Skousen insisted the researchers use formal scholarly methods to complete the study. Although he is a believing Mormon (the nickname sometimes applied to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), he wanted to use academic methodology so the study would have academic validity.

Skousen explained, “There are two main goals for a critical text of the Book of Mormon. The first is to determine, to the extent possible, the original English-language text of the book. The second purpose is to establish the history of the text, including both accidental errors and editorial changes that the book has undergone as it has been transmitted down through time in its many editions.”

He notes there are challenges in doing the study. Joseph read from the original plates. It is possible for errors to arise as one reads aloud. The scribe had to understand what Joseph said correctly and to record it correctly. Scribes were then directed to make an official copy for the printer and this too offered opportunities for mistakes. All but one-sixth of the typeset was made from this copy, not the original text.

Scribes made an average of two to three changes between the original dictated copy and the printer’s text. The printer added additional mistakes or changes and most of these were not caught in later editions.

Daniel C. Peterson, a professor of Islamic studies and Arabic at Brigham Young University says that the study allows us to know more than has ever been known before about the changes in the manuscript and the study proves that the changes were not faith-destroying. They were, in fact, unimportant changes.

As an example, Peterson offers the following:

1 Nephi 12:18 originally read, “And a great and a terrible gulf divideth them; yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God.” Oliver Cowdery thought the word “sword” was “word” because of the scribe’s handwriting. In fact, the researchers on this modern project also initially thought it said word. However, a study of the entire book makes clear that the phrase in other parts of the book is always sword, not word. There are no mentions of “the word of the justice of the Eternal God.”

Nothing he found would alter existing doctrine, although he says it sometimes restores the original doctrine. He suggests this is true of Alma 39:13, which in the original read, “but rather return unto them, and acknowledge your faults and repair that wrong which ye have done.” This aligns with Mormon teachings on the importance of restitution in the repentance process. However, Oliver Cowdery, who was the scribe for this section, had a leaky pen that day and the manuscript has drops of ink on the page. Some happened to drop on the word “repair” and this combined with Cowdery’s habit of looping his r’s downward. When Oliver copied it over, the placement of the ink drops caused him to think he’d written “retain.” This mistake was not found until James E. Talmadge was working on the 1920 edition and he and his committee realized the verse made no sense. It removed one essential aspect of repentance—but it was one Mormons already knew through other teachings, so it didn’t change doctrine.

Some of the mistakes were merely humorous. One typesetter misread “robber” as nobler, leaving the infamous Gandianton Robbers as the Gadianton Noblers.

The project, according to scholar Terryl Givens, is more complicated than merely reading the first version available. There were times when Skousen had to study every reference to a word and match it to common errors made by specific scribes. For instance, he noted that two scribes commonly dropped plurals, and this meant he had to decide if a word was really meant to be singular or plural, based on that scribe’s habits and the context in other places in the book.

There are some who mistakenly think God takes all the work out of scripture. Since we know the Bible was handwritten not by God, but by fallible men, there have been a variety of errors that have crept in. Different versions of the Bible contain different wording due to errors in copying or differences in translation. The same is true of the Book of Mormon. God is perfect, but His servants are not. We must anticipate that there will be unimportant errors—but none that impact the great gospel truths of the Book of Mormon.

Sources:

Sarah Petersen, BYU professor Royal Skousen concludes his discussion on changes to the Book of Mormon original text, Deseret News, March 19 2013

Terryl L. Givens, The Book of Mormon Critical Text Project, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Volume – 15, Issue – 1, Pages: 32-35, 71, Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 2006

Royal Skousen, History of the Critical Text Project of the Book of Mormon, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Volume – 11, Issue – 2, Pages: 5–21, Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 2002

Scholar details ‘striking’ parallels between Book of Mormon and ancient civilization, R. Scott Lloyd, Church News staff writer, Monday, Aug. 6 2012 4:55 p.m. MDT

Sorenson notes the Book of Mormon has everything a person would expect to find from a book written in the time and place of the Book of Mormon, a record of ancient scripture that Mormons (a nickname sometimes applied to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) hold as a companion to the Bible. “”It is not rational to suppose that mere coincidence can account for similarities of this magnitude,” he declared. “The parallels are too striking and too sweeping to allow that casual explanation.”

The Book of Mormon does not specify where the events in the book occurred. Mormons have as doctrine only that they happened on what is today the American continent. However, scholars have devoted many hours to trying to place events into specific locations. Sorenson, like many others, believes they occurred in Mesoamerica.

“Similarly, Sorenson has correlated Mesoamerican archaeology with Book of Mormon content.

His method was to determine what area best corresponds with the apparent “mental map” Mormon had in mind when abridging the Nephite record known today as the Book of Mormon. In previous works, he settled on this: “The Isthmus of Tehuantepec in southern Mexico is the narrow neck of land of the Nephites, the highlands of southern Guatemala contained the land of Nephi, the basin of the Grijalva river and adjacent areas in extreme southern Mexico is the land of Zarahemla, and areas immediately north and west of the isthmus are the land northward. This, then, defines the area where it makes sense to look for correspondences between the Book of Mormon and the archaeological/cultural record.”

Sorenson outlines 450 examples in which Mesoamerican culture and Book of Mormon culture correlate, and notes they are only a sampling of the correlations. Included are:

• The construction of sacred towers in both cultures. The Book of Helaman, in the Book of Mormon, refers to a tower used for private prayer and discourse, a usage also found in Mesoamerica.
• The installation of a younger king before the death of the current king, leading to emeritus status for the retiring king
• 380 cultural patterns for religion and ideology found in both the ancient Near East in second and first millennia B.C. and in Mesoamerica. Sorenson suggests the complexity and numbers of correlations are possible only if people from the Near East came to Mesoamerica, an essential aspect of the Book of Mormon.
• The significance of warfare, which today’s scholars see in ways that more closely align with the writings of Mormon, an ancient Book of Mormon prophet, than they did in the days when the Book of Mormon was translated.

Lehi was the first prophet of the Book of Mormon. He lived in Jerusalem and was a prophet just prior to the fall of Jerusalem. He was married to Sariah, and had at least six sons. Daughters are mentioned later in the Book of Mormon and may have married into the family that joined them on their wilderness journey prior to the beginning of the account.

The oldest two sons were Laman and Lemuel. Both lacked the faith of their father and are best noted for their tendency to whine when asked to obey God. Later, their rebelliousness turned violent and they attempted to murder their younger brother Nephi many times.

Sam was the third son. He managed to overcome the tendency of children to follow in the footsteps of older siblings and chose instead to follow the teachings of his family and his religion. This may have set the stage for the righteousness of the next youngest brother.

Nephi, the fourth son, was also righteous and would be chosen by God to lead the family and the church following the death of his father. His leadership began, however, in his teenage years.

Two additional sons were born in the wilderness and also followed the good example of their father and of Sam and Nephi.

When Lehi’s life was threatened as a result of his prophecies concerning the wickedness of the people and the future fall of Jerusalem, God instructed him to leave behind his home and possessions, which were great, and flee into the wilderness with his family. They would eventually travel by boat to what is today known as the American continent.

We first gain a glimpse of Sam’s character in 1 Nephi 2. Lehi tells his family of a vision he had. Nephi wanted to understand the vision better, so he prayed to God and received his own vision, the first of which we have a record for the young teenager. He told Sam of his vision:

17 And I spake unto Sam, making known unto him the things which the Lord had manifested unto me by his Holy Spirit. And it came to pass that he believed in my words.

18 But, behold, Laman and Lemuel would not hearken unto my words; and being grieved because of the hardness of their hearts I cried unto the Lord for them.

In the next chapter, the boys are asked by God to return to Jerusalem to obtain important records after the family has fled. Laman and Lemuel complained about the task. Nephi gave a famous speech about his willingness to obey and his faith that God would help them. Interesting, there is no record of Sam’s response, suggesting he simply quietly did as he was asked, not rebelling and perhaps so comfortable with obedience that he did not need to make a speech.

Throughout the account of this family, the author, Nephi records his own reactions to the events, naturally, and also usually records the reactions of his two oldest brothers. He seldom mentions Sam’s reactions. Howard W. Hunter, a former president and prophet, said of Sam:

“Many who read the story of the great prophet Nephi almost completely miss another valiant son of Lehi whose name was Sam. Nephi is one of the most famous figures in the entire Book of Mormon. But Sam? Sam’s name is mentioned only ten times in the scriptures. When Lehi counseled and blessed his posterity, he said to Sam:

“Blessed art thou [Sam], and thy seed; for thou shalt inherit the land like unto thy brother Nephi. And thy seed shall be numbered with his seed; and thou shalt be even like unto thy brother, and thy seed like unto his seed; and thou shalt be blessed in all thy days” (2 Ne. 4:11).

The role of Sam was basically one of supporting and assisting his more acclaimed younger brother, and he ultimately received all the blessings promised to Nephi and his posterity. Nothing promised to Nephi was withheld from the faithful Sam, yet we know very little of his service and contribution. He was almost an unknown in life, but he is obviously a victor in the annals of eternity.”

Sam’s contributions, while perhaps not recognized in his own life, contributed to the overall events. He was an unquestionable support and comfort to his younger brother. After the deaths of the parents, Nephi was forced to take his supporters and leave home because the two oldest brothers were determined to kill him. Sam chose to go with Nephi and their descendents were joined together as one civilization. Although he was passed over for reasons we don’t know as the leader of his people in favor of his younger brother, he appears not to have complained about this, as did Laman and Lemuel. In fact, we note that he gave his full support to his brother’s leadership from the very start. He is an example to us that God honors not just the “stars” of the story of Christianity, but also those valiant people who work quietly in the shadows.