The always-interesting Spengler tries to make sense of Mormonism. Excerpt:
Belief in the Book of Mormon is one of the strangest collective delusions in history. The circumstances of its forgery are transparent and exhaustively documented. After supposedly finding golden tablets composed by the aptly-named Angel Moroni, Smith "translated" 16 pages of them using his treasure-hunting stones. A friend showed the manuscript to his suspicious wife, who hid or destroyed it. Smith could not exactly reproduce the "translation" which he had dictated free-style, and stood in danger of exposure were he to produce a different version. Instead he received a new revelation to translate not those golden tablets, but yet another set of tablets that no one else could see.Historians have demonstrated that a sizable chunk of the supposed Book of Mormon was copied from a novel by a certain Reverend Solomon Spalding, who concocted the notion of an ancient Hebrew migration to North America as an entertainment. Most of the remainder was lifted from a 1769 edition of the King James Bible, with printer's errors intact. A history of the patriarch Abraham that Smith later "translated" from ancient Egyptian papyri was shown to be an ordinary Egyptian funerary document. A useful summary of the facts has been published online by Father Brian Harrison of the Pontifical University of Puerto Rico. An exhaustive report is found in the book Mormon America, by Richard and Joan Ostling (Harper 2007).
Incidentally, Fr. Harrison's work on Mormonism can be found here (part 1) and here (part 2). Read it now, because we're not going to have ol' Mittens to kick around much longer, the national attention span will move on to something else, and America's Mormon moment will pass, at least for a time. Until, that is, the Mighty, Mighty Russell Arben Fox arises from the plain like a prairie fire. Woo!
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Rod, I'm surprised by your tacit approval of the Spengler quote. That selection is full mistakes about issues surrounding the Mormon faith, many of which have been addressed in an expansive literature, e.g. the Spalding reference.
You have plenty of legitimate aspects of the Mormon faith that strain a rationalist's credulity to beat up on Mormons without needing to resort to cheap shots such as Spengler's, so why do you do it?
I've been researching Mormonism for years now, and I've got a pretty good handle on what's truth and what's propaganda purported by the ignorant to throw down a religion that doesn't agree with their own. Sometimes people just hate mormonism flat out, and so they'll put up any evidence to discredit it. However, having said that, I don't think this writer was too far off the mark. There are a lot worse things that could have been thrown out there about Joseph Smith himself, which even Richard Bushman admits are puzzling and at times cause doubt. This passing paragraph about incorrect translations wasn't offensive. The Book of Abraham has long been proved to be the book of breathings-- it's rather silly to hold on to it, unless of course your faith system hinges on it. We can also see (and mormons freely admit) that whole passages are lifted from the bible. Mormons claim this is just a representation of God's consistency-- it's the whole purpose of the book of mormon to teach the same things in the new world that were taught in Jerusalem. But anyone who speaks more than one language knows this type of word for word translation makes no sense. It couldn't be strong coincidence, it would have to in fact be false. Anyway, enough on this, I just didn't want everyone yelling at the author for attacking mormonism, when this type of response is hardly disrespectful, it's just honest. It's not angry, it's just blunt. I'm open to discuss these types of things if someone wants to shoot me an email. I'm not afraid of being proven wrong.
Daniel,
Once again, I commend you to By The Hand of Mormon, for a treatment of Biblical passages in the BoM. And the most that can be said about the Book of Abraham is that the documents many believe to be the source of the Book of Abraham are actually the Book of Breathings. In any case, neither of those issues invalidates the core claims of our faith. The way prophets through the ages have delivered to us the texts and teachings we have has been at times a convoluted process that often looks like plagiarism, historical revision, and any number of other things Joseph Smith is accused of. When Harold Bloom called Joseph Smith an "authentic Hebrew prophet," he was not making a claim for Joseph's Divine calling; he was simply stating that how Joseph arrived at his revelations - like it or not - looks a lot like how other prophets have gone about it.
You are correct to point out that Bushman and other Mormons (like me) are puzzled and doubtful of many things Joseph Smith said and did. I believe he was flat-out mistaken or overzealous about many things, but the scriptures show that prophets down through the ages have often been intemperate, rough, and sometimes a little bit crazy. Bushman claimed after writing RSR that he believes more than ever, and after reading it, I do too.
Thanks for posting the links to articles at catholic.com. I congratulate you on having the guts to do so.
Mr. Spengler has broken one of the 10 commandments. Thou shalt not bear false witness.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.