Had some problems posting this morning, so did not get all info on the thread:
https://theconversation.com/seal-of-the-prophet-isaiah-sorting-out-fact-from-fantasy-92296
I was using a discussion that appeared in The Conversation. It was headlined;
Seal of the Prophet Isaiah: sorting out fact from fantasy.
Eilat Mazar,who is an archaeologist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem claims that even though part of the inscription is missing, the missing section should be translated as prophet.
My own take is that an historical existence does not prove divine inspiration or even the existence of a divinity, anymore than the existence of buddhist relics prove that the magical claims of Buddhism are true.
Candida Moss's write-up notes that:
"Isaiah is one of the most important Old Testament prophets, who predicted the birth of Jesus Christ."
That's referring to Isaiah's prophecy at Isa 9:6. Which claims that one day a special person in the life of Israel would be born.
The Christian appropriation of those verses does not make Jesus the promised 'Prince of Peace.' For since the death of Jesus, wew have heard nothing from him.
and the other reference to Isaiah &:14) notes:
"Christian tradition interprets Isaiah’s words as prophecies about the Virgin Birth, the nature of being a messiah and the universal relevance of Jesus’ messianic identity to both gentiles and Jews. "
But the Hebrew word used there and translated centuries later in the Septuagint does not suggest that the Messiah would be born to a virgin, but merely a young woman.
We need to differentiate between historical figures and outlandish mythical claims.
But an interesting find even if the claims that will follow are outlandish.