In this insightful discussion, Kent Jackson, a Professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University and expert on Joseph Smith's Bible translation, tackles tough questions about the Joseph Smith Translation (JST). He explores whether Smith believed his work was ever complete and why subsequent prophets haven't engaged in similar efforts. Jackson also clarifies the complexities of biblical warnings against modifications and discusses potential reasons behind the tapering of revelations. Get ready for a deep dive into the intertwining of scripture and prophetic authority!
Joseph Smith considered his Bible translation work complete in 1833, signified by the 'done' noted in the manuscript.
Scholars argue that Joseph Smith's revisions in the JST represent divinely authorized clarifications rather than mere alterations of scripture.
Deep dives
Joseph Smith's Translation Timeline
Joseph Smith's Bible translation, known as the Joseph Smith Translation (JST), was considered complete by July 1833. The process concluded when Joseph and his scribes wrote 'done' and 'finished' in the manuscript. For years, there has been debate about whether Smith continued to work on it or intended to revise it further; however, it is clear from historical records that he viewed the project as complete. This understanding has led scholars to conclude that the JST was finalized before the introduction of controversial elements in Smith's life, such as plural marriage.
Nature of the Joseph Smith Translation
The JST contains both new material and revisions of existing biblical texts, with significant portions showcasing Joseph Smith's inspirational revelations. Discussions indicate that many changes served to clarify context and message, making ancient texts more comprehensible to modern readers. While Smith is often viewed as restoring original biblical content, this assertion lacks clear evidence, as no definitive original texts have been identified for comparison. Instead, scholars emphasize the importance of understanding the JST as Joseph's inspired revisions, contextual restorations, and clarifications within the scriptures.
Conflicts with Traditional Biblical Canon
Debate exists surrounding the potential conflict between the JST and traditional scriptural warnings against altering biblical texts, as referenced in Deuteronomy and Revelation. Critics argue that Joseph Smith's revisions contradict these prohibitions; however, scholars argue that these passages were contextually limited to their original authors. They suggest that God, as the ultimate authority, is not bound by these constraints and may direct prophets to expand or clarify scripture as part of ongoing revelation. Thus, the JST can be viewed as a divinely authorized revision rather than a mere alteration of established scripture.
Influences on the Joseph Smith Translation
The concept that Joseph Smith may have consulted outside sources during the JST's creation has been a topic of significant analysis. Some scholars suggest that Smith could have used commentaries or other documents for inspiration; however, the evidence supporting this idea is predominantly absent. Careful examinations of text revisions indicate that while Smith's translations may reflect learned insights, they remain rooted in revelation rather than originating from external literary influences. As such, the potential use of outside sources, if any, does not diminish the spiritual and theological significance of the JST.
Did Joseph Smith ever consider his Bible translation work finished? Will the JST ever be canonized and replace the King James Version as the official Latter-day Saint Bible? Why haven’t any other of our prophets since Joseph Smith engaged in similar translation work? How can we reconcile Joseph Smith’s Bible revision work with Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelation 22:19 which actually warn against adding to the Bible? Is there any evidence whatsoever that Joseph Smith consulted any outside sources in his Bible translation work? Does the fact that Joseph Smith’s Bible translation started out with massive amounts of new and significant revealed text and then tapered off at the end with only minor revisions support the narrative that Joseph became a fallen prophet? If not, how else can we make sense of this timeline?
In this episode of Church History Matters, we dive into all of these questions and more with Dr. Kent Jackson, a scholar on Joseph Smith’s Bible translation.