Various people, both here, on Facebook, and on anti-Mormon discussion boards in the nether regions of the Internet have insisted that I have misrepresented David Bokovoy in my discussion here. The truth of the matter is that their opinions are irrelevant. Only David knows his position, and whether I have misrepresented him. I’d welcome his clarification on the matter, but David seems reticent. So be it. Ad hoc speculative justifications for David by other people are pointless, and I won’t be posting any more of them here, nor responding to them.
David’s supporters claim that David was merely suggesting a possible approach to scripture that has been de-historicized and mythologized. I find this argument unconvincing. I don’t believe David would have answered the sincere question he was asked by saying something like: “well, here’s a really silly answer that I personally don’t find convincing, but I’ll just throw it out there as a possibility.” I believe David gave what he thought was a legitimate answer.Be that as it may, no one has actually engaged my argument against the position David articulated. Whether David personally believes it, or just summarized a position he personally rejects is largely irrelevant. What is relevant is that I believe such an approach to scripture is fundamentally flawed, for the reasons I discussed. Whether flawed or not, it necessarily entails a fundamental rejection of the ontological truth claims of the Church.