Array

Question: Why are there discrepancies between translations in the Book of Mormon, King James Bible and the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible?: Difference between revisions
Line 16: Line 16:


==Response==
==Response==
I would like to share with you the opinion of Gleason
===Parallel===
Archer.  He is a well known Evangelical Christian and
Gleason Archer, well known Evangelical Christian and the Author of a highly respected book called "Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties", addresses the issue of Paul citing deficient Greek Septuagint translations that appear in our New Testaments today in lieu of better translations of the Old Testament he could have come up with.  Archer says:
the Author of a highly respected book called
"Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties" (as well as a
number of other resource books Evangelicals frequently
refer to).  In the book, Archer addresses the issue of
Paul citing deficient Greek Septuagint translations
that appear in our New Testaments today in lieu of
better translations of the Old Testament he could have
come up with.  Archer says:


"Suppose Paul had chosen to work out a new, more
"Suppose Paul had chosen to work out a new, more accurate translation into Greek directly from Hebrew. Might not the Bereans have said in reply, “that’s not the way we find it in our Bible.  How do we know you have not slanted your different rendering here and there in order to favor you new teaching about Christ?”  In order to avoid suspicion and misunderstanding, it was imperative for the apostles and evangelists to stick with the Septuagint in their preaching and teaching, both oral and written.  
accurate translation into Greek directly from Hebrew.
Might not the Bereans have said in reply, “that’s not
the way we find it in our Bible.  How do we
know you have not slanted your different rendering
here and there in order to favor you new teaching
about Christ?”  In order to avoid suspicion and  
misunderstanding, it was imperative for the apostles
and evangelists to stick with the Septuagint in their
preaching and teaching, both oral and written.  


"We, like the first-century apostles, resort to these
"We, like the first-century apostles, resort to these standard translations to teach our people in terms they can verify by resorting to their own Bibles, yet admittedly, none of these translations is completely free of faults.  We use them nevertheless, for the purpose of more effective communication than if we were to translate directly from the Hebrew or Greek."
standard translations to teach our people in terms
they can verify by resorting to their own Bibles, yet
admittedly, none of these translations is completely
free of faults.  We use them nevertheless, for the
purpose of more effective communication than if we
were to translate directly from the Hebrew or Greek."


How's this relate to the Book of Mormon's use of
Archer's point is that it was more important to the Lord and/or Paul, that Paul's writings be '''familiar''' rather than '''100% precise'''.  
deficient New Testament language?  I think I've
already shown my cards.  My conjecture is that it was
more important to the Lord and/or the translator of
the Book of Mormon that the portions of the Book of
Mormon citing the Bible be *familiar* rather than
*100% precise*.  


And as you point out, Joseph later included a
And as you point out, Joseph later included a
Line 68: Line 39:
automatically discounted, one in which you can allow
automatically discounted, one in which you can allow
the Spirit to operate in your heart.
the Spirit to operate in your heart.
And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.--Title Page
  23 And I said unto him: Lord, the Gentiles will amock at these things, because of our b weakness in writing; for Lord thou hast made us cmighty in word by faith, but thou hast not made us mighty in writing; for thou hast made all this people that they could speak much, because of the Holy Ghost which thou hast given them;
  24 And thou hast made us that we could write but little, because of the aawkwardness of our hands. Behold, thou hast not made us mighty in bwriting like unto the brother of Jared, for thou madest him that the things which he c wrote were mighty even as thou art, unto the overpowering of man to read them.
  25 Thou hast also made our words powerful and great, even that we acannot write them; wherefore, when we write we behold our bweakness, and stumble because of the placing of our words; and I fear lest the Gentiles shall c mock at our words.
  26 And when I had said this, the Lord spake unto me, saying: aFools b mock, but they shall mourn; and my grace is sufficient for the meek, that they shall take no advantage of your weakness;  ---Ether 12


==Conclusion==
==Conclusion==

Revision as of 16:10, 8 October 2007

This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.

Criticism

The Book of Mormon and the Joseph Smith's Inspired Version of the Bible sometimes disagree not only with the King James Version of the Bible, but with each other. Critics frequently point out Matthew 5-7 from the King James and Inspired Versions with 3 Nephi 12-14 from the Book of Mormon. A much celebrated example is:

Matthew 5:48 (King James Version) Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

3 Nephi 12:48 Therefore I would that ye should be perfect even as I, or your Father who is in heaven is perfect.

Matthew 5:50 (Inspired Version) Ye are therefore commanded to be perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect.

Source(s) of the criticism

Response

Parallel

Gleason Archer, well known Evangelical Christian and the Author of a highly respected book called "Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties", addresses the issue of Paul citing deficient Greek Septuagint translations that appear in our New Testaments today in lieu of better translations of the Old Testament he could have come up with. Archer says:

"Suppose Paul had chosen to work out a new, more accurate translation into Greek directly from Hebrew. Might not the Bereans have said in reply, “that’s not the way we find it in our Bible. How do we know you have not slanted your different rendering here and there in order to favor you new teaching about Christ?” In order to avoid suspicion and misunderstanding, it was imperative for the apostles and evangelists to stick with the Septuagint in their preaching and teaching, both oral and written.

"We, like the first-century apostles, resort to these standard translations to teach our people in terms they can verify by resorting to their own Bibles, yet admittedly, none of these translations is completely free of faults. We use them nevertheless, for the purpose of more effective communication than if we were to translate directly from the Hebrew or Greek."

Archer's point is that it was more important to the Lord and/or Paul, that Paul's writings be familiar rather than 100% precise.

And as you point out, Joseph later included a different version of that same verse in his Bible translation. But by then his purpose had changed, from one of bring forth a witness of Christ (i.e., The Book of Mormon) without giving its readers a reason to stumble over the reality that "Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations", to one of more or less a redaction or inspired commentary.

I hope Gleason Archer's ideas can help create a climate for you in which the Book of Mormon is not automatically discounted, one in which you can allow the Spirit to operate in your heart.

Conclusion

Endnotes

None


Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

FAIR web site

  • FAIR Topical Guide:

External links

Printed material

Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=Question:_Why_are_there_discrepancies_between_translations_in_the_Book_of_Mormon%2C_King_James_Bible_and_the_Joseph_Smith_Translation_of_the_Bible%3F&oldid=19786"