Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible

Expand Messages
  • Henry Shaner
    Why dont you read the Inspired version  and not just parts the lds Utah have. Others and I do not credit the Inspired version or Joseph Smiths Translation of
    Message 1 of 53 , Sep 14 8:58 PM
      Why dont you read the Inspired version  and not just parts the lds Utah have. Others and I do not credit the Inspired version or Joseph Smiths Translation of the Bible comming from Joseph Smith but God.

      --- On Mon, 8/31/09, nickels325@... <nickels325@...> wrote:

      From: nickels325@... <nickels325@...>
      Subject: Re: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible
      To: LDSgroups@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Monday, August 31, 2009, 5:42 PM



      Hello Jim,
       
      Most Biblical experts today, see the Bible as being collated from various ancient manuscripts, revised, rewritten, added to and sometime taken away from: what they call, "redacted." Both Old Testament (Hebrew Bible, to be politically correct) and the New Testament are a record of beliefs and how they evolved over time. These original redacters were actually myth-makers trying to convey their own theological perspectives in story form. Sometimes, it is hard for us, today, to see these beliefs behind the stories, as we are quite certain about the historical context in which they were written. And, may I say, at the risk of heresy, that Joseph Smith did the same thing. A poor, but highly intelligent. possibly a prodigy with creative talents as I believe J.S. to have been, farm boy in the early years of the 19th Century, who had read the Bible and thought about religion since he was very small, had a great may theological ideas. But, if he just started expounding them, who would listen? So, in the tradition of the ancient Biblical redactors, he made up stories and couched his teachings in these stories, myths. His beliefs kept changing, as can be seen by the difference between the Book of Commandments and the Doctrine and Covenants, till at the end, his thought was becoming quite sophisticated. I would urge you to compare J.S.'s beliefs on eternal progression and the godhood of humans (apotheosis) with those of the 20th Century Process philosophers and theologians. Joseph Smith, in a real sense, got there long before any of them did! So, now I ask, does it really matter whether there was a worldwide flood or not?
       
      Jim Nickels
       
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "zion_heritage" <zion_heritage@...>
      To: LDSgroups@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:56:08 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
      Subject: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible

       
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Latterday_Israelite/message/7

      --- In LDSgroups@yahoogroups.com, Jas E Elliott <jelliott6523@...> wrote:
      >
      > Tell me where Enoch supports  the IV. Give the citation, like 4Q201
      >   I have the side by side KJV and IV.  KJV Ch 6 says God repented of creation and brought the flood.  IV ch 8 says Noah repented of creation and God brought the flood.  KJV  tells of a flood myth.  The IV is Joseph's version of the myth.  I don't really believe there  was a world wide flood that reached the top of mount Ararat.  And it is very improbable that God would destoy all mankind and animal life because one man repented of creation.
      > Jim Elliott
      >
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      > --- On Thu, 8/27/09, zion_heritage <zion_heritage@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > From: zion_heritage <zion_heritage@...>
      > Subject: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible
      > To: LDSgroups@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 12:12 PM
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In LDSgroups@yahoogrou ps.com, Jas E Elliott <jelliott6523@ ...> wrote:
      > >
      > > I found Enoch in my Harper Collins Dead Sea Scrolls.
      > > > Page281-2 4Q201 Col 3  Women made pregnant by angels and giants were born.
      >
      > > This supports the KJV, not the IV.  James Elliott
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > ***Not so. Enoch actually supports both the KJV and IV very clearly in this area. If you have a side by side JST, you can see the inspired version against the KJV and how it was made clearer to understand.
      > I have the Herald Publishing House edition, ISBN 0-8309-0032- 2
      >
      > Shalom, Sis Sandra
      >




    • Jas E Elliott
      Maybe I am just dumb, but I am not certain whether you believe the JST was the work of Joseph or of God.  I have concluded it is not from God.  Genesis 6
      Message 53 of 53 , Sep 15 12:59 PM
        Maybe I am just dumb, but I am not certain whether you believe the JST was the work of Joseph or of God.  I have concluded it is not from God.  Genesis 6 has a myth about "sons of God" who impregnate human woman who then bear giants.  I don't believe that story but I think it was part of Jewish mythology and the King James translators got it right.
         
        Josephs "inspired" version of chapter 6 is in chapter 8 of he Inspired version. It is obvious that Joseph rejected "sons of God" other than Jesus..  He wrote that  Noah's sons were so good that people called them sons of God.   The KJV says God repented of creation and brought the flood.  Joseph  seemed to think that the word repent implied sin and God doesn't sin.  So his version has Noah's family repenting of creation  This triggers the flood.   Does any sane person think that if a human family repents of Creation, God will drown all living creatures except those in a boat?
         
        Are there any defenders of Joseph out there?  write a rebuttal     James Elliott
        --- On Mon, 9/14/09, Henry Shane <henryshaner@...> wrote:

        From: Henry Shaner <henryshaner@...>
        Subject: Re: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible
        To: LDSgroups@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, September 14, 2009, 10:58 PM

         
        Why dont you read the Inspired version  and not just parts the lds Utah have. Others and I do not credit the Inspired version or Joseph Smiths Translation of the Bible comming from Joseph Smith but God.

        --- On Mon, 8/31/09, nickels325@comcast. net <nickels325@comcast. net> wrote:

        From: nickels325@comcast. net <nickels325@comcast. net>
        Subject: Re: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible
        To: LDSgroups@yahoogrou ps.com
        Date: Monday, August 31, 2009, 5:42 PM



        Hello Jim,
         
        Most Biblical experts today, see the Bible as being collated from various ancient manuscripts, revised, rewritten, added to and sometime taken away from: what they call, "redacted." Both Old Testament (Hebrew Bible, to be politically correct) and the New Testament are a record of beliefs and how they evolved over time. These original redacters were actually myth-makers trying to convey their own theological perspectives in story form. Sometimes, it is hard for us, today, to see these beliefs behind the stories, as we are quite certain about the historical context in which they were written. And, may I say, at the risk of heresy, that Joseph Smith did the same thing. A poor, but highly intelligent. possibly a prodigy with creative talents as I believe J.S. to have been, farm boy in the early years of the 19th Century, who had read the Bible and thought about religion since he was very small, had a great may theological ideas. But, if he just started expounding them, who would listen? So, in the tradition of the ancient Biblical redactors, he made up stories and couched his teachings in these stories, myths. His beliefs kept changing, as can be seen by the difference between the Book of Commandments and the Doctrine and Covenants, till at the end, his thought was becoming quite sophisticated. I would urge you to compare J.S.'s beliefs on eternal progression and the godhood of humans (apotheosis) with those of the 20th Century Process philosophers and theologians. Joseph Smith, in a real sense, got there long before any of them did! So, now I ask, does it really matter whether there was a worldwide flood or not?
         
        Jim Nickels
         
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "zion_heritage" <zion_heritage@ yahoo.com>
        To: LDSgroups@yahoogrou ps.com
        Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:56:08 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
        Subject: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible

         
        http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Latterday_ Israelite/ message/7

        --- In LDSgroups@yahoogrou ps.com, Jas E Elliott <jelliott6523@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > Tell me where Enoch supports  the IV. Give the citation, like 4Q201
        >   I have the side by side KJV and IV.  KJV Ch 6 says God repented of creation and brought the flood.  IV ch 8 says Noah repented of creation and God brought the flood.  KJV  tells of a flood myth.  The IV is Joseph's version of the myth.  I don't really believe there  was a world wide flood that reached the top of mount Ararat.  And it is very improbable that God would destoy all mankind and animal life because one man repented of creation.
        > Jim Elliott
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        > --- On Thu, 8/27/09, zion_heritage <zion_heritage@ ...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > From: zion_heritage <zion_heritage@ ...>
        > Subject: [LDSgroups] Re: Smith's Translation of the Bible
        > To: LDSgroups@yahoogrou ps.com
        > Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 12:12 PM
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In LDSgroups@yahoogrou ps.com, Jas E Elliott <jelliott6523@ ...> wrote:
        > >
        > > I found Enoch in my Harper Collins Dead Sea Scrolls.
        > > > Page281-2 4Q201 Col 3  Women made pregnant by angels and giants were born.
        >
        > > This supports the KJV, not the IV.  James Elliott
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > ***Not so. Enoch actually supports both the KJV and IV very clearly in this area. If you have a side by side JST, you can see the inspired version against the KJV and how it was made clearer to understand.
        > I have the Herald Publishing House edition, ISBN 0-8309-0032- 2
        >
        > Shalom, Sis Sandra
        >




      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.