The Christian Bible is unequivocally the most significant text ever authored based solely on the sheer volume of individuals that have been exposed to its influence. Reproduced in more languages and greater quantities than any other single book in human history, the Bible has become a largely ubiquitous concept, regardless of religious tradition or physical location. In some circumstances with appropriate societal stimuli, such as the nineteenth century New England ripe with Revolution ideals, a feverous religious ethos is the consequence of a biblical super-saturated populace.
In the excerpt from Philip L. Barlow’s book "Mormons and the Bible: the Place of the Latter-day Saints in American Religion", the religious scholar considers the indirect impact of the Bible on Joseph Smith’s formative period and how this directly affects the Book of Mormon. Beyond determining that Smith had definitively read some portion of the Bible, and was thus familiar with some essential scriptures, prior to his dictation of the Book of Mormon, Barlow focuses on the myriad ways the Bible ultimately affected the Prophet and are expressed in his “third testament” (Barlow, 40). Barlow posits that it was not the physical or intellectual act of reading the Bible that profoundly affected Smith’s dictation. Instead, the historian argues that the ethos created by the ubiquity of the Bible is subtly manifested in the Book of Mormon. For example, the religious language Smith uses subconsciously throughout the text is based on popular vernacular that has integrated biblical vocabulary.
Barlow identifies and explicates parallels and discontinuities between the King James Version of the Bible and the Book of Mormon to highlight subtly biblical influences in the latter text. Fundamentally, the Book of Mormon is intended as a “restoration of the truths, ordinances, and priesthood of all eras or ‘dispensations’, including Old Testament” to the pure state of Christianity, and a fairly high degree of correlation between the texts is expected (18). However, Barlow maintains that both parallels and discontinuities belie biblical influence. Parallels demonstrate the inseparability of biblical Christianity from the Smith’s worldview. Deviations from the King James Version are indicative of Smith’s dissatisfaction and desire to return the scripture to its accurate condition. Additionally, Barlow addresses an anomalous aspect of Smith’s amendments compared to other religious texts: being that Smith directly inserts himself into the Book of Mormon. The Prophet includes his existence and even attempts to define himself and his work as the realization of various biblical prophesies. The Second Book of Nephi, Chapter 29, explicitly addresses the creation of texts such as the Book of Mormon while the Fourth Nephi, Chapter 1, Verse 49, alludes to the creation of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith.
The excerpts from Barlow and the Book of Mormon raise several questions regarding the true nature of the interplay between the Bible and the Book of Mormon. Is the Book of Mormon an independent “restoration” of the true words of God, as claimed by Joseph Smith? Or is the Book of Mormon a byproduct of the Bible saturated ethos that conditioned Joseph Smith? Neither question addresses the veracity of the contents of the Book of Mormon or the Bible; responses should consider historical and linguistic analyses. Additionally, what does Joseph Smith's inclusion of himself in the Book of Mormon indicate about Joseph Smith?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe that Joseph Smith made a conscious choice in using Biblical language to add legitimacy to the Book of Mormon as a true piece of God’s scripture. He was raised in a society full of religious vigor, but this would not have predisposed him to write in a certain way. In fact, he rejected all of the zealous religious sects and tried to find his own enlightenment. The religious saturation of the time would have been more likely to drive Smith away from traditional standards rather than inspire a similar writing style.
ReplyDeleteI think that his reason for writing in a Biblical style and even borrowing almost exact quotes from the Bible was to promote his new scripture as a sequel to the preexisting Old and New Testaments. Joseph Smith did indeed live in a Bible-based society, but his main reason in writing in a Biblical style was to present the Book of Mormon as a direct continuation of the King James Bible.
Your blog post contends that Philip Barlow asserts that Joseph Smith used biblical language subconsciously during his dictation of the book of Mormon. I would argue that Barlow neither proposes that Smith inserts the language subconsciously nor that Smith purposely employs religious language. Implying one or the other would contend that Smith was not truly reading from the book of Mormon, but that he was making up scripture as he was going. Barlow is careful not to dismiss the book of Mormon as a falsehood, but he does cast doubts on its veracity. Lending skepticism to the book of Mormon, the author mentions the religious language of Smith’s day may have transferred into the translation of the book of Mormon. However, Barlow also quotes Emma Smith who contends just the opposite; Joseph Smith lacked the ability to write the book of Mormon on his own. Barlow leaves his readers to make their own conclusions about the origin of the biblical language found in the book of Mormon.
ReplyDeleteI think Jacob made a really good point about Smith blending Biblical style and vernacular language in creating the Book of Mormon. To make his faith legitimate, Smith cannot write like the Bible. The people does not need another Bible, they already have one passed down from the ages. So in order to strengthen his faith, he must incorporate some contemporary components to make Mormonism seem more relatable. In the Book of Mormon, repetition of the phrase “the promised land” is meant to conjure images of the New World and correlates with America’s ideal of their “manifest destiny” to rule from coast to coast. Smith actually gave religious support of this popular idea which resounded with his audience.
ReplyDeleteIn the Book of Mormons there are many events similar to Biblical stories, however the morals of each disaster are based on the same set of God’s laws. I feel it is Smith’s attempt to restore faith. Perhaps he felt the public needed more recent examples of God’s wrath to remain fearfully virtuous. The fact that Smith included himself in the Book of Mormon indicates that he sees himself as the savior of contemporary American souls and clearly, this gives him unprecedented power in his Church and makes it easier to find new converts.
I believe that Joseph Smith’s diction in the Book of Mormon was intentionally chosen to call upon the Bible. Like other have said before me, Smith understood that he had to associate Mormonism with Christianity in order to gain supporters. However, I wouldn’t say that he saw it as “his faith.” Barlow mentions that he knowledgeably takes on the role of prophet and writes himself inside the biblical tradition, yet sources suggest that he was a fairly uneducated man. It is possible that he simply did not understand an alternate way of expressing his beliefs.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, there is precedent for this self-involvement. When reading the passages from the Book of Mormon, one can see consistent usage of the first-person voice by the other prophets. These men did not create their own religions but were further defining a preexisting one. Additionally, Smith’s own time period was one of religious reexamination. Religious epiphanies stating Christian reformation were fairly common and frequently explored. I believe that Smith is continuing these two traditions. He is not seeking to form his own religion but redirecting Christianity to the “right path” in the only way he knows how to.