Jump to content

War poured out starting with Civil War


cdowis

Recommended Posts

On 10/9/2018 at 11:02 PM, sunstoned said:

No trap.  Just a straight forward reading of what was written.

You have made it quite clear that your interest lies in debate, to showcase your rhetorical skills,  rather than to obtain  understanding and knowledge.. 

Hint:
Similar to poetry, one cannot understand the scriptures with a "straight forward reading."  Therein lies the trap.

Anyway, I give you the last word, and wish you all the best.

Edited by cdowis
Link to comment
On 10/8/2018 at 10:41 PM, longview said:

This was the war that greatly united the German Confederation which led to a massive military threat against the rest of Europe.  When the Russians pulled out of WW I, the Germans were able to shift 50 divisions to the Western Front.  The entry of the US in 1917 was providential.

At some point it becomes pointless to try and understand prophecies about cause-and-effect historical events, because ultimately history is everything that happened, in the order it happened.  Add in vague terminology and ill-defined time frames, and all bets are off.

 

Link to comment
On 10/9/2018 at 12:17 PM, cinepro said:

Ah, the Civil War prophecy!

First, you should familiarize yourself with the environment in which this prophecy was made. Specifically, Joseph Smith made his prediction in 1832 right as the Nullification Crisis was occupying the national mind. What’s that? You aren’t familiar with the “Nullification Crisis” of 1832? Here is some background.

Nullification Crisis

Nullification Crisis

Nullification Crisis

Then consider other subsequent parts of the prophecy:

The Southern States call upon Great Britain

A possible hit for Joseph?

Ummm…no. That didn’t happen.

Ummm…no. That didn’t happen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

More here…

History of Slave Rebellions

(Notice the Turner rebellion in 1831, with no notable rebellions during the Civil War)

 

Who are the “remnants”? Who are the “Gentiles”? When did these remnants “marshal themselves” and “vex” the “Gentiles”?

Honestly, by any reasonable measure, things are drastically better all over the world since the Civil War.

And “end of all nations”….? It probably sounded foreboding in 1832, with the second coming just around the corner and all that, but 186 years later, most nations seem to be doing just fine, with little worry of “ending” any time soon.

So if I have to spell it out for you, let’s go through verse by verse and see how many specific claims Section 87 (the Prophecy on the Civil War) contains, and how many are “hits”:

The nullification crisis of 1832 (just months before this revelation was given) provides ample context for this prophecy. Also, the term “shortly” is certainly debatable. But we can call it a “hit”.

1/1 (Hits/Claims)

The American Civil War did not “pour out war upon all nations”. Not even Britain and France got really involved.

http://www.civilwarhome.com/europeandcivilwar.htm

That’s a miss.

1/2

Yup. Yup. Nope. Nope.

3/5

Nope.

3/6

Nope. Nope. Nope.

3/9

This is pretty dramatic stuff, but “all nations” seem to be doing fine, by and large. We’ll just say he’s 0/2, and not break down each prophecy in the verse.

3/11

 

I have no idea what he meant by this, so if you can explain it, it could be a “hit”.

 

The “day of the Lord” hasn’t come yet. I’m gonna say that “185+ years” does not equal “quickly”, and call this a miss. You can stretch “quickly” as long as you like and call it a hit, but that’s more of a stretch than I could make.

3/12

So of the 12+ distinct portions of the prophecy contained in Section 87, Joseph Smith only got 3 right, and even that involves a stretch of the word “shortly”, and ignoring the contemporary Nullification Crisis as a probable “inspiration”.

In short, the “Civil War” prophecy would be the prophetic equivalent of (current LDS Prophet) President Nelson seeing a weather forecast for a hurricane in Florida, and prophesying that a hurricane was going to soon wipe all of Flordia into the ocean. Then the hurricane dies out, and nothing happens. 30 years later, a small monsoon hits Florida, and causes a little damage. Church members point to President Nelson’s prophecy as being fulfilled, conveniently ignoring the part about Florida being wiped into the ocean.

The nullification crises may have provided context, but the part about the war ending in the “death and misery of many souls” is quite remarkable considering that many thought the war would be over in a month when it began in 1861.  In fact, many volunteers had to be turned away because so many feared the war would end too quickly and they would lose their chance to fight.

The irony for those dismissing the prophecy due to the nullification crises, is that if the war had in fact started in the 1830’s, it wouldn’t have ended in the “death and misery of many souls”.  The military technology that separated the 1830’s and 1860’s isn’t comparable.

Great Britain sent troops to Canada and threatened war when Lincoln captured Cinfederate Diplomates on international waters.  They were headed to Britain to establish diplomatic relations and make their case for Britain to ally itself with the CSA.  Nowhere does the prophecy make the claim that Britain would take an active role.

As for slaves rising up against their masters...what part of 150,000 blacks being enlisted into the Union army doesn’t fulfill the prophecy?  It’s even more remarkable considering that the idea of black troops would’ve been unthinkable in 1832–and it I’m actuallity caused a great deal of contention even in 1863.  The notion that blacks fought for the South is false.  I defy anyone to show an example where armed blacks served in the Confederate army.  They served as hospital corpsman mostly, and essentially did slave work with the promise of freedom once the war ended.   It’s not the same thing at all.

Petersburg is often called the “dress rehearsal” for the trench warfare that characterized the First World War only 54 years later.  Incidentally, that was also a war nobody thought would last longer than a month.  The Second World War redrew the world map, and birthed the United Nations.  Most populists complain about the phenomenon known as “globalism” that robs the national sovereignty of the US...Nobody in the 1830’s could possibly have foreseen the destruction of the 20th century.

Its a pretty good prophecy I think

Edited by SteveO
Link to comment
56 minutes ago, SteveO said:

The nullification crises may have provided context, but the part about the war ending in the “death and misery of many souls” is quite remarkable considering that many thought the war would be over in a month when it began in 1861.  In fact, many volunteers had to be turned away because so many feared the war would end too quickly and they would lose their chance to fight.

The irony for those dismissing the prophecy due to the nullification crises, is that if the war had in fact started in the 1830’s, it wouldn’t have ended in the “death and misery of many souls”.  The military technology that separated the 1830’s and 1860’s isn’t comparable.

I called verse 1 a "hit."  I'm glad you agree.

Quote

Great Britain sent troops to Canada and threatened war when Lincoln captured Cinfederate Diplomates on international waters.  They were headed to Britain to establish diplomatic relations and make their case for Britain to ally itself with the CSA.  Nowhere does the prophecy make the claim that Britain would take an active role.

Verse 3 seems to pretty clearly predict the war spreading to "all nations" as a result of Great Britain getting involved.  If you read it differently, that's fine.

Quote

As for slaves rising up against their masters...what part of 150,000 blacks being enlisted into the Union army doesn’t fulfill the prophecy?  It’s even more remarkable considering that the idea of black troops would’ve been unthinkable in 1832–and it I’m actuallity caused a great deal of contention even in 1863.  The notion that blacks fought for the South is false.  I defy anyone to show an example where armed blacks served in the Confederate army.  They served as hospital corpsman mostly, and essentially did slave work with the promise of freedom once the war ended.   It’s not the same thing at all.

Petersburg is often called the “dress rehearsal” for the trench warfare that characterized the First World War only 54 years later.  Incidentally, that was also a war nobody thought would last longer than a month.  The Second World War redrew the world map, and birthed the United Nations.  Most populists complain about the phenomenon known as “globalism” that robs the national sovereignty of the US...Nobody in the 1830’s could possibly have foreseen the destruction of the 20th century.

Its a pretty good prophecy I think

If you look at the black Union soldiers as being "slaves rising up against their masters", that's fine.  To me, that seems to be describing actual slaves rising up against their actual masters, as in a slave rebellion, which I point out had happened shortly before the prophecy was made.

Link to comment
14 hours ago, cinepro said:

I called verse 1 a "hit."  I'm glad you agree.

I took it as a “mulligan”, you didn’t sound very convinced.  It’s a pretty solid hit.

Verse 3 seems to pretty clearly predict the war spreading to "all nations" as a result of Great Britain getting involved.  If you read it differently, that's fine.

I’ve never heard of anyone reading that the American Civil War would spread across the globe.  I read it as the wars preceding the second coming.

 

If you look at the black Union soldiers as being "slaves rising up against their masters", that's fine.  To me, that seems to be describing actual slaves rising up against their actual masters, as in a slave rebellion, which I point out had happened shortly before the prophecy was made.

There were 3 million slaves in 1861.  Those 150,000 blacks that served in the army were former slaves...who would they be fighting against if not their former masters?

 

Edited by SteveO
Link to comment
On 10/13/2018 at 12:27 PM, Anon the Great said:

SeekingUderstanding has brought to our attention the revelation was changed.  I have replace the word "then" with "thus" in the war prophecy.  The word "thus" divides the revelation between the physical and spiritual wars. If the Lord is going to give a prophecy on war, then He is going to reveal both kinds of wars, and the war in our souls is far more important, providing 22 more Chapters in Revelation to explain the kingdom of God within us in detail and how the spirit and soul operate:

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord concerning the wars that will shortly come to pass [on earth], beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina, which will eventually terminate in the death and misery of many souls;

**The wars on earth broke in many wars.  The Lord looks over hundreds of year and not just the short Civil War.  The LDS misleads others when they say this is the "Civil War" prophecy, but it is about all the wars that take place on the earth that has been and still are a continually disaster.  The Lord is the God of the whole earth, and not just the LDS Church.

2 And the time will come that war will be poured out upon all nations, beginning at this place.

**This is crystal clear.  We are still in the prophecy today.

3 For behold, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations;

**this is the Civil War 

and thus war shall be poured out upon all nations.

**This is the continual wars after the Civil War, including the two World Wars after that, including all wars today. This is the physical wars of the outer kingdom of God to teach us good and evil ideas.  Our nation was involved in both world wars and all the wars today.  A nation is the people not the land that goes to war.  Our people are involved in all the wars and crimes on the planet indirectly.  It is called the military industrial complex.  The Lord knows exactly what He is telling us. Then He changes from the physical view to the spiritual, inner-kingdom view of ideas and feelings: 

4 And it shall come to pass, after many days [in the light--change of focus with symbolic language], slaves shall rise up against their masters, who shall be marshaled and disciplined for war.

**The ideas are symbolic of the slave and master mentality we all live under, as the pyramid structures mentally are marshalled into intellectual wars inside the heart, as the Book of Revelation reveals the conflicts of the ideas and feelings of in spirit and soul and not the body..  The Lord's ideas of truth will prevail.  He gave this prophecy to the LDS Church to help them bridge to the Book of Revelation.

5 And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation.

In the book of Revelation, the saints are overcome by the inner dragon, beast, its mark (the love of money), false prophet, and the religions harlot, which is a sore vexation of the Gentiles.  The remnant are the few handful of leaders in the intellectual land that arrogantly believe the Biblical theologians and vex everyone else, especially the unbelieving Marxist or Communist for not believing in the Bible.  The atheists have rejected the dumb ideas created by theologians or the half-true sons of God that are full of the love of God.  The Gentile unbelievers are just trying to get away from the stupid ideas and live a reasonable and sane life.

6 And thus, with the sword and by bloodshed the inhabitants of the earth shall mourn; and with famine, and plague, and earthquake, and the thunder of heaven, and the fierce and vivid lightning also, shall the inhabitants of the earth be made to feel the wrath, and indignation, and chastening hand of an Almighty God, until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all nations;

**All of these ideas of the inner kingdom of God within us are explained in the 22 chapters of the Book of Revelation in detail.   Good and evil ideas act like people and organized books act like nations.  The final consumption decree is he His Word and ideas will replace all the nations of bad and evil ideas in our hearts that are intellectual darkness that create evil feelings.  

7 That the cry of the saints, and of the blood of the saints, shall cease to come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, from the earth, to be avenged of their enemies.

**The good ideas in the light will destroy the evil ideas and feelings within us by translation or by resurrection, in which Satan, or the evil one created in us, is removed from our souls.

8 Wherefore, stand ye in holy places, and be not moved, until the day of the Lord come; for behold, it cometh quickly, saith the Lord. Amen.

**Stand at Mount Sinai and Horeb (Holy Places) to wait until the Lord shows up in our soul with the light to teach us how to renew our minds in the light. This is not talking about His coming quickly in the outer kingdom, but the revelation is talking about how He comes to our spirits and souls in the inner kingdom.  The same idea is in the Book of Revelation in the first verses of Chapter 1 to make sure the LDS people connect this modern prophecy to the Book of Revelation.  When we go to the mountains, He comes quickly to start to process of destroying the bad ideas in His light.

**This is a true prophecy.  We cannot understood the Book of Revelation until we overcame the 7 tests and enter the first heaven, recorded in Chapter 4. 

I disagree.

Link to comment

I'll also add that I think part of the problem is that we're interpreting this verse from a modern-day perspective.

Early LDS, especially in 1832, lived in a different universe than we do, especially when it came to the millennium and end-of-days.  This is a good book on the subject:

The Millenarian World of Early Mormonism

Quote

This book provides the most detailed study yet of early Mormon thought about the "end times." Underwood shows how Mormonism from 1830 to 1846 was profoundly influenced by its views of an imminent second coming of Christ and millennial transformation of the earth. In particular, the book explores the ways in which early LDS interpretation of the Bible and the Book of Mormon affected, and was affected by, Mormon millennial doctrines.

If you went back in time to 1832 and asked Joseph Smith "So, is this revelation prophesying that there will be a civil war in America in about 30 years, and then after that's over, things will kind of continue on for another 55 years until there's a big war in Europe, and then after that is over things will be relatively peaceful until there's a huge war about 20 years later, but then the good-guys win that war and things are relatively quiet (and "cold"), with regional skirmishes but no major conflagrations, with Church members in 2018 living in a relatively peaceful world and still waiting for the second coming and the end of days...?"

While we don't know for sure what his response would be, I suspect it would be along the lines of :blink:.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, cinepro said:

I'll also add that I think part of the problem is that we're interpreting this verse from a modern-day perspective.

Early LDS, especially in 1832, lived in a different universe than we do, especially when it came to the millennium and end-of-days.  This is a good book on the subject:

The Millenarian World of Early Mormonism

If you went back in time to 1832 and asked Joseph Smith "So, is this revelation prophesying that there will be a civil war in America in about 30 years, and then after that's over, things will kind of continue on for another 55 years until there's a big war in Europe, and then after that is over things will be relatively peaceful until there's a huge war about 20 years later, but then the good-guys win that war and things are relatively quiet (and "cold"), with regional skirmishes but no major conflagrations, with Church members in 2018 living in a relatively peaceful world and still waiting for the second coming and the end of days...?"

While we don't know for sure what his response would be, I suspect it would be along the lines of :blink:.

I am not so sure. While I agree that the Saints thought the Second Coming very imminent and Joseph Smith strongly believed in the Second Coming there are hints that he was not convinced it was so imminent. His prophecies about the church filling the Americas and then the world do not fit neatly into believing they had 5-10 years. His sending Orson Hyde to dedicate Jerusalem for the return of the Jews also suggests he knew there were things coming and it would take time before the Savior's advent.

Even if Joseph did believe the Second Coming was imminent that still does not mean that D&C prophecy which is accepted by LDS to be the Lord Himself speaking is not necessarily limited to the prophet's understanding. This is normal. I certainly do not believe my patriarch saw the event in my life that led him to say things in my blessing nor do I believe he understood it then as well as I do now.

Link to comment
On 10/12/2018 at 2:59 PM, SteveO said:

Its a pretty good prophecy I think

I think the prophecy hits the marks correctly.  Sure there was stuff going on in 1832 but that should not shock anyone.  It was normal procedure that Joseph asked questions or something occurred that started the ball rolling on the revelations he got.  Rarely did the Lord throw out a revelation from left field.   People seem to think the prophecy is about the civil war bit its is not when one reads the chapter heading.  It speaks of wars in the plural and speaks of slaves throughout the whole world, not just in the south.  Only a couple verses actually deal with the Civil war and that Civil war simply is used as a starting point for wars to occur until the Second Coming.   Wars occurred before 1961 and wars to one degree or another have gone on constantly but I think the Lord is more concerned about wars of significance over wars where a few small groups here and there are killing each other. 

It is also critically important not to take any prophecy or revelation in isolation but look at other things in how the pieces fit in.  Orson Hyde during the time of the Civil War seems to have a certain perspective on what was to happen next.  He did not think the civil war going to spark warfare immediately in other places but gives a place for people to pay attention to next for the next big war or wars and he hits it dead on.  Speaking in 1832 he says

"You have scarcely yet read the preface of your national troubles.  Many nations will be drawn into the American maelstrom that now whirls through the land [on this point he appears to be wrong]; and after many days, when the demon of war shall have exhausted his strength and madness upon American soil, by the destruction of all that can court or provoke oppression, excite cupidity, inspire revenge, or feed ambition, he will remove his headquarters  to the banks of the Rhine. (Orson Hyde, Millennial Star Vol 24. p 274)

Orson Hyde is tell people to pay attention to that part of Europe where the Rhine is as that is the next place of big trouble and clearly it was in the first half of the 20th century.

We can easily see wars being poured out on all nations this century as things more forward.  The big issue if what is claimed is correct will lead to this and that is climate change.  As populations are disrupted, civil wars will break out.  It will lead to people fleeing to other nations to either get away from the wars or water shortages and other things.  This population movement will cause other nations to become unstable and ignite new wars.  We got a taste of this over the past few years with Syria.  The outflows caused major problems in Europe and still are causing problems today.  Now think of a situation where we got 5 or 10 Syria like situations going off.  We have seen the future and it does not look good.  Wars played a big role in the 20th century but that was nothing of what we are going to see in the 21st century.

Link to comment
On 10/13/2018 at 11:27 AM, Anon the Great said:

4 And it shall come to pass, after many days [in the light--change of focus with symbolic language], slaves shall rise up against their masters, who shall be marshaled and disciplined for war.

5 And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation.

Verse 4 can be interpreted as talking about the end of the Soviet Union when the Republics (Slavic countries, slav is the origin of the word slave) split out while their masters were marshaled for war (Cold War)

Verse 5 can mean that the remnant of the descendants of scattered Israel in the middle east will vex the gentiles (Terror, War on Terror etc.)

Link to comment
On 10/12/2018 at 5:54 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

A major problem for those wanting to read “and then war ...” as WW1 and later wars is that the original revelation read “and thus war”. It’s clear from this that the wars would start immediately. 

But "and thus war" clause was after the clause where Great Britain calls upon other nations. Which didn't occur until WW1.

The Lord clearly stated that the prophecy was on the Wars the proceeded the second coming. Not the war.

Multiple wars

Link to comment
On 10/8/2018 at 8:12 PM, SettingDogStar said:

Also didn't the Civil War really introduce "gorilla warfare" into the major theater of war?

The term "guerrilla warfare" came out of the war of 1812 and the British tactics in Spain. The term is from the Spanish guerra which means war - and in Spanish use a person who is a member of a guerrilla unit is a guerrilleo. The British aiding and directing the Spanish picked up the term to refer to those not under normal British formations. Although the tactic/strategy goes back long before that. Arguably it's in Sun Tzu's The Art of War and was a key tactic in the American revolutionary war as well as wars in the French/English wars in Canada/US. Even in European history is was frequently used in places like Ireland prior to modern warefare. It's really the Napoleonic Wars where people date it due to the beginning of the modernization of war. The two cases there are the Russian opposition to Napoleon's invasion and then the Pinusular War battles in Spain as I mentioned. This latter is what tended to get studied the most not only as a successful tactic but also the aftermath which has serious consequences for decades.

The guerrilla war in the Civil War in many ways followed the tactics of the earlier Indian wars and revolutionary war. Even the part of the War of 1812 that was fought between the US and Canada had its share of guerrilla warfare precisely making use of these earlier tactics. The difference in the Civil War, particularly in the Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee and Kentucky area was how much of it was neighbor on neighbor violence. Although one could argue that, especially in Missouri, that type of guerrilla warfare went back decades earlier. (Think of the Missouri Mormon War for instance, even if not remotely as violent as what went on during the Civil War - but some would argue that the conflicts from then persist in many ways up through the end of the Civil War)

Anyway, while I think it's right that the Civil War really started modern warfare, although some date it to Napoleon, it's not the case that it introduced asymmetrical warfare which is a fairly common tactic in history. The main difference was the place of the industrial revolution on war. Elements of that can be found earlier in the Napoleonic wars but nowhere near the same degree. Further weapons really became reliable, relatively cheap, and deadly starting with the Civil War with rifling and mass production. You also as others noted had new forms of technological transport significantly used with balloons, trains and so forth. The way supply lines in particular, which really end up being the key concern in war, radically shifted in how they were dealt with. Unlike prior wars, which while bloody and devastating, the efficiency of killing really changed significantly. The death toll even in the early battles was unexpected even for people familiar with the War of 1812. Arguably it was the Civil War where you started to have big changes in strategy and tactics. Also it's the war where arguably industrial production decided the war from the beginning despite the South arguably having the best troops and most of the military leadership.

Edited by clarkgoble
Link to comment
On 10/15/2018 at 3:24 PM, Anon the Great said:

Of course you do.  You are hot or cold in your beliefs about Christ and Joseph Smith, which is a good thing, not a bad thing.  You are not lukewarm, so Christ will not spit you out.  You are responding with integrity.  I suggest you not change your beliefs unless the light tells you something is true.  That being said, it does beg the question what you disagree with and why?

“Beg the question” does not mean “raise the question.”

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Anon the Great said:

To Mansquatch's insights,

If we move to a physical interpretation, we have three logical problems:  

1) The word "thus" should be changed to "then", which the LDS Church did, assuming the revelation is only about the physical wars.

2)  The wars of the mind over the soul are the far more important than physical wars, and if true, then it seems reasonable that the Lord would not ignore that reality.

3)   The last few verses of the prophecy imply, as the theologians do, that the wicked are going to die physically to glorify God.  The idea makes no sense to create souls that die in war unless there is a very good purpose.  Death never glorifies God, unless the soul knows good and evil *ideas*  from the experience.  We can all understand the war of ideas inside our soul because of the physical wars on the outside.  All physical war is to prove Lucifer is lying about mortality being removed, and physical war reveals what a wicked liar he is to those at the top that create the wars.  When those at the top see how they have been lied to about their purpose of proving Yahweh is a liar to remove mortality, they will finally walk away from Lucifer and assist the Lord to build heaven on earth by free will.

That being said, each mind and heart has a lot of different ideas in it.  You believe your view is most reasonable with the zillion of ideas you believe in your head is true about the LDS Church.  I am not here to force you to change your mind, and indeed, many ideas need to change before you can even consider connecting the war prophecy to the Book of Revelation to refer to the spiritual wars that occur in our hearts.  If the belief is true, then the war prophecy and the LDS Church using the Holy Spirit will lead the entire world into the truth about the eternal purpose of war.

The eternal purpose of war being, of course, to prepare the world for my dark crusade. Over the crushed skulls of my enemies I will ascend to my dark throne as the First Emperor of the Earth and I will not stop there......no.....there are worlds of other beings in scripture that must bow before me. Then I shall assemble the grandest space armada the Universe has ever known, cross the nigh-infathomable distances of the void between the stars and the galaxies before arriving at our final destination.

Finally from the gates of Kolob I will fight my way into heaven itself to dethrone God and seize control over all of creation as is my destiny.

It is inevitable. Anyone interested in signing up to join me?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Anon the Great said:

I don't understand this comment in context.  Please explain.  Thank you.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy. Google it.

57 minutes ago, Anon the Great said:

The Bible does not say this about Yahweh.  Why would you present such ideas to the board?  Yahweh only used force of war in the Promise Land.  The murder was justified by translation life instead of death.  Contaminating the culture of Israel would make translation impossible.  Yahweh used no such force of war by Israel against Egypt or Babylon.  His people co-existed peacefully with the other gods that were worshipped when they lived in Egypt or Babylon. 

So you wish to stop my dark crusade? Very well, I will get a Danite team on this immediately......

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

“Beg the question” does not mean “raise the question.”

 

1 hour ago, Anon the Great said:

I don't understand this comment in context.  Please explain.  Thank you.

It means that you've misused the phrase "begs the question." Go here for an explanation:

http://begthequestion.info/

Here's a quote from the link:

 

Quote

 

What is "Begging the Question?"

"Begging the question" is a form of logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. When one begs the question, the initial assumption of a statement is treated as already proven without any logic to show why the statement is true in the first place.

A simple example would be "My favorite author is always right because he says so in his latest book." The proof is merely a restatement of the premise. The sentence has begged the question.

What is it Not?

To beg the question does not mean "to raise the question." (e.g. "It begs the question, why is he so dumb?") This is a common error of usage made by those who mistake the word "question" in the phrase to refer to a literal question. Sadly, the error has grown more and more common with time, such that even journalists, advertisers, and major mass media entities have fallen prey to "BTQ Abuse."

 

If you mean to say, "this raises the question" or "this brings up the question" or "this calls out for the question," you should not use the phrase "begs the question," for that does not mean what you intend it to mean.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Anon the Great said:

This is exactly why this world is so messed up.  Please look up the word "beg" in a dictionary.  I am not trying to prove anything.  I am interested in what is being disagreed.  The whole idea?  Part of the idea?  But the educated create these dumb ideas that turn the mind into mush when communicating so that no one can speak what they mean and learn from each other.   I cannot use the word "beg" according to a simple dictionary meaning. and I am supposedly not credible, so don't believe me.  It is very evil to destroy communication between us and to stop the uneducated masses  from asking questions by creating intimidation so the masses keep their mouths shut.  Very effective. The tricks at the top are amazing!  I am not using the word "beg" as accused.

If you want to communicate in a language it behooves you to know how it is used.

4 hours ago, Anon the Great said:

The educated have created an idea around a word that means something different than the idea being presented.  This creates confusion in society.  It was not done innocently.  It was done on purpose to create confusion in society.  "Beg the question" means "ask the question".  But the guys at the top created the "logical fallacy" around a word that doesn't mean what they are claiming it means.  For example, "My favorite author is always right because he says so in his latest book."  This does not ask any questions.  The word "because" is used incorrectly for there is no cause and effect reality in the statement.  But instead of the truth, we are taught that it "begs the question" when no question is asked.  Therefore, we never learn the truth that the word "because" is not being used correctly.  The guys at the top are so evil to confuse society, it is amazing.  The word because in the English language is the heart of the power of cause and effect, and if the powers that be can confuse the truth and create the "beg the question fallacy', we will cannot see the real issue.  They blind the mind with these kinds of tricks.  As such, we do not understand the truth of cause and effect.  Does every see how the "beg the question" fallacy logic screws up the mind?   No question is asked.  They cleverly use the word "beg" instead of "ask" so we won't notice what they are doing as word magicians.

I prefer the educated method of communicating as what you just said is total nonsense in any conventional understanding of English.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Anon the Great said:

Basically, "begging the question" says if there is no evidence, we cannot ask a question.  If we cannot ask questions, we cannot develop new theories.  If we cannot use creativity the Lord gave us to reason, then there is no science into new thought to improve progress in the truth.    The idea effective keeps the masses uncreative and unable to step out of the boxes to remove the theologians to know the truth.  Why?  Because the insane logic actually stops the reasoning processes of the mind.

You’re still not getting it. Go back to the link I provided and read through it until you understand. 

It’s a name for a logical fallacy. It has nothing to do with asking questions. 

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, Anon the Great said:

OK. That is a choice.

I have a masters degree and learned the word tricks over the last 43 years.  The top Satanists rob and control us with the manipulation of words, and the masses have no idea what they do (even the insiders at the bottom). Jesus says they have been murdering good people since Able and Cain in Matthew 23.   I hope those at the bottom wake up to it.  This discussion makes it easy to see.  Beg=ask.  No question is asked.  The real issue is misusing the word "because".   The so-called "logical fallacy" purposely screws up the brain to not properly think, and it creates confusion.  This gives power to someone else. 

The fallen sons of God work on the genetic reengineer with fooled mortals behind the curtain to control eternal life, which has failed after 150,000 years.  It is time for God to expose the scam and prove they are liars. 

 Jesus said: "He that lives and believes in me shall not die."  The war prophecy is the key to lead the LDS church to the Book of Revelation to start the process of entering the First Heaven.  Next comes translation of a few.  Then comes the third temple era and the translation of many.  The sealed book in Isaiah 29 is the Book of Revelation that is "spiritually sealed".  The learned carnal mind cannot read it because it is spiritually sealed.  Only Christ has the power to open the book by His grace through faith.  The Book of Mormon is not the sealed book.

Someone with a Master’s degree ought to understand the proper meaning of “begging the question.” 

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Someone with a Master’s degree ought to understand the proper meaning of “begging the question.” 

A person with a high school diploma should know the proper meaning.

but I suspect many with masters degrees don’t know. Advanced degrees is no indication of actual education

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...