PS. Hey MG, since Joseph Smith would have excommunicated you had you lived in his day, you are therefore already damned. So, let go and give it up. Move on.
....all of modern archaeology is wrong....all the world's most brilliant historians and archaeologists are missing the obvious....
The truth isn't about pesky things like peer-reviewed journals and carbon dating....
MG, please provide a link in which Egyptologist John Gee supports a "short chronology" as opposed to "accepted chronology." What has your Church/BYU published about an unorthodox "short chronology" that challenges established conventional Egyptology in order to provide favor for biblical dating/timelines?
But there is more. Much more. God would desire us to have all that he has. And that’s more than sitting around playing a harp for eternity.
Oh, you mean there is more to being a Mormon god than just strumming a harp? Mormon priesthood men aspire to be like "Heavenly Father" and hope to have unlimited celestial sex through the arousal of a penis that rises to the occasion in order to make yet another celestial spirit baby. All this because "if thou canst count the number of sands, so shall be the number of thy seeds." (Abraham 3:14)
I don't believe that nonsense anymore than I can read a king's name in Facsimile No. 3.
MG, please provide a link in which Egyptologist John Gee supports a "short chronology" as opposed to "accepted chronology." What has your Church/BYU published about an unorthodox "short chronology" that challenges established conventional Egyptology in order to provide favor for biblical dating/timelines?
Put your money where you mouth is.
To the best of my knowledge he hasn’t spent much time on short vs. long chronology. I read through your two links. What are the specific issues you had with yourself?
To the best of my knowledge he hasn’t spent much time on short vs. long chronology.
When you say he hasn't spent much time, it leaves me to understand that Gee hasn't spent any time on short vs. long because his publications lack content on that particular subject matter. And what might that suggest?
So, we can equate hasn't spent much time = 0 time.
I read through your two links. What are the specific issues you had with yourself?
Specific issues with myself? Your question is not clear.
But I will say I've spent a great deal of time studying chronology. I would have loved to have found a way to scrunch Egypt's existence between the time Ham's daughter left Noah's camp to when Abram entered Egypt to sit on Pharoah's throne. There is no way the Dynasties can fit that small time frame. It's impossible. I cover this in detail in the Celestial forum and this thread is as deathblow to the Book of Abraham and destroys the Catalyst theory because the story is false from the get-go so it doesn't matter how he translated because it's all false history:
To the best of my knowledge he hasn’t spent much time on short vs. long chronology.
When you say he hasn't spent much time, it leaves me to understand that Gee hasn't spent any time on short vs. long because his publications lack content on that particular subject matter. And what might that suggest?
So, we can equate hasn't spent much time = 0 time.
I read through your two links. What are the specific issues you had with yourself?
Specific issues with myself? Your question is not clear.
But I will say I've spent a great deal of time studying chronology. I would have loved to have found a way to scrunch Egypt's existence between the time Ham's daughter left Noah's camp to when Abram entered Egypt to sit on Pharoah's throne. There is no way the Dynasties can fit that small time frame. It's impossible. I cover this in detail in the Celestial forum and this thread is as deathblow to the Book of Abraham and destroys the Catalyst theory because the story is false from the get-go so it doesn't matter how he translated because it's all false history:
Yes. It’s a comprehensive destruction of the Book of Abraham’s credibility. Gee won’t touch the chronology because he knows the world of Egyptology would be laughing at him.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
But I will say I've spent a great deal of time studying chronology. I would have loved to have found a way to scrunch Egypt's existence between the time Ham's daughter left Noah's camp to when Abram entered Egypt to sit on Pharoah's throne. There is no way the Dynasties can fit that small time frame. It's impossible. I cover this in detail in the Celestial forum and this thread is as deathblow to the Book of Abraham and destroys the Catalyst theory because the story is false from the get-go so it doesn't matter how he translated because it's all false history:
Yes. It’s a comprehensive destruction of the Book of Abraham’s credibility. Gee won’t touch the chronology because he knows the world of Egyptology would be laughing at him.
Thanks for chiming in. Yes, Gee fully understands conventional Egyptian chronology and understands the principles involved in producing it and all the elements combined in order to recreate an accurate timeline that follows mathematical rule. The scholarly world has firmly established that ancient Egypt predates Ham's Post-Flood period. There are still lots of questions and anomalies in chronology and that's okay. But we know there is no way that the narrative in Abraham chapter 1 is historical. It's not possible. Formulas that determine this are as fixed as math itself.
And then there is poor ole Ed Goble who recently came out and claimed there really is a king's name in the writing of Facsimile No 3 and that it's Sesostris (Senusret) of the 12th Dynasty. But three kings of that dynasty who reigned by that name hated Asiatics and would just as well run a dagger through the heart of Abram rather than grant him the sacrilegious privilege of donning a god's crown and sitting on the royal throne holding the sacred crook and flail reserved for kings only. Jesus F-ing Christ! That would be like having a drag queen in full attire sit next to President Nelson during General Conference and rubbing the prophet's ass!
Poor Ed. Book of Abraham apologetics has turned him to mush. At some point he simply turned his brain off.
Specific issues with myself? Your question is not clear.
You gave two links. If you were to go back point by point what are the things that you would now take issue with in your own writings? Why, at the time, didn’t you ‘catch’ Rohl’s errors? Assuming that he is mistaken, of course.
Specific issues with myself? Your question is not clear.
You gave two links. If you were to go back point by point what are the things that you would now take issue with in your own writings? Why, at the time, didn’t you ‘catch’ Rohl’s errors? Assuming that he is mistaken, of course.
Woe man; that's way too much to be asking here. It's not necessary for me to get into all that and it would require hours of response and interaction between us. It's complicated stuff!
I APPEAL TO AUTHORITY:
The conventional chronology is established by modern Egyptology and credible Egyptologists support it fully. I have to think that includes John Gee. He knows that math doesn't lie. He knows ancient Egypt predates the figure 2300 BC. There simply is no argument he can make to counter that and maintain any credibility with his peers.
I have a great deal of personal notes saved on this subject showing how I worked tirelessly to make it work. I failed. End of story.
which is what keeps you going because of FEAR!
That would be like having a drag queen in full attire sit next to President Nelson during General Conference and rubbing the prophet's ass!