Matthew 7:1 JST and 3 Nephi 14:1

[Brian]

This is something I have wondered about for a long time, and I wonder if someone here can explain it. As you know, both of these chapters represent the concluding chapter of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount. Matthew 5-7 contains the original delivery, and 3 Nephi 12-14 contains the version given to the Nephites. For the most part, the wording is identical. This doesn't really bother me, considering it is basically the same talk given by the Savior on two occasions. There is no reason for me to doubt that he could give the same talk twice. However, I have at times been confused by the following:

Matthew 7:1 reads, "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

Likewise, 3 Nephi 14:1 reads, "... Judge not, that ye be not judged."

However, the Joseph Smith Translation of Matthew 7:1 reads, "Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged: but judge righteous judgment."

Why is it that the Book of Mormon contains the same wording as the Bible, and yet the wording in the Bible was modified by Joseph Smith?

[volgadon]

Because the JST is a doctrinal revision of the Bible. It shows how the Bible should be read in light of the truths restored and brought to the fore through the Restoration.

[Doctrine 612]

This may help. Through my understanding of the Jst is not only a perfecting of the passage to its true form but also a doctrinal perfecting.

Ask your self could you really not make any judgement no, it would be inpossible we all need to make decissions in our lifes, so the jst just telles us if we make a judgement about any thing or one that it must be a rightous one in that.

[BCSpace]

Why is it that the Book of Mormon contains the same wording as the Bible, and yet the wording in the Bible was modified by Joseph Smith?

My opinion is that JS generally quoted the Bible he knew when he came upon familiar teachings. I think it equally likely that the Spirit guided him to quote it that way because the JST revelation was not supposed to come forth until later as was the case.

[TAO]

The JST gives us the interpreteations that the Bible should be read in, not the precise verses that were removed (although it does give verses that were removed - albight in different, and clearer words).

In other words, "Judge not that ye be not judged were the correct words from the beginning"

However, "judge not unrighteously" is the much more clear interpretation, and what the verse truly means.

That's why you'll find some verse found in the Dead Sea Scrolls that had been altered in KJV, however, there isn't a correction in the JST. It's because the interpretation is the same. JST revelation is there to put clarity on certain ambiguous verses in the Bible. It's the true interpretation as God intended it.

[canterdogs]

The JST is the most egregious revision of scripture ever produced. That modification identified above is an abominable, invalid interpretation of the scriptures. Another more shocking modification in the Joseph Smith translation is found in Romans 4:5

"but believeth on him who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness"

Notice that Joseph Smith inserts the word "not" into the text. Notice also that this absolutely reverses the meaning of the original text. Either God justifies the ungodly or God justifies "not" the ungodly. You can't have it both ways. This is part of the evidences I consider that points to the falsehood of Joseph Smith's ministry and work. There are many other evidences in science, linguistics, theology, history and so on. The presence of a substantial apologetic effort on just about all of Mormonism's claims both theological and historical points the outright falsehood of Mormonism. Of course there is also substantial apologetics in mainline Christendom also. But we need not apologise about the historical record of our scriptures to the same extent that Mormons do for their scriptures. We do not have all the missing pieces that the Book of Mormon has. Not only is our faith alive today through the work of the Holy Spirit, but our faith is also historical. We have the testimony of scripture and we are led by the Spirit - a Spirit that is faithful to the Word of God. We have an authority that comes from the scriptures - God's revealed will - and not from the authority of men. Men like Joseph Smith who twist scriptures and invent scriptures to conform to his own teachings or, more accurately, his whims. I submit the above textual bastardization as another evidence of the falsehood of his prophetic ministry.

[TAO]

The JST is the most egregious revision of scripture ever produced. That modification identified above is an abominable, invalid interpretation of the scriptures. Another more shocking modification in the Joseph Smith translation is found in Romans 4:5

"but believeth on him who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness"

Notice that Joseph Smith inserts the word "not" into the text. Notice also that this absolutely reverses the meaning of the original text. Either God justifies the ungodly or God justifies "not" the ungodly. You can't have it both ways. This is part of the evidences I consider that points to the falsehood of Joseph Smith's ministry and work.

Actually, it makes total sense that God doesn't justify the ungodly. He has mercy on those who ask for forgiveness, but those are not the ungodly.

There are many other evidences in science, linguistics, theology, history and so on. The presence of a substantial apologetic effort on just about all of Mormonism's claims both theological and historical points the outright falsehood of Mormonism.

The reason this is done is because our religion is attacked. If nobody attacks our religion, we wouldn't need apologetics, would we?

Of course there is also substantial apologetics in mainline Christendom also. But we need not apologise about the historical record of our scriptures to the same extent that Mormons do for their scriptures. We do not have all the missing pieces that the Book of Mormon has.

Actually, apologetics isn't related to apologizing - it's related to defending. And second of all, if your worried about missing pieces, you should try faith. It works. Whereas proof gets us nowhere - there has been no 'proving' or 'disproving' evidence given at the time, and I highly doubt that there will be in the future. Ultimately, all the people trying to 'disprove' and 'prove' things have made a big giant mess.

Not only is our faith alive today through the work of the Holy Spirit, but our faith is also historical. We have the testimony of scripture and we are led by the Spirit - a Spirit that is faithful to the Word of God.

I have to say, it's the same way with us. It's the same way I got my testimony. First I obtained a testimony in God. Then in the Book of Mormon. Then in the modern day prophets and leaders. I have faith in the Bible, but the Bible does not connect to me in any way as well as the Book of Mormon does. The Book of Mormon is an amazingly edifying book, if one bothers to listen to it with a heart open to it's teachings.

We have an authority that comes from the scriptures - God's revealed will - and not from the authority of men.

The scriptures are written by men canterdogs. Every one of them came from the mouth of a man, and that man had the Spirit, and so it was the word of God. It is the same way today, that it is - God speaks through the mouths of his servants, the prophets. And when we listen, our hearts rejoice and a peace comes across us. I testify to you that I know that Thomas S. Monson is a prophet of God.

Men like Joseph Smith who twist scriptures and invent scriptures to conform to his own teachings or, more accurately, his whims. I submit the above textual bastardization as another evidence of the falsehood of his prophetic ministry.

Alas, I know he didn't invent them. I could show many evidences to you that he didn't, but ultimately, that will cause your mind to be obcessed with proof, and go in the wrong direction. Instead you must learn things by faith. And I don't think you've read the book, and asked the question, as you should have. Perhaps you should read this:

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. 5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

So my question than becomes, did you truly test it, or did you assume, did you actually read it, and go to God in humble prayer, and ask him whether these things were true. If you haven't, oh, how I wish you would. How I wish you would open your mind and be born again.

[DeepThinker]

That modification identified above is an abominable, invalid interpretation of the scriptures. .

I'm not a theologian and definately not an academic. I am however, an accountant, and accustomed to measuring validity against a standard.

One thing I've always wondered about statement like the one above - What is the standard of truth that you measure against ?

I assume you'll say the Bible, but who's interpretation of the Bible? I would like to know who you think got it right ? Who is that person or organization that has it all figured out, with the correct interpretation that you measure Joseph Smith against ? It can't be Christianity in general - there's two much divergence in doctrine . The same question that Joseph Smith started with - which of all the sects is right ? Where is the correct statndard of interpretation of all doctrine ?

[canterdogs]

I'm not a theologian and definately not an academic. I am however, an accountant, and accustomed to measuring validity against a standard.

One thing I've always wondered about statement like the one above - What is the standard of truth that you measure against ?

I assume you'll say the Bible, but who's interpretation of the Bible? I would like to know who you think got it right ? Who is that person or organization that has it all figured out, with the correct interpretation that you measure Joseph Smith against ? It can't be Christianity in general - there's two much divergence in doctrine . The same question that Joseph Smith started with - which of all the sects is right ? Where is the correct statndard of interpretation of all doctrine ?

In all the textual evidence of that scripture in Romans 4 we have it how it is read in the mainstream translation we have today. It's not a matter of interpretation. Either God justifies the ungodly or He justifies not the ungodly. Joseph Smith's modification completely changes the meaning of the text. Nowhere other than in the JST do we read the text as Joseph modified it. One must conclude, on the basis of overwhelming evidence, that Joseph Smith simply altered the verse as he wished.

[TAO]

In all the textual evidence of that scripture in Romans 4 we have it how it is read in the mainstream translation we have today. It's not a matter of interpretation. Either God justifies the ungodly or He justifies not the ungodly. Joseph Smith's modification completely changes the meaning of the text. Nowhere other than in the JST do we read the text as Joseph modified it. One must conclude, on the basis of overwhelming evidence, that Joseph Smith simply altered the verse as he wished.

When you quote part of the Joseph Smith Translation, and don't read it in it's whole context, you won't understand it. The way you quoted it was miselading.

Here is the real thing guys:

For if Abraham were justified by the law of works, he hath to glory in himself; but not of God. 3 For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4 Now to him who is justified by the law of works, is the reward reckoned, not of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

[Vance]

Well, shall we look at the "ungodly" in the context of other New Testament verses?

1 Tim. 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

1 Pet. 4:18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

2 Pet. 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

Sounds bad for the "ungodly" doesn't it!

2 Pet. 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Bad indeed.

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

[NauvooSaint]

The JST is the most egregious revision of scripture ever produced. That modification identified above is an abominable, invalid interpretation of the scriptures. Another more shocking modification in the Joseph Smith translation is found in Romans 4:5

"but believeth on him who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness"

Notice that Joseph Smith inserts the word "not" into the text. Notice also that this absolutely reverses the meaning of the original text. Either God justifies the ungodly or God justifies "not" the ungodly. You can't have it both ways. This is part of the evidences I consider that points to the falsehood of Joseph Smith's ministry and work. There are many other evidences in science, linguistics, theology, history and so on. The presence of a substantial apologetic effort on just about all of Mormonism's claims both theological and historical points the outright falsehood of Mormonism. Of course there is also substantial apologetics in mainline Christendom also. But we need not apologise about the historical record of our scriptures to the same extent that Mormons do for their scriptures. We do not have all the missing pieces that the Book of Mormon has. Not only is our faith alive today through the work of the Holy Spirit, but our faith is also historical. We have the testimony of scripture and we are led by the Spirit - a Spirit that is faithful to the Word of God. We have an authority that comes from the scriptures - God's revealed will - and not from the authority of men. Men like Joseph Smith who twist scriptures and invent scriptures to conform to his own teachings or, more accurately, his whims. I submit the above textual bastardization as another evidence of the falsehood of his prophetic ministry.

I realize I'm a bit late in responding to this claim, however I think it vitally important to correct this mistake on your part in misquoting Inspired Version (JST) Romans 4:5. I'll quote starting with verse 2 (note: bold text are additions made in the JST, strike-outs are deletions made in the KJV) (To read JST only simply read bold text & ignore strike-outs):

"2 For if Abraham were justified by the law of works, he hath whereof to glory in himself; but not before of God.

verse 3 ....no difference in JST from KJV

4 Now to him that who worketh is justified by the law of works, is the reward not reckoned, not of grace, but of debt.

5 But to him that worketh seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him that who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without the law of works,

7 Saying, Blessed are they through faith whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered."

As can be seen this is far from the context & misunderstanding of what was claimed in the earlier post. It is The Man who seeketh Not to be justified by the law of works, but believes in God (God is the one who justifieth not the ungodly), his faith (The Man's faith in God is counted for righteousness)

[canterdogs]

Well, shall we look at the "ungodly" in the context of other New Testament verses?

1 Tim. 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

1 Pet. 4:18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

2 Pet. 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

Sounds bad for the "ungodly" doesn't it!

2 Pet. 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Bad indeed.

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

[canterdogs]

When you quote part of the Joseph Smith Translation, and don't read it in it's whole context, you won't understand it. The way you quoted it was miselading.

Here is the real thing guys:

I'm sorry, but context only adds to the case that JS was completely wrong. by invoking the law, Paul is telling us that we are all unworthy - because none of us have kept the law perfectly. He then shows us our only way out - the mercy of God who justifies the ungodly (as it reads in ALL the manuscript evidence)

[TAO]

I'm sorry, but context only adds to the case that JS was completely wrong. by invoking the law, Paul is telling us that we are all unworthy

We are all unowrthy without God, but according to JST, Paul is referring to worthiness to use God's mercy.

He then shows us our only way out - the mercy of God who justifies the ungodly (as it reads in ALL the manuscript evidence)

However, if we read in Psalms, it states:

5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.

6 For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.

No, the Joseph Smith Translation does not contradict, merely it clarifies on what was being referred to in Romans.

[canterdogs]

We are all unowrthy without God, but according to JST, Paul is referring to worthiness to use God's mercy.

However, if we read in Psalms, it states:

No, the Joseph Smith Translation does not contradict, merely it clarifies on what was being referred to in Romans.

Again not in contradiction to the original Romans text. Who makes us righteous? Only Jesus. In the Psalms 103:12 it says that:

As far as the east is from the west, [so] far hath he removed our transgressions from us.

He has removed our transgressions through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. We no longer stand condemned because our faith in Jesus has made us righteous.

[TAO]

He has removed our transgressions through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. We no longer stand condemned because our faith in Jesus has made us righteous.

No, he has not made us righteous, simply, he has suffered for our sins, so we don't have to pay for them. However, unless we ask for forgiveness, we cannot take advantage of that offer, and those who don't ask for forgiveness are the ungodly.

[canterdogs]

No, he has not made us righteous, simply, he has suffered for our sins, so we don't have to pay for them. However, unless we ask for forgiveness, we cannot take advantage of that offer, and those who don't ask for forgiveness are the ungodly.

Has has made us righteous! the scriptures couldn't be more clear about this. He bore our sins so we don't have to. He continues to bear the sins of believers. But true conversion means repentance from sin. When we confess sin AND turn away from sin, this is evidence of true conversion.

The unfortunate thing about American protestantism is that they have, in large part, moved away from this teaching. Only a few men like Piper and Washer still proclaim this message. Still we need not work to become righteous, rather we must accept Jesus and it is He who is the author and finisher of our faith - not our own works. We don't work for salvation. But true conversion is accompanied always by a changed life.

[TAO]

Has has made us righteous! the scriptures couldn't be more clear about this. He bore our sins so we don't have to. He continues to bear the sins of believers. But true conversion means repentance from sin. When we confess sin AND turn away from sin, this is evidence of true conversion.

But only through forgiveness. If people do not call the law in on their account, when they know they can, it isn't borne.

eh... gtg, will respond later!

[jmordecai]

Whereas proof gets us nowhere

The Apostle Paul didn't share that notion.

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

1 Thessalonians 5:21

[TAO]

The Apostle Paul didn't share that notion.

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

1 Thessalonians 5:21

Yes, but by prove in that verse, he meant prove by faith, not prove by evidence, tossing faith aside.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

In proving things with evidence unseen, through the Spirit, yes that is good.

But in throwing away faith for visual proof, no, that is a mistake.

Proof by sight may be 'sure', but it makes it impossible to have faith.

[Vance]

All these passages are right. But they don't make your case.

Actually they do.

Scripture teaches that we were all ungodly once.

And those that repent and become godly are justified.

There is no one good, not one.

Excepting Jesus of course.

Christ died for us while we were enemies of God.

Yeah, so? What about Abraham? Did Christ die for him while he was yet an enemy of God or was it well after he was declared righteous?

That is, God justified us while we were ungodly.

Which means that the work of the atonement was done while we were yet in sin. But only after we exercise faith in Christ and repent of our sins and make a covenant of obedience (as the saints in Rome had done before receiving this letter from Paul) does His justification get applied to us as individuals.

But we're not to stay that way. When we accept Jesus as our Savior, we no longer practise [sic] these things. All those passages you state above are merely making this point. Christians are to be different. They can no longer be conformed to this world.

Which is EXACTLY my point. When we are converted and repent we are no longer "ungodly" but have become "godly" (obedient). So thank you for reinforcing my point.

They must strive to live godly lives. They were once ungodly before they heard the gospel. BUT they are justified on true conversion.

Which includes repentance, so thanks again for reinforcing my point.

They are made righteous only by the merits of Jesus.

EXACTLY!!! I am glad you agree. We repent from our sins, then Jesus forgives us (imputing righteousness to us) thus making us righteous.

Peter completely agrees with Paul. In fact in 2 Peter he lifts up Paul's epistles to the level of scripture.

?????

You mean with statements like this?

2 Pet. 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

If Paul's writings are "hard to be understood", does that mean that they are easy to be MIS-understood?

[David T]

Because the JST is a doctrinal revision of the Bible. It shows how the Bible should be read in light of the truths restored and brought to the fore through the Restoration.

Bingo.

[volgadon]

If anyone is interested, I can provide information on a recent Jewish parallel to the JST.

[semlogo]

In all the textual evidence of that scripture in Romans 4 we have it how it is read in the mainstream translation we have today. It's not a matter of interpretation. Either God justifies the ungodly or He justifies not the ungodly. Joseph Smith's modification completely changes the meaning of the text. Nowhere other than in the JST do we read the text as Joseph modified it. One must conclude, on the basis of overwhelming evidence, that Joseph Smith simply altered the verse as he wished.

Given the fact that no primary texts exist for any passage in the Bible... fill in the blank.