Originally posted by metatronscube
Another note, those books weren't manipulated over centuries. When we compared the current book of Isaiah with the very old copy found among the Dead
Sea scrolls, the two books were nearly identical. Nothing has been changed.
Yet another apologist myth that is completely wrong.
(And yet another apologist who repeated something he heard without checking it.)
There were two main copies of Isaiah found (and a few smaller sections of it too.)
One copy was very different to our modern version.
The other was a bit more similar - only a 1000 or so differences.
Among these very many differences were some so significant that modern Bibles have been CHANGED to match :
The RSV and NRSV consider the meaning of the MT difficult and find clarification in 1QIsaa, which adds bsht (shame) following ky, understood in
its usual meaning of “for” or “because,” translating, “for shame shall take the place of beauty.” However, HOTTP points out that ky can be
understood as a noun meaning “branding mark,” and the MT can be translated, without resorting to the 1QIsaa reading, as does the NJV, “a burn
instead of beauty.” This would mean that the 1QIsaa scribe may have been unfamiliar with the rare meaning of ky as a noun and supplied the Hebrew
word for “shame” as a reasonable complement.
NIV, alone, makes note of the 1QIsaa reading, wqr’ (masculine) for the MT wqr’t (apparently second person feminine singular, but perhaps third
person). It seems clear that 1QIsaa is once again seeking to simplify a difficult form (Rosenbloom 1970:125). There seems little reason to provide a
textual note here.
The MT and 4QIsae have a first person future verb form for “I will call as witness(es),” while 1QIsaa reads wh’d, an imperative form, “and
have it attested,” as in NRSV. The NIV translates the MT (with 4QIsae), “And I will call in Uriah the priest and Zechariah … as reliable
witnesses for me.” Some translations translate the consonants of the MT, but change the vowel of the first letter from we to wa, changing it to the
past tense. The future tense of the NIV, however, is a legitimate tense shift in prophetic literature, reflecting the prophet’s certainty that he
will be the agent of God’s message. In any case, it does not seem necessary to resort to the 1QIsaa reading.
The MT and 4QIsac add to the list of two animals, “calf and beast of prey (lion),” a third, wmry’ “and the fatling.” Early commentators
proposed that this noun be emended to a verb, ymr’w “will feed.” This reading is now found in 1QIsaa and is recommended by the HOTTP committee
for translation, as in the GNB, “Calves and lion cubs will feed together.” The NJV mentions this Qumran reading in a note. The NIV also notes this
reading in a footnote but fails to mention the Qumran evidence.
The NJV, RSV, NRSV, and NIV all follow 1QIsaa in the text. It is the only Qumran reading followed by all eight of the translations studied by
Clark (1984). The NJV provides the explanation of this remarkable unanimity: “madhebah (the MT) is of unknown meaning.” It is likely that one
letter, d, in the MT is incorrect, and the text should read r, a letter that is quite similar in shape. In fact, this is the reading of 1QIsaa:
marhebah, and is translated “insolence” (NRSV), “fury” (NIV), or in similar terms. In many cases the MT presents difficulties for the
translator because of certain obscurities in Hebrew grammar or lexicography. But in some cases, as here, the difficulty is created by textual
corruption, and the Qumran evidence provides valuable assistance.
[edit on 6-11-2008 by Kapyong]