Kishkumen wrote: ↑Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:48 amPlease continue with the word studies, however. It is good data and interesting in its own right for sure. But I will tell you that your bizarre crowing and ugly insults about inanimate objects and Joseph Smith get old.
That said, I know you do all of this self-stimulation to get your own rocks off, and you won’t let me spoil your exhibitionism.
Imagined Gabriel's reply: "Good Luck getting sleep should you lay your head on that UPSTART crow's second-best bed. With a START you'll discover it's occupied! (Anne and Will were mismatched ere the knot was tied.)"
Contrafactual history can be fun. Of course, if the editors at Grandin had any experience translating anything, they probably wouldn’t have viewed this as a mistake and would thus have not known to say anything to Smith about it. It is only if one assumes that everyone involved shared your assumptions about the aims of Joseph Smith’s project that we get bogged down with these kinds of questions.
Kishkumen wrote: ↑Wed Mar 23, 2022 11:29 pmContrafactual history can be fun. Of course, if the editors at Grandin had any experience translating anything, they probably wouldn’t have viewed this as a mistake and would thus have not known to say anything to Smith about it. It is only if one assumes that everyone involved shared your assumptions about the aims of Joseph Smith’s project that we get bogged down with these kinds of questions.
Insult? What insult? In my opinion, you and many other people bring a set of assumptions to Joseph’s intentions that may not be accurate. In this case, that he had any idea about the necessity of linguistic precision in copying certain old texts. It is important to you, but why is it important? Would he have thought it was important? Do his purposes and methods line up with your expectations and standards?
Okay, you still can't answer the question because you're stubborn. (Have you ever been told you're stubborn?) Look, pal, it's simply a matter of yes or no based on what you think.Kishkumen wrote: ↑Thu Mar 24, 2022 1:15 amInsult? What insult? In my opinion, you and many other people bring a set of assumptions to Joseph’s intentions that may not be accurate. In this case, that he had any idea about the necessity of linguistic precision in copying certain old texts. It is important to you, but why is it important? Would he have thought it was important? Do his purposes and methods line up with your expectations and standards?
Obviously they don’t. But the better question is: could or should they have done so in the first place?
Lieutenant Uhura wrote:But Mr. Spock, I don't think the word felicitations is in the Bible. I'll cross check my circuits and see if I can find it in the Book of Mormon.
Ah, Captain Kishkumen! You've come to educate me and grace me with your benevolence. How wonderful!
My dear captain consiglieri, surely you know the word START is not in the Bible. Now take it back or I shall have to get very angry.
I am not a big believer in simple binaries. You call it stubbornness. I see it as a realistic recognition of the complexity of life.Okay, you still can't answer the question because you're stubborn. (Have you ever been told you're stubborn?) Look, pal, it's simply a matter of yes or no based on what you think.
I posit to say that had Joseph Smith learned that the word START was not a word used in the English Bible he would have scrubbed it and replaced it with began.
So my answer is definitely, YES.
Do you have an answer or do you want to continue to be stubborn?
It's a very, very, simple answer and there is ONLY one. It's a 1 or a 0 or a yes or a no. Keep the word or replace it with something else. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, complex about the outcome of this choice. I don't doubt at all that Smith would have scrubbed START on the manuscripts and penciled in an alternative had he realized what he had said. His task was to make his work look as genuine as possible and dress it in the official language of the English Bible. The fact that he let adieu into his novel is an anomaly that is hard to explain. But the Bible's main thrust starts at the very beginning of Genesis and Joseph Smith was keen on that. But Smith was not perfect and neither was his Book of Mormon which he wanted to be the most correct book on earth. But the use of START is 5 errors he made while making up stories.Kishkumen wrote: ↑Fri Mar 25, 2022 10:34 amI am not a big believer in simple binaries. You call it stubbornness. I see it as a realistic recognition of the complexity of life.Okay, you still can't answer the question because you're stubborn. (Have you ever been told you're stubborn?) Look, pal, it's simply a matter of yes or no based on what you think.
I posit to say that had Joseph Smith learned that the word START was not a word used in the English Bible he would have scrubbed it and replaced it with began.
So my answer is definitely, YES.
Do you have an answer or do you want to continue to be stubborn?
Are you telling me that Joseph Smith did not realize that "adieu" was not in the Bible? The problem here is your foundational assumption that, because Joseph Smith emulated King-Jamesian language, he must have felt it was important to emulate it precisely. All of that assumes a certain approach to the Book of Mormon project that I just don't know is true, and I am not confident that your assumptions are right. The questions you ask will determine the kind of answers you come up with. In the search, you will look at things that are valuable to people who are not asking your particular question, so, even if they don't agree with your assumptions, they can benefit from what you are doing.Shulem wrote: ↑Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:05 amIt's a very, very, simple answer and there is ONLY one. It's a 1 or a 0 or a yes or a no. Keep the word or replace it with something else. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, complex about the outcome of this choice. I don't doubt at all that Smith would have scrubbed START on the manuscripts and penciled in an alternative had he realized what he had said. His task was to make his work look as genuine as possible and dress it in the official language of the English Bible. The fact that he let adieu into his novel is an anomaly that is hard to explain. But the Bible's main thrust starts at the very beginning of Genesis and Joseph Smith was keen on that. But Smith was not perfect and neither was his Book of Mormon which he wanted to be the most correct book on earth. But the use of START is 5 errors he made while making up stories.
