Evidence may answer the simpler questions, but it rarely settles the ultimate issues. They are separate, subjective formulations made by them in response to the evidence. Similarly, religious matters are approached by asking different levels of questions. Certain queries ask ultimate questions: Did Joseph Smith tell the truth?
Did Jesus appear to the Nephites? Such questions are usually tackled by breaking the question down and asking intermediate and easier questions: Is it reasonable to think that Lehi came from Jerusalem around B. Does it appear that many authors contributed to the writing of the Book of Mormon?
To answer the intermediate questions, we start looking for specific bits of data. Was there timber in Arabia suitable for ship building? In what style did the Jews write around BC? They used many varieties of parallelism. The study of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon illustrates in more detail this interaction of questions and data in the operation of evidence. What does the presence of chiasmus in a text prove? Chiasmus is usually thought of as evidence of Hebrew style, which it is, but it may be evidence of many other things as well, depending fundamentally on what question a person asks.
For example, is the English text of the Book of Mormon orderly, complex, precise, and interestingly composed in purposeful units, or is it dull, chaotic, and redundant as some have suggested? Chiasmus gives evidence to answer that question. What is the meaning of a text? Did they revise and rework their own earlier texts? The abrupt antithetical parallelisms in Mosiah Because all authors did not use chiasmus in the same ways, this literary element also provides evidence of multiple authorship and historical development in the Book of Mormon.
King Benjamin is quite classical in his use of chiasmus. Alma the younger is more creative and personal in his use of chiasmus. The chiasmus in Helaman 6 works even better in Hebrew than it does in English. Each time a word appears within these given frameworks, it seems to have been rendered by the same English word. Each of these bits of evidence is interesting in its own right, but these points do not begin to function as evidence until we have provided the question we seek to answer.
Thus, we are involved in the inception and conception of evidence by the questions we choose to raise. Some of these questions are simple, and objective answers to those questions from the realm of evidence may, to a large extent, confirm faith or make faith plausible. But the ultimate questions are more subjective, and although influenced by reason, their answers remain predominantly in the realm of belief.
Just about anything can serve potentially as evidence, depending on what a person wishes to emphasize. Some have viewed violent opposition to the Book of Mormon as evidence of its divinity. Some rightly find evidence for the spiritual truthfulness of the Book of Mormon in its clarity, plainness, and expansiveness. Some properly find persuasiveness in its uniformity and its conformity with eternal truths, while others appropriately find confirmation in its variety and cultural idiosyncracies.
When we seek evidence of something, we are prospecting, looking around at just about anything to see what we can find. Of course, not everything we find will ultimately amount to useful evidence, but just because some people may go overboard and wish to see every hole in the ground in South America as evidence of pre-Columbian baptismal fonts, or to see every use of a King James phrase as evidence of plagiarism or forgery, that does not mean that one should reject all evidence as worthless.
Thomas Edison had several silly ideas before coming up with his many inventions. For this reason, evidence can almost always be found or generated for and against just about any proposition. Only a very impoverished mind cannot find evidence for just about anything he or she wants. Once again, this points out that evidence is not only discovered but also created.
That creation is not arbitrarily ex nihilo, but neither is it impersonally predestined. Different kinds of evidence evoke different kinds of responses. The law allows physical evidence, written documents, oral testimony, and so on. But at the same time, different people or legal situations may require or prefer one kind of evidence over another. No rules automatically determine how one kind of evidence stacks up against another or what kind of evidence is best. In fact, many different types of evidence likewise exist concerning the Book of Mormon: Its historical complexity and plausibility is supported by the study of warfare in the Book of Mormon including remarkable coherence in its martial law, sacral ideology of war, and campaign strategy, buttressed by archeological evidence regarding weaponry, armor, fortifications, and seasonality.
And so on, many times over. One can scarcely avoid wondering: How could any author keep all of these potential lines of evidence concurrently in his head while dictating the Book of Mormon without notes or a rough draft? It also subjectively engages the spirit: How should all these different kinds of evidence be received, assessed, and evaluated?
Legal evidence is often circumstantial. Indeed, the circumstances surrounding a particular event or statement are usually essential to understanding the matter. A number of concurrent facts, like rays of light, all converging to the same center, may throw not only a clear light but a burning conviction; a conviction of truth more infallible than the testimony even of two witnesses directly to a fact. Another fascinating and crucial question is how are we to evaluate the cumulative weight of evidence?
Some compilations of evidence are strong; other collections are weak. Yet once again, in most settings, no scale for evaluating the cumulative weight of evidence is readily available. An interesting scale has developed in the law which prescribes specific levels of proof that are required to support certain legal results. The world of evidence is not black and white; there are many shades of grey. Ranging from a high degree of certitude on down, standards of proof on this spectrum include:.
A grand jury can indict a person on probable cause. But even within this spectrum, as helpful and sophisticated as it is, no precise definitions for these terms exist. Lawyers and judges still have only a feeling for what these legal terms mean, and their applications may vary from judge to judge. In a religious setting, no arbiter prescribes or defines the level of evidence that will sustain a healthy faith.
All individuals must set for themselves the levels of proof that they will require. Should investigators require that it be proved beyond a reasonable doubt before experimenting with its words to learn of its truth or goodness? Should believers expect to have at least a preponderance of the evidence on their side in order to maintain their faith? Or is faith borne out sufficiently by a merely reasonable or plausible position, perhaps even in spite of all evidence? Few people realize how much rides on their personal choice in these matters, and that their answer necessarily originates in the domain of faith.
Moreover, different types of legal cases call for different configurations of evidence. In such cases, every element is crucial and each must be satisfied in order for the legal test to be met. Thus, for example, in determining whether a person is either an independent contractor or an employee, over twenty factors have been recognized by law as being potentially significant in resolving the issue; some are more important than others, but none of them is absolutely essential, and the outcome of the case turns on how they all stack up.
Similarly, simple Book of Mormon evidences may come in all three of these configurations: In ultimate matters of faith, however, the individual must decide what configuration of evidence to require. Is the ultimate issue of Book of Mormon origins to be answered by putting it to a single factor test and if so, who decides the criterion? In certain cases, the sum of the evidence may be greater than the total of its individual parts. It is in some senses ironic that a few strong single facts can be overwhelmed and defeated by a horde of true but less significant facts, a strategy I used in winning several tax cases.
But should one give greater credence to a wide-ranging accumulation of assorted details or to a few single strong factors? Only personal judgment will answer that question. Another interesting effect occurs when a good case is actually weakened by piling on a few weak additional points. A bad argument may be worse in some minds than no argument at all if the weak arguments tend to undermine confidence in the strong points.
But who can tell what will work or not work for one person or another? The degree of confidence a person is willing to place in any evidence is another manifestation of faith or personal response. Similarly, advocacy and rhetoric are virtually part of the evidence. The techniques of presenting evidence are often as important as the evidence itself, and the subjective decision to feature certain points in favor of others can be the turning point of a case.
Important facts forcefully presented take on added significance; crucial evidence overlooked and underutilized will not always be even noticed by the judge or jury. Again, it is a sobering reality that the apparent victory in debates often goes to the witty, the clever, the articulate, and the overconfident. Hopefully, good arguments will always be presented in a clear manner so as not to obscure their true value, but because this will not always happen, prudent observers need to be careful to separate kernels of truth from the husks they are packaged in.
Not all evidence ultimately counts. In a court of law, the judges and jury will eventually decide to ignore some of the evidence, especially hearsay, mere opinions, or statistical probabilities.
The Role of Evidence in Religious Discussion | Religious Studies Center
Similarly, in evaluating Book of Mormon evidence, one needs to be meticulous in separating fact from opinion. Likewise, fantastic statistics can be generated by either friends or foes of the book. This does not mean that statistical presentations should be ruled out of Book of Mormon discussions; some word-printing studies, for example, have achieved noteworthy results. Constraints on time and the availability of witnesses or documentary evidence may be completely fortuitous yet also very important. If a witness is unavailable to testify in court, the case may be lost.
Documentary evidence known or presumed once to have existed is scarcely helpful. In order to reach a legal decision, time limitations are imposed on all parties; and in most cases, evidence discovered after a decision has become final is simply ignored. In much the same way, important evidence relevant to religious matters will often be perpetually lacking. Thus, a person must subjectively choose at what point enough has been heard.
What is Kobo Super Points?
Further historical or archeological discoveries may eventually surface, but in the mean time, one must choose. Clearly, the matter of evidence is complex. While certain evidences will be demonstrably stronger and more objective than others, the processing of evidence is not simply a matter of feeding the data in one end of a machine and catching a conclusion as it falls out the other. Even in the law we read: Caution on the side of reason tells us that the power and value of evidence may be overrated in the world.
Although evidence is certainly required in order to prevent our legal system of justice from degenerating into the Salem witch trials, even under the best of circumstances evidence is often ambiguous, incomplete, or nonexistent. On the side of faith, caution is also advised. Revealed knowledge must be understood and interpreted correctly.
Join Kobo & start eReading today
What has actually been revealed? Do we know by revelation where the final battles in the Book of Mormon were fought? Do we know that because twenty-one chapters of Isaiah are quoted in the Book of Mormon that all sixty-six were on the plates of brass? Moreover, the implications of revelation are not always clear. Does the revealed fact that God is a God of order require us to reject the Heisenberg uncertainty principle? Elder Widtsoe thought so. At this point, perhaps another metaphor can be of help: Moreover, we are also missing several pieces of the puzzle, and we are not even sure how many of them are absent or lost.
It appears at first glance that some of the pieces in our box may not belong to our puzzle, while others quite definitely are strays. The picture on the box becomes clearer to us, however, with greater study of the details on it and on the individual pieces. The closer we look and the more use we make of our minds, the more we are able to put together a few pieces of solid truth here and there. We may, of course, put some of the pieces in the wrong place initially, but as other pieces are put into position and as we continally refer back to the picture on the lid, we are able to correct those errors.
As our understanding of both the picture and the pieces progresses, we have greater respect for what we know, how it all fits together, and what we yet do not know. Good scholars and inquirers keep the big picture of faith and revelation in mind while at the same time being aware of the need to scrutinize individual details closely. In the study of any serious religious matter, one strives to put the puzzle pieces together as far as one can, recognizing that critical study and thought is necessary, while at the same time remaining well aware of the limitations of our knowledge and theories.
We do not have time here to probe individual arguments for and against the doctrines and scriptures embraced by the Latter-day Saints. But what is assuredly remarkable is the mere fact that so many arguments in favor of them can be made at all. Indeed, the variety of points in its favor is broader and deeper today than they were even twenty or thirty years ago. While I do not wish to overstate the case for any of these points, neither should they be understated.
Nor do I want to deny the many gifts this faith and way of life has given me. I have been actively and professionally involved in Book of Mormon research and Mormon studies generally now for over forty years. But since others disagree, a seeker of truth is left with these questions: Who will judge between these views, and on what basis? Who is making sense? Whose footnotes are reliable? Who is credible, if anyone?
Who can judge if the naturalistic explanations for the Book of Mormon have succeeded or fallen short? Who can confirm that the Gadianton robbers are much better understood in terms of ancient brigandage than nineteenth-century Masonry? Who can authoritatively declare the Spaulding theory finally dead and give it a proper burial?
One might imagine impaneling a body of judges, but doing so would probably be far trickier than confirming Supreme Court nominees, and it is doubtful that such a process could ever be any less problematic than the Jesus Seminar has been. Perhaps with Mormon studies programs now being inaugurated in highly regarded universities, an unofficial community of qualified peer reviewers may eventually emerge.
Could such a panel of academicians be composed of highly informed but also disinterested observers? Could they judge strengths and weaknesses according to disclosed assumptions and articulated criteria? Could they be methodologically savvy but not ideologically slavish?
Could they produce responsible, cautious, written opinions? Or at least call preliminary attention to misleading statements and material omissions? That much we can hope for.
- Autumns Promise.
- Keep you in Lace Complete Bundle;
- This World;
And then again, who will finally say when enough has been heard? While many interesting things continue to surface, all the evidence still is not in yet. Good science takes time. Much careful work remains to be done. In the mean time, we may need to wait for conclusive answers that now evade us. Indeed, in all matters of faith, important evidence will always be lacking. The result will always be a hung jury, as arguments can be made on both sides.
These are surely debatable subjects. One should not expect these examinations to be any more conclusive than the inconclusively arrayed approaches in biblical and Christian studies generally. Full agreement on religious issues will probably always remain elusive, but that does not excuse fair-minded people from striving to state the evidence clearly and to seek to achieve agreements where possible.
In the mean time, the choice remains in the hands, minds, and hearts of all those who care and who seek to increase their knowledge and faith. As a young man and still today, I have always felt very satisfied in my testimony of the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught and revealed in the Bible and LDS scripture. At first, I believed that there was little or no evidence of any kind at all. Never expecting to find great proofs or evidence for the gospel, I have been astonished and richly satisfied with what the Lord has done.
It seems clear enough that the Lord does not intend for the Book of Mormon, the Bible, or any other sacred matters to be open-and-shut cases intellectually, either pro or con. If God had intended this, he could have left more concrete evidences one way or the other. Instead, it seems that the Lord has maintained a careful balance between requiring people to exercise faith and allowing them to find reasons that affirm the stated origins of his revealed word.
Instead, the choice is, then, entirely ours. Ultimately, evidences may not be that important; but then again, it is always easy to say that a parachute is irrelevant after you are safely on the ground. Of course, it would be ideal if all could accept the gospel without suspicion and then, upon humble prayer, receive the witness of the Holy Ghost that it is true. And it would be good if weapons in the war of religious discussion could be designed only for defensive and constructive purposes, to build up without only tearing down.
But in this less than ideal world, it is good that so much evidence exists, creating an environment in which belief may prosper, nurturing faith, and helping our unbelief.
- After the Ink Dries: Long-Term Postconflict Reconciliation (World Politics Review Features)!
- Reward Yourself.
- SYSTEMANTICS. THE SYSTEMS BIBLE.
By combining study and faith, I find myself drawn closer to God. I am grateful as this deepening relationship enriches the love I feel for him and his Son. Gratefully, as my knowledge grows, my faith grows too. I express appreciation to my wife, Jeannie, for her astute and insightful suggestions in shaping and refining this paper, and also to other family members and colleagues whose comments and examples have contributed in many ways to the thoughts presented here. Bookcraft , ; Robert L. Deseret Book, , BYU Studies, , lxxiii. Deseret Book and Provo, UT: FARMS, , — Ricks and John W.
A Bicentennial Conference at the Library of Congress , ed. BYU Press, , The Lord expects the searcher after truth to approach him with a contrite spirit and with sincerity of purpose, if he will do this and keep the commandments of the Lord, he shall receive the witness through the Holy Spirit and shall know the truth.
Bookcraft , , 3: Bookcraft , , FARMS, , Harcourt and Brace, , 26; cited by Neal A. Van Orden and Brent L. FARMS, , 7. Why, because he was a man. Today we are on a straight path to repeat the exact same mistake a second time for the exact same reason. The past 20 years this world has been a revolution of technology advancements. In the past years more historical evidence has been unearthed than throughout written history. Religion however is still basically the same as it was in the Middle Ages.
In this book you will find that when Science is viewed from the proper perspective, it is the anchor of evidence that proves who God actually is. Supported not only by mankind's history but is actually the only evidence that the Bible itself supports. Read it for yourself. Learn where the Bible originated from and what's actually in it. There is only one truth in the world. It is where Science and History meet. You will be surprised to find that it is also where the Bible has been all along.
In life the decision regarding your relationship with God, ultimately falls on you. The Quest for the Truth! Is it in you? How Jesus Became God. The Lost Gospel of Mary. Praying the Psalms with the Holy Fathers. The Fire of Christ's Love. The Grace of Repentance Repackaged Edition. Your Guide to the Purpose and Power of Confession. What Christians Ought to Believe.
Telling the Story of Jesus. Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle. The Missing Family of Jesus. Three Angels, One Message. The Faith We Profess. How the Bible Was Formed. Who or What Is the Prophetic Beast? Forgive 70 x 7: Dr Clement T DeWall. Meditations on the Holy Scriptures of Orthodoxy. The Concise Theological Dictionary. The Community We Call Church. What the Bible Says. Exploring the Belief in the Real Presence. The Covenanters of Damascus. Ministering the Word of God. Lent and Easter Wisdom From St. The Truth About Roman Catholicism.
Journey Lesson 40 Come Lord Jesus. All Things Bible Translation July Bible Appreciation for Catholics. Connecting the Dots of Prophecy: Profile of a Killer.