Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How the Bible Came to Be: Part 7, The Sweet and Ripened Fruit
The Ensign ^ | Lenet H. Read

Posted on 07/07/2008 7:13:25 PM PDT by Grig

The bloodshed in the late 1500s had a decidedly sobering effect on England. The outrageous spectacle of Protestants being martyred under one regime, and Catholics under another, helped prepare the way eventually for greater religious tolerance. Under James, who became king in 1603, a major move in that direction took place.

James faced a nation badly in need of religious unification. The Puritans had grown strong in numbers and also in determination to make their numbers felt, and they petitioned James for reforms.

Though he was not sympathetic to the Puritan cause, James felt it politically wise to hold a conference to consider their grievances, and did so the following year. It is surprising that the most remarkable accomplishment to come out of that three-day conference arose not from the carefully prepared petitions, which were generally rejected, but from one individual’s seemingly extemporaneous suggestion—that there be a new Bible. The suggestion was made by John Reynolds, a leading Puritan and president of Corpus Christi College, who felt the Bible used in the churches was “corrupt and not aunswerable to the truth of the Originall.” 1 Reynolds was not seeking a pro-Protestant version, however; he was seeking a correct Bible that would be satisfactory to all.

The majority of those in attendance were opposed to another translation. One participant remarked that there would never be an end to translations if everyone’s whims were humored. But the person who really counted, King James, was very taken with the idea.

It is true that part of his excitement over a new translation was due to his strong disapproval of the Geneva Bible. He was displeased not because of inaccuracies, but because of what he considered improprieties in its notes. But he also was excited at the idea of heading such a project—for King James liked books, and the Bible most of all. 2

His boyhood tutor had acquainted him with the Bible, and he had discovered for himself its worth. In fact, he considered himself somewhat of a biblical scholar. He had translated a paraphrase of the book of Revelation and some of the Psalms, and in all his communications he made frequent references to the scriptures.

One writer points out that we should feel quite thankful that Reynold’s lonely request fell upon James’s ear. Otherwise, such an idea probably would have died. 3 Indeed, when we consider the differing roads that various kings and queens have pursued to embellish and glorify their names, it is easy for us to conclude that King James undoubtedly was among those who chose most wisely. Not only did James nurture this dream of a new Bible acceptable to all, but he also cared enough about the final product to carefully ensure its excellence.

The excitement King James felt about this project is shown in the rapidity with which he acted. Within one month, he had a detailed plan drawn up outlining how the work would be accomplished. 4 The translators were then chosen with care. Initially there were fifty-four of them, selected with a representative balance in mind—Anglicans and Puritans, high churchmen and low churchmen, clergy and laity, theologians and linguists. 5 James sincerely wanted a book for all people, regardless of religious preference, one to which no one would take offense.

Furthermore, he wanted it to be of highest scholastic quality. Among the men selected was the dean of Westminster, a master of fifteen languages with an unquestioned reputation for accuracy in scholarship. Another had spent thirty years as King’s Professor of Hebrew at Trinity College, Cambridge. Others were skilled in various combinations of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, and Spanish. 6

But the committee possessed more than just linguistic acumen. Among its members were men of high character who exercised good influence on their peers in many ways. One was persistent in persuading fellow clergymen of the need to take the gospel abroad. Four were Puritan clergymen, some of whom had made enormous financial sacrifices for their faith. Another had gained wide-reaching respect for his meekness and charity, even toward his enemies. Still another labored among the Scots, preparing ground necessary for unifying the Church of England and the Church of Scotland. 7 Reynolds himself, who had suggested the work, in the end sacrificed his life for it. For though he became ill, he insisted on giving his utmost to the project, thereby contributing to his own death. 8

Though King James intended to give every support necessary to the translation, he was not wise in money matters and soon encountered an empty treasury. Undaunted, however, he appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Bancroft, as a general manager of the project and suggested he raise funds for it from the bishops and clergy. But the appeal evidently fell on deaf ears. Finally, the universities agreed to provide, without charge, food and lodging for the translators while they worked. Some scholars also claim that a publisher promised to pay a sum for the right to print and sell the book. But it is generally felt that most of the translators did their work at considerable sacrifice to themselves and with little financial remuneration. 9

The extent of that sacrifice is captured in an account given by one of the committee members, John Bois, to an associate. Bois indicated that he as a translator was secluded in his work throughout the week until Saturday evening, that he then went home on Sunday to take care of his most urgent clergical duties, and that he returned on Monday morning to resume translation. This kind of schedule he followed for four years. 10

Although the committees had been appointed in 1604, formal work did not begin until 1607 because of the fund-raising delays. While fifty-four men supposedly were appointed, only forty-seven actually worked on the Bible, and several of them died before its completion. These forty-seven were divided into groups of six. Two of the groups worked at Oxford, two at Cambridge, and two at Westminster. Each group was assigned a different section of the scriptures to translate.

The instructions they received through Bancroft were very strict. This work was to be a revision only, not a fresh translation, and the work they were to revise was the Bishops’ Bible. They were granted permission, however, to refer to Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, and the Geneva versions; and where any of those agreed more closely with the Hebrew and Greek texts that were available, they could use them instead. 11

There is strong evidence that the scholars worked much more independently than these instructions indicate. For example, according to their own accounts, they consulted every translation or scholarly work currently available, including versions of the Bible in Spanish, French, Italian; the Vulgate and other Latin versions; Luther’s and other German versions; as well as the best Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek manuscripts then existing. 12 They even consulted the Rheims-Douai Version, which had recently been translated by Roman Catholic scholars in a defensive move against the Protestant translations. Because the Douai Version was still so heavily laden with Latin terminology, it did not have much effect on the King James, but the King James Version came to have much effect on later Douai versions. 13

Thus, every source that might possibly give an insight into the best translation was eagerly sought. In fact, the translators sent appeals to all bishops to notify those who were skilled in ancient tongues, and who had information or observations that might be helpful to the translators, to forward that information to the appropriate college. And when there was difficulty over any obscure passage, the translators did not hesitate to make contact with outside specialists who might be able to shed some light upon its meaning. 14

The process by which the translators obtained not just a coherent but an excellent translation in spite of its being a many-handed work was apparently quite unusual for the times. Each man began by working separately on his assigned chapters. Then the committee met for review. There is some uncertainty as to how this final correlation process was actually carried out, but John Seldon, who knew some of the translators, was quoted in 1689 as saying:

“The translators in king James’s time took an excellent way. That part of the Bible was given him who was most excellent in such a tongue … and then they met together, and one read the translation, the rest holding in their hands some Bible, either of the learned tongues, or French, Spanish, Italian, etc. If they found any fault they spoke; if not, he read on.” 15

While some have questions about the full accuracy of this summary, 16 the fact that the King James Version is so beautifully lyrical—so pleasing to the ear—lends credence to this oral method of correlation.

In the March 1974 Ensign, Margaret Tuttle Sanchez illustrated the process with which one committee probably dealt with the problem of translating the Psalms. In her imaginative portrayal, one of the scholars begins by reading the Scripture as existing in the Bishops’ Bible.

“ ‘God is my shepherd. …’ ‘Wait!’ There is a chorus of exclamation. … All present agree that ‘shepherd’ is the correct meaning. But to begin by saying ‘God’ is too abrupt. The rhythm is awkward. There is no melody to the line. Moreover, the Hebrew word is Jehovah that here and elsewhere Coverdale has translated as the LORD, using capital letters. And besides, the Book of Common Prayer and the Geneva Bible both agree that there is a superior wording: ‘The Lord is my shepherd.’

“The reader continues: ‘Therefore I can lack nothing.’ This is better than the inversion in the Prayer Book, ‘Therefore can I lack nothing,’ but it does not equal the simplicity and power of the Geneva version, ‘I shall not want.’ This is it, a line with dignity and beauty of movement: ‘The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.’

“Again, the Bishops’ version is read: ‘He will cause me to repose my self in pasture full of grass.’ The Prayer Book (Great Bible) version states, instead, ‘He shall feed me in a green pasture.’ But why the future tense? Coverdale originally used the present tense, ‘He feedeth me.’ The Geneva text agrees on this point and contributes a valuable alternative: ‘He maketh me to rest in green pasture.’ ‘He maketh me’—how effectively the rhythm is enhanced by the alliteration. ‘To what?’ ‘Repose myself’ and ‘rest’ both suggest the same thing. But how else could it be said if the Lord were a shepherd and I were a sheep?

“ ‘He maketh me to lie down’—here the committee has had inspiration. The words are not in any of the English texts before them, but they agree to adopt them. ‘He maketh me to lie down in green pasture.’ ‘Why not green pastures?’ a new voice asks. Perhaps one of the group has glanced at an English paraphrase … [by] Gilby published in 1580. …

“ ‘Green pastures’ suddenly sounds universal. Coupled with the use of the present tense, the line takes on immediacy and significance for each follower of the Good Shepherd. It is accepted.

“ ‘And he will lead me unto calm waters.’ The future tense has already been vetoed. Geneva, Coverdale, and Gilby all say, ‘And leadeth me.’ Someone makes an astute observation: there is more balance and dignity if the ‘he’ of the Bishops’ Version is retained but all the ‘ands’ are dropped. ‘He leadeth me’—it is a good beginning. There is a choice of prepositions: ‘to’? ‘unto’? ‘by’? ‘forth’? ‘beside’? ‘Beside’ is chosen. Shall it be ‘calm waters,’ ‘the pleasant rivers of waters,’ ‘a fresh waters,’ ‘the waters of comfort’? The Geneva Version triumphs again with the quiet beauty and appropriateness of ‘the still waters.’ ‘Green pastures’ and ‘still waters’ now balance perfectly.

“ ‘He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.’

“The line surpasses those of all earlier texts; it bears the stamp of excellence so characteristic of the King James Version.” 17

Because records are available of the other translations the committee used, we can tell from which of these the King James Version ultimately drew. What is important here is that although the translators were seeking accuracy, they were seeking far more than just that. To have sought accuracy alone would have been much easier, but they were also seeking that which would be spiritually satisfying. They recognized that the true purpose of scripture is to move—to motivate. Ideas placed in their best frame are far more stimulating. They are more memorable. Because the committee members were often willing to expend the energies necessary to find the best word, the most pleasing phrase, they were able to conserve “all that was gracious and dignified and beautiful from the cherished versions of the past,” 18 and to blend them with inspiration into a glorious new whole. The result of that toil, that love, is a Bible that has had immense impact on every generation since its publication.

Actually, accuracy and beauty of phrasing were not left to just one committee. As one of the translators explained, “Neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had [already] hammered.” 19 Although there is some question as to whether it was fully carried out, the original plan was that each group’s work be reviewed by every other group. If this plan was followed, the manuscript went through at least six or more revisions before it was actually published. We know for certain that there was at least one review—this by a committee of twelve, two from each of the six major groups, who met after the other committees had disbanded, at least for nine more months and perhaps longer, reviewing and revising the work as a whole. 20 The original plan had also called for final review and approval by the bishops, the Privy Council, and King James. In view of James’s strong personal interest in the results, it would be surprising if at least some of these steps were not taken.

And so, in 1611, King James’s Bible was completed. It is said he felt more pride in seeing this work accomplished than in a recent military victory over Spain. And he had every right to feel proud. The Bible was handsome—both inside and out. Of special satisfaction to him, no doubt, was its flattering dedication. But it was impressive for many other reasons as well, particularly for its beautiful new illustrations. In addition, it boasted a table of contents, various other tables of information, an almanac, a genealogical chart, and a map of Canaan. Each chapter had an introductory summation of contents and briefer summations at the top of each column. The chapters and verses were numbered. 21 While these kinds of features are common in our Bibles of today, in earlier times they were remarkably new.

One thing the Bible did not contain was controversial notes. James had been emphatic about this. The only notes allowed were those which explained Hebrew and Greek words or which gave alternative translations or referred the reader from one scriptural passage to another. “The text ought to speak for itself” was the policy adhered to. 22

One feature which the original version possessed but which has been left out of subsequent editions was a lengthy preface titled “The Translators to the Readers.” Believed to have been written by Dr. Miles Smith, but obviously approved by all, it reveals much insight into the hearts of the men who translated the Bible for us. Still mindful of the great struggles that had been waged in behalf of the Bible prior to this time, and of the still lingering negative opinions toward this new translation, the spokesman for the translators referred sadly to their “zeal to promote the common good” which “deserveth certainly much respect and esteem, but yet findeth cold entertainment in the world.” 23

The translators insisted that their only object was to make out of several good translations one final one that was better. And they reaffirmed once more the great need for translation itself, stating that such work “openeth the window, to let in the light; … breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; … removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water; even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well.” 24

Not only had the stone been rolled away, but every effort had been made to ensure that the water which came forth was in its purest, most refreshing form. In the King James Version, that water was a river, its fountainhead truth, but fed by many streams and tributaries.

From the pens of the Hebrew prophets and Greek translators who had given physical shape to that truth, there had come homely but highly effective imagery—truth wrapped in images of wells and wildernesses; of shepherds and sheep; of sowing, cultivating, and harvesting; of oil and lamps, arks and threshing floors. The Hebrews had influenced the rhythmic poetry of the books, providing parallelism to its structures, giving it balance and contrast.

From the New Testament writers, who were influenced by Greek, there had come a more flexible sentence structure and Greek customs and names. Even the English form of the name Jesus Christ was inherited from the Greek.

From the Latin influence had come melody and deeply imbedded Latin terminology such as justification, sanctification, dispensation.

From the Anglo-Saxon had come brevity in the form of one-syllable words. Over eighty percent of the Sermon on the Mount consists of one-syllable words, attesting to their Saxon origin. 25

Of this inheritance from strong multiple sources one writer has observed of the Bible, “It must suffice here to point out that the perennial glory of the King James Bible is that it succeeded so wonderfully in combining these diversified elements—some from Hebrew, some from Greek, some from Latin, some from Anglo-Saxon—and in fusing them into a unified and harmonious kind of speech.” 26

As the Bible’s original shape came from several different cultures, so its final English form was the handiwork of many men. One writer explains that “the development of the English text was … a gradual unfolding. Each translation entered into the making of the one that came after it and was incorporated with it, thus transmitting its own influence down the whole line of descent.” 27

The English translation had begun with Wycliffe, and his influence remains upon it. The Geneva Bible translators had used the Wycliffe translation and so had passed on some of his work. Also, his precedent of simple structure and plainness of speech was a route which was consistently followed.

Tyndale, however, exercised the greatest influence. The entire line of Bibles which followed him were basically revisions of his first work. While it had been refined again and again by other hands, the work remained basically Tyndale’s.

Coverdale had been the laborer behind the Great Bible and other versions. To him is attributed the Bible’s final smoothness, an even-flowing tempo, and a special sweetness, contributions consistent with Coverdale’s own basically gentle nature.

The Geneva Bible also had much influence. Because its writers had so diligently sought the Bible’s pristine intent, searching newly discovered manuscripts previously unavailable to Tyndale, it added clarity in areas which had been obscure. It also added a vitality which had been part of the original; because of its fidelity to original tongues, its renderings often were highly poetic. 28

The high-church origins of the Bishops’ Bible are seen in the elegance and high propriety found in some verses of the scriptures. And it helped tone down some renderings of the Geneva that were felt to be too sharp. 29

Finally, there is the touch of those forty-seven translators who produced the King James Bible. Charles Butterworth describes the impact of their sensitive and polished work:

“Compared with its predecessors, the King James version shows a superb faculty of selection and combination, a sure instinct for betterment. … No doubt, the men of the six revising companies were aided by the era wherein they worked; it was an age in which there was a lively appreciation of literary skill. …

“[But] much was also required of the King James workmen to know what they should preserve untouched in such a rich inheritance.” 30

Perhaps the most precious gift bequeathed by every translator who labored on the Bible—from Wycliffe to the forty-seven—was their earnest care for it, an unselfish love void of personal ambition and personal pride. Precisely how true this is may be best illustrated by the following outline of sources from one section of the Sermon on the Mount. (See Matt. 6:28–33.) It should be realized, however, that in many cases, a phrase attributed to one source may be distinctly different from Tyndale’s version only by the change of one or two words.

Tyndale: Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow;

King James: They toil not,

Coverdale: neither do they spin:

Great: And yet I say unto you,

Geneva: That even Solomon in all his glory

Coverdale: was not arrayed like one of these,

Great: Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field,

Rheims Douai: Which today is,

Geneva: and tomorrow is cast into the oven,

King James: shall he not much more clothe you,

Tyndale: O ye of little faith? Therefore take no thought, saying,

Wycliffe: What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink?

Coverdale: or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?

Bishops’: (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:)

Tyndale: for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

Geneva: But seek ye first the Kingdom of God,

Wycliffe: and his righteousness;

Bishops’: and all these things shall be added unto you. 31

Out of a full understanding of its history, and in deep appreciation of its artistry, readers have called the King James Version of the Bible a “miracle,” a “masterpiece,” a “literary wonder of the world.” 32

But while it was destined for greatness, when it first appeared, it received cold welcome—even vicious attacks. Some with axes to grind called it theologically incorrect, even blasphemous. 33 And many of the common people, their ears prejudiced to the Geneva, were uncomfortable with its unfamiliar sounds.

But, in time, with greater acquaintance, came greater appreciation. King James’s Bible crept its way into the hearts of its readers and won the admiration of individuals of numerous religious faiths. It would become the chief religious influence in the lives of many men for centuries.

Nevertheless, there have been additional efforts to revise it. Two revisions of minor consequence were made in the 1600s. In 1769 a revision was made to modernize the spelling. It is this specific revision that is the King James Version of today. 34

In even later times, as other old manuscripts have been discovered, as more is learned about ancient tongues, and as language usage has changed, there have come more versions of the Bible. Among the first of the major versions were the Revised Version (1881, 1885), the American Standard Version (1901), and the Revised Standard Version (1946). However, the original manuscripts which have most heavily influenced these translations are manuscripts which lack material found in other ancient copies. The result, in some revisions, is insufficiently supported substitutions for or deletions of precious original truths. Among the most serious losses are phrases which verify Christ’s divinity. President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., writing in 1956, documented the changes made in some of the earlier revisions and explained why many of the substitutions and deletions in these works are of such concern to Latter-day Saints. 35

This is not to say that the translations President Clark mentions, and the others available to us today, are not helpful in their own ways. Some of the newer versions since President Clark wrote are easier to read and incorporate translations of documents (some dating to the second century A.D.) unavailable to the King James revisers. However, the Church continues to hold to use of the King James Version because of its general soundness in doctrine, its relative accuracy in telling the life and mission of the Savior, and its wide popularity. 36

In fact, the King James Version most likely can never be completely replaced because it is such a vital part of the heritage of English-speaking nations. Its language that has become “part and parcel of our common tongue—bone of its bone and flesh of its flesh.” 37 In one fifty-year period alone, this Bible was the source of more than eleven hundred titles of published books, a credit to its “terse and telling imagery.” 38 And everywhere in our language are its unforgettable phrases: “the apple of his eye” (Deut. 32:10; see Ps. 17:8; Prov. 7:2), “the signs of the times” (Matt. 16:3), “a pearl of great price” (Matt. 13:46), “a labor of love” (1 Thes. 1:3), “straining at a gnat” (Matt. 23:24), “a thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor. 12:7).

The heritage of the King James Bible has been in far more than expressive language, however. One writer says of it:

“It has been in life and death the guide of a billion hearts and minds. It has taught, consoled, enlightened, civilized and disciplined millions who have read little else. It has … astonished the learned, and formed the characters of those who have led.” 39

When the common man first began to desire the Bible during that long period when it was denied him, one of the great arguments against his receiving it was that he would cheapen and debase it. Yet, the reverse has proven true. Man has not debased the Bible. The Bible has lifted man. It has enriched his language and lifted his hopes, his achievements, and his eternal perspective.

Through all the centuries of its being written, compiled, and translated, this collection of sacred records has indeed proved to be a truly sweet and ripened fruit.

Gospel topics: Bible, scriptures

Notes

  1. Charles C. Butterworth, The Literary Lineage of the King James Bible (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1941), p. 206.

  2. F. F. Bruce, History of the Bible in English (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 96.

  3. H. W. Hoare, The Evolution of the King James Bible (London: John Murray, 1902), p. 244.

  4. Frederick C. Grant, Translating the Bible (Greenwich, Conn.: The Seabury Press, 1961), p. 70.

  5. Fred Gladstone Bratton, A History of the Bible (Boston: Beacon Press, 1959), p. 261–62.

  6. Geddes MacGregor, The Bible in the Making (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1959), pp. 164–78.

  7. MacGregor, pp. 164–78.

  8. MacGregor, pp. 169–70.

  9. MacGregor, pp. 148–49; Bruce, p. 98.

10. Anthony Walker, Life of John Bois: Translating for King James; Notes Made by a Translator of King James, trans. and ed. by Ward Allen (Vanderbilt University Press, 1969), p. 139.

11. MacGregor, p. 163.

12. Butterworth, pp. 216–17; MacGregor, p. 163.

13. Edgar J. Goodspeed, The Making of the New Testament (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1925), p. 36; Butterworth, pp. 195, 203–4.

14. MacGregor, pp. 162–63.

15. Butterworth, p. 214.

16. Butterworth, p. 214.

17. Margaret Sanchez, Ensign, Mar. 1974, p. 39.

18. Sanchez, p. 40.

19. See J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Why The King James Version (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1979), p. ii.

20. S. L. Greenslade, “English Versions of the Bible,” Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 3, The West From the Reformation to the Present Day (Cambridge University Press, 1963), p. 166. Also see Butterworth, pp. 213–14.

21. The original scriptures were not written with chapters and verses. While some divisions into chapters occurred earlier, the first known usage of chapters and verses occurred in the 13th century by Stephen Langton for his own use as teacher. (See Beryl Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1941, pp. 180–83.) Some scholars point out that these insertions can actually hinder a correct understanding of the scriptures because they give an artificial break to the message and encourage readers to take passages out of context. However, they continue to be used because they provide a convenient form of reference.

22. MacGregor, p. 160; Butterworth, pp. 215–16.

23. Clark, p. 32.

24. Clark, p. 34.

25. Millicent J. Taylor, Treasure of Free Men (New York: Harper and Bros., 1953), p. 23; Butterworth, pp. 224, 312.

26. Butterworth, p. 21.

27. Butterworth, p. 228. For elaboration see all of chapter 12.

28. Butterworth, pp. 236–37.

29. Butterworth, p. 237.

30. Butterworth, p. 242.

31. Butterworth, pp. 320–26.

32. MacGregor, p. 192; Butterworth, p. 240; H. G. G. Herklots, How Our Bible Came to Us (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954), p. 12.

33. Bruce, p. 107.

34. Ira Maurice Price, The Ancestry of Our English Bible, third revised edition by William A. Irwin and Allen P. Wikgren (New York: Harper and Row, 1956), pp. 275–76.

35. See Clark, especially notes (chapters) 26–34.

36. See Clark, pp. 3–7, 60–61.

37. John Livingston Lowes as quoted in Butterworth, p. 5.

38. Bratton, pp. 263–64.

39. MacGregor, p. 192.


TOPICS: Catholic; History; Mainline Protestant; Other Christian
KEYWORDS: ctr; lds; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last
To: colorcountry; Pan_Yans Wife; MHGinTN; Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; Osage Orange; svcw; Enosh; ...

Ping


21 posted on 09/11/2008 4:42:27 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 ("I fear all we have done is awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve. ( DBM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grig

“... improprieties in its notes.”

The Geneva is a hoot.


22 posted on 09/11/2008 5:26:20 PM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 7MMmag
Did I miss something?

Yes, in my opinion you did.

It is entirely understandable though, sometimes posters have an agenda. Sometimes we get caught in agenda snares.

23 posted on 09/11/2008 6:22:59 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 7MMmag
Did I miss something?

Yes, in my opinion you did.

It is entirely understandable though, sometimes posters have an agenda. Sometimes we get caught in agenda snares.

24 posted on 09/11/2008 6:23:21 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

This I found interesting from the article as the history of the AV is well known. The translators had no problem with revisiting their work to make corrections where needed as they stated in their comments but it seems Mormons do:

“However, the original manuscripts which have most heavily influenced these translations (RSV, etc.) are manuscripts which lack material found in other ancient copies. The result, in some revisions, is insufficiently supported substitutions for or deletions of precious original truths. Among the most serious losses are phrases which verify Christ’s divinity. President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., writing in 1956, documented the changes made in some of the earlier revisions and explained why many of the substitutions and deletions in these works are of such concern to Latter-day Saints. 35

This is not to say that the translations President Clark mentions, and the others available to us today, are not helpful in their own ways. Some of the newer versions since President Clark wrote are easier to read and incorporate translations of documents (some dating to the second century A.D.) unavailable to the King James revisers. However, the Church continues to hold to use of the King James Version because of its general soundness in doctrine, its relative accuracy in telling the life and mission of the Savior, and its wide popularity. 36”

“However the original manuscripts..”
There are no “original” manuscripts, what we have are copies or even copies of copies.

“.. . The result, in some revisions, is insufficiently supported substitutions for or deletions of precious original truths. Among the most serious losses are phrases which verify Christ’s divinity.”

The writer here is being coy since no teaching of Christianity depends upon a “phrase”. Greek and Hebrew might be translated by different phrases or words that convey the thought expressed by the Bible writer. If a doctine depends upon the paticular wording of a translation then it is the doctrine of the translator not the Bible.

“...why many of the substitutions and deletions in these works are of such concern to Latter-day Saints. 35”

More to the point, the BOM plagarizes the AV and so appears to gain legitimacy from it. A translation in modern English, however accurate, doesn’t work as well.

Church uses King James Version because of its “....general soundness of doctrine..”
Could that be because the BOM attempts to copy the Engish of the AV and not “soundness of doctrine”?


25 posted on 09/11/2008 7:29:27 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Grig; Tennessee Nana; greyfoxx39; colorcountry; Utah Binger
How the Bible came to be... CORRUPTED is a thread that is needed.

Just HOW the LDS organization can CLAIM that so unashamedly is beyond me.


But while it was destined for greatness, when it first appeared, it received cold welcome—even vicious attacks.







 

Articles of Faith

The Articles of Faith outline 13 basic points of belief of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The Prophet Joseph Smith first wrote them in a letter to John Wentworth, a newspaper editor,
in response to Mr. Wentworth's request to know what members of the Church believed.
They were subsequently published in Church periodicals.
They are now regarded as scripture and included in the Pearl of Great Price.

 

 

 
THE ARTICLES OF FAITH
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
History of the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 535—541
 
 

  1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
  2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.
  3. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
  4. We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
  5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.
  6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.
  7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.
  8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
  9. We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
  10. We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.
  11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
  12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
  13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Joseph Smith

 
 
 



 
We believe the Bible to be the word of God
as far as it is translated correctly;
we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
 
 

26 posted on 09/12/2008 5:03:07 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; Grig
But while it was destined for greatness, when it first appeared, it received cold welcome—even vicious attacks. Some with axes to grind called it theologically incorrect, even blasphemous. 33 And many of the common people, their ears prejudiced to the Geneva, were uncomfortable with its unfamiliar sounds.

Isn't it interesting? Many of today's King James only devotees have the same thing to say about the NIV, the NASB, the NKJV, or the NLT. They seem to focus on the familiarity of the sounds used and not the content of His Word.

27 posted on 09/12/2008 5:04:40 AM PDT by colorcountry (To anger a conservative, lie to him. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 7MMmag
 
You didn't read the posted article, did you?
 
Joseph Smith "didn't read the article" before falling for the LIES from THESE dudes!

 

 
 
 

2 Corinthians 11:12-15
 12.  And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about.
 13.  For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ.
 14.  And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
 15.  It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve. (niv)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
 
 

28 posted on 09/12/2008 5:05:16 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 7MMmag
What the heck does Joseph Smith have to do with the formation and compilation of the King James, anyway?

Joseph Smith made certain CLAIMS...

29 posted on 09/12/2008 5:10:48 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Grig
 
You don’t like a more objective look at the history of the Bible so you try to shoot the messenger.
How typical, and what a double standard.
 
 
I just HATE when that happens!

 
 

THE FIRST BOOK OF NEPHI
HIS REIGN AND MINISTRY
CHAPTER 14
 
An angel tells Nephi of the blessings and cursings to fall upon the Gentiles—There are only two churches: the Church of the Lamb of God and the church of the devil—The saints of God in all nations are persecuted by the great and abominable church—The apostle John shall write concerning the end of the world. Between 600 and 592 B.C. 
 
   1 And it shall come to pass, that if the Gentiles shall hearken unto the Lamb of God in that day that he shall manifest himself unto them in word, and also in power, in very deed, unto the taking away of their stumbling blocks—
  2 And harden not their hearts against the Lamb of God, they shall be numbered among the seed of thy father; yea, they shall be numbered among the house of Israel; and they shall be a blessed people upon the promised land forever; they shall be no more brought down into captivity; and the house of Israel shall no more be confounded.
  3 And that great pit, which hath been digged for them by that great and abominable church, which was founded by the devil and his children, that he might lead away the souls of men down to hell—yea, that great pit which hath been digged for the destruction of men shall be filled by those who digged it, unto their utter destruction, saith the Lamb of God; not the destruction of the soul, save it be the casting of it into that hell which hath no end.
  4 For behold, this is according to the captivity of the devil, and also according to the justice of God, upon all those who will work wickedness and abomination before him.
  5 And it came to pass that the angel spake unto me, Nephi, saying: Thou hast beheld that if the Gentiles repent it shall be well with them; and thou also knowest concerning the covenants of the Lord unto the house of Israel; and thou also hast heard that whoso repented not must perish.
  6 Therefore, woe be unto the Gentiles if it so be that they harden their hearts against the Lamb of God.
  7 For the time cometh, saith the Lamb of God, that I will work a great and a marvelous work among the children of men; a work which shall be everlasting, either on the one hand or on the other—either to the convincing of them unto peace and life eternal, or unto the deliverance of them to the hardness of their hearts and the blindness of their minds unto their being brought down into captivity, and also into destruction, both temporally and spiritually, according to the captivity of the devil, of which I have spoken.
  8 And it came to pass that when the angel had spoken these words, he said unto me: Rememberest thou the covenants of the Father unto the house of Israel? I said unto him, Yea.
  9 And it came to pass that he said unto me: Look, and behold that great and abominable church, which is the mother of abominations, whose founder is the devil.
  10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.
  11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over ball the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.
  12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon ball the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.
  13 And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God.
  14 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the power of the Lamb of God, that it descended upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and they were armed with righteousness and with the power of God in great glory.
  15 And it came to pass that I beheld that the wrath of God was poured out upon that great and abominable church, insomuch that there were wars and rumors of wars among all the nations and kindreds of the earth.
  16 And as there began to be wars and rumors of wars among all the nations which belonged to the mother of abominations, the angel spake unto me, saying: Behold, the wrath of God is upon the mother of harlots; and behold, thou seest all these things—
  17 And when the day cometh that the wrath of God is poured out upon the mother of harlots, which is the great and abominable church of all the earth, whose founder is the devil, then, at that day, the work of the Father shall commence, in preparing the way for the fulfilling of his covenants, which he hath made to his people who are of the house of Israel.
  18 And it came to pass that the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!
  19 And I looked and beheld a man, and he was dressed in a white robe.
  20 And the angel said unto me: Behold one of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
  21 Behold, he shall see and write the remainder of these things; yea, and also many things which have been.
  22 And he shall also write concerning the end of the world.
  23 Wherefore, the things which he shall write are just and true; and behold they are written in the book which thou beheld proceeding out of the mouth of the Jew; and at the time they proceeded out of the mouth of the Jew, or, at the time the book proceeded out of the mouth of the Jew, the things which were written were plain and pure, and most precious and easy to the understanding of all men.
  24 And behold, the things which this apostle of the Lamb shall write are many things which thou hast seen; and behold, the remainder shalt thou see.
  25 But the things which thou shalt see hereafter thou shalt not write; for the Lord God hath ordained the apostle of the Lamb of God that he should write them.
  26 And also others who have been, to them hath he shown all things, and they have written them; and they are sealed up to come forth in their purity, according to the truth which is in the Lamb, in the own due time of the Lord, unto the house of Israel.
  27 And I, Nephi, heard and bear record, that the name of the apostle of the Lamb was john, according to the word of the angel.
  28 And behold, I, Nephi, am forbidden that I should write the remainder of the things which I saw and heard; wherefore the things which I have written sufficeth me; and I have written but a small part of the things which I saw.
  29 And I bear record that I saw the things which my father saw, and the angel of the Lord did make them known unto me.
  30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.
 
30 posted on 09/12/2008 5:12:17 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Grig
 
Religious bigotry in action is an ugly thing to see and it doesn’t stop to evaluate the facts rationally.
 
You got THAT right!
 
 
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/19#19
  17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
  18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
  19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
  20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother,
“I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”
 
 
 
 

31 posted on 09/12/2008 5:16:00 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: killermedic
Thanks for bringing this thread to our attention.

It had died back in July...

32 posted on 09/12/2008 5:16:58 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Could that be because the BOM attempts to copy the Engish of the AV and not “soundness of doctrine”?
 
Doctrine??
 
 
We don't need no steeking DOCTRINE!!!                   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lj056ao6GE
 
 
 
 
 



 

TRUTH IGNORED
 
 

Smith, Young, Taylor, Pratt, Snow, Kimball, Woodruff ...

 
 
 

 1 Timothy 3:2-3
 2.  Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
 3.  not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
 
 
1 Timothy 3:12
   A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
 
 
 Titus 1:6
   An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.




 
BEHOLD!!!!  The Restorative Power  of the Book of Mormon!!
 



 
THE BOOK OF JACOB
THE BROTHER OF NEPHI
CHAPTER 2
 
  24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
  25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
  26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
  27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
  28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
  29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
  30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
  31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
  32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 
 

33 posted on 09/12/2008 5:34:59 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; Birmingham Rain; greyfoxx39; fproy2222; Colofornian; Tennessee Nana; P-Marlowe

Here’s a fun quiz:

Which religious leader wrote/transcribed their holy book in secrecy and had heavenly visions:
a. Jos. Smith
b. Mohammad

Which “prophet” had multiple wives?
a. Jos. Smith
b. Muhammad

Which prophet married underage girls?
a. Jos. Smith
b. Muhammad

Which prophet claimed the Bible is corrupt and they now have the truth?
a. Jos. Smith
b. Muhammad

Which religion claims you are saved by your own works, either fully or partially?
a. Islam
b. Mormonism

(This is not to imply that I want Islamic terrorists living next door to me, or don’t want a Mormon next door, or that Mormons are in anyway followers of Islam....)


34 posted on 09/12/2008 5:35:42 AM PDT by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Grig
Reynolds was not seeking a pro-Protestant version, however; he was seeking a correct Bible that would be satisfactory to all.

Interesting idea...

Just WHY ins't the Joseph Smith Tranlation 'acceptable' to the LDS Organization®?

Why isn't IT a part of their 'Standard Works'?

Why isn't IT considered to be 'scripture'?

35 posted on 09/12/2008 5:37:15 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
It had died back in July...


36 posted on 09/12/2008 5:55:44 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Regardless of how old the anti-Mormon posts are, they still need to be revealed as such, so....your welcome!


37 posted on 09/12/2008 8:55:25 AM PDT by killermedic (Git some, baby)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: killermedic
Regardless of how old the anti-Mormon posts are, they still need to be revealed as such, so....your welcome!

So true!

They go clear back to when Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthian church...

38 posted on 09/12/2008 12:20:10 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I didn’t know that Paul or the Corinthians were Anti-Mormon? I guess I will stick to my KJV of the bible.


39 posted on 09/13/2008 10:59:29 AM PDT by killermedic (Git some, baby)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: killermedic
I didn’t know that Paul or the Corinthians were Anti-Mormon? I guess I will stick to my KJV of the bible.?

Ok...

Here ya go:






 

KJV
 Galatians 1:6-9
 6.  I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
 7.  Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
 8.  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
 9.  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
 
 
 
 
ANYBODY???
 
Like this fine looking fellow???
 
 
 
 
 

2 Corinthians 11:12-15
 12.  But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
 13.  For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
 14.  And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
 15.  Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
 
 

Like THESE guys??
 
 
17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
 
 


 
Ephesians 2:1-2 
1.  And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:


 
1 Corinthians 4:17
  For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.
 
1 Corinthians 11:2
   Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
 
2 Thessalonians 2:15
   Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
 
2 Timothy 1:13
   Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
 
2 Timothy 3:14-15
 14.  But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
 15.  And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

40 posted on 09/14/2008 5:11:29 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson