- NEW!
by Mister IT is trying to Liahona outta here on December 8th, 2009
Help answer this question below.
by laie_techie on December 8th, 2009
FALSE. I know Answerbag severely limits the number of characters you can use in a question, but as it stands, I say you went too far.
I would say that changes would make it more unreliable than missing passages. What has survived is fairly reliable.The missing passages would introduce additional doctrine, not necessarily contradict existing doctrine.
by Fr Joe on December 8th, 2009
I would say false. Why? I have several Bibles and a great software program where I can see parallel views of up to 4 bibles at the same time. I can read and compare a bible from the 1500's to a contemporary version of today. Some of the latest bibles written in the last 10 years have definitely changed a lot.
BUT... Since the Book of Mormon was written in the late 1800's, it cannot be compared with today's modern texts.
A 1611 King James Version, a Literal Translation Version of the 1500's, the Bishops Bible of 1568, and an 1898 version of Young's Literal translation, all compared - verse by verse, all say the same thing. The only difference is the usage of Thee, Thy, and Thou. Take these older versions and compare with the early 1900's versions and they are almost identical. The Joseph Smith King James Bible is also almost identical to the older versions. The changes he made are minor and do not seem to change the meaning at all. Lately the New International Version and the Peoples Bible have been changed to be "politically correct" and nice to women.
At least Joseph Smith did one good thing when he changed the King James Version to his own version. He showed people both the old and the new - what he had written so people could see the difference.
The software program? Go to www.e-sword.net It is free and so are most of the resources you can download for the program.
by whew4 on December 9th, 2009
My friend, again you try to catch us in our words... This question also cannot be answered with a simple "True" or "False" statement.
It is true, the Bible today does contain many mistakes, contradictions, and omissions. But that only hurts the Catholics and Protestants who do not have access to a living Prophet of God to guide them in the right way.
By the grace of God we have access to a living Prophet and inspired Apostles and many other leaders who can speak for God in our behalf. Joseph Smith restored many of those "plain and precious things". Things that were taken away by evil and designing men, before the Bible was compiled.
Today, we can use the Bible just fine, because we know much of what was removed anciently and now have access to them again and are able to know the full word of God...Later
by AndyP on December 9th, 2009
False - These verses dont discredit the bible or try to. There are bible teachings that are not observed by some or changed, for example some churches have Gay Priests and others think thats blasphemy, they cant both be correct but both use the bible to support thir view.
by Bridget_D8547 on March 3rd, 2011
False. The Bible is true. The interpolations of men cannot detract from that. Just go by what the Holy Spirit says instead of by man's interpretation and you'll find the Bible to be the most valuable body of scripture we have.
by Does it matter? on October 7th, 2010
False, first off 1 nephi 13:24-28 says nothing about "gentile scribes" removing parts of the bible. it also says nothing about the "christian church" or that it apostatized. the only church that is mentioned is the "great and abominable church" is best understood as worldliness and anything not of god.
so to sum it up pretty much nothing in your question is true.
Mormons: Is everything of which Joseph Smith Jr. spoke concerning religion true?
by k on December 6th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
Mormons: Do you believe that Joseph Smith Jr.'s 1891 prophecy has been fulfilled?
by k on December 6th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
do mormons believe in being "saved"?
by Does it matter? on October 7th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
Mormons: Does the LdS church define murder as only the shedding of innocent blood?
by k on December 20th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
LdS: what does "We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed"* mean EXACTLY?
by k on January 25th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading MORMONS True or False: '1 Nephi 13:24-28 tells us that the Bible we use today is unreliable because so much was taken out of it by Gentile scribes when the Christian Church apostatized' Please start with "True" or "False" before you explain your answer.
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
Thank you for your answer. +6
.
>I know Answerbag severely limits the number of characters you can use in a question<
.
Very true - it is a constant challenge and frustration.
.
>I would say that changes would make it more unreliable than missing passages<
.
But don't missing passage make it unreliable?
.
>The missing passages would introduce additional doctrine, not necessarily contradict existing doctrine<
.
Why do you think the Gentiles would remove doctrine from the scripture? And if 1 Nephi 13:24-28 why don't the oldest manuscripts contain these missing passages?
.
Rather, the pattern tends to be that the scribes ADDED to text creating text variants.
.
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't dream of subtracting from the scripture were I copy them for present and future generations. However, being a typical opinionated, self-righteous, controlling fallen man I would be sorely tempted to add my own doctrine.
.
So it's easier for me to to visualize corruption via ADDITION than subtraction.
by Mister IT is trying to Liahona outta here on December 9th, 2009
And one last question:
.
Since you're unhappy with the way that the question is currently worded, if it simply said...
.
"MORMONS True or False: '1 Nephi 13:24-28 tells us that the Bible we use today is unreliable."
.
...would your answer still be "False"?
by Mister IT is trying to Liahona outta here on December 9th, 2009
I hate these black and white, all or nothing, questions. I would say that the Bible, as we have it today, is at least 85-90% reliable. It's not to the point where we want to get rid of it completely.
by laie_techie on December 9th, 2009
.
LOL.
.
Laie, forcing bifurcation can be an invaluable tool for enlightenment.
.
Think of it as pushing the "turbo button" for your brain.
.
And interesting enough your 85-90% figure statistically matches the disparity between the King James Bible and the Joseph Smith Translation.
.
So if nothing else by forcing bifurcation onto you in regard to this question you came to the same conclusion that Joseph Smith did!
.
(no need to thank me)
.
;-)
by Mister IT is trying to Liahona outta here on December 9th, 2009
I wasn't even consulting the JST when I came up with 85-90%. I was thinking about what's in the Bible, and how much clearly meshes with our doctrine (eg. not having to read with an LdS perspective), and how much of our doctrine is present in the Bible. And then I factored in that Joseph Smith called the book of Canticles "uninspired".
by laie_techie on December 9th, 2009
.
Well I think that it's remarkable that you and Joseph Smith are so closely aligned on this point.
.
I think you should get a new calling based on THAT alone Laie!
.
Give me your Ward information and I'll start lobbying your Bishop. Heck give me your Stake information and I'll lobby the Stake President!
.
;-)
by Mister IT is trying to Liahona outta here on December 9th, 2009