Philo Sofee wrote: ↑Sun Jan 08, 2023 4:09 am
I've read everything you have posted dear Shulem....
Then that is good. You are now empowered and the lights have come on.
Apologists have somehow managed to keep this particular topic under wraps. It's a wonder that they managed to pull it off. Apologists are always trying to link parallels with the Book of Abraham and find ways to make words and names stick like throwing spaghetti up in the air and make it stick to the wall of faith. Let me give you a classic example of this very tactic. But do note that nothing is ever linked to how
"Menes" is not dated to biblical times after the flood. Nibley doesn't touch that. He's just trying to find a name and throws it to the wall and says something to the effect, "See here, Smith's works really are ancient." Make it look Egyptian!
Hugh Nibley, Ph. D. wrote:
The WORLD Of The JAREDITES, Improvement Era 1951-52
A more remarkable coincidence is that the
Jaredite king, Aha,
was the son of Seth (Ibid., 1:10; 11:10),
since Menes, the fabled founder of the First Egyptian Dynasty, bore the name of Aha (meaning warrior), and was supposed to have succeeded Seth as the ruler of the land. A good idea of how mixed up things are may be gained from considering the name of Corihor. We noted above that the name of the high priest who in 1085 B.C. usurped the throne of Thebes (incidentally, the oldest city in Egypt and the oldest city in Europe both bear the name of Thebes—how come?) seemed to be identical with that of the Nephite upstart Korihor. But we have just seen that Korihor is just as obviously identical with the Jaredite Corihor. What is the tie-up? Not in Egypt, surprisingly enough, for Hur-hor, Heriher, or whatever it was, does not seem to have been an Egyptian name at all, but is possibly a late adoption from the Hurrian, through Canaanite or Amorite; that is, it comes from the original stamping grounds of the Jaredites. The Nephites can thus have got it either from the Jaredites through Mulek or have imported it directly from their corner of the Egyptian Empire, where its Egyptian form was illustrious among the followers of Ammon.
Here is a classic example to show that Nibley equated the Jaredites who came out of the tower shortly after the flood to have been from the line of Seth. He cites the First Dynasty and king Menes. Of course, he knew damn well that this era was in 3000 BC long before the flood. But does Nibley discuss that? Does he point out the great contradiction? The flood era came after 2300 BC!
He does say this in the above article:
Nibley wrote:It is only of recent years that men have begun to correlate the great migrations of history, with their attendant wars and revolutions, with those major weather crises such as the great wind and drought of 2300-2200 B.C. and the world floods of 1300 B.C.
And this:
Nibley wrote:Men had the knowledge all along, then, but were "not interested" in using it. But there is no reason for denying the Jaredites iron if they wanted it, as apparently they did. A Mesopotamian knife blade "not of meteoric origin" has been dated with certainty to the twenty-eighth century B.C., iron from the Great Pyramid goes back to 2900 B.C. and "might perhaps have been smelted from an ore." 12 Yet the Egyptians, far from specializing in iron, never paid much attention to the stuff except in their archaic rituals. While Wainwright himself found iron beads at Gerzah in Egypt that "date to about 3500 B.C. or earlier, ... actually Egypt was the last country of the Near East to enter the Iron Age, and then under an intensification of northern influences." 13 In fact by 1000 B.C. Egypt still keeps on in the Bronze Age"; 14 having proved that the working of iron is as old as civilization, the Egyptians then go on to prove that civilization is perfectly free to ignore it, to the dismay of the evolutionists.
Nibley avoids the main issue with how the Egyptian chronology in the world table developed by modern science does not match the Jewish timeline of the Bible! He wants his cake and eat it too. The Church will cite 3000 BC and 2300 BC at the same time to do their bidding. It's really dishonest and disgusting.
Don't ya think??
