Scripture as God’s word

During the time that Covenant of Christ was being written I was prayerful and submissive to the Lord. It was an intimidating effort and seemed audacious to even consider undertaking. My first impression was that it might be a useful commentary, but not something authoritative. I was surprised to learn by revelation from the Lord on December 22, 2023 that: ” The original Book of Mormon translation was to get that generation to be willing to accept it as scripture. They needed it to mimic the King James Version language. But this has a different purpose. This is to help a new generation to understand the content to help with the Lord’s return. There is as much Divine attention and assistance in getting this new version completed as before.” True to that revelation there was Divine attention and a great deal of Divine assistance. More importantly, it became clear that this was not like the earlier publication, but had a different purpose for a different audience, living at a different time. This was for US (this generation), today.

When it was stabilized into a final text I offered it in prayer to the Lord to receive His acceptance. Instead of accepting it, I was instructed to read the entire text again, which was done. In that final read-through there were a handful of corrections made. With that, the Lord was again asked for His acceptance. We got an answer on June 20, 2024, the Solstice when the longest daylight and shortest nighttime happens. That answer began with these words:

It is enough. I have given to you my direction both now and as the work was underway, and therefore I say to you: It is enough.
I labored alongside you in this work. My word is truth. My word is spirit. As you worked with the text I gave you my word and it is to be kept as it was given. My word carries with it the power of truth, and you are not called to alter it, but are to defend it. As you have considered comments from others you have feared man more than me. The corruption of scripture has been caused by men fearing others and failing to heed my word. You were told to update the language, and that included restating my doctrine, sacrament and baptismal prayers but you hesitated and needed to be commanded to do so. Let your work of updating the language now end with the words I have given you.

Just like the earlier revelation on the Winter Solstice, this one affirmed the Lord’s involvement, His direction, and His ownership of the results. The words that state that the Lord’s “word is truth” and His “word is spirit” is a thought I’ve not understood before they were spoken in this answer. When the Lord breathes into words His animating spirit of truth, they contain power that can save the souls of mankind.

The revelation about the effort to restate the text in modern English confirms the Lord was as concerned and assisted in this new text similarly to what He did with the original translation. I believe and accept that because I witnessed it. To the extent that there were “changes” I think the Lord was helping to make it more closely conform to the original purpose of the book. I put “changes” in quotes because I trust when the Lord authorizes clarifications for a modern reader that is not truly a change, but is instead a restatement to help us understand.

I do not think the text is smooth and a model of modern English. That was never the objective. The objective was clarifying meaning and making it accessible to us in our day. But remember, too, that there is no prohibition about retaining and using the original text, even if someone decides they’re going to accept this one as scripture.

In the beatitudes, the “God is with” and “God remembers” and “God is beside” language is something that took three days of input from the Lord before I was willing to make that rendering for the wording. I’m confident that the Lord could clarify what He intended, and I just accepted it from Him (but not without some resistance). The “blessed are” language is iconic. I would not dare change it, and in fact I did not change it. The Lord did.

There are a number of wording choices that I am convinced were intended to make the text applicable to the generation that will welcome the return of the Lord. Those are to help us. But we are under no obligation to uncritically accept it, and I am pleased with all the reactions and feedback. However, I do not claim this is mine, because it belongs to the Lord. As He put it: “I gave you my word and it is to be kept as it was given.”

Despite the Lord saying this, He has also said in that answer: “Publish it for the people to read. Then, have the voice of the people determine if they will accept it as my Covenant, as they will be judged by their voice on this matter. Once the voice of the people has been heard, if they accept it let it be your Covenant version to guide you. No one should be forbidden from using the earlier text, nor compelled to use only one of these two, but if approved by their vote it will be your Covenant text to guide you.”

We are free to accept or reject the text. The Lord respects our agency and intends for us to actively participate in His work. He treats us as equals having a choice to accept or reject even His word, even though He offers us His gift. Given the Lord’s mortal experience it is clear He tolerates rejection. Perhaps more than any of us He is acquainted with rejection and sorrow. He can sincerely ask: For what does it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift. I don’t think that is rhetorical, but a lamentation and a sincere reflection on how He and His word have been received in times past.

There are some variances in how some of the text is restated in the modern English version. You will notice, if you consider the entire body of scripture, that the same original passages of scripture get quoted elsewhere in the scriptures with remarkable variances in text wording. The Malachi text about the return of Elijah is in all volumes of scripture, but wording is quite different. When John the Baptist appeared and spoke to Joseph and Oliver, he is quoted differently by Joseph than by Oliver. Isaiah passages are quoted differently by Paul, and by Abinadi, and by Christ. Yet every one of these variations is scripture.

I’m not sure what to make of it other than to say that different renderings of the same material is not at all unprecedented. The hope is that each rendering is capable of bringing the reader into contact with the truth, and in turn closer to God. However well treated or mistreated the scriptures have been in generations past, I can assure you that when the Lord claims ownership of the Covenant of Christ text it can be trusted as scripture, and as the will of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, the word of the Lord, the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.