72 replies to this topic

[volgadon]

zerinus, on 12 April 2011 - 05:00 AM, said:

I like this one better:

I guess apostates don't know class when they see it.

[volgadon]

Quote

The Book of Isaiah is great poetry. It is fantastic poetry. The whole of it is, not just parts of it. Since when was great poetry written by multiple authors, especially separated over several centuries? It takes a genius like Shakespeare to produce Shakespeare; a genius like Dante to produce the Inferno; a genius like Homer to produce the Illiad and The Oddysey; a genius like Milton to produce Pradise Lost and Paradise Regained; a genius like Molavi (Runi) to produce the Mathnavi. Such geniuses turn up once in a thousand years in a culture or civilization. Isaiah was one of those. He was the Shakespeare, Milton, Dante, Homer, or Molavi of Hebrew literature. It is the most ridiculous thing on earth to blow up his magnificent poem into a thousand pieces and assign each to a different author at a different time. I pity the intellectually bereft LDS “scholars” who cannot see beyond the length of their nose.

Seems that you've never read Arthur Quiller-Couch's "Oxford Book of English Verse" or Francis James Child's "The English and Scottish Popular Ballads" or Sir Walter Scott's "The Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border."

[WalkerW]

zerinus, on 12 April 2011 - 05:00 AM, said:

I like this one better:

I'm sure you do. It fits your attitude and approach quite well.

[stemelbow]

Zerinus vs Walker

Bokovoy vs Schryver

Our bishop's wife vs the Primary President

I've been subjected to too much internal fighting the past couple days.  What's with us LDS folk?

[Questing Beast]

That's FUNNY! Little blighter aping his elders veeerry well indeed. A religious parallel can be made instantly. Our children ape us, until they don't. But even when they quit, they are still scarred for life by their upbringing. "Caveat parentor"!...

[WalkerW]

stemelbow, on 12 April 2011 - 06:33 AM, said:

Zerinus vs Walker

More like Zerinus vs. anyone who disagrees with his interpretation of scripture.

Notice I was defending David after Zerinus had the audacity to state that David didn't have a testimony.

If people would actually engage the arguments or the methodology instead of arrogantly pronouncing spiritual judgments on everyone, things would go a lot smoother.

[volgadon]

Quote

If people would actually engage the arguments or the methodology instead of arrogantly pronouncing spiritual judgments on everyone, things would go a lot smoother.

Precisely.

[stemelbow]

WalkerW, on 12 April 2011 - 06:41 AM, said:

More like Zerinus vs. anyone who disagrees with his interpretation of scripture.

Notice I was defending David after Zerinus had the audacity to state that David didn't have a testimony.

If people would actually engage the arguments or the methodology instead of arrogantly pronouncing spiritual judgments on everyone, things would go a lot smoother.

I'm not taking sides on this.  I'm just saying...its disappointing to see, whatever the causes.  truth be told the most disappointing has been the bishop's wife and the Primary president.  I will spare all from the details.

[zerinus]

WalkerW, on 12 April 2011 - 06:20 AM, said:

I'm sure you do. It fits your attitude and approach quite well.

You must admit, it is a good rebuttal to your pic, isn't it? LOL!

[WalkerW]

stemelbow, on 12 April 2011 - 06:53 AM, said:

I'm not taking sides on this.  I'm just saying...its disappointing to see, whatever the causes.  truth be told the most disappointing has been the bishop's wife and the Primary president.  I will spare all from the details.

How dare you not take sides! I'm obviously for the Primary president. Maybe if you had a stronger testimony, you would see things my way!

[stemelbow]

WalkerW, on 12 April 2011 - 08:35 AM, said:

How dare you not take sides! I'm obviously for the Primary president. Maybe if you had a stronger testimony, you would see things my way!

Let's be honest, if I had a stronger testimony I wouldn't be so troubled by it all.

[ELF1024]

I'm prolly just the dumbest jester in the room, but I don't understand Rob's use of "dependance" in the threads title. I don't see that the BoM is dependant upon any other work of scripture. It stands on it's own. Just because it quotes from other sources doesn't mean that it's dependant on anything else.

[Rob Bowman]

ELF1024,

You wrote:

ELF1024, on 12 April 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

I'm prolly just the dumbest jester in the room, but I don't understand Rob's use of "dependance" in the threads title. I don't see that the BoM is dependant upon any other work of scripture. It stands on it's own. Just because it quotes from other sources doesn't mean that it's dependant on anything else.

"Literary dependence" is a technical term in the study of texts. It means that some of what appears in text A derives from text B. So, for example, most scholars think that Luke's Gospel is "dependent" on Mark. This isn't a bad thing; it just means that Luke used Mark as a source. It would only be a problem if text A claimed to have been written before text B or in a context in which use of text B was impossible.