Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
Note this interpreation "
God sitting upon his throne 0.1 Joseph identifies Figure 7 in Facsimile 2 as God sitting upon his throne, being presented with the key words of the priesthood. This matches well with the Egyptian understanding of the creator god Min being offered an Egyptian symbol of wisdom (the wedjat-eye). It could, however, be a relatively straightforward interpretation of those figures. We’ll count this as specific and detailed, but not unusual."
He says nothing about the figure presenting the wedjat-eye. Smith writes "the sign of the Holy Ghost unto Abraham in the form of a dove"
The sketch only shows the top of the figure. This is actually Nehebkau who offers the wedjat-eye to the sitting diety before him....Nehabka is ndentified with the Atum-serpent. " Mekis p. 273.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xoKNOA ... 6eBlG/view
God sitting upon his throne 0.1 Joseph identifies Figure 7 in Facsimile 2 as God sitting upon his throne, being presented with the key words of the priesthood. This matches well with the Egyptian understanding of the creator god Min being offered an Egyptian symbol of wisdom (the wedjat-eye). It could, however, be a relatively straightforward interpretation of those figures. We’ll count this as specific and detailed, but not unusual."
He says nothing about the figure presenting the wedjat-eye. Smith writes "the sign of the Holy Ghost unto Abraham in the form of a dove"
The sketch only shows the top of the figure. This is actually Nehebkau who offers the wedjat-eye to the sitting diety before him....Nehabka is ndentified with the Atum-serpent. " Mekis p. 273.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xoKNOA ... 6eBlG/view
Last edited by hauslern on Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
Tamas Mekis paper
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fc7 ... t3DDc/edit
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fc7 ... t3DDc/edit
Last edited by hauslern on Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
“You stare at your computer screen. The cold blue-white glow from the Mormon Discussion Terrestrial forum casts a ghastly light around your miserable damp bedroom. The Book of Mormon sits on the desk, taunting you with its Bayesian ways. Refusing to be beaten. Laughing at your pathetic attempts to explain it away.
The Interpreter website opens in a new tab. The warm glow of the dark redwood tones fall softly around you, as if to hug you. To forgive you and your life spent in hatred fighting the one true church on earth. In the distance you hear the faint angelic tones of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. A single thought begins to settle on your mind.. spoken in a soft, familiar, friendly voice that you have heard so many times..
‘It’s true, isn’t it?’”
The Interpreter website opens in a new tab. The warm glow of the dark redwood tones fall softly around you, as if to hug you. To forgive you and your life spent in hatred fighting the one true church on earth. In the distance you hear the faint angelic tones of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. A single thought begins to settle on your mind.. spoken in a soft, familiar, friendly voice that you have heard so many times..
‘It’s true, isn’t it?’”
- Dr. Sunstoned
- Valiant A
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:59 am
- Doctor CamNC4Me
- God
- Posts: 9082
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
What part of the linked paper would you recommend we read in context to this discussion? 290 pages is a lot to commit to, but I do appreciate there are a lot of pictures, because, you know, midwit here.hauslern wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 5:27 amTamas Mekis paper
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fc7 ... t3DDc/edit
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
You'll notice it appears only in the Interpreter Blog, also. Not even Peterson and the editorial board of the Journal dare to put those laughable pieces into the Journal itself.Dr. Sunstoned wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:35 amIt would not end well for Kyler. He and others of his ilk know this. This is why they choose to remain in their own little echo chamber.
- sock puppet
- 2nd Counselor
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:29 pm
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
I suspect that as soon as the Big 15 might de-canonize the Book of Abraham, as was done with the Lectures on Faith in 1921--without a vote of the general membership--all these Mopologists would immediately stop talking about the Book of Abraham, or claim that they knew all along it was not properly part of the canon. Scripture non grata, as it would then be.
"I'm not crazy about reality, but it's still the only place to get a decent meal." Groucho Marx
"The truth has no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie." Mark Twain
The best lack all conviction, while the worst//Are full of passionate intensity." Yeats
"The truth has no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie." Mark Twain
The best lack all conviction, while the worst//Are full of passionate intensity." Yeats
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
Kyler's admission " None of this is new information, and would fall under the categories listed in the essay, particularly Joseph's misunderstanding of the papyrus and the incorporation of his own ideas into his interpretations." Sounds like 1984. We have always been at war... "
-
- God
- Posts: 5099
- Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
They would also say that they always suspected it wasn't actually scripture, but more in line with midrash, and so no harm, no foul. MG tried to pull something along the lines that Smith hisself never actually tried to canonize it, so he didn't think it was scripture. Shulem, true to form, simply man handled the weak argument. It's up in the Celestial forums....sock puppet wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 6:27 pmI suspect that as soon as the Big 15 might de-canonize the Book of Abraham, as was done with the Lectures on Faith in 1921--without a vote of the general membership--all these Mopologists would immediately stop talking about the Book of Abraham, or claim that they knew all along it was not properly part of the canon. Scripture non grata, as it would then be.
Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham
I think I may have found a suitable journal for Kyler to submit his work to:Marcus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 4:33 pmYou'll notice it appears only in the Interpreter Blog, also. Not even Peterson and the editorial board of the Journal dare to put those laughable pieces into the Journal itself.Dr. Sunstoned wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:35 am
It would not end well for Kyler. He and others of his ilk know this. This is why they choose to remain in their own little echo chamber.
https://www.universalrejection.org/Journal of Universal Rejection (JofUR) wrote: About the Journal
The founding principle of the Journal of Universal Rejection (JofUR) is rejection. Universal rejection. That is to say, all submissions, regardless of quality, will be rejected. Despite that apparent drawback, here are a number of reasons you may choose to submit to the JofUR:
You can send your manuscript here without suffering waves of anxiety regarding the eventual fate of your submission. You know with 100% certainty that it will not be accepted for publication.Instructions for Authors
- There are no page-fees.
- You may claim to have submitted to the most prestigious journal (judged by acceptance rate).
- The JofUR is one-of-a-kind. Merely submitting work to it may be considered a badge of honor.
- You retain complete rights to your work, and are free to resubmit to other journals even before our review process is complete.
- Decisions are often (though not always) rendered within hours of submission.
The JofUR solicits any and all types of manuscript: poetry, prose, visual art, and research articles. You name it, we take it, and reject it. Your manuscript may be formatted however you wish. Frankly, we don't care.
After submitting your work, the decision process varies. Often the Editor-in-Chief will reject your work out-of-hand, without even reading it! However, he might read it. Probably he'll skim. At other times your manuscript may be sent to anonymous referees. Unless they are the Editor-in-Chief's wife or graduate school buddies, it is unlikely that the referees will even understand what is going on. Rejection will follow as swiftly as a bird dropping from a great height after being struck by a stone. At other times, rejection may languish like your email buried in the Editor-in-Chief's inbox. But it will come, swift or slow, as surely as death. Rejection.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!