David Bokovoy Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Hello Friends,Hope everyone has had a great Sunday! Thought I would share with the board a few things I
oMtonic Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Very nice, David.It is contributions such as these from yourself and others that are amongst the highlights of my participation on this message board. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the other insights that will make it into your "part two" post.
WalkerW Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 I second oMtonic's post. Very timely too. We are going over D&C 76 in institute tomorrow. Thanks!
mercyngrace Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Now, all this exciting textual allusion to obscure biblical motifs and I have not even yet shared the issues pertaining to the prophetic
David Bokovoy Posted January 31, 2011 Author Posted January 31, 2011 Thanks friends, it's fun to share. I appreciate the kind words and interest. Best,--DB
Rob Bowman Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 David,I'm sorry if I come across as the resident spoil-sport, but I have a different take on your post. I can't go into all the details at the moment, but let me make a couple of quick observations. You wrote:D&C 76 begins with a Deuteronomic-like invocation calling heaven and earth to pay close attention to the information contained in the revelation:
David Bokovoy Posted January 31, 2011 Author Posted January 31, 2011 David,I'm sorry if I come across as the resident spoil-sport, but I have a different take on your post. I can't go into all the details at the moment, but let me make a couple of quick observations. You wrote:Perhaps D&C 76 sounds Deuteronomic-like because it is influenced by Deuteronomy. Just a possibility!You wrote:I don't think it is correct that the "inhabitants" in D&C 76:1 are inhabitants of both heaven and earth.
Mansquatch Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 David,I'm sorry if I come across as the resident spoil-sport, but I have a different take on your post. I can't go into all the details at the moment, but let me make a couple of quick observations. You wrote:Perhaps D&C 76 sounds Deuteronomic-like because it is influenced by Deuteronomy. Just a possibility!You wrote:I don't think it is correct that the "inhabitants" in D&C 76:1 are inhabitants of both heaven and earth.
Vance Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 I don't think it is correct that the "inhabitants" in D&C 76:1 are inhabitants of both heaven and earth.
volgadon Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 I'm particularly struck by verse 21, which depicts tiers of divine and semi-divine beings (angels and sanctified humans) and how that connects to the idea of judgement, sanctification and the Hallel.
Rob Bowman Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 I apologize, but a matter of a personal nature came up and I am not sure how long it will be before I can resume this discussion.
volgadon Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 I apologize, but a matter of a personal nature came up and I am not sure how long it will be before I can resume this discussion.I hope everything will work out.
Vance Posted February 3, 2011 Posted February 3, 2011 I apologize, but a matter of a personal nature came up and I am not sure how long it will be before I can resume this discussion.I can see how busy you are.
Rob Bowman Posted February 3, 2011 Posted February 3, 2011 David,You wrote:Of course the verse has been influenced by the language of Deuteronomy. Part of the thesis behind this observation is that Joseph's revelations frequently adopt biblical phrases and motifs in a way that reflects ancient conceptions. In terms of your second issue, taking the grammar at face value, the subject would in fact be both heaven and earth. Perhaps more significantly, Joseph's inspired revision of Genesis clearly shows that the phrase "inhabitants thereof" appears in Joseph's revelations directly linked with the two realms:"And it came to pass that Moses spake unto the Lord, saying: Be merciful unto thy servant, O God, and tell me concerning this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, and also the heavens, and then thy servant will be content" (Moses (1:36)I don't agree about the grammar of D&C 76:1. I think grammatically "Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof," is easily understood grammatically such that "thereof" refers to the earth alone. In this regard the text would be similar to the following:
Vance Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 I don't agree about the grammar of D&C 76:1. I think grammatically "Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof," is easily understood grammatically such that "thereof" refers to the earth alone. It is obvious that, had he intended to mean only the inhabitants of the earth, he could easily have worded it differently. For example "Give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof, and hear, O ye heavens,"That begs the question. If, as you don't agree, Joseph had intended to refer to the inhabitants of both the heavens and the earth, how would (or could) he have worded it differently?
Rob Bowman Posted February 5, 2011 Posted February 5, 2011 Vance,Doesn't the same supposed ambiguity apply to Ether 4:9? Do you wish to argue that "the inhabitants thereof" in that verse also refer to inhabitants of both heaven and earth?I'm not going to camp on this grammatical point endlessly. The argument I present is much bigger than this one point.It is obvious that, had he intended to mean only the inhabitants of the earth, he could easily have worded it differently. For example "Give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof, and hear, O ye heavens,"That begs the question. If, as you don't agree, Joseph had intended to refer to the inhabitants of both the heavens and the earth, how would (or could) he have worded it differently?
Vance Posted February 5, 2011 Posted February 5, 2011 Vance,Doesn't the same supposed ambiguity apply to Ether 4:9? Do you wish to argue that "the inhabitants thereof" in that verse also refer to inhabitants of both heaven and earth?Not at all. The insertion of a ";" clearly demarks the phrases there. I'm not going to camp on this grammatical point endlessly. The argument I present is much bigger than this one point.I understand that.Your other point is about the presence of gods on the earth. However, Jesus did say, speaking to human beings, "Ye are gods", and Paul did say, "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,).
zerinus Posted February 5, 2011 Posted February 5, 2011 Perhaps D&C 76 sounds Deuteronomic-like because it is influenced by Deuteronomy. Just a possibility!I don't think it is correct that the "inhabitants" in D&C 76:1 are inhabitants of both heaven and earth.
zerinus Posted February 5, 2011 Posted February 5, 2011 So it's "Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants [only of the latter, but for you in heaven no rejoicing],""Thereof" literally means "of it" or "of that," not "of them". It is singular; and in a sentence such as the one cited above, it refers to the nearest antecedent, which happens to be earth, not heaven.
David Bokovoy Posted February 5, 2011 Author Posted February 5, 2011 "Thereof" literally means "of it" or "of that," not "of them". It is singular; and in a sentence such as the one cited above, it refers to the nearest antecedent, which happens to be earth, not heaven.Nonsense! I simply cannot let this slide. The English term
Rob Bowman Posted February 5, 2011 Posted February 5, 2011 Vance,Regarding Ether 4:9, you wrote:Not at all. The insertion of a ";" clearly demarks the phrases there.There is also a semicolon separating "and at my command the inhabitants thereof shall pass away, even so as by fire
Rob Bowman Posted February 5, 2011 Posted February 5, 2011 David,You are correct about thereof. It can refer back to a plurality of referents, as in 3 Nephi 9:8:"And behold, the city of Gadiandi, and the city of Gadiomnah, and the city of Jacob, and the city of Gimgimno, all these have I caused to be sunk, and made hills and valleys in the places thereof; and the inhabitants thereof have I buried up in the depths of the earth...."Here "thereof" refers twice to a plurality of "places," specifically the four cities mentioned.That having been said, where taking "thereof" to refer to the closest antecedent alone makes sense of the sentence, that is probably how we should take it. See my recent reply to Vance for how this consideration combines with others in favor of my exegesis of D&C 76:1.Nonsense! I simply cannot let this slide. The English term
David Bokovoy Posted February 5, 2011 Author Posted February 5, 2011 Hello Rob,While I appreciate the thoughtful critique, I have a different perspective on these issues.I don't agree about the grammar of D&C 76:1. I think grammatically "Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof," is easily understood grammatically such that "thereof" refers to the earth alone. In this regard the text would be similar to the following:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.