 |
|
From Isaiah 9:6 in the Old Testament.
Posted on: May 13, 2018 at 20:24:10 CT
MizzouTigerz MU
Posts:
37095
Member For:
21.29 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
The Dead Sea Scrolls have effectively put an end to the arguments regarding the splitting up of Isaiah since in 100BC, over 500 years earlier than previous manuscript evidence, an entire Isaiah scroll was found - not split up in any way. However, the old presuppositional arguments first used in the 19th century still are used by some since it is too inconvenient to allow the Bible to be true and correct as written, even though the actual evidence points that way. Arguments which split up Isaiah are effectively arguments from silence, as well as arguments against the unanimous and actual evidence in favor of unity and the earlier date in the
eighth century BC
under the relevant Kings of Israel.
One of the major reasons for placing the later section of Isaiah into a later period is a specific belief that predictive prophecy is impossible. Thus all of the predictions concerning Cyrus and the Babylonian captivity are placed into a later period, even though there is no indication in the text itself that this is necessary.
In fact, for this approach to be carried through consistently, it would have to be necessary to assert that when Isaiah was writing about the Messiah, Jesus Christ, in passages such as chapter 53, that this portion of Isaiah was therefore written in Jesus time. Such is of course preposterous.
Those who hold the deutero-Isaiah theory state that a period of one and a half centuries has been omitted and that the book recommenced then (obviously with a different author). One of the problems with this assertion is that the historical section which deals with Hezekiah particularly ends in the end of chapter 39. The rest of the book is predictive prophecy with no historical narratives whatever. It is not at all correct to suggest or assert that this is anything other than an assumption based on a presupposition as the text itself is clearly prophetic and not historical and contrasts sharply with the historical narrative that goes before.
There are no indications anywhere in the book of Isaiah that any long periods of time have been omitted. The preface in 1:1 indicates the Kings under which Isaiah prophesied. This gives a definite historical time-frame in which the book in its entirety would have been written. That the second portion of the book changes its focus from judgment to prophecy, especially comfort and consolation, says nothing about any necessity of postulating a later authorship.
Summary:
Isaiah's long ministry went from 740 to 680 BC and his prophecies were undoubtedly from this period. There is no valid reason to doubt the authenticity of the entire work, or even of any part of it, nor is there any valid evidence that it was written by more than one author.
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
The Dead Sea Scrolls have effectively put an end to the arguments regarding the splitting up of Isaiah since in 100BC, over 500 years earlier than previous manuscript evidence, an entire Isaiah scroll was found - not split up in any way. However, the old presuppositional arguments first used in the 19th century still are used by some since it is too inconvenient to allow the Bible to be true and correct as written, even though the actual evidence points that way. Arguments which split up Isaiah are effectively arguments from silence, as well as arguments against the unanimous and actual evidence in favor of unity and the earlier date in the
eighth century BC
under the relevant Kings of Israel.
One of the major reasons for placing the later section of Isaiah into a later period is a specific belief that predictive prophecy is impossible. Thus all of the predictions concerning Cyrus and the Babylonian captivity are placed into a later period, even though there is no indication in the text itself that this is necessary.
In fact, for this approach to be carried through consistently, it would have to be necessary to assert that when Isaiah was writing about the Messiah, Jesus Christ, in passages such as chapter 53, that this portion of Isaiah was therefore written in Jesus time. Such is of course preposterous.
Those who hold the deutero-Isaiah theory state that a period of one and a half centuries has been omitted and that the book recommenced then (obviously with a different author). One of the problems with this assertion is that the historical section which deals with Hezekiah particularly ends in the end of chapter 39. The rest of the book is predictive prophecy with no historical narratives whatever. It is not at all correct to suggest or assert that this is anything other than an assumption based on a presupposition as the text itself is clearly prophetic and not historical and contrasts sharply with the historical narrative that goes before.
There are no indications anywhere in the book of Isaiah that any long periods of time have been omitted. The preface in 1:1 indicates the Kings under which Isaiah prophesied. This gives a definite historical time-frame in which the book in its entirety would have been written. That the second portion of the book changes its focus from judgment to prophecy, especially comfort and consolation, says nothing about any necessity of postulating a later authorship.
Summary:
Isaiah's long ministry went from 740 to 680 BC and his prophecies were undoubtedly from this period. There is no valid reason to doubt the authenticity of the entire work, or even of any part of it, nor is there any valid evidence that it was written by more than one author.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
From Isaiah 9:6 in the Old Testament. - MizzouTigerz MU - 5/13 20:24:10