Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Stem
God
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:21 pm

Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Stem »

If Conference didn't do it for you, you might want to try https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... tnote60anc

Yeah...right! No way in hell did Joseph Smith consult Adam Clarke. That's all lies and foolish nonsense.

I may kid, but I admit, Jackson's little rebuttal turned out a little better than I thought. makes me feel like there is plenty more for folks to look into, if they are so inclined. My interest may be waning.

kairos
God
Posts: 1916
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:56 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by kairos »

My sense is that Clarke's fingerprints are all over the JST and Joseph Smith's fingerprints are all over Clarke's work. Can Jackson concede that the Clarke's commentary was not a source of Joseph Smith work on the JST- i think he will answer that uh uh Clarke's work was used in some fashion when Joseph Smith wrote the JST .
Now it is clear that Joseph Smith used the KJV in the Book of Mormon when years ago that was not conceded; to me Wayment and Wilson present a
solid case for Joseph Smith use of Clarke's work. So much for divine direct inspiration from God to Joseph Smith on both books imho.

k

Stem
God
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:21 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Stem »

kairos wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:32 am
My sense is that Clarke's fingerprints are all over the JST and Joseph Smith's fingerprints are all over Clarke's work. Can Jackson concede that the Clarke's commentary was not a source of Joseph Smith work on the JST- i think he will answer that uh uh Clarke's work was used in some fashion when Joseph Smith wrote the JST .
Now it is clear that Joseph Smith used the KJV in the Book of Mormon when years ago that was not conceded; to me Wayment and Wilson present a
solid case for Joseph Smith use of Clarke's work. So much for divine direct inspiration from God to Joseph Smith on both books imho.

k
In the comments Jeff Lindsay says,
It is simply amazing that the handful of weak parallels to Adam Clarke are being billed as evidence of “plagiarism” by the most prominent voices of anti-Mormonism. Even if every case raised by Wayment and Wilson-Lemmon really were cases of Joseph being influenced directly by Clarke, they would represent little more than occasional minor influence. Since the JST was never published by Joseph, there isn’t even a case for actual plagiarism for that incomplete work in progress (requires publication without attribution). But the reality is that among the alleged instances of borrowing from Clarke published by Wayment and Lemmon, not a single one withstands scrutiny. Their best examples are sometimes completely erroneous, far-fetched, or have much more credible explanations rather than borrowing from Clarke. But some of our critics bill this as an amazing find of historical importance that cuts to the heart of LDS claims.
Thanks for doing the homework required to show what an empty, even ridiculous case this is against the JST.
SHoot. Seems all settled to me.

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 12055
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Shulem »

Don't forget about this thread:

Radio Free Mormon: 187: “Borrowed Robes”–The JST’s Reliance on the Adam Clarke Bible Commentary

It's conclusively shown that Smith ripped off Clarke. Never mind what the apologists have to say. What they have to say is not important and may be safely ignored.

User avatar
fetchface
God
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:38 am

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by fetchface »

It's funny how strong parallels can be dismissed when inconvenient for LDS belief, but weak parallels become strong evidence when they link the Book of Mormon to some random ancient proper noun.

There's just no attempt at consistency here.
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
My Blog: http://untanglingmybrain.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 12055
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Shulem »

fetchface wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 2:39 pm
It's funny how strong parallels can be dismissed when inconvenient for LDS belief, but weak parallels become strong evidence when they link the Book of Mormon to some random ancient proper noun.

There's just no attempt at consistency here.
Double standard lying Mormons. Oh how Mormons love to cover lies and cover their own sins up in them. I wouldn't trust a Mormon any further than I could throw one.

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 21366
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Kishkumen »

There will always be bizarre denials from the Mopologists. Their job is to say what they perceive to be necessary to keep people in the Church, no matter how implausible or unsupported by the evidence.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 849
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Dr Moore »

So the apologists are attacking Wayment’s scholarship in order to take away any potential for a slam dunk? This is an odd strategy indeed. If parallels don’t work then I’m afraid the entirety of the Interpreter’s corpus is null and void. I will have to go see how it is that Wayment’s 100s of instanced fail to “withstand scrutiny.”

Stem
God
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:21 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Stem »

Dr Moore wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:21 pm
So the apologists are attacking Wayment’s scholarship in order to take away any potential for a slam dunk? This is an odd strategy indeed. If parallels don’t work then I’m afraid the entirety of the Interpreter’s corpus is null and void. I will have to go see how it is that Wayment’s 100s of instanced fail to “withstand scrutiny.”
I thought I'd pull up Wayment/lemonss treatment and see it side by side with this response. Of course it's true in that wayment and lemon only offered a few examples to make their case and yet otherwise suggested there are many more examples. I figured Jacksons problem would be relying on the small sample, but he certainly doesn't think so. After reading jackson I'm wondering if other commentaries also fill in as sources.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22502
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by moksha »

Kishkumen wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 4:29 pm
There will always be bizarre denials from the Mopologists. Their job is to say what they perceive to be necessary to keep people in the Church, no matter how implausible or unsupported by the evidence.
No matter how bogus the rebuttal, people in the wards take comfort in knowing there is a rebuttal. The Interpreter has done its job.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 21366
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Kishkumen »

No matter how bogus the rebuttal, people in the wards take comfort in knowing there is a rebuttal. The Interpreter has done its job.
Indubitably. Salvation is much more important than clear thinking.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist

User avatar
fetchface
God
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:38 am

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by fetchface »

Dr Moore wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:21 pm
If parallels don’t work then I’m afraid the entirety of the Interpreter’s corpus is null and void.
Yep, if parallels to Clarke's commentary don't offer strong evidence of a connection, then no parallels offer strong evidence of a connection.
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
My Blog: http://untanglingmybrain.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 849
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Dr Moore »

With only a few subject-noun changes, Kent Jackson's article could be re purposed to explain beautifully and forcefully why the Book of Mormon is not a historical text.

User avatar
fetchface
God
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:38 am

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by fetchface »

Dr Moore wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:40 am
With only a few subject-noun changes, Kent Jackson's article could be re purposed to explain beautifully and forcefully why the Book of Mormon is not a historical text.
I guess the interesting follow up question for me is, do these people not see the double standard or do they see it and it doesn't bother them?

It's hard for me to understand since I never spent any significant time wrestling with the contrary evidence. The day I decided to wrestle with the contrary evidence with an open mind was the day I lost my belief. And specifically, I lost my belief because I realized that I would have to maintain a huge double standard of evidence to maintain that belief. I couldn't bring myself to do that.

I guess I just don't understand what makes these guys tick.
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
My Blog: http://untanglingmybrain.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 3615
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Dr Exiled »

fetchface wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:15 am
Dr Moore wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:40 am
With only a few subject-noun changes, Kent Jackson's article could be re purposed to explain beautifully and forcefully why the Book of Mormon is not a historical text.
I guess the interesting follow up question for me is, do these people not see the double standard or do they see it and it doesn't bother them?

It's hard for me to understand since I never spent any significant time wrestling with the contrary evidence. The day I decided to wrestle with the contrary evidence with an open mind was the day I lost my belief. And specifically, I lost my belief because I realized that I would have to maintain a huge double standard of evidence to maintain that belief. I couldn't bring myself to do that.

I guess I just don't understand what makes these guys tick.
I think they are so obsessed with supporting the team that they'll sacrifice logic. One sees that attitude of turning a blind eye to whatever the supposed "enemy" is saying regardless of the truth in many areas including politics. The team and its goals are paramount. So, attack the foes and support your friends.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 

kairos
God
Posts: 1916
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:56 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by kairos »

Are any of you concerned that Wayment and Wilson only gave a few examples? Why? to constrain the devastation to the JST by Clarke was Wayment asked top tone it down and not list/comment on the hundred instances they found?
Am i all wet here? is an exhaustive list and assessment of supposedly hundred instances around somewhere?

thanx
k

ps- i asked in an email to Wayment about 3 weeks ago, whether the second document Buck's theological dictionary was used by Joseph Smith on the JST- he replied that he had not investigated that but said he would be interested if someone did that- he added the does see Buck being used in the D&C!
The beat, i mean plagarism goes on and on and on.

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 849
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Dr Moore »

It isn't that Jackson fails to present some logic -- he does. His article raises intriguing questions. For instance, why DID Joseph change "unicorns" in one place (consistent with Clarke), but not in other places where "unicorn" or "unicorns" appears? Jackson did the research to show that yes, Joseph did cover at least one of those other "unicorn" passages in the JST. Obviously a contradiction - what gives?

I submit that the real problem is the logic of Jackson's implicit foundational assumption -- that Joseph sought for completeness and consistency in his works, and/or that God guided him to a place of completeness and consistency.

But of course he didn't, and He didn't. What a terrible place to start an academic perspective on Joseph Smith. There are hundreds of ways in which Joseph's translations, revelations, theology and his actions produced highly problematic contradictions, anachronisms, falsehoods, honest mistakes, etc.

I found Matthew Grey's summary of a (the?) primary motivation behind Joseph's translation enterprises to be simply perfect. That being "showing off", or as Grey puts it ever so gently:
Matthew Grey wrote:display his erudition


(in Grey, Approaching Egyptian Papyri through Biblical Language, 2000)

In the framework of Joseph "showing off", Wayment's conclusions and Jackson's questions can both be valid simultaneously. Joseph never undertook the burden of being complete and consistent in any of his translations. Why does Jackson feel compelled to make it so with Wayment's JST discovery?

User avatar
Rick Grunder
Nursery
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2019 4:13 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Rick Grunder »

Kairos,

Regarding Buck's Theological Dictionary which you mentioned, here is my somewhat brief entry which may serve as an introduction to that work:

http://www.rickgrunder.com/parallels/mp77.pdf
“I prefer tongue-tied knowledge to ignorant loquacity.”
― Cicero, De Oratore - Book III

kairos
God
Posts: 1916
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:56 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by kairos »

Rick
Thanx for the links and comment!
k

User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 4055
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

I would have to agree with Brant Gardner’s assessment of Kent Jackson’s article. http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic. ... 3#p1236733

And, IRL Kent Jackson is a total douche. His posting history here would made kiwi57 blush. Take a short trip down memory lane and look at some of his posts:

http://mormondiscussions.com/memberlist ... le&u=18269
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 849
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Joseph coulnd't possibly have relied on Adam Clarke

Post by Dr Moore »

Sheesh. No wonder Jackson goes for the jugular on Wayment as he does. It will be interesting to see how Jackson addresses the matter once Wayment releases all of the "hundreds" of instances of Clarke-borrowing he found with Wilson-Lemmon.

Post Reply