We prefer to render this passage of scripture: "Who hath believed our words of Him in whom the power and authority of God is made known?," or, "Who hath believed our words of Him in whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?" (See Mosiah 12:24) In the translation of the manuscripts used by the eminent scholars who prepared the King James Version of the Holy Bible, the question asked by the Prophet Isaiah appears to be two queries. But it is not; it is one! The translators failed to understand the purport of the prophet's words. They render the last part of his question, "To whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?" This is incorrect. The Servantis the central figure of the poem, not someone else. He is the Lord, Jesus Christ. The whole poem is written concerning Him; His growth as a child, His ministry, death, and resurrection, and the manner of the reception to be accorded Him by the Jewish nation, which then was apostate.
We eliminate the conjunction and. In the place of to, we substitute the preposition in. Doing so makes the entire poem appear more to our understanding. Many of the commentators on Isaiah either neglect or deliberately overlook the fact that he was a great advocate of the coming of the Lord, the Messiah, Jesus Christ, who in this lyrical song, he calls the Servant. Isaiah, and it may be said of all the Hebrew prophets, understood the mission of the Messiah whose coming he foretold. He talked of Christ; he rejoiced in Christ; he preached of Christ; he prophesied of Christ, and he wrote according to the prophecies. (See 2 Ne. 25:26)
Every translator is, indeed, a commentator. The words he chooses to use are limited to his own understanding; thus he gives color, and shape, and sometimes improper form to much he does not comprehend. (See COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF MORMON, Vol.. I, p. 67, Notes)
Before any objections are considered to the changes made by us in the rendering of the first verse of Isa. 53, it is well to remember that the division of the books of the Bible into chapters and verses and even sentences, is not a part of the original arrangement of the sacred book.
"The present divison of the Scriptures into chapters and verses...are not of divine origin, nor are they of great antiquity. The Vulgate was the first version divided into chapters: a work undertaken by Cardinal Hugo, in the 13th Century, or as Jahn thinks, by Lungton, archbishop of Canterbury, 1227. He introduced the division into chapters only. The Hebrew Scriptures were similarly divided by Mordecai Nathan, in 1445, and in 1661 Athias added in his printed text, the division into verses. The New Testament was divided in the same way by Robert Stephens, who is said to have completed it in the year 1551, during a journey (inter equitandum), from Paris to Lyons.
"As might be expected, these divisions are very imperfect, and even when not inaccurate, they tend to break the sense and to obscure the meaning." (Bible Handbook, by Dr. Joseph Angus, p. 60.)
Let us remember, too, that the ancient Hebrew scribes did not write the vowels; they used few, if any, conjunctions or prepositions. They did not punctuate, and they wrote their words using a long, single scroll which formed, as it were, a continuous block of writing.
When they, the translators of Isaiah, render the second part of his question "to whom," they do so capriciously, and with little understanding of the text. We choose to say, "in whom," because it magnifies the service rendered by the Servant, and it acknowledges Him to be the particular Servant of God.
The question stated, is asked by Isaiah for himself and all the holy prophets, "Who hath believed our words," and the implied answer is, "No one." None, or few, recognized the divine message they bore, or saw in it the working of God's power in His Servant, Jesus Christ.
A thought that may have merit, is expressed by some of the most learned students, including Dr. Adam Clarke, who have made a study of Old Testament prophecy and religion. They refer to a portion of the second part of Isaiah's question in which "the arm of the Lord" is made mention. They contend the translation of the word arm is wrong, "the connexion broken, and the sense obscured." The Hebrew word, zeroa, is translated arm, from the root, zara, which, contrary to the interpretation given it by the translators, means, to sow, or plant; also, it means seed. If, they argue, we translate the word zeroa in the sense that it means seed, the true meaning of the text would then be given.
The same word, zeroa, meaning seed, can be found in Gen. 28:14. Isaiah, in effect, calls the offspring of the Patriarch Abraham, "The seed (children) of the Lord." Zara115, then in this place, should be understood to mean not only "the seed of herbs, but also children, offspring, or posterity." Thus, zara should be understood to mean Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, by the power and authority of God, is the one who is made known. If we agree with this as being the right interpretation of the word, zeroa, or its root-word, zara, the passage with our correction would read, "Who hath believed our words of Him, in whom the seed of the Lord (i.e. the Child is born, and a Son is given, or as John says, 'the Son of God, the only Begotten of the Father') is revealed."