Using The Term 'anti' To Describe Someone

[theplains]

I have seen the use of the term 'anti-Mormon' to denote someone who is rather hostile 

to the LDS faith.  But in Alma 23:16-17, Aaron and the priests come up with a new name 

for a converted group of people; and they are called Anti-Nephi-Lehies.

 

Can 'anti' be used with both positive and negative connotations?  Are there other instances

where 'anti' is a friendly portrayal?

 

Thanks,

Jim

[Scott Lloyd]

My belief is that it's not intended to be seen as the same word. I think that anti- in anti-Nephi-Lehies is a transliteration from the Nephite language and has a meaning of which we latter-day readers are unaware.

 

Of course, I have no way to prove that. But consider the words in the Book of Mormon that have a-n-t-i or something close to it as part of their spelling. Two that come to mind are Manti and onti.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[CV75]

 

I have seen the use of the term 'anti-Mormon' to denote someone who is rather hostile 

to the LDS faith.  But in Alma 23:16-17, Aaron and the priests come up with a new name 

for a converted group of people; and they are called Anti-Nephi-Lehies.

 

Can 'anti' be used with both positive and negative connotations?  Are there other instances

where 'anti' is a friendly portrayal?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

Anti-M was a nice character in the wizard of Oz

[mnn727]

 

I have seen the use of the term 'anti-Mormon' to denote someone who is rather hostile 

to the LDS faith.  But in Alma 23:16-17, Aaron and the priests come up with a new name 

for a converted group of people; and they are called Anti-Nephi-Lehies.

 

Can 'anti' be used with both positive and negative connotations?  Are there other instances

where 'anti' is a friendly portrayal?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

Anti does not always mean 'against' it also means 'after'

 

Antediluvian

 

antebellum 

[Scott Lloyd]

Anti does not always mean 'against' it also means 'after'

Antediluvian

antebellum

It doesn't mean after, it means before or prior to. In your examples, antediluvian means before the flood, and antebellum means before the Civil War.

Moreover, anti- and ante- are not the same prefix.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[mnn727]

You are right, I meant 'before' -- regardless, I was pointing out that words or even prefixes do not only have 1 meaning.

 

as far as different spellings: divers  is in the BoM where it actually means diverse, they were not out diving.

Edited July 25, 2015 by mnn727

[Scott Lloyd]

You are right, I meant 'before'

 

as far as different spellings: neither is divers and diverse yet the first is in the BoM where it actually means the second

But in the case of ante- and anti-, they are very different in meaning and cannot be considered the same word or different forms of the same word.

The "ante-Nicene fathers," for example, are the Christian leaders who pre-dated the Nicene Creed, not ones who were against the creed.

[thesometimesaint]

 

I have seen the use of the term 'anti-Mormon' to denote someone who is rather hostile 

to the LDS faith.  But in Alma 23:16-17, Aaron and the priests come up with a new name 

for a converted group of people; and they are called Anti-Nephi-Lehies.

 

Can 'anti' be used with both positive and negative connotations?  Are there other instances

where 'anti' is a friendly portrayal?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

 

We of course don't know for sure what the peoples of the Book of Mormon meant by the prefix Anti. It obviously doesn't have the same meaning in modern day English. But even in English it doesn't always mean against. IE; Antiparticles are not against normal particles. They just carry an opposite electrical charge

Edited July 25, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[mnn727]

But in the case of ante- and anti-, they are very different in meaning and cannot be considered the same word or different forms of the same word.

 

Neither can 'divers' or 'diverse' they are 2 totally different words, yet no one can mistake that one was meant to be the other

 

My point is the JS was apparently a terrible speller at least at the point he was translating the BoM, and his scribes made mistakes also.

[Scott Lloyd]

Neither can 'divers' or 'diverse' they are 2 totally different words, yet no one can mistake that one was meant to be the other

 

My point is the JS was apparently a terrible speller at least at the point he was translating the BoM, and his scribes made mistakes also.

Divers is not an incorrect spelling. It is an archaic spelling that is consistent with the old English King James Bible style and phrasing into which the Book of Mormon was translated.

 

See here for a definition of divers.

 

Is this another instance of anti-Mormons being too quick to impute error to Joseph Smith, as with the silly argument about the use of adieu in the Book of Mormon?

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

We of course don't know for sure what the peoples of the Book of Mormon meant by the prefix Anti. It obviously doesn't have the same meaning in modern day English. But even in English it doesn't always mean against. IE; Antiparticles are not against normal particles. They just carry an opposite electrical charge

Anti- does mean "opposite" as well as "against." So there is nothing irregular about its use in the example you cite.

 

See here.

[PeterPear]

My belief is that it's not intended to be seen as the same word. I think that anti- in anti-Nephi-Lehies is a transliteration from the Nephite language and has a meaning of which we latter-day readers are unaware.

 

Of course, I have no way to prove that. But consider the words in the Book of Mormon that have a-n-t-i or something close to it as part of their spelling. Two that come to mind are Manti and onti.

Unaware? Maybe for you.

The Book of Mormon is quite clear: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/23.17?lang=eng#16

"Anti" means the opposite of. Such as Korihor the Anti-Christ.

They no longer called themselves Lamanites. So what were they? They weren't Nephites.

They refused to call themselves after Laman which denoted "rebellious." So they called themselves Anti-Nephites who were descendants of Lehi to distinguish Nephites who were mixed descendants of Mulek. "Anti-Nephi-Lehite."

See also the village of Ani-Anti: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&start=1&end=10&query=Anti-

[Scott Lloyd]

Unaware? Maybe for you.

The Book of Mormon is quite clear: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/23.17?lang=eng#16

"Anti" means the opposite of. Such as Korihor the Anti-Christ.

They no longer called themselves Lamanites. So what were they? They weren't Nephites.

They refused to call themselves after Laman which denoted "rebellious." So they called themselves Anti-Nephites who were descendants of Lehi to distinguish Nephites who were mixed descendants of Mulek. "Anti-Nephi-Lehite."

See also the village of Ani-Anti: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&start=1&end=10&query=Anti-

Though anti-Christ is obviously using the English (derived from the Latin) prefix, I still say that anti in anti-Nephi-Lehies is likely a transliteration of a Nephite word that is not the same as our anti-. The anti-Nephi-Lehies were definitely not opposed to Nephites, so the meaning you want to ascribe to it doesn't work in that usage.

 

I suppose we'll never have the definitive statement on this, though. Not in your or my lifetime, at any rate.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[thesometimesaint]

Anti- does mean "opposite" as well as "against." So there is nothing irregular about its use in the example you cite.

 

See here.

 

That's what I said. "It doesn't ALWAYS mean against".

[ERayR]

Unaware? Maybe for you.

The Book of Mormon is quite clear: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/23.17?lang=eng#16

"Anti" means the opposite of. Such as Korihor the Anti-Christ.

They no longer called themselves Lamanites. So what were they? They weren't Nephites.

They refused to call themselves after Laman which denoted "rebellious." So they called themselves Anti-Nephites who were descendants of Lehi to distinguish Nephites who were mixed descendants of Mulek. "Anti-Nephi-Lehite."

See also the village of Ani-Anti: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&start=1&end=10&query=Anti-

 

Not opposite it means opposed (i.e. Korihor the Anti-Christ means Korihor opposed to Christ).

 

Their traditions made them opposed to Nephi but they were not opposed to Lehi.

[Scott Lloyd]

That's what I said. "It doesn't ALWAYS mean against".

"against" and "opposite to" are very close in meaning.

[Scott Lloyd]

Not opposite it means opposed (i.e. Korihor the Anti-Christ means Korihor opposed to Christ).

 

Their traditions made them opposed to Nephi but they were not opposed to Lehi.

That strikes me as a stretch. At the time the name was applied to them, they were not opposed either to Nephi or Lehi.

 

(Note to ttribe: Here is an instance where ERayR and I disagree. So I'm afraid I must shatter your preconception.)

[Calm]

https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/onoma/index.php/ANTI-NEPHI-LEHI

"If anti is a transliteration, it might come from the EGYPTIAN relative marker nty (Coptic ente) meaning "which is," which can be nominalized as "that which is". Since the gentilic of the term is used in the plural, if it were pluralized as EGYPTIAN it should be ntyw. This would mean something like "those who are Nephi-Lehi". In later stages of EGYPTIAN, the relative marker and the genitive marker were confused. If this term derived from such a situation, it would mean something like "those of Nephi-Lehi".

If anti is a translation, the meaning could be “facing Nephi-Lehi,” from the HEBREW word that means approximately “anti,” (neged), i.e., “facing, opposite, etc.” (HWN). It is the HEBREW Vorlage in Genesis 2:18 of “help meet.” (The Greek Vorlage of English “anti” can mean “opposite, against, in exchange, instead, representing, rivaling, simulating.” See OED.) Perhaps from such considerations, it has been suggested that the significance of ANTI-NEPHI-LEHI is “those who imitate the teachings of the descendants of NEPHI and LEHI” (Ludlow, A Companion to Your Study of the Book of Mormon, 210).

Hugh Nibley suggested to one of his classes that anti might come from Arabic inda which, like Greek anti, means "opposite". Since this root is not found in other Semitic languages, it may actually be a borrowing from Greek.

Taken as a translation, and separating the group Nephi-Lehi, it might mean "descendants of Lehi opposed to Nephi". (JG)

It has also been suggested, *without attestation, that “Anta-Anti,” is an old Indian word, “a mountain region in the land of Nephi in the land of Lehi” (CBM, III, 366)."

Edited July 25, 2015 by calmoriah

[Scott Lloyd]

https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/onoma/index.php/ANTI-NEPHI-LEHI

"If anti is a transliteration, it might come from the EGYPTIAN relative marker nty (Coptic ente) meaning "which is," which can be nominalized as "that which is". Since the gentilic of the term is used in the plural, if it were pluralized as EGYPTIAN it should be ntyw. This would mean something like "those who are Nephi-Lehi". In later stages of EGYPTIAN, the relative marker and the genitive marker were confused. If this term derived from such a situation, it would mean something like "those of Nephi-Lehi".

If anti is a translation, the meaning could be “facing Nephi-Lehi,” from the HEBREW word that means approximately “anti,” (neged), i.e., “facing, opposite, etc.” (HWN). It is the HEBREW Vorlage in Genesis 2:18 of “help meet.” (The Greek Vorlage of English “anti” can mean “opposite, against, in exchange, instead, representing, rivaling, simulating.” See OED.) Perhaps from such considerations, it has been suggested that the significance of ANTI-NEPHI-LEHI is “those who imitate the teachings of the descendants of NEPHI and LEHI” (Ludlow, A Companion to Your Study of the Book of Mormon, 210).

Hugh Nibley suggested to one of his classes that anti might come from Arabic inda which, like Greek anti, means "opposite". Since this root is not found in other Semitic languages, it may actually be a borrowing from Greek.

Taken as a translation, and separating the group Nephi-Lehi, it might mean "descendants of Lehi opposed to Nephi". (JG)

It has also been suggested, *without attestation, that “Anta-Anti,” is an old Indian word, “a mountain region in the land of Nephi in the land of Lehi” (CBM, III, 366)."

Interesting. Thanks for citing this scholarship.

 

I note that there is no definitive explanation, and I'm glad to see that scholars allow for my transliteration theory.

[ERayR]

Interesting. Thanks for citing this scholarship.

 

I note that there is no definitive explanation, and I'm glad to see that scholars allow for my transliteration theory.

 

And my opposed to Nephi theory.

[PeterPear]

Though anti-Christ is obviously using the English (derived from the Latin) prefix, I still say that anti in anti-Nephi-Lehies is likely a transliteration of a Nephite word that is not the same as our anti-. The anti-Nephi-Lehies were definitely not opposed to Nephites, so the meaning you want to ascribe to it doesn't work in that usage.

I suppose we'll never have the definitive statement on this, though. Not in your or my lifetime, at any rate.

So you're claiming the Book of Mormon is "anti-consistent."

You have every right to your opinion the Book of Mormon is wrong and your'e the one who is correct. Even throughout your lifetime and into Eternity.

A "Nephi-Lehite" is a Nephite of a pure descent of Lehi. Such as the Prophet Mormon.

An "Anti-Nephi" is a Lamanite who refused to call him or her after Laman. A "Lamanite" is a pure descendant of Lehi.

An (Anti-Nephite) = (Lamanite) who refuses to call him or her self after Laman, an d therefore is a (Anti-Nephi)-Lehite.

In other words an Anti-Nephi is a Lamanite opposed or "Anti" to naming themselves a Lamanite. It has nothing to do with being opposed to the Nephites as the text clearly indicates they embraced the Nephites and rejected their Father's (Laman's) false traditions.

Good luck with believing the Book of Mormon is wrong due to your transliteration theory.

Edited July 25, 2015 by PeterPear

[Scott Lloyd]

So you're claiming the Book of Mormon is "anti-consistent."

You have every right to your opinion the Book of Mormon is wrong and your'e the one who is correct. Even throughout your lifetime and into Eternity.

A "Nephi-Lehite" is a Nephite of a pure descent of Lehi. Such as the Prophet Mormon.

An "Anti-Nephi" is a Lamanite who refused to call him or her after Laman. A "Lamanite" is a pure descendant of Lehi.

An (Anti-Nephite) = (Lamanite) who refuses to call him or her self after Laman, an d therefore is a (Anti-Nephi)-Lehite.

In other words an Anti-Nephi is a Lamanite opposed or "Anti" to naming themselves a Lamanite. It has nothing to do with being opposed to the Nephites as the text clearly indicates they embraced the Nephites and rejected their Father's (Laman's) false traditions.

Good luck with believing the Book of Mormon is wrong due to your transliteration theory.

You're not making sense.

Calmoriah just showed us that scholars acknowledge there is no definitive explanation, and they allow for my transliteration theory among others.

And your claim that my theory means I believe the Book of Mormon to be wrong is weird. Are you, by chance, a Meldrumite?

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[ERayR]

So you're claiming the Book of Mormon is "anti-consistent."

You have every right to your opinion the Book of Mormon is wrong and your'e the one who is correct. Even throughout your lifetime and into Eternity.

A "Nephi-Lehite" is a Nephite of a pure descent of Lehi. Such as the Prophet Mormon.

An "Anti-Nephi" is a Lamanite who refused to call him or her after Laman. A "Lamanite" is a pure descendant of Lehi.

An (Anti-Nephite) = (Lamanite) who refuses to call him or her self after Laman, an d therefore is a (Anti-Nephi)-Lehite.

In other words an Anti-Nephi is a Lamanite opposed or "Anti" to naming themselves a Lamanite. It has nothing to do with being opposed to the Nephites as the text clearly indicates they embraced the Nephites and rejected their Father's (Laman's) false traditions.

Good luck with believing the Book of Mormon is wrong due to your transliteration theory.

 

Huh.

[PeterPear]

Scott Lloyd claims a Meldrumite believes the Book of Mormon is correct? You're promoting them in a good light.

I'm also labeled as a "Christian" and a "Mormon" used as a derogatory label by those opposed to the Faith.

I'm following the text of the Book of Mormon. If you don't want to follow it, that's your choice.

You know very well that there were Nephite dissenters living among the Lamanites. Amalekites and Amulonites, for example.

All the converts due to the missionary efforts of the Sons of Mosiah were Lamanites except for one, an Amalekite. (Alma 23:14)

The converted Lamanites were looking for a NAME to distinguish themselves from their unconverted Lamanite brethren.

Therefore, they choose Anti-Nephi and the added -Lehi at the end of it to distinguish themselves from the Nephite dissenters, the Amalekites and Amulonites, who were considered by Nephites to also be Lamanites.

So an Anti-Nephi-Lehite has several connotations; Anti-Nephi = Lamanite. Lamanite-Lehite which means a Lamanite directly descendant from Lehi. Not a Lamanite-Nephite-dissenter.

Good Luck with your conversion to the Book of Mormon, whom you call Meldrumites!

Edited July 25, 2015 by PeterPear

[PeterPear]

Huh.

Huh? Well, Bro. Lloyd claims the use of Anti- in the Book of Mormon is inconsistent between Anti-Christ and Anti-Nephi-Lehi.

I know he doesn't actually believe the Book of Mormon is inconsistent; he's just trying to defend his earlier statement about "Anti-."

Edited July 25, 2015 by PeterPear