Thee, Thy, Thou - Archaic English - Essential To L D S Prayer

[Rob Osborn]

Oh, and BTW, lawyers, the learned and politicians both have made the english language puffed up and corrupted. Oh thank heavens for the Dr. Suess books! b

[thesometimesaint]

That's another thing: Comparing the leaders of the Church, and those who desire to follow them, to the unrighteous Zoramites of the Book of Mormon is offensive.

 

It is my Rameumptom and I'll whine if I want to.

[thesometimesaint]

I respectfully disagree with opinion and still honor him as a man of God. From what he said he basically equated things children do as "childish" in the context of "ignorance" and as such we should learn how to do things right. I have a lot of problems with his take on the matter. For one thing, man has made the rules of "english" and not God! Its whats "conveyed" from the heart, that is all that matters. We dont have to abide by special "formal" man made rules in addressing God. This is one reason childrens prayers actually have more focused power and affect with God because theybtruly speak or "convey" the words of the heart. My mother used to record everything in journals including who said family prayers and how prayers were answered. Now that I am older I go back and read the miracles that came from a childs humble prayer. There is no "childish" in how a child prays. We could actually learn a lot from listening to the prayers of children who truly possess no flowery or "formal" distinction in language. Its only when we grow up that we start hearing speech rules that man has made up to sound more formal. It amazes me how Native Americans in their speech use true pure speech laboring in no instance, or not many, to use "pretty sounding" speech. They are slower, more methodical, yet also simpler in their speech. In my opinion their soeech is closer to God because they speak with greater authority by not having so many rules, manmade, that would make their speech "puffed" up like ours.

 

Agreed.

[Ahab]

The point is, formality and being intimate and loving are not necessarily mutually exclusive, particularly when it comes to approaching Deity.

Yes, that is the point, and I will state it even more boldly. Formality is an indication of deep respect, love and intimacy. The problem is that some people think formalities need only apply until a relationship becomes intimate, as if it's no longer necessary to use a formal language.

It kinda reminds me of a scene from the movie 'The King and I' (or was it 'Anna and the King') when the woman was saying it was no longer necessary to bow to the king. For my king, I will still bow.

[Scott Lloyd]

Do you use thee and thou in your other intimate and loving relationships? If not, why not?

You mean my relationships with people who are not God? No, because they are not God.

 

Next question?

Edited January 23, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Ahab]

Do you use thee and thou in your other intimate and loving relationships? If not, why not?

Try asking if formalities are a good thing to use in intimate and loving relationships. I don't use the same formalities in all of my intimate and loving relationships, but I do use certain formalities with each one, or with each type.

With God I use a formal language for prayer, and some other formal gestures.

With my wife I use another formal language, and some other formal gestures.

And with some others I use some other forms of formal languages and gestures.

[mfbukowski]

When you say hello to a former bishop of yours do you say "Hey Bob- what's happening dude?"

[Damien the Leper]

Heck no!  Quite the contrary.  I find your search for truth earnest and fascinating.  I too value our friendship and wouldn't do anything to hurt that.  True searchers jump around from one truth model to another, and it sounds like now you are in some kind of perhaps Anglican mode?  Your comments on communion were pretty interesting but obviously not.....   very "LDS".   I consider myself "weird" and meant that as one weirdo to another.  You remind me very much of myself when I was younger.  The hippies of old called themselves "freaks" proudly- and that is the way I meant "weird".  So greetings from one "freak" to another!

I prefer the term Orthodox. I align most of my theological preferences with those who recognize a continuing apostolic succession as opposed to a break in such a succession.

[Rob Osborn]

You mean my relationships with people who are not God? No, because they are not God.

 

Next question?

It appears from just a simple approach to understanding scripture that the same type of language is used to address bot our fellow man and God. It appears that there is no "formal" language in the scriptures and that "thee, thine, thy and thou" were used in speaking to all people. So why do we now have a "prayer language" with certain words where it appears we never used to?

[Rob Osborn]

I found the lyrics to this song of interest- (A Child's Prayer)

http://www.lds.org/music/library/childrens-songbook/a-childs-prayer?lang=eng

1. Heavenly Father, are you really there?

And do you hear and answer ev'ry child's prayer?

Some say that heaven is far away, But I feel it close around me as I pray.

Heavenly Father, I remember now Something that Jesus told disciples long ago:

"Suffer the children to come to me." Father, in prayer I'm coming now to thee.

This classic childrens song about prayer starts with just that- addressing Heavenly Father with the words "you". Forget formalities, this is the language of angels!

[Ahab]

It appears from just a simple approach to understanding scripture that the same type of language is used to address bot our fellow man and God. It appears that there is no "formal" language in the scriptures and that "thee, thine, thy and thou" were used in speaking to all people. So why do we now have a "prayer language" with certain words where it appears we never used to?

It does seem to be a modern convention, but at least it is with good intentions. Can you get on board with the idea with that mindset or would you rather just go around saying that this is just silly?

[Yirgacheffe]

When you say hello to a former bishop of yours do you say "Hey Bob- what's happening dude?"

Do you say "what's happening dude" to anyone?  I just can't see how pronouns such as "you" are in anyway equivalent to slang words like dude.

[Rob Osborn]

It does seem to be a modern convention, but at least it is with good intentions. Can you get on board with the idea with that mindset or would you rather just go around saying that this is just silly?

I have no problem with saying thee thine thou in prayers just as i have no problem with saying you or your. I find it problematic however when we start making rules for addressing deity that is somehow more "proper" that apparently never was seen this way in the past.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Rob Osborn

[Storm Rider]

Do you say "what's happening dude" to anyone?  I just can't see how pronouns such as "you" are in anyway equivalent to slang words like dude.

 

I think the context of the question, and I could be wrong, is based on social formalities. The LDS generally have a formality when addressing God in prayer; Catholics have formalities in the way they address their clergy. Why is one formality acceptable and the other is not? That is the gist of the comments/questions. 

Edited January 23, 2014 by Storm Rider

[Thinking]

When you say hello to a former bishop of yours do you say "Hey Bob- what's happening dude?"

 

Yep. Except his name is not Bob.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

When I was growing up LDS, we were taught some curious things. Among them, that we must use archaic pronouns when addressing “Heavenly Father” in prayer. The reason was these pronouns supposedly expressed the reverence and formality due God.

My sister & her husband (devout LDS) pray in this manner and have likewise instructed their kids—who (most of the time) dutifully bow their heads, fold their arms and via their speech turn the clock back to William Tyndale & early 16th century England.

It’s led to some interesting conversation because her kids have picked up the fact our family also prays but without following LDS protocol, and that’s lead to questions. My sister provides the same explanation I heard growing up—use of thee, thou, etc. is the formal, reverent way to address God and therefore my family doesn’t do it right (albeit in a gentle way which doesn’t produce tension among young cousins—which I appreciate).

AS it happens, the truth is exactly 100% the opposite. Those pronouns were never formal—they were always informal for casual speech as you would have with a friend (“you” is formal). The ancient Greek language of the New Testament had no distinction of formal vs. informal pronouns. And as David Daniell explains in his remarkable history of the English language Bible, The Bible in English—Tyndale was faced with a choice, and he deliberately chose the informal pronouns to make the theological point that the reader could have a close personal relationship with God. And the King James Version translators persisted those pronouns—even though by 1611 they had already fallen into disuse in the vernacular.

White is black, up is down, and informal is formal. Her children have no idea the air of religious solemnity they create is antithetical to the actual meaning of their words, to say nothing of the intent of Tyndale or the KJV translators.

Here’s a question for the board: Should they know? If not, why not?

--Erik

Five, is your problem about how we pray, or do you have issues with Tyndale, I use this type of wording in my poems, because it has a greater rhythm and such beauty. Edited January 23, 2014 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[volgadon]

Okay, I'll accept that correction, but the point is that it is a formal language we LDS use to speak intimately and lovingly with our Father.

 

Russian has lost this, but in Ukrainian one refers to one's parents and grandparents with the formal, respectful "vy," not the informal "ty." One can be both formal, and intimate, as you've noted.

[mfbukowski]

Do you say "what's happening dude" to anyone?

No you're right. 

 

It would have been "What's the haps, dude?" to get it grammatically correct. 

[mfbukowski]

I think the context of the question, and I could be wrong, is based on social formalities. The LDS generally have a formality when addressing God in prayer; Catholics have formalities in the way they address their clergy. Why is one formality acceptable and the other is not? That is the gist of the comments/questions. 

Yes thanks.

 

My actual point was that we have respectful forms of speech we use all the time, according to the right context.  I was jokingly giving an absurd example to show how out of context it would be to speak that way - using street slang- in a church context speaking to someone you respect.

 

The point was that we should also address God with respect.

[mfbukowski]

Yep. Except his name is not Bob.

Well I can see that goes with the Dodger logo.

 

That's LA-speak!

[mfbukowski]

Russian has lost this, but in Ukrainian one refers to one's parents and grandparents with the formal, respectful "vy," not the informal "ty." One can be both formal, and intimate, as you've noted.

Reminds me of a Randy Newman song-  I won't quote the lyric here but it has something to do with a hat. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Yes thanks.

 

My actual point was that we have respectful forms of speech we use all the time, according to the right context.  I was jokingly giving an absurd example to show how out of context it would be to speak that way - using street slang- in a church context speaking to someone you respect.

 

The point was that we should also address God with respect.

And who disagrees with you that we should show respect to God? The point is that Thee / Thou / and other archaic words are not needed to show respect to God and have no scriptural basis. If people want to adopt this usage as a way of showing respect, more power to them, but it is definitely not necessary.

Edited January 23, 2014 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Rob Osborn]

And who disagrees with you that we should show respect to God? The point is that Thee / Thou / and other archaic words are not needed to show respect to God and have no scriptural basis. If people want to adopt this usage as a way of showing respect, more power to them, but it is definitely not necessary.

I agree.

[Rob Osborn]

I personally think God would have us all speak with the same language, dignity and respect whether we were addressing God,  the courts, our fellow man in the world or even a wicked person in prison. This certainly seems to be the pattern in scripture. Reading back over Oak's talk I find it interesting that he said he developed special language as a lawyer and in how he addressed the judge and equated this to also how we should learn how to speak with a special language with God. But, this doesn't apply accross the board, especially within God's kingdom here on earth. For instance- how do we address our bishop? Do we use special language only reserved for him? Is he not also a common judge in Israel? And yet, we do not appease his presence with "your honor" or anything like that. No, we speak to him the same as we speak to the prophet if we have the chance encounter or to Sister so and so in the ward. The scriptures speak little on how we should pray to Heavenly Father and nowhere in all of scripture does it teach us to use a different language when addressing God. In fact, the pattern set forth is to use normal language but be humble and sincere with real intent.

[mfbukowski]

And who disagrees with you that we should show respect to God? The point is that Thee / Thou / and other archaic words are not needed to show respect to God and have no scriptural basis. If people want to adopt this usage as a way of showing respect, more power to them, but it is definitely not necessary.

Honestly, who are you to tell others what they think is necessary to express respect to God?  That's a pretty audacious statement.

 

Maybe I think it is not necessary for you to pray or go to the temple- would you listen?