- Stephen C on The Restored Gospel, the Great Apostasy, and the Didache: “Not sure, I just googled around and clicked on the links that came up, and then I switched translations midstream when I couldn’t find the first one again, but I didn’t notice anything significantly different in the two versions.” Dec 19, 04:42
- on The Restored Gospel, the Great Apostasy, and the Didache: “What translation did you use?” Dec 18, 18:08
- on The Restored Gospel, the Great Apostasy, and the Didache: “Good stuff. These early documents are important evidence for what the early Christians thought Christian teachings meant, making it harder today to hand-wave away inconvenient Bible verses, for good and for ill.” Dec 18, 17:21
- on Beyond the King James Version: The Church’s New Handbook Policy on Bible Translations: “A curious fact about the pronouns used in prayer is that the English forms “thee”, “thou”, and thine”, when in common use, were never the dignified or honorific forms of address. The forms used to show respect and deference were “you”, “your”, and “yours”. That first set of pronouns were the intimate forms used in everyday life to address your friends, spouse, and children, and even your dog. It was the “you” forms that were used to address persons in authority such as kings and magistrates. “Your honor”, not “thy honor”. In modern European languages that retain familiar and formal levels of address (for example: Spanish “tú” and “usted”, French “tu” and “vous”, German “du” and “Sie”), the first (familiar) forms are the ones used in prayer. These are, in fact, historically equivalent to the archaic English “thou” and “thee”, but they are not honorific – rather, they express intimacy and familiarity.” Dec 18, 06:31
- on Beyond the King James Version: The Church’s New Handbook Policy on Bible Translations: “RL, no. If you look at some of the other changes in the handbook, they’re mostly doubling down on things they’ve been doing. I.e., the senior apostle becomes president and a call to the Q12 is a lifelong calling were both officially codified in this update (with random scriptures supporting those points that I’m still struggling to see how they connect).” Dec 17, 21:52
- on Beyond the King James Version: The Church’s New Handbook Policy on Bible Translations: “No. (Maybe ask that question again when the new hymnbook comes out.)” Dec 17, 19:56
- on Beyond the King James Version: The Church’s New Handbook Policy on Bible Translations: “Is this our Vatican 2?” Dec 17, 17:59
- on Beyond the King James Version: The Church’s New Handbook Policy on Bible Translations: “Critchlow, I understand the point that Oaks is trying to make, and am fine with that being an option in prayer. At the same time, language is very arbitrary and many of the counter points or protests to his way of thinking that he brings up are, in my opinion, still valid. I agree most fully with his statement that, “I am sure that our Heavenly Father, who loves all of his children, hears and answers all prayers, however phrased. If he is offended in connection with prayers, it is likely to be by their absence, not their phraseology.” I think the only thing I truly object to is his statement, “Latter-day Saints, of course, prefer the latter.” What he is really saying is that “this is the way it’s always been done and the way I think it should be done. I believe that you should think this way too.” But instead of saying it that way, he chose to dictate my thoughts to me regardless of what I actually think.” Dec 17, 09:56
- on Beyond the King James Version: The Church’s New Handbook Policy on Bible Translations: “I take issue with this statement “Some individuals may benefit from translations that are doctrinally clear and also easier to understand.” ALL individuals benefit from clear and easy doctrinal understanding. The use of “some” and “may” here is meant to reduce the use of non KJV translations in church settings even as they expressly make doing so permissible” Dec 17, 09:54
- on Delighting in bloodshed: “Steve B., it’s on my mind. Mortimer, your concerns – which are valid – deserve their own discussion. It’s a post I’ve had in mind for a while, so I’ll try to make it happen soon. It might be after the holidays, and hopefully won’t be preempted by anything dire.” Dec 17, 09:49
