selek Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Is there something intrinsically bad about that? If so, I fail to see what.Ray,There is much that you and I don't agree on, but I still feel inclined to say to you the most damning thing I can think of:I would rather have a thousand critics of your character and integrity here than a single fool, fraud, and agent provocatuer such as "apologize".Thank you for your stand-up position here.
consiglieri Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 I would rather have a thousand critics of your character and integrity here than a single fool, fraud, and agent provocatuer such as "apologize".It's kind of fun reading the exchange with DCP if you understand "apologize" is actually Royal Skousen.All the Best!--Consiglieri
Ray Agostini Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 I appreciate your sentiments, Selek. Now let's get back to our regularly scheduled diagreements.
Aquilifer Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 It's kind of fun reading the exchange with DCP if you understand "apologize" is actually Royal Skousen.All the Best!--Consiglieri
Ray Agostini Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 It's kind of fun reading the exchange with DCP if you understand "apologize" is actually Royal Skousen.Being one who lives wholly, entirely and strictly by the laws of logic, I would require more evidence than your say-so.
selek Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Being one who lives wholly, entirely and strictly by the laws of logic, I would require more evidence than your say-so.I'm not quite as stringent as Ray, but I find that thought particularly troubling on a variety of levels.If "apologize" is Prof. Skousen in disguise, then all mankind is in the greatest of peril- his antics would be living proof that DCP's sense of humor is catching!Can civilization endure both THAT plague AND H1N1 all at the same time?Consig, it's bad enough that I made a fool of myself, but couldn't you have warned me BEFORE I said something nice to Ray?Prof. Skousen- if that really is you- I apologize, withdraw the charges and congratulate you on your stealthy irony.I acknowledge the hand of the Master Artisan.
Ray Agostini Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Consig, it's bad enough that I made a fool of myself, but couldn't you have warned me BEFORE I said something nice to Ray?Prof. Skousen- if that really is you- I apologize, withdraw the charges and congratulate you on your stealthy irony.I acknowledge the hand of the Master Artisan.Aww, c'mon. Don't spoil my high!! Don't dent my vain and apostate ego five minutes of fame!!"apologise" didn't make much sense to me from the start, because he/she was contradictory. Do you think I would have been so timid in replies if I thought otherwise? And look at the mods appreciation of "apologize". It may well be Skousen, or some other pretender. Who knows? But you see, you were right all along. Even if it IS Skousen, on this thread he acted like a total fraud.
selek Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Aww, c'mon. Don't spoil my high!! Don't dent my vain and apostate ego five minutes of fame!!"apologise" didn't make much sense to me from the start, because he/she was contradictory. Do you think I would have been so timid in replies if I thought otherwise? And look at the mods appreciation of "apologize". It may well be Skousen, or some other pretender. Who knows? But you see, you were right all along. Even if it IS Skousen, on this thread he acted like a total fraud.If it is, RS, then he is certainly guilty of PLAYING the fool (and, yep, I GOT played).Truth be told, Ray, "apologize" merely gave me the necessary cover to say what I'd been thinking for a while- without risking my street cred as a "rabid" Mormon.Can't have it said that I'm going soft on all you "Hell-bound apostates", now can I?Don't take it too much to heart tho.Heck, if this spell of dizziness and weakness doesn't pass, I may find myself saying something nice to Hoops!
Ray Agostini Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Truth be told, Ray, "apologize" merely gave me the necessary cover to say what I'd been thinking for a while- without risking my street cred as a "rabid" Mormon.Can't have it said that I'm going soft on all you "Hell-bound apostates", now can I?Hell-bound, habit-fattened, who cares? Speaking of which, where is William these days?? I need to increased my inferiority complex. I just wouldn't feel the same without William telling me to get off my habit-fattened apostate ***.
Daniel Peterson Posted September 4, 2009 Author Posted September 4, 2009 Don't know what happened to "apologize."Oh well.Life goes on.
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Don't know what happened to "apologize." Oh well. Life goes on.Not so fast! Still wondering if anyone is going to apologize for what was stated in my first post - #16. Well? Six pages and no responses?---------------------------For those uninformed of the significance of Skousen's new book, let me lay the ground work by quoting from Book of Mormon star Sidney Sperry: No responsible authority of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever claimed that God or an angel DICTATED the physical format of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, or directed what the GRAMMAR, SPELLING, punctuation, and capitalization of the text should be. NOR HAS ANY RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH, PAST OR PRESENT, said in specific terms that the translation in the Book of Mormon was DICTATED WORD FOR WORD to Joseph Smith by divine means. (Sidney Sperry, The Problems of the Book of Mormon, Bookcraft, 1964, p. 183.) True, the Lord would aid the prophet by means of the Urim and Thummim to get the ideas expressed by the characters on the Gold Plates, BUT HE LEFT IT TO HIS SERVANT TO EXPRESS THOSE IDEAS IN THE BEST LANGUAGE AT HIS COMMAND. The Lord seldom does for man what man can do for himself. CONSEQUENTLY THE ALMIGHTY IS NOT TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR FAULTY GRAMMAR AND DICTION IN THE FIRST EDITION OF THE BOOK OF MORMON. (p. 186) The Lord was rightly concerned about the correctness of the ideas expressed in Joseph Smith's translation BUT LEFT IT TO THE PROPHET'S GOOD SENSE TO SEE TO IT THAT THE BOOK OF MORMON APPEARED TO THE PUBLIC IN AS DECENT A FORM AS HE COULD BRING ABOUT. (p. 187) Compare what Sperry said with Skousen:We now have a much clearer insight into how Joseph Smith translated (however one interprets the word translate), with STRONG EVIDENCE THAT HE DICTATED THE TEXT WORD FOR WORD AND THAT HE CONTROLLED FOR THE SPELLING OF THE STRANGE BOOK OF MORMON NAMES. In my mind, the original text as given to Joseph Smith is "a marvelous work and a wonder" and not to be treated lightly. My ultimate goal has been to pay this text the respect it deserves. In preparing this edition, I have done my utmost to ensure that the Yale edition of the original text is reproduced as accurately as possible and in a format that brings the text forth in a new light. -Royal Skousen (The Book of Mormon, the Earliest Text, 2009, p. xlv)Skousen's work has the wherewithal to stop an error that has perpetrated itself for four decades. Now, Mr. Peterson, how tangible will your efforts be?
Brant Gardner Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Still wondering if anyone is going to apologize for what was stated in my first post - #16. It probably didn't get a response because it didn't deserve one. However, in the spirit of making sure you have a question answered. . .the question is:Will those who claimed that Joseph "used his own words" in the process apologize? I am one who claims that Joseph used his own vocabulary in the translation, a position I have taken after a fair amount of study and thought on the topic.Do I apologize (in the sense of saying I am sorry). No.Do I apologize (in the sense of defending my position). Yes.
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 It probably didn't get a response because it didn't deserve one. Your view is pathetic. I am one who claims that Joseph used his own vocabulary in the translation...Skousen just placed his name on TWENTY YEARS OF RESEARCH that contradicts your position, the Sperry position. It is sad (though not surprising) to hear you won't be changing your position. Very sad.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Not so fast! Still wondering if anyone is going to apologize for what was stated in my first post - #16. Well? Six pages and no responses?---------------------------For those uninformed of the significance of Skousen's new book, let me lay the ground work by quoting from Book of Mormon star Sidney Sperry: Compare what Sperry said with Skousen:Skousen's work has the wherewithal to stop an error that has perpetrated itself for four decades. Now, Mr. Peterson, how tangible will your efforts be?Apologize is a bit strong of a word. Perhaps "change" would be a better word. One could change their views one something with out feeling like they need to apologize (and rightly so). Oh well I will leave it to you professor types to figure this one out, as I don't really care either way.
Daniel Peterson Posted September 4, 2009 Author Posted September 4, 2009 Not so fast! Too bad.Still wondering if anyone is going to apologize for what was stated in my first post - #16. Well? I'm not. I have nothing to apologize for. Least of all to you.Six pages and no responses?It seems that board participants have, as it were, voted with their feet.Now, Mr. Peterson, how tangible will your efforts be?My efforts will be at least as tangible as they have been for the better part of the past two decades.Do you have any idea at all what my role has been in supporting Professor Skousen's work?Are you going to do anything besides demanding slave labor from others in the rare intervals when you're not condemning people? What have you been been doing? Anything?
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Apologize is a bit strong of a word. Perhaps "change" would be a better word. One could change their views one something with out feeling like they need to apologize (and rightly so).A soft approach...if it will help. Peterson, will change your position?
Daniel Peterson Posted September 4, 2009 Author Posted September 4, 2009 A soft approach...if it will help. Peterson, will change your position?What is my position, O my master?Please explain it to me. And it would be especially helpful if you could identify for me a place or two in which I've expressed it. (Or, perhaps, you'll demand that I do so?)
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 It seems that board participants have, as it were, voted with their feet views.My efforts will be at least as tangible as they have been for the better part of the past two decades.Do you have any idea at all what my role has been in supporting Professor Skousen's work?Are you going to do anything besides demanding slave labor from others in the rare intervals when you're not condemning people? What have you been been doing? Anything?Using the eye witness accounts as my guide. I have no apologies to make.
Daniel Peterson Posted September 4, 2009 Author Posted September 4, 2009 Using the eye witness accounts as my guide. I have no apologies to make.Of course not. The beam in your eye enhances your ability and heightens your willingness to imagine motes in the eyes of others.Your chosen title is a command to the rest of the world, not a reminder to yourself to be more humble.To what "eye witness accounts" do you refer, O my master?
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Of course not. The beam in your eye enhances your ability and heightens your willingness to imagine motes in the eyes of others.Your chosen title is a command to the rest of the world, not a reminder to yourself to be more humble.To what "eye witness accounts" do you refer, O my master?It was in Hardy's Introduction.
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 What is my position, O my master?Your position? Now's your chance to say. Side with Sperry/Gardner, or Royal?
Brant Gardner Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Skousen just placed his name on TWENTY YEARS OF RESEARCH that contradicts your position, the Sperry position. It is sad (though not surprising) to hear you won't be changing your position. Very sad.I have been through his typescripts of the Book of Mormon manuscripts and read five of the volumes on the Variants (I am ordering the 6th, now that it is out). I have also read the one article he wrote specifically defending his conclusion that there is tight control over the vocabulary.I trail Skousen's time researching the Book of Mormon by about 5 years (on active projects), but our paths of inquiry are very different. His scholarship on the text of the Book of Mormon is nothing short of breathtaking.However, having been very carefully through his arguments in the one paper (not included in any of the volumes on the text of the Book of Mormon) where he specifically lays out the argument you are talking about, I disagree with him--on the basis of evidence. I have the distinct impression that you are not familiar with the range of evidence available or the reasons for the conclusions drawn from that evidence.Certainly, however, I would change my opinion based upon evidence and analysis that provides a better understanding of the text than the evidence and analysis I propose. That is precisely how I came to my current opinion, which did require a change in a previous position.Notwithstanding this one disagreement with Skousen, I cannot disagree with much in his textual analysis. The whole is simply brilliant.
apologize Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 ...be more humble.I took Ram's advice and "asked."
Daniel Peterson Posted September 4, 2009 Author Posted September 4, 2009 Does Hardy's Introduction discuss my position on "tight" versus "loose" translation? I must have missed that, O my master. Can you supply a specific page reference for me, so that your humble servant might be enabled to learn what his position on this subject is?Your position? Now's your chance to say. Side with Sperry/Gardner, or Royal?In other words, O my master, you're demanding that I apologize for holding a position -- or, now, in your slightly less aggressive language, that I change a position -- that you don't even know that I do hold.What a piece of work you are.Is your life a daily round of ignorant demands and condemnations directed at everybody around you?
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Your position? Now's your chance to say. Side with Sperry/Gardner, or Royal?This is quite telling.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.