Conclusions

A vital test for any theory or explanation is how much it explains. The Tanners' nineteenth-century explanations reminds us of the blind men who tried to describe the elephant. One man, feeling only the trunk, said it was a snake, while another, gripping a leg, staid it was a tree. yet another, feeling the tail, thought it resembled a rope. Each went his way, telling his tale, certain he had it right; some may even have believed them. But their superficial descriptions hardly defined the nature of the beast. The Tanners' parallels to the Apocrypha, like those provided elsewhere, explain very little about the Book of Mormon. They note a common phrase, a similar idea there, but like the blind men in our story, their conclusions have questionable value. In past reviews of the Tanners' criticisms, we have noted certain authentic elements in the Book of Mormon that are not found in accessible nineteenth-century sources. The Tanners have yet to deal with these. Some might be persuaded by the Tanners' recent arguments, but we think they are groping in the dark.