Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts 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?

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
  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):



    It soon became necessary to take some measures to accomplish the translation of the record into English but he was instructed to take off a facsimile of the charecters <composing the alphabet> <which were called reformed egyptian> Alphabetically and send them to all the learned men that he could find and ask them for the translation of the same. Joseph was very solicitous about the work but as yet no means had come into his hands of accomplishing it.


    it was agreed that Martin Harris should follow him as soon as <Joseph> should have sufficient time to transcribe the Egyptian alphabet which  Mr. Harris  was to take to the east and through the country in every direction to all who were professed linguists to give them an opportunity of showing their talents— 



    • Upvote 1
  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.



    [Martin Harris] immediately came to Susquehanna and said the Lord had shown him that he must go to New York City

     <with> some of the characters so we proceeded to copy some of them and he took his journey to the Eastern [Cities] and to the Learned <saying> read this I pray thee and the learned said I cannot but if he would bring the [plates] they would read it but the Lord had forbid it and he returned to me and gave them to <me> <to> translate and I said I cannot for I am not learned but the Lord had prepared spectacles


     for to read the Book therefore I commenced translating the characters and thus the [prophecy] of Isaiah was fulfilled which is written in the 29 chapter concerning the book.



    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
  4. And my favorite blog on the subject, from a non-member who investigates unknown texts:


    In summary, probably the least controversial inference you can draw from the lettershapes is their post-1650 dating: the embellished “H” shape and the probable links with Rich-family shorthand letter-shapes indicate that this is in no way ancient.

    In the absence of any other credible information, the most likely story I can reconstruct is that the “caractors” in the Anthon Transcript were copied in no particular order from a shorthand Bible (or possibly a shorthand diary), with various other letter-shapes added to make the overall alphabet look more ‘exotic’, or even “hieroglyphic” (even though, to our modern eyes, these singularly fail to have the desired effect). I would also be fairly unsurprised if the same shorthand Bible itself was subsequently used as a prop to convince skeptics – in short, that this was the Detroit Manuscript itself (but which, like the rest of the Anthon Transcript, subsequently disappeared from sight).


  5. FYI:


    Until recently, the prevailing notion was that a document now housed in the archives of the Community of Christ in Independence, Missouri, is the actual piece of paper shown by Harris to Anthon and others in New York. Letters recently found from Anthon indicate “it is virtually impossible to argue with certainty” that the transcript in Independence is the only one Anthon saw, Brother Bennett said. Moreover, recent research stemming from the Joseph Smith Papers project and based on handwriting analysis shows that the extant manuscript was likely not written by Joseph in 1828 but by John Whitmer in 1829 “and therefore could not have been the one displayed in New York City,” he added.



    • Upvote 1
  6. 22 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

    Interestingly enough, Davis has responded briefly to Hales' review here. Since it is a brief response I will quote Davis' response. 



    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!"

    • Like 1
  7. 13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

    No, I had no idea.  So the joke is on me for innocently thinking that there actually will be sequels?

    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.


    • Haha 1
  8. 17 hours ago, InCognitus said:

    I've always considered this to be a nomenclature issue for the Jaradites or Nephites, and not a translation issue, although the translation consideration may compound the problem.   If you arrive in a new world and see something that reminds you of a horse or elephant, you may call it a horse or elephant for lack of a better word.  If that was the case, the Reformed Egyptian word for "horse" or "elephant" may have been used in the Book of Mormon text.

    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 might be useful for defending the belief that it is an ancient document, but I'm not sure if it actually makes sense.

    • Like 1
  9. 17 hours ago, pogi said:

    Except that vitamin D is hardly absorbed through supplementation.  The best way to make it bioavailable is to get it as Rongo suggests - "sunshine".  That is entirely free and wont be wasted in your urine.  

    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.


    According to our data, amounts of vitamin D3 increased in the blood serum of all treated animal groups in proportion to time, during vitamin supplementation, until the 7th day (Figure 3). As early as after 3 days of supplementation, microencapsulated and oil-based vitamin D3 increased vitamin levels in the blood by almost three times: The control level of vitamin D3 in the rat serum ranged from 36.49 ± 4.12 to 40.5 ± 3.05 nmol/L, meanwhile in the microencapsulated and oil-based treatment groups it got up to 143.35 ± 14.72 and 150.85 ± 35.77 nmol/L, respectively. The highest vitamin D3 concentration in the rat blood serum was registered in the oil-based vitamin D3 group on day 7—the tested vitamin concentration reached 198.93 ± 51.6 nmol/L. Comparing the duration of the effect of all vitamin vehicles, microencapsulated SmartHit IV™ supplementation vitamin D3 concentrations in the blood serum remained constant for the longest time (up to the 14th day).





    Vitamin D supplementation significantly increased the serum 25(OH)D levels in both groups. Miscible form of vitamin D3 appears to be better in achieving higher levels of serum 25(OH)D than that observed with a similar dose of fat-soluble vitamin D3. Further studies with different dose regimens are required to establish its efficacy over the conventionally used fat-soluble vitamin D3.




    Subjects in both the groups had a significant increase in their serum 25(OH)D levels following [Vitamin D] supplementation.




  10. 15 minutes ago, Emily said:

    If you wish to think of the word "elephant" in the context of translating text of an ancient language and you don't have a word for a particular animal in your modern vocabulary, you could potentially include any animal that might be visually similar to an “elephant”.


    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 "chinchilla."

  11. 1 hour ago, rongo said:

    I tell people taking vitamins and supplements that they have expensive urine. :) 

    I'm with you. If you have a good, balanced diet, adequate sleep, exercise, and drink a lot of water (I started taking water seriously after my kidney stone), that's the best thing you can do for your health. And sunshine --- taking care not to get sunburn. 

    I don't have any "studies" to back it up, but it makes sense to me that getting your vitamins through food (and sunlight) is more effective than swallowing pills. I think you eliminate most of it that way. 

    Except for Vitamin D.


    COVID-19 is characterized by marked variability in clinical severity. Vitamin D had recently been reviewed as one of the factors that may affect the severity in COVID-19. The objective of current study is to analyze the vitamin D level in COVID-19 patients and its impact on the disease severity.

    This all translates into increased mortality in vitamin D deficient COVID-19 patients. As per the flexible approach in the current COVID-19 pandemic authors recommend mass administration of vitamin D supplements to population at risk for COVID-19.


    • Upvote 1
  12. 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...




    When someone is abusive they attack & discredit ppl who know— in order to stop anyone from listening to what they have to say. I have seen this many times w John Dehlin, including to the woman who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against him. He told me she was "crazy."

    Since he can't make the info not true, he wants people to believe those who have it are liars. Again, this is a common tactic for abusers. For example, Harvey Weinstein went to great lengths to discredit his accusers— that's how he was able to get away w it for so long.

    John Dehlin is very, very skilled at creating a victim narrative. He is a master at creating drama & noise to distract from legitimate critiques + making himself the center of attention. In every case (inconceivably), he manages to raise money off of his alleged "victimization."

    Several very credible women (incl Kristy Money & myself) have voiced concerns over his behavior & it's catching up with him. He's having an increasingly hard time demonizing & dismissing trustworthy, straightforward people (who otherwise seem like they should be on his side).

    I have, of course, been blocked by him. But he often uses women as go-betweens to try & get me to "forgive" or "make amends" with him. This is gross for a whole host of reasons, but mostly bc they try to insinuate I don't care abt the community as a whole bc I won't shut up.

    Abusive men try to twist things & say that it's truth-tellers who HURT the community by TELLING the truth... rather than the person *doing* the actual action they are telling folks about. You'd be surprised how effective this tactic is.

    His bread & butter is taking advantage over very vulnerable people in a really hard transition (cult exit) in their life. I just wish that men who benefit so incredibly much from vulnerable people in the community didn't ALWAYS get the benefit of the doubt over women.

    Gadflys always attract extreme opinions. John Dehlin does get a lot of vitriolic hate-comments & videos. We all do. It's awful & it comes with the territory. But, some of the critiques (particularly from people who once knew & trusted him, like me) ARE worth examining.

    Back in May 2017 when I questioned the ethics of Mormon Stories paying women far less than men, John Dehlin went from BFFs to ENEMY-mode in the space of one, single day. It was a complete & total Jekyll & Hyde in less than 24 hours.

    In many ways I've put some healthy distance between myself & Mormonism. I save my energy for new projects. John Dehlin doesn't have other projects. His status as an X-Mormon pseudo-celebrity is all he's got. That's why he goes unhinged when that precarious status is threatened.

    Many vulnerable people look to him as the one throwing them a life raft in the choppy sea that is leaving-Mormonism. I worry about someone who sucks up so much in the way of $$, attention, free labor (particularly of women) & cannot do ANY self-reflection that's not performative.

    He's a flawed dude who routinely spirals into self-loathing fueled tirades on the internet. He's neither saint nor devil. Neither am I. However, he is an expert as monetizing everything, so I have no doubt he'll figure out a way to monetize this most recent pity party.

    There are incredibly talented, interesting & amazing podcasts & communities cropping up every day in post-Mormonism. THERE ARE NO PROPHETS. Isn't that the point? It's time we reconsider giving so much attention to one person who has done & has the potential to do so much harm.

    It's important for me to speak up bc in the past I was known for speaking up for John Dehlin. People told me about sexist, racist, homophobic stuff he said or really problematic things he did to others & I said, "that's not my experience with him." I regret it.

    One woman came to me & told me she was a former employee & filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against John Dehlin w her state’s Human Rights Commission. I went to him directly & he convinced me she was “crazy” & her claim had no merit. I continued to support him. I regret it.

    In our culture our brains are already wired by our socialization under patriarchy to reflexively doubt women's claims & require supporting evidence for them beyond what we require for men's claims. Both men & women tend to be more skeptical of women's accounts. I regret this.




    • Like 3
    • Upvote 1
  13. 35 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

    Perhaps, but, then, ought one not make too big of a deal out of something of which one should not make too big of a deal.  I'm not condoning what Kwaku and Co. did, but, of his own choice, Mr. Dehlin has made himself a public figure.  A lot of public figures wish to court publicity and celebrity when it suits them, while, on the other hand, they wish to remain free to shun publicity and celebrity when it does not suit them.  That isn't the way it works.  Again, while I'm not condoning what Kwaku & Co. did, Mr. Dehlin, of his own choice, is not a public figure but ... Mr. Dehlin, of his own choice, is a public figure period.

    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.

    • Like 1
  14. 1 hour ago, juliann said:

    Cinepro. Get your facts straight!  FM didn't retweet anything. Go after them for what they did, not what a couple of kids did on their own twitter feed. 

    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. You and I might understand the nuances of content creation, independent contractors, work-for-hire, subbrands, re-tweets and plausible deniability.

    But this is the first thing people see on the video that was promoted by the same people that are making the videos mentioned in the meme.


    So if you're offering a preview of FAIR's defense ("It wasn't us - we would never do that!"), then I'll save FAIR the effort and let them know that's weak sauce.

    And to be clear, I am going after FAIR for what they did. They hitched their cart to content creators that are going to burn the brand down to the ground.

    • Like 1
  15. 31 minutes ago, Judd said:

    So if they thought it was funny, and knew what they were referencing when they said TITS, but they themselves didn’t intend to name the show that, they never would have retweeted it?

    If a church leader retweets an interview or article that makes reference in it to being a Mormon, does that mean they approve of the name again?

    The Church leader would certainly be acknowledging that the term "Mormon" is understood to apply to whatever it was discussing.

  16. 1 hour ago, Ipod Touch said:

    In reality, what is the worst that happens here?  Banned from Twitter and YouTube?  And that probably more due to copyright infringement more than anything else.  No serious person believes that this video was an actual threat.  It's a joke.  A stupid joke, but a joke.

    John calling the cops is the biggest boomer move I've seen in a long time.

    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.

    • Like 3
  17. 1 hour ago, Judd said:

    Did someone affiliated with their videos make the meme or did they share something someone else made/shared? If it was someone affiliated with the show then yes, it backs up your point about invalidating discussion regarding the acronym. But if not...

    The way social media works is that if you share something (without commenting otherwise), you are endorsing what you share.

  18. 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"), and never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined it would come to this.

    If FAIR represents LDS apologetics, then LDS apologetics has just jumped the shark. I honestly feel sorry for everyone who spent decades building the brand and then watched them hand the keys to the three stooges.

    FWIW, Cardon Ellis should have "Requires Adult Supervision" tattooed on his forehead. Whoever bought his sales pitch for this at FAIR is a sucker.

    • Like 3
  • Create New...