FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Array
The Bible/Joseph Smith Translation/Was the translation complete: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
{{parabreak}} | {{parabreak}} | ||
== == | == == | ||
{{ | {{QA label}} | ||
{{:Question: Was Joseph Smith's translation of the Bible ever completed?}} | |||
===The JST is not intended primarily or solely as a restoration of lost Bible text=== | |||
Two main points to keep in mind regarding the Joseph Smith "translation" of the Bible: | Two main points to keep in mind regarding the Joseph Smith "translation" of the Bible: | ||
| Line 32: | Line 21: | ||
The JST often makes changes that harmonize one gospel with another, which is what your example does. While one gospel says "judge not" (though this may not be as absolute as you make it out to be) John 7:24 has Jesus commanding to "judge righteous judgment." The JST change harmonizes the two gospels by making Matthew agree with John. If indeed "there is a very real difference in commanding to "Judge righteously" and to "Judge not" at all" then it is a problem inherently present in the differing accounts of the Gospels, which the JST resolves in a particular way. | The JST often makes changes that harmonize one gospel with another, which is what your example does. While one gospel says "judge not" (though this may not be as absolute as you make it out to be) John 7:24 has Jesus commanding to "judge righteous judgment." The JST change harmonizes the two gospels by making Matthew agree with John. If indeed "there is a very real difference in commanding to "Judge righteously" and to "Judge not" at all" then it is a problem inherently present in the differing accounts of the Gospels, which the JST resolves in a particular way. | ||
</onlyinclude> | </onlyinclude> | ||
{{endnotes sources}} | |||
{{endnotes | |||
{{Articles Footer 1}} | {{Articles Footer 1}} | ||
Revision as of 00:37, 3 November 2014
Was the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible ever completed?
We have heard President Brigham Young state that the Prophet, before his death, had spoken to him about going through the translation of the scriptures again and perfecting it upon points of doctrine which the Lord had restrained him from giving in plainness and fullness at the time of which we write.
—George Q. Cannon, The Life of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Juvenile Instructor Office, 1888), 142.
Home > The Bible > The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
The Bible/Joseph Smith Translation/Was the translation complete
Summary: Joseph Smith created an inspired "translation" of parts of the King James version of the Bible, mostly from 1830-1833, then continued until his death in 1844. It was complied into a book in 1867 by The Reorganized Church (now Community of Christ). In 1979 it was included in as footnotes in the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 1979 King James Version of the Bible.
The JST as compiled/published in 1867 is not considered scripture, but some of it has been canonized in the Pearl of Great Price, the Book of Moses, and the Book of Matthew. We believe some of it was restoring the original intent of some Biblical verses. Some of it was restoring missing scripture or missing events. Some was for clarifying or harmonizing similar verses. Some of the same verses have different interpretations for some temporary purpose. Some call it inspired commentary. See the JST on the church website.
[1]
Is the JST a restoration of lost Bible text?
The JST is not intended primarily or solely as a restoration of lost Bible text.
As expressed in the Bible Dictionary on churchofjesuschrist.org "The JST to some extent assists in restoring the plain and precious things that have been lost from the Bible."
Two main points should be kept in mind with regards to the Joseph Smith "translation" of the Bible:
- The JST is not intended primarily or solely as restoration of text. Many mainline LDS scholars who have focused on the JST (such as Robert J. Matthews and Kent Jackson) are unanimous in this regard. The assumption that it is intended primarily or solely as a restoration of text is what leads to expectations that the JST and Book of Mormon should match up in every case. At times the JST does not even match up with itself, such as when Joseph Smith translated the same passage multiple times in different ways. This does not undermine notions of revelation, but certainly challenges common assumptions about the nature and function of Joseph's understanding of "translation".
- One of the main tendencies of the JST is harmonization. Readers are well aware of differences in Jesus' sayings between different Gospels. For example, Jesus' statements about whether divorce is permitted and under what conditions differ significantly. Matthew offers an exception clause that Mark and Luke do not, and this has severely complicated the historical interpretation of Jesus' view of divorce.
- The JST often makes changes that harmonize one gospel with another. While one gospel says "judge not" (though this may not be as absolute as some make it out to be), John 7:24 has Jesus commanding to "judge righteous judgment." The JST change harmonizes the two gospels by making Matthew agree with John. If there is a real difference between being commanded to "Judge righteously" and being commanded to "Judge not", then it is a problem inherently present in the differing accounts of the Gospels, which the JST resolves.
FAIR Resources on the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
- How was the JST translated?
- Was the JST ever completed?
- Why are there discrepancies between translations in the Book of Mormon, KJV, and the JST?
- Why is the JST Genesis creation account not more like the Book of Abraham?
- Why does the church use the KJV instead of the JST as its official Bible?
- Was the JST influenced by outside sources?
- Did Adam Clarke's Bible commentary influence the JST?
- Why does the Book of Mormon and Book of Moses use "God" while the Book of Abraham use "Gods"?
- Why does the Book of Moses contain New Testament language?
- What is the relationship between the JST and biblical manuscripts?
- Was Joseph Smith a "self certifying prophet" with JST Genesis 50:33?
- Is the church embarrassed by the JST?
Key sources |
|
FAIR links |
|
Online |
|
Video |
Video published by BYU Religious Education.
|
Print |
|
Navigators |
Life and Character |
|
Youth |
|
Revelations and the Church |
|
Prophetic Statements |
|
Society |
|
Plural marriage (polygamy) |
|
Death |
Latter-day Saints and the Bible |
|
Reliability of the Bible |
|
Creation |
|
Genesis |
|
Understanding the Bible |
|
Cultural issues |
|
The Bible and the Book of Mormon |
|
Notes
- ↑ Video published by BYU Religious Education
The JST is not intended primarily or solely as a restoration of lost Bible text
Two main points to keep in mind regarding the Joseph Smith "translation" of the Bible:
First, the JST is not intended primarily or solely as restoration of text. Unimpeachably orthodox LDS scholars who have focused on the JST (such as Robert J. Matthews and Kent Jackson) are unanimous in this regard. The assumption that it *is* intended primarily or solely as a restoration of text is what leads to expectations that the JST and Book of Mormon should match up in every case. At times the JST does not even match up with itself, such as when Joseph Smith translated the same passage multiple times in different ways. This does not undermine notions of revelation, but certainly challenges common assumptions about the nature and function of the JST and the Book of Mormon translation.
Second, one of the main tendencies of the JST is harmonization. You may be aware of differences in Jesus' sayings between different Gospels. For example, Jesus' statements about whether divorce is permitted and under what conditions differ significantly. Matthew offers an exception clause that Mark and Luke do not, and this has severely complicated the historical interpretation of Jesus' view of divorce.
The JST often makes changes that harmonize one gospel with another, which is what your example does. While one gospel says "judge not" (though this may not be as absolute as you make it out to be) John 7:24 has Jesus commanding to "judge righteous judgment." The JST change harmonizes the two gospels by making Matthew agree with John. If indeed "there is a very real difference in commanding to "Judge righteously" and to "Judge not" at all" then it is a problem inherently present in the differing accounts of the Gospels, which the JST resolves in a particular way.
Notes