Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
“An Unfortunate Approach to Joseph Smith’s Translation of Ancient Scripture”

“An Unfortunate Approach to Joseph Smith’s Translation of Ancient Scripture”

Last updated on: June 17, 2022 at 3:54 pm by Dan Peterson

“An Unfortunate Approach to Joseph Smith’s Translation of Ancient Scripture” 2022-06-17T15:54:22-06:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The Oberammergau Passion Play stage in 2010 (Wikimedia Commons public domain image). It looks pretty much, but not entirely, the same today.

***

A new article appeared today in Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship:

“An Unfortunate Approach to Joseph Smith’s Translation of Ancient Scripture,” by Spencer Kraus

Review of Jonathan Neville, A Man That Can Translate: Joseph Smith and the Nephite Interpreters. Salt Lake City: Digital Legends Press, 2020. 385 pages. $22.99 (paperback).

Abstract: This is the first of two papers that explore Jonathan Neville’s two latest books regarding the translation of the Book of Mormon. Neville has long argued that Joseph Smith did not use a seer stone during the translation of the Book of Mormon, and he has more recently expanded his historical revisionism to dismiss the multitude of historical sources that include the use of a seer stone. Neville’s “Demonstration Hypothesis” is explored in A Man That Can Translate*, arguing that Joseph recited a memorized text from Isaiah rather than translate Isaiah from the Book of Mormon record. This hypothesis, meant to redefine how Joseph Smith used a seer stone during the translation of the Book of Mormon, however, fails to deal with the historical record seriously or faithfully. Neville, in a purported effort to save Joseph Smith’s character, ironically describes Joseph as a liar, reinvigorating old anti-Latter-day Saint claims that Joseph simply recited a memorized text, even to the point that Neville defends hostile sources while targeting Church-published histories and publications. He further attacks the witnesses of the translation in an effort to discredit their testimonies regarding the seer stone, and repeatedly misrepresents these sources. Coming from a Latter-day Saint, such claims are troubling and demand a response.*

***

We just walked back from the Passionstheater to our room in the Hotel Wittelsbach. It’s late. We arrived in Oberammergau at roughly eleven in the morning and had some free time to walk around and get lunch. Then our group went for the afternoon portion of the famous Oberammergau Passion Play. After a three-hour dinner break, we returned for the evening portion, which concluded just a few minutes ago. I’ll probably write my next column for Meridian Magazine about the Passion Play, so I’ll save my observations for that. Amusingly, though, I ran into Maurine and Scot Proctor, who run Meridian, in the theater just prior to the afternoon performance today. They were sitting with their daughter Mariah and a tour group. It was fun to see them here. The last time that I saw them was a few weeks ago at Ein Bokek, on the Israeli side of the Dead Sea. They were leading a group there, too. Either we’re stalking them or they’re stalking us. I’m. not sure which it is.

In any case, because it’s late and I’m tired and we’re starting out fairly early in the morning, and because I try to post a blog entry of a certain length every day, I’m going to repost a past item here right now:

Over the years, I’ve run into the comment — often, but not always, from embittered and hostile ex-Mormons — that Mormonism (a term that I’ll use in certain ways until I think of a better one) is a shallow faith, lacking any and all intellectual or cultural merit, satisfying only to unreflective middlebrow business types (if not, indeed, only to dimwits).

Some years ago, Thomas Cahill was attempting, in his best-selling book How the Irish Saved Civilization, to explain the ancient Manichaean faith, and in the course of his comments, gratuitously insulted Latter-day Saints and their beliefs by saying something to the effect that Manichaeism, like Mormonism today, had no depth in it that would satisfy a serious mind.

I’ve heard the assertion more than a few times, and I’ve seen it several times just recently.

My old Mormon Scholars Testify site — now Latter-day Saint Scholars Testify — was launched, in part, as a response to Cahill’s uncharitable remark. I really need to crank that project up again, but I’ve been really busy. (Is there anybody out there who would like to help?)

Probably the first problem that I see with the claim is that, in my judgment, it’s simply not true. (Of course, it might be responded, I’m a very shallow person, so who cares about my “judgment”?)

Although the Latter-day Saint intellectual and cultural tradition is still young — we were, until fairly recently, a small and relatively rural group, concentrated and largely isolated in the Great Basin West — I think it’s beginning to come along. (There were few if any genuinely great Christian literary figures, philosophers, artists, or composers, let alone architects, at a comparable period in early Christendom — i.e., around the early third century.) To provide just a pair of examples, I suggest a serious engagement with the philosophical work of Blake Ostler or listening through Hugh Nibley’s lecture series Time Vindicates the Prophets.

Moreover, I believe that there is enormous depth, as yet still largely crying out for exploration, in our doctrine. As B. H. Roberts put it,

I believe “Mormonism” affords opportunity for disciples of the second sort: nay, that its crying need is for such disciples. It calls for thoughtful disciples who will not be content with merely repeating some of the truths, but will develop the truths; and enlarge it by that development. Not half — not one-hundredth part — not a thousandth part of that which Joseph Smith revealed to the church has yet been unfolded, either to the church or to the world. The work of the expounder has scarcely begun. The Prophet planted by teaching the germ-truths of the great dispensation of the fulness of times. The watering and weeding is going on, and God is giving the increase, and will give it more abundantly in the future as more intelligent discipleship shall obtain. The disciples of “Mormonism,” growing discontented with the necessarily primitive methods which have hitherto prevailed in sustaining the doctrine, will yet take profounder and broader views of the great doctrines committed to the Church; and, departing from mere repetition, will cast them in new formulas; cooperating in the works of the Spirit, until they help to give to the truths received a more forceful expression and carry it beyond the earlier and cruder stages of development. (B. H. Roberts, “Book of Mormon Translation,” Improvement Era 9/9 [July 1906]: 713.)

But, viewing the question from another angle, I can’t help but think that the matter of “depth” — if what is meant by depth is simply the kind of complexity with which intellectuals and academics love to play and to show off — is largely irrelevant.

It would be fatuous in the extreme for someone sitting in a crowded movie theater to ignore a scream of “Fire!” simply because it came from a lower class “rube” or “philistine,” someone whose hands are soiled with (ugh!) trade or calloused by manual labor, or because it was expressed in an uncouth way, or voiced in an unsophisticated accent, or unsupported by allusions to recent developments in critical literary theory, or not couched in iambic pentameter.

I doubt that every early Christian was an elite intellectual, capable of holding his or her own with the philosophers of Athens or the scholars of Alexandria. But so what?

Could the Greek sophists Protagoras, Gorgias, Thrasymachus, and Cratylus have tied their rough contemporaries Ezra and Nehemiah in intellectual knots? Very possibly. But what would that matter?

Moreover, admonitions to kindness, charity, service, and other such positive attributes are always worthwhile, even if they’re dismissed as lacking “depth.” I would rather live in a society characterized by such qualities than among a colony of supremely clever intellectuals who lack them. (That might actually be a good description of Hell.)

And I have little patience for anybody disposed to reject the good news of Christ’s resurrection, or of the appearance of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith, on the grounds that these accounts lack intellectual subtlety. Simple or not, if they’re true they’re of incomparable importance.

And I’ll add this: The story that’s related in the Passionsspiele Oberammergau isn’t enormously complex. But, if true, it’s profoundly important.

Posted from Oberammergau, Bavaria, Germany

Uncategorized

Previous Post

June 16, 2022

In the Halls of the Mountain King

Next Post

June 18, 2022 "Differently Wired Brains"

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

To whom did Jesus say, "Today you will be with me in paradise"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The repentant thief Pilate Nicodemus Peter