In recent months I've moved away from a strictly "apologetic" perspective on how I view Mormonism. However, there are times when I feel objections deserve reasonable answers, and something happened today that illustrated my point.
It's easy to see, McCraney is simply reading something into the text that isn't there, or at least in this segment, whether knowingly or unknowingly, altering the wording of Elder Nelson's address to suit what he would have preferred Nelson to say. Elder Nelson wasn't denying the historicity of the Book of Mormon, he simply outlined the fact that the Book of Mormon is not formatted like a novel or history book. It reads as scripture, for the purpose of convincing all people that Jesus is the Christ.
I believe the Book of Mormon is reflective of various events that actually happened. I believe there was a man named Lehi, and that his environment described in the first few chapters of the Book of Mormon fits remarkably well into a preexilic, Israelite setting. I believe King Benjamin's address in Mosiah 2-5 ties in wonderfully to the ancient patterns and rituals found to be connected with the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). I could easily go on, but I'll suffice with this.
If an LDS apostle were to claim outright that the Book of Mormon was fiction, that it was all figurative revelation given to the prophet Joseph Smith, then I'm quite confident that we'd know about it. However, the LDS Church maintains rather emphatically, that the Book of Mormon is describing historical events.
McCraney believes that the historical validity of the Bible proves its truthfulness. He couldn't be more wrong. I think my friend Kerry Shirts sums it up best.
After commenting on my friend's video, he removed the entire link from his profile later in the day. Perhaps the issue isn't as "interesting" as it was touted to be.
I attend a university owned and operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where 99.3% of the student body shares my faith (one-fourth of whom are married). Today was like most days, though I opted to bring my laptop to campus for a group project later in the day. In a few brief moments between classes I got on Facebook (seriously, who doesn't check their Facebook at least five times a day?) to see a few updates from friends and family.
Not all of my friends share my faith; in fact most of them don't. Some are Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, or atheists, and several hail from Evangelical, fundamentalist, or Reformed Protestant churches. Some love talking about Mormonism, which comes as no surprise to me, especially when they don't shy away about their contempt for it.
As I sat on a cushioned bench outside the Jacob Spori Art Gallery, a Calvinist friend of mine posted a link to a YouTube video he described as "Very Interesting" alleging that Elder Russell M. Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles was denying that the Book of Mormon was a "historical book." Intrigued, I checked it out.
McCraney: I thought you would find this quote from M. Russell Nelson (sic) in the Priesthood Session quite ironic. Nelson said quote: 'You can invite a friend to read the Book of Mormon. Explain that it is not a novel, or a historical book.' You can find that on lds.org. You see, you know what they're doing now, is they're going to get away. Because evidence is going to show more and more that it is not a historical book. The Bible--a historical book that you can trust. God works through reality, not through dreams and fanciful visions. They are more and more finding that that Book of Mormon is going to be under scrutiny, so you have an Apostle saying 'share the Book of Mormon, but make sure you tell them--not a novel, and it's not a historical book.' What would that make it? It would make it fiction, or a revelation? And they're probably going to rely more and more on the idea that Joseph Smith received revelation about this book, rather than it actually being a literal, historical event, which is what they taught me, and showed me, and actually you know showed me maps and stuff of where everything happened. Not anymore.
The video features ex-Mormon Shawn McCraney, a self-proclaimed "born-again Mormon" talking about Elder Nelson's supposed denial of the Book of Mormon making any sort of historical claims. This, on the other hand, did come as a surprise to me. It wasn't as though I'd never heard of the talk. I watched it live as it was being given. I read the printed copy of it the month after it was broadcast and never noticed the alleged claim. In fact, it would have been monumental, if only it was true.
NELSON: You can invite a friend to read the Book of Mormon. Explain that it is not a novel or a history book. It is another testament of Jesus Christ. Its very purpose is “to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations.” There is a power in this book that can touch the hearts and lift the lives of honest seekers of truth. Invite your friend to read the book prayerfully.The Prophet Joseph Smith said “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”The Book of Mormon teaches of the Atonement of Jesus Christ and is the instrument by which God will fulfill His ancient promise to gather scattered Israel in these latter days.
It's easy to see, McCraney is simply reading something into the text that isn't there, or at least in this segment, whether knowingly or unknowingly, altering the wording of Elder Nelson's address to suit what he would have preferred Nelson to say. Elder Nelson wasn't denying the historicity of the Book of Mormon, he simply outlined the fact that the Book of Mormon is not formatted like a novel or history book. It reads as scripture, for the purpose of convincing all people that Jesus is the Christ.
I believe the Book of Mormon is reflective of various events that actually happened. I believe there was a man named Lehi, and that his environment described in the first few chapters of the Book of Mormon fits remarkably well into a preexilic, Israelite setting. I believe King Benjamin's address in Mosiah 2-5 ties in wonderfully to the ancient patterns and rituals found to be connected with the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). I could easily go on, but I'll suffice with this.
If an LDS apostle were to claim outright that the Book of Mormon was fiction, that it was all figurative revelation given to the prophet Joseph Smith, then I'm quite confident that we'd know about it. However, the LDS Church maintains rather emphatically, that the Book of Mormon is describing historical events.
McCraney believes that the historical validity of the Bible proves its truthfulness. He couldn't be more wrong. I think my friend Kerry Shirts sums it up best.
After commenting on my friend's video, he removed the entire link from his profile later in the day. Perhaps the issue isn't as "interesting" as it was touted to be.
0 comments:
Post a Comment