Part 6 - Apologetics

In this post I will introduce Book of Mormon apologetics.  This will likely not be the last word I have to say on this topic, but a general introduction.  Apologetics comes from the Greek "Apologia" and means "speaking in defense."  The practice of apologetics is the practice of defending a position.  It does not constitute "apologizing" for a belief but rather defending a belief with logic and reason.  While apologetics does not have to apply only to religion, that is its most common current usage.  Its original usage in ancient Greece referred to a legal defense in a court of law.

The main organizations devoted to Mormon apologetics are The Maxwell Institute (formerly the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies or FARMS) and The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR).  The former is part of the church-owned Brigham Young University while the latter is an independent non-profit organization.  Many other unofficial apologetic sites exist.  Of particular note is Jeff Lindsay's site.  These sites cover many topics relevant to Mormonism, but my main interest is what they have to say about the Book of Mormon.

An article from the Maxwell Institute entitled Recent Trends in Book of Mormon Apologetics describes some of the broad themes that apologetics have addressed.  The author, Benjamin N. Judkins, distinguishes between external and internal evidence.  By external evidence, he means archeology, while he further subdivides internal evidence into textual and ethnographic.  Textual analysis consists of the search for Hebraic forms in the text of the Book of Mormon while ethnographic analysis looks for cultural elements that are consistent with Book of Mormon claims.

Judkins admits the lack of American archeological support for the Book of Mormon.  He points out that Hugh Nibley, one of the most prominent and scholarly apologists of the recent past, was quite pessimistic that American archeology would ever produce anything conclusively supporting the Book of Mormon.  Recent research has instead turned towards archeological finds near where Mormons believe Lehi and his family traveled across the Arabian peninsula around 600 BC.

... a new generation of scholars is moving ahead with various archaeological projects with surprisingly good results. Rather than focusing on Mesoamerica, an area that has yet to yield anything identifiably "Nephite" in character, recent work has focused on Lehi's departure from the Near East. These studies are viewed as the most promising development to date in many FARMS and Latter-day Saint academic circles.

Judkins quotes Mormon scholars indicating that the most significant find is a stone alter inscribed with the name "Nihm."  The connection with the Book of Mormon is found in 1 Nephi 16:3, which states, "And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom."  Jeff Lindsay places this discovery at the top of his list of Book of Mormon evidences with the comment "this may be the most powerful evidence for authenticity yet!"  Judkins, however, advises caution against any expectations that this will be accepted by the non-Mormon academic community citing controversies over Jericho's walls, which subject is far less divisive than Book of Mormon historicity.  No specific archeological finds in the Americas are mentioned at all in Judkins' article.

The most widely studied area of textual analysis is the identification of Hebraic forms in the text of the Book of Mormon, especially chaismus, a form in which a central idea is couched between material that precedes the main idea and then follows in reverse order.  However, Judkins points out that many of these finds are lacking in rigorous definition, and therefore not very meaningful as evidence.

A Latter-day Saint Web site purports to have found the "key" to the so-called Davidic Chiasmus (a simple variation of other well-documented forms). The site provides a set of rules whereby readers can find these literary structures for themselves. And find them they do—in both ancient scripture and modern revelation. The fact that chiasmus appears to show up in the Doctrine and Covenants has led these individuals to expect it in any document that was partially the product of divine inspiration. Casting even wider nets, they have found the same pattern in dozens of political documents and even in Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech. Applying their rules, I have also been able to locate the Davidic Chiasmus in such presumably uninspired works as modern novels and the Manhattan telephone directory (a text that is totally random and can therefore reflect any pattern one cares to project upon it). All of this illustrates the need to set clearer ad hoc guidelines as to what sorts of parallels we are willing to accept as nonspurious. Otherwise, through lax application, the search for ancient poetic and interpretive forms could very well become a Mormon Kabbalah.

In the area of ethnographic analysis, Judkins points out that scholars have not made strong claims in favor of Book of Mormon historicity, but rather used the technique to explain the meaning of Book of Mormon passages within the context of a nomadic Hebrew culture.

Its goals have been modest—to show how the practices, beliefs, and traditions of Lehi's people were congruent with certain modes of life in antiquity. Methodologically, the approach was, and continues to be, the loosest of all the schools discussed.

Judkins is refreshingly honest, but the picture he paints of the current state of Book of Mormon apologetics reveals it to be quite barren, and Judkins is a pro-Mormon author writing on the most official Mormon apologetic site.  With all the possibilities that exist for finding artifacts in the Americas that would support the Book of Mormon (steel swords, chariots, writing on metal plates, coins, cattle, sheep, horses, elephants, wheat, barley, and many more) it is rather striking that not a single one of these has been found.  Mormon apologetics confirm that none of these items have been found or it would certainly not consider such an obscure connection as the "Nihm" inscription the most powerful evidence for Book of Mormon historicity.  It is also noteworthy that the Book of Mormon fails to mention many items that are known to have existed in ancient America such as squash, tomatoes, corn, chocolate, llamas, pigs, tapirs, dogs, jaguars, and many more.  I will be getting into many more specifics in subsequent posts.

When I was first beginning to question the historicity of the Book of Mormon, apologetic writings allowed me to confirm many things that I first learned from Mormon critics.  Many average Mormons are not aware of how bleak the case is for Book of Mormon historicity.  Apologetic writings are honest enough that they generally do not reflect popular Mormon culture where the most tenuous connections are exaggerated into solid evidence.  My experience with Mormon culture is what made many of the discoveries I am writing about in these series of posts such a surprise to me at first.  Even though I still approach this endeavor with an open mind, it seems that the deeper I look, the weaker the case for Book of Mormon historicity becomes.