Religion and Theology

From his own writings, Whedbees work was a comparison of the functions of the prophets and the wise men in order to understand the prophets indebtedness to their traditional heritage. At the onset, Whedbee depicted the differences between the two in such a way that he is comparing good and evil, the prophets representing good and the wise men evil. But Whedbees shift of identity with the wise men being earlier depicted as evil turns light whose function overlapped on some occasion with priests and prophets. Whedbee seemed to enjoy shifting his character as the wise man now depicting wisdom was portrayed as dependent on Yahweh, an evolutionary development from a being profane into sacred. He admitted however that the relationship between wisdom and the prophet is complex, Referring to this relationship, Whedbee stated, This is coupled with increasing awareness that law, prophecy, and wisdom are not self contained, isolated categories, but are interrelated in various ways in the history of Israelite society. Hence it is recognized more and more that wisdom has a zone of influence that extended far beyond the boundaries of the Old Testament wisdom. For Whedbee, Isaiahs call, triggered a dramatic and decisive change. On the auspicious occasion, Isaiah perceived the sinfulness of his ways and his nations and was thrust into the task of prophetic proclamation.
Whedbee beautifully illustrated through his seemingly conflicting narrative of the functions and evolution of the wise man from profane into religious, Isaiahs relations with wisdom tradition. Citing the works of Fichtner, Whedbee noted that the prophet Isaiah stands firmly in the wisdom traditions.

He suggested that Isaiah could have been belonging to the circle of the wise during his time. This suggestion holds some weight in the sense that Isaiah was not ordinary person not because he was a prophet but because of his link to the throne. That is Isaiah served as advisers to the king of Israel, a position deserve only by the wise men. Therefore, Isaiah must be right the only difference was that he was a man of God, which means he must be both a prophet and a wise man. However, citing the works of J. Fichtner, Whedbee noted that Isaiah himself experiences conflict with his dual character, being member of the circle of the wise and divine spokesman. Here, Whedbee referred to the passage in Isaiah chapter 64 to which Isaiah upon sensing the divine holiness of God cried out that he was sinful and dwells among sinful people. In this case, the author draws his idea from the passage by interpreting Isaiahs admission of his own sinfulness, in view perhaps of his collaboration being member of the circle of the wise. It can recalled that earlier that Whedbee described the wise men as utilitarian whose main concern is to make their lives happy by getting the best of this world.

Whedbees presentation was creative and clear as he was able to clearly demonstrate Isaiahs connection with what he calls problem of indebtedness and at the same time provided interpretation on the statement made by Isaiah wherein he admitted his sinfulness. Whedbee noted, To Isaiah, then, true wisdom may be defined thus, to know where I belong, to know whose voice is valid for me.  This confirms that Isaiah was indeed indebted to wisdom. Whedbee cited that the sages reflection and its terminology is securely grounded in wisdom. On his discussion regarding Isaiahs anology of the father and son relationship, the authors knowledge of the Old Testament apparently provided him vast understanding of the subject that enable him to provide such interpretation. Regarding Isaiahs concept on the father and son relationship,

In the succeeding chapter, Whedbee calls Isaiahs series of prophecy as Isaianic speeches linking his use of parables and other figurative language to wisdom. Whedbee however, objected to the notion that Isaiahs use of parables and figurative language was associated with wisdom asserting that metaphors and similes as well as parables and figurative speeches are the common property of poets and speakers from time immemorial. This must be a good assertion because in the New Testament, Jesus has never been a member of any such group but he used all types of figurative language and parables more than anyone else in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Whedbee apparently made a good point and I agree with him that parables and figurative language have been commonly used by poets and prophets in order to articulate the message they bring to the people, though admittedly, such manner of speaking reflect the impact of wisdom.

Much of Whedbees presentation of Isaiah in relation to wisdom has much to do with his theological understanding of the Old Testament. His discussion of the father and sons relationship sounds like a commentary on the Old Testament, as he has ably provided a critical analysis of the book of Isaiah using the works of other Old Testament scholars pertaining to Isaiahs notion of word son, as well as an interpretation of the passage in view of Israels sinfulness

The subsequent discussion was tedious and difficult to comprehend not because the writer uses unfamiliar language or vocabularies but because he was dealing with various speeches. Whedbee pointed out that Isaiah in 10 5-19 is one of the most profound speeches in Isaiah.

The difficulty here was that not many are familiar of the biblical history. Whedbee though, was generous to give clues as to what really the message behind this speech. He stated, In his speech Isaiah takes something of the posture of the wise man. He reflects on the problem of the conflict between human and divine purposes and simply draws the inevitable conclusion Assyrias pride will lead to destruction. That he chooses a distinctively wisdom speech to sum up the whole oracle and to give the rationale for Assyrias destruction would seem to confirm this insight into the prophets activity. It appears that Isaiah speeches were words of comforts for Israel in view of the imminent fall to Assyria who will soon face its own woes in the hands of God.

Throughout the book however, Whedbees argument regarding the relation of Isaiah with wisdom continues to dominate the pages of his discussions. Citing various wisdom texts from the book of Proverbs and Job, Whedbee argues that the tone on such text were the same with woes indictment of Isaiah. Whedbee stated, It is important to note that the same tone pervades these wisdom texts as we found in the woe indictments. The texts are based on age-old rules that are concerned with protection against the avaricious and power hungry. In the authors final analysis of verbal speeches concerning wisdom text and woes indictment, he concludes that Isaiah penetrates to the deepest level of spiritual insensitivity. Whedbee puts it, On all these counts Isaiahs handling of the theme transcends the sages for the prophet zeroes in on the detrimental effect of extravagant living at the point of its implication for the peoples relationship to Yahweh

On the final chapter of the book, the author brings back the issue of wisdom to the front along with the concepts of Old Testament scholars such G. von Rad and McKane which he has earlier consulted. In this case, the author pointed out that to understand Isaiahs use relations to traditional wisdom he insists the need to understand Isaiahs usage of the term in relations to the wise man. He also suggests that to understand what is involve in the term counsel in wisdom circle. I believe this suggestion is important in the sense that one can not really have clear understanding of things without understanding its characteristic or properties, or in regard to a particular issue, its context. His discussion has now shifted back to relation of wisdom and Isaiah but this time with some findings on the relation between the roles played by the prophet and the wise man. As Whedbee pointed out,
To be sure, there was a certain overlap. For example, just as a prophet or a wise man could give Torah on occasion, so counsel could sometimes be given by prophets, priests, princes, or elders. It should be noted that in almost every case it was only an authoritative person who could give counsel and that it was often done in the context of deciding important political questions at the royal court. In the majority of cases, it the wise man who dispensed counsel either in general role in the community or in his official role as member of the royal court

While Whedbees discussion was aimed at providing solution to the problem regarding the prophets indebtedness on wisdom, he has also provided an important insight regarding the manner by which God reveal his plan through the prophets speeches. Citing von Rad, Whedbee puts it, such wisdom, as von Rad puts it, combines two thingsmans confidence in his ability to master life and at the same time, with all wisdom in the world, an awareness of the frontiers and a preparedness to fail in the sight of God  In this case, it is important that we understand the context by which the message is intended. Furthermore, while Whedbee clearly indicated that there is a difference between wise men and the prophets, and between traditional wisdom and the divine knowledge, it appears that they can be use as the situation requires. As I ponder on Whedbees discussion of wisdom, I realized that the difference between traditional wisdom and divine knowledge lies in the heart of the individual. Those whose hearts are pure possesses both wisdom and understanding. Isaiah was an ordinary man but he became great, a great man indeed, through his willingness to obey and to do what God wants him to do. He was chosen by God because he was pure in heart. In view of this, I could say that anyone can do great things if they would trust in God and be willing to obey his will. Indeed, Whedbees discussion is spiritually enlightening.