Zerinus?????s argument is decimated

[_Shulem]

Say what you like. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "slave" is not an image of Anubis, nor is it functioning as Anubis in the image that is displayed.

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=1042015#p1042015

Zerinus is deceiving himself when he attempts to relieve conventional Egyptology from Joseph Smith's official Explanation. Zerinus's illogical approach separates Egyptology from Egyptology and puts it into chaos. A lousy woodcut engraving was used to print Anubis in the original Facsimile of the Times & Seasons. That was Joseph Smith's first mistake. His second mistake was to identify a mighty god of Egypt as a slave.

Now, let us apply Zerinus logic:

1. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "King Pharaoh" is not an image of Isis, nor is it functioning as Isis in the image that is displayed.

2. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "Abraham" is not an image of Osiris, nor is it functioning as Osirs in the image that is displayed.

3. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "Prince of Pharaoh" is not an image of Maat, nor is it functioning as Maat in the image that is displayed.

4. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "waiter Shulem" is not an image of Hor, nor is it functioning as Hor in the image that is displayed.

[_Shulem]

The bottom line:

The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "slave" is an image of Anubis, and is functioning as Anubis in the image that is displayed.

Also:

1. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "King Pharaoh" is an image of Isis, and is functioning as Isis in the image that is displayed.

2. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "Abraham" is an image of Osiris, and is functioning as Osiris in the image that is displayed.

3. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "Prince of Pharaoh" is an image of Maat, and is functioning as Maat in the image that is displayed.

4. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "waiter Shulem" is an image of Hor, and is functioning as Hor in the image that is displayed.

[_Shulem]

[Guest]

Shulem,

Save for Zerinus I honestly believe there's not a soul here nor lurking that would believe what he just posted. It's so obtuse and willfully ignorant I actually, and I mean this, I actually feel bad for the guy. Like, if I were in the same room and he said something like that I'd just get a pained look on my face, give him a pat on the back, and say, "Yeah, man. You're gonna make it, buddy. It'll be ok." and I'd walk away understanding why humanity will never make it past our solar system.

- Doc

[_cwald]

Shulem,

Save for Zerinus I honestly believe there's not a soul here nor lurking that would believe what he just posted. It's so obtuse and willfully ignorant I actually, and I mean this, I actually feel bad for the guy. Like, if I were in the same room and he said something like that I'd just get a pained look on my face, give him a pat on the back, and say, "Yeah, man. You're gonna make, buddy. It'll be ok." and I'd walk away understanding why humanity will never make it past our solar system.

- Doc

Calm/Nemesis and Julian very much follow this board and make snide comments all the time, so I don't know.

[_Fence Sitter]

Now, let us apply Zerinus logic:

Here is a simplified version of Zernius logic.

I know the Book of Mormon is true therefore (insert any claim at all).

[_Shulem]

Calm/Nemesis and Julian very much follow this board and make snide comments all the time, so I don't know.

I dare any of those bozos to step forward and stake a claim that the figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "slave" is not an image of Anubis, nor is it functioning as Anubis in the image that is displayed.

Step right up and join zerinus. Do I hear crickets?

Zerinus made a vain attempt in another thread to explain why he thought Joseph Smith's slave was not the Egyptian god Anubis. His arguments were flawed and totally off base. He was proven wrong at every point. In the end he basically clenched his fist and walked off in a huff. It reminded me of a teenage kid when he gets mad and loses an argument. And I should know, I raised three teenagers (back in the day).

[_zerinus]

Say what you like. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "slave" is not an image of Anubis, nor is it functioning as Anubis in the image that is displayed.

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=1042015#p1042015

Zerinus is deceiving himself when he attempts to relieve conventional Egyptology from Joseph Smith's official Explanation. Zerinus's illogical approach separates Egyptology from Egyptology and puts it into chaos. A lousy woodcut engraving was used to print Anubis in the original Facsimile of the Times & Seasons. That was Joseph Smith's first mistake. His second mistake was to identify a mighty god of Egypt as a slave.

Now, let us apply Zerinus logic:

1. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "King Pharaoh" is not an image of Isis, nor is it functioning as Isis in the image that is displayed.

2. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "Abraham" is not an image of Osiris, nor is it functioning as Osirs in the image that is displayed.

3. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "Prince of Pharaoh" is not an image of Maat, nor is it functioning as Maat in the image that is displayed.

4. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "waiter Shulem" is not an image of Hor, nor is it functioning as Hor in the image that is displayed.

Your obsession can’t be good for your health. I suggest taking a break, going on holiday or something.

[_Shulem]

Here is a simplified version of Zernius logic.

I know the Book of Mormon is true therefore (insert any claim at all).

Exactly. The Book of Abraham is true no matter what. The early saints in Kirtland thought the same thing. They believed the explanations and translations were divine -- a literal translation from Egyptian into English. However, at that time they didn't have to contend with critics or modern Egyptology. They could simply say and believe what they wanted, unchecked. Joseph Smith must have had a blast doing it and his starry eyed fans really thought he was reading ancient Egyptian straight off the papyrus.

In reality, it was nothing more than a circus act. An illusion. Modern Egyptology has exposed Joe's magician tricks. I confess, it gives me a certain amount of pleasure to mock the phony revelations Joe concocted in his circus tent.

[_Shulem]

Your obsession can’t be good for your health. I suggest taking a break, going on holiday or something.

Your church has mocked the ancient Egyptian religion repeatedly and unchecked for too long. Your church has blasphemed the ancient god's of Egypt and made a complete mockery of ancient Egyptian writings that were sacred to the Egyptians and to their memory.

You, zerinus, are guilty and share in the immoral act of defending lies and mocking another religion for the sole purpose of making your own look special. You should feel ashamed. If you don't, it's because your conscience has been seared and you are past feeling.