Journal of Biblical and Pneumatological Research. Paul Elbert

The English Standard Version is quoted in this section because, in these verses, it bears a word for word correspondence to the Hebrew text.

37. xykwhw was translated by LXX e1legcei, chose. The sense of rebuke, punish, discipline, has been followed by the Good News Version, KJV, and Douay Rheims American edition. Because people can be nations, the New Living Translation envisions international justice.

38. Bertil Wiklander, Prophecy as Literature: A Text-Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to Isaiah 2–4 (ConBOT 22; Lund: Gleerup, 1984), 206.

39. Isa 6:1–9:7 pertains to the Syro-Phonecian war during the time of Ahaz (735–33 BCE); Isa 20:1–6 notes the Phillistine revolt against Assyria (713–711 BCE); Isa 36–38 reports Isaiah’s interactions with Hezekiah during Sennacherib’s seige of Jerusalem in 701 BCE; Isa 39 relates to the rising Babylonian power during Merodach -baladan (721–710 BCE) (with HBC, 548).

40. Against an early date for Isa/Mic is the universal and eschatological expectation like those of Isa 40–65. But John D. W. Watts, Isaiah (WBC 24; Waco, Tex.: 1985), 28–29, and John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1986), 115, are most impressed by its genius, and so attribute it to pre-exilic Isaiah. Wiklander (Prophecy as Literature, 181, 201) places Isa 2:2–4 between 734–622, the reigns of Hezekiah or Josiah, composed by a scribal school that used diverse materials from diverse times and genres for rhetorical purposes. Marvin A. Sweeney, Isaiah 1–39: with an Introduction to Prophetic Literature (FOTL 16; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1996), 97–99, places it in the reign of Cyrus.

41. Hans Walter Wolff, Micah (trans. Gary Stansell; Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsberg, 1990), 85. For a full comparison of Isa 2:2–4 and Mic 4:1–3 and ancient translations with the conclusion that the final form is post-exilic because of its international vision see William McKane, The Book of Micah: Introduction and Commentary (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998), 121.

42. For example, Joel 3:6 (MT 4:6) mentions Judeans enslaved to Mynwyh (LXX #Ellhne/j) “the Hellenes,” for which there is an exilic precedent in Ezek 27:13, “Hellas . . . traded with you [Tyre] in the persons of men.” Joel’s date of composition, however, can be argued either as contemporary with Ezekiel, or archaizing.

43. There are debates about all of these passages as to date. But cf. Jer 46:3, 50:14, 51:11 for similar calls to arms. See too, Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (trans. D. M. G. Stalker; 2 vols.; London; SCM, 1975), 2:408.

44. On this point, John Strazicich, Joel’s Use of Scripture and the Scripture’s Use of Joel: Appropriation and Resignification in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity (BibInt 82; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 233, n. 97, cites Mikhail Bakhtin’s well-known essay, “Discourse Typology in Prose,” in Russian Poetics: Formalist and Structuralist Views (ed. Ladislav Matejka and Krystyna Pomovska; Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press 1971), 176–97 (185).

45. Raymond F. Person, The Deuteronomic School: History, Social Setting, and Literature (SBLStBl 2; Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002).

46. Wolff, Micah, 85; Otto Kaiser, Isaiah 1–12 (trans. R. A. Wilson; London: SCM, 1972), 25.

47. Neilsen, Hope for a Tree, 51.

48. For a full explanation how Hebrew Leitwörter (Leading Words) create Botschaft (Message), see Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig, Scripture and Translation (trans. Lawrence Rosenwald and Edith Fox; Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature; Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1994).

49. Everett Fox, The Five Books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy: a New Translation with Introductions, Commentary and Notes (New York: Schocken, 1995).

50. Evidence of its importance as a symbol of an unseen, unparalleled and infinite Deity is found in the Judaic practice of reading Adonay, or “my lord” instead of Yahweh in order to sanctify the name. Yawe from LXX of Theodoret and Epiphanius, –yahu (i.e. Eliyahu) and yeho- (i.e. Jehoshaphat) of compound theophoric names and the contracted form yah all favor a first closed syllable with patah. Galatinus introduced the pronunciation Jehovah in 1520 without regard for MT vocalization and Le Merecier, J. Drusius, and L. Capellus argued for grammatical and historical propriety. Traditionally lexicons, see Buxdorf (91), Davidson (300), Gesenius (336), Mandelkern (323), and BDB (218), list it as a derivative of hyh or hwh because hyh) in Exod 3:10–14 has continuously shaped efforts to locate the root of the word, resulting in theological definitions such as “self-existent, self-creative, eternal.” The school of thought on this context that parses it as a causative hiphil is represented by P. Haupt, “Der Name Jahwe,” OLZ 12 (1909): 211–14; W. F. Albright, “Contributitons to Biblical Archaeology and Philology: The Name Yahweh,” JBL 43 (1924): 370–78; idem, review of B. N. Wambacq, L’épithète divine Jahvé Seba’ôt: Étude philologique, historique et exégétique [Bruges: Desclée, De Brouwer, 1947] in JBL 67 (1948): 377–81; idem, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan: A Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths (Garden City, N.Y.; Doubleday, 1968), 168-172; F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1994), 60–75; D. N. Freedman, “The Name of the God of Moses,” JBL 79 (1960): 151–56; Jean Kinyongo, “Origine et signification du nom divin Yahvé ala lumiere de récents travaux et de traditions sémitico-bibliques,” BBB 35 (1970): 69–82; J. P. Hyatt, “Was Yahweh Originally a Creator Deity?,” JBL 86 (1967): 369–77.

      Other strands of interpretation have precedents in other biblical traditions. First, Tg Neofiti’s Memra associated the divine name with speaking (R. Hayward, Divine Name and Presence: The Memra [Oxford Center for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies; Totowa, N.J.: Allenheld, Osmun, 1981]), a derivation from supposed Ugaritic hwy “to speak” (A. E. Murtonen, A Philological and Literary Treatise on the OT Divine Names yhwh, ’lwhym, ’lw’, ’l (StudOr 18/1; Helsinki: Societas Orientalis Fennica, 1952), 90]; R. A. Bowman, “Yahweh the Speaker,” JNES 3 [1944]: 1–8), for all of which Gen 1:1–2:4 serves as precedent. Second, arguments from Arabic hwy, hwh in afel in three senses: “befall” (R. De Vaux, The Early History of Israel [Philadelphia, Pa.: Westminster, 1978], 345); “blow” linked to storm-god metaphors (T. J. Meek, Hebrew Origins [New York: Harper, 1960], 99–101); and “love, be passionate, be jealous” (S. D. Goiten, “YHWH the Passionate: the Monotheistic Meaning and Origin of the Name YHWH,” VT 6 [1956]: 1–9; cf. DeVaux, Early History, 345f; and the metaphor of the marriage covenant in prophecy and Exod 20:5 = Deut 5:9; Exod 34:4; Deut 4:24). Third, it is thought to be an elemental sound, yah (G. R. Driver, “The original form of the name ‘Yahweh’,” ZAW 5 [1928]: 7–25) perhaps first derived from the personal pronoun, ya huwa from Arabic “O He!” (S. Mowinckle, “The Name of the God of Moses,” HUCA 32 [1961]: 121–33; cf. Martin Buber, On the Bible: Eighteen Studies [ed. Nahum N. Glatzer; New York: Schocken, 1982], 44–62) for which Biblical precedents are ykwn) or )wh yn) in Deut 32:39; Isa 41:4; 43:10, 13, 25; 46:4; 48:12; 51:12; 52:6 and )wh ht) in Ps 102:28.