Inspired Version of the Bible vs. The Book of Mormon
Joseph Smith's
Inspired Version of the Bible vs. The Book of Mormon
Plus Commentary on Book of Mormon Alterations
The inspired version of the Bible was in some parts words that were lost but in other parts was more revelation that should be revealed that was not ready to come forth at the time the original prophet received it. Just like the additions and more revelations to older revelations in the Book of Commandments (Doctrine and Covenants).
I see so many confused over the changes in the inspired version that conflict with the Book of Mormon, and earlier documents. Myself knowing for a fact that the Book of Mormon was straight from the seer stone and though in limited understanding of their writing style- these questions were put into my mind when I bought a copy of the inspired version the RLDS sells.
I took it to the Lord and after a while was blunty shown knowledge that I didn't have seconds before. Knowledge that flowed to me after he said those words "Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I have seen your troubles and heard your thoughts concerning these things..." And was told what I explained above. The inspired version was "more" inspiration. Not all of it was necessarily receiving lost words from mistranslation. But words that were "with-held" from the original revelations even during the Book of Mormon translation.
Take it as you may- But for those of you who have rejected the "inspired version" and label it as a fallacy of Joseph Smith, beware that you have condemned words of the Lord.
I would say the 1830 Book of Mormon is more correct in terminology and that the alteration took away from truth and meaning. The examples you gave show the "oneness" of how "The Father is in me and I am in him." Other alterations where "sun of God" is changed to "son of God." I feel Sun was not a spelling error but literally showing Christ is a Sun, Celestialized ruler that governs the heavens and gives light to all. Another change which is the most questionable is before the 1980 alterations by Talmage (who by the way made most of the alterations you will find - the same man who said their was no revelation or light during the dark ages) is this. that the lamanites "shall become a white and delightsome people." was changed in 1980 to "shall become a pure and delightsome people."
Spencer W. Kimball even gave an entire speech on "white and delightsome" before the BoM was altered. He said that it was being fulfilled and he had seen for himself lamanites were becoming white on indian reservations. Why was this verse changed? Quite simple, government pressure, an issue of prejudice, the same reason they gave blacks the priesthood. It's a shame, and yet another sign of apostasy. I have the original 1830 BoM and am starting to read it over again.
Enoch
A visitor writes:
Well, I hate to say it but that is one of the reasons I rejected the"Inspired Version" a couple of years ago. Another reason is that I spent some time becoming intimately familiar with the Gospel of John, some of it in Greek. Eventually I discovered that the oldest known copies of John date back to the middle-to-late First Century CE (We worked with copies, not having the wherewithal to go to Rome and Oxford, where these precious docuements are kept.) They came from Ephesus and are reliably dated back to the time and place when John the Beloved was known to be there. In other words, they were copied when John himself was there to supervise the work, and presented to an audience who knew the life and work and writings and theology intimately. There is no --zero-- chance of errors in transmittal or corruption. And John in the IV bears no resemblance to John in the 1st Century Greek. Joseph and Sidney made it up out of whole cloth. On the other hand, if you want to call the IV "Joseph Smith's inspired commentary on the Bible," well, I might be interested.
--Zionic Mark
A visitor writes:
There is something else about the BoM and the Inspired version of the
Bible that will get one going in circles. Like a dog chasing his tail.
Notice that some passages in the BoM (3Nephi) match exactly those in the KJ Bible. But, then Joseph corrects them in the inspired version of the Bible:
Here is an example...
Judge not, that ye be not judged. (3Nephi 14:1)
Judge not, that ye be not judged. (KJ Matthew 7:1)
Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged; but judge righteous
judgment. (JST Matthew 7:2)
So, which time would you say that Joseph was "inspired"? When he
translated the BoM or when he corrected the Bible? Why didn't he get it
right in the BoM in the first place?
In truth, it is supposed to be this way. So man will learn to quit
worshiping man as well as the written word.
Randall
Hellowdy, folks!
As time draws to an end for the corporate way of things, and a new dawn is ushered in, here are a few things for your contemplation and consideration...
Besides mutilating the sacred garment to render it more user-friendly fashion wise, and the removal of unchangeable things from sacred ceremonies, there have been over 8400 word changes in our LDS scriptures (inspired corrections of the word of God?). Here are some examples which completely change meanings:
1 Nephi 11:18
"Behold, the virgin whom thous seest is the mother of THE SON OF God..."
varies from the 1830 edition p. 25
"Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of God..."
Cute, eh? Those busy little deseret bees have much to do in "maintaining
doctrinal purity"...
But wait, there is more!
1 Nephi 13:40
"...the Lamb of God is THE SON OF the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world;..."
1830 p. 32
"...the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world;..."
And then...
1 Nephi 11:21
"...Behold the Lamb of God, yea even THE SON OF the Eternal Father!"
1830 p. 25
"...Behold the Lamb of God, yea even the Eternal Father!"
Finally (actually there are many more...)
1 Nephi 11:32
"...THE SON OF the everlasting God was judged of the world;..."
1830 p. 26
"...the everlasting God was judged of the world;..."
So my question is which one is correct, which version is "the most correct of any book on earth", the 1830 Joseph Smith version, or the "inspired translation" of the Book of Mormon? Perhaps there should be a qualifier included in the currently published Book of Mormon which states that although it was the most correct of any book in 1830, it is even more most correct now. New and improved!
Inspired Version of the Bible vs. The Book of Mormon
Plus Commentary on Book of Mormon Alterations
The inspired version of the Bible was in some parts words that were lost but in other parts was more revelation that should be revealed that was not ready to come forth at the time the original prophet received it. Just like the additions and more revelations to older revelations in the Book of Commandments (Doctrine and Covenants).
I see so many confused over the changes in the inspired version that conflict with the Book of Mormon, and earlier documents. Myself knowing for a fact that the Book of Mormon was straight from the seer stone and though in limited understanding of their writing style- these questions were put into my mind when I bought a copy of the inspired version the RLDS sells.
I took it to the Lord and after a while was blunty shown knowledge that I didn't have seconds before. Knowledge that flowed to me after he said those words "Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I have seen your troubles and heard your thoughts concerning these things..." And was told what I explained above. The inspired version was "more" inspiration. Not all of it was necessarily receiving lost words from mistranslation. But words that were "with-held" from the original revelations even during the Book of Mormon translation.
Take it as you may- But for those of you who have rejected the "inspired version" and label it as a fallacy of Joseph Smith, beware that you have condemned words of the Lord.
I would say the 1830 Book of Mormon is more correct in terminology and that the alteration took away from truth and meaning. The examples you gave show the "oneness" of how "The Father is in me and I am in him." Other alterations where "sun of God" is changed to "son of God." I feel Sun was not a spelling error but literally showing Christ is a Sun, Celestialized ruler that governs the heavens and gives light to all. Another change which is the most questionable is before the 1980 alterations by Talmage (who by the way made most of the alterations you will find - the same man who said their was no revelation or light during the dark ages) is this. that the lamanites "shall become a white and delightsome people." was changed in 1980 to "shall become a pure and delightsome people."
Spencer W. Kimball even gave an entire speech on "white and delightsome" before the BoM was altered. He said that it was being fulfilled and he had seen for himself lamanites were becoming white on indian reservations. Why was this verse changed? Quite simple, government pressure, an issue of prejudice, the same reason they gave blacks the priesthood. It's a shame, and yet another sign of apostasy. I have the original 1830 BoM and am starting to read it over again.
Enoch
A visitor writes:
Well, I hate to say it but that is one of the reasons I rejected the"Inspired Version" a couple of years ago. Another reason is that I spent some time becoming intimately familiar with the Gospel of John, some of it in Greek. Eventually I discovered that the oldest known copies of John date back to the middle-to-late First Century CE (We worked with copies, not having the wherewithal to go to Rome and Oxford, where these precious docuements are kept.) They came from Ephesus and are reliably dated back to the time and place when John the Beloved was known to be there. In other words, they were copied when John himself was there to supervise the work, and presented to an audience who knew the life and work and writings and theology intimately. There is no --zero-- chance of errors in transmittal or corruption. And John in the IV bears no resemblance to John in the 1st Century Greek. Joseph and Sidney made it up out of whole cloth. On the other hand, if you want to call the IV "Joseph Smith's inspired commentary on the Bible," well, I might be interested.
--Zionic Mark
A visitor writes:
There is something else about the BoM and the Inspired version of the
Bible that will get one going in circles. Like a dog chasing his tail.
Notice that some passages in the BoM (3Nephi) match exactly those in the KJ Bible. But, then Joseph corrects them in the inspired version of the Bible:
Here is an example...
Judge not, that ye be not judged. (3Nephi 14:1)
Judge not, that ye be not judged. (KJ Matthew 7:1)
Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged; but judge righteous
judgment. (JST Matthew 7:2)
So, which time would you say that Joseph was "inspired"? When he
translated the BoM or when he corrected the Bible? Why didn't he get it
right in the BoM in the first place?
In truth, it is supposed to be this way. So man will learn to quit
worshiping man as well as the written word.
Randall
Hellowdy, folks!
As time draws to an end for the corporate way of things, and a new dawn is ushered in, here are a few things for your contemplation and consideration...
Besides mutilating the sacred garment to render it more user-friendly fashion wise, and the removal of unchangeable things from sacred ceremonies, there have been over 8400 word changes in our LDS scriptures (inspired corrections of the word of God?). Here are some examples which completely change meanings:
1 Nephi 11:18
"Behold, the virgin whom thous seest is the mother of THE SON OF God..."
varies from the 1830 edition p. 25
"Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of God..."
Cute, eh? Those busy little deseret bees have much to do in "maintaining
doctrinal purity"...
But wait, there is more!
1 Nephi 13:40
"...the Lamb of God is THE SON OF the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world;..."
1830 p. 32
"...the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world;..."
And then...
1 Nephi 11:21
"...Behold the Lamb of God, yea even THE SON OF the Eternal Father!"
1830 p. 25
"...Behold the Lamb of God, yea even the Eternal Father!"
Finally (actually there are many more...)
1 Nephi 11:32
"...THE SON OF the everlasting God was judged of the world;..."
1830 p. 26
"...the everlasting God was judged of the world;..."
So my question is which one is correct, which version is "the most correct of any book on earth", the 1830 Joseph Smith version, or the "inspired translation" of the Book of Mormon? Perhaps there should be a qualifier included in the currently published Book of Mormon which states that although it was the most correct of any book in 1830, it is even more most correct now. New and improved!
Comments
Post a Comment