Clarke’s influence on some JST changes is plausible and disputed. In Romans 11:2, both use “complaint,” a natural description of Elijah’s words. In Colossians 2, the JST moves a clause where Clarke recommends. Dickinson’s 1833 translation makes a similar move, and the 1826 Campbell edition retains the older order. These are clues about particular edits. The original sources let you judge how distinctive each match is. - Check the shared word in Romans 11:2 - Compare the clause move in Colossians 2 - Separate textual borrowing from the claim of inspiration
Clarke’s influence on some JST changes is plausible and disputed. In Romans 11:2, both use “complaint,” a natural description of Elijah’s words. In Colossians 2, the JST moves a clause where Clarke recommends. Dickinson’s 1833 translation makes a similar move, and the 1826 Campbell edition retains the older order. These are clues about particular edits. The original sources let you judge how distinctive each match is.
Thomas Wayment and Haley Wilson-Lemmon argue that Adam Clarke’s Bible commentary influenced some of Joseph Smith’s revisions to the King James Bible. Kent Jackson challenges their evidence for particular revisions. The examples below show why scholars can agree about the text and disagree about where a change came from. Wayment and Wilson’s 2017 report · Their 2020 book chapter · Jackson’s 2020 response
The shared word makes Clarke a possible source. Jackson points out that Clarke uses it while explaining the story. Clarke gives no explicit instruction to replace the word in the verse. Elijah’s words in verse 3 already make “complaint” a natural description, so an independent revision is also plausible. Wilson-Lemmon interview, around 53:22 · Jackson, Romans 11:2, pp. 39–40
In the King James Bible, “after the commandments and doctrines of men” comes at the end of verse 22. Clarke explicitly recommends putting that clause after verse 20. The JST puts it there too, reversing the order of “doctrines” and “commandments” and reworking the next clauses. This shared structural change gives the proposed connection more weight than a single shared word. Colossians 2:20–22 · Clarke on Colossians 2 · New Testament Revision 2, page 134
Jackson names Alexander Campbell and Rodolphus Dickinson as parallels. Dickinson’s 1833 edition does place the corresponding clause before the prohibitions. It appeared after the surviving New Testament revision manuscript, so it illustrates a similar solution. The 1826 Campbell text linked here leaves the clause after the prohibitions. Check the exact edition before relying on Campbell as a counterexample. Jackson also argues that the KJV’s awkward sentence could have prompted Joseph to make the change independently. Dickinson, printed p. 304 · Campbell’s 1826 Colossians · Jackson, pp. 43–44
The Joseph Smith Papers editors describe Clarke as a commentary Joseph was known to consult in a note on an 1843 sermon. That is relevant to the question of access. Linking the commentary to a particular revision in the earlier Bible project takes a separate argument. Wayment and Wilson-Lemmon propose Clarke as a source for some smaller changes and distinguish those from the major expansions. The two examples here give readers a way to test part of their proposal. Joseph Smith Papers, June 11, 1843 discourse annotation · 2020 chapter details
A Latter-day Saint can believe the project was inspired and allow for study, editorial judgment, and revelation. The Church describes the JST as a revision of the King James Bible. Joseph and Sidney also report that studying John 5:29 during the project led to the vision now in D&C 76. Those are different kinds of claims. A distinctive match can strengthen the case for textual influence. A claim of plagiarism requires a closer look at what was borrowed and how it was represented. The textual comparison alone cannot establish whether God guided the project. Church history account of the JST · D&C 76:15–19
“I take the Clarke parallels seriously, especially the matching move in Colossians. I also want to know whether that move was distinctive to Clarke and which changes Joseph made on his own. I believe God can guide a person who is studying and revising a text. The historical question of where a particular change came from is worth answering on its own.”
