Do They Have To Update The Book Of Mormon Every Few Years?

[Holly3278]

A friend of mine claims that the Book of Mormon has to be updated every few years. Is this true?

[Guest Yediyd]

A friend of mine claims that the Book of Mormon has to be updated every few years. Is this true?

No, but we do have a living prophet...so if he says something new...Listen to him.

[MaidservantX]

The Book of Mormon, or selected portions thereof, has been translated into 100 languages. That was the number as of 2000. Perhaps there have more translations since then. I think an update "every few years" would be a very difficult thing -- I'd need to keep buying new ones (I have a quad -- Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants together in one tome; sucker costs 60.00). What is there to up date, anyway? It is a record of a people that are now gone. On the other hand, I really don't know what or if any type of review is involved in the Book of Mormon; I would suspect none, but I defer to those who actually know.

[Pelagius]

A friend of mine claims that the Book of Mormon has to be updated every few years. Is this true?

"Updates" are not common. If I am reading this correctly, the current edition was published in 1981 (see back of the The Book of Mormon's title page). Also, look at the first few pages in your Book after the title page -- find the "Brief explanation About The Book of Mormon. The last paragraph explains that some minor errors in text were corrected in this edition.

Is your friend a latter day saint? I get the feeling that one of the mis-informations commonly passed around in anti-mormon circles is that the church is always having to change things to clean up after itself. It's not true. I am not trying to demean your friend. Many people get false ideas about our church from the ministers and teachers of their own church. Much of it is sincere. But more of it comes from dark animosity, passed along to innocent truth seekers to keep them from investigating the restored gospel.

I am pretty sure I've seen a detailed analysis -- in an article somewhere -- describing the kinds of errors that have been repaired in The Book of Mormon. Mostly errors in editing -- spelling, punctuation, etc. If I can find it, I'll post a link or something for you.

[Pelagius]

Here's a pretty detailed source.

The Church Publishes a New Triple Combination

The information you want is near the end of the article, under the subheading "Texts Additions and Corrections." Keep in mind that this article is about the publishing of the Triple Combination, which is the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Prices inside of one cover. So, there's a lot that doesn't address your specific question.

[CrimsonKairos]

A friend of mine claims that the Book of Mormon has to be updated every few years. Is this true?

Yes, it has to be...if it isn't, all angel Moroni statues worldwide start to disintegrate.

p.s. That was a joke, for those who didn't know.

[Snow]

I notice that you ran away from your thread on the accuracy of the Book of Mormon and Bible.

Having trouble defending your positions?

[Holly3278]

I notice that you ran away from your thread on the accuracy of the Book of Mormon and Bible.

Having trouble defending your positions?

Ummm no. I happen to agree with the answers that were given me. If you haven't noticed, I call myself a Mormon too. I am converting to Mormonism in two weeks.

[Snow]

<div class='quotemain'>

I notice that you ran away from your thread on the accuracy of the Book of Mormon and Bible.

Having trouble defending your positions?

Ummm no. I happen to agree with the answers that were given me. If you haven't noticed, I call myself a Mormon too. I am converting to Mormonism in two weeks.

Perhaps I misunderstood. Good luck.

[musashi]

its not updated every few years. but has been updated a number of times and many changes have been made to it. unfortunately they are not all punctuation or grammatical changes, although most of them are.

[Snow]

its not updated every few years. but has been updated a number of times and many changes have been made to it. unfortunately they are not all punctuation or grammatical changes, although most of them are.

And why is that "unfortunate?"

[orrinjelo]

Some anti-Mormon stuff I ran into on my mish was the one with something thousand changes in the Book of Mormon. That confused me a bit, until I realize they misinterpreted what the changes meant--grammatical errors, puncuation, or the 'white' to 'pure' thing--stupid things like that. Yeah, there are updates like that every so often (last one back in the eighties????) or new prints (like in the past ten years, they printed and reprinted the quad, I guess something with the tabbing). Minor changes like that really don't matter to me because it doesn't change from the truthfulness of the book. Plus, when you have God tell you that it is true and it is His words, well, nothing compares to that. It kinda helps, I think, when you know another language and see what changes were made in that languages BoM and compare the words with the English for better comprehension. Heck, I have a German BoM from the 1960's and they weren't sure how to translate 'And it came to pass' so they just put '[...]' in place of it--that still didn't change it much.

[musashi]

unfortunately meaning faith destroying? it hasn't affected orrin jelo but it was one more thing that lead me to leave the lds church

[CrimsonKairos]

I'd almost be worried if there weren't updates to editions of the scriptures, or the temple ceremony, et al...

Miracles and revelation didn't end with Brigham Young or Joseph Smith. We should expect God to reveal and clarify more and more as we go forward (AoF 9).

[Holly3278]

So has the stuff that has been changed major or is it all minor stuff that has been changed?

[musashi]

Depends on your perspective. For me they are significant.

Here is a link that summarizes the changes.

http://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/bom1830/changes.shtml

[CrimsonKairos]

*Yawwwwwwn*

That list cracks me up.

[Guest Yediyd]

*Yawwwwwwn*

That list cracks me up.

Why does it crack you up? Where does this guy get his information? And is there any validity to his claims?

[Jason]

<div class='quotemain'>

*Yawwwwwwn*

That list cracks me up.

Why does it crack you up? Where does this guy get his information? And is there any validity to his claims?

The list is accurate, but like anything, subject to interpretation.

Yediyd you should pick up a reprint of the original 1830 edition and compare for yourself. They're running about twenty bucks.

http://www.amazon.com/Book-Mormon-Facsimil...3458&sr=8-1

[CrimsonKairos]

Why does it crack you up? Where does this guy get his information? And is there any validity to his claims?

Of course the changes occured, but the guy's explanations for why they changed is what cracks me up. This is one anti-tactic that always amuses me.

Thanks for the link, Jason. I think it's time I bought me my own copy of the 1830 BoM. It'll be interesting to read it without chapter or verse divisions.

I already have a pocket-size facsimile copy of the 1833 "Book of Commandments" (only the first 65 sections included...later called D&C) published by the RLDS Church (well, Herald publishing which is pretty much the same).

[Jason]

Thanks for the link, Jason. I think it's time I bought me my own copy of the 1830 BoM. It'll be interesting to read it without chapter or verse divisions.

I already have a pocket-size facsimile copy of the 1833 "Book of Commandments" (only the first 65 sections included...later called D&C) published by the RLDS Church (well, Herald publishing which is pretty much the same).

Herald used to sell them in a set (the BoC and BoM), as well as the 1835 D&C.

[Guest Yediyd]

<div class='quotemain'>

Why does it crack you up? Where does this guy get his information? And is there any validity to his claims?

Of course the changes occured, but the guy's explanations for why they changed is what cracks me up. This is one anti-tactic that always amuses me.

Thanks for the link, Jason. I think it's time I bought me my own copy of the 1830 BoM. It'll be interesting to read it without chapter or verse divisions.

I already have a pocket-size facsimile copy of the 1833 "Book of Commandments" (only the first 65 sections included...later called D&C) published by the RLDS Church (well, Herald publishing which is pretty much the same).

Maybe I need to get myself a copy, too. I'm a little perplexed by the changes and would like to read the original and see the changes for mysefl.

Jason does have a point. If JS was inspired....why was there a need for changes? Now I am confused.

In all honesty...I have to say: score 1 for Jason, you have me thinking.

[CrimsonKairos]

I wouldn't be perplexed, Yediyd. Either God told you Joseph Smith was a prophet, or He didn't. Or does your testimony involve the grammar and diction of each edition of the Book or Mormon?

It's one thing for Joseph Smith to translate scripture, and for someone else to write it down for him without there being errors, but its another thing entirely for the printer to type-set the 532 page book without any spelling, grammar or word errors.

To tell Joseph Smith he or future prophets can't change the Book of Mormon text from its first edition is to say Joseph Smith can't grow in knowledge or gain new revelations. I know, the anti's always claim, "But Joseph said the BoM is the most correct book of any book on earth! Why did he need to change it?" Too bad they don't read the rest of the quote which says that the Bom is the most correct of any book and a man will get nearer to God by abiding its precepts than by any other book. It's not the book's grammar that's the most correct, it's the book's doctrines, teachings, and inspiring principles.

If the Lord wants to give Joseph Smith or Pres. Hinckley, for that matter, word changes to scriptures to clarify their meaning or add a new teaching or principle, I say: "Bring it!"

I always shake my head when someone reads the BoM, prays, says they know God told them its true, and then runs into anti-mormon garbage and end up losing their testimony over grammatical and diction changes to the BoM.

I want to say to them, "Oh, well you were supposed to ask God if the grammar and wording of the 1980 version of the BoM was unchanged. You silly person, you went and asked God if He called Joseph Smith to restore His gospel! No wonder you were misled!"

[Jason]

Maybe I need to get myself a copy, too. I'm a little perplexed by the changes and would like to read the original and see the changes for mysefl.

Perhaps this would add some weight to the Modalist argument?

Jason does have a point. If JS was inspired....why was there a need for changes? Now I am confused.

In all honesty...I have to say: score 1 for Jason, you have me thinking.

I don't believe I made that point.

CK's response is appropriate. If (which obviously I don't accept...but I digress) Joseph Smith was a prophet, then he could be inspired enough to make post-dictatorial changes as God's mouthpiece on earth, right?

And if (which I do accept) Joseph Smith's understanding of the Godhead changed over time, then the alterations are necessary to clarify misunderstandings.

NOW (and this is the big "now") I seem to recall that there were other passages that already began "son of" in the BOM, and so this is really just a change for added consistency throughout the text. It's not a wholesale alteration, but it was done to make the text more uniform.

Almost makes me sick to be so nice.

[Guest Yediyd]

I wouldn't be perplexed, Yediyd. Either God told you Joseph Smith was a prophet, or He didn't. Or does your testimony involve the grammar and diction of each edition of the Book or Mormon?

It's one thing for Joseph Smith to translate scripture, and for someone else to write it down for him without there being errors, but its another thing entirely for the printer to type-set the 532 page book without any spelling, grammar or word errors.

To tell Joseph Smith he or future prophets can't change the Book of Mormon text from its first edition is to say Joseph Smith can't grow in knowledge or gain new revelations. I know, the anti's always claim, "But Joseph said the BoM is the most correct book of any book on earth! Why did he need to change it?" Too bad they don't read the rest of the quote which says that the Bom is the most correct of any book and a man will get nearer to God by abiding its precepts than by any other book. It's not the book's grammar that's the most correct, it's the book's doctrines, teachings, and inspiring principles.

If the Lord wants to give Joseph Smith or Pres. Hinckley, for that matter, word changes to scriptures to clarify their meaning or add a new teaching or principle, I say: "Bring it!"

I always shake my head when someone reads the BoM, prays, says they know God told them its true, and then runs into anti-mormon garbage and end up losing their testimony over grammatical and diction changes to the BoM.

I want to say to them, "Oh, well you were supposed to ask God if the grammar and wording of the 1980 version of the BoM was unchanged. You silly person, you went and asked God if He called Joseph Smith to restore His gospel! No wonder you were misled!"

I wasn't perplexed by the grammer changes...I was concerned about the MEANING changes as was quoted in that link. That was something that got me to wondering where they came up with that stuff.

I believe that JS was a prophet...I also believe that Baalim was and Jonah...they too made some mistakes in their ministrey.

I still have no doubts about JS...but I wonder about these changes. I'd like to see them for myself. Then pray about it. I still do trust the Holy Spirit..and for that matter...the modern day prophets...what say they about these changes?