...And still the king has no clothes.
Martin Stower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> > None of this resulting gibberish is in any way
> > comprehensible. . . .
>
> Stop lying.

Well great!!! If I'm lying you must understand it, eh?

I've been wondering what this line means for the longest;

502b. The double doors of heaven are locked; the way goes over the flames under that which the gods create,
503a. which allows each Horus to glide through, in which N. will glide through, in this flame under that which the gods create.
503b. They make a way for N., that N. may pass by it. N. is a Horus.

This must make perfect sense to you but one Egyptologist believes it means;

Before the doors close again the gate to the path
over the fire, beneath the holy ones as they grow dark
As a falcon flies as a falcon flies, may Unis rise into this fire
Beneath the holy ones as they grow dark.
They make a path for Unis, Unis takes the path,

While another says it means;

Pull back, Baboon’s penis! Open, [sky’s door!
You sealed the door, open a path for Unis] on the blast of heat where the gods scoop water.
Horus’s glide path--TWICE--will Unis glide on, in this blast of heat where the gods scoop water,

I don't even understand what the second one means in English. I suppose it means there is a blast of heat containing water in which imaginary consciousnesses scoop water two times and that the dead king slides on this heat.

I'm not really certain this is even English since it really makes no sense.

If Egyptologists can't agree on a meaning then why in the hell would anybody think any Egyptologist can understand it.

So here we are again, you say it makes sense and I must point out that no knowledge of any kind has ever been derived from the entire corpus!!! Imagine how improbable that is. Imagine aliens find a book in a million years but they can't make ONE SINGLE DEDUCTION about humanity after they decipher it!!! All they can do is put forth opinions about meaning while no two of them agree.

How can you believe this stuff. But not only believe it but believe it so profoundly as to call me a liar because you don't agree!

> No, I’m assuming that, being language, they are
> like language. If they are not like language,
> then they are not language, but something else.

Maybe you should define "language". Obviously you're going to define it to match the way we communicate and won't consider the gibberish they used was a different kind of language. Maybe if you understood the language you'd see the above is merely referring to the path of the horuses over the mks-sceptre. Maybe.

Audrey has some very good points and I look forward to her posts. But arguing the language is understood is exactly the same as whipping "cultural context" that exists only in the minds of Egyptologists and is predicated on the assumption the people never changed so translating the PT in terms of the book of the dead is acceptable methodology.