Skip to main content

REVIEWING THE REVIEW: VOL. 21, ISS. 2 (2009)

Overview

            I obtained this issue of the Review by attending some of the Nibley Lecture series last year. They were giving copies away at a desk near the entry way as a way of promoting their work.

            This issue of the Review is not especially long, and possess nothing particularly ground breaking. Nonetheless, it contains some solid contributions to Mormon studies and related fields, on topics such as the biblical Christmas story, the influence of Greek philosophy on protestant soteriology, Mesoamerica, the “New Atheism,” the Book of Mormon, early Mormon history, LDS apologetics, and “born-again Mormonism.” Interestingly (and perhaps “bafflingly” to some), this issue only has one review of an anti-Mormon book. It contains an additional article which is directed at an anti-Mormon claim, and a review of an atheist book. In contrast, it has three reviews of LDS publications (two of which are generally positive, while one is critical), a review of recent “reader editions” of the Book of Mormon, and a generally positive review of a book by British Methodist scholar Margaret Barker.


Recommended Reading:

            Richard Lloyd Anderson, “Probing the Lives of Christ and Joseph Smith,” pg. 1-29: This is a printing of the Neal A. Maxwell Lecture originally given on March 20, 2009. Anderson briefly shares experiences as a historian of both ancient and modern history, and the different approaches required for each, and reviews the reliability of the Gospels and Pauline letters, as well as the accounts of foundational events in early Mormon history (i.e. the first vision and the testimony of the Book of Mormon witnesses).

            William J. Hamblin, “The Most Misunderstood Book: christopher hitchens on the Bible,” a review of Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (New York: Twelve, 2007), pg. 47-95: Hamblin, a professor of ancient history, rips into Hitchens’ sloppy approach to the Bible. The non-capitalization of Hitchens name in the title is not a typo, but was intentional on the part Hamblin to parody Hitchens in his refusal to capitalize “God.”

            Stephen D. Ricks, “Lehi and Local Color,” a review of S. Kent Brown and Peter Johnson, eds., Journey of Faith: From Jerusalem to the Promised Land (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute, 2006), pg. 169-177: A good summary and overview of the Near-Eastern nature of the story found in 1 Nephi, focusing specifically on the proper names found in those chapters.

            Matthew Roper, “Myth, Memory, and ‘Manuscript Found’,” pg. 179-223: The Solomon Spaulding theory on the Book of Mormon has been, for the most part, abandoned. Yet there are some who continue to cling to it. Roper has, in my opinion, put the last nails in the coffin. This article, combined with Roper’s review, “The Mythical Manuscript Found” in 17/2, serve as the most authoritative works on the issue of the Spaulding theory. If anyone ever wishes to resurrect this theory on the origins of the Book of Mormon (and I sure hope no one does – please let Solomon Spaulding rest in peace!), then they must deal with the research Roper has done on this topic. This article is a must read for anyone interested in the Spaulding theory, or the intellectual history of anti-Mormonism in general.

Final Thoughts

            In my opinion, this issue of the Review is somewhat mediocre. Other than Roper’s article above, I would not consider much of this issue to be on the level of “must-read.” Still, for anyone who is interested in Mormon studies, the other recommended articles are interesting and valuable to some degree. Depending on your interest level, they may be worth your while, as may be some of the other reviews not recommended here.

Rating: 3/5 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:


As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…

The 15 “Best Books” to Read BEFORE Having a Faith Crisis

Elder M. Russell Ballard recently stressed that it is important for Gospel educators to be well-informed on controversial topics, not only by studying the scriptures and Church materials, but also by reading “the best LDS scholarship available.” I personally think it is imperative in today’s world for every Latter-day Saint—not just Gospel educators—to make an effort to be informed on both controversial issues as well as knowing reliable faith-building information as well.
(Given that Elder Ballard’s CES address was published to general Church membership in the Ensign, I think it’s safe to say that Church leadership also feels this way.)
An important step in the process of getting informed is reading the 11 Gospel Topic essays and getting familiar with their contents. But what’s next? How can a person learn more about these and other topics? What are the “best books” (D&C 88:118) or “the best LDS scholarship available”?
Here are 15 suggestions.
1. Michael R. Ash, Shaken Faith S…

New Paper on Isaiah in the Book of Mormon

Joseph M. Spencer, an adjunct professor at the BYU religion department, recently published a paper in the non-LDS peer review journal Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception, titled, “Isaiah 52 in the Book of Mormon: Note’s on Isaiah’s Reception History.” Spencer is a young scholar who is doing exciting stuff on the Book of Mormon from a theological perspective.
The paper is described as follows in the abstract: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of Mormonism to American religion, little attention has been given to the novel uses of Isaiah in foundational Mormon texts. This paper crosses two lines of inquiry: the study of American religion, with an eye to the role played in it by Mormonism, and the study of Isaiah’s reception history. It looks at the use of Isa 52:7–10 in the Book of Mormon, arguing that the volume exhibits four irreducibly distinct approaches to the interpretation of Isaiah, the interrelations among which are explicitly meant to speak to nineteent…