Problem: According to some pro-homosexual interpreters, Isaiah 56:3 prophesied homosexuals will be brought into the kingdom of God. The Lord said, “to them I will give within my temple and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off” (niv). Should this be taken to mean that Isaiah predicted the day of acceptance for homosexuals into God’s kingdom?
Problem: According to Isaiah, Jesus was “despised and rejected by men.” Yet in the Gospels, even Jesus’ enemies seemed to respect Him, saying as Pilate did, “I find no fault in Him at all” (John 18:38). The Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus exclaimed, “Certainly this was a righteous Man” (Luke 23:47). Indeed, Luke says that Jesus “increased … in favor with God and men” (2:52). Which is true—was Jesus respected or despised?
Problem: According to this verse, God “creates good and evil” (kjv, cf. Jer. 18:11 and Lam. 3:38; Amos 3:6). But many other Scriptures inform us that God is not evil (1 John 1:5), cannot even look approvingly on evil (Hab. 1:13), and cannot even be tempted by evil (James 1:13).
Problem: In Isaiah 44:28 and 45:1, Isaiah specifically names Cyrus in connection with the future restoration of Israel and the laying of the foundations of the temple. However, Isaiah conducted his ministry some time between 739 and 681 b.c., while Cyrus would not even become king of Persia until 539 b.c. That is a period of at least 150 years. How could Isaiah specifically name Cyrus before he even lived?
Problem: Isaiah wrote: “ `To whom will you liken Me, or to whom shall I be equal?’ says the Holy One.” Yet the Bible says “God created man in His own image” (Gen. 1:27).
Problem: Isaiah declares in this passage that “the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.” However, earlier Isaiah contended that the wicked “will not behold the majesty of the Lord” (Isa. 26:10). How can both be true?
Problem: Isaiah has two apparently contradictory predictions. One is that the light to the heavenly bodies will be increased sevenfold (Isa. 30:26). The other is that it will be “ashamed” in the light of the Lord Himself (Isa. 24:23).
Problem: Some Muslim commentators take the rider on the “donkeys” to be Jesus and the rider on “camels” to be Mohammed, whom they believed superseded Jesus.
Problem: Many commentators consider this passage to be a reference to Satan, because the name “Lucifer” is used. However, in Isaiah 14:4 this entire poetic section stretching from 14:4 through 14:27 is a proverb against the king of Babylon. How can this be a reference to Satan when it is against the king of Babylon?
Problem: The orthodox Christian doctrine of the Trinity holds that God is one Essence in three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, Isaiah 9:6 calls the Messiah “the everlasting Father.” How can Jesus be both the Father and the Son?
Problem: The prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 concerns the conception of a virgin and the bringing forth of a son whose name would be Immanuel. However, verse 16 seems to place the birth of the child before the invasion of the Assyrian armies and the fall of Samaria in 722 b.c., and Isaiah 8:3 seems to be a fulfillment of this prophecy. How can this be a prophecy about the virgin birth of Jesus?
Problem: The traditional view of the Book of Isaiah is that it was written by Isaiah, son of Amoz, some time between 739 and 681 b.c. However, modern critics have argued that Isaiah is actually composed of at least two individual books. What has been designated as First Isaiah encompasses chapters 1 through 39, while Second Isaiah encompasses chapters 40 to 66. Is the Book of Isaiah actually several books put together, or is it one book written by the one prophet Isaiah who lived in the 8th century b.c.?
Problem: Here Solomon is said to have had only 140 wives and concubines, but 1 Kings 11:3 gives the number of 1,000.
Solution: These two passages may refer to two different times in his life, the lower number being the earlier one. Or, it may be that there were different ways of counting his wives. First Kings 11:3 does not really say he had seven hundred wives but “seven hundred wives, princesses.” In other words, many of these were more political alliances rather than actual marriages. Further, in the Song of Solomon it speaks of “virgins without number” (Song 6:8) being part of Solomon’s female entourage. This general statement could easily account for the total of 1,000 mentioned in 1 Kings 11.
Problem: Evangelical Christians defend the literal interpretation of the Bible. They insist that it should be taken in its normal, historical-grammatical sense, not in some hidden, mystical, or allegorical sense. To do so in the Gospels, for example, leads to liberalism, denying the historicity of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. However, many evangelicals do not take the Song of Solomon literally, but give it an allegorical or spiritual meaning. Is this not inconsistent?