Isaiah 53, 700 B.C: Historical Evidence of the Divine Omniscience.

[Bucky Ball]

General background :

The main places in which the invasion and Exile are "recorded", (there actually were a number of invasions of Israel" by foreign powers, as History records externally to the Bible),
are 2 Kings, Isaiah, and 2 Chronicles. Hezekiah was the king. This is a sort of compilation of various texts regarding him, and how this period was seen when they got around to writing about
it. It is generally recognized that Proto-Isaiah, Duetero-Isaiah, and Trito-Isaiah contributed to "Isaiah". 3 different authors.
This sort of places in context what various texts said about the period. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=CEV

The invasion happened during the reign of Hezekiah. Israel at the time was polytheistic. Yahweh had a wife, (Ahsera), and Isaiah's main message was that the presence of representations of all the gods of the time was permitted in Israel, and despite Hezekiah's attempt at asking for forgiveness, he didn't get it, and the invasion happened anyway.
Deutero-Isaiah's message was that the suffering during and after the Exile, (during which only certain select high-ranking Hebrews were removed to Babylon, but some priests also were exiled) was due to the unfaithfulness of allowing other gods in the city, and that also was where the Bible began to be written, not coincidentally. There is no record of it anywhere in human history prior to Ezra's introduction of the the Torah of Moses in the Fall Festival, as mentioned in Nehemiah.

There are various theories about why the Judean priests collected the various myths and put them in Genesis, and the other first three books in the Bible, but the sources for much of them has been worked out. It's called the Source Hypothesis, or Documentary Hypothesis. It it confirmed by 6, independent sets of supporting evidence.
1. The linguistic dialect in each source is known, and can be documented as separate by decades, or longer.
2. The terminology for the same idea, person, object, or place is different in each source.
3. The content of each of the sources is different.
4. The "flow" of the story works if the source materials are combined.
5. The same known sources are similar or connect to the same known sources in other books.
6. The inferred political motivations for each source matches the material and it's apparent goals.

(It also makes sense, as there is so much Babylonian material in Genesis).

So one of the theories is that the Persian Emperor had the texts compiled to provide a cultural and legal foundation for his project of returning the educated Jews back to Israel to serve as a buffer between him and the invading Greeks. It makes sense to me, but not everyone agrees. It's also interesting that Isaiah insisted that they stop worshipping other gods, (ie monotheism), and that it arose just as the Greeks were invading and brought the concept of "individualism" to the Levant. Not a coincidence. There's also the humorous story about how Deuteronomy "just happened" to be found by one of the priests, but only peripherally important here. It just happened to be found when they needed it. LOL.

King: "We need some more laws".
High Prost: I might be able to help you, let me rummage around in the temple"
* rummages in the temple*
Priest : Oh look I just happened to find some in this *old* book which Moses wrote. I found it laying about in a back room. Really I did.
King : Well that will work just fine. Mum's the word. Wink wink.
Priest : I wanna raise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_De...E2%80%9310).

Anyway, The prophets (3 of them) writing Isaiah told Israel that the reason they were punished and suffered was that they allowed the "idols" of other gods in Hezekiah's capitol.
That's the background. They allowed idols, they were punished, and they were forgiven ALREADY by THEIR suffering, which was confirmed by the Duetero-Isaiah "poem" -
"Comfort ye, comfort ye",
Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and proclaim to her
that her hard service has been completed,
that her sin has been paid for,
that she has received from the Lord’s hand
double for all her sins.” —Isaiah 40:1–2

That's the background as seen by Jewish people. and the Bible.
They needed no "savior" They suffered THEMSELVES and were already forgiven and they chose to see their history as returned and forgiven to Israel.
Isaiah reminded them of this in his text. The concept of a suffering messiah had no place here. Christians made that up, and took all this totally out of context with their claim of prophecy.