RE: Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.
October 31, 2014 at 11:49 am
(October 29, 2014 at 3:00 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Actually no. Isaiah was not written in the 600s B.C.E. Most scholars accept that the first 39 chapters in Isaiah are based on Isaiah ben Amoz, who lived in the Kingdom of Judah during the reigns of four kings from the mid to late 8th century BCE. However, he did not record the book in the 700s. It was probably actually written in the 500s by others.
It always seems that as it relates to the Bible, the guy who's name is on a particular book, never actually wrote it. why is this? This is never said about Plato, or Herodotus... strange.
In any case, most scholars don't need to accept anything, the Bible tells you who Isaiah is in the first sentence of the book.
Quote:Isaiah 1
1 The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.
he also appears in 2nd Kings and 2nd Chronicles
(October 29, 2014 at 3:00 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Verse 40:22 (the verse in question) is not even based on Isaiah be Amoz and was written at the earliest during the Babylonian captivity, in the 500s, but more likely later yet after the exile had ended. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_IsaiahThe book of Isaiah is a book of prophecy and therefore would only be accepted by the Hebrews if it was written by a vindicated Prophet. Take Isaiah 40:3 for instance.
Believer's date, which I addressed, is fairly accurate. Yours is not.
Quote:Isaiah 40This prophecy is clearly speaking of John the Baptist, and had to be written by a Prophet, in this case Isaiah.
3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
As a side note, to be accepted as a Prophet meant your prophecies had to have a 100% success rate, anything less, meant getting stoned.