LDS Apostle Orson Pratt taught that the earth was literally divided during the days of Peleg.
"Enoch, the seventh from Adam, who lived contemporary with his old ancestor, and others who were called by him, went forth and gathered out the righteous from all the nations, and as there was no Atlantic Ocean in those days rolling between the eastern and western continents, they could gather together by land from Asia, Africa and Europe. In those days the earth was not divided as it was after the flood, in the days of Peleg. In that gathering many came from the ends of the earth. Adam might have been among the emigrating companies, if not, then, he most probably had his residence at that central place of gathering. Let this be as it may, it is not revealed."
I would like to draw attention to a recent conversation that took place down in the Terrestrial forum regarding Book of Abraham apologetics and the timeline/chronological time span between Egypt's original founding and Abram's alleged sojourn therein according to biblical myth. Let's be perfectly clear, there is no actual record or evidence that Abram was ever in Egypt which is entirely based on a faithful story in establishing Hebrew religious roots. Or in other words, it could be argued how the story of Abram including his willing choice to murder his own son (Isaac) by sacrificial rite was faith promoting fiction just like Job who was covered by boils and other wild biblical stories so fantastic that a reasonable or rational mind will categorize it as faith promoting fiction.
I can let that sit on a shelf for the sake of what I see as more important things. Things that, for me, seem to lead towards salvation rather than damnation.
Ah, yes, the classic "I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm just a guy who thinks all of modern archaeology is wrong for the sake of my personal spiritual journey." It's so humble, really. You're just subtly implying that all the world's most brilliant historians and archaeologists are missing the obvious, and only you have the secret decoder ring to true history.
The truth isn't about pesky things like peer-reviewed journals and carbon dating, but about "things that... lead towards salvation rather than damnation." It's the ultimate get-out-of-jail-free card for any inconvenient fact: "This doesn't align with my eternal reward, so clearly it's wrong.
Many years ago while working as an apologist, I carefully digested David Rohl's book you linked above and did everything I could to try and make it work and squeeze a shorter Egyptian chronology into the time allotted by the Bible which was adopted by Smith. I worked through every imaginable theory in effort to come up with a new chronology. It does not work! I've spent countless hours on that project only to come to the conclusion that Egypt was indeed a nation state around 3000 BC. There is no way around it, no way over it, no way under it! The Bible is wrong! So also is Joseph Smith.
The shelf in which you set these things is your own fear in realizing that maybe it's not really what you think it is -- or in other words, Smith was a liar.
There, go figure.
David Rohl? Been there done that! Hours and hours and hours...and it's impossible that Egypt was founded in 2300 BC by a woman and her son. Impossible.
Hey, would you like to take a look at my old apologetic webpage that touches on these things?
Here are a couple of links that demonstrate my work on this very subject in which you think I'm ignorant:
MG, please provide a link in which Egyptologist John Gee supports a "short chronology" as opposed to "accepted chronology." What has your Church/BYU published about an unorthodox "short chronology" that challenges established conventional Egyptology in order to provide favor for biblical dating/timelines?
To the best of my knowledge he hasn’t spent much time on short vs. long chronology.
When you say he hasn't spent much time, it leaves me to understand that Gee hasn't spent any time on short vs. long because his publications lack content on that particular subject matter. And what might that suggest?
So, we can equate hasn't spent much time = 0 time.
I read through your two links. What are the specific issues you had with yourself?
Specific issues with myself? Your question is not clear.
But I will say I've spent a great deal of time studying chronology. I would have loved to have found a way to scrunch Egypt's existence between the time Ham's daughter left Noah's camp to when Abram entered Egypt to sit on Pharoah's throne. There is no way the Dynasties can fit that small time frame. It's impossible. I cover this in detail in the Celestial forum and this thread is as deathblow to the Book of Abraham and destroys the Catalyst theory because the story is false from the get-go so it doesn't matter how he translated because it's all false history.
<snip>
Gee fully understands conventional Egyptian chronology and understands the principles involved in producing it and all the elements combined in order to recreate an accurate timeline that follows mathematical rule. The scholarly world has firmly established that ancient Egypt predates Ham's Post-Flood period. There are still lots of questions and anomalies in chronology and that's okay. But we know there is no way that the narrative in Abraham chapter 1 is historical. It's not possible. Formulas that determine this are as fixed as math itself.
<snip>
I APPEAL TO AUTHORITY:
The conventional chronology is established by modern Egyptology and credible Egyptologists support it fully. I have to think that includes John Gee. He knows that math doesn't lie. He knows ancient Egypt predates the figure 2300 BC. There simply is no argument he can make to counter that and maintain any credibility with his peers.
there is no actual record or evidence that Abram was ever in Egypt which is entirely based on a faithful story in establishing Hebrew religious roots.
There's no credible evdidence that Abram existed at all.
Right, belief in Abraham is strictly a faith based exercise that is wholly propitiated by religious fervor that was so intense that it justified murdering one’s own son (Isaac) as if he was an animal that should be brutally sacrificed whereby his blood is spilled in order to prove loyalty to a god that required blood sacrifices in order to appease his troubled mind. This story in the Bible is evil -- inspired by demons who lust for blood. Think about it, how many loving fathers are willing to slit the throat of their own son in order to prove their holiness to religion? Only a demon would be willing to perform such a vial and evil act! This god-awful story about Jehovah is a biblical red flag that is rightly rejected by those who desire to encompass peace and love in all things.
There's no credible evidence that Abram existed at all.
It doesn't have the historical documentation of Joseph being sealed to Fanny via the Haystack Ceremony.
But there is evidence (testimony) to indicate that Joseph had a “dirty nasty filthy scrape” with a young woman named Fanny Alger behind the barn. I suspect they consummated their affair on more than one occasion. There is no question in my mind that Joseph Smith loved women and was in fact a polygamist and an adulterer.
There's no credible evdidence that Abram existed at all.
Right, belief in Abraham is strictly a faith based exercise that is wholly propitiated by religious fervor that was so intense that it justified murdering one’s own son (Isaac) as if he was an animal that should be brutally sacrificed whereby his blood is spilled in order to prove loyalty to a god that required blood sacrifices in order to appease his troubled mind. This story in the Bible is evil -- inspired by demons who lust for blood. Think about it, how many loving fathers are willing to slit the throat of their own son in order to prove their holiness to religion? Only a demon would be willing to perform such a vial and evil act! This god-awful story about Jehovah is a biblical red flag that is rightly rejected by those who desire to encompass peace and love in all things.
It doesn't have the historical documentation of Joseph being sealed to Fanny via the Haystack Ceremony.
But there is evidence (testimony) to indicate that Joseph had a “dirty nasty filthy scrape” with a young woman named Fanny Alger behind the barn. I suspect they consummated their affair on more than one occasion. There is no question in my mind that Joseph Smith loved women and was in fact a polygamist and an adulterer.
Someone claiming to hear supernatural voices commanding them to sacrifice their child are a danger to society and should be locked up. The SLC LDS Church lauds Abraham for his willingness to follow the instructions of the voices in his head. They call it having faith. That should give members pause for thought.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
Someone claiming to hear supernatural voices commanding them to sacrifice their child are a danger to society and should be locked up. The SLC LDS Church lauds Abraham for his willingness to follow the instructions of the voices in his head. They call it having faith. That should give members pause for thought.
Indeed, the story of Abraham being willing to murder his own son in cold blood to appease his imagined god is really sick and should turn anyone's stomach. The story in the Book of Mormon about Nephi cutting off the head of Laban is a low point for Book of Mormon morality lessons. It's just bad stuff. It was the author's (Smith) way of experiencing what it was like to kill. Smith was writing his own personal fantasy! But happiness and good living is available and found outside the realms of organized religion. Religionist reject that concept and threaten nonbelievers with hell or a lower kingdom if they refuse to join their organized religion. But today, more and more people are waking up and realizing that religion is not what it's cracked up to be.
A monumental problem for the Mormons is to try and figure out how the pyramids were built long before so-called lady "Egyptus" discovered the land of Egypt and established the firstgovernment.
Here is a link to The British Museum’s timeline for ancient Egypt. The Book of Abraham is proof positive that Joseph Smith made stuff up.
Science and Egyptology have determined that Egyptian history PRECEDES the biblical flood dated at 2400 BC:
By 11,000 BC wrote:Settling in the Nile valley
About 3250 BC wrote:The invention of writing
About 3100 BC wrote:Egypt is united
About 2700 BC wrote:Evolution of writing
2600–2500 BC wrote:The Great Pyramid
The Mormons refuse/neglect to discuss this matter when they defend the Book of Abraham as a historical record. They bury their faithful heads in the sand and do not want to face the facts.
Someone claiming to hear supernatural voices commanding them to sacrifice their child are a danger to society and should be locked up. The SLC LDS Church lauds Abraham for his willingness to follow the instructions of the voices in his head. They call it having faith. That should give members pause for thought.
Indeed, the story of Abraham being willing to murder his own son in cold blood to appease his imagined god is really sick and should turn anyone's stomach. The story in the Book of Mormon about Nephi cutting off the head of Laban is a low point for Book of Mormon morality lessons. It's just bad stuff. It was the author's (Smith) way of experiencing what it was like to kill. Smith was writing his own personal fantasy! But happiness and good living is available and found outside the realms of organized religion. Religionist reject that concept and threaten nonbelievers with hell or a lower kingdom if they refuse to join their organized religion. But today, more and more people are waking up and realizing that religion is not what it's cracked up to be.
A monumental problem for the Mormons is to try and figure out how the pyramids were built long before so-called lady "Egyptus" discovered the land of Egypt and established the firstgovernment.
To this, the Mormons have said NOTHING.
Dead silence!
Indeed. The Biblical timeline for the alleged global flood would be 2348 BCE. While the first Egyptian pyramids were build around 2670 BCE, more than 300 years prior to the alleged global flood. There is no disruption in the continuous Egyptian history to account for such a disaster. The early Egyptian dynasties were meticulous, bordering on obsessive, about their recordkeeping.
Rocker and a mocker and a midnight shocker.
Pronouns: eat/my/shorts
