Facsimile 1 Knife in Hand

[_Themis]

p.s. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...jus sayin

You show your ignorance again. In many cases it is evidence of absence. Think about it for a while and maybe you might just figure it out. I won't hold my breath.

[_Fence Sitter]

Good point. This would also explain why Abraham's legs are separated because obviously he is trying to escape being circumcised. I mean there is no reason to think Abraham would already have been circumcised now is there?

the OP made no qualification beyond what i posted.
If you would like the poster to move the goalpost, surely they would oblige.

Which says nothing about the absurdity of pointing to a circumcision as an exemption to the OP. I have no problem with your point since it does more damage to your own position than it does to the OP. Feel free to suggest that it might have been a priest trying to circumcise someone.

By the way, moving the goal posts is only an effective rejoinder when the movement adds an additional requirement of proof. What you have done is move the goal post toward your opponent.

[_Bazooka]

to match the white legs?

Have another go.
Take a look at the figure who is standing and is clearly black, upon which Joseph has drawn a white head.
Now shift your gaze a little lower down and see if you can tell us the colour of his black legs....

[_subgenius]

p.s. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...jus sayin

You show your ignorance again. In many cases it is evidence of absence. Think about it for a while and maybe you might just figure it out. I won't hold my breath.

Now i just feel pity for you.....exhale

[_subgenius]

to match the white legs?

Have another go.
Take a look at the figure who is standing and is clearly black, upon which Joseph has drawn a white head.
Now shift your gaze a little lower down and see if you can tell us the colour of his black legs....

Now i know you are kidding...why would the heads of each figure be different...your answer - to match their pant suit....got it!

[_subgenius]

Which says nothing about the absurdity of pointing to a circumcision as an exemption to the OP. I have no problem with your point since it does more damage to your own position than it does to the OP. Feel free to suggest that it might have been a priest trying to circumcise someone.

By the way, moving the goal posts is only an effective rejoinder when the movement adds an additional requirement of proof. What you have done is move the goal post toward your opponent.

My position? Pretty sure i have yet to state one...but feel free to quote it for me here...our should we just assume more predisposition from the peanut gallery?

As for more proof...it is, at this point, not necessary because the challenge cleary stated in the OP hasi been meet.
In other words, " that was through the goalposts"

Obviously, you should read the OP again...it is not exclusive to "priests"

"I'd even like to see any picture that from a pryamid text or a coffin text that shows anyone..."

Feel free to board the loser train with Themis and Bazooka, its going somewhere you guys are all too familiar with.

[_Fence Sitter]

Which says nothing about the absurdity of pointing to a circumcision as an exemption to the OP. I have no problem with your point since it does more damage to your own position than it does to the OP. Feel free to suggest that it might have been a priest trying to circumcise someone.

By the way, moving the goal posts is only an effective rejoinder when the movement adds an additional requirement of proof. What you have done is move the goal post toward your opponent.

My position? Pretty sure i have yet to state one...but feel free to quote it for me here...our should we just assume more predisposition from the peanut gallery?

As for more proof...it is, at this point, not necessary because the challenge cleary stated in the OP hasi been meet.
In other words, " that was through the goalposts"

Obviously, you should read the OP again...it is not exclusive to "priests"

"I'd even like to see any picture that from a pryamid text or a coffin text that shows anyone..."

Feel free to board the loser train with Themis and Bazooka, its going somewhere you guys are all too familiar with.

In other words you got nothing but a picture of a circumcision on someone who obviously can't be Abraham.

Thought so.

[_ZelphtheGreat]

He is holding a mirror to see how handsome he is and check out the light reflections on his chrome dome.

[_Themis]

Now i just feel pity for you.....exhale

To far above you to understand? Maybe this will help. How do they determine if a species has gone extinct?

[_bcuzbcuz]

...(snip)... I'd even like to see any picture that from a pryamid text or a coffin text that shows anyone, god(s) or priest(s), holding a knife that is not defined in the text as defending the dead or protecting the dead from named or un-named dangers. ...(snip)...

So up to proof. Find all the papyri, texts, pyramid texts or coffin texts where a knife, sword, or blade, is held with the purpose of cutting someone. Good luck.

(circumcision) from the Tomb of Ank-Mahor at Saqqara, Sixth Dynasty, Teti, c. 2340 BC.



p.s. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...jus sayin
http://www.egyptianmyths.net/knife.htm

I don't have to move any goals posts. You've already done it. When do you see circumcision done in any "BOOK of the DEAD"? Unless, of course, it's a circumcision gone horribly wrong.