Deutero-Isaiah

[Anonymous]

Okay, another topic that I wonder about: Any thoughts out there about the issue of Deutero-Isaiah, and implication for chapters that are included in the Book of Mormon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutero-Isaiah

[Anonymous]

Just off of the top of my head, but if it was on the Brass Plates and Nephi believed that it was also the word of God, (even though theory states that Isaiah himself my not have written it,) Nephi would have put it in his record to help substantiate his doctrine given to his people.

Is this along the lines of where you want to go with this post? Please clarify, or what may be your concern?

[Anonymous]

Sorry for not being more clear, the concern is that per the theory, some of the chapters included in the Book of Mormon were written after Lehi’s departure. I’d have to go spend some time in 2nd Nephi, but I think anything past Isaiah 40 is considered by academia to have been written by a second source.

[Anonymous]

Or, if the BofM is in fact true, and it does contain chapters after Isaiah 40 which scholars say may have been written after 600bc, then the scholars may be wrong in their estimate of timetables. In my study there doesn’t seem to be a firm concensus on Deutero-Isaiah with any scholars. They all have their own ideas about the subject matter and timetables. The Church’s Old Testament manual simply says that Isaiah changed his style of writing, that it became more poetic.

I counted 5 post Isaiah 40 chapters just by scanning through the headings, all at the end of 1Nephi and beginning of 2Nephi, and Mosiah 14.

[Anonymous]

In the book of essays, American Apocrypha, David P. Wright wrote a section concerning this, titled Isaiah in the Book of Mormon: Or Joseph Smith in Isaiah. Wright does a pretty thorough analysis of the sections of Isaiah represented in the BoM and what it could mean. He subscribes to the idea that JS was looking at the Bible KJV whilst translating, hence all the slightly altered Bible chapters reappearing all over the BoM. I think Palmer lays this out in An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins as well. This obviously is a big issue when thinking on the likelihood of the BoM being a 19th century creation.

[Author]

Posts