94 A. Gardner Such an interpretation does not fit with Whybray’s own statement, “What is promised here is a return to the longevity of the age before the Flood recorded in Genesis” (21). A perusal of Genesis 5 shows that apart from Enoch (who did not die), the youngest patriarch at the time of death was eight hundred and ninety five (Mahalel, Gen 5,17). A life span of one hundred years for the righteous person in Isa 65, 20 does not approach such longevity. Is Whybray wrong then in linking a longer life-span in Isa 65, 20 with the pre-diluvian period? Probably not, for Isa 65, 25 (22), with its vision of shalom in nature, is harking back to God’s original intentions for his creation, intentions which Gen 6,9-11 posit were not being fulfilled prior to the flood (23). Isa 65,22 states that the days of God’s people will be as the days of a tree: trees mentioned in the Bible include the oak (24), cedar (25), olive (26), fig (27). The oak is renowned for its long life-span with examples having been recorded of 1,600 years. The Cedar of Lebanon lives to an age of 2,000 years. Olive trees can live for 1,000-1,500 years, with unconfirmed reports of a tree near Jerusalem being 1900 years. Olive trees on the islands of the Greek archipelago have been claimed to be 2,000 years old. The oldest known fig tree was 345 years old (28). A mere 100 years of life, as posited by Whybray and others, in Isa 65,20 does not accord with Isa 65,22 where the life-span of a tree is more in keeping with the life-span of the Patriarchs in Genesis 5. That there is a link between 65,20 and 65,22 is likely for, apart from the thematic —————— Isaiah. An Introduction and Commentary (Downer’s Grove, IL 1993) 530, see an allusion to Genesis 3, but it should be noted that in Genesis 3 people are not cursed. It is the earth and the serpent who are “cursed”. (21) WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40-66, 277. E.J. KISSANE, The Book of Isaiah (Dublin 1943) II, 312 also draws attention to the link with “the patriarchs of old” as does R. MARTIN-ACHARD, “L’esperance des croyants d’Israel face à la mort selon Esaie 65,16c-25 et selon Daniel 12,1-4”, RHPR 59 (1979) 445. (22) Many scholars have asserted that Isa 65,25 was a later addition e.g. WESTERMANN, Isaiah 40-66, 410; WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40-66, 266. J. VERMEYLEN, Du prophète Isaie a l’Apocalyptique, (Paris 1978) II, 497; K. PAURITSCH, Die neue Gemeinde. Gott sammelt Ausgestossene un Arme (Jesaja 56–66) (Rome 1971) 173; P.E. BONNARD, Le Seconde Esaie. Son disciple et leurs editeurs: Isaie 40–55 (Paris 1972) 476; MARTIN-ACHARD, “L’esperance”, 444 thinks that the reference to the serpent could have been added later. However, a number of voices have been raised in support of the verse as an original component of Isa 65, 16-25, e.g. BRUEGGEMANN, Isaiah 40–66, 250; WATTS, Isaiah 34–66, 355; SMITH, Rhetoric and Redaction, 152; KISSANE, The Book of Isaiah, II, 306; J. SCULLION, Isaiah 40–66 (Wilmington, DE 1982) 202-203. (23) For a discussion of the allusions to Genesis 1 in Gen 6,9-11 cf. GARDNER, “Ecojustice”, 117-29. Gen 6,9-11 has traditionally been assigned to “P” and it is likely that “P”, or its forerunner, was in existence at the time of the writing of Isa 65,16-25 as R.D. WELLS, “‘Isaiah’ as an Exponent of Torah: Isaiah 65:1-8”, New Visions of Isaiah (eds. R.F. MELUGIN – M.A. SWEENEY) (Sheffield 1996) 140-155 has shown connections between legal texts in “P” and Isaiah 56–66. (24) There are 19 references to oak trees in the Hebrew Bible e.g. Gen 35,4.8; Josh 24,26; Jud 16,11. (25) There are many references to cedar used in building e.g. 2 Sam 7,2; Cant 1,17, but also to the cedar tree itself e.g. Ps 92,12; Ezek 17,3. (26) Deut 24,20; Judg 9,8; Isa 17,6; Hos 14,6 etc. (27) Judg 9,10-11; 1K 4,25; 2K 18,31 etc. (28) I am grateful to Kiah Martin, Senior Arborist, Royal Botanic Gardens, Melbourne, Australia, for the information about the age of the above species of trees.