top of page
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Isn't this just another “easy-to-read” or “simplified” version of the Book of Mormon?

A: It is not. No efforts were made to “dumb down” the language or otherwise reduce it. It is certainly true that reading the text in Modern English makes a huge difference in ease of understanding, but as described in the Preface and Introduction, great care was taken at every level to fully preserve meaning.

Q: So many of the passages of the Book of Mormon read differently here than I'm now used to, so why do this at all, and why should I trust its accuracy? Hasn't this taken the text too far?

A: This Modern English version of the Book of Mormon does not, of course, prevent anyone from continuing to use and enjoy the text as it was given through Joseph Smith.

 

In the revealed “Prayer for Covenant” dated July 9, 2017, it says this:

 

“We have also determined to update some words that were in use and understood by earlier people, but whose meaning has been lost or so changed as to render the language foreign to modern usage. We ask for your approval to update the wording so as to clarify the language for modern readers.”

The Answer to Prayer for Covenant has this corresponding statement:

… “you are permitted to proceed to the end with your plan to update language to select a current vocabulary, but take care not to change meaning — and if you cannot resolve the meaning, either petition me again or retain the former words.”

As the Preface and Introduction explain, this direction was the impetus for this work. The language used by the Book of Mormon when published in 1830 has many words in common with our Modern English language. As a result, we read those words and understand that grammar as though the meaning were unchanged. But it has changed in many cases, which has removed our ability to correctly understand it.

 

This version attempts to remedy that problem within this very narrow mandate—“to select a current vocabulary, but [to] take care not to change meaning.” The chapter and verse references are provided in part as an invitation for the reader to compare this version to whichever version of the Book of Mormon she is familiar with. Such an exercise will reveal how painstakingly & prayerfully those who labored on it worked to carefully render it into our language. See the Preface and Introduction for more details on the process followed.

Q: Why are there still many parts of the text that read awkwardly?

A: The Book of Mormon did not originate in English. Neither Joseph nor the project team are the authors of it. Those who labored on this text attempted to find the balance between preserving each original author's voice and style, while still “updat[ing] the language to select a current vocabulary.” It was a very challenging labor. So, while there may be parts that are still somewhat awkward, or not particularly how a modern editor might rewrite the passage, that was the personality, text, and the language given to Joseph Smith. This was honored and respected. The language was simply updated, so it can be understood by the common English speaker.  There was no attempt to rewrite scripture as if taking the place of the authors, or as if it originated in English. Elements of its unique personality and quirks were not removed. The effort tried to produce a modern English text that could also preserve its authenticity as an ancient text. Other Book of Mormon versions remain available. But the reader is encouraged to very seriously consider this text. See the Prayer and Answer in the print edition for more.

Q: Is this book endorsed by or does it have the approval of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

A: This work does not claim to be endorsed by that organization. The original Book of Mormon is part of the public domain and not owned by any church claiming Joseph Smith as their founder. It was published before Joseph organized a church. Many organizations and independent parties have published versions of it, including Penguin Classics. This is similar to how the Bible is not owned by the Catholic church or any other Christian denomination.

 

Because the language of the original version is one no longer spoken, written, or properly understood (i.e., Early Modern English), it is clear that without a version rendered in Modern English, current and future generations of readers will be unable to benefit from what the Lord gave through Joseph Smith. This is not unlike the situation in Martin Luther's day, when the Bible was only available in Latin, a language only understood by trained clergy and not by common people. That inaccessibility invited abuse through misrepresentation and neglect of God’s word. This turned the words of God themselves into a worshiped relic, rather than something that could come alive in the hearts of believers.

 

This project was done both with painstaking care for accuracy and doctrinal integrity and also in a way that attempted to preserve evidence of an authentic text. It is hoped that by bringing the text into the common man’s language of today, all today and in future generations may read, understand, and benefit from it.

Q: I thought Nephi cut off Laban’s head, not just cracked it? Isn't this a complete change in meaning?

A: In our current language, it is easy to think of “smote off his head” as meaning “cut off his head.” But in Early Modern English, “smote off his head” can also be understood to be similar in meaning to a blacksmith who “smote off an anvil”— that is, “smite” meaning to deliver a blow, and “off” in the sense of “off of”, expressing motion from a place. In other words, striking a glancing blow off something. In our modern vernacular, “he delivered a blow off of his head with his sword” is better rendered as “cracked his head with his sword”, suggesting only the hilt of the sword may have been used. 
 
Judges 2:14 RE (Judges 5:26 KJV) contains the one and only instance of “smote off his head” in the Bible. In that passage “smote off” does not mean “cut off.” Here, Jael used a hammer and nail and “smote off his [Sisera’s] head when she had pierced and stricken through his temples.” Modern Bible translations of this verse will use words like “split, crushed, smashed” for the archaic use of “smote off” in the King James Version of the Bible. 
 
Similarly, consider the other incident in the Book of Mormon text where “smote off the head” is used in the passage in Ether about the final scene of the Jaredite civilization: “And it came to pass that when Coriantumr had leaned upon his sword, that he rested a little, he smote off the head of Shiz. And it came to pass that after he had smitten off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised up on his hands and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.” Had it meant decapitation here, Shiz could not have lifted himself up on his hands and then struggled for breath. 

Q: In 1 Nephi 3:6 RE (1 Nephi 11:6 LE), why is “son” in the phrase “son of the Most High God” lowercase?

The word “son” in that instance refers to Lehi and is therefore lowercase.

bottom of page