[Note: I set the stage for this post in my last post about the corrupted Book of the Lamb of God and in the post prior to that which proposes a potential origin story for this world’s ethno-religious group called Jews. You really need to read those prior two posts to have a chance at understanding this post.]

A book called The Words of Joseph Smith (WJS) really has me questioning how bad the Bible really is or isn’t.

WJS was compiled by Andrew Ehat, a BYU professor who gathered a bunch of contemporaneous records of what Joseph Smith said during his life. The reason I find this book so valuable is because it’s the closest we can get to what Joseph actually said during his life and it appears to be free from the heavy Brighamite editing that went on in the post-Nauvoo era.

There is a much more famous book called Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith that is heavily edited to the point that it hardly resembles things Joseph actually said. TPJS should be avoided at all costs in my opinion, unless merely used to demonstrate the degree to which Brighamites altered Joseph Smith’s words and records for their own purposes.

And that’s not to say WJS is error proof. These are, after all, notes people took in real time so we only get whatever they wrote down and that’s assuming they wrote an accurate account. But it’s the closest thing we have to the real thing so I cherish the book for that reason.

What does Joseph Smith say about the Bible?

If you read WJS you’ll find that Joseph quotes from the Bible quite often and it’s not to disparage it. He does at one point make this statement:


“If I should say anything but what was in the bible the cry of treason would be herd [sic]. I will then go to the Bible.”

And then later says:

“I sup I am not alld. to go into investign. but what is contd. in the Bible & I think is so many wise men who wod. put me to death for treason”

These statements apparently came as a threat from the Law brothers who warned Joseph to not stray from the Bible. Joseph’s response is to not denounce the Bible as an utterly corrupt record but to instead show that the Bible supports his teachings.

Notwithstanding the above quotes, Joseph speaks pretty favorably of the Bible and that’s beside the fact that he quoted and taught from the Bible quite often, far more than he ever did from the BoM or D&C. Here are some quotes from WJS about the Bible:

“…do not betray the revelations of God whether in the bible, Book of Mormon, or Doctrine & Covenants or any of the word of God“

He then took up the Bible. “I believe,” said he, “in this sacred volume. In it the ‘Mormon’ faith is to be found. We teach nothing but what the Bible teaches. We believe nothing, but what is to be found in this book. I believe in the fall of man, as recorded in the Bible;

He closed by referring to the Mormon Bible, which he said, contained nothing inconsistent or conflicting with the Christian Bible, and he again repeated that all who would follow the precepts of the Bible, whether Mormon or not, would assuredly be saved.

“…[the Book of Mormon] contained nothing contrary to the Bible, or its virtue”

[While preaching from the Bible] “No man holds this book more sacred than I do.”

He did, however, take issue with the translation of the Bible, which I take to mean there are passages that have been misrendered but still contain truth. Here are some examples:

“I am now going to take exception to the present translation of the bible in relation to these matters.”

“I will turn linguist. Ma[n]y things in the bible which do not, as they now stand, accord with the revelation of the holy Ghost to me.”

“I believe the bible, as it ought to be, as it came from the pen of the original writers”

He was a big fan of the German translation of the Bible apparently:

“I have an old book [Bible] in the Latin Greek Hebrew & German & I have been readg. the Germ: I find it to be the most correct that I have found & it corresponds the nearest to the revns. that I have given the last 16 yrs”

“the Germans are an exalted people, the old German translators are the most correct; most honest of any of the translators, and therefore I get testimony to bear me out in the revelations that I have preached for the last 14 years”

But What About Article of Faith #8 & the Joseph Smith Translation?

Here’s what AoF 8 says:

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

I used to read that as merely lip service, kind of like saying “oh sure, read your Bible and just pick and choose whatever fits, discard the rest as ‘mistranslated’.” Granted this article of faith is a far cry from the Bible absolutists who breathlessly declare it as the only word of God and infallible to boot (an utterly indefensible position in my opinion), but here Joseph is clearly putting the Bible in the “word of God” camp even if some of it is mistranslated.

As for the JS translation of the Bible, it was mostly a scholarly exercise believe it or not. Few people seem to know this, but a large percentage of the JST comes from a pretty popular Bible concordance that was widely available in his day. And I mean lifted word for word from it in what today would be considered plagiarism. A BYU study uncovered this not too long ago. We do have large additions in Genesis and Matthew that are obviously not from a concordance but you’ll notice that these are appended to the Bible as expansions of the story, not repudiations of it.

What Does the D&C Say About the Bible?

This first quote surprised me quite a bit because once again we see that far from the Bible being, you know, “loathsome” (more on that later), the Bible is actually spoken of pretty positively.

And again, the elders, priests and teachers of this church shall teach the principles of my gospel, which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, in the which is the fulness of the gospel.

There are multiple revelations that mention the Bible translation effort by Joseph and Sidney but it’s usually just telling them when to start, stop, pause, etc. And there are some revelations that are said to have come about as a result of the translation of the Bible. Then there is this ringer about the Apocrypha:

“There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly; There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men.”

I mean geez, even the Apocrypha is in pretty decent shape apparently! So much so that God says don’t even bother translating it, just be aware when you read it, because it is “mostly” correct despite the interpolations of men.

Where Did the Bible Come From?

This thought extends from my origin story a couple posts back but I now view the Bible as Dwarvish, at least the Old Testament to be sure. Keep in mind that written records that cite the Jews as a people don’t begin until about 1200 BC which is coincidentally about the time they leave Egypt. That would track very well with my origin story which claims that the people of Israel (again, not the House of Finwe, but the people on our world who are wrongly called “Israel”) were essentially rescued by the Dwarves in an attempt to fulfill their version of Gentile prophecy. The dwarves taught them language, writing, warring, nation building, etc.

This would account for the nature of the Pentateuch where you have the book of Genesis covering a looooong period of time with pretty sparse detail in what appears to be a cursory attempt at giving the Israelites an identity and a lineage as well as making a case for them being numbered among God’s chosen people.

Genesis seems to be intentionally vague, only telling essential stories, and perhaps really just an attempt to make a case that this group of people satisfies what is required of the Gentile-dwarves by prophecy. Think of Genesis as a legal document establishing the validity of a claim, or at least trying to. It’s the Gentile-dwarves saying “this effort counts!!” in hopes that they can get the promised reward of redeeming Israel.

As such, I think it’s written not as a counterfeit, far from it, but more as an honest attempt to make their case about why these people were chosen AND as an attempt to help these people believe it.

After Genesis, you get a lot more detail with the story of Moses, wandering in the desert, taking over their holy land and all their many wars and contentions with their neighbors, which goes on to this very day. I suspect Genesis was given to these people by the Dwarves and the rest of the OT is what these people recorded themselves, in a rather Dwarvish way, I might add. Conquest, intrigue, war, wealth, and a hardy ruggedness dominate their history. Sounds a lot like dwarves to me, or a people mentored by them.

As to why this Israelite nation eventually fell into bondage, I suspect it had more to do with the waning of the Dwarves on earth and less to do with God turning His back on them for disobedience. Or perhaps the Dwarves themselves realized their experiment had run afoul and they withdrew their direct support. Either could be true, I suppose.

Loathsome.

And to tie this long post off, I need to point out what Pengolodh says through Daymon Smith’s pen about the Bible in Words of the Faithful:

“And though she knew he had been as a man upon Westernesse, espoused; and that this woman had borne him sons – called in your (loathsome) bibles…”

Daymon references this in the book’s introduction as follows:

“Reckoned in this tale as “loathsome,” the Bible in all its translations, alterations, editions, and versions is mostly incorrect: internally inconsistent, as history confused, and altogether corrupted by men. The Book of Mormon says as much by way of a vision to the man Nephi, who describes it as a Satanic imitation of the Book of the Lamb of God…”

I find this to be a difficult contrast to what Joseph Smith and the D&C report about the Bible. I also think Daymon badly misreads Nephi’s vision. Granted, I agree that the Bible has its issues, but those issues seem to run mostly skin deep if Joseph is to be believed. He himself apparently regarded it as “sacred”, boasting no man believed so more than he did. Daymon labels it as “mostly incorrect” whereas the Apocrypha at least is deemed “mostly correct” in the D&C. That’s quite a contrast!

Why does Pengolodh view the Bible as “loathsome”? The answer could be a deep-seated resentment for the dwarves and their records. That wouldn’t surprise me. I think there could be other reasons that I’ll explain in my next post.

But for now, I will reframe my thinking of the Bible as “sacred” (not infallible though! far from it) rather than “loathsome”. Maybe I’m wrong though. Did I miss something? A reference, a quote, a scripture? If so, please leave a comment. I really would like to know.