The Prophecies of Isaiah 40-55

I've been trying to live in Isaiah's world this week. By Isaiah, I mean Isaiah the prophet from the Hebrew Bible. And to be more precise, I am thinking about the section of the book's prophecies that come from the 6th century BC. That's chapters 40-55. This part of the Book of Isaiah deals with Judah's return from Babylonian captivity.

Isaiah the prophet lived at the end of the 8th century & start of the 7th century BC. During his lifetime, the northern kingdom Israel was permanently dismantled. He served as a prophet to many nations, though his primary role seems to have been as prophet to the Judean kings who ruled in Jerusalem.

Hezekiah is the king we most associate with Isaiah. Hezekiah is known as a good king, largely because of two great prayers. First, he had a terminal illness. He prayed for God to extend his life, and Isaiah brought the word of 'reprieve' and healing from God. (See Isa 38). Second, he prayed for help when the armies of Assyria threatened Jerusalem. These are the same armies who wiped out the northern kingdom, so the threat to Jerusalem was real. Isaiah chided Hezekiah for trusting alliances with other nations more than God. Hezekiah then prayed to God who delivered the city by fighting for them (Isa 36-37).

I could say many things about Isaiah or Hezekiah. But my focus is on chapters 40-55. These words of God address people living long after Isaiah -- more than a century later. Yet they are in the book of Isaiah, grouped with prophetic words that come from Isaiah's lifetime (ch 1-39) and some that seem to address an even later audience (ch 56-66). So how do we explain this huge gap between prophecies? How could Isaiah have spoken all these words?

There are several possible explanations for the authorship of Isaiah 40-55:

(1) Isaiah spoke these prophecies during his lifetime and they were recorded. No one knew what they were about until well over a century later when they realized the relevance of his words. This explanation puts a heavy weight on Isaiah as the author of all these words. If you read Isaiah 40-55, however, you see that the prophet is not named. We also know that the function of prophecy all throughout the Bible is to provide a word of the Lord with immediate relevance directly to real people. As one example, when Aaron spoke God's words to Pharaoh, he delivered them directly to the great Egyptian ruler himself. This is the norm. So for Isaiah to have spoken words that had no relevance -- until well over a century later -- seems to run counter to the rest of the biblical witness about prophecy. This understanding of prophecy sounds more akin to Nostradamus than the biblical idea of prophecy.

(2) Isaiah was projected into the future to speak words of comfort to the people of Judah when they were in captivity. His words therefore were relevant because they were spoken directly to the captive Judeans who needed God's words of hope. I suppose God can do all things. But it seems a strange explanation. Is this really the best understanding? To some, perhaps.

(3) Later prophets reinterpreted Isaiah's earlier prophecies and spoke them anew with fresh insights given them from the Lord. These words are 'Isaianic' in nature, but they were not spoken in this way or with this meaning by Isaiah himself. The Book of Isaiah doesn't claim to be written by Isaiah or to contain words spoken only by Isaiah himself. As a matter of fact, Isaiah commanded his disciples to gather up his prophecies and write them down (8:16). We need not stretch to assume that others served as Isaiah's scribes. Clearly, someone believes that the prophecies in Isa 40-55 are tied to Isaiah, so it might make sense to see them as stemming from his earlier teachings and ideas even if not coming directly from his mouth.

Interesting ideas to ponder. Hard to answer for certain, however. Maybe you can come up with an even better explanation. Peace!