Jump to content

cinepro

Contributor
  • Content Count

    10,528
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cinepro

  1. Does everyone agree that there is simply no possible way for Anthon (or any other living person) to actually verify a translation of Reformed Egyptian -> English? I mean, Mormon himself said that "none other people" back then could read it, so how would it be possible for Anthon to figure it out? So any story that claims Anthon claimed he could verify the translation is either incorrect, or Anthon was lying or mistaken?
  2. Lucy Smith's account also says that no translation had been done at the time Martin went to New York (spelling and grammar cleaned up):
  3. Additionally, here is the version of the story from Joseph's 1832 diary (spelling and grammar cleaned up). According to this entry, Martin didn't have a translation to show, just some characters. The translating didn't start until he got back.
  4. And my favorite blog on the subject, from a non-member who investigates unknown texts: https://ciphermysteries.com/2009/06/01/the-anthon-transcript
  5. Davis's response sounds amazingly similar to something I said dozens of times on my mission. "Don't believe what someone else wrote about the book. You need to read it yourself to know if it's true!"
  6. I think it's easy to underestimate the impact of the pandemic on the Church. I mean, who hasn't looked around the Church at at least one point in their lives and noted the lasting impact of the 1918 pandemic? (Other than this one, of course...) That being said, I think the church was in the biggest pickle with missionary work. The missionary program is a massive logistics machine, and it couldn't just be shut down on a dime and then reopened. Think of the countless leases, utility bills, auto expenses etc. that would continue. It would be a massive drain on the Church's balance sheet. And
  7. You're really missing out. The Babylon Bee is my favorite satirical site. It's satire from a Christian/Conservative viewpoint, but they poke fun at all the different christian sects (including LDS; you might want to avoid those), as well as the more annoying aspects of Conservatism. https://babylonbee.com/
  8. But that still leaves the translation problem. If the translation is tied that closely to the actual text (the word for "horse" or "elephant" must be translated as "horse" or "elephant", even if it's referring to a different animal), then how is it possible to have 19th century artifacts or influences in the translation? Ultimately, you have two different translation theories: the "loose" translation and the "tight" translation, and defenders must insist that both were used, with Joseph ping-ponging back and forth between a tight translation and a loose translation. Such an elastic theory m
  9. Wow. The world is a crazier place than I imagined.
  10. What's your definition of "hardly absorbed"? Because there appear to be several studies that show supplements are more-than-hardly absorbed, depending on the delivery method. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6631968/ Also...
  11. Good news. You're both right.
  12. That analogy only works for translations being done where the translator is fluent in both languages. In the case of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith didn't actually read Reformed Egyptian. And the translation process was precise enough to convey words that Joseph Smith didn't know, so it wasn't limited to words Joseph Smith had in his vocabulary. I mean, once you have a process that can convey words like "Coriantumr", "Zemnarihah" and "Riplakish" (not to mention "cumom" and "curelom"), it's kind of hard to say that the translation process couldn't convey words like "tapir" or "chinchill
  13. Except for Vitamin D. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-77093-z
  14. My ward in California is doing nothing. The stake is doing a drive-through Primary activity with different stations set up in a church parking lot.
  15. I just stumbled across Kate Kelly's Twitter feed, and in between her far-left musings, she's shared her thoughts on Dehlin and the recent brouhaha. Here are some of the more interesting comments for those who are interested. I wonder what the future of his brand is in the exMo world...
  16. My objection to the Basterds video wasn't based on the assumption that Dehlin was a private individual and should have special protections from ridicule. My objection is based on the assumption (fact?) that he is a human being.
  17. You are factually correct. Unfortunately, the facts don't support the perception. If Kwaku and Cardon had never retweeted and tacitly approved of the video, you'd be correct. It was some lone nutball who got a little carried away. So good for you, you've got the facts on your side. Unfortunately, this is the internet, and the facts aren't worth the paper they're printed on. The only thing that is important is perception. And the perception is that Cardon and Kwaku work to represent FAIR in some capacity. Part of that may be because FAIR has been posting their videos under the FAIR name.
  18. The Church leader would certainly be acknowledging that the term "Mormon" is understood to apply to whatever it was discussing.
  19. You and I are both speaking about this hypothetically. We are both participating under aliases. Life is good. I'm not fan of Dehlin. I've been critical of him for 20 years. I think he's a dunderheaded doofus. I think his interviews are meandering and oftentimes filled with non-sequiturs. But I can only imagine the feeling of seeing a video of an actor labeled "(insert cinepro's real name)" brutally clubbed to death. Maybe that's no big deal to others. I think it's a big deal.
  20. Whoever created the video made one huge mistake. Setting aside the general tastelessness, they should not have labeled the people "John Delin" and "Jeremy Runnells." Those characters should have been named "Mormon Stories" and "CES Letter." The other entities are labeled as things and groups, such as "FAIR" and "TITS." They should have maintained that across the board. Naming specific people was a huge mistake.
  21. The way social media works is that if you share something (without commenting otherwise), you are endorsing what you share.
  22. I have to admit, I love how TITS took all the conversations and defenses of the last few days ("They don't support the acronym...", "They are just being edgy like the youth want...", "This is the new direction of apologetics...") and did a "Hold my root beer" with a video of a guy labeled "John Dehlin" getting his head bashed in with a baseball bat labeled "TITS" (referring to the This Is The Story podcast), with FAIR labeled as an encouraging onlooker. I've been following apologetics for 30 years (since the days of "The Truth about the Godmakers" and Dan Petersen's "Offenders for a Word")
  23. Wow. I'm trying my best to see the upside in these videos, but I'm just not seeing it. If this is the type of content that will save the youth of the Church, then I have to admit I am hopelessly out of touch. I honestly can't believe these are being released under the FAIR brand. I've seen Kwaku pop up on different things over the years, and I think he has a problem with his focus. I'm all for being entrepreneurial and exploring different options, but at some point, you need to pick your lane. I mean, is this really the Instagram post of someone who aspires to defend the Church as an apol
×
×
  • Create New...