Nephi: Scripture Reading from Reformation to Enlightenment

Bible literalism is a relatively late development in the production, collection, and canonization of scriptures. It popped up throughout the Middle Ages (and earlier), of course, but didn't take off until the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

The Reformation

Martin Luther was

quite argumentative.

Luther et al. challenged Rome's authority based on the belief that the scriptures were the only reliable source of God's truth. The matter was instantly made more complicated by not everyone understanding what the scriptures actually said (translations into everyday language were being made but not all translators had the same background in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin). Luther and Calvin believed that scripture was the ultimate authority--and were no more enthused than Catholic authorities at the variety of interpretations. 

The variety of interpretation happened anyway. For instance, some Protestants insisted on literalism regarding Christ's whereabouts ("right hand of God") while some insisted that the reference was only figurative. 

The Enlightenment

The Enlightenment—a highly varied movement itself—underscored the concept of a rational and reasonable deity. The associated assumptions have impacted everything from church organization to charity work to scripture reading. Many things we take for granted—such as forensics as evidence—are both older than the Enlightenment and were encouraged by the Enlightenment. (Theology, likewise, has always focused on producing a coherent explanation of God and God's acts.)

One of the Enlightenment's ideas was “evidential” religion, the idea that the natural world and rational argument could prove philosophical and, if necessary, religious truths. The idea influenced generations of believers, from literalists using the natural world and the Bible to prove the equivalent of Creationism to near-atheists using the natural world and Bible studies (coming out of Germany) to prove the non-existence of miracles. 

Not everyone was a fan of using the scriptures as proof. But "evidential" religion fit in with the Protestant Reformation's emphasis on going to the scriptures for proof. 

Nineteenth Century

In the nineteenth century, the Bible’s clarity was being challenged by aforementioned scholars. An increasing number of Protestants pointed out that Saint Paul was probably speaking hypothetically or metaphorically or specifically or historically when he spoke about “election.”

There were plenty of people in-between. Many religious believers honestly didn’t want to go in either direction. They didn’t want to discard rationality and evidence from the natural world—but why should that mean getting rid of the unseen, unknowable, and unprovable?

Since an understanding of quantum mechanics hadn’t yet shown up in the sciences, they had a point.

That is, many nineteenth-century religious communities were perfectly capable of rejecting the logical fallacy of either/or (one must either accept that all scriptural events are metaphors or one must accept that they are meant to mean exactly what a current translation argues in a one word=one definition sense without any room for debate or context). 

Nineteenth-century readers were also open to a third possibility: more revelations, more visions, more scriptures, and more to come. 

In 1 Nephi, Nephi defines the brass plates as "spoken by the mouth of all the holy prophets..delivered unto [the prophets] by the Spirit and power of God” rather than spoken by God...delivered as incontestable words. The prior phrase places the translator on the non-literal side of the argument with the addition of a possible compromise.  

God may not change. But that doesn't mean that humans fully understand the mind/nature of God--which, as in the Reformation--opens religion to endless interpretation.