President Faust stated in the April 2006 conference: “Indeed, as the First Presidency stated
in 1978, we believe that ‘the great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.’” I believe great works of literature such as “The Brothers Karamazov” contains “moral truths” and falls within the plain meaning of the First Presidency’s statement.

Indeed the New Testament supports this. Consider the parables of Jesus. I’ve heard no one claim that the “Parable of the Prodigal Son” reports an actual occurrence. It does, however, teach great truths. In much the same manner, “The Brothers Karamazov” teaches great truths although it reports events that did not actually occur.

I would also second what RT said in the comment above mine.

So, I feel really awkward saying this, but what is this testimony of fictitious (and non-fictitious) books that people claim to have? Surely, we’re not just saying the book has some amount of truth. One might as easily have a testimony of the dictionary. But then is a testimony simply that we get a warm and fuzzy feeling when we think of something? That it has helped us to live better lives? If so, do I have a testimony of Mahler? Of my wedding pictures? Of the blanket that my great-grandmother made for me?

Maybe, and maybe that’s all a testimony should be — a listing of things that give meaning to our lives. There’s something valuable about coming together once a month to share such lists. Particularly if we recognize them as such, if I need not feel ashamed because Brother X has a testimony of XYZ and I don’t.

But if a testimony is meant to be something more, then perhaps we should all be careful to reserve its use as such? In fact, if a testimony is a declaration of faith, or knowledge that comes from faith, then it probably makes no sense to say: “I have a testimony of the Book of Mormon,” but rather we should say something like: “I have a testimony that the Book of Mormon is factually true” or “I have a testimony that the Book of Mormon can change lives.”

By the same logic I would humbly submit that it would make little sense to say: “I have a testimony of The Brothers Karamazov”, although it might make sense to say: “I have a testimony that The Brothers Karamazov better captures the human condition than any other book I’ve read.”