The Backyard Professor

NEW BOOK De Hoyos, Morris DESTROY the Anti-Mason Stupidity

Reading a new and very impressive book by Arturo De Hoyos, R. Brent Morris, "Is it True What They Say About Freemasonry?", M. Evans, 2010 (269 pp). This book is stellar research, and devastating refutations of the insipidly inane anti-Masonic arguments, innuendos, and deliberate lying. A very POWERFUL contribution for ALL Masons to read, learn from, and see the *real* truths about Masonry. I am almost half way through it, and already have learned so very much, which I will be reviewing in detail. The authors are to be congratulated for destroying the stupidity of anti-Masonry.

Many topics such as the fraud of Leo Taxil saying Albert Pike taught upper degrees of Masonry teach the worship of Satan, that Masons do not regard the Bible as important, that Masonry is simply pagan, Masonry as anti-religious,  etc. I will bring out the many details in this stunning tour de force of very strong, very logical, and stellar research decimating the anti-Masons, once I complete my reading of it. Simply a MUST OWN, and MUST READ book. I will write up a serious review of this here once I finish it.

The astonishing parallels with anti-Mormonism and Anti-Masonry is something else I am going to write about. Even down to the exact same authors who are both anti Mormon,/Mason, and the exact same strategies, and types of lies. De Hoyos and Morris destroy the anti-Masons. The deliberately stupid ones like Decker, Scnoebelen (sp?, yeah, I really don't care that much whether I get it right or not), etc.

Powerful Egyptological Evidence for Book of Abraham facsimile 1, figure 9 Crocodile as "Idolatrous god of Pharaoh"

 

Every now and then, we see or hear a critic of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints say that Joseph Smith got nothing right in his explanations for the facsimiles in the Book of Abraham. They do not realize that the explanations of Joseph Smith are not translations, literally rendered, but explain what the function of the figures are for. He described what the story is with the various figures. True he did not translate the crocodile in Facsimile #1 as “Sobek,” but does that mean he was wrong to identify it as “The idolatrous god of Pharaoh?”

 

When we look at what the Egyptologists and ancient Egyptians taught about Sobek, we are in for a real surprise. It just so happens that Sobek literally is “the idolatrous god of Pharaoh!” Lets consider the Egyptian evidence.

 

James P. Allen, Curator of Egyptian Art at the Metropolitan Museum of art in New York and Research Associate and Lecturer in Egyptology at Yale University since 1986, shows the crocodile in the “sign list” when it is the determinative, signifies “aggression.” As a doubled sign, the ideologram is “jty” which, interestingly enough, means “sovereign.”[1] Sovereign, according to the “Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology,” comes from the 14^th century Old French “so(u)vereinete” meaning “(supreme) ruler.” The old Roman word related to this was “superamus,”

Evolution and Mormonism (Religion in General) incompatible?

BYU biology professor Steven Peck has something thoughtful to say in his latest blog post:

...[T]heology is under unprecedented attack from a cluster of philosophers and scientists, called the ‘New Atheists.’ While this group is hardly representative of scientists in general, they are popular, vocal, evangelical and influential. They are theologically naive, but their misrepresentations of religion and theology are gaining traction. What seems odd is that in responding to these atheists there seems to be a tendency for believers to buy into their most harmful (from my perspective) argument. That is, that evolutionary biology and religion are incompatible and that one must be chosen above the other. They both accept the thesis that there can be no compromise and that this is a fight to death between one or the other. This is unfortunate because this false dichotomy, widely accepted by both camps, is the real danger. As I have said elsewhere in [the Salt Lake Tribune] speaking about the creationist movement Intelligent Design, “[My] complaint about Intelligent Design is it sets religion and science against each other. It puts forward a false dichotomy in students’ minds that suggests that evolution and faith are incompatible. It makes people of religious faith suspicious of science. When students genuinely think that science and religion are incompatible, one of two things typically happens. One is they embrace science and since it is incompatible to religion, religion is abandoned. The other is that they maintain their faith but remain suspicious of science and cast doubt upon its methods and findings, inclining themselves to superstition and pseudoscience. I have to wonder if the reason science education in the United States is falling behind other countries is because misinformed people of faith have been dissing science to the point that many students are choosing other paths. Faith and science need not be enemies. I embrace both fully and without reservation. My religious convictions are part of who I am. My science and faith reciprocate and inform one another. They are part of the way I understand my place in the universe. Intelligent Design does nothing to promote the search for understanding and cooperation between these two vital ways of knowing. It is a darkening of the mind on every level, both religiously and scientifically.”

Does the Shema (Deut 6:4) Prove There are No Other gods?

Monotheism & The Shema: אֶחָֽד יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהוָ֥ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל שְׁמַ֖ע​ Hear O Israel: the Lord your God the Lord is one: Is This Proof There are No Other gods?

 The Shema can be translated in various ways depending on which context one proposes for its meaning. The verb שְׁמַ֖ע in the Qal imperative means “hear.” It’s simple. It is a vocative addressing Israel. The command of God to Israel is to listen