I am reading in Latin, pretty much figuring it out by context and through my knowledge of English loanwords, French and in particular Spanish.
I am reading a reprint of a fourth Century translation of the Gospel of Matthew known as the Codex Vercellensis.
Whether the reader selects The Bible, The Book of Mormon, The Qur'an, or any other sacred text, the history of preparation for publication always reveals fascinating textual variants. As a side note, the popular belief that "Sacred Writ has never changed, for God would not allow it" is never the result of actual careful and prayerful study.
Changes Were Made in The Bible
There were numerous changes made to Sacred Writ. The questions to study--and I mean study the source texts for yourself relying on The Lord to instruct you through His Spirit--are when were the changes made and what were the changes? Where possible investigate who made the changes and why.
The Bible was changed. The first books were summarized, and we have the summarizations. Some words were tweaked in both The Old Testament and The New Testament, books were removed from both portions, and in a few instances passages were inserted. One major indication that the oldest texts in particular were reworked is "third person narration". Moses would have documented his interactions in the first person continually rather than narrating himself, "Moses fled from the face of Pharoah", "Moses stood up and helped them", "Moses was content to dwell", "Moses said", etc.
Mark chapter 16 ended with verse 8, but by the fourth century verses 9-20 were added, presumably by drawing from Matthew and Luke. In John chapter 8, verses 1-11, "the woman taken in adultery", were added in the fourth century possibly by extracting an account of Jesus that was recorded by early theologians (this source was extant).
The following books were removed from The New Testament in the fifth century: First Clement, Second Clement, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and possibly others.
Mark chapter 16 ended with verse 8, but by the fourth century verses 9-20 were added, presumably by drawing from Matthew and Luke. In John chapter 8, verses 1-11, "the woman taken in adultery", were added in the fourth century possibly by extracting an account of Jesus that was recorded by early theologians (this source was extant).
The following books were removed from The New Testament in the fifth century: First Clement, Second Clement, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and possibly others.
Changes Made in the Qur'an
The Qur'an was changed. Whole chapters were pulled, some chapters were rearranged, words were tweaked, and the key passages that separated Islam from Christianity were added to the source texts, chiefly that Jesus is not The Son of God--this fundamental difference between these two great faiths was added later, and the evidence for this is striking. In this case the evidence is to be found in the current Arabic text itself.
The 19th Chapter of the Qur'an is an ancient style of poetry that followed a strict and uniform rhyme scheme. The entire chapter follows this pattern, except for verses 36 through 40, and it is here that the critical claim is made, and the deviant rhyme pattern itself reveals the claim to be a later interpolation.
Please look carefully at these two images.
You don't need to be able to read Arabic because the middle column, the one in red, is Arabic written with English letters. You will notice that every line ends in the same rhyme which is /i/ or/y/ followed by a long /aa/. This was the pattern of this ancient type of religious poem. Now I said that every line ends in this pattern, except for verses 34 through 40. See for yourselves. This dramatic deviation from the prescribed rhyme pattern can only indicate that this segment, verses 34 through 40, was inserted at some point after the main body of the poem had been composed. And it so happens that this insertion was responsible for the separation of Islam from Christianity. The word is indeed exceedingly powerful.
The 19th Chapter of the Qur'an is an ancient style of poetry that followed a strict and uniform rhyme scheme. The entire chapter follows this pattern, except for verses 36 through 40, and it is here that the critical claim is made, and the deviant rhyme pattern itself reveals the claim to be a later interpolation.
Please look carefully at these two images.
You don't need to be able to read Arabic because the middle column, the one in red, is Arabic written with English letters. You will notice that every line ends in the same rhyme which is /i/ or/y/ followed by a long /aa/. This was the pattern of this ancient type of religious poem. Now I said that every line ends in this pattern, except for verses 34 through 40. See for yourselves. This dramatic deviation from the prescribed rhyme pattern can only indicate that this segment, verses 34 through 40, was inserted at some point after the main body of the poem had been composed. And it so happens that this insertion was responsible for the separation of Islam from Christianity. The word is indeed exceedingly powerful.
In the case of the Qur'an the people responsible for making the changes to the sacred text also inserted passages into the text that state that no changes were ever made. Though interestingly enough, the chief person responsible for compilation, Uthman, was adamant that all autographs, original documents prepared during the days of the prophet Muhammad, be burned so that only the Uthmanic compilation would remain as the sole authorized text.
But as always happens there were scribes who deviated from the directive, and now that their documents that predate the compilation of the official text and are concurrent with the compilation have been rediscovered in Sanaa, Yemen, the evidence for changes is quite incontrovertible. One such change found in the oldest texts (now rediscovered in Yemen) is where The Qur'an now mentions "a holy spirit" but the older text reads "The Holy Spirit".
Changes to The Book of Mormon
The Book of Mormon was changed. The Book of Mormon seemed to have many awkward passages, so starting from the second edition on Joseph Smith and his successors would smooth over grammatical and syntactic quirks to render the text in a more uniform King James Style English. In a few instances the wording was tweaked to render the correct understanding in the reader. In this latter case we're looking at maybe two or three such tweakings. I will add that the quirks that the Book of Mormon seems to have in its first edition, as it turns out, are actually not errors but pure Jacobean English, the English of the age in which the King James Bible was translated. I will also add that the King James Bible that Joseph Smith had, and that we all now use, was the 1769 version, an eddition in which many Jacobean quirks were smoothed out. In the interest of time I will include a couple examples of the many instances in which what appeared to be quirks in the 1830 edition of The Book of Mormon are actually stunning examples of Jacobean English, the English that would have been used at the time the King James Bible was translated:
Mosiah 3:19
"for the natural man is an enemy to God
and has been from the fall of Adam
and will be forever and ever
but if he yieldeth to the enticings
of the Holy Spirit."
As of 1920 our text reads:
Mosiah 3:19
"for the natural man is an enemy to God
and has been from the fall of Adam
and will be forever and ever
unless he yieldeth to the enticings
of the Holy Spirit."
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) states that "but if" was used to mean "unless" up until about 1596.
In 1830 Alma 5:19 read:
"I say unto you,
Can you look up, having the image of God
engravened upon your countenances?"
Currently our text reads:
"I say unto you,
Can you look up, having the image of God
engraven upon your countenances?"
The OED states "ingravened" ("engravened") was being used from 1583-1658, the entire Jacobean period.
Mosiah 3:19
"for the natural man is an enemy to God
and has been from the fall of Adam
and will be forever and ever
but if he yieldeth to the enticings
of the Holy Spirit."
As of 1920 our text reads:
Mosiah 3:19
"for the natural man is an enemy to God
and has been from the fall of Adam
and will be forever and ever
unless he yieldeth to the enticings
of the Holy Spirit."
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) states that "but if" was used to mean "unless" up until about 1596.
In 1830 Alma 5:19 read:
"I say unto you,
Can you look up, having the image of God
engravened upon your countenances?"
Currently our text reads:
"I say unto you,
Can you look up, having the image of God
engraven upon your countenances?"
Interpolation in The Book of Mormon
In the case of Book of Mormon interpolations (insertions of words) the original reading was actually literally from Hebrew and its resultant tweaking rendered the translation understandable in the same way the words would have been understood anciently.
For example, in Genesis, chapter 1, Moses presents us with 2 "Elohims", a Father Elohim who is embodied and a Son Elohim, both called "Elohim" or in translation "God". In 1 Nephi 11:18 in 1830 the text read "the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of God". Joseph Smith clarified it to read, "the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God". Joseph Smith did not clarify Mosiah 15:1 "I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men and redeem his people" to read "The Son of God should come down" because verses 2 and 3 explain that this "God" is "The Son of God". Understanding the process of transmission and translation as part of that transmission is very helpful for understanding the dealings of God.
Are Changes Invalidating?
For example, in Genesis, chapter 1, Moses presents us with 2 "Elohims", a Father Elohim who is embodied and a Son Elohim, both called "Elohim" or in translation "God". In 1 Nephi 11:18 in 1830 the text read "the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of God". Joseph Smith clarified it to read, "the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God". Joseph Smith did not clarify Mosiah 15:1 "I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men and redeem his people" to read "The Son of God should come down" because verses 2 and 3 explain that this "God" is "The Son of God". Understanding the process of transmission and translation as part of that transmission is very helpful for understanding the dealings of God.
Are Changes Invalidating?
Just because a change has been made in a text does not mean the text is invalidated nor does the change necessarily have to be false. John 1:18 now reads, "No one hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." That is a 4th Century change. The older texts read, in particular if Aramaic is taken into consideration, "No sinful man hath seen God at any time; an only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the father, he hath declared him." Both the original reading and the changed version are true, but one can conclude that the reason the change was made was because the original reading did not concord with the much later Nicene Creed.
Changes Authorized by God are Made Clear
If the changes were made by an authorized servant of God he will make it known who he was; he will identify himself. The changes in the Book of Mormon were made by Nephi the third, Mormon, Moroni, Joseph Smith, and his successors. Most recently the Church officially stated that some antiquated pre-standardization spellings in the Book of Mormon had now been standardized. These are changes, they do not affect the meaning, and the people who made the changes stated who they were and even their motivation. Sadly, in the case of The Bible and The Qur'an no one who made changes ever stated who he was, though in many instances we have some general idea of who they were. In the case of the latter the editors tried to cover for themselves by inserting statements in a Divine voice that no changes were ever made.
However, as I said earlier, if we study the word of God and ask the Lord to guide our understanding through his Spirit, He will do that. Then no change ever made by any unauthorized hand will ultimately prevail over us, especially if we receive all that God continues to give.
But very long story shorter, here is Matthew, chapter 5, verse 7, from the Codex Vercellensis:
"Beati misericordis
quia ipsis miserebitur Deus."
quia ipsis miserebitur Deus."
'Happy are the merciful,
for God shall have mercy on them.'
for God shall have mercy on them.'
I actually really like this reading! Now was this a variant in the Latin translation, was it a variant in the source Greek text, was it a variant beatitude that Jesus Himself used (as He preached He would sometimes express his ideas somewhat differently depending on the audience)? Some answers must be deferred for a day of far greater light and Revelation, but for now, this verse feels good, and it's good enough for me to know that the changes themselves, however you may interpret them, are actually textual.
