
Among the already large canon of scripture that Latter-day Saints accept as inspired, the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible (JST) stands as truly unique both in its scope, authority, and claimed origins.
The Latter-day Saint Articles of Faith inform us that “[w]e believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly” (Articles of Faith 1:8). Joseph Smith embodied this statement in his attempt to retranslate the biblical text. The creation of the JST commenced in June 1830 and was mostly finished by July 1833. However, the Bible Dictionary notes that Joseph Smith “continued to make modifications while preparing a manuscript for the press until his death in 1844, and it is possible that some additional modifications would have been made had he lived to publish the entire work.” The translation was hampered by the intermittent duties that Joseph Smith had to fulfill as prophet and leader of the fledgling Church. The translation was originally referred to by Joseph Smith and his colleagues as simply as the “New Translation” but, by the 1970’s, it had begun to be called the “Joseph Smith Translation.”
Some have assumed that the JST only contains a restoration of the pristine originals of the texts that make up the Bible today. However, no major Latter-day Saint authority, whether academic or ecclesiastical, has made this claim. For example, the Bible Dictionary states that “The JST to some extent assists in restoring the plain and precious things that have been lost from the Bible (see 1 Ne. 13–14)” (emphasis added). Scholars agree that there are various kinds of revisions. These include restorations of lost text, text that describes events that happened but were not recorded or simply did not make it into the biblical record, resolutions for contradictions, harmonizations with doctrinal concepts, commentary that interprets the text, enlarges it, elaborates on it, and even adapts it to latter-day situations, grammatical improvements, technical clarifications, and modernization of terms.10 In many ways, the Joseph Smith Translation is even more audacious than many have assumed.
Indeed, there are portions of scripture inspired by the JST that appear to be restorations of lost texts. These have been separately canonized from other portions of the JST. These include the Book of Moses and Joseph Smith–Matthew. Other revelations were received in consequence of the efforts made to create the JST. These include revelatory insights into the meaning of different scriptures and could perhaps be considered restorative of lost knowledge (Doctrine & Covenants 76-77, 91).
At present, questions exist about the Joseph Smith Translation pertaining to its completeness and its authority. Those passages that were canonized separately from the Joseph Smith Translation seem to be established as authoritative, but what about the other emendations made by Joseph Smith that merely show up in the footnotes of the King James Bible published today by the Church? Further, it is not known if Joseph Smith considered the JST as finished prior to his death in 1844.11
Scholars are currently exploring the question of whether outside sources or influences aided Joseph Smith in his creation of the New Translation.12 If Joseph Smith did use outside sources, it should not be a large problem to Latter-day Saints since much of this influence is only claimed to show up in those portions that likely represent “inspired commentary by Joseph Smith.” Also, information that appears in Joseph Smith’s environment can catalyze Joseph Smith to, in one way or another, confirm that information as correct and adapt it to his various scriptural projects’ scope and style through divine inspiration and revelation.
The JST makes unique contributions to Latter-day Saint doctrine including on the themes of the nature of God, the scope of the Father’s role in the Godhead, the mission of Jesus Christ, the plan of salvation, the character and motives of Satan, the Fall of Adam, the antiquity of the Gospel, Enoch and the establishment of Zion, the doctrine of translated beings, Melchizedek and his priesthood, the destiny of the house of Israel, the purpose of animal sacrifice, the age of accountability, the origin of the law of Moses, the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, and the three degrees of glory.13
Truly, the JST is a unique and exclusive gift to those that belong to the Latter Day Saints Movement.
10Robert J. Matthews, "A Plainer Translation": Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible: A History and Commentary (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1985), 253. Other scholars have offered other taxonomies. See Philip Barlow, Mormons and the Bible: The Place of the Latter-day Saints in American Religion (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1991), 55–61.
11Jared W. Ludlow, “The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible: Ancient Material Restored or Inspired Commentary? Canonical or Optional? Finished or Unfinished?” BYU Studies 60, no. 3 (2021): 147–57, https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/the-joseph-smith-translation-of-the-bible.
12See Thomas A. Wayment and Haley Wilson-Lemmon, “A Recovered Resource: The Use of Adam Clarke’s Bible Commentary in Joseph Smith’s Bible Translation,” in Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith’s Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity, eds. Michael Hubbard MacKay, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Brian M. Hauglid (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2020), 262–84; Kent P. Jackson, “Some Notes on Joseph Smith and Adam Clarke,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 40 (2020): 15–60, https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/some-notes-on-joseph-smith-and-adam-clarke/. Nicholas J. Frederick, "Section 77 and Book of Revelation Scholarship," Religious Educator 22, no. 2 (2021): 46–71, https://rsc.byu.edu/vol-22-no-2-2021/section-77-book-revelation-scholarship.
13Scott H. Faulring, Kent P. Jackson, and Robert J. Matthews, “The New Translation and Latter-day Saint Doctrine,” in Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts, eds. Scott H. Faulring, Kent P. Jackson, and Robert J. Matthews (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2004), 17–25.