Was Cyrus prophesied by Isaiah?

[upbeatjonm]

In the Journey Through the Bible study course, it indicates that King Cyrus was prophesied by Isaiah by name, hundreds of years in advance. I way amazed at this. When I began to research, I found that conventional wisdom is that this portion of Isaiah (ch.44) was probably not written by Isaiah, but by some poet toward the end of the Exile. Thus is was not really predicting King Cyrus by name, but was written after the fact.

What is the real scoop here? Was this a predictive prophesy or not?

Jon

 

[Crimson_Seraph]

Jesus quotes from both supposed parts of Isaiah, and says that Isaiah said those words. Thus, I take the words of the Savior that Isaiah is the one author of his book. Besides, the only people who doubt it are those who don’t believe in prophecy anyway, or try to delute God’s Word.

 

[NotWorthy]

Being that the reading of this prophecy to Cyrus is one of the reasons he let the Jews return to Jerusalem, one would assume it was prophecied long before Cyrus came about.

Regarding the three authors of Isaiah, yes there probably was three authors (the Church realizes this but does not let this discount the inspiration), but I’d question the timing. Again, Cyrus would care less if someone wrote this during his reign. But if it was written 100’s of years prior, then he would see it as a prophesy.

 

[David_Zampino]

Besides, the only people who doubt it are those who don’t believe in prophecy anyway, or try to delute God’s Word.

That is a terribly judgmental statement, especially considering the number of devout Biblical scholars – Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike – who recognize two (or possibly three) authors in Isaiah. This has nothing to do whatsoever with rejection of prophecy – I think that virtually all Christians would regard the beginning of Isaiah 40 and Isaiah 53 to be messianic prophecies – even though those scholars who do divide Isaiah would place these statements as part of Deutero-Isaiah.

 

[Crimson_Seraph]

That is a terribly judgmental statement, especially considering the number of devout Biblical scholars – Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike – who recognize two (or possibly three) authors in Isaiah. This has nothing to do whatsoever with rejection of prophecy – I think that virtually all Christians would regard the beginning of Isaiah 40 and Isaiah 53 to be messianic prophecies – even though those scholars who do divide Isaiah would place these statements as part of Deutero-Isaiah.

The Lord attributed all of these sections to Isaiah, who are we to question his judgement?

**“Lord Jesus…um…sorry to tell you this but there were actually two Isaiahs, probably even three.”

“Um…no there was not. I inspired those writings I should know.”

“Weeeeeeeellll…but don’t you think it REALLLY happened this way?”

Jesus does a Facepalm**

 

[garysibio]

That is a terribly judgmental statement, especially considering the number of devout Biblical scholars – Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike – who recognize two (or possibly three) authors in Isaiah. This has nothing to do whatsoever with rejection of prophecy – I think that virtually all Christians would regard the beginning of Isaiah 40 and Isaiah 53 to be messianic prophecies – even though those scholars who do divide Isaiah would place these statements as part of Deutero-Isaiah.

As Crimson Seraph said, Jesus quotes from passages throughout the book of Isaiah and says they came from Isaiah. How can someone be a “devout Biblical scholar” and claim that Jesus got it wrong?

Not everything that calls itself scholarship is actually scholarship.

Gary