Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Fence Sitter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Fence Sitter »

zernus wrote:
Modern scholars have not yet figured out how add 2+2. It is awfully arrogant of them to suppose that with their puny little knowledge they can outsmart a prophet of God. Our knowledge of arithmetic is simply not sufficient for anyone to be able to do so.


Zerinus has resorted to the Little Nipper defense of "My God can beat up your God".
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
_zerinus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1858
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:45 pm

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _zerinus »

Shulem wrote:It's rather humorous to see someone hide behind the word 'esoteric' in a vain attempt to defend the Joseph Smith Egyptian translations. It makes me almost want to laugh at the silliness it requires to twist and distort one's thinking in order to protect their brain chemical induced testimonial experience that Mormonism is somehow true. Logic and reason go out the window and faith, magic, and Joseph Smith appear like a cartoon with pink elephants and polka dots.

Joseph Smith lied when he pointed to a character on the papyrus and said it was the autograph of such and such.

Joseph Smith lied about his explanations he made up in the Facsimiles.

Joseph Smith could not read or write Egyptian.

Anubis has never been depicted as a slave anywhere in ancient Egypt. To blaspheme the god of Egypt was a crime worthy of death. There is no Mormon apologetic that can defend Joseph Smith's lies. Those who do are liars themselves, people that have no interest in truth and fact. They are dreamers who are locked into a bubble of deception. It is a sad human experience for sure.
You are talking an awful lot of rubbish and you don't even know it. Where in any of the facsimiles does Joseph Smith identify Anubis as a slave? The “slave” figure appears in facsimiles #3 (the last figure on the right):

Image

Which has nothing to do with Anubis. Anubis is the jackal headed god, which has no resemblance with the figure Joseph Smith identifies in facsimiles #3 as the “slave”. You are picking up an awful lot of crap off anti-Mormon websites (like the one where that image comes from) without even stopping to think about it (assuming you know how to think about it). Anubis looks like these:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=anubi ... &*&imgrc=_

Not that. Anubis appears in funerary scenes, to do with mummies the afterlife; not before someone sitting alive and well on a throne.
_Dr Exiled
_Emeritus
Posts: 3616
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:48 am

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Dr Exiled »

zerinus wrote:
Shulem wrote:It's rather humorous to see someone hide behind the word 'esoteric' in a vain attempt to defend the Joseph Smith Egyptian translations. It makes me almost want to laugh at the silliness it requires to twist and distort one's thinking in order to protect their brain chemical induced testimonial experience that Mormonism is somehow true. Logic and reason go out the window and faith, magic, and Joseph Smith appear like a cartoon with pink elephants and polka dots.

Joseph Smith lied when he pointed to a character on the papyrus and said it was the autograph of such and such.

Joseph Smith lied about his explanations he made up in the Facsimiles.

Joseph Smith could not read or write Egyptian.

Anubis has never been depicted as a slave anywhere in ancient Egypt. To blaspheme the god of Egypt was a crime worthy of death. There is no Mormon apologetic that can defend Joseph Smith's lies. Those who do are liars themselves, people that have no interest in truth and fact. They are dreamers who are locked into a bubble of deception. It is a sad human experience for sure.
You are talking an awful lot of rubbish and you don't even know it. Where in any of the facsimiles does Joseph Smith identify Anubis as a slave? The “slave” figure appears in facsimiles #3 (the last figure on the right):

Image

Which has nothing to do with Anubis. Anubis is the jackal headed god, which has no resemblance with the figure Joseph Smith identifies in facsimiles #3 as the “slave”. You are picking up an awful lot of crap off anti-Mormon websites (like the one where that image comes from) without even stopping to think about it (assuming you know how to think about it). Anubis looks like these:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=anubi ... &*&imgrc=_

Not that. Anubis appears in funerary scenes, to do with mummies the afterlife; not before someone sitting alive and well on a throne.


Am I missing something here? Joseph Smith was completely wrong in his interpretations. So, how can you defend that? It seems to me the only defense is the silly catalyst theory or ed goble's problematic theory. Either way, the book of abraham is made up, regardless of your emotional experience. That seems the only rational conclusion. Surely you don't think the Mormon god needed the magician's tricks surrounding the book of abraham or Book of Mormon "translations." The Mormon god could have easily revealed the books like the book of moses supposedly was given? So why the mystery and magic? Why the seer stone? Why not just be straight forward?
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Shulem »

Folks,

Don't give any credence to zerinus' denial of Joseph Smith identifying the Egyptian god Anubis in Facsimile No. 3 as a slave with the fictitious name of Olimla.

zerinus thinks to write only what he wishes to be true in order to save his testimony -- he is in denial and lying to himself. His reasoning and understanding of the Egyptian language, history, culture, iconography is certainly limited. He's only capable of representing Egyptology in mere rudimentary terms and depends entirely on cut and paste. The most prominent Egyptologists in the world have already refuted Joseph Smith's Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 and there is nothing zerinus can say or think that will change the truth. He's a lost cause and a board troll.
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Philo Sofee »

zerinus wrote:
Shulem wrote:It's rather humorous to see someone hide behind the word 'esoteric' in a vain attempt to defend the Joseph Smith Egyptian translations. It makes me almost want to laugh at the silliness it requires to twist and distort one's thinking in order to protect their brain chemical induced testimonial experience that Mormonism is somehow true. Logic and reason go out the window and faith, magic, and Joseph Smith appear like a cartoon with pink elephants and polka dots.

Joseph Smith lied when he pointed to a character on the papyrus and said it was the autograph of such and such.

Joseph Smith lied about his explanations he made up in the Facsimiles.

Joseph Smith could not read or write Egyptian.

Anubis has never been depicted as a slave anywhere in ancient Egypt. To blaspheme the god of Egypt was a crime worthy of death. There is no Mormon apologetic that can defend Joseph Smith's lies. Those who do are liars themselves, people that have no interest in truth and fact. They are dreamers who are locked into a bubble of deception. It is a sad human experience for sure.
You are talking an awful lot of rubbish and you don't even know it. Where in any of the facsimiles does Joseph Smith identify Anubis as a slave? The “slave” figure appears in facsimiles #3 (the last figure on the right):

Image

Which has nothing to do with Anubis. Anubis is the jackal headed god, which has no resemblance with the figure Joseph Smith identifies in facsimiles #3 as the “slave”. You are picking up an awful lot of crap off anti-Mormon websites (like the one where that image comes from) without even stopping to think about it (assuming you know how to think about it). Anubis looks like these:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=anubi ... &*&imgrc=_

Not that. Anubis appears in funerary scenes, to do with mummies the afterlife; not before someone sitting alive and well on a throne.

you really don't read much of the literature on the book of Abraham do you? You don't have to try to demonstrate to us that you know what you're talking about because of this post demonstrate you don't what is really going on.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_Fence Sitter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Fence Sitter »

Philo Sofee wrote:
you really don't read much of the literature on the book of Abraham do you? You don't have to try to demonstrate to us that you know what you're talking about because of this post demonstrate you don't what is really going on.

Well he is using google to look at pictures that obviously refute what people like Michael Rhodes say. I mean that right there is impressive!
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Lemmie »

zerinus wrote:
Shulem wrote:It's rather humorous to see someone hide behind the word 'esoteric' in a vain attempt to defend the Joseph Smith Egyptian translations. It makes me almost want to laugh at the silliness it requires to twist and distort one's thinking in order to protect their brain chemical induced testimonial experience that Mormonism is somehow true. Logic and reason go out the window and faith, magic, and Joseph Smith appear like a cartoon with pink elephants and polka dots.

Joseph Smith lied when he pointed to a character on the papyrus and said it was the autograph of such and such.

Joseph Smith lied about his explanations he made up in the Facsimiles.

Joseph Smith could not read or write Egyptian.

Anubis has never been depicted as a slave anywhere in ancient Egypt. To blaspheme the god of Egypt was a crime worthy of death. There is no Mormon apologetic that can defend Joseph Smith's lies. Those who do are liars themselves, people that have no interest in truth and fact. They are dreamers who are locked into a bubble of deception. It is a sad human experience for sure.
[]You are talking an awful lot of rubbish and you don't even know it. Where in any of the facsimiles does Joseph Smith identify Anubis as a slave? The “slave” figure appears in facsimiles #3 (the last figure on the right):[]

Image

[]Which has nothing to do with Anubis. Anubis is the jackal headed god, which has no resemblance with the figure Joseph Smith identifies in facsimiles #3 as the “slave”. You are picking up an awful lot of crap off anti-Mormon websites (like the one where that image comes from) without even stopping to think about it (assuming you know how to think about it). Anubis looks like these:[/color]

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=anubi ... &*&imgrc=_

[]Not that. Anubis appears in funerary scenes, to do with mummies the afterlife; not before someone sitting alive and well on a throne.[]

Exiled wrote:Am I missing something here? Joseph Smith was completely wrong in his interpretations. So, how can you defend that? It seems to me the only defense is the silly catalyst theory or ed goble's problematic theory. Either way, the book of abraham is made up, regardless of your emotional experience. That seems the only rational conclusion. Surely you don't think the Mormon god needed the magician's tricks surrounding the book of abraham or Book of Mormon "translations." The Mormon god could have easily revealed the books like the book of moses supposedly was given? So why the mystery and magic? Why the seer stone? Why not just be straight forward?

I was wondering the same thing. I'm not a Book of Abraham expert but just based on the reading I've done here, it's seems confusing that Zerinus is unaware that the images above Joseph Smith' "slave" identify the image as Anubis, and that the image of the head was filled in due to papyrus damage. Even in my limited research, I've learned enough to know Zerinus' argument is specious.
Paul Osborne, 2010, wrote:http://www.bookofabraham.com/boamathie/BOA_6.html

Figure 6
Joseph Smith:
"Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince."

Figure 6
Egyptology:

True to his 19th-century American point of view, Joseph identified the only "black" person in the drawing as a slave. However, this figure is undoubtedly Anubis, guide of the dead, who is there to support the deceased. He has helped the deceased complete his journey, and assisted him in the use of the spells that were contained in his funeral book. Reuben Hedlock's rendering is not very good, perhaps because of damage to the original papyrus fragment from which he took the drawing, but Anubis is always black, and always has a jackal's head — in fact, you can still make out the pointed dog ear on the top of his head. The words above Anubis read: "Recitation by Anubis, who makes protection(?), foremost of the embalming booth,...

Image

Paul O
http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 32#p360632
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Shulem »

zerinus wrote: Anubis appears in funerary scenes, to do with mummies the afterlife; not before someone sitting alive and well on a throne.


Folks, zerinus is a novice and doesn't know what he's talking about. Just ignore him/her. His understanding of funerary rituals and iconography is on a child's level. Rest assured, Anubis, god of Egypt, is not and never has been called a slave in Egyptian funerary spells.

Image
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Lemmie »

Zerinus wrote: Anubis appears in funerary scenes, to do with mummies the afterlife; not before someone sitting alive and well on a throne

This is some fascinating reasoning. So because Joseph Smith misinterpreted a scene as "someone sitting alive and well on a throne" instead of correctly as a "funerary [scene]," Zerinus argues that since a misinterpreted Anubis character shouldn't be in a misinterpreted non-funerary scene, the two errors somehow cancel each other out.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Mar 03, 2017 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Fence Sitter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Brent Metcalfe's book on the Book of Abraham?

Post by _Fence Sitter »

Yes but google does not show Anubis that way (like in Fac#3) so Shulem must be an idiot!

If only Shulem had spent some time studying this issue, he would not make such a simple error.

Bad Shulem, bad.

One has to wonder if Zerinus spent as much effort on the books he wrote as he is showing here?
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Post Reply