?As Does the Bible?: Official Statement Forthcoming?Maybe

By November 12, 2007

There has been considerable question concerning how we should interpret the omission of the phrase “as does the Bible” from the Introduction to the Book of Mormon. The phrase first appeared thus in the 1981 edition: “It is a record of God’s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americans and contains, as does the Bible, the fullness of the everlasting gospel.” However, in the 1992 Spanish-language edition, the phrase “as does the Bible” was removed. The change was reflected in subsequent foreign-language (re)printings, and first appeared in English in the 2004 Doubleday edition.

Carrie Moore in her Deseret News article mentioned the “as does the Bible” change, but stated that the church had declined to comment. In a response to an email from the Juvenile Instructor, Church spokesman Mark Tuttle stated the following:

Support and reference materials for the scriptures are only changed for major new editions (the last English edition was in 1981), and not with individual (re) printings. How this is done and its timing (considering all of the individual language translations), is a complex problem that we hope to address in detail in the near future. Until that time we are not able to provide additional comments.

This response gives me hope that the Church’s media representatives will soon address the issue of how the “as does the Bible” change occurred. Although Tuttle confirmed that a statement is forthcoming, he was unable to state that it would address this specific issue.

Article filed under Categories of Periodization: Modern Mormonism Current Events


Comments

  1. Support and reference materials for the scriptures are only changed for major new editions (the last English edition was in 1981), and not with individual (re) printings. How this is done and its timing (considering all of the individual language translations), is a complex problem that we hope to address in detail in the near future. Until that time we are not able to provide additional comments.

    I’m impressed that you obtained a response. (My previous emails to church spokespeople on other subjects have been ignored.) I’m surprised that the Doubleday edition would feature changes prior to the official English edition.

    Comment by Justin — November 12, 2007 @ 3:04 pm

  2. Justin: I established a bit of a relationship with Tuttle during the MM apology/not an apology thing. He’s been quite helpful.

    I agree that it’s strange. I hope that this statement that he mentioned will contain some type of explanation.

    Comment by David Grua — November 12, 2007 @ 3:27 pm


Series

Recent Comments

Ben S on Call for Applicants: Mormon: “Dang. Missing it by 36 hours.”


John Turner on What's in a name?: “Titles are hard because they serve so many purposes, as several of you have mentioned. I am also agonizing about my current project (it's a…”


Ben P on What's in a name?: “These are good questions, Janiece. I suck at coming up with titles, so I often rely on others. (Ironically, it was John Turner who came…”


JJohnson on What's in a name?: “I'm not so much opposed to the pithy quote title formula, as I am impressed when a non-semi-colon title is able to accomplish as much…”


J Stuart on What's in a name?: “I may stand alone but I like the pithy quote title formula, so long as it isn't too obscure. I think it's what the book…”


JJohnson on What's in a name?: “Secularism in Antebellum America's subtitle wins everything.”

Topics


juvenileinstructor.org