Comments about ‘Defending the Faith: Book of Mormon style can be both subtle, sophisticated’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, June 23 2011 5:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

Love it! Excellent analysis!

Salt Lake City, UT

Great article!!!! True the BofM, returns more and more with careful reading, becomes prophecy more than history, and great counsel more than prose.

Bountiful, UT

My experience is that it is much easier to feast upon the word if you serve it up aloud. My wife and I read all of the standard works aloud during the last three months of our mission, and we appreciated the scriptures more than ever before.

moniker lewinsky
Taylorsville, UT

Solomon Spalding certainly seemed to think so.

Round Rock, TX

acrostic name calling cookies in "scholary" papers are subtle and sophisticated too. But it doesnt make them correct either.

Idaho Coug
Meridian, Idaho

On page 160 of my re-read and enjoying it. But honestly struggling to find "Mormonism" in it. Other than the backstory of the Lehites traveling to the Americas and the finding and translation of the plates by joseph Smith which is obviously uniquely Mormon, the book itself reads in a way that most mainstream Christians would generally say "yeah, we believe that too."

Were the unique LDS teachings and doctrines most associate with Mormonism today not known to the Nephites? It definitely seems that much of what makes us unique TODAY came from the DandC, PofGP, and LDS leader teachings. So far (through page 160) it is searching for and living the Law of Moses to better anticipate the coming of Christ. Good stuff but far from uniquely LDS.

Murrieta, CA

Yep. And Peter Sellers' character, Chauncey, in the movie "Being There" was a brilliant economist.

Layton, UT

I am a firm believer that the truth never needs a defense. So I am puzzled by those LDS members who make a living (as self-proclaimed defenders of the faith)out of doing just that. As an active LDS member, I've never been befuddled with, or by reading and studying the scriptures. The writing style is not something I choose to study, the message is what I concentrate on. The truth never needs a defense, even today.

moniker lewinsky
Taylorsville, UT

Nor should the truth require such elaborate and full time apologetic efforts.
When it comes to religion and spirituality and morality, I believe two things:

The truth should ring true.
Faith should act as a bridge, but never an eraser.

When somebody asks me to believe that which can't stand up to scrutiny or is incredulous or goes against knowledge I have attained or if that belief requires elaborate mental gymnastics in order for me to maintain it, I know to ignore that person. When somebody asks me to try to unlearn something or ignore it or sweep it under the rug or wait until later to think about it all in the name of having faith, I know I should ignore that person.

Temple City, CA

The truth doesn't need a defense, per se, but some in the faith really appreciate seeing it defended.

Explaining the literary methods of the Book of Mormon is something that I appreciate--partly to strengthen my testimony, but very much because I love to discuss literature, and I have been fascinated for some time at how the Book of Mormon may be approached as a literary work. I enjoyed this reading of this particular passage--something I had not considered before.

layton, UT

Helooo, Great article!!!! True the BofM, returns more and more with careful reading? Carefully reading the Bible can return more.

And other sheep(gentiles)I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.(John 10:16).
Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, "I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding." And Isaiah* ( Isaiah 65:1,gentiles) boldly says, "I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me."( Romans 10:19-20 NIV).
Neither the Nephites nor the Lamanites can meet this qualification.

But you are a *chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation(ethnic), Gods special possession (a peculiar people, KJV) that you may declare the praises of him who* called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. (1 Peter 2:9 NIV) *God,s elect or(Church,). God chooses (elects) nation(ethnics).

The true church are Gods elect.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

Idaho Coug: You will find that as you read the Book of Mormon more that you will find that it truely is ANOTHER TESTAMENT of The Lord Jesus Christ. You are right that the Nephites did follow the Law of Moses as they prepared for the birth of the Savior. This is why it follows so well with the teachings of the Old Testament. What is even more correct is that we learn in the Book of Mormon that what was taught to one people was also taught the same to another. This way the teachings are the same.

When you speak of uniqueness to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints you will find it in the teachings on baptism, authority through the Priesthood (not something a man can take upon himself), the importance of Prophets and Apostles, the partaking of the sacrament (the emblems of Christ) and most of all the marriage covenant. All are not unquie but all are comprised within the cover of the Book of Mormon. Where some say the Book of Mormon and the Bible contradict really there is no contradiction, only in the precepts of man himself.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

TO Sharrona: Clearly you misunderstand Isaiah 65 entirely. The Lord is rebuking Israel for disregarding him, not the Gentiles as you state. A carefully reading of the entire Chapter is necessary to understand just one verse. Joseph Smith Translation of this same verse shows clearly that the Lord was speaking to Israel. Even using the NIV with the rest of the verses clearly shows that the rebuke was for Israel who and that he was silent because of their own wickedness. This is clearly illustrated further in the Book of Mormon when the Nephites and Lamanites both would become a stiffnecked people. The Lord would withdraw himself from them. So clearly not only do the Lamanites and Nephites meet this criteria as do all of the Lord's people who neglect to obey his commandments and ordinances.

Again faith is dead without works. You have to prove to the Lord that you are willing to obey his commandments as with the charge to all of us, "Be ye perfect even as I am". How can we be perfect if we don't obey his commandments and ordinances? In the end, our Saviour's grace saves us, after all we can do.

Aspiring Theist
Sandy, UT

It is interesting to me how different people perceive their scriptures, and I appreciate insights I didn't see.

When I read this story in the Book of Mormon I was intrigued by Heleman 13:8-9 where Samuel is telling the people if they don't repent they would be smitten in about 400 years. It seemed strange that the people would feel compelled to act by something that would happen that far in the future.

I also felt Helaman 15:12 was a bit curious when Samuel says the Lord's blessing are on "our brethren" the Lamanites, kind of like he wasn't a Lamanite.

Maybe I am too picky.

layton, UT

Bill in Nebraska,Gentiles were not plan B*:
...I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the "Gentiles"(Isaiah 42:6).

It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the "Gentiles",that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth. (Isaiah 49:6).
One of the basics Biblical hermeneutics is to use the N.T. to interpret the O.T..
The Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel who pursued a law of righteousness has not attained it. (Romans 9:30)

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect(in Love)(Mt 5:48)Jesus uses the law. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith(Gal 3:24 NIV).
*No plan for Nephites or Lamanites.

Scottsdale, AZ

Idaho Coug, you raise an interesting point. The BoM Jews had suspiciously detailed prophecies about the coming of the Messiah, even by name, hundreds of years before it happened. The Old World Jews had nothing of the sort. And yet on the other hand, the NT church supposedly practiced all of the peculiar Mormon doctrines, like baptism for the dead (Mormons claim 1 Cor 15:29, but it really doesn't say a whole lot about the practice), temples, Melchizedekan priesthood, polytheism, etc. So the question becomes, how is it that the BoM Jews received a visit from the Savior, had detailed prophecies about him, but never were instructed in the basics of the LDS faith?

The best explanation appears to be that Joseph Smith's theology developed over time. When he first started, his doctrine was slightly more orthodox, even Trinitarian in places in the BoM. But over time, the peculiar Mormon doctrines were developed and added to the repertoire.

Once again, I challenge a Mormon to present hard, manuscript evidence for the JSTs. No one has taken me up on this yet. The Bible promises some of the severest punishment for those who add to the words of Scripture.

sandy, ut

Brokenclay - the part in the bible about 'adding to scripture' doesn't apply to this - the bible is made up of parts of thousands of manuscripts so they are technically adding to each other. Another thing is that the Book of Mormon supposedly was taking place around the same time - so that wouldn't be considered adding to scripture either. I do, however, agree with you that Joseph Smith and what he taught transformed over time. I agree that there are many inconsistencies with doctrine and the history. It seems, at least to me, that the more you know about the church and its history the less impressive and faith promoting it becomes.

Montana Mormon
Miles City, MT

I just re-read Helaman 13 last night. I found Dan Peterson's insights into Samuel the Lamanite's words very enlightening. Thank you for sharing.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

Brahmabull and Brokenclay: What both of you miss and don't understand is that the Book of Mormon and the Bible are basis for what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believes. We believe in revelation, therefore of course Joseph Smith theology changed over time as more and more things were revealed to him. This is no different than any other prophet who lived or will live on the earth.

Secondly, why do I have to give you a manuscript. The fact you ask for one is because there never was one. The translation Joseph Smith did of the Bible was done completely by revelation. In this he was a revelator and a seer, besides just being a prophet. I have read the Book of Mormon many times and I continue to read it. I find the insights brough by others of faith to be quite rewarding and something maybe I didn't see before. I learn something new each time I read the Book of Mormon. The reason there are apologists and defenders is because critics still refuse to listen. The only explanation after everything comes to light is that Joseph Smith told the truth.

Temple City, CA

Brahmabull and brokenclay: You both seem to be raising the idea that there is some deep, dark issue in that fact that LDS doctrine developed over time. Nothing could be more obvious. It's intrinsic in our Standard Works.

I disagree that there are Trinitarian ideas in the Book of Mormon, but I disagree that they're found in the Bible, too. That both books use the same language to speak of God, despite the fact that Mormons from the First Vision have believed in the separateness and distinctness of the Father and the Son, shows that the books are inspired from the same source.

I disagree with Brahmabull that there are inconsistencies in doctrine and history. I agree wtih Richard Bushman that Joseph Smith did not always fully understand the revelations that he was receiving, but the revelations, taken as a whole, are astoundingly consistent.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments