His calling, Isa_6; his marriage, Isa 8:3; father of two sons, Isa 7:3; 8:3
Isaiah (Heb. Yeshayâhû, “Yahweh saves” or “Yahweh’s salvation”; also appears on old Heb. seals; Gr. Esaias). Several biblical characters were called Yeshayâhû (and its short form Yeshayâh), but their names were transliterated as Jesaías * and Jesahías * The greatest of the Hebrew prophets and the author of the book that bears his name. He was the son of Amoz, called to the prophetic office towards the end of Uzziah’s reign; he also served under Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (Isa 1:1). Tradition says he was a cousin of Uzziah and died c 686 BC Called to be a prophet in his youth, Isaiah devoted himself fully to the service of God on the occasion of the only vision he has recorded: the insight into the infinite holiness of God’s character that it led him to a fuller conversion and a more committed response to serving God (Isa_6). His contemporaries in prophetic office were Hosea (in the northern kingdom of Israel; Hos 1:1) and Micah (in the southern kingdom of Judah; Mic 1:1). An eloquent, educated, and highly cultured man, Isaiah lived in Jerusalem and served as the nation’s political and religious adviser. He attempted to keep Judah steadfast and loyal to God through the turbulent and uncertain years that saw the northern kingdom dissolve and fall in 723/22 BC, and through the repeated Assyrian invasions of Judah in the years that followed. He fearlessly rebuked the sins of the people, counseled rulers to trust in God rather than rely on foreign alliances that bound him, foresaw the Babylonian captivity, and wrote in detail regarding the glorious restoration that would culminate in the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of his eternal kingdom, provided the people cooperated with God. Isaiah’s influence was largely responsible for the reform effected by Hezekiah, whom he encouraged and guided throughout his reign. His advice and warnings were the decisive factors in persuading the king and the people to stand firm when Sennacherib* threatened to take Jerusalem. According to tradition, Isaiah was martyred to Hezekiah’s son Manasseh, who abolished the reforms instituted by his father and presumably had the prophet sawn in half (cf. Heb 11:37). Isaiah, Book of. The first of the so-called Major Prophets. In the Hebrew Bible, Isaiah is in the “The Prophets” section, preceded by the combined book of Kings, and followed by Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve (the Minor Prophets). The incomparable beauty of style and expression make this book a masterpiece of Hebrew literature of all time. I. Author. From the earliest times, the Jewish and Christian traditions are unanimous in attributing the entire book to Isaiah, a gifted orator and poet and also the prince of the prophets. In proclaiming his inspired messages he employed a vocabulary richer than that of any other OT book; an Isaiah glossary would list more than 2,000 individual words. His exalted concept of the majesty, power and character of God surpasses what is reflected in the writings of the other prophets. Isaiah’s understanding of Israel’s messianic role, the coming Messiah, and his kingdom earned him the honorable title of messianic and evangelical prophet. However, in the early 19th century AD some critical scholars in Germany raised the conjecture that the book was actually a work written by several authors separated in time. Over the years more conflicting theories were proposed, each time to distinguish between the portions written by Isaiah and those supposedly written by others. In general, these biblical scholars assign chs 1-39 to the prophet Isaiah (who lived in the last half of the 8th century BC) and chs 40-66 to a so-called “Deutero-lsaias”, or “second Isaiah” (from who is supposed to have lived among the Jewish exiles in Babylon towards the end of the 70 years of captivity, 2 centuries later). Others have proposed a further subdivision that would assign chs 56-66 to a 3rd Isaiah, or “Trito-lsaias” (from the Restoration period, mid-5th century BC). Some of the more radical critics have assigned certain chapters and minor portions to a period of the Maccabees (mid 2nd century BC). Just as, according to tradition, Isaiah was sawn asunder by his ancient critics, so has his prophecy been torn to shreds by moderns. In his study of the prophets, the basic assumption or focus of criticism is that each prophetic message was formulated in a definite historical situation and was intended to meet a specific need of Israel at that time. The corollary of this is: a careful examination of each passage may give clues or clues by which to determine, at least roughly, when the message was given. Conservatives will agree that, within limits, these analyzes that place the messages of the prophets in the context of the historical circumstances that made them necessary are of great value in determining their true meaning and important to modern readers. . But critical scholars rejected the validity of predictive prophecy and arbitrarily assigned to a later period the composition of passages containing prophecies that found remarkable fulfillment in the history of predicted events. As chapters 40-66 of Isaiah deal largely with the liberation of God’s people from Babylonian captivity – an event still in the future when the message was written – and it presents a glorious picture of the destiny of Israel as a nation after the restoration of Jerusalem in the s V -which would culminate with the messianic age-, critics claimed that this part of the book could not have been composed in the 8th century BC, long before the rise of the Neo-Babylonian Empire and the subsequent advent of Cyrus to liberate the exiled Jews. Furthermore, critics deny that Isaiah wrote many messianic passages in the book (arbitrarily relegating the formulation of the messianic hope to a later time). II. Unit. The fundamental fallacy and weakness of the critical position on Isaiah is the complete lack of objective evidence. The arguments presented are entirely subjective, and are based on the critics’ a priori assumptions. Conservative scholars cite both internal and external evidence in favor of the position that the book is a literary unit and not a composite work. Among the internal evidences they point out the similarity between the point of view that saturates the entire book and certain characteristic words and expressions that appear indiscriminately in the various sections, which reflect the thought and style of one person instead of 2 or more writers. Particularly noteworthy is Isaiah’s unusual title for God, “the Holy One of Israel,” which appears 13 times in chs 1-39 (1:4; 5:19, 24; 10:20; 12). :6; 17:7; 29:19, 23; 30:11, 12, 15; 31:1; 37:23), 13 times in fps 40-66 (41:14, 16, 20; 43:3 , 14, 15; 45:11; 47:4; 49:7; 54:5; 55:5; 60:9, 14) and 2 times in the section assigned by some critics to the so-called Trito-Isaiah. That title, which only appears 6 times elsewhere in the OT, clearly marks the book as the work of a single author. The same is true of Isaiah’s use of the words for “way” (11:16; 35:8; 40:3; 49:11; 62:10) and “remnant” (10:20, 21; 37:32; 46:3; etc.); and other singular words and expressions could be cited. Two literary devices are the frequent emphatic duplication of thoughts and ideas (as in 2:7, 8; 8:9; 24:16, 22; 40:1; 43:11, 25; 48:15; 51: 12; 62:10) and the affirmation of an idea in both positive and negative forms (as seen in 1:19, 20; 42:1-4, 16; 46:9; 48:21; 49:10; 55 :7-9; 65:13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 22, 25). Long passages in 586 poetic form (see chs 1-6; 9-19; 21; 23-35; 40-66), the same cleverly crafted graphic metaphors and other figures of speech, and incomparable literary elegance are found throughout. the book. The great similarity of perspective, language, and literary style are much more impressive than the supposed differences. No one will deny that chs 40-66, with their exalted conception of divine purpose and their sublime beauty of expression, surpasses the first part of the book, but this can easily be attributed to the maturity of perspective and experience that characterized the later years of the book. Isaiah. The basic theme – liberation from enemies without and within – and the point of view that characterizes the book from beginning to end are even more important than the strictly mechanical similarities between the various sections. Isaiah’s name, “Yahweh saves”, properly summarizes the teaching of all the sections of the book. 267. Complete Book of Isaiah, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, open at chapters 38-40. The external evidence in favor of the unity of the book comes mainly from 2 sources. In the apocryphal work called Ecclesiasticus (48:22-28) the author, Jesus ben Sirach, attributes the various sections of the book to one writer. Even more important in this regard is the evidence recently provided by 2 copies of Isaiah found in Cave 1 of Khirbet Qumrân. One of them (called 1QIsa) is from the 2nd century BC. and the other (designated 1QIsb) is from the 1st century BC. In both manuscripts Isaiah appears as a unit, with no indication that the book ever existed as a group of independent documents. For conservative Christians, however, the ultimate evidence of the unity of their authorship is the fact that Jesus and the NT writers, who quote Isaiah more often than any other OT book except the psalms-and more so than the Psalms if the proportional length of the 2 books is taken into account- uniformly attribute all portions of the book to Isaiah (cf Isa 6:9, 10 with Mat 13:14, 15; Joh 12:40, 41; Act 28:25-27; Isa 40:3 with Mat 3:3; Mar 1:3; Joh 1:23; Isa 53:1 with Joh 12:38; Rom 10:16; Isa 61:1, 2 with Luk 4:18, 19; etc.). Evidently, Christ and the apostles accepted Isaiah as the author of the entire book that bears his name. The 2 Isaiah Dead Sea Scrolls, already mentioned, are very important in confirming the Masoretic text of the OT. They provide conclusive evidence for the reliability of the OT text as it has come down to us, and show that, for all practical purposes, it is identical to the text that existed at the time of Christ. 1QIsa is Complete but contains a number of scribal errors and is not as well written as other scrolls in the collection. Some of the more interesting variants of the text have been discussed in the CBA (see comments on 1:15; 3:24; 4:4-5:24, 27; 9:17; 34:4; 36:5; 37). :28; 38:6, 13; 45:8, g; 49:5, 12; 51:3; 52:8, 12; 53:11; 63:11; 65:3, 15; 66:16). 1QIsb is…