ISAIAH
Our
knowledge
of
the
life
and
teaching
of
Isaiah
rests
on
the
book
that
bears
his
name,
which,
however,
is
not
a
book
compiled
by
him,
but
one
containing,
together
with
other
matter,
such
of
his
prophecies
as
have
been
preserved,
and
narratives
relating
to
him;
see,
in
detail,
next
article.
Isaiah
received
the
call
to
be
a
prophet
'in
the
year
that
king
Uzziah
(or
Azariah)
died'
(Is
6').
The
year
is
not
quite
certain.
If
Azariah
king
of
Judah
and
the
Azriau
king
of
Jaudi
mentioned
in
Tiglath-pileser's
annals
of
the
year
738
be
identical,
Isaiah's
call
cannot
be
placed
earlier
than
738.
But
if
the
identification
be
not
admitted,
and
it
is
by
no
means
certain,
his
call
may
with
more
probability
be
placed
a
few
years
earlier.
His
activity
extended
at
least
down
to
the
invasion
of
Sennacherib
in
701,
and
some
years
later,
if
the
theory
be
correct
that
chs.
36-39
refer
to
two
invasions
of
Sen-nacherib,
of
which
that
in
701
was
the
first.
In
any
case
Isaiah's
public
career
covered
at
the
least
close
on
forty
years,
whence
we
may
infer
that,
like
Jeremiah
(Jer
1«),
he
became
a
prophet
in
early
life.
Unlike
his
contemporary
Micah,
his
life,
so
far
as
we
can
trace
it,
was
spent
in
Jerusalem.
Not
improbably
he
was
a
man
of
rank,
at
least
he
had
easy
access
to
the
king
(Is
7'"),
and
was
on
terms
of
intimacy
with
persons
of
high
position
(8').
His
father's
name,
Amoz,
has
in
Hebrew
no
resemblance
to
that
of
the
prophet
Amos.
Isaiah
was
married,
and
his
wife
is
termed
the
prophetess
(8').
Like
Hosea,
he
gave
to
his
children,
Shear-jashub
(7')
and
Maher-shalal-hash-baz
(8'),
names
which
briefly
stated
characteristic
elements
in
his
teaching;
his
own
name,
though
of
a
normal
and
frequent
Hebrew
type,
also
happened
to
have
a
significance
('
help
of
Jahweh
'
or
'Jahweh
helps')
of
which
he
could
have
made
use;
that
he
actually
did
so
we
may
perhaps
infer
from
8",
if
we
do
not
rather
interpret
that
statement,
so
far
as
Isaiah
himself
is
concerned,
of
such
symbolic
conduct
as
that
which
he
pursued
when
he
went
'
half-
clad
and
barefoot'
(ch.
20).
It
is
impossible
either
to
construct
a
complete
biography
of
the
prophet
or
to
trace
with
any
elabora-tion
developments
in
his
thought
and
teaching.
His
prophecies
have
obviously
not
come
down
to
us
in
chronological
order,
and
many
are
without
any
clear
indication
of
the
date
when
they
were
delivered;
any
attempt
to
date
accurately
much
of
the
material
must
therefore
be
exceedingly
imcertain,
and
the
numerous
attempts
that
have
been
made
naturally
differ
widely
in
their
results.
But
there
are
four
periods
at
which
we
can
clearly
trace
the
prophet
and
his
thought
or
teaching:
these
are
the
time
of
his
call,
about
B.C.
740
(ch.
6);
of
the
Syro-Ephraimitish
War
(b.c.
736-734:
7'-8");
of
the
siege
of
Ashdod
in
b.c.
711
(ch.
20);
and
of
the
invasion
of
Sennacherib
in
b.c.
701
(chs.
36-39).
The
last-mentioned
narratives
are,
however,
of
a
later
age
than
that
of
Isaiah,
and
require
to
be
carefully
used.
At
the
time
of
his
call
Isaiah
became
conscious
that
he
was
to
be
a
teacher
whose
primary
task
was
to
warn
his
people
of
judgment
to
come,
of
judgment
which
was
to
issue
in
the
extermination
of
his
nation
(e"-"
—
the
last
clause
is
absent
from
the
LXX,
and
probably
not
original).
This
judgment
of
Jahweh
on
His
people
was
to
be
executed
by
means
of
Assyria,
which,
since
the
accession
of
Tiglath-pileser
in
745,
had
entered
on
a
course
of
conquest,
and,
as
early
as
740,
had
achieved
marked
success
in
Northern
Syria.
The
causes
of
this
coming
judgment,
Isaiah,
like
Amos
before
him,
and
not
improbably
in
part
owing
to
the
influence
on
him
of
the
teaching
of
Amos,
found
in
the
prevalent
social
and
moral
disorder
(see
e.g.
2*-4'
S'-'*
for
the
kind
of
offences
which
he
denounced),
in
the
ingratitude
(e.g.
1»
5'-')
of
the
people
to
Jahweh,
and
in
their
failure
to
trust
Him
or
to
understand
that
what
He
required
was
not
sacrifice,
which
was
offered
by
the
people
in
wearisome
abundance,
but
justice
and
humanity
(cf.
e.g.
1*-").
In
this
teaching,
as
in
his
lofty
con-
ISAIAH,
BOOK
OF
ception
of
God,
Isaiah
did
not
fundamentally
advance
beyond
the
already
lofty
moral
and
religious
standpoint
of
Amos
and
Hosea,
though
there
are
naturally
enough
differences
in
the
details
of
the
presentation.
But,
so
far
as
we
can
see,
he
exercised
a
more
direct,
im-mediate,
and
decisive
influence,
owing
to
the
fact
that
over
a
long
period
of
years
he
was
able
to
apply
this
teaching
to
the
changing
political
conditions,
insisting,
for
example,
at
the
several
political
crises
mentioned
above,
that
the
duty
of
Jahweh's
people
was
to
trust
in
Jahweh,
and
not
in
political
alliances,
whether
with
Assyria,
Egypt,
or
Ethiopia
(cf.
e.g.
7*-'
20,
and
[in
b.c.
701]
301-s-
«
31'-»);
and
to
the
fact
that
from
the
first
he
set
about
the
creation
of
a
society
of
disciples
who
were
to
perpetuate
his
teaching
(cf
.
8")
.
Although
judgment
to
come
was
the
fundamental
note
of
Isaiah's
teaching,
there
was
another
note
that
marked
it
from
the
outset:
Israel-Judah
was
to
perish,
but
a
remnant
was
to
survive.
This
at
least
seems
to
be
the
significance
of
the
name
of
Shear
-jasbub,
who
must
have
been
born
very
shortly
after
the
call,
since
in
735
he
was
old
enough
to
accompany
his
father
on
his
visit
to
Ahaz
(7')
.
Beyond
the
judgment,
moreover,
he
looked
forward
to
a
new
Jerusalem,
righteous
and
faithful
(1").
How
much
further
was
Isaiah's
doctrine
of
the
future
developed?
Was
he
the
creator
of
those
ideas
more
particularly
summed
up
in
the
term
'Messianic,'
which
exercised
so
powerful
an
influence
in
the
later
periods
of
Judaism,
and
which
are
doubtless
among
those
most
intimately
connected
with
the
prophet
in
the
minds
of
the
majority
of
students
of
the
Bible?
In
particular,
was
the
vision
(9'-')
of
the
Prince
of
Peace
with
world-wide
dominion
his?
Or,
to
take
another
detail,
did
he
hold
that
Zion
itself
was
invincible,
even
though
hostile
hosts
should
approach
it?
These
are
questions
that
have
been
raised
and
have
not
yet
received
a
decisive
answer.
On
the
one
hand,
it
is
exceedingly
probable
that
in
the
several
collections
of
the
ancient
prophecies
later
passages
of
promise
have
in
some
instances
been
added
to
earlier
prophecies
of
judgment;
that
later
prophecy
in
general
is
fuller
than
the
earlier
of
promises;
and
that
several
of
the
Messianic
passages,
in
particular,
in
the
Book
of
Isaiah,
stand
isolated
and
disconnected
from
passages
which
bear
unmistakably
the
impress
of
Isaiah
or
his
age.
On
the
other
hand,
Isaiah's
belief
in
a
remnant,
which
seems
secured
(apart
from
individual
and
perhaps
doubtful
passages)
by
the
name
of
his
son,
forms
a
certain
and
perhaps
a
sufficient
basis
for
the
more
elaborate
details
of
the
future.
Further,
from
the
very
fact
that
they
deal
with
the
future,
the
passages
in
question,
even
if
they
were
by
Isaiah,
might
naturally
bear
less
unmistakable
evidence
of
their
age
than
those
which
deal
with
the
social
and
political
conditions
of
his
own
time.
And
again,
had
Isaiah
prophesied
exclusively
of
judgment
and
destruc-tion,
we
might
have
expected
to
find
his
name
coupled
with
Micah's
in
Jer
26'"-.
G.
B.
Gray.
ISAIAH,
ASCENSION
OF.—
See
Apocalyptic
Lit-
EKATURE,
No.
6.
ISAIAH,
BOOK
OF.—
The
Book
of
Isaiah
is
one
of
the
four
great
collections
of
Hebrew
prophecies.
Like
the
book
of
'The
Twelve
Prophets'
—
another
of
these
great
collections
(see
Micah
[Book
of])
—
it
was
formed
by
incorporating
with
one
another
smaller
and
earlier
collections,
and
contains
prophecies
of
many
prophets
living
at
different
periods;
with
the
exception
of
Isaiah's,
the
prophecies
contained
in
the
collection
are
anony-mous,
the
term
'Deutero-Isaiah,'
applied
to
the
author
of
chs.
40-66
(or
40-55),
being
of
course
nothing
more
than
a
modem
symbol
for
one
of
these
anonymous
writers.
1.
Composition
and
literary
history
of
the
present
book.
—
The
Book
of
Isaiah,
substantially
as
we
now
have
it,
probably
dates,
like
the
'
Book
of
the
Twelve
Prophets,'
from
towards
the
end
of
the
3rd
cent.
b.c.
But
