Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah and Korash ...Really?

[_SteelHead]

DarthJ and Corpsegrinder regurgitating apologist pap. I almost snorted coke out my nose. You guys do it really well..... were you able to type that stuff with a straight face?

[_ludwigm]

DarthJ and Corpsegrinder regurgitating apologist pap. I almost snorted coke out my nose. You guys do it really well..... were you able to type that stuff with a straight face?

Straight face is a minimal requirement for the best jokes. See Buster Keaton, known as "The Great Stone Face," who got big laughs out of his relentlessly blank expression in silent film comedies like The Saphead (1920), Sherlock, Jr. (1924), and his famous The General (1927).

As an effective teacher, I was kind of performer. My students have bought everything I produced. (by the way, the material was about radar maintenance. Pure reality, if I may explain the environment.)

For a short time, I imagined I can produce the same behaviour as a member of %. The straight face.
All GAs of % can produce it. See any GC of %.

(Blixa!!! Are good teachers are good performers?)

(Zeez!!! Part of my story, which I have bidden to reveal.)

[_BrianH]

Theories become facts when substantiated with evidence.

Well, that’s a nice theory. Unfortunately, the “evidence” you speak of can only be perceived with the imperfect and unreliable senses that are embodied in our mortal tabernacles. Ultimately, the truthfulness of the Book of Abraham can only be discerned through our spiritual eyes, with the Holy Ghost as our guide and constant companion.

Your fervent denials of the plain and precious truths of the Book of Abraham are symptomatic of your estrangement from the Holy Ghost.

LOL ...

Let me know if you ever want to get serious about something, little girl.

-BH

.

[_BrianH]

The truth of these things are known by the Spirit. So if the Spirit tells us that something is true, we know that academic theories are just the ideas of men that are subject to change.

Please explain why you think that matters of Egyptian language, mythology and history are matters that can only be understood by means of "the spirit". For my part I will be glad to point out the fact that 100% of ALL of our understanding of ancient Egyptian documents arises from academic pursuit and that in fact, the Egyptians were pagan idolaters and that Egypt was the ENEMY of God's people ...so its odd that you would claim that their pagan documents could only be understood by means of the (Holy?) Spirit.

Or ...are you just doing what Mormons are mentally conditioned to do: make excuses as a means to retreat so that you can try to hide from basic, objective questions behind the transparent scrim of pure subjectivism? Dude ...simply restating what the LDS organization has told you to "think" is not the same thing as offering a reasoned explanation of WHY we should conclude that what you have been told to "think" is actually TRUE.

-BH

.

[_consiglieri]

LOL ...

Let me know if you ever want to get serious about something, little girl.

-BH

It is difficult to take seriously any argument from a flagrant sexist.

I dismiss you out of hand, Brian.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_LDSToronto]

Why is it that I have to cite sources and you do not. You are the one challenging the established consensus, T. There are no experts outside your obscure little cult who accept that the papyrus in question really IS the "Book of Abraham" and no one inside your organization has ever provided any reason to think that it IS.

The reason you have to cite sources is because you are making claims about what so-called "scholarly works" say. You did not come to any conclusion about the Book of Abraham or the papyri on your own - you don't possess the tools to carry out original research from primary sources. So, if you are going to represent the works of scholars, you need to show which works you are referring to.

Challenging the consensus of scholarly work looks like this:

"I believe that the scholarship is incorrect with respect to X. So-and-so said Y, and that is incorrect based on Z ( article stating Z)."

I have said nothing of the sort. I have said that there is room for scholarly research AND for Joseph's work. I fail to see how that challenges the consensus of scholarly work.

Now, Brian, show that you are more than just the usual run-of-the-mill anti-Mormon Evangelical hack and get busy on those citations.

H.

[_LDSToronto]

For my part I will be glad to point out the fact that 100% of ALL of our understanding of ancient Egyptian documents arises from academic pursuit and that in fact, the Egyptians were pagan idolaters and that Egypt was the ENEMY of God's people ...so its odd that you would claim that their pagan documents could only be understood by means of the (Holy?) Spirit.

Awesome - you are actually going to provide citations of relevant peer-reviewed scholarly works? I can't wait!

H.

[_consiglieri]

In an attempt to give you an idea what LDST is suggesting on your part, Brian, I submit the following.

In Facsimile 2, Joseph Smith translated the same figure of the four sons of Horus as "Representing the earth in its four quarters."

Modern non-LDS Egyptians recognize that the four sons of Horus were associated with the cardinal compass points. Lurker, Manfred, Lexikon der Götter und Symbole der alten Ägypter. Bern: Scherz (1974).

This reference is found in the Wikipedia article on the subject at footnote 10.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_sons_of_Horus

Your turn, Brian.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_BrianH]

Why is it that I have to cite sources and you do not. You are the one challenging the established consensus, T. There are no experts outside your obscure little cult who accept that the papyrus in question really IS the "Book of Abraham" and no one inside your organization has ever provided any reason to think that it IS.

The reason you have to cite sources is because you are making claims about what so-called "scholarly works" say. You did not come to any conclusion about the Book of Abraham or the papyri on your own - you don't possess the tools to carry out original research from primary sources. So, if you are going to represent the works of scholars, you need to show which works you are referring to.

Challenging the consensus of scholarly work looks like this:

"I believe that the scholarship is incorrect with respect to X. So-and-so said Y, and that is incorrect based on Z ( article stating Z)."

I have said nothing of the sort. I have said that there is room for scholarly research AND for Joseph's work. I fail to see how that challenges the consensus of scholarly work.

Now, Brian, show that you are more than just the usual run-of-the-mill anti-Mormon Evangelical hack and get busy on those citations.

H.

Wait a minute ...You missed the question. The question why is it that I have to cite sources and YOU do NOT? Do you REALLY think that the Egyptological academy actually ACCEPTS Joseph Smith's "translation" of the Book of Breathings? Are you really THAT ignorant or are you just playing the usual Mormon games?

And why do you keep running from the fundamental question here, H-man? I keep asking it (10 or 12 times now) and you keep IGNORING it. Its plain to me that you are doing what Mormons always do: avoid the question and try to shift the burden of proof to the negative (a logical impossibility). Why are you doing that, Mormon? I think its because you yourself know that you do not have a single molecule of evidence or any valid reasons to believe what the LDS organization has told you to believe.

-BH

.

[_BrianH]

In an attempt to give you an idea what LDST is suggesting on your part, Brian, I submit the following.

In Facsimile 2, Joseph Smith translated the same figure of the four sons of Horus as "Representing the earth in its four quarters."

Modern non-LDS Egyptians recognize that the four sons of Horus were associated with the cardinal compass points. Lurker, Manfred, Lexikon der Götter und Symbole der alten Ägypter. Bern: Scherz (1974).

This reference is found in the Wikipedia article on the subject at footnote 10.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_sons_of_Horus

Your turn, Brian.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

So then what ...the Egyptian words for North, South, East and West are Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah and Korash ...Really?

-BH

.