First, there was the recent publication of Thomas A. Wayment’s The New Testament: A Translation for Latter-day Saints. Now we get another gem, Julie M. Smith’s The Gospel According to Mark, the fourth volume in the BYU New Testament Commentary series. These are the best tools for serious Mormon personal study of the New Testament that have ever been produced. Let’s talk about the 961-page Mark commentary (which, by the way, costs only $30 at the BYU Studies site).
Julie Smith, the author, delivered a presentation at a one-day conference at BYU focused on the New Testament that was held on Saturday Jan. 26. She examined the use of the Greek term hodos (“the way”) which can refer literally to a road or path but became a technical term referring to the very early Church (what some scholars call “the Jesus movement”). In some translations the term is even capitalized when used to refer to the early Church. Here is Acts 9:1-2 from the Wayment translation:
But Saul was still breathing out threats … and went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the Damascus synagogues so that if he found any who were of the Way, men or women, he would bring them to Jerusalem as prisoners.
Where this awareness of the term really gets interesting is when it is used in a verse that has an evident literal meaning but also speaks to the Christian use of the term and would resonate in that way with early Christians. Here is Matthew 5:25 in Wayment:
Agree quickly with your accuser while you are in the way with him ….
And right at the beginning of Mark, in verse 3 of chapter 1, we read in the new translation (termed “a rendition”) that is included with the Mark commentary:
The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
I’m throwing in these details just to emphasize that there really is a lot to be learned by any LDS reader from these excellent study tools, no matter how many times one has read KJV Mark or any other book in the New Testament. Let me throw in just a few of my own observations about Mark to suggest why the Mark commentary is an especially worthwhile investment of $30 of your cash and a few hours of your time if you are a serious student of the Bible. Or even just a casual reader.
- As the first gospel written, around 65 or 70 CE, Mark is the closest in time to the events recounted in the text and arguably therefore the most reliable in a historical sense. And we all ought to care about the historical sense.
- Mark is something of a control text for Matthew and Luke, whose authors both borrowed a lot of material from Mark but also often expanded or modified what they borrowed. Evidence suggests the modifications were made to make points Matthew and Luke wanted emphasized or to make their portrayal of Jesus closer to the picture they were trying to paint.
- Being very familiar with Mark also highlights additional material in Matthew (like the Sermon on the Mount) and Luke (like the parable of the Prodigal Son). Where did Matthew and Luke get material not in Mark? The infancy narratives and the post-resurrection stories in particular deserve some consideration, given how different the two sets of infancy narratives and post-resurrection appearances are in the two books.
- Matthew and Luke borrowed not just material but also the narrative structure of Mark: the Galilean ministry, the journey to Jerusalem, and then the event-filled week in Jerusalem. They liked Mark, they just wanted a revised and expanded version of Mark. Had independent copies of the text of Mark not survived, the Book of Mark would have merged or disappeared into Matthew and Luke the same way the Q material (of which we do not have independent texts) was merged into Matthew and Luke.
- John, on the other hand, presents a very different narrative structure for the story of Jesus, with a much longer time frame of several years, not one year, and several trips to Jerusalem, not just one final journey. The author of John, writing several decades after Mark, was likely familiar with the synoptics, but did not adopt Mark’s structure. This, too, merits some reflection.
Obviously, the Mark commentary and the entire BYU New Testament commentary series stand out as a real step forward for LDS biblical scholarship. Too often mainstream Mormons focus on the Book of Mormon for scripture reading and sort of relegate the “as far as it is translated correctly” Bible to second-tier status. Impenetrable KJV prose and vocabulary no doubt add to this tendency. The Wayment NT translation and these commentary volumes are a real opportunity to put at least the New Testament right up front where it should be.
At the same time, one has to wonder why so little of this LDS Bible scholarship (not secular or Catholic or Protestant scholarship, but LDS scholarship) makes it into the LDS curriculum. We finally got a new curriculum for LDS adult Sunday School, but … well, be careful what you ask for. We really need a GA or two to quite explicitly suggest in Conference that more modern Bible translations are helpful for personal study. We really need a GA or two to quote from and reference in Conference these new Bible tools produced by LDS scholars. If you happen to be related to a GA (they seem to listen to their relatives more than any of the rest of us) please make this suggestion!
Wheat & Tares 
I must say that I agree with you Dave. I LOVE Thom Wayment’s book, and look forward to getting to know Julie Smith’s Commentary on Mark. It has both the KJV and Julie translations (and I think it would be interesting to compare to Thom’s, but I haven’t done that yet.) But the thing that sold me on the book was the fact that Julie said she includes multiple interpretations of different stories in Mark. I always love to hear different interpretations, and that alone I think can really add to personal Bible study.
By the way, if you want to get Julie’s translation of Mark for FREE (but without the commentary), you can download it from Amazon or Deseret Book. Here is the Amazon link: https://amzn.to/2WtxhGv
I was surprised to see the full commentary doesn’t appear to be available to the public yet, but was glad I was able to see you Saturday and pick up my copy for $5 off at the JFSB! (I think that was a one-day special.)
Rick B., we really need to give a shout out to BYU Studies not only for sponsoring the commentary series but also for keeping the price down on these volumes. That makes it much more likely that rank-and-file Mormons will buy a copy and use it. I hope Deseret Book gets on board and features some of these commentary volumes on display tables at their bookstores.
Currently free on kindle
Not sure for how long.
YES! This is even available free on Kindle here in Germany. Thank you for highlighting this, I’m looking forward to diving in!
I am friends with a GA and will pass on your suggestion about LDS scholarships since I teach the YSA …however he is not a relative……so ?…..
It is a shame when God said ” Their creeds are an abomination,” that Mormons for almost 200 years took that to mean that centuries of Biblical scholarship and study needed to be tossed out, too. Looks like with these new study aids, Latter-day Saints will begin to catch up with the rest of the Christian world.
The nice thing about these new tools — the Wayment translation and new commentaries — is that they are focused on the text of the New Testament. What the Bible actually says. Not what this or that GA thinks it says or wishes it says. Not what a CES commentary (the Institute manuals) says the text says. So often reading these other Mormon-friendly commentaries they take a Bible scripture, then provide a GA quote or explanation for why what it *really* means is the exact opposite of what the text says, to bring it into conformity with LDS doctrine or the LDS view of the apostasy or the Bible.
So it’s nice we have these new tools, but there is still the problem that for most members the text is almost irrelevant compared to everything else that circulates in the Mormon curriculum and Mormon culture.
Ok. The complete volume is thirty dollars for kindle.
Not discounted at all
My wife recently completed a masters degree in theology at a Presbyterian seminary. She has a number of what appear to be similar commentaries on the New Testament. How does this one stack up? Is it so distinctively Mormon (victory for Satan) that it won’t be useful outside of our tribe? How valuable would it be for a Protestant pastor? I realize that this is sort of an unfair, read-my-mind question since I can’t even tell you the name of her commentaries or where her pastor trained except it was in Scotland, not to mention they bore me to tears when I have tried to read them.
Since I just finished a rant on another thread here on W&T about stepping up our game when it comes to studying the doctrine of Christ and how the BoM is distracting, this seems like a pretty darn good answer to my rant. If it gets past the local bishop and ward fireballs and ram rods.