Thursday, February 25, 2021

George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl on 1 Nephi 13:28

In their commentary on the Book of Mormon, George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl offered the following commentary on 1 Nephi 13:28, arguing it refers to the removal/destruction of books no longer extant/part of the canon as opposed to textual corruption of those that are now extant:

 

VERSE 28

 

Many plain and precious things taken away from the book. This, as I understand it, refers to books and, perhaps, parts of books, that have been destroyed, rather than to the corruption of the texts in the books extant.

 

Many modern scholars are changing their attitude toward the Bible. They admit, for instance, that the books of the New Testament almost without exception belong to the first century, although they were not gathered together in a volume, as we know them, until a couple of centuries later. Archeological finds prove that the grammar, the vocabulary, the form of the letters, the diction and the historical background stamp them as products of that early age. They also admit that in all essential particulars the text we have is identical with the original writings. They consider these conclusions established by the scientific methods of criticism applied to thousands of manuscripts. 

 

There are discrepancies. And even apparent contradictions. In the Old Testament, and particularly in the Chronicles, dates and names are sometimes hopelessly changed. In fact, the entire chronology of the Old Testament, before the Temple of Solomon, is guesswork. Usher calculates the time from the creation to the flood to be, 1656 years; the Septuagint makes it, 2262 years; Josephus, 2256 years. Similar discrepancies appear in the following periods. From the flood to the call of Abraham, Usher, 427 years; Sept., 1207; Josephus, 1062. From the call of Abraham to the exodus, Usher, 430, Sept. 425, Josephus, 445. From the exodus to the foundation of the temple of Solomon, Usher, 479, Sept. 601, Josephus, 621. From the temple of Solomon, to the restoration of Cyrus, Usher, 476, Sept. 476, Josephus, 493. From the restoration by Cyrus to our Lord, Usher, 536, Sept. 537, and Josephus, 534 years. That is, the entire time from the creation to the beginning of our era appears thus:

 

Usher 4004 years

 

Septuagint 5508 years

 

Josephus 5411 years

 

To this may be added that the Samaritan text makes the period between the creation and the exodus 2809 years. 

 

In the New Testament, too, there are numerous variations. A few of these will have to suffice for illustrations. In Matthew 19:17: "Why callest thou me good?" Griesbach notes another reading: "Why asketh thou me concerning the good?" The doxology in the Lord's prayer, "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen," is lacking in some MSS. Matt. 16:2, is omitted in some MSS. The last 12 verses of Mark are missing in some MSS. The story of an angel "moving" the water of Bethesda (John 5:4) is absent from some MSS. Many omit the story of the woman in John 8:1-11. Peter's visit to the grave (Luke 24:12) is omitted in some MSS, but Griesbach considers the verse genuine.

 

Such are the variations in the text. Dr. Joseph Angus remarks: "In the 7959 verses of the New Testament there are not more than ten or twelve various readings of great importance, and these affect not the doctrines of the Scriptures, but only the number of proof passages in which they are revealed."

 

Such variations are easily accounted for. Many of them are accidental. A copyist can accidentally mistake one letter for another. He can happen to leave out words or lines, or repeat sentences. Sometimes the changes are made deliberately, in order to correct grammar, or perhaps establish proof of a doctrine. Sometimes owners of a manuscript would make marginal notes, and a copyist may have incorporated them in the text, thinking that they belonged to it originally. An Armenian translation of St. Mark has been found in which the last 12 verses of Mark are said to have been written by a church father, Aristion. If that is correct, he, no doubt, added it to the gospel because it was an accepted tradition at that time in his part of the church. They may have been part of the original, for the end leaf of a papyrus might easily get lost.

 

Nephi, in his wonderful vision, sees that many precious things had been taken away from the book. For the reasons here given I believe this was fulfilled in the destruction of books that originally belonged to the collection of inspired literature. (George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl, Commentary on the Book of Mormon, volume 1, emphasis added)

 

Further Reading

 

Not By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura


Refuting the Myth that all but 11 verses of the New Testament Can be Reconstructed from the Church Fathers


Refuting Christina Darlington's Claim the Bible has Been Preserved with 99.5% Accuracy


Modern (Evangelical Protestant) New Testament Scholarship vs. Christina Darlington


Brant Gardner on 1 Nephi 13:24-28 and a Note on Psalm 110:3 in the MT and LXX

Blog Archive