DiscussMormonism.com

Shulem wrote: ↑

Wed May 11, 2022 10:16 pm

Dear John Gee,

Now that you know the original snout in the printing plate was hacked out and the head of Anubis was reshaped into that of a man, it behooves you to come up with an opinion of why that took place. Recently you reconfirmed that the Missing Roll Theory is still your preferred choice and and the Catalyst Theory is a "decent second choice". This declaration also means that you do not have a testimony from the Holy Ghost that either theory is true. Up until now you still refuse to accept the third and final option which is Joseph Smith just made it all up and everyone was fooled including you.

So, we will be waiting to hear your expert explanation for the snout. Bear in mind we are fully aware that you do NOT have a witness of the Holy Ghost that the Missing Roll theory is true so if you are forced to embrace the "decent second choice" then you'll need to get that witness because the only other option is the one that Smith made it all up and that means you'll have to throw in the towel.

So what are you going to do, you poor tortured man?

It sucks to be you!

Shulem

But , but........

Do you believe this actually happened? Because I guarantee that you reject the occurrence of events in Latter-day Saint history which are better attested than this. You are a third degree witness.

I've looked at the pictures of the printing plate. The alleged "nose chiseling" doesn't look different from the chiseling around it in the negative space of the facsimile. Furthermore, I have a question for you: is Mekis a Demoticist?

Is that John Gee asking if Mekis is a Demoticist, or is this a fun mockery of it? Because, and I may be incorrect here, but being a Demoticist appears to me to be entirely irrelevant to the issue of the snout being hacked off. Perhaps I missed the joke, yet on the other hand Gee, it strikes me, actually would respond in this silly manner.

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 12:47 pm

Is that John Gee asking if Mekis is a Demoticist, or is this a fun mockery of it? Because, and I may be incorrect here, but being a Demoticist appears to me to be entirely irrelevant to the issue of the snout being hacked off. Perhaps I missed the joke, yet on the other hand Gee, it strikes me, actually would respond in this silly manner.

No it is Hoosier responding to Noel over at the DCP blog. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... qus_thread

Rivendale wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 12:04 am

But , but........

Do you believe this actually happened? Because I guarantee that you reject the occurrence of events in Latter-day Saint history which are better attested than this. You are a third degree witness.

I've looked at the pictures of the printing plate. The alleged "nose chiseling" doesn't look different from the chiseling around it in the negative space of the facsimile. Furthermore, I have a question for you: is Mekis a Demoticist?

Perhaps at some point it will become helpful if not necessary to fully explain or describe how the snout was hacked out of the metal ore by simply explaining the defined remnants and telltale traces left behind. Just look at it and you can see that a snout was carved out of the original design. But what is most interesting is the six vertical notches which I've identified as canine teeth secretly inserted deeply below the recessed area where the snout originally existed. Look at those notches! They were produced by a single pointed tool. Craftsmen did not have a multi-tipped engraving tool that could cause those notches with a single swipe. Those notches were produced ONE BY ONE, OR ONE AFTER THE OTHER, intentionally. Each notch was a deliberate swipe of the tool. Each notch was met with equal pressure with the point of the tool and etched into the metal being nearly perfectly parallel. This is NOT an accident! It did not happen by itself! It had to have been performed by the human hand and with human precision and great care. The engraver's eyeballs were sharply focused on each point to ensure they aligned up exactly as intended and that the swipe was made in just the right manner and that each stroke was in proper alignment. Those are TEETH in which Hedlock left as a witness of the original character on the papyrus vignette. It serves as a hidden record and a personal testimony that the artist respected the work of the original artist and therefore notched the teeth into the recess to honor the original workmanship.

Never fear, Shulem is here. So is Hedlock.

Hoosier wrote:I've looked at the pictures of the printing plate. The alleged "nose chiseling" doesn't look different from the chiseling around it in the negative space of the facsimile. Furthermore, I have a question for you: is Mekis a Demoticist?

Then you're a dodo or blind as a bat. Put your glasses on and your thinking cap. Clearly you can see there is a footprint left where the original snout was in place. Clearly you can see that the chiseling strokes and impressions in that area are unique within the recessed areas of the entire plate. The strokes of those carved impressions are very different than the rest. If you can't see that then you're a dodo or a blind fool. Take your pick. Or it could just be you're a liar!

Daniel Peterson wrote:Sigh.

And what to say of professor Peterson? Well, he knows it was a jackal nose. Of course he does. He knows that's a jackal ear atop the head. He knows there is no human ear etched on the side of the head. He knows that Egyptians always showed the ear as a requirement to artistic convention in which the body was depicted in full form. Peterson knows that it's a jackal eye. He knows that if he were to stick his finger in existing mouth that was hacked from the original snout then his finger would pop the eyeball out.

Peterson knows it's Anubis. He knows! And I know that he knows. And God knows too.

So says Shulem.

Shulem wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 2:50 pm

Hoosier wrote:I've looked at the pictures of the printing plate. The alleged "nose chiseling" doesn't look different from the chiseling around it in the negative space of the facsimile…

just so I understand, Gee has concluded, just by eyeballing the picture, that he understands “chiseling,” and what it should look like. So, no evaluation of the information you’ve collected on this topic, no research into the topic on his own, just “it doesn’t look like it.” That’s such an uneducated and lazy position to take. For it to be expressed on a DCP blog entry where the proprietor lectures people that simply dismissing other's viewpoints is a moral failing is rife with irony.

Why did the engraver leave the dog’s ear, though? That’s such a mystery to me. It’s clear it was Anubis because of the coloring, the jackal’s eye, the chiseled out snout, and the dog’s ear. But why leave the ear if they were changing the narrative? Hrm.

- Doc

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 6:51 pm

Why did the engraver leave the dog’s ear, though? That’s such a mystery to me. It’s clear it was Anubis because of the coloring, the jackal’s eye, the chiseled out snout, and the dog’s ear. But why leave the ear if they were changing the narrative? Hrm.

- Doc

That's a good question and every good question deserves a good answer. You will also note that a human ear was NOT etched into the side of the head. It would have only taken a second or so to carve an arced lobe by which the printing process would have clearly made the distinction. But no human ear was added! And with the face being transformed from the jackal head to a human head, nobody would have noticed the canine ear left atop the head. It would have appeared as simply part of a headgear or some kind of diadem such as had by the other characters but of lessor quality seeing he was the slave. Also, the original headcloth that was about Anubis's head was smoothed out and removed whereby Anubis was left with an ill shaped head. But it was enough to pass muster and meet with Smith's approval. All Smith was concerned about was getting rid of the image of an Egyptian deity that to him was just another idol abomination.

As I say, I happen to think that Reuben was a dog lover and kept the ear because he knew he could get away with it and he added the teeth in the recess because he knew nobody except for him would ever know, until now, here on Discuss Mormonism in 2022.

Thank you, Reuben, for your service!

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 6:51 pm

Why did the engraver leave the dog’s ear, though? That’s such a mystery to me. It’s clear it was Anubis because of the coloring, the jackal’s eye, the chiseled out snout, and the dog’s ear. But why leave the ear if they were changing the narrative? Hrm.

- Doc

Makes you wonder if Hedlock reckoned that if the snout of a canine god was impermissible, an extraterrestrial ear would suffice. Actually, I like Shulem's thought that Hedlock was a dog lover. It helps humanize the Book of Abraham story.

Moksha wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 8:56 pm

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑

Thu May 12, 2022 6:51 pm

Why did the engraver leave the dog’s ear, though? That’s such a mystery to me. It’s clear it was Anubis because of the coloring, the jackal’s eye, the chiseled out snout, and the dog’s ear. But why leave the ear if they were changing the narrative? Hrm.

- Doc

Makes you wonder if Hedlock reckoned that if the snout of a canine god was impermissible, an extraterrestrial ear would suffice. Actually, I like Shulem's thought that Hedlock was a dog lover. It helps humanize the Book of Abraham story.

Amen. And the inscription above Anubis says "Anubis". That's pretty conclusive and verifies beyond all doubt that it's Anubis. The apologists now have their work cut out for them. They have to justify Smith's alteration and deception in changing the person in the papyrus in order to coverup the error in designating him as an earthly slave through Mormon revelation. Clearly he was the Dog Star of heaven and the Blazing Star of Freemasonry.

The cat dog is out of the bag and apologists better run for cover because Osborne, Vogel, and Shirts are out to set the record right. Nothing can stop us!

Yeah baby!!!!