If Daniel is lurking, why did you shorten the truth by saying that Joseph did not know Egyptian, when you believe the plates were written in REFORMED Egyptian?
Also, what the hell is a divinatory device?
Is it any wonder that even Dan admits that "Book of Mormon archaeology" is a joke in academia.
Just watch the video!
Edit to add text for the bandwidth impaired:
PBS: How were these plates translated? ... [S]et the scene for us, how you imagine what happened from the various accounts you've read.
Dan:The plates of the Book of Mormon were translated in a sense by Joseph Smith and in a sense not by Joseph Smith. Joseph didn't have the capacity to translate any modern or ancient language, certainly, at that time. A little bit later on he'll learn some Hebrew and some German -- not much, but a little bit. But the translation occurred by supernatural means, far beyond his capacity to do it.
There were a couple of means that were prepared for this. One was that he used an instrument that was found with the plates that was called the Urim and Thummim. This is kind of a divinatory device that goes back into Old Testament times. Actually, most of the translation was done using something called a seer stone. The seer stone is obviously something like the Urim and Thummim. It seems to be a stone that was found in the vicinity, and I can't say exactly how it would have worked.
It may have been a kind of a concentrating device or a device to facilitate concentration. He would put the stone for most of the concentration period in the bottom of a hat, presumably to exclude surrounding light. Then he would put his face into the hat. I
It's kind of a strange image for us today, but it sort of makes sense if you think of a computer screen, I suppose: You don't want to be looking at [anything] against a bright background; it hurts your eyes. ...
He would read off what he saw in the stone, apparently in passages of about 25 to 35 words. ...
Polygamy Porter wrote:Also, what the hell is a divinatory device?
Is it any wonder that even Dan admits that "Book of Mormon archeology" is a joke in academia.
In this case, it was one of the stones of power. Some believe they were forged by men during the Second Age. Others believe they were scattered throughout the Earth during Precambrian times.
Polygamy Porter wrote:Also, what the hell is a divinatory device?
Is it any wonder that even Dan admits that "Book of Mormon archeology" is a joke in academia.
In this case, it was one of the stones of power. Some believe they were forged by men during the Second Age. Others believe they were scattered throughout the Earth during Precambrian times.
And MOST people don't believe that horses***
I can't tell if you are being serious or making a Lord of the rings joke.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Not that I'm comfortable coming to Dan's defense, and he certainly doesn't need me to defend him, but...
1. I see no evidence that scholars think he's a fool, for starters. Can you show where they do?
2. I see no reason why scholars would cross the lines of their expertise to comment on someone else's religious beliefs. Unless their field of expertise was religion. And Dan's not an expert in the field of religion, is he? I mean, don't scholars pretty well stick to critiquing their own field of expertise? So why would someone in Dan's field (Arabic or whatever else it is he's an expert at) comment on Dan's religion? Wouldn't they stick to Arabic/whatever else?
A divinatory device would be like a ouija board. The spirit(s) decide on the message, and then the medium, in this case joseph, has to facilitate the delivery. The medium of course has to concentrate and focus - no focus, no hocus pocus.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
Look, saying that you believe the Hobbit was real is one thing, but running around saying there is evidence that the hobbit actually lived in a certain area? That is not a religious belief.
Its just plain stupid.
Dan has climbed up this tree to the top branches and he knows it would hurt like a biotch if he fell. He is trapped by 25 years of a life spent on something that amounts to absolutely nothing.
PP wrote:Look, saying that you believe the Hobbit was real is one thing, but running around saying there is evidence that the hobbit actually lived in a certain area? That is not a religious belief.
It could be. Maybe there is a Church of Hobbit/Lord of the Rings somewhere in the cosmos.
;)
PP wrote:Its just plain stupid.
Stupid in your opinion, yes. And maybe it is stupid in the opinion of others. But this country is founded on the practice of freedom of religion. If someone wants to worship flying spaghetti monster...or the true religion...the religion of Mac....that is their choice.
PP wrote:Look, saying that you believe the Hobbit was real is one thing, but running around saying there is evidence that the hobbit actually lived in a certain area? That is not a religious belief.
It could be. Maybe there is a Church of Hobbit/Lord of the Rings somewhere in the cosmos.
;)
I was thinking about starting one. All the LARP groups I've ever hung out with were too sloppy, IMHO, and constantly slipped out of character. They could definitely use some more church-like structure.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Polygamy Porter wrote:Dan has climbed up this tree to the top branches and he knows it would hurt like a biotch if he fell. He is trapped by 25 years of a life spent on something that amounts to absolutely nothing.
Getting a PhD in Arabic amounts to absolutely nothing? Teaching at a university is absolutely nothing? Heading the group that studies the Dead Sea Scrolls is absolutely nothing?
FAIR may be absolutely nothing, but he's not FAIR. FARMS apologetics may amount to absolutely nothing, but FARMS isn't just apologetics. The Dead Sea Scroll thing is pretty fascinating and I don't see hordes of scholars making fun of him for that.
There's more to the man than just his religion, just like there's more to you than just your ex religion.