25. Biblical Compilation
"I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the
original writters. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing
and corrupt priests have committed many errors." ~ Prophet Joseph Smith,
TPJS p. 327
Many plain and precious things pertaining to God's Salvation have been
removed and lost from the Bible as kept by the Jews and cannonized by
Traditional Christianity (1 Nephi 13:26, 32, 34, TPJS p. 9 and 327) And though
we recognize and thank the hand of the Jews for preserving what they have
so done in the Bible record, we also recognize that it is not all correct and
many parts have been lost and/or corrupted. This was the prime consideration
in Joseph Smith's work of the Inspired Version of the Bible. And even there
the work of restoring all is undone and imcomplete.
Thus apart from, though partner to, the Enigma of a Jewish prepared Old
Testament and the understandable skewed slant that bias would bring, is the
time factor involved in human errors of the preparation of the Old Testament
which does account for much that is lost. It is widely accepted that the
Jewish 'Old Testament' was not begun to be compiled as we have it today until
after the Babylonian captivity. Perhaps beginning with the exiled prophet
Ezekiel who was commanded to write the record of the Jew by the instructions
of the Lord as recorded in Ezekiel chapter 37.
"Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For
Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions . . . " ~ Ezekiel
37:16
What is of some interest is that this is not the first time that such a
commandment was given to man. Scripture which is missing from the Jewish
prepared Old Testament records that among the promises to Joseph of Egypt
is found one such insrtuction. The latter-day prophet Joseph Smith is the
supplier of this information from the inspired version of the Bible as
follows:
"Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of the loins of
Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins,
and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah, shall
grow together unto the confounding of false doctrines, and laying down of
contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing
them to a knowledge of their fathers in the latter days; and also to the
knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord." ~ Inspired Version Genesis
50:31
Now whether the plates of brass, as kept by Laban's and Lehi's ancestors,
were a part of this record of the House of Joseph may be discussed, but
certainly the Book of Mormon and even the more modern latter-day scriptures
do qualify as being written by the fruit of the loins of Joseph of Egypt. And
the book of Ezekiel was not the first time where/when/that the Lord had stated
that both the Houses of Joseph and of Judah would write their separate
accounts of the history of Israel. Interesting also to note is that Moses, the
writer of the first five books of the Old Testament and of the Brass Plates
could well be considered to also, like the House of David, have of dual
inheritence, both in Joseph and in Levi, having claim to parentage as
explained in item number 8 previous. Therefore Moses could be cosidered as being
of the fruit of the loins of Joseph and the first writer of the scriptural
text.
Therefore, while Joseph's seed was given the promised blessing of
responsibility to write beginning in the days of Joseph, as it was given
directly to Joseph in his promises, the Jewish record records no such
responsibility is recorded upon the Jews until it is recorded in the book of
Ezekiel in the reference just given. Jeremiah the immediate prior writer of
scripture was of the land of Benjamin and Benjamin Levi according to his
place of birth. Joshua the writer after Moses was definately of the tribe of
Ephraim. And even Samuel was recorded to be the son of an Ephrathite, though
he is given in Chronicles as having a Levi family tree. And thus as discussed
earlier, even Samuel the author of Judges and likely the book of Ruth was
either an Ephraimite Levite or a Ephraimite dedicated to the Lord by his
mother and thus assumed a Levitical ancestry from such an adoptive source,
perhaps even his mother's over his father's. Even David and Solomon's
writings would come under the scope of being those of the fruit of the House
of Joseph as set out in these pages.
Now Lehi refers to the plates of brass of Laban as being the record of the
Jews. But that was in a day when Israel as a nation had been scattered
among the northern nations and even though Lehi and Laban where both of the
lineage and house of Joseph, they were part of the nation of the Jews and were
refered to as Jews by all others and even by themselves, calling themselves
Jews or of the Jewish nation. Thus the point is that in a very real sense
the Old Testament as we have it today was not compiled and written from
whatever selected prior records until after the Babylonian captivity,
beginning with Ezekiel.
Thus the Old Testament must be read with that understanding. The books of
Moses where edited and compiled by the Jewish scribes after 600 BC, not before.
Such editing took on the effect of leaving out or cutting from the record such
selected texts and books as the compilers felt where no longer in effect for
the remaining Jewish nation. Thus it is not surprising that such records as
those of Zenos, Zenock, and Ezias who dealt primarily with the House of Israel
as that of Joseph's seed and right, and the prophecies of the scattering such
as the allegory of the tame and wild olive trees where not included in the
Jewish compiled Old Testament dated after 600 BC.
And this is obvious in the editorial commentary which accompanies much of the
compiled Old Testament writings. Such editorial commentary was certainly not
part of the original texts but added in as later commentary by the compilers
to make the scriptures more understandable from their limited perspectives.
Such is the example about the Explanation of Ephrath and Bethlehem as
compiled from the record of Moses in his first book now called Genesis.
"And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem."
~ Genesis 35:19
Now Bethlehem was the later name given by the Jews to the place prior
known in the days of Jacob as Ephrath. Ephrath meaning 'fruitful' and the
name by which Joseph named his second son Ephraim after. Jacob would have
called it Ephrath. Moses would have only known it by the name of Ephrath
and it would have only been the later compilers of the Jews which would have
put in such a qualifying and explanitory phrase as 'which is Bethlehem.'
And so it is throughout the Old Testament text. Whenever in the same such
things as 'even unto this day,' they are not speaking a direct quote from the
original author of the ancient text but as an explanitory qualifying note of
explanation from the stand point of the later Jewish editor and compiler of
the record written and compiled after 600 BC. Thus one needs be careful as to
what the orignal author did say and what the later editor and compiler of the
record did record, explain according to them, add to or delete from the
orignal text.
As is obvious from the many New Testament scriptural references to the
prophecies of Jesus which are no longer available in the ancient texts, one
must understand that they were so later removed as they were apparently had
even at the time of Christ. Thus this compilation and editing did continue
even after the time of 600 BC down and until after the time of Christ. From
modern scripture we know that Moses, Adam and many of the other prophets did
speak many precious things concerning Christ and his gospel which never made
it into the Jewish cannon of the Old Testament and the records which we have
today.
Many of these can only be implied such as Philip's statement that Moses and
the prophets had written that Christ was the son of Joseph. That is Joseph
of Egypt, as Joseph the husband of Mary would not have understandably been
known to them. Further when the Pharisees state the they 'well say that
Christ was a Samaritan', it implies much greater understanding upon their
part that Christ was legally the descendant of the House of Joseph and
Ephraim as well as the blood of Judah through Boaz. These implied
understandings must be considered as evidences and hints as to the nature of
the scriptures and writings which have been lost, edited out and withheld
over the belated compilation of the Old Testament text by the compilers of
the Jewish Bible.