Thursday, August 3, 2023

Reed C. Durham Appealing to a Loose Understanding of "Translate"/"Translation" n his 1965 PhD Thesis on the JST

  

There are eighteen sections in the Doctrine and Covenants wherein the Lord gives commands and specific instructions relating to the Revision. In these passages, the Revision was generally referred to as a “translation.” But since Joseph did not at any time use any biblical manuscripts for his Revision, and only the English Authorized Version, the word “translation” in this case should more appropriately be interpreted to mean “revision.” (Reed C. Durham, “A History of Joseph Smith’s Revision of the Bible” [PhD Thesis; BYU, August 1965], 24)

 

The word “translate” has other definitions than “to turn one language into another” as it is most generally understood at the present time. When Joseph Smith received revelations using the word “translate” in regard to the Revision, or when he used it in his letter to John Wentworth (“We believe the Bible . . . as far as it is “translated” correctly), he probably understood the word to mean such things as, to express in other words, to paraphrase, . . . to interpret, explain; to expound the significance of; also to express (one thing) in terms of another. The Oxford English Dictionary [Oxford, England: The Clarendon Press, 1961, reprint] XI [T-U], 265). (Ibid., 24 n. 34)

 

Blog Archive