Why Stripling "Warriors"?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

I just found at least 10 General Conference talks from the 1970s that feature the stripling warriors by searching the church website using the lone search term “Ammonite.”  When I saw the word Ammonite coupled with the number 2,000 in the search results, I checked the contents further just to be sure.

Brilliant…I was too focused on the exact phrase.  
 

So the story could be popular before the 80s, but using the phrase “stripling warriors” for it was not particularly, at least in General Conference.
 

Note:  I was thinking the Corpus would act like other search functions and search for warriors even if the search term had no “s” as long as I didn’t add a space to the end.  Apparently it’s picky.  Be sure and search for all variations if interested in all variations of a term

 

Edited August 27 by Calm

[webbles]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Brilliant…I was too focused on the exact phrase.  
 

Note:  I was thinking the Corpus would act like other search functions and search for warriors even if the search term had no “s” as long as I didn’t add a space to the end.  Apparently it’s picky.  Be sure and search for all variations if interested in all variations of a term

The fact that Elder Peterson didn't use "stripling warriors" but instead spoke of them in different terms would indicate that the term "stripling warriors" did not become a thing until after his time.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

just found at least 10 General Conference talks from the 1970s

I am only seeing 3, can you list the ones you found?  Want to check my search function for trustworthiness. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I wonder if this increase in the use of the term and the popularity of the story has any connection to the growing popularity of "Saturday's Warriors"?  It looks like it was first produced by BYU in 1974 but was made into a movie in 1989.

It was popular when I first went to BYU in 76.  I bet that is what caused “warrior” to catch on and then “stripling warrior”.  I am trying to remember when I first saw pictures of youth in their “armor of God” in the art section in  church related bookstores in Utah.

[The Nehor]

10 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Maybe in your society, but not mine.  In my various mil family and cop family circles, there's an awful lot of reverence for the word, and those who feel called to the profession.   If you know anyone close to a professional soldier or a cop, you might want to run your opinion past them to see what they say.  Just a suggestion.

The “Warrior Training” and “Warrior mindset” for cops is at the root of a lot of the problems in US policing. Ironically the military is better at policing out that kind of warrior mindset.

10 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Having a difficult time not saying something snarky and sarcastic and unhelpful.  This just strikes me as the height of unrighteous judgmentalism, I'm guessing based on ignorance.   Maybe this might be a helpful response:  You know any people who practice a warrior's mindset?  How well?  Maybe get to know a few before opining about them.

I do know people who “practice a warrior’s mindset”. I avoid them. Most of the media pushing the “warrior” schtick is toxic garbage.

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, bluebell said:

Mormon, being an impressive general for decades, seems to see a lot of value in different aspects of this specific conflict between the nephites and lamanites during this time.  Maybe it's because this era and war had really good records for him to delve into and other wars throughout their history didn't. Or maybe the nephite generals like Captain Moroni and Teancum were so impressive to him in their military strategy and spiritual beliefs that he felt they needed special mention.

Or maybe for some other reason.  Having grown up in a war-torn land and being surrounded by it his whole life, he is certainly in a position to know what it is like firsthand and utilize it for good.

Does Mormon never call them refer to them as stripling?  I've never paid attention.

There is a lot to be learned from conflict. I study war. It is a fascination of mine. I think we should study it a lot with the intent of having less of it. Captain Moroni was trying to prevent a war. Mormon was throw into leadership. I don’t think Teancum was a model of spirituality. In his second assassination he did it while deeply in anger (warning sign) and in the brief discussion of mourning him they mourn him as a friend to liberty and don’t praise his devotion to God. I wondered about that when I was a kid and I think Mormon was implying Teancum was zealous but not pious.

[Bernard Gui]

Here are some definitions from Joseph’s era. I was hoping some would comment on Joseph’s choice of soldiers over warriors. Neither Lamanite nor Nephite fighters are called warriors or braves, the common terms used at the time.

[.] STRIPLING, n. [from strip, stripe; primarily a tall slender youth, one that shoots up suddenly.] A youth in the state of adolescence, or just passing from boyhood to manhood; a lad. [.] [.] And the king said, inquire thou whose son the stripling is. 1 Samuel 18.

SOLDIER, n. soljur. [from L. solidus, a piece of money, the pay of a soldier.]1. A man engaged in military service; one whose occupation is military; a man enlisted for service in an army; a private, or noe in the ranks. There ought to be some time for sober reflection between the life of a soldier and his death

2. A man enrolled for service, when on duty or embodied for military discipline; a private; as a militia soldier.

3. Emphatically, a brave warrior; a man of military experience and skill, or a man of distinguished valor. In this sense, an officer of any grade may be denominated a soldier.

[.] WARRIOR, n. [.] 1. In a general sense, a soldier; a man engaged in military life. [.] 2. Emphatically, a brave man; a good soldier.

[Bernard Gui]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

There is a lot to be learned from conflict. I study war. It is a fascination of mine. I think we should study it a lot with the intent of having less of it. Captain Moroni was trying to prevent a war. Mormon was throw into leadership. I don’t think Teancum was a model of spirituality. In his second assassination he did it while deeply in anger (warning sign) and in the brief discussion of mourning him they mourn him as a friend to liberty and don’t praise his devotion to God. I wondered about that when I was a kid and I think Mormon was implying Teancum was zealous but not pious.

Hmmm. There’s no need to dis Teancum. Moroni certainly did not. One would want such a fellow to lead your troops when things get grim. Some adjectives come to mind that describe a fighter who dares to go into the enemy camp twice to eliminate their leaders…indomitable-loyal-ardent-heroic-selfless-dauntless-lionhearted-champion, and more. The two evil leaders that he killed had caused the Nephites immeasurable pain and grief, so Teancum sought them out and eliminated them. He gave his all to the righteous cause of the Lord. The Savior said, “Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” Teancum had boundless love for his people.

One might consider these statements before passing judgement on Teancum…

Quote

Therefore, come unto me [Pahoran] speedily with a few of your men, and leave the remainder in the charge of Lehi and Teancum; give unto them power to conduct the war in that part of the land, according to the Spirit of God, which is also the spirit of freedom which is in them…

And we will take possession of the city of Zarahemla, that we may obtain more food to send forth unto Lehi and Teancum; yea, we will go forth against them [the Lamanites] in the strength of the Lord, and we will put an end to this great iniquity…

See that ye strengthen Lehi and Teancum in the Lord; tell them to fear not, for God will deliver them, yea, and also all those who stand fast in that liberty wherewith God hath made them free.

Now it came to pass that when Lehi and Moroni knew that Teancum was dead they were exceedingly sorrowful; for behold, he had been a man who had fought valiantly for his country, yea, a true friend to liberty; and he had suffered very many exceedingly sore afflictions.

Teancum’s anger was righteous anger. Moroni expressed such righteous anger in his letters to Ammoron..l

Quote

I will come against you with my armies; yea, even I will arm my women and my children, and I will come against you, and I will follow you even into your own land, which is the land of our first inheritance; yea, and it shall be blood for blood, yea, life for life; and I will give you battle even until you are destroyed from off the face of the earth.

…Thou art a child of hell…behold, I am in my anger, and also my people; ye have sought to murder us, and we have only sought to defend ourselves. But behold, if ye seek to destroy us more we will seek to destroy you!

…and to Pahoran (who was supposed to be his “beloved brother”)…

Quote

…Can you think to sit upon your thrones in a state of thoughtless stupor, while your enemies are spreading the work of death around you? Yea, while they are murdering thousands of your brethren…

…ye have withheld your provisions from them, insomuch that many have fought and bled out their lives…the blood of thousands shall come upon your heads for vengeance…

…we know not but what ye yourselves are seeking for authority. We know not but what ye are also traitors to your country…

…except ye grant mine epistle, and come out and show unto me a true spirit of freedom, and strive to strengthen and fortify our armies…I will leave a part of my freemen to maintain this part of our land…And I will come unto you, and if there be any among you that has a desire for freedom, yea, if there be even a spark of freedom remaining, behold I will stir up insurrections among you, even until those who have desires to usurp power and authority shall become extinct…

…it is time, yea, the time is now at hand, that except ye do bestir yourselves in the defence of your country and your little ones, the sword of justice doth hang over you; yea, and it shall fall upon you and visit you even to your utter destruction.

These are the words of a deeply angry man, but one cannot question  Moroni’s righteousness. I have no doubt that Moroni would have quickly enforced them with decisive actions. As George Patton said, “A good plan violently executed today is better than a perfect plan executed next week.”

Teancum, Lehi, Moroni, and  Pahoran: powerful yet humble men of God, men of action, men of like minds, fierce warriors, steadfast soldiers, righteous and true brothers in arms. Zealous and pious. Just the kind of men we need today. 

Edited August 28 by Bernard Gui

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Hmmm. There’s no need to dis Teancum. Moroni certainly did not. One would want a fellow like him to lead your troops when things get grim. Some adjectives come to mind that describe a fighter who dares to go into the enemy camp twice to eliminate their leaders…indomitable-loyal-ardent-heroic-selfless-dauntless-lionhearted-champion, and more. The two evil leaders that he killed had caused the Nephites immeasurable pain and grief, and Teancum sought them out and eliminated them. He gave his all to the righteous cause of the Lord. The Savior said, “Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” Teancum had boundless love for his people.

One might consider these statements before passing judgement on Teancum…

Did those assassinations truly change much of anything? The first just got the Lamanites a new king and a martyr. The second seems almost superfluous. By all appearances normal war fatigue was bringing the war to a close. I empathize with Teancum. I think those two he killed deserved death. I am not sure the gospel sanctions Teancum’s actions.

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Teancum’s anger was righteous anger. Moroni expressed even greater righteous anger in his letters to Ammoron..l

…and to Pahoran (who was supposed to be his “beloved brother”)…

Moroni’s anger with Ammoron killed his hostage swap. The irony is that Moroni got the terms he wanted but blew up the deal because he got into the ancient equivalent of an internet flamewar with Ammoron. He was a good military leader but he was not a good diplomat. Then again the diplomacy of the ancient world that we know of was….ummmm…..hot garbage. Going off the Greek city states they were bombastic jerks to each other even when they were allies. Athens portrayed their alliance as one of Athenian domination. They didn’t seem to have the concept of friendly ally. It was more like the dominator and the dominated. Rome was much better at it. We sadly don’t have a lot of data on this point so maybe diplomacy as we understand it wasn’t really a thing.

The Pahoran thing I don’t get. The lack of support makes sense with the coup back home but why was Pahoran not telling anyone what was going on? There is mention of some limited support from the capital and it is clear that the “foraging” parties of the Nephite military had eaten the countryside dry and they needed supplies but Pahoran isn’t talking? Did he think Moroni was in on the coup? If Zarahemla is supposed to be sending supplies it can’t be that far away. In premodern warfare sending food supplies only makes sense if you can move it by ship on ocean or ship on river and/or you are very close. If you move it by land any great distance you get the problem of the people or animals moving it eating it all on the way and the Nephites didn’t seem to have animals to make the equation a little better. I assume they were using river transport. Why were the communications so bad?

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

These are the words of a deeply angry man, but one cannot justly question  Moroni’s righteousness. I have no doubt that Moroni was capable of  quickly enforcing them with decisive actions. As George Patton said, “A good plan violently executed today is better than a perfect plan executed next week.”

While I have a harder time seeing Moroni as an unambiguous hero once I understood how premodern armies feed themselves he was as good as it is likely to possibly be in those circumstances. The one thing that made me stare a bit was Moroni promising that if Ammoron did not stop that Moroni would march into the Lamanite lands and start a campaign of genocide until they do stop. That is not only wrong but it also goes against the commands Lehi and Nephi left about aggressive warfare against the Lamanites. I am glad Moroni didn’t follow through on that.

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Teancum, Lehi, Moroni, and  Pahoran: powerful yet humble men of God, men of action, men of like minds, fierce warriors, steadfast soldiers, righteous and true brothers in arms. Zealous and pious. Just the kind of men we need today. 

Again, not so sure on Teancum. With Pahoran I need a lot more information before I make that determination. I especially give Moroni a lot of credit for retiring after the war. He probably could have taken over the government if he wanted to. That is a common practice for a victorious military leader. Giving up power is a very ‘George Washingtonesque’ thing to do. I don’t see them as warriors. Warriors wouldn’t have stepped down into a peacetime role. That is commonly the problem with warriors generally.

Here is the beginning of a bit of a dive into the “warrior” thing: https://acoup.blog/2021/01/29/collections-the-universal-warrior-part-i-soldiers-warriors-and/

By this approach Moroni was a soldier and not a warrior. A warrior wouldn’t retire.

[Calm]

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

was hoping some would comment on Joseph’s choice of soldiers over warriors.

I did, perhaps you missed it.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/76044-why-stripling-warriors/?do=findComment&comment=1210194268 

“Soldiers” is  more accurate word choice as “warriors” could be individuals counting coup*** or other nonarmy activity where “soldiers” are expressly in an army.  Given the small vocabulary of the Book of Mormon, it makes sense he used only the most relevant one and left out alternate words.

 

 

***https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counting_coup

Edited August 28 by Calm

[LoudmouthMormon]

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Most of the media pushing the “warrior” schtick is toxic garbage.

No argument there.  And I suppose if such things are informing your understanding of the warrior mindset, that explains your attitude.   

And yes, for every mature reasonable practitioner of the mindset I know, there are plenty of foolish children thinking guns make them look cool.  Yeah, I know some of 'em are cops.

 

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

There is a lot to be learned from conflict. I study war. It is a fascination of mine. I think we should study it a lot with the intent of having less of it.

How strange to hear you expressing such a negative opinion of a warrior mindset, and then in your next post, you boldly proclaim one of the central tenets I've heard from all my warrior buddies across the decades.

No really dude, maybe go and get to know some personally.  Ten bucks says if you find a couple of reasonable mature practitioners of the mindset, they can change your mind on this. 

Has The art of war been part of your studies?  The more I think about it, the less light I see between "Know thy enemy" and "Love thy neighbor".  

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

A warrior wouldn’t retire.

I guess it's all in how you define the word 'retire'.  I know some older ones.  I'll hear them evolving into things like "the battle against time" as they try to stay fit while aging, or "the war against myself" as they focus on their shortcomings and flaws.  One cop I know is in his late '40's, starting to feel his body not being 18 any more - he's planning on retiring into a Christian ministry and carrying on the battle with his words after his body can't keep up the struggle any more.  He's quite an artist - his African tribal warrior Christ art is something.  Here's a sample:

Nicest guy in the world.  Taught one daughter gymnastics, taught us all MMA.

Edited August 28 by LoudmouthMormon

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

No argument there.  And I suppose if such things are informing your understanding of the warrior mindset, that explains your attitude.   

And yes, for every mature reasonable practitioner of the mindset I know, there are plenty of foolish children thinking guns make them look cool.  

I haven’t seen any of this mature reasonable practitioner species.

1 minute ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

How strange to hear you expressing such a negative opinion of a warrior mindset, and then in your next post, you boldly proclaim one of the central tenets I've heard from all my warrior buddies across the decades.

No really dude, maybe go and get to know some personally.  Ten bucks says if you find a couple of reasonable mature practitioners of the mindset, they can change your mind on this. 

Has The art of war been part of your studies?  The more I think about it, the less difference I see between "Know thy enemy" and "Love thy neighbor".  

I’ve read Sun Tzu. I think Clausewitz is better though despite it being very very dry by comparison. I do find ridiculous the idea that Sun Tzu’s maxims are somehow universal truths and should be used by people to ‘succeed’ in life. Not only is it weird but it is one of those surface level analysis things that misses the point of what Sun Tzu was talking about. It is like people thinking the ancient Spartans would fit right in with the United State Marines. The ancient Spartans would DESPISE the marines and all the Spartan warrior bros who think the Spartan mindset will help them succeed in their careers. A Spartan would hold you in contempt for having a job. Citizens don’t work! That is for the slaves and non-citizens!

A lot of this drawing on the past and holding up ancient societies and warrior codes as universal truths is more about the current crisis of masculinity. In the early days of the internet it was a bunch of weeaboos who got katanas and thought they could live by the code of the samurai because they liked anime. We can and should look to the past but we need to look at the real past. A lot of it is deeply unpleasant and it doesn’t fit into neat boxes to affirm modern men’s masculinity.

[The Nehor]

Lest you think this is just me this is a problem that is discussed quite a bit. Here is one that is pretty representative about the problem with warriors:

https://angrystaffofficer.com/2016/12/14/stop-calling-us-warriors/

[LoudmouthMormon]

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I haven’t seen any of this mature reasonable practitioner species.

Yep, I totally get that.  That's why I'm suggesting you find a couple and talk to them.  Plenty of old and crotchety ones out there, plenty of active duty too.  They might be hard to just randomly find, because they've usually got their mouths closed and aren't spouting off about things.   Maybe easier for me, since I'm in Colorado Springs with all of it's military bases, in a ward with no shortage of active and retired military, but I know more of them online.

 

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

A lot of this drawing on the past and holding up ancient societies and warrior codes as universal truths is more about the current crisis of masculinity.

Oh, I agree, but I mean, they come in girl's sizes too.  You might have to look harder, but they also exist.

 

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I do find ridiculous the idea that Sun Tzu’s maxims are somehow universal truths and should be used by people to ‘succeed’ in life. Not only is it weird but it is one of those surface level analysis things that misses the point of what Sun Tzu was talking about.

Perhaps.  I only have the surface level to offer.  Read through it over a decade ago, as my wife and I had just finished our part in putting a guy behind bars for 5-life.  We knew he'd likely get out in 3-4, he might be up for some payback, and he knew where we lived.  So plump office worker me went searching for people who knew what they were doing, to see what I could learn from them about self-defense.  Yeah, I had to sort through all the tacticool chaff that apparently represents all your experience, but I found no shortage of warrior wheat.  Just about all of 'em urged me to consider moving to another state before they'd even talk to me about how to arm up.  They practically oozed "study it a lot with the intent of having less of it."

They exist.

Edited August 28 by LoudmouthMormon

[LoudmouthMormon]

 (p.s. Long story short - dude did indeed get out after 4 years of his nickel.  He seems happy on his side of the rocky mountains, with zero evidence he's interested in payback for us.  We weren't able to do much for him, but we were happy to learn he had family helping him back into the world, giving him a job and a place to live.  Apparently he got married.  All the mature practitioners of the warrior mindset were satisfied with this as the superior outcome for my family's problem.  Yeah, less light between 'know thy enemy' and 'love thy neighbor' than we'd think.  Maybe less than Sun Tzu would think.  Should have sent some missionaries his way before he published.)

Edited August 28 by LoudmouthMormon

[Bernard Gui]

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Did those assassinations truly change much of anything? The first just got the Lamanites a new king and a martyr. The second seems almost superfluous. By all appearances normal war fatigue was bringing the war to a close. I empathize with Teancum. I think those two he killed deserved death. I am not sure the gospel sanctions Teancum’s actions.

Teancum's first move was decisive and effective. Taking out the jefe demoralized and confused the Lamanites. The day after the second assassination, the Lamanite army suffered total defeat and fled in terror back to their land. This ended the war. Those were great results, in my opinion. Killing the leader vs. killing a lot of soldiers in defensive war - which is less gospel oriented?

Quote

First assassination results:

And now, when the Lamanites saw this [their dead leader] they were affrighted; and they abandoned their design in marching into the land northward, and retreated with all their army into the city of Mulek, and sought protection in their fortifications…

Second assassination results:

Now it came to pass that Moroni marched forth on the morrow, and came upon the Lamanites, insomuch that they did slay them with a great slaughter; and they did drive them out of the land; and they did flee, even that they did not return at that time against the Nephites.

Gospel sanctions? In all-out war for the survival of the righteous? We ain’t got no  sanctions. We don’t need no gospel sanctions! Nephi had gospel sanctions to behead Laban. Elijah was sanctioned to destroy the wicked priests of Baal. Here are Teancum’s gospel sanctions…

Quote

…leave the remainder in the charge of Lehi and Teancum; give unto them power to conduct the war in that part of the land, according to the Spirit of God, which is also the spirit of freedom which is in them.

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Moroni’s anger with Ammoron killed his hostage swap. The irony is that Moroni got the terms he wanted but blew up the deal because he got into the ancient equivalent of an internet flamewar with Ammoron. He was a good military leader but he was not a good diplomat.

Are we reading the same story? The hostage swap was kaput from the start because Moroni knew Ammoron was full of deceit. Ammoron killed the deal by promising to continue the war after the exchange, and he demanded Moroni’s capitulation and Nephite subjection.  How does diplomacy work when your foe swears to drink your blood?

Quote

…this was a critical time for such contentions to be among the people of Nephi; for behold, Amalickiah had again stirred up the hearts of the people of the Lamanites against the people of the Nephites, and he was gathering together soldiers from all parts of his land, and arming them, and preparing for war with all diligence; for he had sworn to drink the blood of Moroni.

Quote

The Nehor said:

The one thing that made me stare a bit was Moroni promising that if Ammoron did not stop that Moroni would march into the Lamanite lands and start a campaign of genocide until they do stop. That is not only wrong but it also goes against the commands Lehi and Nephi left about aggressive warfare against the Lamanites. I am glad Moroni didn’t follow through on that.

Moroni was countering Ammoron’s threats of genocide against the Nephites. Moroni was never the aggressor. Ammoron and his brother had leveraged the lethally false Lamanite belief that Nephi usurped authority from Laman and Lemuel to whip them up to war. This was the perpetual source of the Lamanite animus towards the Nephites. Like their fathers Lehi and Nephi, Moroni an$ his men loathed fighting and killing his brothers. He always sought the least destructive response, but this fight was to the death of all and it was waged with God’s help. This is all made absolutely clear in Alma 48.
 

Quote

The Nehor said:

The Pahoran thing I don’t get. The lack of support makes sense with the coup back home but why was Pahoran not telling anyone what was going on? There is mention of some limited support from the capital and it is clear that the “foraging” parties of the Nephite military had eaten the countryside dry and they needed supplies but Pahoran isn’t talking? Did he think Moroni was in on the coup? If Zarahemla is supposed to be sending supplies it can’t be that far away. In premodern warfare sending food supplies only makes sense if you can move it by ship on ocean or ship on river and/or you are very close. If you move it by land any great distance you get the problem of the people or animals moving it eating it all on the way and the Nephites didn’t seem to have animals to make the equation a little better. I assume they were using river transport. Why were the communications so bad?
 

Pahoran was in exile fearing for his own life. I cant find the part where Moroni’s armies ate the countryside dry. In contrast, he often expresses his great concern for the welfare of the people.

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Again, not so sure on Teancum. With Pahoran I need a lot more information before I make that determination. I especially give Moroni a lot of credit for retiring after the war. He probably could have taken over the government if he wanted to. That is a common practice for a victorious military leader. Giving up power is a very ‘George Washingtonesque’ thing to do. I don’t see them as warriors. Warriors wouldn’t have stepped down into a peacetime role. That is commonly the problem with warriors generally. 

By this approach Moroni was a soldier and not a warrior. A warrior wouldn’t retire.

I’m absolutely sure on Teancum. The story is quite clear about him. Same with Pahoran.  

Moroni wasn’t a common victorious military leader. He made it clear he was not seeking for power. He was a humble man of God who if all men were like him Satan would have no power. 

You appear to be missing my point. It’s not about the nature of Moroni’s character, but about Joseph’s use of the word soldiers when the most common contemporary word describing Native American combatants was warriors. Were he making the story up from his frontier American experience, he most likely would have used the latter. 
 

Quote

Behold, I am Moroni, your chief captain. I seek not for power, but to pull it down. I seek not for honor of the world, but for the glory of my God, and the freedom and welfare of my country.

We certainly see this saga differently. 

Edited August 29 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

Another example where Joseph wrote the word “soldiers” instead of using what during his era would have been the common term “warriors”…

Quote

Alma 51:9 But behold, this was a critical time for such contentions to be among the people of Nephi; for behold, Amalickiah had again stirred up the hearts of the people of the Lamanites against the people of the Nephites, and he was gathering together soldiers from all parts of his land, and arming them, and preparing for war with all diligence; for he had sworn to drink the blood of Moroni.

[Bernard Gui]

14 hours ago, Calm said:

I did, perhaps you missed it.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/76044-why-stripling-warriors/?do=findComment&comment=1210194268 

“Soldiers” is more accurate word choice as “warriors” could be individuals counting coup*** or other non-army activity where “soldiers” are expressly in an army.  Given the small vocabulary of the Book of Mormon, it makes sense he used only the most relevant one and left out alternate words.

***https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counting_coup

I’m not sure Joseph was that nuanced in his use of warriors/soldiers. The BoM uses both words, but the former almost exclusively.  Were he making this up from his own experience, I think he would have used warriors. The lack of such commonly used words in relation to the Lehites is significant. IMO, of course.

I have noted elsewhere that counting coup does not appear in the BoM.  It was certainly in the common parlance of his era when talking about Native American warfare. I believe this does not contain the parameters for the act of taking coup…

Quote

And now when Moroni had said these words, Zerahemnah retained his sword, and he was angry with Moroni, and he rushed forward that he might slay Moroni; but as he raised his sword, behold, one of Moroni’s soldiers smote it even to the earth, and it broke by the hilt; and he also smote Zerahemnah that he took off his scalp and it fell to the earth. And Zerahemnah withdrew from before them into the midst of his soldiers.

And it came to pass that the soldier who stood by, who smote off the scalp of Zerahemnah, took up the scalp from off the ground by the hair, and laid it upon the point of his sword, and stretched it forth unto them, saying unto them with a loud voice:

Even as this scalp has fallen to the earth, which is the scalp of your chief, so shall ye fall to the earth except ye will deliver up your weapons of war and depart with a covenant of peace.

Now there were many, when they heard these words and saw the scalp which was upon the sword, that were struck with fear; and many came forth and threw down their weapons of war at the feet of Moroni, and entered into a covenant of peace. And as many as entered into a covenant they suffered to depart into the wilderness.

 

[Bernard Gui]

14 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I haven’t seen any of this mature reasonable practitioner species.

You haven’t met my son Belicosissimo. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

I’m not sure Joseph was that nuanced in his use of warriors/soldiers.

But I don’t consider Joseph the author of the Book of Mormon, even if at times he influenced the text. So why would it matter if he was nuanced or not that way?

Edited August 29 by Calm

[LoudmouthMormon]

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

How does diplomacy work when your foe swears to drink your blood?

It's a tangent, but it struck me that Israel has been grappling with this exact question for decades.  Their answer was forced to change on October 7th.  I'd welcome a thread on such things, if anyone is interested enough to start one, and we can keep away from the politics.

Edited August 29 by LoudmouthMormon

[bluebell]

29 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

It's a tangent, but it struck me that Israel has been grappling with this exact question for decades.  Their answer was forced to change on October 7th.  I'd welcome a thread on such things, if anyone is interested enough to start one, and we can keep away from the politics.

I think that at least some of their answer is what lead to October 7th.  Trying to keep your enemies from getting to the point of believing that drinking your blood is the only answer to their suffering, is one way to deal with the question.

 

[Bernard Gui]

11 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

It's a tangent, but it struck me that Israel has been grappling with this exact question for decades.  Their answer was forced to change on October 7th.  I'd welcome a thread on such things, if anyone is interested enough to start one, and we can keep away from the politics.

The same thought has occurred to me. 

[Emily]

On 8/27/2024 at 2:00 PM, Bernard Gui said:

I also find it interesting that almost none of the words commonly associated with Native Americans 18th and 19th  century literature appear in the BoM…such as tepee, tomahawk, feather, bison, beaver, deer, moose, fur, tobacco, powwow, bead, medicine, wampum, corn, taking coup, squaw, war songs and dances, canoe, chief, chanting, drums, and many more. It seems reasonable to assume Joseph would have used them if he were making it up out of his imaginatbased on what was commonly known at the time.  

I'm not entirely sure Joseph made any connection between the "Indians" of his time and the Book of Mormon "ancient inhabitants" before the book was translated. 

Most of the speculation associating Native Americans with the "Lamanites" in the book occurred after the book was published. Even Joseph was obviously speculating, and only speculating, on fairly basic issues like where the events of the book took place. He easily changed his opinion on that subject whenever new physical data that might be related was found. 

The extent of his knowledge before he actually translated the records seemed to be visions and/or stories from Moroni of certain Nephite events (that he shared with his family if his mom's accounts are to be believed) and the rather vague notion that he would be obtaining records of "ancient inhabitants."

Which isn't to negate the point that you are trying to make, but rather emphasize your point.  Joseph didn't start the translation of the Book of Mormon with the idea that he was going to explain the origin of the 1800s Northern Plains Indians with his new book. He didn't seem particularly interested in drawing correlations between the modern natives and the ancient inhabitants either. Most of the statements he made connecting Book of Mormon events to modern locations revolved around the discovery of old physical artifacts.

For example, I don't recall any quotes of him showing that he had any interest in the speculations of other authors who were noticing signs of "Christianity" lingering in the culture of modern tribes. But I might have missed something. I haven't delved that seriously into any of the latest "things Joseph said", but I know there's been a fair amount of research since I last dabbled in the subject.

 

[Stargazer]

On 8/27/2024 at 10:19 PM, teddyaware said:

I just found at least 10 General Conference talks from the 1970s that feature the stripling warriors by searching the church website using the lone search term “Ammonite.”  When I saw the word Ammonite coupled with the number 2,000 in the search results, I checked the contents further just to be sure.

As an occasional archaeology hobbyist the word Ammonite sometimes conjures this up in my mind's eye: