Jump to content

Talk:Isaiah: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 15: Line 15:


Our intentions were to talk about both the book and the prophet. Perhaps this page would be better incorporated into "book or Isaiah" and this page reverted to its previous content? -Nathan Hill
Our intentions were to talk about both the book and the prophet. Perhaps this page would be better incorporated into "book or Isaiah" and this page reverted to its previous content? -Nathan Hill

I don't think "Christianity" regards Isaiah as a Saint. Prophet yes, saint no.


I have completed the revision and switch-Nathan Hill
I have completed the revision and switch-Nathan Hill

Revision as of 06:25, 16 June 2009

The Prophets Hosea and Isaiah were (near) contemporaries. Moreover, the High Priest at this time was Hoshaiah. (See Wikipedia's List of the High Priests of Israel entry.) Could Hoshaiah the High Priest, Hosea the Prophet, and Isaiah the Prophet all have been the same person???

Hi All, I have just made some major additions to this page of Isaiah and have preserved some original material as well. Comments are welcome! - Nathan Hill

This page seems to overlap badly with Book of Isaiah. I think the idea of this page was to be mainly about the prophet, not about the book.


Our intentions were to talk about both the book and the prophet. Perhaps this page would be better incorporated into "book or Isaiah" and this page reverted to its previous content? -Nathan Hill

I don't think "Christianity" regards Isaiah as a Saint. Prophet yes, saint no.

I have completed the revision and switch-Nathan Hill

Nathan,

Rastafari, the Jamaican sect which believes Blacks are the chosen people, has many roots within this chapter. I would suggest bridging the two pages to facilitate an easier guide.

Hey! Isn't the main reason for Isaiah's importance his prophesies of the Messiah? Why isn't that mentioned??? Brutannica 01:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I wondered that. Certainly for Christians that's his chief importance, although the Jews might take issue with that. I would like to know where to find Isaiah's prophecies to do with the Messiah are to be found. Can anyone help? ThePeg 15:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isaiah's prophecy of the Messiah.

In reference to Isaiah's reference to the Messiah (otherwise known as Jesus Christ), I have only scratched the surface to find Isaiah 9:1 - 7; Isaiah 7:13 - 14; and Isaiah 52:13 - 53 (whole chapter). These are simply a few of the overt prophecies of the Christ; their are many more subtle references. I'm unsure of the qualifications needed to edit/comment, so I'll leave it there. I'm no professor; just a Minister. Hope this at least gets someone on the track. As for Jews being offended by these references, I fail to see how this could be. Surely the Jewish understanding of these references would be quite plausible... hence the debate about whether or not they are reference to Christ Himself or someone else entirely.

144.135.136.210 05:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Neil.144.135.136.210 05:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.135.136.210 (talk) 00:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Isaiah

Moved from Fayenatic_london talk page

I'm sure your intentions for your recent edits of Isaiah were good but...

  • The Hebrew word for Isaiah is already included within the article
  • The link is too general for the article.

WikiJonathanpeter 18:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WJP, in that case I suggest you go further and delete the whole external link to the Tanakh Profiles site. Two or three of us who cannot read Hebrew agreed to let Rambamfan's edits remain, on condition that the transliteration link should be added to help non-Hebrew-readers work out the names. OK? - Fayenatic london (talk) 18:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK - I see - done. Thanks. WikiJonathanpeter 07:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Commonly considered"

The opening paragraph says that the prophet Isaiah is "commonly considered" to be the author of the entire book. In fact, he is not so considered by the overwhelming majority of biblical scholars.

Shouldn't this be changed? Jhobson1 13:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Find a good source, change the page, cite the source. Easy-peasy. --130.243.208.12 08:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I suppose that regular Christians who are not Biblical scholars are pretty "common"... I'll change it to "traditionally". Hopefully there's no controversy about that. --Robert Stevens (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of "Critical Scholarship"

I see that virtually the entire "Critical Scholarship" section was removed on September 19th in an unexplained deletion by an anonymous user with a track record of vandalism (see here for another example of this user's "contribution"). I see no reason to suppose that this edit was made in good faith, and what's left has since been tagged as "confusing", so I'm restoring the section. --Robert Stevens 13:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The 12 May, 2008 version was fine. It could use some touch ups, but I don't see why the whole thing was deleted and turned into a stub without any explanation.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.108.0.190 (talk) 21:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This whole section should be removed and put into the article Book of Isaiah. That is the place to discuss "critical scholarship" - this article should be about the person, not the book.--FimusTauri (talk) 14:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted it - the article Book of Isaiah more than covers this topic.--FimusTauri (talk) 14:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haircut

This article needs a serious haircut. The request for citations is almost a year old. I think it's time to start trimming out the unreferenced speculations. All in favor? Opposed?--Nowa (talk) 00:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]