TRINJ 34NS (2013) 3-16

JUSTICE AND THE ATONEMENT

IN THE BOOK OF ISAIAH
ANDREW SLOANE‫״‬
Every so often in theology and biblical studies, a brushfire
breaks out that threatens to become a major conflagration. So it
seems with the atonement and the death of Jesus this decade—at
least in evangelical circles. There are, of course, major theological,
philosophical, and ethical issues at stake in this debate, but these
largely lie outside my brief.1 My aim in this piece is to practice
biblical theology with an eye on systematics by looking at the
question of how justice and the atonement are related in the book of
Isaiah. While I will not directly engage with larger systematic
questions, such as the logic of penal (and other forms of)
substitution, I believe that this discussion can inform those larger
debates and anchor them in (this key section of) the biblical text.
This discussion is prom pted by and responds to three key
considerations. The first is John Oswalt's work on Isaiah and biblical
theology and his observations about how the language of justice and
righteousness works across the book of Isaiah.2The second is the role
of the Servant of Yahweh in Isa 40-55 (both within the texts of the
"Servant Songs" and in terms of the structure and rhetoric of this
section of Isa). The third is, of course, our topic: justice and the
atonement. In seeking to bring these interests together, I hope to
present a worked example of biblical theology so as to prom pt more
fruitful discussion of the relationship between justice and the
atonement. This is particularly done w ith an eye on the way that

*Andrew Sloane is Lecturer in Old Testament and Christian Thought at Morling

College (Australian College of Theology and MCD University of Divinity) in
.Macquarie Park, N ew South Wales, Australia
See, for instance, Joel B. Green, "Must We Imagine the Atonement in Penal
.Substitutionary Terms? Questions, Caveats and a Plea," in The Atonement Debate (ed
D. Tidball et al.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 153-71; Garry W illiams, "Penal
Substitution: A Response to Recent Criticisms" in Tidball, The Atonement Debate, 172-
Oliver D. Crisp, "The Logic of Penal Substitution Revisited" in Tidball, The ;91
Atonement Debate, 208-27 .
2John Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah: A Study of the Function of Chapters 55-
:in the Present Structure of the Book," in W riting and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah 66
,Studies o f an Interpretive Tradition (ed. C. C. Broyles and C. A. Evans; Leiden: Brill
idem ., "The Book of Isaiah: A Short Course on Biblical Theology," CTJ ;177-92 ,)1997
His focus is on the word group .54-71 :)2004( 39 ‫צדק‬, but, as he notes, this term is
generally closely associated w ith justice and often consists in living justly ,
4 TRINITY JOURNAL

some of those who celebrate Jesus‫ ׳‬saving work as the victory of God
and are committed to social justice seem to downplay (or reject) the
notion of penal substitution, and some of those who champion penal
substitution seem to downplay (or reject) God's call to God's people
to respond to God's liberating work in Christ by being agents of
God's liberating justice in the world .3
Let me begin with the big picture of Isaiah. Oswalt notes that the
language of justice )‫ (משפט‬and righteousness )‫־ןז‬$( is used quite
differently in the three main sections of Isaiah. In Isa 1-39, the
language primarily relates to "social justice": God's invitation and
demand that the people of God reflect God's own passion for justice
and just agency in how they conduct themselves in the world, and
,.God's just punishment of them for their flagrant failure to do so (e.g
Isa 1, 2, 5, 10) .4 This is seen clearly in the presentation of the ideal
Davidic king in Isa 11, one of whose primary roles is to enact God's
just rule on earth. In contrast, in Isa 40-55, justice and righteousness
,relate primarily to God's free salvation of God's people in exile
releasing them from bondage and calling them to freedom.5 Here, as
seen, for instance, in Isa 42 and 49, the prim ary reference is to God's
free and gracious liberating agency, rather than God's call to God's
people to reflect that in their social relationships. In Isa 56-66, these
two quite different emphases are woven together.6 Here, as is seen
clearly in Isa 58 and 61, justice is both God's liberating work on

3For an influential articulation of this critique of penal substitution, see J. Denny

Weaver, The Nonviolent Atonement (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001). For an example of
the uneasy relationship between a commitment to social justice and penal
substitution, see Lionel Windsor, The Problem with Social Justice 2008 [cited 2010]);
available from http://solapanel.org/article/the_problem _w ith_social_justice/. This
seem s to be more of a "popular" view than one represented in key theological
treatments of the issue, as seen in the presence of motifs of social justice (if somewhat
naïve and muted) in Steve Jeffery et al., Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the
Glory of Penal Substitution (Nottingham: Inter-Varsity, 2007), 138; 55-57; 307-11. John
Piper (The Future of Justification [Wheaton: Crossway, 2007]), however, is silent on the
topic, except for a brief reference to individual ethics (pp. 110-11), perhaps due to the
polem ical focus of his book. Piper also offers an approving endorsement (p. 81) of
Wright's critique of "individualism and pietism" and praises the w ay in which
Wright's account of the gospel retains its character as "the magnificent announcement
of the lordship of Jesus, not only over my personal problems, but over all of history
and all the nations and all the environment." For helpful outlines of and defenses
against the charges of Weaver et al. from those who endorse (some notion of) penal
substitution, see Steve Holm es, "Of Babies and Bathwater? Recent Evangelical
Critiques of Penal Substitution in the Light of Early M odem Debates Concerning
Justification," EuroJTh 16 (2007): 93-105; Stephen Walton, "Penal Substitution and
Social Transformation," Chm 120 (2006): 337-52; and in som e detail, Graham A. Cole,
God the Peacemaker: How Atonement Brings Shalom (Downers Grove, Π1.: A pollos, 2009),
especially the appendix, pp. 233-57.
4Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah," 179-80,83,84-85; idem , "Book of Isaiah," 54-
55.
5Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah," 185-87; idem , "Book of Isaiah," 55.
6Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah," 187-90; idem , "Book of Isaiah," 56-57.
S im ila r observations are found in H. G. M. W illiamson, "Preaching from Isaiah" in
"He Began ■with Moses Preaching the Old Testament Today (ed. G. J. R. Kent et al;
Nottingham: Inter-Varsity, 2010), 141-56.
SLOANE: JUSTICE AND ATONEMENT 5

behalf of God's people and the pattern of life they ought to express
in response to and in imitation of that liberating action.7
This suggests a number of things. First, we need to recognize
that the judgm ent that falls on God's people and that is a prominent
feature of Isa 1-39, is prompted by their failure to ‫״‬do justice." That
is evident in, say, Isa 5 and its placement immediately before the
account of Isaiah's call, which culminates in a fierce word of
judgment (something generally ignored in preaching on this text), a
judgment that only ends when the stump of the people is burned
over again.8 Second, we need to acknowledge that the result of God's
liberating action on the people's behalf is the restoration of justice
and of the people of God as agents of justice, as is seen, for instance,
in the description of the (inhabitants of the) new Zion in Isa 54:13-14.
I wonder whether this partially explains why justice and
righteousness are used of God's saving work in Isa 40-55; that is,
while the result of the formation of a just community is only rarely
directly in view, in the context of Isaiah as a whole, that m ust be the
result of God's action in redeeming God's people. That redemption
is also God's righteous action inasmuch as it involves Israel's
judgment; it would not be right for God to abandon them.9 And so
this salvation is a work of God's justice in (at least) two senses: first,
it is the God of justice who does this, demonstrating that justice in
action (Yahweh is exalted by justice, both in judging Israel and in
restoring the nation, as already hinted at in Isa 5:16); second, the
result is the enacting of justice in the (social) world, bringing that
justice to light (as is seen, for instance, in the juxtaposition of
Yahweh's justice and the call to those who pursue righteousness in
Isa 51:l-8).10
Turning to the Servant Songs, especially the fourth song in Isa
53, the notion of atonement proper comes into view.11 The fourth
Servant Song is notoriously difficult textually, exegetically, and

7Oswalt ties that to the work of a m essianic deliverer in Isa 61 which, w hile
plausible, lies beyond the scope of this discussion (see Oswalt, "Book o f Isaiah/' 57-
59).
8For an interesting theological engagement with this text, see Richard S. Briggs,
The Virtuous Reader: Old Testament Narrative and Interpretive Virtue (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2010), 167-92, and for the related theme of "hardening" in Isa, see Tosten
Uhlig, "Too Hard to Understand? The M otif of Hardening in Isaiah/' in Interpreting
Isaiah: Issues and Approaches (ed. D. G. Firth and H. G. M. W illiamson; Nottingham:
Inter-Varsity, 2009), 62-83.
9Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah," 186.
10This, it seem s to me, is echoed in Paul: God is both just and the justifier of those
w ho trust Jesus (Rom 3:26) and calls them to embrace God's purposes as those new ly
set free (Rom 6).
11This is the particular focus of the recent discussion of Peter John Gentry, "The
Atonement in Isaiah's Fourth Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13-53:12)/' Southern Baptist
Journal of Theology 11 (2007): 20—47. While I have benefited from his work, I part
company with him on a number of key points in relation to the structure (and so
rhetorical purpose of) Isa, including where the main divisions of the book lie;
furthermore, his piece does not directly address the question of justice and the
atonement, despite noting the importance of justice as a theme in Isa.
6 TRINITY JOURNAL

theologically; much of that I m ust leave to one side.12 I would,

however, suggest in passing that a key problem has bedeviled this
discussion: it has focused on the identity of the servant rather than
the function the servant performs for Israel, whereas the focus of the
text is on the function of the servant.13 Incidentally, that focus is seen
in Philip's use of the text in answering the Ethiopian's question: he
does not explicitly answer the question "about whom does the
prophet speak," but "beginning from that Scripture, he proclaimed
to him the good news of Jesus" (Acts 8:34, 35). His concern is not to
identify Jesus directly w ith the Servant, but to demonstrate that in
the gospel of Jesus the Servant's task has been achieved.14
Let me move on, however, to make some observations on the
song itself and its rhetorical function in Isa 40-55. First, whatever
happens to the Servant in Isa 52:13-53:12 (apart from his exaltation
and vindication in Isa 52:13 and 53:12, which deliberately bracket the
text), and whoever the Servant might be (something I believe the text

12For a sample of this discussion, see Leland E. W ilshire, "Servant-dty: A N ew

Interpretation of the Servant of the Lord in the Servant Songs of Deutero-Isaiah," JBL
94 (1975): 356-67, who sees the Servant as a (masculine) metaphor referring to Zion
and its fate (cf. James Muilenburg, "The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66," in The
Interpreter's Bible, vol. V [ed. G. A. Buttrick; N ew York: Abingdon, 1956], 381-773, esp.
463-70, 564-71, 578-88, 615-31, who sees the Servant as a corporate figure,
representing [exiled] Israel as Yahweh's disciples); M ichael L. Barré, "Textual and
Rhetorical-Critical Observations on the Last Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13-53:12)," CBQ
62 (2000): 1-27, who, on the basis of numerous textual emendations and retranslations
of key words, concludes that the Servant is a suffering (but not dying) w isdom figure;
Kristin Joachimsen, "Steck's Five Stories of the Servant in Isaiah lii 13-liii 12, and
Beyond," VT 57 (2007): 208-28, w ho examines a particular historical-critical
reconstruction of the book of Isa and the role of the Servant Songs in it; Paul R. Raabe,
"The Effect of Repetition in the Suffering Servant Song," JBL 103 (1984): 77-84, who
exam ines how repetition serves to highlight the contrasts in the Servant's career and
fate; Peter Wilcox and David Paton-Williams, "The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah,"
JSOT (1988): 79-102, w ho seek to deal w ith the identity of the Servant in relation to
theological and rhetorical shifts in "Deutero-Isaiah"; Hans-Jürgen Hermisson, "The
Fourth Servant Song in the Context of Second Isaiah," in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53
in Jewish and Christian Sources (ed. B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmacher; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2004), 16-47. Wilcox and Paton-W illiams exem plify common
characteristics of this discussion: they focus on "Deutero-Isaiah," that is, Isa 40-55 in
relative isolation from the book of Isa and on the identity of the Servant rather than on
the role of the Servant. Indeed, much of the discussion focuses on the Servant Songs in
isolation from the rest of the "book" of "Deutero-Isaiah," partly as a result of the view
that the songs are a later redactional addition to the text and have little if any
connection to their surrounding context. Part of m y aim is to bypass this im passe in
OT scholarship by asking a different kind of question: what is the role of the Servant in
Isa 40-55 and in the book as a whole? A similar point is made by W illiamson,
"Preaching from Isaiah," 149-51.
13This is evident even in Cullen Story, "Another Look at the Fourth Servant Song
of Second Isaiah," HBT 31 (2009): 100-110, a recent attempt to read the song in its
canonical context, in which he differentiates a number of servants in the songs: Israel
in Isa 42, the prophet in Isa 49 and 50, and the future M essiah in Isa 53.
14So also Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah (London: SCM, 2001), 423. This is in contrast to
m ost conservative readings of Acts, which presume that Philip directly answers the
Ethiopian official's question and see Isa 53 as directly predicting the coming of Jesus.
See, for instance, Oswalt, "Book of Isaiah," 64-65, esp n. 14.
SLOANE: JUSTICE AND ATONEMENT 7

is deliberately unclear about),15 the Servant suffers undeservedly and

that suffering seems to free the audience (as represented by the
narrator and his voice) from the plight of their sin (both their
sinfulness and its consequences).16 That seems to be the obvious
im port of Isa 53:4-6, 8b, lib . Indeed, the language of vicarious
suffering as both representative and substitutionary seems
inescapable to me: that is, the innocent (or better, the righteous17)
Servant bears the punishment of the guilty people.
That, as is well known in biblical scholarship, is a highly
controversial claim. A number of OT exegetes, most notably H. M.
Orlinsky and R. N. Whybray, have disputed the claim that the
Servant suffers vicariously. They see the Servant as the victim of
undeserved suffering, but this is only either because he is caught up
in the corporate consequences of Israel's sin or because of the violent
opposition he faces as a result of his faithful proclamation of
Yahweh's word of deliverance.18 He may function as an example of
faithful suffering that prompts contrition and repentance on the
audience's part, but his suffering (they argue that the "death" of the
Servant is metaphorical for extreme suffering and rejection) has no
redemptive significance. This exegesis requires multiple
emendations of the text and unusually restrictive interpretations of
key words, as well as depending on hypothetical reconstructions of
the ministry of "Deutero-Isaiah" and its association with Isa 40-55.19

:15David Clines, I , He, We, and They: A Literary Approach to Isaiah 53 (Sheffield
JSOT, 1976(.
16See Gentry, "The Atonement in Isaiah's Fourth Servant Song." W hile I think he
over-reads the import of the use of ‫זם‬2<‫ א‬and am not persuaded of other elem ents of his
analysis of the text, he does establish that the text speaks of the vicarious significance
.of the Servant's death
17Cole, God the Peacemaker, 241, w ith reference to Jesus as not merely innocent but
righteous; see also Paul D. Hanson, "The World of the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah
.in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H ' / 40-55
Bellinger and W. R. Farmer; Harrisburg: Trinity, 1998), 9-22, although he does not use
.the language of atonement, per se
18Harry M. Orlinsky, "The So-Called 'Servant o f the Lord' and 'Suffering
.Servant' in Second Isaiah," in Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah (ed. H. M
Orlinsky and N. H. Snaith; Leiden: Brill, 1977), 1-133; R. N . Whybray, Isaiah 40-66
)Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 167-83; idem , Thanksgiving fo r a Liberated Prophet: An
Interpretation of Isaiah Chapter 53 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1978(.
19Orlinsky, "Servant of the Lord," 51-63, 75-96; Whybray, Isaiah 40-66 , 175, 77,
idem , Thanksgiving for a Liberated Prophet ;82-83 ,81 ,78-79 , 29-31 , 58-76 ; 79-106 ; 134-
cf. Antony Tharekadavil, Servant ofYahweh in Second Isaiah: Isaianic Servant Passages ;40
,in Their Literary and Historical Context (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2007), who
w hile rejecting notions of the Servant's death or vicarious suffering, presents the
Servant as the nonidolatrous faithful remnant in exile w ho, suffering exile along with
the idolaters, calls the rest of Israel to turn to Yahweh alone (see esp. pp 139-55, 161-
E. Robert Ekblad, "God Is N ot to Blame: The Servant's Atoning Suffering ;)66
according to the LXX of Isaiah 53," in Stricken by God? Nonmolent Identification and the
Victory o f Christ (ed. Brad Jersak and Michael Hardin; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007(,
w ho argues that the LXX differs from the MT in Isa 53 for theological , 180-204
reasons, seeking, amongst other things, to "disassociate God from the Servant's
Israel's) suffering in verses where the MT could be (wrongly, I believe), and often has(
been, interpreted to support a notion of atonement through penal substitution" (p .
8 TRINITY JOURNAL

While the text of Isa 52:13-53:12 is notoriously difficult, the

alternative readings make good sense of the text as we have it
w ithout recourse to such major emendations.20 The main difficulty
seems to be that the notion of vicarious suffering for sin by a
righteous person on behalf of those deserving judgm ent is alien to
the general thought-world of the OT. True, but that is part of the
point—or at least, part of the reason for the incredulous response of
the witnesses of the Servant's fate to his ministry—why else the
who has believed our message?" which opens the poem proper (Isa"
l :53(?21
The text, then, speaks of the substitutionary suffering (and
death) of the Servant.22 The Servant has borne )‫ (נשא‬our grief and
carried )‫ (סבל‬our sorrows (Isa 53:4); the discipline of our peace )‫(שאם‬
was upon him )‫ (מוסר חלומנו עליו‬and by his blows we have our
healing (53:5); Yahweh made the iniquities of all of us fall on him
from the transgression of Yahweh's people, a blow to him —)53:6(
makes his life a reparation offering )53:8( )‫אס־תשים אשם נפשו‬, 53:10(,
and he himself bears the people's iniquities and the sins of many
)‫ועונתם הוא לסבל‬, The suffering and eventual death of the .)53:11
Servant is not the suffering and death that he deserves; it is the
suffering and death "earned" by the sinful exilic community that the
Servant bears instead of them. The Servant suffers vicariously, as a
substitute for sinful Israel.23 And whatever we might want to say

204). W hile Ekblad's claim that the LXX "translation" is theologically m otivated seems
sound, his claim that the MT is wrongly understood to support notions of penal
substitution is not.
20See, for instance, Sue Groom, "Why Did Christ Die? An Exegesis of Isaiah
52:13-53:12" in Tidball, The Atonement Debate, 96-114.
21Cf. Jeffery et al., Pierced for Our Transgressions, 52-67; Hanson, "The World of
the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah 40-55," 18—20.
22See Childs, Isaiah, 407-23; J. Alan Groves, "Atonement in Isaiah 53," in The
Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Theological and Practical Perspectives (ed. C. E. H ill and F.
A. James; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2004), 61-89; Bernd Janowski, "He Bore Chur
Sins: Isaiah 53 and the Drama of Taking Another's Place," in The Suffering Servant:
Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (ed. B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmacher; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 48-74; Christopher R. North, The Second Isaiah: Introduction,
Translation and Commentary to Chapters X L -L V (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964), 64—65, 234-
46; John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah Chapters 40-66 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998),
373-410; idem, "Isaiah 52:13-53:12: Servant of A ll/‫ ׳‬CTJ 40 (2005): 85-94; Henning Graf
Reventlow, "Basic Issues in the Interpretation of Isaiah 53," in Jesus and the Suffering
Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H. Bellinger and W. R. Farmer;
Harrisburg: Trinity, 1998), 23-38; Christopher Seitz, "The Book of Isaiah 40-66/' in The
New Interpreter's Bible, vol. 6 (ed. L. Keck; Nashville: Abingdon, 2001), 307-552 (esp.
457-70); Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 40-66 (Nashville: B&H, 2009), 430-72; Hermann
Spieckermann, "The Conception and Prehistory of the Idea of Vicarious Suffering in
the Old Testament," in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jezcdsh and Christian Sources
(ed. B. Janowski and P. Stuhhnacher; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 1-15; Barry
Webb, The Message of Isaiah (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 1996), 209-14.
23See W alton's intriguing suggestion that the text draws on the ANE practice of a
substitute bearing the king's "guilt" (strictly, ill-om en, for whatever reason) and dying
in h is place to appease the deity, but democratizes it to cover the sins of the
community (John H. Walton, "The Imagery of the Substitute King Ritual in Isaiah's
Fourth Servant Song," JBL 122 [2003]: 734-43).
SLOANE: JUSTICE AND ATONEMENT 9

more generally in systematic categories, it seems to me that the

Servant is substitute because he is the first representative: the use of
the term Servant makes that fairly clear.
That relates to the second point regarding the structure and
rhetoric of Isa 40-55. Outside the Servant Songs, the word servant
relates to Israel and, with one exception (Isa 54:17, which
importantly comes after the fourth song and is also the only use of
the plural servants in Isa 40-55), does so negatively. Servant Israel is
blind and deaf, which, in light of Isa 6, esp. vv. 9-10, must be seen as
a negative description of Israel as sinful and under judgment, or at
the very least as weak and in need of redemption (see Isa 42:18-20;
43:8-10; 48:20).24 In the songs, the Servant is faithful and the agent of
God's saving work for Israel and through Israel to the nations (most
obviously—and difficultly—in Isa 49:5-6).25 This contrast between
Servant Israel outside the songs and the faithful Servant within them
needs to be understood carefully. As Seitz has noted, this contrast is
not the result of the insertion of alien material into the flow of
"Deutero-Isaiah," but is a feature of the rhetoric of the final form of
Isaiah and contributes to it.26
Related to that, Isa 40-55 displays a dynamic movement,
propelled (and complicated) by the four Servant Songs: after each of
the first three Servant Songs, there is a return to the dismal realities
of the exilic community (those who are addressed in this section of
the book, whenever it was written).27 The first Servant Song
24For these connections, see Christopher Seitz, "Isaiah 1-66: Making Sense of the
Whole," in Reading and Preaching the Book of Isaiah (ed. C. Seitz; Minneapolis: Fortress,
1988), 105-26; idem, Word without End: The Old Testament as Abiding Theological Witness
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 130-49,68-93.
25There is considerable debate about this text and its relationship to the theme of
"universalism" in Isa 40-55. The latter point need not detain us and has been w ell
explored in Joseph Blenkinsopp, "Second Isaiah—Prophet of U niversalisai/' ] SOT 41
(1988): 83-103; Ronald Clements, "A Light to the Nations: A Central Theme of the
Book of Isaiah," in Forming Prophetic Literature (ed. J. W. Watts and P. R. House;
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 57-69; Joel Kaminsky, "The Concept of Election
and Second Isaiah: Recent Literature," BTB 31 (2001): 135—44; Deryck Sheriffs, '"A Tale
of Two Cities'—Nationalism in Zion and Babylon," TynBul 39 (1988): 19-57; Rikki
W atts, "Echoes from the Past: Israel's Ancient Traditions and the Destiny of the
N ations in Isaiah 40-55," JSOT 28 (2004): 481-508. For the notion of the Servant as
(representative/true) Israel and agent of Israel's restoration, see Oswalt, "Book of
Isaiah," 64; Christopher Seitz, '"You Are My Servant, You Are Israel in Whom I Will
Be Glorified': The Servant Songs and the Effect of Literary Context in Isaiah," CTJ 39
(2004): 117-34.
26Seitz, "You Are My Servant," 123.
27M ost commentators recognize that exiled Israel is the intended audience for Isa
40-55, irrespective of their view of the provenance of the text. See, for instance,
Oswalt, Isaiah 40-66, 1-16; Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66 (London: SCM, 1969), 3-6;
pace Smith, Isaiah 40-66, 50-51. My analysis depends on a particular understanding of
the structure of Isa 40-55 (and the legitim acy of that as a section within Isa). It largely
follow s that of Oswalt (see Oswalt, Isaiah 4 0 -6 6 , 7-19); however, I think he is wrong to
see Isa 40-48 as dealing with political freedom from exile and Isa 49-55 as dealing
w ith freedom from sin in forgiveness, especially in light of the clear new exodus
m otifs in, say, Isa 52:1-3, 11-12; 55:12). For alternative structural analyses, see, for
instance, Stephen Lee, Creation and Redemption in Isaiah 40-55 (Hong Kong: Alliance
10 TRINITY JOURNAL

celebrates the spirit's endowment of the Servant for the task of

bringing justice to the nations (Isa 42:1-9) and leads into a song of
praise of the sovereign Yahweh (42:10-13), affirmation of coming
action (42:14-17), a rebuke of the deaf and blind Servant, and a
rehearsing of past sin and present unresponsiveness (42:18-25). The
second song sees the Servant affirm his service of the word and his
expanded commission in light of its apparent failure (49:1-6/7), and
is again followed by a word of the future joy of salvation }49:13(,
which is contrasted w ith Israel's unbelieving complaint (49:14). The
third song shifts to suffering faithfulness, presenting the Servant as a
model of "faith in the darkness," in contrast to Israel's faithless
attempts to "light their own path," ending with one of the clearest
and most stark expressions of judgm ent as a present possibility in
this section of Isaiah (50:4-9; 10-11).28 This is followed by ringing
calls to action on the basis of what Yahweh has achieved for his
people by his mighty arm (Isa 51 and 52); here we also find
embedded the reality of the current plight of Israel )51:17-20; 52:1-5(.
The w ord of hope is proclaimed to exilic Israel, but they find
.themselves as they were, perpetrators and victims of sin
However, after the fourth song, there is a sustained shift to
celebration, as if the problem of the persistence of sin and unbelief in
Israel is a thing of the past (Isa 54). In the world of this text, shame is
past (54:1-8), God's mercy is more certain than the foundations of
the earth (54:9-10), desolate Zion will be rebuilt in glory and fidelity
,and justice (54:11-15), and, drawing on key covenantal terminology
righteousness )‫ (צז־כה‬will be the inheritance )‫ (נחלה‬of the servants of
Yahweh (rn¡T ‫עברי‬, It seems as though, somehow, the Servant .)54:17
has achieved that shift. That, I would suggest, is the result of the
atoning work of the Servant most clearly seen in the fourth song .29
Indeed, that shift in thé macro-structure of Isa 40-55 reflects a similar
shift to that in Isa 52:13-53:12, where there is a new awareness not
only of sin, but also of its being decisively dealt w ith in the puzzling
fate of the Servant (53:4-6). The end is that in 54:17 the servants (now
plural for the first time in 40-55) receive vindication (better, their
righteousness, ‫ (צז־קתם‬from God and the extravagant freedom that
God promised them in Isa 40-55.30 That, in turn, leads to a call to

-Bible Seminary, 1995), 167-89; Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah (Leicester: Inter
Varsity, 1993), 23-25, 289; Seitz, "The Book of Isaiah 40-66 ,‫ ״‬Smith, Isaiah ;325-26 40-
6 6 ,5 1-55 .
28This is such an atypical statement that Westermann argues it is a postexilic
addition, given that it does not fit the tone of "Deutero-Isaiah," for which see
Westermann, Isaiah 4 0 -6 6 , 232-35 .
29For similar structural observations see Gentry, "The Atonement in Isaiah's
Fourth Servant Song/' 4 0 .1 should note that, follow ing Motyer, he sees this section of
Isa beginning at 38:1 rather than 40:1. This is, however, a flawed judgment given the
clear shifts in tone, genre, and language that occur at 40:1. Nonetheless, this judgment
.does not affect the argument at this point
30Similar points are made by: William Dumbrell, The Search for Order: Biblical
Eschatology in Focus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 115-23; Q uids, Isaiah, 407-23 ;
Stephen Dempster, "The Servant of the Lord," in Central Themes in Biblical Theology
 SLOANE: JUSTICE AND ATONEMENT 11

embrace that freedom, knowing the futility of the alternative, the

abundance of God's grace, and the certainty of Yahweh's achieving
of his purposes, embodied in their return to the land, which is, in
itself, a demonstration of Yahweh's righteousness (Isa 55) and which
culminates not only in the transformation of Israel, but also the
transformation of creation as a memorial of Yahweh's saving grace
(55:13).
This picture is complicated, however, when we move onto Isa
56, where there is another shift in both tone and language. It has
been suggested that this shift is a result of the postexilic
community's failure to embrace the call to freedom found in Isa 40-
55.31 They revert to Israel's sinful, unjust past (hence the return of the
language of judgm ent on injustice in Isa 56 and 57, so strikingly
absent in 40-55) and to the need of a further "return from exile" in
which they are fully transformed and can enact the justice God has
freed them to embrace (so, Isa 59 and 64-65). The question of the
addressees of Isa 56-66 is, however, a vexed issue, particularly as
that relates to their presumed historical location. While some
sections of the text seem to presuppose a return from exile and
problems associated with it (e.g., Isa 66:7-13), others seem to fit a
putative postexilic context loosely at best (e.g., Isa 57:4-10). There is,
however, a clear dependence on what has gone before in the book of
Isaiah: indeed, Isa 56-66 deliberately weaves together themes from
both previous sections of the book. This, along with the relative lack
of historical specificity in this section of Isaiah, has led Christopher
Seitz and others to question the value of the division between Isa 40-
55 and 56-66. If earlier notions of (Proto- and) Deutero- and Trito-
Isaiah have generated an artificial division between these blocks of
material, there is, nonetheless, a significant shift in the material that
needs to be accounted for somehow, even if not on simple historical
grounds. The question is: how do we understand the continuities
and discontinuities that exist in the movement from Isa 55 to 56?
This interplay between continuity and difference is particularly
clear in the use of the language of righteousness in Isa 56-66.32 This
suggests that the key context for this section of Isaiah is less
historical in orientation than literary and theological, dealing with
the dynamics of righteousness in light of the extravagant grace of

(ed. S. J. Hafemann and P. R. House; Nottingham: A pollos, 2007), 128-78; Peter Dray,
"Isaiah 52:13-53:12: Isaiah on the Suffering Servant," Evangel 26 (2008): 33-36;
Dumbrell, Search fo r Order, 115-23; Mark Gignilliat, "Who is Isaiah's Servant?
Narrative Identity and Theological Potentiality/‫ ׳‬SJT 61 (2008): 143-57; John
Goldingay, Isaiah (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2001), 301-9; Oswalt, Isaiah 40-66, 373-410;
idem , "Isaiah 52:13-53:12: Servant of All, 88-90 ‫ ;״‬Scott Rae, "Texts in Context:
Scripture and the Divine Economy," Journal of Theological Interpretation 1 (2007): 1-21;
Seitz, "You Are My Servant."
31So, for instance, Rikki Watts, "Consolation or Confrontation? Isaiah 40-55 and
the Delay of the N ew Exodus," TynBul 41 (1990): 31-59.
32I discussed this earlier in relation to Oswalt's work on righteousness in Isaiah.
12 TRINITY JOURNAL

Yahw eh's redemption of Israel in Isa 40-55.33 Whether that is

understood as a response to an actual or anticipated failure of Israel
to embrace this call to new freedom or an attem pt to wrestle with the
implications of how the divine gift of righteousness is to be worked
out in the realities of Israel's national life, Isa 56-66 projects a vision
of freedom that goes beyond that experienced in Israel's return from
exile. Now, I would suggest that this full and final freedom is
eschatological (e.g., Isa 65-Ó6)34 and is the achievement of the death
and resurrection of Jesus—which is, of course, a contested judgment
that clearly lies beyond the horizon of the book of Isaiah. But this
much stands: the liberating work of God, announced in Isa 40-55
and achieved somehow by the Servant, both as Israel and for Israel
(although this is deliberately unclear in Isa 40-55), aims at the end of
injustice in the life of the people of God and their freedom for
justice.35
And so, finally, we move now to questions of justice and the
atonement. The connection between the two is seen first in the fact
that one of the key sins that led to the judgm ent of exile was social
injustice (e.g., Isa 5, or, for that matter, the overture in Isa 1).
Inasmuch as the atoning work of the Servant deals with the problem
of Israel in exile, an exile occasioned in part by injustice, the
atonement of the Servant is necessarily connected to God's justice
and to Israel's own injustice. This is an im portant point to remember
when we think about the atonement in Isaiah. It relates not to
generalized issues of hum an sin and abstract divine justice but to the
specifics of Israel's blindness and deafness, its refusal and resulting
inability to respond to God's call to covenant fidelity, and the
judgm ent this entails. And, of course, in Isaiah that necessarily
includes its refusal to hear God's call to do justice and the just
judgm ent that comes as a result.
This relates fairly clearly to the second connection between
justice and atonement in Isaiah: the purpose and result of that
atonement. The Servant's role is to free Israel from both bondage and
faithlessness so that Israel, like the Servant, can be and do Israel, and
so become servants. Israel under judgment has become blind and
deaf, unable to bear witness to Yahweh and Yahweh's purposes in
the world, a blindness and deafness that culminates in the death of
exile. The Servant, in contrast, is one whose ear is open, who hears
and speaks, who embodies and bears witness to Yahweh's purposes
in the world, who embraces the call to justice. As a result of the
Servant's work, Israel once again can see and hear, Zion is called
from death to life, the exiles are called to a faithfulness expressed in
righteousness, and a responsiveness that fulfills Israel's identity and
purpose. Israel is meant to be a people of justice (e.g., Isa 1:17,21, 26,

33So, in particular, Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah."

34Childs, Isaiah, 440-49; Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah," 187-91.
35See the suggestive comments by Oswalt, "Book of Isaiah," 54r57‫־‬.
SLOANE: JUSTICE AND ATONEMENT 13

27); justice, then, is one of the goals of atonement as seen in the book
of Isaiah.
Panning back a bit and thinking about the puzzling work of
atonement itself in Isa 53, I think we can see a third connection
between justice and the atonement: the unjust death of the Servant in
Isa 53 is a work of God's justice—not merely because of why it is
needed and what it achieves, but also in how it works. For the
Servant is both ideal Israel and Israel's representative: the Servant is
Israel (the faithful, responsive covenant partner) and does Israel
(representing God and God's rule to a watching, waiting world). But
the Servant also willingly embraces a fate not his own, the fate of
unfaithful failed Israel: the fate of death (for Israel, the death of exile;
for the Servant, death itself), and in so doing averts death from
Israel. This is a work of covenant solidarity in which the faithfulness
of the Servant is seen in embracing Yahweh's will, a will that brings
the fate of the people of God upon the Servant in suffering covenant
fidelity. That which would otherwise be unthinkably unjust—the
righteous one suffering that the guilty might go free—can be justly
embraced by the one who righteously embraces Israel's character
and destiny.
Thus, it seems to me, justice and atonement are intimately
connected in Isaiah. It is God's passion for justice and God's
commitment to see his own passion for justice enacted in the life of
Israel that motivates God's punishment and that will end in a
liberated and transformed people of God exemplifying it. It is that
commitment to justice that also motivates God's provision of
atonement for Israel by means of the Servant. This atoning work also
exemplifies the three main "theories" of the atonement: penal
substitution, victory, and moral example. God's victory is a major
theme of Isaiah (esp. in Isa 40-55), a victory over God's and Israel's
political enemies, over other gods and their claims to sovereignty,
even over Israel's own sinful recalcitrance. Inasmuch as Israel's
restoration is accomplished by the Servant's (atoning) work, his
victorious suffering is God's victory over God's foes (as seen in the
references to the Servant's w isdom /prosperity in Isa 52:13 and 53:12
and the "arm of Yahweh" in 53:1). Equally, the Servant is the
representative who embodies (true) Israel and Israel's role in the
world and amongst the nations: this is the righteous Servant, the one
fully committed to justice, who demonstrates to Israel w hat it means
to be Israel, and so calls it to faithful (suffering) service (as is seen
most clearly in Isa 50:10-11). But this is also a work of restoring
Israel to Israel's Servant task (Isa 49:6), a restoration which is
accomplished, we discover, in the atoning death of the Servant who,
while himself righteous, suffers vicariously for sinful Israel, bringing
them freedom (Isa 53:11).
I must say, while the Servant's suffering in Isa 53 seems to be
vicarious and substitutionary and penal and even forensic, the latter
terms do not seem to be couched in the ways in which they are
14 TRINITY JOURNAL

commonly employed in systematic theological formulations, nor do

they exhaust the text's presentation of the Servant and his role .36
What is in view in Isa 53 is not universal human sin and the
universal/eschatological courtroom, but the court of covenant
lawsuit, addressing covenant failure on Israelí part and enacting
covenant fulfillment (of both curse and blessing) on the Servant's
part and the restoration of relationship w ith Yahweh that this
enables.37 That explains, I think, the puzzling use of
restoration/reparation offering )‫ (אשם‬in relation to the offering of the
Servant's life in suffering death.3®It is not being used with its full
formal force, but in a way tapping into the sacrificial system's
provision for the individual Israelite's covenant breaches. Here its
meaning is extended, even stretched to the breaking point, in being
used w ith reference to the effects of the righteous Servant's suffering
for the "us" who embrace the new perspective on the Servant
exemplified in the fourth song. A concern with the breadth of

36In particular, penal and forensic categories are not those operating in relation to
the sacrificial imagery in Isa 53, pace Dray, "Isaiah 52:13—53:12: Isaiah on the Suffering
Servant," 34-35; cf. David Peterson, "Atonement in the Old Testament," in Where
:Wrath and Mercy Meet: Proclaiming the Atonement Today (ed. D. Peterson; Carlisle
Paternoster, 2001), 1-25; William D. Barrick, "Penal Substitution in the Old
Testament," MSJ 20 (2009): 149-69, w ho see the sacrificial system as a w hole, and the
,Servant's sacrificial death in particular, as payment of a (quasi) legal penalty. I doubt
how ever, that penalty is the primary category operating in the sacrificial system. The
theology of Leviticus seem s to be driven by a theology of life (order, such as clean and
ultim ately the holy) and death (disorder, such as unclean and ultim ately, the
abhorrent). The atoning sacrifices work by dealing w ith the disorder occasioned by
uncleanness, as w ell as sin which, in Leviticus, is primarily seen as a powerful
unclean-making" phenomenon. Hence, the " ‫) חטאת‬probably purification offering
NTV, "sin offering"]) applies to uncleanness as w ell as sin, as is seen in Lev 12 and[ 13.
Thus, there is a symbolic transfer of the disorder onto the animal which, by w ay of its
death, rem oves that disorder and, by w ay of its life (blood), reorders that particular
state of affairs. Thus, Leviticus operates not w ith forensic notions of guilt and
punishm ent, but ritual or symbolic notions of life and order, and death and disorder
so too Green, "Must w e im agine the atonement in penal substitutionary terms(?" 161-
Sacrifice in Leviticus, then, w hile related to notions of substitution, is not .)62
primarily understood in terms of penal substitution. However, given that it deals with
)the disorder occasioned by impurity and sin, it is related to notions of justice (osuto
inasmuch as ‫ משפט‬.relates to the establishing or maintenance of order in the world
37See the brief discussion of the atonement in Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of
Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 2005(, 380-94 .
38Traditionally, w hen used w ith reference to an offering , ‫ אשם‬is translated "guilt
offering," largely due to the force of its other use with reference to guilt (for which see
Gen 26:10; Ps 68:22; Jer 51:5). However, it is better tra n sla té "restitution" or
reparation offering," as its use in Numbers makes plain (see Num 5:7-8). On this, see"
Gordon J Wenham, The Book of Leviticus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979(, 104-12 .
N onetheless, given the deliberately allusive and elusive use of language in Isa 5 3 ,1
think it is inappropriate to force the meaning here; so, too, John Goldingay, The
Message of Isaiah 40-55: A Literary-Theological Commentary (London: T&T Clark, 2005(,
Smith, Isaiah 40-66, 458; pace Gentry, "The Atonement in Isaiah's Fourth ;510-12
Servant Song"; R. E. Clements, "Isaiah 53 and the Restoration of Israel," in Jesus and
.the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H. Bellinger and W. R
Farmer; Harrisburg: Trinity, 1998(, 39-54 .
SLOANE: JUSTICE AND ATONEMENT 15

covenant failure may also explain the plethora of images used in

relation to the Servant's death, images that belong to the worlds of
(covenant) lawsuit, sacrifice and temple, honor and shame, life and
death, punishment and freedom, sickness and healing, success and
failure.39 These are all terms that can be used in relation to the
covenant and its requirements and consequences: what the text
seems to say, then, is that the Servant takes sinful Israel's place in
suffering the price of covenant failure that Israel may enjoy, through
him, renewed covenant call and its blessings. This is a work of
reconciliation enabled and embodied in a person, restoring
relationships distorted and broken by sin.
Broader questions arise in relation to the Servant's work for the
nations, especially given his role as one who brings light, salvation,
and righteousness to them. A few observations are in order. First,
inasmuch as the Servant restores Israel, this is bringing light to the
nations, for that is a key function of Israel in God's purposes in the
OT and in Isaiah in particular (seen, for instance, in the image of the
exaltation of Zion in Isa 2:1-5). Second, if the exile is seen as a
response to and demonstration of radical covenant failure on Israel's
part, then in one sense at least, despite Isaiah's affirmation of its
election, Israel has become (like) one of the nations. This, in turn,
means that its restoration is more radical than it might appear—as
evident in the use of the language of redemption that features so
heavily in Isa 40-55. If Israel has become (like) one of the nations in
its sin, then its redemption opens up the possibility of the
redemption of the nations on the same basis.40 TTiis means, finally,
that through the Servant's work, his role as covenant representative
can come to include the nations as they are identified with him and
included in his broader covenant purposes.
In the Servant's (atoning) work, then, we see God's victory, a
clear and costly moral example and sacrifice and substitution, all at
work to bring God's justice to the nations. Whatever we may say
about other articulations of atonement theology, in the book of
Isaiah, at least, justice and the atonement are inextricably linked, and
this link includes elements of (representative and) penal substitution.
There is, then, in the book of Isaiah, no conflict between ethics and
atonement, a commitment to justice and the teaching of penal
substitution, particularly when penal substitution is framed more
broadly (or in other terms than) traditional abstract forensic notions.
Of course, that broader framing may not satisfy traditional
exponents of penal substitution given the welter of images used in
Isa 53; many of which fit poorly with classically forensic articulations

39While I disagree with him on a number of points (for instance, his identification
of the Servant w ith the prophet), for a helpful discussion of the range of metaphors
used, see Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 4 0 -5 5 , 477-88.
40See David Starling, N ot M y People: Gentiles as Exiles in Pauline Hermeneutics
(Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), for this as a m otif in Paul's understanding of the OT,
especially the book of Isa.
16 TRINITY JOURNAL

of penal substitution. A more historically and covenantally driven

articulation of substitution is needed, I would suggest one which
recognizes that the category is driven by the narrative of Israel's
covenant failure and the Servant's identification as covenant
representative with Israel and its fate so as to open up a new
(renewed) covenantal future for the people of God, rather than
abstract notions of the nature of divine justice and human sin.41 So
too, it clearly will not satisfy the desire of Weaver and others for a
nonviolent atonement, one in which the death of Jesus is other than
willed by God (and consciously accepted by Jesus). In this respect at
least, the biblical-theological reflection on justice and atonement in
Isaiah fits the categories and expectations of neither "camp." But
that, surely, is one way in which biblical scholarship can serve
broader theological interests—by questioning the categories that
have operated in the debate and opening up potentially fruitful new
lines of inquiry. Such exploration m ust await another occasion.42 For
now, this much is clear: Isaiah's vision of substitutionary atonement
does satisfy a desire to see (social) justice and the atonement
inextricably linked. And that, surely, should be reflected in our life
and proclamation, the words and deeds that seek to do justice to the
atonement.

41See, for instance, N. T. Wright, "Justification: Yesterday, Today and Forever,"

JETS 54 (2011): 49-63. For all I said at the start that I w ould not deal with bigger
conceptual issues, this does allow for a more philosophically adequate notion of
substitutionary atonement. A covenantally driven articulation of the metaphor does
not require us to wrestle w ith questions of how God's universal justice is satisfied, but
provides us with a narrative and covenanted context in which representation,
identification, and substitution work (cf. Crisp, 'T he Logic of Penal Substitution
Revisited").
42See Hans Boersma, "Eschatological Justice and the Cross: Violence and Penal
Substitution," ThTo 60 (2003): 186-99; idem , Violence, Hospitality, and the Cross (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 2004), esp. ch. 7, for interesting reflections on these lines, explicitly
dealing w ith issues of violence, (eschatological) justice, and penal substitutionary
notions of the atoning work of Jesus.
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(sV express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder( s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of ajournai
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.