Isaiah, Spring Harvest, Sermons and Wasting Time.

The morning Bible readings were on Isaiah this year at Spring Harvest. I listened to a talk about Isaiah 53 on the first morning. There is quite allot of background information when it comes to studying the book of Isaiah. In a fairly straightforward way the preacher covered the information very quickly. Straight forward and to the point, is good at times (though slightly boring). His point was: One book (Isaiah), Three authors, Three different periods of time that the authors were writing to. Then he told us WE DIDN’T NEED TO KNOW THAT!

There are two issues here for me. Firstly, if a congregation don’t need to know something why bother telling them? What a waste of time!

Secondly, I do see why he said that we didn’t need to worry about it. Who wrote Isaiah doesn’t affect the text at all. However, it does affect the kind of God you believe in. Let me explain:

Isaiah breaks down into three sections.

1. The first is written when the people to whom it is addressed were living under the threat of invasion.
2. The second some (400?) years later when the city has been ransacked and most of the people are living in a foreign land. It is written with incredible detail.
3. The third when they have returned or are returning to their homeland.

If one person wrote it, we can see that God speaks about the future and predict it. He is the all knowing all powerful God. Nothing wrong with that.

But, wait a minute, if one person wrote it, that means God is predicting the future some four centuries before it happened. What is the use of that to the people who would have heard it? I agree it is very impressive, but it lacks credibility. There is one time we get an example of someone being told in explicit detail what will happen after they have died. Their reaction is fascinating. They say “That’s OK then. I’m all right Jack.” They are totally disinterested. You can read the story in Isaiah in chapter 39.

To me, it doesn’t make sense that God would tell people in detail what is going to happen centuries after they have died.

If two or three people wrote it at different times, then God is still able to predict the future, but it is more immediate, more connected to the people. That makes much more sense to me. Not only does it make sense, it also concurs with the way God interacts with people in the rest of scripture. He is interested in the present as well as the future, dealing with ordinary people in an everyday way.

Which God would you rather believe in, the remote one who tells you things you don’t need to know, or the close, concerned immediate one who tells you things that are relevant to today?

Leave a Reply