Chapter 11 begins a section where Nephi receives divine confirmation that Lehi's messianic prophecies. It also marks the repetition of a pattern (first seen in chapter 2) that I want to talk about. The pattern is this: it seems that every time someone wants to know the truth about something (especially if it's prophecies and divine commands relayed through others), they pray about it. Thus far, this thing has only really happened twice in the story (both times done by Nephi in response to prophecies of Lehi), but I suspect it's going to develop into one of the Book's major themes. After all, it's basically the theme repeated by the Book of Mormon's introduction and Mormon missionaries all over the world: if you want to know the truth about the Mormon Church and the Book of Mormon, pray about it.
At first, this seems wise. I mean, what could make more sense than asking the Spirit of Truth what is true? But, in taking the Book of Mormon at its word and comparing it to the Bible, an odd pattern emerges. In the Book of Mormon, people pray to determine truth all the time, and the Book contains multiple exhortations for the reader to do the same...but in the Bible this mode of determining truth is neither encouraged nor used even once. The only verse that even seems to encourage it is James 1:5, but even a cursory examination of that passage shows that James is not talking about spiritual or emotional "testimony" to truth, but to actual wisdom, of the book of Proverbs sort.
So why doesn't the Bible use prayers for and receipt of spiritual or emotional "testimony" as the best way to know truth? Because, as it turns out, the Bible teaches that these things are unreliable. Of spiritual testimony, 1 John 4:1-3 warns Christians to "believe not every spirit...for many false prophets are gone out into the world" of whom it says, "and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard it should come; and even now already is it in the world." Instead, believers are to "try the spirits, whether they are of God." Dueteronomy 13:1-3 and 18:20-22 similarly warn against false prophets, who use spiritual testimony to lead people astray. The Bible also warns that Satan can practice spiritual deception, making himself and his ministers appear to be angels and ministers of light (2 Corinthians 11:14). When it comes to emotional testimony of the heart, the Bible warns that "the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?" (Jeremiah 17:9). Clearly, if the Bible teaches that spiritual and emotional testimony are so fraught with peril and deception, it cannot advocate or model them as good ways of knowing truth.
Instead, the Bible offers two things, and characters in the Bible repeatedly seek these two things in order to know truth. The first is scripture. In 2 Timothy 3:16, Paul testifies that all scripture is inspired directly by God (the word means "God-breathed") and is thus applicable for all sorts of things, including "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." It is an accurate and applicable testimony to truth direct from the Spirit of Truth. In the Bible, people are commended for seeking it out. The Bereans, specifically, are called "noble" because when the apostles came to them with the message of Christ, they "searched the scriptures daily, whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11). They did not pray and ask God or search their feelings for a "testimony"--they tested the apostles by the objective standards of scripture, and for that they were highly praised. The Bible also contains many exhortations and examples of people using the scriptures as the test of truth (Luke 24:25-27 and John 5:39 being to examples of Christ Himself doing this). Second, the Bible uses objective outside events to add further verification. This is reflected in every sign that God ever gave in the Bible. Nowhere is the sign given by God an internal feeling or subjective testimony: always it is something objective in the outside world. For Gideon, it was the fleece being alternately dry from dew in the morning, and covered with it (Judges 6:37-40); for Hezekiah, it was the shadow on the sundial moving backward ten degrees (2 Kings 20:8-11); for Jesus' followers, it was the miracles He performed (John 14:11 and Matthew 16:5-12), with the ultimate proof being His resurrection (Matthew 12:39-40)...and these are but a few of the examples in Scripture!
It is by these objective things, according to the Bible, that subjective spiritual proofs and testimonies are to be evaluated. In Deuteronomy 18, a prophet whose words and predictions contradict the objective facts of the world around him and what actually happens is judged to be a false prophet. Earlier, in chapter 13, a prophet who contradicts the objective testimony of scripture in leading the people to other gods is not to be heeded. 1 John 4 combines the two, demanding the spirits be tested to see whether or not their testimony is that Jesus Christ came in the flesh--a doctrine that is backed by both scriptural and factual proof. These are the things God gives to help us determine truth from error. At no point in the Bible does He tell us to ignore what He has already given us and pray for extra spiritual testimony--testimony which may turn out not to be from God at all (Satan can appear as an angel of light, after all).
But in the Book of Mormon, such unreliable subjective testimony is seen as the final authoritative way of knowing truth. If what I've read so far is any indication of the overall contents of the Book of Mormon, the reason why it does not appeal to the same standards of truth as the Bible may be embarrassingly obvious: it doesn't appeal to them, because it can't stand up under them. So far, after 8 posts and 10 chapters, the Book of Mormon is not measuring up very well at all against the Bible, and from reading ahead through chapter 14, it seems it only gets worse. As any archaeologist can tell you, the Book of Mormon also has a lousy track record when it comes to objective facts. Subjective proofs may be all that's left to it--but here's the rub, if it doesn't agree with other scripture, how can it be reliable as scripture? If it isn't reliable when it speaks of objectively-verifiable facts, how can it be reliable in spiritual matters (John 3:12)? If what we "know is true" based on subjective evidence clashes with the plain objective facts of scripture and science, how can we really know it is true at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment