What Mormons Think of the Bible

Michael Davis' Virtual Desk ^ | Michael Davis

[delacoert]

Official Mormon Statements about the Bible:

The Mormon church teaches that the Bible has been corrupted and does not contain the fullness of the gospel. This is reflected in one of their Articles of Faith which states: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly" (Pearl of Great Price).

• Joseph Smith stated: "it was apparent that many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.10); "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 327).
• When: "the book [Bible] proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew...it contained the fullness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record" (1 Nephi 13:24), but afterwards "thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church...after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God. And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles" (Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 13:26,28). See also Doctrines of Salvation, vol.3, p.190-191.
• "many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible...Wherefore because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written" (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 29:3,10).
• When his "revelation" about Adam being God was disputed, Brigham Young stated: "You believe Adam was made of the dust of this earth. This I do not believe...I have publicly declared that I do not believe that portion of the Bible as the Christian world do. I never did, and I never want to. What is the reason I do not? Because I have come to understanding, and banished from my mind all the baby stories my mother taught me when I was a child" (Journal of Discourses, vol.2, p.6).
• Orson Pratt's lack of confidence in the Bible is obvious: "...and who, in his right mind, could for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? No one can tell whether even one verse of either the Old or New Testament conveys the ideas of the original author" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 28).
• Apostle Bruce McConkie: "Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors, many plain and precious things were deleted, in consequence of which error and falsehood poured into the churches. One of the great heresies of modern Christendom is the unfounded assumption that the Bible contains all of the inspired teachings now extant among men" (Mormon Doctrine, pp. 82,83).
• McConkie continues: The Bible of the Old World has come to us from the manuscripts of antiquity - manuscripts which passed through the hands of uninspired men who changed many parts to suit their own doctrinal ideas. Deletions were common, and, as it now stands, many plain and precious portions and many covenants of the Lord have been lost. As a consequence, those who rely upon it [the Bible] alone stumble and are confused... (The Ensign, December 1985, p 55).
• Mormon Apostle Mark E. Petersen accused manuscript copyists of deliberately tampering with the Bible: "Many insertions were made, some of them slanted for selfish purposes, while at times deliberate falsifications and fabrications were perpetrated" (As Translated Correctly, p.4).

Comparisons made by Mormon Leaders between the Bible and Book of Mormon. In contrast to the Bible, Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is perfect because it was translated perfectly (miraculously) as reflected in the second half of the same Article of Faith: "...we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God [but without any qualifications as to translation accuracy]" (Pearl of Great Price).

• President Ezra Taft Benson stated: "Unlike the Bible, which passed through generations of copyists, translators, and corrupt religionists who tampered with the text, the Book of Mormon came from writer to reader in just one inspired step of translation" ("The Keystone of Our Religion", The Ensign, January 1992, page 5).
• Joseph Smith claimed: "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was more correct than any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding its precepts, than by any other book" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.194).
• An official and widely read LDS publication reads: "Men can get nearer to the Lord, can have more of the spirit of conversion and conformity in their hearts...can gain a better understanding of the doctrines of salvation through the Book of Mormon than they can through the Bible...there will be more people saved in the kingdom of God - ten thousand times over - because of the Book of Mormon than there will be because of the Bible" (The Ensign, November 1984, p. 7).
• A letter from the First Presidency (Presidents Benson, Hinckley, and Monson) to all members of the Church states: "The most reliable way to measure the accuracy of any biblical passage is not by comparing different texts, but by comparison with the Book of Mormon and modern-day revelations". (Church News, June 20, 1992, page 3, letter dated May 22, 1992).

[Uncle Chip]

We do believe it. What would make you think otherwise?

If you had to choose between the Bible and the Book of Mormon, which would you choose???

[the long march]

I also agree that the sun rises in the East. I am not a Mormom and NEVER plan on being one. Your comment is nonsensical and meaningless. ALL books which are translated are only as good as the translation which is dependent on the translator. Since the BOM was supposedly translated by Smith ( or channeled or whatever) I look to his abilities -—they do not exist. Moreover his supposed holy book is about the equivalent of the koran ( holy or otherwise). I will rely on scripture both new and old which has come to us in a more reliable fashion.

You faith in a book of fiction is interesting but of no real value. I am glad it helps you live “a good” life here and now. Ithas NO value for you in eternity

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Regarding salvation, I’ll take Jesus over js.***

“Amen!”

How can you say that! Don’t you know God will not allow anyone into heaven without Joseph Smith’s OK! Joe said so!

[Godzilla]

"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly"

So which parts are not "translated correctly" - what has your prophet and seer discerned? Seems he 'corrected' those areas in the JST/IV. So state chapter and verse which are not correct.

[TheDon]

Most definitely the BofM. Fortunately, we get to have both!

[TheDon]

You will see there is nothing seriously mistranslated about it.

Yet another believer in the Bible, as long as it is translated correctly. Is there anyone who believes otherwise?

[TheDon]

So which parts are not "translated correctly"

Since we do not have the original manuscripts it is impossible to say for certain what the original authors wrote down. But of the manuscripts we do have so far, modern textual criticims provides many variants to choose from.

One example is the longer end of Mark 16.

There are many other interesting variants that you can lookup for yourself either online or through the purchase of various reasonably priced books on the subject.

[TheDon]

How can you say that!

Easy, Jesus is the author of my salvation.

[Old Mountain man]

And delacoert NEVER denegrates Mormons.

/s saracasm off

[Uncle Chip]

Most definitely the BofM. Fortunately, we get to have both!

But Jesus said that no man can serve two Masters. He will follow the words of the one and ignore the words of the other.

[CommerceComet]

I has to a particularly painful kind of denial to be confronted with straightforward evidence that your founding father is fraud.

I think that it is important to remember that Mormons are not the enemy, Mormonism is the enemy of the Gospel. As Paul tells us, we are contending against powers and principalities. Individual Mormons are the victims of the system of Mormonism which blinds them to the true Gospel.

I feel compassion for all Mormons but particularly those who come to the realization of the falsity of Mormonism. Their entire world view comes crashing down and they often lose their support structure as their Mormon friends and family often abandon them. It has to be painful and I wouldn't deliberately inflict that kind of pain on anyone if it weren't for the fact that something far worse awaits those who stay in Mormonism.

I have a number of Mormon friends, all of whom are aware of my views on Mormonism. They realize that my hostility is directed at Mormonism, not at Mormons. I have been introduced a few times as an "anti but a really good guy." I have never met a Mormon who I disliked (although I'm sure there are some out there whose personality would rub me the wrong way).

[Godzilla]

Since we do not have the original manuscripts it is impossible to say for certain what the original authors wrote down. But of the manuscripts we do have so far, modern textual criticims provides many variants to choose from.

thank you for displaying the complete lack of foundation for the mormon arguement in this area. All will please note that instead of identifying those areas that are mistranslated, the attention is directed to variants in MSS. This attempts to compare apples to rocket fuel, since mistranslation does not equal the presence of variants. This ignorance is clearly displayed by the all condemning example cited

Mark 16

Instead of citing an authorative source, wilkipedia is commonly cited as an authorative "source". I could cite Metzger, Bruce and others regarding this passage (generally, the arguement about the apparent longer ending). The point is - is this a mistranslation (as mormons attempt to assert) or a scribal error or addition. Simplified statements from wiki do not even begin to address the issue in its fullness, but it is not one of TRANSLATION, but one of TRANMISSION.

Finally, VARIANTS do not equal 'incorrect translation'. Of those thousands of 'variants' most by and large are spelling errors or other scribal slips. These too are well documented and categorized should you decide to educate yourself. Secondly, textural criticism relies upon variants to develop the most likely true text - they serve to correct the received text.

Please tell us all Don, how many MSS are available for scholars to examine in regards to the BOM and the thousands of changes in THAT document. (please suprise me by answering this and not ducking it.)

[SZonian]

But your prophet brigham clearly stated that none shall pass into heaven without josephs approval.

SZ

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Easy, Jesus is the author of my salvation. ***

Which Jesus?
The Jesus of the Bible and TRUE Christianity?
The Jesus Joseph Smith claimed to see?
The Jesus of that time who could not speak German to German settlers?
The Jesus who proclaimed his son with a farmer’s pretty wife would rule the world? (She had a daughter)

The Jesus who sent his followers to kill the Tate,LaBianca families?

Like It has been pointed out, there are more than one Jesus but only ONE is the right one! Which is it? And how do YOU know it is the TRUE one!

[TheDon]

Which Jesus?

Easy, the one who atoned for my sins.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Which Jesus?
***Easy, the one who atoned for my sins.***

Oh, the MITHRA fake Jesus! Ok. (Forgot about him!)

I’ll stick with the BIBLICAL one.

[TheDon]

Correct. Thankfully, the same Master inspired both volumes.

[TheDon]

Of those thousands of 'variants' most by and large are spelling errors or other scribal slips. These too are well documented and categorized.

Correct, but then again you have Mark 16, the Johannine Comma, the woman caught in adultery story, etc.

Secondly, textural criticism relies upon variants to develop the most likely true text - they serve to correct the received text.

Correct. I'm still trying to convince delacoert on that point, but without much luck so far. Perhaps you can give it a go.

Please tell us all Don, how many MSS are available for scholars to examine in regards to the BOM and the thousands of changes in THAT document.

I think the following would be what you are looking for:

"Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, Part 1: 1 Nephi 1-2 Nephi 10"

A description of the work from Royal Skousen follows:
1. What is the critical text project of the Book of Mormon? From the beginning, the two goals of the critical text project have been (1) to recover the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon, and (2) to determine the history of the text (namely, how it has changed over time). There are two basic kinds of changes in the history of the text: (a) accidental errors in the transmission of the text, and (b) the editing out of nonstandard English. I began the critical text project in 1988 and have been working full time on it since then.

Not sure if the analysis has been completed and published, but several parts have been published.

[Godzilla]

Correct, but then again you have Mark 16, the Johannine Comma, the woman caught in adultery story, etc.

Again, are these mistranslated - as you are insisting from your aof, or 'transmission' issues? It appears that you cannot tell the difference between the two as you bring this back up again.

Please tell us all Don, how many MSS are available for scholars to examine in regards to the BOM and the thousands of changes in THAT document.
I think the following would be what you are looking for:
"Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, Part 1: 1 Nephi 1-2 Nephi 10"

ROTFLAICGU, not even close. Thanks Don, you further show that you do not know the subject you are arguing. MSS is short hand for manuscripts. bom has only two extant handwritten copies of the origional 'translation' of the bom plates. Your mormon history proclaims that the bom was translated by the power of god on a literal word by word basis, so that the grammar and spelling of those two MS are exactly as the seer stone presented it. There are no 'plates' to compare the thousands of bom changes to.

Textural critics can trace the changes you mentioned and show where the variant entered. Your 'source' cannot make that same claim since you mormons contain two copies only once removed, of the tranlated plates. So please tell us how well bom textural critics are for those ms copies only 170 yrs old in comparison with tens of thousands of NT MS as old as first century, in multiple languages, cited by numerous church fathers - all available for cross reference and critical analysis.

So lets apply some very simple textural criticsm to the bom. What textural support is there for the change in Ether 4:1 changing Benjamin to Mosiah? The oldest mormon ms both agree - it was origionally Benjamin. Again, these handwriten ms are the first generation past the plates - no time for scribal errors to creep in.

How about 1 Nephi 20:1 - what textural critical evidence is there to support the addition of "or out of the waters of baptism" in the 1964 edition? Again, the oldest extant mormon ms do not contain this statement.

[restornu]

Please tell us all Don, how many MSS are available for scholars to examine in regards to the BOM and the thousands of changes in THAT document.

***

When I think of the Book of Mormon and there was one translation from the Brass Plates not hundreds floating around like the manuscipts that composed the Bible from which copy did they select to use of the 3 gererations removed from the original texts?

The Lord in His wisdom took back the Plates and will produce them again in the Lord own time!:)