07-26-2007, 01:20 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
|
Reading assignment for Pearl of Great Price Class
So here is the reading assignment for tomorrow's Pearl of Great Price class:
Abraham 1:1-20, 28-31. Observation 1: yeah, it's short. We had a paper due, also. Even so, it's a light load. Observation two: check out the verses he skipped. Don't think I won't be mentioning it tomorrow. The coward.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος Last edited by All-American; 07-26-2007 at 01:44 AM. |
07-26-2007, 03:20 AM | #2 |
Board Pinhead
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the basement of my house, Murray, Utah.
Posts: 15,941
|
Interesting.
Go get'em AA.
__________________
"The beauty of baseball is not having to explain it." - Chuck Shriver "This is now the joke that stupid people laugh at." - Christopher Hitchens on IQ jokes about GWB. |
07-26-2007, 03:32 AM | #3 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
I've never known what to think of these verses, but I've liked the tradition set forth in this verse:
Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that aorder established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the bblessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood. Which Pharaoh is referred to here? Is the lineage of Pharaoh from the First Dynasty to the Ptolemalic Dynasty? This verse is confusing and does not look upon the true origins of Egypt, so it is a perplexing verse. Yes I know Seattle's claim, it's all bullshit. However, if we give a more charitable reading, what the hell does it mean?
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
07-26-2007, 04:08 AM | #4 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
A run through of the Egyptian temple is startling to an endowed latter-day saint. I have some files left over somewhere from an Ancient Near Eastern class on the Egyptian Temple; I'll look for them and see if I can't post them here.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
|
07-26-2007, 05:12 AM | #5 | |
Master
|
Quote:
__________________
Ernie Johnson: "Auburn is a pretty good school. To graduate from there I suppose you really need to work hard and put forth maximum effort." Charles Barkley: "20 pts and 10 rebounds will get you through also!" |
|
07-26-2007, 05:15 AM | #6 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Sekret is not a pharaoh I know much about, and Narmer was known as the Scorpion King. So was Rock a righteous man, because he got righteously laid in the movie?
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
07-26-2007, 05:55 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
|
We know comparatively nothing about Egypt's first dynasties. And who knows if that is what Abraham is referring to, anyway. Most scholars doubt that what we have labeled the first dynasty was really the first dynasty.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
07-27-2007, 01:44 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
|
Allright, the update. I asked the teacher about the conspicuously missing verses and he promised that they would be covered in a different class period. I suppose he gets a pass on that for now.
Truth be told, it was actually a rather good lecture today. We spent about an hour talking about various problems people have with the Book of Abraham-- debunking most of them, of course, but that's better than not mentioning them at all, methinks. Topping it off was a twenty minute or so discussion on what to do if information gained from science, history, etc. seems to conflict with the revealed word. The general consensus was not to be afraid of conflicts of those kinds. Given that we don't know everything about science, history, OR religion, it would be very surprising if they should agree with each other on all counts. If a conflict arises between, say, Egyptology and our understanding of the Book of Abraham, either one of the two could be wrong-- and there was plenty of emphasis on the idea that our own ideas or interpretations of the scriptures may not necessarily be accurate. Quite reasonable, all things said.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
07-27-2007, 06:43 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
So why does Nephi talk about his race as a "white and delightsome people"? I can think of two explanations: 1. "White" is relative. 2. The black blood had been diluted by the time Nephi was born. 3. Nephi had blancophilia.
__________________
太初有道 Last edited by ChinoCoug; 07-27-2007 at 06:45 PM. |
|
07-27-2007, 07:02 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Toward the end of the Middle Kingdom era, just before the second intermediate period, power shifted to a group of people known as Hyksos, who are actually semitic. This power struggle doesn't seem to have been a military conquest so much as a usurpation. It was during the reign of the Hyksos that many biblical scholars believe Joseph's story took place. Ian Shaw's Oxford History of Ancient Egypt notes that the names of Hyksos names derive from west semitic languages, and points out Syrian, Hittite, and other Asiatic influences in their culture. Though their lifestyle was "heavily adulturated" by Egyptian influence, Shaw shows their origination from the Syrio-Palestinean region. So yeah, it is altogether possible that Asenath, Ephraim, and Manasseh were full-blooded Semites. Not that it would have mattered, anyway.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|