tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post1370005129467609498..comments2023-11-02T07:25:45.884-05:00Comments on Mormanity - a blog for those interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: The Book of Mormon Versus the Consensus of Scholars: Surprises from the Disputed Longer Ending of Mark (The Longer Ending of Mark, Part 1)Jeff Lindsayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-8243100699603166732016-08-30T12:36:32.042-05:002016-08-30T12:36:32.042-05:00Jeff, I think you're confused about what tight...Jeff, I think you're confused about what tight control is. You're confusing it with iron-clad control. You'd better read Skousen's 1998 JBMS 7.1 article and get some clarity. Also, Skousen has shown that JS's 1837 BofM editing was incomplete and sporadic human editing, that it was not a revealed recension. See his April 2016 presentation on that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-63995847550067703392016-08-28T09:44:24.984-05:002016-08-28T09:44:24.984-05:00On Luke 22:43-44, Dr. Lincoln Blumell's articl...On Luke 22:43-44, Dr. Lincoln Blumell's article really is excellent and insightful. The reference is: Lincoln Blumell, “<a href="http://www.lincolnhblumell.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2014-TC-Journal-of-Biblical-Textual-Criticism-Luke-22.pdf" rel="nofollow">Luke 22:43–44: An Anti-Docetic Interpolation or an Apologetic Omission?</a>” TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism 19 (2014): 1–35. Thanks, Anon, for the lead. <br /><br />It is available on his website:<br />http://www.lincolnhblumell.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2014-TC-Journal-of-Biblical-Textual-Criticism-Luke-22.pdf<br /><br />Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-89397001624687775592016-08-28T09:35:53.085-05:002016-08-28T09:35:53.085-05:00We need to be careful about making a prior assumpt...We need to be careful about making a prior assumptions about how God or Joseph could or should have done the translation, and first seek to understand what the data actually tells us. Tight control is clearly the case in at least some instances. But Joseph's willingness to edit out apparent bad grammar or other problems in the Book of Mormon shows that he was not afraid to be directly involved with the text. Further, the human errors of scribes also show us that there was not divine tight control in the sense of forcing the correct words and spelling upon the printed product. I think Joseph's inspired translation of the Book of Mormon could have elements of both tight and loose control, just as modern translation work is often aided with "tight control" from electronic tools but further shaping and revising by translators when it seems needed. Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-16265489505059511842016-08-27T19:16:41.548-05:002016-08-27T19:16:41.548-05:00EBU, We can also ask, why wouldn't God say the...EBU, We can also ask, why wouldn't God say the same thing word for word? What is the real problem with a word for word quote by the same person who originally uttered the words? You will just have to ask Him.<br /><br />Do you have anything substantive to otherwise refute anything Jeff has said? I am afraid you are attacking reflexively here.<br /><br />GlennGlenn Thigpenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16289698106336334148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-17849530465335952002016-08-25T15:35:52.601-05:002016-08-25T15:35:52.601-05:00I will agree with you on this, EBU. There is confu...I will agree with you on this, EBU. There is confusion in the Mormon world on this issue, and Jeff has not committed one way or the other. And sometimes we run across schizophrenic thinking, and I have seen that in some of what Jeff has written. The question boils down to Skousen's 1998 tight control and loose control. Under loose control -- ideas into words -- Smith would have had to consult a Bible. Indeed, as you point out, this Mark passage is almost word for word. I think there is an extra "and" in the BofM. And that's about it. So loose control + consulting a Bible works in this instance, since there is hardly any difference. But it is an unsatisfactory view generally since there are almost a thousand differences between biblical and BofM readings, and some sentences are quite different from each other.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-27277223386667096872016-08-25T11:45:18.160-05:002016-08-25T11:45:18.160-05:00Again...we have the problem of a word-for-word quo...Again...we have the problem of a word-for-word quotation from the KJV. Why would God send over a word-for-word quotation on the seerstone? Does that mean God wanted it to sound just like it did in the KJV? But if that is the case, then why are other portions of the BoM written in EModE forms that pre-date the KJV? <br /><br />You apologists have a lot of work to do. You need to start harmonizing all these competing theories. You throw out theory after theory, and yet there is no consistency or harmony between your theories. You guys just can't admit that really, you have no idea what this Book actually is. You certainly don't want to admit that it isn't what it claims to be, so you are left with a mess of confusion and conflicting ideas. <br /><br />Yet...you will all stand up and bear testimony that the Book of Mormon is true. You don't even know what it means to call that book "true." Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-75010636435810639992016-08-25T08:52:29.903-05:002016-08-25T08:52:29.903-05:00A similar problem exists for Luke 22:43-44, where ...A similar problem exists for Luke 22:43-44, where Jesus sweat drops of blood. This account does not exist anywhere else in the new testament, and the earliest and best new testament manuscripts don't include it. It is, however, in in the Book of Mormon (Mosiah 3:7). BYU professor Lincoln H. Blumell wrote an interesting article regarding this issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com