Gerald Smith wrote:
There are differences in why the Lord canonized the Bible, but not the
Apocrypha.
In my opinion the Lord had nothing to do with it. The canon was chosen by
apostate councils, that is, councils of professional clergy who met long
after the Great Apostasy was complete and the
There are differences in why the Lord canonized the Bible, but not the Apocrypha.
First, the Bible is more complete doctrinally, while the Apocrypha does not always
concentrate on doctrine or God. Secondly, historically, we aren't completely sure who
wrote the books of the Apocrypha (same troub
> -Original Message-
> From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 8:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [ZION] Apocrypha
>SNIP<
> Question: The Bible is "mostly translated correctly" and "contains both
&
I have been trying to figure out that very thing. Why have the distinction
at all? I don't think the New Testament apocryphal writings were available
for Joseph Smith Jr. to look at.
Stacy.
At 04:02 PM 11/16/2003 -0900, you wrote:
From: Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol.1, APOCRYPHA AND PSEUDEP
From: Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol.1, APOCRYPHA AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
When Joseph Smith was engaged in translating the Old Testament (see Joseph
Smith Translation of the Bible [JST]), he came to the Apocrypha and sought
divine counsel on what to do with it. The revelation given in response to
hi
