Multiplying Isaiahs
Up until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1946, the earliest manuscript of Isaiah was from 1000 CE, the Masoretic Text (MT). What a discovery then, to find an intact copy of Isaiah from around 150 BCE! Â This scroll contains the entire book of Isaiah, an astounding 24-foot-long leather scroll (that’s a lot of cow!). Â This manuscript (1QIsa) is almost identical to the MT in every way, except a few spelling mishaps and minor word variations here and there.
Most scholars think that Isaiah 34 was written long into the Babylonian captivity – 150 years after the situation of a potential Assyrian invasion had passed – for this unnamed author, the main concern for the Jews is not Assyria, but Babylon and the nation of Edom, who betrayed Judah and helped Babylon capture Jerusalem. Â There’s just no way that Isaiah could’ve lived long enough to have written the later parts of Isaiah.
There is a complication to this theory. Â If there was truly two authors (or more) penning the prophet Isaiah, then it must have been assumed as early as 300 years afterward that there was only one author. Â The 1QIsa Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah makes no indication that there should be a new voice in chapter 34, and again in chapter 40. Â In fact, the switch from 39-40 is seamless – in the same column – the writer is not skipping a beat. Â The same holds true with 34 – there is little indication that there should be a heading or demarkation of a new author for this new topic of Edom, Babylon, and the like.
Why does this matter? Â Well – if Isaiah son of Amoz wrote the entire book in a pre-exilic Jerusalem, it sure says something about Isaiah’s prophetic ability to see the political situation brewing 150 years into the future.
If he didn’t write the whole book – then we have a fascinating picture of how Jews pictured authorship – fitting 2 or 3 authors together as if they were one.
What do you think?
