Nephi's Neighbors

[Kevin Christensen]

I'm trying to understand the difference between an ~interpretation~ of a text and the text itself.

SNIP

I thought the most important thing in the Church was listening to the teachings & promptings of the Spirit and that the Prophet, called by God Himself, would never lead us astray. You'd think that God would have a better quality control standard for something so important what with the Book of Mormon trying to live up to its reputation as "the most correct book on Earth". It is rather interesting that outside forces do seem to affect Church policy & teachings. But what do I know? I'm just interpreting things the best I can and watching out for those lying in wait to deceive.

Read up on postmodernism and deconstruction. There is probably a Very Short Introduction on the topic. It will help. Alan Goff's essays at FARMS provide a good introduction in the context of debates about LDS scripture.

Also, let's not leave D&C 1 out of the equation. It is God's formal description of who he called, and why, and what expectations we ought to have. That makes me think it might be worth reading, notably, in this context, these verses about our prophets and how quality control actually works as an ongoing process, not as a priori error prevention:

24 Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.

25 And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;

26 And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed;

27 And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent;

28 And inasmuch as they were humble they might be made strong, and blessed from on high, and receive knowledge from time to time.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Doug the Hutt]

Read up on postmodernism and deconstruction. There is probably a Very Short Introduction on the topic. It will help. Alan Goff's essays at FARMS provide a good introduction in the context of debates about LDS scripture.

Also, let's not leave D&C 1 out of the equation. It is God's formal description of who he called, and why, and what expectations we ought to have. That makes me think it might be worth reading, notably, in this context, these verses about our prophets and how quality control actually works as an ongoing process, not as a priori error prevention:

24 Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.

25 And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;

26 And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed;

27 And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent;

28 And inasmuch as they were humble they might be made strong, and blessed from on high, and receive knowledge from time to time.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Thanks man. I'll look those up.

[Kevin Christensen]

Thanks man. I'll look those up.

You are welcome. And regarding text and interpretation, I should have also mentioned the Parable of the Sower, in which the seed (word) can have a vastly different yield depending on the ground in which it is planted, and the nurture and care it is given. I'm struck by Jesus' comment, regarding the interpretation of this particular parable: "Know ye not this parable? How then will ye know all parables?"

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Brant Gardner]

I don't think there is good evidence for that. The biblical usage of the term gentile is separate from the nationalistic designations. In fact, the nationalistic designation such as "Philistine" or "Egyptian" show up far more often than the conceptual usage of "gentile". In the book of Mormon, if one assumes the model you propose, Lamanite is never used distinctively from nationalistic or geopolitical terms. I just don't see evidence of your case.

There is always a danger in using comparisons because the comparisons may or may not be associated with the same circumstances. In the case of the Jew/gentile-Nephite/Lamanite-insider/outsider vocabulary, the comparison fits in that there is a common cultural label used to distinguish the in-group from the out-group. That basic function appears in more than just Hebrew cultures, becoming almost a universal trait.

The next question has to do with the problem you pointed out concerning national references. I believe that you are correct that this is used more often than insider/outsider terminology in the Bible. There is a major problem with using that particular model to explain the Book of Mormon terminology, however. The Book of Mormon doesn't describe state-level societies and at that time, there were no "nations" in the New World. What there were, were city-states at best. Therefore, there would be no "nation" terminology. You would refer to the city, or fall back to the insider/outsider vocabulary. The Book of Mormon uses both of those, finding a way to subsume all cities under he general outsider name, unless they were friendly and therefore an insider.