The Book of Isaiah is much beloved by Christians for it contains a wondrous prophecy concerning the death and resurrection of Jesus – or so we are told.  In Christian-Muslim debates over the meaning of the crucial chapter 53 I have always been struck by the complete and utter absence of any awareness of what Old Testament historians have to tell us about this Book’s authorship and date.

So for this article I had a rummage in my library (again!) in order to share with you what reputable and authoritative biblical scholarship has to say about the Book of Isaiah. It may shock you.

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (published by Oxford University Press) under the entry to the Book of Isaiah tells us:

‘Traditionally the whole Book is ascribed to Isaiah, but critics are now generally agreed that everything after chapter 36, as well as considerable portions of the earlier chapters, have no real claim to be his.’ p. 850.

The Wikipedia article on Isaiah informs us:

‘The scholarly consensus which held sway through most of the 20th century saw three separate collections of oracles in the book of Isaiah.^[3] A typical outline based on this understanding of the book sees its underlying structure in terms of the identification of historical figures who might have been their authors:^[16]

• 1–39 – Proto-Isaiah, containing the words of the original Isaiah;
• 40–55 – Deutero-Isaiah, the work of an anonymous Exilic author;
• 56–66 – Trito-Isaiah, an anthology of about twelve passages.^[17]

The consensus still holds – virtually no contemporary scholar maintains that the entire book, or even most of it, was written by one person.

Authorship

While it is widely accepted that the book of Isaiah is rooted in a historic prophet called Isaiah, who lived in the Kingdom of Judah during the 8th century BCE, it is also widely accepted that this prophet did not write the entire book of Isaiah.^[7][23] The observations which have led to this are as follows:

• Historical situation → Chapters 40–55 presuppose that Jerusalem has already been destroyed (they are not framed as prophecy) and the Babylonian exile is already in effect – they speak from a present in which the Exile is about to end. Chapters 56–66 assume an even later situation, in which the people are already returned to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Temple is already under way.^[24]
• Anonymity → Isaiah’s name suddenly stops being used after chapter 39.^[25]
• Style → There is a sudden change in style and theology after chapter 40; numerous key words and phrases found in one section are not found in the other.^[26]

These observations led scholars to the conclusion that the book can be conveniently divided into three sections, labelled Proto-Isaiah, Deutero-Isaiah, and Trito-Isaiah.’

***

So when we debate and argue about the meaning of a word or phrase in Isaiah 53 (or elsewhere in the Book) it is wise to bear in mind that it may not be a prophecy uttered by the Prophet but a composition by an unknown Jewish scribe pretending to be Isaiah. Should it matter?

That is the question… 

Categories: Bible, Biblical scholarship, Christianity, Judaism