Joseph Blenkinsopp

A historical-critical, heavy on the critical, commentary on Ezekiel.

While the Interpretation series generally does feature some contetxtual, often historical-critical commentary, it generally does so with a view to application, since it's designed for pastors.

Well, Blenkinsopp is the author here, and there's not a whole lot of application, but there is a whole lot of historical-critical comments.

There are strengths to this approach. Blenkinsopp brings in the ancient Near Eastern context show more very well, and helps the reader understand Ezekiel's world and the power of his message in that world.

But there's corresponding weaknesses. I thought Blenkinsopp spent a bit too much time in his Anchor Bible Isaiah commentaries attempting to pick apart different authors and editors, and I can see from this commentary that this is apparently his thing. Even though Ezekiel is pretty consistent throughout, if there could possibly be a question of a later addition, Blenkinsopp is there. Even when there's no real reason to question the authorship of a text, sadly, Blenkinsopp will be there doing so.

His denial of Ezekiel being mute save for words of YHWH from the narrative moment of Ezekiel 4 to Ezekiel 33 is baffling and not well argued. His handling of Gog, though, is very good.

There is value in this commentary as long as you can overlook the overly critical disposition of the author. show less

A modern, historical-critical commentary on what has been deemed the "Second Isaiah"-- Isaiah 40-55.

The author begins by taking issue with any interpretation that ascribes the work to Isaiah son of Amoz. He seems baffled why people do not accept the idea of an anonymous yet inspired prophet's work being appended on Isaiah's work. The introduction to the work is rather lengthy and goes through matters of history of interpretation along with the late exile context of the audience (and, as show more Blenkinsopp believes, the author).

Comments on the text itself are valuable, even if one does not always agree with the emendations supplied. Comments on the substance have some value in helping to ascertain the text in context.

A helpful commentary on some levels, less so on others. show less

An introduction to Isaiah, a translation and a commentary on Isaiah 1-39.

The author does well at establishing the history of interpretation of the text over the past 200 years or so, with some reference to commentators and others from earlier periods. He definitely holds to the belief in composite authorship, and the attempt to establish when and where the various pieces of material were composed takes up much of the discussion.

Comments on the difficulties in the text itself and the show more evidence from the versions has benefit, as does the author's discussion of the 8th century context of Isaiah. Much of the commentary, however, is difficult to accept if one does not believe in the composite authorship theory. show less

A historical critical commentary on Isaiah 56-66.

The author views much of the material as having been written after the exile, but at least believes in compositional unity within most of the sections of the book. Compared to his commentaries on 1-39 and 40-55, his comments on 56-66 are more expansive, spending more time on the material in its ancient Near Eastern context. His exercises in attempting to ascertain some sort of authorship and specific audience demonstrates the futility in show more attempting to do such things based on literary and/or historical-critical methodologies, especially considering the nature of the material in these chapters.

A detailed introduction and bibliography assists in understanding the state of the field of understanding of these chapters. His textual notes also are of value. show less