FAIR - Recent changes [en]

Authorship of New Testament books

SpencerMarsh — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:27:59 GMT

Church leaders have been relatively unconcerned about the actual authorship of the New Testament

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:27, 12 August 2026
Line 25:		Line 25:
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

			<onlyinclude>
	=Church leaders have been relatively unconcerned about the actual authorship of the New Testament=		=Church leaders have been relatively unconcerned about the actual authorship of the New Testament=
	President J. Reuben Clark, as First Counselor in the First Presidency, stated, "I am not really concerned, and no man of faith should be, about the exact authorship of the books of the Bible. More than one Prophet may well have written parts of books now collected under one heading. I do not know. There may have been ‘ghost writers’ in those days, as now."<ref> J. Reuben Clark, ''On the Way to Immortality and Eternal Life'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1950), 210; as cited in Szink, "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews," 254.</ref>		President J. Reuben Clark, as First Counselor in the First Presidency, stated, "I am not really concerned, and no man of faith should be, about the exact authorship of the books of the Bible. More than one Prophet may well have written parts of books now collected under one heading. I do not know. There may have been ‘ghost writers’ in those days, as now."<ref> J. Reuben Clark, ''On the Way to Immortality and Eternal Life'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1950), 210; as cited in Szink, "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews," 254.</ref>

	And Elder Bruce R. McConkie, speaking specifically of the Epistle to the Hebrews but applicable to all New Testament books, noted, "The principles set forth in the Epistle are more important than the personage who recorded them; an understanding of the doctrines taught is of greater worth than a knowledge of their earthly authorship."<ref>Bruce R. McConkie, ''Doctrinal New Testament Commentary'' (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1973), 3:133; as cited in Szink, "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews," 255.</ref>		And Elder Bruce R. McConkie, speaking specifically of the Epistle to the Hebrews but applicable to all New Testament books, noted, "The principles set forth in the Epistle are more important than the personage who recorded them; an understanding of the doctrines taught is of greater worth than a knowledge of their earthly authorship."<ref>Bruce R. McConkie, ''Doctrinal New Testament Commentary'' (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1973), 3:133; as cited in Szink, "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews," 255.</ref>
			</onlyinclude>
	{{Endnotes sources}}		{{Endnotes sources}}

	<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->		<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->

Latter-day Saint scripture and the closed canon

SpencerMarsh — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:27:17 GMT

Does the fact that the Bible states that nothing should be "added to" or "taken away" from the book mean that the Book of Mormon is false?

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:27, 12 August 2026
Line 231:		Line 231:
	{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Completeness/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}		{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Completeness/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}

			<onlyinclude>
	=Does the fact that the Bible states that nothing should be "added to" or "taken away" from the book mean that the Book of Mormon is false?=		=Does the fact that the Bible states that nothing should be "added to" or "taken away" from the book mean that the Book of Mormon is false?=
	==Misuse of the Book of Revelation==		==Misuse of the Book of Revelation==
Line 278:		Line 279:

	{{Critical sources box:The Bible/"Adding to" or "taking away from"/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}		{{Critical sources box:The Bible/"Adding to" or "taking away from"/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}
			</onlyinclude>
	{{endnotes sources}}		{{endnotes sources}}

Biblical inerrancy

SpencerMarsh — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:26:26 GMT

Do Latter-day Saints consider the Bible to be untrustworthy?

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:26, 12 August 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

			<onlyinclude>
	=Do Latter-day Saints consider the Bible to be untrustworthy?=		=Do Latter-day Saints consider the Bible to be untrustworthy?=
	==Early LDS leaders' views on the problems with biblical inerrancy and biblical translation would seem mainstream to most today==		==Early LDS leaders' views on the problems with biblical inerrancy and biblical translation would seem mainstream to most today==
Line 67:		Line 68:

	{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Trustworthy/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}		{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Trustworthy/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}
			</onlyinclude>
	{{Endnotes sources}}		{{Endnotes sources}}

	<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->		<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
	[[Category:Questions]]		[[Category:Questions]]

Textual variants in the Bible

SpencerMarsh — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:24:33 GMT

Are the Biblical textual variants theologically significant?

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:24, 12 August 2026
Line 57:		Line 57:
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

			<onlyinclude>
	=Are the Biblical textual variants theologically significant?=		=Are the Biblical textual variants theologically significant?=
	==Non-LDS scholar Kenneth Clark addressed this notion==		==Non-LDS scholar Kenneth Clark addressed this notion==
Line 105:		Line 106:
	* "'''We may well begin to ask if there really was a stable text at the beginning. We talk of recovering the original text, and of course every document had such a text. But the earliest witnesses to NT text even from the first century already show such variety and freedom that we may well wonder if the text remained stable long enough to hold a priority.'''" (16, {{ea}}).		* "'''We may well begin to ask if there really was a stable text at the beginning. We talk of recovering the original text, and of course every document had such a text. But the earliest witnesses to NT text even from the first century already show such variety and freedom that we may well wonder if the text remained stable long enough to hold a priority.'''" (16, {{ea}}).
	* "The NT text and the theology of each church father, of each regional text such as fam. 13, or of each major recension such as the Caesarean text—especially where departures from the common text are notable" (16).		* "The NT text and the theology of each church father, of each regional text such as fam. 13, or of each major recension such as the Caesarean text—especially where departures from the common text are notable" (16).
			</onlyinclude>
	{{Endnotes sources}}		{{Endnotes sources}}

	<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->		<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->

The Great Apostasy

SpencerMarsh — Tue, 11 Aug 2026 22:15:19 GMT

Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:15, 11 August 2026
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3,146:		Line 3,146:

	The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.		The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

			====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
			Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

			Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

			Combs says, "Moreover, the Lord could also say very positive things about ministers from other Christian churches (see Doctrine and Covenants 35:3–4; 39:7–8), and the Lord could speak of his [sic] 'church' already existing at the time that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was being established (see Doctrine and Covenants 5:14; 10:52–56, 67–69)."<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 11.</ref>

			Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–49.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. He revealed that people who were baptized in another church could not count those baptisms as valid, and had to be rebaptized into the Lord's Church (Doctrine and Covenants 22). The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church.

	====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====		====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====

KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon

SpencerMarsh — Tue, 11 Aug 2026 19:54:40 GMT

Show changes

The Great Apostasy

SpencerMarsh — Sun, 09 Aug 2026 09:12:05 GMT

The Reformed View

Show changes