LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
pakeha said:
Oh, myyy.
Winston Smith.
How could I have missed it?
Brilliant, Foster Zygote, brilliant.
And, RandFan, thanks for the link to Tory Magoo. I'm now subscribed to her channel.
Click to expand...
:) It's funny the parallels to Mormonism and Scientology. There's lots of differences but when it comes to control and vindictiveness by some authorities and shunning, they can be pretty close. Of course they both employ milk before meat so as not scare off the suckers.
 
RandFan said:
:) It's funny the parallels to Mormonism and Scientology. There's lots of differences but when it comes to control and vindictiveness by some authorities and shunning, they can be pretty close. Of course they both employ milk before meat so as not scare off the suckers.
Click to expand...

It's pretty clear one was inspired by the other.
 
torifrog said:
I realise I am EXTREMELY tardy to the party (the quoted text is from January this year: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8921348&postcount=2275 ) ... but I was surprised no-one else picked up on this (bolding).
Click to expand...

Can you explain more the significance of the bolded part "wherefore"?

In context:
"The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the Gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands until it has filled the whole earth; that the inhabitants thereof may receive it, and be prepared for the days to come, in the which the Son of man shall come down in heaven, clothed in the brightness of his glory, to meet the kingdom of God which is set up on the earth; Wherefore may the kingdom of God go forth, that the kingdom of heaven may come."

Other than the fact it's capitalized in the middle of a sentence, seems a straightforward pseudo-Elizabethan usage as a conjunction. From www.oxforddictionaries.com:

adverb

for what reason:
she took an ill turn, but wherefore I cannot say

adverb & conjunction

as a result of which:
[as conjunction]:truly he cared for me, wherefore I title him with all respect
Click to expand...
 
Pup said:
Can you explain more the significance of the bolded part "wherefore"?


Other than the fact it's capitalized in the middle of a sentence, seems a straightforward pseudo-Elizabethan usage as a conjunction. From www.oxforddictionaries.com:
Click to expand...

In my experience, it's more commonly translated simply as "why" - which makes the statement a question, without a question mark, rather than a declaration. To me, it just highlighted how JS misused English, and I'm surprised no-one else thought it noteworthy or misplaced.
 
torifrog said:
In my experience, it's more commonly translated simply as "why" - which makes the statement a question, without a question mark, rather than a declaration. To me, it just highlighted how JS misused English, and I'm surprised no-one else thought it noteworthy or misplaced.
Click to expand...

Probably because the entire BoM and other Mormon materials are filled with that pseudo-Ye Olde Englishe. You stop noticing it after a bit.
 
torifrog said:
In my experience, it's more commonly translated simply as "why" - which makes the statement a question, without a question mark, rather than a declaration. To me, it just highlighted how JS misused English, and I'm surprised no-one else thought it noteworthy or misplaced.
Click to expand...

In this case, I'd say that evidence (a definition in the OED) trumps personal experience.

There's also an explanation for how Smith knew a secondary but correct usage better than modern people. He was familiar with the KJV of the Bible and "wherefore" is also used as a conjunction there. For example, Exodus 17:1-2:

"and there was no water for the people to drink. Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink."

It makes skeptics look desperate or uninformed if they criticize Joseph Smith for using "wherefore" wrong, when he was using it in accordance with the OED and the same way that King James' translators used it. Especially when there's real stuff to go after.
 
Is there any particular reason Smith adopted a pseudo-KJV style of writing?
 
pakeha said:
Is there any particular reason Smith adopted a pseudo-KJV style of writing?
Click to expand...

It added a flavor of authenticity. People knew from reading their bible what a holy book was supposed to sound like so that's what he gave them.
 
pakeha said:
Is there any particular reason Smith adopted a pseudo-KJV style of writing?
Click to expand...

I always figured it was to make his things sound more like what people expected bibles and prophecies to sound like.

It's the same reason that American movies have Biblical characters speak with an English accent for no apparent reason. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wir4fH6hUxw

There's no logical reason that Biblical characters speaking in translation should sound as if they're from the British Isles--in fact, it's more logical that they should speak the same vernacular as the audience their words are being translated for--but Jesus with a Boston or Atlanta accent would sound silly to Americans. Same way, I think Smith realized that prophecies and ancient stories in modern vernacular would sound much less convincing.

Edited to add: tsig beat me to it while I was looking for a youtube clip. :)
 
tsig said:
It added a flavor of authenticity. People knew from reading their bible what a holy book was supposed to sound like so that's what he gave them.
Click to expand...

Pup said:
I always figured it was to make his things sound more like what people expected bibles and prophecies to sound like.

It's the same reason that American movies have Biblical characters speak with an English accent for no apparent reason. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wir4fH6hUxw

There's no logical reason that Biblical characters speaking in translation should sound as if they're from the British Isles--in fact, it's more logical that they should speak the same vernacular as the audience their words are being translated for--but Jesus with a Boston or Atlanta accent would sound silly to Americans. Same way, I think Smith realized that prophecies and ancient stories in modern vernacular would sound much less convincing.

Edited to add: tsig beat me to it while I was looking for a youtube clip. :)
Click to expand...
Agreed. Also:
Isaiah 29:4 said:
And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the adust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the bground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.
Click to expand...
Mormons believe that it was to fulfill prophecy. Though in the Bible "familiar spirit" typically means necromancy which makes more sense. The Mormon apologetics on this can be found here.
 
tsig said:
It added a flavor of authenticity. People knew from reading their bible what a holy book was supposed to sound like so that's what he gave them.
Click to expand...

Right.
To impress the potential clientele.

RandFan said:
Agreed. Also:
Isaiah 29:4
And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the adust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the bground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.
Click to expand...
Mormons believe that it was to fulfill prophecy. Though in the Bible "familiar spirit" typically means necromancy which makes more sense. The Mormon apologetics on this can be found here.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Randfan!
 
RandFan said:
Agreed. Also: Mormons believe that it was to fulfill prophecy. Though in the Bible "familiar spirit" typically means necromancy which makes more sense. The Mormon apologetics on this can be found here.
Click to expand...

From the link:

Summary conclusion

This doesn't mean that Isaiah was only referring to the Book of Mormon, or that he was particularly thinking about it at all. Nephi simply used the imagery and language of Isaiah, and adapted it to make his point. This was common practice in the ancient world.

One wonders how young Joseph Smith knew that?

Could it be that Joe had a bible with the Book of Isaiah in it?
 
tsig said:
From the link:

Summary conclusion

This doesn't mean that Isaiah was only referring to the Book of Mormon, or that he was particularly thinking about it at all. Nephi simply used the imagery and language of Isaiah, and adapted it to make his point. This was common practice in the ancient world.

One wonders how young Joseph Smith knew that?

Could it be that Joe had a bible with the Book of Isaiah in it?
Click to expand...

Pfft. You're never going to make the celestial kingdom with a bevy of wives maintaining an attitude like that. It was clearly because JS was talking to god.
 
This is from page 277 of An American Fraud: One Lawyer's Case against Mormonism.

These declarations by the Prophet are some of the best evidence of his psychopathic or meglomanic delusions of graneur. When accurate history is consulted, even when that history is limited to what is contained within the Church's own documents and written by the Church's founding leaders, it is abundantly clear that Joseph Smith was not the humble farm boy depicted over the decades by the Church.

"I have more to boast of than any man....I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet...When they can get rid of me, the devil will also go."
History of the Church Volume 6 (May 26, 1844): Pages 408-409
http://carm.org/joseph-smith-boasted

That last line is interesting and poorly phrased.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom