The book of Isaiah has a complicated literary history, and its perceived composition history has contributed to debates around its structure and interpretation. For some time, the critical consensus has been that Isaiah is divided into three major sections (Isa 1–39; 40–55; 56–66) composed at different times by different authors (e.g., Duhm). Redaction-critical studies have demonstrated a literary unity to the whole of Isaiah, leading to the interpretation of these three sections together (Ackroyd, Childs, Clements, Melugin, Seitz, Williamson). Even Evangelicals have been influenced to structure Isaiah based on this critical analysis (Oswalt, Longman & Dillard). Yet, there is less of a consensus about the composition history and structure of Isaiah than is generally recognized. One alternative, known as the Bifid structure, divides Isaiah into two halves: Isaiah 1–33 and Isaiah 34–66 (Brownlee, Harrison, Gileadi, Watts, Sweeney, Byun, Garrett). Another alternative divides Isaiah concentrically, where the individual sections repeat words and themes to convey the same message throughout the book (O’Connell, Gentry, House).
In this paper, I will argue that the book of Isaiah has a bifid structure. To do this, I will first overview the strengths and weaknesses of the three main structural proposals mentioned above. The parallelism between sections in Isaiah distinguishes this proposal from other bifid structures. Next, I will briefly explain how I structure the book of Isaiah and how parallelism contributes to the overall message of Isaiah. Then, to demonstrate the structural parallelism, I will examine the structure of two parallel sections, Isaiah 1:2–5:30 and Isaiah 34:1–35:10. I will do this by showing how both sets of chapters alternate oracles of judgment and salvation and by identifying linguistic and thematic parallels (such as a highway to Zion, the Day of YHWH, אדם as both Adam and Edom, and the appeal to listen). Finally, I will explain how Isaiah 5:1–30 concludes the introduction with a final word of judgment and anticipates Isaiah’s vision (Isa 6) and the Hezekiah Narratives (Isa 36–39).
This paper seeks to contribute to the conversation on the unity and structure of Isaiah by presenting a persuasive alternative to the traditional tripartite division of the text. The analysis of these chapters serves as a case study for the parallelism in the book of Isaiah and demonstrates the implications for interpreting Isaiah.