★★★★★ 3
Comprehensive, but not convincing to this non-believer
Format: Paperback
Having previously read Fawn Brodie's
, I read this one to get the believer's view. Bushman is at his best describing the evolution of Smith's thinking and revelations. Although the book is long, it is well written and authoritative. It gives a deeper understanding of Smith's religious philosophy than does Brodie's book.
To his credit, Bushman confronts many of the crucial controversies surrounding Smith. From my non-believer's perspective, however, the defenses of Smith are not remotely convincing. Some examples:
1. DNA analysis shows without question that the American Indians came from east Asia. This fact is in direct contradiction of the traditional LDS view that Native Americans are lost Israelites. Bushman argues that Smith may have been writing about a small tribe somewhere in New York, or about people outside North America altogether. Within a few pages, Bushman has forgotten about this controversy altogether, and happily describes the Book of Mormon as a history of the American Indians.
2. Smith made the huge mistake of reproducing parts of the hieroglyphics he claims to have interpreted as the "Book of Abraham." These documents have been translated by scholars and have nothing to do with Abraham. Bushman (pp. 291-2) puts forth the argument that Smith's translation may not have been a true translation, but instead may have been a divine revelation simply inspired by the presence of the scrolls. Bushman suggests the same for the Book of Mormon. This is a truly shocking stance for an LDS believer to take: if Smith's "translations" weren't translations, why should anyone believe that his revelations were divinely inspired? Ironically, Bushman's view here sounds much like Brodie's: Not anticipating that scholars would use the Rosetta stone to translate hieroglyphics, Smith imagined that bogus translations would not be found out.
3. Smith repeatedly lied about whether he and the Saints were practicing polygamy. Bushman's defense of Smith in this context reminds me of Bill Clinton's statements regarding Monica Lewinsky: Smith held a secret definition of the term "polygamy," and thus felt free to mislead (or lie) with impunity. The facts, as reported by both Brodie and Bushman, support the conclusion that Smith coerced women into his bed by arguing that their eternal salvation was at stake. The stain of Smith's lustful "revelation" regarding polygamy continues to haunt the LDS, which claims to recoil from earthly polygamy but argues that men (not women) get to have harems in heaven.
Despite these complaints, I recommend this book to non-believers who are patient enough to get through it. I feel that I have much greater insight into the LDS mindset than I did before.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on April 21, 2008
