So what do we do with the JST?<\/p>\n
I think that many Church members think the following:
\n(1) There is something vaguely untrustworthy about the JST.
\n(2) All of the JST is in the footnotes.
\n(3) The JST restores the text to what it read orginally.<\/p>\n
I want to dispute all three points. <\/p>\n
(1) There is something vaguely untrustworthy about the JST.<\/em>I believe this was<\/em> a concern in the late 19th and early 20th century because the original JST was owned by the (as it was then known) RLDS Church. This concern was later dismissed through the work of Robert J. Matthews (this is a very interesting story, and if you have access to Robet L. Millet’s “Joseph Smith’s Translation of the Bible: A Historical Overview” in Nyman and Tate’s Joseph Smith Translation: The Restoration of Plain and Precious Things<\/em>, which is part of LDS Gospelink, you should definitely read it. Not only is it a fascinating story, but it has interesting insights into the role of the JST in the mid 20th century.) This is not to say, however, that the JST is complete or perfect, merely that the text that we currently have has not been tampered with. President Joseph Fielding Smith addressed the fact that the JST is incpomplete:<\/p>\n It has been thought by some, that the Prophet went through the Bible beginning with the first chapter of Genesis and continued through to the Book of Revelation, but this was not the case. He went through the Bible topic by topic, and revising as the Spirit of the Lord indicated to him where changes and additions should be made. There are many parts of the Bible that the Prophet did not touch, because the Lord did not direct him to do so. Therefore, there are many places in the Scriptures where errors still are found. This work was never fully completed, but the Prophet did as much as the Lord commanded him to do before the days of Nauvoo.” (Church History and Modern Revelation<\/em>, 1:242; see also Smith, History of the Church, 1:324, 368).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n (2) All of the JST is in the footnotes. <\/em> Some may even be unaware of the longer exerpts in the back; most seem to be unaware that there are parts that are not in the LDS edition at all. The complete IV is available online (see here<\/a>), but [unless I missed something–please let me know], it is not available in a form where the KJV and JST\/IV are compared verse-by-verse. There is a text put out by the RLDS (now CoC) that compares the two versions (see here<\/a>) and I think it is worth owning. This<\/a> new book does the same thing (I think–I haven’t seen it–anyone? anyone?) for the parts of the IV that are in the NT. <\/p>\n (3) The JST restores the text to what it read orginally.<\/em> According to Robert J. Matthews, the preeminent LDS scholar of the JST, the JST\/IV can do one (or more) of four different things:<\/p>\n (a) restore of the text to the way that it originally read This, of course, makes for interesting reading, since there is no way to objectively determine which of the four is present in a given passage.<\/p>\n One more thought and then some questions:<\/p>\n
\n(b) add material that was not originally part of the biblical text
\n(c) consist of Joseph Smith\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s commentary
\n(d) consist of material added for doctrinal harmonization<\/p>\n