01_van Wieringen_481-497_481-497 10/12/15 10:10 Pagina 488 488 ARCHIBALD VAN WIERINGEN 488 munity is described from the “I”-figure’s perspective (he is the one who has to do without his community, not his community without him), in v. 16 the rescue by the Lord is described from the perspec- tive of the community and of all the persons who form the com- munity. It is in view of them and not the “I”-figure that the Lord lets the “I”-figure continue to live. Verse 19 forms step IV. The change in step III demands the use of a new metaphor. Whereas in v. 12 the royal metaphor of the shep- herd is used to indicate the relation between the “I”-figure and the community, v. 19c uses the metaphor of the father as a teacher of his sons. In the Hebrew Bible, the word ba is rarely used metaphor- ically to indicate royalty 19, and remarkably it is used only three times in the Book of Isaiah. In Isa 9,5, the new ideal leader in Jerusalem receives the name d[yba (“father forever”) as one of his throne titles; in Isa 22,21, the royal scribe Eliakim is represented as a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The metaphor of the fa- ther, while not excluding kingship, clearly includes the wider sig- nificance of every father-son relationship. This broader significance conforms to the double mention of “the living” in v. 19a, before mentioning the “I”-figure in v. 19b. Because the teaching role of the father towards his sons is suitable for all the living, it is also valid for the “I”-figure as well. Step V is made in v. 20. This concluding verse forms an inclu- sion with v. 10 by using two semantic contrasts. Firstly, the word ~wy in v. 20a is a repetition of the word ~wy in v. 10a: the absent days are continued all the days of his life. Secondly, a movement is men- tioned in v. 20d, namely hwhy tyb-l[ (“up to house of the Lord’). This movement stands in sharp contrast with the lwav yr[vb in v. 10b. These contrasts are meaningful because of the presence of two characters in v. 20 who are not present in v. 10. Firstly, as I have shown above, the Lord is mentioned, indicated by using the Tetra- grammaton in vv. 20a and 20d, as an inclusion within v. 20 itself. Secondly, a new character is introduced by using the first person plural. The community, first expressed from the “I”-figure’s per- spective and then seen as the group which notices God’s salvific intervention, is now present in the new role of the “we”-figure, being a synthesis of the “I”-figure and the community. The “we”-figure 19 See E. JENNI, “ba, ’āb Vater”, THAT 1 (1978) 6-7.