zil2

Well, it may just be me and you, but the link above takes you to the Come, Follow Me manual, which is divided out into each week of the year. This week's reading is 1 Nephi 1-5. Last week was the introductory material. I'm finding that because of how thorough I was in our previous reading, I don't have many new thoughts (sometimes none), but I'm happy to share them, and if you have questions or thoughts or just want to discuss, I'm game. Let's start here and make new threads, perhaps monthly.

I pulled PDFs of the LDS edition of the Bible (one for OT, one for NT) and searched the literal phrase "fear not", without footnotes or study aids. Same search in the BofM shows 10 (more in the index, but I didn't count that as it's just duplicating). Heaven knows what ChatGPT is counting.

62 (LDS edition, not including footnotes, TG, etc.) ETA: 48 in the OT; 14 in the NT.

You have to have 5 syllables in the first line, 7 in the second, and 5 in the third - that's a haiku. (Well, there are a few other rules if you want to get technical, but you have to at least get the syllable count right.)

How they determine Easter in Japan: Vernal equinox... A full moon follows after, Easter Sunday comes.

He's called perdition, yes. The phrase after the semi-colon could be interpreted either way, but the semi-colon separates it a bit too much... You'd think if that were the interpretation, others would have said something. Further, I don't believe anyone was sent here to fail. Your interpretation seems to suggest Cain was sent here to fail.

How do you get that out of the text? That's not how I read it. The "for thou was also before the world." isn't saying, "You were Perdition before the world." It's saying "You existed before the world - in the pre-mortal realms." Because Cain, like all of us, is an eternal being, his loss is a tragedy. Bruce R. McConkie may have interpreted it the way you do, though that portion of his talk was not delivered in General Conference (watch the video, he skips that and the following two paragraphs). I couldn't find anyone else who interpreted it this way. Anyway, I'm not seeing it. Meanwhile, read this thread - holy rampant unsupported speculation, Batman!

I went searching after I posted, and it appears there are folks in both camps. The difficulty I have with the "small plates" version is that it's too interspersed with things that are strictly Nephi's POV (Lehi not present), and never has anything that's not Nephi's POV (as far as I can tell). Things to look forward to.

How rude!

Well, and here I've just tripped over 1 Nephi 1:17: It would appear that the large plates of Nephi contain an abridgement on the book of Lehi - no doubt called the book of Lehi, but still an abridgement. That would suggest that Lehi had a lot to say. It would also suggest that Mormon may have abridged Nephi's abridgement of the book of Lehi. (Or Mormon may have abridged the original book of Lehi, or that book may have been added to Nephi's large plates, heaven knows - but it's interesting to note that Nephi made an abridgement.)

What do you think, everyone? Should we repeat the Book of Mormon group reading and discussion, but at a slower pace, following the Come, Follow Me schedule? Participation would be easier this year, since everyone is reading it for Sunday School (right? you're reading it? yes?). @Jamie123 could be a Book of Mormon pro by the end of the year! His neighbors will be wondering what that strange flag is that he's flying... (Just teasing, Jamie. No harm meant.)

Love me a good snake clip. Here is my "holy grail" pen (that I'll never, ever own, unless the world turns upside down): (Montblanc Agatha Christie - some have emerald eyes rather than ruby - not sure I have a preference since I'll never actually own one. But dig that snake on the nib!)

Aren't neutrinos just young neutrons from south of the border?

This quote from Elder Neal A. Maxwell is one of my favorites related to this topic: All These Things Shall Give Thee Experience [1979], 14–15, 21

I don't know how to respond to Brigham Young's assertion that immortal beings continue to learn. in Lectures on Faith, it is well argued that if we didn't have assurance of God's omniscience and omnipotence, we couldn't have faith it God's ability to save or exalt us - after all, if He doesn't know all and have all power, how does He know that he can exalt us - for all He knows, there is something that will stop him, or someone more powerful that will interfere. Of course, one can argue that God's omniscience and omnipotence are both within his sphere, and that he may well be increasing in knowledge and power by advancing to higher spheres: Revelation 2:17 D&C 130:10-11 This white stone (the phrasing may make it seem like there are two, but I think the combination of both references clarifies that it's one) will reveal to those in the celestial kingdom "things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms" - What!? Yep, that's saying there are kingdoms higher than the celestial - at least, I don't know what else it could be saying. Now, I think it's worth noting that only those in the celestial kingdom receive this. Therefore, I don't believe it can be argued that those in the terrestrial or telestial may also advance. Indeed, every indication is that they cannot. What's more, there's every indication that only those in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom have any chance at advancing, if anyone does. So then we go back to the quote from the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith - about the Savior working out his kingdom and giving it to the Father. Perhaps this constitutes the Father moving into a higher order of kingdom. That would correspond to only those in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom advancing - since only they have increase / continuation of the seeds. Eventually, the "round" will repeat, and the exalted will present their kingdoms to the Savior, etc. etc. This leaves the lower levels of the celestial kingdom, and the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms stagnant while one of your quotes has those in outer darkness devolving back into raw material and loss of identity (difficult to reconcile with the teaching that resurrection is a permanent, unchangeable state; also something that I think would be dangerous to preach in our day and age when depression and despair are prevalent enough that those in such states might find a sort of hope in the idea of an eternal cessation of consciousness and therefore act to "obtain" said cessation).

Ha! I tripped over that the other day when looking through the list of things others had shared with me on my g-drive (trying to find things to delete - no, I did not delete it ).

The proper use of iridium: (full disclosure: they say nibs aren't tipped with iridium any more, even though most Chinese nibs claim to be - but then those same Chinese nibs usually say "IRIDIUM POINT GERMANY" on them - I suspect the nibs on the left and right are Chinese. The one in the middle is not and likely has an iridium tip.) (I'm not aware of any fountain pens with platinum(-plated) nibs, but here's one with platinum-plated trim: There. Now everyone knows the proper uses for platinum and iridium. (Let me know if you'd like to see palladium too. )

Yes, that seems quite clear from the Words of Mormon. I wondered the same thing. I mean, if keeping plates is quite common, and it seemed to be (as far as prophets and rulers were concerned), and someone had made the "template", so to speak, why not reuse it?

So, today while finishing my study of the intro material to the Book of Mormon, I went down a rabbit hole, and discovered things that lead me to this conclusion (supports to follow): The 116 pages were entirely the book of Lehi. That's what was lost. But Joseph had translated more than those 116 pages. The "more" was not lost. But it also was not used to produce the Book of Mormon. Rather, it was all replaced by the translation of the small plates. Whatever happened to this additional part, which Joseph had not given over with the 116 pages, I have no idea, and have never even heard mention of. I would guess they were destroyed so they couldn't be used as the 116 pages might have been. Supports: That quote @Vort posted, from History of the Church, volume 1, page 56, footnotes: D&C 10:41 (says the same thing) Section 10 pretty clearly delineates this in my mind - there are the pages "which have gone out of your hands" and "that which you have translated, which you have retained" - two different groupings. The large plates, which Mormon abridged, would have contained: Lehi The equivalent of 1 Nephi through Omni (but as history and from the perspective of the kings rather than the prophets) Mosiah through 4 Nephi My reading of "which you have retained", suggests Joseph Smith translated to some point in bullet #2 (likely to the end of it, given the rest of verse 41). Now, I suppose one can argue that "which you have retained" refers to some other thing, but I don't think so. I recommend reading the entry in History of the Church and all of D&C 10 before deciding what you think. (My rabbit hole also makes me believe that Mormon wrote the Words of Mormon on Nephi's small plates (even if he had to make a new plate to do it, though there's no evidence he did). Some verses in Words of Mormon have him referring to "these plates" in a way that suggests they're not just the small plates, but that he's writing on them.)

I think it's more a case of, God would like for things to be as clear for man as they are for him, but before we are ready for that clarity, it would destroy us. So to prepare us to receive the clarity, he gives us parables and "blurry" versions ("through a glass, darkly") and as we choose to be led into the light, we see more and more clearly. Etc. (So, not so much that God wants things blurry as that in his mercy, he leaves things blurry, lest we be destroyed by the clarity.)

@Vort's explanation is the only one I can think of.

IMO, that's not what's happening here. I mean, "these two feathers went over to the head on the right" cannot in any way be understood as "they left the right side and went to the bad side". I think dude is just royally confused or spouting what he wants it to say, or something. (But yes, generally, you're right.) Amen! Double amen! Amen and amen! I believe this is in part due to our language, which cannot communicate everything (see all the instances in 3 Nephi where people were unable to write, speak, or even imagine the things Christ said). I think there are things in each of us that we simply cannot communicate to others - we'll have to do it in the next life (this includes the depth of certain feelings, the significance to us of small acts of kindness, and the things we have come to understand). To try would take volumes. And, of course, you cannot teach trigonometry to someone who has yet to learn algebra.

Yeah, a set of scriptures, where God wrote the answer.

If people are getting their information from videos like this rather than reading the vision itself in II Esdras - and I keep getting the impression that no one is reading it - it's no wonder there's confusion surrounding it. The video in the above thread has the guy saying "the right side, the good side" - there is nothing whatsoever in the text of the vision to suggest the right side is good (yes, I know, it's frequent in scripture, but not in this vision). The only indication of meaning for the right side is that it represents the place of rulers (the wings go there ("arise") when they rule). People are assuming an eagle with two wings, one on the left and another on the right, but the vision doesn't read like that at all - it has 12 feathered wings1 and three heads, and "out of her wings there grew [8] other wings over against them;". Usually, "over against them" means "across from them" or "on the opposite side" - suggesting there are 12 wings on one side of the eagle and 8 on the other. (Some translations have the 8 "opposed" or "contrary" to the 12 (and growing out of the feathers of the bird rather than the wings).) Given that the ones that rule always "arise" or "rise up" or are "set up" on the right side, and sides aren't otherwise mentioned, I don't think we can assume anything except that the right side is a place of authority. Anyway, he talks about how these two little wings "were on the right side, the good side, they're gonna break over to the bad side" - but the vision says: "...lo, two little wings divided themselves from the six, and remained under the head that was upon the right side..." Um, so they didn't go from the "right side, the good side, ...to the bad side" - they went from some undefined place (but possibly the left side) to the head on the right. Dude just read those verses aloud before saying the exact opposite of what the verses say. What the, huh? How can I be the only one to catch these things? Good grief. Dude is claiming the vision says things it doesn't! It's like this guy never read the Old Testament and doesn't know the way they spoke / wrote. It's also like he never read chapter 12. (And he's crappy at making videos - using a pointer that doesn't show on the recording and doesn't edit the video to add visual markers. Grrr. Why would anyone pay attention to this dude? I can't bear to watch more.) 1Wouldn't it be funny if this should have been translated as "twelve-feathered wings". Then there would be 24 "big" feathers and 8 little feathers. But alas, I don't know Latin, Armenian, Ethiopian, or Gregorian (the languages of the oldest versions of this text), so I can't go try to figure it out. Apparently it's universally accepted as 12 wings, so, nevermind. It was fun while it lasted...

Sweet! The Jinhao dragon pen. As I recall from online reports, it weighs a ton. This pen rates between fabulous and "most obnoxious" depending on who you talk to. I've never seen it in purple before and I have to say, of the colors I've seen (just black and red, I think), I like this one the best. The concept (fude nib) is Japanese, but that nib is made in China by Jinhao (and despite what's stamped on it, there's no gold in / on that nib). It would have been fine if you drove (elevation change should not be fast enough to change air pressure and push ink out of the pen (only airplanes taking off should be enough to do that)). The pumpy thingy is called a converter. (Anatomy of a Fountain Pen (and its accessories).) It will take Jinhao cartridges or any that say they have a 2.6mm bore diameter. Some Chinese brands use that same 2.6mm bore, others use 3.4mm. Standard international is 2.4mm. I've noticed a tendency in Amazon listings for them to say the bore size (or to say standard international for non-Chinese brands; all Japanese brands, and some European, are proprietary). Bottled ink is cheaper anyway, and you get a wider variety. You can use a blunt-tip syringe or tiny pipette (these have a small enough tube) to transfer the ink out of the cartridges you have and into the converter. The syringe will open the cartridge for you, the pipette is too soft to do that - you just have to push a nail or some other stiff thing against the ball that's sealing the cartridge opening. Tell me the color and I'll happily give you recommendations for good-performing inks. Or you can visit https://inkswatch.com/ and pick a color and it will suggest inks. (If you like the look of a Noodler's ink, we should talk before you buy - a few have special, um, concerns. ) I foresee visits to Dromgoole's in your future (they're in Houston and I'm jealous).