Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide

I loved this book! Grant Hardy steps away from the ways of reading generally adopted by non-Mormon scholars (trying to show what it tells us about Joseph Smith), Mormon scholars (trying to prove its truth through identification of literary techniques unique to Hebrew literature), or lay Mormon readers (seeking verse by verse for inspiration) and instead suggests "that the Book of Mormon can be read as literature - a genre that encompasses history, fiction, and scripture - by anyone trying to understand this odd but fascinating book." In doing so, he examines the book as the work of three principal narrators - Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni - each very distinctive in circumstances, style, and sense of audience. What I loved about this book: 1. Hardy analyzes not only what IS there but what ISN'T there but perhaps should be. For one example, Nephi recounts his father Lehi's blessings to each of his children, except his blessing to Nephi! Why might that have been excluded? Admitted speculation - albeit textually suggested - ensues. For another, Hardy points out that with one major exception, the Jaredite record (Book of Ether) seems to be almost entirely non-Christian. 2. Hardy is a believer - as of a fabulous interview I heard in April 2011 on the Mormon Stories podcast he was serving in a Stake Presidency - but does not shy away from the difficult elements of the Book of Mormon. How does Nephi quote from elements of Isaiah that the best Biblical scholarship suggests were written long after Nephi et al left Jerusalem? What about the passages that rely heavily on New Testament prose? Hardy explores potential explanations, and which are more likely to be faith-based rather than evidence-based. As Hardy says, "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" [1]. 3. In his analysis of the Book of Mormon as literature, he draws on other scripture traditions, from Zen classics to Tibetan tests to Hindu sacred poetry. He also draws on literature, from Gulliver's Travels to Nabokov's Pale Fire to Don Quixote . 4. The footnotes are fabulous: They provide all the additional information and source material that you could want. I hope to come back to this text again and again, and - more importantly - use it launch my own much more careful reading of the Book of Mormon and other sacred texts. If you don't want to trust me, here are a few other reviews worth reading: * Steven Walker, BYU Studies, 50(3), 2011 * Julie Smith, Times & Seasons Blog, 15 August 2011 (adapted from her Dialogue review) * 12 Questions with Grant Hardy at the Times & Seasons Blog, 7 September 2011 (part 1 & part 2) * For a non-Mormon perspective, see Alan Wolfe, "Chloroform in Print: Does the Book of Mormon Get a Bad Rap?" Slate, 17 May 2010 [1] 12 Questions with Grant Hardy, Part 2, Times & Seasons Blog, 7 September 2011.

This was a fantastic book. It is a literary analysis of the Book of Mormon text, with a particular focus on its narrative structure and the personalities and motivations of its three primary authors/characters: Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni (whether they are "authors" or "characters" in a book depends on your point of view). Dr. Hardy is a member of the church, but he tries very hard to take an objective look at the text of the Book of Mormon itself, without expressly passing judgment as to whether the Book of Mormon is actually what it purports to be. Although his bias does shine through occasionally (something that I personally had no problem with), he does an amazing job of picking up on subtle hints and clues contained withing the text of the Book of Mormon to not only reveal what Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni were like, but to also tell us about Alma the Younger, his son Helaman, Nephi's brother Jacob, Captain Moroni, and many others. Dr. Hardy even gives us 6 full pages of analysis of Zeniff, who is definitely not one of the Book of Mormon's main players. We are shown the likely identity of the sins that Nephi bemoans in 2 Nephi 4, which apparently included pride and a lack of patience with his brothers. Alma the Younger's literary genius and ability with Hebrew poetry is revealed. Mormon's editorial technique and his strategy in abridging the Nephite record is revealed in example, after consistent example. Moroni's insecurity about his writing is reflected in the way he relies so heavily on quotations from others (primarily from his father Mormon and from Nephi). The distinction between the views of Mormon and Moroni regarding the role of historical evidence in building faith is made clear with Dr. Hardy's analysis. There were a few things in the book I didn't agree with. For example, Dr. Hardy thinks Nephi asked the "wrong question" in his multi-chapter vision in 1 Nephi when the Spirit of the Lord asked him what he desired and Nephi answered by requesting an interpretation of the tree of life Lehi had seen in a vision. Hardy argues that, because the Spirit of the Lord immediately leaves Nephi after Nephi makes that request and an angel comes to walk Nephi through the remainder of his vision, Nephi must have done something wrong. I disagree. I think that, prior to his birth, Christ did not announce his own coming. That was the job of angels, and that is why the Spirit of the Lord departed and an angel came to teach Nephi about Christ's "condescension," which was necessary to answer Nephi's request for an explanation of the love of God. There were also a few things that I wish Dr. Hardy would have spent more time on. For example, I would have liked more analysis of the evidence for "Second Isaiah" and why we should question its appearance in the Book of Mormon. In all, however, the book was very, very good. At the end, Dr. Hardy says that the book was the result of his first pass through the Book of Mormon using his method of literary analysis, and he hints that much more could be done. Well, I want more. I hope that he is working to do another volume.

Most Mormons accept the Book of Mormon at face value. Most critics and non-Mormons reject it out of hand. Hardy writes that the Book of Mormon is the one book that critics can reject without actually reading it. Hardy gives the Book of Mormon a detailed contextual analysis of the book from the perspective of its three narrators: Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni. The differences among the narratives is distinct and very important. He also analyzes the text itself and finds passages of poetic beauty. There are only two meaningful arguments for the origin of the Book of Mormon. The first is that it was written by Joseph Smith, an 1820 American frontiersman with perhaps a 4th grade education at the time he "wrote" the Book of Mormon in about 20 weeks with the help of several persons as scribes. The original foolscap was delivered directly to the printer who set the type and printed it. Given Smith's age, education, location, era, and the extremely short time to produce the book, the "genius" hypothesis seems very problematic to me. I doubt that any American scholar could have produced such a work in 1830 in 20 weeks out of whole cloth. Hardy's analysis create even more doubt that the conventional origin hypothesis is plausible. The only alternative to the "genius" hypothesis is the miraculous origin story accepted by the Mormons. Other explanations including plagiarizing Spaulding's manuscript or Ethan Smith' "View of the Hebrews" have been discredited by historians. Hardy points out that the book is extremely complex, subtle, and deep and recommends that it be read at face value. Mormons will be very comfortable with Hardy's academic approach to this controversial book. Non-Mormon scholars will find a very careful analysis of a book they might not be inclined to believe to be authentic, but which is a non-trivial work that deserves careful reading. I highly recommend Hardy's book, as well as his "Readers Version" of the Book of Mormon, which is nothing less than the Book of Mormon reformatted to read like the narrative it is.

As a believer in Mormonism I wasn't sure if this book would be necessary. I already "understand" the Book of Mormon, I've ready it numerous times, and have read many commentaries on it. I know there are new insights that I gain each time I read it but I didn't know if reading another commentary would shed new light. Wow was I wrong! This book is unlike any other commentary on the Book of Mormon you've read before. Dr Hardy's literary approach is not only refreshing but insightful as well. And it's not a slow read at all. There are no dry parts that you have a hard time getting through. The three main narrators (Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni) come to life as Hardy explains their writing styles, motivations and circumstances. His insights into Moroni were especially interesting to me. The way Moroni weaved Nephi and Mormon's words together to tie off the Book of Mormon is something I've never read in any other commentary. So much of the book was new to me and I consider myself well-read on the Book of Mormon. Dr Hardy has an unusual approach in that he withholds his own opinion on controversial issues. He wants you (the reader) to form your own opinion and to also approach the Book of Mormon differently than you usually do. Read it without focusing on Joseph Smith. Instead try and get into the minds of the narrators (whether they are real or fictional). This allows believers and non-believers to read the Book of Mormon and gain new insights. So glad I picked up this book. I'm rereading it and marking up my scriptures with it. It is hands down the best commentary I've ever read on the Book of Mormon.

Hardy's book does two things that make this a must-read for serious students of the Book of Mormon: First, he breaks down the text of the Book of Mormon based on who is narrating each section and examines how differently each record-keeper (primarily Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni) handles their task. This leads to some fascinating insights into the possible motivations and mindsets of the writer(s) than a more detached reading can offer. Second, he offers a coherent argument for why Joseph Smith's explanation of the origins of the Book of Mormon is not only plausible, but defensible. While he explicitly allows for the possibility of Joseph Smith being the primary author/editor and a purely nineteenth century origin for the text, at every step along the way, he demonstrates how unlikely that conclusion is, especially based in the cumulative weight and ramifications of the suppositions that would have to be true in order for that to be the case. His arguments are intricate and substantive and require that any critic who wishes to dismiss the Book of Mormon as a wholly nineteenth century text address his analysis and arguments in detail or else be considered negligent and unserious in their methodology and suspect in their motivations. Finally, I also enjoyed this book because it was not afraid to question some of the overly simplistic and yet caricatured assumptions that Mormons sometimes all too easily fall in to about Book of Mormon characters, e.g., Nephi as the ever-obedient son/leader, Captain Moroni as the faithful warrior leader, etc. By going deeper into the text (and in some cases calling in readers to consider what the text does NOT say), what emerges in Hardy's analysis are characters who are much more human, much more fallible, much more prone to the same temptations and challenges that confront all of us, and as a result, they are all that much more relatable to our own experiences and struggles. What we are left with when this analysis is complete, rather than a tarnished and diminished impression of those re-examined characters, is an even greater appreciation for how much The Lord can do with such flawed imperfect people, and thus, perhaps a hope for what He can do with our lives as well, flawed and imperfect as we all are.

I just finished Grant Hardy's Understanding the Book of Mormon. I have vaguely the same impression that I had when I read Rough Stone Rolling. I find both books to be very well written, both to be tremendously insightful and "brilliant" enough to be straight-forward in their presentation. Both books gave me exciting "ah ha" moments of learning and insights. Both books seem to be by very, very knowledgeable scholars who ask the most difficult questions, do not shy away from difficult issues, and who find some excellent and "open" conclusions. Finally, both books allowed me to see their respective subjects in an exhilarating new light. Hardy's treatment of Nephi was, to use a word he uses, moving. Hardy shows how the very "surety" of Nephi's voice could mask and reveal some substantial doubts and fears. Those fears make Nephi seem much more real to me. And Hardy's treatment of Mormon is also tremendously insightful. While the section on Moroni is also very compelling, I found myself getting caught up in the New Testament anachronisms Hardy points out. It seems to me that Hardy does not resolve those anachronisms in a convincing way, and that was unexpected for me, given how well he addresses other possible concerns. The only other "problem" clearly left unresolved is are the First and Second Isaiah issues. I respect Hardy for acknowledging them and I respect him for sticking to the purpose of his book--an examination of the voices of the book's three different "authors." Hardy achieves his purpose brilliantly--showing the rich literary complexity of the Book of Mormon. And, in the best of all possible ways, I will never read that book the same again.

The degree to which I attempt to incorporate content, insights, notions, and so forth from something I read into my thoughts, organized study notes, journals, go-to sources, and etc, is a measure of its influence upon me and a mark of high praise and gratitude to and for the author and creator of that meaning. By that measure this book sits among a rare few I hold in high regard. I marvel at the degree of insight suggested by Grant Hardy’s literary analytical approach. I think it impossible to read any book a second time without seeing things previously unrecognized. That has certainly been my experience generally and in telling-to-me ways yet more so with The Book of Mormon which book I no longer attempt to track how many times I’ve read. And now, having read this work by Grant Hardy, I expect reading it (The Book of Mormon) anew will be yet again ”never the same” and profoundly and poignantly so.

I have read the Book of Mormon many times throughout my life, and always learn something from each reading. Hardy's book approached this work in an entirely new way that helped me see several things that I had never seen before. His main approach was to try to understand what the three main narrators (real or fictional) of the Book of Mormon were trying to say. He made it clear that the three narrators had different styles of making their points along with different focuses. It is still clear that the focus of the Book of Mormon is about Christ, but is so much more. Among other things Nephi was focused on the gathering of Israel and applying Israelite scriptures to his descendants. Mormon was more of a historian trying to teach through events important truths. Moroni was trying to teach that the best way to know truth is through direct revelation. Mormon's style was more crafted and pre-meditated. He told similar stories at least twice, even using almost identical phrasing. Moroni closed the Book of Mormon three times, using very comparable words. Most of his writings were either direct quotes from other scriptures or existing scriptures slightly modified to impart what he was trying to say. There were many literary techniques used throughout the Book of Mormon. From a scholarly point of view, it is a very rich book. I highly recommend this book to either an LDS looking for a fresh perspective of the Book of Mormon, or a scholar trying to understand the book as a work of literature, or as someone who is just getting interested in learning more about the book. I found the time spent reading this book very worthwhile.

This is not a detailed commentary per verse, but definitely one of the best commentaries I have read on the Book of Mormon. Most commentaries tend to iterate what we already know, with few original insights. Not this book.