Leaderboard

I had a somewhat scattered but entertaining discussion with a born again gentleman. I didn't catch his whole backstory as he was jibbering and jabbering too much. After I had gone on to explain that my over all goal was to move to the states and be with my people, possibly starting my life as a saint properly and settling down, he rather condescendingly informed me that I would be '' planting a generation of hellbound seeds ''. The discussion ( although random ) was civil enough but I was mildly amused at him thinking he could shake my testimony. He had just been dispensing all manner of flyers and pamphlets about this and that. I haven't had a good talk with someone from a random encounter since the Jehovas about four years ago. Anybody else have any tips or stories regarding such people. Normally I'd keep walking but today I had some time to kill and the summer hasn't left us altogether so it was pleasant enough for a stop and talk.

I first encountered such people as a new missionary in Philadelphia, waiting for my visa to Italy. This would have been about March of 1983. A middle-aged man stopped me on the street and kindly informed me that I was going to hell if I didn't leave the Mormon cult. He told me the unspeakably awful things people do in the temple. When I told him I had been to the temple and that no such things happened, he responded that I just hadn't been to the right place in the temple, where I would have seen such things. Although I admit I found it mildly entertaining, I have mostly refused to engage such antiMormons since that time. I don't like laughing at or mocking people for their ignorance, and I like even less having to listen to slander about things I consider sacred without responding. And I do not care to respond to open, unrepentant, hateful ignorance. I realize this is a fault in my personality, but there it is. I try hard not to be the kind of prideful jerk who brags about not suffering fools gladly, but some things are frankly more insufferable than others. For me, antiMormonism and antiChristianity is at or at least near the top of the insufferability curve.

Here's another example. See the last phrase from the 3 Ne quote above: Hebrew example: In English, the "again" would be placed at the end, as is found in the KJV. But in 3 Ne? No. The word "again" is an adverb. As such, it needs to be placed next to the verb in Hebrew. It is very awkward in English. But in Hebrew, it makes perfect sense. The "thither" is placed last in Hebrew. But it is awkward in English. So, we place it closer to the verb, but after the object. I'm beginning to think this is a testimony to the validity of the BoM. The objection I have is: Why there are so many passages that actually seem to follow more traditional English when it seems to violate Hebrew word order? I came upon an answer: After the loss of the 116 pages, Joseph was told to start translating from Mosiah onward. Then after Moroni was translated, he was informed about the small plates, and was instructed to go back to work on the small plates (1 Ne to WoM). When they were doing their editorial review for the printer's manuscript, they edited a lot to make it more readable in English. But as they were getting near the end, the printer was catching up to them and they couldn't edit as much in the last sections of the translation. It is possible that 3 Ne 21 was about the point where the printer caught up, and they couldn't do as much editing. Consider how much of the BoM is between Mosiah and 3 Ne 21. We also find that there are a lot more cultural markers in 1&2 Ne as well. Again, a Hebrew linguistic quirk. Why did he separate out "wood" from a "straight stick"? Bows are usually not made of a single piece of wood. They are usually glued/laminated strips of wood. So, they'd be multiple pieces of wood, vs a single stick that merely needed to be carved. In English, when we "make something out of wood" we tend to think of wood as a "mass". But in Hebrew, it is spoken of as a plural (i.e. many "pieces of" wood). They don't say "pieces of" they simply make "wood" plural instead of singular. But the single stick used for the arrow? That was the singular. Compare to Exodous 37:1 and Ezekiel 37:16. They both use the same word for "wood" or "stick" (ates). But the former is plural; the latter, singular. Amazing.

All fair points. But it seems that these explanations aren't enough. It seems like they are no longer trying. The "overwhelm" per @Backroads is probably a fair comment on that. But they could still try a bit harder. Or at least they could just call it a day and preserve the fond memories of a really good series of movies. As it is they're destroying the legacy.

I'm gratified to see some of the younger generation starting to realize that some folks are just plain pushing the social agenda a bit too hard. The latest meme:

Tips for what? How to spot/avoid them? How to change their opinions about things? I haven't been preached to by a born again person in a couple decades. But I did have an immensely enjoyable 3 hour long conversation with an atheist last month. Both of us talking 100 miles an hour, totally respectful. We managed to solve pretty much all of the world's problems in that conversation, but neither of us budged a single inch on our beliefs about God.

I’m not sure how fair a comparison those clips were. Hulk and Hawkeye are comparing movie effects and choreography against a tv series, isn’t it? And Black Widow is movie v. movie, but White Widow’s weak, goofy landing was done intentionally to mock Black Widow’s signature landing style. I can’t compare Wakanda to Iron Man because I didn’t even know that one was happening (happened?).

I just found something really amazing for me. I think it would fit perfectly with this thread. My missionary son (the one who got his Urkaine mission cancelled and is now in Layton, UT) found an old copy of the BoM in his apartment. It had some weird markups of various types. He said it was apparently a library copy, so it was probably marked up by someone who picked it up from a library. One thing he conveyed to me was that 3 Ne 21:1-7 had a marking stating: "Poor English, but perfect Arabic." He didn't know what that meant. But he knew that I'd been studying Hebrew lately (and he knew that Hebrew and Arabic were from the same language family) and wondered if I had any idea. I looked at Ch 21. Immediately I realized what he was talking about. I had never really thought much about the word order in the Book of Mormon. I was raised with it. I was used to it. And I have studied various languages enough to be able to decipher weird word order. But when the topic was on my mind, I realized those verses are absolutely terrible. Technically, it is grammatically acceptable. But stylistically, it's an aesthetic nightmare. So, I began understanding what @Jamie123 was talking about. He was right. There are some phrases that are terrible. So, taking a cue from my son, I looked up similar phrases in the Bible to compare with the Hebrew. I was AMAZED at the results. Virtually everything that seems weird (regarding word order) can be attributed to it being a translated work. Biblical Example: I think the translators of the KJV really tried to keep the word order from the Hebrew as much as practical. But there were some word orders that were so inscrutable that it simply wouldn't be decipherable in English. So, they changed what they felt they had to in order to convey the message. Not only that, but some verb conjugations had to be altered. Example: We use "will" to denote future tense. And we also use it to denote a commitment to do something. But both inflections (in parenthesis above) are actually present imperfect in Hebrew. I don't believe we have a present imperfect tense in English. The closest comparison would be the present progressive. And we seem to use that ad nauseum for everything. Hebrew has no progressive state, so it isn't quite the same as the meaning in Hebrew. I believe the translators did a good job. The context and voice of the English seems to indicate that the future tense is meant to hint at a present imperfect meaning. Now let's see what we read in 3 Ne 21. Notice that order of the direct object and indirect object placement. In English, we tend to want to drop a preposition where we can. So, instead of "I want to give a sign to you", we use "I want to give you a sign." Both are correct English. But stylistically, one is more preferable and more common. The verb "gather in" is worthy of note. When we have a split verb like this, we tend to put an object phrase between the two words. But in Hebrew, the word (asap) can be translated as either "gather" or "gather in". Regardless of the translation in English, the verb is complete as one word. So, the Hebrew word would have been translated as "gather in". Then the verb would have been followed by the object. And that is exactly how it reads in the BoM text. Also notice the use of the word "shall" instead of "will". I had always wondered about that. Why were both used throughout the Bible? In today's English, they both indicate a future tense. But it appears that (based on context) the "will" was used to indicate this "present imperfect" tense, while "shall" was used to indicate a future tense (in scriptures). That really gives some insight into the meanings of some passages of scripture. I haven't looked at the D&C, to see if it uses the same convention. It was fascinating to discover that this uneducated farm boy would have provided the word order that clearly indicate that it was a translated work from a language that was significantly similar to Hebrew.

Yeah the water appears to be cooler around Florida so hopefully that brings it's strength down a bit before landfall.

It’s too early to tell now but as of five hours ago, direct hit. Again though, it’s still too early and it’s expected to get weaker.

Our local Publix is still stocked quite well. It’s gasoline that I’m concerned about

I don't know. He has straight up instructions for making an abortion drink in the Bible. It's one that causes a miscarriage and instructions on it's use. To many that shows that even the Lord supports the idea of abortion, at least in certain circumstances. Personally, I am of the generation (that probably is driving the latest Supreme Court decisions) that is completely against abortion. I think it is a dangerous thing to participate in no matter the circumstances in relation to your spiritual health and welfare. Personally I may feel it is something that should be outlawed except in cases of rape, incest, or the health of the mother. I also know much of that is driven by my religious beliefs rather than more logical ideas. The rational me dislikes the idea of any group of religious individuals pushing their beliefs on others. This is why I think our modern interpretations of the separation of Church and State are a good idea. In that light, taking a more logical though, the State (or government) should keep itself out of abortion AS LONG AS IT IS A MEDICAL ISSUE DECIDED BETWEEN A DOCTOR AND THE WOMAN. (in otherwords, anything that is done that is NOT from a medical doctor in the arena of abortion, I have no problem with it being outlawed). The State should not be dictating what has to be done by trained medical personnel in these types of situations. A doctor should not have to be afraid of trying to save the life of a woman or do something in relation to keeping her healthy because the state will punish him for doing so. A Doctor should be allowed to treat their patients to the best of their ability. The problem I have with many of these laws are that they are being made by those who have no medical experience, no medical training, and are not done in pursuit of saving lives or helping woman. They are being made purely from religious views with no insight into actually helping those who may need it. One result is that they cause doctors to be afraid of actually caring for the health of patients in certain situations. I am not a doctor, I know I should not be telling a doctor what they can or cannot do when trying to save someone's life or health. I think we should let doctors practice the medicine in these cases (and others), not someone in the government not connected to the situation, and even more so, most of those making the laws who have no medical training at all.

While I think Trump was a good President, I hope he does not run again, or loses to a quality opponent in a primary. I do not think a second term with him at the helm would be good for the country. We are wayyyyy to polarized at this point for him to be President again.

.

It’s mostly the snowbirds and really new residents that are going crazy. For the rest of us, this ain’t our first rodeo.

Nurse Ratched.

And lest we forget... I remember a movie about a bunch of pre-pubescent boys having a pow-wow about their celebrity objects of their affection. Three of the above were mentioned as alternatives to Ginger and Mary Ann. (No implication on present company, of course).