Jesaja net een boek? : die pendulum swaai terug (Afrikaans)

Abstract

Afrikaans: Daar is nou reeds vir so om en by drie dekades 'n groeiende belangstelling in die boek Jesaja, maar dan in besonder die eenheid van die boek. In die Verenigde State van Amerika het dit onder meer gelei het tot die organisering van The Formation of the Book of Isaiah Seminar of the Society of Biblical Literature onder voorsitterskap van Marvin Sweeney en Roy Melugin. Die huidige debat het gegroei uit die onvergenoegdheid van al hoe meer navorsers met die Histories-Kritiese metode en sy resultate. Die klassieke driedeling van Duhm, maar veral sy volgelinge se toepassing daarvan, word bevraagteken. As altematief word daar gewys op die eenheid van al 66 hoofstukke van Jesaja. Die eenheid, anders as die klassieke kerklike standpunt, lê egter nie opgesluit in die outeur nie, maar in die teks met sy verskeidenheid intratekstuele verbindings. In Suid-Afrika, soos ook maar die geval is met die res van die akademiese wereld, word die sinkroniese en diakroniese benaderings tot die teks dikwels teen mekaar afgespeel. Hier word gepoog om beide perspektiewe aan die orde te stel met die doel om aan te toon dat elke benadering sy tekortkominge het. Soos die Historiese Kritiek nie reg is met sy waterdigte skeiding tussen Proto-, Deutero- en Tritojesaja nie, is die sinkroniese benaderings ook nie reg in hul optimisme oor die duidelik gestruktureerde eenheid van die finale teks nie. Daar is beide 'n kontinuïteit en diskontinuïteit in Jesaja te bespeur. Deur egter vanuit sowel 'n diakroniese as 'n sinkroniese perspektief na die teks te kyk, word die ryke geskakeerdheid van die teks emstig opgeneem, komplimenteer genoemde twee perspektiewe mekaar se resultate, ondersteun mekaar self op bepaalde punte en kom die moontlike boodskap duideliker na die oppervlak. In hierdie studie dien Jesaja 36-39 as illustrasie, terwyl Jesaja 38-39 in detail geëksegetiseer word. Hierdie teks staan reeds vir dekades om verskeie redes in die brandpunt van die bespreking. Die rede vir die plasing daarvan in die spesifieke konteks van Jesaja, die parallelle teks in 2 Konings 18-20 en die annale van Sanherib van Assirie en hul weergawe van die beleg van Jerusalem, is van die belangrikste vrae in die verband. Die onderhawige studie bevestig die hipotese aan die begin van hierdie studie gestel, naamlik dat die pendulum terug geswaai het deurdat die klem verskuif het van 'n driedeling na die eenheid van die boek Jesaja. Die klassieke skeiding tussen Proto-, Deutero- en Tritojesaja is nie so waterdig as wat daar oor die algemeen onder histories-kritiese navorsers aanvaar word nie. Daar is wel 'n bepaalde relasie tussen die drie dele, maar die omvang en aard van die relasies is nie so duidelik is as wat voorstanders van die sinkroniese benaderings tot die teks dit wil hê nie. Daarom behoort 'n sinkroniese en 'n diakroniese benadering in die eksegetiese proses nie teenoor mekaar gestel te word nie, maar behoort dit eerder komplementerend aangewend te word. English: For three decades or so, there has been growing interest in the book of Isaiah, particularly with regard to the unity of the book. In the United States of America this has led to, among other things, an organisation called The Formation of the Book of Isaiah Seminar of the Society of Biblical Literature under the joint chairmanship of Marvin Sweeney and Roy Melugin. The current debate has grown out of the discontent of more and more researchers with the Historical-Critical methods and their results. The classical tripartition of Duhm, and especially his supporters' application of it, is being queried. The unity of all 66 chapters of Isaiah is indicated as an alternative. This unity, unlike the traditional standpoint of the church, is, however, not implied in the authorship, but rather in the text, with its variety of intertextual links. In South Africa, as is the case in the rest of the academic world, the synchronic and diachronic approaches to the text are often played off against each other. An attempt is made here to raise questions about both perspectives with the aim of showing that each approach has its shortcomings. Just as the Historical-Critical method is not correct in its rigid division between Proto-, Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, neither are the synchronic approaches correct in their optimism over the clear, structured unity of the final text. Both continuity and discontinuity can be detected in Isaiah. However, by looking at the text from a diachronic as well as a synchronic perspective, an improved view of the rich variety of the text can be seen. The results of the aforementioned perspectives are complementary, even supporting each other on certain points, and the eventual message comes more clearly to the surface. In this thesis, Isaiah 36-39 serves as an illustration, while Isaiah 38-39 is analysed in detail. This text, for various reasons, has been the focal point of discussion for many years. The reason for its insertion in the specific context of Isaiah, the parallel text in 2 Kings 18-20 and the annals of Sennacherib of Assyria and their varying versions of the siege of Jerusalem, are some of the most important questions. This study confirms the hypothesis proposed at the beginning, namely that the pendulum has swung back, shifting the emphasis from tripartition to a unified book of Isaiah. The classical division between Proto-, Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah is not as rigid as generally accepted by the Historical-Critical researchers. There is a definite relationship between the three parts but the extent and nature of the relationship is not as clear as the advocates of the synchronic methods to the text would like it to be. Therefore, synchronic and diachronic methods in the exegesis should not be set against each other but should rather be applied in a complementary fashion.