Lamanite Posted June 3, 2008 Author Posted June 3, 2008 Kevin C. has given some interesting insights regarding deutero-Isaiah showing that it might date to a time frame that would have given Lehi and co. access to it. I'm not wholly convinced yet, and still find the DI passages problematic.Yeah, the tight/loose translation is a subject Iâ??ve never been able to completely come to a conclusion on. We have things like sheum, yet we also have anachronisms.Maybe some days the seer-stone was transmitting in analog and some days G-d decided to upgrade to HD. Then again, maybe we're all wrong and the Hindus have it right.*shrugs*I've said it before but tight/loose need not be mutually exclusive. I was thinking how Joseph gave his seer stone to Oliver sometime in the early 30's and said he didn't need it to receive revelation anymore. Maybe God pulled him away from the magic culture of the time , during the translation period, and taught him to rely on the spirit more fully(without instruments).As for DI, I think it's funny to picture Isaiah showing up on Lehi's doorstep and saying "Hey, heard you were taking off, here is just a little something I wrote, Peace out!".
Hammer Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 Mahalo=HawaiianMalo=TonganI appreciate the sentiment!Big UP!= JawaiianSioneI should have noted that-- I served in Hawaiian Mission and later I was an ordinance worker for the Tongan and Somoan sessions.
LifeOnaPlate Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 [...](yet somehow the OT was trustworthy enough for Christ and the Apostles to teach from)[...]Wait. You're telling me that quoting former scripture, etc. is not plagiarism, but is actually effective gospel teaching when employed by Christ and His servants? The Book of Mormon wins again!
hgomez2 Posted June 4, 2008 Posted June 4, 2008 Wait. You're telling me that quoting former scripture, etc. is not plagiarism, but is actually effective gospel teaching when employed by Christ and His servants? The Book of Mormon wins again!I don't understand how referencing the OT when teaching is plagiarism. Plagiarism is passing off as yours the work of another without giving credit.
Deborah Posted June 4, 2008 Posted June 4, 2008 I don't understand how referencing the OT when teaching is plagiarism. Plagiarism is passing off as yours the work of another without giving credit.In which case there is no plagarism in the BOM, which was the point being made. All the Isaiah passages are credited to Isaiah and all of Christ's words are credited to him. I don't get the issue with the Isaiah passages. Lehi sent his sons back to get the records of his people which included the writings of Isaiah. They should be similar to what is in the Bible.
LifeOnaPlate Posted June 4, 2008 Posted June 4, 2008 I don't understand how referencing the OT when teaching is plagiarism. Plagiarism is passing off as yours the work of another without giving credit.Exactly. Hence, the prophets in the Book of Mormon who reference the OT when teaching are not plagiarizing. I'm glad we're now on the same page.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.