The student of the New Testament should be primarily an historian. The centre and core of all the Bible is history. Everything else that the Bible contains is fitted into an historical framework and leads up to an historical climax. The Bible is primarily a record of events. (History and Faith by J Gresham Machen)
In the previous quote Mr Machen defines history as a main framework for building faith. Similarly, the people over at Living Hope Ministries in Brigham City Utah feel the same way. They recently made a video that strives to discredit the Book of Mormon due to lack of historical evidences found to support the Book vs. the Bible that has many historical evidences to support it.
As a counter-attack, people at the FAIR LDS site have put out a video on how many things in the Bible can not be historically proven while acknowledging that most things in the Book of Mormon can not be supported historically. (As a side note, there is an interesting site called The Nephi Project where George Potter traces Lehi’s trail through the Arabian desert by using the Book of Mormon as a reference.)
The question then is: Does one need historical evidence to believe and have faith?
My initial response is that one doesn’t need to have historical evidence to believe. The definition of faith, according to the Bible in Hebrews 11:1 is that it is the “substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.” The Bible doesn’t support history as something needed to build faith.
Secondly, I feel that Even if something can be historically proven, one still has to have the witness from the Spirit in order to believe on it.I’m reminded of the classic Book of Mormon scripture in Moroni 10 that says “by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.” Therefore, it appears that a witness from the Holy Spirit is the most essential element to one’s faith.
I’ll admit that I’ve struggled with my faith when I try to reason with both Bible and Book of Mormon stories that seem to have no “evidence.” However, I always fall back on the witness I’ve received from the Holy Ghost that both books are true and they come from God. I know they are both true because I’ve felt and seen the fruits of the Spirit in my life as I’ve read and applied principles found in both books. As historical “evidences” appear they are an added bonus to my faith, but not the main source.
What has your experience been with either the Bible or the Book of Mormon? Do you feel historical evidence is necessary to have faith?
Grace for Grace 
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 21, 2008 at 4:48 am
Faith and Historicity of the Bible and Book of Mormon - LDS Mormon Forums
[…] Faith and Historicity of the Bible and Book of Mormon Faith and Historicity of the Bible and Book of Mormon Grace for Grace […]
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 6:48 am
Marc
I don’t believe historical evidence is necessary to have faith or receive a witness about the Book of Mormon or the Bible. Consider the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. We have many historical and biblical accounts of Roman crucifixions in the first century AD. It was very common to see many people hanging on crosses throughout the Roman empire as examples of punishment to the masses, however there exists no substantial archaeological or historical evidences that crucifixions ever took place. The only archaeological evidence that remotely supports the possibility of a crucifixion ever having taken place is found in a small burial tomb of a Jew named Jehohanan, where a singular spike was curled through his heel bone.
Despite all of my research I have yet to find any documented evidence to support any accounts of a crucifixion. How ironic considering that the most influential man to ever have walked the earth died by crucifixion. One would think as prevalent a means of execution would have produced numerous evidences considering that thousands and tens of thousands were crucified by the Romans.
No, people do not need proof or evidence that Christ walked the earth to believe that He is the Son of God. It is a matter of personal revelation as Christ told Peter in Matt. 16:17, “…Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.”
So it is through personal revelation that man can know the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.
LikeLike
July 21, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Gerald Smith
I believe that religious texts are not designed, for the most part, to be historical texts. They were never designed to be historical texts. The book of Genesis ostensibly covers thousands of years in just a few dozen chapters. That is not history.
The same occurs in the Book of Mormon. Centuries are covered in but a few short pages in Omni and 4 Nephi. While most of the rest of the book covers either doctrinal discourses or an occasional major war/event, these are but snap shots in the history of the Nephites. Of course the 1000 year reign of the Jaredites are covered in less than 30 pages.
All of these snapshots, in both the Bible and Book of Mormon, take the author’s viewpoint. Or, in the case of the Documentary Hypothesis and Mormon’s abridgement, the viewpoint of people centuries down from the original text/oral history.
Margaret Barker and other Biblical scholars have shown how the Deuteronomists and Priest groups changed the writings to support their viewpoints. Other religious views were purged from the official record, only to reemerge in bits and pieces within the Bible, and in other discovered documents (like the Dead Sea Scrolls). The DSS teach that the true priests were kicked out of the temple and replaced by the Wicked Priest and others, who did not have proper authority to serve in the temple. These usurpers then wrote Chronicles and tweaked other writings to establish the primacy of the Zadokite priests over everyone else.
Lehi is a perfect example of a differing viewpoint from the religious leaders of his day. He viewed things from the Elohim (Documentary Hypothesis) view of sacrifices in the wilderness (ala Abraham), and a priesthood outside of the Zadokites or Levites. Jeremiah also was suggestive of this when he praised the Rekhabites for doing the same as Lehi. Jeremiah, btw, was a Mosaic line priest, and would therefore be outside the Zadokite authority, as well.
But these things do not come easily out of books that were not made to be historical. They were written from a particular viewpoint, or viewpoints, some combined, others tossed out, over political and religious differences.
Stating the Bible is true because we can still find Jerusalem on a map is meaningless. Stating the Book of Mormon is true because we now have found Nahum, which was not easily known in Joseph Smith’s day, is an accomplishment. Yet, it is still not proof of the religious truths in the book.
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 7:58 am
Eric Zacharias
Incredible… and yet not incredible.
As I have mentioned before, when it comes to credibility of the Bible vrs. Book of Mormon, when it becomes very clear that the Bible is backed up by historical and archaeological evidence and the BOM is not, the once very conservative Mormon will leap over to the liberal side to cast doubt on the veracity of the Bible. Gerald, for instance, mentions the so-called “sources” that were collated to bring about the Old Testament. Gerald is referring to the JEDP theory, a theory liberal “scholars” concocted to reconcile their disbelief in the authenticity of the Bible. In other words, he is citing skeptics who set about to explain what they did not want to believe: the supernatural work of God to create and the redemptive work of God to deliver his people, in remarkable ways.
You can’t have it both ways. Either God is God or he is the creation of man’s ideas. Which is it for you?
Yes, the Bible doesn’t need archaeological finds to verify its history–but the evidence arises, nonetheless. For instance, in the late 1800s Christians were ridiculed by liberals for believing in the Bible, since the Hittite culture had never been found. Christians could only shrug, but insisted on the veracity of the Word. Just into the 1900s, evidence of the Hittites became very evident; and now it is a field of study all its own.
The “finds” pop up all the time, often unexpectedly. The Dead Sea Scrolls show us the remarkable accuracy in the transmission of the holy texts, from one generation to the next. There is no end to the discoveries that arise that shed light on the Biblical way of life.
Marc’s comment is incredible. Marc admits that history recounts crucifixions by the Romans. (Josephus recounts the crucifixion of hundreds of Jewish rebels by the Romans.) Marc admits even the recovery of a man whose heel-bone would not give up the spike that nailed him to the cross (these iron spikes were precious and re-used by the Romans). And then Marc marvels at the fact that Jesus was said to be crucified… but we don’t have evidence of that????
Yes, “Faith is the evidence of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen,” as mentioned; but heed the Word of God, as he defines what a prophet is: if the words come to fruition, that man is a prophet. If it fails, he is not a man of God. Throw that into reverse: If the words of a prophet happen to be found to be true, then have some sort of satisfaction that what he spoke must surely be of God.
My friends…
if you find satisfaction in casting doubt in the Bible (to balance the doubt you find in the BoM),
and
if you find satisfaction in pondering Marc’s supposition that Jesus’ crucifixion was really but creative-fiction (a sadistic one at that)
then
what is it that you stand for — truth or fiction?
and
who is Christ — idealist or savior?
and
what is the crucifixion — the focus of our salvation or a curious footnote in history?
Stand with truth.
Stand with faith (verified) by Scripture–that which was predicted of Christ and that which was fulfilled by Christ.
Stand with hope, which looks forward in confidence because it has a solid foundation in the past (Christ, the Rock).
Blessings in Christ,
Eric
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Kevin Christensen
Historical evidence contributes to my faith as part of the total fabric. However, there is much more to it than that. Elsewhere I drew on Ian Barbour’s book, Myths, Model’s and Paradigms to show that there are several kinds of experience that people draw upon in service of their faith:
****
Those I shall discuss in this paper (following Barbour) can be seen as generally framing a movement:
From responses to external impressions regarding:
Order and creativity in the world, the
Common mythic symbols and patterns underlying most religious traditions
Key historical events that define separate traditions and bind individuals
Through the innermost experiences of the individual:
Numinous awe and reverence [1]
Mystical union
Moral obligation
Reorientation and Reconciliation with respect to personal sin, guilt, and weakness, the existence of evil, suffering, and death, and tensions between science and faith.
Then returning to the external world as human action:
Personal dialogue where you begin interpret external events as God speaking to you, and you answer through your own actions.
Social and Ritual behavior
These matters cannot objectively prove the existence of a God (whether personal or impersonal), but, as I hope to demonstrate, they do constitute the core of religious experience for believers. They provide the ground of experience on which reasoned and feeling assessments of the validity and worth of faith are based. They encompass the ways in which spirituality is manifest in history and symbol. They are the wine — and doctrine the wine-bottles.
****
http://www.meridianmagazine.com/articles/060104Experience.html
The historical evidence issue fits in two places in this scheme. Key historical events, and possibly as part of the Reorientation and Reconcilliation process, when it deals with resolving specific questions on historical issues. But it should be clear that there is much more to consider than historical evidence.
Kevin Christensen
Pittsburgh, PA
LikeLike
July 22, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Dan
My testimony is based on the promptings of the Spirit.
However, I love to ask questions, and still have many that are unanswered.
I put those aside for the time being. Typically, I will get them answered over time, but some might have to wait until the next life to get a full understanding.
Whereas we shouldn’t be afraid to ask questions, especially difficult ones regarding the Book of Mormon, Bible, etc. A person’s foundation needs to be built on a spiritual witness.
Building your spiritual house on only DNA evidence or other empirical evidence would be to build your foundationon in sand, and not on the rock of our Redeemer.
LikeLike
July 23, 2008 at 3:32 am
Becca
#4 Eric,
I really appreciate how you emphasized how important it is to stand by truth and Christ.
If I were to ask you how you knew what truth about Christ was, I’m sure you would say you know as a witness through God’s Holy Spirit because that is really the only answer.
You are absolutely right in what you say about casting doubt on scripture and no one should find satisfaction with doing that. You need to realize though that those of us who believe the Book of Mormon also believe the Bible and have felt the Holy Spirit testify to us of the truths found in both books. When someone “attacks” an LDS person for things they see in the Book of Mormon due to historical issues, etc. I think the natural man wants to “prove” scriptures are historical and if they can’t then they fall back on showing inconsistancies in both books. Their purpose (I hope) isn’t to discredit the Bible. Rather, to show that regardless of inconsistancies due to historical issues there is truth (as you said) in the words that testify of Christ.
You are right to mention that the Bible hasn’t had all historical evidence “proven” but throughout the years more historical evidence has come forth. The same thing has happened with the Book of Mormon. However, until one opens their ears to hear and their eyes to see the truths found in either books, the Lord will not witness the truth to them through the Spirit.
I think this is what Dan in comment #6 is trying to say as well is that it is the Holy Spirit’s witness of truth that is most essential, not historical evidence.
LikeLike
July 23, 2008 at 5:41 pm
CS
I too have at times struggled with my faith as I have paid too much attention to critics of the B of M and also the Bible. As I parayed about and contemplated this issue, I felt that I was taught by the Spirit that God really does want us to beleive in Him through faith (as you Ama mentioned in Hebrews 11:1). He does not want it to be proven with worldly, material things. That is one of the great reasons we are here.
On the other hand, Satan, to accomplish his goal, would want nothing to be proven so as to shake everyone’s belief.
These two objectives make it apparent to me that there will never be much concrete evidence found that will support either book, until God wills it.
The Spirit has born witness to me of both books and I believe in each more strongly because of the other. I believe in Christ more strongly because of them both.
LikeLike
July 24, 2008 at 5:12 am
ama49
Everyone, thank you for your comments. I think the consensus is that history and “evidence” doesn’t breed faith.
#8 CS
As I read your comments I was reminded of a scripture in the Book of Mormon right before the Savior appears to the people after His resurrection. It’s found in 3 Nephi 11. Here’s the scripture:
1 And now it came to pass that there were a great multitude agathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple which was in the land bBountiful; and they were marveling and wondering one with another, and were showing one to another the cgreat and marvelous change which had taken place.
2 And they were also conversing about this Jesus Christ, of whom the asign had been given concerning his death.
3 And it came to pass that while they were thus conversing one with another, they heard a avoice as if it came out of heaven; and they cast their eyes round about, for they understood not the voice which they heard; and it was not a harsh voice, neither was it a loud voice; nevertheless, and notwithstanding it being a bsmall voice it did cpierce them that did hear to the center, insomuch that there was no part of their frame that it did not cause to quake; yea, it did pierce them to the very soul, and did cause their hearts to burn.
4 And it came to pass that again they heard the voice, and they aunderstood it not.
5 And again the third time they did hear the voice, and did aopen their ears to hear it; and their eyes were towards the sound thereof; and they did look steadfastly towards heaven, from whence the sound came.
6 And behold, the third time they did understand the voice which they heard; and it said unto them:
7 Behold my aBeloved Son, bin whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name—hear ye him.
8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they asaw a Man bdescending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.
9 And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying:
10 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world.
If you notice, it took awhile for the people to become sensitive to the Spirit of the Lord, but when they did, they understood and not only believed, but saw Jesus.
We can all have similar experiences if we open our eyes to see and our hearts and ears to hear and feel the still small voice of the Holy Spirit in our lives testify of truth.
LikeLike
July 24, 2008 at 6:09 pm
mormonsoprano
Ama,
A very thoughtful post to read, and interesting comments. I also base my beliefs on faith and listening to the Holy Spirit. However, I also love history. It is interesting to me that often our faith is built by reading history and vice versa – because the experiences written down through all generations can teach us so much, and bear witness that God has blessed all of His people since the beginning of time, and miracles are real. God’s blessings come through life experiences.
This is one of the beauties of the Book of Mormon – it gives us additional “life histories” of people’s experiences with God and Jesus Christ. It supports the Bible in every way as another scriptural witness that God speaks through prophets, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and that no matter where you live or what your life experiences are, history repeats itself, and we can learn from it.
There is no way for my blind friend Amy to know what a flower looks like – she can feel it, and listen to other’s descriptions (which often include words like “color” that also cannot be comprehended). There is no way my deaf friend Bryce can know what music sounds like, he can only watch others participate in making it and enjoying it, and sometimes he can feel the vibrations, which makes his musical experience unique from mine. Both Amy and Bryce have what we would consider physical limitations, however they are both amazing and valuable human beings, and I love them dearly not only in spite of their differences, but because of their differences! Both of them feel sorrow, love, joy, grief, pain. Both of them bleed if they get a cut, or laugh if they hear a funny joke. And both of them feel the spirit of God in their lives. Their interpretation of the world is based upon what they know and experience right now. Someday Amy will see a flower, and a sunset and a mountain. And someday Bryce will hear the music, and the songbirds and the rushing waterfall. I think this is how it is for each of us. We each must accept that we have spiritual and intellectual limitations based on our life experiences and our innate abilities to comprehend. This does not make us any less important, nor does it devalue any of the spirituality that we have already gained. It also should not mean that we allow ourselves to be limited. We each have the ability and promise that we can find more answers and further understanding either in this life or the next.
As for the anger and bitterness and mean-spirited-ness that continually creeps into non-LDS and LDS alike who try desperately to “prove” their beliefs one way or the other – using complex communication and based upon scientific facts? It brings to mind my favorite quote by Elder Robert Wood of the Seventy:
“The first casualties of human wrath are truth and understanding.” (James 1: 19-20)
I personally think that the problems and derision that arise in religious dialogue stems from
#1. A “loss in translation” issue, where words and terms are used that neither side understand.
#2. Fear. There is real terror that comes from the following thought process: “if you believe something different than I do, and you insist that it is true, then it sounds like you are trying to take away from me what I hold closest to my heart. I cannot let you do that! These are my gifts from God! I will fight you to the death if I have to, in order to protect what I hold dearest to me!”
This is the very lie that Satan loves to feed to all of our weak minds. He delights making us experience irrational panic attacks which then leads to irrational words and behavior. He feeds these lies over and over to breed hatred and discontent and fear, which in turn breeds hatred and discontent and fear….. because it works! Human beings have bought the lie from the beginning of time. The real truth he doesn’t want us to ever figure out is that we could all actually be helping each other get closer to God, and build each other’s faith if we trusted ourselves enough to put aside our fear, and humble ourselves enough to see each other as we truly are – the way God sees us:
Each a valued child with amazing gifts, knowledge and abilities, who are each a “work in progress”.
LikeLike
July 29, 2008 at 7:30 pm
HT
I think history is important after all it is HIS STORY!
That video from living hope ministries is what got me the heck out of dodge. Things were said in that message that no one ever shared with me before I joined the mormon religion. I will be completely honest and say that the next two quotes I list are the real reasons I left.
“Each of us has to face the matter-either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing.”
– President Gordon B. Hinckley. “Loyalty,” April Conference, 2003.
Orson Pratt: (on the Book of Mormon) this book must be either true or false, if
false it is one of the most cunning wicked bold deep-laied impositions ever pawned
upon the world. Calculated to deceive and ruin millions who will really receive it
as the word of God… If after a rigid examination it be found an imposition it should
be extensively published to the world as such the evidences and arguments upon
which the impostor was detected should be clearly and logically stated. ..
(the Divine authority of the book of Mormon)”
Joseph Fielding Smith: Mormonism, as it is called, must stand
or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of
God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he
was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no
middle ground. “If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully
attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed; his
claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false,…”
(Doctrines of Salvation, vol.1, pp. 188-189)
God is good. I will be forever grateful to my next door neighbor for saving that video in her inbox for over 2 yrs and only when she knew it was the right time to share it did she send it. I was at the right place in my life to receive that gift. Since leaving the mormon church my mormon friends have asked if I am happy. I should ask the same to them!
LikeLike
July 30, 2008 at 1:33 am
ama49
#11 HT,
I think faith and our walk with God is like any relationship. It is what we make of it. The more I try to do what God would have me do, the happier I am. I am happy and content with being a Mormon, thanks for asking. I’ve never experienced the Holy Spirit in such abundance as when I’m serving in the LDS church, reading the scriptures, testifying of the Lord, serving in the temple, loving others, and thanking God for being alive. There’s no doubt you can experience most of these things in any other religion.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. What makes you happy?
LikeLike
July 31, 2008 at 12:33 am
ht
I noticed that everything you said that brought you happiness is an action.
“The more I try to DO what God would have me DO, the happier I am.”
“..I’m SERVING in the LDS church, READING the scriptures, TESTIFYING of the Lord, SERVING in the temple, LOVING others, and THANKING God for being alive.”
My happiness is as simple as BELIEVING God sent His son to die for my sins. Knowing that there is nothing I can do to repay that gift.
My eyes were covered in deceit when I was a mormon. Although I was just like you and your family. Believing with everything in me that it was true. I have been humbled to know that God used my experience in the mormon church to glorify Him. Now the generational line of deceit has been broken and we are free from a legalistic regimen.
LikeLike
August 20, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Zeezrom
Hey Aaron,
long time, no writing (actually I haven’t visited here in a long time either).
So, I have a hard time when people bring up this history v. faith v. facts v. spiritual experiences, etc. stuff. Mainly because I used to base my faith on feelings, until I came to the self-realization that feelings shouldn’t dictate truth (in the spiritual/religious sense).
I don’t mean that to come across negatively, by any means. I’m just saying that personally, for me, I need more proof than just a feeling. And also, personally, I think if there were a god (which I highly doubt) he/she ought to be powerful enough to prove his/her existence. All the “life is a test” answers handed out to me as a kid seem to be a huge cop-out. Anyway, I don’t want to go off on that tangent.
I read something today on the theme of history, regarding mormon history, that is. It is a letter written by a woman to her sister, take from it what you will. I don’t agree with everything she writes (mostly how the Bible is a “history”, since I think the Bible is purely made up, but again, that’s just me) Much love. Peace.
-Z
“Dear #####
Yes, history is history, but the church is based and exists because of its history. Without the grove, the prayer, we have nothing. No history, no church. As Pres. Hinckley said, either the first vision happened or it didn’t, you can look up the rest of that quote if you would like but it is history so maybe it doesn’t matter any more. The church is based on its history. A testimony is based on truth. If the history has been tampered with, and the church exists because of the history, then what do we base the testimony on? The history is our salvation. Every revelation is based on its history, when it came, how it came, who was told, what was said, that’s its history, no history means it never happened. How many times have we been told if we don’t know the history of our country we are bound to repeat the same mistakes from the past? History is critical to keep us from repeating the same mistakes. If history doesn’t matter then a good portion of the BoM was unnecessary, it is a history of the Lamanites, only the doctrine should have been passed on if the history wasn’t important to our salvation. The Bible, a history book, is it unimportant to our salvation too?
I don’t expect perfection or a pretty past but I do expect honesty. The history isn’t the biggest problem, it’s that I have never been told the true history, just the white washed version. If history doesn’t matter why change it to make it more palatable? Leave it as it was originally recorded. Changing it changes everything. The lesson manuals are full of history, their version, not the facts. If history doesn’t matter why bring it up at all, anywhere? If history doesn’t matter why re-enact the pioneer trek? If history doesn’t matter why did the church build a museum to contain its history or a new library? If history doesn’t matter why repent? It’s history and history doesn’t matter. If history doesn’t matter why are we told to keep a journal? It is a history and of no value and there is nothing to be learned from it. If history doesn’t matter why are we continually told to follow those who have gone before us and learn from their history? Or are we to handpick only the best stories and let the rest go as unimportant? Or should we change the history to better reflect what we prefer to believe?
Satan is the father of all lies; we have been told lies; I did not create the lies; I only discovered them; but I am paying a high price for not accepting the lies, being honest with myself and with my family. I couldn’t quote all the scripture about the importance of being honest and the importance of honesty to our salvation. Do those scriptures exclude the leaders? Is the beginning of the 13th article of faith still in effect? Are the ordinary members the only ones expected to be honest with our fellow men?
I have only been offended by the lack of honesty in presenting our history. It is shameful we exist because of our history and then deny its importance when it becomes a problem. This has nothing to do with the trust and love I have for my husband. This has nothing to do with the trust I have in the Lord. This has nothing to do with expecting perfection, I do not expect perfection. I do expect honesty, I don’t think that is too much to ask from men of God.
LikeLike
December 7, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Scripture Fights and Bible Bashing | Main Street Plaza
[…] example, this is a short little skirmish on the […]
LikeLike
June 18, 2012 at 2:33 pm
yodude1990
Heck no at all. It’s like now, no one still alive has seen the revolutionary war, but yet it really happened and was recorded. Then on the DNA deal that people bring up there’s such thing called evolution. I probably don’t have any/ extremely little German stuff to my DNA, but yet my history still comes from there. The bible and Book of Mormon are truth.
LikeLike