Customer Reviews

American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon (Essays on Mormonism Series)

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

To be brief, I'll just point to the essay by Professor Edwin Firmage, who tells a compelling story of how he came to abandon his belief that the Book of Mormon is an ancient document. The other essays in this book are also fascinating. Highly recommended for anyone interested in the Book of Mormon.

Professor Edwin Firmage, Jr. writes:

"Nearly twenty years ago, as a first year-graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, my ambition was to become another Hugh Nibley, whose writings I loved since I was twelve...."

"Still a neophyte, but armed with German and a little Arabic, Greek, and Hebrew, and intent on acquiring the requisite apologetic tools, I cameo Berkeley to study ancient Near Eastern languages, particularly Egyptian, the language of mysteries par excellence.

"Not long after my arrival, I was asked to teach the Book of Mormon in the Gospel Doctrine class in my Berkeley ward. I welcomed the opportunity, as it would give me a chance to delve deeper into the book. By any standard, my wife and I were faithful Mormons who attended church, visited the temple, and prayed together. I expected my study of the Book of Mormon to result in an increase of faith as it had done on my mission. But within six months, I no longer believed the Book of Mormon to be an ancient text.

"To this day, I am not sure how it happened, although I can isolate several issues that played a role in my change of mind....I have often thought that what happened to me in Berkeley was fundamentally a conversion, or, if you like, an anti-conversion. The process had all the inscrutable suddenness that characterized some of the conversions I had witnessed as missionary. Like a conversion to faith, the effect of my change of mind propagated with amazing speed. Almost overnight my whole outlook on life was different."

"The remaining pages of this essay will present a few of what, for me in 1984, were discoveries of some importance. These do not by any means constitute a comprehensive explanation of the Book of Mormon. Nor are they offered as proof of my thesis that the book is modern, but as examples of how the assumption that is modern resolves otherwise significant difficulties."

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Days (Mormons) teaches its members that if they want to know whether the Book of Mormon is true or not they should pray about the matter. If they receive a "burning in their bosom" they will know that the book and the accounts depicted inside are accurate. For faithful members of the church this is the only way to discover the "truth" of the Book of Mormon.

Brent Metcalfe and Dan Vogel take a different approach. They present a number of articles from scholars who have attempted to get at "the truth" of the Book of Mormon in a totally different manner. They apply the tools of the scientific method, historical research, and logical analysis to formulate hypotheses and draw conclusions. As a result, people who use logic and science to resolve issues are likely to be impressed by this book. On the other hand, those who believe in a religion purely because of faith and answers they have received in prayer are not likely to be impressed by this work, or to want to read it for that matter.

The articles are quite interesting. My favorite three included the one on "automatic writing", Tom Murphy's article on DNA and the Lamanites (which he came close to being excommunicated for writing), and the article on former "Seventy" B.H. Roberts and what he really believed about the Book of Mormon.

What comes through to the educated person is that many things that have long been presented "as facts" by the church are not. The truth is far more complicated. One can read the Book of Mormon and conclude that Nephites and Lamanites were supposedly the only groups present in the Americas between 600 BC and 400 AD. However, DNA testing shows this is simply impossible. The vast, vast bulk of Native Americans are related to groups in Asia that crossed the Bering Straits into this continent 10,000 to 50,000 years ago. In fact, its virtually impossible to find any connection between Native Americans and either Jews or Egyptians as claimed in the Book of Mormon.

The article on automatic writing challenges the allegation that it would be impossible for one uneducated person to "invent" or "write" the Book of Mormon by himself. In fact, such things have been documented to have been done several times in the past and perhaps on a more impressive scale.

This is a good book for a scholarly person who has questions about Mormon doctrine and seeks an answer that is not "faith-based". Whether all the writers have arrived at the correct conclusions or not, it does stimulate alot of powerful thinking.

Signature Books is famous for their "cutting edge" (OVER the edge, to most "traditionalists") books on Mormon subjects; e.g., New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology, The New Mormon History: Revisionist Essays on the Past (Essays on Mormonism Series), Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History (Essays on Mormonism Series), etc. This 2002 collection does not disappoint, in that regard.

Here are some quotations from the book:

"Both the brass plates and the Book of Mormon were written, according to Lehi, in the Egyptian language and not just Egyptian characters. Despite Hugh Nibley's efforts to make this extraordinary notion palatable, it is wildly improbable. Is one seriously to believe that for several generations Lehi's family was at home in the Egyptian language? Moreover, are we to believe that centuries before the Old Testament was translated into Greek (Septuagint), Lehi's kin had privately sponsored the translation of the entire Hebrew canon into Egyptian?" (Pg. 4)
"...we learn, for example, that the three (witnesses) did not experience the vision together; that Martin Harris's vision occurred separately. Both Harris and David Whitmer later testified that they also saw in their visions a table upon which rested a breastplate; the urim and thummim, the liahona, the sword of Laban, and brass plates---an interesting detail missing from the official testimony. The statement also fails to mention that the angel spoke, although it refers to the voice of God." (Pg. 81-82)
"Harris, for example, told several residents of Palmyra, New York, that he had seen the plates with his 'spiritual eyes.'" (Pg. 86)
"If the (eight) witnesses were shown an empty box or if ... it seems probable that at the signing of the testimony only some of the witnesses had handled them, that what was true for the group was not necessarily true for each man. Third, (Joseph) Smith may have produced a box containing the plates or perhaps something of similar weight. The witnesses were permitted to lift the box, but their view of the plates was visionary." (Pg. 104)
"During the last twelve years of his life, (B.H.) Roberts spoke with two voices regarding the Book of Mormon. When he could not come up with answers to his questions, he did not find it necessary to abandon his role as a general authority, nor to renounce his faith." (Pg. 145)
"The (Book of Mormon) conserves unacceptable translations of the KJV now clearly recognized as such from the stance of modern research." (Pg. 173)
"So far, I have tried to indicate that, far from being a miscnievous or malicious hoaxer, Joseph Smith was simply doing what the authors of the various biblical and extra-biblical pseudepigrapha were doing." (Pg. 333)
"A case in point would be Gordon H. Fraser, author of the polemical What Does the Book of Mormon Teach. One can scarcely imagine him welcoming Higher Critics of scripture to apply the same critical tools on Fraser's beloved Bible as he himself has used in vivisecting the Mormon scripture." (Pg. 334)

Amazon's editorial review lists Scott Dunn's essay on "automaticity" as a "weak link" in this volume. I frankly thought it was the most compelling essay in the whole book; it reconciles some conflicting lines of evidence that competing theories of "inspiration" and "fraud" fail to adequately take into account. Overall, this volume is an excellent sampling of critical Book of Mormon scholarship. High marks from me.

It is a great honour to have read "American Apocrypha" because it is what Book of Mormon really is, a holy book with unknown origins or authors, just as 1-4 Esdra, Enoch books etc.

Signature books has in a nuanced way given alternative approaches to origins of Book of Mormon. As always, the alternativ approach is a naturlistic and deistic approach on the origins, where Joseph Smith is seen as the primarily author of Book of Mormon. In this case it is not a decieving Joseph who wants to exploit but a god-seeking man who thru writing the Book of Mormon wanted a new basis or fundament for real Christianity (and who can blame him?).

The authors are not Bible literalists which give the book a sound and just evaluation of Book of Mormon. What has attracted me is about the priority of Mosiah which gives a notion about the development of Joseph Smith's calling to become prophet and the last chapter, which discusses what I believe is the eternal struggle for the Bible literalist: if god never took part in writing the Bible, can it still be true? Pseudepigraphia: those who write books in the namne of others, like the Gospels, the Torah and the three Isaiahs! How can we reconcile the fact that fallible humans have written fallible scriptures with the scriptures being divine? The chapter gives an important perspective to this view which I will not reveal here.

The chapters are of different character and of different style. The chapter about Isaiah is a bit of grammatical challenge especially when Hebrew is just un-understandable as Mel Gibson's Aramaic, but very well written. The BYU-unit of Book of Mormon studies', FARMS, review of this chapter is a bit weak. The chapter about freemansory feels like reading the old anti-LDS of 1830s Alexander Campell once again. Signature books should reassess the old ways of tackling Book of Mormon and write more about the evolutive perspective of LDS like those chapters mentioned above. Many times articles about Book of Mormon become a serial counter-argumentation to FARMS - counter-argument essays are the worst kind of reading, as a reader, you can never get the whole picture.

I look forward to the next serie from Signature and hopefully the mainstream LDS members will take the challenge to read this book. I am not into holy stuff, I am just an outsider, but reading American Apocrypha gave me in insight in my own spiritual development and made me remember how I coped with Bible criticism, form criticism and other theological tools.

Well, I should not tell you what I became - you can guess for yourself - but "American Apocrypha" tries to say that Joseph is not more different that DeutroIsaiah which wrote the post-exilic parts of book called "Isaiah". Both wrote apocrypha, DeutroIsaiah in Palestine and Joseph in Palmyra!

An editorial introduction erects the most vulnerable possible reading for nine essays to knock down, insisting on continent-wide geography (internal travel accounts permit only a few hundred miles) and exclusive populations (which the text does not require.) I enjoyed (with reservations) the essays by Robert Price (a Jesus Seminar Fellow), Dunn, which sketchily compares the Book of Mormon translation to various channeled texts, and Straker's essay on Seer accounts in the text. Only Straker explores the text in a sustained way, which means that a reader of this volume should not expect to greatly increase their knowledge of the Book of Mormon.

Firmage provides his own de-conversion account, showing that he lost lost faith over issues that show his misreading and impatience, which is ironic in light of his title, "Historical Criticism and the Book of Mormon." For example, "are we to believe that centuries before the Old Testament was translated into Greek (Septuagint), Lehi's kin had privately sponsored the translation of the entire Hebrew canon into Egyptian?" (page 4) The "private" sponsorship is entirely Firmage's speculation, unsupported by the text, a poor choice as anchor for one's faith decisions. The Septuagint itself was commissioned by Ptolomy II, the Egyptian King (285-247 B.C.) for his royal library. The ties between Egypt and Israel around 600 B.C. are conspicuous.

Vogel provides two essays. One defends the Masonic/Gaddiation equation, notably ignoring any comparisons to New World secret societies, as discussed by Mesoamericanists, John Sorenson and Brant Gardner, and making inadequate notice of Old World parallels, notably Welch and Tvedtnes. The other claims that Joseph Smith hypnotized the witnesses to the Book of Mormon. He does a lot of "reading into" selected texts, and documents this (his note 60) via an 1857 letter which actually reports a second-hand rumor that Joseph Smith learned the craft from a German peddler. His note 59 refers to a 1975 BYU Studies article in which the curious are rewarded with a discussion 1856 novel by Maria Ward, which first launched the "mesmerism" hypothesis by reporting that Smith had learned the craft from a German peddler. I think it hilarious that Vogel inadvertently documents the fictional 1856 source of his 1857 rumor.

In his fascinating "Automaticity and the Dictation of the Book of Mormon", slightly updated from its 1985 appearance in Sunstone, Scott Dunn surveys a number of accounts and examples of automatic writing, and makes comparisons to the translation and content of the Book of Mormon. While providing some interesting observations, Dunn also makes some missteps, and has not having kept on with Book of Mormon scholarship. Dunn aptly refers to W.F. Prince's studies of Pearl Curran channeling Patience Worth to produce a novel of Christ called "The Sorry Tale", and to Prince's 1917 essay about Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, but not to Theodore Schroeder's scathing 1919 response to Prince in the same academic journal. He mentions Richard L. Anderson's essential 1986 essay, ""Imitation Gospels and Christ's Book of Mormon Ministry," but Dunn fails to come to terms with it's implications. Nor will it do just to quote a "few awe struck reviews." (Anderson, 61) If The Sorry Tale, or any of the others, have substance to compare with the Book of Mormon, Dunn does not display it. Anderson observes that "Depth and dimension permeate Third Nephi but are notably absent from the spurious later gospels. Most are thinly disguised special pleading-making Christ a precursor to Mohammed, promotor of a natural health program, an Eastern mystic, or a cosmic spiritualist. These books mix strange code words and jargon with the well known teachings of the Lord. But they are also disconcerting even in the portions that do not conflict with the Gospels, for they trivialize Jesus into a wordy moralizer. So the fictitious gospels, must hazard two dangers: contradictions, or flattening of dynamic events and vital personality. The gospel forger stands at the cross roads of too much novelty or too little substance." (Anderson, 80.)
George D. Smith's article rehashes material that he and Brigham Madsen and derivative critics have published repeatedly. He claims that B.H. Roberts 1921 study raises important questions, but reveals his slanted agenda by failing to even reference John Welch's 1985 essay called "Answering B.H. Roberts Questions."
Murphy reports that "So far, DNA has lent no support to the traditional Mormon beliefs about the origins of Native Americans. Instead genetic data have confirmed that migrations from Asia are the primary source of American Indian origins. This research has substantiated an already-existing archeological, cultural, linguistic, and biological evidence. While DNA shows that ultimately all human populations are closely related, to date, no intimate genetic link has been found between ancient Israelites and indigenous Americans, much less within the time frame suggested by the Book of Mormon."

As a paradigm shifting event, the recent DNA studies come late. In light of the "already-existing archeological, cultural, linguistic and biological evidence" and a consequent re-examination of the Book of Mormon text, informed LDS opinion had already long since shifted. President Anthony Ivins of the First Presidency in 1929 cautioned "The Book of Mormon teaches the history of three distinct peoples, or two peoples and three different colonies of people, who came from the old world to this continent. It does not tell us that there was no one here before them. It does not tell us that people did not come after. And so if discoveries are made which suggest differences in race origins, it can very easily be accounted for, and reasonably, for we do believe that other people came to this continent." (Anthony W. Ivins, Conference Report, April 1929, 15) I easily found similar arguments in several LDS sources. Murphy challenges LDS pop culture; not LDS scholarship. DNA transmitted only via female lines (mDNA) or Y-chomosone (male only) inherently censors the vast majority of the possible contributors.

Finally, Price entertainingly appreciates Joseph Smith as "inspired" as Biblical pseudepigrapha, but does little reading of the Book of Mormon or LDS scholarship.

This is the follow-up collection of essays to Metcalfe's 1993 book "New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Essays on critical methodology." This anthology, edited by Metcalfe and Dan Vogwl, is critical of the alleged ancient origins of the Book of Mormon and focuses on a number of topics. Dan Vogel's two essays were weak and errant. His discussion on 19th century anti-Masonic sentiment arising from the murder of Hook in 1826 and how this allegedly seeped its way into Joseph Smith's "Book of Mormon" added very little new information on the topic. His essay on the 3 and 8 witnesses to the Angel Moroni and the Book of Mormn plates relied too much on hearsay accounts to be credible, which was a disappointment, as Vogel is a historian who really should have done better with his sources.

Murphy's essay was a strawman from start to finish, relying on a popular but errant interpretation of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon ITSELF does not allow for a hemispheric geographical scope but a limited geography, a position many Latter-day Saints, including leaders such as Ivins, has taken for over a century. Such a position seems to have been Joseph Smith's take on the text by at least 1842. Thus, the fact that 99.6% of mDNA of Amerindians being Asiatic is consistent with the limited geographical model for Book of Mormon events. It was disappointing that HLA was no discussed, as recent HLA analyses supports diffusion from the Old World to the New World, consistent with the Book of Mormon.

David Wright's essay on Jopseph Smith's alleged reworking of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon was, by far, the most scholarly essay in the anthology, with Wright providing some interesting discussions of Isaiah variants in 2 Nephi 12-24, and other passages, such as the variant in 2 Nephi 12:16 and Isaiah 2:16 ("Ships of the Sea"). However, some of his claims are incorrect. For example, he dedictes a section of his essay to alleged KJV errors in Isaiah that appear in the Book of Mormon variants. However, some of this "errors" are not problematic, as he appears to judge the variant by using modern semantics. A glance at the 1611 and 1828 semantics of some of these words reveal that the KJV (and BOM) vatiants are correct.

Much more could be said about this book, which, despite several failings, is a much better book on the market critical of the antiquity of the Book of Mormon than books such as those by Harveat House, such as Ron Rhodes' uneducated and inane comments on the Book of Mormon in "Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Mormons," and many similar books.

Yet another in a fairly recent series of works designed to confront mormonism from a scholarly approach. While I appreciate the work these writers have put forth, this is not a book designed for the casual researcher into the murky world of mormon history and theology. These essays are ideally suited for a reader with a solid background in both Christianity as well as mormonism. For the average individual just looking for an intro to the fallacies of mormonism, Bill McKeever's "Mormonism 101" or Richard Abanes "One Nation Under Gods" are good materials.

I do find the approach of this book, along with "The New Mormon Challenge" to be a bit disturbing. They purport to discard the "tired old arguments" against mormonism, but these arguments still are as valid as ever. One cannot understand mormonism without looking at the history and character (or lack thereof) of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young (see Fawn Brodie's "No Man Knows My History" on Smith), looking critically at the temple ceremony, the absolute laughable quality of the Book of Mormon and especially at Smith's bogus translation that makes up the "Book of Abraham". There are an awful lot of books on mormonism, of varying quality and it seems that many authors are trying too hard to look at new information, when the existing information is more than enough to quash mormonism as a serious theology.

As a side note, take some of these preceding reviews with a sizable grain of salt. One reviewer, John Tvedtnes, is a "professional" mormon apologist who gets his paycheck from Brigham Young University, so he has a vested financial interest in maintaining the mormon illusion. Kevin Christensen's review also mentions Tvedtnes and his "scholarly" friends at FARMS as sources. Anyone familiar with FARMS reviews of books will notice that a) they tend to be polemic and nasty in tone toward the authors and b) FARMS reviewers have a pretty mixed bag of backgrounds, including: "coordinator of performance tours at Brigham Young University", "self-employed artist currently writing a book on scrollsaw art " and "director of Parking and Transportation Services at the University of Utah". Certainly there is nothing wrong with these professions, but it makes you wonder how much of their reviews are mere parroting of what the top dogs at FARMS tell them to write.

Collaboratively compiled and edited by Dan Vogel and Brent Lee Metcalfe, American Apocrypha: Essays On The Book Of Mormon is a selection of nine scholarly essays that focus upon the Book of Mormon, scrutinizing the testimonies of witnesses and carefully evaluating historical context. A carefully researched, meticulously presented, and highly methodological collection, the essays comprising American Apocrypha include: Historical Criticism and the Book of Mormon: A Personal Encounter (Edwin Firmage, Jr.); Automaticity and the Dictation of the Book of Mormon (Scott C. Dunn); Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics (Thomas W. Murphy); The Validity of the Witnesses' Testimonies (Dan Vogel); B. H. Roberts: Book of Mormon Apologist and Skeptic (George D. Smith); Isaiah in the Book of Mormon: Or Joseph Smith in Isaiah (David P. Wright); Secret Things, Hidden Things: The Seer Story in the Imaginative Economy of Joseph Smith (Susan Staker); Echoes of Anti-Masonry: A Rejoinder to Critics of the Anti-Masonic Thesis (Dan Vogel); and Joseph Smith: Inspired Author of the Book of Mormon (Robert M. Price). American Apocrypha is a welcome and seminal contribution to Mormon History supplemental reading lists and academic reference collections.

This is not the first foray into criticism of the Book of Mormon by Brent Metcalfe and Dan Vogel, though it is their first cooperative effort. Former believers in the book, each has come to reject it as an authentic ancient text. This book is a cut above the standard anti-Mormon fare, but it still relies on time-worn assumptions that have long since been refuted. Having studied genetics and having read the literature on DNA studies done among Native Americans and Asiatics, I must relegate Tom Murphy's article to the back of the class. He suggests that DNA evidence disproves the Book of Mormon. Whether you believe in the Book of Mormon or not, you will find that Murphy's approach is tainted by a number of unwarranted assumptions that are not supported by the text itself. Among these are that believers must accept the propositions that 1) all Native Americans are descendants of Book of Mormon peoples, 2) the account covers all of North, Central, and South America. Both of these suppositions have been passe for more than half a century; indeed, the earliest proposal for a limited geography (Mesoamerica) was made more than a century ago and serious Book of Mormon scholars have been teaching the limited view for a long time. Some leaders of the Church have also accepted that limited geographical view. The various DNA studies of Native Americans neither prove nor disprove the Book of Mormon; rather, they suggest that the major component among those peoples came from Asia--something that is not contradicted in the Book of Mormon, Murphy's antiquated views notwithstanding. I will deal with this issue and with David Wright's article at length in forthcoming reviews to appear in the FARMS Review of Books.