It is currently Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:51 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 8:46 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 4470
Location: Firmly on this earth
Kerry Muhlestein (p. 46) “Interpreter, A Journal of Mormon Thought” (2016) Discussing the Book of Abraham facsimiles....

Quote:
“Another note regarding Facsimile Three is in order. It has received the least amount of scholarly study and attention, and thus it has the least debate associated with it. As with the other two facsimiles, some have highlighted incongruences between Egyptological interpretations and Joseph Smith’s explanations as evidence for disbelief in Joseph Smith, and these are similarly based on unsupported assumptions about the Prophet’s intentions…

There is a key difference with Facsimile Three compared to the other two: the explanations for Facsimile Three label some of the hieroglyphs above the heads of the figures differently than the way I would translate them as an Egyptologist. As an LDS Egyptologist, it seems to me that the most likely explanation for this is that Joseph Smith was teaching either how ancient Jews or a small set of ancient Egyptians would have interpreted the drawings or how we should interpret them, after which he then assumed that the glyphs would translate that way. Again, Joseph Smith did not claim to be able to read hieroglyphs. This particular issue has not yet received much scholarly attention.”


Notice how Muhlestein is simply ad hoc excusing away the errors in the Facsimile Three. It’s a little bit too convenient however. Assumptions? No, it is direct Egyptological knowledge that Smith's Egyptian translation is wrong. Speaking of assumptions, notice Muhlestein's. There is no evidence of any kind that Joseph Smith was associating his “translation” of the hieroglyphs in Facsimile Three with some ancient Jews. Where on earth did that come from? Muhlestein’s fantasy, of course. There is no evidence that it was only a small set of Egyptians who interpreted the hieroglyphs that way either. Muhlestein is simply making stuff up to save Joseph Smith from error.

There is a reason Facsimile Three has received the least amount of attention. It is because it is indefensible. Even as an Egyptologist, Muhlestein would refute Smith’s translation! He admits that! Does he not recognize what this means? So If Joseph Smith simply assumed that was how hieroglyphs should translate, how can we be sure he didn’t do this all the way through all the scriptures he ever pretended to translate?! Does Muhlestein not get how stupid this apologetic actually is?!

And who does he think he is kidding when he says Joseph Smith did not claim to be able to read hieroglyphs??? Smith directly described what the hieroglyphs said and where they were located. What else is this than him being able to read them? Within 3 short days of receiving the papyri Joseph Smith claimed he was reading them and finding entire books in the papyri! You know, the ones he said were the Book of Abraham and the Book of Joseph? How many hieroglyphs would he have had to have looked at and “read” to acquire that information? He directly says he was translating the papyri. And the real kick in the butt of reality is many of his followers and even his scribes said he did this translating either through the Urim and Thummim, or direct inspiration from heaven. In that case, not even God knows how to read the hieroglyphs correctly. That is the implication that terrifies the LDS Apologists. There is more here on the line than many suppose.

Is Joseph Smith’s English here beyond apologetic scholarly acumen to grasp? Once again, the anti-Mormon who told me what they did is entirely true. All you have to do with the apologists claims is simply quote Joseph Smith back at them. They obviously don’t believe what he said, because he thought it safe back then, and back then it was. But today Joseph Smith is caught in the snare, and so apologists have to lie for Joseph Smith in order to extract him out of his errors. But he talked too much and left too much evidence behind for us to grasp the truth.

And finally, Robert K. RItner has demonstrated why there should not be any more time wasted on facsimile three It is entirely, in totality wrong. Joseph Smith blew it with that one, entirely. That is the simplest explanation based on clear evidence that apologists attempt to warp. When apologists actually show how Ritner is wrong in his assessment, and the evidence gets him to change his mind because his view is Egyptologically sound, then and only then can we give the LDS Egyptologist a nod of agreement. Until then, no soap bubbles cowboy.

_________________
Relativity means relatedness - fronts go with backs, tops with bottoms, insides with outsides, solids with spaces. Everything goes together. And it makes no difference if something lasts a long time or a short time - a galaxy goes together with all the universe just as much as a mosquito. - Alan Watts


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 11:02 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 19138
Location: Koloburbia
There seems to be a point there: If Joseph Smith's interpretation of the characters and actions in Facsimile #3 have nothing to do with the real characters and actions, then maybe he was seeing through an alternate reality veil into a possible meaning in that alternate reality. At no point is it acceptable to say that the prophet was weaving a tall tale to satisfy those followers clamoring for a translation. That would be a sign of weakness, like issuing an apology. There are more truths in heaven, earth and alternate realities, Horatio, than you can grasp in your Mormon Discussions board.

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:29 am 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 12838
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
moksha wrote:
If Joseph Smith's interpretation of the characters and actions in Facsimile #3 have nothing to do with the real characters and actions, then maybe he was seeing through an alternate reality veil into a possible meaning in that alternate reality.

That is, of course, the most logical explanation.

_________________
"[Elder] Pearson says he uses a 'black box' for those issues that bother him. . . He forgot to mention that his black box has gotten so big he had to put an addition onto his house."

--kairos, 08-08-2018


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:46 am 
θεά
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:06 pm
Posts: 4110
Location: Mount Prospect, IL
Philo Sofee wrote:
There is no evidence of any kind that Joseph Smith was associating his “translation” of the hieroglyphs in Facsimile Three with some ancient Jews. Where on earth did that come from? Muhlestein’s fantasy, of course.

Actually, it comes from Kevin Barney's Jewish Redactor theory on the Book of Abraham:

https://publications.mi.BYU.edu/fullscr ... 8&index=10
https://bycommonconsent.com/2013/06/27/ ... f-abraham/

I'm not saying Kevin is right, just pointing out that the idea didn't come from Muhlestein.

_________________
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:27 am 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Modern apologists have thrown Joseph Smith under the bus and refuse to take their founding prophet at his word. The revelation given to the prophet Joseph Smith says:

"King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head"

That is the revelation given, plain and simple. Unfounded wild clarification and deviation from what the translator originally claimed and revealed to the world in the Times & Seasons from modern day LDS apologists are unwarranted. Further, the apologists are not appointed to interpret scripture or represent the church. Against Joseph Smith, they seek to usurp the original meaning of the revelation because they realize fully that the revelation is a failure.

Stick with the original and let the prophet Joseph Smith do the talking. The apologists have nothing to add, really. All they can do is reject Joseph Smith's original claim and attempt to redo the revelation in their own mind's eye to suit their own make believe fancy.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: One, two -- punch
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:29 am 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
1. JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION: King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.

APOLOGETIC DENIAL: No, there is not really an Egyptian king's name in the characters above the head. Joseph Smith didn't really mean what he said or believed. We know better.

2. JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION: Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand.

APOLOGETIC DENIAL: No, that is not really an Egyptian prince per se, neither is a prince's name written above the hand. Although Joseph Smith believed it, he was wrong. Through modern apologetics, Joseph Smith stands corrected.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:23 am 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Kerry Muhlestein wrote:
Again, Joseph Smith did not claim to be able to read hieroglyphs.


An eyewitness account says otherwise by quoting Joseph Smith:

Henry Halkett's notes, Clements library, Michigan
(The Saga of the Book of Abraham; Jay M. Todd, p. 256,257)

. . . . These are hieroglyphics, nobody can read them but myself. I can read all the writing and all the hieroglyphics . . . .

Kerry Muhlestein doesn't know what he is talking about . . . .

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:27 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Egyptologist Muhlestein wrote:
the explanations for Facsimile Three label some of the hieroglyphs above the heads of the figures differently than the way I would translate them as an Egyptologist


This means that Muhlestein and Smith are not in agreement. Smith translated one thing and Muhlestein translates something completely different. Both can't be right. The original ancient author/artist of the papyrus is not going to agree with both Mormon translators.

Egyptologist Muhlestein wrote:
As an LDS Egyptologist, it seems to me that the most likely explanation for this is


Now we see that an LDS Egyptologist is going to be completely biased and disregard the idea that Joseph Smith's translations were false. How about nonLDS Egyptologists? Would they give Joseph Smith a free pass to get it wrong but still be right? Isn't this just pure Mormon bias with rose colored testimony glasses? I think so.

This just goes to show that LDS Egyptologists are not to be trusted and are not playing with a full deck. They attempt to deceive and make stuff up just like Joseph Smith did when he translated the Facsimile.

It's reasonable to assume that the author and owner of the original papyrus are rolling in their graves for the slander and lies committed by the Mormon religion. The LDS church has desecrated the memory of the Egyptian religion without any apology or regret. It's very sad.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:50 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Egyptologist Muhlestein wrote:
it seems to me that the most likely explanation for this is that Joseph Smith was teaching either how ancient Jews or a small set of ancient Egyptians would have interpreted the drawings or how we should interpret them, after which he then assumed that the glyphs would translate that way


Muhlestein is grasping at straws and looking for some kind of crazy explanation to get Smith off the hook. I should point out that Muhlestein said that his above explanation is "the most likely" excuse he can come up with which seems to indicate he has other excuses up his sleeve -- or does he? He has no way to prove his excuse is scientific or even works. It's just pulling something out of thin air and calling it, "The most likely".

How about the most likely explanation is Joseph Smith lied? That's the most logical and reasonable explanation anyone could come up with. All of the evidence and testimony points to that very conclusion. Suppose the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 were from the pope and not Smith. Would Muhlestein be defending them?

Hell no.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:23 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Dr. Shades wrote:
That is, of course, the most logical explanation.


Indeed, considering everything we know about what was said regarding the production of the Book of Abraham and the Facsimiles it becomes readily apparent that the product is a result of an alternate reality in the mind of Joseph Smith.

Don't you think the apologists should at least admit that this is the most logical conclusion even if they don't agree it's the correct conclusion? It's nearly impossible to get an apologist to agree that the most logical conclusion proves that the whole translation was a fraud. I think the vast majority (99.9%) of the human race would conclude that Joseph Smith's translations are false. But the Mormons seem to have a hard time facing reality. Mormons have a difficult time being honest. That's the way they've been bred.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:06 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Philo Sofee wrote:
Even as an Egyptologist, Muhlestein would refute Smith’s translation! He admits that! Does he not recognize what this means? So If Joseph Smith simply assumed that was how hieroglyphs should translate, how can we be sure he didn’t do this all the way through all the scriptures he ever pretended to translate?! Does Muhlestein not get how stupid this apologetic actually is?!


How about Muhlestein hop in his time machine and go back to Kirtland and set the prophet straight? What kind of reception would Muhlestein receive from Smith's cult should he tender a conventional translation and contradict the prophet in the midst of Zion?

Away with Muhlestein! Away with apostates and those who fight against the Lord.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:23 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
Philo Sofee wrote:
All you have to do with the apologists claims is simply quote Joseph Smith back at them. They obviously don’t believe what he said, because he thought it safe back then, and back then it was. But today Joseph Smith is caught in the snare, and so apologists have to lie for Joseph Smith in order to extract him out of his errors. But he talked too much and left too much evidence behind for us to grasp the truth.


The conversations had by the early saints regarding Joseph Smith's translations of the papyrus are totally unlike the conversations of the unbelieving saints today. Back then they used to brag about the prophet's ability to translate Egyptian and how he was able to interpret the Egyptian writings and images just as the Egyptians did in ancient times. They bragged that Joseph Smith was restoring original content had by the Egyptians and that the language of the Egyptians was being restored through the instrumentality of the prophet. The Kirtland papers are perfect examples to show that the early Mormons really believed they were restoring Egyptian and that Joseph Smith really knew his stuff.

But today, Mormons lack faith and don't like the Kirtland papers at all or the Facsimiles for that matter. They have thrown the poor founding prophet and his translations under the bus.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:58 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm
Posts: 1473
Dr. Shades wrote:
moksha wrote:
If Joseph Smith's interpretation of the characters and actions in Facsimile #3 have nothing to do with the real characters and actions, then maybe he was seeing through an alternate reality veil into a possible meaning in that alternate reality.

That is, of course, the most logical explanation.


Maybe the magic mushroom did have a place in Joseph Smith's life?

_________________
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:22 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:47 pm
Posts: 5617
This idea of a Jewish redactor is speculative nonsense.

The only thing it is has going for it is that it is technically possible--in the same sense it is possible the sun will not rise tomorrow.

One other thing it has going for it--it is completely non-falsifiable. How can you refute the idea that it is possible the sun might not rise tomorrow?

I have said it before and I will say it again.

Although this type of explanation may be possible, Mormons should be aware that they are more and more being pushed to explanations for their foundational scriptural texts that are objectively indistinguishable from intentional fraud.

That recognition alone should be enough to give a reasonable person pause.

_________________
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:52 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm
Posts: 1473
consiglieri wrote:
This idea of a Jewish redactor is speculative nonsense.

The only thing it is has going for it is that it is technically possible--in the same sense it is possible the sun will not rise tomorrow.

One other thing it has going for it--it is completely non-falsifiable. How can you refute the idea that it is possible the sun might not rise tomorrow?

I have said it before and I will say it again.

Although this type of explanation may be possible, Mormons should be aware that they are more and more being pushed to explanations for their foundational scriptural texts that are objectively indistinguishable from intentional fraud.

That recognition alone should be enough to give a reasonable person pause.


I also see the hint at this life being a "test" from the apologists in order to combat the intentional fraud conclusion. They never want to go to "god purposefully deceives" in order to "test." But it is there lurking.

_________________
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:42 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 4470
Location: Firmly on this earth
Shulem wrote:
Kerry Muhlestein wrote:
Again, Joseph Smith did not claim to be able to read hieroglyphs.


An eyewitness account says otherwise by quoting Joseph Smith:

Henry Halkett's notes, Clements library, Michigan
(The Saga of the Book of Abraham; Jay M. Todd, p. 256,257)

. . . . These are hieroglyphics, nobody can read them but myself. I can read all the writing and all the hieroglyphics . . . .

Kerry Muhlestein doesn't know what he is talking about . . . .


Outstanding..... just o.u.t.s.t.a.n.d.i.n.g........ refute em with actual eyewitness testimony. They claim it works for the Book of Mormon witnesses, then it works with Book of Abraham/papyri witnesses also. And in a Mormon source to boot! :biggrin:

_________________
Relativity means relatedness - fronts go with backs, tops with bottoms, insides with outsides, solids with spaces. Everything goes together. And it makes no difference if something lasts a long time or a short time - a galaxy goes together with all the universe just as much as a mosquito. - Alan Watts


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:50 pm 
Savior (mortal ministry)

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 11:51 pm
Posts: 920
Muhlestein isn't going to get that kind of thinking/writing into many Egyptology journals, but he might get it considered by some psychology journals. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:01 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 4470
Location: Firmly on this earth
deacon blues wrote:
Muhlestein isn't going to get that kind of thinking/writing into many Egyptology journals, but he might get it considered by some psychology journals. :wink:


No LDS Egyptologist that I am aware of has actually stated Joseph Smith's translations of the facsimiles and defended them showing the evidences he is "mostly correct" (Rhodes claim) in any scholarly journal such as The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology or the Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Ritner has talked about the subject in the JNES, but not one LDS scholar of any calibre or inkling ever has. It is always in the safe LDS venues, written to and for believers who already won't argue, and who mostly just can't because they lack the necessary scholarship. The old cackle that no one is interested in that subject so they wouldn't publish it is mere eyewash.

Yes, I am perfectly aware that Gee gave a paper and it was published about hypocephali in a tribute to Edith Varga (and it's a good study actually), but he nowhere shows Joseph Smith's translations or any defense and evidence they were correct. He won't touch that with a twenty foot pole (to use an old Nibley metaphor that is coming back to haunt the students of the grand old man).

_________________
Relativity means relatedness - fronts go with backs, tops with bottoms, insides with outsides, solids with spaces. Everything goes together. And it makes no difference if something lasts a long time or a short time - a galaxy goes together with all the universe just as much as a mosquito. - Alan Watts


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 4:59 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
An eyewitness account quotes Joseph Smith wrote:

Henry Halkett's notes, Clements library, Michigan
(The Saga of the Book of Abraham; Jay M. Todd, p. 256,257)

. . . . These are hieroglyphics, nobody can read them but myself. I can read all the writing and all the hieroglyphics . . . .



LDS.org and church scholars do not quote sources that ruin their whole argument -- LDS.org is not to be trusted. They are a terrible source for unbiased and accurate reporting. The church cannot provide evidence that Joseph Smith claimed he couldn't read Egyptian. It's just the opposite! The church simply sweeps the evidence under the rug in a cover up. The LDS religion is dishonest in their presentation.

https://www.LDS.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng

Quote:
We do know some things about the translation process. The word translation typically assumes an expert knowledge of multiple languages. Joseph Smith claimed no expertise in any language.


Quote:
The Lord did not require Joseph Smith to have knowledge of Egyptian.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 5:34 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:38 pm
Posts: 4985
Philo Sofee wrote:
Kerry Muhlestein (p. 46) “Interpreter, A Journal of Mormon Thought” (2016) Discussing the Book of Abraham facsimiles....

Quote:
This particular issue has not yet received much scholarly attention.”


Joseph Smith's translations don't really deserve major scholarly attention.

_________________
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die."
- Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LDS Egyptologist Muhlestein on Facsimile 3
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:36 pm 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 6876
DarkHelmet wrote:

Joseph Smith's translations don't really deserve major scholarly attention.


Modern-day Mormons are stuck with Book of Abraham baggage, the Explanations of the Facsimiles. This is without a doubt the stuff that sticks in the craw of every apologist. It's the boogie man under the LDS revelation bed -- that which requires nothing but faith, hope, and excuse.

Modern-day Mormons are poisoned by the Explanations of the Facsimiles. They have no choice but to drink their poison while sitting on their shelf of Book of Abraham faith. All they have is faith that an antidote will someday be provided (by their prophet, seer, and revelator) and deliver them from the false Egyptian translations which have proven nothing but a liability to the church. But no antidote is coming. The poison will take its course and sicken the mind of every Modern-day Mormon that's ponders the reality of the Explanations of the Facsimiles .

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: boo, Fence Sitter, Google [Bot], moinmoin, Quasimodo and 40 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group