The Relationship of the Nations To Yahweh and To Israel in Isaiah Xl-Lv1

Abstract

In modern scholarship there is a lack of consensus regarding Deutero-Isaiah's conception of the relationship of the to Yahweh and to Israel. On the one hand, there are scholars who suggest that Deutero-Isaiah envisages the salvation of the and their co-equality with Israel. As an example of this position C. C. Torrey remarks that Deutero-Isaiah's message was the inclusion of the whole Gentile world side by side with in the family of one God (Torrey, p. 118). In addition, C. Westermann states that God has designated to be a light to the world and to mediate salvation to it; she is to bring enlightenment and liberation to others (p. 84). On the other hand, there are scholars who suggest that Deutero-Isaiah envisages the salvation of alone and the nations' abject submission to her. For example, after concluding his form-critical analysis of Deutero-Isaiah, A. Schoors remarks that although Yahweh is considered to be the creator of the universe, there is no expectation of salvation on behalf of the gentiles (p. 302). N. H. Snaith adds that any place which the gentiles have in the new order is entirely and debasingly subservient (1950, p. 191). To complicate the matter further, there are scholars who acknowledge that there are passages in Deutero-Isaiah which seem to envisage the nations' salvation as well as sections which emphasize their submission to Israel. These scholars seek to resolve the tension in several different ways. Torrey eliminates the nationalistic passages (pp. 119-20) while P. A. H. de Boer omits the universalistic ones (p. 90). R. Halas and D. E. Hollenberg redefine the terms nations and Israel in order to demonstrate a consistent adherence to either nationalism or universalism. P.-E. Dion (L'universalisme ...) explains the discrepancy by positing

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 26 citations exist upstream.