consiglieri Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 Well, that was irritating. I just went to post this and it disappeared. I will try again, without so much detail.Hugh Nibley says that the "oldest title of Pharoah in Egypt is . . . simply written with an eye and with the two stones under it."This in a discussion of Mosiah 28:16: "And whosoever has these things is called seer, after the manner of old times."Hugh Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon, II, 202-03.Does anybody here know if this is correct?And if so, what do you make of it?All the Best!--Consiglieri
Brant Gardner Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 Well, that was irritating. I just went to post this and it disappeared.The modern version of slippery earth.
consiglieri Posted June 3, 2008 Author Posted June 3, 2008 The modern version of slippery earth. So I come back to the office and see that the Brant Gardner has responded to my post.Anxiously, I spill my coffee as I grab for the mouse to click to see what he has to say.And that's it? All I get is a consiglieriesque rejoinder?*glumly starts mopping up mess*
Matthew J. Tandy Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 So I come back to the office and see that the Brant Gardner has responded to my post.Anxiously, I spill my coffee as I grab for the mouse to click to see what he has to say.And that's it? All I get is a consiglieriesque rejoinder?*glumly starts mopping up mess*Yet another reason to not drink coffee .
consiglieri Posted June 3, 2008 Author Posted June 3, 2008 Yet another reason to not drink coffee .Not to mention what it did to my lap.
consiglieri Posted June 3, 2008 Author Posted June 3, 2008 consig,I hope it was decaff....Based on the ensuing activity in my lap, I'm thinking not.
DispensatorMysteriorum Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 Based on the ensuing activity in my lap, I'm thinking not.
Brant Gardner Posted June 4, 2008 Posted June 4, 2008 And if so, what do you make of it?The Book of Mormon interpreters aren't named except by that function. That there was some sacred object used for divination is hardly unusual in world religions. What the object was might change from time to time. I suspect that in many Mesoamerican cultures, it was embodied in the "god-bundle" or the sacred object they carried around that was the physical manifestation of a particular deified ancestor.The idea of spiritual communication is pretty widespread, and the use of some object is similarly widespread. That doesn't allow me to draw connections, other than the "hmmmmm....." type.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.