The Critical Edition

After so many assurances that Joseph Smith did receive revelation from God, we might expect to hear from Smith himself.

The Prophet Joseph Smith’s own words about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon are: “On the evening of the . . . twenty-first of September [1823] . . . I betook myself to prayer and supplication to Almighty God . . . . “While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor. “He had on a loose robe of most exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had ever seen; nor do I believe that any earthly thing could be made to appear so exceedingly white and brilliant. His hands were naked, and his arms also, a little above the wrists; so, also, were his feet naked, as were his legs, a little above the ankles. His head and neck were also bare. I could discover that he had no other clothing on but this robe, as it was open, so that I could see into his bosom. “Not only was his robe exceedingly white, but his whole person was glorious beyond description, and his countenance truly like lightning. The room was exceedingly light, but not so very bright as immediately around his person. When I first looked upon him, I was afraid; but the fear soon left me. “He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people. “He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants; “Also, that there were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim—deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted Seers in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book.

At last, a question from the Introduction is answered: Moroni is an angel. Yet none mentioned in the Bible. One would think that, if God were going to reveal something through an angel almost two thousand years after his last revelation, that he would set things up in advance, at least mentioning the angel.

Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer — we get these names. Milton gives us others.

And from Smith, Moroni.

DNA and Descendants

“He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.” Famously, DNA evidence has cast some doubt on Mormonism’s claims. Jeff Lindsay, a Mormon apologist, writes,

The issue of DNA and the Book of Mormon has raised many questions and some inappropriately harsh attacks by critics. Sadly, I even know of one person who claims to have left the Church because the preliminary DNA evidence did not square with his expectations. Still in its infancy, the application of DNA analysis to ancient history has posed tough new questions for those who believe in the Book of Mormon, just as it poses tough new questions for those who believe in the Bible–and for those who “believe” in linguistics, anthropology, and other sciences. DNA evidence is forcing many old assumptions to be reevaluated, but is also causing genuine head-scratching as it sometimes seems at odds with reasonable conclusions drawn from other fields. (Source)

Those “who ‘believe’ in linguistics, anthropology, and other sciences”? My initial reaction: so much for thoughtful apologetics. “Hey, it’s a belief, just like linguistics!” Lindsay continues,

DNA analysis of multiple Native American tribes generally points to Asian origins. Native American DNA does not appear to have distinctly “Jewish” traits. The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which is passed only along maternal lines, primarily falls into four groups — haplogroups — that are termed A, B, C, and D — and these same groups are typical of Asian DNA. Initial studies comparing the mtDNA of Native Americans and other peoples of the world pointed to a definite Asian origin. Latter-day Saints pointed out that Lehi’s tiny group might have had negligible impact on the genes that would persist on the continent if the New World already had thousands or millions of people upon his arrival, as it almost certainly did.

So the argument is, “Well, there were too few to have an impact on the Native American gene pool.” Yet the LDS argument might be stronger than that:

Then it was noticed that 3 or 4 percent of northern Native Americans had a fifth haplogroup called the X haplogroup, which was unknown in Asia but common in Europe and especially the Middle East. Some of us Latter-day Saints pointed to the non-Asian X haplogroup as evidence for possible transoceanic contact with Europe or the Middle East, though probably not as evidence for Lehi’s migration since the estimated date of entry into the New World for haplogroup X was thousands of years before Lehi. But we would emphasize the complete absence of haplogroup X in Asia and its relative abundance in Europe and the Middle East, including Israel.

You see, there is another haplogroups in Native American genes, but even though it would have been present long before Lehi (still not sure who that is — could Google it, but I’ll just keep reading the Book of Mormon and find out like a good, patient reader) migrated. It shows it’s possible, though.

The bottom line, though, is that these criticism of Mormonism are based on a misunderstanding of what the Book of Mormon actually claims: “The Book of Mormon does not claim to explain the primary genetic origins of all Native Americans.”

It explains their geographic origins, but not their genetic origins.

Cognitive dissonance at its finest.

The drama at the Yearning for Zion compound has a familiar ring to anyone raised in any kind of sect that preaches seclusion from the world. Different definitions of reality; different morality; different everything. The outside world is not to be trusted; the outside world is evil; our protective group is heaven.

ABC was recently allowed into the compound and interviewed some of the women, who have now been separated from their children.

Neil Karlinsky, the correspondent, asks a group of mothers who insist that children are not abused in the compound whether or not young girls are forced into marriage.

“We’re talking about our children,” is the reply to Karlinsky’s repeated questioning.

That’s the point — so is Karlinsky, and so is the state. “We can’t understand why the state took the children away from us,” say the mothers. “Because we don’t know what you’re doing to your children,” comes the reply.

Another woman, when asked if she shares a husband with other wives, says she cannot answer the question at this time.

“Why not?” Karlinsky presses.

“Because it’s sacred to me,” she replies.

“I take that to mean a yes,” Karlinsky responds, reading viewers’ minds.

Yet as a parent now, I cannot imagine what the parents of these children must be going through. Not only has Child Protective Services taken these children, but they’ve taken them into the wild of the world. For the parents, these children are at risk in every sense of the word. I imagine the opposite: my child taken from me and plopped down in Yearning for Zion, where everyone holds beliefs diametrically opposed to my own: I would fear for my daughter’s safety in more ways than one.

Jeff Lindsay, at Mormanity, writes,

This case is not about the children. It’s about the power of the State. No apologies. No backing down. No care for the children who are being traumatized and abused as they are torn from their mothers. It’s all for their own good and protection, just like the Cultural Revolution. (Source)

It’s abusive to rip them away from their mothers that way; it’s abusive if young girls are being forced into marriages. Which abuse is worse?

The whole interview is available here.

As if three were not enough, we get eight more.

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Christian Whitmer
Jacob Whitmer
Peter Whitmer, Jun
John Whitmer
Hiram Page
Joseph Smith, Sen
Hyrum Smith
Samuel H. Smith

Enough with the sales pitch!

There is a big difference, though, between these two testimonies. The Eight claim that they saw and handled the plates; the Three simply saw the plates. Additionally, they claim that Smith himself showed them the plates; the Three claimed that an angel had shown them the plates.

Far from putting me at ease, this makes me even more suspect. Not everyone has an experience of being shown something by an angel; everyone, though, has an experience of being shown something by a fellow human. And like Saint Thomas, the Eight are able to put their hands in the wound, so to speak.

It almost seems planned. And they all seem to eager to convince.

The list of signatories is also enlightening. A little research shows that in fact everyone on the list was either of Smith’s family or the Whitmer family (early followers of Smith). Even “Joseph Smith, Sen.” testified. Apparently, even father vouched for son. If what Joseph Smith claims to be true really happened, then why not? However, if this was a grand hoax, or a case of self-delusion, it’s frightening that Smith Senior would assure us that there really were tablets, that his son was not lying when in fact he knew very well that he was.

Nonetheless, it’s a little like putting your father’s name down as a reference on your resume.

But all of this assumes that these people did see what they claim to have witnessed.

After the introduction, the Book of Mormon grows odd: “The Testimony of the Three Witnesses” immediately leaves me suspect. I get the feeling I’m talking to a used car salesman.

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

Oliver Cowdery
David Whitmer
Martin Harris

“This is a good car. Really — a good car. Hey, Tony, tell this guy how good this car is.”

The Book of Mormon begins,

Wherefore, it is an abridgment of the record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites-Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel; and also to Jew and Gentile-Written by way of commandment, and also by the spirit of prophecy and of revelation-Written and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed-To come forth by the gift and power of God unto the interpretation thereof-Sealed by the hand of Moroni, and hid up unto the Lord, to come forth in due time by way of the Gentile-The interpretation thereof by the gift of God.

An abridgment taken from the Book of Ether also, which is a record of the people of Jared, who were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, when they were building a tower to get to heaven-Which is to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever-And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations-And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.

TRANSLATED BY JOSEPH SMITH, Jun.
First English edition published in 1830

Immediately, we seem to be transported into a fantasy world, as when we read the first pages of Lord of the Rings. Questions abound: Who are these Nephi? What about the Lamanites? Are they more important than the Nephi? It seems logical, since this is both a record of the Lamanites and written to the Lamanites. And Moroni? Was he a Nephi (I’m sure that’s a plural form)? Was he a Lamanite? Neither one nor the other?

This is only the introduction, so it’s too much to ask who all these people are, but that leads to an obvious question: what Holy Book has an introduction?

The Hebrew Bible begins,

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

The Hebrew Bible jumps right into the thick of things, discussing the origins of life without any introduction or preface. It speaks with authority. This is how it was. There’s no justification: “This is the word of God, to those that eventually will become the Hebrews and later the Jews.”

The Koran begins,

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. The Beneficent, the Merciful. Master of the Day of Judgment. Thee do we serve and Thee do we beseech for help. Keep us on the right path. The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray.

Where the Hebrew Bible shows, the Koran tells: God is great and all powerful.

Only the New Testament begins similarly:

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon: And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel; And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Both the Book of Mormon and the Christian New Testament begin with a sense of an author trying to legitimize something. The difference is that the New Testament is trying to legitimize Jesus as the Christ, while the Book of Mormon seems to be legitimizing itself more than anything else. Of course in legitimizing Jesus as the Anointed, the Matthew’s gospel is legitimizing itself indirectly.

The Book of Mormon, though, starts off like a mystery, trying to hook us with the first line. Who are these Nephi and Lamanites?

The mystery is compounded when we read of things being sealed and shut up. It has notes of esoteric antiquity, long lost but discovered and delivered unto a thirsting, ignorant world. That, of course, is the whole premise behind the Book of Mormon, but I wasn’t expecting to find it in the opening lines.

Indeed, it all hints at there being so much more behind the veil: this is an abridgement (Why can’t we have the whole thing?) written to the Lamanites (Who could they be?) and sealed up by Moroni (He must be some supernatural being.) that is a gift of God.

It’s a bold way to begin.

We end with the of-God/of-man dichotomy. “If there are any mistakes in the text,” authors are fond of writing in their acknowledgements, “It lies with me, and not all these wonderful people who advised me.” Thus ends the introduction to the Book of Mormon: any mistakes in here are of human origin, not God. For good measure, we have a dash of submit-for-the-sake-of-your-eternal-life tossed in at the end.

I’ve never read the Book of Mormon. I remember seeing it advertised on television — “Another testament of Jesus Christ” or something like that — but to date, that has been the extent of my exposure to it.

In planning this site, I decided that one of the things I wanted to do was to “blog” books: read a book and write a commentary on it as I go along. I’d like to do the Koran, the New Testament, and the Book of Mormon at the very least. So why not start with the Book of Mormon?

I would like to say that I intend on reading it objectively, with an open mind, so to speak. That is to say, without assumptions. However, I hold such a dim view of Mormonism based on the scant knowledge I have of it that it will be difficult to do so.

And so, coming soon: Part I, the introduction.