« Fiction and History | Main


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

In the world of "translated correctly," I guess the Bible now means whatever present authorities say it means. No sense trying to make sense out of the text, or relying on historical criticism methods. Or considering what the rest of the bible-reading world might think about particular content.

"which is a problem for some teachers because the manual has so many Mormon misreadings of Old Testament verses as well as adopted Christian misreadings of Old Testament verses."

I don't see the problem. What you call "misreadings" I call reinterpretations a la Nephi's "liken them" and modern revelations. Secondly, one could argue that the New Testament was a misreading of the Old Testament (an argument that has been made). Yet, for a Christian of faith such an idea dismisses the religious reasons for those "misreadings." Besides, such a criticism seems to argue against one kind of "literal ism" and replace it with another. After so many hundreds and thousands of years, and the belief that the Holy Ghost is the ultimate interpreter of the text, then the Bible is more reader response than historical theory. Its just that for Mormons and most other Christians, the ultimate authority of what interpretations are acceptable is more specific than simple individual believers.


The comments to this entry are closed.

Now Reading

General Books 09-12

General Books 06-08

General Books 04-05

About This Site

Mormon Books 2015-16

Mormon Books 2013-14

Science Books

Bible Books

Mormon Books 2012

Mormon Books 2009-11

Mormon Books 2008

Mormon Books 2007

Mormon Books 2006

Mormon Books 2005

Religion Books 09-12

Religion Books 2008

Religion Books 2004-07

DMI on Facebook

Blog powered by Typepad