- Joined
- Jun 25, 2005
- Messages
- 3,237
- Reaction score
- 402
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
A few years ago Richard Dawkins was on a Swedish talk show that also happened to have the lead singer of band The Killers, Brandon Flowers, who is Mormon.
Brandon Flowers I am a Mormon video: I'm Brandon Flowers and I'm a Mormon - YouTube
Richard Dawkins ambushes the unexpecting Brandon flowers on the Book of Mormon.
"There is far more beauty in the real understanding of the reality of nature than there is from reading some ancient book, or the reading of some modern book, which is what the Book of Mormon is. I have to say when I read the Book of Mormon recently, what impressed me is that it is an obvious fake. I mean this is a 19th century book written in 16th century English. And it came to pass, verily I say unto you. Things like that. That is not how people talked in the 19th century. It's a fake. So it is not beautiful, it is a work of charlatanry."
Beginning around 2:42 of the video is where this happens. Richard Dawkins Hurts Brandon Flowers Feelings talking about the Mormon religion - YouTube
Dawkins has used the "19th century book written in 16th century English" rationale in mocking the Book of Mormon several times. He doesn't realize just how embarrassing his rationale is.
The Book of Mormon is a TRANSLATION. Joseph Smith could have translated the text in 10th century English, 11th century English, 13th century Chinese, etc. That he chose the scriptural language of the King James Bible is common sense given that is the scriptural language of his day. People have mocked that the French word Adieu is in the Book of Mormon. But as a TRANSLATION obviously the word was not the original text but the translator used a word available to him to translate an ancient Hebrew or Egyptian word that means farewell.
Dawkins also mocks the "and it came to pass" but again he shows his lack of knowledge:
"Mark Twain joked that if the phrase, 'And it came to pass,' were removed from the Book of Mormon, it would be just a pamphlet. However, the phrase is very typical of ancient texts."
Hugh Nibley
"Nothing delighted the critics more than the monotonous repetition of 'it came to pass' at the beginning of thousands of sentences in the Book of Mormon. Here again is something that Western tradition found completely unfamiliar. Instead of punctuation, the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon divides up its phrases by introducing each by an 'and,' 'behold,' 'now,' or 'It came to pass . . . .' Simply outrageous--as English literature, but it is standard Egyptian practice. Egyptian historical texts, Grapow points out, 'begin in monotonous fashion' always with the same stock words; at some periods every speech is introduced with the unnecessary 'I opened my mouth.' Dramatic texts are held together by the constant repetition of Khpr-n, 'It happened that' or 'It came to pass.' In Egyptian these expressions were not merely adornments, as Grapow points out, they are a grammatical necessity and may not be omitted. Paul Humbert has traced the origin of prophetic biblical expressions to archaic oracular formulas. At any rate they are much commoner in Egyptian than in the Bible, just as they are much commoner in the Book of Mormon. However bad they are in English, they are nothing to be laughed at as Egyptian." (Since Cumorah, p. 29)
"When Richard Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion,” was asked if there’s a better word for a nonbeliever than “atheist,” Dawkins suggested the word “bright.” He explained, “I think it’s rather a good word, though most of my atheist friends think it suggests religious people are “dims.” I say, ‘What’s wrong with that?’”
The rationale of this arrogant man is pretty dim.
A blogger calling Dawkins out on all this:
Joseph Smith, Richard Dawkins, and the Language of Translation | Interpreter
Brandon Flowers I am a Mormon video: I'm Brandon Flowers and I'm a Mormon - YouTube
Richard Dawkins ambushes the unexpecting Brandon flowers on the Book of Mormon.
"There is far more beauty in the real understanding of the reality of nature than there is from reading some ancient book, or the reading of some modern book, which is what the Book of Mormon is. I have to say when I read the Book of Mormon recently, what impressed me is that it is an obvious fake. I mean this is a 19th century book written in 16th century English. And it came to pass, verily I say unto you. Things like that. That is not how people talked in the 19th century. It's a fake. So it is not beautiful, it is a work of charlatanry."
Beginning around 2:42 of the video is where this happens. Richard Dawkins Hurts Brandon Flowers Feelings talking about the Mormon religion - YouTube
Dawkins has used the "19th century book written in 16th century English" rationale in mocking the Book of Mormon several times. He doesn't realize just how embarrassing his rationale is.
The Book of Mormon is a TRANSLATION. Joseph Smith could have translated the text in 10th century English, 11th century English, 13th century Chinese, etc. That he chose the scriptural language of the King James Bible is common sense given that is the scriptural language of his day. People have mocked that the French word Adieu is in the Book of Mormon. But as a TRANSLATION obviously the word was not the original text but the translator used a word available to him to translate an ancient Hebrew or Egyptian word that means farewell.
Dawkins also mocks the "and it came to pass" but again he shows his lack of knowledge:
"Mark Twain joked that if the phrase, 'And it came to pass,' were removed from the Book of Mormon, it would be just a pamphlet. However, the phrase is very typical of ancient texts."
Hugh Nibley
"Nothing delighted the critics more than the monotonous repetition of 'it came to pass' at the beginning of thousands of sentences in the Book of Mormon. Here again is something that Western tradition found completely unfamiliar. Instead of punctuation, the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon divides up its phrases by introducing each by an 'and,' 'behold,' 'now,' or 'It came to pass . . . .' Simply outrageous--as English literature, but it is standard Egyptian practice. Egyptian historical texts, Grapow points out, 'begin in monotonous fashion' always with the same stock words; at some periods every speech is introduced with the unnecessary 'I opened my mouth.' Dramatic texts are held together by the constant repetition of Khpr-n, 'It happened that' or 'It came to pass.' In Egyptian these expressions were not merely adornments, as Grapow points out, they are a grammatical necessity and may not be omitted. Paul Humbert has traced the origin of prophetic biblical expressions to archaic oracular formulas. At any rate they are much commoner in Egyptian than in the Bible, just as they are much commoner in the Book of Mormon. However bad they are in English, they are nothing to be laughed at as Egyptian." (Since Cumorah, p. 29)
"When Richard Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion,” was asked if there’s a better word for a nonbeliever than “atheist,” Dawkins suggested the word “bright.” He explained, “I think it’s rather a good word, though most of my atheist friends think it suggests religious people are “dims.” I say, ‘What’s wrong with that?’”
The rationale of this arrogant man is pretty dim.
A blogger calling Dawkins out on all this:
Joseph Smith, Richard Dawkins, and the Language of Translation | Interpreter
Last edited:
