Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-08-07
THE BOOK OF ISAIAH.
A Great Difference Between the First
and Second Parts.
NOT OF THE SANE AUTHORSHIP
Dispute Between the Scholarship Of Ancient
and Modern Times
NOT OF ANY CONCERN TO RELIGION

| WRITTEN FOR THE pIsPArcHl
This book of Isaah falls into two quite
distinct divisions Thesecond part, which
begins with the fortieth chapter, is so differ
ent from the first part, and different in so
many ways, that the question is suggested,
and has now for some years been ardently
debated, as to whether the two parts could
possibly have had the same author. Die
Isaiah write the whole of s'Isaiah?"
Thus, besides the historical and theo
logical points Of view from which the last
27 chapters of this book may be studied
there is also the literary point of view. o.
this will speak first.
When we ask, Who wrote these chaptersi
and answer our own question in the ole
way by the name of the prophet Isaiah, W.
find ourselves contradicted by the great
company of modern Biblical scholars. The
general verdict of modern scholarship il
that Isaiah was dead at least q hundred
years when the last part of the book Of
Isaiah was written.
1t Does Not Concern Religion.
The first thing to be said about this mat
ter is that it has nothing whatever to dc
with religion. 1t has really no more to dc
with religion than the controversy as tc
whether Shakespeare or Bacon wrote the
plays of Shakespeare. The titles that are
set at the beginnings Of the books OF the
Bible are not part OF the Bible. The Old
Testament titles were for the most part set
In place by Jewish teachers in the two OF
three centuries before Christ. These teach
ers were not especially inspired. Certainly
they were not infallible. And the titles
are simply the record of their private
opinions. Because they said that certain
books were written by Moses, that does not
| settle that matter for U.S. Because they said
that certain psalms were written by David,
we have not therefore any sacred limitation
set upon our literary Judgment
Indeed. the chances are that scholars to-
day are In position to know more than those
old rabbis ever dreamed of. There are
better scholars in the world to-day than
there have ever been. Those good Jews
OF the ancient time, using the best judg-
ment they had, set together considerable
number of chapters, 66 in all, and labeled
them with the name of Isaiah. But the
fact that they put them all together under
one label does not prevent US from looking
Modern Versus Ancient Scholarship.
So far as the first half of the book goes
the book itself tells US who wrote most of
1t. 1t is not the old Jewish teachers, but
the sacred Scripture itself which tells Us of
the 1ssiauic authorship of this much. But
there is great break at the fortieih chap-
ter The scene entirely changes. The
style Is different The point OF view is
altered. And the Bible has here no note OF
authorship whatever. The name of Isaiah,
which enters often into the first halt of the
book, is found in the second half never. Let
us understand, then, that any dispute as to
the authorship of the last q chapters OF
Isaiah is not a dispute between modern
scholars and the Bible, but between modern
scholars and certain old unknown Jew ish
scholars who lived in Syria or in Egypt
several hundreds of years before the birth
OF Christ. l confess that in such differ
ence OF opinion my sympathies are with the
moderns.
Neither is the denial of Isaiauic author.
ship in any way derogatory to these latter
chapters 1t simply leaves them anony-
nous. But great deal of Holy Scripture
Is anonymous Who can set any author to
many Of the psalms which help and uplift
US? Who knows who wrote the Epistle to
the Hebrews? The lesson OF great deal of
Holy Scripture is that God cares more that
we should learn to reverence the truth than
that we should reverance the preachers of
truth. The truth is the one thing i'm
portant.
Truth More Important Than Authorship.
And God would have it believed for its
own sake, because we recognize it is as
true, not because some great man said it.
Those great religious truths do not need
any mans authority. Inspiration Is not to
be measured by great names. Isaiah was
not the only inspired man of those ancient
times The author of those last 81 chapters
was as much inspired as Isaiah. The voice
OF the Most High God is audible through
out. The question of authorship and the
question Of inspiration have nothing to do
with each other.
Another thing to be said in this connec-
tion is that the decision of this question
must be left to the scholars The question
OF authorship, one must see at once, is
largely question of style. Every writer
has his own Characteristic way of wiring.
If you should find roll of paper upon
which somebody had copied down certain
things out Of the Spectator and had labeled
the copy by the name Of Addison, and then
in the middle, without any indication OF
change OF authors, had ceased to quote Ad-
u
from Carlyle, you would know the differ
ence. You would be perfectly sure that
there was change of authorship Just at that
place. Nothing could persuade you that
Addison wrote those last pages. The style
would show that to be impossible For
there is as much difference between Addison
and Carlyle as there is between the comedies
OF Sullivan and the epics of Wagner
The Effect of Translation.
But suppose, now, that the roll of manu-
script were translated out of English into
German and thus read by an uncritical Ger
man reader. The chances are that the
transition from Addison and Carlyle would
be missed altogether. The personality OF
the translator would come In to obscure the
difference. The sentiments would still be
those of the originals, but a good deal of
the style would be neither that of Addison
nor Carlyle, but Of the translator. Nobody
would see the wide difference unless he un-
derstood English.
See, then, where we are. This roll of
manuscript which we call the Book of
Isaiah was written in Hebrew. 1t was all
translated into English by one man or COM
pany of men. The English of it is the En-
glish of the days of James L If there is a
difference between the first 80 and the last
27 chapters the translation will disguise it.
The difference in style which is plain to us
between Addison and Carlyle, wilt be
plainly visible, if it exists, to the Hebrew
scholar. But we are not Hebrew scholars.
Very few people will read these words to-day
who can understand single sentence of the
Book of Isaiah either in part one or in part
two in the original language in which it was
written. We have no business, therefore, to
have an independent opinjon ON the subiect