Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: hall@vice.ico.tek.com (Hal Lillywhite) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Multiple Isaiahs Message-ID: Date: 14 Sep 90 03:51:30 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR. Lines: 145 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes: >Our good moderator chides me for my simplistic dismissal of >The Book of Mormon on the grounds that it quotes parts of the >Book of Isaiah that some people claim are post-Exilic. He >continues: >>... But you'd >>expect to see BoM quotations of the OT showing at least some >>improvements over the text used in the KJV. > >I agree. Indeed, if somebody could cite several such passages - >where the BoM disagrees with the AV and with the scholarship >of Smith's time, but agrees with more modern scholarship, I'd >regard that as strong evidence against my claim. I respectfully >invite such evidence. The following are a few examples of where the Book of Mormon, King James Bible and Qumran (Dead Sea scrolls) give different versions of some of the book of Isaiah. This is taken from "The Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon" by John A. Tvedtnes, published by FARMS (the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies), P.O. Box 7113, Provo, Utah 84602. This is not an extensive comparison between the 3 sources and it is quite probable I have overlooked even some pertinent information in Tvedtnes paper. In fact I only got about half way through it and ran out of time. I would invite those interested to get a copy of the paper and look it over themselves. Tvedtnes looks at the cases where the BoM Isaiah differes from the King James and tries to determine the reasons for the differences and classify them into several categories. There is of course quite a bit more than just Qumran comparisons. If I get time I will try to do a more extensive extract from this paper and post it later. I will use the following abbreviations to refer to the various manuscripts: KJ: King James Bible BM: Book of Mormon MT: Masoretic text LXX: Septuagint 1Q: The first Qumran scroll of Isaiah 1 Ne, 2 Ne refer to books in the BoM I will also try to indicate italicized words in KJ by dashes, ie. -it-. Is 2:22, 2 Ne 12:11: BM adds to the beginning, "And it shall come to pass..." This is partially supported by both LXX and 1Q which add the "and," probably lost by haplography in MT. Is 2:20, 2 Ne 12:20 BM: he hath made for himself. KJ: they made each one for himself. MT: which they made for him 1Q: which his fingers made. (somewhat interpolated, there is a tear in the edge of the manuscript here.) Is 3:9, 2 Ne 13:9 BM: and they cannot hide it KJ: they hide -it- not MT: (agrees with KJ) 1Q, LXX add the "and" In this same verse BoM has "soul" in the plural while KJ gives the singular. MT, LXX, and 1Q all have singular but Hebrew singulars often have collective meaning. Is 3:11, 2 Ne 13:11 BM: the reward of their hands shall be upon them KJ: the reward of his hands shall be given him MT: the reward of his hands shall be done 1Q: the reward of his hands shall return KJ gives a very loose translation of MT. BM is closer to 1Q than to any of the others. All the versions non-BM give singular but the antecedent ("the wicked") is probably collective so it is probably justified to use the plural in English. In this verse no 2 versions agree. Is 9:9, 2 Ne 19:9 BM: inhabitants KJ: inhabitant LXX: agrees with BM MT: agrees with KJ (but could have collective sense) 1Q: abbreviated, could be either singular or plural. Is 13:22, 2 Ne 23:22 BM: her day shall not be prolonged for I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people but the wicked shall perish. KJ: her days shall not be prolonged. LXX: quickly shall it be done and shall not be delayed 1Q: her days shall not be prolonged more. (BM ending starts with "for" as does the next verse, 14:1. This phrase could have been dropped by haplography. Note that the BM addition leads much more naturally to the meaning of the following verses.) Is 14:2, 2 Ne 24:2 BM: and bring them to their place, yea, from the far ends of the earth; and they shall return to their lands of promise. KJ: and bring them to their place. MT: agrees with KJ 1Q: and bring them to their land and to their place. (Again, wording is similar enough in verses 1 and 2 that some haplography may have occured.) Is 14:2, 2 Ne 24:2 (later in the same verse as above) BM: and the land KJ: in the land MT, LXX: upon the land 1Q: unto the land Is 14:32, 2 Ne 24:32 BM: What shall then answer the messengers KJ: What shall -one- then answer the messengers MT: agrees with KJ (somewhat uncertain) LXX: what shall the kings of the nations answer 1Q: agrees with BM (also the verb is plural,indicating "messengers" instead of "one") Is 29:5, 2 Ne 26:18 BM: those who have been destroyed KJ: the multitude of thy strangers MT: agrees with KJ LXX: the wealth of the unholy ones 1Q: "zryq" meaning unknown and perhaps scribal error Is 29:7, 2 Ne 27:3a BM: Zion KJ: Ariel LXX: Israel (most Mss) 1Q: Ariel Is 29:12, 2 Ne 27:19 BM: the Lord God will deliver again the book KJ: and the book is delivered LXX, MT: agree with KJ 1Q: and they shall deliver the book