-
April 3rd 2004, 08:30 PM #1
The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
As most LDS folk know, Joseph Smith, claiming Divine guidance, took upon the task of correcting the Bible, the result, The Joseph Smith Translation.(JST) Yet the LDS church has never made the JST it's official translation. They continue to use the King James Version of the Bible as the officially recognized translation of the Bible.
Apostle Bruce R McConkie made the following statement:
"In consequence, at the command of the Lord and while acting under the spirit of revelation, the Prophet corrected, revised, altered, added to, and deleted from the King James Version of the Bible to form what is now commonly referred to as the Inspired Version of Bible. . . The first 151 verses of the Old Testament, down to Genesis 6:13, are published as the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price. But as restored by the Prophet the true rendition contains about 400 verses and a wealth of new doctrinal knowledge and historical data.... the marvelous flood of light and knowledge revealed through the Inspired Version of the Bible is one of the great evidences of the divine mission of Joseph Smith." (Mormon Doctrine, 1979, p. 383-84)
If indeed Joseph Smith was given this task by God, and made a great many changes and additions to the text of the Bible, why hasn't the LDS church adopted it as their official Bible?
I have a Bible published by the LDS church, and it has the text of the King James version, but in an appendix at the back of the book I find the JST. Why would the LDS church continue to use a corrupted version of the Bible when they have a corrected version?
-
April 3rd 2004, 09:33 PM #2
Trout, as far as my memory serves, I believe the JST was never finished b/c he was killed before he could finish the work...but I could be wrong.
If I have a mystical experience, an experience that's so overwhelming that I know now that there's a God, the cognitive fallout from that is irrelevant. The fact that that experience can be explained by psychologists in numerous ways is irrelevant to the fact that I now know.
-
April 4th 2004, 11:19 PM #3
The LDS members believe the JST is a paraphrase, in the fashion of "The Message."
I may not yet be as old as dirt, but dirt and I are starting to have an awful lot in common... Stephen Donaldson - Author of my favorite series (The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant)
S'cuse me... oops, I'm sorry... I didn't see your sign - Bill Engvall
-
April 5th 2004, 08:06 PM #4
To Troutk13
JOHN MORMON:TROUT:
Why would the LDS church continue to use a corrupted version of the Bible when they have a corrected version?
The prophet Joseph did not finish his revisions of the Bible and because that's what we're told to do by God's mouthpieces on Earth and we try to obey God's instructions.
POWELL:
Because conversions occurred more frequently using the KJV. It was more effective to say to a KJV-believer "We believe your Bible, but we have more, namely the Book of Mormon" than to say "Your Bible is wrong. Here, use ours and check out our other scriptures like the Book of Mormon."
JW's use the other method.
John Powell
-
April 6th 2004, 01:45 AM #5God has corrected missing and faulty sections of the Bible, yet the LDS church hasn't declared them it's official version? That seems odd.
Originally posted by John Powell
In D&C 73, aren't Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon commanded to finish the translation?
It would seem as though God has spoken and the LDS church is in disobedience.
It's my understanding that the JST was originally published by the RLDS, much to the chagrin of the LDS, but maybe I'm mistaken.POWELL:
Because conversions occurred more frequently using the KJV. It was more effective to say to a KJV-believer "We believe your Bible, but we have more, namely the Book of Mormon" than to say "Your Bible is wrong. Here, use ours and check out our other scriptures like the Book of Mormon."
JW's use the other method.
John Powell
Article
The edition I have is a 1979. The JST is footnoted, and appendixed, but Joseph Smith's corrections aren't included within the text itself.
-
April 8th 2004, 04:10 PM #6
To Troutk13
JOHN MORMON:TROUT:
God has corrected missing and faulty sections of the Bible, yet the LDS church hasn't declared them it's official version? That seems odd.
That shouldn't surprise you since "it's" means "it is" rather than the possessive "its" so if they declared in writing what you suggest then they wouldn't be writing properly.
The Bible revision wasn't finished.
POWELL:
Apparently, it was better to use the Book of Mormon and other scriptures to get Gospel "truths" than to rely on a partially complete revision of the Bible. The Bible was more of a tool to show that Mormonism was Biblically-based than as the source of the clearest exposition of Mormon doctrine.
JOHN MORMON:TROUT:
In D&C 73, aren't Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon commanded to finish the translation?
No. That was just an answer to a question or a call to repentence (just kidding). It says they are to continue with the translation until it's done [see how I used the contraction?]. Joseph died before it was finished. Maybe Joseph has now finished it in the afterlife. You still don't understand the conditional nature of things like this, Trout. You don't seem to understand what free will entails.
JOHN MORMON:TROUT:
It would seem as though God has spoken and the LDS church is in disobedience.
The command was to Joseph and Sydney, not to Brigham Young or those who followed. God commanded Moses to build a tabernacle and Solomon to build a temple. Does your church have temples? If no, then apparently your church is in disobedience, based on your reasoning.
Besides, Trout, even if God did command us to do something that we didn't do that would not mean we weren't the true church, just not individually perfect. Jesus commanded us all to be perfect like the Father is perfect (Matt 5:48), and we aren't. God commands perfection of us. That doesn't mean He thinks we'll do it. He encourages us to be all we can be.
JOHN MORMON:TROUT:
It's my understanding that the JST was originally published by the RLDS, much to the chagrin of the LDS, but maybe I'm mistaken.
Maybe you're right.
JOHN MORMON:TROUT:
Article
The edition I have is a 1979. The JST is footnoted, and appendixed, but Joseph Smith's corrections aren't included within the text itself.
You seem to have an LDS/Mormon edition rather than an RLDS/Community of Christ edition.
John Powell
-
April 8th 2004, 11:40 PM #7Oopsy. . .my bad. (Does your friend JP actually have a sense of humor?)JOHN MORMON:
That shouldn't surprise you since "it's" means "it is" rather than the possessive "its" so if they declared in writing what you suggest then they wouldn't be writing properly.
Hmm, Joseph Smith said, "We this day finished the translating of the scriptures. . ." (Page 802)JM:
The Bible revision wasn't finished.
Joseph said it was finished.JOHN MORMON:
No. That was just an answer to a question or a call to repentence (just kidding). It says they are to continue with the translation until it's done [see how I used the contraction?]. Joseph died before it was finished. Maybe Joseph has now finished it in the afterlife. You still don't understand the conditional nature of things like this, Trout. You don't seem to understand what free will entails.
So it seems that the church just hasn't adopted it for some strange reason yet unknown. (But not unknown to an omniscient God)
John Powell,
I heard in conversation with an LDS co-worker that the reason the LDS church hasn't published the JST as their official version, is that the RLDS own the copyright to it.
Have you ever heard that?
Trout
-
April 9th 2004, 05:46 PM #8
To Troutk13
JOHN MORMON:JOHN MORMON:
That shouldn't surprise you since "it's" means "it is" rather than the possessive "its" so if they declared in writing what you suggest then they wouldn't be writing properly.
TROUT:
Oopsy. . .my bad. (Does your friend JP actually have a sense of humor?)
Yes, but slightly out of the norm.
JOHN MORMON:JOHN MORMON:
The Bible revision wasn't finished.
TROUT:
Hmm, Joseph Smith said, "We this day finished the translating of the scriptures. . ." (Page 802)
I was going on what I have been taught, so I had to investigate your claim.
Technically that was Sydney who said it, but apparently Joseph signed his name to the letter. Apparently, this was a finishing of the FIRST DRAFT of the revision since Joseph continued to make revisions after this date and intended to COMPLETELY finish it and have it published, but did not succeed before his death.
If the Prophet Joseph really was finished in 1833 then it's surprising he didn't have it published before his death in 1844.
JOHN MORMON:JOHN MORMON:
No. That was just an answer to a question or a call to repentence (just kidding). It says they are to continue with the translation until it's done [see how I used the contraction?]. Joseph died before it was finished. Maybe Joseph has now finished it in the afterlife. You still don't understand the conditional nature of things like this, Trout. You don't seem to understand what free will entails.
TROUT:
Joseph said it was finished.
So it seems that the church just hasn't adopted it for some strange reason yet unknown. (But not unknown to an omniscient God)
Sure, Trout, and Jesus said "it is finished" when it still wasn't. Jesus still needed to give up the ghost and go to the spirit world and be resurrected and return a glorious Second time and . . .
POWELL:TROUT:
John Powell,
I heard in conversation with an LDS co-worker that the reason the LDS church hasn't published the JST as their official version, is that the RLDS own the copyright to it.
Have you ever heard that?
Trout
That could be. It sounds familiar, but I haven't thought about these things for a while. That would be an even better reason why Mormons didn't use that translation, not having the copyright to publish it. I wonder if the RLDS had any rights to publish the Book of Mormon.
John Powell.
-
April 10th 2004, 12:59 AM #9
To John Powell
The following is from an article found here:
-
April 10th 2004, 12:49 PM #10
To Troutk13
POWELL:
Thanks, Trout.
John Powell
-
April 10th 2004, 02:41 PM #11I found this title page here:POWELL:
That could be. It sounds familiar, but I haven't thought about these things for a while. That would be an even better reason why Mormons didn't use that translation, not having the copyright to publish it. I wonder if the RLDS had any rights to publish the Book of Mormon.
John Powell.
So it would seem, the RLDS do have the right to publish the BOM, however the RLDS version differs from the LDS version, the differences are outlined in the site mentioned above.
-
August 22nd 2004, 10:09 PM #12
Bible too monumental....
Hi all,
Surely most of the record-evidence shows that the translation of the Bible was considered as completed. I think ultimately it would be too monumental a task to actually publish the JST as a new inspired version bible - I believe it was more like one of JS's side ventures - where he curiously sought to make corrections...and put in additions that prophesied his own divine calling! (several verses are added that prophesy himself as Gods latter day prophet in the book of Genesis.) Such an inclusion was obviously self serving.
The JST therefore serves no real purpose but a few curious paraphrasings and JS's own personal prophesy - the BoM was the main kicker as establishing him as Gods choice seer. It remains evident that the KJV is more reliable as a whole and the JST is more a novelty item to be used and quoted from when convenient. But its evident that his self-invented prophesy in the book of Genesis could never be proved by ancient bible manuscript evidence....so it would be likely rejected by scholars at large. The BoM and BoA(book of abraham) have already been exposed as 19th cent. productions....so there is nothing to show the JST as being anything less...as well as 'invented'.
p.s. I have been trying to upload an avatar...but cant find that option anywhere - any tips?
Thanks,
paul
www.freelightexpress.com
-
August 22nd 2004, 11:26 PM #13
Re: Bible too monumental....
In order to upload an avatar, you must have 25 posts, so get cracking!
Originally posted by freelight
"I'm hoping to rope enough corpses together to make a small raft." Mad_Gerbil, D&G
-
November 25th 2004, 01:33 AM #14
Re: The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
The LDS church does not print the full JST I guess for a variety of reasons but the 2 that come to my mind are 1) The "Community of Christ" [RLDS] church holded the copyright of that book and 2) The LDS edition of the KJV has the vast majority of JST changes in the footnotes. If one knows how to use the footnotes, one can see the changes.
Originally posted by troutk13
I should note that the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price is from the JST. So though the Church does not officially have an entire JST that it prints, practically speaking it endorses the JST. I love the JST footnoting in my KJV and use them often.
-
November 25th 2004, 01:47 AM #15
Re: The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
Thanks for the info.
Originally posted by master_mormon
"I'm hoping to rope enough corpses together to make a small raft." Mad_Gerbil, D&G
Similar Threads
-
Where is Joseph Smith mentioned in the Bible?
By wonbyone in forum LDS - MormonismReplies: 106Last Post: September 16th 2009, 05:18 AM -
Joseph Smith the man
By Krusader in forum LDS - MormonismReplies: 82Last Post: April 25th 2006, 05:12 PM -
Harry Potter, The Bible, and Joseph Smith
By master_mormon in forum LDS - MormonismReplies: 20Last Post: March 9th 2006, 07:16 PM -
Joseph Smith...
By misterguss in forum LDS - MormonismReplies: 1Last Post: February 11th 2005, 06:06 PM















































































Quote

Globalization isn't all its...
Yesterday, 10:28 PM in Civics 101