Why are Christians so intent on proving that scriptural events occurred and that they occurred as described in scripture?
Why, for example, are they intent on proving that Noah’s flood occurred? Why are they intent on proving the Garden of Eden was an actual place and that it housed an actual Adam and Eve? Why are they so intent on proving the creation story? Why are they so intent on proving the events surrounding Jesus’s birth? And so on?
Is there not value in scriptural stories being just stories but with moral messages? Why mingle them with science? Why not just focus on the moral of the story rather than the legitimacy of the story?
I think you likely know the answer. If we can prove events happened historically then we can have greater assurance that the message is correct to. For example, if we found actual archaeological evidence of Lehi and his family then claims about the Book of Mormon’s truth are much stronger and plausible.
The thing that strikes me interesting in your post is that I have been in classes where the teacher has read a book or two and goes to great lengths to describe the setting, culture and history of scripture. What Jerusalem looked like in Jesus’ time. What did the Pharisees believed and how did they behaved.The exact route of Paul’s missionary journeys.
This has never really done much for me personally. Does it matter if Paul travelled north or south or east or west. Perhaps. But it is what he says and what that means that I find most interesting. What is the text saying to me, now, as I read and what did the original author have in mind when it was recorded. Context is important though.
(While I appreciate Biblical Scholarship and insights it might bring, my favorite way to read scripture is just read the text and notice what I think and feel as I read the text.It is how the text affects me that I am most interested in.)
A belief in literalism and inerrancy of the Bible sometimes get in the way of a good reading. There is room for symbolism, myth, allegory, parable, imagery, allusion, and other literary tools to convey important messages.
For a church that puts so much weight in faith, we seem to put a lot of effort into undermining it.
Hi Kim,
I have followed your blog on and off for many years since you wrote of your crisis of faith back in 2015. Back then it caught my eye, as someone who had once experienced such a crisis but came to a different conclusion. My thoughts came back to you after reading the memorial posts after the passing of a mutual friend, and I revisited your blog and found this post interesting.When reading of the relationship between scripture and archaeology and weather or not events actually occurred, my advice to all adherent Latter-Day Saints is that if you need to look in to the veracity of the events that occurred in South and Central America centuries ago, you have already at least begun down the road to losing your faith.
The Church is an institution that promotes kindness, brotherhood and service, and many find strength and inspiration in the passages of the Book of Mormon. But a history book it is not. It speaks of large mammals that did not exist at the time, agriculture that does not predate the Columbian Exchange, technologies that did not exist and cities and cultures for which there is no archaeological record. What it is, is a book that spoke to the needs of those who lived 200 years ago and contains material that is still useful for people today. From it derives a faith that encourages discipline, which has allowed many of its adherents to flourish in the realms of sport, politics, education and, yes, even science. It is not, however, a history book. Much can be gained, much can be learned… I hold the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints who I come across in work or in other aspects of life in very high esteem. What they learn from their sacred text obviously gives them something meaningful and substantive, and therefore it is truly a work of great value.
Thanks for your thoughts, Matt. I appreciate them.
Hope all is going well, my friend. :)
Interesting views. I see it somewhat differently.
I suppose we need to examine the intent of those attempting to prove or disprove. What is their agenda? For me, on the surface I don’t think it matters as feel-good stories can often lead us to do good as much as a story with good morals. Think of Aesop’s fables. These are fictional stories that teach a moral lesson.
However, at a deeper level I certainly don’t want fables to inform my eternal salvation, which is what happens if I cannot prove the stories, circumstances, genealogies, locations, etc. And telling me to simply “have faith” is unfair. The adage trust but verify might be applicable here. What’s more, if I cannot trust a story truly occurred then what is my real basis for belief? I think there is great need to validate an event actually occurred, whether something as ancient as a biblical story or more recent like during the early days of the restoration. Without proof it falls into the category of Paul H. Dunn whose stories turned out to be fabrications that heavily undermine any moral story that was intended to teach.
I don’t think, for the most part, that the stories of the scriptures do inform our eternal salvation. For example, how is our eternal salvation affected if the story of Jonah is fictional? Or Noah? Or Job? I don’t think it is.