The sister missionary described, "We went with the purpose of just softening her up for her brother's baptism, but when we got there and sat down, the Spirit took the lesson in a direction completely different." Together they read passages from the Book of Mormon, although Ana "previously REFUSED (to accept) that there was any chance the Book of Mormon is the word of God WITH the Bible."
So far, the only thing you have demonstrated that you know is how to say "fool" (mere child's play), and make assertions pretending that is enough to contstitute reality and truth. You don't know spit, and love to bluster to hide your ignorance. It is amusing to us though, thanks for the entertainment.
"yet those works contradict each other" You truly are clueless. Even if this were true, (the BoM and BoA don't contradict each other) this is all you have, one supposed contradiction about the plurality of Gods.
Once again, this is completely true, and this is even without getting into whether or not your imaginary "god" even EXISTS; this BS artist's own words contradict himself time and time again on MANY issues, besides contradicting the original book he tried to build his cult on (the christian's bible). How many contradictions are you willing to swallow in "the infallible word of god" anyway, fool?
Just as the magnitude of your gullibility staggers me; how can anyone who possibly considers themselves to be even moderately intelligent, be possibly sucked in by the obvious lies that this con-man told, without even a smidgen of evidence to back any of them up?
I have SHOWN in these vids the EGYPTOLOGICAL evidences for Joseph Smith's interpretations. Can you show me the EGYPTOLOGICAL evidences showing what I showed were wrong? Or do you think when you speak, the universe forms into your version of reality because you are so great even it obeys your every whim?
You HAVEN'T shown any "egyptological evidences" fool, you've simply picked and chose fragments which you think you can twist the con-man Smith's words to fit, no differently than what the true believers in any OTHER superstition do, whether it's Scientology, astrology, Nostradamus, or any one of a million others.
I have too. I absolutely have. Now you are just being cantankerously stupid on purpose, disagreeing just to do so. You have no real ability to deal with evidences against your mere assertions do you.....
So where are the huge cities that this liar Smith claimed? Where are the iron tools, Where are the chariots? Where is any DNA evidence? Where is any cultural evidence AT ALL, for ANYTHING that this bullshit artist ever claimed? He simply made it all up, which is evident not only from his stories, but from the way he came up with those stories, and the absolute lack of any support for those stories.
This video is not about the big cities, it is about one of Joseph Smith's interpretations in the Book of Abraham. Stay with one subject at a time. I have shown Egyptological evidences in these videos. THAT is their subject. Switch and bait all you want, you have not refuted a thing in these videos, nor can you do so I suspect.
If this con man was an actual "prophet", he's not ALLOWED to get even one thing wrong, remember? I'm playing the game by one of the books that your cult claims to hold as "sacred", and that's the rule as laid out in Deuteronomy, remember? So, once again, how many lies are you willing to stomach from the liar that founded your cult?
You show me ***ANYWHERE**** where the Book of Mormon is ever described within its own pages as "the infallible word of God" and I will absolutely, without hesitation QUIT Mormonism and join you in your fight against it. Now then, what are YOU going to do for me if you CANNOT find this red herring in the Book of Mormon? Put yer ridiculous so-called "educated" mind where your obviously ignorant mouth is.
Explain to me, "professor", exactly where it is claimed that this liar Smith "received the word of god", and then tell me how any of you gullible sheep can claim that it is anything BUT "the word of god" if you do, in fact, profess to believe in this nonsense cult. His own lies contradict themselves, but the lengths to which followers of any cult will go to avoid the truth are absolutely amazing.
Had you really learned about Mormonism instead of your own version of what it is supposed to be, you would know this already. You really ain't the brightest bulb in the pack are you.....
I've read enough to know that this shyster conned you all, yet you continue to suck it up like gravy. Exactly how many lies and contradictions are you willing to tolerate in "the infallible word of god", anyway?
The Book of Mormon nowhere claims to be the infallible word of God (this is twice, your power of observation is rather weak me thinks). Your strawman is worthless.
BTW, even if you have a diploma in archaeology, which I seriously doubt, because of your penchant for fallacious argument, unless you have a background in Mesoamerican archaeology, what is the point?
The point is that there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for any of the claims that this con-man made, ranging from his "lost israeli tribes" nonsense, to his baldfaced lie of having been given a "book of gold by an angel and running 3 miles while fighting off 3 attackers while carrying that book". Most people want to see EVIDENCE for these sorts of claims, unless they're slower than dirt.
"NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER " Now that's a baldfaced lie. I would be careful not to join the ranks of those you accuse. Really pathetic assertion as well. For a person with a degree in criminology, you use informal fallacy like you invented it.
That is the absolute truth; every single claim that this con-man ever made has been shown to be complete BS, and the only reason he got away with conning the rubes for so long is because the vast majority of them were likewise, slower than dirt. Now, the question you have to ask yourself is, exactly how much of the shit this shyster pumped out are you willing to swallow?
Stacey.....are YOU this gullible?! EVERY SINGLE THING HE EVER SAID HAS BEEN PROVEN FALSE?!? I suppose it would really be too much of me to ask you for some evidence wouldn't it. After all, if all one has to do is say so for the truth, my that is the far easier way.
He claimed to be able to translate hieroglyphics; that was proven false. he claimed that the Americas were colonized by "lost Israeli tribes; that has been proven false. he claimed to have run 3 miles while carrying a book that would have weighed anywhere between 70 and 200 pounds, all while fighting off 3 men; that has been proven false, and you can replicate the experiment yourself. And so on, and so on. There's a point when you have to ask yourself what exactly this BS artist DIDN'T lie about
If you call any of us any more names, I am going to ban you. Be civil, be decent, and you can post. I am sick to death of your righteous smug attitude. Clean up the language, or get lost. I *won't* tell you twice. Disagreeing is fine, but lose the attitude, or lose the right to be here.That is an order not a request. I've had it with your childishness.
If I was a TENTH as smug as those who claim to have some sort of monopoly of "the word of god", let alone claimed to know that such "god" existed, then you might be able to call me "smug". Until then, religions SPECIALIZE in smug, and all without being able to prove their claims.
From which institution? It's a terrible shame that you'd allow yourself to be sucked in by Smith's transparent lies, so the question is, what part of reality has you so scared that you'd rather believe his fairy-tales?
Idaho State University (1994), and my Bachelor's Thesis was on the Identification of the Teacher of Righteousness in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which was also good enough that I got invited to the Pacific Northwest History COnference to present it (7 states attending) Now then, YOUR info? Or are you the one conning us with this phony authoritativeness that obviously is a mere dimmer switch compared to the absolute light of God in the Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as we understand it....
The MO that is used by StaceyC123, reminds me of the sham trials the Nazis conducted in order to dispose of their enemies. Hear only the evidence that corroborates your position, and ignore the rest, having presupposed it to be false. The very definition of prejudice.
Book Of Abraham speaks of many Gods yes, but not of greater Gods than God the Father. We have no doctrine or scripture which teaches that. If the Book Of Mormon doesn't say anything about that, so what!!
So you're allowed to pick and choose among these works of fiction what you're allowed to believe or not? It seems to mwe that if this con-man ACTUALLY "spoke for god", his lies wouldn't contradict each other, right? Fool.
"So you're allowed to pick and choose among these works of fiction what you're allowed to believe or not?" What does that mean, and where did I do that?
Thus, Moroni makes plain that they are the ones who have given this name to their written language, a language "that none other people knoweth" (Moroni 9:34). Also, Moroni says they "altered" the Egyptian characters. They called it "reformed" because they had altered it. They were using altered Egyptian characters to write their non-Egyptian language.
Some Book of Mormon critics scorn this claim of Book of Mormon language, saying, "there is no such language as Reformed Egyptian" — "there has never been a single example found." Is this a case of deliberate misunderstanding? Of course there's no such language! Moroni says, "in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian — a small "r," an adjective.
Why, YOURS, of course; like any other cult member, you will twist reality to any degree in order to hang onto your nonsense, no matter how unrealistic the claim.
Some beautiful scenic shots, BTW, but can you explain why, in a 9:52 video that is supposed to explain why this con-man Smith should be believed as an "Egyptologist", you spend a total of exactly ZERO seconds actually trying to support your claim?
Yes, I do that deliberately so that idiots like you can prove how dense you are shown through your poor thinking skills proven via moronic questions that mean nothing.
@TheBackyardProfessor Meaning that your superstition has nothing more behind it than any OTHER cult throughout history; it is absolutely astounding that supposedly intelligent people can be so sucked in by the ramblings of con-men like L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith that they will claim to believe their nonsense. There is absolutely NO scientific or archaeological evidence in support of anything that Smith claimed, and plenty to show that he was an outright LIAR.
No, it means no matter what we teach. learn or share, you will call it names thinking that is enough to refute it. Calling it window dressing makes you think you have refuted the evidence so you can safely ignore anything in favor. It's a cheap and shallow trick, labeling something derogatorily because you don't like it, and then proclaim victory without having to show anything refuting the evidence.
Wrong again; taking a viewer on a hike through the mountains, while claiming to show the liar Joseph Smith was anything more than a con-man is most CERTAINLY window-dressing, because it doesn't address the lies he told, OR the complete lack of evidence for any of his lies. If you expect someone to believe you, you're going to have to lay out areasonably-intelligent argument, supported by evidence, otherwise you're simply selling the same snake-oil that the Scientologists and Raelians are.
Nothing I say will ever be a "reasonable" argument with one such as yourself who is so obviously obssessed with name calling instead of scholarship that there is no hope here. Good luck in your life.
A "reasonable" argument is one in which a hypothesis is laid out and supported by allied evidence; your superstition has nothing of the sort, preferring to instead swallow the simplistic lies of this con-man Smith. Can you point to even a SINGLE solitary piece of concrete evidence that supports the fairy-tales spun by this BS artist? I didn't think so.
I have OVER 860 videos which is dealing with MYRIADS of evidences. YOUR ignorance is not the standard of truth and reality for Mormonism you dork. Single piece? Yo wake up I have shown HUNDREDS of ideas, themes, and evidences. Your ignorance is not my liability. Do some homework before you show off just how seriously ignorant you really are.
No, you have 860 "folksy"-style videos which make plenty of CLAIMS for your superstition, but absolutely no EVIDENCE for your superstition; there's a difference. If I were to believe any of the nonsense that came out of this con-man Smith's mouth, I'd need to see some supporting evidence, for example, something to show that he was actually "given a book of gold by an angel", or that "the Americas were colonized by Lamanites", or any of the OTHER bug-dung that he claimed.
So you can say this because you have already watched all of them? Or are you mind reading? You have no idea what my videos show if you have not watched them. But don't let the facts stop you from proclaiming your silliness.
I can say I've watched (make that: "wasted my time on") at least SIXTY of your folksy little backyard chats, and in not ONE of them can I recall seeing anything resembling actual EVIDENCE; now, if Smith wasn't so full of BS that it fell out everytime he opened his mouth, where is any of the actual PROOF for any of his lies? Where are the iron tools? Where are the chariots? Where are the huge cities? Where is the DNA to show that any natives are descended from Israelis? Nowhere at all.
LOL! Well what kind of a ding-a-ling is gonna waste time on so MANY videos when obviously from the very start I am nothing but a moron braindead, no good, brainwashed idiot?!? Now who's the ridiculous one? If it's a waste of your time, how do you justify continuing watching them?!? And continue talking to me?
Because I'm interested in how and why so many people are so desperate to "live forever" that they are willing to swallow ANY lie, no matter how big or small; that goes for your cult as well as any other, ranging from Judaism to Islam to Christianity. The only thing that really separates your cult from most others is that this con-man Smith was able to run across a group of simpletons and delude them relatively late in recorded history.
Yeah, we religious folk, nmo matter HOW MANY degrees we acquire will always be seen as simpleminded. Such simplistic and unrealistic labeling is always done by those who don't know spit about the issues they attack in ignorance such as you are doing.
There's a simple way to avoid that, fool; simply back up the nonsense you claim to believe with evidence. Since the con-man Smith simply made this cult up, you're not able to do that, are you? ;-)
I have already been doing so for literally decades and thousands of written pages my dear. It is you who are not able or willing to read and study it all out.
Why haven't you offered any in the 60 or so videos that I've watched of yours? Statistical probability alone says that if you had any actual evidence, you would have offered it somewhere in there, but all I've ever seen you do is ramble on about what your baloney "prophet" claimed, and then not back it up. Here's your chance: show me some solid evidence for once that shows these claims to be anything more than baldfaced lies.
See the "PART 1" in the title? That means the video showing the evidence was not a mere 9:52, and with the video responses, you would have learned that I spent over an hour discussing the evidence. But I suspect you won't take an hour to learn anything new, so that's why you stop so far short.
So why bother with any of this 'window-dressing" nonsense? If you HAVE any actual evidence in support of the lies that this con-man Smith told, why not lay it out directly, openly, honestly, and clearly?
I DID lay it out in over an hour and a half of videos for crying out loud. Watch ALL of them and THEN discuss the evidence. Good Lord ya ding-a-ling. If a scholar wrote a 45 page paper, would you only read 1 PAGE AND THEN COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW WRONG IT ALL IS IN SUCH DISMAL IGNORANCE?
And NONE of it explains why there is such a complete and utter lack of evidence for anything that this con-man Smith ever said; even your own superstition can't agree on most of it, because it was entirely MADE UP. There is no evidence whatsoever for his claims that the Americas were colonized by "lost Israeli tribes", that they built huge cities, that they used iron, built chariots, and so forth. In other words, he was a CON-MAN, no different than L. Ron Hubbard.
The BofM *nowhere* claims its people are from any of the Lost tribes of Israel. Hello McIgnorant?! Obviously you haven't a clue about what it really says because you won't read it, but instead choose the lazy way of pretending the anti-Mormon arguments are legitimate. They are that....legitimately stupid, uninformed, ahistorical, and ridiculously easy to refute.
It claims that the Americas were "colonized by Lamanites", and that said imaginary "Lamanites" built huge cities, made iron weapons, built chariots, and plenty of other bogus claims that have absolutely no evidence in support of them. In fact, all of the evidence that we DO have shows that there is absolutely no connection between aboriginal Americans and "lost Israeli tribes" whatsoever, fool.
Certainly none built by these imaginary "Lamanites" claimed by that liar Smith; there were plenty of large cities built by the Mayas and Incas, but not a shred of anything by any "Lamanite".
Your ignorance of the Book of Mormon is amusing.......thanks for the entertainment though. This is turning out to be far more fun than I imagined it would.
I'm glad you're enjoying it as well; the nonsense you believe is, purely and simply, CRAZY, with no more behind it than the Scientologists' tales of "ghost aliens" being packed into spaceships and stored in volcanoes. But, you are so wedded to your nonsense that you're not willing to take a close look at exactly how crazy it is.
Coming from you, one who truly parrots the already refuted anti-Mormon arguments (while pretending to have a degree in archaeology - CHORTLE), I find this also deeply ironic.
All you need to do to "refute" those arguments is to PROVE your beliefs by showing some actual evidence; you're not about to do that, prefering instead to ramble on about your camping trips.
No one can PROVE anything to someone who does not want to learn. I DO very much more than ramble about camping. You wouldn't know what evidence is if it hits you right on the nose. ANd you claim to have a degree in archaeology - howling laughter! Like I said, you got riupped off.
You don't offer any evidence AT ALL for your nonsensical claims, you simply make unsupported claims for your superstition (no different than any OTHER cult or superstition); now, if you could point to some ACTUAL evidence (for example, some of this bogus "reformed Egyptian", or some DNA evidence showing that "Lamanites" from the Middle East colonized the Americas, or some cultural artifacts from this supposedly advanced civilization, then you might be more than a mere crackpot.
BYP repeatedly quotes his sources in many of his videos, the DNA evidence argument is rather moot considering the relatively small gene pool and mixing that would have occured among the Nephites. Also, Nephites were from Manasseh, not Judah, so the likelihood of finding Jewish DNA in their descendants becomes even harder.
Reformed egyptian. There is such reformed langauges, such as meroitic, a modified form of egyptian script.
You obviously have no idea of how DNA is even PASSED from generation to generation, fool; if we can determine that someone's genetic background is northern European or mid-African (which we can), then we can most certainly detect the presence of any Middle Eastern heritage in someone's bloodline; not a SINGLE indicator of such has ever been found in any aboriginal American, meaning that this was just another of Smith's lies.
Meroitic is simply a method of writing, the same way Hieratic and Demotic are (analogous to printing versus cursive), so it'as no more "reformed Egyptian" than it's "reformed Polish". If ignorance is bliss, you must whistle like a tea-kettle.
Exactly; that's why a fast-talking con artist like Joseph Smith was able to sucker the rubes into believing his "an angel gave me a book of gold" fairy-tale.
If you had any notion on how the Book of Mormon was written, you would never have used the Lincoln quote. To the person who is aware of the history, you simply reinforce it/s authenticity.
Oh, I KNOW how your little magic book was written; the shyster stuck his face in his hat and started to ramble on about things that he thought sounded sufficiently "biblical" to pull in the gullible fools.
Well, we can start with the differences between this con-man's claims in his various books (all of which, the claim is made, were the result of an imaginary "god" speaking through Smith); in the original book, he claimed that (just as the bible claims) that there is only ONE "god", but in his later nonsense, he went on to claim that there are MANY "gods". If he can't even keep his story straight in the basic details, how gullible do you have to be to believe ANY of it?
Even if this were true, (which it isn't) how is this contradiction in the Book of Mormon? Face it, you do nothing but assert, and flail away at the straw man you have created. Give some citations of these claims, other than the terrible peep stone (old news) in the hat proof. "how gullible do you have to be to believe ANY of it" We could all say the same about your claims. An observer from 175 years after the fact, who bases his knowledge on Google, and a fictitious archaeology degree.
Ah, but it IS true, you just don't want to take a look at this con-man's claims; the "book of mormon" specifically claims ONE "god", while (for example) the "book of abraham" claims MANY "gods"; if you're willing to delude yourself to the point where you can't even recognize that this shyster was an accomplished bullshit artist, you'll believe ANYTHING in the name of your cult. And, I'd be happy to mail you a copy of my diploma, which would be more proof than anything that this cult has offered
Simon Fraser University, 1995. Now, once again, if this shyster was able to keep his lies straight, he wouldn't have claimed only ONE "god" in one of his works of fiction, and MANY "gods" in his other works of fiction. Further, many of the things that this liar Smith claimed run so contrary to the claims of the cult of christianity, that the majority of christian sects disavow any affiliation with your cult (despite the fact that they have no more evidence for their nonsense than you do).
And I have 4 masters degrees from Mcgill university, what does that prove. Without a name or some other proof, my degrees (in what?) remain fictitious as well. Did you major in ad hominem argument? You argue like a schoolboy.
You haven't showed one thing yet. But my what a lot of hot air you blow. Talk is not refutation or proof against evidences presented. I know the 4th graders in our neighborhood understand this, what's your hold up on comprehending that?
Like every other cultist, you would prefer to not examine your own beliefs too closely, because you're afraid that what you'll find would show the superstition you have invested so much into would be proven just as full of nonsense as all the rest.
I have been exmining my own beliefs for decades, and writing about them and videoing them, etc. I have FAR MORE to PROVE that than your mere twaddle you peddle you phony archaeologist. You CLAIMED that was your specialty, and now you change your tune to anthropology. And by your mere assertions, I KNOW you know nothing about anthropology either, because I certainly DID study it.
And, as I've already shown, you've done nothing except repeat the obvious lies that this con-man Smith told, and then say "Well, maybe this was what he was talking about, if we take "a" to mean "b" and "x" to mean "y", and then stand logic on its head". The same thing EVERY cult does.
What precisely are your "degrees" in? Modern fiction? My degrees (Archaeology and Criminology) both relate to the subject matter at hand, which is "How did Joseph Smith manage to pull off such an obvious scam that even some otherwise inteligent people choose to overlook his lies and believe the nonsense he spouted?"
Forensic archaeology?? Not only have you no background ( assuming you actually have degree) in Mesoamerican archaeology, you aren't even in the same field. The only crime scene here, is your grasp of the facts.
LOLOL! WHICH area of archaeology are you a so-called "specialist" in (CHORTLE!....specialist indeed!). You write as if archaeology is a single discipline, it's not. You're nothing but a blow hard.
Do I NEED to mail you a copy of my diploma? Not that it would make the slightest bit of difference to someone who can delude themselves to the point where they claim to believe in the nonsense that Joseph Smith spouted, but my specific area of interest in arhaeology was forensic anthropology (ie. identifying human remains), because I work in a crime lab. That means I work with ACTUAL evidence, not the fairy-tales that this shyster Smith spun out for the rubes.
Latter-day Saints believe in an eternal cycle where God creates children in the purpose that they may grow to be joint-heirs of Jesus Christ and thus become one with God or like God. This is commonly called exaltation with the LDS church. However, Gordon B. Hinckley, former prophet and president of the church, stated that we do not currently possess a clear understanding of what it means to be joint-heirs with Christ.
Revelations 1:6 - "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen" Joseph Smith interpreted this to mean that individuals were made kings and priests unto God, referring here to Jesus Christ, and to his Father.
A recently discovered text written in Egyptian characters has been determined to be an Aramaic language rendering of Psalm 20:2-6 — Egyptian characters used to write a biblical text in a Semitic language. This certainly sounds very much like Moroni's reformed Egyptian.
Once again, Aramaic is NOT "reformed Egyptian", and this shyster Smith wouldn't have been able to read it even if he had known of it's existence; his supposed "translations" make that abundantly clear.
If Joseph Smith was anything but a dyed-in-the-wool BS artist, he wouldn't have claimed to be able to "translate" hieroglyphics, let alone his bogus "reformed Egyptian" language.
You are obviously out of date on the issue of Reformed Egyptian. no surprise. But hey, your methodology is simply to mock and then pretend that is actually evidence against what you don't believe. Such naivete.
"Reformed Egyptian" was what this con-man claimed to be able to read, despite the fact that there is no such language. Now, if the information that this liar gave you is "out of date", that tells me that he was LYING about it. Or are you going to claim that he came back to make some corrections? ;-)
I am saying were you half as incliuned to learn as you are spout your idiocy you would already know this issue and where the answers are. Your very argument proves to me you have no intention of being truthful and learning about it.
Hey you dork. If you would quit reading the wrong silliness and read the correct stuff you would know that the BofM does NOT teach the Reformed Egyptian is a world language. It is the language that the NEPHITES themselves changed the original Egyptian into ******for their own purposes*****
Why you continue using idiotic anti-Mormon arguments is utterly beyond me, uinl;ess, of course, you glory in stupidity and thrill in showing how brainwashed you are.
I really appreciate your work here on youtube. but why are you calling someone a dork? It is not right to insult somebody...even if his arguments may be wrong.
In other words, the ONLY "evidence" for this "reformed Egyptian" nonsense are the words of the liar Joseph Smith himself; gee, I wonder why I don't believe you?
Did I say that ONLY Joseph Smith has discussed the Reformed Egyptian? Your reading skills seem to be going downhill. Tell ya what, there is an invention made in the 1990's called The Internet. Google Reformed Egyptian on it and see what happens. Go ahead, I double dog dare ya.... And if you only stop at the anti sites you are the fool.
Oh, I've already read PLENTY on your superstition and the lies that Smith told his gullible followers; the ONLY people that pay any attention at all to his claims about "reformed Egyptian" are those that have already bought into the rest of his lies, so they are desperate to make up something that they can CLAIM is evidence for his lies.
Yeah riiiiiight. Oh I just betchta you have read hundreds of pages of materials on this......... you probably have a Phd of knowledge on the Reformed Egyptian. Whoa I am a tremblin in fear of your great knowledge......
I hate to break it to you, "professor", but I DO have a degree in Archaeology; there is NOTHING called "reformed Egyptian", except in the minds of the simpletons who buy into this con-man's lies.
Oh and you think that degree gives you brains? Yeah, yeah, sure sure...... you got ripped off then, you know nothing about HOW archaeology works, let alone languages and how they change through time.
Really, "professor"? I suppose that explains why no-one else has been able to produce an example of this imaginary "reformed Egyptian" language then, right? Smith was a con-man, pure and simple, and gullible fools like you continue to suck his lies up.
Yes really. Obviously you are oblivious to the outstanding scholarly materials dealing with this issue. But why read the LDS scholars right? Biased, closed minded, numbskulls, twits, ne'er do wells, stupid dolts, morons, children who can't read, pseudoscholars, etc.
If I'm going to believe the brainwashed simpletons who already believe your nonsense without any evidence, why wouldn't I just as easily believe the brainwashed simpletons who make similar claims on behalf of THEIR chosen cult, be it Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Voodoo, or any OTHER nonsense?
Like I said, nothing I say or show will convince you. You are only a mere 100 HOURS of videos behind. Refute my Book of Mormon Commentary (73 vids). It's a playlist so easy to access and use.
This is why the apologetics to the Joseph Smith papyri is so difficult to grasp and the anti-Mormon arguments come off as believable. Most people don't understand the Egyptian culture and religions (including the majority of LDS members). Understanding these things make you realize why scholars like Dr. John Gee is a strong advocate of the Book of Abraham being authentic.
What is so silly is that they are taking any historical document and ignoring the context. If a document was written 2000 years after the events in question, how stupid to put it's own renderings with more weight than the historical events themselves as well as the writings that preceeded it (and are of course closer in time to the historical link). Why not then accept the Quran as true, and Muhammad's interpretation of the Gospels as fact? It came much later too.
Not only am I denying it, i am demanding you Romm offer some proof that he was white? Why white? Why not black? What's your rationale for that/
2. There is no connection to Abraham and Osiris anymore than there is a connection between me and you. Osiris was known in history thousands of years before Abraham was born or even mentioned anywhere.
3. Anything Greek came long after the events in question and so it's irrelevant historically to the much earlier Egyptian and Hebrew events!
Keep in mind something. Throughout Jewish and Christian history blacks have been priests. Ethiopia, Egypt, Sudan. Heck, you have Lemba Jews in South Africa who have been genetically proven to be from the Kohen priesthood of Jews since the 2nd temple period.
History disproves Mormonism on this essential core point. How then do you take black history and try to make a black man white, or make it irrelevant. It was so relavent to make up the curse on blacks in the first place, now refuting it isnt?
I mean I showed you how fundamentally wrong Joseph Smith was in linking black skin, black people, black skinned people, and African "negroes" to any curse, ban, or restriction from any Jewish or Christian priesthood.
That in itself is a core breakage of Mormonism. This notion that God excluded 1/3rd to 2/5ths of all the humans in history from being priests, with skin color being some sign of it.
That was invented FIRST by the Talmud & white racists and adopted by the Mormon founder Smith.
And God says IN Amos 9:6 - You are like the Ethiopians oh people of Israel. The Hebrew word is "Kush" again signifying AFRICA, not some other "Ethiopians" way off yonder. Obvioulsy the Bible did not signify the Ethiopian black race as anything other than people with a darker complexion.
you'd have also criticized the church in the old testament when the priesthood was restricted to anyone other than the Levites!!! or in the NT when the gospel was reserved for a selected group until God, in his wisdom, sent it forth to the gentile as well. you'd have been a critic of the church no matter the century you were born... but hey, i can't claim to know your heart so i'll leave that to Christ who i presume you follow.. continue in prayer and growing to know your saviour. i wish u well
The priesthood was dispensed to the ONLY Tribe of people that acknowledged God. Therefore any followers would be a part of that tribe (The Hebrews). They would not be rejected because their ancestors came from here and there. Read Leviticus, the Priesthood was not denied to people who were mixed, but simply was required to have A Levite ancestor, not "all ancestors to be Levite".
And relating this notion that "God in his wisdom" relating to blacks. When god in his wisdom came as Christ, then the Levitical priesthood was no longer required. HOWEVER, the restriction Europeans conjured up against black people had no biblical element. In addition in 1979, if I pretend to accept, nothing was revealed in that respect other than it was simply done.
Those who grow to God know in their hearts that dark skin was never used to racially seperate people based on a cursed lineage.
It's like on one hand you guys look for the smallest detail and explode it's significance well beyond it's context,
but then on the same token you ignore essential details that totally invalidate your assumptions.
And on top of that, you take the diffusionist (anything can mean anything) approach. The Bible clearly refutes Egyptian mythology. God calls the gods of Egypt mute, nothing, non existent.
There is no reference to Osiris in the Bible! Osiris is written in Egypt 2-3K years b4 Abraham
I read the B o'Abraham & B o' Moses... with Cain and his black skin mark & Mormons run around insisting a mark is a skin color! I had to show a Mormon what a permanent pen does to my skin when I draw on it and then ask him "what is this"? Because Mormons go around saying that, after all the discussions get to the heart of the matter, they ask "what else could the mark of cain have been".
And that's when I have to put a mark on my hand and show them.
"Since there aren't any green people, the black is the obvious choice for a living human."
Actually, according to Richard Wilkinson (Symbols and Magic in Egyptian Art, page 116), both black and green are used to represent both live and dead figures. They can be both used in a funerary and non-funerary context. So really it becomes a non-issue. Plus, don't think for a second that the Egyptians were realists with their art. Egyptian art is HIGHLY symbolic.
Yeah...um... the figure of Osiris/Abraham in Joseph Smith Papyrus 1 is neither green nor black. He is white. So, um, what is your point again? Are your strange ramblings able to contend with the original documents themselves?
i would like to see the mormon river it must be beautiful. Where are you in the video? which country?
dorisfenella 11 months ago
Why compairing one made up story eith another made up thing?
Leads to knowhere, at least not to more knowledge.
knetterrrr 1 year ago
your the backword professor
FUwogs 1 year ago
you do have a beautiful backyard
kitchwatembo 1 year ago
Stacyc123 strikes me an a minister whose salary depends on what he/she can get people to buy.
trappedhere2 1 year ago
The sister missionary described, "We went with the purpose of just softening her up for her brother's baptism, but when we got there and sat down, the Spirit took the lesson in a direction completely different." Together they read passages from the Book of Mormon, although Ana "previously REFUSED (to accept) that there was any chance the Book of Mormon is the word of God WITH the Bible."
omiolo 1 year ago
stacey123 won't continue the video set, but only try to discredit you here. If she would actually take the time, she might learn something.
I'd say atheism is more like panning for gold in the bathtub.
LDSapologist71 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HEHE Atheism is more like panning for gold in the bathtub.
LDSapologist71 1 year ago
Comment removed
LDSapologist71 1 year ago
StaceyC won't look at the proof you present. I'm sure her comments stop right here on part 1. for I am sure you got allot more in the further parts.
LDSapologist71 1 year ago
How did you learn so much?!
Doliath 2 years ago
So far, the only thing you have demonstrated that you know is how to say "fool" (mere child's play), and make assertions pretending that is enough to contstitute reality and truth. You don't know spit, and love to bluster to hide your ignorance. It is amusing to us though, thanks for the entertainment.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I'm glad I'm not the only one enjoying it; do you actually have any evidence at all, or are you going to continue to run away?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
"yet those works contradict each other" You truly are clueless. Even if this were true, (the BoM and BoA don't contradict each other) this is all you have, one supposed contradiction about the plurality of Gods.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Once again, this is completely true, and this is even without getting into whether or not your imaginary "god" even EXISTS; this BS artist's own words contradict himself time and time again on MANY issues, besides contradicting the original book he tried to build his cult on (the christian's bible). How many contradictions are you willing to swallow in "the infallible word of god" anyway, fool?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
The magnitude of your ignorance staggers the imagination.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Just as the magnitude of your gullibility staggers me; how can anyone who possibly considers themselves to be even moderately intelligent, be possibly sucked in by the obvious lies that this con-man told, without even a smidgen of evidence to back any of them up?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I have SHOWN in these vids the EGYPTOLOGICAL evidences for Joseph Smith's interpretations. Can you show me the EGYPTOLOGICAL evidences showing what I showed were wrong? Or do you think when you speak, the universe forms into your version of reality because you are so great even it obeys your every whim?
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
You HAVEN'T shown any "egyptological evidences" fool, you've simply picked and chose fragments which you think you can twist the con-man Smith's words to fit, no differently than what the true believers in any OTHER superstition do, whether it's Scientology, astrology, Nostradamus, or any one of a million others.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I have too. I absolutely have. Now you are just being cantankerously stupid on purpose, disagreeing just to do so. You have no real ability to deal with evidences against your mere assertions do you.....
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
So where are the huge cities that this liar Smith claimed? Where are the iron tools, Where are the chariots? Where is any DNA evidence? Where is any cultural evidence AT ALL, for ANYTHING that this bullshit artist ever claimed? He simply made it all up, which is evident not only from his stories, but from the way he came up with those stories, and the absolute lack of any support for those stories.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
This video is not about the big cities, it is about one of Joseph Smith's interpretations in the Book of Abraham. Stay with one subject at a time. I have shown Egyptological evidences in these videos. THAT is their subject. Switch and bait all you want, you have not refuted a thing in these videos, nor can you do so I suspect.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
If this con man was an actual "prophet", he's not ALLOWED to get even one thing wrong, remember? I'm playing the game by one of the books that your cult claims to hold as "sacred", and that's the rule as laid out in Deuteronomy, remember? So, once again, how many lies are you willing to stomach from the liar that founded your cult?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
You show me ***ANYWHERE**** where the Book of Mormon is ever described within its own pages as "the infallible word of God" and I will absolutely, without hesitation QUIT Mormonism and join you in your fight against it. Now then, what are YOU going to do for me if you CANNOT find this red herring in the Book of Mormon? Put yer ridiculous so-called "educated" mind where your obviously ignorant mouth is.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Explain to me, "professor", exactly where it is claimed that this liar Smith "received the word of god", and then tell me how any of you gullible sheep can claim that it is anything BUT "the word of god" if you do, in fact, profess to believe in this nonsense cult. His own lies contradict themselves, but the lengths to which followers of any cult will go to avoid the truth are absolutely amazing.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Had you really learned about Mormonism instead of your own version of what it is supposed to be, you would know this already. You really ain't the brightest bulb in the pack are you.....
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I won't explain anything to you you closed minded fool. Read the Book of Mormon, it's in there.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I've read enough to know that this shyster conned you all, yet you continue to suck it up like gravy. Exactly how many lies and contradictions are you willing to tolerate in "the infallible word of god", anyway?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
The Book of Mormon nowhere claims to be the infallible word of God (this is twice, your power of observation is rather weak me thinks). Your strawman is worthless.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Ever heard about, "straining at a gnat, and swallowing a camel." You fit that bill, to a T.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
As opposed to "straining to believe in an imaginary god, and swallowing a con-man's pile of BS", you mean?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
BTW, even if you have a diploma in archaeology, which I seriously doubt, because of your penchant for fallacious argument, unless you have a background in Mesoamerican archaeology, what is the point?
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
The point is that there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for any of the claims that this con-man made, ranging from his "lost israeli tribes" nonsense, to his baldfaced lie of having been given a "book of gold by an angel and running 3 miles while fighting off 3 attackers while carrying that book". Most people want to see EVIDENCE for these sorts of claims, unless they're slower than dirt.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
"NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER " Now that's a baldfaced lie. I would be careful not to join the ranks of those you accuse. Really pathetic assertion as well. For a person with a degree in criminology, you use informal fallacy like you invented it.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
That is the absolute truth; every single claim that this con-man ever made has been shown to be complete BS, and the only reason he got away with conning the rubes for so long is because the vast majority of them were likewise, slower than dirt. Now, the question you have to ask yourself is, exactly how much of the shit this shyster pumped out are you willing to swallow?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Your comments have degenerated into ad nauseam rants, which I will no longer dignify with a reply.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Stacey.....are YOU this gullible?! EVERY SINGLE THING HE EVER SAID HAS BEEN PROVEN FALSE?!? I suppose it would really be too much of me to ask you for some evidence wouldn't it. After all, if all one has to do is say so for the truth, my that is the far easier way.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
He claimed to be able to translate hieroglyphics; that was proven false. he claimed that the Americas were colonized by "lost Israeli tribes; that has been proven false. he claimed to have run 3 miles while carrying a book that would have weighed anywhere between 70 and 200 pounds, all while fighting off 3 men; that has been proven false, and you can replicate the experiment yourself. And so on, and so on. There's a point when you have to ask yourself what exactly this BS artist DIDN'T lie about
StaceyC123 2 years ago
If you call any of us any more names, I am going to ban you. Be civil, be decent, and you can post. I am sick to death of your righteous smug attitude. Clean up the language, or get lost. I *won't* tell you twice. Disagreeing is fine, but lose the attitude, or lose the right to be here.That is an order not a request. I've had it with your childishness.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
If I was a TENTH as smug as those who claim to have some sort of monopoly of "the word of god", let alone claimed to know that such "god" existed, then you might be able to call me "smug". Until then, religions SPECIALIZE in smug, and all without being able to prove their claims.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
@TheBackyardProfessor pwned. Well done prof.
TheOptimusprime9 1 year ago
Stacey has only one degree. It is in Assertology. Not to be confused with a real degree in a real field Assyriology.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
As opposed to YOUR "degree", "professor"? LOL.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
A legitimate B.S. in history dear one.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
From which institution? It's a terrible shame that you'd allow yourself to be sucked in by Smith's transparent lies, so the question is, what part of reality has you so scared that you'd rather believe his fairy-tales?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Idaho State University (1994), and my Bachelor's Thesis was on the Identification of the Teacher of Righteousness in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which was also good enough that I got invited to the Pacific Northwest History COnference to present it (7 states attending) Now then, YOUR info? Or are you the one conning us with this phony authoritativeness that obviously is a mere dimmer switch compared to the absolute light of God in the Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as we understand it....
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
The MO that is used by StaceyC123, reminds me of the sham trials the Nazis conducted in order to dispose of their enemies. Hear only the evidence that corroborates your position, and ignore the rest, having presupposed it to be false. The very definition of prejudice.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Book Of Abraham speaks of many Gods yes, but not of greater Gods than God the Father. We have no doctrine or scripture which teaches that. If the Book Of Mormon doesn't say anything about that, so what!!
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
So you're allowed to pick and choose among these works of fiction what you're allowed to believe or not? It seems to mwe that if this con-man ACTUALLY "spoke for god", his lies wouldn't contradict each other, right? Fool.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
"So you're allowed to pick and choose among these works of fiction what you're allowed to believe or not?" What does that mean, and where did I do that?
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Oh, and there is plenty of internal evidence to suggest of the Book of Mormon's Hebrew origin and place in antiquity.
Cognitive accusative, if-and clauses in the early manuscripts, chiasmus spanning whole chapters, etc.
StorminMormin91 2 years ago
Thus, Moroni makes plain that they are the ones who have given this name to their written language, a language "that none other people knoweth" (Moroni 9:34). Also, Moroni says they "altered" the Egyptian characters. They called it "reformed" because they had altered it. They were using altered Egyptian characters to write their non-Egyptian language.
StorminMormin91 2 years ago
Some Book of Mormon critics scorn this claim of Book of Mormon language, saying, "there is no such language as Reformed Egyptian" — "there has never been a single example found." Is this a case of deliberate misunderstanding? Of course there's no such language! Moroni says, "in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian — a small "r," an adjective.
StorminMormin91 2 years ago
So now whose position is nonsensical, Stacey?
StorminMormin91 2 years ago
Why, YOURS, of course; like any other cult member, you will twist reality to any degree in order to hang onto your nonsense, no matter how unrealistic the claim.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Some beautiful scenic shots, BTW, but can you explain why, in a 9:52 video that is supposed to explain why this con-man Smith should be believed as an "Egyptologist", you spend a total of exactly ZERO seconds actually trying to support your claim?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Yes, I do that deliberately so that idiots like you can prove how dense you are shown through your poor thinking skills proven via moronic questions that mean nothing.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
@TheBackyardProfessor Meaning that your superstition has nothing more behind it than any OTHER cult throughout history; it is absolutely astounding that supposedly intelligent people can be so sucked in by the ramblings of con-men like L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith that they will claim to believe their nonsense. There is absolutely NO scientific or archaeological evidence in support of anything that Smith claimed, and plenty to show that he was an outright LIAR.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
No, it means no matter what we teach. learn or share, you will call it names thinking that is enough to refute it. Calling it window dressing makes you think you have refuted the evidence so you can safely ignore anything in favor. It's a cheap and shallow trick, labeling something derogatorily because you don't like it, and then proclaim victory without having to show anything refuting the evidence.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Wrong again; taking a viewer on a hike through the mountains, while claiming to show the liar Joseph Smith was anything more than a con-man is most CERTAINLY window-dressing, because it doesn't address the lies he told, OR the complete lack of evidence for any of his lies. If you expect someone to believe you, you're going to have to lay out areasonably-intelligent argument, supported by evidence, otherwise you're simply selling the same snake-oil that the Scientologists and Raelians are.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Nothing I say will ever be a "reasonable" argument with one such as yourself who is so obviously obssessed with name calling instead of scholarship that there is no hope here. Good luck in your life.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
A "reasonable" argument is one in which a hypothesis is laid out and supported by allied evidence; your superstition has nothing of the sort, preferring to instead swallow the simplistic lies of this con-man Smith. Can you point to even a SINGLE solitary piece of concrete evidence that supports the fairy-tales spun by this BS artist? I didn't think so.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I have OVER 860 videos which is dealing with MYRIADS of evidences. YOUR ignorance is not the standard of truth and reality for Mormonism you dork. Single piece? Yo wake up I have shown HUNDREDS of ideas, themes, and evidences. Your ignorance is not my liability. Do some homework before you show off just how seriously ignorant you really are.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
No, you have 860 "folksy"-style videos which make plenty of CLAIMS for your superstition, but absolutely no EVIDENCE for your superstition; there's a difference. If I were to believe any of the nonsense that came out of this con-man Smith's mouth, I'd need to see some supporting evidence, for example, something to show that he was actually "given a book of gold by an angel", or that "the Americas were colonized by Lamanites", or any of the OTHER bug-dung that he claimed.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
So you can say this because you have already watched all of them? Or are you mind reading? You have no idea what my videos show if you have not watched them. But don't let the facts stop you from proclaiming your silliness.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I can say I've watched (make that: "wasted my time on") at least SIXTY of your folksy little backyard chats, and in not ONE of them can I recall seeing anything resembling actual EVIDENCE; now, if Smith wasn't so full of BS that it fell out everytime he opened his mouth, where is any of the actual PROOF for any of his lies? Where are the iron tools? Where are the chariots? Where are the huge cities? Where is the DNA to show that any natives are descended from Israelis? Nowhere at all.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
LOL! Well what kind of a ding-a-ling is gonna waste time on so MANY videos when obviously from the very start I am nothing but a moron braindead, no good, brainwashed idiot?!? Now who's the ridiculous one? If it's a waste of your time, how do you justify continuing watching them?!? And continue talking to me?
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Because I'm interested in how and why so many people are so desperate to "live forever" that they are willing to swallow ANY lie, no matter how big or small; that goes for your cult as well as any other, ranging from Judaism to Islam to Christianity. The only thing that really separates your cult from most others is that this con-man Smith was able to run across a group of simpletons and delude them relatively late in recorded history.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
LOL! Yep, you gots it all figgered out now....... me just a dope. Me no know nothin.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I'm glad you can admit that to yourself; admitting you have a problem is the first step in solving it.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I am merely practicing the true words of Jesus when he said "Agree with thine adversaries quickly lest they perceive thee as an enemy."
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I wouldn't call you an "enemy", simply a misguided simpleton.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Yeah, we religious folk, nmo matter HOW MANY degrees we acquire will always be seen as simpleminded. Such simplistic and unrealistic labeling is always done by those who don't know spit about the issues they attack in ignorance such as you are doing.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
There's a simple way to avoid that, fool; simply back up the nonsense you claim to believe with evidence. Since the con-man Smith simply made this cult up, you're not able to do that, are you? ;-)
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I have already been doing so for literally decades and thousands of written pages my dear. It is you who are not able or willing to read and study it all out.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Why haven't you offered any in the 60 or so videos that I've watched of yours? Statistical probability alone says that if you had any actual evidence, you would have offered it somewhere in there, but all I've ever seen you do is ramble on about what your baloney "prophet" claimed, and then not back it up. Here's your chance: show me some solid evidence for once that shows these claims to be anything more than baldfaced lies.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
See the "PART 1" in the title? That means the video showing the evidence was not a mere 9:52, and with the video responses, you would have learned that I spent over an hour discussing the evidence. But I suspect you won't take an hour to learn anything new, so that's why you stop so far short.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
@TheBackyardProfessor
So why bother with any of this 'window-dressing" nonsense? If you HAVE any actual evidence in support of the lies that this con-man Smith told, why not lay it out directly, openly, honestly, and clearly?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I DID lay it out in over an hour and a half of videos for crying out loud. Watch ALL of them and THEN discuss the evidence. Good Lord ya ding-a-ling. If a scholar wrote a 45 page paper, would you only read 1 PAGE AND THEN COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW WRONG IT ALL IS IN SUCH DISMAL IGNORANCE?
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
And NONE of it explains why there is such a complete and utter lack of evidence for anything that this con-man Smith ever said; even your own superstition can't agree on most of it, because it was entirely MADE UP. There is no evidence whatsoever for his claims that the Americas were colonized by "lost Israeli tribes", that they built huge cities, that they used iron, built chariots, and so forth. In other words, he was a CON-MAN, no different than L. Ron Hubbard.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Are you deliberately being dense or does it just come naturally with the genes your parents gave you?
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
The BofM *nowhere* claims its people are from any of the Lost tribes of Israel. Hello McIgnorant?! Obviously you haven't a clue about what it really says because you won't read it, but instead choose the lazy way of pretending the anti-Mormon arguments are legitimate. They are that....legitimately stupid, uninformed, ahistorical, and ridiculously easy to refute.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
It claims that the Americas were "colonized by Lamanites", and that said imaginary "Lamanites" built huge cities, made iron weapons, built chariots, and plenty of other bogus claims that have absolutely no evidence in support of them. In fact, all of the evidence that we DO have shows that there is absolutely no connection between aboriginal Americans and "lost Israeli tribes" whatsoever, fool.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
No HUGE cities in ALL the Americas? You don't read much do ya......
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Certainly none built by these imaginary "Lamanites" claimed by that liar Smith; there were plenty of large cities built by the Mayas and Incas, but not a shred of anything by any "Lamanite".
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Your ignorance of the Book of Mormon is amusing.......thanks for the entertainment though. This is turning out to be far more fun than I imagined it would.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I'm glad you're enjoying it as well; the nonsense you believe is, purely and simply, CRAZY, with no more behind it than the Scientologists' tales of "ghost aliens" being packed into spaceships and stored in volcanoes. But, you are so wedded to your nonsense that you're not willing to take a close look at exactly how crazy it is.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Coming from you, seeing you accuse me of not being willing to take a close look is interestingly and deeply ironic!
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Not at all, since you merely parrot the lies that this con-man Smith told as the "truth", logic be damned.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Coming from you, one who truly parrots the already refuted anti-Mormon arguments (while pretending to have a degree in archaeology - CHORTLE), I find this also deeply ironic.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
All you need to do to "refute" those arguments is to PROVE your beliefs by showing some actual evidence; you're not about to do that, prefering instead to ramble on about your camping trips.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
No one can PROVE anything to someone who does not want to learn. I DO very much more than ramble about camping. You wouldn't know what evidence is if it hits you right on the nose. ANd you claim to have a degree in archaeology - howling laughter! Like I said, you got riupped off.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
You don't offer any evidence AT ALL for your nonsensical claims, you simply make unsupported claims for your superstition (no different than any OTHER cult or superstition); now, if you could point to some ACTUAL evidence (for example, some of this bogus "reformed Egyptian", or some DNA evidence showing that "Lamanites" from the Middle East colonized the Americas, or some cultural artifacts from this supposedly advanced civilization, then you might be more than a mere crackpot.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Ignorance is bliss, Stacey.
BYP repeatedly quotes his sources in many of his videos, the DNA evidence argument is rather moot considering the relatively small gene pool and mixing that would have occured among the Nephites. Also, Nephites were from Manasseh, not Judah, so the likelihood of finding Jewish DNA in their descendants becomes even harder.
Reformed egyptian. There is such reformed langauges, such as meroitic, a modified form of egyptian script.
StorminMormin91 2 years ago
You obviously have no idea of how DNA is even PASSED from generation to generation, fool; if we can determine that someone's genetic background is northern European or mid-African (which we can), then we can most certainly detect the presence of any Middle Eastern heritage in someone's bloodline; not a SINGLE indicator of such has ever been found in any aboriginal American, meaning that this was just another of Smith's lies.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Meroitic is simply a method of writing, the same way Hieratic and Demotic are (analogous to printing versus cursive), so it'as no more "reformed Egyptian" than it's "reformed Polish". If ignorance is bliss, you must whistle like a tea-kettle.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing .
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Exactly; that's why a fast-talking con artist like Joseph Smith was able to sucker the rubes into believing his "an angel gave me a book of gold" fairy-tale.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
"drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."
Alexander Pope
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
"No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar. - Abraham Lincoln
Maybe this explains why the little magic book dreamt up by Smith and sold as "the word of god" has so many contradictions in it, eh?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
If you had any notion on how the Book of Mormon was written, you would never have used the Lincoln quote. To the person who is aware of the history, you simply reinforce it/s authenticity.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Oh, I KNOW how your little magic book was written; the shyster stuck his face in his hat and started to ramble on about things that he thought sounded sufficiently "biblical" to pull in the gullible fools.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
BTW, To what contradictions are you referring? A little more than empty assertions of you please.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Well, we can start with the differences between this con-man's claims in his various books (all of which, the claim is made, were the result of an imaginary "god" speaking through Smith); in the original book, he claimed that (just as the bible claims) that there is only ONE "god", but in his later nonsense, he went on to claim that there are MANY "gods". If he can't even keep his story straight in the basic details, how gullible do you have to be to believe ANY of it?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Even if this were true, (which it isn't) how is this contradiction in the Book of Mormon? Face it, you do nothing but assert, and flail away at the straw man you have created. Give some citations of these claims, other than the terrible peep stone (old news) in the hat proof. "how gullible do you have to be to believe ANY of it" We could all say the same about your claims. An observer from 175 years after the fact, who bases his knowledge on Google, and a fictitious archaeology degree.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Ah, but it IS true, you just don't want to take a look at this con-man's claims; the "book of mormon" specifically claims ONE "god", while (for example) the "book of abraham" claims MANY "gods"; if you're willing to delude yourself to the point where you can't even recognize that this shyster was an accomplished bullshit artist, you'll believe ANYTHING in the name of your cult. And, I'd be happy to mail you a copy of my diploma, which would be more proof than anything that this cult has offered
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Diploma in what? What school? What year. Why mail it me? Why not PM me the info?
Our first article of faith states, "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost."
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Simon Fraser University, 1995. Now, once again, if this shyster was able to keep his lies straight, he wouldn't have claimed only ONE "god" in one of his works of fiction, and MANY "gods" in his other works of fiction. Further, many of the things that this liar Smith claimed run so contrary to the claims of the cult of christianity, that the majority of christian sects disavow any affiliation with your cult (despite the fact that they have no more evidence for their nonsense than you do).
StaceyC123 2 years ago
And I have 4 masters degrees from Mcgill university, what does that prove. Without a name or some other proof, my degrees (in what?) remain fictitious as well. Did you major in ad hominem argument? You argue like a schoolboy.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
BTW, Who was the Dean of Graduate Studies at SFU for the archaeology dept. when you were there?
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
I don't recall, as I had no business to conduct with them; my specialty was in Anthropology, and the director of that Program was Mark Skinner.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Forensic archaeology, that's a hoot. I see you were eminently qualified to chime in.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
I'm eminently qualified to know a LIAR when I see one, and Joseph Smith fits that bill perfectly. ;-)
StaceyC123 2 years ago
You're lying......
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
About anything in particular, or do you just not like someone showing your cult up for being the fanciful creation of an 1800's Jim Jones?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
You haven't showed one thing yet. But my what a lot of hot air you blow. Talk is not refutation or proof against evidences presented. I know the 4th graders in our neighborhood understand this, what's your hold up on comprehending that?
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Like every other cultist, you would prefer to not examine your own beliefs too closely, because you're afraid that what you'll find would show the superstition you have invested so much into would be proven just as full of nonsense as all the rest.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I have been exmining my own beliefs for decades, and writing about them and videoing them, etc. I have FAR MORE to PROVE that than your mere twaddle you peddle you phony archaeologist. You CLAIMED that was your specialty, and now you change your tune to anthropology. And by your mere assertions, I KNOW you know nothing about anthropology either, because I certainly DID study it.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
And, as I've already shown, you've done nothing except repeat the obvious lies that this con-man Smith told, and then say "Well, maybe this was what he was talking about, if we take "a" to mean "b" and "x" to mean "y", and then stand logic on its head". The same thing EVERY cult does.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
What precisely are your "degrees" in? Modern fiction? My degrees (Archaeology and Criminology) both relate to the subject matter at hand, which is "How did Joseph Smith manage to pull off such an obvious scam that even some otherwise inteligent people choose to overlook his lies and believe the nonsense he spouted?"
StaceyC123 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Forensic archaeology?? Not only have you no background ( assuming you actually have degree) in Mesoamerican archaeology, you aren't even in the same field. The only crime scene here, is your grasp of the facts.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
LOLOL! WHICH area of archaeology are you a so-called "specialist" in (CHORTLE!....specialist indeed!). You write as if archaeology is a single discipline, it's not. You're nothing but a blow hard.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Do I NEED to mail you a copy of my diploma? Not that it would make the slightest bit of difference to someone who can delude themselves to the point where they claim to believe in the nonsense that Joseph Smith spouted, but my specific area of interest in arhaeology was forensic anthropology (ie. identifying human remains), because I work in a crime lab. That means I work with ACTUAL evidence, not the fairy-tales that this shyster Smith spun out for the rubes.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Latter-day Saints believe in an eternal cycle where God creates children in the purpose that they may grow to be joint-heirs of Jesus Christ and thus become one with God or like God. This is commonly called exaltation with the LDS church. However, Gordon B. Hinckley, former prophet and president of the church, stated that we do not currently possess a clear understanding of what it means to be joint-heirs with Christ.
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
Revelations 1:6 - "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen" Joseph Smith interpreted this to mean that individuals were made kings and priests unto God, referring here to Jesus Christ, and to his Father.
Got a problem with that??
canadianbacon007 2 years ago
A recently discovered text written in Egyptian characters has been determined to be an Aramaic language rendering of Psalm 20:2-6 — Egyptian characters used to write a biblical text in a Semitic language. This certainly sounds very much like Moroni's reformed Egyptian.
StorminMormin91 2 years ago
Once again, Aramaic is NOT "reformed Egyptian", and this shyster Smith wouldn't have been able to read it even if he had known of it's existence; his supposed "translations" make that abundantly clear.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
If Joseph Smith was anything but a dyed-in-the-wool BS artist, he wouldn't have claimed to be able to "translate" hieroglyphics, let alone his bogus "reformed Egyptian" language.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
You are obviously out of date on the issue of Reformed Egyptian. no surprise. But hey, your methodology is simply to mock and then pretend that is actually evidence against what you don't believe. Such naivete.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
"Reformed Egyptian" was what this con-man claimed to be able to read, despite the fact that there is no such language. Now, if the information that this liar gave you is "out of date", that tells me that he was LYING about it. Or are you going to claim that he came back to make some corrections? ;-)
StaceyC123 2 years ago
I am saying were you half as incliuned to learn as you are spout your idiocy you would already know this issue and where the answers are. Your very argument proves to me you have no intention of being truthful and learning about it.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Hey you dork. If you would quit reading the wrong silliness and read the correct stuff you would know that the BofM does NOT teach the Reformed Egyptian is a world language. It is the language that the NEPHITES themselves changed the original Egyptian into ******for their own purposes*****
Why you continue using idiotic anti-Mormon arguments is utterly beyond me, uinl;ess, of course, you glory in stupidity and thrill in showing how brainwashed you are.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I really appreciate your work here on youtube. but why are you calling someone a dork? It is not right to insult somebody...even if his arguments may be wrong.
Sebastian7908 2 years ago
Good point. I shall refrain from doing so in the future. Sometimes though, I just gotta calls em as I sees em....
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
In other words, the ONLY "evidence" for this "reformed Egyptian" nonsense are the words of the liar Joseph Smith himself; gee, I wonder why I don't believe you?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Did I say that ONLY Joseph Smith has discussed the Reformed Egyptian? Your reading skills seem to be going downhill. Tell ya what, there is an invention made in the 1990's called The Internet. Google Reformed Egyptian on it and see what happens. Go ahead, I double dog dare ya.... And if you only stop at the anti sites you are the fool.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Oh, I've already read PLENTY on your superstition and the lies that Smith told his gullible followers; the ONLY people that pay any attention at all to his claims about "reformed Egyptian" are those that have already bought into the rest of his lies, so they are desperate to make up something that they can CLAIM is evidence for his lies.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Yeah riiiiiight. Oh I just betchta you have read hundreds of pages of materials on this......... you probably have a Phd of knowledge on the Reformed Egyptian. Whoa I am a tremblin in fear of your great knowledge......
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
I hate to break it to you, "professor", but I DO have a degree in Archaeology; there is NOTHING called "reformed Egyptian", except in the minds of the simpletons who buy into this con-man's lies.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Oh and you think that degree gives you brains? Yeah, yeah, sure sure...... you got ripped off then, you know nothing about HOW archaeology works, let alone languages and how they change through time.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Really, "professor"? I suppose that explains why no-one else has been able to produce an example of this imaginary "reformed Egyptian" language then, right? Smith was a con-man, pure and simple, and gullible fools like you continue to suck his lies up.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Yes really. Obviously you are oblivious to the outstanding scholarly materials dealing with this issue. But why read the LDS scholars right? Biased, closed minded, numbskulls, twits, ne'er do wells, stupid dolts, morons, children who can't read, pseudoscholars, etc.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
If I'm going to believe the brainwashed simpletons who already believe your nonsense without any evidence, why wouldn't I just as easily believe the brainwashed simpletons who make similar claims on behalf of THEIR chosen cult, be it Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Voodoo, or any OTHER nonsense?
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Gee, I wonder why you don't watch the videos that deal with this.....
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
If you had any "evidence" WORTH seeing, you'd put it in the first video, instead of wasting time with a travelogue of you driving to a camping trip.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Like I said, nothing I say or show will convince you. You are only a mere 100 HOURS of videos behind. Refute my Book of Mormon Commentary (73 vids). It's a playlist so easy to access and use.
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Thank you, sir.
bigeyedfish0041 2 years ago
My good pleasure
TheBackyardProfessor 2 years ago
Entirely mine, I assure you.
StaceyC123 2 years ago
Major religions seem more credible because their origins go so far back the historical facts are almost impossible to prove.
joseph smith should have started his religion a thousand years ago.
sunandmoon111 2 years ago
This is why the apologetics to the Joseph Smith papyri is so difficult to grasp and the anti-Mormon arguments come off as believable. Most people don't understand the Egyptian culture and religions (including the majority of LDS members). Understanding these things make you realize why scholars like Dr. John Gee is a strong advocate of the Book of Abraham being authentic.
AcademicTheologian 2 years ago
What is so silly is that they are taking any historical document and ignoring the context. If a document was written 2000 years after the events in question, how stupid to put it's own renderings with more weight than the historical events themselves as well as the writings that preceeded it (and are of course closer in time to the historical link). Why not then accept the Quran as true, and Muhammad's interpretation of the Gospels as fact? It came much later too.
osirica 3 years ago
Not only am I denying it, i am demanding you Romm offer some proof that he was white? Why white? Why not black? What's your rationale for that/
2. There is no connection to Abraham and Osiris anymore than there is a connection between me and you. Osiris was known in history thousands of years before Abraham was born or even mentioned anywhere.
3. Anything Greek came long after the events in question and so it's irrelevant historically to the much earlier Egyptian and Hebrew events!
osirica 3 years ago
Keep in mind something. Throughout Jewish and Christian history blacks have been priests. Ethiopia, Egypt, Sudan. Heck, you have Lemba Jews in South Africa who have been genetically proven to be from the Kohen priesthood of Jews since the 2nd temple period.
History disproves Mormonism on this essential core point. How then do you take black history and try to make a black man white, or make it irrelevant. It was so relavent to make up the curse on blacks in the first place, now refuting it isnt?
osirica 3 years ago
I mean I showed you how fundamentally wrong Joseph Smith was in linking black skin, black people, black skinned people, and African "negroes" to any curse, ban, or restriction from any Jewish or Christian priesthood.
That in itself is a core breakage of Mormonism. This notion that God excluded 1/3rd to 2/5ths of all the humans in history from being priests, with skin color being some sign of it.
That was invented FIRST by the Talmud & white racists and adopted by the Mormon founder Smith.
osirica 3 years ago
osirica said:
"This notion that God excluded 1/3rd to 2/5ths of all the humans in history from being priests, with skin color being some sign of it"
I think there was something else involved, not sure what;
1. I'm sure that Adam & Eve were black, even science agrees that there was an African Adam & Eve
2. Egyptians were black, Joseph married an Egyptian, so all of the Ephraimites & Manassehians were 50% black
3. Ismael married an Egyptian so Arabs are 50% black
4. God calls Egyptians my People
FC275 3 years ago
And God says IN Amos 9:6 - You are like the Ethiopians oh people of Israel. The Hebrew word is "Kush" again signifying AFRICA, not some other "Ethiopians" way off yonder. Obvioulsy the Bible did not signify the Ethiopian black race as anything other than people with a darker complexion.
osirica 3 years ago
you'd have also criticized the church in the old testament when the priesthood was restricted to anyone other than the Levites!!! or in the NT when the gospel was reserved for a selected group until God, in his wisdom, sent it forth to the gentile as well. you'd have been a critic of the church no matter the century you were born... but hey, i can't claim to know your heart so i'll leave that to Christ who i presume you follow.. continue in prayer and growing to know your saviour. i wish u well
glycoboy 3 years ago 2
Nope.
The priesthood was dispensed to the ONLY Tribe of people that acknowledged God. Therefore any followers would be a part of that tribe (The Hebrews). They would not be rejected because their ancestors came from here and there. Read Leviticus, the Priesthood was not denied to people who were mixed, but simply was required to have A Levite ancestor, not "all ancestors to be Levite".
osirica 3 years ago
And relating this notion that "God in his wisdom" relating to blacks. When god in his wisdom came as Christ, then the Levitical priesthood was no longer required. HOWEVER, the restriction Europeans conjured up against black people had no biblical element. In addition in 1979, if I pretend to accept, nothing was revealed in that respect other than it was simply done.
Those who grow to God know in their hearts that dark skin was never used to racially seperate people based on a cursed lineage.
osirica 3 years ago
It's like on one hand you guys look for the smallest detail and explode it's significance well beyond it's context,
but then on the same token you ignore essential details that totally invalidate your assumptions.
And on top of that, you take the diffusionist (anything can mean anything) approach. The Bible clearly refutes Egyptian mythology. God calls the gods of Egypt mute, nothing, non existent.
There is no reference to Osiris in the Bible! Osiris is written in Egypt 2-3K years b4 Abraham
osirica 3 years ago
I read the B o'Abraham & B o' Moses... with Cain and his black skin mark & Mormons run around insisting a mark is a skin color! I had to show a Mormon what a permanent pen does to my skin when I draw on it and then ask him "what is this"? Because Mormons go around saying that, after all the discussions get to the heart of the matter, they ask "what else could the mark of cain have been".
And that's when I have to put a mark on my hand and show them.
osirica 3 years ago
Pathetic
fbass40 3 years ago
So with Osiris,
osiris is represented in two colors. Green and black.
Since there aren't any green people, the black is the obvious choice for a living human. And you identify Osiris with Abraham, a LIVING man.
Therfore you're saying Abraham was black.
And you are right. Just for the wrong reasons.
Yet in the end it doesn't matter because you contradict Mormonism anyway.
How then can Abraham (Osiris) be represented with WHITE skin in your Facimilies???
And I have MANY more examples.
osirica 3 years ago
"Since there aren't any green people, the black is the obvious choice for a living human."
Actually, according to Richard Wilkinson (Symbols and Magic in Egyptian Art, page 116), both black and green are used to represent both live and dead figures. They can be both used in a funerary and non-funerary context. So really it becomes a non-issue. Plus, don't think for a second that the Egyptians were realists with their art. Egyptian art is HIGHLY symbolic.
Rommelator 3 years ago
Yeah...um... the figure of Osiris/Abraham in Joseph Smith Papyrus 1 is neither green nor black. He is white. So, um, what is your point again? Are your strange ramblings able to contend with the original documents themselves?
Rommelator 3 years ago