BYU exhibit, lecture will celebrate King James Bible anniversary

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Chickenchaser Centralia, WA
    Sept. 24, 2011 2:06 p.m.

    Methinks Mormonism could have survived the test of time without the book from whence it received its name. The second witness simply is not necessary.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Sept. 23, 2011 8:40 a.m.

    dotp,I have been a member of the church for 35 years and have ALWAYS believed the Bible to be the Word of God, inasmuch as it is "Translated Correctly.

    The KJV use of Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost. They are same Greek word(pneuma, 4151)is used for Holy Ghost and holy Spirit. Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit (pneuma) of God dwelleth in you? (1 Cor. 3:16 KJV) And What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost(pneuma) which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?(1 Cor. 6:19 KJV).

    Who Is the Holy Ghost? The Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead (see 1 John 5:7; D&C 20:28). He is a spirit that has the form and likeness of a man (see D&C 130:22). He can be in only one place at a time, but his influence can be everywhere at the same time. Joseph Fielding Smith Gospel Principles. Wrong.

  • dotp POTEAU, OK
    Sept. 22, 2011 3:41 p.m.

    I have been a member of the church for 35 years and have ALWAYS believed the Bible to be the Word of God, inasmuch as it is translated correctly. There are some passages in the Bible that make absolutely NO sense to me, but when read in light of the information given in the Book of Mormon, suddenly make perfect sense. I was taught from the beginning that the Book of Mormon is ANOTHER Testament of Jesus Christ -- meaning that the Biblical description of the Life of Christ is accurate. Do I feel "indoctrinated"? Not at all. I have studied the Bible all my life -- the King James Version -- and have also studied other books concerning religion, and I had NO problem believing either the Bible or the Book of Mormon. I not only believe IN God, but I also BELIEVE GOD. "....but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord". Joshua 24:15 There is not space here to quote the whole verse, but it is worth reading and pondering. I'm glad I did. I wouldn't have it any other way.

  • Grace Bakersfield, CA
    Sept. 22, 2011 1:47 p.m.

    Correction on my previous post, paragraph 2, first sentence should read that the church seems to be changing its position:
    to one of acceptance...

    It appears to observers of Mormon doctrines that they change with new discoveries, technology, etc that refutes 19th century attitudes and claims. I am asked all the time, "How could you have believed that?", concerning certain teachings that are controversial or unbiblical. I can only respond that our leaders teachings always pre-empted any Biblical assumption or tradition and that on-going revelation was the foundation of our church.

    That is why they view all this KJV honor with great skepticism. And I don't have the answee to their question as to why free books are given at doorsteps, when those books were considered patently corrupt since 1830?

  • Grace Bakersfield, CA
    Sept. 22, 2011 1:34 p.m.

    What exactly will they be celebrating? When I was growing up LDS, we were thoroughly indoctrinated that the Bible was not correct, accurate, trustworthy, etc., based on all the 19th and 20th-century founder's statements. I attended four years of seminary, Ricks and BYU, was a faithful Mormon for 35 years, and we always treated the Bible with sub-par status. Even my Hebrew prof at BYU, Gabriel Tabor, was less than enthusiastic.

    Now that I've been an evangelical Christian for the past 25 years, I have watched the church slowly change its position tooneif praise and cautious acceptance. Missionaries on my doorstep insist that they "believe in" the Bible, and do not quote Joseph and all the early leaders' challenges to its authenticity.

    Can anyone enlighten me as to what is being taught to seminary students now re: the veracity and trustworthiness of (any) Bible translation? I teach Hebrew and have never found problems with the original translation copies, just with the commentaries and various other versions, as stated by Brother Freeman here. Thank you.

  • Morgan_Freeman's_Voice Provo, Zion
    Sept. 22, 2011 12:10 p.m.

    If you were to research anything about the history of Biblical criticism and development, The King James Version of the Bible, "The authorized version" is probably the worst translation of all time. The Message paraphrase is even a better translation because at least it admits that it is just paraphrasing. The King James Version was created off of the worst manuscripts that we have and in FACT, the King James Version that we have today is not even the original that was written centuries ago. Rather, it has been re-translated off of itself...making it even less accurate. The only thing holding this translation going is tradition. There is honestly no reason to get this translation when you can get the ESV for FREE, and it is much more accurate.

    However, for people interested in history or literature, the King James Version is very important. In fact, it is by far the most important translation into English and, as I said before, arguably the most significant book in the history of the English language.

  • jkcook Petersaurach, Germany
    Sept. 22, 2011 7:36 a.m.

    When are they going to release the King James Bible movie, Fires of Faith?