Introduction
Latter-day Saints revere the New Testament.1 From the beginnings of the Restoration, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have seized on the New Testament as their primary source for understanding the ministry and Atonement of Jesus Christ and the organization of his Church.2 Referring to this engagement with the New Testament, philosopher Paul Hedengren wrote,
Latter-day Saints revere the New Testament for its accounts of the birth, ministry, atonement, and resurrection of the Savior, Jesus Christ. The teachings of Jesus in the New Testament comprise the core of LDS doctrine, and their preeminence is evidenced by their frequent appearance in other LDS standard works accepted as scripture and in LDS speaking and writing. The writings of the New Testament apostles are accepted and appreciated for their doctrine and wise and inspired counsel and for documenting the apostolic challenge of proclaiming the gospel, adhering to the original teachings of Christ, establishing the unity of the faith, and promoting the righteousness of believers in a rapidly growing Church.3
With such reverence, we might ask the question, How have Latter-day Saints lifted themselves and one another in coming to grips with this volume of holy writ? While numerous works have focused on how Latter-day Saints (particularly Latter-day Saint leaders) have appealed to the Bible in sermons, periodicals, scriptural coherency, and biblical interpretation,4 scholars have largely overlooked the way in which the faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have conducted their study of the Bible, the New Testament specifically, and how their study has been enhanced by the unmuting of many Latter-day Saint voices. In our discussion, we will probe the institutional influence of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on its devotees’ study of the New Testament throughout the Church’s history. Additionally, we will examine the role of New Testament scholarship both in the wider academic arena and within the Church (namely, works officially produced by the Church and by individual Latter-day Saint members).
Our discussion will progress chronologically through five major periods of Latter-day Saint history and identify how faithful members have been influenced in their study of the New Testament.5 Within each historical period, we will first set out how other religious communities have approached their study of the New Testament. Additionally, in each era, we will identify prominent Church personalities and analyze publications that impacted the place of the New Testament in Latter-day Saint life. At the end of each segment, we will attempt to measure the impact of these publications and how they influenced New Testament study in the Church. The final analysis will focus on how burgeoning resources influenced individuals and families. We will also assess how the Brigham Young University (BYU) New Testament Commentary adds to the rich history that Latter-day Saints have enjoyed by intellectually engaging in the text of the New Testament.
The Foundations of the Restored Gospel and the New Testament (1830–1844)
Americans shifted their approaches to the study of the Bible during the two centuries that predated the founding of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Although the Bible played a quintessential role in the colonization of the United States of America, the way in which it was influential oscillated. During the majority of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Bible was predominantly interpreted through the clergy and the antique Christian creeds.6 These sources provided religious practitioners with a recognizable, acceptable, and hierarchical source of interpretation for the texts of the Bible. Americans, however, began to question these sources because of the rise of empirical methods of analyzing the world, including the role of supernatural revelation and spiritual influence.7
The middle of the nineteenth century witnessed an evolution in public perceptions concerning approaches to the Bible in America. Nathan Hatch observed, “The notion of the sovereignty of the people captured the imagination of the American people—common people—and wrought a serious crisis of authority within popular culture.”8 With the rise and spread of individual sovereignty throughout the United States between 1780 and 1820, the balance of power over the interpretation of the Bible shifted from preacher to congregant. Historian Philip Barlow recognized this shift within religious communities, stating, “By the onset of the egalitarian age of Jackson, privately interpreted scripture rivaled or surpassed the clergy and the traditional creeds as the preeminent religious authority of the land.”9 By proclaiming themselves as sovereign in their interpretations, students of the Bible in America continued to ponder, discuss, and debate the nature of the scriptures and their application for their own lives. These biblical discussions focused on trying to “strengthen the authority of [the Bible] in light of mounting attacks [by rising skepticism and criticism]. Nonetheless, interpreting the Bible by increasingly natural and empirical means affected the way they perceived holy writ. American Protestants began to treat the Bible more like any other book.”10 It is within this context of studying the Bible that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was established.
Joseph Smith’s personal study of the Bible, particularly the New Testament, from a young age is unquestionable.11 Smith’s continued study of the New Testament included unique perspectives. Focusing on the dissemination of Smith’s biblically informed language, his Christian primitivism, his selective literalistic bent of mind, his dissatisfaction with the current state of the biblical texts, and his disbelief in the Bible as the sole and final authority in doctrine produces a vivid picture of what the restored gospel provided its converts for study of the New Testament. Outside the Church’s foundational scriptures—the Book of Mormon, Smith’s published revelations, and the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible (JST)—no direct publication was produced that guided Latter-day Saint study of the New Testament.
Biblically Informed Language
One of the most apparent aspects of scripture in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the vernacular employed within them. Religious scholar Nicholas Frederick observed that in all of the Latter-day Saints’ scriptural texts the trait “that is immediately noticeable is the presence and prominence of the King James Bible. . . . Much like the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants appropriated the language and tone of the Bible, sanctifying the latter-day narrative by adopting the tongue of its spiritual predecessor.”12 Smith appears to have been inspired by the Lord to employ the familiar biblical language since the earliest converts to the faith associated authority and power with the voice of the Bible.13 Such a realization stood as an enduring statement that the voice of God came in the manner of scriptural language, as the Book of Mormon and one of Smith’s revelations attested.14 This understanding that the language in which the scriptures are given is an important component of their effectiveness sets the foundation for the exclusive adoption of the King James New Testament as the official English version for Latter-day Saints.15
Christian Primitivism
Likewise, early Latter-day Saint teachings offered an equal place for Christian primitivism, the idea that New Testament principles and doctrines reach back to the beginning of the world.16 In addition to the foundational documents of the Church adapting New Testament scriptural language, the Book of Mormon provides a clear window through which early Latter-day Saints could glimpse the importance of Christian primitivism. Numerous passages within the Book of Mormon, which by the account’s own dating precede the events of the New Testament by upwards of six hundred years, contain descriptions of New Testament events in striking detail.17 Joseph Smith emphasized Christian primitivism in his teachings to exemplify how the teachings of the New Testament were not only the source of true Christianity but that those principles were taught from the foundation of the world.18
Selective Literalism
Like other Americans, Joseph Smith questioned the degree to which the Bible should be read literally. Americans employed reason to begin questioning the literal interpretation of scripture, often concluding that scripture needed to be amended to reflect reality.19 While some scholars of the restored gospel have perpetuated the claim that the tradition’s primary tendency in studying the Bible is literalism,20 others have redirected the focus to selective literalism.21 Summarizing this approach to the Bible by Joseph Smith, Barlow concludes, “Although the Prophet acknowledged metaphorical interpretation and even biblical error, for him, the major events told in the Bible corresponded with external reality.”22 Barlow provides a series of examples that help identify Smith’s method in distinguishing between the literal and the metaphorical aspects of scripture, but he does not expand on how Smith and other Church leaders taught such selective literalism to the followers of the faith.23 On one occasion, Smith provided context for his selective literalism by stating, “I believe the bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers.”24 Although absent from Smith’s teachings, the Prophet sought to train others how to study the text of the New Testament as it was penned by the original authors, including a study of the text in its original Greek language.25
Dissatisfaction with Biblical Language
The JST provides examples of how Latter-day Saints were to approach the New Testament. In their work on the JST, historians observed a variety of changes that Joseph Smith made to the biblical text, such as restoring original text, restoring text that was not included in the original Bible, editing language to allow enhanced reader understanding, editing language to align with other revelations, and adding teachings that were not in the original text.26 These changes can be summarized under two ideas: restoring lost texts and clarifying texts for modern readers.
Restoring original text from the Bible was one of Joseph Smith’s primary objectives.27 We see this reflected in Smith’s belief that “ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors [in the Bible].”28 This belief coincides with the Book of Mormon prophet Nephi’s statement that there were “many plain and precious things taken away from the [Bible]” (1 Ne. 13:28). This type of change to the biblical text encourages Latter-day Saints to engage in a form of the scholarly activity called textual criticism: to study and establish a more correct edition of the text.
The JST stands as an example of the Lord’s desire to make the Bible accessible to all his children. The changes made by Smith reflect a modernization of the Bible translation and a joining of the biblical text to the teachings and revelations of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. In this way, Smith exemplified his disregard for biblical inerrancy, infallibility, and status as the final word on doctrinal matters by stating, “There are many things in the Bible which do not as they now stand, accord with the Revelations of the Holy Ghost to me.”29 Barlow provides a commentary on this quotation, observing, “Such a statement implies that, for Smith, it was not so much that his revelations needed to be tailored absolutely to biblical data but, rather, that an imperfect Bible ought to conform to his more current and direct revelations.”30
Disbelief that the Bible Has Sole Doctrinal Authority
Latter-day Saints believe that the New Testament is part of an ever-expanding canon of authoritative religious texts. With the addition of the Book of Mormon and revelations given through the Prophet Joseph, the process of continuing to build on the biblical canon is a central tenet in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Smith viewed this belief to be self-evident from the Bible itself, stating, “From what we can draw from the scriptures relative to the teachings of heaven we are induced to think, that much instruction has been given to man since the beginning which we have not [in our possession].”31 Church members appear to have shared this recognition as Smith noted in his history that “much conjecture and conversation frequently occurred among the Saints, concerning the books mentioned, and referred to, in various places in the Old and New Testaments, which were now nowhere to be found.”32 The Book of Mormon affirmed this belief (see 2 Ne. 29:13), and Smith received a revelation that he introduced as part of a record of John the Beloved.33 Smith instructed Latter-day Saints to continue to look for and accept different texts outside of the Bible.
Joseph Smith emphasized the necessity of reading the New Testament with the gift of the Holy Ghost to distinguish the literal from the metaphorical and the authentic from error. For Smith, and practitioners of the restored gospel, the Bible, and ancient scripture were insufficient on their own. Smith emphatically proclaimed this by saying, “I have an old edition of the New Testament in Hebrew, Latin, German, and Greek languages. . . . I thank God I have got this old book, but I thank him more for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I have got the oldest book in the world, but I have got the oldest book in my heart, even the gift of the Holy Ghost.”34 It is this same gift that Smith stated separated Latter-day Saints from all other religious organizations during his audience with President Martin Van Buren.35 Without the Holy Ghost, Latter-day Saints were doomed to make the same mistakes that the ancient Christians made in failing to come to grips with and to adequately reproduce the Bible.
Joseph Smith encouraged this type of study of the New Testament within established Schools of the Prophets. These schools, which operated from 1833 to 1884, likely shared their curriculum with similarly established groups in the nineteenth century36 and incorporated many of the additional insights that the Prophet had introduced through his inspired translation of the Bible. Smith appears to have limited this training to the leaders of the Church, perhaps with the intent that they would pass their knowledge on to the general populace of Latter-day Saints.37 Ultimately, Smith encouraged members of the Church to “study the bible”38 but to do so from the unique perspective of the Restoration.
The impact of this period on the study of the New Testament in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was not felt immediately. Following the Prophet’s martyrdom in 1844 and the splintering of the main body of Saints, most of whom followed Brigham Young, the JST was viewed with caution. The Church issued an official statement on the JST in 1868 to advise on the recent publication of the text by the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints entitled The Holy Scriptures.39 As professor Thomas Wayment summarizes, “The key points of the Church’s official position in 1868 are an allusion to the future coming forth of the New Translation under the direction of God, a clear endorsement of the inspiration that the Prophet Joseph had received while working on the Bible, and the belief that the New Translation was not complete.”40 Although initially resisted, the later work of Robert J. Matthews would resurrect the JST within the Latter-day Saint community, leading to its incorporation into general Church circulation and study in 1979.
The Development of Sunday School Answers to the New Testament (1845–1885)
As the nineteenth century progressed, so did approaches to the study of the Bible in the United States. Christians who had previously disavowed creeds and religious hierarchy began to develop various approaches to the study of the Bible that aimed at balancing the progress of science and philosophy with traditional approaches to interpreting the biblical text. These attempts created the popular perspective that scripture contained dualism, or multiple meanings derived from the same text. As George Marsden has observed, “Almost all [American Protestants] held that the Bible contained dual meanings. . . . Hidden in the words of the original sayings might be a secondary meaning not apparent until much later when the prophecy was fulfilled.”41 This was especially true for the study of the Old Testament, which Christians contested could only be properly understood through the lens of the New Testament. Christians in America frequently employed typological interpretations upon scripture (such as seeing Old Testament figures and events as prophecies pointing towards the figure of Christ in the New Testament).42 Often these typological interpretations were pointed toward current events in the United States. Marsden concluded, “These views continued to have great force in nineteenth-century America, as the view that the United States was the New Israel and the central cite of the spiritual preparations for the millennial age. The progress of history was thus casting new light on the meanings of God’s revelation.”43
While many American Protestant Christians were employing these methods of rationalism and dualism to find meaning in the Bible, biblical scholars emphasized principles and methods that aimed to get back to the original meaning of the text. An understanding of the authorial intent of the biblical author became the critical foundation to their understanding of the Bible.44 Moses Stuart, a nineteenth-century biblical scholar and primary proponent of discovering authorial intent, declared that if there was an intended understanding that the author placed upon the biblical text and the hearers of the biblical text were aware of the intent, there could be no dualistic or hidden meaning outside of that which was originally revealed.45 Stuart’s writings provoked a plethora of responses but illustrated the many different approaches for attributing meaning to a biblical text.
The introduction of these new approaches to the study of the Bible in the nineteenth century required Protestant American Christians to develop new methods of presenting the biblical narrative to the rising generation. Although Bibles aimed at the young and unlearned have existed since the Middle Ages, in nineteenth-century America, local sectarian publications dominated the biblical narrative for children.46 Unlike Great Britain, where publications of children’s biblical material were centralized in London and controlled by the Church of England, local congregations and denominations produced individualized children’s Bibles for their laity.
Local sectarian groups also began to form Sunday Schools. One historian noted, “The Sunday school movement in America started in the early nineteenth century. . . . The organizers of the first American Sunday schools imagined they could reach poor children in order to instill social behaviors associated with religious virtue, primarily obedience.”47 In addition to these denominational Bibles and Sunday schools, scripture catechisms (short sayings organized in a question-and-answer format intended for memorization) were a primary and popular source for Bible literacy in the nineteenth century.48
The tradition of local publications and catechisms instructing youth and adults from the Bible carried over into the Restoration. Kenneth Alford observed, “Converts to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints often brought with them a catechistic background. . . . Thus catechisms were a familiar religious education device to many early Latter-day Saint converts. It was a natural extension, therefore, for Latter-day Saints to create and use catechisms to teach the doctrines of the Restoration.”49 Various publications that focused on the doctrines of the restored gospel were produced throughout the nineteenth century in a catechistic format, but only two catechisms were specifically produced for the study of the Bible.
Beginning with the November 23, 1872, issue of the Juvenile Instructor, a serial catechism titled “Questions and Answers on the Bible” appeared within the periodical.50 This serial provided catechisms on general biblical facts in the first serial and then published a catechism on the text of the Old Testament weekly until the November 27, 1875, edition. At this time, the publication of the series became erratic. From its inception, the series ran alongside a catechism titled “Questions and Answers on the Book of Mormon.”51 This practice continued until the January 1, 1879, edition, when it appears that catechisms were removed from the periodical’s circulation schedule prior to the publication of various catechisms in book form.52
In addition to the serial publication of “Questions and Answers on the Bible” in the Juvenile Instructor, Eliza R. Snow, second president of the Relief Society and noted author, published Bible Questions and Answers for Children in 1881.53 Snow explained the purpose for the volume in her own words as being an aid in “impress[ing] the minds of the children with important facts in the Old and New Testaments.”54 In the catechism, Snow posed various questions regarding the biblical text that were no different from other biblical catechisms circulating in America at the time.55 But unlike other Christian publications that merely quoted the Bible, Snow’s publication interpreted the Bible through the lens of her religious tradition.56
Although these catechisms were aimed at children, they were “not designed to be placed in the hands of children for them to study, but to assist those who have charge of children . . . [who are] expected to read a question, and another appointee to read the answer, and all the children present repeat the answer in concert.”57 This is exemplified by the heading of the first article in the Juvenile Instructor series, which read, “Catechism for Sunday Schools.”58 These catechisms provided a central curriculum and were the catalyst for important developments for Church members’ study of the Bible during the nineteenth century. Although early Latter-day Saints held meetings of various types that involved the discussion, expansion, and study of the Bible, it wasn’t until the Saints settled in the West that Church leaders founded an official arm of the Church devoted to the study of Church doctrine and authoritative texts.59 As is evident today, the establishment of the Sunday School and its heritage for studying the New Testament continues to influence members of the Church, though the curriculum has changed drastically.
Higher Criticism and the Establishment of Church Religious Education with Academies, Seminaries, and Institutes (1885–1960)
The populace of the United States began to change in their acceptance of the Bible and Christianity as the nineteenth century began to give way to the twentieth. The complexities between faith and reason began to strain relationships between theologians, philosophers, scientists, and different religious communities that had once been complementary to one another. Commenting on the growing tension between religion and science, Edwin Gaustad and Leigh Schmidt stated, “[For] theologians, science kept invading their territory, answering questions about the origin and purpose of the world, about the nature and destiny of humanity—questions that were fundamentally religious rather than scientific. [For] scientists, theology blocked the pathways to knowledge, ruling the experiments of the laboratory as off limits, improper, and even dangerous.”60 These ideological battles, best known in the field of biology over the theory of evolution, spilled over into the fields of psychology, sociology, anthropology, history, and archaeology. Scholars carried these debates forward, but the trickle-down effect of these discussions influenced adherents and almost all religious traditions that revered the Bible.
The methods and ideology of higher biblical criticism, which flourished in Germany during the nineteenth century, contributed to the growing animosity between religious approaches to the Bible and scientific ones. These methods for studying the Bible began to cross the Atlantic and find place in the United States as the century concluded. Higher criticism consisted of using rational judgment to understand the text of the Bible and its validity in recounting historical events. Richard and Kendall Soulen explain this as “an approach to the study of scripture that is centrally concerned with searching for and applying neutral, i.e., scientific and nonsectarian, canons of judgment in its investigation of the biblical text.”61 While rational approaches and the application of scientific methods were applied to the Bible long before the waning years of the nineteenth century, most American Protestants shared the belief that the Bible still contained the infallible word of God. Although they disagreed on the meaning of the infallible text, they maintained a sense of its validity as fact until the closing decades of the century.62
The general acceptance of the validity of the biblical texts as historical fact began to change in public perception during the last third of the nineteenth century. Textual criticism, the analysis of ancient manuscripts to identify the most plausible and oldest reading of a biblical text, came to an apex in the late 1800s. Through seeking after the elusive “original reading” or “autograph” of each biblical text, textual critics identified various mistakes within the translation of the Authorized (King James) Version.63 With the publication of the Revised Version of the New Testament in 1881 and its companion of the Old Testament in 1885, individuals began to modify their traditional conceptualization of the Bible as being infallible.64 Additional translations of the Bible followed over the next fifty years. Scholars and religious adherents sought to create a translation that satisfied the changing needs of students of the Bible.65 Furthermore, citizens began to have greater access to public and higher education following the American Civil War, leading to a professionalization of the academic life and a dissemination of academic ideals.66 The rise of critical New Testament scholarship at this time threatened traditional understandings of the nature and character of Jesus Christ and the validity of Christian claims to a historically accurate and dependable New Testament text.67
This changed perspective among the masses led to an equal response by faith traditions who sought to reaffirm the biblical record. Despite the Bible’s textual inconsistencies and blossoming Bible translations, many believed that the same scientific inquiry used by opponents to the Bible could be used to affirm it. Shalom Goldman observed,
By the mid-nineteenth century [the higher criticism] school of interpretation, which subjected the biblical text to the same rigorous historical analysis as it did the texts of the classical world, was seen as a challenge to the belief that Scripture was divinely inspired. Churchmen and theologians feared that the subversion of biblical authority would lead to the spread of “unbelief.” Many considered exploration and discovery in Palestine to be an “antidote to the poison of unbelief.”68
Many faith traditions relied on the work of archaeologists like Archibald H. Sayce, who tested the main points made by higher critics against the evidence of archaeology.69 The spread of higher criticism and a dwindling belief in the validity of the biblical texts led many Christian congregations to establish places of learning that were patterned after academies but devoted to the study of the Bible within an established and secure setting.70 Many believing individuals pursued advanced education at approved Bible schools for the purpose of advancing their particular faith tradition’s approach to biblical texts.71
Within this cultural milieu, Latter-day Saints also engaged in higher education, attempting to validate their own interpretations and conclusions about the New Testament. Most relevant to the study of the New Testament is the education of Elder James E. Talmage (a superintendent of classes for the religious instruction of children among the Latter-day Saints), who began to engage in higher education through the obtaining of advanced degrees in the fields of geology and education at Lehigh and Johns Hopkins Universities. Throughout his educational experience, Talmage was exposed to thoughts about religion and science that he applied to the teachings of the restored gospel. Talmage sought to make these insights accessible to members of the Church.72 He wrote extensively through the early years of the twentieth century and in his later ministry as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Like scholars from other faith traditions, Talmage utilized his academic training to improve his ability to speak with an authoritative voice in both the fields of religion and science.73
Talmage wrote Jesus the Christ74 as a response to the criticisms of this period about the New Testament, particularly against multiplying discussions that diminished the divine character and nature of Jesus Christ.75 Influenced by other writers who preceded him,76 Talmage wrote a response to higher criticism as it pertained to the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. Talmage’s purpose is made clear in the preface to the volume: “It is particularly congruous and appropriate that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—the only Church that affirms authority based on specific revelation and commission to use the Lord’s Holy Name as a distinctive designation—should set forth her doctrines concerning the Messiah and His mission.”77 While Talmage provided the messages, the Church provided a platform for its dissemination.
The influence that Talmage’s work has had on approaches to studying the New Testament in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints cannot be overstated. Discussing the reception of Talmage’s work within the Latter-day Saint community, professors Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Thomas Wayment have stated, “The immediate acceptance and popularity of Jesus the Christ following its publication in September 1915 are demonstrated by the release of a second edition just three months later.”78 This popularity was influenced by an endorsement the work received from the leaders of the Church. A letter published by the First Presidency concerning the work states,
The book is more than a “Life of Christ” in the ordinary acceptation of that title. . . . We desire that the work, “Jesus the Christ” be read and studied by the Latter-day Saints, in their families, and in the organizations that are devoted wholly or in part to theological study. We commend it especially for use in our Church schools, as also for the advanced theological classes in Sunday schools and priesthood quorums, for the instruction of our missionaries, and for general reading.79
For nearly a century, the book maintained a rare position as an official publication of the Church and was among only a handful of volumes authorized for use by missionaries.
While Talmage sought to emphasize the divinity of Jesus Christ in contrast to secular manipulations that diminished the Savior’s character and nature, the work of J. Reuben Clark focused on combating the rise of secularism that sowed distrust in the biblical text and in the King James Version. Clark was highly educated, revered in the field of law, and a prolific writer. Clark, who would later serve in the First Presidency of the Church, devoted his Church leadership capacities to ensuring that the rise of secularism did not breach Church education.80 Two publications from President Clark played a primary role in shaping the way in which Latter-day Saints approached learning about and studying the New Testament.
Presented in 1938, “The Chartered Course of the Church in Education” is one of Clark’s most enduring legacies. Still maintained as suggested reading for all Church Education System personnel, the “Chartered Course” emphasizes the way in which Church seminaries, institutes, and academies are supposed to approach the study of the gospel in general. Leaving no room for misinterpretation, Clark stated,
You are not to teach the philosophies of the world, ancient or modern, pagan or Christian, for this is the field of the public schools. Your sole field is the gospel, and that is boundless in its own sphere. We pay taxes to support those state institutions whose function and work it is to teach the arts, the sciences, literature, history, the languages, and so on through the whole secular curriculum. These institutions are to do this work. But we use the tithes of the Church to carry on the Church school system, and these are impressed with a holy trust. The Church seminaries and institutes are to teach the gospel.81
While addressed to religious educators, the discourse found a wider audience through appearances in the Deseret News, the Improvement Era, and in a pamphlet separately published by the Church.82 The document “has become the most influential address to seminary and institute teachers in the history of Church education.”83 Adhering to its call to curb secularism, Church education emphasized the necessity to maintain a course consistent with revealed truths rather than the doctrines of men.
Clark’s other enduring legacy is a series of study notes defending the King James Version of the Bible. While organizing his notes for publication, President Clark delivered a general conference address on the material he was preparing to present to the Church and the world. After recounting the history of textual criticism on the New Testament and highlighting various controversies in the academic world concerning events in the life of Jesus Christ, Clark concluded, “To the Latter-day Saint, Jesus was the Christ, the Only Begotten, the Son of God, a member of the Trinity. All our modern scriptures are to this point, and the true ancient scriptures will neither take away from, nor destroy this everlasting truth.”84
Clark’s finished work, Why the King James Version,85 built upon the foundation he established in his general conference address. This nearly five-hundred-page compilation of personal notes is almost exclusively interested in the New Testament. In the preface, Clark states:
Save for some few comments on the origin of writing and alphabets and on Old Testament criticism, these Notes relate exclusively to the New Testament which it is now proposed to name “The New Covenant.” The problem covered by these Notes is,—Shall the King James Version (also known as the Authorized Version) be abandoned and a Revised Version (one of the three of them, British and American) be adopted in its stead?86
Clark continues to explain why he has chosen to engage primarily in the New Testament rather than the entire Bible. He declares:
The effect of the position of the Extreme Textualists as set forth in their Revisions of the Bible, is to weaken, if not destroy the Messiahship of Jesus. Incidents recorded in the King James Version have been omitted from the Revised Version; substantial parts of whole chapters . . . ; doctrines and teachings have been changed; doubts have been cast on fundamental expressions declaring the divinity and personality of Jesus the Christ; faith-destroying questions have been raised by marginal notes and by the text itself; the personality of Jesus in its Christian concept has in effect, been challenged. . . . The Latter-day Saints cannot in any way sanction even the slightest derogation of these principles. The Prophet has put his stamp of approval upon all this as contained in the New Testament of the King James translation.87
Clark articulates to the reader his perceptions concerning the rise of secular approaches to the New Testament as revealed through modern Bible translations. Through meticulous research, Clark details translator errors as revealed through their annotations and execution. Clark ultimately concludes, “The King James Version is the best record to these ends that has yet been revealed through the Bible.”88 While Clark’s work influenced Latter-day Saints in their attitudes and approaches toward their study of the New Testament and New Testament scholarship, it is telling that Clark emphasized, “For this book I alone am responsible. It is not a Church publication.”89
Developments within the Church brought about an expansion in Church religious education beyond Sunday School and accelerated the influence of Talmage’s and Clark’s works and messages against secularism. Additionally, the study of the New Testament on a regular basis introduced publications from other individuals who occupied less prominent positions within the Church. Church Commissioner of Education Joseph F. Merrill commissioned Obert C. Tanner, a prolific writer in his own right, to produce an appropriate textbook for the study of the New Testament in 1932.90 Tanner’s publication New Testament Studies91 contributed to an attempt at uniformity in the curriculum for the newly established seminaries and institutes throughout the Church, although it included sectarian approaches to the text.92 The work, along with its subdued iteration, The New Testament Speaks,93 consisted of individual lessons that instructors used to guide classroom discussions on the New Testament.
In 1954, Lowell Bennion wrote the New Testament course of study for Gospel Doctrine classes of the Church Sunday Schools. This curriculum was revised and published under the title Teachings of the New Testament (1962) with the intent to be used as a reference guide for the New Testament. Unlike the other Latter-day Saint study guide writers, Bennion organized his book topically, covering the major themes of the New Testament: salvation through Jesus Christ, personal and social ideals taught in the New Testament for modern readers, and characteristics of the pristine Church. These writings focus mostly on the doctrinal implications of the New Testament with little reference to historical or social circumstances.94
During this period, the first seminaries and institutes of religion for the Church were established and played an essential role in engaging Latter-day Saints with the texts of scripture, including the New Testament. Under the direction of Joseph F. Merrill, seminaries and institutes offered concurrent classes throughout the school year in each of the four standard works of the Church.95 John A. Widstoe, who succeeded Merrill as Church Commissioner of Education, introduced a rotating schedule where classes offered the same course of study throughout the year and rotated through the standard works during a four-year period.96 While seminaries and institutes reverted back to the old system of concurrently teaching the standard works of the Church, Widstoe’s rotation would later become the norm in Church religious education.
Seminary classes were offered concurrently with a high school education to provide a foundation of scriptural literacy to youth. Institute classes were intended to fulfill a different role. The first institute director of the Church, J. Wyley Session, had to decide the curriculum for his students at the University of Idaho in the mid-1910s. Commissioner Merrill assisted him. Sessions recounted Merrill instructing him to “enable our young people attending the colleges to make the necessary adjustments between the things they have been taught in the Church and the things they are learning in the university, to engage them to become firmly settled in their faith as members of the church.”97 The institute program, which offered New Testament courses on a rotating basis in a similar way to the seminary program, began to spread to other universities.
Like a double-edged sword, mixed outcomes resulted from increased exposure to New Testament study in the Church. While students and members were exposed to the text more directly through professionalization, instructors were expected to have an advanced knowledge in the subject matter, leading some to pursue advanced degrees.98 When instructors returned with advanced degrees from the University of Chicago in the 1930s, “they resumed their positions in the religious education programs of the Church. As the influence of the Chicago school spread, Church leaders began to see some of the harmful effects of introducing worldly scholarship into the study of the scriptures.”99 This proliferation of modern biblical interpretation in classrooms, which intended to combat the influence of secularism, invigorated the work of J. Reuben Clark and later Elder Boyd K. Packer, both of whom sought to ensure that the introduction of such material did not damage the faith of students. The question of what it meant to learn “by study and also by faith” (D&C 88:118) would greatly influence the study of the New Testament among Latter-day Saints in the coming decades.
New Testament in the Era of Contribution (1960–2018)
Various textual criticism theories and ideological approaches can cause disputes about biblical text. The explosion of publications during this time widened the divide between various Christian interpretations that influenced students of the Bible to adhere to their respective ideologies. Since 1960, no less than twenty different major translations of the Bible have become available.100 Additionally, various commentaries on the books of the New Testament have been published along a wide range of interpretive ideologies. Making interpretation even more challenging is the plethora of commentaries, translations, and opinions that are available through the worldwide web.
While the debate between differing interpretations of the New Testament is rooted in the scientific and historical critical debates of the past, some New Testament scholars established the Jesus Seminar, a type of scholarship focused on finding the historical Jesus. Jesus Seminar scholars employed higher criticism to discover the “actual” Jesus as opposed to what they deemed the glorified or exaggerated Jesus of the Gospels. They investigated the sources of the narrative about Jesus Christ with the purpose of identifying the most historically plausible and least historically plausible accounts of his life. Many questions posed by the Jesus Seminar were rooted in the synoptic problem (the relationship between Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and earlier critical views of the New Testament.101
As historian John Dominic Crossan has observed, “[The search for the Historical Jesus] is precisely [a] fourfold record, even if there were no external documents whatsoever, that constitutes the literary problem. If you read those four texts vertically, as it were, from start to finish and one after another, you get a generally persuasive impression of unity, harmony, and agreement. But if you read them horizontally, focusing on this or that unit and comparing it across two, three, or four versions, it is disagreement rather than agreement that strikes one most forcibly.”102 The sweeping desire to find the historical Jesus dominated New Testament scholarship for nearly five decades. While subsiding in recent years, most scholars continue to employ methods akin to those of the Jesus Seminar to validate or disprove various elements of the New Testament. It is within this cultural context that many of the most pervasive conclusions concerning the New Testament among Latter-day Saints were perpetuated.
Like Christianity at large, there exists a divide among students of the New Testament in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints concerning interpretation. Unlike other Christian congregations (who might solve these issues with schisms or creedal pronouncements), the Latter-day Saints are left to themselves to decide. Terryl Givens has observed this abundant degree of allowance. He states, “The absence of a clear pronouncement from the Mormon leadership on matters of scriptural interpretation means that members have a good deal of latitude in how they interpret subjects [in the Bible].”103 The lack of an official statement requires individual Latter-day Saints to decide for themselves how they interpret the declaration, “We believe the Bible to be the word of God so far as it is translated correctly” (A of F 1:8). For decades, the interpretation of this statement has been constructed to support both conservative and progressive views of scripture within the Church.
Latter-day Saints, while given this wide latitude in identifying an appropriate interpretation of the scriptures, can be widely influenced by competing and compelling sources. Philip Barlow observed, “Latter-day Saints are urged to depend primarily on the scriptures rather than on works about the scriptures,” but he added that “from among the many expressions of Mormon faith articulated throughout its history, one particular expression will have unofficial—perhaps even the inadvertent—but nevertheless the implied support of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”104 In this connection, Givens maintains that the unofficial support has been predominantly given to the interpretations championed by individuals like Elder Joseph Fielding Smith and Elder Bruce R. McConkie, largely due to their positions as Apostles within the Church.105 However, Barlow’s recognition that the official position of the Church is one of individual freedom is instructive. While the work of McConkie, Smith, and Clark are more recognized and often more frequently quoted, the scholarship of other Latter-day Saints can be equally inspiring.
For the most part, the New Testament scholarship in the Church from the mid-twentieth century was written from a Latter-day Saint perspective for a Latter-day Saint audience. However, many scholars shied away from being apologetic about the distinctive characteristics of the restored gospel and wrote with a voice intending to collaborate with other faiths and general biblical scholarship. Their scholarship increased New Testament literacy among Latter-day Saints. In the survey of influential works, we will discuss four categories of scholarship with specific examples.106
Devotional Scholarship
The first category of writings on the New Testament in this period is possibly the broadest and most interpretive—devotional scholarship. These works, like the compilation of discourses in Jesus Christ: Son of God, Savior,107 address a general Latter-day Saint audience with the intent to promote faith. The authors’ concern is not so much the accuracy of research and scholarship, but rather the implication of the text. The following few examples show some of the characteristics of this type of scholarship among the Latter-day Saints.
One of the most prolific Latter-day Saint authors, orators, and scholars during this period was Bruce R. McConkie. McConkie’s first major work on the New Testament, the three-volume Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, provided a Latter-day Saint interpretation of virtually every New Testament verse.108 In his explanation of the collection, McConkie includes a three-step key to interpreting scripture. First, one must search and read the text diligently; second, one must listen to the counsel from modern-day prophets and inspired leaders; and third, one must live worthy to have the Holy Spirit aid in understanding.109 This pattern is a guide for his writing and his expectation of the reader in interpreting the New Testament. Most of his commentary comes directly from other scripture (the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants) or other valid sources for Church doctrine (primarily writings and sermons of Church leadership).
In his four-volume series The Mortal Messiah,110 McConkie follows a predetermined sequence of events in Christ’s life, emphasizing the true identity of Christ rather than presenting a more traditional, chronological New Testament commentary. In the preface to the first volume, McConkie calls James E. Talmage one of his “most prominent predecessors” and acknowledges Jesus the Christ as the foundation for his series.111 McConkie follows the New Testament Gospels chronologically and, like his Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, draws most of his conclusions from other scripture.
McConkie explicitly favors Protestant scholarship and relies on the same Protestant biblical commentators that Talmage did when writing Jesus the Christ. His approach occasionally includes academic tools and intellectual investigation, but his overwhelming emphasis is on doctrinal interpretations and implications for personal conduct and faith. He is cautious with and critical of scholarly writing. Like Talmage, his goal is to testify and persuade the reader to believe. Thus his writing is laced with personal spiritual feelings and thoughts. In A New Witness for the Articles of Faith,112 McConkie explains that the Bible, “as far as it is translated correctly” (see A of F 1:8), is scripture and is true. In its current state, the Bible is binding upon the Latter-day Saints. McConkie lessens the value of studying the language, customs, traditions, and lifestyle of those in the New Testament to aid in determining the intent and meaning of the message.113 He clearly proports that interpretations given through the power of the Holy Ghost are the only true way to understand scripture.
In addition, Mick Smith’s The Book of Revelation: Plain, Pure, and Simple114 provides commentary on the book of Revelation that is understandable and accessible to every type of reader. His intent is to help “clarify hard-to-understand terms and phrases in a manner that is accessible to the general membership of the Church.”115 Authors like Smith come from varied backgrounds and do not always have higher academic degrees in religious studies. They seek to publish personal spiritual insights and meaning from the New Testament. W. Jeffery Marsh’s primary motive in writing His Final Hours was to assist the reader to make direct spiritual applications from his “insights . . . that can be drawn from the final hours of the Savior’s life and atoning sacrifice.” 116 As exemplified by Smith and Marsh, the sources for most writing in this category come from Church officers and General Authorities like Talmage and McConkie. However, General Authorities now tend to shy away from writing volumes of scriptural interpretation, contributing instead through articles and essays in official Church publications like the Ensign and Liahona. These works, while not academic in nature, are important to consider because they shape the overall Latter-day Saint approach to the New Testament.
Accessible Academic Scholarship
The second category is accessible academic scholarship written with the intent to inform readers of the context and content of the New Testament. Sidney B. Sperry contributed to the understanding of the New Testament among Latter-day Saints from this more academic perspective. A scholar and educator at BYU, Sperry taught in religious education for forty years starting in 1932. Sperry’s background in biblical history and languages caused him to favor a scholarly approach to biblical commentary, and in the preface to his book Paul’s Life and Letters, he encourages members of the Church to pursue a greater understanding of scholarly issues.117 In Paul’s Life and Letters, Sperry chronologically addresses the Apostle’s life events and details Paul’s individual journeys. He cites other scriptures and relies on common knowledge for some historical context, but also takes a careful historical approach—attempting to illuminate background, conditions, and circumstances of Paul’s life not readily recognizable in the biblical text. It is difficult to distinguish when Sperry’s information is derived from scripture or outside sources, a noticeable shift from other writers in the Church during this time.
Although written for a Latter-day Saint audience, Sperry’s work offerd an informative and unbiased view for any student of the New Testament. He largely omitted modern-day revelation or writings specific to the restored Church. However, he kept his Latter-day Saint audience in mind in his bibliography of sources by including warnings and personal comments regarding each source. Unlike Talmage and other Latter-day Saint scholars who favored Protestant scholarship, Sperry favored Roman Catholic sources.118
Accessible academic writing is still tuned to the needs of a student of the scriptures, as in Jay A. Parry and Donald W. Parry’s book Understanding the Book of Revelation,119 a verse-by-verse commentary. The Parrys’ desire was “to find meaning in John’s vision for our day, to seek to understand what people in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries might need or want to know about what John saw and heard.”120 Their book is based on scholarship and carefully researched (especially when it comes to Greek word origins and historical sources), but it is not rigorous academic reading. They are careful and analytical in their approach and cite frequently from Latter-day Saint and non–Latter-day Saint sources.
More works of this type are three similar books concentrated on the teachings and doctrines of Jesus Christ. Andrew C. Skinner and W. Jeffrey Marsh’s Scriptural Parables for the Latter Days121 and Richard D. Draper’s The Savior’s Prophecies122 are both based on sound research and emphasize a direct application to the modern world of scriptural teachings. Draper writes with an intent to help his readers prepare for the Second Coming by dealing “with specific historical events the Savior predicted just a few days before His crucifixion, as He sat on the Mount of Olives.”123
Robert J. Matthews, a late professor emeritus of ancient scripture at BYU, wrote a study of John the Baptist that falls into this accessible category of academic scholarship. He wrote A Burning Light: The Life and Ministry of John the Baptist124 with the intent to “cultivate a wider knowledge and a greater appreciation for” John and to increase “awareness of John’s ministry in three dispensations of the gospel, in light of latter-day revelation, which gives a fuller view and a more complete knowledge than can be obtained from the Bible alone.”125 Even with his understanding of the Bible as a limited text, Matthews references multiple Bibles and makes cross-textual comparisons to explore the life and ministry of John. Like the other authors in this category, he relies on Latter-day Saint sources but is more interested in providing contextual information to illuminate the biblical text. Matthews is also a pivotal individual for the study of the New Testament in the Latter-day Saint tradition because of his work on the Joseph Smith Translation.126 Matthews’s work brought the JST out of obscurity and was primarily responsible for the additions of the JST in the 1979 Latter-day Saint edition of the King James Version.127
Andrew C. Skinner’s three-volume series, Gethsemane,128 Golgotha,129 and The Garden Tomb,130 analyzes the details surrounding the suffering, death, and Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Skinner’s work provides in-depth personal insights and analysis, but through historical detail, word origins, and textual explanations, readers can gain extensive knowledge of ancient languages and history.
One of the Church’s largest concentrated pools of current Latter-day Saint New Testament scholarship is the BYU Religion Faculty. Approximately every four years, the Department of Religious Education hosts the Sidney B. Sperry Symposium on topics dealing directly with the New Testament. The published writings from this and other symposia constitute a large source of New Testament reference and scholarship that primarily focuses on scholarly questions surrounding the New Testament text but made accessible to a general Latter-day Saint audience.131 New Testament Sperry Symposium topics from the years 1987–2022 have focused on themes found in the Gospels, the Epistles, the Apostle Paul, the general New Testament message, social and family life during New Testament times, and the contextualization of the Messiah.
Compiled symposium essays address a broad academic, Latter-day Saint audience. The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and other modern-day scriptures and revelations are commonly cited and held as authoritative and essential to understanding the New Testament. Authors consider the scriptures topically, make frequent personal comments, and include spiritual insights from their own study. Authors are careful to provide historical background and context, and references to Greek and Hebrew word origins indicate original research and accurate intent.
The audience for the previous few examples is primarily comprised of informed Latter-day Saint readers seeking a closer reading of a particular aspect of scripture. As an appeal to Latter-day Saints seeking more devotional content in these works, some authors include separate topics or questions for discussion and reflection. Occasionally, academic authors discuss other biblical scholarship issues, such as authorship, language origins, and historical background, but they mostly assume a Latter-day Saint perspective on these issues—approaching the scriptural text with the intent to provide doctrinal meaning rather than attempt to address historical criticism.
Critical Reading Scholarship
Another category of Latter-day Saint New Testament writing aligns with the academic rigor of scholarship through critical reading. The selected works in this field are considered highly specialized research and are usually intended to be read by those who already have a basic understanding of the history and context of the New Testament. In 1983, BYU Religious Education Professor Richard Lloyd Anderson made a significant contribution to New Testament scholarship with Understanding Paul.132 This volume is a valuable work on the life of Paul—built upon Sperry’s Paul’s Life and Letters. Anderson studied the life and teachings of Paul “as a witness of the great truths of the restored gospel.”133 Moving chronologically through the Epistles of the New Testament, Anderson introduced each letter with background information and authorship before moving into an exploration of the teachings.
Anderson’s scholarly approach is combined with modern-day revelation and Book of Mormon references. He also includes an explanation of scripturally supported Latter-day Saint doctrines in the appendices. His biblical sources stem largely from the Greek text and the King James Version, but he refers to other translations as well.134 A few sources for his extensive historical research include Josephus, the Loeb Classical Library, early Christian writers, and other early Church members. This work remains important because of its research and scholarly value.
Richard Holzapfel, a former professor of church history and doctrine at BYU and author of A Lively Hope: The Suffering, Death, Resurrection, and Exaltation of Jesus Christ,135 states as his objective “to introduce to a nonspecialist readership some of the insights from recent New Testament research that may benefit the believer and help him or her gain a deeper appreciation for the richness of the narratives left to us as a gift from the writers of the four Gospels.”136 His book is divided into two main parts, which separate the passion and Resurrection narratives as told from the perspectives of each Gospel writer—paying particular attention to the intended audience of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Holzapfel’s research is thorough and comes largely from non–Latter-day Saint sources. He includes historical background information and Greek translations of some words, but his emphasis is on the events themselves as depicted by the different Gospel writers.
Four years later, Holzapfel and Thomas A. Wayment jointly edited From the Last Supper through the Resurrection,137 a collection of in-depth scholarly essays about the last week of the Savior’s life. In Andrew Skinner’s introduction to the series, he strongly states the authors’ objectives to
aim both at informing our understanding of the historical facts about the sufferings of our Lord . . . and also at answering the charges of critics and secular scholars who would try to persuade us that Jesus was not the literal Son of God, the actual Redeemer of all humankind, or that the New Testament accounts that report the last hours and acts of Jesus cannot be trusted as literal.138
In addition to relating the accounts from the four Gospels’ perspectives, the various authors in this series focus on specific events from the last week of the Savior’s life (for example, the Last Supper, Gethsemane, the Jewish and Roman arrests, the Crucifixion, the burial, and the Resurrection). Five supplementary essays provide historical context and address some of the controversial issues surrounding Christ’s death (early accounts, responsibility for his death, and conspiracies).139
In 2006, Holzapfel and Wayment joined with Eric D. Huntsman to write one of the most comprehensive and complete single volumes on the New Testament ever published by Latter-day Saints. Jesus Christ and the World of the New Testament140 is primarily a scholarly exploration into the world of the New Testament with some highlights from restored scripture and revelation. Describing the purpose of the volume, the authors inform the reader that the work is
not a verse-by-verse commentary, nor does it seek to provide the ultimate interpretation of doctrine, a role that Latter-day Saints reserve for inspired apostles and prophets. . . . This effort is in harmony with the charge to seek learning by study as well as by faith (Doctrine and Covenants 88:118) and to “become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues, and people” (Doctrine and Covenants 90:15). Therefore, when we apply this charge to the study of the world of the New Testament, it seems clear that learning about the New Testament is second only to learning from the New Testament.141
While interpretation of doctrine is reserved for the leaders of the restored gospel, personal interpretation and application of the biblical text is still the responsibility of the reader.
A recent development in Latter-day Saint studies of the New Testament is the focus on the voice of women within the text. In 2014, Camille Fronk Olson wrote an engaging volume that highlighted the place and voice of New Testament women.142 The primary purpose of her volume was “to know Christ better by exploring his example and teachings through the eyes of the women of the New Testament. This unique perspective writes women back into history. It provides a glimpse from a different angle into the ancient world, hopefully to inspire readers toward a deeper reverence for the gift of the Savior and a greater commitment to serve him.”143 Olson emphasized that the New Testament is not a singular voice but a multifaceted and multigendered one.
Daniel Ludlow wrote a series of commentaries on all the standard works of the Church. However, he did not write about the New Testament books past the Gospel of John; his only volume about the New Testament is A Companion to Your Study of the New Testament: The Four Gospels.144 Ludlow includes only the references for the verses about which he is writing rather than printing the biblical text before each section of commentary, as in Bruce R. McConkie’s Doctrinal New Testament Commentary. Using his Greek language background, Ludlow largely focuses on language issues, including an alternate translation for almost every verse cited.
Professors D. Kelly Ogden and Andrew C. Skinner, teamed up to create a first-of-its-kind, succinct, “one-volume study guide aim[ed] at touching upon the historical context, geography, and doctrine of the books of Acts through Revelation as a whole” in New Testament Apostles Testify of Christ.145 This verse-by-verse study is filled with word origins, historical background, photographs from the Holy Land, and other Latter-day Saint scriptural references. The four-hundred-page book reads like a reference work, with a chapter devoted to each book in the New Testament, starting with the book of Acts. They followed up this volume with an identical work that covers the Gospels.146
John W. Welch and John F. Hall collaborated to write Charting the New Testament, a reference collection of charts and lists falling into eighteen different categories. The charts, tables, graphs, maps, lists, and timelines cover a huge spectrum of topics: chronology, Jewish cultural and literary backgrounds, Roman history, demographics, teachings of Christ, doctrines, journeys of Paul, word counts, linguistic comparisons (of the Gospels), people and places, time periods, lineages, and more. This collection is a thorough and useful reference for any teacher or student of the New Testament.147
Church-Published Reference Works
A final genre of published works to aid Latter-day Saints in their New Testament studies are reference sources, such as study guides for Sunday School and other Church classes, lesson manuals, and Gospel and general New Testament harmonies, published by the Church itself. Although this type of writing is not necessarily considered scholarship in an academic sense, it is important to mention because an analysis of the frequency and focus of any such literature pertaining to the New Testament over time will reflect the direction and position of the entire Church body. The Church began producing these manuals in connection with the creation of the Correlation Department in 1972 to “plan, correlate, prepare, translate, print, and distribute instructional materials and periodicals”148 and ensure that all official Church teachings were in harmony with the doctrine of the Restoration. Additionally, “in 1972 the adult Gospel Doctrine class in Sunday school began a systematic study of the standard works of the Church,” focusing on the New Testament every four years.149 With all adults either personally studying or receiving New Testament instruction at least every four years, the Church maintains a respectable sense of biblical literacy.
Most New Testament study guides that were produced to coincide with the four-year cycle emphasized the Gospels were chronological for student reference, and followed a verse-by-verse study guide format. All such guides were for the students, providing some factual and historical background as points of interest but emphasizing Christ’s doctrine as maintained by the teachings and revelations of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Much of the commentary comes from modern-day prophets’ and apostles’ teachings. Like the catechisms of the late 1800s, these materials aim to train Church members in Church doctrine with particular emphasis on how the restored gospel differs from the teachings of other Christian churches, especially in New Testament interpretation. This emphasis aligned with exponential Church growth around the world, necessitating a common understanding of the biblical text.
The Church’s most influential and long-lasting publication during this era of contribution is the 1979 Latter-day Saint version of the King James Bible. For the first time in the history of the Church, Latter-day Saints had an edition of the New Testament that was produced with supplementary material for Latter-day Saints. Commenting on this edition of the scriptures, which were primarily produced by a committee chaired by Elders Robert J. Matthews, Thomas S. Monson, Boyd K. Packer, and Bruce R. McConkie, the purpose was stated that “not only will this new edition be helpful to the individual student reading at home, but there’s never been a better classroom edition . . . with the topical guide, references, and dictionary in the Bible.”150 This publication, with subsequent versions in Spanish (2009) and Portuguese (2015), aimed to provide Latter-day Saints with an edition of the Bible that would uniquely meet their needs, especially as the Church moved to a home-centered study of the New Testament in 2018.
Home-Centered, Church-Supported Study of the New Testament (2019–Present)
The advent of the internet, social media, digital media, and artificial intelligence during the first part of the twenty-first century formed a world in which information and knowledge are created, transmitted, and obtained at the click of a button. Such ease of access to information and knowledge led Paul McClure to conclude “that with higher levels of Internet use, individuals are less likely to pray, read sacred texts, attend religious services, consider religion personally important, or affiliate with a religious tradition.”151 Similarly, Allen B. Downey observed that the internet can negatively impact one’s views of religion in two ways: “[First], for people living in homogeneous communities, the Internet provides opportunities to find information about people of other religions (and none), and to interact with them personally. [Second], for people with religious doubt, the Internet provides access to people in similar circumstances all over the world.”152 While such information and trends are beginning to be recognized by scholars and religious leaders alike, responses are ongoing and disparate.
In 2018, the First Presidency of the Church announced that, beginning in 2019 (with the New Testament), a new resource developed by the Church titled Come, Follow Me—for Individuals and Families would be used for the annual study of the scriptures and intended to “take a home-centered, Church-supported approach to gospel living, learning, and teaching.”153 While the Church emphasized that parents have the responsibility to teach the gospel to their children,154 the adoption of Come, Follow Me as the primary course of study at all levels within the Church is intended to “support home-centered gospel learning as teachers inspire learners to experience the power of God’s word for themselves. They invite class members to discover gospel truths in the scriptures and share their discoveries with each other ‘that all may be edified of all’ (D&C 88:122).”155
Primarily devotional in nature, the first Come, Follow Me resource broke down the New Testament into weekly chronological selections of chapters to study over the course of a calendar year. Each weekly section included key devotional themes, historical background, teachings by modern prophets and apostles on New Testament topics, and ideas for personal and family study of the text. While some historical, linguistic, and cultural contexts are provided at varying points throughout the Come, Follow Me manual, members of the Church are encouraged to refer to seminary and institute manuals that “provide historical background and doctrinal commentary for principles and accounts found in the scriptures.”156 This official resource for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is intended to provide scriptural experiences for devoted members.
While scholars within the Church have continued to publish works detailing the history, culture, and languages of the world of the New Testament, the most recognizable advancement in New Testament studies during this final time period is the rise in digital media as a resource for studying the New Testament. Accompanying the Come, Follow Me materials in 2019 and 2023, members have access to a plethora of podcasts, YouTube channels, and social media accounts that utilize scholars within the Church to present insights on New Testament topics and scriptures. Moreso than any other time in history, Latter-day Saints have access to numerous resources to assist in their “home-centered” New Testament study. The impact of this study has been noted by numerous Church leaders during this time of transition in the Church. Elder Neil L. Andersen articulated such an impact when he said, “With the isolation of the worldwide pandemic and the help of Come, Follow Me, the teachings of the Savior are becoming more prominent in our homes, helping our worship of the Savior during the week.”157
The BYU New Testament Commentary
As has been outlined above, the Latter-day Saint study of the New Testament has never been a monolithic pursuit. Throughout time, different approaches have been influenced by world perceptions and reactions. It is within this heritage that the BYU New Testament Commentary series (BYUNTC) contributes to the overall history of New Testament study in the Church. Drawing upon different perspectives from various scholars, the BYUNTC series provides readers with multiple scholarly voices about the New Textament texts and a new rendition based on the original Greek. With new renditions and commentary, the BYUNTC fulfills the commission given by Brigham Young in 1871.
Take the Bible just as it reads; and if it be translated incorrectly, and there is a scholar on the earth who professes to be a Christian, and he can translate it any better than King James’s translators did it, he is under obligation to do so, or the curse is upon him. If I understood Greek and Hebrew as some may profess to do, and I knew the Bible was not correctly translated, I should feel myself bound by the law of justice to the inhabitants of the earth to translate that which is incorrect and give it just as it was spoken anciently. Is that proper? Yes, I would be under obligation to do it. But I think it is translated just as correctly as the scholars could get it, although it is not correct in a great many instances. But it is no matter about that. Read it and observe it and it will not hurt any person in the world. If we are not to believe the whole of the Bible, let the man, whoever he may be, among the professed Christians, who thinks he knows, draw the line between the true and the false, so that the whole sectarian world may be able to take the right and leave the wrong. But the man Christ Jesus, who has revealed himself in the latter days, says the Bible is true and the people must believe it. Let us believe it, and then obey it.158
The BYUNTC aims to fulfill this charge and build upon the great legacy of seeking to be instructed in the way of the Lord.
