Is all history mythology?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

What makes me grumpy is when people try to deny any historicity whatsoever from scripture, essentially rendering scripture as pure allegory.

Just because the history is often incomplete or inaccurate, it shouldn't exclude the possibility that the events even in their most general terms actually occurred.

The hard part about scripture is determing which part is historical, which part is composite analysis by later scribes and which part is allegorical. That is not a difficulty to be overlooked.

And because we have no cross-referenced data for BoM historicity, we need to tread lightly until and if such evidence is produced.

May we believe the events cited therein as historical events? Of course, but we are not in a position to assert them academically or historically in light of a lack of cross references.

Much of the OT may be based loosely upon historical events and some archaeology provides some support, but much of it is exaggerated tradition or allegory.

[Solon]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Using this logic, what Old Testament events are mythical? Are events such as the exodus, flood, tower, etc. merely figurative and intended as teaching tools?

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I think reason tells us, for example, the Adam and Eve story is mythical. The story of the Exodus provides a good example of what bits of history can be fruitfully gleaned from the text.
Humans' impetus to create myth and the value of myth to humans may be the most facinating subject to study ever (in my opinion). You have identified some purposes of mythology. I would not limit it to that; some may be difficult to articulate or even identify. The need for myth seems to be in our very DNA (Waters has said the same thing about religion; we're probably talking about the same thing at the end of the day).

It's all myth - not by its truth or untruth - but by the way these stories functioned in society. The aetiologies in the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament are just another manifestation of certain, basic human impulses that are part of a Mespotamian tradition as well as (generally) universal principles.

James Frazer's The Golden Bough, although in many respects outdated, presents a fascinating comparative approach to myth in ancient societies. Modern religion, LDS included, in many ways, is just another manifestation of certain basic stories (like the sacred tree or the dying god) that repeat themselves over and over again.

Some LDS would say that it's pre-apostacy remnants of an early, pristine religion; others would say that it reduces Christianity to just another pagan religion. Take your pick. Over the past 4,000 years, humans haven't proven all that innovative in the mythic realm.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

The hard part about scripture is determing which part is historical, which part is composite analysis by later scribes and which part is allegorical. That is not a difficulty to be overlooked.

And because we have no cross-referenced data for BoM historicity, we need to tread lightly until and if such evidence is produced.

May we believe the events cited therein as historical events? Of course, but we are not in a position to assert them academically or historically in light of a lack of cross references.

Much of the OT may be based loosely upon historical events and some archaeology provides some support, but much of it is exaggerated tradition or allegory.

Joseph Smith claimed to have met several of the key figures of the Book of Mormon (Moroni, Nephi, etc.)

[Archaea]

And believers will use that for their religious benefit, but in terms of establishing the historicity of the events, I fail to see how that helps.

[Indy Coug]

Wouldn't it follow if Joseph Smith actually met the prophets of the Book of Mormon that the writings attributable to them would have at least some basis in historical fact?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Wouldn't it follow if Joseph Smith actually met the prophets of the Book of Mormon that the writings attributable to them would have at least some basis in historical fact?

I don't find the testimony of Herodotus persuasive nor of Thucydides, but rather, clay pots, and other hard artifacts extant seemingly confirming some of their allegations and stories. OTOH, what they tell us may never have happened.

By virture of how I perceive Joseph, my view of his stories is different than if I were a nonmember empiricist. In that light, his telling me that has no historical value, especially in light of the supernatural character of it.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Solon

It's all myth - not by its truth or untruth - but by the way these stories functioned in society. The aetiologies in the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament are just another manifestation of certain, basic human impulses that are part of a Mespotamian tradition as well as (generally) universal principles.

James Frazer's The Golden Bough, although in many respects outdated, presents a fascinating comparative approach to myth in ancient societies. Modern religion, LDS included, in many ways, is just another manifestation of certain basic stories (like the sacred tree or the dying god) that repeat themselves over and over again.

Some LDS would say that it's pre-apostacy remnants of an early, pristine religion; others would say that it reduces Christianity to just another pagan religion. Take your pick. Over the past 4,000 years, humans haven't proven all that innovative in the mythic realm.

Of course you're right in the narrow sense you identify. In that sense the story of the founding of our republic and of the Civil War are myths, and George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are Americans' foremost saints or gods in this cosmology. But at some point you have to use some jargon or nomenclature to distinguish between what is fanciful and what is arguably fact in the Bible, because this is an important even necessary distinction to be made.

[fusnik11]

I think all of Genesis is mythology.

Or maybe the Annuna are simply the offspring of Adam and Eve.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

I think all of Genesis is mythology.

Or maybe the Annuna are simply the offspring of Adam and Eve.

Adam didn't exist?

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Adam didn't exist?

As represented in the Bible, temple, etc?

Probably not Johnny, probably not.