.

[Moksha]

Then I invite you also to never contact me again, neither on this thread, neither on this site, nor privately either.

Sometimes we need friends, even if they say something we disagree with.

[Ed1]

.

[Shulem]

vicious lies from the pit of hell when they know better.

For example:

[Pointing to a particular character]

That is the signature of the patriarch Abraham


..................................................................................................................................That's bullshi*t, Joe

[Lem]

Sometimes we need friends, even if they say something we disagree with.

Sorry, friends that say things other friends disagree with say things in ways that are constructive, not vicious lies from the pit of hell when they know better. You are not my friends and you never have been. Don't pretend to be. You especially that make light of everything I have ever said. You are not my friend. Shulem is not my friend. You people are not the kind of people I want anything to do with ever again, let alone pretend like there could ever rationally be some basis for friendship. I am deliberately choosing to never try to have a friendship again with the likes of any of you who have displayed your true colors. There is no basis for it. No desire for it. No rational reason to continue to desire further communication, let alone feedback.

Please don't pretend like you have been the least bit helpful, or the least bit humane.

"the likes of any of you"? "You people"???

This is a really unstable post, Ed. It's a little scary to imagine what a person must be feeling that would cause them to so viciously lash out at a disparate group of people as though they all boil down to one single, hated and despised thing. Your words are not rational.

[Ed1]

.

[Shulem]

Lem,

Ed is undoubtedly going through a faith crisis and is desperately seeking self-confirmation in order to make good on his testimony of Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham. Sounds like he's gasping and lashing out at the same time. There is a great deal of hostility and anger in him. I can understand that and I'm not judging him or condemning him for his actions or behavior. I know what it's like to loose faith and confidence in Smith's Egyptian Grammar. Been there, done that.

I will not apologize for being critical of his work and pointing out that he's not really following a standard of conventional Egyptology that even LDS Egyptologists would require, let alone all the other Egyptologists in the world. When it comes to real Egyptology, I have that in common with John Gee and back him all the way when he's telling the truth.

[Lem]

"the likes of any of you"? "You people"???

This is a really unstable post, Ed. It's a little scary to imagine what a person must be feeling that would cause them to so viciously lash out at a disparate group of people as though they all boil down to one single, hated and despised thing. Your words are not rational.

And you hope to provoke what with this post?

I was responding to your irrationality, but it's clear from your response that you write with the intent to provoke. You may not see it, but your tendency to project your own anger onto others has always come through pretty clearly.

You asked me to comment again on the passage you adjusted, did you see my response?

[Lem]

Lem,

Ed is undoubtedly going through a faith crisis and is desperately seeking self-confirmation in order to make good on his testimony of Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham. Sounds like he's gasping and lashing out at the same time. There is a great deal of hostility and anger in him. I can understand that and I'm not judging him or condemning him for his actions or behavior. I know what it's like to loose faith and confidence in Smith's Egyptian Grammar. Been there, done that.

I will not apologize for being critical of his work and pointing out that he's not really following a standard of conventional Egyptology that even LDS Egyptologists would require, let alone all the other Egyptologists in the world. When it comes to real Egyptology, I have that in common with John Gee and back him all the way when he's telling the truth.

I know, and I agree. His assumptions about hieroglyphs are very inconsistent and cherry-picked, and don't seem to be supported by any standard approach.

[Shulem]

I know, and I agree. His assumptions about hieroglyphs are very inconsistent and cherry-picked, and don't seem to be supported by any standard approach.

Ed cherry picks certain aspects taken from Smith's Egyptian Alphabet wherein the earth, moon, and sun, are drawn in the left register with the explanation and definition of the glyphs to the right of the characters. The bogus names Smith used are NOT Egyptian and therefore don't belong in an Egyptian Alphabet. The signs he uses in those instances are either wrong or corrupt. Smith pretended to translate a dead language into English and he was wrong on every account. There is not a single Egyptologist in the world today that will stand by those signs and definitions given by Smith as correctly representing the Egyptian. Only Ed does. And his knowledge of Egyptian is lacking, apparently. Yet he comes to this board and acts like he's an Egyptologist but peddles garbage.

[Ed1]

.