cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board - this statement, still published in Bible Dictionary...

- Religion (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)

- - this statement, still published in Bible Dictionary... (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11552)

this statement, still published in Bible Dictionary...

is embarrassing.

Quote:

With the discovery of more ancient mss. not available to the King James translators, many translations of the Bible have been produced since 1900 by Bible scholars. However, based on the doctrinal clarity of latter-day revelation given to Joseph Smith, the Church has held to the King James Version as being doctrinally more accurate than these recent versions. The newer versions are in many instances easier to read, but are in some passages doctrinally weaker in their presentation of the gospel. Therefore, the King James Version remains the principal Bible of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/b/55

Note, NRSV, finished in 1989 was presumably not studied by the committee that wrote this.

Agree. I am totally embarassed by that.

I recently heard (was it here?) that they are publishing a new edition of the LDS standard works and there will be overhauls of the chapter headings and dictionary.

Didn't Elder McConkie write (or at least oversee the writing of) the Bible Dictionary?

If so, what in there doesn't embarrass you?

to the outside observer this statement says "LDS church leaders are to bible history as the earth is 6000 years old folks are to science."

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 120748)

to the outside observer this statement says "LDS church leaders are to bible history as the earth is 6000 years old folks are to science."

Heh. Do you know what "outside observers" say about the Book of Mormon?

Lingo's question is a good one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex (Post 120753)

Heh. Do you know what "outside observers" say about the Book of Mormon?

Yeah, but why give them silly stuff like this that validates their stereotypes and pre-conceived notions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 120748)

to the outside observer this statement says "LDS church leaders are to bible history as the earth is 6000 years old folks are to science."

From the 1998 LDS Church Handbook

Bible

The Church uses the King James Version of the Bible for English-speaking members. The First Presidency has stated:

[Page 147]

"Many versions of the Bible are available today. ... 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.

"While other Bible versions may be easier to read than the King James Version, in doctrinal matters latter-day revelation supports the King James Version in preference to other English translations" (First Presidency letter, 22 May 1992).

Ideally, English-speaking members should use LDS edition of the King James Bible. This edition includes the Topical Guide, footnotes, other study aids, excerpts from the Joseph Smith Translation, and cross-references to the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price.

The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have selected an edition of the Bible for preferred use in many non-English languages. Members should use this Bible. It is available through Church distribution centers.

http://www.provocation.net/chi/chi18.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon (Post 120758)

LCD approach. For lingo and Tex, that means lowest common denominator .

I think members who know better are wise not to limit themselves to the KJV. In fact, I venture to say that if you have very good reason to believe one text is better than another, you are under CONDEMNATION for not seeking out that text and studying it.

In fact, if I found out that none of the Seventy owned a non-KJV version of the Bible, I would be very disappointed.