Book of Laman an interesting take on Mormon scripture

Review by Doug Gibson

While reading "Book of Laman," (By Common Consent Press, 2017), author Mette Ivie Harrison's literary take on the LDS scripture, "The Book of Mormon," I kept thinking of Joan Osborne's song "What If God Was One of Us."

What if God was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Tryin' to make his way home?

If God had a face what would it look like?
And would you want to see if, seeing meant
That you would have to believe in things like heaven
And in Jesus and the saints, and all the prophets?

I don't claim that this is the author's intended theme, but to me it's that Laman is like nearly every one of us. We're trying to believe; that's why we head to church once a week and read our Scriptures. But we often fight a losing battle with spirituality and godly enthusiasm when it's stacked against frustration, grief, resentment, anger, temptation, envy, disappointment, love and hate, and even justice. OK, you're saying Laman tried to commit murder and we don't. But would we never think of doing that if forced to leave a comfortable home to spend a generation in the desert?

And that's what Laman is dealing with in his book. With some literary license, Harrison paints a picture of the Jerusalem family of Lehi and Sariah as one saddled with a discredited, formerly drunk, over-zealous father who abandoned his sons and wife for a spell and is mocked for it. It's a dysfunctional family who is then commanded by its head to leave their home.

Laman is also jealous/annoyed at his supercilious yet supremely devout younger brother, Nephi. The relationship between the two, from Laman's perspective, is interesting. The elder brother does believe that the younger brother speaks for God, and is God's choice to lead the exodus. The problem is Laman, and Lemuel, just can't stand Nephi. Harrison's portrayal of Nephi is not flattering. It reminds of the ubiquitous overzealous, condescending, condemning missionary invariably met in our tours of spiritual duty. We know they're doing what they're supposed to be doing but can't they show a little humility?

"The Book of Laman" is not, as I anticipated, a satire or a polemic. It is a straightforward, at times even plodding retelling of the beginning of "The Book of Mormon." All the major early scenes are includes, up to the arrival to the Americas and the split between the families. It concludes with a very old Laman, mostly ignored and sometimes mocked, filled with regret.

Laman's life is a lot like our lives. He sins. He repents. He has spiritual experiences. He has dark moments of anger. He'd like to be a better person who pleases God more often.

Like "The Book of Mormon," some characters are not developed. Lemuel is a bit of a shadowy character, who becomes more menacing as the novel progresses. Lehi and Sariah, as they age become, perhaps appropriately, less relevant. A scene with Lehi offering final blessings to his children is, however, strongly written. It captures Laman's conflicting desires to follow Lehi's counsel despite his anger at his brother Nephi.

Besides the conflict between Laman and Nephi, the most interest relationship is between Laman and his wife, Naomi, who share a bond and deep love. They are true confidantes. Ironically, due to their deep connection, much of Laman's later aggressions against Nephi is supported, and even prodded, by Naomi, including the burning of a temple that prompts Nephi's faction to leave.

Near the end of the book, Laman, begging forgiveness of God, is rewarded with a vision of Christ's visit to his new land. Through a voice from heaven, his sins are forgiven him. Again, he's not much different from those of us who beg God's mercy, and ask that He forgive our sins. 

Book of Mormon biography charts its existence, influence

In “The Book of Mormon: A Biography,” (Princeton University Press, 2012) author Paul C. Gutjahr notes that critiques and evaluations of Mormonism’s most important book have moved simple two-way, primarily theological debates between Mormon apologists and mostly evangelical critics who opposed the book for its claims of being holy scripture. As Gutjahr writes, including his own, slim but scholarly volume as one example, “By the early twenty-first century it was finally escaping the narrow confines of Mormon/non-Mormon religious debate as it increasingly came to be treated as an important text in American culture more generally.”

“The Book of Mormon” has inflamed passions, and interests from the moment the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith announced he was translating scripture that detailed a history of the Americas. Gutjahr charts how the book came to be, while adding some details that will come as news to many. One example: while at the printer’s shop of E.B. Grandin, copies of the Book of Nephi were lifted and printed in a local periodical. Smith warned the publisher of the legal consequences of the printing, and publication of the excerpts ceased.

“The Book of Mormon” was preceded, Gutjahr, explains, by an era when religious leaders sought to get the Holy Bible into as many American homes as possible. Its advertisement as additional scripture, as well as its egalitarian, democratic, and patriotic message, certainly helped it gain adherents in the individualistic, very religious U.S. frontier.

Readers will be interested to know that for the latter half of the 19th century, and well into the 20th century, The Book of Mormon’s importance was overshadowed by The Bible. Gutjahr notes in that the Southern States Mission, President Ben E. Rich, an LDS apostle, intentionally featured The Bible over the Mormon scripture, realizing that converts needed to be familiar with scripture that they were comfortable with. However, putting less emphasis on The Book of Mormon turned into a problem for LDS Church leaders in the 20th century as some professors at Brigham Young University, the church-run university, began advocating the theories that scripture, whether Bible or Book of Mormon, was largely fictional accounts designed to teach Gospel concepts. Church leaders, writes Gutjahr, worried that they were failing the Lord’s command to be stewards of The Book of Mormon, re-energized emphasis on The Book of Mormon, removed professors who doubted the book’s veracity from BYU, and gradually through the 20th Century elevated the status of The Book of Mormon to the point that today it is clearly the primary book of scripture of Mormonism. Members are repeatedly urged to read it often.

The importance of The Book of Mormon to Mormon culture and theology, explains Gutjahr, is underscored by how it is translated. The book is translated in literally dozens of languages (there is a list of translations in the book). The LDS Church trains all of its translators to use the conservative formal equivalency method of translation, which dictates a precise, word-by-word translation. Not used is functional equivalency translation, which is designed to capture the spirit of a book being translated. As Gutjahr writes, “The Church wishes each of its Book of Mormon translations to retain as much as possible the sentence structure, phrasing, and idioms of the original language.”

There is a direct contrast between the biographies of the larger Salt Lake City-based Mormon Church and its Midwestern brother, the formerly named Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While the Reorganized Church maintained a greater emphasis on The Book of Mormon, as well as Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible, than the Mormons did for well more than a century, the past couple of generations have seen a reversal: With the LDS Church doubling down with its emphasis on The Book of Mormon and the reorganized church, while remaining fond of Smith’s discovery, downgrading its importance and doubting its veracity. In fact, the reorganized church has abandoned most Mormon-specific theology, opened its offering of the sacrament to non-members and has changed its name to Community of Christ, joining mainstream Protestantism.

Gutjahr devotes parts of the book to the Mormon Church’s challenges of apologetics of The Book of Mormon. This has become difficult, as expeditions and DNA studies have failed to yield evidences that support the scripture. However, there is scholarly research devoted to defending the Book of Mormon’s claims. Its central hub is the Neal A. Maxwell Institute at BYU. One evolutionary theory that differs from past defenses is that the entire Book of Mormon occurs in a very small portion of the Americans, primarily in Mexico and Central America, and does not deal with events in other parts of the continent.

Gutjahr includes chapters that deal with the Book of Mormon’s influence on art and film. Readers won’t be surprised at reading commentary on the iconic, masculine images created by Arnold Friberg but the more feminine Book of Mormon art of Minerva Teichert (1888-1976) is also discussed. Teichert’s softer depictions, which placed more emphasis on women (almost ignored in The Book of Mormon) and children, were largely ignored during her life but have recently gained prominence due to their display at BYU.

The chapter on films is fascinating. Readers will wish they could find a copy of the lost 1915 silent, “The Life of Nephi:” a still is shown from the book. And I would love to see a print of the 1930 film, “Corianton: A Story of Unholy Love.” This film, which dramatizes the sexual sins of Book of Mormon prophet Alma’s son, Corianton, included songs from The Mormon Tabernacle Choir. However, church leaders were distressed to discover that the pre-Hays morality code film contained nude shots of the actress who portrayed the harlot Isabel. (Alma: chapter 39)

The recent film, “Book of Mormon Movie Vol. 1, The Journey,” is examined. Gutjahr posits that the box office failure of the film — no sequel was filmed — is due to its direct faithfulness to the book. On the screen, formal equivalency, without nuance or character expansion, leads to dullness. This reviewer’s take on BOM’s “The Journey” is footnoted by Gutjahr, who writes, “One reviewer found the movie so boring that he parodied Mark Twain’s famous characterization of The Book of Mormon by calling (director Gary) Rogers’s motion picture ‘chloroform on film.’” Alas, it was. The LDS Church needs a Cecil B. DeMille to make a great Book of Mormon film adaptation.

In Gutjahr’s opinion, the best adaptations of the Mormon scripture are on the stage, where the enthusiasm of the actors are evident. He cites the many pageants that LDS faithful have produced, noting the famous Hill Cumorah Pageant. He also cites the success of the irreverent but widely acclaimed “Book of Mormon: The Musical” Broadway play.

The Broadway success of Joseph Smith’s “Gold Bible,” completely divorced from any Mormon involvement, stands as the best evidence that The Book of Mormon, while treasured by the LDS faithful, now belongs to the rest of the world. “The Book of Mormon: A Biography,” is a suitable serious secular introduction to this iconic book.

-- Doug Gibson

Originally published at StandardBlogs

B.H. Roberts spent most of his life defending 'The Book of Mormon'

I ran across an interesting article in the Summer 1979 issue of Brigham Young University Studies. It’s “B.H. Roberts and The Book of Mormon,” and was written by Truman Madsen. Roberts was a remarkable man. Born in England, his birth father, and later a stepfather, both abandoned him and his family. He migrated to Utah early in his life and settled through a few rocky years struggling with the Word of Wisdom before straightening out, and eventually became a general authority at the age of 31.

He remained one for the rest of his life, dying in 1933 at 76. He served in World War I as a chaplain and was elected to the U.S. Congress in 1898, although that body refused to seat him because he was a polygamist. He married three wives and had 15 children.

Roberts was unique within the LDS hierarchy for his reasoning that evolution and Gospel doctrines did not conflict. He wrote a book, “The Truth, The Way, The Life,” that was not published due to the objections of creationist Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith. It eventually was published in 1994.

In the mid-1890s Roberts almost left the church over a disagreement on whether church authorities could be active in politics. He eventually apologized for the near apostasy.

Despite his maverick views, Roberts was respected by his colleagues in the church hierarchy. He was fascinated by “The Book of Mormon,” at one point calling it the “fifth Gospel.” He spent much of the second half of his life defending the book. According to Madsen’s piece, the unique doctrines of “The Book of Mormon” — so different from traditional christianity — and the biblical and historical knowledge within “The Book of Mormon” made it impossible for any man as unlearned as Joseph Smith to create it from scratch. “It imposes what Roberts called ‘a greater tax on human credulity’ to say Joseph Smith, or anyone in the nineteenth century, created it,” writes Madsen.

Roberts, explains Madsen, has a different viewpoint of what the book’s translation was like than perhaps the typical Latter-day Saint. Roberts did not regard it as “magical,” or in other words, just viewing the Urim and Thummim, seeing words, and writing them down. “On the contrary, ‘brain sweat’ was required, and preparation, and labor,” writes Madsen.

Besides, word-for-word translation is impossible, Roberts maintained. Smith had to use, in instances, what he had available to translate. That explains near copies of biblical chapters, biblical-like phrases, and even the inclusion of terms such as horses in “The Book of Mormon.”

Madsen lists 10 “attributes that define Roberts’ devotion to “The Book of Mormon.” One bit of information that surprised me was that Roberts enjoyed writing creative fiction based on “The Book of Mormon.” I hope it was better than most of the kitsch published today.

He wrote stories about Moroni, the Nephite nation and even a novel about Alma’s son, Corianton, which is described as “a tale of sneaking indulgence, and remorse and renewal.” I have read it and it’s a kitschy, fun read available for free on the Internet or via Kindle. Madsen adds that Roberts desperately wanted to see a major film based on “The Book of Mormon” produced. A movie was made of the Corianton novel, BYU has the only remaining copy and it was shown several years ago.

One category Madsen describes Roberts in regards to “The Book of Mormon” is the role of “devil’s advocate.” As mentioned earlier, Roberts intellect brought him much respect among general authorities. He spent many of the final years of his life providing church leaders with hypothetical attacks on the legitimacy of “The Book of Mormon.” These efforts, which Madsen compares to a skilled lawyer preparing to better understand a courtroom adversary, have led to claims that Roberts lost or questioned his testimony regarding “The Book of Mormon.”

Madsen doubts these assertions. Roberts told colleagues that these reports were never intended to be balanced. They were intended as tools to increase learning about “The Book of Mormon.”

Roberts’ greatest influence as a church leader is that his example reminds us that our beliefs need to be tested for them to grow. If they remain unchallenged, they stay weak and susceptible to failure in times of stress.

Yet Roberts remained in awe of the personal power “The Book of Mormon” gave him. Madsen writes, “Though renowned for his gifts as a speaker, B.H. Roberts agonized over the fact that he could never communicate the intensity, the power, the consuming white light that seemed to him to shine through the book.”

-- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardNET