The Question of Cyrus

That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid. Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;

Isaiah 44:28-25:1

Isaiah wrote of Cyrus in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, around the years of about 780-730BC. Cyrus was king of the Medo-Persian Empire about 200 years later, and was the one who allowed the Hebrews to return to Jerusalem (Ezra 1:1-4). The fact that Isaiah names Cyrus by name is astonishing, and has led people to three different conclusions.

The first conclusion that some people reach is that the book of Isaiah is a forgery. Those who believe this say that since Isaiah, being a man, could not have known the future that clearly, that the book must have been written by someone else, several hundred years later. The biggest problem with this is that Christ, the Son of God, referred to passages in Isaiah and identified Isaiah as the author. (Matthew 13:14, etc.). Being God, He would know accurately who wrote the book of Isaiah. Likewise, the apostles and inspired writers referred to Isaiah's writings as being authored by Isaiah (Luke 3:4, Acts 28:25-26, Romans 15:12, etc.). Clearly, this conclusion is wrong.

The second conclusion that some people reach is that Isaiah was tampered with years after Isaiah died. This view is that Isaiah wrote the book, but that someone else came in several hundred years later and made changes to the text. The problem with this conclusion is that it allows for God's word to be corrupted and changed through time. In I Peter 1:24-25, Peter states that the word of the Lord endures forever. David also made this statement (Psalm 12:6-7). As we have two inspired writers stating that God will preserve His word, this conclusion stands as false.

The third conclusion that can be reached is that Isaiah did write this passage, that is has been preserved by the Lord, and that the Lord gave Isaiah a true prophecy. While the other two conclusions assumes a lack of God's direction, the third conclusion realizes the nature of prophecy and that all scripture does indeed come from God (II Timothy 3:16-17).

So there's several lessons that we can take from realizing that God indeed gave the prophecy through Isaiah and that He has preserved His word.
1.We can trust God's word.
2.We can trust that God has a plan and can carry out that plan.
3.We can trust that God's power and ability is far greater than man's.