Jump to content

Glenn101

Members
  • Content count

    2,969
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,908 Excellent

4 Followers

About Glenn101

  • Rank
    Just Basic
  • Birthday 04/26/1946

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Seven Springs, North Carolina

Recent Profile Visitors

3,122 profile views
  1. Glenn101

    Richard Lloyd Anderson

    A good man, a great scholar, and a greater person.
  2. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    So you do not believe Stanford Carmack when he says that a person would have to be facile in Early Modern English, to speak it as a second nature, for such level of Early Modern English to show up his spoken or written vocabulary? You really think that is is probable that a person could try to imitate Biblical sounding language and wind up producing not just occasional, but extensive Early Modern English? If you do, please provide us some references where it has been done before. If Joseph had been exposed to Early Modern English so that it was ingrained in him to the point that it showed up so prominently in the Book of Mormon, it would aslo show up in his personal writings and dictations. Is there evidence of this? Or do you believe that he was such an accomplished writer and orator that he could turn it on and off at will? If so, is ther any evidence of this? Glenn
  3. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    That there is extensive Early Modern English in the Book of Mormon. Is that something that you disagree with? Glenn
  4. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    If you will read my comments again you will note that I am talking about two different things. (1) Stanford Carmack (and Rotal Shousen) have established that there is extensive Early Modern English in the Book of Mormon. (2) Although the presence of Early Modern English has been established there is not a consensus that the Book of Mormon is a 16th century text. There are all kinds of theories being floated around as to how it got there, such as an earlier translation by someone in the 16th century. Jarman thinks that Hugo Grotius authored the Book of Mormon as inspired fiction with an English translator. (Maybe you could engage him in a dialog as to the unique nineteenth century elements you find in the Book of Mormon. That would be interesting.) You may not be impressed with that Early Modern English, but I believe that you would not find many linguists that would affirm to you that a text having the level of Early Modern English that has been found in the Book of Mormon would be found in a nineteenth century text. Glenn
  5. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    Stanford Carmack has evidentially (not evidently) established it as a fact.
  6. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    The EmodE is not a theory. Glenn
  7. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    Firstly, I do not think that there is a consensus that the Book of Mormon is a 16th century text. The LDS position is that it is an ancient Hebrew text written in some form of Egyptian. There no one secular explanation that accounts for all of the different types of things that appear in the Book of Mormon. A totally nineteenth century viewpoint does not account for the Early Modern English, many of the Book of Mormon names, some of the theology, etc. Glenn
  8. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    The extensive Early Modern English is from the 16th century. I was asking how did that get into Joseph's brain. Stanfor has done a lot of searching Joseph's environment and has not found any extensive EmodE in Joseph's environment. Glenn
  9. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    What happened with the 16th century text? Glenn
  10. Glenn101

    The State of Mormon Apologetics

    Why is 16th century content to be expected in a document supposedly authored by Joseph Smith, a person with no known contact with 16th century ideas and thoughts. Then, there are things that should not be in a ninteenth century text such as the Early Modern English and many of the names found in the Book of Mormon. That is something that opponents of the EmodE theory (which is not a theory by the way) fail to come to ghrips with. Glenn
  11. Glenn101

    Individual v.s. Office

    Am not an expert on the subject, but as I understand it there were a group of scribes that after the exile assiduously scrubbed the texts of references to multiple Gods becuase wordhip of false gods and idols was one of the reasons for the exile. In the process they also erased a lot of the Christianity of the Old Testamnet. I am not a Hebrew scholar and probably garbled the actual message. Glenn
  12. Glenn101

    Individual v.s. Office

    I gather that you have never heard of the Deuteronomists? Glenn
  13. Glenn101

    Horses in the Book of Mormon

    I'll take that and agree with you all of the way. Never thought I would see the day. Glenn
  14. Glenn101

    Horses in the Book of Mormon

    I agree that the 240 Km is probably the total length of the causeways. However, Doctor Hansen does tell us that the intersite causeways were all pretty wide. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323172522 The Sacelero causeway evidently is intrasite but the El Mirado to Nakbe and Elmirado to Tintal are inersite. Tintal also has causeways that connect to a couple of other sites, and one of those sites connect back to El Mirado but I can find no descriptive information. As I noted before, I am not even arguing that horses or other types of beasts of burden were used, only that the causeways listed were suitable for theur use. Glenn
  15. Glenn101

    Horses in the Book of Mormon

    There is also zero evidnce from the text of the Book of Mormon that Lehi and company used any type of beast of burden when they departed the environs of Jerusalem yet it would seem well nigh impossible for the group to have carried their provisions, etc. and their tents on their backs. Although Nephi says that his father dwelt in a tent, it stands to reason that the other members of the party would have had some type of shelters. Even a modest sized tent would be awfully difficult to carry on one's back just by itself. Above is a picture of a modest sized Bedouin tent made from woven goat hairs. Don't know if Lehi's tent was of such a size or maybe a larger type where one could actually dwell in it. But I may be projecting my understanding of what "dwell in means" into Nephi's words. The above is an example of a tent I would descibe as one that a person could dwell in, along with a wife and probably at least two daughters. That is not something that Laman and Lemuel complained about either. 🙂 Glenn
×