What do you think?
Rate this book
Studies of the Book of Mormon
Available for the first time fifty years after the author’s death, Studies of the Book of Mormon presents this respected church leader’s investigation into Mormonism’s founding scripture. Reflecting his talent for combining history and theology, B. H. Roberts considered the evident parallels between the Book of Mormon and Ethan Smith’s View of the Hebrews, a book that predated the Mormon scripture by seven years. If the Book of Mormon is not historical, but rather a reflection of the misconceptions current in Joseph Smith’s day regarding Indian origins, then its theological claims are suspect as well, Roberts asserted. In this and other research, it was Roberts’s proclivity to go wherever the evidence took him, in this case anticipating and defending against potential future problems. Yet the manuscript was so poorly received by fellow church leaders that it was left to Roberts alone to decide whether he had overlooked some important piece of the puzzle or whether the Mormon scripture’s claims were, in fact, illegitimate. Clearly for most of his colleagues, institutional priorities overshadowed epistemological integrity. But Roberts’s pathbreaking work has been judged by the editor to be methodologically sound–still relevant today. It shows the work of a keen mind, and illustrates why Roberts was one of the most influential Mormon thinkers of his day. The manuscript is accompanied by a preface and introduction, a history of the documents’ provenances, a biographical essay, correspondence to and from Roberts relating to the manuscript, a bibliography, and an afterword–all of which put the information into perspective.
546 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 1, 1985
52 people are currently reading
226 people want to read
About the author
B.H. Roberts
412 books15 followersBrigham Henry Roberts was a Mormon leader, historian, and politician who published a six-volume history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) and was denied a seat as a member of United States Congress because of his practice of plural marriage.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
November 18, 2014
This title is open to a misreading, and yet, is accurate. The late B.H. Roberts, revered LDS historian, general authority, President of the Quorum of the Seventy, and faithful to the church throughout his life, sets out to answer a series of tough questions about Mormonism's key book of scripture (he even comes up with questions of his own, demonstrating his dedication to a thorough examination). Joseph Smith claimed that the Book of Mormon is the "keystone" of the LDS religion--that without it, the whole faith crumbles.
Internal and external problems with the Book of Mormon have been well-documented, but it is rare for a church authority to take them head on--even rarer for the research and conclusions to be published. Coming from a high-ranking leader like Roberts as it does, the book is unusual, as these kinds of studies and criticisms usually originate with disaffected members, ex-members, or neutral or hostile scholars. Roberts's conclusions are too often sound, too often troubling, to allow a believing member of the church to remain fully comfortable. His research is exhaustive (sometimes too exhaustive), and it should surprise interested readers that a bald-faced, objective scrutiny of the Book of Mormon came about in this way, or that Roberts would be so bold as to compile this research, despite the critical angle it takes on the divine origin of the Book of Mormon, present it to the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the top of the hierarchy of the LDS church), and then organize it for publication. While the leaders of the church were able to brush aside the concerns Roberts presented, the careful and honest reader may not find that an easy option.
This book is not a faith-destroyer, necessarily. Roberts himself remained faithful in the church, despite his findings. But it at least shows that the inconsistencies and problems in the Book of Mormon are not fabrications of anti-Mormons, but real issues. This is not the standard Deseret Book-type, glossy, hagiographic treatment. Its aim is scholarship, not the promotion of faith, and it's no wonder it has never made it into the canon of acceptable LDS reading.
The late Roberts deserves credit and respect for an unflinching examination of a book he himself revered and believed in, and for presenting his findings, compromising as they are. The LDS church needs more of this kind of scholarship, both for its own members and for those outside its membership, who are interested in sound research and objective conclusions.
Internal and external problems with the Book of Mormon have been well-documented, but it is rare for a church authority to take them head on--even rarer for the research and conclusions to be published. Coming from a high-ranking leader like Roberts as it does, the book is unusual, as these kinds of studies and criticisms usually originate with disaffected members, ex-members, or neutral or hostile scholars. Roberts's conclusions are too often sound, too often troubling, to allow a believing member of the church to remain fully comfortable. His research is exhaustive (sometimes too exhaustive), and it should surprise interested readers that a bald-faced, objective scrutiny of the Book of Mormon came about in this way, or that Roberts would be so bold as to compile this research, despite the critical angle it takes on the divine origin of the Book of Mormon, present it to the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the top of the hierarchy of the LDS church), and then organize it for publication. While the leaders of the church were able to brush aside the concerns Roberts presented, the careful and honest reader may not find that an easy option.
This book is not a faith-destroyer, necessarily. Roberts himself remained faithful in the church, despite his findings. But it at least shows that the inconsistencies and problems in the Book of Mormon are not fabrications of anti-Mormons, but real issues. This is not the standard Deseret Book-type, glossy, hagiographic treatment. Its aim is scholarship, not the promotion of faith, and it's no wonder it has never made it into the canon of acceptable LDS reading.
The late Roberts deserves credit and respect for an unflinching examination of a book he himself revered and believed in, and for presenting his findings, compromising as they are. The LDS church needs more of this kind of scholarship, both for its own members and for those outside its membership, who are interested in sound research and objective conclusions.
May 2, 2024
Update-May, 2024: Having immersed myself in Church history for the past three years I’m pretty confident that none of the apologist arguments against Roberts’ original parallels and critiques hold any water. This remains a serious and scholarly challenge to the Book of Mormon’s claims of being an authentic historical record.
3 stars for content and writing (a bit dry, meandering, and repetitive), 5 stars for what this book represents. Roberts was a member of the highest leadership echelons of the church when he researched and wrote the essays in this book in response to a letter of inquiry from a member about the origins of the Book of Mormon. Although many of the points have been treated by subsequent scholarship and do not pose the serious challenges that they did in Roberts' day, this book is simply astounding for the candid and objective analysis it takes of historical anachronisms in the Book of Mormon, and similarities with the content of the book to other sources in Joseph Smith's day.
These essays were presented to the First Presidency of the church in the early 1920s, after which they met with Roberts for a three day discussion of these issues, then shelved the essays and did not address any of the points to Roberts' satisfaction. The material in this book was not published until 50 years after Roberts' death. The communication between Roberts and the First Presidency is alone worth reading. It is easy to read his frustration with the unserious and dismissive way his ideas and research are engaged with, and his passion for addressing what he feels are fatal criticisms in an objective, rigorous way in order to fortify the faith of the membership, particularly the youth.
Reading it today, it's easy to poke holes in a lot of the arguments, but if we remember that Roberts was engaging with the most up-to-date scholarship of the time, it is incredible how willing he was to submit the Book of Mormon to the ultimate tests of historic authenticity. His is a commitment to honest and difficult inquiry that is inspiring and feels missing these days.
The story of the bringing forth of the Book of Mormon is so incredible that in many ways it can never be submitted fully to an accurate historical verification, but Roberts did his very best, and he treats everything here with an objective, critical eye. Roberts seems to have lost a bit of faith in the Book of Mormon over his research, although he never left the church or denied its truthfulness, he appears to have spoken with less conviction of the Book of Mormon after these studies. Perhaps he just came to view it a bit differently after his inquiry.
While in many ways these essays are more of a historical artifact, they present an important snapshot of someone who is trying to be true to their spiritual and religious beliefs while still pursuing a rational explanation for perceived inconsistencies between history and professed occurrence. That this person was a member of the highest circles of church leadership at the time is remarkable, and makes me wish there were a little more of such transparent inquiry and questioning conveyed to the membership by its leaders today. In a day and age where membership seems to be falling off a cliff and the leaders express concern for the youth of the church, it seems appropriate to revisit Roberts' strategy and belief in a faith that can stand hand in hand with a belief in rational inquiry and respect for historical authenticity and transparency. We can learn a lot from his methods and courage today.
3 stars for content and writing (a bit dry, meandering, and repetitive), 5 stars for what this book represents. Roberts was a member of the highest leadership echelons of the church when he researched and wrote the essays in this book in response to a letter of inquiry from a member about the origins of the Book of Mormon. Although many of the points have been treated by subsequent scholarship and do not pose the serious challenges that they did in Roberts' day, this book is simply astounding for the candid and objective analysis it takes of historical anachronisms in the Book of Mormon, and similarities with the content of the book to other sources in Joseph Smith's day.
These essays were presented to the First Presidency of the church in the early 1920s, after which they met with Roberts for a three day discussion of these issues, then shelved the essays and did not address any of the points to Roberts' satisfaction. The material in this book was not published until 50 years after Roberts' death. The communication between Roberts and the First Presidency is alone worth reading. It is easy to read his frustration with the unserious and dismissive way his ideas and research are engaged with, and his passion for addressing what he feels are fatal criticisms in an objective, rigorous way in order to fortify the faith of the membership, particularly the youth.
Reading it today, it's easy to poke holes in a lot of the arguments, but if we remember that Roberts was engaging with the most up-to-date scholarship of the time, it is incredible how willing he was to submit the Book of Mormon to the ultimate tests of historic authenticity. His is a commitment to honest and difficult inquiry that is inspiring and feels missing these days.
The story of the bringing forth of the Book of Mormon is so incredible that in many ways it can never be submitted fully to an accurate historical verification, but Roberts did his very best, and he treats everything here with an objective, critical eye. Roberts seems to have lost a bit of faith in the Book of Mormon over his research, although he never left the church or denied its truthfulness, he appears to have spoken with less conviction of the Book of Mormon after these studies. Perhaps he just came to view it a bit differently after his inquiry.
While in many ways these essays are more of a historical artifact, they present an important snapshot of someone who is trying to be true to their spiritual and religious beliefs while still pursuing a rational explanation for perceived inconsistencies between history and professed occurrence. That this person was a member of the highest circles of church leadership at the time is remarkable, and makes me wish there were a little more of such transparent inquiry and questioning conveyed to the membership by its leaders today. In a day and age where membership seems to be falling off a cliff and the leaders express concern for the youth of the church, it seems appropriate to revisit Roberts' strategy and belief in a faith that can stand hand in hand with a belief in rational inquiry and respect for historical authenticity and transparency. We can learn a lot from his methods and courage today.
November 13, 2017
It's so hard to narrow down a favorite Mormon church history book I've read this year, because they have all been fantastic. It was really great to end this year on a strong note with B.H. Roberts companion studies on the Book of Mormon. These two studies, aka "Book of Mormon Difficulties," were written in the 1920s when Roberts decided to dive deep into the criticisms of the Book of Mormon and see if he could address some of the big issues plaguing the book. In so doing, he found himself opening a can of worms, raising even more questions regarding the book's authenticity. When he presented his findings to the Quorum of the 12 and the First Presidency, they simply responded by bearing their testimonies. In their defense, it would have been difficult for any faithful LDS scholar to seriously address Roberts's many questions when put on the spot, or even in another book of its own. However, it is quite telling that to this day, no general authority of the church has so much as mentioned it to the church as a whole, let alone address some of its huge problems.
While Roberts continued to affirm his testimony of the Book of Mormon's divine authenticity until his death, his manuscript went into hiding and wasn't unearthed for about 50 years until some family member delivered it to the University of Utah in 1978. It came into the hands of Brigham Madsen, who published it in 1985, sending Mormon scholars into a frenzy. Anti-Mormon books criticizing the Book of Mormon had been around since the later days of Joseph Smith, but never had such a book emerged from one of the church's most respected historians, much less the one that had authored the church's official six volume history. Since that time, FAIRMormon has done its best to discredit any notion that Roberts had lost his testimony in the Book of Mormon. Certainly Roberts went on the record as still maintaining his faith, but nowhere has there ever been a response to his many questions he posed in the original studies.
I would go so far as to say that most faithful Mormon scholars would today consider these studies to be nothingburgers, only worth mentioning if one wishes to affirm how faithful B.H. Roberts was to the church. However, I think all believing Mormons owe it to themselves to wrestle with some of the questions that Roberts posed, including this:
"Do we have here a great historical document, or only a wonder tale, told by an underdeveloped mind, living in a period and in an environment where the miraculous in ‘history’ is accepted without limitations and is supposed to account for all inconsistencies and lapses that challenge human credulity in the thought and in the easy philosophy that all things are possible with God?"
It is important to note that although Roberts may well have "died in the faith," he left behind a manuscript wholly capable of leading one to believe that Joseph Smith was the author of the Book of Mormon. If he was so convinced as he was, why then did he not simply destroy the study? Certainly he knew the potential damage it could do to the faith of a family member or fellow saint. Perhaps he had a plan to one day delve back into the study and offer meaningful answers, but surely he must have known as he entered his 70s that he wasn't going to live forever.
I'm sure this debate will go on until the end of time, but regardless of where you fall on the spectrum, I think every Mormon owes it to themselves to really investigate the questions that Roberts raises. They are questions that will never be asked in a Sunday School lesson, but they are meaningful and legitimate. Had I known about these issues while I was still a member of the church, I would have found myself genuinely wondering and questioning. The leaders of the church continue to insist that nothing has been able to "disprove" the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon, but you won't see them mentioning this book over the pulpit, much less offering meaningful answers to Roberts's questions. It amazes me that not a general conference goes by without a talk about how amazing the Book of Mormon is and how it can stand up to any criticism laid before it, yet, no one has actually taken the time to seriously address the criticisms themselves.
If you read nothing else, you should at least check out the editor's article from the Dialogue magazine which was published around the same time as the release of the first edition, in which he gives an overview of the project.
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-co...
It is one thing for Mormons to dismiss anti-Mormon literature such as "Mormonism Unvailed" out of hand. It is entirely different to attempt to discredit Roberts or these studies.
While Roberts continued to affirm his testimony of the Book of Mormon's divine authenticity until his death, his manuscript went into hiding and wasn't unearthed for about 50 years until some family member delivered it to the University of Utah in 1978. It came into the hands of Brigham Madsen, who published it in 1985, sending Mormon scholars into a frenzy. Anti-Mormon books criticizing the Book of Mormon had been around since the later days of Joseph Smith, but never had such a book emerged from one of the church's most respected historians, much less the one that had authored the church's official six volume history. Since that time, FAIRMormon has done its best to discredit any notion that Roberts had lost his testimony in the Book of Mormon. Certainly Roberts went on the record as still maintaining his faith, but nowhere has there ever been a response to his many questions he posed in the original studies.
I would go so far as to say that most faithful Mormon scholars would today consider these studies to be nothingburgers, only worth mentioning if one wishes to affirm how faithful B.H. Roberts was to the church. However, I think all believing Mormons owe it to themselves to wrestle with some of the questions that Roberts posed, including this:
"Do we have here a great historical document, or only a wonder tale, told by an underdeveloped mind, living in a period and in an environment where the miraculous in ‘history’ is accepted without limitations and is supposed to account for all inconsistencies and lapses that challenge human credulity in the thought and in the easy philosophy that all things are possible with God?"
It is important to note that although Roberts may well have "died in the faith," he left behind a manuscript wholly capable of leading one to believe that Joseph Smith was the author of the Book of Mormon. If he was so convinced as he was, why then did he not simply destroy the study? Certainly he knew the potential damage it could do to the faith of a family member or fellow saint. Perhaps he had a plan to one day delve back into the study and offer meaningful answers, but surely he must have known as he entered his 70s that he wasn't going to live forever.
I'm sure this debate will go on until the end of time, but regardless of where you fall on the spectrum, I think every Mormon owes it to themselves to really investigate the questions that Roberts raises. They are questions that will never be asked in a Sunday School lesson, but they are meaningful and legitimate. Had I known about these issues while I was still a member of the church, I would have found myself genuinely wondering and questioning. The leaders of the church continue to insist that nothing has been able to "disprove" the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon, but you won't see them mentioning this book over the pulpit, much less offering meaningful answers to Roberts's questions. It amazes me that not a general conference goes by without a talk about how amazing the Book of Mormon is and how it can stand up to any criticism laid before it, yet, no one has actually taken the time to seriously address the criticisms themselves.
If you read nothing else, you should at least check out the editor's article from the Dialogue magazine which was published around the same time as the release of the first edition, in which he gives an overview of the project.
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-co...
It is one thing for Mormons to dismiss anti-Mormon literature such as "Mormonism Unvailed" out of hand. It is entirely different to attempt to discredit Roberts or these studies.
March 10, 2008
Every Mormon should read this book. This book presents a manuscript written by President of the First Quorum of the Seventies and Church Historian B.H. Roberts that he wrote to answer a young members questions about the Book of Mormon in, I believe 1930.
The result is a very fair and objective review of the major problems with the Book of Mormon as a historical document, most of which are still very relavent today and deserve serious consideration from anyone who takes their faith seriously.
The result is a very fair and objective review of the major problems with the Book of Mormon as a historical document, most of which are still very relavent today and deserve serious consideration from anyone who takes their faith seriously.
June 11, 2008
LDS apostle and chief apologist circa 1920 wrote this book to show how Joseph Smith used the book View of the Hebrews as the primary source for the BofM. It also raises many questions about the ridiculous stories Joseph Smith put into the BofM. I never thought about how crazy many of the stories actually are until reading this. BH Roberts was a general authority and these writings were not published until more than 50 years after his death. They were donated to the UofU. His conclusion was that the B of M was a work of 19th centurty fiction.
November 19, 2020
I greatly admire BH Roberts. Yes, I’m a major fan. Even though my friend tells me he had some problematic views re women. I will have to look into that.
There was a scientist who came to Utah in the early 1900s, not sure the year, and he was in Salina canyon, sent there by the government to study poisonous plants. Anyhow, a member of the church got to be friends with the scientist and shared the Book of Mormon with him. Well, this scientist read it, took it seriously and wrote five reasons why the Book of Mormon could not be historical. The young man was disturbed and wrote to the General Authorities. I think initially they ignored him, but he kept pestering them. So they commissioned B H Roberts, who was the church historian and a general authority to research the claims and come up with a decent answer.
And dang. He took it seriously. So seriously that he wrote 400 pages of essays on what he found.
It turns out there was a book published several years before the BOM, that has many of the same theories and themes as the bom. And it was published s county over from where Joseph Smith grew up and it was published by Oliver Cowderys former minister. And it was widely circulated. BH thinks JS definitely saw it and that it formed the groundwork for the BOM.
He took all his findings to the GAs . He was understandably deeply concerned. He felt the church rested on whether the BOM was a historical document. He wanted the GAs to help him figure out wth was going on.
Disappointingly, they did not want to deal with the issues. They listened to two days of his findings, then disregarding all of them, each simply stood and bore testimony that they knew the book was true.
What I admire about BH is his willingness to follow the evidence, to revise his former assumptions, and to speak truth to power. Dude had integrity. Mad integrity. I do want to shake his hand when I reach the other side.
There was a scientist who came to Utah in the early 1900s, not sure the year, and he was in Salina canyon, sent there by the government to study poisonous plants. Anyhow, a member of the church got to be friends with the scientist and shared the Book of Mormon with him. Well, this scientist read it, took it seriously and wrote five reasons why the Book of Mormon could not be historical. The young man was disturbed and wrote to the General Authorities. I think initially they ignored him, but he kept pestering them. So they commissioned B H Roberts, who was the church historian and a general authority to research the claims and come up with a decent answer.
And dang. He took it seriously. So seriously that he wrote 400 pages of essays on what he found.
It turns out there was a book published several years before the BOM, that has many of the same theories and themes as the bom. And it was published s county over from where Joseph Smith grew up and it was published by Oliver Cowderys former minister. And it was widely circulated. BH thinks JS definitely saw it and that it formed the groundwork for the BOM.
He took all his findings to the GAs . He was understandably deeply concerned. He felt the church rested on whether the BOM was a historical document. He wanted the GAs to help him figure out wth was going on.
Disappointingly, they did not want to deal with the issues. They listened to two days of his findings, then disregarding all of them, each simply stood and bore testimony that they knew the book was true.
What I admire about BH is his willingness to follow the evidence, to revise his former assumptions, and to speak truth to power. Dude had integrity. Mad integrity. I do want to shake his hand when I reach the other side.
May 23, 2025
Studies of the Book of Mormon by B.H. Roberts is a fascinating and bold exploration of critical issues surrounding the Book of Mormon, authored by one of the most respected intellectuals in early Latter-day Saint history. Compiled posthumously from Roberts' private manuscripts, the book offers a rare glimpse into his inner wrestlings with questions of authorship, anachronisms, and parallels with 19th-century texts.
What makes this volume so compelling is not just the content itself, but the courage with which Roberts confronted troubling issues—many of which remain topics of discussion today. From linguistic questions to archaeological challenges and the influence of contemporary writings like View of the Hebrews, Roberts tackled these with a seriousness that few in his time dared.
However, reading this book in the 21st century requires a critical and informed lens. I found myself pausing often to research and correct many of Roberts’ now-outdated assumptions, particularly in areas like archaeology, linguistics, and the historicity of pre-Columbian civilizations. Understandably, his conclusions were limited by the scholarship available in the early 20th century, and some of his concerns have since been addressed—though many remain unresolved or hotly debated.
That said, the enduring relevance of the questions Roberts raised is striking. The fact that so many of these concerns persist more than a century later—still without universally satisfying answers—speaks volumes about the depth and complexity of the Book of Mormon debate.
In the end, this was more than a good read—it was a valuable scholastic exercise. It challenged me to engage critically, think historically, and consider both faith and doubt within the same intellectual space. For anyone serious about Book of Mormon studies, whether believer or skeptic, Studies of the Book of Mormon remains a seminal and thought-provoking contribution.
What makes this volume so compelling is not just the content itself, but the courage with which Roberts confronted troubling issues—many of which remain topics of discussion today. From linguistic questions to archaeological challenges and the influence of contemporary writings like View of the Hebrews, Roberts tackled these with a seriousness that few in his time dared.
However, reading this book in the 21st century requires a critical and informed lens. I found myself pausing often to research and correct many of Roberts’ now-outdated assumptions, particularly in areas like archaeology, linguistics, and the historicity of pre-Columbian civilizations. Understandably, his conclusions were limited by the scholarship available in the early 20th century, and some of his concerns have since been addressed—though many remain unresolved or hotly debated.
That said, the enduring relevance of the questions Roberts raised is striking. The fact that so many of these concerns persist more than a century later—still without universally satisfying answers—speaks volumes about the depth and complexity of the Book of Mormon debate.
In the end, this was more than a good read—it was a valuable scholastic exercise. It challenged me to engage critically, think historically, and consider both faith and doubt within the same intellectual space. For anyone serious about Book of Mormon studies, whether believer or skeptic, Studies of the Book of Mormon remains a seminal and thought-provoking contribution.
February 28, 2022
Overall, Studies of the Book of Mormon is extremely informative and goes in-depth to specific instances, stories, and claims about the BoM and Joseph Smith and I would recommend the book to anyone interested in B.H Roberts, the secret meetings of 1922, the perspectives of LDS leaders 100 years ago, and credible sources for legitimate concerns with the church.
B.H. Roberts was an extremely studious man with a great affinity for science and the pursual of truth through as credible of means as he could find. I read this book to learn more about the perspectives of one of the last true Mormon scholars. The book is wordy and can be a bit repetitive at times, and he quotes extensively from the Book of Mormon and other sources (sometimes including full chapters). This is definitely helpful in terms of backing up his points although some of the critiques just aren't as strong as others.
I have grown to respect Roberts a lot. He brought up difficult points to church leaders as far back as the early 1920's and was part of multiple meetings pleading for leadership to address these issues and come up with solutions. The leaders did not, could not, and elected instead to ignore the issues that are still brought up to this day. He stood up to other LDS scholars and called them out for using faulty science and deceptive spins in order to come to the conclusions they presented to the public ie James Talmage.
The book doesn't definitively disprove the church, however; the view of Roberts is made very clear as he meticulously goes through many instances of issues, and claims that there are more he could bring up, but doesn't currently have enough evidence to feel honest talking about, that would not be faith promoting.
B.H. Roberts was an extremely studious man with a great affinity for science and the pursual of truth through as credible of means as he could find. I read this book to learn more about the perspectives of one of the last true Mormon scholars. The book is wordy and can be a bit repetitive at times, and he quotes extensively from the Book of Mormon and other sources (sometimes including full chapters). This is definitely helpful in terms of backing up his points although some of the critiques just aren't as strong as others.
I have grown to respect Roberts a lot. He brought up difficult points to church leaders as far back as the early 1920's and was part of multiple meetings pleading for leadership to address these issues and come up with solutions. The leaders did not, could not, and elected instead to ignore the issues that are still brought up to this day. He stood up to other LDS scholars and called them out for using faulty science and deceptive spins in order to come to the conclusions they presented to the public ie James Talmage.
The book doesn't definitively disprove the church, however; the view of Roberts is made very clear as he meticulously goes through many instances of issues, and claims that there are more he could bring up, but doesn't currently have enough evidence to feel honest talking about, that would not be faith promoting.
May 5, 2025
As a person who grew up Mormon and left the church later in life, this was a shocking book to read. It is pretty standard book for questioning Mormons but it was eye opening. BH Roberts, a church leader, did a deep dive on the scientific basis ostensibly supporting the claims of the Book of Mormon. He documented what he found, which was that the evidence was very flimsy at its very best. This is a very different message than is taught over the pulpit and in Sunday school. I highly recommend for any Mormon or scholar of Mormonism and Mormon history.
August 14, 2020
John Dehlin and his ilk were beaten to conclusions about BoM authorship by BH Roberts (President of the 70) almost 90 years earlier! Fascinating.
Bit of a dry read. Took me a while to get through.
Bit of a dry read. Took me a while to get through.
April 16, 2024
BH Roberts did a fantastic job at reviewing many of the main historic and scientific issues with the Book of Mormon.
March 9, 2017
Great book! There are new things here that I had not thought of before as well as things that confirmed what I already believed. The book is repetitive, but so worth the read. B. H. Roberts uses critical thinking to look at things others want to ignore.
October 24, 2024
I have admired BH Roberts for a long time, flaws and all. He was always honest. This book is the greatest evidence of that, as it cost him dearly to write. I'm grateful.
October 25, 2015
This book is fascinating on many levels.
1 - That someone so high up in the Mormon Church structure should even give these questions a second look. What now?! Awesome. He was unafraid to look at the difficulties with an open, scrutinizing mind, and a lot of research.
2 - The Brethren's response when he presented the first half of his findings with them. They were deeply uncomfortable (as they should have been - these topics aren't easy), and so refused to discuss things. They instead bore testimony. The line that stuck out to me the most was when Roberts told them there was more to be looked into. One of the Brethren asked if it would lessen or deepen the difficulties. Roberts said it would deepen the difficulties by a large degree. And the Brother responded with a statement that said, in effect, "Then why should we bother looking at it?" I find this particularly damning, but not surprising. It's been the Mormon Church's party line for years: Don't look over there. It's not safe there. Just bear testimony.
3 - The difference in Roberts' language and tone from his first set of findings/writings to his second set. They were written years apart and they are MUCH different.
The first set almost sounds like a plea: I found this stuff out; it makes me uncomfortable; I can't figure out how to resolve it; help me resolve it! The emotion is raw and it was hard for me to read at times. He felt deep down in his bones that the Book of Mormon was true, but he also was required by his love of Truth to subject the book to rigorous examination. The Book came out the loser and he wanted to resolve it!
The second set isn't a plea. It's an announcement. This book isn't historically accurate for these 100 reasons. Decide from there what you want. Mic drop.
...
I wish things like this were discussed out in the open. In Roberts' time, saying that ANYTHING about the Book or Mormon isn't fact was reason for the Mormon Church to not be true. Nowadays, we don't require that all Native Amerians be descendants from Lehi, so we've already come further than Mormons in Roberts' time. However, we also have more evidence than in Roberts' time and NONE of it points to the Book of Mormon being true, in fact quite the opposite.
After reading this book I wanted to say to every Mormon I know, "Hey, did you know about A, B, C, .... Z? Yep, that's the way it is. Now, what should we do about it?" I don't care what your conclusions are, just let's TALK about it.
I think that was Roberts' point.
1 - That someone so high up in the Mormon Church structure should even give these questions a second look. What now?! Awesome. He was unafraid to look at the difficulties with an open, scrutinizing mind, and a lot of research.
2 - The Brethren's response when he presented the first half of his findings with them. They were deeply uncomfortable (as they should have been - these topics aren't easy), and so refused to discuss things. They instead bore testimony. The line that stuck out to me the most was when Roberts told them there was more to be looked into. One of the Brethren asked if it would lessen or deepen the difficulties. Roberts said it would deepen the difficulties by a large degree. And the Brother responded with a statement that said, in effect, "Then why should we bother looking at it?" I find this particularly damning, but not surprising. It's been the Mormon Church's party line for years: Don't look over there. It's not safe there. Just bear testimony.
3 - The difference in Roberts' language and tone from his first set of findings/writings to his second set. They were written years apart and they are MUCH different.
The first set almost sounds like a plea: I found this stuff out; it makes me uncomfortable; I can't figure out how to resolve it; help me resolve it! The emotion is raw and it was hard for me to read at times. He felt deep down in his bones that the Book of Mormon was true, but he also was required by his love of Truth to subject the book to rigorous examination. The Book came out the loser and he wanted to resolve it!
The second set isn't a plea. It's an announcement. This book isn't historically accurate for these 100 reasons. Decide from there what you want. Mic drop.
...
I wish things like this were discussed out in the open. In Roberts' time, saying that ANYTHING about the Book or Mormon isn't fact was reason for the Mormon Church to not be true. Nowadays, we don't require that all Native Amerians be descendants from Lehi, so we've already come further than Mormons in Roberts' time. However, we also have more evidence than in Roberts' time and NONE of it points to the Book of Mormon being true, in fact quite the opposite.
After reading this book I wanted to say to every Mormon I know, "Hey, did you know about A, B, C, .... Z? Yep, that's the way it is. Now, what should we do about it?" I don't care what your conclusions are, just let's TALK about it.
I think that was Roberts' point.
June 22, 2012
B.H. Roberts, as the church historian, addresses the leaders of the LDS religion in full faith that they will be able to receive divine answers to the historical inaccuracies of the Book of Mormon. He pleads with them to receive revelation and put to silence the scientific evidence standing against them. He spent his life in defense of the Book of Mormon, but when he presents this information to the twelve apostles he is met with silence. Silence is the only answer and it's not good enough...
Definitely a difficult read. It is a lot like reading a college paper...very dry, but very interesting to learn that the world was aware of the historical BOM discrepancies within a hundred years of it's publication. The LDS Leadership has yet to address these issues even when presented to them almost a hundred years ago by a leading church historian.
Definitely a difficult read. It is a lot like reading a college paper...very dry, but very interesting to learn that the world was aware of the historical BOM discrepancies within a hundred years of it's publication. The LDS Leadership has yet to address these issues even when presented to them almost a hundred years ago by a leading church historian.
January 26, 2015
While some of the Book of Mormon difficulties that Roberts came across are interesting, the real exciting aspect of the book is the drama that occurred when Roberts presented the issues to the other Church leaders.
June 18, 2008
Will open your eyes!
August 22, 2010
very interesting book by an apostle, historian and apologist of the book of mormon. b.h. roberts questions the book of mormon's claims.
December 26, 2010
Every Mormon and ex-Mormon should read this book. Eye-opening and can't be ignored.
March 21, 2012
Enlightening.
May 9, 2015
Although a bit repetitive at times, very enlightening. Especially given his position as a General Authority.
July 10, 2016
The ideas found in this book are easily discarded, which may be why most anti-Mormons ignore this book.
December 25, 2025
A little known work.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews