Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Revisiting Elder Holland's Sermon

Uncle Dale

By Uncle Dale
in Miscellaneous

Recommended Posts

rockslider Rookie

rockslider

Posted
Posted

Presumably they will. FARMS (the Maxwell Institute) most certainly will.

I can hardly wait.

Live stream (well ok, not live anymore) is available, have you seen it yet?, inappropriate to drop link here?

jadams_4242 Contributor

jadams_4242

Posted
Posted

Hi again, Dale, sorry I was too tired to chat last night.

From a worldly nonLDS perspective the Book of Mormon is seen strictly as a religious volume of faith based nature which cannot be proven true either historically or doctrinally. It's all about faith. Frankly, I think elder Holland was harsh to use the word "pathetic" considering that billions of people on this earth have or will reject the Book of Mormon out of hand for whatever reason they conclude. Are the thinking minds of billions of people simply pathetic? Not really. They just won't give into the kind of faith that elder Holland wants them to have.

I think the use of the word "pathetic" was not only offensive but hurtful towards those who don't have faith in an unproven book. I don't see President Monson using that kind of language or tone ever.

Paul O

using the word pathetic in the context he did was perfectly 100 percent acceptable to all and was not insulting to anyone but those whom garner hate in the heart for everything mormon. :P

rockslider Rookie

rockslider

Posted
Posted

Ah. No, I haven't seen it.

The response that I was speaking of is a response to the published Criddle paper.

He briefly mentioned that it had been peer reviewed etc. I was not clear on how long it has been published

Daniel Peterson Grand Master

Daniel Peterson

Posted
Posted
He briefly mentioned that it had been peer reviewed etc. I was not clear on how long it has been published

It appeared a year or so ago.

Academic responses take time. The wait, though, will have been worth it.

rockslider Rookie

rockslider

Posted
Posted

It appeared a year or so ago.

Academic responses take time. The wait, though, will have been worth it.

There was some announced additions that apparently were just finished up in the last few days and edited into the presentation last night. The very end of the presentation went into these ... D&C correlations

LifeOnaPlate Community Regular

LifeOnaPlate

Posted
Posted

Okay, so do you think that critics are "pathetic" for bringing the anachronisms up?

Elder Holland never called people pathetic. He called certain theories or dismissals pathetic. I agree that there are some pathetic criticisms. There are also some pathetic attempts at vindication. Each should be evaluated on their own merits.

I think you are confusing "addressed" with "answered". There are plenty of theories, but I'd be hard pressed to say a theory equates to an answer.

OK, no evidences for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon have been answered by the critics (if we're gonna play it like that).

Uncle Dale Grand Master

Uncle Dale

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It appeared a year or so ago.

Academic responses take time. The wait, though, will have been worth it.

Take care that the writer doesn't overlook the more recent Jockers'

stuff, with the Smith word-print in it. To miss noting that will

make the LDS response look outdated.

I'm a bit skeptical on the Book of Commandment attributions, since the

one known Cowdery chapter wasn't attributed to his "voice" as a strong

first choice. I haven't yet seen the word-print analysis on the Lectures

on Faith. Am still waiting for them to get around to comparing the

articles attributed to Rigdon in the 1830s Church publications.

UD

Paul Osborne Veteran

Paul Osborne

Posted
Posted
using the word pathetic in the context he did was perfectly 100 percent acceptable to all and was not insulting to anyone but those whom garner hate in the heart for everything mormon

This is simply not true. How do you think billions of nonMormons would size up the context of that snippet? In my view, it was mean and lacked kindness. I think the apostle should have expressed kindness and not condemn everyone who walks away from the Book of Mormon. Now, everyone who doesn't walk towards the Book of Mormon will be made to feel condemned already. It just wasn't a kind thing to do. YOU WILL NEVER SEE PRESIDENT MONSON ACT THAT WAY! Why? Because in my view he is man that feels after the heart of others more so than his fellows. I don't feel that way towards elder Hollands talk. It seemed cruel. But God will take care of business in his own way.

Paul O

Nevo Veteran

Nevo

Posted
Posted

I suppose that the Apostle had some special reason, to go so far as mentioning Ethan Smith and Solomon Spalding, rather than something more generic, such as anachronisms in the BoM.

I don't know that there was any special reason for the mention. I suspect just about any GA testimony of the Book of Mormon referencing critics' explanations of its origin would mention Ethan Smith and Solomon Spalding. I heard Elder Neal A. Maxwell mention Ethan Smith in a talk at the MTC in December 1992. President Hinckley mentioned Smith and Spalding in an October 1993 conference talk:

It is strange to me that unbelieving critics must still go back to the old allegations that Joseph Smith wrote the book out of ideas gained from Ethan Smith
Paul Osborne Veteran

Paul Osborne

Posted
Posted

Paul: Elder Holland has, over time, delivered some of the most heart-felt testimonies of Christ and the gospel I have ever heard. FWIW.

I don't deny that at all. The man has a remarkable history and track record. But, in my opinion he really screwed up this time. Love fled and anger took over. The Spirit flew away! I don't know what his problem was or is. But, I would think that President Monson has already talked to him about it. Just wait and see how elder Holland talks next conference. Oh will it be different!! Just wait and see. LOVE, baby, it's all about love.

Paul O

Uncle Dale Grand Master

Uncle Dale

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Unk,

What, exactly, does it mean to de-construct the text?

Well, I'll try illustrate. Here's an unfinished "de-construction" chart

of Mosiah -- saved on Oct. 4th. I'll have to upload the updated version later.

phrchrtM2.gif

The bottom bar graph represents significant Spalding word-string occurrences in Mosiah.

The middle line graph represents Spalding vocabulary overlap with the BoM's Mosiah.

The top break-down is my approximation of the Criddle-Jockers data for Mosiah.

Sorry for the unfinished graphic. I've been busy on other projects.

UD

rockslider Rookie

rockslider

Posted
Posted

UD, I asked Criddle how he thought things might be different with the Royal version, but I later wanted to ask about how the analysis is done. Is there a well known software program people use for this? Are they writting their own software, or are these done on more of a brute force search?

Daniel Peterson Grand Master

Daniel Peterson

Posted
Posted
I don't deny that at all. The man has a remarkable history and track record. But, in my opinion he really screwed up this time. Love fled and anger took over. The Spirit flew away! I don't know what his problem was or is. But, I would think that President Monson has already talked to him about it. Just wait and see how elder Holland talks next conference. Oh will it be different!! Just wait and see. LOVE, baby, it's all about love.

For very, very many Latter-day Saints with whom I've spoken, Elder Holland's remarks were a high point of conference. It was certainly so for me. The Spirit was powerful in them.

I saw no anger.

I expect that many of the Brethren congratulated him on his talk. I did.

Paul Osborne Veteran

Paul Osborne

Posted
Posted
For very, very many Latter-day Saints with whom I've spoken, Elder Holland's remarks were a high point of conference. It was certainly so for me. The Spirit was powerful in them.

I saw no anger.

I expect that many of the Brethren congratulated him on his talk. I did.

We see things very differently. Perhaps in some ways I'm more gifted than you! I could say there are a great many Latter-day Saints that failed to recognize the anger in the man and a lack of love which love is what emulates the Spirit. It went right over their heads, including yours, apparently.

Now, what happens privately between elder Holland and President Monson will not be open to your view or mine. You can shake their hands and give happy greetings but you aren't going in the back room where they talk about their problems.

Again, I saw the anger. I felt it. It was clear and strong and came right into my spirit. I cannot deny it. I'm sorry that so many others lacked the ability to see this too.

Also, I wonder how many times elder Paul H. Dunn was praised for his talks even though there was something wrong with them? Praise for a talk doesn't mean all is well. It's a courtesy thing if anything.

Paul O

Uncle Dale Grand Master

Uncle Dale

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Is that relative probability?

The top band of colors and letters is my over-generalization of the Jockers-Criddle

"relative probability" for authorship. "Relative," because they examined only a

small set of potential authors, "relative" to one another.

The other two sets of graphed data is not relative. The middle, line-graph is merely

vocabulary overlap. You can get an idea of a yardstick by looking at the Isaiah

chapter in Mosiah, compared to Spalding's Roman story vocabulary. Anything over 95%

seems particularly significant to me; but you'll have to make your own assessments.

At any rate pages 180-181 in the current LDS edition are quantitatively "closest"

to Spalding's vocabulary use -- that's page 205 in the 1830 edition -- with a

vocabulary overlap of 98%. We have to go into the last part of Alma to find a BoM

page with a higher percentage of shared vocabulary than page 205 in the 1830 ed.

The bottom bar chart is, essentially, the count of word-strings wherein the same

4 words occur in contiguity in both the BoM and Spalding. The strings counted per

page is a bit more complicated than that. But, again, you'll see that 1830 page 205

is the closest to Spalding's phraseology.

Perhaps it's all due to coincidence -- but if anybody ever asks you, tell them

that Dale Broadhurst says 1830 ed. page 205 is the most "Spaldingish" Mosiah page.

UD

.

Daniel Peterson Grand Master

Daniel Peterson

Posted
Posted

We see things very differently. Perhaps in some ways I'm more gifted than you! I could say there are a great many Latter-day Saints who failed to see any anger in Elder Holland, simply because it wasn't there, and who failed to notice any lack of love because that is also not true. The talk went right over the heads of many critics -- including yours, apparently.

Now, what happens privately between Elder Holland and President Monson will not be open to your view or mine. You can criticize and condemn Elder Holland to your heart's content, but you aren't going in the back room, and they probably don't spend much time talking about the criticisms they get from apostates, anti-Mormons, and dissidents.

Again, I saw no anger. I felt no anger. The talk was clear and strong and spoke directly to my spirit. I cannot deny it. I'm sorry that some others lack the ability to see this too.

Scottie Proficient

Scottie

Posted
Posted

Elder Holland never called people pathetic. He called certain theories or dismissals pathetic. I agree that there are some pathetic criticisms. There are also some pathetic attempts at vindication. Each should be evaluated on their own merits.

It seems you are splitting hairs here, but I'll play. Do you believe the actual criticisms of anachronisms in the BoM are pathetic? If I understand Elder Holland correctly, he believes they are. Personally, I believe they are valid criticisms.

OK, no evidences for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon have been answered by the critics (if we're gonna play it like that).

I'm not sure any critic claims any of them have been answered?? I'll be the first to admit I have no idea how the BoM was created.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...