Is it just me, or have apologetics really veered into the crazy lane?
I thought it was crazy a few years ago when something like the major problem in the BoM of "...made ready the horses and chariots" was explained as "maybe they ate horse meat and carried it on a travois, so it would be like 'prepare the chicken and backpacks!'", but lately it seems like 2+2=5 is really taking over. Without naming anyone, I've seen things like "temple endowment ceremony" used in an explanation of the BoA, so if you're a TBM, you're thinking: "Wow!"; another discussion (I had to watch twice to make sure I heard it right) basically said the Egyptologists were right about one of the facsimilies, but there was a double meaning in the illustrations, so it also meant something completely different, so if you're a TBM, you're thinking: "Isn't that amazing!"; another is that an Egyptian would "take on the name of Osiris" when being embalmed, so naturally Abraham would do the same thing, so if you're a TBM, you're thinking: "Of course!"
Of course, the forest-for-the-trees observation is that Egyptians would never have 'temple endowment ceremonies' like Mormons, but by placing that phrase in apologetics, a connection is made, or the "lion couch scene" is not supposed to be a bad guy trying to stab Abraham, it's supposed to be Anubis preparing a body for burial and the afterlife. Nothing to do with the religion that Abraham is supposed to be the founding father of.
It's like they either don't care anymore, so they're just going balls-to-the-wall, or they are drunk on the Kool-Aid. It's like me picking apart 'Star Wars' and saying "See, it's really 'Star Trek'!
No, that's not right: it's like me picking apart 'Three's Company' and saying: "See, it's really 'War and Peace'!"