1.8 KiB
| Date | ||
|---|---|---|
|
It's kinda fascinating how long and complex the path is from the events of the new testament and the text that we have. I always talked about it on my mission, but the details add some precision and argumental strength to what I might be able to say. I only regret that I don't have enough time to really get into this class, because a lot of the stuff is really cool. Wow the King James version of the Bible was partially written at Oxford. It was like, a super academic pursuit, not just a bunch of monks in a parish, but instead it was a whole official council of professors commissioned by the King. Kinda cool. I would totally watch a movie about the midieval creation of the Bible as we know it today. I totally did not know about the italics. That would have been way more useful at the start of the semester! The professor should really experiment with doing the class in reverse order. I sincerely doubt that the JST was truly what was spoken in those situations, but instead Joseph Smith's rewriting of events to bring them in line with correct doctrine that was revealed to him. I read a few of the writings, and they just feel pretty heavy-handed, and the clarifications of the historicity of the passages he edits are pretty convincing against them. Didn't we get those recently, too? Like, didn't the other church hold them from us for a while?
The septuagint would be a cool read. Is it closer to reality? Would it be worth it to learn ancient greek just to read it? I had a piano teacher learn latin and greek for just that reason. I imagine she read the vulgate, too. The talks do a good job of really putting into a complete narrative the miraculous and monumental and long-running nature of the restoration. It's been a millenia-long trend.