How to Read a Mormon Scholar
How to Read a Mormon Scholar
https://www.ldsliving.com/going-into-th ... ar/s/10697
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-cont ... 04_131.pdf
Kerry Muhlestein tries to cover himself not being found to just be a common apologist:
"There are also some places where Joseph’s interpretations don’t match as well. I believe there’s convincing evidence that Joseph’s explanations could reflect the specific interpretation of the priest who owned Facsimile 1. Research reveals that this priest would have been interested in the writings of Abraham and may have seen symbolism pointing toward Abraham that the average Egyptian would not have seen. At this point, the evidence does not lead perfectly to any single theory regarding Joseph Smith’s explanations of the three facsimiles, and no theory can perfectly account for all the evidence.
In some ways this is frustrating. It would be nice to have some answers we could be confident about. Yet in another way, it is exhilarating that we don’t. The process of translating the Book of Abraham and interpreting the facsimiles deeply involved the divine. Joseph Smith interacted with Deity during this entire process, and it was that interaction that gave him the ability to produce the Book of Abraham—something he wasn’t capable of on his own. When we think about it carefully, shouldn’t we expect that we won’t fully understand any process that involves God because His methods exceed our understanding"
Kerry was it a knife or a jar? I see in the picture you are studying facsimile 1:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1l ... HNVYg/edit
Supplied to me by an Egyptologist from York University
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-cont ... 04_131.pdf
Kerry Muhlestein tries to cover himself not being found to just be a common apologist:
"There are also some places where Joseph’s interpretations don’t match as well. I believe there’s convincing evidence that Joseph’s explanations could reflect the specific interpretation of the priest who owned Facsimile 1. Research reveals that this priest would have been interested in the writings of Abraham and may have seen symbolism pointing toward Abraham that the average Egyptian would not have seen. At this point, the evidence does not lead perfectly to any single theory regarding Joseph Smith’s explanations of the three facsimiles, and no theory can perfectly account for all the evidence.
In some ways this is frustrating. It would be nice to have some answers we could be confident about. Yet in another way, it is exhilarating that we don’t. The process of translating the Book of Abraham and interpreting the facsimiles deeply involved the divine. Joseph Smith interacted with Deity during this entire process, and it was that interaction that gave him the ability to produce the Book of Abraham—something he wasn’t capable of on his own. When we think about it carefully, shouldn’t we expect that we won’t fully understand any process that involves God because His methods exceed our understanding"
Kerry was it a knife or a jar? I see in the picture you are studying facsimile 1:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1l ... HNVYg/edit
Supplied to me by an Egyptologist from York University
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
The facial expression of a man who knows the papyrus purchased by Joseph Smith was never touched or handled by the mortal hands of Abraham or Joseph. Kerry knows that the vignettes and the sacred spells of the Egyptian religion have nothing to do with the Bible or the biblical patriarchs. Poor Muhlestein is forced to come up with a silly song and dance in order to defend the faith, keep his testimony afloat, and maintain employment at BYU who provides him a regular paycheck.
Kerry, you lying sack of ______! Your lying eyes are right here in front of us! It's pathetic. You're not fooling me.
![Image](https://cdn.ldsliving.com/dims4/default/4707d95/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3648x2736+0+0/resize/800x600!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flds-living-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F8e%2Ffa%2Fa69ff15946efa54895d09a264c1e%2Fimg-1375.JPG)
Kerry, you lying sack of ______! Your lying eyes are right here in front of us! It's pathetic. You're not fooling me.
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
Does he ever document the "convincing evidence that Joseph’s explanations could reflect the specific interpretation of the priest who owned Facsimile 1" ?There are also some places where Joseph’s interpretations don’t match as well. I believe there’s convincing evidence that Joseph’s explanations could reflect the specific interpretation of the priest who owned Facsimile 1. Research reveals that this priest would have been interested in the writings of Abraham and may have seen symbolism pointing toward Abraham that the average Egyptian would not have seen.
Does he ever document the "Research" that "reveals that this priest would have been interested in the writings of Abraham"?
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
Shulem:
Did you notice he is studying the papyri piece from where Smith extracted the figure in the boat in the bottom of the right hand corner. Smith inerted that as figure 3 in the missing part of the facsimile (see the sketch)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f7Y ... 4Sbbg/edit
This is what he is checking:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-87 ... Dge0E/edit
Did you notice he is studying the papyri piece from where Smith extracted the figure in the boat in the bottom of the right hand corner. Smith inerted that as figure 3 in the missing part of the facsimile (see the sketch)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f7Y ... 4Sbbg/edit
This is what he is checking:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-87 ... Dge0E/edit
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
Whenever I see this guy playing scholar, I am just astonished.
“The past no longer belongs only to those who once lived it; the past belongs to those who claim it, and are willing to explore it, and to infuse it with meaning for those alive today.”—Margaret Atwood
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
Marcus wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 2:05 amDoes he ever document the "convincing evidence that Joseph’s explanations could reflect the specific interpretation of the priest who owned Facsimile 1" ?There are also some places where Joseph’s interpretations don’t match as well. I believe there’s convincing evidence that Joseph’s explanations could reflect the specific interpretation of the priest who owned Facsimile 1. Research reveals that this priest would have been interested in the writings of Abraham and may have seen symbolism pointing toward Abraham that the average Egyptian would not have seen.
Does he ever document the "Research" that "reveals that this priest would have been interested in the writings of Abraham"?
The apologists love to couch things in mysterious riddles and complicate simple things. Recall our own Ed Goble in whose paper you determined was a farce. Look how he turned everything into ridiculous riddles. All common sense is thrown out the window! Now he's just a broken down apologist with no where to turn or go.
Kerry Muhlestein knows that the priest who owned Facsimile No. 1 also owned Facsimile No. 3. Does Kerry have a good reason or answer for why Joseph Smith presented the god Anubis with a hacked off snout and labeled him a slave? Would the priest have approved of such action? How about Anubis? Would he approve of his nose being wacked off and told to get at the end of the line because it's assumed he's a negro slave by a 19th century pretended prophet who knew nothing about Egyptology?
Kerry Muhlestein is nothing but a liar for the Lord. Never fear though, because I got my eyes on that little piece of _______.
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
Yes, I noticed, I certainly did.hauslern wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 11:23 amShulem:
Did you notice he is studying the papyri piece from where Smith extracted the figure in the boat in the bottom of the right hand corner. Smith inerted that as figure 3 in the missing part of the facsimile (see the sketch)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f7Y ... 4Sbbg/edit
This is what he is checking:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-87 ... Dge0E/edit
Kerry Muhlestein is attempting to give the impression of the papyri being mysteriously related to the things Joseph Smith translated or revealed.
There is nothing Muhlestein can do to turn the papyri into the Book of Abraham & Joseph any more than he can turn the writing in Facsimile No. 3 into a King's name. All of it is DOA.
Kerry Muhlestein has lost. It's over for him.
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
He gets to collect a paycheck for playing games and messing with people's heads. Kerry Muhlestein is not a good person.
He's slimy and slippery.
- Physics Guy
- God
- Posts: 1604
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
- Location: on the battlefield of life
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
He has a nice tie. Hieroglyphics or something, I think.
I was a teenager before it was cool.
Re: How to Read a Mormon Scholar
Physics Guy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:56 pmHe has a nice tie. Hieroglyphics or something, I think.
I used to wear nice Egyptian ties back in my church going days. My former wife made several handmade ties and some had hieroglyphic writing on them. Everyone in my ward figured I was an expert on the subject of Egyptology and the Book of Abraham. And they were right about that.
![Smile :-)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)