RussB Posted February 9, 2010 Author Posted February 9, 2010 Hmmm, I am gonna need a CFR that JS claimed that he was identifing egyptian gods.The only time Egypt is used is to identiy that King of Pharaoh over Egypt. This verse might shead some light. 13 It was made after the form of a bedstead, such as was had among the Chaldeans, and it stood before the gods of Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash, and also a god like unto that of Pharaoh, king of Egypt. Which I will also point out that the figure identifed as "the God of Pharaoh" is indeed a hit in Egyptian. The other gods are never identifed as being egyptian.IOW the God of Pharaoh is indeed an egyptian god, that JS did get right. However to get back to my other point, the other gods are never claiemd to be egyptian. Please keep that in mind. And repetition is indeed a powerful tool to help people learn.Osiris is said to be an Egyptian god.Don't play games here, k?
Vance Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Egyptologists say "whoops!" That one there on the left isn't Elkenah. We never heard of that guy. Well that explains it. They never heard of the guy so OBVIOUSLY they are to ignorant to claim that it is or isn't him. All they can do is admit the truth and that is that they haven't seen a scene where the guy on the left isn't Anubis (If that is in fact true). Just because they haven't seen it before, doesn't mean that it isn't possible.(Here is hoping that this doesn't go over your head.) And that guy on the alter isn't Abraham. It's Osiris. Well that explains it. Perhaps they don't believe that Abraham ever existed, so OBVIOUSLY they are unwilling to claim that it is or isn't him. All they can do is admit the truth and that is that they haven't seen a scene where the guy on the left isn't Osiris (If that is in fact true). Just because they haven't seen it before, doesn't mean that it isn't possible.(Here is hoping that this doesn't go over your head, either.)
Vance Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Osiris is said to be an Egyptian god.Don't play games here, k?Rather than respond with drivel why don't you address the CFR!!!
LifeOnaPlate Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 I simply wish to pose my question(s) and see how Mormons respond. Is that okay?I was hoping you would participate in a conversation, one where people can answer questions, ask questions, you know, exchange ideas. I didn't know you were doing some sort of weird experiment. It certainly helps explain why you have failed to enter a meaningful discussion with me.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 ame='Mola Ram Suda Ram' date='09 February 2010 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1265756278' post='1208801358']Hmmm, I am gonna need a CFR that JS claimed that he was identifing egyptian gods.Osiris is said to be an Egyptian god.Don't play games here, k?Oh, I see, you think I am playing games. My CFR stands. You need to substantiate the claim. JS never claimed to be giving an understanding of egyptian. That is your claim. He never claimed he was giving the names of gods as the egyptian understood them. If you can't subsiantiate your claim there is no point in continueing.My only hope now is that this is of some benefit to our readers.
Doctor Steuss Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 The Bible clearly tells us that Abraham would have in no way been connected with pagan idolatry. I have got to start spending time on this board again.There you have it folks, the Akedat Yitzchak can in no way be found to have connections to pagan idolatry.Something casts a shadow of doubt upon Mormonism = Faith be damned... silly MormonsSomething casts a shadow of doubt upon the divine origins of one
LifeOnaPlate Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 I tried to engage him further on that point Steuss, and was accused of introducing a red herring.
Vance Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 I have got to start spending time on this board again.That, dear Doctor is a true statement!
Doctor Steuss Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 I tried to engage him further on that point Steuss, and was accused of introducing a red herring. If a feller is chumming the waters with drivel, he shouldn
RussB Posted February 9, 2010 Author Posted February 9, 2010 I have got to start spending time on this board again.There you have it folks, the Akedat Yitzchak can in no way be found to have connections to pagan idolatry.Something casts a shadow of doubt upon Mormonism = Faith be damned... silly MormonsSomething casts a shadow of doubt upon the divine origins of one
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Playing the fool and waving the arms of emotion won't get you far.In fact, such tactics only further convince this guy that Mormons are desperate for an answer.All one has to do is provide a concrete, solid, peer review that Smith got the story right, the genders right and the identities right.Until then....... needle/haystack.So peer review = truth? Do you hold that same standard for things pertaining to the bible?is there a peer reviewed journal that confirms Jesus resurrection did indeed happen?I digress, can you just answer my CFR?!
Pahoran Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 So. Yet another CARMite, who has clearly never so much as opened the Book of Abraham, comes swanning in here to tell us what idiots we are for not being Calvinists. Of all things.The BoA depicts Abraham as involved. Abraham would never have been involved at all.Call for references, please; on both counts.Egyptologists inform us that it wasn't Abraham at all. It was Osiris or a person becoming a type of Osiris, a pagan deity.Call for references, please.The BoA informs us that a pries name Elkenah drew a sword to slay Abraham.It is clear that you have never read the Book of Abraham. Rather, you rely upon the polemical propaganda flick you are promoting.Had you actually bothered to read the text, you might have seen that little word "of." Which means that Joseph didn't give the figure a name at all.LDS apologists defend Smith's ideas while those who know what's happening in the scene inform us otherwise.You absolutely love what "Egyptologists" have to say -- but only as long as they tell you what you want to hear: namely, that there is something wrong with a religion you despise and detest. Are you equally happy with them when they tell you things you don't want to hear?Will you accept the verdict of the "Egyptologists" about whether or not there really was an Exodus?Or are you going to skate over that, like a good little Pharisee?Regards,Pahoran
Doctor Steuss Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Playing the fool and waving the arms of emotion won't get you far.So that's what you're doing with your arms.Was wondering what was happening over there (thought maybe it was some new dance).Thank you for the clarification. As for emotion... the internet is serious business.In fact, such tactics only further convince this guy that Mormons are desperate for an answer.I'm agnostic. Want to know what your tactics further convince this guy of?All one has to do is provide a concrete, solid, peer review that Smith got the story right, the genders right and the identities right.That's all?What happens when someone provides "a concrete, solid, peer review [sic]" that human sacrifice is attested to in the Bible? Or can we not be bothered by such trivial things whilst tossing stones during our assent on Jacob
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 So that's what you're doing with your arms.Was wondering what was happening over there (thought maybe it was some new dance).Thank you for the clarification. As for emotion... the internet is serious business.StuYou sir are a funny upstanding man. That was some serious class you displayed.
SilverKnight Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 You absolutely love what "Egyptologists" have to say -- but only as long as they tell you what you want to hear: namely, that there is something wrong with a religion you despise and detest. Are you equally happy with them when they tell you things you don't want to hear?Though he has studied "biblical difficulties" I predict RussB would not like what those same professors of Egyptology, Archeology, History, Biology, Chemisty and Physics (at least those not employed at Oral Roberts University) would have to say about his Biblical Fundamentalism.Russ if you "desire to be taken seriously, you should present peer-reviewed, non-Christian material substantiating Biblical claims"Surely there must be volumes of such material out there.
Doctor Steuss Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 You sir are a funny upstanding man. That was some serious class you displayed.Meh. You just feel that way because I save my Mormon bashing for family functions, and drinking contests..
RussB Posted February 9, 2010 Author Posted February 9, 2010 What happens when someone provides "a concrete, solid, peer review [sic]" that human sacrifice is attested to in the Bible?Then we can talk about that rather than Smith's boo-boo.In this thread, we should discuss what evidence exists for Smith. I suppose you disagree.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Meh. You just feel that way because I save my Mormon bashing for family functions, and drinking contests..Well, I can't say that that is true since I have no idea what you do beyond this board. By their fruits shall ye know them.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Then we can talk about that rather than Smith's boo-boo.In this thread, we should discuss what evidence exists for Smith. I suppose you disagree.Yes, lets do that. Were did JS claim that he was telling us the names of the gods as the egyptians udnerstood them?
RussB Posted February 9, 2010 Author Posted February 9, 2010 Meh. You just feel that way because I save my Mormon bashing for family functions, and drinking contests..HAH!
Doctor Steuss Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Well, I can't say that that is true since I have no idea what you do beyond this board. By their fruits shall ye know them.I wear Haynes.------------------Then we can talk about that rather than Smith's boo-boo.In this thread, we should discuss what evidence exists for Smith. Fair enough.I suppose you disagree.About what?The purpose of the thread, or your gifted ability to introduce a Red Herring, and then feign outrage when it manages to find its way into someone else
RussB Posted February 9, 2010 Author Posted February 9, 2010 Yes, lets do that. Were did JS claim that he was telling us the names of the gods as the egyptians udnerstood them?Oh, I dunno, fac. 1 and stuff, I guess. Fig. 2. Abraham fastened upon an altar. Fig. 3. The idolatrous priest of Elkenah attempting to offer up Abraham as a sacrifice.Did Abraham escape the knife?
volgadon Posted February 10, 2010 Posted February 10, 2010 Russ, you can keep on ignoring my post on Baal-Seth, but it is quite obvious that you in no way, shape or form were interested in a real discussion.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 10, 2010 Posted February 10, 2010 Oh, I dunno, fac. 1 and stuff, I guess. Fig. 2. Abraham fastened upon an altar. Fig. 3. The idolatrous priest of Elkenah attempting to offer up Abraham as a sacrifice.Did Abraham escape the knife?Can a symbol have more than one meaning? Does context mean anything to you?Were did JS claim he was giving an egyptian understanding for this fac?What does this V symbol mean?
RussB Posted February 10, 2010 Author Posted February 10, 2010 I wear Haynes.------------------Fair enough.About what?The purpose of the thread, or your gifted ability to introduce a Red Herring, and then feign outrage when it manages to find its way into someone else
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.