isaiah the book of

1 definition found

isaiah the book of - Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary :

  Isaiah, The Book of
  consists of prophecies delivered (Isa. 1) in the reign of Uzziah
  (1-5), (2) of Jotham (6), (3) Ahaz (7-14:28), (4) the first half
  of Hezekiah's reign (14:28-35), (5) the second half of
  Hezekiah's reign (36-66). Thus, counting from the fourth year
  before Uzziah's death (B.C. 762) to the last year of Hezekiah
  (B.C. 698), Isaiah's ministry extended over a period of
  sixty-four years. He may, however, have survived Hezekiah, and
  may have perished in the way indicated above.
  
    The book, as a whole, has been divided into three main parts:
  (1.) The first thirty-five chapters, almost wholly prophetic,
  Israel's enemy Assyria, present the Messiah as a mighty Ruler
  and King. (2.) Four chapters are historical (36-39), relating to
  the times of Hezekiah. (3.) Prophetical (40-66), Israel's enemy
  Babylon, describing the Messiah as a suffering victim, meek and
  lowly.
  
    The genuineness of the section Isa. 40-66 has been keenly
  opposed by able critics. They assert that it must be the
  production of a deutero-Isaiah, who lived toward the close of
  the Babylonian captivity. This theory was originated by Koppe, a
  German writer at the close of the last century. There are other
  portions of the book also (e.g., ch. 13; 24-27; and certain
  verses in ch. 14 and 21) which they attribute to some other
  prophet than Isaiah. Thus they say that some five or seven, or
  even more, unknown prophets had a hand in the production of this
  book. The considerations which have led to such a result are
  various: (1.) They cannot, as some say, conceive it possible
  that Isaiah, living in B.C. 700, could foretell the appearance
  and the exploits of a prince called Cyrus, who would set the
  Jews free from captivity one hundred and seventy years after.
  (2.) It is alleged that the prophet takes the time of the
  Captivity as his standpoint, and speaks of it as then present;
  and (3) that there is such a difference between the style and
  language of the closing section (40-66) and those of the
  preceding chapters as to necessitate a different authorship, and
  lead to the conclusion that there were at least two Isaiahs. But
  even granting the fact of a great diversity of style and
  language, this will not necessitate the conclusion attempted to
  be drawn from it. The diversity of subjects treated of and the
  peculiarities of the prophet's position at the time the
  prophecies were uttered will sufficiently account for this.
  
    The arguments in favour of the unity of the book are quite
  conclusive. When the LXX. version was made (about B.C. 250) the
  entire contents of the book were ascribed to Isaiah, the son of
  Amoz. It is not called in question, moreover, that in the time
  of our Lord the book existed in the form in which we now have
  it. Many prophecies in the disputed portions are quoted in the
  New Testament as the words of Isaiah (Matt. 3:3; Luke 3:4-6;
  4:16-41; John 12:38; Acts 8:28; Rom. 10:16-21). Universal and
  persistent tradition has ascribed the whole book to one author.
  
    Besides this, the internal evidence, the similarity in the
  language and style, in the thoughts and images and rhetorical
  ornaments, all points to the same conclusion; and its local
  colouring and allusions show that it is obviously of Palestinian
  origin. The theory therefore of a double authorship of the book,
  much less of a manifold authorship, cannot be maintained. The
  book, with all the diversity of its contents, is one, and is, we
  believe, the production of the great prophet whose name it
  bears.