Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
Tuesday July 29, 2008
Joseph Smith was inspired to translate the King James Version of the Bible and many of his revelations are printed in the Bible that is distributed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. These translations are located in the footnotes or, for lengthy passages, at the back after the Bible Dictionary, in a specific section titled Joseph Smith Translation (JST).
I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that he received revelation from God to bless all of mankind. (See Articles of Faith #6-9.)
"The Joseph Smith Translation has restored some of the plain and precious things that have been lost from the Bible (1 Ne. 13). Although it is not the official Bible of the Church, this translation does offer many interesting insights and is very valuable in understanding the Bible" (Joseph Smith Translation (JST), Guide to the Scriptures).One of numerable passages from the Joseph Smith Translation that shows this restoration of "plain and precious things" is Hebrews 11:40. In the King James Version it states, "God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect" whereas the Joseph Smith Translation is, "God having provided some better things for them through their sufferings, for without sufferings they could not be made perfect."
I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that he received revelation from God to bless all of mankind. (See Articles of Faith #6-9.)
Comments
That blog address is invalid.
Thanks, Seanette, that comment has been removed.
I think it is important to remember the difference between a ‘translation’ and a paraphrase. A translation is material that is written in one language and is translated into another language. A paraphrase is rewriting material to say the same thing but just using different words.
What Joseph Smith did was a paraphrase. To the best of my knowledge, he did not have Greek or Hebrew manuscripts that he translated. The KJV as well as other newer English versions have been translated by using the ancient manuscripts (Hebrew for the OT and Greek for the NT) and translating them into English. There are other paraphrases too, The Message is a very popular one, done by Eugene H. Peterson.
It is not a translation. It is the Inspired version.. The changes were inspired not translated
I am trying to understand how the LDS Church supports its belief that the Bible is true only “as far as it it translated correctly.” Why then, does the LDS Church not use the JST as the authority so that we can know which parts the LDS Church believes are “translated correctly?” I am so confused!
The point that the JS version was only a paraphase and not a ‘translation’ is an important point.
The fact that Joseph Smith did not know the original languages of the scriptures would, of course, kept him from doing a new translation.
But would it? JS claimed to have translated ‘reformed’ Egyptian to produce the Book of Abraham under the inspiration of the Spirit of God. Yet when the key to the Egyptian language was finally unlocked by scholars, the manuscripts used by JS to ‘translate’ the Book of Abraham were found to be nothing more than Egyptian death records! They had no resemblance to what Smith has ‘translated’!
The study of archeology has proven many parts of the bible. And that the stories in the bible were likely the truth since evidence is there when archeology discovers findings in the Holy Land.
How come archeology does not support Joseph Smith’s ideas about the nephites and other stuff here in America? Its just incredible to believe when there is no evidence like the Holy Bible has.
Other doctrines from Joseph Smith that contradicts the bible is a shame. Jesus said in heaven people would not be married or given in marriage. But of course Joseph Smith’s ideas advocate just the opposite. How tragic the deception given to members of the Mormon church. Its tragic.
I would believe your comment about marriage if you actually gave a verse and book of the Bible in which it actually quotes Jesus and him saying that marriage is for earth only. You are a narrow minded individual who knows nothing of our doctrines and has probably not even researched much it if all you can find is just two examples. This blog is about the JST and not a commentary on how our church is wrong. Central American architecture is similar to that of mid-eastern architecture at the time of 600 B.C. to Christ’s time. Of course architecture is a little different depending upon what materials are available. We might actually have a congruent record that matches the Nephites and Lamenites records if the Spanish didn’t burn many of the Mayan records and those of the indians they came across while on there holy tirades. This is all conjecture and with archeology it is the same. You can’t tell me otherwise. I’ve taken archeology courses in which instructors will agree that archeology is not fool-proof.
The JST certainly isn’t a translation, but I don’t think we can call it a paraphrase either. In a few cases, Smith simply reversed the meaning of a few passages with a well-placed ‘not’. (e.g.)