No, Thank You: Some Thoughts On Why The Book of Mormon Does Not Need Revising
My intellectual LDS friend was talking about his intellectual LDS friends who think that The Book of Mormon could stand being re-done into more common vernacular language, much like The Living Bible, The Good News Bible, the Comfort-able Bible, etc. I very much dislike this idea. Here are my reasons why.
1. Books which are in Modern English are defined as texts written after the year 1800. Book of Mormon was translated and published in... 1830. This means there are no archaic verbs, no random German words, and no one used a giant "F" as a substitute for the "s" sound. So we're good. The average English speaker can understand the Book of Mormon ... once they get over the pronunciation of the proper names.
2. We live in a post-modern society. Yes we do. The ancients used metaphor and parable. The Dark Ages were state mandated ideals over reality or logic. Modernism is scientific process and "prove it". And when speaking of religion, post-modernism today means multiple points of view, which turns into multiple realities which equals uncertainty. And while the average fundamentalist hates uncertainty SO MUCH that they decide they can "prove" scientifically an ancient metaphor (scripture) using authoritarian ideals direct from the dark ages, the enlightened intellectuals who live in Boston know that maturity comes from finding one's own truths -- even if they are uncertain. Knowing this, why would we want to remove any of the metaphoric elements from the Book of Mormon? Why would we want to close down those gaps which allow for reflection, contemplation, and growth? Would an extra gospel fact be pinned down? I don't believe there is much to gain from removing the poetry and making things more literal in the scriptures. I actually think it would be detrimental.
3. Who thinks they are cool enough and enough removed from their own cultural baggage to re-interpret the Book of Mormon? We are all products of our times and if the wordage gets changed, won't that alter the meanings?
4. I'v actually read some of the edited Book of Mormon the RLDS church uses. Unzipped it from it's leather case with the cross pendant zipper pull. Stuff is really changed in it. Different books, stuff out of order, and lots of red ink added so we know when Jesus spoke. It's weird. The RLDS don't have an established creed because they are very very post modern. This makes me feel like a jerk, (see #2) but I'm not gonna change what I said before because I think it's true. The difference is the LDS church DOES have a creed and has values. And everyone is free to work out their own salvation against and with those values. Editing the Book of Mormon is not a necessary part of that process.
5. The Book of Mormon is a reference and a teaching tool. President Joseph Fielding Smith taught: “The Spirit of God speaking to the spirit of man has power to impart truth with greater effect and understanding than the truth can be imparted by personal contact even with heavenly beings. Through the Holy Ghost the truth is woven into the very fibre and sinews of the body so that it cannot be forgotten” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 1:47–48).
So perhaps it's probably best to get over our brainy selves and let the Spirit do His thing. Maybe better to worry about people rather than re-doing something which is already doing a pretty good job. Or, I dunno, talk about Jesus or something.
6. And I'm fairly certain I'm not supposed to cite sections of the book in question as proof that it doesn't need to be re-done, but I'm gonna do it anyway. =)
Ether 12:25-28
25 Thou hast also made our words powerful and great, even that we acannot write them; wherefore, when we write we behold our bweakness, and stumble because of the placing of our words; and I fear lest the Gentiles shall cmock at our words.
1. Books which are in Modern English are defined as texts written after the year 1800. Book of Mormon was translated and published in... 1830. This means there are no archaic verbs, no random German words, and no one used a giant "F" as a substitute for the "s" sound. So we're good. The average English speaker can understand the Book of Mormon ... once they get over the pronunciation of the proper names.
2. We live in a post-modern society. Yes we do. The ancients used metaphor and parable. The Dark Ages were state mandated ideals over reality or logic. Modernism is scientific process and "prove it". And when speaking of religion, post-modernism today means multiple points of view, which turns into multiple realities which equals uncertainty. And while the average fundamentalist hates uncertainty SO MUCH that they decide they can "prove" scientifically an ancient metaphor (scripture) using authoritarian ideals direct from the dark ages, the enlightened intellectuals who live in Boston know that maturity comes from finding one's own truths -- even if they are uncertain. Knowing this, why would we want to remove any of the metaphoric elements from the Book of Mormon? Why would we want to close down those gaps which allow for reflection, contemplation, and growth? Would an extra gospel fact be pinned down? I don't believe there is much to gain from removing the poetry and making things more literal in the scriptures. I actually think it would be detrimental.
3. Who thinks they are cool enough and enough removed from their own cultural baggage to re-interpret the Book of Mormon? We are all products of our times and if the wordage gets changed, won't that alter the meanings?
4. I'v actually read some of the edited Book of Mormon the RLDS church uses. Unzipped it from it's leather case with the cross pendant zipper pull. Stuff is really changed in it. Different books, stuff out of order, and lots of red ink added so we know when Jesus spoke. It's weird. The RLDS don't have an established creed because they are very very post modern. This makes me feel like a jerk, (see #2) but I'm not gonna change what I said before because I think it's true. The difference is the LDS church DOES have a creed and has values. And everyone is free to work out their own salvation against and with those values. Editing the Book of Mormon is not a necessary part of that process.
5. The Book of Mormon is a reference and a teaching tool. President Joseph Fielding Smith taught: “The Spirit of God speaking to the spirit of man has power to impart truth with greater effect and understanding than the truth can be imparted by personal contact even with heavenly beings. Through the Holy Ghost the truth is woven into the very fibre and sinews of the body so that it cannot be forgotten” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 1:47–48).
So perhaps it's probably best to get over our brainy selves and let the Spirit do His thing. Maybe better to worry about people rather than re-doing something which is already doing a pretty good job. Or, I dunno, talk about Jesus or something.
6. And I'm fairly certain I'm not supposed to cite sections of the book in question as proof that it doesn't need to be re-done, but I'm gonna do it anyway. =)
Ether 12:25-28
25 Thou hast also made our words powerful and great, even that we acannot write them; wherefore, when we write we behold our bweakness, and stumble because of the placing of our words; and I fear lest the Gentiles shall cmock at our words.
27 And if men come unto me I will show unto them their aweakness. I bgive unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my cgrace is sufficient for all men that dhumble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make eweak things become strong unto them.
28 Behold, I will show unto the Gentiles their weakness, and I will show unto them that afaith, hope and charity bringeth unto me—the fountain of all brighteousness.
posted by naudy at 6:57 PM
<< Home