2003

Knud Jeppesen's scholarship has concentrated on prophetism. Among his many contributions to this field, one of the most inspired is his excursus on Deutero-Isaiah, which he included in his dissertation on Micah. It is evident that at the time of writing, Jeppesen was more inspired by the Book of Isaiah than the more pedestrian Book of Micah. Common to his analyses of the books of Isaiah and Micah, is the notion that both works were put together under the pressure of the Babylonian exile. In short, this literature is exilic. Any discussion of the redaction of the Book of Isaiah must begin with Deutero-Isaiah not with ProtoIsaiah. It is the circle of authors or collectors who put Deutero-Isaiah together that were responsible for the inclusion of the prophecies attributed to ProtoIsaiah. These show how the people of Israel used the history of ancient Israel to produce a reason for its harsh fate of exile. They not only found explanation in the history of their nation, but also hope for the future. There would be a new Israel, a new covenant (Jer. 31:27–34) or a new David, a Messiah who was to restore the greatness of ancient Israel (Isa. 9:6–7; 11). Jeppesen's analysis of the redaction history of the Book of Micah (and Isaiah) must be seen in the light of the development which began in biblical studies during the 1970s. Over the next twenty years, this was to change the field in a very thorough way.