7.  Do you worry that some of the “unsettling” aspects of the book (e.g., your frankness concerning the anachronistic Isaiah passages or New Testament linguistic influences or stylistic similarities between all three books of restoration scripture) will have a negative impact on the faith of some of your Mormon readers?

No, I don’t. The Book of Mormon is what it is; I don’t feel like I need to apologize for it or try to hide its more troubling features. That would seem like a failure of nerve or a lack of faith, and it seems to me that there are enough wonderful things about the text to balance out the things that seem strange or unsettling. As believers, we should read it as carefully as possible, and we should bring to our study the best biblical and historical scholarship available, but there is enough theological flexibility to accommodate whatever we might find. For people who accept the book as scripture, it is almost as if it comes with something like the standard addendum to political ads: “I am Jesus Christ and I approve of this message, in these words.” I don’t always understand why the Book of Mormon takes the form it does, but who am I to say, for instance, that “God would never use poor grammar in a revelation” or “God would never allow historical anachronisms into his perfect word,” Similarly, I was a bit disappointed to hear that Christian Vuissa’s new film Joseph Smith – Volume 1: Plates of Gold didn’t at least briefly and tactfully portray Joseph using a seer stone in a hat (especially since Vuissa has handled difficult issues quite nicely in some of his previous films). It is time for us as Latter-day Saints to get over our embarrassment and embrace that well-documented and widely-reported aspect of our heritage. It may seem odd by today’s standards, but if that is how the Lord chose to communicate with his prophet, why should we try to conceal or ignore the facts? And who knows, sometimes weaknesses turn into strengths.

With regard to some of the specific issues mentioned in the question, the presence of Second Isaiah in the Book of Mormon is one of the strongest arguments against its historicity, but Latter-day Saints should recognize that ideas about Second Isaiah are among the most widely accepted  in all of biblical scholarship; to dismiss the scrupulous work of generations of fine, often devout scholars with a simple “Well, they just don’t believe in prophecy” is both arrogant and foolish. It is very much like rejecting evolution because it doesn’t fit your particular interpretation of Genesis. You can either show some respect for evidence, argumentation, and scholarship, or you can withdraw into fundamentalism. I’m not exactly sure how Adam and Eve fit into the scientific story of human origins, just as I’m not quite sure how to explain Nephi’s quoting of Isaiah 48-49, but I trust that there is some reasonable explanation (though it may require the sort of divine intervention that only believers would accept). By the way, even if scholars were to discover evidence that led them to revise their opinions and date Isaiah 40-55 as pre-exilic, the Book of Mormon is still in trouble, because careful analysis suggests that even chapters 1-39 (quoted at length by Nephi in something quite close to their current KJV form) underwent considerable revision and augmentation after 600 BCE.  Similar things could be said about New Testament phrasing. Why try to deny or downplay what is so obviously there for all to see? Let’s evaluate the evidence as fairly and open-mindedly as possible, and then we can figure out later what it might mean or how believers might account for it. (See again the last paragraph in question #6 above.)

8.  Similarly, the Book of Mormon editors and prophets as you disclose them are quite human – perhaps uncomfortably human. What, in your opinion, does this say about prophets generally, and specifically our prophets today?

Earlier this year, Peggy Fletcher Stack wrote an article in the Salt Lake Tribune in which she stated that “Mormons don’t use the term ‘infallibility’ to refer to their leaders and readily acknowledge that they are imperfect men. In practice, though, LDS belief comes awfully close to that standard.” I’m not sure that this is healthy. A close reading of the Book of Mormon (or the Old Testament) will show that regarding prophets as infallible goes directly against the whole force of the narrative. I believe with Joseph Smith that “a prophet is a prophet only when he is acting as such.” At the same time, the Book of Mormon also stresses the need for generosity and humility toward divinely-appointed leaders who are doing the best they can to lead with inspiration in sometimes trying times. Perhaps reading the scriptures more attentively can help us better balance our reactions to those who have been called of God in our own day.

9.  Despite these and other aspects that might be unsettling to the faithful, there seems to be a general consensus that this book is much more palatable for Mormons than non-Mormons. Consequently, how well do you think you succeeded in your attempt to give your two audiences a “neutral ground” on which to discuss the Book of Mormon? Given the difficulty of both the task and the current climate, can faithful Mormons really reach out to non-Mormons on the subject of our scripture without alienating or turning them off, especially if we stop anywhere short of simply granting their claims concerning the absurdity of belief in the Book of Mormon?

It seems like I have been answering this question all along, but I’ll add a bit more here. Perhaps in order to facilitate discussions between Mormon and non-Mormons, it will be necessary for outsiders to acknowledge that the Book of Mormon can be seen as a rich, complex, coherent work of religious literature (that’s the point I’m pushing in my book; I’m happy for non-believers to remain non-believers, I just think that the Book of Mormon deserves a little more respect). On the other hand, Latter-day Saints who wish to participate in academic conversations will probably need to recognize that belief in the Book of Mormon as revelation or as ancient history does seem absurd to reasonable, even sympathetic outsiders. I personally believe that the Book of Mormon had its origins in the ancient world based on my interpretation of the evidence, but also because of my religious background and spiritual experiences that are outside the realm of academic discourse. I don’t expect that people with different backgrounds and experiences will interpret the literary or historical evidence in the same way. But I am still interested in what they have to say (for instance, Krister Stendahl’s essay on the Third Nephi is one of my favorite articles on the Book of Mormon ever).

I don’t really know if this sort of flexibility on both sides will eventually lead to better conversations. Nevertheless, it’s clearly up to Latter-day Saints to make the first move, that is, to make a case that the Book of Mormon is an interesting text that will repay close attention, that it is worth reading even if you’re not looking for conversion. We can’t expect outsiders to read our scripture more closely than we ourselves have done (and if you want to see what close reading looks like, you can start with the mainstream biblical scholarship that Mormons have avoided for so long).

10.  As Sam notes, when most of us read the Book of Mormon, we can’t help but read 180 years of tradition into the text. One of the most enjoyable aspects of your book is the new and often refreshing ways that you read “against the grain.” What has been the single most helpful tool for you in overcoming the cultural constraints under which we so often approach the text?

There are a several tools that have helped me to see new things in the Book of Mormon. (1) I try to read widely in history, literature, philosophy, biblical scholarship, and religious studies, and I’m always on the lookout for ideas that might be applicable to Mormon scripture. For instance, outsiders often regard the Book of Mormon as a forgery of sorts, but forgeries can be interesting, and I have recently discovered that even imaginary forgeries can be compelling—read Arthur Phillips delightful new novel The Tragedy of Arthur with the Book of Mormon in mind.  If study time is limited in your life—as it is for most people—you might start with the New Oxford Annotated Bible; the introductions and general essays offer a crash course in biblical scholarship, and after you’ve read through the Bible in the New Revised Standard Version, aided by the focus provided by brief annotations, not only will you know the Bible better than most other Latter-day Saints, you will also have all kinds of ideas about how to approach the Book of Mormon. (2) I use an old Infobases program from 1992 (“LDS Scriptures Infobase”) that allows me to track specific words and phrases in the standard works quickly and precisely. I’m interested in identifying connections and allusions, as well analyzing patterns of usage. For example, the phrase “son of man” occurs 196 times in the Bible, but only once in the Book of Mormon (and that is in a direct quotation of Isaiah 51:12). I’m not sure what that means, but it is potentially interesting. (3) My most important tool though, as I noted above, is the Reader’s Edition, which offers a fresh perspective as I encounter familiar words and phrases in a new format that emphasizes narrative continuity and context. That version does the initial work that readers must otherwise do for themselves (rather laboriously) of figuring out which sentences go together in paragraphs, who is saying what to whom, identifying where there are changes in topic or transitions from narrative to commentary to inserted documents to sermons, etc. When all of that is readily apparent, readers can then focus more easily on finding connections or narrative gaps, or looking for subtle shifts of tone.  If you read through the Reader’s Edition, from beginning to end, I guarantee that you too will see things that you have never noticed before.

11.  Dave wrote: “while his criticisms are definitively held to be insightful and productive, his prescription for how to go beyond the limitations of historical criticism and properly elicit meaning and interpretation from history-like or realistic narrative is rather unclear, at least in Eclipse. So when Hardy states that Frei ‘argued that narratives can be understood by their own logic and on their own terms rather than by constant reference to external standards of truth’ (p. 153), that should be the opening statement to a longer discussion of what Hardy understands as Frei’s method for establishing such an understanding or meaning, or for Hardy to set forth his own method for establishing such an understanding or meaning.” Would you take the time now to briefly set forth your methodology on this point, or otherwise respond to the invitation?

The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative is an important, provocative, and sometimes rather dense work. I had not intended to offer a detailed response to it in Understanding, which would have taken my book far off course, but rather I pulled out one significant idea—that post-Enlightenment attempts to understand scripture by reference to external referents (as in the historical-critical method or as embodiments of general moral principles) can distort or obscure the meaning that comes from the stories themselves. Frei is a careful scholar—for instance, his term “history-like narratives” intentionally blurs the line between history and fiction—and while he acknowledges the power of historical criticism, which makes it impossible for thoughtful readers to return to pre-critical approaches, he at the same time realizes that something is lost when we can no longer read the Bible on its own terms. Frei’s work is historical and descriptive rather than prescriptive, so as Dave notes, he does not offer a clear path forward, though others have taken up the challenge. The emergence of the fields of biblical narrative criticism and narrative theology in the last few decades is in many ways a response to Frei’s documentation of a major shift in Western thought in the 18th and 19th centuries.

For my purposes, the important thing is that Frei resisted any general hermeneutical theories. He cogently identified problems in contemporary biblical interpretation, but then intentionally left open the question of how to reconnect to the indispensable narrative character of scripture (though he does a little more with this in his later books—his image of an eclipse suggests that we might someday come out of the shadow). Frei recognized that the Bible is a strange book, which  makes unusual demands on its readers, and this is also true of the Book of Mormon. In Understanding, I tried to implement Frei’s notion that the meaning of a narrative is the narrative itself (or that the meaning emerges cumulatively from the text), by giving close attention to what the Book of Mormon actually says and how it says it. At this point I think it would be a mistake to try to develop a general theory of interpretation based on philosophical, historiographical, or literary considerations. It seems to me that what we need right now is not abstract theorizing but better and more accurate descriptions of how the text works, how it is organized, how it makes its points, and how it employs language. (Not surprisingly, I’m a huge fan of Royal Skousen’s painstakingly detailed textual and linguistic analyses.)

We can certainly learn from scholars of the Bible such as Frei, Alter, and Sternberg, but the Book of Mormon is in many ways a very different book, which makes its own way through a whole series of religious issues. It seemed to reaffirm traditional modes of biblical interpretation (literalism, typology, prophecy, salvation history, and canonical authority) at the very time that the Christian consensus about how to read the Bible was collapsing. The Nephite scripture—with its near absence of standard archaeological-historical evidence—ends up promoting pre-critical approaches (but not exactly), while its multivocal, deconstructable narratives sound almost postmodern (but not quite). Richard Bushman once suggested that “read in the twenty-first century, the book seems almost postmodern in its self-conscious attention to the production of the text” (Rough Stone Rolling, p. 87), but this doesn’t exactly capture it. Despite the Book of Mormon’s perspectivism (and self-awareness of such), it is all about meta-narratives and un-ironic truth. What an odd, engaging text!

12.  Everyone is of course curious about what you might be working on now – particularly anything Book of Mormon related. Any hints for us?

I took some time off from Mormon Studies to co-edit the first volume of the Oxford History of Historical Writing and to create a thirty-six lecture CD/DVD course for the Teaching Company entitled Great Minds of the Eastern Intellectual Tradition (both of which were released earlier this year), but now I’m anxious to start working on the Book of Mormon again. I was hoping in Understanding to identify some common ground between believers and outsiders as they analyze the way the book is structured and how it presents its message. The more important question, however, is what exactly that message might be. (My concern here is academic rather than religious; I’m not so much interested in persuading outsiders of the book’s ultimate meaning or truth as in analyzing what the book claims for itself.) It seems to me that one of the main purposes of the Book of Mormon is to clarify and resolve ambiguities in the Bible. In other words, it is, among other things, a fairly serious work of theology. I’ve sketched out an outline for a volume with chapters on the closed canon, Deuteronomistic history, rational religion (including the challenge of Deism), the delayed Parousia, salvation history, soteriology, ecclesiology, the destiny of the house of Israel, and so on. Many of these were important issues in the nineteenth century, while others go back to debates found in the New Testament itself, and still others come to prominence in the twentieth century.

Once again, perhaps naively, I’m hoping to find some common ground.  The characters in the Book of Mormon obviously respond to the Bible, which was part of Joseph Smith’s culture but which also has a presence within the narrative framework—in the Brass Plates, in Nephi’s vision, and in Jesus’ sermons to the Nephites. And while there is no question that the Book of Mormon addresses nineteenth-century concerns (otherwise, it would never have gained a following), I will try to leave open the question of whether it does so as a result of Joseph Smith’s own thinking, his inspiration, God’s direct revelation, or the visions and foreknowledge of ancient prophets. Regardless of ideas of origins, it seems to me that careful readers should be able to agree on the main points of Book of Mormon theology, and I’m optimistic that I might be able to persuade outsiders that Joseph Smith was an observant student of the Bible and an innovative, perhaps even prescient, theological thinker. (It shouldn’t be a stretch for Latter-day Saints to accept that the Book of Mormon adds something significant to the biblical witness, but what, exactly?) Still, don’t expect anything from me in the near future. I work at a university with a heavy teaching load, I have the privilege of serving in a rather demanding church calling, and this project will require a lot of reading in biblical scholarship, theology, and religious history. In addition, I’m sure I will end up rewriting the manuscript many times before I’m ready to publish. But to me this sounds like a great way to spend the next several years. The Book of Mormon continues to be a vital, fascinating text in both my life and my scholarship—a statement that can serve as a concluding testimony of sorts.

1.  Can you tell us a bit about the background to this book? What inspired you to begin this type of project? Were there any prior works that were a critical influence for you? What sort of process did you go through to write the book? What were the biggest challenges in writing it?

Understanding the Book of Mormon is a sequel to an earlier project, The Book of Mormon: A Reader’s Edition, which was published by the University of Illinois Press in 2003. As I was reformatting the text in the manner of modern biblical translations (with paragraphs, topical headings, poetic stanzas, quotation marks, indented documents, and so forth), I came to a better understanding of how the Book of Mormon is structured, and particularly the crucial role played by the major narrators. Reading in context, with an eye toward the editing of the narrators, uncovered interpretive layers and nuances that seemed to make the Book of Mormon a much more interesting work than many have assumed, both inside and outside the Church. So in a sense, Understanding the Book of Mormon is a set of field notes on the Reader’s Edition. (I was pleased by Rosalynde Welch’s observation that the Reader’s Edition is the more important of the two books. I agree. The particular arguments in Understanding will always be subject to debate and revision, but the Reader’s Edition could be a starting point for a new generation of Book of Mormon scholarship.)

In addition, it seemed to me that a narrative-based approach might offer some common ground between insiders and outsiders. Regardless of whether one views Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni as ancient prophet/historians or as fictional characters invented by Joseph Smith, they are presented in the Book of Mormon as playing a crucial role in selecting and shaping its contents. Too often, believers and critics alike get so wound up in trying to prove or disprove historicity that they cite  a few verses and then almost immediately get sidetracked by ancient Near Eastern or nineteenth-century parallels. As a result they end up not really reading the text at all. Similarly, a great deal of what passes for commentary from faithful Latter-day Saints is little more than paraphrase, with regular references to conference talks and gospel principles. None of these approaches lend themselves to careful, comprehensive readings. I myself am a believer who accepts the existence of ancient Nephites, but I’m not offended or threatened by those who see things differently, and indeed I think that there is much to learn from astute readers of any religious persuasion (or lack thereof). In many ways, I wish that outsiders would take the Book of Mormon more seriously as fiction, and that Latter-day Saints would take it more seriously as history.

My models in this endeavor were Robert Alter and Meir Sternberg, who analyze the Hebrew Bible from a narrative perspective while at the same time acknowledging the contributions made by historical-critical scholarship. It is probably not coincidental that they are both Jewish. Over the last half century, Latter-day Saints have come under the sway of evangelical or even fundamentalist Protestants in the way that we approach scripture. I’m not sure that this is a positive development, and it certainly does not seem to be a necessary part of being true to our tradition (whatever Joseph Smith may have been, he was not a fundamentalist). I have often asked myself, Why can’t Mormons be more like Jews?

As for writing Understanding itself, it was more a matter of rewriting. I would start with a few ideas from my own reading and from conversations with my wife Heather, who is a much better reader than I am, and then I would write a quick draft that would then be the subject of weeks, if not months of additional conversations (Heather is a gifted editor as well). The most difficult chapter was the one on Third Nephi, which went through eight complete revisions before I finally got something we were satisfied with. As might be expected in a book that concentrates on formal analysis, the form of Understanding was important to me. I wanted something that would lead readers through the main events and characters of the Book of Mormon from 1 Nephi to Moroni, as well as something that focused on the narrators, where every chapter also introduced and illustrated some specific, representative literary technique.

2.  Tell us about your relationship with Oxford? What sort of a process did you go through to get this book published?

The process of getting a book published with Oxford is the same as with any other academic press. After the manuscript was finished I sent a proposal to the religion editor at Oxford (OUP was the first press I contacted, largely because they had recently published Terryl Givens’ By the Hand of Mormon), and she was interested enough to ask to see the entire manuscript, which she  then sent to outside readers who are experts in the field. The readers’ reports were mixed, as they often are, with there being some concern that I was simply assuming historicity, which would make the work more devotional than academic. I think that it is possible to bracket the historicity question, at least temporarily, and I believe there are strong arguments on both sides— indeed, if I weren’t LDS, I would most certainly regard the Book of Mormon as religious fiction, or as a fascinating, modern example of pseudepigrapha—but somehow that didn’t come through as I intended. So I rewrote the manuscript yet again, deleting passages that might be misinterpreted and adding more parallel examples from fictional works that bear some similarity to the Book of Mormon. Oxford sent the revised manuscript to additional readers, including non-Mormons, and they were quite positive in their assessments, so contracts were signed, copyediting commenced, and the printing presses started to roll.

3.  Have you been disappointed, encouraged, or neither by your book’s reception?

The book’s reception is still unfolding. More than disappointment or encouragement, I have felt surprise that my work hasn’t attracted more attention, particularly from Latter-day Saint sources. After all, this is the first academic book on the contents of the Book of Mormon, and Oxford is not a marginal press. I would have thought that Mormons would have been more engaged with a text they hold sacred, which many read from nearly every day. I do understand that reviews often take a while to appear in print, but Understanding the Book of Mormon was released more than a year and a half ago and there still have not been many formal responses—a few book notices, on-line reviews from Blair Holmes and Rosalynde Welch, a Dialogue review by Julie M. Smith (the last two were recently reprinted in Times and Seasons), and a review by Terryl Givens in the Journal of Ecclesiastical History. But nothing substantive in Sunstone, BYU Studies, or in any of the publications of the Maxwell Institute. I expect that full reviews from BYU will appear eventually, but I’m puzzled by the slow pace. Most authors would rather be criticized than ignored, and I tried to give readers plenty to talk about.

There have been two particularly interesting responses from non-Mormons. The first was a review in the on-line magazine Slate by Alan Wolfe, a highly-respected commentator on the contemporary American religious scene. My analysis persuaded Wolfe that the Book of Mormon does have a complicated, coherent structure, and in fact he went back to the text to give it another try. In the end, he still didn’t see it as having much literary merit, but I was delighted that my work had encouraged him to take a fresh look. I did not expect to convince everyone, though I was hoping to make easy, off-hand dismissals of the Book of Mormon less academically respectable. The other unexpected response has come from the Community of Christ. Last month I was invited to give a presentation in Nauvoo at a meeting of Midwestern leaders, including two of their apostles, and I was pleasantly surprised to discover that nearly everyone in attendance—some fifty people—had read my book. It appears that there are many in that Restorationist denomination who are looking for ways to better utilize the Book of Mormon as scripture, while still acknowledging the serious historical problems of the text. I was thrilled that they were willing to reach out to a Latter-day Saint for advice on the Book of Mormon, and I would be quite pleased if they found my literary approach useful in better understanding a scripture that we have in common.

4.  Much in our reviews focused on your attempt to write to two audiences and fruitfully bring them together in exploring the Book of Mormon. Tell us what it is that you’re most hopeful that the Mormon audience will take from this book. What is your main message (and any subsidiary ones you want to mention) to the faithful?

I’m not sure that my approach will bring together insiders and outsiders when they explore the Book of Mormon—our interpretations of what the book ultimately means and where it comes from will always be far apart. But it seems to me that it should be possible to come to some agreement on how the book is structured, on what is says, and what it claims for itself. And I would hope that all readers, regardless of why they come to the text, would be able to agree that despite the awkward diction and repetitions, the book is not nonsense. It shows evidence of careful composition, for instance in the chronological flashbacks and the smooth handling of the frequent but irregular notices of the beginnings and endings of years of the judges. That is simply in the text, objectively.

For Latter-day Saints, I hope that my work will encourage them to see the Book of Mormon as more than just a sign of Joseph Smith’s prophetic calling. The contents matter as much as the book’s mere existence. Too often we don’t really read the Book of Mormon, preferring instead to skim it for proof-texts of principles that we know from elsewhere. Yet it seems incredibly important to me that the book was written as narrative rather than as a collection of propositional truths like Gospel Principles. Close readings, within the book’s multi-layered, thick contexts, often reveal lessons and insights that can help us become more Christ-like, even after we have been converted by Moroni’s promise. I try to apply a critical, questioning mode of reading that, while staying within the parameters of the narrative, allow us to identify and interpret connections, seams, and disjunctions. Indeed, this is along the lines of the way that historians read texts, and I often wish that Latter-day Saints treated figures from the Book of Mormon as if they were real individuals, with distinctive personalities and concerns, who struggle to articulate their ideas persuasively, and who develop over time. Instead, we too often claim the book as history and then read it as inspirational myth. I would also like Mormons to understand the important ways in which the Book of Mormon is not like the Bible (which may well increase our appreciation for both).

5.  Tell us why you think non-Mormons ought to be interested in this book. If you’re not interested in evangelizing them, what, beyond mere trivia, will the kind of close reading you put on display do for them? Why should they care?

This question comes up regularly and I’m always a bit puzzled by it. People who ask why anyone would care about a religious tradition that is not their own probably need to get out a little more. The Book of Mormon is one of the most significant books in American religious history and in recent world scripture. But this is not to jump up and down and insist that everyone should pay attention to us. The real question is, How interested are you in other religions and philosophies? Have you ever read the Qur’an? Why? Can you name half a dozen books from the Apocrypha? Are you interested in studies of the Daodejing or the Yoga Sutra? Have you ever wondered what the appeal was of Tibetan treasure texts? Are you excited about the other volumes in the Princeton’s “Lives of Great Religious Books” series? (I mean besides the forthcoming one on the Book of Mormon, written by the non-Mormon scholar Paul Gutjahr). If not, then you have no business asking people to care about your book, unless you are targeting them as potential converts. But those who are curious about the varieties of religious experience will at some point or other be interested in the Book of Mormon, and we have not made it easy for them. Simply put, the book is not easy to read or appreciate, particularly in the official, double-columned, verse-by-verse format.

In academics, there is a long tradition of monographs on significant texts that are easier to read than the texts themselves. For instance, I’m reading Spinoza’s Ethics right now, but only because I have already read a couple of studies that convinced me the book is worth my time and that explained its organization, main ideas, and significance. In the past, there has not been a detailed, academic introduction to the contents of the Book of Mormon. I’m afraid that our scripture will generally be a tough slog for those who do not already accept it as revelation, but people who make it all the way through Understanding will come away knowing the Book of Mormon better than many Latter-day Saints do. There will always be scholars of US history, or religious studies, or sacred texts, or American literature who would like to know about the Book of Mormon, or who at least feel an obligation to have some basic understanding of it. My book will give them access to what might otherwise be an opaque, bewildering text. By the same token, if there were some insider who could explain the Bahá’í scriptures to me, I would be most grateful; I’m always interested in the best, most persuasive readings that believers can come up with. (By the way, there has been some terrific work done lately on the Sikh’s Adi Granth, which is the most successful new scripture of the last few centuries, as measured by the number of adherents. The Book of Mormon comes in second.)

6.  Over the course of the week much was said about the modern subjectivity that your reading imparts to the three main editors (see particularly Rosalynde’s critique here). Can we really expect ancient subjects whose worlds are so very different than our own to have left such a coherent and familiar picture of who they were, their motives, goals, and stylistic elements? And doesn’t your answer to this question directly bear on the historicity debate?

Rosalynde’s review highlighted a new, significant critique of my narrator-based analysis, for which I’m grateful, but before I respond to her specific objection, let me make a few general comments. I was somewhat surprised (but then again, not really), by how much of the discussion in the essays and comments about my book at Times & Seasons were concerned with historicity.

This is the way that Latter-day Saints and their critics primarily approach the Book of Mormon, and it can be hard to imagine doing anything else. But I don’t think this is a burning issue for most academics—for them the book is obviously fiction, which doesn’t make it any less interesting. Try to imagine things from the other side.

For example, I think that the Mahabharata is a fascinating epic of great cultural, philosophical, and religious significance. I have read books about its textual history, its complex organization, and its themes. Yet there are some Hindus to whom it is of paramount importance whether the war between the Pandavas and the Kauravas actually happened, or whether Krishna was or was not an actual historical figure. You can follow their arguments about dating the war based on astronomical references or about the significance of finding the submerged city of Dwarka in the 1980s, but such issues don’t matter much to me. While it can be intriguing to see how believers try to adapt their faith to the challenges of modernity, the reality of Hindu gods is not really a live option for me at this point, and the evidences put forward don’t even come close to what it would take to persuade me to take such claims seriously. (From the outside, a lot of Mormon apologetics looks something like this. I am deeply interested in the epic, but arguments about its historicity seem peripheral, parochial, or even a little silly. So I believe that it is possible to decouple close literary analysis from the question of ancient Nephites. Don’t get me wrong; taking historical contexts into consideration is one important way to read scripture (it does make a difference whether you view the Book of Mormon as a product of the ancient world or nineteenth century), but it’s not the only way to read, or even the most fruitful way. Perhaps Mormon scholars need to spend more time with their colleagues in religious studies departments.

The Book of Mormon presents a problem for religiously neutral readings though, because it was written by dictation, one time through, over the course of just three months. So any complex coherence can be taken as evidence of divine intervention rather than human composition. Latter-day Saints are very quick to jump to the conclusion that “Joseph Smith could not have written this.” But that wasn’t the point of my book, and I don’t think that arguments based on complexity are particularly compelling to outsiders. Could Joseph Smith have kept the lineage of Jaredite kings straight in both Ether 1 and then in reverse order in chapters 6-11? Perhaps, if he had worked things out beforehand and then used a mnemonic memory palace to be able to recall them forwards and backwards, but in any case, there are all kinds of astonishing human achievements in music, or math, or athletics that seem completely beyond the reach of ordinary mortals. That doesn’t prove that Mozart or Ramanujan or Michael Jordan had divine assistance. I was sincere when I talked about bracketing the issue of historicity, and I deliberately tried to leave respectful space for various ideas about origins of the Book of Mormon.

Rosalynde takes up the question of historicity, but from the opposite end. To her, my reconstruction of the narrators makes them seem too modern for an ancient work. I’m sympathetic with this. I have often wondered if the Book of Mormon just isn’t strange enough to be an ancient text.  Again, such subjective judgments are hardly conclusive, but the plainness of the book could be a point against its historicity. Rosalynde makes a much more specific argument, about the distinctively modern self-consciousness and self-presentation of the narrators. There are several possible responses. The first is to point to a few ancient authors who do appear to write from a coherent sense of self—people like Plato, Herodotus, Thucydides, and Sima Qian. Modern minds, and even autobiographical perspectives, did not absolutely begin with Augustine or Rousseau. (The point here is not simply first-person narration; it’s more a matter of having motivations, notions of autonomy, a sense of audience, and a feel for how one is positioned within a literary tradition— all of which must be intelligible to moderns; see Ben Huff’s essay.) Second, I could acknowledge James Olsen’s suggestion (comment #13) that perhaps I have read modern sensibilities into my interpretations of Book of Mormon narrators. It’s quite possible, though there is always a delicate balance in reading old texts (we are still talking about historicity, right?) between recognizing the real differences between how moderns and ancients mentally construct the world and their own identities—what aspects are mutable, what counts as evidence, what sorts of assumptions go unquestioned—and concerns that are universal across time and space, without which, there would be no chance of cross-cultural communication. It would be odd, in most cultures, that Nephi talks incessantly about his descendants but never about his own children, particularly the sons that presumably would succeed him as king. Or third, I could argue that perhaps Nephi and his prophetic successors were rather unique—that their implicit canon (the brass plates), their conversations with the Lord, and their sense of writing for readers many centuries in the future gave them a subjective sensibility that was quite distinct from other ancient authors.

In the end, I suspect that it is the Nephites’ religious assumptions that seem the most suspiciously modern, and perhaps the most satisfying answer for believers is to assume that this is a function of the translation, or of posthumous editing by narrators working on the other side of the veil, or that it is the result of extraordinary revelation. All of these are supernatural explanations that I would not expect outsiders to take seriously, but as for me, I actually believe in angels and translation by seer stones. Rosalynde’s question makes me want to read the Book of Mormon through again, looking for evidence of how the narrators think about the world and their place within it. It could be the subject of a whole book.

1. Mormons feature prominently in this book. I’m biased to say that this is because, as you state on page 15, Mormonism is a “highly distinctive tradition[] that, because of [its] size, [is] often neglected in analyses of the American religious environment.” Despite our currently being in “the Mormon moment,” however, I suspect that many would claim that the prominence of Mormonism in your study is merely a result of your being one of the authors. How legitimately is Mormonism stacked up alongside the other traditions you analyze in order to accurately gauge the American religious scene? And can you speak to the reaction of your audience at large with regard to your discussion of Mormonism and its prominence in your analysis?

I confess that I wondered myself whether reviewers would criticize the book as featuring Mormons too prominently. (As an aside, you may be interested to know that our chief ethnographer, Shaylyn Romney Garret, is also LDS). I can report that, thus far, no one has raised this as an issue. To the contrary, one prominent scholar (non-LDS) who reviewed an early version of the manuscript actually suggested that we say more about Mormons!  But if someone were to bring up the role played by Mormons in the book, I am happy to defend placing Mormonism alongside the other major religious traditions in the United States. Numerically, there is no question that Mormons deserve to be studied. But, just as importantly, Mormons truly are distinctive sociologically, and have received short shrift in the empirical study of religion. Indeed, my next book will be an exploration of Mormons and politics, as there is a need for a book that carefully examines Mormons’ political beliefs and behavior.

2. It seems that the aim of the book is twofold: first, to give sociological evidence that religious diversity and personal spiritual fluidity have been a positive phenomenon in recent times that has (surprisingly) served to harbor religious tolerance in America; second (more implicitly), that our religious diversity ought to harbor tolerance. In what ways has Mormonism as a religious tradition added to or detracted from this public spirit of tolerance?

The story of Mormons and religious tolerance is double-sided. On the one hand, Mormons themselves are very accepting of other religions. Mormons rate other religions very highly. Given the emphasis placed on the great apostasy within LDS teachings, I would not have necessarily predicted that Mormons would be so warm toward other religions. The explanation appears to be that Mormons are also the most likely to say that people of other religions can go to “heaven.” Readers of this blog will, of course, recognize that such a question has a unique meaning in Mormonism. In LDS theology, heaven might be thought to mean a degree of glory, even if it falls short of the celestial kingdom. But, perhaps even more importantly, the doctrine of redeeming the dead opens an avenue to the highest degree of post-mortal glory. That is, the LDS emphasis on redeeming the dead appears to foster an appreciation for other religions, notwithstanding Mormon teachings about the apostasy. The future apparently outweighs the past.

That’s the good news. The bad news is the fact that Mormons are viewed very negatively by people of most other religions. Why is that? The data are clear: Mormons have “cocooned” themselves into religiously homogeneous social networks. And I emphasize that this is not only true for Utah Mormons, or Mormons who live in heavily LDS communities. By being so insular, Mormons do not often build bridges to people of other religions, and thus do not benefit from the good feelings that accompany such personal relationships. If there is a message for Mormons in American Grace, it is that Latter-day Saints ought to stop being so insular and instead develop inclusive social networks.

I am an optimist and so believe that because of the good feelings Mormons have toward other faiths that it is possible for Latter-day Saints to do better at befriending those of other faiths. But changing a culture is difficult.

3. Another major theme of your study concerns the rising generation’s disillusionment with religion’s (particularly conservative religion’s) political ties in American, citing this as a primary cause of young people abandoning organized religion. Despite your vignette about the “liberal” Pioneer Ward, as you acknowledge, Mormons are strongly conservative (including members of Pioneer Ward). Likewise, you note (e.g., your chart on 440) that most Mormons claim that their politics are a result of their religious beliefs. Do Mormon youth buck the trend of disillusionment? Or are we in fact seeing significant attrition on account of what you call the “If A then B” bias that believing Mormons ought to be Republican? There have been a number of prominent discussions lately (like this one) about a significant change amongst younger Mormons leaning more to the left; does your own research speak to such claims?

Unfortunately, our data are unable to speak to trends in the political attitudes of young Mormons, simply because we do not have enough Mormons to divide them up by age-cohort. In other data I have examined I actually see little evidence that young Mormons are shifting leftward. As just one, but very important, example, Mormons under age 30 are just as likely to identify as Republicans as Mormons who are age 30-49 and 50-64. Sixty percent of Mormons identify as Republicans in all three of those age groups. (Those 65 and older are a little more likely to be Republican, as 66 percent of them identify with the GOP). These numbers are taken from data collected by You-Gov Polimetrix as part of a nationwide study known as the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

However, trends in the politics of small population groups are difficult to track accurately, so it is entirely possible that there are political changes afoot that may lead young Mormons to shift leftward. If any issue could cause young Mormons to reconsider their attachment to the Republican Party, it is immigration. Mormons of all ages are more liberal on immigration policy than the population as a whole, and far more than other politically-conservative groups (like evangelical Protestants). Given that young people are more likely than their elders to switch party allegiances, if immigration were to cause a political shift among Mormons, I would expect it to occur among the young.

4. You note that “Mormons, especially Mormon women, appear to be the only substantial holdouts against the growing and substantial consensus across the religious spectrum in favor of women playing a fuller role in church leadership.” Nevertheless, I was rather surprised by your numbers: 30% of Mormons favor female clergy: 48% of men favoring it but only 10% of women. What do you think these numbers say about Mormon culture with regard to women and ecclesiastical authority? And what is behind the dramatic discrepancy between men & women’s feelings on this issue in the church?

Interestingly, this same issue has arisen on the Exponent II blog, where it has spurred a fascinating discussion. Those who want to explore this issue further can do so at http://www.the-exponent.com/ [see here].

In brief, let me note that I would caution that statistics for subgroups (men vs. women) of a small group (Mormons) have a wide margin of error or, more technically, confidence interval. Thus, while we can have confidence that Mormon men and women differ on the question of whether women should be clergy, which for Mormons would mean holding the priesthood, I would not be terribly confident in the precise numbers. Nonetheless, this leaves the question of why there is any difference, and why women are less likely than men to say that Mormon women should hold the priesthood.

Part of the explanation is simply that, as has been noted, Mormon women are more likely to be religious traditionalists than men. In the LDS context, believing that the priesthood should be held by men only is certainly the traditionalist position.  But that is probably not the whole explanation. I also suspect that those women who truly object to a male-only priesthood have left the LDS Church and would not report their religious identification as Mormon. For men, this is less likely to be a make-or-break issue, and so a “feminist Mormon male” is more likely to remain in the faith. Consequently, when Mormon women are asked this question they presumably have thought about the issue and therefore made peace with the role of women in the LDS Church.

5. You discuss congregation shopping and note various reasons why persons will switch congregations. Given that Mormon “shopping” is rather limited (while one might “shop” when deciding which part of a city they want to live in, our nearly uniform style of worship rather defeats the purpose), how would you extend this research to Mormonism? Do we see similar patterns in Mormons who leave the faith? Is it right to presume that shopping religions is more rare than shopping congregations?

Empirically, you are correct that Mormons report far less congregation-shopping than members of other religions. Although it is also interesting that Mormons still report some congregation-shopping, but much of that is probably a matter of deciding to live in one neighborhood versus another.

It is also correct that Americans are more likely to switch congregations than religions. But, as you note, switching LDS wards is not likely to change much about one’s worship experience. And it would definitely not mean much of a change in what is taught over the pulpit or in Sunday School lessons, etc. Thus, when Mormons are unhappy with their religion, it seems more likely that it would result in becoming inactive or even leaving the faith rather than switching wards (which Church policy makes difficult, although I have found that just how difficult varies according to local leadership). In American Grace, we report that Mormons are about as likely to leave their faith as are evangelicals, but that both groups have much lower switching rates than Catholics or mainline Protestants. So, comparatively speaking, Mormons have a high retention rate. This is undoubtedly due to the emphasis placed on religious education and on the relatively low interfaith marriage rate among Mormons. But while comparatively high, the Mormon retention rate is still only about 60 percent. In other words, two out of five people raised as Mormons drop out of the faith in adulthood.

6. Your research shows Jews to be—broadly speaking—the “best liked religion in the country.” This fact appears to be in spite of their geographical concentration and relatively small numbers—variables you cite as leading to suspicion and intolerance, with Mormons, Muslims, and Buddhists as prime examples. Why the difference between Jews and Mormons? Mormons also seem a counterexample to your claim that shared goals lead to increased tolerance, given several decades of Mormon partnering with evangelicals on social issues. What is it that is uniquely off-putting about Mormons? Or are we simply a bit behind and soon to catch up to  Jews? If so, what’s kept us lagging?

Actually, there is a big difference between Jews and Mormons that helps to explain the difference in how the two groups are perceived. Jews engage in a lot more “religious bridging” than Mormons. While, as noted above, Mormons are one of the the most religiously insular groups in America, Jews are one of the least.

On the question of Mormon-evangelical partnering: the fact that Mormons are perceived so negatively by evangelicals in spite of their shared political positions should serve as a sobering lesson. Politics make strange bedfellows, but it does not necessarily win you friends. The sort of contact that we hypothesize leads to religious tolerance consists of personal relationships, not simply shared political goals.

American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us

Times and Seasons is very excited, then to have the opportunity of sharing some of David Campbell’s additional insights. What follows is the first half of our 12 Questions interview with Campbell. One of the unique features of American Grace is the prominence it gives to Mormonism alongside other major U.S. religions. Consequently, we divided up our questions topically between those that deal with general issues from the book and those that deal more specifically with issues related to Mormonism. This first post will deal with former.

By way of introduction, Campbell is the John Cardinal O’Hara, C.S.C., Associate Professor of Political Science and founding director of the Rooney Center for the Study of American Democracy at the University of Notre Dame. His research and teaching focus on American politics, political participation, religion and politics, and education policy. Also, as detailed in the book, Campbell is a Mormon who was raised in an interfaith marriage (see page 36).

Part I: On American Grace in general:

1. Wilfred McClay in his WSJ review of AG is one of the many voices claiming that along with moderation and tolerance in the American religious scene there is actually a profound loss of seriousness with which individuals and society look at and experience religion. Philosopher Sean Kelly’s recent NYT piece interprets Nietzsche’s notorious claim concerning the death of God as picking out just this fall from centrality. Your book lauds our religious moderation. But do you see a loss of “deep” religiosity or the centrality of religious experience accompanying the shifts in religious activity that your study tracks?

In the discussion of American Grace, this is probably the most interesting question to arise.  The quick answer is that our findings are not just that there is a loss of religiosity, but rather a polarization in religiosity. That is, while one portion of the population is drifting away from religion, another has become more religious, or at least more outwardly devout. In other words, the loss of deep religiosity among some has been partially counter-balanced by a deeper religiosity among others.

The longer answer is that American society is moving into uncharted waters, and so we do not yet know whether the inter-religious comity we detail in American Grace is a leading indicator of a softening of religious commitment, even among those on the “stricter” end of the religious spectrum.

2. One of your delightful findings is that religious persons make better neighbors and citizens, and are in general happier. You chalk this up to the social networks involved in religious communities. Is there then an ill omen for our communities and national cohesion given the trend toward religious privatization that your study features?

Religious congregations remain a bedrock component of America’s civil society, and wellsprings of social capital. But, as you note, a growing portion of the population has turned away from religion, and thus from congregational involvement. If that trend continues, we would expect to see a further deterioration in America’s social capital. However, that is a big “if.” History teaches us that American religion has often found ways to woo the unchurched back to the pews, often by inventing new forms of worship or religious organization. The mega-church is only the latest in a long series of such innovations. Looking forward, it is likely, although not certain, that religious innovators will find ways to bring the disaffiliated back to church. Should that happen, then congregations will likely remain a key part of our civic infrastructure.

3. On page 233 you note: “Religion in America is disproportionately a women’s sphere of activity. . . . In the average Sabbath service women outnumber men by three to two. Women believe more fervently in God, they aver that religion is more important in their daily lives, they pray more often, they read scripture more often and interpret it more literally, they talk about religion more often—in short, by virtually every measure they are more religious,” and this remains true when holding for almost any variable. Do you have any insight into the great metaphysical question: Why is this the case?

There are myriad theories about why women are, in general, more religious than men. Many of them offer “socialization” as the explanation, but that is completely unsatisfying to me. These explanations mean that women are more religious because, when they were girls, they were taught to be more religious, or they absorbed cultural signals that spurred their religiosity. Yet that only leaves us to wonder why socialization works the way it does. I guess that is a long way of saying that I do not claim to know the answer to the puzzle of women’s higher average religiosity.

However, it is important to note that there are exceptions to women’s higher religiosity. In both Judaism and Islam men score “higher” than women on at least some religious indicators. Both religions place limits on women’s roles, which likely explains why men show up as more religious. (Readers of this blog may find it interesting that, the priesthood notwithstanding, the religiosity of Mormon men generally lags behind that of Mormon women). In other words, there is a cultural component to gender differences in religious behavior.

4. One of the most significant changes that you track concerns the sexual mores of religious Americans, beginning with the genuine revolution of the sixties, the (partial) backlash in the seventies and eighties, and finally noting that today’s youth are the most sexually liberal of any generation. How has this liberalizing of sexual mores affected religious attendance? You also note the prodigiously innovative nature of American religions. Have religions and their doctrines been adapted to these profound changes in sexual mores?

Of all the issues where religious and secular Americans might take differing views, we find the widest gaps on those related to sexuality. (Indeed, on most other issues there are either modest or no differences). One explanation for such a finding is that being religious makes someone more conservative on issues related to sex. However, it is almost certainly not that simple, since holding conservative attitudes on sex can also mean you are attracted to religion. Or holding liberal views on sex could lead someone away from religion, or at least from religions that take a hardline on sexual behavior. Whatever the process, the end result is that religious and secular Americans differ sharply on their attitudes toward sexuality.

As to whether many religions have adapted to changing views on sexuality, the answer is yes. Or, more accurately, many religious leaders have become less likely to condemn sexual behavior that was once strictly verboten, even if the actual doctrines of their religions have not changed.

5. Another significant shift is the dramatic (if gradual) rise of interfaith marriages (with 30-40% of all marriages currently being mixed). As part of this trend you note that children of mixed marriages are much more likely to leave the faith of their parents or become religiously unaffiliated. Has this contributed to or does it foretell the continued privatization of religion? And has there been any change in the trend concerning children leaving their parents’ faith over time, given the significant increase in mixed marriages?

Perhaps not surprisingly, one of the strongest predictors of remaining in one’s childhood religion is being raised by two parents who share that same religion. Thus, as interfaith marriages have become more common we have also seen a decline in religious affiliation among young people, although this is a contributing factor rather than the primary cause. Since the jump in “no affiliation” began suddenly in the late 1980s/early 1990s it cannot simply be owing to generational change, which is slow and steady. Looking forward, we would expect that the children of today’s interfaith marriages are more likely to grow up to be what we call a religious “none” (someone who selects “none” as a religious preference).  However, we would also expect that a sizable fraction of children of interfaith marriages will find a new, and different, religion. In many case, this will likely be an amalgam of the religions they experienced growing up. This is another example of a potential niche for religious entrepreneurs. Indeed, in our research we found anecdotal evidence that mega-churches often attract people with a mixed religious upbringing.
6. As Robert Wright notes in his review of AG, while your study is very amicable toward religion, the subtitle appears to be misleading. Your data seems to claim that religion in fact does not divide or unite us. Rather, our communal ways of organizing, gathering, and involving ourselves in politics unites and divides us. Is this right? Is the role of religion merely a secondary or superficial phenomenon, emerging out of a more basic and profound fact of human being: that we are social and political animals?

I would be looking a gift horse in the mouth if I quibbled with Robert Wright’s kind words about our book, but I would disagree (amicably!) with this particular interpretation of how religion divides and unites Americans. In politics, religion is currently a divisive force. It need not be this way but, owing to the way religious imagery and rhetoric is used by the Republicans, it is. I concede that it would be more accurate to say that we are divided by the “way religion is employed by politicians” but the latter would make for an awfully long subtitle.

As for whether religion truly “unites” us, I acknowledge that much of American Grace details how we are united in spite of our religious differences, which is slightly different than religion itself being the unifying thread. However, we do have a discussion of how, in the American context, “civil religion” does bring Americans together. At times of national crisis or of high political ceremony (e.g. presidential inaugurations), Americans look to their leaders to speak in religious terms. This is but one example of how religion can unify rather than divide.

But let me also offer my opinion on the question of whether religion is secondary or superficial. To that, I would say no. Indeed, the very reason that religion can be so divisive—and why peaceful coexistence among different religions is so remarkable—is precisely because religion is not merely superficial. I would submit that social science has historically done a bad job of studying religion because so many scholars want to reduce religion to something else (typically, material interests).  But such reductionism is like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

Changes in the Book of Mormon

© 2009 by Royal Skousen

1. What is the critical text project of the Book of Mormon?

From the beginning, the two goals of the critical text project have been (1) to recover the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon, and (2) to determine the history of the text (namely, how it has changed over time). There are two basic kinds of changes in the history of the text: (a) accidental errors in the transmission of the text, and (b) the editing out of nonstandard English. I began the critical text project in 1988 and have been working full time on it since then.

2. What has been published thus far?

In 2001 the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), now a part of Brigham Young University (BYU) and a division of the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, published the first two volumes of the critical text, namely:

(a)                The Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon: Typographical Facsimile of the Extant Text

564 pages (including 41 pages of introduction and 16 pages of black-and-white ultraviolet and color photographs of fragments)

(b)               The Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon: Typographical Facsimile of the Entire Text in Two Parts

1000 pages (bound in two parts, including 36 pages of introduction and 8 pages of color photographs of the manuscript)

These two volumes present an exact reproduction in typescript of the extant portions of the two manuscripts (about 28 percent of the original manuscript and all but three lines of the printer’s manuscript).

A year later FARMS/BYU published a history of the project, the result of a symposium held at BYU:

(c)                Uncovering the Original Text of the Book of Mormon: History and Findings of the Critical Text Project (edited by M. Gerald Bradford and Alison V.P. Coutts).

This 76-page document includes articles by me on the history of this project and the systematic nature of the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon. It also includes articles by Robert Espinosa on the Wilford Wood fragments of the original manuscript, Ron Romig on the printer’s manuscript, and Larry Draper on the printed editions of the Book of Mormon.

From 2004 through 2009 FARMS published Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, volume 4 of the critical text, in six parts (each one appearing at the end of the summer):

(d)               Part One: Title Page, Witness Statements, 1 Nephi 1  2 Nephi 10

[published in August 2004; 658 pages, covering 14 percent of the text]

(e)        Part Two: 2 Nephi 11- Mosiah 16

[published in August 2005; 716 pages, covering 18 percent of the text]

(f)         Part Three: Mosiah 17- Alma 20

[published in August 2006; 686 pages, covering 16 percent of the text]

(g)        Part Four: Alma 21- 55

[published in September 2007; 700 pages, covering 17 percent of the text]

(h)        Part Five: Alma 56 – 3 Nephi 18

[published in August 2008; 730 pages, covering 19 percent of the text]

(i)         Part Six: 3 Nephi 19 – Moroni 10; Addenda

[published in August 2009; 638 pages, covering 16 percent of the text]

The addenda at the end of part 6 contains additional items of analysis, including a few reversals of previous textual decisions.

All of the above items (a through i) are available for purchase from the BYU Bookstore (FARMS now distributes their books through the BYU Bookstore). These books can also be ordered through other bookstores and website distributors.

In addition to these works, in August 2009 Yale University Press published The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text. The following is the promotional information that Yale released for the book:

First published in 1830, the Book of Mormon is the authoritative scripture of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Over the past twenty-one years, Royal Skousen has pored over Joseph Smith’s original manuscripts and identified more than 2,000 textual errors in the 1830 edition. Although most of these discrepancies stem from inadvertent errors in copying and typesetting the text, the Yale edition contains about 600 corrections that have never appeared in any standard edition of the Book of Mormon, and about 250 of them affect the text’s meaning. Citing the earliest sources available, Skousen corrects the text in a work of remarkable dedication that will be a landmark in American religious scholarship.

Completely redesigned and typeset by nationally award-winning typographer Jonathan Saltzman, this new edition has been reformatted in sense-lines, making the text much more logical and pleasurable to read. Featuring a lucid introduction by historian Grant Hardy, the Yale edition serves not only as the most accurate version of the Book of Mormon ever published but also as an illuminating entryway into a vital religious tradition.

Grant Hardy, professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Asheville, provides the following summary in his introduction to the Yale edition:

Royal Skousen has single-handedly brought the textual analysis of the Book of Mormon to a professional level on part with the finest classical and biblical scholarship. This volume is the culmination of his labors, and it is the most textually significant edition since Joseph Smith’s work was first published in 1830. It takes us back to the original manuscript (as best we can reconstruct it) and sometimes beyond, to the very words as they were first dictated by Joseph Smith.

Also included in the Yale edition is my own preface and an appendix listing over 700 significant changes in the history of the text.

The Yale edition presents the reconstructed original text in a clear-text format, without explanatory intervention. Unlike modern editions of the Book of Mormon that have added chapter summaries, scriptural cross-references, dates, and footnotes, this edition consists solely of the words dictated by Joseph Smith in 1828-29, as far as they can be established through standard methods of textual criticism. Later emendations by scribes, editors, and even Joseph Smith himself have been omitted, except for those that appear to restore original readings.

Anyone opening this volume will immediately be struck by the sense-lines format of the Book of Mormon text – that is, the way the lines of the text are broken up according to phrases and clauses. Joseph Smith dictated the book to scribes who wrote down his words. His dictation did not indicate punctuation, sentence structure, or paragraphing. These he left, ultimately, to the discretion of the printer. Consequently, the Yale edition constitutes a scholarly effort to present to the reader a dictated rather than a written text. To that end, I have decided to adopt the sense-line format. I make no claim that the sense-lines adopted in The Earliest Text represent Joseph’s actual dictation breaks, but the first verbalization of the text would have sounded something like the result of reading the sense-lines out loud.

The text of the Yale edition is a consolidation of the decisions made in the six parts of volume 4 of the critical text project, Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon. Over the course of the six parts, including the addenda at the end of part 6, I have analyzed 5,280 cases of variation (or potential variation). The resulting text published by Yale University Press can be briefly characterized as follows:

2,241 differences between The Earliest Text and the standard printed edition

Cases of grammatical variation are discussed only once; volume 3 of the critical text (see below) will provide a complete discussion of grammatical changes.

606 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

216 are found only in the original manuscript, O

187 are found in only the printer’s manuscript, P (in these cases O is not extant)

88 are found in both O and P

2 are found in copies of the title page

113 are conjectural emendations

256 readings that either make a difference in meaning or change the spelling of a name

As might be suspected, none of these differences make a fundamental change in the message or doctrine of the book, but they make a difference when translating the Book of Mormon

131 readings that make the Book of Mormon text more consistent in phraseology or usage

34 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here is a brief numerical summary of the results for part 1 of volume 4 (from the title page through 2 Nephi 10):

773 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

419 differences between the critical text and the standard text

156 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

95 in O only; 6 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 38 in both O and P;

2 in the 1829 copyright certificates; 15 conjectured readings

75 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

51 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

14 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the changes that are recommended in part 1 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

1 Nephi 7:5            Ishmael and also his household
Ishmael and also his whole household

1 Nephi 7:17          my faith which is in thee
my faith which is in me

1 Nephi 8:27          towards those which had came at
towards those which had came up

1 Nephi 8:31          multitudes feeling their way
multitudes pressing their way

1 Nephi 10:10        take away the sins of the world
take away the sin of the world

1 Nephi 10:19        in these times
in this time

1 Nephi 11:36        the pride of the world and it fell
the pride of the world

1 Nephi 12:18        the word of the justice of the eternal God
the sword of the justice of the eternal God

1 Nephi 13:24        the gospel of the Lord
the gospel of the Lamb

1 Nephi 13:32        state of awful blindness
state of awful wickedness

1 Nephi 14:13        did gather together multitudes
did gather together in multitudes

1 Nephi 14:28        the things which I saw and heard
the things which I saw

1 Nephi 15:16        they shall be remembered again
they shall be numbered again

1 Nephi 15:35        the devil is the preparator of it
the devil is the proprietor of it

1 Nephi 15:36        the wicked are rejected from the righteous
the wicked are separated from the righteous

1 Nephi 17:3          he did provide means for us
he did provide ways and means for us

1 Nephi 17:41        he sent fiery flying serpents
he sent flying fiery serpents

1 Nephi 17:53        I will shock them
I will shake them

1 Nephi 19:2          the genealogy of his fathers
the genealogy of his forefathers

1 Nephi 19:4          what they should do
that they should do

1 Nephi 19:10        according to the words of Zenock
according to the words of Zenoch

1 Nephi 20:1          or out of the waters of baptism
<omitted>

1 Nephi 22:8          unto the being nourished by the Gentiles
unto the being nursed by the Gentiles

1 Nephi 22:12        the lands of their inheritance
the lands of their first inheritance

2 Nephi 1:5            the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me
the Lord hath consecrated this land unto me

2 Nephi 2:11          neither holiness nor misery
neither happiness nor misery

2 Nephi 3:18          I will raise up unto the fruit of thy loins
I will raise up one unto the fruit of thy loins

2 Nephi 3:20          their cry shall go
their cry shall go forth

2 Nephi 4:5            in the way that ye should go
in the right way that ye should go

2 Nephi 4:26          the Lord … hath visited men
the Lord … hath visited me

2 Nephi 9:13          deliver up the body of the righteous
deliver up the bodies of the righteous

We get the following results for part 2 of volume 4 (from 2 Nephi 11 through Mosiah 16); note that for most of this part of the text, the original manuscript is not extant, which has lessened the number of proposed changes:

897 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

387 differences between the critical text and the standard text

66 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

2 in O only; 34 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 5 in both O and P;

25 conjectured readings

23 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

13 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

5 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the changes discussed in part 2 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

2 Nephi 20:2          to turn away the needy
to turn aside the needy

2 Nephi 20:10        my hand hath founded the kingdom of the idols
my hand hath found the kingdom of the idols

2 Nephi 20:13        and I have moved the borders of the people
and I have removed the borders of the people

2 Nephi 20:29        Ramath is afraid
Ramah is afraid

2 Nephi 24:19        the remnant of those that are slain
the raiment of those that are slain

2 Nephi 24:25        I will bring the Assyrian in my land
I will break the Assyrian in my land

2 Nephi 26:9          the Son of righteousness shall appear
the Sun of righteousness shall appear

2 Nephi 28:23        and death and hell and the devil

and the devil

2 Nephi 30:6          they shall be a pure and a delightsome people
they shall be a white and a delightsome people

2 Nephi 30:18        I make an end of my sayings
I must make an end of my sayings

Jacob 5:8                I take away many of these … branches
I will take away many of these … branches

Jacob 5:13              in the nethermost part of my vineyard
in the nethermost parts of my vineyard

Jacob 5:19              to the nethermost part of the vineyard
to the nethermost parts of the vineyard

Jacob 5:20              the master
the master of the vineyard

Jacob 5:45              a part thereof brought forth wild fruit
the other part thereof brought forth wild fruit

Jacob 5:46              these I had hoped to preserve
these I had hope to preserve

Jacob 5:74              the Lord had preserved unto himself
the good the Lord had preserved unto himself

Jacob 5:75              [ye] have brought unto me again the natural fruit
it hath brought unto me again the natural fruit

Jacob 6:13              I shall meet you before the pleasing bar of God
I shall meet you before the pleading bar of God

Enos 1:3                 and the words which …
and I remembered the words which …

Enos 1:20               with a short skin girdle about their loins
with a short skin girded about their loins

Enos 1:24               between the Nephites and Lamanites
between the Nephites and the Lamanites

W of M 1:5            I chose these things to finish my record
I choose these things to finish my record

Mosiah 3:19          unless he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit
but if he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit

Mosiah 4:30          and observe the commandments of God
and observe to keep the commandments of God

Mosiah 7:20          that he has brought us into bondage
that has brought us into bondage

Mosiah 8:17          things which are past
things which have passed

Mosiah 9:14          to take off their flocks
to take of their flocks

Mosiah 10:5          and work and work all manner of fine linen
and work all manner of fine linen

Mosiah 15:24        and these are those who have part …
and there are those who have part …

For part 3 of volume 4 (from Mosiah 17 through Alma 20), the results are quite similar to part 2, especially since so little of the original manuscript is extant for this part of the text:

898 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

360 differences between the critical text and the standard text

82 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

0 in O only; 58 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 3 in both O and P;

21 conjectured readings

28 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

17 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

5 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 3 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

Mosiah 17:10        yea and I will suffer even until death
yea and I will suffer even unto death

Mosiah 17:13        and scourged his skin with fagots
and scorched his skin with fagots

Mosiah 19:24        after they had ended the ceremony
after they had ended the sermon

Mosiah 21:28        king Mosiah had a gift from God
king Benjamin had a gift from God

Mosiah 25:2          which was a descendant of Mulek
which was a descendant of Muloch

Mosiah 25:6          [omit]

and his brethren and all their afflictions
and he also read the account of Ammon

Mosiah 26:9          Alma did not know concerning them
Alma did know concerning them

but there were many witnesses against them
for there were many witnesses against them

Mosiah 26:23        it is I that granteth … unto the end a place
it is I that granteth … in the end a place

Mosiah 27:30        but now that they may foresee that …
but now I know that they may foresee that …

Mosiah 28:4          suffering much and fearing
and suffering much fearing

Mosiah 29:42        Alma was appointed to be the first chief judge
Alma was appointed to be the chief judge

Alma 1:24               they were remembered no more among the people
they were numbered no more among the people

Alma 2:30               to save and preserve this people
to save and protect this people

Alma 3:5                 save it were skin which was girded about their loins
save it were a skin which was girded about their loins

Alma 5:1                 Alma began to deliver the word of God
Alma began to declare the word of God

Alma 5:35               and ye shall not be hewn down
and ye shall not be cut down

Alma 10:2               I am the son of Giddonah
I am the son of Gidanah

Alma 10:5               his mysteries and his marvelous powers
his mysteries and his miraculous powers

Alma 11:2               or be stripped or be cast out
or be striped or be cast out

Alma 11:6               an ezrom of silver
an ezrum of silver

Alma 11:16             a shiblum is a half of a shiblon
a shilum is a half of a shiblon

Alma 11:21             and this Zeezrom began to question Amulek
and thus Zeezrom began to question Amulek

Alma 11:44             and shall be brought … before the bar of Christ
and all shall be brought … before the bar of Christ

Alma 12:14             for our words will condemn us
for our works will condemn us

Alma 17:1               he met with the sons of Mosiah
he met the sons of Mosiah

Alma 17:26             which was called the water of Sebus
which was called the waters of Sebus

Alma 17:31             we will preserve the flocks unto the king
we will restore the flocks unto the king

Alma 18:25             and he answered and said unto him
and he answered unto him

Alma 19:30             she clasped her hands
she clapped her hands

The results for part 4 of volume 4 are like those of part 1 since the original manuscript is basically extant for Alma 21-55:

995 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

422 differences between the critical text and the standard text

150 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

93 in O only; 12 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 28 in both O and P;

17 conjectured readings

56 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

16 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

4 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 4 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

Alma 24:5               they came forth to the land of Midian
they came forth to the land of Middoni

Alma 24:20             for the purpose of destroying the king
for the purpose of dethroning the king

Alma 27:27             they were among the people of Nephi
they were numbered among the people of Nephi

Alma 29:11             and by this did establish his church
and by them did establish his church

Alma 31:35             and many of them are our brethren
and many of them are our near brethren

Alma 32:2               success among the poor class of people
success among the poorer class of the people

Alma 33:21             that ye might be healed
that ye might behold

Alma 39:13             and that wrong which ye have done
and repair that wrong which ye have done

Alma 41:5               the one raised to happiness
the one restored to happiness

Alma 42:2               yea he drew out the man
yea he drove out the man

Alma 42:16             except there were a punishment (which also was
except there were a punishment (which also was

as eternal as the life of the soul should be affixed affixed
as eternal as the life of the soul) should be, affixed

Alma 43:6               they were all Amlicites and Zoramites
they were all of the Amlicites and the Zoramites

Alma 43:14             now those descendants were as numerous
now those dissenters were as numerous

Alma 43:38             by their swords and the loss of blood
by their wounds and the loss of blood

Alma 43:45             for their rites of worship and their church
for their rights of worship and their church

Alma 44:8               we will not suffer ourselves to take an oath unto you
we will suffer ourselves to make an oath unto you

Alma 44:13             saying unto them with a loud voice,  saying   …
crying unto them with a loud voice, saying …

Alma 46:34             he had power according to his will
he had power to do according to his will

Alma 47:13             if he would make him Amalickiah a second leader
if he would make him Amalickiah the second leader

Alma 48:8               banks of earth round about to enclose his armies
banks of earth round about to encircle his armies

Alma 48:21             in the latter end of the nineteenth year yea
in the latter end of the nineteenth year

Alma 49:5               in preparing their places of security
in repairing their places of security

Alma 49:28             because of his matchless power
because of his miraculous power

Alma 51:7               and also many of the people of liberty
and also among the people of liberty

Alma 51:15             desiring that he should read it
desiring that he should heed it

Alma 51:26             many cities : the city of Nephihah
many cities : the city of Moroni

Alma 53:6               in the land of Nephi
in the land of the Nephites

Alma 54:13             we have only sought to defend ourselves
we have only sought to defend our lives

Alma 54:24             and behold now I am a bold Lamanite
and behold I am now a bold Lamanite

The results for part 5 of volume 4 are in many respects quite different from other parts of the text since both P and the 1830 edition are firsthand copies of O for much of the text for this part; O is also extant for parts of the text, which helps in reconstructing the original text:

906 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

349 differences between the critical text and the standard text

100 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

25 in O only; 50 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 13 in both O and P;

12 conjectured readings

27 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

17 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

2 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 5 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)       Revised reading

Alma 56:10             because of the numerority of their forces
because of the enormity of their forces

Alma 56:19             but thus were we preserved
but thus were we favored

Alma 56:37             and as we suppose it was their intent
and as we supposed that it was their intent

Alma 56:48             we do not doubt our mothers knew it
we do not doubt; our mothers knew

Alma 57:32             they did rise up in rebellion
they did raise up in rebellion

Alma 58:2               they were so much more numerous
they were so exceeding more numerous

Alma 58:4               to the governor of our land
to the great governor of our land

Alma 58:33             behold we trust in our God who …
behold we trust that it is our God who …

Alma 59:8               they came even and joined the army
they came over and joined the army

Alma 59:9               than to retake it from them
<omit>

Helaman 1:9           they sent forth one Kishkumen
they sent forth one Kishcumen

Helaman 1:29         and thus he did and he did head them
and thus he did head them

Helaman 2:4           for there was one Gadianton
for there was one Gaddianton

Helaman 3:3           in the forty and sixth yea there were …
in the forty and sixth year there were …

Helaman 4:12         and deserting away
and dissenting away

Helaman 4:25         exceedingly more numerous
more exceeding numerous

Helaman 6:20         every means in their power
every means whatsoever was in their power

Helaman 6:21         the more part of the Nephites
the more parts of the Nephites

Helaman 7:10         the garden gate which led by the highway
the garden gate which was by the highway

Helaman 7:16         how could ye have given way
how could ye have given away

Helaman 8:11         the waters … parted hither and thither
the waters … departed hither and thither

Helaman 8:19         even since the days of Abraham
ever since the days of Abraham

Helaman 8:20         and also Ezias and also Isaiah
and also Ezaias and also Isaiah

Helaman 9:36         that I Nephi know nothing concerning …
that I Nephi knew nothing concerning …

Helaman 12:15       for surely it is the earth that moveth
for sure it is the earth that moveth

Helaman 12:22       and woe unto him to whom he shall say this
and woe unto whom he shall say this

Helaman 14:5         there shall a new star arise
there shall be a new star arise

Helaman 16:3         when they saw that they could not …
when they saw this, that they could not …

Helaman 16:11       and these were the conditions
and thus were the conditions

3 Nephi 2:18          they did come forth
they did come forth again

3 Nephi 4:28          they did fell the tree to the earth
they did fall the tree to the earth

3 Nephi 5:9            a shorter but true account
a more short but a true account

3 Nephi 7:3            and thus they became tribes
and thus there became tribes

3 Nephi 9:9            the people of the king of Jacob
the people of the king Jacob

3 Nephi 9:21          I have come unto the world
I have come into the world

3 Nephi 10:4  <omit>
O ye people of the house of Israel

3 Nephi 11:0          Jesus Christ did show himself
Jesus Christ sheweth himself

3 Nephi 11:8          and behold they saw a Man
and behold they saw a man

3 Nephi 14:4          let me pull the mote out of thine eye
let me pull out the mote out of thine eye

3 Nephi 16:6          the Holy Ghost which witnesses unto them
the Holy Ghost which witness unto them

3 Nephi 16:15        but if they will not turn unto me
but if they will not return unto me

3 Nephi 16:17        and then the words … shall be fulfilled
and when the words … shall be fulfilled

3 Nephi 17:5          and beheld they were in tears
and behold they were in tears

3 Nephi 18:13        the gates of hell is ready, open to receive them
the gates of hell is already open to receive them

3 Nephi 18:16        I have set an example for you
I have set an example before you

3 Nephi 18:34        which hath been among you
which hath been among you beforetimes

Finally, in August 2009 the last part of volume 4 was published, with the following statistical summary of the analysis:

811 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

304 differences between the critical text and the standard text

52 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

1 in O only; 27 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 1 in both O and P;

23 conjectured readings

47 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

17 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

4 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

These results are much like those for parts 2 and 3 since O is generally not extant for the last part of the Book of Mormon text. Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 6 of volume 4:

Current  reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

3 Nephi 21:9          and there shall be among them those
and there shall be many among them

3 Nephi 21:16        and I will cut off witchcrafts out of thy land
and I will cut off witchcrafts out of thy hand

3 Nephi 22:4          and shalt not remember the reproach of thy youth
<omit>

3 Nephi 22:17        every tongue that shall revile against thee
every tongue that shall rise against thee

3 Nephi 25:2          the Son of righteousness arise
the Sun of righteousness arise

3 Nephi 28:3          blessed are ye because ye desired this thing
blessed are ye because ye desire this thing

3 Nephi 28:36        I knew not whether they were cleansed
I knew not whether they were changed

4 Nephi 1:27          there were many churches which professed to know the Christ
there were churches which professed to know the Christ
Mormon 2:4           we did come to the city of Angola
we did come to the city of Angolah

Mormon 4:14         many prisoners both women and children

many prisoners of women and of children

Mormon 6:14         and Jeneum had fallen with his ten thousand
and Joneum had fallen with his ten thousand

Mormon 6:15         and a few which had deserted over unto the Lamanites
and a few which had dissented over unto the Lamanites

Mormon 8:9           save it be the Lamanites and robbers
save it be Lamanites and robbers

Mormon 8:10         and whether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth
and whither they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth

Mormon 8:28         leaders of churches and teachers shall rise
leaders of churches and teachers shall be lifted up

Ether 1:34               Jared his brother said unto him
therefore Jared his brother said unto him

Ether 1:41               and gather together … thy families
and gather together … thy family

Ether 1:43               and thus I will do unto thee
and this I will do unto thee

Ether 2:11               until the fullness come
until the fullness be come

Ether 2:13               and they dwelt in tents and dwelt in tents
and they dwelt in tents

Ether 2:14             at the end of four years
at the end of the four years

Ether 2:25               for ye cannot cross this great deep
for how be it / ye cannot cross this great deep

Ether 3:1                 he did carry them in his hands upon the top
he did carry them in his hands up on the top

Ether 3:18               and all this that this man knew that …
and all this because that this man knew that …

Ether 4:1                 and for this cause did king Mosiah keep them
and for this cause did king Benjamin keep them

Ether 6:5                 there should be a furious wind blow
there should a furious wind blow

Ether 8:24               or woe be unto it
for woe be unto it

Ether 9:2                 which did not seek his destruction
which were not or which did not seek his destruction

Ether 9:22               yea and he even saw the Son of righteousness
yea and he even saw the Sun of righteousness

Ether 11:4               and Shiblom reigned in his stead
and Shiblon reigned in his stead

Ether 12:2               for he could not be restrained
for he could not be constrained

Ether 12:4               which hope cometh of faith maketh an anchor
which hope cometh of faith and maketh an anchor

Ether 13:31             and there was none to restrain them
and there was none to constrain them

Ether 14:2 and of his wives and children
and they of his wife and children

Ether 14:12             he fled to the borders upon the seashore
he fled to the borders by the seashore

Ether 14:17             and he did slay both women and children
and he did slay both men women and children

Ether 14:28             the valley of Shurr was near the hill Comnor
the valley of Shurr was near the hill Comron

Moroni 7:16           and to persuade to believe in Christ
and persuadeth to believe in Christ

Moroni 7:26           and by faith they become the sons of God
and by faith they became the sons of God

Moroni 9:24           many of our brethren have deserted over
many of our brethren have dissented over

Moroni 9:24           and many more will also desert over unto them
and many more will also dissent over unto them

Moroni 10:34         before the pleasing bar of the great Jehovah
before the pleading bar of the great Jehovah

3. What other volumes will be published as part of this project?

(a) Volume 3, The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon

In this third volume, I will discuss each step in the transmission of the text, including Joseph Smith’s dictating of the text and his scribes’ writing it down (the original manuscript), their copying of the text into the printer’s manuscript, the typesetting of the first (1830) edition, and the publishing of 19 significant editions since then (the 1837 and 1840 under Joseph Smith’s direction, plus 12 more within the LDS textual tradition, and 5 within the RLDS textual tradition). This volume will examine some of the important issues regarding how Joseph Smith translated and what kind of text was revealed to him. Each edition will also be examined in terms of its editing history. Each type of grammatical editing will be thoroughly described in this volume. There will also be a lined-up comparison between the biblical quotations from the King James Bible and the corresponding Book of Mormon passages.

In 2002 I decided that I could not produce volume 3 without first determining what the original text was. For that reason, volume 4 has been published first – and also in parts, so that the reading public will have time to examine the textual analysis in manageable segments.

(b) Volume 5, A Complete Electronic Collation of the Book of Mormon

This last volume will be available in an electronic format. A few printed copies of the collation will be prepared for archival purposes. In this volume, the entire text for both manuscripts and the 20 editions is lined up and compared, with every difference specified – not only word and phrase differences, but also punctuation, capitalization, spelling, paragraphing, versification, and so forth. The differences will be categorized and can be searched in terms of the type of change. I am planning to make this electronic collation available at the same time volume 3 is published.

4. What are some of the major findings of this project?

(a) The original manuscript supports the hypothesis that the text was given to Joseph Smith word for word and that he could see the spelling of the names (in support of what witnesses of the translation process claimed about Joseph’s translation – namely, that he spelled out the Book of Mormon names, at least when the name first appeared).

(b) The original text is much more consistent and systematic in expression than has ever been realized.

(c) There are a number of errors in the text that have never been corrected in any LDS or RLDS edition, although none of them fundamentally alter the text.

(d) There are occasional errors in the original manuscript itself (see, for instance, the reading “Ishmael and also his hole hole” in 1 Nephi 7:5); errors could enter the text from its very earliest transmission; many of the errors in the original manuscript show that this manuscript was written down from oral dictation.

(e) Errors in the printer’s manuscript clearly show that this manuscript was produced by visual copying from another text, not by oral dictation.

(f) Joseph Smith’s editing for the second and third editions (1837 and 1840) represents human editing, not a revealed revision of the text.

(g) The original text includes unique kinds of expression that appear to be uncharacteristic of English in any time and place; some of these expressions are Hebraistic in nature.

(h) The early transmission of the Book of Mormon text does not in general support the traditional assumptions of textual criticism – namely, the assumptions that the transmitted text tends to remove difficult readings and lengthen the text; instead, the early transmission of the Book of Mormon text tends to introduce more difficult readings and to omit words and phrases.

(i) The vocabulary of the Book of Mormon text appears to derive from the 1500s and the 1600s, not from the 1800s.

This last finding is quite remarkable. Lexical evidence suggests that the original text contained a number of expressions and words with meanings that were lost from the English language by 1700, including the following (with the date of their last citation in the Oxford English Dictionary given in parentheses):

to require ‘to request’ (1665)

Enos 1:18 reads “thy fathers have also required of me this thing”

[Ezra 8:22: “for I was ashamed to require of the king a band of soldiers and horsemen to help us against the enemy in the way”]

sermon ‘talk, discourse, speech’ (1594) [conjectural emendation]

Mosiah 19:24 should read “after they had ended the sermon”

(not the current reading “after they had ended the ceremony”)

to cast arrows ‘to shoot arrows’ (1609)

Alma 49:4 reads “the Lamanites could not cast their stones and their arrows at them”

[Proverbs 26:18: “as a mad man who casteth firebrands arrows and death”]

to counsel ‘to counsel with’ (1547)

Alma 37:37 originally read “counsel the Lord in all thy doings”

[similarly in Alma 39:10]

but if ‘unless’ (1596)

Mosiah 3:19 originally read “for the natural man is an enemy to God …

and will be forever and ever but if he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit”

to depart ‘to part’ (1677)

Helaman 8:11 originally read “to smite upon the waters of the Red Sea

and they departed hither and thither”

extinct: in reference to an individual’s death (1675)

Alma 44:7 reads “and inflect the wounds of death in your bodies

that ye may become extinct” [similarly in several other places]

the pleading bar of God (not in the Oxford English Dictionary, but three early 1600 citations have been found, including one in a legal context) [conjectural emendation]

Jacob 6:13 should read “until I shall meet you before the pleading bar of God”, not “the pleasing bar of God” [similarly in Moroni 10:34]

As noted, only two of these instances of archaic vocabulary (dating from Early Modern English) are found in the 1611 King James Bible.

5. What have been the most significant events in the history of this project?

Besides the actual publishing of the volumes of the critical text themselves, there are two events that stand out:

(a) April 1991: two weeks spent in Independence, Missouri, making a careful examination of my transcript of the printer’s manuscript against the actual manuscript, with the assistance of my wife, Sirkku, and Ron Romig, archivist for the Community of Christ (then the RLDS Church).

(b) October 1991: three weeks working with Robert Espinosa and his fellow conservators at the BYU library on fragments of the original manuscript owned by the Wilford Wood family of Bountiful, Utah; these fragments were photographed in ultraviolet light by David Hawkinson and constitute about two percent of the original manuscript.

6. What has been your relationship with the LDS and RLDS Churches in this project?

This project began as an independent scholarly project, and I have made sure by legal agreements that this independence has been preserved. Since the beginning of this project (in 1988) the LDS Historical Department has provided full access to ultraviolet photographs of the original manuscript and has allowed me to directly examine the original manuscript as well as their enormous library of Book of Mormon editions. Without their cooperation, this project would never have been possible. Similarly, archivist Ron Romig, church historian Richard Howard (now retired), and the leadership of the Community of Christ (formerly the RLDS Church) have also been fully cooperative in providing access to the printer’s manuscript as well as an enlarged photocopy of that manuscript, plus their large collection of Book of Mormon editions.

In 1994 the LDS Church Scriptures Committee requested that I provide information about my findings on the text. For the next four to five years, this information was conveyed to the Scriptures Committee. Prior to submitting this information, however, the Church, BYU, and I signed a legally binding letter of understanding guaranteeing the independence of the critical text project, with these two important provisos: (1) I would hold the copyright to the critical text, and (2) I would exercise complete control over the content of the critical text, including my interpretations and analyses of the text.

The critical text project is a scholarly one and has not received any ecclesiastical approval or endorsement. The transcripts and the textual interpretations represent my own scholarly work, with peer review from a number of scholars (especially David Calabro, a graduate student in Hebrew studies at the University of Chicago). I have received no explicit response regarding any of my interpretations or suggestions for changes from the Church Scriptures Committee. The Church committee has had full access to my findings and is free to use them (or not use them) as they wish.

I have also retained the right to legally extend this freedom to use the results of the critical text project to anyone wishing to create their own single reading of the Book of Mormon text, including the Community of Christ and other churches as well as publishing firms interested in producing a noncritical edition of the Book of Mormon.

7. Will any of these changes appear in subsequent LDS editions of the Book of Mormon?

I do not know the answer to this question. The Church will decide for itself what changes, if any, will be implemented. The Church has never engaged in a public discussion of such changes or the arguments for making (or not making) those changes. On the other hand, this scholarly critical text project promotes public discussion and, when done properly, establishes an on-going process and allows others to contribute. For instance, as part of this project, I have requested anyone who has any suggestions for emendations to the text or questions about problematic readings to send them to me. Thus far I have received over a hundred suggestions for change – and about thirty percent of these have led to emendations in the text. Surprisingly, most of these emendations have come not from scholars but from regular members of the Church – readers of the Book of Mormon who are simply striving to understand the text. Such an open request for participation has significantly improved the findings of this project.

One important fact that I realized early on in this project is that the original text is not fully recoverable by scholarly means. Only 28 percent of the Book of Mormon text is extant in the original manuscript. Over half of the new readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition derive from readings in the original manuscript. Oliver Cowdery averaged about three textual changes per manuscript page as he copied from the original manuscript into the printer’s manuscript. The clear majority of these changes would be unrecoverable if those portions of the original manuscript were not extant. In most cases we have no clue that there is even an error in the current text unless the original manuscript tells us so. Given that the majority of the original manuscript is no longer extant, we will be unable to fully recover the original text by human means. And even the extant portions of the original manuscript probably have errors that we are unaware of. The only way that the original text could be fully restored would be if the Lord chose to reveal it again. Such is definitely not within the purview of this scholarly project.

One valuable aspect of this public, scholarly discussion of the text is that later changes in the text could be made by the Church without engendering the typical complaint that the Church is making changes for political reasons. Note, in particular, the uproar over the 1981 change in 2 Nephi 30:6 from “a white and a delightsome people” to “a pure and a delightsome people”. The change was first implemented in the 1840 edition; Joseph Smith’s motivation for making that change was based on quite something else, as I argue in part 2 of volume 4 under 2 Nephi 30:6. An independent public discussion in a scholarly context will avoid having the Church take abuse for making alterations to the text.

8. Does this project have an apologetic purpose? In other words, is one of its purposes to defend the Book of Mormon against detractors?

My task, as I have always seen it, is to recover the original English-language text to the extent scholarly and academic analysis will allow. I have therefore restricted my discussion to the text per se and have completely avoided discussions of whether there are practices found among the cultures of the world (including the Americas) in support of particular readings. Nor have I engaged in any discussion of external evidences for the Book of Mormon, including questions of geography, genetics, and archaeology.

My initial endeavor as editor of the critical text project was to produce a detailed transcription of the original and printer’s manuscripts. And right from the beginning, I discovered errors that had crept into the text as Oliver Cowdery and the other scribes produced the printer’s manuscript from the original manuscript. Within a year or so I recognized that I would not be able to completely recover the original text by scholarly methods. Yet at the same time, I began to see considerable evidence for the traditional interpretation that witnesses of the translation process claimed: (1) the text was given word for word, (2) Book of Mormon names were frequently spelled out the first time they occurred in the text, and (3) during dictation there was no rewriting of the text except to correct errors in taking down the dictation. Joseph Smith was literally reading off an already composed English-language text. The evidence in the manuscripts and in the language of the text itself supports the hypothesis that the Book of Mormon was a precisely determined text. I do not consider this conclusion apologetic, but instead as one demanded by the evidence.

The opposing viewpoint, that Joseph Smith got ideas and he translated them into his own English, cannot be supported by the manuscript and textual evidence. The only substantive argument for this alternative view has been the nonstandard nature of the text, with its implication that God would never speak ungrammatical English, so the nonstandard usage must be the result of Joseph Smith putting the ideas he received into his own language. Yet with the recent finding that the original vocabulary of the text appears to be dated from the 1500s and 1600s (not the 1800s), we now need to consider the possibility that the ungrammaticality of the original text may also date from that earlier period of time, not necessarily from Joseph’s own time and place. Joseph Smith is not the author of the Book of Mormon, nor is he actually the translator. Instead, he was the revelator: through him the Lord revealed the English-language text (by means of the interpreters, later called the Urim and Thummim, and the seer stone). Such a view is consistent, I believe, with Joseph’s use elsewhere of the verb translate to mean ‘transmit’ and the noun translation to mean ‘transmission’ (as in the eighth Article of Faith).

I should also point out that my personal testimony of the Book of Mormon is not dependent upon my work on this project. The Book of Mormon stands on its own and is ultimately not dependent on how that text may vary in printed editions or in the manuscripts. Moroni promised that the Lord will give a testimony of the book to the prayerful reader – irrespective of any infelicities and errors in the text (which Moroni recognized could be there, as he himself noted in the last sentence on the title page of the Book of Mormon). I received my own personal witness of this book long before I ever began work on this project. I have never needed to prove to myself that the text is from the Lord. Nor have errors in the text ever prevented the Spirit from bearing witness that the book is the Lord’s.

My own personal witness of this book dates from 1979, when I was reading the book during a time of difficulty. I was reading the words that king Lamoni’s queen expresses as she comes out of her state of unconsciousness:

Alma 19:29-30 (original text)

she arose and stood upon her feet and cried with a loud voice saying

O blessed Jesus who has saved me from an awful hell

O blessed God have mercy on this people

and when she had said this she clapped her hands being filled with joy

speaking many words which were not understood

As I was reading this passage, the Spirit witnessed to me, “This really happened.” What is interesting about this passage is that I didn’t actually read “she clapped her hands” (the reading based on the printer’s manuscript), but instead I read “she clasped her hands” (the reading found in the 1830 edition as well as in all LDS editions). Now I do not take this personal witness as evidence that I should reject the earliest reading, clapped. It simply means that the Lord witnesses the truthfulness of this book irrespective of the minor errors that may have crept in. I know of no error that changes any doctrine or the basic account of the text. There is no error, awkward expression, or ungrammaticality in any of the printed editions of the book that will prevent the honest reader from gaining a testimony of the Book of Mormon.

9. So why should we be interested in recovering the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon?

The major thrust of this project is oriented towards scholars, not the lay readers of the book. There is no reason to restore in the current standard text the nonstandard language and the non-English Hebraisms that were largely eliminated by Joseph Smith himself in his editing of the text for the second (1837) edition. On the other hand, many of the word and phrase changes proposed by the critical text project (such as those listed under question 2 above) make the text much more systematic and consistent. The Church (especially in its 1920 and 1981 editions) has sought to print an accurate text, including the restoration of original readings (providing the language itself is standard English).

From a scholarly perspective, restoring the original text provides new ways of viewing the Book of Mormon text. By studying the language of the text, I have seen much that confirms my personal testimony of the book as well as what early witnesses of the translation were able to observe.

10. Won’t changing the text prove embarrassing for some commentaries and interpretations by church leaders and scholars?

I do not think this is much of a problem. There are so few examples where restoring an original reading will cause difficulties for previous commentary. In virtually every case, the original text will reinforce and make gospel principles even clearer. As an example, there is the passage in Alma 39:13 where Alma tells his son Corianton (in the current text) to “return unto them [the Zoramites] and acknowledge your faults and that wrong which ye have done”. Yet the original text read here “return unto them and acknowledge your faults and repair that wrong which ye have done”. The original text emphasizes that repentance involves more than saying “I’m sorry”: it requires us to do all we can to make restitution for our sins. This doctrine is, of course, supported by other passages in the Book of Mormon (see, for instance, Helaman 5:17).

One place where the original reading will lead to some revision of commentary deals with the parenthetical phrase that Joseph Smith added to the 1840 edition in 1 Nephi 20:1, which explains that the phrase “the waters of Judah” means ‘the waters of baptism’. The 1920 edition removed the parentheses that Joseph had placed around the extra phrase “or out of the waters of baptism”, which has subsequently led some church writers to interpret the additional phraseology as part of the original Isaiah text, with a few writers even accusing ancient Jewish scribes as having purposely removed a clear Old Testament reference to baptism from the book of Isaiah!

11. Would it be worth doing textual criticism for the translations of the English-language Book of Mormon into other languages?

Yes. In fact, I can think of one very specific aspect that could be of tremendous benefit to my own project – namely, the question of how translators have dealt with problematic passages. Their solutions may suggest possible conjectural emendations for the English-language text. As an example, consider the English-language reading for Mosiah 17:13: “they took him and bound him and scourged his skin with fagots yea even unto death”. This passage literally states that Abinadi was whipped to death with bundles of sticks. I have conjectured that the word scourged here is a mishearing for scorched, the verb used in the next verse (Mosiah 17:14) to refer to Abinadi’s death by fire (“and now when the flames began to scorch him”). And some foreign language translators have also realized that the text intends to say that Abinadi was burnt to death and have therefore substituted for scourged a verb that is equivalent to burning rather than whipping. Some students in my class on textual criticism have involved themselves in projects of this sort, but their work has been limited to a few languages and only to checking whether the English-language conjectures proposed in this project can be found in any of the translations. It would undoubtedly be worthwhile checking the other side of the coin: Are there readings in the translations that suggest conjectures for the English-language text?

12. What role has your theory of Analogical Modeling played in the Book of Mormon project?

Analogical Modeling (AM) is a theory of language that I have worked on since the 1970s. The traditional method for describing language has been in terms of rules, but in Analogical Modeling there are no rules, only examples (instances) of past behavior that a speaker uses to understand and produce language. AM is actually a general theory of description that uses both nearest neighbors and not-so-near neighbors (under certain well-defined conditions of homogeneity) to predict behavior.

AM has been implicitly used in many aspects of the critical text project, particularly in finding instances of usage for testing the reliability of readings. One important characteristic of the Book of Mormon – one that is very helpful in establishing the text – is the size of the book (584 pages of canonical text in the 1830 edition). The specific language of the text is sufficiently repeated throughout the book so that there are usually enough exemplars to make a reasoned analysis for any given expression or phrase. It has not, in my opinion, been fully appreciated how huge a scriptural text the Book of Mormon is and what an advantage that is in analyzing and establishing its text.

In distinction to the findings of computerized stylistic analyses of the Book of Mormon text, I have found that many expressions, phrases, and words extend throughout the text, such as the term pleading bar by both Jacob and Moroni (in Jacob 6:13 and Moroni 10:34) or the precise expression “yea even the sword of the justice of the eternal God” by both Nephi and Moroni (in 1 Nephi 12:18 and Ether 8:23). Sometimes Jacob uses expressions that are unique to him (at least in the original text), such as “the commands of God”. As many readers have recognized, every time Jacob starts to speak or write, his flowing style is almost immediately distinguishable from his brother Nephi’s complex syntax – and it doesn’t take a statistical analysis of function words within passages of five thousand words to figure this out!

As a result of my work in AM, I have continually attempted to look for exemplars that might be responsible for creating errors in the Book of Mormon text. As an example, in 2 Nephi 20:29 all the printed editions as well as the printer’s manuscript read Ramath instead of the Ramah found in Isaiah 10:29 (the original manuscript is not extant for this passage). A number of scholars have noted that Ramath would have been the earlier Hebrew form for Ramah and have therefore claimed that the Book of Mormon text here maintains the earlier Hebrew name for this place, thus showing that the Book of Mormon text was translated from a more ancient version of the book of Isaiah. What has not been noticed in all of this discussion is that within the Book of Mormon quotation for Isaiah 2-14 (found in 2 Nephi 12-24), a number of names are misspelled in the printer’s manuscript. The 1830 typesetter corrected all of these misspellings by reference to his own King James Bible – except for the case of Ramath. And for each of these misspelled names there is an analogical source for the misspelling – either a nearby word in the Isaiah quotation or a common English word or biblical name:

In the case of Ramath, we find Hamath earlier in the same chapter (2 Nephi 20:9). Another influence that would have led Oliver Cowdery to write Ramath instead of the correct Ramah would have been the name Aiath, found in the immediately preceding verse (2 Nephi 20:28). In fact, these two earlier occurrences of names ending in -ath could have readily misled the 1830 typesetter into thinking that he didn’t need to check his King James Bible for the spelling Ramath.

Three AM books have been published and are all available, two authored by me and one edited by me and colleagues:

(a) Analogical Modeling of Language (Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1989)

(b) Analogy and Structure (Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1992)

(c) Analogical Modeling: An Exemplar-Based Approach to Language, edited by Royal Skousen, Deryle Lonsdale, and Dilworth B. Parkinson (John Benjamins: Amsterdam, 2002)

These books are rather technical. For a general introduction to AM, see my article “Analogical Modeling: Exemplars, Rules, and Quantum Computing”, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Berkeley, California: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 2003), pages 425-39. A preprint version of this paper is available from our research group’s AM website: <http://humanities.byu.edu/am/>.

Changes in the Book of Mormon

© 2009 by Royal Skousen

1. What is the critical text project of the Book of Mormon?

From the beginning, the two goals of the critical text project have been (1) to recover the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon, and (2) to determine the history of the text (namely, how it has changed over time). There are two basic kinds of changes in the history of the text: (a) accidental errors in the transmission of the text, and (b) the editing out of nonstandard English. I began the critical text project in 1988 and have been working full time on it since then.

2. What has been published thus far?

In 2001 the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), now a part of Brigham Young University (BYU) and a division of the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, published the first two volumes of the critical text, namely:

(a)                The Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon: Typographical Facsimile of the Extant Text

564 pages (including 41 pages of introduction and 16 pages of black-and-white ultraviolet and color photographs of fragments)

(b)               The Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon: Typographical Facsimile of the Entire Text in Two Parts

1000 pages (bound in two parts, including 36 pages of introduction and 8 pages of color photographs of the manuscript)

These two volumes present an exact reproduction in typescript of the extant portions of the two manuscripts (about 28 percent of the original manuscript and all but three lines of the printer’s manuscript).

A year later FARMS/BYU published a history of the project, the result of a symposium held at BYU:

(c)                Uncovering the Original Text of the Book of Mormon: History and Findings of the Critical Text Project (edited by M. Gerald Bradford and Alison V.P. Coutts).

This 76-page document includes articles by me on the history of this project and the systematic nature of the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon. It also includes articles by Robert Espinosa on the Wilford Wood fragments of the original manuscript, Ron Romig on the printer’s manuscript, and Larry Draper on the printed editions of the Book of Mormon.

From 2004 through 2009 FARMS published Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, volume 4 of the critical text, in six parts (each one appearing at the end of the summer):

(d)               Part One: Title Page, Witness Statements, 1 Nephi 1  2 Nephi 10

[published in August 2004; 658 pages, covering 14 percent of the text]

(e)        Part Two: 2 Nephi 11- Mosiah 16

[published in August 2005; 716 pages, covering 18 percent of the text]

(f)         Part Three: Mosiah 17- Alma 20

[published in August 2006; 686 pages, covering 16 percent of the text]

(g)        Part Four: Alma 21- 55

[published in September 2007; 700 pages, covering 17 percent of the text]

(h)        Part Five: Alma 56 – 3 Nephi 18

[published in August 2008; 730 pages, covering 19 percent of the text]

(i)         Part Six: 3 Nephi 19 – Moroni 10; Addenda

[published in August 2009; 638 pages, covering 16 percent of the text]

The addenda at the end of part 6 contains additional items of analysis, including a few reversals of previous textual decisions.

All of the above items (a through i) are available for purchase from the BYU Bookstore (FARMS now distributes their books through the BYU Bookstore). These books can also be ordered through other bookstores and website distributors.

In addition to these works, in August 2009 Yale University Press published The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text. The following is the promotional information that Yale released for the book:

First published in 1830, the Book of Mormon is the authoritative scripture of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Over the past twenty-one years, Royal Skousen has pored over Joseph Smith’s original manuscripts and identified more than 2,000 textual errors in the 1830 edition. Although most of these discrepancies stem from inadvertent errors in copying and typesetting the text, the Yale edition contains about 600 corrections that have never appeared in any standard edition of the Book of Mormon, and about 250 of them affect the text’s meaning. Citing the earliest sources available, Skousen corrects the text in a work of remarkable dedication that will be a landmark in American religious scholarship.

Completely redesigned and typeset by nationally award-winning typographer Jonathan Saltzman, this new edition has been reformatted in sense-lines, making the text much more logical and pleasurable to read. Featuring a lucid introduction by historian Grant Hardy, the Yale edition serves not only as the most accurate version of the Book of Mormon ever published but also as an illuminating entryway into a vital religious tradition.

Grant Hardy, professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Asheville, provides the following summary in his introduction to the Yale edition:

Royal Skousen has single-handedly brought the textual analysis of the Book of Mormon to a professional level on part with the finest classical and biblical scholarship. This volume is the culmination of his labors, and it is the most textually significant edition since Joseph Smith’s work was first published in 1830. It takes us back to the original manuscript (as best we can reconstruct it) and sometimes beyond, to the very words as they were first dictated by Joseph Smith.

Also included in the Yale edition is my own preface and an appendix listing over 700 significant changes in the history of the text.

The Yale edition presents the reconstructed original text in a clear-text format, without explanatory intervention. Unlike modern editions of the Book of Mormon that have added chapter summaries, scriptural cross-references, dates, and footnotes, this edition consists solely of the words dictated by Joseph Smith in 1828-29, as far as they can be established through standard methods of textual criticism. Later emendations by scribes, editors, and even Joseph Smith himself have been omitted, except for those that appear to restore original readings.

Anyone opening this volume will immediately be struck by the sense-lines format of the Book of Mormon text – that is, the way the lines of the text are broken up according to phrases and clauses. Joseph Smith dictated the book to scribes who wrote down his words. His dictation did not indicate punctuation, sentence structure, or paragraphing. These he left, ultimately, to the discretion of the printer. Consequently, the Yale edition constitutes a scholarly effort to present to the reader a dictated rather than a written text. To that end, I have decided to adopt the sense-line format. I make no claim that the sense-lines adopted in The Earliest Text represent Joseph’s actual dictation breaks, but the first verbalization of the text would have sounded something like the result of reading the sense-lines out loud.

The text of the Yale edition is a consolidation of the decisions made in the six parts of volume 4 of the critical text project, Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon. Over the course of the six parts, including the addenda at the end of part 6, I have analyzed 5,280 cases of variation (or potential variation). The resulting text published by Yale University Press can be briefly characterized as follows:

2,241 differences between The Earliest Text and the standard printed edition

Cases of grammatical variation are discussed only once; volume 3 of the critical text (see below) will provide a complete discussion of grammatical changes.

606 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

216 are found only in the original manuscript, O

187 are found in only the printer’s manuscript, P (in these cases O is not extant)

88 are found in both O and P

2 are found in copies of the title page

113 are conjectural emendations

256 readings that either make a difference in meaning or change the spelling of a name

As might be suspected, none of these differences make a fundamental change in the message or doctrine of the book, but they make a difference when translating the Book of Mormon

131 readings that make the Book of Mormon text more consistent in phraseology or usage

34 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here is a brief numerical summary of the results for part 1 of volume 4 (from the title page through 2 Nephi 10):

773 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

419 differences between the critical text and the standard text

156 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

95 in O only; 6 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 38 in both O and P;

2 in the 1829 copyright certificates; 15 conjectured readings

75 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

51 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

14 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the changes that are recommended in part 1 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

1 Nephi 7:5            Ishmael and also his household
Ishmael and also his whole household

1 Nephi 7:17          my faith which is in thee
my faith which is in me

1 Nephi 8:27          towards those which had came at
towards those which had came up

1 Nephi 8:31          multitudes feeling their way
multitudes pressing their way

1 Nephi 10:10        take away the sins of the world
take away the sin of the world

1 Nephi 10:19        in these times
in this time

1 Nephi 11:36        the pride of the world and it fell
the pride of the world

1 Nephi 12:18        the word of the justice of the eternal God
the sword of the justice of the eternal God

1 Nephi 13:24        the gospel of the Lord
the gospel of the Lamb

1 Nephi 13:32        state of awful blindness
state of awful wickedness

1 Nephi 14:13        did gather together multitudes
did gather together in multitudes

1 Nephi 14:28        the things which I saw and heard
the things which I saw

1 Nephi 15:16        they shall be remembered again
they shall be numbered again

1 Nephi 15:35        the devil is the preparator of it
the devil is the proprietor of it

1 Nephi 15:36        the wicked are rejected from the righteous
the wicked are separated from the righteous

1 Nephi 17:3          he did provide means for us
he did provide ways and means for us

1 Nephi 17:41        he sent fiery flying serpents
he sent flying fiery serpents

1 Nephi 17:53        I will shock them
I will shake them

1 Nephi 19:2          the genealogy of his fathers
the genealogy of his forefathers

1 Nephi 19:4          what they should do
that they should do

1 Nephi 19:10        according to the words of Zenock
according to the words of Zenoch

1 Nephi 20:1          or out of the waters of baptism
<omitted>

1 Nephi 22:8          unto the being nourished by the Gentiles
unto the being nursed by the Gentiles

1 Nephi 22:12        the lands of their inheritance
the lands of their first inheritance

2 Nephi 1:5            the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me
the Lord hath consecrated this land unto me

2 Nephi 2:11          neither holiness nor misery
neither happiness nor misery

2 Nephi 3:18          I will raise up unto the fruit of thy loins
I will raise up one unto the fruit of thy loins

2 Nephi 3:20          their cry shall go
their cry shall go forth

2 Nephi 4:5            in the way that ye should go
in the right way that ye should go

2 Nephi 4:26          the Lord … hath visited men
the Lord … hath visited me

2 Nephi 9:13          deliver up the body of the righteous
deliver up the bodies of the righteous

We get the following results for part 2 of volume 4 (from 2 Nephi 11 through Mosiah 16); note that for most of this part of the text, the original manuscript is not extant, which has lessened the number of proposed changes:

897 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

387 differences between the critical text and the standard text

66 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

2 in O only; 34 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 5 in both O and P;

25 conjectured readings

23 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

13 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

5 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the changes discussed in part 2 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

2 Nephi 20:2          to turn away the needy
to turn aside the needy

2 Nephi 20:10        my hand hath founded the kingdom of the idols
my hand hath found the kingdom of the idols

2 Nephi 20:13        and I have moved the borders of the people
and I have removed the borders of the people

2 Nephi 20:29        Ramath is afraid
Ramah is afraid

2 Nephi 24:19        the remnant of those that are slain
the raiment of those that are slain

2 Nephi 24:25        I will bring the Assyrian in my land
I will break the Assyrian in my land

2 Nephi 26:9          the Son of righteousness shall appear
the Sun of righteousness shall appear

2 Nephi 28:23        and death and hell and the devil

and the devil

2 Nephi 30:6          they shall be a pure and a delightsome people
they shall be a white and a delightsome people

2 Nephi 30:18        I make an end of my sayings
I must make an end of my sayings

Jacob 5:8                I take away many of these … branches
I will take away many of these … branches

Jacob 5:13              in the nethermost part of my vineyard
in the nethermost parts of my vineyard

Jacob 5:19              to the nethermost part of the vineyard
to the nethermost parts of the vineyard

Jacob 5:20              the master
the master of the vineyard

Jacob 5:45              a part thereof brought forth wild fruit
the other part thereof brought forth wild fruit

Jacob 5:46              these I had hoped to preserve
these I had hope to preserve

Jacob 5:74              the Lord had preserved unto himself
the good the Lord had preserved unto himself

Jacob 5:75              [ye] have brought unto me again the natural fruit
it hath brought unto me again the natural fruit

Jacob 6:13              I shall meet you before the pleasing bar of God
I shall meet you before the pleading bar of God

Enos 1:3                 and the words which …
and I remembered the words which …

Enos 1:20               with a short skin girdle about their loins
with a short skin girded about their loins

Enos 1:24               between the Nephites and Lamanites
between the Nephites and the Lamanites

W of M 1:5            I chose these things to finish my record
I choose these things to finish my record

Mosiah 3:19          unless he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit
but if he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit

Mosiah 4:30          and observe the commandments of God
and observe to keep the commandments of God

Mosiah 7:20          that he has brought us into bondage
that has brought us into bondage

Mosiah 8:17          things which are past
things which have passed

Mosiah 9:14          to take off their flocks
to take of their flocks

Mosiah 10:5          and work and work all manner of fine linen
and work all manner of fine linen

Mosiah 15:24        and these are those who have part …
and there are those who have part …

For part 3 of volume 4 (from Mosiah 17 through Alma 20), the results are quite similar to part 2, especially since so little of the original manuscript is extant for this part of the text:

898 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

360 differences between the critical text and the standard text

82 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

0 in O only; 58 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 3 in both O and P;

21 conjectured readings

28 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

17 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

5 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 3 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

Mosiah 17:10        yea and I will suffer even until death
yea and I will suffer even unto death

Mosiah 17:13        and scourged his skin with fagots
and scorched his skin with fagots

Mosiah 19:24        after they had ended the ceremony
after they had ended the sermon

Mosiah 21:28        king Mosiah had a gift from God
king Benjamin had a gift from God

Mosiah 25:2          which was a descendant of Mulek
which was a descendant of Muloch

Mosiah 25:6          [omit]

and his brethren and all their afflictions
and he also read the account of Ammon

Mosiah 26:9          Alma did not know concerning them
Alma did know concerning them

but there were many witnesses against them
for there were many witnesses against them

Mosiah 26:23        it is I that granteth … unto the end a place
it is I that granteth … in the end a place

Mosiah 27:30        but now that they may foresee that …
but now I know that they may foresee that …

Mosiah 28:4          suffering much and fearing
and suffering much fearing

Mosiah 29:42        Alma was appointed to be the first chief judge
Alma was appointed to be the chief judge

Alma 1:24               they were remembered no more among the people
they were numbered no more among the people

Alma 2:30               to save and preserve this people
to save and protect this people

Alma 3:5                 save it were skin which was girded about their loins
save it were a skin which was girded about their loins

Alma 5:1                 Alma began to deliver the word of God
Alma began to declare the word of God

Alma 5:35               and ye shall not be hewn down
and ye shall not be cut down

Alma 10:2               I am the son of Giddonah
I am the son of Gidanah

Alma 10:5               his mysteries and his marvelous powers
his mysteries and his miraculous powers

Alma 11:2               or be stripped or be cast out
or be striped or be cast out

Alma 11:6               an ezrom of silver
an ezrum of silver

Alma 11:16             a shiblum is a half of a shiblon
a shilum is a half of a shiblon

Alma 11:21             and this Zeezrom began to question Amulek
and thus Zeezrom began to question Amulek

Alma 11:44             and shall be brought … before the bar of Christ
and all shall be brought … before the bar of Christ

Alma 12:14             for our words will condemn us
for our works will condemn us

Alma 17:1               he met with the sons of Mosiah
he met the sons of Mosiah

Alma 17:26             which was called the water of Sebus
which was called the waters of Sebus

Alma 17:31             we will preserve the flocks unto the king
we will restore the flocks unto the king

Alma 18:25             and he answered and said unto him
and he answered unto him

Alma 19:30             she clasped her hands
she clapped her hands

The results for part 4 of volume 4 are like those of part 1 since the original manuscript is basically extant for Alma 21-55:

995 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

422 differences between the critical text and the standard text

150 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

93 in O only; 12 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 28 in both O and P;

17 conjectured readings

56 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

16 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

4 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 4 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

Alma 24:5               they came forth to the land of Midian
they came forth to the land of Middoni

Alma 24:20             for the purpose of destroying the king
for the purpose of dethroning the king

Alma 27:27             they were among the people of Nephi
they were numbered among the people of Nephi

Alma 29:11             and by this did establish his church
and by them did establish his church

Alma 31:35             and many of them are our brethren
and many of them are our near brethren

Alma 32:2               success among the poor class of people
success among the poorer class of the people

Alma 33:21             that ye might be healed
that ye might behold

Alma 39:13             and that wrong which ye have done
and repair that wrong which ye have done

Alma 41:5               the one raised to happiness
the one restored to happiness

Alma 42:2               yea he drew out the man
yea he drove out the man

Alma 42:16             except there were a punishment (which also was
except there were a punishment (which also was

as eternal as the life of the soul should be affixed affixed
as eternal as the life of the soul) should be, affixed

Alma 43:6               they were all Amlicites and Zoramites
they were all of the Amlicites and the Zoramites

Alma 43:14             now those descendants were as numerous
now those dissenters were as numerous

Alma 43:38             by their swords and the loss of blood
by their wounds and the loss of blood

Alma 43:45             for their rites of worship and their church
for their rights of worship and their church

Alma 44:8               we will not suffer ourselves to take an oath unto you
we will suffer ourselves to make an oath unto you

Alma 44:13             saying unto them with a loud voice,  saying   …
crying unto them with a loud voice, saying …

Alma 46:34             he had power according to his will
he had power to do according to his will

Alma 47:13             if he would make him Amalickiah a second leader
if he would make him Amalickiah the second leader

Alma 48:8               banks of earth round about to enclose his armies
banks of earth round about to encircle his armies

Alma 48:21             in the latter end of the nineteenth year yea
in the latter end of the nineteenth year

Alma 49:5               in preparing their places of security
in repairing their places of security

Alma 49:28             because of his matchless power
because of his miraculous power

Alma 51:7               and also many of the people of liberty
and also among the people of liberty

Alma 51:15             desiring that he should read it
desiring that he should heed it

Alma 51:26             many cities : the city of Nephihah
many cities : the city of Moroni

Alma 53:6               in the land of Nephi
in the land of the Nephites

Alma 54:13             we have only sought to defend ourselves
we have only sought to defend our lives

Alma 54:24             and behold now I am a bold Lamanite
and behold I am now a bold Lamanite

The results for part 5 of volume 4 are in many respects quite different from other parts of the text since both P and the 1830 edition are firsthand copies of O for much of the text for this part; O is also extant for parts of the text, which helps in reconstructing the original text:

906 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

349 differences between the critical text and the standard text

100 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

25 in O only; 50 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 13 in both O and P;

12 conjectured readings

27 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

17 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

2 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 5 of volume 4:

Current reading (or equivalent)       Revised reading

Alma 56:10             because of the numerority of their forces
because of the enormity of their forces

Alma 56:19             but thus were we preserved
but thus were we favored

Alma 56:37             and as we suppose it was their intent
and as we supposed that it was their intent

Alma 56:48             we do not doubt our mothers knew it
we do not doubt; our mothers knew

Alma 57:32             they did rise up in rebellion
they did raise up in rebellion

Alma 58:2               they were so much more numerous
they were so exceeding more numerous

Alma 58:4               to the governor of our land
to the great governor of our land

Alma 58:33             behold we trust in our God who …
behold we trust that it is our God who …

Alma 59:8               they came even and joined the army
they came over and joined the army

Alma 59:9               than to retake it from them
<omit>

Helaman 1:9           they sent forth one Kishkumen
they sent forth one Kishcumen

Helaman 1:29         and thus he did and he did head them
and thus he did head them

Helaman 2:4           for there was one Gadianton
for there was one Gaddianton

Helaman 3:3           in the forty and sixth yea there were …
in the forty and sixth year there were …

Helaman 4:12         and deserting away
and dissenting away

Helaman 4:25         exceedingly more numerous
more exceeding numerous

Helaman 6:20         every means in their power
every means whatsoever was in their power

Helaman 6:21         the more part of the Nephites
the more parts of the Nephites

Helaman 7:10         the garden gate which led by the highway
the garden gate which was by the highway

Helaman 7:16         how could ye have given way
how could ye have given away

Helaman 8:11         the waters … parted hither and thither
the waters … departed hither and thither

Helaman 8:19         even since the days of Abraham
ever since the days of Abraham

Helaman 8:20         and also Ezias and also Isaiah
and also Ezaias and also Isaiah

Helaman 9:36         that I Nephi know nothing concerning …
that I Nephi knew nothing concerning …

Helaman 12:15       for surely it is the earth that moveth
for sure it is the earth that moveth

Helaman 12:22       and woe unto him to whom he shall say this
and woe unto whom he shall say this

Helaman 14:5         there shall a new star arise
there shall be a new star arise

Helaman 16:3         when they saw that they could not …
when they saw this, that they could not …

Helaman 16:11       and these were the conditions
and thus were the conditions

3 Nephi 2:18          they did come forth
they did come forth again

3 Nephi 4:28          they did fell the tree to the earth
they did fall the tree to the earth

3 Nephi 5:9            a shorter but true account
a more short but a true account

3 Nephi 7:3            and thus they became tribes
and thus there became tribes

3 Nephi 9:9            the people of the king of Jacob
the people of the king Jacob

3 Nephi 9:21          I have come unto the world
I have come into the world

3 Nephi 10:4  <omit>
O ye people of the house of Israel

3 Nephi 11:0          Jesus Christ did show himself
Jesus Christ sheweth himself

3 Nephi 11:8          and behold they saw a Man
and behold they saw a man

3 Nephi 14:4          let me pull the mote out of thine eye
let me pull out the mote out of thine eye

3 Nephi 16:6          the Holy Ghost which witnesses unto them
the Holy Ghost which witness unto them

3 Nephi 16:15        but if they will not turn unto me
but if they will not return unto me

3 Nephi 16:17        and then the words … shall be fulfilled
and when the words … shall be fulfilled

3 Nephi 17:5          and beheld they were in tears
and behold they were in tears

3 Nephi 18:13        the gates of hell is ready, open to receive them
the gates of hell is already open to receive them

3 Nephi 18:16        I have set an example for you
I have set an example before you

3 Nephi 18:34        which hath been among you
which hath been among you beforetimes

Finally, in August 2009 the last part of volume 4 was published, with the following statistical summary of the analysis:

811 cases of variation (or potential variation) analyzed

304 differences between the critical text and the standard text

52 readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition:

1 in O only; 27 in P only (in cases where O is not extant); 1 in both O and P;

23 conjectured readings

47 readings that make a difference that would show up in translation

17 readings that make the Book of Mormon more consistent in phraseology or usage

4 readings that restore a unique phrase or word choice to the text

These results are much like those for parts 2 and 3 since O is generally not extant for the last part of the Book of Mormon text. Here are some of the more significant changes proposed for the text in part 6 of volume 4:

Current  reading (or equivalent)
Revised reading

3 Nephi 21:9          and there shall be among them those
and there shall be many among them

3 Nephi 21:16        and I will cut off witchcrafts out of thy land
and I will cut off witchcrafts out of thy hand

3 Nephi 22:4          and shalt not remember the reproach of thy youth
<omit>

3 Nephi 22:17        every tongue that shall revile against thee
every tongue that shall rise against thee

3 Nephi 25:2          the Son of righteousness arise
the Sun of righteousness arise

3 Nephi 28:3          blessed are ye because ye desired this thing
blessed are ye because ye desire this thing

3 Nephi 28:36        I knew not whether they were cleansed
I knew not whether they were changed

4 Nephi 1:27          there were many churches which professed to know the Christ
there were churches which professed to know the Christ
Mormon 2:4           we did come to the city of Angola
we did come to the city of Angolah

Mormon 4:14         many prisoners both women and children

many prisoners of women and of children

Mormon 6:14         and Jeneum had fallen with his ten thousand
and Joneum had fallen with his ten thousand

Mormon 6:15         and a few which had deserted over unto the Lamanites
and a few which had dissented over unto the Lamanites

Mormon 8:9           save it be the Lamanites and robbers
save it be Lamanites and robbers

Mormon 8:10         and whether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth
and whither they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth

Mormon 8:28         leaders of churches and teachers shall rise
leaders of churches and teachers shall be lifted up

Ether 1:34               Jared his brother said unto him
therefore Jared his brother said unto him

Ether 1:41               and gather together … thy families
and gather together … thy family

Ether 1:43               and thus I will do unto thee
and this I will do unto thee

Ether 2:11               until the fullness come
until the fullness be come

Ether 2:13               and they dwelt in tents and dwelt in tents
and they dwelt in tents

Ether 2:14             at the end of four years
at the end of the four years

Ether 2:25               for ye cannot cross this great deep
for how be it / ye cannot cross this great deep

Ether 3:1                 he did carry them in his hands upon the top
he did carry them in his hands up on the top

Ether 3:18               and all this that this man knew that …
and all this because that this man knew that …

Ether 4:1                 and for this cause did king Mosiah keep them
and for this cause did king Benjamin keep them

Ether 6:5                 there should be a furious wind blow
there should a furious wind blow

Ether 8:24               or woe be unto it
for woe be unto it

Ether 9:2                 which did not seek his destruction
which were not or which did not seek his destruction

Ether 9:22               yea and he even saw the Son of righteousness
yea and he even saw the Sun of righteousness

Ether 11:4               and Shiblom reigned in his stead
and Shiblon reigned in his stead

Ether 12:2               for he could not be restrained
for he could not be constrained

Ether 12:4               which hope cometh of faith maketh an anchor
which hope cometh of faith and maketh an anchor

Ether 13:31             and there was none to restrain them
and there was none to constrain them

Ether 14:2 and of his wives and children
and they of his wife and children

Ether 14:12             he fled to the borders upon the seashore
he fled to the borders by the seashore

Ether 14:17             and he did slay both women and children
and he did slay both men women and children

Ether 14:28             the valley of Shurr was near the hill Comnor
the valley of Shurr was near the hill Comron

Moroni 7:16           and to persuade to believe in Christ
and persuadeth to believe in Christ

Moroni 7:26           and by faith they become the sons of God
and by faith they became the sons of God

Moroni 9:24           many of our brethren have deserted over
many of our brethren have dissented over

Moroni 9:24           and many more will also desert over unto them
and many more will also dissent over unto them

Moroni 10:34         before the pleasing bar of the great Jehovah
before the pleading bar of the great Jehovah

3. What other volumes will be published as part of this project?

(a) Volume 3, The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon

In this third volume, I will discuss each step in the transmission of the text, including Joseph Smith’s dictating of the text and his scribes’ writing it down (the original manuscript), their copying of the text into the printer’s manuscript, the typesetting of the first (1830) edition, and the publishing of 19 significant editions since then (the 1837 and 1840 under Joseph Smith’s direction, plus 12 more within the LDS textual tradition, and 5 within the RLDS textual tradition). This volume will examine some of the important issues regarding how Joseph Smith translated and what kind of text was revealed to him. Each edition will also be examined in terms of its editing history. Each type of grammatical editing will be thoroughly described in this volume. There will also be a lined-up comparison between the biblical quotations from the King James Bible and the corresponding Book of Mormon passages.

In 2002 I decided that I could not produce volume 3 without first determining what the original text was. For that reason, volume 4 has been published first – and also in parts, so that the reading public will have time to examine the textual analysis in manageable segments.

(b) Volume 5, A Complete Electronic Collation of the Book of Mormon

This last volume will be available in an electronic format. A few printed copies of the collation will be prepared for archival purposes. In this volume, the entire text for both manuscripts and the 20 editions is lined up and compared, with every difference specified – not only word and phrase differences, but also punctuation, capitalization, spelling, paragraphing, versification, and so forth. The differences will be categorized and can be searched in terms of the type of change. I am planning to make this electronic collation available at the same time volume 3 is published.

4. What are some of the major findings of this project?

(a) The original manuscript supports the hypothesis that the text was given to Joseph Smith word for word and that he could see the spelling of the names (in support of what witnesses of the translation process claimed about Joseph’s translation – namely, that he spelled out the Book of Mormon names, at least when the name first appeared).

(b) The original text is much more consistent and systematic in expression than has ever been realized.

(c) There are a number of errors in the text that have never been corrected in any LDS or RLDS edition, although none of them fundamentally alter the text.

(d) There are occasional errors in the original manuscript itself (see, for instance, the reading “Ishmael and also his hole hole” in 1 Nephi 7:5); errors could enter the text from its very earliest transmission; many of the errors in the original manuscript show that this manuscript was written down from oral dictation.

(e) Errors in the printer’s manuscript clearly show that this manuscript was produced by visual copying from another text, not by oral dictation.

(f) Joseph Smith’s editing for the second and third editions (1837 and 1840) represents human editing, not a revealed revision of the text.

(g) The original text includes unique kinds of expression that appear to be uncharacteristic of English in any time and place; some of these expressions are Hebraistic in nature.

(h) The early transmission of the Book of Mormon text does not in general support the traditional assumptions of textual criticism – namely, the assumptions that the transmitted text tends to remove difficult readings and lengthen the text; instead, the early transmission of the Book of Mormon text tends to introduce more difficult readings and to omit words and phrases.

(i) The vocabulary of the Book of Mormon text appears to derive from the 1500s and the 1600s, not from the 1800s.

This last finding is quite remarkable. Lexical evidence suggests that the original text contained a number of expressions and words with meanings that were lost from the English language by 1700, including the following (with the date of their last citation in the Oxford English Dictionary given in parentheses):

to require ‘to request’ (1665)

Enos 1:18 reads “thy fathers have also required of me this thing”

[Ezra 8:22: “for I was ashamed to require of the king a band of soldiers and horsemen to help us against the enemy in the way”]

sermon ‘talk, discourse, speech’ (1594) [conjectural emendation]

Mosiah 19:24 should read “after they had ended the sermon”

(not the current reading “after they had ended the ceremony”)

to cast arrows ‘to shoot arrows’ (1609)

Alma 49:4 reads “the Lamanites could not cast their stones and their arrows at them”

[Proverbs 26:18: “as a mad man who casteth firebrands arrows and death”]

to counsel ‘to counsel with’ (1547)

Alma 37:37 originally read “counsel the Lord in all thy doings”

[similarly in Alma 39:10]

but if ‘unless’ (1596)

Mosiah 3:19 originally read “for the natural man is an enemy to God …

and will be forever and ever but if he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit”

to depart ‘to part’ (1677)

Helaman 8:11 originally read “to smite upon the waters of the Red Sea

and they departed hither and thither”

extinct: in reference to an individual’s death (1675)

Alma 44:7 reads “and inflect the wounds of death in your bodies

that ye may become extinct” [similarly in several other places]

the pleading bar of God (not in the Oxford English Dictionary, but three early 1600 citations have been found, including one in a legal context) [conjectural emendation]

Jacob 6:13 should read “until I shall meet you before the pleading bar of God”, not “the pleasing bar of God” [similarly in Moroni 10:34]

As noted, only two of these instances of archaic vocabulary (dating from Early Modern English) are found in the 1611 King James Bible.

5. What have been the most significant events in the history of this project?

Besides the actual publishing of the volumes of the critical text themselves, there are two events that stand out:

(a) April 1991: two weeks spent in Independence, Missouri, making a careful examination of my transcript of the printer’s manuscript against the actual manuscript, with the assistance of my wife, Sirkku, and Ron Romig, archivist for the Community of Christ (then the RLDS Church).

(b) October 1991: three weeks working with Robert Espinosa and his fellow conservators at the BYU library on fragments of the original manuscript owned by the Wilford Wood family of Bountiful, Utah; these fragments were photographed in ultraviolet light by David Hawkinson and constitute about two percent of the original manuscript.

6. What has been your relationship with the LDS and RLDS Churches in this project?

This project began as an independent scholarly project, and I have made sure by legal agreements that this independence has been preserved. Since the beginning of this project (in 1988) the LDS Historical Department has provided full access to ultraviolet photographs of the original manuscript and has allowed me to directly examine the original manuscript as well as their enormous library of Book of Mormon editions. Without their cooperation, this project would never have been possible. Similarly, archivist Ron Romig, church historian Richard Howard (now retired), and the leadership of the Community of Christ (formerly the RLDS Church) have also been fully cooperative in providing access to the printer’s manuscript as well as an enlarged photocopy of that manuscript, plus their large collection of Book of Mormon editions.

In 1994 the LDS Church Scriptures Committee requested that I provide information about my findings on the text. For the next four to five years, this information was conveyed to the Scriptures Committee. Prior to submitting this information, however, the Church, BYU, and I signed a legally binding letter of understanding guaranteeing the independence of the critical text project, with these two important provisos: (1) I would hold the copyright to the critical text, and (2) I would exercise complete control over the content of the critical text, including my interpretations and analyses of the text.

The critical text project is a scholarly one and has not received any ecclesiastical approval or endorsement. The transcripts and the textual interpretations represent my own scholarly work, with peer review from a number of scholars (especially David Calabro, a graduate student in Hebrew studies at the University of Chicago). I have received no explicit response regarding any of my interpretations or suggestions for changes from the Church Scriptures Committee. The Church committee has had full access to my findings and is free to use them (or not use them) as they wish.

I have also retained the right to legally extend this freedom to use the results of the critical text project to anyone wishing to create their own single reading of the Book of Mormon text, including the Community of Christ and other churches as well as publishing firms interested in producing a noncritical edition of the Book of Mormon.

7. Will any of these changes appear in subsequent LDS editions of the Book of Mormon?

I do not know the answer to this question. The Church will decide for itself what changes, if any, will be implemented. The Church has never engaged in a public discussion of such changes or the arguments for making (or not making) those changes. On the other hand, this scholarly critical text project promotes public discussion and, when done properly, establishes an on-going process and allows others to contribute. For instance, as part of this project, I have requested anyone who has any suggestions for emendations to the text or questions about problematic readings to send them to me. Thus far I have received over a hundred suggestions for change – and about thirty percent of these have led to emendations in the text. Surprisingly, most of these emendations have come not from scholars but from regular members of the Church – readers of the Book of Mormon who are simply striving to understand the text. Such an open request for participation has significantly improved the findings of this project.

One important fact that I realized early on in this project is that the original text is not fully recoverable by scholarly means. Only 28 percent of the Book of Mormon text is extant in the original manuscript. Over half of the new readings that have never appeared in any standard printed edition derive from readings in the original manuscript. Oliver Cowdery averaged about three textual changes per manuscript page as he copied from the original manuscript into the printer’s manuscript. The clear majority of these changes would be unrecoverable if those portions of the original manuscript were not extant. In most cases we have no clue that there is even an error in the current text unless the original manuscript tells us so. Given that the majority of the original manuscript is no longer extant, we will be unable to fully recover the original text by human means. And even the extant portions of the original manuscript probably have errors that we are unaware of. The only way that the original text could be fully restored would be if the Lord chose to reveal it again. Such is definitely not within the purview of this scholarly project.

One valuable aspect of this public, scholarly discussion of the text is that later changes in the text could be made by the Church without engendering the typical complaint that the Church is making changes for political reasons. Note, in particular, the uproar over the 1981 change in 2 Nephi 30:6 from “a white and a delightsome people” to “a pure and a delightsome people”. The change was first implemented in the 1840 edition; Joseph Smith’s motivation for making that change was based on quite something else, as I argue in part 2 of volume 4 under 2 Nephi 30:6. An independent public discussion in a scholarly context will avoid having the Church take abuse for making alterations to the text.

8. Does this project have an apologetic purpose? In other words, is one of its purposes to defend the Book of Mormon against detractors?

My task, as I have always seen it, is to recover the original English-language text to the extent scholarly and academic analysis will allow. I have therefore restricted my discussion to the text per se and have completely avoided discussions of whether there are practices found among the cultures of the world (including the Americas) in support of particular readings. Nor have I engaged in any discussion of external evidences for the Book of Mormon, including questions of geography, genetics, and archaeology.

My initial endeavor as editor of the critical text project was to produce a detailed transcription of the original and printer’s manuscripts. And right from the beginning, I discovered errors that had crept into the text as Oliver Cowdery and the other scribes produced the printer’s manuscript from the original manuscript. Within a year or so I recognized that I would not be able to completely recover the original text by scholarly methods. Yet at the same time, I began to see considerable evidence for the traditional interpretation that witnesses of the translation process claimed: (1) the text was given word for word, (2) Book of Mormon names were frequently spelled out the first time they occurred in the text, and (3) during dictation there was no rewriting of the text except to correct errors in taking down the dictation. Joseph Smith was literally reading off an already composed English-language text. The evidence in the manuscripts and in the language of the text itself supports the hypothesis that the Book of Mormon was a precisely determined text. I do not consider this conclusion apologetic, but instead as one demanded by the evidence.

The opposing viewpoint, that Joseph Smith got ideas and he translated them into his own English, cannot be supported by the manuscript and textual evidence. The only substantive argument for this alternative view has been the nonstandard nature of the text, with its implication that God would never speak ungrammatical English, so the nonstandard usage must be the result of Joseph Smith putting the ideas he received into his own language. Yet with the recent finding that the original vocabulary of the text appears to be dated from the 1500s and 1600s (not the 1800s), we now need to consider the possibility that the ungrammaticality of the original text may also date from that earlier period of time, not necessarily from Joseph’s own time and place. Joseph Smith is not the author of the Book of Mormon, nor is he actually the translator. Instead, he was the revelator: through him the Lord revealed the English-language text (by means of the interpreters, later called the Urim and Thummim, and the seer stone). Such a view is consistent, I believe, with Joseph’s use elsewhere of the verb translate to mean ‘transmit’ and the noun translation to mean ‘transmission’ (as in the eighth Article of Faith).

I should also point out that my personal testimony of the Book of Mormon is not dependent upon my work on this project. The Book of Mormon stands on its own and is ultimately not dependent on how that text may vary in printed editions or in the manuscripts. Moroni promised that the Lord will give a testimony of the book to the prayerful reader – irrespective of any infelicities and errors in the text (which Moroni recognized could be there, as he himself noted in the last sentence on the title page of the Book of Mormon). I received my own personal witness of this book long before I ever began work on this project. I have never needed to prove to myself that the text is from the Lord. Nor have errors in the text ever prevented the Spirit from bearing witness that the book is the Lord’s.

My own personal witness of this book dates from 1979, when I was reading the book during a time of difficulty. I was reading the words that king Lamoni’s queen expresses as she comes out of her state of unconsciousness:

Alma 19:29-30 (original text)

she arose and stood upon her feet and cried with a loud voice saying

O blessed Jesus who has saved me from an awful hell

O blessed God have mercy on this people

and when she had said this she clapped her hands being filled with joy

speaking many words which were not understood

As I was reading this passage, the Spirit witnessed to me, “This really happened.” What is interesting about this passage is that I didn’t actually read “she clapped her hands” (the reading based on the printer’s manuscript), but instead I read “she clasped her hands” (the reading found in the 1830 edition as well as in all LDS editions). Now I do not take this personal witness as evidence that I should reject the earliest reading, clapped. It simply means that the Lord witnesses the truthfulness of this book irrespective of the minor errors that may have crept in. I know of no error that changes any doctrine or the basic account of the text. There is no error, awkward expression, or ungrammaticality in any of the printed editions of the book that will prevent the honest reader from gaining a testimony of the Book of Mormon.

9. So why should we be interested in recovering the original English-language text of the Book of Mormon?

The major thrust of this project is oriented towards scholars, not the lay readers of the book. There is no reason to restore in the current standard text the nonstandard language and the non-English Hebraisms that were largely eliminated by Joseph Smith himself in his editing of the text for the second (1837) edition. On the other hand, many of the word and phrase changes proposed by the critical text project (such as those listed under question 2 above) make the text much more systematic and consistent. The Church (especially in its 1920 and 1981 editions) has sought to print an accurate text, including the restoration of original readings (providing the language itself is standard English).

From a scholarly perspective, restoring the original text provides new ways of viewing the Book of Mormon text. By studying the language of the text, I have seen much that confirms my personal testimony of the book as well as what early witnesses of the translation were able to observe.

10. Won’t changing the text prove embarrassing for some commentaries and interpretations by church leaders and scholars?

I do not think this is much of a problem. There are so few examples where restoring an original reading will cause difficulties for previous commentary. In virtually every case, the original text will reinforce and make gospel principles even clearer. As an example, there is the passage in Alma 39:13 where Alma tells his son Corianton (in the current text) to “return unto them [the Zoramites] and acknowledge your faults and that wrong which ye have done”. Yet the original text read here “return unto them and acknowledge your faults and repair that wrong which ye have done”. The original text emphasizes that repentance involves more than saying “I’m sorry”: it requires us to do all we can to make restitution for our sins. This doctrine is, of course, supported by other passages in the Book of Mormon (see, for instance, Helaman 5:17).

One place where the original reading will lead to some revision of commentary deals with the parenthetical phrase that Joseph Smith added to the 1840 edition in 1 Nephi 20:1, which explains that the phrase “the waters of Judah” means ‘the waters of baptism’. The 1920 edition removed the parentheses that Joseph had placed around the extra phrase “or out of the waters of baptism”, which has subsequently led some church writers to interpret the additional phraseology as part of the original Isaiah text, with a few writers even accusing ancient Jewish scribes as having purposely removed a clear Old Testament reference to baptism from the book of Isaiah!

11. Would it be worth doing textual criticism for the translations of the English-language Book of Mormon into other languages?

Yes. In fact, I can think of one very specific aspect that could be of tremendous benefit to my own project – namely, the question of how translators have dealt with problematic passages. Their solutions may suggest possible conjectural emendations for the English-language text. As an example, consider the English-language reading for Mosiah 17:13: “they took him and bound him and scourged his skin with fagots yea even unto death”. This passage literally states that Abinadi was whipped to death with bundles of sticks. I have conjectured that the word scourged here is a mishearing for scorched, the verb used in the next verse (Mosiah 17:14) to refer to Abinadi’s death by fire (“and now when the flames began to scorch him”). And some foreign language translators have also realized that the text intends to say that Abinadi was burnt to death and have therefore substituted for scourged a verb that is equivalent to burning rather than whipping. Some students in my class on textual criticism have involved themselves in projects of this sort, but their work has been limited to a few languages and only to checking whether the English-language conjectures proposed in this project can be found in any of the translations. It would undoubtedly be worthwhile checking the other side of the coin: Are there readings in the translations that suggest conjectures for the English-language text?

12. What role has your theory of Analogical Modeling played in the Book of Mormon project?

Analogical Modeling (AM) is a theory of language that I have worked on since the 1970s. The traditional method for describing language has been in terms of rules, but in Analogical Modeling there are no rules, only examples (instances) of past behavior that a speaker uses to understand and produce language. AM is actually a general theory of description that uses both nearest neighbors and not-so-near neighbors (under certain well-defined conditions of homogeneity) to predict behavior.

AM has been implicitly used in many aspects of the critical text project, particularly in finding instances of usage for testing the reliability of readings. One important characteristic of the Book of Mormon – one that is very helpful in establishing the text – is the size of the book (584 pages of canonical text in the 1830 edition). The specific language of the text is sufficiently repeated throughout the book so that there are usually enough exemplars to make a reasoned analysis for any given expression or phrase. It has not, in my opinion, been fully appreciated how huge a scriptural text the Book of Mormon is and what an advantage that is in analyzing and establishing its text.

In distinction to the findings of computerized stylistic analyses of the Book of Mormon text, I have found that many expressions, phrases, and words extend throughout the text, such as the term pleading bar by both Jacob and Moroni (in Jacob 6:13 and Moroni 10:34) or the precise expression “yea even the sword of the justice of the eternal God” by both Nephi and Moroni (in 1 Nephi 12:18 and Ether 8:23). Sometimes Jacob uses expressions that are unique to him (at least in the original text), such as “the commands of God”. As many readers have recognized, every time Jacob starts to speak or write, his flowing style is almost immediately distinguishable from his brother Nephi’s complex syntax – and it doesn’t take a statistical analysis of function words within passages of five thousand words to figure this out!

As a result of my work in AM, I have continually attempted to look for exemplars that might be responsible for creating errors in the Book of Mormon text. As an example, in 2 Nephi 20:29 all the printed editions as well as the printer’s manuscript read Ramath instead of the Ramah found in Isaiah 10:29 (the original manuscript is not extant for this passage). A number of scholars have noted that Ramath would have been the earlier Hebrew form for Ramah and have therefore claimed that the Book of Mormon text here maintains the earlier Hebrew name for this place, thus showing that the Book of Mormon text was translated from a more ancient version of the book of Isaiah. What has not been noticed in all of this discussion is that within the Book of Mormon quotation for Isaiah 2-14 (found in 2 Nephi 12-24), a number of names are misspelled in the printer’s manuscript. The 1830 typesetter corrected all of these misspellings by reference to his own King James Bible – except for the case of Ramath. And for each of these misspelled names there is an analogical source for the misspelling – either a nearby word in the Isaiah quotation or a common English word or biblical name:

In the case of Ramath, we find Hamath earlier in the same chapter (2 Nephi 20:9). Another influence that would have led Oliver Cowdery to write Ramath instead of the correct Ramah would have been the name Aiath, found in the immediately preceding verse (2 Nephi 20:28). In fact, these two earlier occurrences of names ending in -ath could have readily misled the 1830 typesetter into thinking that he didn’t need to check his King James Bible for the spelling Ramath.

Three AM books have been published and are all available, two authored by me and one edited by me and colleagues:

(a) Analogical Modeling of Language (Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1989)

(b) Analogy and Structure (Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1992)

(c) Analogical Modeling: An Exemplar-Based Approach to Language, edited by Royal Skousen, Deryle Lonsdale, and Dilworth B. Parkinson (John Benjamins: Amsterdam, 2002)

These books are rather technical. For a general introduction to AM, see my article “Analogical Modeling: Exemplars, Rules, and Quantum Computing”, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Berkeley, California: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 2003), pages 425-39. A preprint version of this paper is available from our research group’s AM website: <http://humanities.byu.edu/am/>.

See Parts One, Two, and Three for our introduction of Brother Perkins and his responses to our first 10 questions.

(11) Some people have complained that the Church is being broken down or fragmented by a growing set of grievances, one might even say “grievance groups,” all of which want the Church to yield to their demands. There are secularly oriented intellectuals who feel their voices have not been heard (or even punished); women who claim they have been unjustly relegated to an inferior status; gays who claim that the Church does not understand their issues and has vigorously worked against their efforts to achieve equal rights; African-Americans who do not feel an adequate account has been given for the initial denial of the priesthood to Blacks; and American Indians who feel misunderstood and mistreated. The list could be made much longer. How can we as a Church respond in full faith to these various grievances while remaining positive and committed to the promises and covenants that ties us together?

The fortunate thing about the gospel is that it is made up of imperfect people. The unfortunate thing about the gospel is that it is made up of imperfect people. One can act from his weakness, and because he’s in a leadership position, it is seen as the position of the Church. This has been the case with the persecution of some with grievances.

On the other hand, in my experiences, it appears the Church has adopted a pattern of ignoring some problems instead of dealing with them directly. Yes, they have the power to choose which concerns are heard and dealt with, but this doesn’t make the problems they ignore go away. This reminds me of a story President Hinckley gave in a General Conference session several years ago. He recalled his father noticing a tree was growing at an angle and asked him to go out and secure it so that it would grow straight. The then young Gordon did not follow his father’s counsel and over time the tree grew so large and slanted that it could not be corrected or saved. President Hinckley’s message was that problems left uncorrected only grow into much larger problems.

I have found in my life that groups generally only make demands when their concerns are ignored. In addition I’ve learned that demands most times will produce resistance, not results. Each of these groups you’ve mentioned are worthy of and deserving of having their concerns heard. We, the Church, administer humanitarian aid and compassionate service in impressive amounts all throughout the world, inside and outside of the Church. If we have the pattern of accomplishing this, why would we not extend it to all?

D&C 38: 26 For what man among you having twelve sons, and is no respecter of them, and they serve him obediently, and he saith unto the one: Be thou clothed in robes and sit thou here; and to the other: Be thou clothed in rags and sit thou there—and looketh upon his sons and saith I am just?

The women have a valid claim and deserve to have the claims heard and discussed. The end result may not include any changes in the way we administer the ordinances of the gospel, but there are many changes in thought and behavior that can improve their quality of life within the Church.

We could learn a great deal about what gays suffer and how we can help them in their struggles. They deserve to have their concerns heard as we work together with them in search of solutions, without compromising on eternal principles.

In 1847 Brigham Young made the first statements that the Church would stop giving priesthood to Blacks, despite that fact that the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to give priesthood to all who would embrace the gospel. From that time, Blacks have been maligned, from our contribution in the pre-existence, our reasons for being on earth, our skin color, character, lineage, noses etc. Then in 1978, when the Latter-day Saints were sufficiently believing all that they’d been taught over the 131 year span, the restriction is removed, yet none of the of the false teachings have ever been addressed. It’s the equivalent of tearing down the Berlin Wall, but never cleaning up the debris, allowing it to become a stumbling block for millions trying to come into or remain in the Church.

There is such an obvious need for clarification on the Blacks issues that many may not be able to see that there has already been a statement issued. That statement is silence. Why would the Church not speak about this, the most significant development in the Church in the past 100 years? We don’t speak about things we’re not proud of, but this one has much more at stake. Most of the Saints are deeply grateful when they see Blacks in the Scriptures or one of the firesides. They join the Church or come back into the Church or just move forward with a great fire now armed with truth. However, there are others that are shaken by it. Even though our work is positive, scripturally based and delivered with a great spirit, some unfortunately see it, and all they hear is that which they and their parents were taught by leaders of the Church that is contrary to what the scriptures actually say. This is a direct attack on their testimonies and they feel if the leaders were wrong, then the Church can’t be true. Our critics shout the exact same thing saying “If Brigham Young was wrong, then he couldn’t have been a true prophet.” This couldn’t be farther from the truth. The scriptures show us in all of the standard works, the errors of prophets and the acknowledgment of God that they would and do err. Let’s go back to D&C 1:24-28 …

24 Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.
25 And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;
26 And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed;
27 And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent;
28 And inasmuch as they were humble they might be made strong, and blessed from on high, and receive knowledge from time to time.

Out of this grows our most common question “what do the brethren say about the scriptures you’ve compiled?” So we have one group, the Saints, who are looking to the brethren to speak before they act to help their brother. Then you have another group, the Church, who has committed to remain silent on the issue. Until one of these two groups realizes the stalemate and is moved to action to help build God’s kingdom, millions outside of the Church will remain outside, and millions inside the Church will be as salt that has lost its savor.

(12) A number of studies and sources dealing with race issues (particularly vis-a-vis Blacks) and the Church have appeared in the past several years, including Armand Mauss’s sociological work; important historical research by a number of researchers including Jessie Embry, Newell Bringhurst and Darron Smith; historical fiction from Darius Gray and Margaret Young; the recent documentary Nobody Knows; and of course, your own work with Brother Gray on scriptural interpretation. What areas in the race-and-the-Church umbrella remain to be explored?

First I have to make a clarification, the Blacks in the Scriptures DVD series does not deal with scriptural interpretation. It’s critically important to make that distinction and understand the purpose for doing so. Scriptural interpretation implies that we are giving our opinions on what certain scriptures mean or could mean, which is not the case at all. What we’ve done is pointed out a wealth of scripture in all of the standard works as they relate to 5 key areas that make up the foundation of the misunderstandings. With over 2 ½ hours of scriptural evidence, there is very little, if any interpretation needed, just the ability to read, common sense and a very basic understanding of the nature of God.

There are a wealth of areas yet to be explored, though I think President Gray and I have unmasked the keystone. All concerned about this issue, in or out of the Church, want to know how Mormons believe God views His children of African descent, what role did Blacks play in Biblical history, is dark skin a curse and was the restriction on priesthood of God or man. These are the issues that keep Blacks out of the Church. We’ve seen that true doctrine understood brings them into the Church.

I recall the story of the building of the Salt Lake Temple when workers found that there were cracks in the foundation blocks. They were forced to take them out and start over, using new stones that were cut to fit together without mortar. So with obvious cracks in the foundation of the teachings regarding Blacks, it is also obvious that with over 162 years of these teachings, we now have a forest of incorrect doctrine being spread and taught. The entire forest needs to be removed with seeds of truths planted in their stead. Many Saints and leaders still incorrectly teach that interracial marriage is not of God, that the Lamanites had a darker skin than the Nephites, and that dark skin is a curse. Church manuals, children’s books, artist’s renderings are just some of the trees of this forest that need to be cut down and replaced with seeds of truth. One of our greatest areas of responsibility would be to the missionaries. They dedicate 18-24 months of their lives to go out and warn our neighbors, delivering the good news. For this labor of love, we have a responsibility to send them out prepared.

Church leaders and auxillaries are in desperate need of training. We still have parents taking their children out of nursery or primary because they don’t want them in with Black kids. We recently had a Bishop refuse baptism to several Blacks families saying that we don’t want to add so many Black families to the ward all at once. We recently had a Stake President say that he doesn’t call Black Bishops because he knows they’ll try to address the Blacks issues. We have an incredible amount of Black single sisters, but very few Black men for them to marry because the folklore and the lack of understanding of these issues has a greater effect of keeping Black men out of the Church. So these faithful sisters tarry alone waiting for their blessings. Black children struggle with self esteem because they don’t have anyone that looks like them in the circles where they spend most of their lives.

So once you get involved and actually go to the forest with your ax or chainsaw, ready to help fix the problem, then you’ll have a better view of the enormous amount of issues yet to be addressed, or trees that need to be hewn down. When a problem is ignored for as long as we have, the work of restitution could take decades. So we really should get to work on it.

D&C 123: 13 Therefore, that we should waste and wear out our lives in bringing to light all the hidden things of darkness, wherein we know them; and they are truly manifest from heaven—

(6) Do you feel like the Church at some point will need to publicly disavow old folklore regarding blacks and the priesthood? Or do you think efforts like this DVD and podcast will ultimately be successful in putting this mythology to rest? Is there a need for some kind of “affirmative action” program in the Church to quicken the pace at which old prejudices are eroded and replaced by a new more inclusive Church community?

You know what’s really funny about this is that it seems like the only people in the world who need the priesthood restriction clarified are the members of the Church. Everyone else seems to be really clear on it, and they’re just waiting for us to admit what is already known. Our refusal to do so only makes us look bad. Yes, we may have some members leave. Yes, some of our critics would cry false prophets, but none of that will ever change the fact that the Church is true. We’d deal with both of those problems in productive ways. A root canal hurts, but after a few days, you’re better off without the decay in your mouth. We’d have stronger Saints, and we’d drastically increase our convert baptisms. There is no doubt that if the Church came out and disavowed all the folklore and clarified the truths, it would help accelerate the effort. In my 20 years in the Church, I’ve never heard a talk in General Conference, sacrament, gospel doctrine or priesthood on the Blacks & the priesthood issue. If the Church chose to speak, it would be a great help. But until that time, do the Saints need to be commanded in all things?

D&C 58: 26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.

This issue could be the weighted question on the final exam for Latter-day Saints. We all see the problem, but most pass by on the other side, again, thinking someone else will take care of it.

Luke 10: 31-32 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.

In reality, the scriptures tell us that it is the Saints that have the most to lose by not reaching out to Blacks and others who are alienated from the gospel because of our teaching incorrect doctrines.

D&C 137:7 Thus came the voice of the Lord unto me, saying: All who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God…

The Lord has asked us to feed His sheep, and if we believe the scriptures, we learn the fate of those who do not:

D&C 1:10 Unto the day when the Lord shall come to recompense unto every man according to his work, and measure to every man according to the measure which he has measured to his fellow man.

D&C 104: 18 Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment.

So I don’t know if our efforts with Blacks in the Scriptures and the African American Outreach Program will be successful in doing away with the folklore amongst all of the members of the Church world wide, but I do know that we are being successful in keeping the covenants we’ve entered into by actively reaching out to all of God’s children that we have alienated from His Church. We invite every Saint to learn of these scriptural truths and have the faith to greatly increase the fold of the Lamb. We’ve done the hard work and now each can simply watch, study and pray about what they’ve seen, join us in our efforts and watch the Church grow in ways they’ve never imagined.

There have been times where the Church has not grown because they – collectively – were not doing all that they’d been commanded to do. One of the key elements in the principle of repentance is restitution. So when we live all of the principles of the gospel, restitution eliminates the need for affirmative action.

(7) Do you mind sharing with us how you felt upon hearing of the call of Elder Joseph W. Sitati as the first black African to the First Quorum of the Seventy?

I actually didn’t realize during General Conference that a Black General Authority had been called. The day after, I received an email from Africa, from a friend in Elder Sitati’s hometown announcing his joy of this news. So my first thought was to share in the joy of my friend. My second thought was that I felt sorry for Elder Sitati. Because of the Church’s silence on the Blacks issues, I feared that many would unfairly look to Elder Sitati to take on this matter that General Authorities before him have not. We’ve already received a number of contacts from all over the world on the Blacks in the Scriptures website inquiring about this very thing. The feeling that followed was one of excitement for Black, White and all in between, who’ve prayed and waited for this day to come.

(8) Do you think having a person of color in the highest circles of Church leadership will make any difference in our outreach efforts to African-Americans?

In a small way yes, but you must know that this is a problem throughout the world, not just amongst African Americans. We are working with Saints and investigators in France, England, Jamaica, Brazil and other parts of the world. Many are joining in Africa, but many are leaving as well or will not join because we are seen as the White church teaching that Blacks are cursed.

Just having a Black man in this high position has generated conversation, like your questions, which allow exchanges of information that lead to understanding the issues that keep Blacks out of the Church. However, it has been demonstrated over and over again, whatever the Church focuses on it accomplishes. I’m speaking of from the top levels or from the local leader levels, to the individual members. When the Church at any of these levels decides collectively that they’re going to address this problem, the problem will be eradicated. We already have the tools to fix it, the scriptures, and the Blacks in the Scriptures DVD series simply helps us to better understand them. We just need the Saints to pick it up and get to the work of repairing. So it’s up to us. To borrow words and sentiment from Declaration 2, when we are inspired with a desire to extend all the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords to Blacks, then the solution is simple. Until then, the reality is that the priesthood is now again available to Blacks, but in many ways, the restriction is still in place.

(9) The Church is increasingly diverse in its overall membership, with nearly a third of its membership being Hispanic. Even in Utah, wards and stakes reflect these changes. How can we avoid the damage that competing loyalties to the ethnic, national, gender, racial, political, and class elements of our identity can cause to our larger identities as brothers and sister in the Gospel?

Matt. 11: 28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

1 John. 3:17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

The invitation is for all to come and lay their burdens at the feet of the Lord. This is His Church and so this is what we, His servants welcome and dedicate our lives to. The Church organizes so incredibly well, that we can easily accommodate all that labor and are heavy laden. When we begin deciding who we help and who we do not, then we’ve established a class system which has no place in the Lord’s Church. It seems that too often we are so concerned with protecting what we have that we lose sight of the fact that when we have charity for all, we gain more than we give, which brings a couple of scriptures to mind:

Matt. 16: 25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

Mosiah 2: 17 And behold, I tell you these things that ye may learn wisdom; that ye may learn that when ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God.

If we simply focus on the covenants we’ve made, remember whose Church this is, and recognize our original identity as sons and daughters of God who kept their first estate and are now experiencing the test, we will do whatever it takes to be of one heart and one mind.

(10) On the other hand, how can we draw on the richness of our different backgrounds to increase our understanding of God’s plan and better carry out our mission to preach the “Good News” and meet or tend to the needs, both spiritual and material, of those who suffer?

Some of the greatest blessings of the Church are the abundance of gifts, talents and blessings that flow from each culture that makes up the body of Saints. One of the areas we could afford to dedicate a considerable amount of time to would be in reversing the underlying, and in some cases, overt attempts to have all that come into the Church assimilate to what I call the pioneer culture. The children of the pioneers were indeed here first. Their way of doing things, their culture, their style of worship and music became the standard. We would do well to teach the Saints that there are other ways to reverence the Lord and administer in His kingdom. There are other styles of music that are sufficiently reverent for our sacred meetings. We would be wise to discontinue attempts to make sure everyone does things the way they’ve always been done and seek to be more inclusive within the bounds of eternal principles. Each culture brings to the Church value and richness, and when tradition impedes inclusion, we unfortunately rob the Lord’s Church, ourselves and our own posterity of a multitude of blessings.

(2) At an event featuring Darius Gray last fall, Gregory Prince mentioned that the DVD was shown to the missionaries in his son’s California mission. To your knowledge, has the DVD frequently been used to train missionaries and/or leadership in this way?

It most certainly has. Many mission presidents around the world have embraced Blacks in the Scriptures. One of the statements we’ve grown accustomed to hearing is “we get these questions all the time and because we don’t know how to answer them, we’re losing Black families who would otherwise get baptized”. One of the Presidents shared something that really stuck with me. He said “not only does this give us the answers we need to be successful, but we don’t have to be experts on the subject to teach it. Because they’re on DVD it allows us to just show the DVDs, and the investigators receive a consistent message each time, while we learn as well.” I’ve even been invited in to a number of missions to teach all of the missionaries there. This format gives them an opportunity to ask questions specific to what they’re encountering.

(3) In your personal study and in developing these DVD presentations, how has your research regarding these issues influenced your approach to scripture in general, not merely scripture regarding blacks, because it’s obviously no simple thing to undo centuries or generations of assumptions about certain passages?

The passages “seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you” and “unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God” have been verified to me as truths from on high. I know that there are answers to every gospel related question that I may have, in the scriptures.

The Blacks issue almost kept me from joining the Church, seeing that not one member, missionary, mission president, seminary or institute teacher, Bishop, Stake President or Area Seventy could explain Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price scriptures that appeared to me, an investigator, to be prejudiced. This only confirmed in my mind that the Church was one big racist organization, which is a natural reaction to any who are being honest with themselves.

Shortly after I joined, I remember being in a priesthood leadership meeting in the Irvine, CA stake. Elder Robert D. Hales was teaching us and he said something along the lines of “there is an answer to every one of your questions, in the scriptures”.

I positively question and test everything, no matter who it comes from, the prophet or any neighbor. The Lord has given each of us a gift by which we can know all truths, and by questioning and testing, I always know for myself. So this was a defining moment for me to test that counsel of the Apostle which I’ve found to be true. One of the ways I put that counsel to the test was on this Blacks doctrine. Facing the priesthood, skin color and curses issue has been one of the most trying, humbling, and defining experiences of my Christianity. I knew that I was not cursed, but I went to the Lord, telling Him that if I am cursed and He tells me that I am, I can handle it. So I was willing to accept whatever was true, I just needed to hear it from Him. He confirmed to me that I was not cursed and showed me in His scriptures where man has misunderstood and misused what is written, to the point where He had to chastise them.

D&C 3:6 And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men.

So it was the scriptures that freed me from the bonds of my own ignorance and that of others. I now see the scriptures as an incredible treasure chest, with many layers that will reveal to me the mysteries of God if I demonstrate to Him that I’m willing to diligently seek, act upon what He gives me, and act responsibly with what He reveals, as I move about my brothers in sisters seeking to build His kingdom. I also see the scriptures as a divide that determines one’s ability to maximize his or her effectiveness in administering the things of God. We all can obtain a pretty good snapshot of eternal truths by reading a passage or two of scripture, but in order to truly understand the things of God, the deeper mysteries and complete pictures are revealed to me when I know what all of the books of scripture say, from Old Testament to Pearl of Great Price. This truly gives me the bigger picture. So after this project, I realized that to truly understand any gospel principle I must study the voice of the Lord and of all of the prophets, from Adam to President Monson. Out of these collective voices will arise all truths.

4) In the past, scripture has been used by some to push back against the claims of various minorities, including women, various racial, ethnic and religious groups, and those advocating for alternative sexual and marital practices. Today, we often like to give a liberal reading to the scriptures, focusing on all of the tolerant verses while ignoring the seemingly intolerant ones. In your reading of the scriptures, how have you sought to deal with this? Has your research led you to insights concerning any other groups that feel aggrieved?

In my research I’ve only sought to deal with truth, find out what is true and embrace it. I have three agendas; serve the Lord, seek truth and help others. As I mentioned earlier, I’ve learned that the key to understanding the will of the Lord is through hearing all that He’s said, and all that His prophets have said. This is why we have scriptural accounts dating back from the first man up until present day. There were times when I’d take a passage or two that fit what I wanted to believe, and was afraid to read more fearing that if I did, I might run into something that brought an entirely different meaning to the topic than I wanted to hear. I could never get comfortable with this approach which lacked integrity. I could hide from or deny the truth, but that wouldn’t change the truth. My purpose has always been to be able to go back and live with God when this life is through. Using scripture irresponsibly to suit worldly comforts, victories and pursuits is simply choosing the treasures of the world over treasures in heaven. So I only seek after truth, whatever it may be.

It’s likewise easy for some groups to find scriptural passages to support their causes, whatever they may be. However, if you listen to the voice of the Lord and all of the prophets, past and present, and all scripture, on any given subject, out of these voices will arise a consistency of eternal principals that leave no doubt as to what the Lord would have us do. Invite any of the groups you’ve mentioned to the table with the purpose of searching all of the scriptures in quest of a solution for each grievance, and you’d leave the table with more solutions for those who have valid arguments, and fewer grievances from those who realize their desires are contrary to the commandments of God.

My research has led me to insights of some of the grievances of other groups. Some of them have valid arguments and deserve a seat at the table to find resolution. Some of them are so obviously not in keeping with the commandments of God, that the fact that they’ve been given so much support or attention is a great indicator that we are truly in the last days.

(5) How have you seen attitudes among African Americans toward the Church change in the more than twenty years since you first joined? How do you think the Church and its membership is doing in the effort to reach out to the African American community?

African Americans are more convinced now that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a discriminatory Church than they were twenty years ago. There are a couple of reasons for this. One reason is because of the great ease of sharing information via the media, internet, email, YouTube etc. Our critics have a wealth of documented information flowing through these channels to justify their claims. Another reason is because the Church has chosen not to talk about this subject after 1978. The African American community has been waiting for over 30 years for the Church to clarify over 162 years of incorrect teaching regarding our race, but the Church remains silent. This position has also created a body of Saints and missionaries, teachers and leaders who are completely unaware of how to answer the “Blacks” questions, arguably the biggest thorn in the side of the Church. This means not only are they unaware of the truths, but they’re still teaching error, tarnishing the reputation of the Lord’s Church every single day. It’s amazing when you think that we, ourselves, are giving the most sacred organization on earth, a racist reputation. I just can’t imagine how the Lord can be pleased with this.

Let’s look at the impact of ignoring this issue. As reported in April 2009 General Conference, we have 52,494 missionaries in the field. Let’s be conservative and say half of those are in areas where they run into Blacks on a daily basis, and actively tract five days per week and each have a chance to speak to just one Black individual per day. So that’s 26,247 missionaries or 13,124 companionships. Remember this is extremely conservative, and with these numbers, this would mean that every week, 65,620 Blacks ask missionaries questions they can’t answer regarding the Blacks issues, which in turn confirms in their minds what our critics and history are saying about us being discriminatory, thus turning them away from the Church. So with the missionary program alone, this equates to us convincing over 34,122,240 Blacks every year that we don’t care enough about them or our errors and inequality to learn, speak about and clear up all of the incorrect teachings that keep them from joining the Church. It also sends the message that we don’t practice what we preach when it comes to repentance. Now add in all of the Whites, Latinos, Asians, Polynesians and other cultures who are asking the same questions of the missionaries. Then add the members who receive these questions themselves in the workplace, neighborhood etc, and the numbers of potential eternal families being turned away from the Lord’s true Church by those who’ve covenanted with Him to do just the opposite, become astronomical.

We’re working right now with an investigator in Las Vegas who loves the Church but has been brought an incredible amount of information demonstrating our inequality towards Blacks from her family and friends. This is a typical scenario with nearly all Black investigators in the US and abroad. She’s pleading with the members and missionaries for any information that will help her to understand what is true and is receiving an overwhelming amount of silence, and no answers. Not until she found the BlackLDS.org and BlacksintheScriptures.com websites did she feel any hope that she could ever join the Church, and is feeling her baptism will be soon.

In my experience, the Church in general is content with ignoring the African American community and these issues. They’ve somehow grown comfortable with the deafening silence caused by the non existent Black presence in their wards and stakes. I guess everybody sees it as somebody else’s responsibility, and if a ward happens to have a Black family move in, or baptize one, there seems to be an attitude of “ok, we’ve got one, and this shows that the Church is truly for all.”

There are groups and individuals however that are doing an incredible job to reach out to African Americans. Many areas in the country have tremendous public affairs efforts that are building bridges to the Black community, which efforts include family history conferences. Some of these areas are Los Angeles, the Bay Area in CA, Washington DC, Georgia and St. Louis just to name a few. Other truly inspirational endeavors are coming from Darius Gray and Margaret Young with their trilogy on Black Mormon Pioneers, the new film Nobody Knows – the Untold Story of Black Mormons and consistent national speaking engagements. The Genesis Group, FAIR, the BlackLDS.org board, Armand Mauss, Darron Smith, Dana King, Ellie Awak with her Black Latter-day Saints Facebook community, Amethyst Legree with her Black LDS MySpace community, Genesis-like groups in Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, Norfolk and other areas along with Bishop Fred Bethel, myself, the Coordinators of the African American Outreach Program and others are just a few putting forth consistent efforts to reach the Black community at large.

Many Saints across the country are going to their Stake Presidents and arranging “How to Reach African Americans” fireside presentations. Bishop Fred Bethel of Ft. Lauderdale was one of these. He was very concerned that we didn’t have a Church program that provided the continued support needed to ensure success in the Black community. So he, inspired by the success the Kenyan missionaries were experiencing using the Blacks in the Scriptures DVD series, came up with the idea for the African American Outreach Program which we launched in February of 2009. Twice per month, on the odd weeks, outreach coordinators throughout the country invite members to come and view one segment of the Blacks in the Scriptures DVD series and are encouraged to bring just one African American of another faith with them. In this manner, both the member and non-member are learning scriptural truths on the issues. In addition, the members have a chance to see the impact of these truths on non-members and become converted to the inspiration of this member oriented proselyting program as counseled by President Monson and Elder L Tom Perry in the April 2009 General Conference. At the end of each class, there is an opportunity to call in questions to our message line. We answer these questions on our podcast on the Saturday of the even weeks of the same month and archive them on the iTunes music store.

Also, some are quite surprised that participants of the African American Outreach Program will even go out into the Black community making street contacts and knocking on doors. We have generated 61 referrals for the missionaries so far this year, had 21 baptisms and 8 reactivations. We recently taught a set of missionaries how to be successful with African Americans, and they came back after just four days reporting that they are actively teaching 16 families because of their new approach.

Matt. 26: 40 And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?

So if the Saints would simply “watch with us for one hour” by joining us in addressing this epidemic, we’d be able to easily double if not triple the convert baptisms each year and put this problem behind us once and for all. Problems ignored don’t go away, they only grow larger.

On to the 12 Questions… or it least the first question. We’ve broken up our Q&A with Brother Perkins into more manageable chunks, and his first response is worthy of a post in its own right.

(See Parts Two, Three, and Four of the series for Brother Perkins’ responses to our next 11 questions.)

(1) How did the lecture series that ultimately came to be Blacks in the Scriptures come about, how widely has the DVD series been circulated, and what has been the response?

Darius Gray has been a member of the LDS church for over 40 years. I joined over 20 years ago. The restriction on priesthood to Blacks and the myriad of incorrect teachings that resulted from this policy almost kept the two of us from joining the church, and are responsible for turning hundreds of thousands away from the church every year. Having to deal with this obstacle in our own conversion, we have been at work for our entire membership trying to find ways to help those who have ears to hear but are turned away because of incorrect doctrines, as well as those members whose hearts are right, however are unaware of the truths surrounding these issues, thus unable to remove the walls that keep so many from joining. After I was baptized I was excited to find some of the truths that would have helped me get here sooner. I wrote to the First Counselor in the First Presidency at the time, President Gordon B. Hinckley, asking if he could share some of these truths during General Conference. He wrote back encouraging me to start small in my local quorums, wards and stakes and let the message spread in this manner. From this message I went from asking someone else to teach this, to realizing that I would be one of those who would bring it forth.

The more we’d studied, fasted and prayed, the more we learned. The more we learned, the more invitations we’d receive to present firesides and speak on the subject. I served under President Gray during his years as Genesis president, as the Genesis Mission leader and on a special project to help reactivate Blacks Saints in the Utah north area. So though we were closely connected through service, even outside of Utah, we’d never had the chance to present our firesides together until 2005 at the FAIR conference. Prior to the conference I’d received a request to come to the UK to teach my findings. I declined this invitation feeling that the money they’d spend to bring me there could go to better use, and letting them know that I could find a way to teach them this material electronically.

Shortly after, President Gray and I presented at the FAIR conference and had a chance to see how well our presentations were received, and how well they complimented each other’s. I told him about the invitation from the UK and that we had to find a way to bring all of this information to people who couldn’t afford to bring us in or who couldn’t obtain or wait for a fireside to be approved and arranged. He agreed and we immediately began brainstorming there at the conference. We agreed that putting the presentations onto DVD was the most cost and time efficient way to get the message to the greatest number of people world wide. Now, all we had to do was to put the idea to prayer and see what the Lord had to say about it. We set a date to fast and pray, and both received the answer that we should move forward with the work. Now I’m a big believer in the idea that if the Lord really wants you to do something, He makes it pretty clear and leads you in that direction. Well our first order of business was to go through our presentations thoroughly and verify all of our material. Producing this work was intended only to help others, but we were wise enough to realize that there would be critics looking for error as well.

So in the process of doing this I received another level of conversion. I remember speaking to President Gray by phone and him telling me that he’d received a flood of inspiration the night before, it just kept flowing and flowing he told me. I was in my car listening to the scriptures when this happened to me the first time. The inspiration was coming so fast that I asked the Lord if He could slow it down a bit because I was driving. I couldn’t write that fast while I was driving, and shouldn’t be writing while I was driving, and didn’t think I’d be able to remember it all. Then, in addition to putting into my mind certain scriptures, and how they tied into each other and their meanings, came through the still small voice, “this work is of me and I will help you to remember.” And he was true to His word.

On the day of the filming, I realized that we had not seen each other’s enhanced presentations. I thought to myself, the final test will be to see if there is any conflict in material, especially with his “Blacks in the Bible” and my “Skin Color & Curses.” There was not. Everything in both presentations complimented and supported doctrinal and eternal principles beautifully.

The DVDs are now in 16 countries: United States, Canada, Mexico, Peru, New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, Jamaica, England, France, Portugal, Ghana, Uganda, Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa. Those who buy from the website may not be aware of this, but for every DVD set sold, we donate a set. So every set in Africa, Jamaica, Peru and Mexico and Brazil were donations made possible by those who purchased from BlacksintheScriptures.com.

Blacks of other faiths see the DVDs which change everything they’ve ever thought about the Church. It’s an instant bridge that only takes an hour to build, and works better than any effort the church has ever put forth to reach the African American community. It simply takes the wall down that kept them out of the church and teaches them more about Blacks in biblical history than any church, book or preacher ever has. The only question they seem to have is why is it that two Black men are going around clearing up this problem, instead of the Whites who caused it, which is ironic because the Whites of the church think that this is a matter best handled by Blacks.

The overwhelming majority of members who view Blacks in the Scriptures express a gospel changing experience. They see the Plan of Salvation in a much clearer light. They are now grateful to be able to reconcile with scripture the discomfort they’ve felt with the previously taught folklore. In addition, they’re excited to be able to finally understand and explain to neighbors scriptures that are commonly used incorrectly to demonstrate that our doctrine is racist. Some missionaries around the country have shared with me that they avoid African Americans because they know that they’ll have the priesthood/curse questions, and they themselves can’t answer them. Now after seeing Blacks in the Scriptures, these same missionaries are seeking out Blacks to bring them the good news.

Many of the Saints express how embarrassed they are that the answers have been in the scriptures the entire time, yet they didn’t put enough time, study and prayer into them to discover these things for themselves. Many outside the church express a great deal of gratitude that “the Mormons” are finally talking about this issue and they are very pleased and impressed with what they’re hearing. And with the scriptural passage “by their fruits ye shall know them” in mind, Blacks and people of all cultures are joining the church and coming back into the church as a result. Missionaries are experiencing that many who didn’t want to speak with them anymore, now have open doors and have accepted the gospel. The scriptural truths contained in the DVD series, simply fixes one of the church’s largest problems.

And then you have a few that struggle. They’d always been taught that Blacks were less valiant or cursed or not ready etc. They’ve been taught this information by prophets and apostles and had it sustained by prophets and apostles that followed, some by their silence. So this creates two major problems. These teaching grew out of a time where we did not have racial equality, or better yet, human rights. Many grew up believing that they were truly superior to Blacks and this gave them a false sense of self-esteem, which caused them to speak as authorities instead of brothers, and carry themselves with a sense of entitlement. Now that they realize we’re all the same, some feel as though they’ve been demoted in stature and they feel less self-worth.

Then you have those who are not familiar enough with the scriptures or the Plan of Salvation to understand that all prophets and apostles make mistakes. They mistakenly believe that all prophets are to be perfect in the administration of the things of God and because of this, their testimony of the truthfulness of the Church suffers a major blow and they begin to doubt and struggle. After we show them D&C 1:24-28 …

24 Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.
25 And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;
26 And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed;
27 And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent;
28 And inasmuch as they were humble they might be made strong, and blessed from on high, and receive knowledge from time to time.

… and a list of prophets who’ve made errors from the Old Testament to the Doctrine and Covenants they begin to see that their testimonies were weighted too much on the Brethren who are imperfect and not enough on Christ who is perfect, and His restored gospel. With this realization, the shift is made and they become stronger, more productive Saints, now able to help their brother.