Kevin Graham wrote:Yes, and his name is Loran Bloodlust.
"Bloodlust?" Its not what meds you've forgotten to take, Graham, its the one's your taking that you shouldn't be.
Why are you approaching him as if he were someone who could possibly admit being wrong, or reasonable enough to change his mind? His preferred prophets of information are the dimwits on talk radio. Nothing you can say will dissuade him. Ever.
This is interesting coming from a totalitarian leftist who peddles hoary Marxist-Leninist bromides and long discredited economic superstitions in public with a straight face, while spending extraordinary amounts of bandwidth crowing about how smart and educated he is, all to forestall any suspicion among any here that, after years of discourse and debate with him...he is not really particularly smart or well educated.
This is the same guy who thinks Egyptologists - sans two or three Mormon "experts" - don't know enough about the subject to speak informatively on the Book of Abraham.
Oh sure, they can speak authoritatively - to the degree modern Egyptology can speak authoritatively - on the Sensen text and associated documents. It cannot speak informatively on the Book of Abraham per se, however, for the simple reason that we do not have any of the original textual material from which it was derived for it to speak upon, and secondly, as a book of scripture, the translation we have within the Church and its actual contents and meaning are outside the purview of secular scholarship of this kind.