Saturday, October 18, 2008

Matrimonial Canopies of the End Times

Isaiah 4:2-6 is a vision of the redeemed and renewed Israel. V. 5, in particular, is very evocative:
Then the Lord will create over the whole site of Mount Zion and over its places of assembly a cloud by day and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night. Indeed over all the glory there will be a canopy. It will serve as a pavilion, a shade by day from the heat, and a refuge and a shelter from the storm and rain. (NRSV)
Mary brought up an excellent question: In Jewish wedding tradition the matrimonial couple are covered by a canopy. Is Isaiah using the same word? Alec Motyer's exhaustive commentary on Isaiah provides the answer:
There is also [in this passage] a consummation of the covenant: over all the glory will be a canopy. Canopy (huppa) always denotes the 'marriage chamber' (Ps 19:6; Joel 2:16). The glory here is either the Messiah (see v. 2) lovingly joined to his bride-people or the whole glorious Zion with its holy people (3) joined in the consummation of love with the Lord under the overshadowing tokens of his presence. (For the covenant of marriage cf. 49:17-18; 54:1-13; Jer 2:2-3; 31:31-34; Hos 2:14-20.)
We discussed whether 4:2-5, which is clearly anticipating an eschatological fulfillment, has a second, prior fulfillment in the new covenant and the Church. The return of YHWH to Zion was partially fulfilled in the inauguration of the kingdom of God by Jesus' ministry, but we know that kingdom waits for consummation at the second coming. (Just as Jesus healed many, but even more await restoration.)

Similarly, the wedding language here called to mind that used by Jesus, suggesting that we see now only a shadow of the future joy the church will experience with the bridegroom. A far more glorious future awaits.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Will the Real Isaiah Please Stand Up?

The second Holy Huddle of Fall 2008 was the start of our Isaiah studies. We did a survey of Isaiah, including authorship issues, and then discussed chapter one--which got us onto the topic of how confession can transform a vague sense of guilt into a life-giving warning from God.

A word about the authorship issue. Since the 1800's interpreters have wrestled with the question of why chs. 1-39 differ in style and context from 40+ (often 40-55 and 56-66, actually). And the canonical answer these days is that there was more than one writer of Isaiah, with an editor who gathered the material under one name. (Canonical, I should say, at mainline seminaries. Since IVP's books all argue for a single author, it's possible that's the evangelical theory of choice.)

While this may be the canonical theory, it has some difficulties. The greatest of these may be that chs. 40-55, which contain the prophecy of Cyrus, also speak in great detail about how predictive prophecy shows God's sovereignty. Surely an ex-post-facto prophecy dressed up like the real thing would never have been attached by any editor to the great scroll of Isaiah?

So here's a theory which never gets any air time: Let's say there are two Isaiahs, one who wrote 1-39 and the other 45-66. (You may choose to add on another Isaiahs if 56-66 bothers you.) But now imagine that Isaiah #2 lived during the exile, knew about Cyrus, but prophesied before 535 and the return from exile. Now 40-55 is coherent, predictive prophecy isn't abandoned a priori, yet you don't have Isaiah prophesying to Hezekiah's subjects about the Babylonian exile. (Not to say this is impossible, but it's unusual--why send a prophet to talk to a people in crisis about another crisis more than a century away?) And there's no problem with inspiration of Scripture--after all, two Isaiahs can be just as inspired as one.

This theory isn't invulnerable. As Barry Webb points out in his IVP commentary, it would be odd for (arguably) the greatest OT prophet, the author of Isaiah 40-55 (which includes the Servant Songs), to remain anonymous.(*) And, frankly, this theory will please neither camp: Those who deny predictive prophecy will dismiss it, while those more conservative will be hungry for the whole enchilada of single authorship. Still, I think it offers a solution which makes more sense than either the standard source-critical theory, or the single-Isaiah thesis.

By the way, if you think the title of this post refers to Slim Shady, I'm going to guess you weren't alive when Jimmy Carter was president!

(*) I am setting aside my second-favorite theory, that like the skit from Monty Python in which everyone's named Bruce, perhaps this scroll is a collection of prophecies by people named Isaiah.

[The image is The Tree of Jesse, a Flemish painting (ink on parchment) from the 16th century, referring to Isaiah's prophecy about the root of Jesse. In the tree's branches are OT kings, with the Messiah and Mary at the apex. Thank goodness for that sheet.]