3 Nephi 6:5 Textual Variants

The 1830 edition has the singular “fall into transgression”, whereas the printer’s manuscript has the plural “fall into transgressions”. In accord with 𝓟, the 1908 RLDS edition changed the RLDS text to read in the plural. The LDS text has maintained the 1830 reading.

Either the singular or the plural will work, although the singular seems more natural. Elsewhere, the text has 15 instances of the singular “to fall into transgression” but none of “to fall into transgressions”. But when combined with sin(s), the conjoined transgression(s) always agrees in number with the preceding sin(s):

• Alma 9:19 if it were possible that they could fall into sins and transgressions
• Alma 24:30 and then have fallen away into sin and transgression

So the plural “to fall into transgressions” is possible but statistically less likely than the singular “to fall into transgression”.

As far as 3 Nephi 6:5 is concerned, there is considerable evidence from other examples of “fall into transgression(s)” that scribes and typesetters have tended to change the singular transgression to the plural transgressions:

• Jarom 1:10 (1907 LDS edition)
  • that if they did not keep the commandments but should fall into [transgression 1ABCDEFGHIJKLMNPQRST|transgressions O]
• Mosiah 7:25 (1953 RLDS edition)
  • for if this people had not fallen into [transgression 1ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRT|transgressions S]
• Mosiah 15:13 (1858 Wright edition)
  • yea and are not the prophets every one that has opened his mouth to prophesy that has not fallen into [transgression 1ABCDEFIJLMNOPQRST|transgressions GHK]
• Alma 9:23 (scribe 2’s error in 𝓟, corrected by Oliver Cowdery)
  • that if they should fall into [𝓢① transgressions > 𝓢② transgression 1| transgression ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST]

To these four clear examples, we can add this example from 3 Nephi 6:5 where Oliver Cowdery, it would appear, accidentally changed transgression to transgressions. The critical text will assume as much and continue the 1830 reading.