LDS Translation 

In examining the text of Isaiah 29 from an LDS perspective, I turned first to Don Parry’s book, Harmonizing Isaiah:  Combining Ancient Sources (FARMS, 2001).  Those unfamiliar with this volume can read Kevin Barney’s review.   Attached to the beginning of  Isaiah 29, Don’s endnote begins,

The JST makes scores of changes to Isaiah 29, including many new verses and a change of versification.  With the exception of verses 1 and 7, the verses of Isaiah 29 in this translation reflect the JST (273).

Wait a minute.  I thought Don’s book was supposed to utilize the Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic text in all the Isaiah chapters.  It seems that this chapter becomes the exception to the rule in scholarship.  The English JST (Joseph Smith Translation) trumps all ancient Hebrew manuscripts for the Isaiah 29 text.  Does this then become the rule?  I have yet to read Robert Cloward’s article, “Isaiah 29 in the Book of Mormon”,  but I did carefully read Grant Hardy’s theory of Midrash.

So after looking at Don’s Isaiah text, I decided to turn to David R. Minert’s book, Simplified Isaiah For the Latter-day Saints:  An Interpretive Guide For Those Who Diligently Search The Book Of Isaiah (Orem: Granite Publishing, 2006).

Next to Isaiah 29:2, David, a bishop over in Eagle, Idaho, discusses in a footnote,

In the Joseph Smith Translation of Chapter 29, the prophet edited verse 2; those changes are in bold.  In the remainder of the chapter, his changes primarily consisted of making the verses correspond to 2 Nephi 26:15-18 and 27:2-35.  In pointing out those changes, I have noted the differences in red.  Any words that are bolded in verses 3-24 of Chapter 29 reflect the prophets using a different word than that used in the Book of Mormon or in the original Isaiah text.  By inserting portions of 2 Nephi into this chapter, Joseph Smith has Nephi speaking in the midst of a prophecy given by Isaiah.  Anyone who finds this strange is invited to discuss it with the prophet when they see him. (102).

Since Joseph Smith is dead and unavailable, I am interested to hear what the modern LDS prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, has to say about this peculiar 19^th century redacting by Joseph on the Isaiah text for the forced accomplishment of a 19^th century fulfillment.

 

In my grief over the reconstruction of Isaiah’s words, I have also discovered the reason why I am so often labeled a Pharisee because of my passion for the Scripture.  I am a biblical bishop in Southeastern Idaho striving to sincerely, accurately, and publicly uphold and spread God’s Word.  But this other bishop in Southwestern Idaho would fault me for where I am saddened over the changing of words in the texts by Joseph.  David writes, using Isaiah 29:21 as his proof text:

The Lord condemns those who lie in wait to find fault with newly revealed scripture, or the preaching of the missionaries, over a word or phrase, and then use that as an excuse to publicly denounce the whole message.  Such people justify their efforts to overthrow the work of God by the tiniest of objections. (Amos 5:12; 2 Nephi 28:16)”(111). 

But can I throw a question back to the LDS bishops and professors?  Why does the Joseph Smith Translation seek to highlight so many faults with what Isaiah wrote?  I have been placed in an either/or position.  It is either the words of Isaiah or Joseph in Isaiah 29 that one must use as a foundation of faith.  But not both.  One of them is wrong.