All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
- Today
-
Thanks, Maklelan. That was very educational. I have to say that I have a bit of a problem with one issue. Are you saying that what is currently written in the BoM is NOT a translation from the Nephi's small plates or the Brass Plates? OR What series of events would you suppose could have put these words into the Brass Plates which were NOT the original intended meaning of Isaiah's own words? And one more question: I can understand that many translators can make incorrect translations out of ignorance. But if the text is that clear (as you seem to indicate) I'm having difficulty with believing that educated people translating a clear text incorrectly. I had always believed that when a text is translated in different ways it is because the text is NOT that clear or something is lost in the translation. But you're not saying anything was "lost in translation." You're saying that they knowingly perpetuated an incorrect translation even though they clearly re-translated a lot of other words/phrases completely differently. So, what is the reason people would do that? Pick and choose which words they leave (knowingly incorrect) and yet change others (believed to be incorrect)? My dependence on consensus is that I have an assumption that a greater majority of translators agreeing would indicate greater level of accuracy in the translation. Why would this be a bad assumption? For the Bible in general, we know that things were lost because of either ignorance of the true gospel or because of intentional mistranslation. Yet these don't fit into these categories. Or do they?
-
-
Bowing before a suzerain could certainly be a part of a covenant requirement, just like it's a part of Tae Kwon Do tournaments, but I'm not aware of any convention that identifies bowing in and of itself as diagnostic of covenant. That would be like saying the word "bow" in any given text indicates they're at a Tae Kwon Do tournament. Could you point me to the texts support your position?
-
I disagree that "is abased" necessarily indicates an outside force. One can abase themselves by the actions they choose. In fact, that's the prototypical use. The Oxford English Dictionary indicates "abase" is "chiefly reflexive." The Hebrew verb here can be used as a stative, meaning it describes a state rather than an action. The semantic focus then is simply on the state rather than on the agent that caused it. It nowhere occurs in the passive, either, so in the absence of a separate subject acting on the object of the verb, a reflexive sense is most likely. I don't know that the Hebrew is that unclear. This verb would have to be piel or hophal or something in order to understand it to clearly mean someone else put them in that state. There are verbal forms that are passive/reflexive (niphal), and others that are purely reflexive (hithpael), but it has a lot to do with the nature of the verbal root, too. Here, it's a stative, as described above. Translators can stick with traditional interpretations for lots of reasons. A widespread. consensus among translations of the Bible doesn't necessarily indicate much, especially when they're all rather conservative translations. These translations all get Genesis 1:1 entirely wrong, too, just like they do It doesn't. The text in Nephi is altering the King James Version of the Bible, so it's not necessarily a reflection of the underlying source text. Frequently it's just trying to make sense of an English text that's problematic, either logically or theologically. When we start using the English text of the Isaiah chapters as commentary on the original text of Isaiah, we enter some incredibly complex territory where our theory of Book of Mormon translation has the potential to be very distorting. The KJV and other translations are assuming verses 11 and 17 out to be used to interpret verse 9. Incidentally, in verses 11 and 17, the KJV interprets in the passive the exact same verbal root as is found in verse 9. It's not about contrasting, it's about repeating. It's synonymous parallelism. It's repeating the same thing over again in slightly different terms. This convention has been described as "A, and what more, B." In other words, there's repetition that frequently also builds on the meaning. This is the single most basic feature of Biblical Hebrew poetry. 1 Sam 17:4, 23 uses the phrase איש־הבנים, which literally means "man of mediation," and refers to the single soldier who fought another single soldier as a proxy for the whole battle. That is precisely the concept of the "champion." Without knowing the Hebrew we can misunderstand the occurrence of איש to be standing on its own, but it's not. In Biblical Hebrew it refers to someone who is vigorous or mighty, so "hero" or "warrior" usually in the Hebrew Bible. In Modern Hebrew, however, it's the generic word for "male." Translating it the same way we translate איש־הבנים is misleading. I'd be careful about using "historical momentum" as an argument. It's always good to see someone trying to dig deeper into the text, and I hope to encourage more of that, but one of the reasons we have the saying that someone knows "just enough Hebrew to be dangerous" is because having a small number of resources can cause more problems than it solves if we don't also know the rules, conventions, and boundaries of the language.
-
-
-
-
The question stipulated that the event be recorded in both the Bible and the Book of Mormon. Other than the oblique Isaiah phrasing about "how art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning" (which wasn't actually about Lucifer at all, but simply an allusion targeting the king of Babylon), I can't think of any clear Biblical reference establishing this. I grant that you're right as far as the "earliest recorded event" goes, but I maintain that our modern Bible doesn't actually record this event, just obliquely references it.
-
I don't know what most of Christianity you are referring to, but I would stay with the scriptures to support any teachings about the justice of God and his mercy. In one particular example, I don't see God extending any mercy to those in Revelation 14:9-11.
-
It's all about definitions. With the Lord, the only "benefactor" may be His Father. And the Father in turn is "well pleased" with His Son. But if there is no one "giving" a benefit or service to God, then a similar feeling of "joy" or "agreeable emotion" may be felt. But the idea of "a benefactor" is not there. This definition doesn't require a benefactor. This emotion certainly can be felt by the Lord. The Lord CAN feel all the range of emotions that we can feel. But many of the negative ones (despair, fear, discouragement) are usually brought about by bowing to an evil spirit. As such, these are not part of his range that he DOES feel.
-
-
-
-
There is a term is science called "tightly coupled". What this means that two things which are different are joined together in such a way that in separating them destroys their individual properties. For example a man and a woman tightly coupled in the covenant of marriage become "one". This implies that the "fullness" if each is only achieved the the union of the two (or all involved). This is often expressed at the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. I believe being thankful or having gratitude is tightly coupled to having love for someone or something. So without gratitude for someone we cannot love them and vice verse with out love for someone we cannot have gratitude for them. In other threads there has been talk of divine punishments for the wicked - but I understand punishments as separate from consequences but rather added to consequences. For me, it is a misunderstanding to believe that G-d is adds punishments out of anger and hatred towards those that do evil. Rather, out of love and gratitude he allows and fosters agency - and then out of love and gratitude grants the desires (even though G-d is not happy with the desires and choices) of those that choose differently. The Traveler
-
I'm not, actually. I think many different interpretations can be correct even if they appear to be in contradiction with one another. I haven't said anything about Maklelan's interpretations to be incorrect. I'm not sure if they are. They're probably perfectly valid. The reason I'm looking at all these different meanings of the passage is to investigate the many ways we could apply the principles in our lives. With different readings/interpretations come different perspectives, applications, principles which could all be correct. And sometimes, by accepting many interpretations, we can get a fuller understanding of the meaning the Lord has for us.
-
@Carborendum and @maklelan - as a armature student of textual criticism I am aware of reading and variant readings of various ancient texts as well as the constant evolution of words and concepts. All of these thing can give greater understanding to scripture. However, I believe there is another context of the idea of bowing down, or abasing one's self. It is my understanding that bowing down or kneeling before a Supreme Suzerain or Magistrate of the law is a chiastic display of covenant of obedience to law. Bowing is also involved in the finalizing of covenant - a signature on the contract so to speak. I believe it is related to bowing one's head (bending of the nick) in acknowledgement of covenant - which is also related to the references in the Book of Mormon to "stiff nick". This would imply that those that do not humble themselves toward or to become subject the covenant (or Law of the Covenant) - cannot be lifted up by that covenant - regardless of their "high, average, or low standing" in the society or citizens of the covenant. In short we are debating the symbolism of covenants by focusing on the literal actions involved in covenant making rather than realizing the reference to and importance of covenant. The Traveler
-
Posted 3 hours ago @laronius Perhaps not first in terms of when it was recorded but first in the timeline is the fall of Lucifer. I agree with @laroniusthat the fall of Lucifer is the first example of divine justice. However, I have a problem with the Eden epoch as generally understood (especially among Traditional Christians) as a display of justice. Perhaps @Vort can explain or anyone???? If the fall was a demonstration of "Justice" - especially pure divine justice - How is it that every living thing on this planet suffers - not just or exclusively Adam and Even that according to the literal implications in scripture were the only beings that were involved or committed "THE TRANSGRESSION"???? By what sense of logic is this justice? The Traveler
-
2006 - on CNN. Smartmatic machines from Venezuela, etc. Here is a video you won't find readily available.
-
@maklelan, Thanks for your comments. First, I need to start off by admitting that I don't know Hebrew. I am looking at various Bible study tools and looking at the English in various verses and various translations. As I put them all together in my head, there is a clearer picture that arises in ENGLISH. And once in English, I'm fairly confident in the multitude of different meanings that we could derive from it. I'm also a student of many modern languages (though only fluent in three of them). The Biblical languages are foreign to me. In these many modern languages, I'm familiar with the linguistic quirks that various languages may have. And I use this knowledge to help advise me on alternative readings of various words. If I'm off, it is because the language I'm working with is so dissimilar to the languages I know that someone would have to inform me of it. That said, here is my response. The slight differences in the English has a significant meaning. You say "becomes low." In English this would imply an "effect" rather than any effort or choice. Whereas, the idea that he "is abased" implies an outside force causing it to happen. Then the "humbles himself" would mean that he chooses the abasement. This is why I say that the Hebrew is not clear in its meaning. I did list many translations. Only a few (which I did not list -- to make a point) used the reflexive. In agreement with your idea here, the passive is the more common translation in English. But that is quite different than "becomes low." Slight differences in wording in English is rather significant in meaning, especially when parsing words as I am. And the fact is that in other languages the passive and reflexive are the same. Not so in English. I don't know how it is in Hebrew. You're the expert there, so perhaps you can comment further on this linguistic idiosyncrasy. In today's world I'm not sure this is a distinction. Based on many general conference addresses, the worship of our own industry is synonymous with idolatry. And again, a new wording: Their bowing down abases them. So, the "outside force" idea and the "effect" idea are unified. It's possible. Again, I'm not going to claim greater knowledge of Hebrew, since my vocabulary is in the 2 digit range. But if your translation is correct, why do ALL of the widely used translations render it "forgive" (or pardon)? And if you are right, how does that effect the reading of Nephi? They don't abase themselves, so don't lift them up? It certainly is more common to render it as "a man" or "people", no doubt. The reason I went with my translation is because: a) That is the way it is written in the KJV and the BoM. b) I noticed the usage in Ezekiel 23:42, where we'd say "average Joe." I realize it is because it is in conjunction with רֹב. But the fact it is so rendered in a few other translations for Isaiah, it leads me to believe it is the intended meaning. c) Then there is the implied compare/contrast of אדם and איש. If they both mean "man" in general, then where is the compare/contrast? So, I see the usage in 1 Sam 17:4 & 23 to describe Goliath (rendered "champion"). Then they describe Goliath again in verse 51 using גִּבּוֹר which by any account is not an average man. I readily admit I could be wrong. And I understand you've got a lot more knowledge of Hebrew than I do. But there is a lot of historical momentum supporting my renderings.
-
I should have. I should have watched President Nelson's message when it aired last Friday. If I had I would have behaved different during that day. Among other things, this hit home especially in light of this particular thread. Part of President Nelson's prayer:
-
I'm grateful for the scriptures... From the Book of Mormon, to the Bible and all the Modern Revelations, that help me better know and understand God and Christ as well as what they would have me do.
-
I'm thankful for in-person contact. Our ward is ahead of the curve as far as getting back to normal. In our meeting yesterday, we were shaking hands and patting each other on the back. Some of us even gave each other hugs.
-
Perhaps not first in terms of when it was recorded but first in the timeline is the fall of Lucifer.
-
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think a person can certainly make sense out of both readings, but I think there's more going on in the Hebrew. In my own translation of Isaiah, I treat the second and third clauses as a bit of a word play. וישפל־איש is literally just "a man is/becomes low." While most translations render "humbles himself," I think a better rendering is "is abased." It's playing off of the fact that they're bowing down, and not just to idols in general, but to the products of their own industry, which Isaiah frequently mocks as powerless. Their bowing down thus abases them. Then the root so commonly translated "forgive" is just נשא, which means "to lift, bear, or carry." While it can be used in reference to removing blame, it's generally far more generic than that. I render "do not raise them up." Thus, they are bowing down in worship, which abases them, and the command is to not raise them up from their lowly and abased state. That imagery I think does more justice to Isaiah's use of contrasts and his rhetoric in this chapter about the people trying to hide in lowly places. I would also say I don't think there's significance to the use of אדם and איש. They're just generic words for "human" and "man." I don't see how one gets the suggestion that one is a commoner and the other is a "man of worth."
-
Saturday and Sunday I got sad news. It is expected I suppose to a degree, but it hits somewhat close to home. Two friends of mine have passed away this week from COVID-19 (or that is what I was told). One was someone I got to know through my daughter as she had a close friend when she was younger and I got to know that friends parents. Both parents came down with Covid but while one made it through, the other did not. The other one was also somewhat unexpected. I am part of a club where we dress up as Cowboys sometimes, and do cowboy things such as riding horses and doing rope tricks and rodeo tricks as well as other such things. These days we didn't do as much (age gets you a little slower at times) but we still did parades and fairs at times. One of them passed away this week as well. You may wonder what this has to do with thanks, but it has brought to me a stark realization of a blessing that I've had thus far. I've been around students and others who have had diseases (not just Covid, students have all sorts of illnesses and ailments. Strep can be a particularly lethal one if untreated, they also have flus, colds, etc.) which probably are not the best things that I am exposed to. I have been blessed with protection in many ways from being as affected by some of these as others. I am VERY grateful for the protection I have been blessed with thus far. I do not know how long it might continue, but I have been blessed tremendously in the past few months. I am grateful for that protection from ailments and sickness as well as with being healthy. There have been times when I may not have the best health, but I am still alive and am still breathing and exercising. I AM sorry for losing friends, but I am grateful for the time i have to spend with my family and those I love on this earth for at least a little bit longer and the protection and health that I have been blessed with.
- Yesterday
-
Tell them not to worry about it, I got it covered this time.
-
When Cain murdered Able. Clearly, Adam and Eve.
-
When Cain murdered Able. The Traveler
-
I figure when President Trump offers someone a job, he lets them know it's temporary. I also am guessing he gives them the option on how to leave, on friendly terms, or with Trump booting them out the door and ranting about them on Twitter. That way, people can work for Trump and not get type cast as a Trump supporter, if they so wish. I have no clue if this wild guess has any substance to it or not, but it sure sounds reasonable to me. Perhaps time and memoirs will tell.
-
I am grateful for the liberty, comforts, and technology that we have in the world compared to ages past. I am grateful for having the priesthood so readily accessible in the world. I am grateful for having temples that dot the land. #GiveThanks
-
I cannot - he died a while back from an automobile accident. I now must apologize for my unabashed sarcasm - he died from heart problems. The Traveler
