Hello, all you funny little internet goblins. Sorry I'm late by a day or so. Here's a quick thought.
When you try to define any religion solely by the contents of their respective scripture, you're going to oversimplify, generalize and assume a dangerous amount of information that may or may not be true. I've seen plenty of books and websites that are devoted to thoroughly refuting the Bible of any credibility it may claim—and come to think of it, the same is true for the book of Mormon.
Now, I'm a Christian, and though I may often be ashamed of the believers, I'm not ashamed of the God I believe in. Furthermore, I believe the Bible to be his own directly inspired word.
But here's the thing—it's not a rulebook, it's a narrative. It's a story about people being people and God being God. Therein lies the potential for enormous conflict and insane amounts of perversion and sin—some graphically depicted, no punches pulled. Let's be honest here—the Bible is chock full of things that kids under seventeen aren't allowed to see at the movies.
<=[Mum and Daddy forgot to fast-forward through the Ezekiel 23 part.]
So what does the Bible have to do with me? It's an inspiration and a conduit for Truth—even if that truth is metaphorical and not literal—and it's a way to open my perception. It's a way for my very finite mind to learn, no matter how vaguely, how to recognize the appearance, movements, characteristics and habits of God. That's the important part.
Are there some literal truths in there? Oh, yeah. You can bet on it—the Bible has proven time and again to be more scientifically and historically accurate than scientists and historians themselves, from things like the existence of King David or the Hittites to the evidence of the universe literally having been created from nothing. Do some research and utilize your friendly neighborhood Google. This info is common knowledge now, but nobody likes to admit the Bible's historical accuracy had one-upped them at any time on any matter.
But I'm not here to prove the accuracy of the Bible and my point remains the same: while I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God himself, it's still only a book. It's only a book because without God's Spirit, it can accomplish nothing and prove nothing. That's why people who try to pick holes in Christianity by way of the Bible think they've already won so solidly—they've reduced the entire movement to the words in a book. Once they experience the movement of God in their life for what it is and can still refute it with logic, then I'll be impressed.
It hasn't happened yet. I don't think it will.
Michelle and I were just talking about how we'd like to spice up the conversation on the Blog, and without so much as an email, Seth delivers with one of the most divisive topics modern Christianity could possibly have. Well played Mr. Morris, well played. :)
ReplyDeleteIs the Bible infallible? Is it just a book? Written by humans and subject to the errors that humans make? Or was it written by God himself, in a sort of way where He controlled the hand an pen of those credited with scribing the original autographs? Did God write this book and order it together Genesis to Revelations on purpose? Also is the Canon complete?
LDS (for the most part) say that the cannon is not complete: that God continues to reveal new truths, precept upon precept. Christians (for the most part) claim that the book is finished in the order that it currently is, the order that was formed by the early church and established by the Nicene Creed.
I believe the Bible to be sufficient, I think it is fallible insomuch as it does have a human mechanic to it. I believe that the truth that God has put into it is truth. I believe that His Word will endure, but I do not believe that is necessary for the cannon to be closed.
Getting back to the point however, I think the claim "The Bible is only a book" needs to be better qualified. I agree in where you say that without God's Spirit it can do nothing, but that's only one instance in where it could be considered "just a book" In other instances, it's much more than just a book. To the Christian, it's a mode of communication between God and man. In this way it's not in the same league as Harry Potter. It also follows the life of a man who claims to be God, in that way it's separated from Carnagies' "How to Win Friends & Influence People".
In the same way, almost any book can be more that "only a book" when looked at in a certain light. "First Step 2 Forever: My Story" may just be a book to most people, but screaming adolescent girls all over the world see it as a window into he heart of Justin Bieber. Wow... Just mentioning that name might boost this blog's viewer hits 100 fold. Ugh. Maybe we should Rename the blog Justin Bieber: A Mormon And A Christian? ;)
Great post tho Seth!
haha Paul as long as we can find a picture of Justin Bieber drinking lemonade I'm all for that. :P Agreed. Very good post. I agree with Paul. The Bible isn't just any old book. Although it literally is a book like any novel, but where it came from and who it comes from makes it a little more.
ReplyDelete"When you try to define any religion solely by the contents of their respective scripture, you're going to oversimplify, generalize and assume a dangerous amount of information that may or may not be true. I've seen plenty of books and websites that are devoted to thoroughly refuting the Bible of any credibility it may claim—and come to think of it, the same is true for the book of Mormon."
"That's why people who try to pick holes in Christianity by way of the Bible think they've already won so solidly"
So I have a question... going by what you said in these sections that you wrote, how is the Bible different from the Book of Mormon? What makes the Bible true and not the Book of Mormon. It's basically the same situation. People outside of the LDS church claim it's not true because they try to "poke holes" in it. The Book of Mormon doesn't do much good for people either unless they read it using God's spirit. Why is the Bible true even though people poke holes and the Book of Mormon not? Is this making sense? I don't really know how to word my thoughts? ha But everything you just said seems to relate exactly to the BOM too.
Good question! I'll answer as soon as I have a moment. I love a good challenge!
ReplyDeleteMy main opposition to the Book of Mormon is this: it was written by one man. A man whose writings are supposed to piggyback on the Bible but at the same time directly dismiss it at certain points.
ReplyDeleteWhen I say what I do about the difference between the Bible's metaphorical bits and literal bits, I'm certainly not saying that any part of the Bible is subjective in any way--contextual, perhaps, but not subjective. It''s just that we need the filter of God's spirit to show us the application and the understanding of the truths we read.
The reason for my conviction that the Book of Mormon is not on the same level as the Bible is that the Book of Mormon doesn't stand up to my doubts the same way, even at the level of my minimal knowledge of it. I know I will have to read the Book of Mormon eventually, (when I have time), but the fact that it was all put together by one guy, who, on top of everything else, claimed without evidence to have received direction from an angel and not God Himself? That's stretching it for me...
Like I said. I have a lot to learn. But it's unnerving to me that the basis of the Book of Mormon is not in God alone, but rather in a man and an angel.
Forgive me if this is arrogance. I do not intend it to be.
Hey, just wanted to offer a little of what I've learned in regards to your last comment Seth :)
ReplyDeleteAccording to the LDS faith, the BOM was written by many different people. LDS claim that Joseph Smith acted as a translator only and did not fabricate the BOM.
It's true that JS claimed angelic visitation by Moroni, but that was for him to be shown the location of the Golden Plates, the records of the former inhabitants of the America's. But before the angelic visitation, Smith claimed a divine visitation from Heavenly Father as well as Jesus Christ. He said that they both appeared to him at the sacred grove and instructed him to not join any of the churched for they were all evil.
As for evidence, LDS boast of witnesses to the original Golden Plates. The 8 witnesses and the 3 witnesses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_witnesses
No one expects everyone to know all of these things, but I would be interested Seth, to know how these things would affect your view of the BOM.
Ditto. Paul covered it all I think. ha Plus, in the Bible there are a ton of situations when God sends an angel to his prophets. Actually, mostly he only ever does. When Eli is chastised for allowing his sons to do as they please, God doesn't visit Eli. An angel does. So how are we to know that Eli was ever a holy person in the first place? (I'm not saying he's not because I believe the Bible as well. The LDS church uses the Bible along with it's other books of teachings.) The Book of Mormon was translated by one man, but not written by one man. Furthermore, Joseph Smith didn't do it on his own. He translated and others wrote it as he read it. There was more than one person involved. You should read the BOM. :)
ReplyDeleteHere's how I see it, I believe the Bible to be internally consistent. I know people can take verses from different places and make a convincing case for Biblical inconsistency, but I believe that when taken in context that these inconsistencies are merely misunderstandings on our part.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to the BOM, I feel like there are points of unresolvable conflict. Of course it is only my opinion that these conflicts aren't just my misunderstandings.
I am also very skeptical of the way in which the supposed rediscovery and translation of the BOM is said to have happened. In the same way, LDS are skeptical of the way the Bible was canonized and preserved to this present day.
I think it would be a great idea for all of us to take an equally skeptical look at both the BOM history as well as that of the Bible. After all, if we're really the "Truth Seekers" that we claim to be, we should never fear what skepticism may uncover.
I'll need a copy then, so I can start a new antagonistic skeptical trolling adventure.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mormon.org/free-book-of-mormon/
ReplyDeleteThis is where I got mine :) After you're done with that they've also got Doctrine & Covenants and the Pearl Of Great Price :)