Common arguments from less sympathetic critics are that Smith’s Book of Mormon was a hoax or an effort to create a new religion that would give him power. Robert Price rejects this even as he agrees that Smith is the author of the book. I hadn’t connected Smith’s effort to those of earlier pseudepigraphic writers, but it’s an interesting perspective:
- “[V]irtually all critical scholars agree that Joseph Smith did not discover the Book of Mormon but rather created it. His goal would have been as analogous to that of Hilkiah as his methods had been: in response to his confusion over which nineteenth-century version of Christianity to embrace — none seeming to have any particular advantage over the others, all seeming to be severely in want of something — Smith tried to make a clean break with the recent past and to go on into a new future by invoking a more distant past. And in so doing he had crated something new, an imaginary Sacred Past, the way it should have been.”
- “What Joseph Smith did, as historical critics understand the matter, is exactly what all ancient pseudepigraphists did, and he belongs to an illustrious company including the authors of the Book of Daniel, the Book of Deuteronomy, the Book of Zohar; the Pastoral Epistles (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus), not to mention a greater or lesser number of other epistles attributed to Paul... But is this group a company of saints or a rogues’ gallery?”
That’s a very good question, and having to answer it forces one to reconsider how they think about Joseph Smith and Mormonism. Price is sympathetic to pseudepigraphists generally and I think that’s probably justified. He definitely provides some very interesting food for thought — in particular, because he makes it clear that the pseudepigraphists really aren’t all that different from those who oppose them:
- "Both the new prophets and the establishment are trying to hide behind the names of the ancient, canonical prophets in order to claim authority for what each side is saying. The establishment scribes are using the corpus of the scriptural prophets as something of a ventriloquist dummy to spout their own views, but just as surely, the pseudepigraphists are impersonating the old prophets, speaking with their own voices while donning the deceptive Esau-mask of pseudepigraphy. The question is: who wears the mantle of the old prophets?”
I can’t claim that all the other essays raise such general and fascinating religious issues — for the most part, they are detailed critiques of the Book of Mormon which sometimes presume a familiarity with the issues. It’s a great resource for those already interested in Mormonism, but Price’s essay may be worth the price for anyone interested in religion and religious scripture generally.
« Back...
