JohnsonJones

Members
  • Posts

    4337
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    JohnsonJones got a reaction from SilentOne in Christology in the Book of Mormon   
    This is most likely what I would back.
    Joseph Smith fell back onto what he was familiar with during the translation in many instances.  It most likely is not a word for word translation, but one that also was done in accordance with what Joseph was familiar with.
    This happens with some translations today as well, especially in texts where it is more poetic.  There is a choice in these texts on whether to go with a word by word translation, which will be a literal translation of what the document actually says, or go with a more substantial translation which confers what the document actually means.
    For example, if we had a phrase in the United States in English that says...Go break a leg...or...beating a dead horse...and translated it to another language people may be confused why we were wishing someone who was about to do something big to go break a leg, or why people who were rehashing old arguments were beating  a dead horse instead of talking.
    Poetic texts are even tougher than that to confer what the author actually means.  In addition, there is the question on whether to try to keep the poetry of the writing, or whether to go more towards what is a standard language.  Take Virgil's Aeneid.  In it, you have all these choices regarding translation.  If you go for a pure translation a lot of the symbolism and other areas of the work could be lost.  If you go only for one that tries to stay as true to the words, but also convey the feelings and experiences of it, you may lose some of the actual wording utilized, and may not convey the feeling of the poetic verse (dactylic hexameter).  If you try to go and convey the feeling of the poetry in motion by replicating the meter of the poetry, you may lose both some of the actual meaning while not staying true to the words.
    It is a tricky thing translating many of the ancient works.
    At times, it is left to the translator's best understanding of the matter.  Some times they already have exposure to a particular type of translation of the work (for example, many translators of the Aeneid choose to go for a more literal word on word that remains close to the actual meter of the epic poem, but that means that the casual reader will miss quite a bit of some of why things are done or the symbology and meaning of some of the work).  It is what they are familiar with and so they go with that tried and true form of translation.
    Joseph Smith did not have the exposure to a lot of various translations of the Bible during his time period (or at least most likely did not, and/or utilized one version of the bible for most of his actual reading and studying).  Hence, just like other translators he probably fell back on that familiarity during his translations.  This is why much of the Book of Mormon, especially when it repeats a portion found in the Bible, replicates those portions of the Bible.  It was what he was familiar with.
    The same could go for certain terms in the Book of Mormon.  He was familiar with the name of the Lord in the New Testament and when a descriptor of that name came up during translation, he fell back on what he was familiar with.  So, the actual term could have been another term or word, but as Joseph was more familiar with the term Christ (which one could view as an actual title rather than a name, Joseph and Mary did not have that as a last name, or at least most Scholars agree they didn't), when a term meaning the anointed one popped up, that's the term he utilized.
  2. Like
    JohnsonJones got a reaction from Just_A_Guy in Christology in the Book of Mormon   
    This is most likely what I would back.
    Joseph Smith fell back onto what he was familiar with during the translation in many instances.  It most likely is not a word for word translation, but one that also was done in accordance with what Joseph was familiar with.
    This happens with some translations today as well, especially in texts where it is more poetic.  There is a choice in these texts on whether to go with a word by word translation, which will be a literal translation of what the document actually says, or go with a more substantial translation which confers what the document actually means.
    For example, if we had a phrase in the United States in English that says...Go break a leg...or...beating a dead horse...and translated it to another language people may be confused why we were wishing someone who was about to do something big to go break a leg, or why people who were rehashing old arguments were beating  a dead horse instead of talking.
    Poetic texts are even tougher than that to confer what the author actually means.  In addition, there is the question on whether to try to keep the poetry of the writing, or whether to go more towards what is a standard language.  Take Virgil's Aeneid.  In it, you have all these choices regarding translation.  If you go for a pure translation a lot of the symbolism and other areas of the work could be lost.  If you go only for one that tries to stay as true to the words, but also convey the feelings and experiences of it, you may lose some of the actual wording utilized, and may not convey the feeling of the poetic verse (dactylic hexameter).  If you try to go and convey the feeling of the poetry in motion by replicating the meter of the poetry, you may lose both some of the actual meaning while not staying true to the words.
    It is a tricky thing translating many of the ancient works.
    At times, it is left to the translator's best understanding of the matter.  Some times they already have exposure to a particular type of translation of the work (for example, many translators of the Aeneid choose to go for a more literal word on word that remains close to the actual meter of the epic poem, but that means that the casual reader will miss quite a bit of some of why things are done or the symbology and meaning of some of the work).  It is what they are familiar with and so they go with that tried and true form of translation.
    Joseph Smith did not have the exposure to a lot of various translations of the Bible during his time period (or at least most likely did not, and/or utilized one version of the bible for most of his actual reading and studying).  Hence, just like other translators he probably fell back on that familiarity during his translations.  This is why much of the Book of Mormon, especially when it repeats a portion found in the Bible, replicates those portions of the Bible.  It was what he was familiar with.
    The same could go for certain terms in the Book of Mormon.  He was familiar with the name of the Lord in the New Testament and when a descriptor of that name came up during translation, he fell back on what he was familiar with.  So, the actual term could have been another term or word, but as Joseph was more familiar with the term Christ (which one could view as an actual title rather than a name, Joseph and Mary did not have that as a last name, or at least most Scholars agree they didn't), when a term meaning the anointed one popped up, that's the term he utilized.
  3. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to LDSGator in I'm a Christian.   
    All excellent points. 
     
    Just to be clear, I also think 95% of Evangelical leaders are appalled by the 5% who are scumbags. Same with LDS, Catholics, Muslims, etc. 
  4. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Traveler in Christology in the Book of Mormon   
    There are some obvious things missing in the translation.  The term Christ is from the Greek.   The Hebrew term translated into English is Messiah.  Both are in reference to “the anointed one”.  There is still some confusion that has arisen from the Dead Sea Scriptures that there may be more than one “the anointed one”.
    There are so many ways that the ancient scripture text cause confusion, but one thing we can understand through the restoration (especially temple revelation) is that all of G-d’s covenant saints are anointed.  The ordinance of anointing is a precursor on the covenant path to a “oneness” with the Christ – who is also one with the Father, thus resulting in the Saints becoming one with G-d.  Of course, the traditional and creedal Christians are lost in a labyrinth of teachings that amount to the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.
    The Biblical Book of Isaiah speaks clearly to the concept of apostasy and restoration.  The history of apostasy and restoration from Jesus to today clearly follows the type and shadow of Isaiah but is lost to most modern Christians.  Why?  Because as the apostasy took place, the Christians of the apostasy forgot Isaiah and thought that apostasy was a heresy or a change of doctrine.  Isaiah clearly taught that man becomes separated from G-d through transgression of the law, changing the ordinances and breaking the everlasting covenant.
    If one uses the internet to investigate why LDS are excluded from those “Traditional” and “Creedal” Christians, you will find that it is always because of a doctrine that they claim is heresy.    And because of what they claim is heresy, the claim is, that LDS worship a “different” Jesus.
    As LDS we ought to be careful and mindful not to fall into the trap of apologetics of doctrine and instead hold to the Gospel of Christ.  Which is to love one another, have faith in Jesus Christ (which is the foundation of the law), be baptized by one authorized by Christ (which prevents changing the ordinances) and keeping the everlasting covenant (which is solemnized in the temple of G-d).
     
    The Traveler
  5. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to laronius in Christology in the Book of Mormon   
    Jesus Christ has many names and titles so we don't actually know what the Nephites were calling Him. So you may be right that Joseph Smith used the name he was most familiar with. Also, it was the prophet Mormon who compiled the gold plated. He lived post Jesus' appearance so he may have simply used the name he was most familiar with.
    Another thought, some of the information pertaining to Jesus' identity may have been hidden to prevent false Messiah's. Once the Nephites separated that was no longer an issue. 
  6. Like
    JohnsonJones got a reaction from Phoenix_person in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    I think the bigger point, is that any Conservative should want a smaller government and less Welfare going out.  Why are my tax dollars paying their full time employees to work at Walmart?
    As I mentioned above, if Walmart want's to subsidize their workforce that way, have them pay our government to reimburse us (the taxpayer).  I propose that they pay us 10X the amount we subsidize any of their full time employees.  Any welfare or food stamps or anything else that a full time employee (note, full time means that this should be the only job the employee needs to do) has to use or qualifies for and uses, will need to be paid back to us 10 fold.
    Stop using taxpayer money to subsidize their own workers.
    This would reduce our Welfare monies we spend, reduce the social programs needed, or bring in more money for us to use on other things in the government.
  7. Sad
    JohnsonJones reacted to Carborendum in Borders, Trade and International Developments   
    From a recently released hostage from Gaza.
    Damari lost two fingers on her left hand when her kidnappers shot her as they dragged her out of her apartment in southern Israel, and for months in captivity the wound did not heal due to the conditions in which she was kept. She was also shot in the leg, and the only medical treatment she was given was an expired bottle of iodine.
    What propriety prevents her from saying is that when she says she was "abused" she means she was sexually assaulted and/or raped.
  8. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Traveler in Borders, Trade and International Developments   
    I listened carefully to the announcement made by the White House today about the US trade deal with the UK – with the UK ambassador to the US present.  Hopefully @HaggisShuu  can give us some across the pond point of view.  The new deal sounded terrific and an opening for prosperity for behalf of both countries. 
    I believe that such trade deals make better allies and promote peace.  The old “global” initiative looked very scare to me and a quick and easy means for a single entity to make a global power grab.  This new kind of trade agreement allows so many countries to participate in trade with lessor fears of threating interests.  It will be interesting to me to see how those involved in secret combinations respond.  
     
    The Traveler
  9. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Carborendum in Borders, Trade and International Developments   
    I'm aware there have always been "protests."  What I'd been hearing is that they have gotten to the point where Xi is afraid.  The numbers reported were higher than Tiananmen Square.  And it is not just one day.  It continues to get worse.  Apparently it has been so for the past few weeks.  But I just couldn't get details on it from sources that were not "fringe."
    Yes, take a look at the dates on those.  They were in just the past few days.  Only one is about a week old.
    And, yes, I'm seeing them now, which was why I finally posted about it. I didn't want to be the boy who cried wolf because it was just a fringe site posting clickbait.
    I've been hearing about it on foreign and fringe sites for weeks.  It was basically from the moment Xi raised tariffs on the US.  That was a few weeks ago IIRC.
    But since I first heard about it, I couldn't find anything on legacy media or even "mainstream conservative" sites -- incl NYPost.  Only in the past couple of days did I start thinking it was real.  And they're acting (writing) as if they'd all been talking about it for weeks.  No, they haven't.
  10. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to NeuroTypical in Borders, Trade and International Developments   
    Dude.    https://duckduckgo.com/?t=h_&q=china+protests&ia=web
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/protests-erupt-in-china-after-furious-workers-demand-back-pay-as-trump-s-tariffs-on-imports-jolt-economy/ar-AA1EfKFi
    https://www.rfa.org/english/china/2025/04/29/china-us-tariff-protests-workers-wages/
    https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/global-trends/china-sees-surge-in-worker-protests-over-unpaid-wages-factory-closures-and-us-tariffs/articleshow/120796368.cms
    https://nypost.com/2025/05/06/opinion/chinas-enraged-workers-are-fed-up-with-eating-bitterness/
     
  11. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to zil2 in Borders, Trade and International Developments   
    Um, this has been the norm for years. It should not surprise you.
  12. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to NeuroTypical in Borders, Trade and International Developments   
    Am I the only one confused by the last 4 posts in this thread?
     
  13. Haha
    JohnsonJones reacted to Jamie123 in Songs that Don't Make Sense   
    I wish songwriters would think their lyrics out a bit more carefully:
    1. The Righteous Brothers: "You never close your eyes anymore when I kiss your lips." How would he even know this unless he kept his own eyes open? Sounds like he's lost some "loving feeling" of his own.
    2. Carly Simon: "I'll bet you think this song is about you." The song is about him! It can be about him without being in praise of him. It would be more a sign of vanity if he thought it wasn't about him, but about some other conceited man, and he's thinking "aren't I so wonderful not being vain like him?"
    3. Chris de Burgh: "Close the shutters, do not cry, there's a new moon in the sky." Earlier in the same song he told us that "a big fat moon is dancing on the sea". In the time it's taken him to sing 11 lines, the moon has gone through half its complete orbit.
    4. REO Speedwagon: "And if I have to crawl upon the floor, come crashing through your door." How can you come crashing through a door if you're crawling on the floor? How would you get enough momentum up, shuffling on your hands and knees? Unless it was a very rotten door that just collapsed when you nudged it with your head.
    It doesn't make sense.
  14. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Phoenix_person in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    I'm arguing that Amazon and Wal Mart employees should make wages high enough that they don't need government assistance. Taxpayers are subsidizing low wages while the CEOs of those companies fly to space and buy new yachts. I'm not against rich people flying to space and owning yachts so long as their employees can afford basic needs, but that condition often goes unmet. 
    Yes, corporate welfare. It's the only aspect of socialism that capitalists have fully embraced.
    As I said, we put men on the moon in the 60s. This isn't new or original technology. And I fail to see why the business ventures of a man worth $400B+ need government assistance.
  15. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Traveler in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    One of the problems we have with our fallen mortality state is that nothing is exempt from corruption.  There are advantages to corporations, even large corporations.  I used to work in the corporate environment.  Because of their vast resources that were made available to me I was able to develop new technologies for patents.  Because of the sophistication of the technologies, there was no way possible I could have done it on my own with my own resources.
    In my mind this is a most important reason that the USA has been at the forefront of technological development.  But there are unfortunate and unforeseen problems, especially in the effort to globalize manufacturing and economic development.  I will give a theoretical example.  To be more competitive a corporation decides to move manufacturing overseas to cut labor costs.  In the short run this works great but there are two levels of engineering that begin to suffer.  First is manufacturing engineering to improve the process which must include the supply chain and distribution with the manufacturing.   The second is the R&D to improve and redesign the products.  Many corporate heads confuse the first engineering process as a management function – in reality it is both.  Regardless, the management begins to realize that engineering needs to be local to manufacturing.  Eventually, it is learned that management needs local involvement as well.
    All this is just a small part of what is affected.  There is aftermarket maintenance for products.  If the market is outside of the manufacturing landscape, then there are technical problems with maintenance.  And education of the next generation has an impact.  There is no reason to educate for jobs that are diminishing or gone.  As much as I hate to admit it – it sure appears to me that Trump is one of the few politicians in many decades that seems to have a clue what is going on with education, engineering, manufacturing, management and markets.
    I finished my professional career as a consultant as an expert in industrial automation, robotics and artificial intelligence.  I can say with some authority and experience that the biggest problem in the corporate environment is the elite educated management that is primarily driven by short-term, bottom-line capitol gains.
    I will not comment on Microsoft because I believe that Mr. Gates belongs in prison.
     
    The Traveler
  16. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Carborendum in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    This is where both sides gets this wrong.
    1. Democracy is an umbrella term which indicates that the masses have some say in how the government goes about passing and enforcing laws.  This includes both the election of representatives as well as direct consent to new laws (e.g.: propositions).
    2. Another definition of democracy (when the context is specifically describing the difference between republics and democracies) is that a "direct" democracy is where the population votes on any measure that effects the entire population. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
    So, I disagree with Republicans who make a big deal and say that "We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic."
    I also disagree with Democrats who say that whenever an elected official does something we disagree with, we can take them out of office immediately "because we live in a democracy."  While there are some jurisdictions that allow for an immediate recall, there are conditions that restrict it somewhat.  And with the President, the Constitution already addresses that.
  17. Like
    JohnsonJones got a reaction from Phoenix_person in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    The problem in the United States is not so much Capitalism, but Corporatism and Monopolism rather than Capitalism.  Unfortunately, in many instances, Capitalism evolves into Corporatism and Monopolism as the "Survival of the Fittest" edges away the smaller companies, companies merge and giant corporations that have far more power than any other business emerge.  
    When we have companies that engulf such a large amount of sales such as Amazon and Walmart in comparison to other companies, such as Mom and Pop shops, the ability those corporations have to affect government and the economy far outscales anything that normal Capitalism can compete with.  
    In order to have a real capitalistic society, social controls over how large corporations, companies, and co-ops can get must be written and legally enforced.
    The problem we have had is that these laws have been slowly eroded over the past half century, where as at the same time a great reluctance to enforce anti-monopoly laws have crippled our government in regards to stopping such corporatism from taking place.
    Part of this is that we see benefits of having large companies control large swathes of our economy in relation to others (an China took note and has attempted a very similar thing, which we can see it's impact on us today).  
    An example...
    Microsoft, though we took a soft punch at it over two decades ago, never really got broken as a Monopoly.  As a result, though other systems are utlized, on the desktop environment, over 75% of the computers worldwide (this does not include phones or tablets, just the desktop and PC environments which we use in such places as schools, offices, etc) still dominate the OS.  Thus, ideas such as forced updates, forced creation of accounts, and other things just to unlock our computers to use for the first time are the norm, because all those things are on Windows.  Linux, Unix, and other OS's, despite having better ways to do things in these areas are largely not utilized due to Windows dominance.  In essence, the competition is not ideal.  There is no real capitalism in this environment.
    Some would say it is a good thing, as we have more universal usage and commonality.  It has allowed the United States to control the computer environment  (and now along with Apple, even greater control with the phones and tablets) of the world.  However, in regards to capitalism, Capitalism is dead in this arena, and has been for decades.  If it were alive and well, the US may not have the control it does over these environments throughout the world.
    If we want Capitalism, than we have to enable capitalism to exist, rather than allowing companies to have basic monopolies in certain areas.  Many do not see the advantages of it in relation to where we stand today in regards to the Corporatism that has engulfed this nation.
    Much of the problems people try to point out regarding Capitalism in the United States is not so much a result of Capitalism itself, but Corporatism and Monopolism in regards to their impact on our Government and Economy.
  18. Like
  19. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to LDSGator in BYU Basketball gets nation’s #1 recruit   
    2025 NCAA CHAMPIONS 
    what a comeback! 
  20. Like
    JohnsonJones got a reaction from NeuroTypical in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    Iran and Saudi Arabia have had a far more hostile cold war between them than the US and the USSR did in the late 20th century (though earlier in the century it probably was hotter between the US and the USSR).
    They absolutely hate each other.  Some of it is over religious disagreements.  It has benefited the US greatly (Saudi Arabia is one of the US's oldest allies, and lean greatly on the US for support, much of it due to wanting and needing weapons and defense in regards to this cold war).  
  21. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Carborendum in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    I don't doubt there are a lot of non-Muslims there. 
    But I'd point out that in a population of 90 million, a non-Muslim population of 1 Million people (which is a lot of people) is just over 1% of the population.  And chances are that they are gathered together to strengthen each other, so it seemed to them that there were more.
    I'd also point out that you cited a "large variety of other nationalities/ethnicities".  I never addressed that.  I only pointed out the religious demographic, not nationalities/ethnicities.
    The Middle Eastern people are of many ethnicities and come from many nations.  They don't all look like the stereotypical Arab.  And they intermarry just fine.  But they are very strict about religious enforcement.
    As I posted earlier, even other Muslim nations don't like Iran and its allies.  They know those countries are ruled by extremists.  Even if the majority of the citizenry would be more moderate, the citizens don't really have a choice.
  22. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Phoenix_person in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    Sure, and democracy is how we select the people who run our constitutional republic, per the Constitution. So we also live in a democracy.
  23. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to LDSGator in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    Don’t we live in a constitutional republic? 
  24. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Phoenix_person in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    Good thing we live in a democracy, then. If you look at the current political makeup of our federal government, I'd say democracy is working out pretty well for your side of the fence.
    Fire departments
    Public roads
    Public schools
    USPS
    USDA
     
    And I would counter that private enterprise is no more immune to corruption and waste than government programs. In fact, I'd argue that it's worse. Each year, over $40 BILLION goes to SNAP benefits for people working full-time jobs, including employees at companies like Amazon and Walmart. Amazon's starting pay is $15/hr, btw. It really highlights how little workers were asking for with that number.
    Elon Musk is a beneficiary of $30B+ in government contracts. Our investment has gotten us spaceships that blow up, robotaxis that crash, Russia using Starlink in their war against Ukraine, and a bunch of dead animals at Neuralink. There's a reason why NASA was able to put multiple men on the moon in the 60s and 70s: direct government oversight. You know, the thing that the Trump administration (with Elon's help) spent its first few months dismantling. If none of that stinks to you, then respectfully, I don't care about your opinions regarding government waste. 
  25. Like
    JohnsonJones reacted to Phoenix_person in The War in Israel may be at it's end.   
    None of those initiatives are incompatible with capitalism. It's hard to say if they're good ideas or not because they've never been tried, but at least he's bringing something to the table other than corruption and scandal. Wealth disparity has steadily gotten worse over the last 40 years because, as it turns out, wealth doesn't trickle down. Tipping the scales in the other direction won't be the end of capitalism. A bunch of rich folks will get mad, but at the end of the day they'll still be rich.