11-12), her walls (49.16), her depopulated state (49.19; 51.18), her devastation (49.17,19; 51.19), and her temple (as implied by 'vessels' in 52.11). It is in 49.13 that the focus shifts from Jacob/Israel (and Cyrus) to Zion.9 Words of comfort ('Sing for joy, O heavens ...

6. See Rikki E. Watts, 'Consolation or Confrontation? Isaiah 40-55 and the Delay of the New Exodus', TynBulM (1990), pp. 31-59. Watts notes, regarding chs 49-55, 'Jacob-Israel terminology disappears as do Cyrus and the anti-idol polemics' (p. 49). 7. Chris A. Franke argues that it is ch. 47, the fall of Babylon, which 'functions as a pivot on which the principal ideas and themes of Second Isaiah turn ... It is in ch. xlvii that the theme of downtrodden Israel is replaced by the prophecy of downtrodden Babylon; the reversal of the fortunes of Israel is also anticipated' ('The Function of the Satiric Lament over Babylon in Second Isaiah (47)', VT41 [1991], pp. 408-18 [410-11]). The merit of Franke's argument is that with the fall of Daughter Babylon the restoration of Daughter Zion begins. The weakness of identifying ch. 47 as the literary pivot is that Cyrus is alluded to in 48.14-16 and Zion does not appear significantly until 49.14. Of the 17 times that 'Israel' and 'Jacob' are addressed as parallel terms in Isa. 40-55, four are in chs 48-49, the last time being 49.6. It is with 49.13 that the focus shifts from Jacob to Zion. 8. Exceptions are Cyrus's mission to rebuild Jerusalem in 44.28 and 45.13. 9. While many scholars identify the break between sections as the break between chs 48 and 49 (e.g. John L. McKenzie, Second Isaiah [AB 20; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968], p. xxxi), 49.1-12 is more consistent with the first section. Zion is not mentioned until 49.14. 'Jacob' and 'Israel' appear as parallel terms in 49.6, and 49.7-12 appears to refer to Cyrus.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

131

for YHWH has comforted his people') parallel the words that open the prologue in 40.1 ('Comfort, comfort my people ... Speak tenderly to Jerusalem'). 3. The City Lament Isa. 49.13-21 borrows many features of the city lament genre. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp explores the features of the Mesopotamian city lament.10 This genre is the lament over the destruction of a city. Examples are the Lamentation over the Destruction ofUr, the Lamentation over the Destruction ofSumer and Ur, and, in the Hebrew Bible, the book of Lamentations. A most notable feature of the city lament in Mesopotamia is the weeping goddess. The basic structure of the lament is this: the gods have made the decision to destroy the city; the city's patron goddess and protectress is driven sobbing from the city; the enemy descends like the storm of the deity; social structures break down, corpses pile up in the streets; the state of destruction is contrasted with the former state of prosperity and peace; eventually, however, the goddess is able to return to the city so that the restoration may begin. A counterpart to the figure of the weeping goddess is found in the Hebrew Bible in the form of the personified city. In Lamentations, Zion laments over the destruction of the city (Jerusalem) by Babylon. Dobbs-Allsopp posits 'a native Israelite genre' that shares 'generic features common to the Mesopotamian [city] laments',11 and argues that 'Lamentations preserves the most complete repertoire of citylament features in the Hebrew Bible'.12 While Lamentations is the best example in the Hebrew Bible, Dobbs-Allsopp finds the conventions or features of the genre elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. He calls the presence of these literary features a 'mode' rather than a genre. He says of his use of the term 'mode', This concept is especially useful... because it allows one to call attention to the presence of city-lament features without committing oneself to a classification of the material in which they are embedded or presuming that an actual city lament existed for every city or country mentioned.

In other words, a text may have some of the features of the city lament without actually being a city lament itself. On this basis, the Zion imagery in DeuteroIsaiah should be included among the Hebrew Bible texts that reflect the city lament genre. Features of the Mesopotamian City Lament Dobbs-Allsopp identifies nine 'major generic features' of the Mesopotamian city lament.14 These appear in Lamentations and to varying degrees elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. The features that are relevant for Isaiah 49-54 are: 10. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion: A Study of the City-Lament Genre in the Hebrew Bible (BibOr 44; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1993). This unit, Isa. 49.13-21, is not included by Dobbs-Allsopp in his discussion of Hebrew city lament texts. 11. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, pp. 95-96. 12. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 28. 13. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 97. 14. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 30; see pp. 30-96 for the full discussion.

132

Mixing Metaphors

1.

'Subject and mood': the subject is 'the destruction of cities'; the mood is 'mournful and somber'. 2. 'The weeping goddess': the goddess sobs as she is driven from her city and weeps over its fate. 3. 'Structure and poetic technique': there is no single structure but there are structural devices, such as a) a varied authorial point of view, b) contrast, c) reversal. 4. 'Divine abandonment'. 5. 'Destruction': the destruction is described, including the destruction of social order (e.g. the breakdown of the family), the disruption of normal work, the breakdown of law, order, and cult. 6. ' Restoration of the City and Return of the Gods'. Three of these points require further explanation. First, there is 'structure and poetic technique'. One of these techniques is the varied authorial point of view. The poet of the city lament speaks in the first, second, and third persons, representing a variety of perspectives. Dobbs-Allsopp argues that this rhetorical device is able to 'express a variety of views and feelings without seeming contradictory... the destruction of the city is often retold from two or more points of view'.15 The narrator observes and addresses the goddess or personified city. One form of address (to the female figure) is the rhetorical question, for example, 'Who can heal you?' (Lam. 2.13) and 'Who has experienced anything like what was done to the heart of the lady of heaven?' (balag 42)16 The feminine figure herself is a speaker. Like the narrator, she uses rhetorical questions; for example, 'Who has ever been treated as I have?' (balag 48)17 or 'Is there any pain like my pain?' (Lam. 1.12b) She protests or makes a plea. In the Mesopotamian city lament the goddess may address a god. In the Hebrew Bible, Zion addresses YHWH. Sometimes the chief male god'is also given a voice. Dobbs-Allsopp notes, though, that in Lamentations God does not speak. However, in Deutero-Isaiah, YHWH answers Zion's lament.18 The second poetic technique is 'contrast'. The 'glorious past' of the city is contrasted to 'the desolate present'.19 For example, 'In the city where daylight used to shine forth—the day darkened' (Eridu Lament 1.22-23) and 'Those who ate delicacies, perish in the streets' (Lam. 4.5; see also Lam. 1.1; 2. Ib; 4.1-10). DobbsAllsopp notes that in the Nippur Lament, 'the motif seems to be employed in a reverse fashion. That is, the present state of desolation ... contrasts with a future state of prosperity'.20 Deutero-Isaiah utilizes this reverse contrast, or contrast of the present with the future, throughout the Zion passages; for example, 'For the children of the desolate woman will be more than the children of her that is married, says YHWH' (Isa. 54. Ib). 15. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 32. He notes that the use of multiple voices is not restricted to the city lament genre. 16. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 36. 17. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 36. 18. Isa. 49.15-26; 50.2-3; 51.22-23; 52.1-10; 54.1-14. 19. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 39. 20. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, pp. 40-41.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

133

The third poetic technique is 'reversal': Dobbs-Allsopp defines it as 'a succession of literary representations depicting the reverse of the normal order of things': slaves rule the people (Lam. 5.8), singing is turned into weeping. A common form of reversal is the 'breakdown of the family', e.g. the 'father abandons his son and the mother her daughter; the husband deserts his wife and the wife her child; the brother does not recognize his brother or sister'.21 All three of these poetic techniques—varied points of view, contrast, reversal—are found in Isa. 49.13-26. Another feature of the city lament is 'divine abandonment'. Dobbs-Allsopp writes, 'In mythological terms, a city can be destroyed only after its god has left' ,22 He notes, 'A defeated people preferred to attribute their loss to the anger and subsequent abandonment of their own gods rather than to the power of the victor's gods'.23 It was, perhaps, preferable to think that one's god was angry, rather than powerless. In the Mesopotamian city lament, the abandonment of the city by the patron goddess meant the departure of its protectress. An example of this in the Lamentation over the Destruction ofUr includes 'a list of city gods and goddesses who abandon their cities and shrines in response to the decision of the great gods (LU 1-39)'.24 This divine abandonment feature seems, at times, to refer to the literal removal of the divine image from the city, captured by the enemy: 'The statues that filled the treasure house were cut down, Niniagara, the great stewardess, ran away from the storehouse' (Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur 408-409). (See also Isa. 46.1-2, in which the idols of Bel and Nebo 'go into captivity'.) In the Hebrew Bible, YHWH is the divine warrior who fights for Israel. If YHWH departs, the city is without a divine defender. Biblical examples of this theme are 1 Sam. 4.11 and Ezekiel 8-11. The first of these refers to the departure of the ark of the covenant, the closest Hebrew equivalent to the divine image. Its loss leaves Israel unprotected from its enemies. In Ezekiel, YHWH'S abandonment of the temple and Jerusalem is described as the Glory of YHWH moving above the wings of the cherubim beside wheels. The image is of the cherubim of the ark of the covenant departing from temple and city, leaving it vulnerable to attack. In Lam. 5.20, Zion asks why YHWH has abandoned the city: 'Why have you forgotten us completely? Why have you forsaken [abandoned] us these many days?' Thus, in contrast with the Mesopotamian city laments, while the feminine figure (Zion) represents the lamentation of the goddess, it is YHWH who had been the city's protector. 'The weeping goddess' is, for Dobbs-Allsopp, the defining feature of the city lament: 'The weeping goddess motif portrays the city goddess grieving over the destruction of her city and temple and the killing, suffering, and dispersement of her people'.25 He argues that the lamenting Zion is patterned after the Mesopotamian motif of the weeping goddess:26 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

Dobbs-Allsopp, Dobbs-Allsopp, Dobbs-Allsopp, Dobbs-Allsopp, Dobbs-Allsopp, Dobbs-Allsopp,

Weep, Weep, Weep, Weep, Weep, Weep,

p. 41. p. 45. pp. 46-47. p. 46. p. 15. p. 85.

134

Mixing Metaphors the Mesopotamian laments employ exile and enslavement language, especially when the goddess talks about her condition after the city's destruction, presupposing her abandonment of the city ... the point of this imagery is to point up the goddess' reduction in status.27

In the Hebrew Bible the goddess figure is transformed into the weeping personified city. The 'Daughter of Zion' correlates with the weeping goddess 'as possessor of the temple and its treasures [and] her image as mother, mourner, and exiled slave'.28 This explains how Zion, a city, can be described as 'exiled' (49.21). The Israelite City Lament The conventions of the city lament shed light on the Zion texts in Deutero-Isaiah. Sections of Isaiah 49-54 have these features to varying degrees, or what DobbsAllsopp calls varying 'modulation'. The city lament conventions of the Hebrew Bible differ from those of Mesopotamia (Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria) in three theologically and rhetorically significant ways. First, the goddess imagery has been transposed into that of the personified city, a natural shift for a body of literature without a goddess. Second, the assignment of responsibility has shifted. In the Mesopotamian city lament, the responsibility for the destruction of the city belongs to the arbitrary decision of the gods. In Hebrew literature the responsibility is assigned to the people of the city or to the personified city as an expression of the collective guilt. YHWH'S destructive actions are thus not arbitrary. Third, in the Hebrew Bible the depiction of the enemy attack as a storm from the deity is generally absent.29 In addition to these three differences, another difference between the conventions of the Mesopotamian city lament and those of the Hebrew city lament is implicitly recognized in Dobbs-Allsopp's study. In the Mesopotamian city lament the goddess is strongly identified with her city, yet she is also one of the gods. Divine abandonment frequently means the abandonment of the city by the goddess herself. Her reluctant departure is forced by a more powerful deity. In the Mesopotamian city lament, the feminine figure is a mediating figure between the other gods and the city. She argues with the gods on behalf of her city, thus representing the city. Yet it is her (forced) abandonment that leaves the city without protection. (It is primarily her role as protectress that makes her the patron goddess.) The destructive deity, usually Enlil, is thus different from the abandoning deity; that is, the goddess. In the Hebrew Bible, however, the destructive deity and the abandoning deity are one and the same—YHWH. The feminine figure, Zion, is no longer the one who abandons but is the one who is abandoned. Dobbs-Allsopp observes: The personified city in Lamentations is the sufferer because she is abandoned by Yahweh, who is both city and national god. In the Lamentation over the Destruc-

27. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 82; see n. 221. 28. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 83. 29. Dobbs-Allsopp (Weep, p. 55) argues that in the Hebrew Bible divine warrior imagery replaces the divine storm imagery generally associated with the god Enlil.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

135

tion of Ur, Ningal, the city goddess, is the sufferer because she is made to abandon her city by the national gods .. .30

In Deutero-Isaiah, although YHWH, not Zion, is the abandoning deity, Zion experiences loss and grief similar to that of the goddess who is forced to abandon her city, in her loss of and grief over her children (Isa. 49.21; 51.18-20). Just as the goddess is portrayed as the 'mother' of the city's citizens,31 so personified Zion is a mother of Jerusalem's exiled citizens. 4. Deutero-Isaiah and the Book of Lamentations Literary connections between Deutero-Isaiah and Lamentations have often been noted. Because of a fair amount of certainty in dating these texts, it is safe to speak of Lamentations' literary influence on Deutero-Isaiah.32 Carol Newsom argues that, in Deutero-Isaiah, 'there is a harmonious, almost an antiphonal answering of the lament that establishes the basic framework within which the Judahite speech of Lamentations is dialogically engaged'.33 Mary Turner describes Deutero-Isaiah as providing YHWH'S answer to the Zion of Lamentations: While the female was given voice in Lamentations to speak of the community's despair and though in Lamentations her speech was directed to Yahweh, there she was not answered. In [Deutero-Isaiah], Yahweh answers the grieving woman and his empathetic response accounts in large measure for the power of these texts.34

Looking at Lamentations and Deutero-Isaiah in light of the Mesopotamian city lament suggests, however, that Deutero-Isaiah is more than an answer to Lamentations. Although Lamentations is the most complete example of the city lament genre in the Hebrew Bible, it omits the conventional reference to restoration. Thus, the Zion passages in Deutero-Isaiah serve as the completion of Lamentations by providing the genre's missing feature of restoration, including the return of the abandoning deity. The book of Lamentations is thus the context for Zion's accusations against YHWH (Isa. 49.14) and other statements concerning Zion. Lamentations l.la speaks of Zion's loss of people, and the loss of her husband is implied by her 30. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 32. 31. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 81. 32. Norman Gottwald posits that 'It is likely that, by the time of Second Isaiah ... the idioms and concepts of the Lamentations "school of thought" had reached Babylonian Jews (cf. Isa. 47; 51.17-23; 54.1-8)' (HBC [New York: Harper-Collins, 1988], s.v. 'Lamentations', pp. 646-51 [647]). For a more recent treatment, see Patricia Tull Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah (SBLDS; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), esp. pp. 188-93 for her treatment of Isa. 49.1-50.3; and Tod Linafelt, 'Surviving Lamentations', HBT 17 (1995), pp. 45-61. 33. Carol Newsom, 'Response to Norman K. Gottwald, "Social Class and Ideology in Isaiah 40-55",' in David Jobling and Tina Pippin (eds), Ideological Criticism of Biblical Texts (Semeia 59; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 73-78 (76). 34. Mary Donovan Turner, 'Daughter Zion: Lament and Restoration' (unpubl. diss., Emory University, 1992), p. 220.

136

Mixing Metaphors

comparison to a widow. Lam. 1.5 speaks of her loss of children, and 1.16 and 2.19 speak again of her children. The accusation is that Zion has been left without a male protector and provider. In Deutero-Isaiah, 54.4 speaks of Zion's 'widowhood'. The term i"|]ft7ft, 'almdnd, translated as 'widow', does not necessarily refer to a woman whose husband is deceased. It refers to a formerly married woman who has lost her male protector and provider.35 The implied accusation in Isa. 50.1, that YHWH has divorced Zion, is consistent with the HDuT'K, 'almana, language of Lamentations 1 and Isaiah 54. (In Isa. 50.1, YHWH responds to the accusation that he has divorced Zion by objecting that Zion has not been divorced. Therefore she is not an H] ft 7ft, 'almdnd, after all.) The restoration element (which is the main point) of Deutero-Isaiah is the most significant difference between Lamentations and Deutero-Isaiah. But another extremely important difference is Deutero-Isaiah's use of the marriage metaphor. In Lamentations, Zion is never explicitly portrayed as the wife of YHWH. Zion is 'like' an !~I]ft7K, ^almdnd, insofar as she is destitute and unprotected, and has suffered loss. A marriage metaphor may be inferred if she is a 'widow' (thus implying that the abandoning God was her husband). But it is Deutero-Isaiah that synthesizes the language of widowhood and abandonment with the image of marriage to YHWH (50.1-3; ch. 54). 5. Mother of the Infant: Commonplaces In this unit both Zion and YHWH are spoken of in terms of motherhood. Verse 14 highlights especially the role of the mother of the infant. Thus, the commonplaces of this role are relevant for our reading of the text. After the child was born, the ritual time that had begun with labor continued (see Chapter 3 for the commonplaces of labor). Ezek. 16.4 describes the normal care of the newborn in light of its absence: 'on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water to cleanse you, nor rubbed with salt, nor wrapped in cloths'. It was with the naming that the newborn became a person.36 Within the community, the new mother 'generated anxiety, as did all aspects of fertility and reproduction in ancient society'.37 This anxiety was related to the high rate of infant mortality. 35. Chayim Cohen, 'The "Widowed" City', JANESCU 5 (1973), pp. 75-81. 36. Nick Veldhuis, A Cow of Sin (Groningen: Styx Publications, 1991), p. 42. 37. Baruch A. Levine, Leviticus: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (The JPS Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), p. 249. Levine addresses the questions of why a new mother is impure for an extended period of time, and why there is a longer period of uncleanness for the birth of a female child. He argues that the female child will eventually (it is hoped) give birth herself, thus her birth has a different impact on the mother (p. 249). Another explanation for the longer period of uncleanness with a female infant is suggested by Nancy Demand (Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994]): in classical Greece, the recovery period after the birth of a girl was longer than that after a boy, possibly because the female infant was regarded as weaker and requiring more effort on the part of the mother to deliver. Demand notes that these beliefs may have seemed confirmed by more complications after the birth of a girl, which Demand attributes to 'less

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

137

Baruch Levine sees the purification rituals provided in Leviticus as somewhat equivalent in function to the magical formulas practiced by Israel's neighbors.38 Nursing was not inherently a time of impurity in Hebrew law, despite the presence of body fluids. This is fortunate since children were commonly nursed to the age of three.39 The period of nursing was, however, considered to be a dangerous time, during which the infant was vulnerable to the attack of demons. Karel van der Toorn notes, 'As long as the child was not weaned (i.e. taken off breast-feeding) anything could happen'.40 The love of a mother for her child was recognized as a strong bond. Yet the Hebrew Bible does not romanticize this bond (e.g. Rebekah's relationship with Esau was problematic). Deutero-Isaiah suggests that, although unlikely, it is not unthinkable that a mother would abandon her child (Isa. 49.15). Deut. 28.56-57,2 Kgs 6.28-29, and Lam. 2.20 and 4.10 report mothers eating their children in time of siege. But an understanding of the 'true mother' as loving and self-sacrificing is demonstrated in Solomon's decision concerning an infant in 1 Kgs 3.16-27. He wisely discerns that the 'true' mother is the woman who would let the child go rather than see him harmed.41 YHWH is depicted as, or compared to, a nursing mother in several texts besides Isa. 49.14-17 to describe a caring, nurturing relationship with Israel: Deut. 32.13, indirectly in Num. 11.12, and, possibly, in Hosea II. 42 In Num. 11.11-15, a mother image is applied indirectly to YHWH via Moses's rejection of the role: So Moses said to YHWH,'... Why have I not found favor in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people on me? Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me, "Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a sucking child" to the land that you promised on oath to their ancestors? Where am I to get meat to give to all this people? ... I am not able to carry all this people alone, for they are to heavy for me. If this is the way you are going to treat me, put me to death at once—if I have found favor in your sight—and do not let me see my misery.' (Num. 11.11-15)

Moses complains that YHWH expects him to mother the people. A mother has a responsibility to care for her child. But Moses does not want that kind of attentive postpartum care given to mothers of girls, motivated by lower social support (financial or emotional) for such women' (p. 49). Perhaps the longer period of impurity for girl births in Hebrew law (a period that functioned as a period of recovery) was also a consequence of this phenomenon. 38. Levine, Leviticus, p. 249. 39. 2 Mace. 7.27. Three years was also the norm in Egypt, according to Henry E. Sigerist (A History of 'Medicine, II [New York: Oxford University Press, 1961], p. 243). Samuel is depicted as having been beyond infancy when weaned (1 Sam. 1.21-28). 40. Karel van der Toorn, From Her Cradle to Her Grave: The Role of Religion in the Life of the Israelite and the Babylonian Woman (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), p. 25. 41. One wonders if the point is that Solomon's wisdom really enabled him to discern which woman was the biological mother, or if his wisdom lay rather in selecting the more fit mother, regardless of biological maternity. 42. See Arthur E. Zannoni, 'Feminine Language for God in the Hebrew Scriptures', Dialogue and Alliance 2 (1988), p. 6; and Phyllis Trible, 'Depatriarchalizing in Biblical Interpretation', JAAR 41 (1973), pp. 30-48 (32).

138

Mixing Metaphors

responsibility. He implies that while a mother rightly has that responsibility, his burden is not based on a natural relationship, but has rather been thrust upon him by YHWH. The implication of the text is that the people are YHWH'S responsibility: YHWH conceived this people, YHWH gave birth to them, YHWH is their mother. Hos. 11.3-4 also uses parental language to describe YHWH'S relationship with Israel. The text describes what YHWH has done for Israel in terms suggestive of a parent dealing with a toddler: 'Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk, I took them up in my arms ... I was to them like those who lift infants to their cheeks. I bent down to them and fed them'.43 This imagery is more suggestive of the maternal than the paternal role.44 6. Exposition of Isaiah 49.13-21 Verse 14 is often treated as the beginning of a unit. But v. 13 fits with what follows better than with what precedes, and begins the first of three subunits of 49.13-50.3. Verse 13 's themes of comfort and compassion interact with the Zion imagery that follows. Verse 22's formula 'Thus says Adonay YHWH' marks the beginning of the second subunit (49.22-26). 50.1-3 is the third subunit, beginning with the words 'Thus says YHWH'. 50.1-3 closely interacts with 49.24-26, as will be shown below in Chapter 7. Verse 13 .. .YHWH has comforted his people and will have compassion on his afflicted ones.

Zion is not mentioned in v. 13. However, the terminology is characteristic of speech about or addressing Zion. This first verse of Deutero-Isaiah's second major section parallels Deutero-Isaiah's opening words in the prologue 'Comfort, O comfort my people,... Speak tenderly to Jerusalem' (40.1 -2). In v. 13 YHWH will 'comfort' his people. This proclamation of comfort is evocative of Zion as one 'not comforted' in Lamentations (1.2, 9, etc.). Here YHWH offers comfort to 'his people'. In Deutero-Isaiah, Zion is typically the receiver of words of comfort.45 49.13 is similar to 52.9, in which there is rejoicing over the return of YHWH to Zion: 'Break forth together into singing, you ruins of Jerusalem; for YHWH has comforted his people, he has redeemed Jerusalem'. YHWH has comforted his people, but the message is very much for Zion. The message of comfort to YHWH'S people in 49.13 is immediately followed here by a message of comfort to Zion. (51.12 likewise makes a quick shift from comfort for YHWH'S people to a focus on Zion herself.) Thus, v. 13 fits well with v. 14 and what follows. In v. 13, YHWH not only comforts but also shows compassion. The use of the word 'compassion'

43. NRSV; the text is somewhat difficult here. 44. Helen Schungel-Straumann, 'Gott als Mutter in Hosea 11', TQ 155 (1986), pp. 119-34. 45. Isa. 40.1; 51.3; 51.19; 54.11; and God's people in 51.12.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

139

(DPI"!, rhm) links v. 13 with v. 14's use of the same root as an attribute of mothers and of YHWH. Phyllis Trible argues that the words for 'womb' and 'compassion', since they share this root, are linked in meaning, i.e. compassion is a characteristic of mother love.46 The issue is not whether these are truly etymologically linked (they seem distinct in Akkadian, remu meaning 'womb' and ra'amu meaning 'love'), but whether they are poetically linked. Mayer Gruber notes: Just as Trible in our time has seen a connection between riham [compassion] and rehem [womb] so was it possible also in antiquity for poets and for those who read or heard poetry to see rahamim 'compassion' as a characteristically motherly attribute47

YHWH's compassion in v. 13 is thus linked to a mother's love in v. 14. Verse 14 But Zion said, 'YHWH has abandoned me! Adonay has forgotten me!'

Zion addresses YHWH as "^TTN, 'addnay. An ]T1N, 'addn, is a lord, master, or husband. In 51.22 YHWH is also Zion's "]HK, "adonay. In both 49.14 and 51.22, ^IIN, "adonay, may reasonably be translated 'Lord' (especially since it appears in parallel with 'YHWH'. However, since Zion is clearly portrayed as the wife of YHWH in 49.13-50.3 and ch. 54, the term "'D'HN, 'addnay, also conveys, for Deutero-Isaiah, the meaning 'husband' .48 The structuring metaphor of marriage that is clearly present in 50.1-3 and in 54.1-8 informs our reading of 49.14. This reading is more immediately (albeit more vaguely) reinforced by the bridal imagery in v. 18. Thus while mother imagery (for God and Zion) is central in 49.13-21, the husband image is present as well. Zion's statement is clearly an accusation. She accuses her husband YHWH of having abandoned and forgotten her. The accusation is explicit. Numerous scholars have noted a literary dependence on Lam. 5.20:49 Why have you forgotten us completely? Why have you forsaken [abandoned] us these many days?

The parallel use of 'forget' (l"Qtf)) and 'abandon' QTU) is not a common one. Thus, an intertextual relationship between Isa. 49.14 and Lamentations is especi46. See Phyllis Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality (Overtures to Biblical Theology 2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978), pp. 31-59. 47. Mayer Gruber, 'The Motherhood of God in Second Isaiah', RB 90 (1983), pp. 351-59 (353). (Reprinted in Mayer I. Gruber, The Motherhood of God and Other Studies [University of South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 57; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992], pp. 3-15). 48. Gen. 18.12 is the clearest use of the term as 'husband', used by Sarah to speak of Abraham. BDB, pp. 10-11 lists 'husband' as one of the potential meanings of ] TIN, adon, citing Judg. 19.2627; Ps. 45.12; Isa. 51.22; Gen. 18.12. BDB notes that the different pointings of ""DIK 'are variations of Mass, pointing to distinguish divine reference fr. human... Orig. reading prob. in all cases "'D'lSt [adonay—no vav]'. See also 1 Kgs 1.17 and Amos 4.1. 49. See Willey, Remember, p. 189.

140

Mixing Metaphors

ally clear. Deutero-Isaiah evokes Lamentations. What is usually called 'synonymous' parallelism is better called 'equivalent' parallelism. Here the two terms function similarly, but not synonymously, which will be shown to be significant. Zion's accusation of abandonment is best read in the context of the city-lament theme of divine abandonment. According to the conventions of the city lament, Jerusalem could not have been destroyed and her people exiled unless her God had first abandoned the city. The evidence for divine abandonment is clear in the events of 587 BCE—the destruction of the city and God's house.50 Is Zion's accusation of divine forgetfulness, then, simply a parallel to the accusation of abandonment? No, it is best read as a similar but separate accusation. YHWH, after all, never denies having abandoned the city but, rather, states explicitly in 54.6-7 that he has abandoned her: For YHWH has called you like a wife forsaken (abandoned) and grieved in spirit, like the wife of a man's youth when she is cast off, says your God. For a brief moment I abandoned you, but with great compassion I will gather you.

49.21 also describes Zion's abandonment (by YHWH). Thus YHWH has abandoned Zion. YHWH only denies having forgotten Zion. Like the goddess driven from her city by the high gods, YHWH was driven from the city by its sin and uncleanness. Like the weeping goddess, YHWH abandons but does not forget. This unit moves beyond a simple echo of and response to Lam. 5.20's declaration of divine abandonment to provide a resolution to Zion's current state, i.e. her state of desolation attributed (by the conventions of the city lament) to divine abandonment. Zion's accusation, 'YHWH has abandoned me', is right on target. YHWH has indeed abandoned her. YHWH's remembrance of Zion is needed to reverse the abandonment and to move to the final stage of the city lament, the restoration. DeuteroIsaiah provides the restoration element that constitutes the resolution of the lament that Lamentations lacks (and awaits). The central issue of this pericope is Zion's childlessness and thereafter her astonishing multitude of children. 49.13-26 is about Zion's barrenness and emptiness: she has no children. In 49.21 she says, 'I was bereaved of children and barren'. In Israelite thought, childlessness meant that YHWH had forgotten. Children were a sign of YHWH'S remembrance. Reading the word 'forget' in light of Zion's childlessness suggests that this is one (perhaps the main) basis for Zion's accusation that YHWH has forgotten her. The accusation is evocative of YHWH'S relationship with two barren women: Hannah and Rachel. In 1 Sam. 1.11, Hannah prays, 'O YHWH of hosts, if only you will look on the misery of your servant, and remember me, and not forget your servant, but will give to your servant a male child'. Verses 19-20 report that 'Elkanah knew his wife Hannah, and YHWH remembered her. In due time Hannah conceived and bore a son'. In Hannah's story divine remembrance consists precisely of the end of barrenness and the granting of

50. The link between divine abandonment and the destruction of the city is especially clear in Ezekiel8-ll.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

141

children. This language is likewise used of Rachel. Rachel had long been barren and had witnessed the birth of children to Leah, Zilpah, and Bilhah. Finally, apparently after many years, 'God remembered Rachel, and God heeded her and opened her womb. She conceived and bore a son and said, "God has taken away my reproach" ' (Gen. 30.22-23). In Isaiah 49, Zion's accusation of YHWH'sybrgeffulness is rooted in her experience of childlessness. YHWH'S remembrance can only be demonstrated by the presence of children. Verses 15-16 15

16

'Would a woman forget her nursing infant, or a mother the son of her womb (DHI)?' 51 'Even these will forget, but / will not forget you. See, upon my palms I have engraved you; your walls are ever before me.'

Verse 15a is generally considered to be the beginning of YHWH'S response. This assumption is not unreasonable. However, these words may also be read as a continuation of Zion's accusation, perhaps best translated, 'Would a woman forget her infant?' Zion suggests that YHWH her God, 'Adonay her husband, is inadequate compared to a human mother. It is almost as if Zion is saying, 'I, as a mother, could never forget my children. How can you, God, do less than a mother?' In asking her rhetorical question, Zion parallels the protests of the city goddess. Zion's rhetorical question will be dealt with further below. YHWH denies that he has forgotten Zion, without denying abandonment ('I will not forget you'). The pattern of accusation and defense here follows the pattern present (both explicit and implicit) throughout Deutero-Isaiah. This is YHWH'S 'Yes, but ...' defense. (Compare Isa. 42.14: yes, YHWH has been silent, but now he cries out.) Here in 49.15 the sense seems to be: yes, YHWH abandoned his city Zion, but no, YHWH has not forgotten. YHWH continues by offering as evidence, 'See, upon my palms I have engraved you; your walls are ever before me'. (Jer. 31.31-34 similarly describes the new covenant written on the heart, so that it will not be forgotten.)

51. The text of 15a(3 is difficult: n3tD3 p DmQnTltf nCTlN mOTTI. Various translations have been suggested. The difficulty is how to translate DmO. Gruber, assuming that an 'alef was omitted, reconstructs it as OH"! DN, and translates thus: 'Or a woman the child of her womb?' (Gruber, 'Motherhood', p. 355, n. 16) John Scullion offers, 'Can a woman forget her sucking child, one pregnant (or a compassionate mother) the child of her womb?' (Isaiah 40-66 [Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, Inc., 1982], p. 102) Translating this as 'woman' or as a participle is problematic in the absence of a feminine ending. Biddle interprets the termOmQ as meaning 'to love': 'Can a woman forget her infant, to love the son of her womb?' (Mark E. Biddle, 'The Figure of Lady Jerusalem: Identification, Deification and Personification of Cities in the Ancient Near East', in W. W. Hallo et al. (eds), The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective [Scripture in Context, IV; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1991], pp. 173-94 [185])

142

Mixing Metaphors

Verses 17-18 '"Your sons52 hasten; Your destroyers and your desolators go out from you. 18 Lift up your eyes all around and see; all of them are gathered, they come to you.' 'As I live', says YHWH, 'truly you shall wear all of them like an ornament and like a bride you shall tie them on.'

Zion's children 'hasten' to her. Here is the evidence that YHWH remembers Zion; the evidence is her children. Rather than admonishing Zion for her doubt, YHWH swears an oath to her. Not only shall her children hasten and be gathered to her, she shall wear them like a bride wears her ornaments.53 This image both shares in and contrasts with the imagery of 54.1 1-12. In 54.1 1-12 Zion's ornaments are gems which make up her foundations, her pinnacles, her gates and her wall. But here Zion's ornaments are her returning people, her children. The focus is on the children (the people), not on the physical city. Verses 19-20 19

'Truly your desolate places and your wastelands and your destroyed land— truly now you will be crowded with inhabitants, and those who devoured you will be far away. 20 The children of whom you are bereaved will yet say in your hearing, "The place is too constricted for me; make room for me and I will dwell" '

Zion is portrayed as bereaved,54 barren, and possibly divorced (!~mD, 'turned away').55 Barbara Kaiser notes: The writers of the Hebrew Bible recognize that there is no sorrow quite like that of a parent bereft of a child ... In poetic texts a mother's bereavement is a common 52. "P^D, 'your sons' or 'your builders'. The MT reads 'your' (Zion's) 'sons' or 'children' rj^S) while Q reads 'your builders' ("fllD or "^33). The difference is in the pointing of the text. Both are attractive possibilities. 'Builders' provides a nice contrast to 'destroyers'. However, 'children' is really what the whole unit is about. The description of Zion's regeneration in w. 1920 is a description of repopulation rather than of rebuilding. Thus 'children' is read here as the primary meaning, with 'builders' echoing 'destroyer' as a poetic undertone. 53. See Jer. 2.32, 'Can a girl forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? Yet my people have forgotten me'. 54. Literally 'the children of your bereavement' (117132}). This term generally refers to bereavement of children. Zion is not bereft here of a husband (as 54.4 might suggest). The term may simply refer to barrenness, rather than the death of children (childlessness was a profound grief whether the children had died or had never been born). However Zion can be both 'bereaved' and 'barren' —inconsistent yet coherent metaphors which describe a Jerusalem with population. 55. Though one must be cautious in seeing divorce imagery in this term, since it does not function as a divorce term in other contexts.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

143

image for a nation's loss of population during warfare (e.g., Isa. 47.8-9; Jer. 31.15). The poet in Lamentations 2 adopts the stock metaphor but enlivens and intensifies the image at the end of the poems, where he assumes the persona of Mother Zion herself, bitterly crying out against the Murderer of her children.56

In Isaiah 49, Deutero-Isaiah continues Lamentations' image of maternal bereavement of children. Our author, however, also provides the theme of restoration (here, of children) which Lamentations lacks. Deutero-Isaiah utilizes the city lament conventions of contrast and reversal. The present is contrasted with either the past or the future. The contrast here is of present with future. The lonely city of Lamentations (1.1), the desolate places (Isa. 49.19), will no longer be alone, but will be teeming with Zion's children. Zion's captive children (Lam. 1.5, 18) are now returning (Isa. 40.22). The empty places of Lamentations will become crowded. Zion will hear her children asking for more space to settle. The devourers will be far removed. Deutero-Isaiah's theme of restoration is expressed in contrast to the past destruction, a restoration awaited since Lamentations. Dobbs-Allsopp defines reversal as 'a succession of literary representations depicting the reverse of the normal order of things'.57 The literary conventions of contrast and reversal are continued in w. 24-26. The captives will be rescued, the oppressors will be oppressed, the accusers will be accused. Not only does YHWH remember Zion, but he will reverse her own forgetful state and restore her children. Verses 22-23 fit the lament categories of both contrast and reversal. In w. 22-23, 'Kings shall be your child-care workers; and their queens your wemurses. With their faces to the ground they shall bow down to you [fern, sing.]) and lick the dust of your feet' (my translation). Not only will Zion have many children but mighty kings and queens will be humbled to serve her in caring for her children, while the humbled Zion will now be the exalted mistress of kings and queens as well as the mother of many sons and daughters. Dobbs-Allsopp notes that in the Nippur Lament 'the present state of desolation ... contrasts with a future state of prosperity'.58 These modes of reversal and contrast are utilized throughout the Zion songs of Deutero-Isaiah: the desolate places become too crowded, the oppressors will be oppressed, the accusers will be accused, the wilderness will be like Eden (51.3), the scattered will be gathered, the widow will be married (54.5), the barren woman will have many children (54.1). Verse 21 'And you will say in your heart, "Who bore me these? I was bereaved of children and barren, exiled and turned away— so who has raised these? See, I was left all alone— where were these?"'

56. Barbara Bakke Kaiser, 'Poet as "Female Impersonator": The Image of Daughter Zion as Speaker in Biblical Poems of Suffering', JR 67 (1987), pp. 164-82 (176). 57. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 40. 58. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 40.

144

Mixing Metaphors

Zion will be astonished and confused at all the children who return to her and who crowd into her once empty places. She will ask a question, not a demanding question of YHWH this time, but rather a question of herself ('in her heart'), 'Who bore me these? ... Who has raised these?' The reason for Zion's perplexity at her children is that 'I was left all alone'. This may mean that she was left alone without her children or that she was left alone without her husband. It will be shown in Chapter 7 that in 50.1-3 (part of the same literary unit) Zion accuses YHWH, her husband, of leaving her alone. In the more immediate context of ch. 49, taken as a response to Lam. 1.1, her aloneness is in the absence of her people, her children. She did not expect to see them again; as in Lam. 2.22, 'no one escaped or survived; those whom I bore and reared my enemy has destroyed'. Isaiah 51.18 speaks of this aloneness: 'There is no one to guide her among all the children she has borne; there is no one to take her by the hand among all the children she has brought up'. Here Zion's voice is very similar to the voice of another bereaved city, a destroyed Sidon in Isa. 23.4, who says, 'I have neither labored nor given birth, I have neither reared young men nor brought up young women'. Note how the loss of citizens is depicted as having never had children at all. Of Sidon in Isa. 23.4, Dobbs-Allsopp says: The image is that of a woman who either has not borne and raised children or can do so no longer. A woman's value in much of antiquity was dependent upon the number of children she could bear. Thus, personified Sidon's present status is one of a childless woman, typical of goddesses in the Mesopotamian city laments.59

In Isaiah 49 it seems natural that Zion would not recognize these children. Historically, few of the people who would return from Babylon were born in Jerusalem. These are strange children. (Does this reflect the attitude of non-exiled Judahites towards those from Babylon?) Rhetorically, in response to Lamentations, these children were assumed dead. That is why Zion was 'bereaved' (v. 20). Nevertheless, this perplexity is an odd response. YHWH has proclaimed to her that he remembers her by giving her a multitude of children. (See also 54.1: 'For the children of the desolate woman will be more than the children of her that is married'.) One would expect the news to elicit a joyful response rather than a questioning confusion. Why will Zion be perplexed? She will be perplexed because she will not recognize them; that is, she will not remember her children. 'Does a woman forget her nursing infant? Or a mother the son of her womb?' Yes, even she forgets! Zion has forgotten! 7. YHWH as a Mother A Problematic Metaphor 1. A Disclaimer: Sometimes Mothers Do Forget! One of the rhetorically most intriguing things about 49.13-21 is the line in v. 15: 'Even these will forget'. Metaphorical language draws on commonplaces or stereotypes. The stereotype

59. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 119.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

145

functioning here is the idea of mother-love being the most intense and loyal love there is. The nursing mother is an especially powerful image, combining the absolute dependence of the child on the mother with the mother's own emotional and physical need to nurse. But stereotypes easily break down. There are bad mothers. There is a limit to any metaphor. What is unusual is that the limits of the metaphor are pointed out even as the metaphor is being utilized. This would seem to weaken the rhetorical impact of the metaphor. Essential to appreciating 49.15 is understanding it as an expression of the reversal of the normal order. This verse reflects, first of all, the city lament's theme of the breakdown of the family; second, more particularly, Lamentations' utilization of the theme of the breakdown of the family; and third, Zion's own forgetfulness as a mother, unable to recognize her returning children. The disclaimer will be explored below. 2. Child Abuse and Abandonment in Socio-historical Context. Historical reconstructions of the exile generally assume that certain classes of people and leadership were exiled with their families and relocated as families. However, it cannot be imagined that the events of 597 and 587 BCE were anything but disruptive to families, and many family members must have been separated. Parents and children may well have been separated from one another, be it over Judah, Babylon, and other destinations such as Egypt, or within Babylon (perhaps some being put to work in the city and others in the country). The pathos of a mother separated from her (older) child would not be a strange concept to a generation in exile. On the other hand, parents may have voluntarily abandoned or even cannibalized children during siege. (It is difficult to know how historically reliable these examples are, since family abandonment is a conventional literary theme for the fall of a city.) Meir Malul offers evidence that the abandonment of infants was not uncommon in the ancient Near East, even in non-crisis situations. He cites a document from the Neo-Babylonian period that reports the abandonment of a child by its mother and a man's subsequent adoption of the child.60 Additional evidence from the Old Babylonian period describes the exposed child as one 'who has no father and mother', 'who does not know his father (and) mother', 'who was found in the well', 'taken in from the street', 'snatched from the dog's mouth', and 'let go from the raven's mouth'. Further evidence comes from names such as 'He-has-been-leftover-from-the-dog's-mouth'.61 Malul concludes: All the above expressions and names clearly prove that the practice of exposing children by their parents was quite widespread in ancient Mesopotamian society. Children were exposed in various places, such as streets, woods, mountains, rivers, wells, and even swamps and puddles, and evidence for this practice ranges throughout Mesopotamian history.62

Malul adds: 60. Meir Malul, 'Adoption of Foundlings in the Bible and Mesopotamian Documents: A Study of Some Legal Metaphors in Ezekiel 16.1-7', JSOT46 (1990), pp. 97-126 (104). 61. Malul, 'Adoption', pp. 104-105. 62. Malul, 'Adoption', p. 105.

146

Mixing Metaphors According to the available evidence from various societies and periods, children were exposed soon after their birth; i.e. they were exposed with the birth blood still on them, without receiving the usual treatment that every newborn underwent when its parents decided to keep it.63

Such children could be rescued and adopted. We also have reports that, in a crisis, parents may have even cannibalized children. The Hebrew Bible reports conditions of siege in Deut. 28.53-57, describing a father eating his children and a mother eating a newborn (stillborn?): 3

In the desperate straits to which the enemy siege reduces you, you will eat the fruit of your womb, the flesh of your own sons and daughters whom YHWH your God has given you. 54Even the most refined and gentle of men among you will begrudge food to his own brother, to the wife whom he embraces, and to the last of his remaining children, "giving to none of them any of the flesh of his children whom he is eating, because nothing else remains to him, in the desperate straits to which the enemy siege will reduce you in all your towns. 56She who is the most refined and gentle among you, so gentle and refined that she does not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground, will begrudge food to the husband whom she embraces, to her own son, and to her own daughter, "begrudging even the afterbirth that comes out from between her thighs, and the children that she bears, because she is eating them in secret for lack of anything else, in the desperate straits to which the enemy siege will reduce you in your towns.

2 Kings 6.24-29 describes mothers eating their sons in a siege. Lev. 26.29, Jer. 19.9, and Lam. 2.20 and 4.4 describe parents eating children in the aftermath of destruction. It is difficult to know how historically reliable these passages are, and how much is hyperbole.64 Were such incidents part of the historical memory of those who had survived the siege of Jerusalem? Or is it the conventional rhetoric of the city lament of the reversal of normalcy and the breakdown of the family? Whether historical or not, these texts show that the stereotype of mother-love has its limits, and was counteracted by the commonplaces of the horror of the city siege. 3. The Breakdown of the Family in the City Lament. If the city lament genre is indeed operative here in Isaiah 49, the evocation of the close mother-infant bond is undermined by the genre's motif of the reversal of normal order. The commonplaces of the genre compel the prophet to acknowledge the limitations of the metaphor of ideal mother-love. The reversal of the normal order in the city lament includes the 'breakdown of the family': 'The husband deserts his wife and the wife her child; the brother does not recognize his brother or sister'.65 Paul Ferris 63. Malul, 'Adoption', p. 106. 64. Kathleen M. O'Connor notes that the cannibalism described in Lamentations 'may be more symbolic than actual. The authors of Lamentations may have adapted a curse from Deut. 28.53-57, which described what would happen if Israel violated the covenant' ('Lamentations', in C. Newsom and S. Ringe (eds), The Women's Bible Commentary [Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992], pp. 178-82 [181]). 65. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, pp. 40-41.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

147

likewise notes the situation described in the ancient Near Eastern laments over the destruction of the city: the social culture obviously cannot survive such circumstances. The basic institutions of society have been crushed. In the family, the husband no longer recognizes his wife and vice versa, should they both have survived. Siblings are separated and do not know each other. Parents no longer recognize their own children.66 Dobbs-Allsopp provides examples from the Mesopotamian city lament: The mother left before her child's eyes ... (LU 223) The father turned away from his child ... (LU 234) The mother turned away from her child ... (LSUr 96) The birth mother (lit. 'The actual mother who gave birth') abandoned her child ... (balag 6.32) The wife of a warrior abandoned the little child, her child ... (balag 6.33)67

Samuel Kramer notes that in the Lamentation over the Destruction ofUr, 'Disorder and confusion reigned everywhere. Mother forsook daughter; father forsook son; wife and child were abandoned'.68 Outside of Lamentations, the best Hebrew Bible example is Jer. 47.1-7, in which Gaza is attacked by Egypt: 'Parents do not turn back for children, so feeble are their hands' (v. 3). Deut. 28.53-57 (cited above) does not genetically fit the category of city lament, but may have adopted its conventions. The majority of biblical examples are in Lamentations. 4. The Breakdown of the Mother-Child Bond in Lamentations. Lamentations describes the breakdown of normal family relationships several times, particularly the breakdown of the bond between mother and child: Look, O YHWH, and consider! To whom have you done this? Should women eat their offspring, the children they have borne? (2.20) 3

Even the jackals offer the breast and nurse their young, but my people has become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness 4 The tongue of the infant sticks to the roof of its mouth for thirst; the children beg for food, but no one gives them anything. (4.3-4) The hands of compassionate women have boiled their own children ... (4.10a)

These examples depicting parental abandonment, neglect, or even cannibalism might make one wonder why Deutero-Isaiah uses parental language for YHWH at all! It must be remembered that these negative scenarios are rooted in a. positive 66. Paul Ferris, The Genre of Communal Lament in the Bible and the Ancient Near East (SBLDS; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), p. 60. 67. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep,pp. 133-34. 68. Samuel Noah Kramer, 'The Weeping Goddess: Sumerian Prototypes of the Mater Dolorosa', BA 46 (1983), pp. 69-80 (71).

148

Mixing Metaphors

stereotype of the parent-child bond. The whole point of these descriptions of family breakdown is that the destruction of the city is so devastating that the most positive and stable of relationships cannot withstand it. Katheryn Darr puts it thus: So strong were motherhood's associations with love and care that the obverse, maternal cannibalism, served to express the ultimate horror threatened by Yahweh in some texts (e.g. Deut 28.51-57) and bewailed in others (e.g. Lam. 2.19-20; 4.10).69

She adds: the depiction of women carrying out such activity also heightens the passage's rhetorical effect precisely because it flies in the face of strong associations with maternal nurture, compassion, and devotion.70

The convention of family breakdown explains the otherwise peculiar disclaimer in Isa. 49.15, 'Even these will forget'. The disclaimer is not simply a grudging acknowledgment of the limitations of metaphor and stereotype. The disclaimer arises from Deutero-Isaiah's use of lament genre features throughout Isaiah 49-54, as well as functioning as an accusation against Zion herself. Zion as a Mother As noted above, John Schmitt argues that the 'motherhood of God' in Isaiah 40-66 is derived from the image of Zion as a mother. Schmitt identifies four texts in which YHWH is portrayed as a mother: Isa. 42.14; 45.10; 49.15; and 66.13. In Isaiah 40-66 Zion is 'a persistent feminine maternal image': Second Isaiah had a deep sense of the motherhood of Zion, and possessed the ability to express it. It seems to me that the tradition of Zion's role as mother inspired the prophet to make motherhood an aspect of God ... The motherhood of God parallels the motherhood of Zion in its goodness, its constancy, and its exuberant prodigality.71

Schmitt's argument is not convincing for 45.10 and is not immediately obvious for 42.14. However, in 49.15 and 66.13 there is a clear link between language for YHWH as a mother and Zion's motherhood. In many ways the motherhood of God 'parallels' the motherhood of Zion, as Schmitt suggests. But in Isaiah 49 it also stands in stark contrast to the motherhood of Zion. Given that 15a is spoken in the voice of Zion, her accusation suggests that YHWH'S care, in his forgetfulness and abandonment, is inferior to the care of a mother. But Zion herself is a prime example of a forgetful mother who cannot recognize her own children. The motherhood of God is the antithesis of the motherhood of Zion. Schmitt is quite right in seeing Zion's motherhood as an inspiration for the image of YHWH as a mother. Zion is a mother who has forgotten her children (49.21). Chapter 49 eventually makes it clear that, although Zion may not have voluntarily abandoned 69. Katheryn Pfisterer Darr, Isaiah's Vision and the Family of God (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994), p. 110. 70. Darr, Isaiah's Vision, p. 243, n. 61. 71. Schmitt, 'Motherhood', pp. 560-61.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

149

her children, she has forgotten them (v. 21). And while YHWH chose to abandon her (54.7), he has not forgotten. In contrast to Zion herself, YHWH is the mother who does not forget Bat Zion (Daughter Zion).72 YHWH is not only compared to a mother here. YHWH is also a husband. Schmitt sees the marriage metaphor as functioning well in Isaiah 49. He writes: The femaleness and motherhood of Zion conies to the fore in Isaiah 49. She who had thought of herself as forsaken (49:14) by her husband now rejoices in the return of her children (w. 18,22) and wears them as the adornments of a bride (v. 18). The prophet dramatically uses two different images: Zion as daughter (v. 15) and Zion as mother (v. 18). The LORD may, indeed, be 'the mother of Zion', but he is also the husband of Zion and father of her children.73

The husband imagery is implied by the term "Addnay. But Zion's multitude of children are not clearly YHWH'S children at this point. YHWH'S responsibility for producing Zion's children is more akin to his actions in producing sons for Hannah and Rachel than to a begetting role. It is only as the unit continues in 50.1 that YHWH'S role is unambiguously transformed into that of a husband and a father. A Positive Metaphor YHWH is clearly compared to a mother in 49.13. But YHWH is not so much equated with a mother as shown to be more compassionate than a mother. As has been noted above, even the most negative portrayals of mothers are rooted in the commonplace image that the relationship of a mother to her small child is one of the most powerful images of love, care, and compassion available. Uncaring motherhood is regarded as unnatural. Not only does the language of 49.15 highlight the very young age of the child, but the use of the term T1U highlights the fact that this is a nursing infant.74 This is a mother who feeds her infant. (Children were nursed for about three years.) Isa. 49.15 emphasizes the mother's role in feeding her infant through the use of the term 71U. The ideal of the nourishing, feeding mother is highlighted in the image of YHWH as a nursing mother in Deut. 32.13. In Deut. 32.11, the image of YHWH as a mother eagle is introduced, describing YHWH'S care for Jacob. Verse 13 adds feeding/nursing imagery (which is consistent with the motherhood of the eagle but inconsistent with the species), 'he nursed him with honey from the crags, with oil from flinty rock'. The value of the nursing image is such that its inconsistency with bird imagery is surpassed by the coherent picture of a nurturing deity. YHWH is also implicitly a nursing mother in Num. 11.12-15 (see above). Moses interprets his responsibilities to the people as similar to the care of a mother, to feed and to carry. But he complains about this responsibility, since he did not conceive them or give birth to them. The

72. It should be noted that the common epithet Bat Zion does not seem to presume that Zion is a daughter of YHWH. For an argument to the contrary see Elaine Follis, 'The Holy City as Daughter', in E. Follis (ed.), Directions in Biblical Hebrew Poetry (JSOTSup 40; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), pp. 173-84. 73. Schmitt, 'Motherhood', p. 561. 74. See Gruber, Motherhood, p. 355, n. 15.

150

Mixing Metaphors

implication is that it is YHWH who takes the responsibility for feeding them (i.e. with quail, Num. 11.18-33). In addition to the association of motherhood with feeding, Numbers 11 highlights the image of the mother as she who carries the child. Carrying as characteristic of the parents' care of the small child may imply that, in Isa. 46.2-4, YHWH is a parent, when he calls Jacob and the remnant of Israel those 'who have been borne by me from your birth, carried from the womb; even to your old age I am he, even when you turn gray I will carry you. I have made, and I will bear (NE?3); I will carry and will save'. Just as in Numbers 11 a mother figure carries the people Israel to the 'promised' land (Num. 11.13), in Deutero-Isaiah YHWH is the one who promises to bring the people back to their mother city (49.18). They shall be carried by YHWH's new servants—the nations, and the kings and queens of nations (49.23), who act as child-care workers and wet-nurses for YHWH and for Zion.75 The association of motherhood with feeding is present in Isa. 49.15a. But the primary focus of the text is on whether a mother would forget. The nursing image emphasizes the inability to forget. A nursing mother must stay near and stay available to her infant. And how can she forget? A hungry infant is able to remind its mother of feeding time with its crying. Additionally, the mother's own body is a reminder to her of the need to feed her infant. Finally, the act of nursing itself strengthens the bond between the mother and the child. Can a mother forget? YHWH is saying, 'You, Zion, may forget your children, but 7 won't forget you'. How is YHWH a mother or like a good mother? Primarily in his remembrance of Zion and her children and consequently in his ability to have the children carried home. 8. Conclusion The image of YHWH in 49.13-21 is highly dependent on Deutero-Isaiah's image of Zion as a mother. This image is rooted in the features of the city lament, in which the city has been abandoned and the feminine figure laments her loss of children and accuses the destroying god. The interacting metaphors explored in this chapter are Zion as a mother, YHWH as a mother, and YHWH as Zion's husband (but more on this in Chapter 7). Incorporation of features of the city lament genre exposes a tension between the image of a mother as an ideal of love and care, and the literary convention of the breakdown of that stereotypically ideal relationship. The breakdown of the mother role is expressed in various literary contexts as child abandonment, forgetfulness or non-recognition of one's child, and in the most extreme case, child cannibalism. Isaiah 49.13-21 uses this tension to contrast the motherhood of YHWH with the motherhood of Zion. Exploring the Zion imagery in light of the city lament genre we find that Zion reflects the image of the patron goddess (following Zion's portrayal in Lamentations)—separated from her citizens by a more powerful deity, unable to prevent the destruction of the city. She is left 75. The association of feeding and carrying may also be seen in Isa. 66.12: 'and you shall nurse and be carried on her [Jerusalem's] arm'.

6. Can a Mother Forget? Isaiah 49.13-21

151

bereft of her children, barren. At the same time she also reflects the literary convention of the city lament of the breakdown of normal relationships, especially the breakdown of the family effected by the crisis of the city's destruction. Although she is a mother, Zion has forgotten her children—she is unable to recognize them when they return to her. In contrast, YHWH is a mother who, like the city goddess, abandoned her children (for a time) but has not forgotten them. Unlike literary examples of human mothers in crisis who are unable (or unwilling) to save their children, YHWH will save her children and return them to their home. This remembrance and restoration completes the city lament 'modes' begun but left incomplete in Lamentations. The message of hope is proclaimed in the contrasts and reversals of present destruction and emptiness to point to a future teeming with children. It is ultimately a text full of irony. The abandoned wife and mother fails to recognize her own children, while the abandoning God does not forget her. The very idea of motherhood is stretched to its limits here. Motherhood at its worst is the ultimate expression of the total breakdown of all human connections in the chaos of destruction. Motherhood at its best is the ultimate expression of love, care, remembrance, and restoration.

Chapter 7 DIVINE HUSBAND AND FATHER: ISAIAH 50.1-3

1. Introduction and Translation Isa. 50.1-3 is the third section of the larger unit 49.13-50.3. Images of marriage, parenthood, debt slavery (and redeemer), and the divine warrior all interact in this short subunit. In 50.1-3 the father metaphor is evoked by means of the husband metaphor. YHWH initially addresses children whose mother is the wife of YHWH. YHWH, then, is the implied father and husband. The mother is Zion and the children are Zion's exiled people. In 49.13-21 the image of YHWH as a parent was dependent on the image of Zion as a mother, but with only an implied reference to YHWH as Zion's husband (in the term ^TTK, "adonay, 'lord' or 'husband'). In 50.1-3, the image of YHWH as a father is dependent on the interaction of the images of YHWH as the husband of the city, Zion, and of Zion as a mother. YHWH is the father of the people by virtue of being a husband to their mother, Zion. DeuteroIsaiah has given us a complete family unit. This family unit is the product of the synthesis of two separate metaphors: YHWH as the husband of the city, and the city as the mother of her people. Not only are these two metaphors 'coherent' but they are quite 'consistent'.1 In 50.1-3 YHWH is responding to an implicit accusation—that YHWH has divorced Zion. (The accusation of abandonment was explicit in 49.14; as noted in chapter 6, divorce may be implied in 49.21.) Furthermore, YHWH is blamed for the sale of her children into slavery, YHWH'S debts being the alleged cause. YHWH refutes the charge by using language that evokes the images of both the 7N13, go'el ('redeemer'), and the divine warrior. 'Thus says YHWH: 'Where, then, is the divorce document of your [masc. pi.] mother whom I sent away? Or (rather) who is my creditor to whom I sold you [masc. pi.]? Because of your [masc. pi.] iniquities you were sold, and because of your rebellions your mother was sent away.'

1. Two metaphors are consistent if a 'single clearly delineated metaphor' can encompass both (George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980], p. 96; see above, Ch. 1). The metaphor of the family easily encompasses both the husbandwife image and the mother-child image. (In contrast, coherent metaphors share only some entailments.)

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

153

[Zion's accusation] 'Why, when I came, was there no one (no 2TK)? I called and there was no answer!'

2

[YHWH'S response] 'Is my hand too short to redeem (THIS), as though I do not have the power to rescue? (See) by my rebuke I dry up (the) Sea/Yamm, I make Rivers a desert. Their fish will stink for there is no water, and they die from thirst. 3 I clothe heavens in darkness; and I make sackcloth their covering.'

This third subunit of 49.13-50.3 is structured as a series of questions: 'Where ...?', 'Who ...?', 'Why ...?', 'Is ...?' Each of the three subunits uses at least one rhetorical question (this one uses several): 'Can a woman forget her nursing child?' (49.15), 'Can the prey be taken from the mighty?' (49.24), and now: 'Where is your mother's divorce document?' (50.1), 'Who is my creditor ...?' (50.1), 'Why was no one there?' (50.2), 'Is my hand too short ...?' (50.2) The first section (49.13-21) has been discussed in Chapter 6. There Zion is a mother who has forgotten her children, in contrast to YHWH who does not forget. YHWH has proclaimed to her the return of her children, the repopulation of her city. YHWH's dialogue is with Zion but his subject is her children. In the second subunit (49.2226) YHWH continues to address Zion ('you' fern. sing.). YHWH will humble and wreak vengeance on Zion's oppressors. Within this subunit, w. 24-25 anticipate elements in 50.1-3. Specifically, addressing Zion, YHWH says, 'I will contend with those who contend with you, and I will save your children'. This second unit concludes with YHWH'S words, 'Then all flesh shall know that I am YHWH your Savior, and your Redeemer (7^13, go'el), the Mighty One of Jacob'. YHWH is once again called 'redeemer'. With 50.1, using the formula 'Thus says YHWH ...', there is a shift in address. YHWH addresses not Zion, but her children! (For this reason most scholars see 50.1-3 as a completely new unit.) This is a significant shift, but these are the very children of whom YHWH has been speaking in 49.17-25. A structuring metaphor here in 50.1-3 is Zion (the children's mother) as the wife of YHWH. A marriage relationship between YHWH and Zion was vaguely alluded to in 49.14, when Zion called YHWH her "^"TN. Here, the marriage metaphor is made explicit by the reference to a document of divorce. The divorce document is the n r P I D I S O , a 'severance document'. In the Hebrew Bible, the term appears L. ' only in Deut. 24.1, 3, Jer. 3.8, and here in Isa. 50.1. The term 'send away' (07^ pi.), occuring twice in this verse, is used with the term nrT~Q~""lSD ('severance document') in Deuteronomy 24 and is used as a divorce term in Deut. 22.19, 29, Jer. 3.1, and Mai. 2.16. The question functions to assert that YHWH has not divorced Zion. This is a rhetorical question that implies that there is no such document. YHWH has not divorced Zion. YHWH is Zion's husband. It is this image, then, that needs to be examined.

154

Mixing Metaphors

2. YHWH as a Husband: A Structuring Metaphor Deutero-Isaiah draws on an established tradition of YHWH as a husband. The image of YHWH as a husband occurs primarily in prophetic material. This metaphor can be seen clearly in Hosea, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, as well as in Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah. For Jeremiah and Ezekiel the wife of YHWH is Zion or Jerusalem (i.e. the wife of primary concern—Samaria is also a wife). YHWH as a Husband in Hosea 1-2 Hosea provides the earliest clear portrayal of YHWH as a husband. Hosea 1 depicts the prophet Hosea's symbolic marriage to Gomer. Most of ch. 2 is a husband's condemnatory speech to his wayward wife, followed by a declaration of a desire for reconciliation. The wayward wife shall be brought back into the wilderness by her husband. There she shall respond as in the days of her youth, as at the time when she came out of the land of Egypt' (2.17b, Eng. 2.15b). In 2.18 (Eng. 2.16) YHWH speaks to this reconciliation: 'On that day, says YHWH, you [fern, sing.] will call me, "My husband" f^N), and no longer will you call me, "My Baal" C^UD)'. Verse 22 (Eng. v. 20) continues, 'I will take you for my wife in faithfulness, and you shall know YHWH'. YHWH is therefore clearly a husband in Hosea 2. In the most general terms, the wife represents the people of Israel. However, a more precise identification of the tenor or referent of the wife has elicited various readings of the metaphor among scholars. The three most likely candidates are: the land, the capital city of Samaria, and the people Israel (the first two effectively representing the people Israel). The most likely specific tenor for YHWH'S 'wife' is the land. Phyllis Bird identifies Hosea's wife in ch. 1 as a 'sign-action' for the land, the children signifying the inhabitants of the land.2 Chapter 2 reflects an inability to discern whether the fertility of the land comes from Ba'al or from YHWH. The language of Hos. 2.5 (Eng. 2.3) ('I will... make her like a wilderness, and turn her into a parched land') suggests that Hosea is using the tenor of the land to signify the wayward people. (Note that both words for land, j*"]N and nQ"TN, are feminine).3 YHWH is both husband and father in Hosea 1-2. The image of YHWH as a husband emphasizes the role of the husband as a provider (not Ba'al) whose wife is unfaithful. First he punishes her by stripping her naked and taking back all that he has provided in the past. But then he will woo her again and begin the relationship anew (and forever). YHWH'S role as husband also includes fatherhood. In ch. 1 the children of Gomer have symbolic names which represent the people of Israel 2. Phyllis Bird,' "To Play the Harlot": An Inquiry into an Old Testament Metaphor', in Peggy L. Day (ed.), Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1986), pp. 75-94 (80-81). She notes that both the mother and the children 'fornicate' (HDT). Bird goes on to discuss the implications of applying this verb to the 'children'. 3. Irene Kerasote Rallis argues that Israelite identification of YHWH as husband of the land was Baalistic: Hosea's point was to re-interpret the marriage imagery to assert that YHWH was the God of the Exodus and husband of the people, not of the land ('Nuptial Imagery in the Book of Hosea: Israel as the Bride of Yahweh', SVTQ 34 [1990], pp. 197-219 [199]).

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

155

(^Kinr, 'Jezreel', HEm'S1?, 'Not Pitied', and "EITK1?, 'Not My People'). Initially YHWH rejects his wife's children, but then he reclaims or recognizes them. "QirNib ('Not My People') is called'children of the living God' (2.1,Engl. 1.10). Thus YHWH acknowledges that he is their father. Furthermore, 'I will say to " ' Q U w ? ('Not My People'), "You are my people"; and he shall say, "You are my God" ' (2.25, Eng. 2.23). The implication is clear that YHWH is the father of the children (people) as well as a husband. YHWH as a Husband in Jeremiah Jeremiah 2-3 also portrays YHWH as the husband of an unfaithful wife. In 2.2 the wife is Jerusalem: Go and proclaim in the hearing of Jerusalem: Thus says YHWH: I remember the devotion of your [fern, sing.] youth, your love as a bride, how you followed me in the wilderness, in a land not sown.

In 2.20-25 and 2.32-37 YHWH addresses a feminine subject who has 'played the whore' (HDT): For long ago you broke your yoke and burst your bonds, and you said, 'I will not serve!' On every high hill and under every green tree you sprawled and played the whore. (2.20) ... But you said, 'It is hopeless, for I have loved strangers, and after them I will go.' (2.25) How well you direct your course to seek lovers! So that even to wicked women you have taught your ways. (2.33)

These verses do not explicitly describe YHWH as a husband, but the language of marital infidelity implicitly depicts YHWH as the husband of an unfaithful wife. In Jer. 3.1 YHWH speaks as a man who has either already 'sent away' his unfaithful wife or is contemplating doing so. (The use of divorce imagery will be discussed further below.) If a man divorces ('sends away', PH2)), his wife and she goes from him and becomes another man's wife, will he return to her? Would not such a land be greatly polluted? You have played the whore with many lovers; and would you return to me? says YHWH.

Jer. 3.6-11 describes YHWH as the husband of two sisters: Israel and Judah. Israel has already been divorced and now Judah is being judged for her unfaithfulness as well. John Schmitt argues, on grammatical grounds, that the wives here are to be understood as the cities of Samaria and Jerusalem, called 'Apostasy' and

156

Mixing Metaphors

'Treachery'.4 Regardless of whether the reference is to the cities or to the nations, YHWH is clearly, once again, the husband of an unfaithful wife (more precisely, of two unfaithful wives). In Jeremiah 31 YHWH refers to himself as the husband of the house of Israel and the house of Judah in times past: The days are surely coming, says YHWH, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt—a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband [though I was married (^IO) to them], says YHWH. (31.31-32)

As in Hosea, Jeremiah's characterization of YHWH as a husband is that of a wronged husband who seeks his wife's repentance and subsequent reconciliation. YHWH as a Husband in Ezekiel Ezekiel likewise uses a marriage metaphor to describe YHWH's relationship with the people, highlighting the themes of infidelity and adultery again, along with a theme of uncleanness.5 In Ezekiel, YHWH is the husband of Jerusalem (as well as Samaria, chs 16 and 23). YHWH is punitive towards his wife, as in Hosea, but the tone is more intense here. YHWH is enraged at his wife's infidelity. Moreover, the language is crude and insulting. No reconciliation is sought here, only enraged vengeance: I will deliver you into [your lovers'] hands, and they shall throw down your platform and break down your lofty places; they shall strip you of your clothes and take your beautiful objects and leave you naked and bare. They shall bring up a mob against you, and they shall stone you and cut you to pieces with their swords. (16.39-40)

YHWH'S role as husband in Ezekiel includes fatherhood. The people of Jerusalem are understood to be the children of father YHWH and the mother city together. In addition to taking lovers, Jerusalem is accused of sacrificing their children: You took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to [idols] to be devoured ... You slaughtered my children. (16.2021) they have even offered up to them [idols] for food the children whom they had borne to me. (23.37)

4. The grammatical issue is that the two wife figures are each spoken of with two nouns 'set side-by-side', the first of which is feminine and the second masculine. Schmitt's proposal smoothes out the grammar by assuming that the terms 'Israel' and 'Judah' were later additions ('Gender Correctness and Biblical Metaphors: The Case of God's Relation to Israel', BTB 26 [1996], pp. 96106 (100-01). See also Schmitt, 'The Gender of Ancient Israel', JSOT26 [1983], pp. 115-25, and 'The Virgin of Israel: Referent and Use of the Phrase in Amos and Jeremiah', CBQ 53 [1991], pp. 365-87). 5. See Julie Galambush, Jerusalem in the Book of Ezekiel: The City as Yahweh's Wife (SBLDS; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), p. 159.

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

157

Jerusalem is not only YHWH'S wife, but her children are YHWH'S children. YHWH is husband and father. The Issue of the City as the Wife of the Deity in the Ancient Near East The metaphor of a city or people as the wife of a deity is not known in the ancient Near East outside of the Hebrew Bible. In line with this observation, Zion and Samaria are the only cities portrayed as the wife of a god in the Hebrew Bible. While the feminine terms PQ ('daughter') and 7171713 ('virgin') are applied to other cities, only the capital cities of Judah and Israel are portrayed as wives of a deity. The possible exception is Isa. 47.8, where a defeated 7D3~rQ~n7irQ ('virgin daughter Babylon', v. 1) says, 'I shall not sit as a widow or know the loss of children'. She is then told, 'the loss of children and widowhood shall come upon you in full measure' (v. 9).6 This might refer to Babylon as the wife of a deity (however, widow imagery seems to highlight loss of status without necessarily highlighting the former existence of a 'husband'7). It should be noted that some scholars argue that it was a convention in the ancient Near East to portray the city itself as a goddess who was married to the patron god. The evidence for such a convention consists of theophoric names, Hellenistic coins, city titles, and city names as feminine forms of a god's name. Early evidence, however, is quite vague and inconclusive. Some of the evidence is too late to apply to the Hebrew Bible, dating from the Hellenistic era.8 Thus, our argument is that Deutero-Isaiah's portrayal of YHWH as a husband draws on an Israelite tradition, perhaps originated by Hosea, and utilized by Jeremiah and Ezekiel. 3. Personified Zion The City as Goddess It was argued above that Deutero-Isaiah adopts (with other Hebrew literature) the conventions of the city goddess and applies the imagery to Zion. In the Mesopotamian city lament genre the city itself is not personified, but the patron goddess of the city represents her city as she laments its destruction. The characterization of the feminine figure Zion in the Hebrew Bible parallels the city goddess of the ancient Near East (see Chapter 6). In the ancient Near East, cities themselves were not referred to as mothers of

6. Galambush interprets Babylon's widowhood as the death of her inhabitants (Jerusalem, 4344, see esp. nn. 48 and 49). 7. Chayim Cohen argues that 'the "widowed" city motif seems to refer to a once independent city which has become a vassal of another state' ('The "Widowed" City',JANESCU5 [1973], pp. 75-81 [78-79]). Note that in Lamentations, Zion is 'like a widow' (Lam, 1.1), but is not explicitly the wife of YHWH. 8. See Julius Lewy, 'The Old West Semitic Sun God H&mmu\HUCA 18 (1944), pp. 429-88 (436-43), and Aloysius Fitzgerald, 'The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as a Queen and False Worship as Adultery in the OT', CBQ 34 (1972), pp. 403-416 (405).

158

Mixing Metaphors

their inhabitants. However, a city's patron goddess might be referred to as a 'mother' with reference to her 'children': In the Mesopotamian laments the goddess often bears the title ama 'mother' (e.g. LU 28 [um-ma]) ... At times this metaphor gets extended, and the citizens are characterized as the goddess' children ...9

Thus, the characterization of a city's people as 'children' of a 'mother' is a convention shared by the Hebrew Bible and other ancient Near Eastern texts. The Virgin City The Hebrew Bible uses the phrase L?N~ltD'1TlL>irQ ('Virgin [of] Israel') in Amos 5.2; Jer. 18.13; 31.4, 21. Is it 'Virgin Israel' or 'Virgin of Israel'? Schmitt argues that this should be read as a grammatical construct form, 'virgin of Israel', referring to a city in Israel, Amos 5.2 and Jer. 18.13 referring to Jerusalem and Jer. 31.4,21 referring to Samaria.10 Schmitt also cites numerous instances of the phrase rQTl71PQ ('virgin daughter'), which he argues always refers to a city. The phrase stands in apposition to Zion (Isa. 37.22=2 Kgs 19.21; Lam. 2.13), to Sidon (Isa. 23.12), and to Babylon (Isa. 47.1). It appears in construct with Egypt (Jer. 46.11), Judah (Lam. 1.15), and 'my people' (Jer. 14.17).'1 What is important is that 'the city is a person and ... cities like goddesses bear the title btwlt [virgin]'.12 The use of the term 7171713 ('virgin') does not imply motherhood. In fact, it contradicts motherhood. However, it is an example of the city personified. The City as a Mother The Hebrew Bible has examples of two senses in which a city may be a mother. In 2 Sam. 20.19 the walled city of Abel is a mother, likely of 'daughter' unwalled villages: '... you seek to destroy a city that is a mother in Israel...'

This appears to be a dead metaphor insofar as the villages are called 'daughters', but none of the entailments of a mother-daughter relationship are utilized (e.g. Josh. 15.14-17; 17.11). The metaphor of the capital city as mother of her inhabitants is much more common (e.g. Ezekiel 16, 23, Lamentations, DeuteroIsaiah [47, 49-51, 54], and Trito-Isaiah [66]). The city as the mother of her inhabitants is a live metaphor in the Hebrew Bible. Zion is spoken of as a mother in Isaiah 51 and 54: There is no one to guide her among all the children she has borne; There is no one to take her by the hand 9. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion: A Study of the City Lament Genre in the Hebrew Bible (BibOr 44; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1993), p. 81, emphasis added. 10. See John J. Schmitt, 'Virgin of Israel', pp. 365-87. 11. Schmitt, 'Virgin', 375, n. 40. He notes Bourget's observation that the form D^lfD appears only before 7N~liC1'' ('Israel') or before PQ ('daughter'), (see Daniel Bourget,Des metaphores de Jeremie [EBib 9; Paris: Gabalda, 1987], p. 482). 12. Fitzgerald, 'Background', p. 409.

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

159

among all the children she has brought up. Your children have fainted ... (51.18, 20) ... the children of the desolate woman will be more than the children of her that is married ... (54.1)

The image of the city as a mother may be tied to the images of YHWH as father and husband (e.g. Ezekiel 16, 23). However, these images of YHWH are not necessary components of the mother image.13 In Lamentations Zion is a mother of her inhabitants without the components of YHWH as husband and father: ... her children have gone away ... (Lam. 1.5) The precious children of Zion, worth their weight in fine gold ... (Lam. 4.2)

Schmitt argues, correctly, that the image of Zion as a mother is not necessarily derived from her relationship with God: 'The city's role as mother is usually not subordinate to, perhaps not even coordinated with, that of God at all. Zion is a mother often without explicit reference to God'.14 Note how Babylon is a mother in Isa. 47.9 without reference to a husband deity. Thus we should take care not to assume that Zion's children are YHWH'S children, unless the text makes the connection for us. In the Hebrew Bible generally, Zion's children are understood to be, not villages ('daughters'), but Israelites or Judahites ('sons' or 'children' D^D) and often YHWH'S children as well. 4. Interacting Metaphors: Husband/Wife and Mother in Isaiah 49-54 As was shown above, Zion/Jerusalem was depicted prior to Deutero-Isaiah as the wife of YHWH. Specifically, she seems to be the wife in Jer. 2.2 and Jer. 3.1-5, and Ezekiel develops this image fully. In Ezekiel, the wife figure highlights the unfaithfulness of Jerusalem (in seeking other lovers), her guilt in sacrificing their children, and her uncleanness; she receives punishment without mercy. Deutero-Isaiah utilizes the metaphor of YHWH as the husband of Zion in 50.1-3, 54.5-8, and possibly 49.14, along with the metaphor of the exiles as the children or offspring of Zion. The synthesis of these marriage metaphors and the city as a mother thus implies that YHWH is the father of the exiles, even though that is not explicitly stated in these chapters.15 Our argument is that in Isa. 50.1 -3 the image of YHWH as a father is the product of the interaction of the two independent metaphors of Zion as a mother and YHWH as a husband. Thus, Isa. 50.1-3 clearly implies that the exiles, who are the children of Zion, are also the children of YHWH, since he is (or has been) her husband. Isaiah 54 implies, more indirectly, that YHWH shall be the father of childless Zion's children. (YHWH promises to return to her as her husband. Now she shall have children.)

13. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, p. 81. See Lam. 1.5c, 16c; 2.19c, 22c. 14. Schmitt, 'Gender Correctness', p. 103. 15. Elsewhere the metaphor of YHWH as father is independent of the marriage metaphor, e.g. Isa. 43.1-7; 45.9-13; and elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (see Ch. 2, above).

160

Mixing Metaphors

Nevertheless, the ideas of a marriage between YHWH and Zion and the image of the city as a mother do not necessarily function simultaneously. As has already been mentioned, the motherhood of the city does not require a father figure (i.e. the father is often a downplayed entailment). It is true that Jer. 3.19-20 utilizes both of these images: I thought how I would set you [fern, sing.] among my children, and give you [fern, sing.] a pleasant land, and the most beautiful heritage of all the nations. And I thought you [masc. pi. or fern, sing.] would call me, My Father, and would not turn from following me. Instead, as a faithless wife leaves her husband, so you [masc. pi.] have been faithless to me, O house of Israel, says YHWH.

These two images, however, are not synthesized into the image of a family unit, but function as separate, parallel images. YHWH'S relationship as husband is one image and YHWH as a father is another, both of which describe YHWH'S relationship with Judah. In Trito-Isaiah, the marriage image and the Mother Zion images are also not synthesized. Marriage imagery describes the relationship between YHWH and Zion: ... your land [shall be called] Married; for YHWH delights in you, and your land shall be married. For as a young man marries a young woman, so shall your builder marry you, and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God rejoice over you (62.4-5).

Zion is portrayed as a mother: ... your sons shall come from far away, and your daughters shall be carried on their nurses' arms ... (60.4) Before she was in labor she gave birth; before her pain came upon her she delivered a son ... as soon as Zion was in labor she delivered her children ... Rejoice with Jerusalem ... that you may nurse and be satisfied from her consoling breast... (66.7-11)

YHWH is portrayed as a father (63.16 and 64.8). (YHWH is also a midwife in 66.9 and a mother in 66.13.) In the Hebrew Bible, then, Zion as a mother, YHWH as a father, and YHWH as the husband of Zion are distinct metaphors. Each of these metaphors has its own integrity. They are not part and parcel of the same structuring metaphor. They are, however, easily synthesized (due to the simple facts of procreation) to produce a family with YHWH as a husband and a. father. Thus, in Isa. 50.1-3, where YHWH is clearly the husband of Zion, and Zion is clearly the mother of the people, the two systems are easily synthesized to portray YHWH as the father of the people. Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah portray Zion both as a mother and (to a lesser extent) as the wife of YHWH, first estranged, then restored (in contrast to Lamentations, which portrays Zion as a mother by reference to her children [1.5,4.2, and possibly 1.16], without portraying her as the wife of YHWH). In Hosea, Jeremiah,

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

161

and Ezekiel, YHWH'S wife is unfaithful and sinful, deserving of punishment. In Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah, in contrast, the image of wife/bride serves to advance the theme of restoration. 5. The City as a Negative Image In the Hebrew Bible, the personified city (including the city as a wife) is always associated with situations of destruction—present, future, or past. The personification appears to be a characteristic of lament. Fitzgerald argues, 'For all practical purposes, at least when the imagery (of the personified city) is in any way developed, it is limited to a situation in which the city is presented as having suffered or about to suffer a disaster'.16 As for the personification of the city as 'daughter', 'virgin', or 'virgin daughter', Mary Donovan Turner notes: it demonstrates a high degree of association with themes of lament and suffering. When the daughter (virgin or virgin daughter) is used in texts of restoration, elements which demonstrate her lamented, devastated past are evident.17

While Turner is dealing specifically with the terms 'daughter' and 'virgin', her observations hold true for other texts in which the city is personified. F. W. DobbsAllsopp argues that the personified city in the Hebrew Bible is related to the image of the lamenting goddess in ancient Near Eastern literature: the propensity of the personified city motifs to appear in contexts of suffering and disaster correlates well with the idea that they owe something of their existence to the weeping goddess motif in the city laments.18

The absence of personification for Zion in the positive Zion psalms is additional evidence that the personification of the city is not characteristic of poetry in general, but characteristic of lament, whether an actual generic lament or another form dependent for its motifs on the lament genre.19 Galambush argues, more broadly, that the Hebrew Bible's utilization of this imagery is consistently negative, not only in the sense of suffering or impending suffering, but also in the depiction of the city as an adulteress.20 She argues that the key entailment in personification of the city is adultery, and that 'condemnation of the city's "adultery" is virtually the only reason the [marriage] metaphor is employed in depicting the cities of Israel'.21 Galambush's focus on the entailment of 16. Fitzgerald, Background, p. 410. 17. Mary Donovan Turner, 'Daughter Zion: Lament and Restoration' (unpubl. diss., Emory University, 1992), abstract. Deutero-Isaiah calls Zion 'daughter Zion' in 52.2. Babylon is called 'virgin daughter Babylon' in 47.1. 18. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, pp. 85-86 (see above, Ch. 6). 19. See, for example, Psalms 48, 76, 84, and 87. 20. Galambush, Jerusalem, p. 26. 21. Galambush, Jerusalem, p. 27. Galambush cites as an exception to the negative imagery 2 Sam 20.19, where Abel Beth-maacah is 'a city that is a mother in Israel' (p. 26, n. 3). She adds, incorrectly, that this text 'is probably the only instance where a fully personified Israelite city is not said to have committed adultery' (p. 27, n. 5).

162

Mixing Metaphors

adultery is quite on target in her study on Ezekiel. In Deutero-Isaiah, however, Zion is not depicted as having committed adultery. Her sins are alluded to only briefly and in the most general terms. (See 40.2. YHWH'S wrath may imply sin in 51.17, 22. In 50.1-3, it is not Zion's sins but the sins of the people that are mentioned.) Accordingly, Mark Biddle argues that the personification of Zion is not consistently the image of an adulteress: the 'harlot' motif of Hosea is not basic to this personification of Jerusalem, who can also be portrayed in the positive roles of mother, maiden, wife, and leading lady of the realm ... She is not per se a wanton character.22

The personified city of YHWH is not necessarily negative in terms of highlighting sin. However, the personified city is negative in its association with situations of suffering and destruction. A distinctive move in Deutero-Isaiah's use of Zion imagery is interweaving it with Deutero-Isaiah's structuring metaphor of 7N13, go 'el ('redeemer'). Both 50.1 -3 and 54.1 -17 utilize this structural metaphor. 50.1 -3 uses the language of debt slavery, while 54.1-7 uses the language of the levirate

safddszfsaff 6. Exposition of Isaiah 50.1-3 Verse 1 Thus says YHWH: 'Where, then, is the divorce document of your [masc. pi.] mother whom I sent away? Or (rather) who is my creditor to whom I sold you [masc. pi.]? Because of your [masc. pi.] iniquities you were sold, and because of your rebellions your mother was sent away.'

YHWH'S two rhetorical questions point out implications of YHWH'S divorcing Zion and of YHWH'S selling his children to his creditors. YHWH is responding to an implied accusation that he has 'sent away', that is, divorced Zion and sold his children into bondage. 1. Accusation of Divorce. YHWH acknowledges that Zion has indeed been 'sent away' (or that he has left her). Yet there is apparently no divorce document. This suggests that there has been estrangement, but that the divorce has not been finalized. YHWH'S demand to see the divorce papers is a rhetorical question that implicitly denies that such papers exist. The term 1*172) ('sent away') is a term associated with divorce, but not equated with divorce.23 Since YHWH'S abandon22. Mark E. Biddle, The Figure of Lady Jerusalem: Identification, Deification and Personification of Cities in the Ancient Near East', in W. W. Hallo et al. (eds), The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective (Scripture in Context, IV; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1991), pp. 173-94(186). 23. See Joseph Blenkinsopp, "The Family in First Temple Israel', in Leo Perdue (ed.), Families in Ancient Israel (The Family, Religion, and Culture Series; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox,

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

163

ment of, or estrangement from, Zion is acknowledged and apparent, why is it so important that a divorce be denied? First of all, a finalized divorce could prevent a future reconciliation. Second, the denial of divorce implies that YHWH's connection to Zion has never been completely severed. (She is engraved on his palms, 49.16.) Just as in 49.13-21, where YHWH'S abandonment of Zion is implied, separation is implied here. Just as in 49.14-21, Zion has been left alone, without husband or children. But if the divorce has not been finalized, then Zion cannot have remarried. Under certain circumstances a man does not have the option of taking back his divorced wife. According to Deut. 24.1-4 and Jer. 3.1, if a man divorces his wife 'for some indecency' and she remarries and subsequently becomes divorced or widowed, he may not take her back: When a husband (2TN) takes a wife and marries (7J2D) her and if she then finds no favor in his eyes, because he has found some indecency in her and he writes her a divorce decree and puts it in her hand, and sends (07$) her from his house; and she departs from his house; and she finds another husband (2TN); and the other husband hates (N]&) her and writes her a divorce decree and puts it in her hand and sends her from his house, or if the other husband dies, who took her as his wife; then her first husband (7iH), who sent her away, may not take her back again as his wife; after that she is unclean; for that is an abomination before YHWH and you shall not bring guilt upon the land which YHWH your God gave to you as your inheritance. (Deut. 24.1-4, translation mine)

Jeremiah 3 describes a situation similar to that of Deuteronomy 24, but without many of the specifics, in which YHWH is the husband. Jeremiah 3 does not stipulate that the cause of the divorce was some 'indecency' in the wife, but she is accused of acting like a 'whore'. Thus the implications are quite similar to those of Deut. 24.1-4; that is, a finalized divorce based on the fault of the wife does not permit reconciliation lest 'land be greatly polluted'. The implications of Deut. 24.1-4 and Jer. 3.1 for Isa. 50.1-3 are this: if the wife was not actually divorced, reconciliation is possible. YHWH'S rhetorical question in Isa. 50.1 effectively affirms the possibility of restoration of relationship by denying that Zion has been divorced. Although they have been estranged (he did abandon her, 54.6-7), the estrangement has not been finalized. 50.1 further affirms that the blame for the situation lies with the children rather than their mother. The mutual legal obligations of marriage are still intact. Isa. 50.1 emphasizes the possibility of restoration first by denying that there has been a divorce, and second, by attributing the transgressions to the 'children' rather than to the 'mother'. She is not depicted as an adulteress. Reconciliation is possible. 2. The Selling of Sons and Daughters. The second rhetorical question is 'Who is my creditor to whom I sold you?' The practice of selling one's own children is attested in Nehemiah 5, where fathers are forced to sell their sons and daughters as 1997), 48-103 (65). Another term, 2713, could have been used instead if divorce was the cause of the sending away (Gen. 21.10; Lev. 21.7, 14; 22.13; Num. 30.9; Ezek. 44.22).

164

Mixing Metaphors

well as their ancestral lands because of famine, taxes, and, apparently, illegal usury on the part of the leadership. In 2 Kgs 4.1 -8 a creditor threatens to seize a widow's two children as slaves for the payment of debts. (Whether these are the debts left by her husband or her own debts is not known.) In Nehemiah the fathers are powerless by virtue of poverty, and in 2 Kings the father is absent. The accusation directed against YHWH in Isa. 50.1 -3 suggests either that YHWH is powerless in the face of the 'creditors' (here Babylon) who have the power to seize the children (49.24) or that YHWH is an absent (or even dead?) father.24 YHWH denies that he is indebted to any creditor or that he is powerless: 'No, because of your sins you were sold.' In ancient Near Eastern law, in fact, another reason besides financial difficulty is given for selling one's child; that is, an adopted child's rebelliousness, ingratitude, or disrespect towards the father or both parents.25 YHWH's response to the accusation is that the bondage of the children is not evidence of YHWH'spowerlessness (or lack of resources), but is, precisely, evidence of the children's rebelliousness?'6 YHWH goes further to say that the children are responsible not only for their own bondage, but also for their mother, Zion, being 'sent away' by YHWH. Are the fates of the children and of the mother the same? The mother has been sent away. The children have been sold. The text does not explicitly say that the mother was 'sold', only that she was 'sent away'. Is Zion implicitly sold into exile?27 A chiasm in v. 1 describes their fates: A 'Your mother' sent away. ('I sent'—act.) B 'You' (masc. pi.) children sold. ('I sold'—act.) B 'You' (masc. pi.) children sold (because of your sins). ('You were sold'—pass.) A 'Your mother' sent away (for your transgressions), ('sent away'—pass.)

24. See also Isaac Mendelsohn, Slavery in the Ancient Near East: A Comparative Study of Slavery in Babylonia, Assyria, Syria, and Palestine, from the Middle of the Third Millennium to the End of the First Millennium (New York: Oxford University Press, 1949) and Legal Aspects of Slavery in Babylonia, Assyria, and Palestine (Williamsport, PA: Bayart Press, 1932). The wife and children of a debtor could be seized by a creditor. See also Georges Contenau, Everyday Life in Babylon and Assyria (London: Edward Arnold Ltd., 1954): 'A father of a family might also be driven by destitution to sell as slaves his wife or children or even himself if he were entirely unable to repay a debt which he had contracted' (p. 19). Mendelsohn notes that 'Only in dire straits did a father sell his children' (Legal Aspects, p. 63). 25. Sumerian laws and CH ##226-27 state that 'a disobedient adopted child was to be branded with a slave-mark and sold for money' (Mendelsohn, Legal Aspects, pp. 32-33). This raises the question of whether the same might be done for a birth-child. 26. See Katheryn Pfisterer Darr, Isaiah's Vision and the Family of God (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994), p. 66. Contenau states, 'the law provided that, if an adopted child disgraced himself, for example by renouncing his adoptive family, he might be sold as a slave' (Everyday Life, p. 19). 27. Carol Newsom argues that, in contrast to Lamentations, Deutero-Isaiah does not depict Zion as being in exile herself. ('Response to Norman K. Gottwald, "Social Class and Ideology in Isaiah 40-55" ', in David Jobling and Tina Pippin (eds), Ideological Criticism of Biblical Texts (Semeia 59; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 73-78 (76).

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

165

On closer examination, the fate of the mother and the children is not assumed to be identical, even though clearly linked. If the mother is identified closely with the physical city of Jerusalem, this verse may reflect her abandonment by YHWH and the children's (citizen's) subsequent exile. The term 'sent away' (H ;>£)) need not be taken as a geographical move, but is conventional language associated with marital separation and divorce. Moreover, the other Zion texts in Isaiah 49-54 indicate that the mother, Zion, has been bereft of, or separated from, her children, or barren of children, as has just been made clear in 49.19-22 (see also 51.17-18; 54.1). In 50.1 the fates of mother and children are not identical. The mother was 'sent away', not only from the father, but from the children as well. Carol Newsom argues that while the Zion passages in Deutero-Isaiah are a response to Lamentations, the characterization of the exiles differs in a significant way. In Lamentations, the exiles are 'referred to in political terms', i.e. princes, king, prophets, priests, elders. Newsom maintains that in Lamentations the leadership in exile is blamed for the fate of Jerusalem at the hands of Babylon: 'the critique of leadership, the blame laid on them for the destruction, is sustained and thorough'.28 In contrast, in Deutero-Isaiah, the exiles are not referred to in leadership or political terms but with kinship terms; that is, 'as children, sons and daughters'.29 In Isa. 50.1-3 it does seem to be these exiles who are blamed for the destruction, as in Lamentations, but designated by kinship terms rather than leadership terms. The 'children' are responsible for YHWH'S abandonment of (and thus the destruction of) Zion, as are the leaders in Lamentations. The primary issue in Isa. 50.1-3 and in Lamentations is that YHWH is not the culpable party and the cause of the situation. Dobbs-Allsopp argues that one major difference between the Mesopotamian city lament and the Israelite city lament is the assignment of guilt.30 In the Mesopotamian lament form the city (and its goddess) is depicted as the innocent victim of the arbitrary decision of the gods. In the Hebrew Bible, the city is guilty and deserving of punishment from YHWH. In the Mesopotamian laments the deity's shrine is referred to as the 'Faithful House' ... and the city [referred to] as the 'Faithful City' ... These epithets refer to the presumed innocence of the city or temple in the Mesopotamian laments. That is, they were correct in their cultic duties and moral behavior. The gods' decision to destroy the city and temple was not motivated by [their] actions good or bad ... on Israelite soil the responsibility for the city's destruction is blamed on the misdeeds of the city's population. 31

Dobbs-Allsopp does not address the issue of whether there can be a split between the personified city and her inhabitants regarding guilt. He implies that either both are guilty or both are innocent. Isa. 50.1 says, 'It was for your sins that your mother was sent away'. Therefore, YHWH has not failed. But the expression also seems to deflect an accusation of guilt from Zion herself. Katheryn Darr argues that the text 28. 29. 30. 31.

Newsom, 'Response', p. 77. Newsom, 'Response', p. 78. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, pp. 52-54. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, pp. 149-50.

166

Mixing Metaphors

depicts Zion herself as blameless: '[Zion's] dismissal resulted from the children's rebellion, and not from misdeeds on her part. Since Zion is blameless and no formal statement of divorce exists, Yahweh can reclaim his wife'.32 In Deutero-Isaiah, the rhetoric directed at the city is consistently that of compassion. Sin is assigned implicitly to the city in 40.2, but with words of comfort. Elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah sin is assigned to the people (see Isa. 42.24b; 43.3437; 44.22; 46.8; 48.8). Verse 2a [Zion's accusation] 'Why, when I came, was there no one (no 2TK)? I called and there was no answer!'

Commentators consistently treat this verse as YHWH'S speech, usually interpreted either as his challenge that a witness to the divorce be produced,33 or his calling to Israel, who does not answer (the term CTN, 'man' or 'husband', means it is not Zion who was being called). The argument that YHWH is calling out for a witness to the divorce (of course, there is none) seems a bit strained. The idea that YHWH called to Israel, which in its rebellion did not answer, seems a bit more satisfactory. However, another reading deserves consideration: that it is an accusation by Zion (like 49.13), which YHWH does not answer. Deutero-Isaiah's theme of contrasting YHWH to the idols bears consideration here. The idols are those who cannot speak or answer.34 In contrast, YHWH is one who can answer. Nevertheless, YHWH is sometimes silent and, indeed, has been silent for some time (42.14; see above, Chapter 3). In Deutero-Isaiah the accusation that there is 'no one' there or 'no answer' is directed at the idols. They do not answer. They are unable to help. This is the accusation against the gods in Isaiah 41 where YHWH extends a legal challenge to the 'gods': 'Set forth your case,' says YHWH; 'bring your proofs,' says the King of Jacob. 'Let them bring them, and tell us what is to happen. Tell us the former things, what they are ... or declare to us the things to come. Tell us what is to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods ... You, indeed, are nothing and your work is nothing at all...' (41.21 -24). 32. Darr, Isaiah's Vision, p. 176. R. N. Whybray, however, speaks of the 'erring mother' (Isaiah 40-66 [NCB; London: Marshal, Morgan & Scott, 1975], p. 148). 33. John Scullion says there is no one at the tribunal 'to substantiate the accusation of abandonment' (Isaiah 40-66 [Old Testament Message 12; Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, Inc., 1982], p. 104). 34. Peter D. Miscall also sees a connection between the silence in 50.2 and the silence of the idols, although he assumes that it is Israel that is silent like the idols: 'He called and no one answered; in this silence, Israel is like an idol (41.28; 48.1, 12; 65.1)' (Isaiah [Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993], pp. 119-20). However, while YHWH is usually the accusatory subject, the object is also a deity or deities exposed as powerless.

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

167

YHWH adds, But when I look there is no one (2TN "pK); among these there is no counselor; who, when I ask, gives an answer? No, they are all a delusion; their works are nothing; their images are empty wind. (41.28-29)

YHWH looks and asks and finds no one. Why? Because the gods are not real. A similar accusation against the idols is found in 46.7. 46.1-7 is a polemic mocking the Babylonian gods/idols. The crux here is that they cannot move but must be carried around. Deutero-Isaiah adds, 'If one cries out to it, it does not answer or save anyone from trouble' (46.7). Elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah it is YHWH from whom an answer is desired (49.8, 'In a time of favor I have answered you'), and it is Israel who is to do the calling, not YHWH (43.23). If, in 50.2, it is YHWH being accused of not being there, and of not answering (just as YHWH is accused of divorcing Zion), who is the accuser? Given that 50.1-3 is a continuation of 49.13-26, Zion may well be YHWH'S accuser here, as in 49.13 ('YHWH has abandoned me') and in 49.21 ('I was left all alone'). Throughout 49.13-50.3 Zion speaks intermittently: 49.14 (and possibly 15), 49.21, and possibly 49.24. An unmarked change in speaker is not at all unusual in prophetic texts (see discussion of 49.14-15 in Chapter 6, and note that the term 'why' marks a change of speaker in Jer. 8.19.) Reading this as Zion's voice, Zion has come looking for her husband, and it is Zion who called for help and received no answer. Zion says there was 'no one', that is, 2TN~"pN. This expression is conventionally translated 'no one', but in the context of a metaphor of marriage and a divorce accusation the word 2TK could be translated 'husband', thus, 'There was no husband'. In the Song of Solomon, similar words describe the actions of a bride seeking her groom: Upon my bed at night I sought him whom my soul loves; I sought him, but found him not; / called him, but he gave no answer. (3.1, see also 6.1)35

The view of Zion conveyed in Lamentations is also consistent with assigning Isa. 50.2a to Zion. In Lamentations she finds no comforter (1.2, 9, 16, 17, 21) and no helper (1.7). In Isa. 50.1, YHWH has protested that he has not divorced Zion. She argues back that he wasn't there when she needed him! YHWH has been accused of abandoning Zion. The implications of reading this accusation as Zion's speech is that she is accusing YHWH of being as mute and powerless as are the gods/idols of Babylon. This is the same implicit accusation as is found in 42.14 (see above, Chapter 3), where YHWH finally answers with the admission that yes, he has indeed been silent. Here in 50.2 the implicit accusation of 42.14 is made explicit, 'I called and there was no answer!' Zion gives voice to the accusations of Deutero-Isaiah's 35. NRSV, based on LXX.

168

Mixing Metaphors

opponents, perhaps those who trust in the other gods.36 It is YHWH (rather than the idols?) who is mute, who does not answer. Trito-Isaiah (= Deutero-Isaiah here?) interprets this for us in 59.1-2: See, YHWH's hand is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear ... your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear [or answer].

Verse 2b [YHWH's response] 'Is my hand too short to redeem (miS), as though I do not have the power to rescue?'

It may seem curious that Deutero-Isaiah should use the term PITTS, pedut here for 'redeem' rather than 7^3, ga'al (which was just used in 49.26). As in 43.1-7, parental language in 50.1 -3 interacts with language related to the 7813, go 'el. The 7N*U, go'el, metaphor is implied by terminology in v. 1 that is evocative of debt slavery. The root 77£,padd, is less characteristic language for Deutero-Isaiah than is /fcW, ga'al, and, following the language of creditors and selling, seems unusual. Although 783, ga yal, and 773,padd, appear in parallel in the Hebrew Bible (even in Deutero-Isaiah in 51.10-11), they are not strictly synonymous (see above, Chapter 4). 77£,padd, does not generally refer to redemption from debt slavery but primarily refers to the redemption of sacrifices or vows: The first issue of the womb of all creatures, human and animal, which is offered to YHWH, shall be yours [Aaron's]; but the firstborn of human beings you shall redeem, and the firstborn of unclean animals you shall redeem. (Num. 18.15) 13b Every firstborn male among your children you shall redeem ... 13When Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, YHWH killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from human firstborn to the firstborn of animals. Therefore I sacrifice to YHWH every male that first opens the womb, but every firstborn of my sons I redeem. (Exod. 13.13b, 15)

Similarly, in 1 Sam 14.45, Jonathan is redeemed (T!7£,pddd) from Saul's vow to kill the warrior who broke the fast before battle: 'So the people ransomed Jonathan, and he did not die'. What are the possible implications of 7173,pddd, being used here? The root is related elsewhere to the exodus tradition and to redemption from sin. 1. The Exodus Tradition (with the Divine Warrior). The exodus tradition includes the redemption of YHWH'S first-born, and the substitutionary sacrifice of the lamb or of the first-born of Egypt (Exodus 12-13). Deut. 15.15 connects the exodus theme with the release of the Hebrew slave in the seventh year, using the term 773,padd: 'Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and YHWH

3 6. Trito-Isaiah likewise portrays YHWH as the one called, rather than the caller, in 5 8.9 (' You shall call and YHWH will answer'), 59.1-2, and 65.24.

7 . Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

169

your God redeemed (HI 2, pddd) you; for this reason I lay this command upon you today'.37 Exodus language (Deuteronomic) is also consistent with the imagery of YHWH's 'hand' in v. 2. (The language of Isa. 5Q.2b evokes the exodus theme when YHWH says 'by my rebuke I dry up the sea' —more on this below.38) The phrases 'mighty hand' and 'outstretched arm' appear throughout the Deuteronomic material in connection with the redemption from Egypt (e.g. Deut. 7.19). God's hand is the instrument of the exodus redemption in Exod. 13.14, 16: When in the future your child asks you, 'What does this mean?' you shall answer, 'By strength of hand YHWH brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery . . . by strength of hand YHWH brought us out of Egypt'.

For this reason the first-born sons will be redeemed (v. 15, Tl1^,pddd). Verse 2 further begins the shift to the divine warrior image that dominates in v. 3. This image is associated with the exodus (see Chapter 3). The root TT~\3,pddd, is appropriate for the warrior image since the kinship aspect of 7N3, ga'al, would be a poor fit. One example of r\1^i,pddd, used for YHWH as a warrior is 2 Sam 7.23: Who is like your people, like Israel? Is there another nation on earth whose God went to redeem (711^, pddd) it as a people, and to make a name for himself, doing great and awesome things for them, by driving out before his people nations and their gods?

In Isa. 51.10-11 both 783, ga "al, and HIS, pddd, are associated with the divine warrior and redemption from Egypt: Was it not you who dried up the sea [Yamm], the waters of the great deep (Dirtf!); who made the depths of the sea a way for the redeemed (root 7K3, ga'al) to cross over? So the ransomed (root rC~\Z,padd) of YHWH shall return, and come to Zion with singing . . .

2. Not for Debts but for Transgressions. While 7&3, ga'al, is characteristic of YHWH's actions in Deutero-Isaiah and YHWH is spoken of as the 7^13, go'el (as recently as 49.26), the point of this passage is that there are no creditors who must be paid off. Debt redemption is not needed because there are no debts. Guilt redemption is needed. For this, HIS, pddd, is more appropriate, referring to the redemption of sacrifices; that is, the substitution of one sacrifice for another. Thus, Ps. 130.7 refers to redemption from sins (711311?) and Exod. 21.29-30 refers to the payment made for the crime of letting one's ox gore a neighbor; in Job 36.18,

37. Gregory C. Chirichigno notes, 'the release of a debt-slave was closely associated with God's release of the Israelites from their bondage to the Egyptians' (Debt-Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East [JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993], p. 255). 38. For a summary of scholars who read 50.2-3 as exodus imagery see Carroll Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah (AnBib 45; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970), p. 272.

1 70

Mixing Metaphors

pasdfsdfsddfsdfsdfsdfsfsdfsd, is used in parallel with 1SD. (See Chapter 4 on the which has as its context guilt and reconciliation.) 3. YHWHas a Father. As with Isa. 43. 1-7, there are areas of overlap between YHWH as a father and the imagery of the exodus and T[1^,pddd—redemption (see Chapter 4). As a father, YHWH redeemed Israel from slavery in Egypt and redeemed the first-born from death (sacrificing the Egyptian first-born). (See Exod. 4.22-23 and 12.13-15.) Verses 2c-3 2c

('See) by my rebuke I dry up (the) Sea/Yamm, I make Rivers a desert. 2d Their fish will stink for there is no water, and they die from thirst. 3 I clothe heavens in darkness; and I make sackcloth their covering.'

The unit ends with YHWH'S assertion of creative power. YHWH'S power over the sea and the rivers evokes the creation mythology of YHWH'S power over the watery chaos.39 It echoes Ba'al's conquest of Yamm. As a creation mythology, this finds its Babylonian parallel in the story of Marduk's conquest of Tiamat. This is, once again, the image of the divine warrior.40 The root word 'rebuke' here is HI7141 It is used in Nahum in a very similar verse, describing YHWH'S vengeance on Nineveh: 'He rebukes the sea and makes it dry; and he dries up all the rivers' (Nah. 1.4a). In Nahum this is divine warrior imagery, with no explicit connection to the exodus. This language also appears elsewhere in connection with the divine warrior: Then the channels of the sea were seen, the foundations of the world were laid bare at the rebuke (~1IJ3) of YHWH, at the blast of the breath of his nostrils. (2 Sam. 22.16) 9

He bowed the heavens, and came down; thick darkness was under his feet . . . II He made the darkness his covering around him, his canopy thick clouds dark with water . . . 39. Stuhlmueller, Redemption, p. 87. 40. The drying up of the land is also characteristic of Enlil's attacks in the Mesopotamian city laments. Enlil attacks with storm, which may be flood or may be drying winds. Dobbs-Allsopp quotes from the laments, 'Enlil brought about an evil storm, silence was upon the city, Nintu put door-locks on the storehouses . . . stopped up the waters' {Weep, p. 50). He notes, in reference to Isa. 15.1-1 6. 14, 'Although not found in Lamentations, the disruption of agriculture and alteration of the water supply are motifs used commonly in the Mesopotamian laments to depict the city's destruction. In Isa 15.6 the waters of Nimrim dry up and the green vegetation withers. The disruption of agriculture continues as the primary motif in Isa 16.8-1 1 ' (Weep, p. 105). 41. See J. M. Kennedy, 'The Root g 'r in the Light of Semantic Analysis', JBL 106 (1987), pp. 47-64. Kennedy argues for the translation 'blast' rather than 'rebuke' (p. 59).

7. Divine Husband and Father: Isaiah 50.1-3

171

15 Then the channels of the sea were seen, and the foundations of the world were laid bare at your rebuke pU3), O YHWH, at the blast of the breath of your nostrils. (Ps. 18.9-15)

In Isa. 17.12-13, it is the nations that are rebuked, but they are depicted in terms of

the Sea: Ah, the thunder of many peoples, they thunder like the thundering of the sea! Ah, the roar of nations, they roar like the roaring of mighty waters! The nations roar like the roaring of many waters, but he will rebuke PU3) them, and they will flee far away, chased like chaff on the mountains before the wind and whirling dust before the storm. In Job this divine warrior imagery describes creation in terms similar to the Enuma Elish: "The pillars of heaven tremble, and are astounded at his rebuke P#2). 12 By his power he stilled the Sea; by his understanding he struck down Rahab. 13 By his wind the heavens were made fair; his hand pierced the fleeing serpent. (Job 26.11-13) Psalm 104 likewise applies this language to creation: 5

You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. 6 You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. 7 At your rebuke (~1UJ) they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight... 9 You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. (Ps. 104.5-7, 9) These texts shed light on the image in Isa. 50.3 of clothing the heavens in darkness. In Nah. 1.3 the 'clouds are the dust of his feet'. In 2 Sam 22.10 'thick darkness was under his feet'. Job 27.9 says, 'He covers the face of the full moon and spreads over it his cloud'. All of these depict the darkening of the sky, as does Isa. 50.3, and the power of the divine warrior. The term 'rebuke' (and the related terms 'dry up', 'sea', etc.) is also explicitly connected to the Exodus tradition in places. The term is used in Ps. 106.9-10, which recounts the Exodus story: He rebuked pi?3) the Red Sea, and it became dry; he led them through the deep as through a desert. So he saved them from the hand of the foe, and delivered (redeemed—783, gd'al) them from the hand of the enemy.

172

Mixing Metaphors

Thus, in this imagery of v. 3 there is a coming together of the divine warrior's battle with the sea (the Chaoskampf theme) and the exodus tradition.42 7. Conclusions This text interweaves several metaphors. Verse 1 brings together two distinct yet consistent metaphors: Zion as YHWH'S wife and the people as Zion's children. The interaction of these produces the image of YHWH as the father of the Israelites. The language of w. 2-3, which evokes the exodus, interacts with the father image, as it did in 43.1-7 (see Chapter 4). The implicit question of this text is whether YHWH has severed his ties with, and his commitment to, Jerusalem and her people. Has YHWH divorced his wife and sold his children into slavery? Once again YHWH responds to an implied accusation. He has been accused of abandoning Zion. (This accusation is explicit in 49.14.) YHWH is Zion's husband who has apparently divorced his wife. But YHWH does not address Zion here, as in 49.14-26 (which consistently uses the second person feminine singular). YHWH speaks of 'your [masc. pi.] mother', addressing the people, not the city.43 He challenges them to produce some proof that he has divorced Zion. It is a rhetorical question. They will not be able to prove it, since YHWH has not divorced her. Yet, paradoxically, he does admit that she has been sent away. YHWH admits that yes, he has been silent. Yes, they have been estranged. But, first of all, there is no documentation and so the estrangement is not final, and second, it was because of their sins, not because of YHWH'S failure. Zion then delivers her own accusation. If she is not divorced, why was YHWH not there when she cried out for help? YHWH does not answer the accusation of silence. (After all, YHWH has been silent—42.14.) Rather, he responds with a rhetorical question and a proclamation of his power to redeem. The shift to the divine warrior and exodus imagery serves to show that YHWH is not powerless. YHWH has the power to redeem, and thus to reconcile. Isa. 50.1-3 completes the unit begun in 49.13. God is mother, father, husband, redeeming kinsman, and divine warrior. The unit as a whole acknowledges God's abandonment (49.14-15, 21) and silence (50.2). But God does not forget (49.14) and has not divorced Zion (50.1). Redemption is coming. God, acting as the avenging kinsman (49.26) and the divine warrior (50.3), will defeat Israel's oppressors and restore Zion and her children. These various kinship roles convey to the exiles God's continuing care and a future restoration of relationship between the people, their mother-city, and their God.

42. Stuhlmueller, Redemption, p. 91. Compare Isa. 50.2d with Exod. 7.18. 43. Naturally, YHWH'S addresses to Zion herself are clearly the prophet's words directed to the people, not to a material city. The issue is who YHWH addresses rhetorically. Here the addressee has shifted from Zion (2 fern, sing.) to the people (2 masc. pi.).

Chapter 8 CONCLUSIONS

The present study in Deutero-Isaiah has been an investigation of the images of God as a father and God as a mother. Neither 'father' nor 'mother' is a root paradigm for God in the Hebrew Bible. Father and mother are just two of the many images that are expressed, along with king, husband, warrior, artisan, redeeming kinsman, shepherd, and many more. In Deutero-Isaiah the images of father and mother fit into pervasive motifs of fertility and kinship. Images of procreation are consistent with Deutero-Isaiah's overall vision of fertility, including such things as streams in the desert and new sprouts, and the theme of YHWH as creator. Other parent images for YHWH fit into Deutero-Isaiah's overall use of kinship categories, including the redeeming kinsman, references to the offspring of Jacob, and the portrayal of Zion as a mother. Thus, while 'father' and 'mother' may not be Deutero-Isaiah's root paradigms for God, they are expressions of the author's main themes and literary motifs. When work on this study began, it was expected that Deutero-Isaiah's father image or mother image would each have a unifying paradigm, such as the father as a covenant partner, protector, or authority; the mother as nurturer, compassionate, or life-source. Such imagery, one would assume, would be shaped by the author's social and historical context. The presupposition that a single author in a particular historical context produced Isaiah 40-55 might suggest that certain images (father and mother) would have a particular consistent meaning within this body of work. However, an in-depth study of this imagery has challenged this assumption. The images of father and mother vary greatly within Deutero-Isaiah and their implications are determined by their literary contexts and the other metaphors with which they mix. 1. Literary Context The investigation of five selected texts has made it clear that diversity rather than unity characterizes Deutero-Isaiah's use of these images of father and mother. Despite a unified authorship and a unified social and historical context, the literary units of Deutero-Isaiah make use of these two images in such diverse ways that it is difficult to force them into boxes labeled 'God as father' and 'God as mother'. For example, the mother images of 42.14 and 49.14-15 resist reduction to a common function or meaning beyond the extremely broad term 'mother'. The father images

174

Mixing Metaphors

of 43.1 -7 and 45.10 have almost no overlap. Each occurrence of the father image or the mother image has its own distinctive rhetorical function. It has further become clear that, not only does the literary unit determine how the parent image functions, but in Deutero-Isaiah this literary context invariably includes other metaphors. The images of YHWH as father and YHWH as mother interpret, and are interpreted by, the metaphors with which they co-exist and interact. Thus, the image of YHWH as a 'father' or as a 'mother' cannot be understood to mean one thing. Rather, the metaphor is interpreted by its context, which includes other metaphors. The parent imagery of Deutero-Isaiah interacts with the following metaphors: warrior, redeeming kinsman, artisan, personified Zion, husband. For instance, in 42.9-17 the images of the warrior and the woman in labor interact. Likewise, 45.913 contains important interaction between the image of the artisan of clay and the images of father and mother. Especially rich in interaction is Isa. 50.1-3, which interweaves a great variety of images and conventions: YHWH as the husband of the city, the divine warrior, the redeeming kinsman, and the father. These images function together to deal with issues of abandonment and redemption. Lakoff and Johnson's concept of 'metaphoric coherence' has provided the means to examine this interaction (see Chapter 1). 'Coherence' refers to the overlap of metaphors that are not 'consistent'; that is, they contradict each other on a literal level but overlap insofar as they have shared entailments. For example, in Isa. 42.9-17 the warrior image and the image of the woman in labor have several areas of overlap: both cry out, both face danger and possibly death, both are potentially life-giving. Thus these two images are not as contradictory as they might first seem. While they are 'inconsistent', they are nevertheless 'coherent'. 2. The Coherence of Commonplaces The interaction of metaphors takes place, not only between the metaphoric expressions themselves (what is explicitly stated), but also between entire networks of'associated commonplaces'. Each one of these images and conventions brings to the text a whole network of commonplaces. Such interweaving takes place in each of the passages examined. In Isa. 42.8-17, the birthing mother image interacts with the image of the divine warrior, with all that this image entails in that culture. The juxtaposition of these images highlights the areas where the networks of associated commonplaces overlap. This includes 'crying out' (which is explicitly stated) and (implicit) entailments of the experience of siege—anguish and courage, danger, inevitability, and the hope of deliverance from death and of new life. In 43.1-7, the image of the 7N13, go'el, that is, the 'redeeming kinsman', interacts with parent language to highlight issues of honor, identity, and protection. The idea of the redeeming father interacts with the imagery of passing through water and walking through fire to evoke Israel's historical tradition of the exodus. Just as YHWH redeemed Israel, his first-born son, from Egypt (the furnace), through the waters, so YHWH will once again gather his sons and daughters from exile. In 45.9-13, the images of begetting father and birthing mother interact with the image of the

8. Conclusions

175

artisan and with its network of associations, including an ancient application of that image to the deities and the creation of humanity. Creation stories depict humanity being created from clay or from the dust of the earth. The most obvious area of coherence lies in the concept of creator; both the artisan and the parent create something new. These images also interact with Deutero-Isaiah's critique of Babylonian practices and beliefs surrounding the creation of idols. This interaction highlights the power of YHWH to create a redemptive future for Israel. In Isa. 49.13-21, the portrayal of Zion as a mother is informed by interaction with the literary conventions embedded in the text of the city as the weeping goddess. Zion as mother also interacts with and informs the image of YHWH as a mother to highlight and even to explain issues of remembrance, abandonment, and regeneration. The convention of the city lament portrays mothers abandoning or forgetting their children. This sheds light on Zion forgetting her children and provides a contrast to YHWH as one who does not forget. Isa. 50.1-3 interweaves multiple images. YHWH is the husband of Zion, whose children have been sold. YHWH is the redeemer who can deliver children and mother. YHWH is the divine warrior whose creative power (over chaos) dries up the waters. Thus, YHWH'S image as a father is informed by his relationship to Zion and his power to redeem. Deutero-Isaiah interweaves a variety of images to convey a message to those in exile. The images examined in the present study work together: father, mother, warrior, redeemer, artisan, husband. The interaction of all of these images creates a rather remarkable and quite beautiful tapestry that we call 'Deutero-Isaiah'. 3. God as a Father and a Mother in Deutero-Isaiah What fruit has been brought forth from this interactive approach? We are not able to say that 'for Deutero-Isaiah father means ...' or that 'for Deutero-Isaiah mother means ...' What, then, may be concluded about God as a father and a mother in Deutero-Isaiah? God as a Father Deutero-Isaiah portrays God as a father fairly clearly in three texts. In 43.1-7, interacting with the image of the redeeming kinsman, YHWH is portrayed as the father who redeems his sons and daughters from slavery, just as he once redeemed Israel from bondage in Egypt (through the water and the fire). As a father, YHWH loves Israel and is the source of Israel's identity ('everyone who is called by my name'). The interaction of the father image with exodus imagery appears again in Isa. 50.1 -3, where YHWH is again the redeeming father who frees his children from slavery. This unit adds the dimension of YHWH'S relationship with the exiles' 'mother', Zion. Thus, YHWH as a father in Isa. 50.1-3 involves both the redemption of the exiles from slavery and, implicitly, the restoration of Jerusalem. In 45.9-13 the father image interacts with the images of mother and artisan to highlight God's creative power. A father is one who creates (begets). God sarcastically challenges Israel to 'ask me about my son!' God's son (Cyrus) signifies God's redemptive power as creator and thus, in contrast with the Babylonian gods, YHWH is the one

176

Mixing Metaphors

who determines Israel's (and Babylon's) destiny and creates the future. The begetting father is the creator of Israel's future. A number of the commonplaces of 'father' are highlighted in Deutero-Isaiah's depiction of YHWH as a father. Among these are the father's role in protecting and redeeming his children and preserving the family (43.1 -7), the father as one who punishes the children (50.1 -3), the father as the source of the child's name (43.7), and the father's role in conception (45.10). God as a Mother The mother imagery is likewise variable. An appreciation of the commonplaces of the 'mother' have shed light on Deutero-Isaiah's rhetoric about YHWH, particularly ideas about labor (42.14 and 45.10), nursing (49.14-15), and child abandonment (49.14-21). In 45.9-13 the laboring woman image appears in parallel with the begetting father to highlight God as the creator who creates Israel's future redemption. Only here in Deutero-Isaiah do father and mother images for God appear together. Here the father image and the mother image advance a common message—God's creative power. Yet the laboring woman suggests something about God that the begetting father cannot. Labor is a process that is all-engaging, in which the outcome occurs at its proper time. The image of the laboring woman in 42.9-17 also conveys God's engagement and creative power. The particular literary form HI7VD, ki-yoledah ('like one who gives birth'), in interaction with the warrior image is suggestive of siege and warfare. The image of the woman in labor in 42.14 evokes not only the culture's understanding of labor itself, but the literary conventions of one facing a situation of siege reacting 'like a woman in labor'. The mother is one who is intensely engaged, who struggles to overcome the constriction of the womb to free the child, to bring the child forth into the light. Thus, in Isaiah 42, the mother is an image of engagement, struggle, constriction, and then freedom and life. In 49.14-15 YHWH is portrayed in terms of the nursing mother. This image functions quite differently from that of the laboring woman. The most obvious association of the nursing mother is one who cares for her child, feeds, nurtures, and has compassion. A closer examination reveals that in this unit a good mother is one who does notforget. YHWH is not just described in terms of a mother, but YHWH is either the model mother or something better than a mother (in contrast to bad mothers, such as Zion, insofar as YHWH does not forget). 4. YHWH as Father and Mother and the Experiential Dimension of Metaphor Why did Deutero-Isaiah favor such familial imagery to describe concepts that could be expressed in any number of ways? The prophet's choice of this imagery must be located experientially, rather than conceptually. Deutero-Isaiah's language seems to have been suggested, not by an implicit systematic theology, but by the experience of exile. (Indeed, Deutero-Isaiah's theology that YHWH is incomparable does not easily lend itself to such anthropomorphic metaphors.) We can imagine that this was a traumatic experience of disruption and discontinuity. The people were wrenched from their homeland, their own families, their history, and their hopes and expectations for the future. The language of family is the language of

8. Conclusions

111

rootedness, of past and future, of identity and belonging, and the language of home. The language of childbirth evokes new life, and thus continuity, into a new generation as creation continues. The unusual prevalence of explicitly feminine language may be especially evocative of the home, since home is stereotypically and archetypally the realm of the mother. The captives are homesick. The longing they experience is for home—for mother Zion, and for the God who has cared for them from the womb. The language of family is also the language of survival and the language of life. The continuity of family ties conveys the sense of timelessness important to Deutero-Isaiah, what was and is and shall be. YHWH may be doing a 'new thing' but this 'new thing' is essentially the means by which YHWH will make it possible for what YHWH created in the past to continue into the future. Family is both ancestors and offspring. It is past, present, and future, as is YHWH'S purpose. 5. Implications for Biblical Studies The interest in biblical metaphors will continue to draw readers to explore these metaphors more fully, perhaps especially metaphors for God, and for Jesus Christ in the New Testament literature. Attention to the commonplaces of a given metaphor has been shown here to be fruitful. The commonplaces of the Hebrew Bible context are located in the socio-cultural context of ancient Israel (and its location in the ancient Near East). This context necessarily includes the literary traditions and conventions of ancient Israel. In addition to the commonplaces (the cultural context), attention to the literary context is essential to appreciate how a metaphor functions and how metaphors act together in a given text. Metaphors exist within texts, where they interact with other elements in the text. Hebrew poetry is especially rich in interweaving multiple images within a single text. Attention to the interaction of these images contributes to our understanding of any given metaphor. Finally, the commonplaces and the literary context come together. When two or more metaphors appear together in a text, the stated entailments of each interact with the rest of the text. But additionally, a metaphor brings a whole network of associations to the text. The metaphors' networks of commonplaces then interact with one another to highlight the areas where the networks overlap. 6. Implications for God-language In recent years there has been intense interest in and discussion of metaphoric language for God, especially in regard to gender. The insights offered by this study are applicable to 'God-language' in a variety of situations—the exploration of other Hebrew Bible texts, New Testament texts, contemporary worship, prayer, and preaching, and virtually any literature about God from the writings of the Church Fathers, to the mystics, to contemporary theological discourse. When God is spoken of as a 'father' or as a 'mother', the meaning of the metaphor cannot be reduced to one simple statement about God. The meaning of a metaphor is highly dependent on the particulars of the 'associated commonplaces'. Deutero-Isaiah's use of a variety of images—father,

178

Mixing Metaphors

mother, artisan, etc.—shows that Deutero-Isaiah was aware of their metaphoric character and did not limit thinking about YHWH to one major root metaphor. What is important is to recognize the meanings of these metaphors in terms of their associated commonplaces, which vary culturally. For example, the significance of applying the term 'father' to God depends very much on the associations that a given culture assigns to the idea of 'father', whether one is a sixth-century BCE Babylonian Jew, a first-century Galilean peasant, a Roman theologian of late antiquity, a mystic in medieval Europe, a Reformation theologian, or a twenty-firstcentury North American. Metaphoric language about God always occurs in a rhetorical context where it interacts with other metaphoric language about God. Thus, in a worship setting the meaning that 'father' conveys about God depends upon whether, for example, that community of faith speaks of God primarily as 'father' and 'king' or primarily as 'father' and 'mother'. The image inevitably interacts with other images. It is our contention that when inconsistent metaphors share a context the areas of coherence will be highlighted. Diverse metaphors for God which co-exist in a given context of discourse can be assumed to be 'coherent' insofar as the community of discourse understands these diverse metaphors to speak meaningfully of the same subject, namely God. The use of diverse images for God can only enrich our ability to speak of the One who is Incomparable.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, Bernard W., 'God, Names of, IDE, II (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), pp. 407-417. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, I (Chicago: The Oriental Institute; Gliickstadt, Germany: J. J. Augustin Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1964), s.v. 'abu, pp. 68-76. Bal, Mieke, 'Metaphors He Lives By', in Cladia Camp and Carol Fontaine (eds), Women, War, and Metaphor (Semeia 61; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993), pp. 185-207. Barr, James, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961). Batto, Bernard F., Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992). Baumann, A., 'VtT, TDOT, IV (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), pp. 344-47. Beardsley, Monroe C., 'The Metaphorical Twist', Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 22 (1962), pp. 293-307; repr. in Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981), pp. 105-122. Beaucamp, E., Le livre de la consolation dTsrdel: Isaie XL-LV (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1991). Berquist, Jon, Judaism in Persia's Shadow: A Social and Historical Approach (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995). Biddle, Mark E., 'The Figure of Lady Jerusalem: Identification, Deification and Personification of Cities in the ANE', in W. W. Hallo et al. (eds), The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective (Scripture in Context, IV; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1991), pp. 173-94. Bird, Phyllis, 'Images of Women in the Old Testament', in Rosemary Radford Ruether (ed.), Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in the Jewish and Christian Traditions (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974), pp. 41-88. Bird, Phyllis,' "To Play the Harlot": An Inquiry into an Old Testament Metaphor', in Peggy L. Day (ed.), Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1986), pp. 75-94. Bird, Phyllis, 'Women: Old Testament', ABD, VI (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 951-57. Black, Max, Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1962). Blenkinsopp, Joseph, 'The Family in First Temple Israel', in Families in Ancient Israel (The Family, Religion, and Culture Series; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1997), pp. 48-103. Blenkinsopp, Joseph, Isaiah 40-55, A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 19A; New York: Doubleday, 2000). Bogaert, M., 'Les suffixes verbaux non accusatifs', Bib 45 (1964), pp. 220-47. Bottero, Jean, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992). Bourget, Daniel, Des metaphores de Jeremie (EBib 9; Paris: Gabalda, 1987).

180

Mixing Metaphors

Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, Istpubl. 1904). Brown, Michael L., Israel's Divine Healer (Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995). Buber, Martin, The Kingship of God (London: Humanities Press International, 1967). Buss, Martin J., 'The Idea of Sitz im Leben—History and Critique', ZA W9Q (1978), pp. 15770. Camp, Claudia, 'Metaphor in Feminist Biblical Interpretation: Theoretical Perspectives', in Claudia Camp and Carol Fontaine (eds), Women, War and Metaphor (Semeia 61; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993), pp. 3-38. Camp, Claudia and Carol Fontaine (eds.), Women, War and Metaphor (Semeia 61; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993). Caplice, R.I., The Akkadian Namburbi Texts: An Introduction (Malibu, CA: Undena, 1974). Carroll, Robert P., Jeremiah: A Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986). Chirichigno, Gregory C., Debt-Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East (JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993). Clements, R. E., Isaiah 1-39 (New Century Bible Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980). Clifford, Richard J., Fair Spoken and Persuading: An Interpretation of Second Isaiah (New York: Paulist, 1984). Clifford, Richard J., 'The Use of hoy in the Prophets', CBQ 38 (1966), pp. 458-64. Cohen, Chayim, 'The "Widowed" City', JANESCU 5 (1973), pp. 75-81. Contenau, Georges, Everyday Life in Babylon and Assyria (London: Edward Arnold Ltd, 1954). Cooke, Gerald, 'The Israelite King as Son of God', ZAW73 (1961), pp. 202-225. Cooke, Gerald, 'The Problem of Divine Kingship: The Divine Sonship of the Hebrew King' (unpubl. diss., Yale University, 1958). Cross, Frank Moore, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History and Religion of Israel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973). Cryer, Frederick H., Divination in Ancient Israel and its Near Eastern Environment: A SocioHistorical Investigation (JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994). Curtis, Edward M., 'Idol, Idolatry', ABD, III (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 376-81. Dandamaev, Muhammad A., A Political History of the Achaemenid Empire (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1989). Dandamaev, Muhammad A., Slavery in Babylonia: From Nabopolassar to Alexander the Great (626-331 BC) (DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 1984). Darr, Katheryn Pfisterer, Isaiah's Vision and the Family of God (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994). Darr, Katheryn Pfisterer, 'Like Warrior, Like Woman: Destruction and Deliverance in Isaiah 42:10-17, CBQ49 (1987), pp. 560-71. De Vaux, Roland, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961). Demand, Nancy, Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994). Dick, Michael B., 'Prophetic Parodies of Making the Cult Image', in Michael B. Dick (ed.), Born in Heaven, Made on Earth: The Making of the Cult Image in the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), pp. 1-53. Dobbs-Allsopp, F. W., Weep, O Daughter ofZion: A Study of the City-Lament Genre in the Hebrew Bible (BibOr 44; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1993).

Bibliography

181

Eichrodt, Walther, Theology of the Old Testament, I (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961). Elliger, K., Deuterojesaja in seinem Verhdltnis zu Tritojesaja (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1933). Faur, Jose, 'The Biblical Idea of Idolatry', JQR 69 (1978), pp. 1-15. Fensham, F. C., 'Father and Son as Terminology for Treaty and Covenant', in Hans Goedicke (ed.), Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Press, 1971), pp. 121-35. Fensham, F. C., 'Widow, Orphan, and the Poor in Ancient Near Eastern Legal and Wisdom Literature', JNES 21 (1962), pp. 129-39. Ferris, Paul, The Genre of Communal Lament in the Bible and the Ancient Near East (SBLDS 127; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992). Fitzgerald, Aloysius, 'The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as a Queen and False Worship as Adultery in the OF, CBQ 34 (1972), pp. 403-16. Follis, Elaine, 'The Holy City as Daughter', in E. Follis (ed.), Directions in Biblical Hebrew Poetry (JSOTSS 40; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987), pp. 173-84. Foster, Julie A., 'The Motherhood of God: The Use of hyl as God-language in the Hebrew Scriptures', in Lewis M. Hopfe (ed.), Uncovering Ancient Stones: Essays in Memory of H. Neil Richardson (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994), pp. 93-102. Franke, Chris A., 'The Function of the Satiric Lament over Babylon in Second Isaiah (47)', VT4\ (1991), pp. 408-18. Fretheim, Terence, The Suffering of God, an Old Testament Perspective (Overtures to Biblical Theology 14; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984). Friedman, Mordechai A., 'Israel's Response in Hosea 2:17b: "You are my husband"', JBL 99 (1980), pp. 199-204. Friedman, Richard E., Who Wrote the Bible? (New York: Harper & Row, 1987). Frymer, Tikva S., 'Ordeal, Judicial', IDBS (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), pp. 638-40. Frymer-Kensky, Tikva, 'The Judicial Ordeal in the Ancient Near East', II (unpubl. diss., Yale University, 1977). Frymer-Kensky, Tikva, 'Pollution, Purification, and Purgation in Biblical Israel', in Carol L. Meyers and J. M. O'Connor (eds), The Work of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1982), pp. 399-414. Galambush, Julie, Jerusalem in the Book ofEzekiel: The City as Yahweh 's Wife (SBLDS 130; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992). Gitay, Yehoshua, Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48 (Bonn: Linguistica Biblica, 1981). Gottwald, Norman, The Hebrew Bible: A Sodo-literary Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985). Gottwald, Norman, 'Lamentations', HBC (New York: Harper-Collins, 1988), pp. 646-51. Gottwald, Norman, The Tribes of Yahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel, 1250-1050 B.C.E. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1979). Gruber, Mayer I., 'Breast-feeding Practices in Biblical Israel and in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia', JANESCU 19 (1989), pp. 61-83; repr. in Mayer I. Gruber, The Motherhood of God and Other Studies (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 57; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 69-107. Gruber, Mayer I., 'The Motherhood of God in Second Isaiah', RB 90 (1983), pp. 351-59; repr. in Mayer I. Gruber, The Motherhood of God and Other Studies (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 57; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 3-15.

182

Mixing Metaphors

Hanson, Paul, Isaiah 40-66 (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1995). Hayes, John H., and J. Maxwell Miller, A History of Ancient Israel and Judah (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986). Killers, Delbert R., 'A Convention in Hebrew Literature: The Reaction to Bad News', ZAW 77 (1965), pp. 86-90. Killers, Delbert W., 'Hoy and /zoy-oracles', in Carol L. Meyers and M. O'Conner (eds), The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983), pp. 185-88. Holladay, William, L., A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971). Holladay, William, Jeremiah, 2 vols. (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986, 1989). Holter, Knut, Second Isaiah's Idol Fabrication Passages (New York: Peter Lang, 1995). Jacobsen, Thorkild, 'The Graven Image', in P. D. Miller et al. (eds), Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), pp. 15-32. Jacobsen, Thorkild, The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976). Janzen, W., Mourning Cry and Woe Oracle (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1972). Jastrow, M., '"V', in A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, I (New York: E. Shapiro, Vallentine & Co., 1926), pp. 563-64. Johns, Algers F., 'A Note on Isaiah 45:9', A USS 1 (1963), pp. 62-64. Johnson, Mark, 'Introduction: Metaphor in the Philosophical Tradition', in Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981), pp. 3-47. Kaiser, Barbara Bakke, 'Poet as "Female Impersonator": The Image of Daughter Zion as Speaker in Biblical Poems of Suffering', JR 67 (1987), pp. 164-82. Kaiser, Otto, Isaiah 73-39, trans. John Bowden (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1974). Kennedy, J. M., 'The RootgVin the Light of Semantic Analysis', JBL 106 (1987), pp. 47-64. Kittay, Eva Feder, Metaphor: Its Cognitive Force and Linguistic Structure (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987). Knight, George A. F., Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40-55 (New York: Abingdon Press, 1965). Knight, George A. F., Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40-55 (ITC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984). Kramer, Samuel Noah, 'The Weeping Goddess: Sumerian Prototypes of the Mater Dolorosa', BA 46 (1983), pp. 69-80. Kuhrt, Amelie, 'Nabonidus and the Babylonian Priesthood', in Mary Beard and John North (eds), Pagan Priests: Religion and Power in the Ancient World (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1990), pp. 119-55. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson, 'Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language', in Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981), pp. 286-329. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980). Lakoff, George, and Mark Turner, More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989). Lambert, W. G., 'A Middle Assyrian Medical Text', Iraq 31 (1969), pp. 28-39. Lassen, Eva Maria, 'Family as Metaphor: Family Images at the Time of the Old Testament and Early Judaism', SJOT6 (1992), pp. 247-62.

Bibliography

183

Leichty, Erie, The Omen Series Summa Izbu (Texts from Cuneiform Sources 4; Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Augustin Publ., 1970). Levine, Baruch A., Leviticus: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (The JPS Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: JPS, 1989). Lewy, Julius, 'The Old West Semitic Sun God Hammu', HUCA 18 (1944), pp. 429-88. Linafelt, Tod, 'Surviving Lamentation', HBT17 (1995), pp. 45-61. Lohfink, N., 'Hate and Love in Osee 9,15', CBQ 25 (1963), p. 417. Longman, Tremper, III, 'The Divine Warrior: The New Testament Use of an Old Testament Motif, WTJ44 (1982), pp. 300-02. Longman, Tremper, III and Daniel G. Reid, God is a Warrior (Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995). McCarter, P.K., 'The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature', HTR 66 (1973), pp. 403-12. McCarthy, Dennis J., 'Notes on the Love of God in Deuteronomy and the Father-Son Relationship Between Yahweh and Israel', CBQ 21 (1965), pp. 144-47. McFague, Sallie, The Body of God: An Ecological Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1993). McFague, Sallie, Metaphorical Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982). McFague, Sallie, Models of God: Theology for an Ecological, Nuclear Age (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987). McKane, W., 'Poison, Trial by Ordeal, and the Cup of Wrath', FT 30 (1980), pp. 474-92. McKenzie, John, L., Second Isaiah (AB 20; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968). Malina, Bruce J., The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural Anthropology (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981). Malina, Bruce J., Windows on the World of Jesus (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992). Malul, Meir, 'Adoption of Foundlings in the Bible and Mesopotamian Documents: A Study of Some Legal Metaphors in Ezekiel 16:1-7', JSOT46 (1990), pp. 97-126. March, W. Eugene,' "Father" as a Metaphor for God in the Psalms', Austin Seminary Bulletin 97 (1981), pp. 5-12. Matthews, Victory H., and Don C. Benjamin (eds), Honor and Shame in the World of the Bible (Semeia 68; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1996). Mays, James L., Micah, A Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976). Milbank, John,' "I will gasp and pant": Deutero-Isaiah and the Birth of the Suffering Subject', in David Jobling and Tina Pippin (eds), Ideological Criticism of Biblical Texts (Semeia 59; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 59-78. Melugin, R. F., The Formation of Isaiah 40-55 (BZAW 141; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1976). Mendelsohn, Isaac, Legal Aspects of Slavery in Babylonia, Assyria, and Palestine (Williamsport, PA: Bayart Press, 1932). Mendelsohn, Isaac, Slavery in the Ancient Near East: A Comparative Study of Slavery in Babylonia, Assyria, Syria, and Palestine, from the Middle of the Third Millennium to the End of the First Millennium (New York: Oxford University Press, 1949). Mettinger, Tryggve N. D., In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988). Meyers, Carol, Discovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988). Meyers, Carol, 'The Family in Early Israel', in Leo G. Perdue et al., Families in Ancient Israel (The Family, Religion, and Culture; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1997), pp. 147.

184

Mixing Metaphors

Miller, P. D. and J. J. M. Roberts, The Hand of the Lord: A Reassessment of the 'Ark Narrative' of 1 Samuel (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977). Miscall, Peter D., Isaiah (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993). Moran, William L., 'The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of God in Deuteronomy', CBQ 25 (1963), pp. 77-87. Muilenburg, James, 'The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40-66: Introduction and Exegesis', IB, V (New York: Abingdon, 1956), pp. 381-773. Newsom, Carol, 'Response to Norman K. Gottwald, "Social Class and Ideology in Isaiah 4055"', in David Jobling and Tina Pippin (eds.), Ideological Criticism of Biblical Texts (Semeia 59; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 73-78. Niditch, Susan, 'War, Women, and Defilement in Numbers 31', in Claudia Camp and Carol Fontaine (eds), Women, War, and Metaphor (Semeia 61; Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993), pp. 39-57. North, Christopher R., The Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation and Commentary to Chapters 40-55 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964). O'Connor, Kathleen M., 'Lamentations', in C. Newsom and S. Ringe (eds), The Women's Bible Commentary (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992), pp. 178-82. Patterson, Orlando, Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982). Perdue, Leo G., 'The Israelite and Early Jewish Family', in Leo G. Perdue et al., Families in Ancient Israel (The Family, Religion, and Culture; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1997), pp. 163-222. Pike, Dana M., 'Names', HBD (1985), pp. 682-84. Pitt-Rivers, Julian, 'Honour and Social Status', in J. G. Peristiany (ed.), Honour and Shame: The Values of Mediterranean Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966), pp. 19-77. Postgate, J. N., Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History (New York: Routledge, 1992). Pritchard, James (ed.), The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, I (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958). Quell, Gottfried, 'ayamxco: Love in the OT', TDNT, I (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), pp. 21-35. Quell, Gottfried, 'ircxTEp: The Father Concept in the Old Testament', TDNT, V (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967), pp. 959-74. Rad, Gerhardt von, Genesis, trans. John H. Marks (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961). Rallis, Irene Kerasote, 'Nuptial Imagery in the Book of Hosea: Israel as the Bride of Yahweh', SF7034(1990),pp. 197-219. Reddy, Michael, 'The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in Our Language about Language', in A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 284-324. Richards, I. A., The Philosophy of Rhetoric (London: Oxford University Press, 1936). Ricoeur, Paul, 'The Metaphorical Process as Cognition, Imagination, and Feeling', Critical Inquiry 5 (1978), pp. 143 -59; repr. in Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981), pp. 228-47 and in Sheldon Sacks (ed.), On Metaphor (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), pp. 141-57. Ricoeur, Paul, The Rule of Metaphor (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977). Schenker, Adrien, 'Kopher et expiation', Bib 63 (1982), pp. 32-46.

Bibliography

185

Schmitt, John J., 'The Gender of Ancient Israel', JSOT 26 (1983), pp. 115-25. Schmitt, John J., 'Gender Correctness and Biblical Metaphors: The Case of God's Relation to Israel', Biblical Theology Bulletin 26 (1996), pp. 96-106. Schmitt, John J., 'The Motherhood of God and Zion as Mother', RB 92 (1985), pp. 557-69. Schokel, Luis Alonso, 'Isaiah', in Alter Kermode, Robert Kermode, and Frank Kermode (eds), The Literary Guide to the Bible (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1987), pp. 165-83. Scullion, John, Isaiah 40-66 (Old Testament Message 12; Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1982). Seibert, Use, Women in the Ancient Near East (Leipzig; Edition Leipzig, 1974). Seitz, Christopher R., Zion's Final Destiny. The Development of the Book of Isaiah: A Reassessment of Isaiah 36-39 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991). Shaw, Charles, The Speeches ofMicah: A Rhetorical-Historical Analysis (JSOTSS; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993). Sigerist, Henry E., A History of Medicine, II (New York: Oxford University Press, 1961). Smart, James D., History and Theology in Second Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 35, 40-66 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1965). Smith, Daniel L., Religion of the Landless: The Social Context of the Babylonian Exile (Bloomington, IN: Meyer Stone, 1989). Smith, George Adam, The Book of Isaiah, II (New York and London: Harper & Brothers, 1927). Smith-Christopher, Daniel L., A Biblical Theology of Exile (Overtures to Biblical Theology; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 2002). Soskice, Janet, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985). Spykerboer, Hendrik C., The Structure and Composition of Deutero-Isaiah with Special Reference to the Polemics Against Idolatry (Meppel: Krips Repro, 1976). Stuhlmueller, Carroll, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah (AnBib 45; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1970). Thomas, D. Winton, 'LibrumJesaiae', BHS VII (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1971), pp. 675-779. Thompson, John A., The Book of Jeremiah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980). Toorn, Karel van der, From Her Cradle to Her Grave: The Role of Religion in the Life of the Israelite and the Babylonian Woman (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994). Toorn, Karel van der, 'Ordeal', ABD, V (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 40-42. Toorn, Karel van der, 'Ordeal Procedures in the Psalms and the Passover Meal', VT36 (1988), pp. 439-42. Trible, Phyllis, 'Depatriarchalizing in Biblical Interpretation', JAAR 41 (1973), pp. 30-48. Trible, Phyllis, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality (Overtures to Biblical Theology 2; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978). Trible, Phyllis, 'God, Nature of, in the OT', IDBS (New York: Abingdon, 1976), pp. 368-69. Turner, Mary Donovan, 'Daughter Zion: Lament and Restoration' (unpubl. diss., Emory University, 1992). Vanoni, Gottfried, 'Du bistdoch unser Voter' (Jes 63, 16): Zur Gottesvorstellungdes Ersten Testaments (Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1995). Veldhuis, Nick, A Cow of Sin (Groningen: Styx Publications, 1991). Walker, Christopher, and Michael B. Dick, 'The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient Mesopotamia: The Mesopotamian mis pi Ritual', in Michael B. Dick (ed.), Born in Heaven, Made on Earth (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1999), pp. 55-121.

186

Mixing Metaphors

Watts, John D.W., Isaiah 34-66 (WBC 25; Waco: Word, 1987). Watts, Rikki E., 'Consolation or Confrontation? Isaiah 40-55 and the Delay of the New Exodus', TynBul4\ (1990), pp. 31-59. Westbrook, Raymond, 'The Prohibition on Restoration of Marriage in Deuteronomy 24:1-4', in S. Japhet (ed.), Studies in Bible (Scripta Hierosolymitana 31; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1976), pp. 387-405. Westermann, Claus, Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary, trans. David M.G. Stalker (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969). Westermann, Claus, Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament, trans. Keith Crim (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1991). Whybray, R. N., Isaiah 40-66 (NCB; London: Marshal, Morgan & Scott, 1975). Willey, Patricia Tull, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah (SBLDS; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997). Wilson, Robert R., Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980). Wolff, Hans Walter, Micah the Prophet, trans. Ralph D. Gehrke (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981). Wijk-Bos, Johanna W. H. van, Reimagining God: The Case for Scriptural Diversity (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1995). Zannoni, Arthur E., 'Feminine Language for God in the Hebrew Scriptures', Dialogue & Alliance 2 (Fall 1988), pp. 3-15.

INDEXES

INDEX OF REFERENCES

BIBLE

Genesis 1-6 1.27 2 2.7 3 3.16 4.1 4.17 4.18 4.20-21 5.2 6.2 10.7-10 10.8 10.13 10.15 10.24 10.26 11.28 11.31 15.7 16.2 16.15 17.19 18.10 18.12 18.14 20.17-18 21.10 21.16 21.22-25 22.13 22.23

74 114 114 107 55 54 28 28 27 117 86 35 90 27 27 27 27 27 88 88 88 26 30 30 70 139 70 26 162 46 28 90 27

25.22-23 25.28 27.38 27.45 29.11 29.31 29.32-33 30.2 30.3 30.5-7 30.15 30.17-19 30.22-23 30.22 30.23 32.21 35.15-16 35.16-19 35.18 37.2-4 38.2-5 38.27 42.36 43.14 44.20 45.7 45.8 45.22

118 100 46 27 46 26 27 26 28 28 90 28 141 26 26-28 89 28 29 86 100 28 28 27 27 100 114 34 114

Exodus 1.19 2.2 2.22 4

28 28 30 97

4.22-23

5 6.6 7.18 11-12 12-13 12.13-15 13 13.11-16 13.12-15 13.13-16 13.13 13.14 13.15 13.16 14-15 14 14.4 14.29 15 15.1-18 15.1-12 15.3 15.8 15.10 15.13 15.14-16 15.14-15 15.14 20.4-5 20.23 21 21.1-6

35, 97-99, 170 105 79 171 97 97, 168 170 97,98 32, 78, 90 98 96 168 169 168, 169 169 96 98 104 96 48,50 96 92 46 50 50 79, 96, 99 57,62 58 28 44 44 80 80

188

Mixing Metaphors

Exodus (cont.) 21.2 80 21.7-11 80 21.7 32 21.26 90 21.28-32 88 21.29-30 89, 169 21.30 89,97 22.21 30 30.12 97 31.2 86 32.1-8 44 32.7-14 95 33.12 86 33.17 86 34.17 44 34.19-20 78 35.20 86 36.22 125 Leviticus 12 12.2 19.4 21.7 21.14 22.13 25 25.10 25.39-55 25.39-46 25.42 25.47-55 25.48-49 26.1 26.29 27

68 28 44 162 162 162 79-82 80 80 80 81,99 81 81 44 146 79

Numbers 5.5-8 5.11-31 11 11.11-15 11.12-15 11.12 11.13 11.18-33

79 94 150 137, 138 35, 149 137 150 149

14.1 18.15-17 18.15 21.29 30.9 31 31.22-23 35 35.31-32 Deuteronomy 1.31 2.25 4.15-19 4.20 4.25 5.8 7.19 8.5 14.1-2 14.29 15.12-18 15.12-17 15.15

15.17 19 21.18-21 22.19 22.29 24 24.1-4 24.1 24.3 28.51-57 28.53-57 28.56-57 32 32.6 32.11 32.13 32.18 32.19 32.20 32.30 33.2

46 78 168 35 162 93 93 79 97

36 28,57 44 92, 97, 99 44 44 169 36 36 30 99 80 80, 99, 168 80 79 30 153 153 163 163 153 153 148 146, 147 137 36,37 36,85 37, 149 37, 137, 149 29, 37, 57 75, 100 36 77 51

Joshua 6.5 6.10 6.16 6.20 15.14-17 17.11 20.3 20.5 20.9 21.9

47 47 47 47 158 158 79 79 79 86

Judges 2.4 4.15 5 5.4 5.7 7.21 9.7 13.5-7 15.14 17.10 18.4 18.6 18.9 18.19 18.24 19.26-27 21.2

46 68 48 51 34 47 46 28 47 33 33 33 47 33 33 139 46

Ruth 1.9 1.14 2.20 3-4 3.9-13 4.1-8 4.1-6

46 46 79 79 79 79 83

1 Samuel 1.5 1.6 1.11 1.15 1.16 1.19-20

26 27 140 27 27 140

189

Index of References

1.19 2.20 2.21 4.3 4.5-11 4.5 4.11 4.19-22 4.19 4.21 8.2 12.3 14.45 15.33 17.20 17.52 24.12 24.16 30.4 2 Samuel 1.9 3.32 4.1 7 7.7 7.13 7.14-15 7.14 7.23 11.1 13.36 14.7 20.19 22.10 22.16

26 90 26,28 51 45 51 133 45 28 55 39 97 168 27 47 47 33 46 46

58 46 57 39 105 105 35 99, 118 169 71 46 26 158, 161 171 170

2 Kings 2.3 2.12 2.15 4.1-8 4.1-2 4.1 4.16 4.17 6.21 6.24-29 6.28-29 7.9 16.7 19.3 19.21 19.24 24.14-16

34 34 34 163 81 30 70 28 34 146 137 47 33 54 158 42 81

1 Chronicles 28 7.23 28 16.30 2 Chronicles 13.12 13.15 16.8 29.1

47 47 90 39

Nehemiah 5 5.1-5 8.11 9.11 9.32

163 32 47 104 46

Esther 1 Kings 1.17 3.16-27 3.17-18 5.5 7.32-36 8.51 19.3 22.3

2.14

139 137 28 105 125 92,97 28 47

86

Job

1.6 2.9 2.12 3.11 3.16 5.1 7.12

35 57 46 55 55 57 49

9.8 17.13-15 26.5 26.11-13 26.12 27.9 28.8 28.19 29.16 31.15 33.24 36.18 38.7-11 38.28-29 39.1-4 41.31 Psalms 2.2 2.7

12.6 13.1 13.3 18.9-15 24 24.5 24.8 27.10 28.1 29 29.1 29.2 29.8-9 29.9 39.3 40.3 45.12 47.2 48 48.5-8 48.6-7 48.6 48.7 49.8 58.8 60.3

49 34 28 171 49 171 34 90 34 121 97 97, 169 49 121 71 104

105 35, 39, 99, 118 43 69 69 170 50,51 46 46 39 47 51 35 51 28 51 47 52 139 47 161 57,59 57 53, 54, 58 57 88,97 55 94

190 Psalms (cont.) 66 92,93 66.1 47 66.6-12 97 66.12 91,97 68.5 39 68.22 104 69.2 104 69.15 104 69.18 78 74.1 43,69 75,9 94 76 161 77 96 77.19-20 97 78.65 46 78.70-71 105 79.5 43,69 84 161 85.6 43,69 87 161 88.6 104 89.10 49 89.20 105 89.26-27 39 89.26 118 89.27 99 89.47 43,69 90.2 29, 121 93.1-4 49 93.3 46 94.6 30 96.1 52 96.9 28 97 51 97.4 28 97.6 51 98 52 98.1 52 98.3 52 103.13 39 104.5-7 171 104.9 171 105.36-38 98 106.9-10 171 107 46 107.24 104 107.33-37 47

Mixing Metaphors 119.154 127.5 130.7 135.8 136 136.10-14 137 139.13 144.9 146.7-8 149.1

79,83 26 169 98 96 96 51 121 52 82 52

10.2 10.211 13.2-8 13.2-7 13.2-5

13.2 13.4 13.6-8

13.7 13.8 13.17

13.21

Proverbs

3.12

21.18 23.10-11 23.22 23.25

39 95 97 29 92 97 89 97 79,83 27 27

Ecclesiastes 3.2 3.8

70 71

6.27-28 6.35 8.22-25 10.20

13.8

16.14

Song of Solomon 3.1 167 6.1 167 Isaiah 1.2-3 1.2 1.17 1.23 3.2 4.1 7.14 8.3 8.7-8 8.8 9.6-7 9.6 10.1-3

37 10 30 30 104 26 28 28 91 92 118 46, 86, 118 115

15.1-16.14

15.6 16.8-11 17.12-13 21.2-10 21.3-4

21.3 22.21 23.4 23.12 24.4-13 24.14 26 26.11 26.16-18 26.17-18 26.17 26.18 26.19 26.27-18 27.1 27.3 28.2 28.15 28.17 28.18 30.1 30.9 30.14 30.19 30.27-28 35.9-10 37.3 37.22

30 46 62 57 62 58 58 62 57,58 28, 54, 57, 58 62 58 170 170 170 170 57, 58, 63 57 28, 54, 58 34 57, 144 158 52 46 63, 66, 67 46 63 28, 53, 57 28, 53, 54, 58 57 72 72 49 28 92 92 92 92 37 37 28 58 92 78 54 158

191

Index of References 42 46 79, 129, 148 17,21,24, 40-55 47, 78, 129, 130, 173 45, 123 40-48 83, 107 40^6 129 40.1-11 138 40.1-2 131, 138 40.1 46, 69, 92, 40.2 162, 166 51 40.3-6 47 40.4 51 40.5 47 40.7-8 50 40.7 40.8-20 110 113 40.8-10 50 40.10 110 40.11 40.12-n-49.12 129 113, 129 40.12 113 40.18-20 44 40.18-19 46 40.18 113 40.19-20 110 40.20 45 40.21-31 143 40.22 47, 50, 69 40.24 46 40.25 74,86 40.26 74, 110 40.28 166 41 41 41.2 46, 109 41.4 45 41.5-9 119 41.5 110, 114 41.7 88 41.8-10 22, 75, 87, 41.8 114 74 41.9 74 41.10

37.25 37.32 40-66

41.11-14 41.13 41.14 41.15-16 41.16 41.17-20 41.17 41.18 41.20 41.21-42.13 41.21-29 41.21-24 41.21-23 41.21-22 41.21 41.22 41.23-29 41.23

41.24 41.25-29 41.25

41.26-29 41.26-28 41.26 41.27-28 41.27 41.28-29 41.28 42

42.1-7 42.1-4 42.5-9 42.5-7 42.5 42.6-7 42.6 42.7 42.8-17

83 74 74,78 113 74 43 128 47 74 43 45 109, 166 43 46, 108 114 45 119 46, 108, 111, 119, 120, 127 110 109, 110 41,86,87, 119, 120 46 43 46, 110 109 46, 108 46, 167 166 15,51, 57-59, 61, 63, 66-68, 71,72,75, 176 43 43 43 43 74 82 58, 106 88 1,2,4144, 48, 50, 52, 72, 174

42^4, 48 41,44^6, 48,51,52, 109 24, 174, 42.9-17 176 42.9 17,43,45, 46, 70, 72 42, 57, 67 42.10-17 42 42.10-16 42.10-14 43 42,43 42.10-13 44, 46, 47 42.10-12 42.10-11 47 42.10 42, 43, 46, 52,74 52 42.11 42.12 41-13,46, 51,52 43 42.13-16 42.13-14 16,48,56 41-46, 50, 42.13 52,59,61, 64, 68, 70 42,43 42.14-17 43 42.14-16 27-29, 42.14 41-44, 46, 47, 53, 60, 61,63,68, 70,71, 129, 141, 148, 166, 167, 172, 176 43,47 42.15-16 47, 50, 52, 42.15 66-68, 70 47,51,52, 42.16 70, 72, 110 42, 44^6, 42.17 48, 110 42.18^3.13 75 76 42.18-25 43 42.18 104 42.21 82,88 42.22

42.8-9 42.8

192 Isaiah (cont.) 77 42.24-25 42.24 89, 92, 95, 166 42.25 50, 89, 92, 101 4214 173 42 428 19, 80, 85, 43 88,89,91, 98,99 43.1-7 1,2,6, 19, 24,31,74, 75, 77-79, 83-85, 87, 95, 96, 98-100, 159, 168, 169, 172, 174-76 74-78, 43.1 84-86, 96, 100, 113 43.2 74, 75, 77, 83, 86-88, 91-97 43.3-4 75, 85, 89, 90 43.3 19, 74, 77, 88-90, 97, 98, 100 43.4 19,26,33, 77, 84, 86, 88, 90, 95, 99, 100 43.5-8 159 43.5-6 74,77 43.5 74, 77, 85-87 43.6 22, 83, 86, 97 43.7 74, 75, 77, 78, 85, 86, 100, 110, 113, 176 43.8-13 45 43.8 92, 114 43.9 45, 46,

Mixing Metaphors

43.10-13 43.10 43.11 43.12 43.14-17 43.14 43.15 43.17-18 43.18-19 43.18 43.19 43.20 43.21 43.22-28 43.23 43.25 43.26 43.28 43.34-37 44-n-45 44.1-7 44.2 44.3 44.5 44.6-8 44.6 44.7-8 44.7

44.8 44.9-11 44.9 44.12 44.21 44.22 44.23 44.24-45.13

44.24-45.7

108 46 46, 108, 110, 114 74 114 50 74, 78, 82, 117 74 95 45 46 47 75 110, 113 92 167 84 114 50 166 106 113 22, 74, 110 22, 47, 87 74, 78, 87 45, 110, 111, 114 46,78 109 45^7, 108, 109, 119, 120, 127 46, 108 110, 111, 114 109, 110, 114 113 113 78, 166 78, 104 102, 103, 105 103

44.24-28 44.24

44.25-26 44.25

44.26-38 44.26-28 44.26 44.27 44.28

45 45.1-7

45.1 45.3-4 45.3 45.4-6 45.4 45.5 45.6 45.7 45.8

45.9-13

45.9-11 45.9-10

45.9

45.10

103-105 22, 78, 103, 104, 110, 121 104 104, 108, 112, 115, 120, 123 104 105 46, 83, 104, 123 50, 105 50, 83, 103-105, 130 105, 115 103, 105, 107 58, 127 74 86 107 107 106, 107 74, 106 74, 106 74, 103, 107, 115, 120 1,2,24, 102-107, 114, 115, 159, 17476 72, 108, 120 103, 104, 114-17, 119, 120 74, 102, 107, 108, 110, 11418, 12026 15,23,24, 27-29, 57, 115-18,

Index of References

45.11-12 45.11

45.12-13 45.12

45.13

45.14 45.15 45.16 45.18 45.19 45.20-21

45.20 45.21-22 45.21 45.25 45.46 46.1-7 46.1-2 46.1 46.2-4 46.2 46.3-4 46.5 46.6-7 46.7-8 46.7

46.8-11 46.8

120, 121, 123, 125, 129, 148, 174, 176 124 45, 74, 75, 102, 104, 108, 109, 111, 114, 115, 11922, 124, 126, 127 121, 127 74, 102, 104, 115, 121,127 41,50,80, 83, 103, 105, 107, 121, 127, 130 74,90 74 111 74 87 45, 46, 111 110, 114 110 45, 46, 74, 108, 109 22,87 110 111, 167 110, 133 113, 114 150 114 36, 110, 114 46 110 110 43, 119, 167 45 166

46.9-11 46.9 46.10-11 46.10 46.11 47

47.1

47.2-31 47.2 47.4 47.5 47.8-9 47.8 47.9

47.12-13 47.12 47.13 47.15 48-55 48-49 48.1 48.3-5 48.3 48.5 48.6 48.8-11 48.8 48.10-11 48.10 48.11 48.12-13 48.12 48.14-16 48.14 48.17 48.19 48.20 48.21 49-55 49-54

111 45-47 109 46, 104 74, 110, 112 112, 130, 135, 158 75, 157, 158, 161 91 91 74,78 75 142 23, 157 23,27, 104, 157, 159 112, 123 104 104 74 130 130 23, 74, 87, 166 109 45,46 109, 110 45 92 166 84,95 113, 114 44, 109 45 166 130 33, 104 74,78 22,87 74, 78, 114, 130 110 130 30, 130, 132, 134,

193

49-51 49

49.1-50.3 49.1-12 49.1 49.2 49.6 49.7-12 49.7 49.8 49.9 49.10 49.12 49.13-55.13 49.13-50.3

49.13-26

49.13-21

49.13

49.14-26 49.14-21 49.14-17 49.14-15

49.14

148, 159, 165 158 23,38, 141, 143, 144, 146, 148, 149 135 130 23, 130 84, 113 74, 130, 131 131 74,78 110, 167 82 110, 128 74, 130 129 129, 138, 139, 152, 153, 167 2, 26, 129, 133, 140, 167 24, 26, 128, 129, 131, 138, 139, 144, 150, 152, 153, 163, 175 130, 138, 139, 149, 166, 167, 172 172 163, 176 137 129, 167, 172, 173, 176 23, 84, 129, 130, 136, 13840, 149, 152, 153,

194

Mixing Metaphors

Isaiah (cont.)

49.15-26 49.15-16 49.15

49.16-23 49.16-17 49.16 49.17-25 49.17-18 49.17

49.18 49.19-22 49.19-20 49.19 49.20

49.21

49.22-26 49.22-23 49.22 49.23 49.24-26 49.24-25 49.24 49.25-26 49.25 49.26

50.1-3

159, 167, 172 132 141 75, 128, 137, 141, 144, 145, 148-50, 153, 167 83 50 130, 163 153 141 75, 95, 130 23, 139, 149, 150 165 142 130, 143 26, 75, 144 23, 27, 28, 134, 135, 140, 143, 148, 167, 172 138, 153 143 22, 75, 138, 149 150 138, 143 153 153, 164, 167 83 75 50, 74, 78, 84, 168, 169, 172 1,2, 15, 24, 29, 78, 79, 136, 138, 139, 144, 152,

50.1-2 50.1

50.2-3 50.2

50.3

50.4-9 50.4 50.6-7 50.7-9 50.11 51 51.1 51.2 51.3 51.7 51.9-11 51.9 51.10-11 51.10 51.12

51.17-52.12 51.17-23 51.17-18 51.17 51.18-20 51.18

51.19 51.20 51.21

153, 159, 160, 16265, 167, 168, 172, 174-76 167 23, 79, 84, 92, 136, 149,153, 163,165, 168, 172 132, 169, 170,172 42, 50, 79, 124,153, 166-69, 171,172 129, 169, 171,172 130 41

84 83,95 92 158 114 22,23,33 138,143 74 49, 50, 95, 96 41 168, 169 74,78 75, 138, 139 129 94,135 165 41, 94, 162 26, 135 75, 84, 130, 144, 158 130, 138 158 128

51.22-23 51.22 52.1-10 52.1 52.2 52.7-12 52.8 52.9 52.11 52.13-53.12 52.14 53.2-4 53.10 54

54.1-17 54.1-14 54.1-8 54.1-7 54.1-3 54.1

54.2 54.3 54.4-6 54.4

54.5-8 54.5 54.6-7 54.6 54.7 54.8 54.10 54.11-12 54.11

132 83, 94, 139.162 132 41 75, 110, 161 50,51 46 78, 84, 138 50, 130 130 75 84 87,104 16, 136, 139, 158, 159 129, 162 26, 132 16, 19,23, 135,139 162 83 16,26,57, 75, 84, 133, 143, 144, 159, 165 130 87 23 16,23,74, 84, 136, 142 84 16,23,74, 78, 143 140.163 23 149 78, 84, 92, 128 128 50, 130, 142 113, 128,

195

Index of References

54.13 54.16 55.5 55.7 57.3 57.11 58.9 59.1-2 59.16 60.4 60.10 62.4-5 63-64 63.1 63.8 63.16 64 64.8

64.11 65.1 65.6 65.24 66 66.7-11 66.7-8 66.8 66.9 66.12 66.13

138 75 74, 113 74 128 104 47 167 167, 168 167 160 128 160 37 52 38 33,37,38, 81, 160 16 37,38,85, 114, 117, 160 42 166 167 167 158 160 28 57 160 150 38, 129, 148, 160

Jeremiah

1.5 2-3 2.2 2.20-25 2.20 2.25 2.27 2.32-37 2.32 2.33 3 3.1-5

121 155 155, 159 155 155 155 35, 122 155 142 155 163 159

3.1

3.6-11 3.8 3.19-20 3.19 4.3 4.9 4.19 4.21 4.29-31 4.29 4.31 5.3 5.22 6 6.22-26 6.22-25 6.22-24 6.22-23 6.23 6.24

6.25 7.6 7.16 7.29 7.32-33 8.19 9.10 9.18 11.4 11.14 11.16 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.20-21 13.21 14.17 18.13 19.9 20.11 20.14 21.3 21.7 22.3

153, 155, 163 155 153 160 38 28 57 60 58 57, 59, 60 58 28, 53, 54, 57, 58, 69 28 28 60,68 57,59 59 60 57 58 28, 54, 57, 58,60 58 30 46 46 108 167 46 46 92,97 46 86 58 58 58 62 54,58 158 158 146 46 28 58 116 30

22.20-23 22.20 22.23 23.1-5 23.5-6 23.9 24 25.25-29 26.17 30.5-6 30.5 30.6 30.18 31 31.4 31.9 31.11 31.15 31.21 31.31-34 31.31-32 32 40.3 40.6 40.9 42.2 42.14 46.10 46.11 47.1-7 47.2 47.3 48.20 48.28 48.40-43 49.12 49.21 49.22 49.23-27 49.23 49.24 50.10 50.15 50.22 50.28 50.33-34 50.41-43

57,61 58 28, 54, 57, 58 105 86 57 82 94 58 57,61 57,58 67 108 156 158 38 78 143 158 141 156 83 58 58 58 58 62 98 158 147 92 147 58 41 62 94 58 62 57,60 57,58 54, 57, 58 58 47 58 58 79,83 57,60

196

Mixing Metaphors

Jeremiah (cont.) 50.42 58 50.43 54, 57, 58, 60 50.46 58 51.3 58 51.7 94 51.13 91 51.36 42 51.39 94 52 82 52.8 58 52.11 82 Lamentations 1 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.12 1.15 1.16

1.17 1.18 1.21 2 2.1 2.13 2.19-20 2.19 2.20 2.22 3.32 3.58 4.1-10 4.2 4.3-4 4.4 4.5 4.10 4.21

136 132, 136, 144, 157 138, 167 136, 143, 159, 160 167 138, 167 132 158 136, 159, 160, 167 167 143 167 143 132 132, 158 148 136, 159 137, 146, 147 144, 159 128 79,83 132 159, 160 147 146 132 137, 147, 148 94

5.8 5.20

Ezekiel 7.17 8-11 11.14-25 11.15 16 16.4 16.20-21 16.39-40 21.11-12 22.18-22 22.28 23

23.31-34 23.37 30.4 30.9 34.3 34.11 37 44.22

62, 133 133, 139, 140

57 133 82 83 10, 156, 158, 159 136 156 156 57 92 104 10, 156, 158, 159 94 156 64,90 64 13 14 72 162

Daniel 3 10.16 11.10 11.22 11.26 11.40 12.43

95 57 92 92 92 92 90

Hosea 1-2 1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2 2.1 2.5 2.17 2.18

154 86, 154 28 28 28 154 37, 155 154 154 154

2.22 2.25 5.8 9.11 9.12 11 11.1-4 11.3-4 13 13.13 13.14

54,71 78,83

Joel 2.1 2.6

47 28

154 155 47 27 27 137 35,37 138 71

Amos 4.1 4.4-5 5.2 5.12 7.17

158 97 108

Obadiah 16

94

Jonah 2.3

104

Micah 3.5-7 4 4.9-13 4.9-10 4.9

139

120, 126

104

58, 64, 66-68

4.13 5.1-2 5.2 7.19 10.11

57 57,64 28, 47, 54, 57,58 28, 53, 57, 66,83 64 71 28 104 104

Nahum 1.3 1.4

42, 49,

4.10

171

197

Index of References

2.11 3.9

170 28,64 90

Habakkuk 2.15-16 3 3.3 3.16 12.2

94 52 52 57 94

Zephaniah 1.14 3.14

47 47

Zechariah 7.10 9.9 9.12 10.2 12.10 13.9 14.3 Malachi 1 1.6 2.10 2.11 2.16 3.2-3 3.5

30 47 82 104 27 93 46

16 38 38 35 153 93 30

APOCRYPHA

Wisdom of Solomon 115 7.2 2 Maccabees 7.27

137

NEW TESTAMENT

MESOPOTAMIAN CITY

John 16.21-22

LAMENTS

72

Romans 8.22-23

72

Revelation 5.5 12.1-6 14.3

52 72 52

OTHER ANCIENT REFERENCES

Code of Hammurabi Law #2 94 Law #138 p. 26 n. 11 Law #144 p. 26 n. 11 Law #170 p. 26 n. 11 Laws #226-27 p. 164 n. 25 A Cow of Sin

p. 53 p. 53 n. 51 p. 54 n. 57 p. 71 n. 99 Enuma Elish p. 105 p. 113n. 25 Epic ofGilgamesh p. 114 p. 56 p. 66 p. 70

balag 6.32 6.33 42 48

147 147 132 132

Eridu Lament 1.22-23 132 Lamentation over the Destruction ofSumer and Ur (LSUr) 96 147 408-409 133 Lamentation over the Destruction ofUr (LU) 1-39 133 28 158 223 147 234 147

INDEX OF AUTHORS

Anderson, B.W. 35 Bal,M. 17 Barr, J. 8 Batto, B.F. 49, 105 Baumann, A. 28,29 Beardsley, M.C. 3,4 Beaucamp, E. 43 Benjamin, D.C. 84 Berquist, J. 82, 116 Biddle,M.E. 141, 162 Bird, P.A. 26, 154 Black, M. 3,4,6,7, 11, 12, 18, 19,24,48 Blenkinsopp, J. 30-32, 42, 46, 90, 95, 162 Bogaert, M. 127 Bottero, J. 27, 112, 119 Bourget, D. 158 Brown, M.L. 3 Buber, M. 2 Buss,M.J. 115 Caplice, R.I. 112 Carroll, R.P. 62 Chirichigno, G.C. 32, 83, 168 Clements, R.E. 62 Clifford, R.J. 115 Cohen, C. 136, 157 Contenau, G. 164 Cooke, G. 39 Cross, P.M. 49-51 Cryer,F.H. 112 Curtis, E.M. 44, 109 Dandamaev, M.A. 32, 81, 82, 106 Darr, K.P. 3, 15, 16, 25, 26, 29, 42, 44, 48, 53, 68-71, 148, 164-66 DeVaux, R. 26,27,32,34

Demand, N. 25, 70, 137 Dick,M.B. 44, 109, 114, 117 Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W. 47, 49, 50, 131-35, 143, 144, 146, 147, 158, 159, 161, 165,170 Eichrodt, W. 3 Elliger, K. 103 Faur, J. 44 Fensham, F.C. 33, 99, 100 Ferris, P. 147 Fitzgerald, A. 157, 158, 161 Follis,E. 149 Foster, J.A. 29 Franke, C.A. 130 Fretheim, T. 3 Frymer, T.S. 94,95 Frymer-Kensky, T. 95 Galambush, J. 12, 13, 156, 157, 161 Gitay, Y. 103, 105, 107, 120 Gottwald, N. 80, 82, 135, 164 Gruber, M.I. 69, 70, 139, 141, 149 Hanson, P. 95, 105 Hayes, J.H. 90 Killers, D.R. 57,64,66, 115 Holladay, W.L. 60-62,70 Holter,K. 112 Jacobsen, T. 34,55, 121, 122 Janzen, W. 115 Jastrow, M. 125 Johns, A.F. 125 Johnson, M. 1, 3, 4, 8-12, 14-19, 69, 152,174

Index of Authors Kaiser, B.B. 142, 143 Kaiser, O. 62,64 Kennedy, J.M. 170 Kittay, E.F. 3 Knight, G.A.F. 69,72,97 Kramer, S.N. 147 Kuhrt, A. 106 Lakoff, G. 1,3, 4, 8-12, 14-19, 69, 152, 174 Lambert, W.G. 56 Lassen, E.M. 33 Leichty, E. 119 Levine, B.A. 136, 137 Lewy,J. 157 Linafelt, T. 135 Lohfink,N. 33 Longman, T. Ill 3, 52 McCarter, P.K. 95 McCarthy, D.J. 33 McFague, S. 2 McKane, W. 94 McKenzie, J.L. 42, 104, 130 Malina, B.J. 84 Malul, M. 145, 146 March, W.E. 39 Matthews, V.H. 84 Mays, J.L. 64 Melugin, R.F. 43, 105, 127 Mendelsohn, I. 164 Mettinger, T.N.D. 3, 24, 78, 79 Meyers, C. 28-31,54 Miller, J.M. 90 Miller, P.D. 45 Miscall, P.O. 166 Moran,W.L. 33,99 Muilenburg, J. 3,103 Newsom, C. 135, 164, 165 Niditch, S. 93 North, C.R. 125, 127 O'Connor, K.M. 146 Patterson, O. 100 Perdue, L.G. 26,30,31 Pike,D.M. 30,87

199

Pitt-Rivers, J. 84 Postgate, J.N. 26 Pritchard, J.B. 114, 115 Quell, G. 99

Rad, G. von 34 Rallis, I.K. 154 Reddy, M. 10 Reid,D.G. 3,52 Richards, LA. 3-7 Ricoeur, P. 3,4 Roberts, J.J.M. 45 Schenker, A. 88-90 Schmitt, J.J. 73, 129, 148, 149, 155, 156, 158,159 Schokel,L.A. 72 Schungel-Straumann, H. 138 Scullion, J. 141, 166 Seibert, I. 54 Seitz, C.R. 45, 46, 108 Shaw, C. 64,65 Sigerist, H.E. 137 Smart, J.D. 47,72,104,126 Smith, D.L. 82,93 Smith, G.A. 42 Smith-Christopher, D.L. 88 Soskice, J. 6,8,48 Spykerboer, H.C. 105 Stuhlmueller, C. 2, 78, 95, 115, 120, 121, 126,127, 169-71 Thomas, D.W. 90, 126 Thompson, J.A. 59 Toorn, K. van der 26, 53, 55, 56, 93-95, 119,121, 137 Trible,P. 39, 137, 139 Turner, M.D. 3,9, 135, 161 Veldhuis,N. 53,55,71, 136 Walker, C. 109, 117 Watts, J.D.W. 42, 106 Watts, R.E. 130 Westermann, C. 42, 43, 74, 75, 77, 91, 103, 105, 110, 126, 127, 129 Whybray,R.N. 42, 105, 125, 166

200 Wijk-Bos, J.W.H. van 3 Willey,P.T. 135, 139 Wilson, R.R. 104

Mixing Metaphors Wolff, H.W. 65 Zannoni, A.E. 137