Talk:Biblical canon: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:33, 14 September 2004

Revision as of 07:14, 15 September 2004

Line 454:

:::::Discussion of the canon of the Bible is clearly an encyclopedic topic, and the article is correctly named as is. - [[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]] 23:33, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

::::::The issue is that not everyone can agree over whether the New Testament or the Apocrypha are part of the Bible. But what all these books have in common is that their intent is to extend the Bible without replacing it. How do we define ''the'' Bible? When it was compiled by [[Ezra]]? When it was compiled in Alexandria? When [[King James I]] commissioned a translation? Either we agree on ''one'' point that defines the Bible, or we don't. And trying to force one point opens a POV pandora's box. We must remain neutral, and neutrality inherently comes with a degree of flexibility — we must be able to bend, or a strike against us will cause us to break and shatter. - [[User:Gilgamesh|Gilgamesh]] 07:14, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Anyway, Gadykozma, in your edits, what do you mean that the languages "were never discovered". It seems vague to me. LDS have beliefs in what some of the languages were, but I said [[Semitic language]]s because listing them all would have made the paragraph too verbose in my opinion. They are believed to be [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]], with supplemental [[Arabic language|Arabic]], and two other languages which in the 19th century were called "Syriac" and "Chaldean", which, considering the purported time period of the texts, would probably mean [[Aramaic language|Aramaic]] and [[Akkadian language|Akkadian]]. The Egyptian references are believed to be a source of [[loanword]]s and given names (such as "Nephi") and of the [[ideographic]] script adapted to Hebrew that [[Mormon (prophet)|Mormon]] and [[Moroni (Mormonism)|Moroni]] are believed to have used to compress a large chronicle into small tarnish-resistant gold plates, as well as in their belief that an ideographic writing system could be better deciphered over an indefinately long period of time than a written language based on [[phoneme]]s specific to one language. With these ''beliefs'' in consideration, I simply think the edits should be less vague and confusing without being overly verbose. - [[User:Gilgamesh|Gilgamesh]] 09:23, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)