DiscussMormonism.com

grindael wrote:I'm sure it is one of Mentalgymnast Weasel's favorite places.

What comes to mind is that this Book of Abraham apologetic website is reminiscent of childhood memories of being at a carnival and witnessing all kinds of strange gimmicks and sideshows. It's like witnessing a freak show filled with lots of jokes. There is nothing there that resembles credible conventional Egyptology in the slightest. The site could be easily ripped to pieces by Egyptologists and historians. There is nothing about that site that honors Egyptology and the ancient Egyptians. It's apologetic nonsense to the extreme and the tactics used to defend the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are utterly shameful and would find absolutely no acceptance whatsoever in the professional world of Egyptology. It's all a ploy -- a freak sideshow put on by novices who have little if any appreciation for conventional Egyptology.

Mormon scholars or Egyptologists that endorse that site should be ostracized or at minimum reprimanded by the world body of Egyptology.

It is probably so beneath their notice that it will never happen.

grindael wrote:It is probably so beneath their notice that it will never happen.

I half expect the Facsimiles to be removed from a future edition of the Pearl of Great Price, anytime now. The days are numbered. The church simply has to get rid of them. The Facsimiles are nothing but a liability for the church. There really isn't anything faith promoting from them and all they do is raise further question to the legitimacy of Smith's ability to translate Egyptian into English.

The leaders of the church can't even discuss the Facsimiles. They obviously have a gag order in place. It's probably something they chuckle about when its mentioned in their secret councils. Then there is Holland: He's a dumb do-do bird and a liar for the Lord.

I find it also fascinating that the apologists are simply thrashing about trying to make anything sound credible these days literally ignoring the various Egyptologists materials, but making sure they at least mention their names as if they are so familiar with them, and then simply lamely asking "why do they care?" That, to me, is literally a concession to defeat. Nibley at least had the good sense of being friends with the Egyptologists for hells sake! The younger pups appear to me to have goe out of their way to make enemies where none were needed. But, that is to be expected. I have found the comparison with the early Christian apologists (including the timeline of being about 150-250 years later than the founder of their faith Jesus on the one hand, Joseph today!) and Mormon apologists and their attitudes to be amazingly correlative. In both cases they were jerks for the Lord throwing out vastly more heat than light, and just muddying up the waters. The only difference I can see is that the Early Christian apologists actually won the game. But then, it was because of their team could, for 400 years, destroy everything else except their own writings...