Pastor Wil Response
A couple of days ago, I posted a response to Pastor Wil’s Top Ten Questions for “Mormons”. As long-time readers know, I have blogged about dissenting opinions in the past. What makes this time different is that the dissenting author has actually seen fit to respond. Pastor Wil, if you’re reading, I greatly appreciate this courtesy. Much as I am apparently “the only member of the [C]hurch [of Jesus Christ] who has answered all the questions,” so you, Pastor Wil, are perhaps the only non–Latter-day Saint who has responded to a relevant blog post. You thus have my gratitude, as well.
Now, normally when someone comments on my blog and I need to respond, I will do so in the same venue as the initial response, i.e. in the comments section. The problem with that method, however, is that it becomes quite unwieldy when a response requires more than a paragraph or two. In this case, I feel that Pastor Wil’s comment does indeed necessitate a more lengthy response, so I hope my other readers will indulge me. If so, you have my gratitude as well.
As for Pastor Wil, the balance of this post is again primarily directed to you. Enjoy.
The first thing I wanted to mention, Pastor Wil, is how impressed I am that you are watching Dr. Daniel C. Peterson’s Evidence of the Book of Mormon. I actually haven’t seen that specific video, so I can’t comment on its contents. I am, however, familiar with some of Dr. Peterson’s other work, and I regularly read his column in the Deseret News (which is, of course, simplified for common consumption; one cannot expect the average reader to be familiar with the finer points of one’s area of expertise). In short, I have great respect for Dr. Peterson, and I applaud you for selecting a reputable source for Latter-day Saint doctrine and apologetics.
That being said, I find the preceding paragraph rather curious: you state that “If there was evidence for the Book of Mormon… then I would look into it.” While this is obviously a logical position to take, it seems to directly contradict the next paragraph. If you’re watching a video called “evidence of the Book of Mormon,” one can only assume said video would include… um… evidence of the Book of Mormon. If you mean to say that you don’t accept the evidence provided, that’s certainly your prerogative, but to claim that it doesn’t exist is an exercise in either folly or deception. As I try not to judge others, my natural inclination is to assume the former, as there is certainly no sin in ignorance. (I, myself, am ignorant of a great many things.)
Returning to the comment in question, though, I think there’s a much bigger issue at stake here. Even ignoring the overwhelming abundance of external evidence for the Book of Mormon (more on this later), your argument seems rather weak. While it’s all well and good to claim that “God has given a large amount of evidence to back up the Bible,” there really isn’t any external evidence to support the spiritual claims of the Bible. Sure, archæology proves Jerusalem (and a few other places) to have existed in Biblical times, but that doesn’t even begin to prove that the Lord Jehovah exists, much less testify to the words and acts attributed to Him. By that argument, we know that the Iliad is a true account of the acts of Zeus and Poseidon because ancient Greece is a real place; or that Oliver Twist is factual because 19th-century England is exactly as described. The point is that history can influence fiction just as easily as scripture, and while you and I both know that the Bible is true, the fact that it includes geographical accuracy does nothing to support its claims of Divinity.
Now, let’s return to the Book of Mormon. If you’re looking for external evidences, I’d probably start by reading The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, particularly Volume 5. (Nibley, as you probably know, is viewed as the father of modern Latter-day Saint scholarship.) While I personally don’t care for the fictional setting imposed on the presentation of the Jaredite sections, the breadth of his knowledge is more than impressive. I’d also look into V. Garth Norman’s The Definitive Mesoamerican Book of Mormon Lands Map, although you can probably skip the accompanying booklet. It’s got some good information—including Joseph Smith’s own declaration on the location of Zarahemla—but while Norman is certainly an accomplished archæologist, his authorship skills are in desperate need of a good editor.
Since you’re familiar with Dr. Peterson’s work, you’re probably also familiar with the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR), which was originally just a bunch of people who were sick of having the same tired arguments on a thousand different web sites. To save themselves the time and trouble of continuing to post the same things over and over again, they formed FAIR and its web site as a centralized repository for scholarly, critical response. The reason I bring this up is because you mentioned some specific concerns—“cities, coins, wars sites, early manuscripts pre 1820” that are all included in their wiki. (As an aside, the Book of Mormon never mentions coins—only a monetary system—and the ostensibly inaccurate header to Alma 11 has been updated to more accurately reflect its content.)
On the subject of apologetic web sites, another great resource is Jeff Lindsay’s LDS FAQ, which—being the work of one man—doesn’t have nearly the content that FAIR has, but does a great job of presenting much of the same information with a brevity not often seen in more scholarly resources. I highly recommend Jeff’s site for the aforementioned common consumption.
The bottom line, Pastor Wil, is that—as mentioned previously—you can choose to ignore the evidence, if you like, but it is there. Thanks again for writing (and for asking, in the first place), and hope that helps!
Now, normally when someone comments on my blog and I need to respond, I will do so in the same venue as the initial response, i.e. in the comments section. The problem with that method, however, is that it becomes quite unwieldy when a response requires more than a paragraph or two. In this case, I feel that Pastor Wil’s comment does indeed necessitate a more lengthy response, so I hope my other readers will indulge me. If so, you have my gratitude as well.
As for Pastor Wil, the balance of this post is again primarily directed to you. Enjoy.
The first thing I wanted to mention, Pastor Wil, is how impressed I am that you are watching Dr. Daniel C. Peterson’s Evidence of the Book of Mormon. I actually haven’t seen that specific video, so I can’t comment on its contents. I am, however, familiar with some of Dr. Peterson’s other work, and I regularly read his column in the Deseret News (which is, of course, simplified for common consumption; one cannot expect the average reader to be familiar with the finer points of one’s area of expertise). In short, I have great respect for Dr. Peterson, and I applaud you for selecting a reputable source for Latter-day Saint doctrine and apologetics.
That being said, I find the preceding paragraph rather curious: you state that “If there was evidence for the Book of Mormon… then I would look into it.” While this is obviously a logical position to take, it seems to directly contradict the next paragraph. If you’re watching a video called “evidence of the Book of Mormon,” one can only assume said video would include… um… evidence of the Book of Mormon. If you mean to say that you don’t accept the evidence provided, that’s certainly your prerogative, but to claim that it doesn’t exist is an exercise in either folly or deception. As I try not to judge others, my natural inclination is to assume the former, as there is certainly no sin in ignorance. (I, myself, am ignorant of a great many things.)
Returning to the comment in question, though, I think there’s a much bigger issue at stake here. Even ignoring the overwhelming abundance of external evidence for the Book of Mormon (more on this later), your argument seems rather weak. While it’s all well and good to claim that “God has given a large amount of evidence to back up the Bible,” there really isn’t any external evidence to support the spiritual claims of the Bible. Sure, archæology proves Jerusalem (and a few other places) to have existed in Biblical times, but that doesn’t even begin to prove that the Lord Jehovah exists, much less testify to the words and acts attributed to Him. By that argument, we know that the Iliad is a true account of the acts of Zeus and Poseidon because ancient Greece is a real place; or that Oliver Twist is factual because 19th-century England is exactly as described. The point is that history can influence fiction just as easily as scripture, and while you and I both know that the Bible is true, the fact that it includes geographical accuracy does nothing to support its claims of Divinity.
Now, let’s return to the Book of Mormon. If you’re looking for external evidences, I’d probably start by reading The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, particularly Volume 5. (Nibley, as you probably know, is viewed as the father of modern Latter-day Saint scholarship.) While I personally don’t care for the fictional setting imposed on the presentation of the Jaredite sections, the breadth of his knowledge is more than impressive. I’d also look into V. Garth Norman’s The Definitive Mesoamerican Book of Mormon Lands Map, although you can probably skip the accompanying booklet. It’s got some good information—including Joseph Smith’s own declaration on the location of Zarahemla—but while Norman is certainly an accomplished archæologist, his authorship skills are in desperate need of a good editor.
Since you’re familiar with Dr. Peterson’s work, you’re probably also familiar with the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR), which was originally just a bunch of people who were sick of having the same tired arguments on a thousand different web sites. To save themselves the time and trouble of continuing to post the same things over and over again, they formed FAIR and its web site as a centralized repository for scholarly, critical response. The reason I bring this up is because you mentioned some specific concerns—“cities, coins, wars sites, early manuscripts pre 1820” that are all included in their wiki. (As an aside, the Book of Mormon never mentions coins—only a monetary system—and the ostensibly inaccurate header to Alma 11 has been updated to more accurately reflect its content.)
On the subject of apologetic web sites, another great resource is Jeff Lindsay’s LDS FAQ, which—being the work of one man—doesn’t have nearly the content that FAIR has, but does a great job of presenting much of the same information with a brevity not often seen in more scholarly resources. I highly recommend Jeff’s site for the aforementioned common consumption.
The bottom line, Pastor Wil, is that—as mentioned previously—you can choose to ignore the evidence, if you like, but it is there. Thanks again for writing (and for asking, in the first place), and hope that helps!
Comments
Post a Comment