I tried getting through this. I listened to the first two hours. Once again reaffirmed my decision to not listen to Mormon Stories interviews. Is there a part where RFM takes over that I can fast forward to?
Just find a way to wiggle your way through it -- turn the volume down or fast forward. We get to hear a lot more of RFM during part II.
I've got a sneaky feeling that more is going to be said about the jackal snout because it goes to show that Smith wantonly mutilated the figure to suit his own purposes and not just decorating the missing section of the outer ring of the Hypocephallus or making an honest attempt to improve the aesthetic appearance as apologists claim. Smith, out and out, mutilated the papyrus via the Facsimile on purpose in order to deceive his readers.
I hope you people can see the importance of this and not just think I'm ranting and raving over nothing.
I tried getting through this. I listened to the first two hours. Once again reaffirmed my decision to not listen to Mormon Stories interviews. Is there a part where RFM takes over that I can fast forward to?
Yeah. I struggled with that as well. Part II was a better paced. Skip the intro 30-45 minutes, especially when John Dehlin interrupts RFM and says we don't want to jump ahead. Even Ritter got frustrated and tried to engage RFM in the issues in the first 30 minutes. I would recommend starting about 45 minutes into part 1. Maybe even go to where they pull up the pictures of the facsimiles.
"Jesus gave us the gospel, but Satan invented church. It takes serious evil to formalize faith into something tedious and then pile guilt on anyone who doesn’t participate enthusiastically." - Robert Kirby
Beer makes you feel the way you ought to feel without beer. -- Henry Lawson
There are three letters that Klaus Baer wrote in reply to Wesley P Walters regarding Nibley's sed festival writing. I gave copies to Chris Smith who put the comments online.Does anyone remember where that is? I have foregotten.
Hilary Clinton " I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's GDP.I won in places are optimistic diverse, dynamic, moving forward"
I wrote to the egyptologist who i mentioned above regarding the hypocephalus and sharing the Ritner interviews with him. He sent me some files which i will check out. His email
Dear Noel,
Thank you for your message on the Academia.edu. Today I managed to see the interview with Prof. Ritner. He is really a great name in Egyptology today, he is an expert of magical practices of Ancient Egyptians. As for your question, in general, I agree with his explications, though he doesn't explain different figures as a coherent whole. He is completely right about that Joseph Smith's translations are completely false, it has nothing to do with the Egyptian Language. Prof. Ritner's translations are correct.
In my articles written on the topic I tried to harmonize figures illustrated on the discs to explain the motor of the horizontal registers of the hypocephalus. As Prof. Ritner told, the main purpose of this amulet was to create protective warmth and light under the head of the deceased as the disc emulates the sundisc. I base my explications on this fact, so behind most of the figures there is a form of the sun god (Amon-Re). As in the case of most of Egyptian amulets, behind each one there is a Book of the Death Spell, which prescribes its usage. In the case of the hypocephalus it is spell 162, which is about the heavenly cow (mother of Amon-Re), who created this amulet for his son at his death to protect him during his journey through the underworld. The texts and figures of the hypocephalus are all with this protective magical purpose.
So symbolically, the death of Amon-Re (the Sun) means the death of the god (Sunset), since the underworld of the Egyptians was a dangerous place they equipped the deceased with magical, protective devices (amulets, magical spells, richly decorated coffin(s), etc.) to safe journey through the underworld as to come up (rise) every morning as or with the sun god. So the deceased assimilated to the sun god who died each day and went down to the underworld on the West but next morning rose from the underworld on the East. As the hypocephalus was basically a sun symbol its figures explain the way of the journey of the sun through the day sky (upper hemisphere) and through the night sky (opposite hemisphere).
I send you through "wetransfer" a synoptic study, which is about the funerary equipment of a priest called Paiuhor. He may have been contemporary of Sheshonq (owner of the hypocephalus - Facsimile no. 2). So you will have an idea how the Egyptians equipped the mummy to the afterlife in the early Ptolemaic Period. In the study (pp. 268-277) I analyse the hypocephalus of this priest, thus you will see my point (which basically rhymes with Prof. Ritner's explications).
If you will have further questions, do not hesitate to write me. If you will still be interested in further details, I can send you my book on hypocephali in a digital form.
Best wishes,
Tamás
Hilary Clinton " I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's GDP.I won in places are optimistic diverse, dynamic, moving forward"
It is from a book which also contains a chapter Malcolm Mosher, Jr.
New Insights on P. Joseph Smith 2 and 3 ................................................................................................... 299
Hilary Clinton " I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's GDP.I won in places are optimistic diverse, dynamic, moving forward"
There is no reason on Osiris's green earth that the Hypocephalus should be printed in LDS canon to support their religious beliefs. The Hypocephalus is a tribute to the gods of Egypt and those who ascribe their faith in them. It has nothing to do with Jesus Christ or the Jehovah of the Old Testament. In fact, the Hypocephalus bears testimony to Egypt's pantheon insomuch as there are gods many and lords many -- and eternal life is had by adhering to the faith of Egyptian myth. That's the ultimate message of the Hypocephalus. The fact that the Mormons publish it today in their canon is a clear indication of their utter stupidity and their lack of regard in valuing principles of honestly and integrity in order to maintain the original lies fostered by Joseph Smith.
I honestly don't think any of the Mormon apostles today want the Facsimile in their work of canon which lies upon the altars of every temple. But what can they do? They are too afraid to admit that Smith made a mistake and that the Church is in the wrong. The Mormons are a very proud people. They don't apologize. They don't make amends. They don't do what's right. The LDS Church chooses the wrong. It's a giant mob organization that will continue to lie at any cost in order to keep it's members in its mob.
These Ritner interviews are so important and meaty, I wish there were a link repository to various topics covered in the conversation such as "Reformed Egyptian", Gee's "pathetic" abuse of his training, "Anubis drawn as a black priest", and "never, never, ever would a human sacrifice happen in this scene."
So we have an open and closed case of 2 Egyptology witnesses (at a minimum) concerning Joseph Smiths translations......were Mormon apologists serious about the importance of witnesses as they pretend (usually only those in favor of the Book of Mormon, which definitely, due to historic circumstances, are seriously suspect), does this not refute Joseph Smith and the Book of Abraham?! If not WHY not. I'm looking at you Daniel "Carmichael" Peterson... if witnesses are vital to Mormon issues, why aren't these Egyptological witnesses vital to conclusions as well? I'm looking at you Lou "I am classless when talking online" Midgley....
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
The MAD board sure does post stupid stuff. Listen to this:
Kenngo1969 wrote:
My position is that the jury is still out on the Book of Abraham. Once the papyri from which Joseph Smith purported to translate the Book of Abraham are found, then a reasonable discussion can take place regarding the issues surrounding it. If that makes me "rigidly dogmatic" and unwilling to entertain other points of view, then, so be it.
This poor fool hasn't made the connection that the hieroglyphic writing Smith translated in Facsimile No. 3 is directly associated with the persons in which Smith described.
How dumb can you get? Would someone please go over there and help that poor man?
