Understanding the Book of Mormon by Ross Anderson

How Latter-day Saints experience the Book of Mormon, part 1

Joseph Smith called the Book of Mormon the keystone of the Mormon religion. It is certainly not the keystone of Mormon theology, beyond its basic portrayal of Jesus and a few other points. Most of the significant doctrines that define contemporary Mormonism are not found in the Book of Mormon – the plurality of gods, the deification of worthy men and women, the eternity of matter, the pre-existence of human souls, and so forth. But this does not render the Book of Mormon irrelevant. The book’s enduring relevance is found primarily in the place the book holds in Latter-day Saint experience. My premise is that evangelical Christians most wisely address the Book of Mormon when they understand not only how to respond to its claim to be an ancient scripture, but also when they grasp the multi-faceted relationship Latter-day Saints have to the Book of Mormon.

I approach Mormonism from two defining perspectives. The first is my experience growing up in an active Latter-day Saint home, which gives me both first-hand knowledge and empathy. The second is my training in missiology. (Long ago in seminary I studied to be a cross-cultural missionary. I see my ministry in Utah in that light.) This perspective encourages me to pay attention to two key components. One is the biblical message itself, which transcends culture and never changes. The other is the audience to which that message is addressed. We must get the gospel right and do biblical theology well. We must also understand the Mormon people well, in the context of their culture.

Thus, in our communication of the good news to Latter-day Saints (as to anyone), we must ask basic questions like: In this culture, how do these people communicate? How do they make spiritual decisions? What do you value? How do they view themselves and others? What is their epistemology? What forces shape their religious identity? And how are the answers to those questions different in LDS culture compared to my own cultural norms, and compared to biblical norms?

Latter-day Saints, like any people, hold to their beliefs and commitments for a wide variety of reasons. Many of these reasons have nothing to do with considerations of truth and falsehood, and thus do not respond merely to cognitive arguments. People follow their beliefs in response to formative cultural forces and events, and in reaction to emotional experiences. Thus effectively sharing the good news of God’s grace to Latter-day Saints involves an appeal to the emotions and to the will as well as to the mind, all in the context of their cultural understanding and response.

I affirm that evaluating LDS beliefs in light of biblical truth is vitally important. But I do not believe apologetics or comparative doctrine approaches are sufficient. Like the apostle Paul, in addressing the diverse audiences of Pisidian Antioch, Lystra, and Athens, our witness must also take into account the world view and life experience of the Mormon people. To that end, my comments on the Koinonia blog this week do not offer another refutation of the claims of the Book of Mormon. I do provide an overview of those arguments in my book, Understanding the Book of Mormon. But what I hope to contribute this week is some insight into how Latter-day Saints experience the Book of Mormon in their daily lives, and its formative role in shaping their understanding of the world and of themselves.

For example, in his landmark book, By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scriptures that Launched a New World Religion, Terryl L. Givens identifies four ways the Book of Mormon is typically read by its various audiences (pp. 6-7):

1. As evidence of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith.

"As a sacred sign, or divine testament to the last days and Joseph’s authorized role as modern day prophet and revelator."

2. As an actual history.

"As ancient history, or a factual account of the pre-Columbian peopling of the Western hemisphere."

3. As a 19th century writing.

"As a cultural production, the imaginative ravings of a rustic religion- maker more inspired by the winds of culture than the breath of God."

4. As a new Scripture.

"As a new American Bible or Fifth Gospel, displacing, supporting, or perverting the canonical word of God, according to the disposition of the reader."

Traditional Christians will typically read the Book of Mormon as a 19th century text. Some Latter-day Saints accept a 19th century provenance for the book, and thus read as a sacred sign and as scripture, but not as an ancient history. Yet most faithful Latter-day Saints read it in all three ways.

Tomorrow I will address the first of five functions of the Book of Mormon in LDS religious experience.

Do you know anyone who actively reads the Book of Mormon? How do they experience it?

Ross Anderson (D.Min., Salt Lake Seminary) is the founding pastor of Wasatch Evangelical Free Church in Roy, Utah, where he has served since graduating from seminary in 1983. He was born in Utah and raised in California as an active member of the Mormon (Latter-day Saint) Church. He is passionate about incorporating ex-Mormons into the church, and is the author of Understanding the Book of Mormon. Ross blogs at http://www.rossanderson.us.

Comments

[Ethan]

How Mormons approach the BOM is not really a very insightful question. Obviously Mormons have nearly the same experience with their scripture reading as Evangelicals do.

That it is "further evidence" that Joseph Smith was a prophet is absolutely identical to a Baptist reading Isaiah as prophetic evidence.

You would be hard pressed to prove that Mormons and Evangelicals differ in any way with regard to scriptures, Bible or Book of Mormon. They both occupy the exact same role in the faith.

Furthermore, critics have a real problem attacking the Book of Mormon. As a believer in the Book of Mormon, I still have never heard a satisfactory, complete origin explanation for the existence of the entire BOM.

Critics lightly toss around misdemeanor flaws that speak nothing of the elephant in the room. The volume as a tome is an anomoly of ghastly proportions given what we know of Smith and his fellows.

Yes, I have read Spalding's manuscript (*chuckle* I almost wept when I read excerpts, they are laughably poor and do not remotely indicate he authored the BOM). I have read most explanations for the BOM and none account for the whole. In the BOM we find countless evidences of Chiasmas, Hebrew culture, linguistic mastery and on and on. FARMS at BYU (don't hate them when they make sense) has written extensively on the myriad of content that Smith could not have known. It just doesn't add up.

If Smith authored the book then Harvard students should be made to study his remarkable fiction. Mark Twain and JRR Tolkein look callow by comparison. Interestingly, Tolkien was a life-long Oxford professor who spent decades on his kids tale about orcs and elves. Joseph Smith turned out a massive Hebrew Bible, harmonious with the Old Testament in TWO MONTHS. Explain it away...

[Ross Anderson]

Ethan, I agree that there is significant overlap between how evangelicals and Mormons read their scriptures. But if you read the rest of my posts this week, you will see why I cannot agree with your assertion that "both occupy the exact same role in the faith."

For example, my post on Wednesday will explore how the Book of Mormon serves an evidentiary function that validates the ministry of Joseph Smith. I hope to demonstrate that his is far different from any similar role of the Bible toward Isaiah or any other biblical writer.

If you read my book, I hope you will find that I do not attack the Book of Mormon. I engage in a conversation that expresses reasons why evangelicals have a hard time accepting the Book of Mormon as an ancient or divine text. I think its possible to express our perspective about the book without attacking. In fact, I asked my LDS relatives to read the manuscript to tell me if they thought I was fair, accurate, and kind in my presentation.

I agree that the questions surrounding the origin of the Book of Mormon are complex and challenging. In my book I try to respectfully and gently articulate some reasons why people who are not already convinced of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith may find the evidence adduced in favor of the Book of Mormon to be less than convincing.

Speaking with humility, I can say that if evangelicals wonder why there are seemingly so many parallels in the Book of Mormon to 19th century American life, or why the Book of Mormon account contradicts the archaeology of ancient Mesoamerica, that does not necessarily constitute an attack. Isn't it fair to voice my doubts about such things without being castigated as an anti-Mormon? After all, growing numbers of Latter-day Saints have expressed doubts about the same issues.

My hunch is that no matter what questions are raised, you're not likely to be convinced anyway. Well, its not the intention of my book to attack Mormonism or to convince Latter-day Saints - but only to explain to my fellow evangelicals what the issues are and why we believe what we do about them.

[Arthur Sido]

Ethan, have you read the Book of Mormon? Huge sections copied verbatum, repetitive comments, long stretches of painfully boring and poor writing, anachronisms that point to it being a product of the imagination of a 19th century farm boy with a vivid imagination. Lest anyone wonder, yes, I have read the Book of Mormon all the way through back in my mormon days. It was miserable to read even when I thought it was true.

[Alma_]

Arthur,

I suspect that you're not as familiar as Ethan is with the Book of Mormon. Anytime someone claims that it contains "huge sections copied verbatim" it betrays an easily demonstrated ignorance. While there are quotations of biblical texts, the reader is encouraged to compare them with the original. If the passages were verbatim, there wouldn't be much of a point to that would there? I have read it many times in several languages and find it to be fascinating every time.