Ezekiel v. Trito-Isaiah

Let's talk Ezekiel 40-48. Whatever we may or may not say of Ez 36 or Ez 38-9; this proposal for the Temple follows up Ez 37.

Lenny Prado's bit - that Ez 44:15-16 does not belong to Ezekiel - assumes Joachim Schaper, Priester und Leviten im achämenidischen Juda: Studien zur Kult- und Sozialgeschichte Israels in persischer Zeit, FAT 31 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000). Schaper went on to argue that the rest of Ez 44 indeed belongs to Ez 40-8 and that Trito-Isaiah (Is 56f) is based upon that.

I recently got hold of Nathan MacDonald, Priestly Rule (de Gruyter, 2015). This argues the reverse of Schaper: that Ezekiel 44 used Isaiah 56 - actually, rebutted it. Overall it is a development of Michael Fishbane: Ezekiel 44 is an exegetical oracle. If it's that late then maybe vv. 15-16 isn't intrusive.

MacDonald would shift the intrusions mostly elsewhere than Schaper - and far more thoroughgoing. Immediately before, chapter 1.2.5 argues Ez 44:10-14 has blended Numbers 18 and Ez 14. MacDonald sees a core instead within v. 15: But the Levitical priests, ... will come near to me to minister to me and they will stand before me to offer to me fat and blood – declaration of Lord YHWH. The Zadokites since intrude into v. 15 and then inject the whole of v. 16. As well as vv. 8, 10-14.

The core, for MacDonald, had constructed its anti-Isaiah-56 rebuttal from Lev 1-7 and Deuteronomy. As to the canon: the expansion's use of Numbers is suggestive of a very late date, for which MacDonald cites Achenbach, Die Vollendung der Tora as published (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003) unavailable to his colinguist Schaper in 2000.

That assessment of Numbers runs against the ABH language of the Balaam poems' language, and the Josiah-era dating of the poem of Sihon. On the other hand... ABH poetry elsewhere lingered until Habakkuk, and Wellhausen had proposed Numbers 13-14 for the "J" source.