Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide

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.

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 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.