DiscussMormonism.com

Kevin Graham wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:37 pm

This was an email I got from Kara Cooney some years ago:

“I watched the three videos, and I don’t agree with any of it. The ancient Egyptians had no concept of Abraham, so I don’t know where he gets these comparisons… And No, most Egyptologists do not agree, despite what Kerry says. I know Kerry, but I do not have much respect for his work. Now I have even less. The fact that he is digging in Egypt is even more worrisome… This Ph.D. was awarded before I arrived at UCLA, although I know that Kerry finished his text based dissertation after only two years of Egyptian language training, which is rather laughable.”

“Have you read Robert Ritner’s work about this in Journal of Near Eastern Studies? It’s the best out there… Kerry is just spinning out the same Mormon rhetoric. What is different is: Mormons are funding PhDs in Egyptology and Biblical Studies and then funding positions at BYU and elsewhere and passing these people off as experts, when they are only ideologically driven researchers, not experts interested in actual evidence.”

I was sooooooooo hoping to find this tonight, and here you are sharing it!!! THANK YOU Kevin!!!

Tom wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 26, 2020 7:15 pm

In reading some exchanges elsewhere regarding Dr. Muhlestein’s essay, I’ve learned that a budding Mormon apologist is working on a Bayesian probability analysis of the Book of Abraham evidence. I assume that the Dales will serve as peer reviewers once the manuscript is submitted to Interpreter.

Oh I SO HOPE SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (wringing hands in gleeful anticipation!!!)

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:41 pm

I was sooooooooo hoping to find this tonight, and here you are sharing it!!! THANK YOU Kevin!!!

Yes, and here's to hoping that more Egyptologists worldwide will step forward and do the right thing and condemn the Explanations of the Facsimiles and publish the condemnations far and wide in every country, every state, and every city.

Oh, I pity poor President NelSatan. What will he do? He can croak and leave the problem to the next man in line. Oaks? Let the fun begin.

This is WAR!

Charge!!!!!!!!!

Shulem wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:56 am

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:41 pm

I was sooooooooo hoping to find this tonight, and here you are sharing it!!! THANK YOU Kevin!!!

Yes, and here's to hoping that more Egyptologists worldwide will step forward and do the right thing and condemn the Explanations of the Facsimiles and publish the condemnations far and wide in every country, every state, and every city.

Oh, I pity poor President NelSatan. What will he do? He can croak and leave the problem to the next man in line. Oaks? Let the fun begin.

This is WAR!

Charge!!!!!!!!!

Oaks would probably say something really stupid like "I don't think research needs to be done..."............................................................ oh wait........

Dial in at the 1:03:20 mark!



Radio Free Mormon: 194: Brave Sir Kerry (Muhlestein)

Allen Wyatt seems to have put a challenge out for any non LDS peer reviewed scholarship on the Book of Abraham. Perhaps Wyatt should re read the Jenkins Hamblin debate.

The fact there is virtually none gives Wyatt not a moment's pause.

Dr Moore wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:27 am

Allen Wyatt seems to have put a challenge out for any non LDS peer reviewed scholarship on the Book of Abraham. Perhaps Wyatt should re read the Jenkins Hamblin debate.

He will simply cheap out and call it anti-Mormonism, problem solved, case closed. Just label it and you don't have to deal with it. They have it down to a science in order to keep the sheep corraled......

Dr Moore wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:27 am

Allen Wyatt seems to have put a challenge out for any non LDS peer reviewed scholarship on the Book of Abraham. Perhaps Wyatt should re read the Jenkins Hamblin debate.

Ritner fits that bill as did Klaus Baer and every non LDS Egyptologist to look at the Book of Abraham. Watch, I will prophesy they will find a way around that.......at least in their own minds. Keep that testimony in tact, facts be damned.

Must be the sugar rush from all of those M&Ms.

Kiwi57 just made this predictable statement:

"It's appropriate to note here that, whatever Dr Ritner's qualifications for reading the extant papyri, he is in no wise an expert on the Book of Abraham."

And then, the junior apologist Jack says,

"Yeah--he's kind of in the same position that Michael Coe was vis-a-vis the Book of Mormon: An expert in his own field but not on the text in question."

Ehhhyea, not quite, Jacky, m'lad. Whatever Coe had on the Book of Mormon, Ritner is well beyond for the Book of Abraham because 1) there are source documents for Abraham and 2) The Book of Abraham is like 12 pages long, there's literally nothing to become an expert on.

This is the excuse the apologists always use. First, they say that apologetics is overlooked by experts, out of lack of interest. Then, if an expert happens to look, their opinion doesn't count because they haven't invested thousands of hours in reading everything every crack-blistered apologist has written on the subject first. Not that it would matter if they had, of course.