Seeking Clarification

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.

 

Does Historicity Matter?
Should we Assimilate?
Tree veneration in India and the Bible
Philip Jenkins on Book of Mormon Historicity

CLOSE | X

HIDE | X