Podcast Summary: Church History Matters – Episode 186

Title: Should the Scriptures Be Taken Literally? | Science & Religion Series
Hosts: Scott & Casey (Scripture Central)
Date: January 6, 2026

Episode Overview

This episode is the second installment in the Science & Religion Series, where Scott and Casey tackle the complex question: Should the scriptures, particularly Genesis 1, be read literally? They dive into the perceived conflict between scientific and religious truths, explore how scripture was written and for what purpose, and suggest a thoughtful paradigm for Latter-day Saints and other believers seeking to harmonize their faith with scientific discovery.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Clarifying the Science vs. Religion Binary

• Context: The hosts recap their previous episode, highlighting the false binary that pits science against religion.
• Main Point: Science and religion are complementary paths to truth when properly understood.
  • “We believe all truth can be circumscribed into one great whole. We don’t care where it comes from.” (A, 04:41)
  • “Science excels at answering questions like when, where, what and how, but it’s really not ever been equipped to answer the question why. That’s where religion and philosophy come in.” (B, 05:52)
• Restoration Perspective: Latter-day Saint revelations are friendly to scientific inquiry and encourage seeking knowledge from various domains (Doctrine and Covenants cited at 03:00).

2. When Scientific & Scriptural Claims Diverge

• Examples Raised:
  • Creation in six days vs. geological ages
  • Adam & Eve’s origin vs. evolution
  • Global flood vs. scientific evidence
  • “You can see the temptation for modern people to read Genesis 1 as a science text, but don’t do it.” (A, 00:00)
• Key Question: What do we do when these claims appear to contradict?

3. A Three-Part Paradigm for Understanding Scripture

At [10:40], Scott lays out a foundational approach:

Scripture texts are:

1. The result of a human-divine collaboration
2. Written by ancient authors embedded in their own cultures
3. Crafted primarily for the purpose of doing theology, not science

1. Human-Divine Collaboration

• Sources: The Bible Project and Restoration scripture (Doctrine & Covenants 1:24; 2 Nephi 31:3)
  • “By exploring its humanity, we discover its divinity. By confessing its divinity, it transforms our humanity.” (Bible Project via B, 10:58)
  • God communicates in “the manner of their language, that they might come to an understanding.” (B, 10:58)
• Implication: God accommodates limited human perspectives rather than providing direct scientific exposition (accommodation principle, 13:13).

2. Cultural Embedding of Ancient Authors

• Key Insight: Scripture must be understood in its original cultural and historical context or “risk serious misunderstanding” (B, 15:34).
  • “Scripture is relevant to us, but it wasn’t written about us, and it wasn’t written to us.” (A, 19:39)
  • Analogy: Reading scripture is “cross-cultural time travel” (B, 17:51).

3. Theology, Not Science, is the Primary Purpose

• Core Point:
  • “The scriptures were not intended as texts in biology, anthropology, geology, or any other of the sciences.” - President Hugh B. Brown (A, 20:39)
  • “We do not show reverence for the Scriptures when we misapply them through faulty interpretation.” - James E. Talmage (A, 20:39)
• Advice: Resist treating scripture as a modern science text; honor its intended theological message.

4. A Deep Dive: The Literary & Theological Nature of Genesis 1

Structure & Symmetry

• Literary Frame: Genesis 1 is structured to highlight order and completeness, not chronological history (26:14).
  • Days 1–3: Creation of functional spaces (light/dark, sky/sea, land)
  • Days 4–6: Filling those spaces (sun/moon, birds/fish, animals/humans)
  • “It’s symmetrical and it’s poetic… functional spaces and then the functionaries that fill those spaces.” (A, 26:14)

Theological Intent

• Main Point: Genesis 1 was crafted to offer profound answers to “Why?” not “How?”
  • Contrasts Genesis with Babylonian creation myths (Enuma Elish), emphasizing:
    • Monotheism: One sovereign God, not warring deities
    • Humanity’s Dignity: Humans as “image bearers”—co-rulers with God, not afterthoughts or slaves (43:08)
    • Cosmic Temple: The 7th day (“rest”) was a statement of divine kingship and sacred time, particularly significant after temple loss in Babylonian exile (33:05).

Literalism vs. Symbolism

• Not all scriptural accounts are intended as literal history.
• Multiple Latter-day Saint accounts (Genesis, Moses, Abraham, temple liturgy) offer varied details and timelines, supporting a non-literal reading.
  • “Not all of them use the word day when they describe creation… It doesn’t seem like they’re talking about 24-hour periods.” (B, 28:44)

5. Implications for Modern Readers

• Genre Awareness: Not all scripture shares the same genre. Genesis 1 is “theological historiography”—mixing history and theology, using literary and poetic forms (50:11).
• Right Tool for the Right Job: Use religion for “Why?” questions, science for the “How?”, “What?”, “When?”, and “Where?” (47:59).
  • “People who try to set up a conflict between science and religion… assume everything we read in the Bible should be taken literally.” (B, 56:33)
• Application for Latter-day Saints:
  • Restoration scripture grants unique lenses beyond biblical literalism.
  • Recognize both the divine intent and the human limitations in scriptural texts.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Literalism:

  • “You can see the temptation for modern people to read Genesis 1 as a science text, but don’t do it.” (A, 00:00)
  • “We don’t show reverence for the Scriptures when we misapply them through faulty interpretation.” – James E. Talmage (A, 20:39)

• On Purpose of Genesis 1:

  • “Genesis 1 is a specific type of genre… theological, literary, highly structured, majestic... written primarily to define who the God of Israel is, what their relationship is to him, what their stewardship is from him.” (B, 24:35)
  • “The cosmos is not the product of a random chance... but it’s actually a perfectly ordered system designed by a single sovereign mind.” (A, 26:14)

• On Human Identity:

  • “We are like the walking, talking, breathing representation of the God of this domain. I think that’s so cool... He says, ‘I’m going to rule the world through you as my image bearers.’” (A, 44:11)

• On Reading Scripture:

  • “Reading scripture is like a cross cultural time travel.” (B, 17:51)
  • “Keeping those three things in mind as you read the scriptures will help you avoid the science vs. scripture dilemma that has plagued so many modern people.” (B, 47:59)

• On Application:

  • “When modern readers read it through the original kind of lenses… the messages become really profound without demanding a need to conform to modern science.” (A, 46:28)
  • “We believe the Book of Mormon is in the genre of history… There is literally a place called Jerusalem, and you can go there. ...We also don’t want to commit the mistake of somebody saying, well, all scripture is allegorical.” (B, 51:01)

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Segment | Time | |---------------------------------------------|-----------| | Science vs. Religion: Framing the Issue | 02:06–05:52 | | Joseph Smith on Truth | 04:41 | | Examples of Science/Scripture Tension | 06:46–09:23 | | Key Paradigm (3 Parts) | 10:23–10:58 | | Human-Divine Scriptural Collaboration | 10:58–13:13 | | Accommodation: Ancient Cosmology | 13:13–15:34 | | Embedded Cultural Context | 15:34–20:39 | | Scriptural Purpose: Theology, Not Science | 20:39–24:35 | | Literary Structure of Genesis 1 | 24:35–28:44 | | Creation Accounts: Image of God | 28:44–33:05 | | The Seventh Day and Post-Exilic Context | 33:05–37:02 | | Comparing Genesis and Babylonian Myth | 37:02–43:03 | | Image-Bearer Theology and Latter-day Saint Temple Thought | 43:03–45:36 | | Summary & Next Steps | 47:59–50:11 | | Genres in Scripture, Applying the Model | 50:11–54:49 |

Conclusion & Next Episode Teaser

• Summary: Scott and Casey urge listeners to approach Genesis and other scripture with awareness of genre, intent, and context—understanding them as theologically rich, culturally embedded works, not modern science textbooks.
• Next Week: They’ll workshop this same paradigm on more complex or controversial Old Testament stories like the sun standing still in Joshua, the Tower of Babel, the Flood, and more.

In a sentence:
Approach sacred texts with respect for their collaboration between God and ancient authors, their cultural settings, and their theological—not scientific—purposes. Doing so dissolves much of the assumed conflict between science and scripture and opens profound spiritual meaning.