Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _moksha »

Shulem wrote:More important is the funerary representation of the canoptic jars and that is what Joseph Smith missed because he was clueless.

It would have helped Joseph to identify the contents of the canoptic jars if there had been some fava beans and a nice bottle of Chianti next to them in the facsimile.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

moksha wrote:
Shulem wrote:More important is the funerary representation of the canoptic jars and that is what Joseph Smith missed because he was clueless.

It would have helped Joseph to identify the contents of the canoptic jars if there had been some fava beans and a nice bottle of Chianti next to them in the facsimile.


Well, truth be told, everything Joseph Smith said about the images and writing contained in the Hypocephalus was based on his own uninspired and unlearned assumptions -- all of which was based in his own fertile imagination. Smith wouldn't have recognized a snake if it hissed and bit him on the nose. Case in point, Fig. 7, of Facsimile No. 2, wherein (dumb, dumb, dumb) Joseph Smith mistook a serpent for a dove. I mean, how dumb can one be? A serpent for a dove!? Jesus Christ. Give me a freaking break. I'm not falling for that crap, Mr. Joseph Smith. You're a fraud and I'm on to you. You faker!

I think Radio Free Mormon and Bill Reel were superb in rebuking two renegade Mormon Egyptologists who have shamed their craft and betrayed the memory of the very people they are commissioned to protect -- the ancient Egyptians.

Where the hell is Kerry Shirts? Kerry? You OWE ancient Egypt. Set the record straight, please. The world is awaiting you. Put your chess game up and get your dusty books out and make that podcast.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

Kerry Muhlestein wrote:To me what is really striking and compelling is for all three of the Facsimiles that Joseph Smith associates with Abraham we find that the Egyptians themselves are also associating them with Abraham -- the odds of that happening are just so small it's not reasonable to suppose that this is blind luck -- three time in a row dead center, Joseph Smith hits a bull'seye.


4:39:
video link --The Three Facsimile Translations Wrong? Book of Abraham Challenge 3


Kerry Muhlestein deserves to be fired from Brigham Young University and stripped of his credentials. I call upon the world community of Egyptologists to go after this renegade and strip him of his credentials and blacklist him. Kerry should be in the unemployment line. He's a conman. His malpractice of Egyptology is criminal in nature as he knowingly misrepresents his craft and purposely lies to church members appealing to his authority in Egyptology so that the church will continue to collect tithing money from members of the church who might otherwise cease believing and stop making donations.

Kerry Muhlestein, Brigham Young University, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have committed fraud.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _moksha »

Shulem, I think Kerry Muhlestein would make the argument that it is his right as a believer to claim that such Egyptian papyri back up the assertion that Xenu dropped a load of atom bombs, and that secular Egyptologists should not be dissing on protected religious claims with their so-called "book learning".
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

moksha wrote:Shulem, I think Kerry Muhlestein would make the argument that it is his right as a believer to claim that such Egyptian papyri back up the assertion that Xenu dropped a load of atom bombs, and that secular Egyptologists should not be dissing on protected religious claims with their so-called "book learning".


I disagree. He is using his authority as a doctor of Egyptology in claiming the science of established conventional Egyptology to verify Joseph Smith's translation of funerary documents. This is fraud and is outright unacceptable -- it is malpractice. He is doing this to support the church in perpetuating a fraud wherein the Mormon church can continue to bilk members into paying donations to a fraudulent organization.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

The world is ever changing and evolving.

It might well be that publications and presentations made by Muhlestein could be used as evidence in a lawsuit to demonstrate how The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is perpetuating fraud by using a professional resource to fraudulently represent its craft in securing donations to the church.

The church is treading dangerous ground as it continues to defraud its members.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Feb 19, 2019 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

food for thought

1. We are told by Joseph Smith that he translated so-called reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics from the gold plates and that his TRANSLATION given by REVELATION states that there were horses in the Book of Mormon.

2. We are also told by Joseph Smith that he translated ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics from papyrus and that his TRANSLATION given by REVELATION states that there is a king's name written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3.

Today, we know by modern science that there were no horses in Book of Mormon times. We also know that there is no king's name in Facsimile No. 3. But a horse is a horse and a king is a king. Joseph Smith's translation by revelation or revelation by translation -- any way you slice it, is false.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

Dr. Kerry Muhlestein,

Please refer to King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head in Facsimile No. 3. What is the name of the king prescribed in the characters of the register? In what Dynasty did he reign?

Also, if you would, please transliterate the name Shulem as represented by the characters above his hand in Fig. 5.

Thank you,

Shulem
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

Shulem wrote:Dr. Kerry Muhlestein, Please refer to King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head in Facsimile No. 3. What is the name of the king prescribed in the characters of the register?


Image

Shulem wrote:In what Dynasty did he reign?


Image

Shulem wrote:Also, if you would, please transliterate the name Shulem as represented by the characters above his hand in Fig. 5.


Image
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Book of Abraham apologetics, part three

Post by _Shulem »

It was a translation by revelation or a revelation by translation.

Image
Post Reply