Second-Isaiah?

Question

Was there more than one authors in the book of Isaiah?
Please give me a specific and in detial explanation, thanks.

Answer 1

No, there was only one Isaiah.

Some believe there was a second one who wrote from what we call chapter 40 onward. Consider this following information:

How Many “Isaiahs”?

7 The issue of prophecy is one thing that has caused many scholars to question the writership of Isaiah. These critics insist that the latter portion of the book must have been written by someone who lived in the sixth century B.C.E., either during or after the Babylonian exile. According to them, the prophecies of Judah’s desolation were written after their fulfillment and hence were not really predictions at all. These critics also note that after chapter 40, the book of Isaiah speaks as if Babylon were the prevailing power and the Israelites were in captivity there. So they reason that whoever wrote the latter portion of Isaiah must have done so during that era—during the sixth century B.C.E. Is there a solid basis for such reasoning? Absolutely not!

8 It was not until the 12th century C.E. that the writership of Isaiah was called into question. This was by Jewish commentator Abraham Ibn Ezra. “In his commentary on Isaiah,” says the Encyclopaedia Judaica, “[Abraham Ibn Ezra] states that the second half, from chapter 40, was the work of a prophet who lived during the Babylonian Exile and the early period of the Return to Zion.” During the 18th and 19th centuries, Ibn Ezra’s views were adopted by a number of scholars, including Johann Christoph Doederlein, a German theologian who published his exegetical work on Isaiah in 1775, with a second edition in 1789. The New Century Bible Commentary notes: “All but the most conservative scholars now accept the hypothesis put forward by Doederlein . . . that the prophecies contained in chapters 40-66 of the book of Isaiah are not the words of the eighth-century prophet Isaiah but come from a later time.”

9 However, questions about the writership of the book of Isaiah did not stop there. The theory regarding a second Isaiah—or Deutero-Isaiah—gave birth to the notion that a third writer may have been involved. Then the book of Isaiah was dissected further, so that one scholar ascribes chapters 15 and 16 to an unknown prophet, while another questions the writership of chapters 23 to 27. Still another says that Isaiah could not have penned the words found in chapters 34 and 35. Why? Because the material closely resembles that found in chapters 40 to 66, which had already been credited to someone other than the eighth-century Isaiah! Bible commentator Charles C. Torrey succinctly summarizes the result of this reasoning process. “The once great ‘Prophet of the Exile,’” he says, “has dwindled to a very small figure, and is all but buried in a mass of jumbled fragments.” However, not all scholars agree with such dissecting of the book of Isaiah.

Evidence of One Writer

10 There is strong reason to maintain that the book of Isaiah is the work of just one writer. One line of evidence pertains to consistency of expression. For example, the phrase “the Holy One of Israel” is found 12 times in Isaiah chapters 1 to 39 and 13 times in Isaiah chapters 40 to 66, yet this description of Jehovah appears only 6 times in the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures. The repeated use of this otherwise infrequently used expression argues for unity of writership of Isaiah.

11 There are other similarities between Isaiah chapters 1 to 39 and chapters 40 to 66. Both portions contain frequent usage of the same distinctive figures of speech, such as a woman with birth pains and a “way” or a “highway.” There is also repeated reference to “Zion,” a term that is used 29 times in chapters 1 to 39 and 18 times in chapters 40 to 66. In fact, Zion is referred to more in Isaiah than in any other Bible book! Such evidences, notes The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, “stamp the book with an individuality which it is difficult to account for” if the book was written by two, three, or more writers.

12 The strongest evidence that the book of Isaiah had just one writer is found in the inspired Christian Greek Scriptures. These clearly indicate that first-century Christians believed that the book of Isaiah was the work of one writer. Luke, for example, tells of an Ethiopian official who was reading material that is now found in Isaiah chapter 53, the very portion that modern-day critics ascribe to Deutero-Isaiah. Luke, however, says that the Ethiopian was “reading aloud the prophet Isaiah.”—Acts 8:26-28.

13 Next consider the Gospel writer Matthew, who explains how the ministry of John the Baptizer fulfilled the prophetic words that we now find at Isaiah 40:3. To whom does Matthew attribute the prophecy? An unknown Deutero-Isaiah? No, he identifies the writer simply as “Isaiah the prophet.” (Matthew 3:1-3) On another occasion, Jesus read from a scroll the words we now find at Isaiah 61:1, 2. In relating the account, Luke states: “The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed him.” (Luke 4:17) In his letter to the Romans, Paul refers to both the earlier and the later portions of Isaiah, yet never does he even hint that the writer was anyone other than the same person, Isaiah. (Romans 10:16, 20; 15:12) Clearly, first-century Christians did not believe that the book of Isaiah was the work of two, three, or more penmen.

14 Consider, too, the testimony of the Dead Sea Scrolls—ancient documents, many of which date from before the time of Jesus. One manuscript of Isaiah, known as the Isaiah Scroll, dates from the second century B.C.E., and it refutes critics’ claims that a Deutero-Isaiah took over the writing at chapter 40. How so? In this ancient document, what we now know as chapter 40 begins on the last line of a column, the opening sentence being completed in the next column. The copyist was clearly unaware of any supposed change in writer or division in the book at that point.

15 Finally, consider the testimony of first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. He not only indicates that the prophecies in Isaiah pertaining to Cyrus were written in the eighth century B.C.E. but also says that Cyrus was aware of these prophecies. “These things Cyrus knew,” Josephus writes, “from reading the book of prophecy which Isaiah had left behind two hundred and ten years earlier.” According to Josephus, knowledge of these prophecies may even have contributed to Cyrus’ willingness to send the Jews back to their homeland, for Josephus writes that Cyrus was “seized by a strong desire and ambition to do what had been written.”—Jewish Antiquities, Book XI, chapter 1, paragraph 2.

16 As mentioned earlier, many critics point out that from Isaiah chapter 40 onward, Babylon is described as the prevailing power, and the Israelites are spoken of as already being in exile. Would this not indicate that the writer lived during the sixth century B.C.E.? Not necessarily. The fact is that even before chapter 40 of Isaiah, Babylon is sometimes described as the prevailing world power. For example, at Isaiah 13:19, Babylon is called “the decoration of kingdoms” or, as Today’s English Version renders it, “the most beautiful kingdom of all.” These words are clearly prophetic, since Babylon did not become a world power until more than a century later. One critic “solves” this so-called problem by simply dismissing Isaiah 13 as being the work of another writer! Really, though, speaking of future events as though they have already occurred is quite common in Bible prophecy. This literary device effectively underscores the certainty of the fulfillment of a prophecy. (Revelation 21:5, 6) Indeed, only the God of true prophecy can make the statement: “New things I am telling out. Before they begin to spring up, I cause you people to hear them.”—Isaiah 42:9.

Answer 2

People make up all kinds of CRAP! I ain't buying it!
Isaiah said in the first verses that God was sick of people killing
animals. And he said in the almost to last verses, killing animals is sick!
If there IS a change in the tone of Isaiah, it was probably a change that went on within Isaiah himself.

Answer 3

I studied under a prof who at one point believed in two Isaiahs but later in his career changed his mind. I think it is one. That is all I can say, but the continuity is greater than many people concede.

Answer 4

Some say yes, some say no. A major proof for those who say no: If Ovadiah, who had a 21 verse prophesy got credit, wouldn't someone who wrote 30 chapters be mentioned by name?