Lee
Administrator
Posts: 1,047
|
Post by Lee on Sept 14, 2014 21:10:14 GMT
These two chapters are almost word for word
ANSWER.—There is no question of forgery in the matter, but simply one of copying for compilation. The only question is, Which is the original writing and which is the copy? The matter in question is appropriate to both books. The book of Kings is professedly a compilation, and some of its sources are mentioned as “the book of the acts of Solomon” (1 Kings 11:41); “the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah” (1 Kings 14:29, and elsewhere); “the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel (verse 19, and elsewhere). Apparently Isaiah originally wrote the historical section of his book, chapters 36.–39., parts of which were afterwards used in the compilation of the book of Kings. Isaiah, we must remember, helped to make the history in question. The book of Kings refers its history of Hezekiah, or the complement thereof, to “the book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah” (2 Kings 20:20); which book gives a reference to “the book of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, and the book of the Kings of Israel and Judah” (2 Chron. 32:32). Nothing could be more straightforward.
1911 Christadelphian p 26
|
|