Two Distinct Canonical Journeys.

The project was commissioned by King James I of England in 1604. His goal was to create a new English translation that would be accessible to the common people and unify the Church of England, replacing earlier, less accepted versions like the Geneva Bible.

The monumental task involved some 47 scholars, divided into six companies, working in Westminster, Cambridge, and Oxford. These scholars did not "gather" new scriptures in the sense of discovering previously unknown books. Instead, their mission was to provide an accurate and authoritative biblical translation of the Old and New Testaments from original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts into English. They meticulously compared existing translations and ancient manuscripts, striving for precision and eloquence.

As the preface to the 1611 King James Bible, "The Translators to the Reader," passionately states:

Their focus was squarely on the existing biblical canon of Christianity, which had largely been settled centuries before King James I's reign.

Understanding the Biblical Canon

The concept of a biblical canon refers to the collection of books considered authoritative and divinely inspired within a religious tradition. The process of deciding which books should be in the scriptures was long and complicated for both Jews and Christians. The process primarily occurred between the 4th century BCE and the 4th century CE.

By the time King James I commissioned his translation, the Old Testament canon (typically comprising 39 books, plus a varying number of Apocrypha depending on the denomination) and the New Testament canon (27 books) were well-established and accepted by the vast majority of Christian leaders. Thus, the KJV translators worked within these established boundaries. Instead of compiling around the world, they engaged in an exhaustive biblical translation of what was known about.

Why No Trip to America for Writings?

The simple, unassailable reason is two-fold: King James's commissioned scholars did not come to America for the writings that would become the Book of Mormon.

1. Geography and Knowledge: In 1611, the ancient scriptures from the Americas were not only unknown but also entirely inconceivable to European scholars. European scholars concentrated their attention on the established ancient world of the Middle East and the Mediterranean, the birthplace of the biblical narratives. While European exploration of the Americas was underway, there was no understanding that the ancient civilizations on these newly encountered continents had a sacred history, which included details about their civilizations, prophetic warnings, their interactions with God, and importantly, an account of the resurrected Jesus Christ's visit to these peoples after His crucifixion in Jerusalem.
2. Chronology: The Lord led Joseph Smith to these plates through the instruction of the resurrected angel Moroni, the last custodian of the record. Joseph first learned of them in 1823 and published in 1830. The King James Bible was published in 1611. There is a gap of 219 years between the two events. The writings that Joseph Smith would later translate were not available in a discoverable or translatable format during the production of the KJV.

The King James scholars were not engaged in a global quest for new revelations; instead, their task was to refine the understanding and accessibility of existing scripture within the Middle East and the Mediterranean.

Separate paths and shared reverence

In conclusion, the absence of the Book of Mormon from the King James Bible stems from its distinct historical origins and the lack of awareness regarding Jesus Christ's visit to the Americas. The King James Bible is an important part of the history of biblical translation and canon formation for Christianity. It is based on ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean history. The Book of Mormon stands as a foundational religious scripture, born from a distinct spiritual experience on a different continent.

Both are profound religious scriptures, held sacred by millions, but they originated from different historical contexts and different continents, leaving them to fulfill their purposes as separate, revered scriptures. Understanding this historical context allows us to appreciate the richness and diversity of scripture history and the various paths canon formation has taken across faiths.

 "Another Testament of Jesus Christ" is not meant to replace the Bible. Instead, it is a second, separate pillar of scripture that supports and adds to the biblical story of the Messiah. This function is established primarily through its unrelenting, central focus on the Savior, offering thousands of verses that testify of His life, mission, and divinity. Crucially, it provides a powerful, supplementary account of Christ’s post-resurrection ministry, uniquely detailing His divine appearance to ancient inhabitants of the American continent. This unparalleled event—where the resurrected Lord taught doctrine, reorganized His church, healed the sick, and blessed the children—verifies the universal scope of His Atonement, demonstrating that His sacrifice and saving power reached beyond the Holy Land to all of God's scattered people. Furthermore, the Book of Mormon’s prophets consistently speak with explicit clarity about the doctrine of Christ, foretelling His redemptive suffering and teaching the principles of faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, thereby uniting its entire purpose around the singular identity of Jesus Christ as the world's Redeemer

CONTINUE:

2. Jesus Christ Is Not “False”

What the Church teaches – Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God, the Firstborn of the Father, and the Only Mediator between God and humanity (see John 3:16 and Book of Mormon 3 Nephi 11). The Church affirms the historic, physical resurrection of Christ (see Doctrine & Covenants 20:2‑4).

Why the claim is inaccurate – “False Jesus” implies a figure who differs fundamentally from the biblical Savior. Latter‑day Saint doctrine aligns with the New Testament and the Book of Mormon on the nature, atoning work, and divinity of Christ. The Church’s The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles (1995) reiterates that the Savior is the same Jesus of the Bible (see https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1995/05/the‑living‑christ).

References: Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 11:10‑14; Doctrine & Covenants 20:2‑4; The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles (1995); Gospel Principles, Chapter 5.

3. Temples and “Secret” Masonic Rituals

What the Church teaches – Temples are holy places where members perform saving ordinances (e.g., baptism for the dead, eternal marriage). The ceremonies are sacred, not “secret,” and their purpose is fully explained in official Church publications (see Temples: Sacred Buildings of the Lord).

Why the claim is inaccurate – The notion of “Masonic rituals” stems from the historical coincidence that some early Latter‑day Saint leaders (including Joseph Smith) were Freemasons. However, the Church has repeatedly clarified that temple ordinances are distinct and divinely revealed, not derived from Freemasonry (see the Church’s official statement, Freemasonry and the Latter‑day Saint Temple – October 1995, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org). The rites are not “secret” in the sense of deception; they are reserved for the faithful because they are of infinite spiritual value (see Handbook 2 §12.4).

References: Temples: Sacred Buildings of the Lord (2000); Freemasonry and the Latter‑day Saint Temple (1995); Handbook 2, “Temple Work” §12.4; Gospel Principles, Chapter 9.

4. The God of the Church Is Not “False”

What the Church teaches – The Church affirms belief in the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost as distinct personages, united in purpose (see Doctrine & Covenants 130:22‑23). This “Godhead” concept is presented as a restoration of the original teaching of Jesus (see John 17).

Why the claim is inaccurate – Calling the God of the Church “false” suggests a deity that is not the God of the Bible. Latter‑day Saint theology identifies the same God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the Savior’s own prayers (e.g., Matthew 6:9). The Church’s Articles of Faith (Item 1) explicitly state belief in “God, the Eternal Father.” The differences in language (e.g., “Father, Son, and Holy Ghost” as separate beings) reflect restored doctrine rather than a denial of the biblical God.

References: Doctrine & Covenants 130:22‑23; Articles of Faith (Item 1); Gospel Principles, Chapter 1; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 102.

Bottom Line

The four criticisms arise mainly from conflating terminology, historical coincidences, and a lack of familiarity with official LDS sources. The Church’s own scriptures, doctrinal manuals, and statements from modern prophets clearly articulate that its priesthood is divinely authorized, its Christ is the same Savior of the Bible, its temples are sacred places for saving ordinances—not “Masonic” halls—and its God is the Eternal Father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For anyone seeking a deeper, balanced understanding, the resources listed above provide transparent, Church‑authored explanations.

These citations demonstrate that the LDS Church’s teachings are openly presented in its own canon and modern publications, leaving little room for the accusation of “false” doctrine. With full wishes for true knowledge studing and seeking the truth from the Heavenly Father you can be fulfilled.