Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
47 of 49 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
B. H. Roberts....Seeker of the Truth, August 17, 2000
This book is a collection of a series of writings by B.H. Roberts who died in 1933, but attained rank as an LDS General Authority before he died. B.H. Roberts was the very antithesis of a dogmatic, inflexible, religious fanatic. B.H. wrote a great deal throughout his life on the Church. It must be remembered that he wrote "The Truth, the Way, the Light" and a "Comprehensive History of the Church". Anyone who reads the book should make certain they review the introduction written by the late Sterling McMurrin. McMurrin points out that B.H. wrote many books defending the LDS faith and this collection of writings has to be viewed in the context. However, after reading "Studies of the Book of Mormon" one really has to ask what Roberts believed about the Church when he died. The answer may not be simple, but in my view its unimportant.In one series of writings, Robert tries to scientifically answer questions such as whether horses could have been in the Americas at the time the Nephites and Jaredites (look in your Book of Mormon) were supposed to have lived here. He tries to answer whether steel swords and metallurgy could have part of the culture in these continents at these times. The answers are inconclusive, but strongly suggest "difficulties" with the Book of Mormon. However, the most fascinating part of the book is when Roberts attempts to draw parallels between a book written a few years before the Book of Mormon was translated (View of the Hebrews) and the Book of Mormon. The parallels are interesting, and at times, startling. He also explores--and answers affirmatively--the question whether Joseph Smith might have had the imagination to have written the Book of Mormon In the end, though, one can't really answer what B.H. Roberts believed towards the end of his life. However, I concluded that would have made him most happy was the knowledge that people tried to investigate and answer for themselves, the questions that he raised. In that respect, he qualifies as a true scholar who possessed immense honesty. He's someone who both Latter Day Saints and non-Latter Day Saints should admire.
|
|
|
38 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
LDS Historian's Discovery of Book of Mormon background, January 18, 2002
By A Customer
B. H. Roberts was one of the 26 general authorities of the Mormon Church from 1890 to 1933. He was appointed Church Historian and in his day was considered the most accurate and unbiased authority for early Mormon history and was regarded as a great defender of the faith. He was a thorough researcher and prolific writer. Among his many books was the seven volume "Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints." I consider his "Studies of the Book of Mormon" the most reliable and interesting backgound information on the Book of Mormon.Roberts wrote the material on his studies just a few years before his death but never published it. About 1985 his family finally released the manuscript for publication. He made an excellent study of the environment and source material available to Joseph Smith in the 1820's. Divided into three parts the first part of "Studies of the Book of Mormon" Roberts deals with his quandry in attempting to answer five questions which were asked by a Doctor who had read the Book of Mormon given to him by a friend. These questions were of archeological and linquistic nature and when his study could not provide adequate answers he wrote 141 pages to the general authorities of the Mormon Church presenting the problem. A two day meeting was held in the Salt Lake Temple to get their input and to ask for help from the Lord but no resolution was forthcoming. Shortly thereafter Roberts was called to preside over the Eastern States Mission. In the second section of "Studies of the Book of Mormon" Roberts gives a report of his research while traveling around the Eastern States visiting libraries looking for what was being published in the newspapers and books in the days of Joseph Smith. He found a book "View of the Hebrews" by a minister, Ethan Smith, published 8 years previous to the Book of Mormon. There are many parallels between the two books. One example is six chapters of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon was previously used by Ethan as proof of his point that the American Indians were part of the lost 10 tribes of Israel. Ethan preached this idea in some of his sermons stating that we should treat the Indians as equals not as animals as was done by many in those days. Roberts found in the Manchester, NY newspaper of August 1823 where Joseph Smith's family lived that Ethan Smith was advertising his coming lecture and presentation of his book. Furthurmore, Roberts found that Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith's cousin and later scribe, lived in the same town where Ethan was minister and that Cowdery's Mother and Sister were members of his congregation. Cowdery also was a traveling book saleman in the summer time for the bookstore/publisher of "View of the Hebrews." The last section of Roberts' "Studies" is a side by side column comparison of passages from the Book of Mormon and "View of the Hebrews." Roberts' books have always been regarded as great source material but few Mormons are even aware of his last writing and invaluable source material. Having been an active Mormon myself I found this book very facinating, enlightening and well documented. I recommend it to all Mormons and Non-Mormons alike as a book which is well written, easy reading and will hold your interest.
|
|
|
68 of 81 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Private Study Gone Public, August 23, 2001
Back in 1979, while working as a manuscript cataloger in the Archives and Manuscript division of the Harold B. Lee Library, I first came across a copy of this manuscript. Someone had donated a photo-copy of the original and I had to evaluate and catalog it for the collection. I discovered that the library already had an excellent copy of the manuscript with associated documents and that the set was already cataloged and available for examination. Instead of tossing the second copy, my boss let me keep it.
When "Brig" Madsen published this edition, I was a bit confused. I studied under Dr. Madsen for my BA in History at the U, and I generally liked his approach to Western Americana. Why then, I wondered, did he neglect to include B.H. Roberts' cover letter that accompanied the original manuscript? The cover letter states 1- that the manuscript is not complete and thus not ready for publication, 2- That Roberts is assuming a "Devil's Advocate" position and that the conclusions in the manuscript are not necessarily his own, 3- The manuscript represented what B.H. Roberts felt were the best arguments anti-Mormons could make against the Book of Mormon, therefore they had to be seriously considered so that Mormons could prepare accordingly.
The relevance of this work today is really the most curious issue. At the time Roberts put this study together, most Mormons accepted the "continental model" of the Book of Mormon. The only Mormons who advocated a "limited geographical model" seemed to be limited to those who had actually created the "graphical models" based on the text of the Book of Mormon. Since 1984, when the _Ensign_ published several lengthy articles that advocated the "limited geographical model," the continental model seems to be accepted by the fringe or by individuals who (strangely enough) don't even accept the Book of Mormon as anything but fiction.
This realignment is significant to the relevance of this Study. Roberts' evidence pounds a stake directly into the heart of the continental model. Once you begin to restrict the geographical area into a small section, his primary arguments collapse.
That leaves only the parallel, which was the weakest argument to begin with. Heck, I might as well draw similar parallels between Ben Hur and the Book of Mormon and argue that Lew Wallace drew on Joseph Smith for his little romance. Parallels like this could be significant if one of two things could be shown: 1- the paralleled item was unique only to the Book of Mormon and the View of the Hebrews or 2- the paralleled item could be shown to be unique to the early 19th Century. For over 50 years now, the Mormon apologetic literature has shown over and over and point by point that neither of these conditions hold. That means, since both works are addressing the same subject area, there is going to be a naturally occurring Venn Diagram overlap. Emphasis on the similarities ignores the much more significant differences occurring outside that Venn overlap. Because interest in View of the Hebrews was so high, and because the differences were so readily apparent, for many years the only place one could purchase a copy of "Views" was through BYU Press.
I found the Study to be interesting, because it reveals the intellectual integrity of B.H. Roberts. And because I am aware of his post-Study actions, the Study demonstrates that Roberts compartmentalized his faith and the material he understood up to that time.
While the LDS church concentrated on celebrating its centennial in 1930, B.H. Roberts (on his own) organized and celebrated in New York State a Book of Mormon centennial in 1929. I've read several oral histories of Mormon missionaries who were in the Eastern States Mission at the time and who observed Roberts and listened to him. His actions and statements don't come across as someone who had "lost their testimony" in the Book of Mormon. In 1926, B.H. Roberts authorized the 2nd Edition publication of New Witnesses for God. The 2nd and 3rd Volumes of that set contained Roberts' detailed analysis of the Book of Mormon. Again hardly the actions of a person who had lost his faith in the Book of Mormon. There is some evidence that as early as 1909, Roberts was toying with a "limited geography" view of the Book of Mormon (see New Witnesses For God 3:502 - 1909 edition). Since this Study was published, there have been many other published studies detailing Roberts public and private statements on the Book of Mormon.
In conclusion, I think that the failure to include the cover letter and to include the entire context of Roberts public and private statements reflect poorly on the whole context of this document. However, I am pleased that the Study was published. I will read anything that B.H. Roberts writes. I hope all the other reviewers of this book feel the same.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Grant H. Palmer
by Fawn M. Brodie
by D. Michael Quinn
See all 9 books citing this book
