Quote:
Originally Posted by Solon
To date, there exists no substantial evidence of Book of Mormon historicity, but - as a friend of mine recently noted - the apologists have adroitly shifted the discussion to challenging "the world" to "disprove" the book, rather than focusing their attempts on "proving" the book. The LDS fixation on "truth," certainty, and absolute knowledge is fine theology, but translates poorly into academic arenas.
|
Wouldn't academia support the approach of disproving rather than proving a hypothesis? The null hypothesis is never accepted; you either reject it or fail to reject it.
If LDS apologists have taken the stance that the truthfulness needs to be rejected rather than proven, then they are merely being consistent with modern empirical analysis.