A new evidence for Facsimile 1

[Markk]

I am not even sure where to start, so I will start with.... aside from this is a complete set up for members of the church that are looking for any reinsurance that the Book of Abraham is indeed about Abraham, that "a lions couch is not an alter."

He specifically stated that Facsimile 1 is a Lion couch scene, "because the alter looks like a lion." I am not remotely a Egyptologist, I am not close to being a expert on the Book of Abraham, but, I have studied it a bit about it and listened to RFM's classic 13 hr interview with Robert Ritner on my daily commute 3 or 4 times. Not to mention I have access to Google and AI....and there is nothing I have read, listened to, or found that would support a lions bed as being an alter.

I have read and heard it called a embalming table, funerary couch, bier, a bed for rituals, a bed, but never an alter from any source outside of Mormonism.

A positive was, for about 5 seconds, Kerry said he was wrong on Execration Rituals after listening to Ritner. But then it went south and he tried to make a point that in these rituals the priests often used knifes performing them on figurines, basically voodoo dolls; subtly tying it to Abraham almost being sacrificed with a knife on the "alter."

About half way through Kerry makes a point to say this new theory is making him take more seriously the missing scroll theory. Is he moving away from the catalyst theory, if I remember correctly he was hinting at?

Towards the beginning he made a remark in regard to changing his mind after listening to Ritner on Execration magic, and said he is not like other people who dlb. down on their theories, even if wrong....I could not help but to think of Gee?

There is a lot more of the same garbage, but in the end, at least for me it came across as Smoot playing the straight man (Abbott) with leading questions setting up Kerry (Costello).

Take it away Paul if you are interested.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSI7knxTAqc

[Shulem]

Take it away Paul if you are interested.

Markk,

Believe it or not, I'm not really interested and don't know when I would find the courage to watch another horrible spectacle presented by apologists who blatantly lie to the camera while twisting and misrepresenting the facts. I just don't know when and if I can do it. Maybe tomorrow I will feel different? Maybe Philo would jump in, but somehow, I doubt he's interested as well. We are tired of the BS and the lies! I feel like letting go entirely, dropping Mormonism, and moving on. I enjoy my massage chair, miles of forests around me, and having everything I could ever want or need while in retirement. The negativity that comes with having to do battle with apologetic liars takes a certain toll on the health of my soul. I'm one of those so-called weird people that is "awake" and am now playing out the balance of my life in a world that is so fake and yet real because you can feel everything.

Please refer to my thread down in the Archives thread that addresses many of the issues of Facsimile No. 1 in showing that this vignette and the writing that flanks it has nothing to do with the so-called Book of Abraham. Joseph's Smith's views are all wrong.

Pearl of Great Price Central Facsimile 1 as a Sacrifice Scene

Also, I have some excellent threads (invincible) in the Celestial forum for those who are interested. It's over for the Book of Abraham. It's dead and buried.

• “King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head”

• Anubis in Facsimile No. 3 and Mormon Deception

• Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

[Dr. Sunstoned]

The tortured and, quite frankly, embarrassing efforts of apologists to defend the Book of Abraham have gone beyond the point of honesty. I doubt most of them actually believe the fraudulent material they keep vomiting all over social media.

I cannot imagine the Cognitive dissonance that people like Gee, Smoot, and Muhlestein are haunted with. Educated men who have given over their lives and professional careers to obvious deceptions.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

I live in constant hope that William Schryver will finally grace us with his long awaited book. William promised it would clear everything up so decisively that critics of the Book of Abraham will all have to find new things to argue about.

[Marcus]

Altar. Markk. The word is altar, not alter. Also, it's reassurance, not reinsurance.

On the other hand, religious people needing to be re-insured "because the alter looks like a lion" sounds like a horror writing prompt. Throw in voodoo dolls and Stephen King would be proud.

[Shulem]

Altar. Markk. The word is altar, not alter. Also, it's reassurance, not reinsurance.

On the other hand, religious people needing to be re-insured "because the alter looks like a lion" sounds like a horror writing prompt. Throw in voodoo dolls and Stephen King would be proud.

It is a bit of a disappointment when someone's opening posts is flooded with so many errors that it takes away from the whole purpose of the thread. The opening post is too important to muck up.

In addition:

support a lions bed

It's a lion's bed because it belongs to a lion.

priests often used knifes

Knives.

Smoot playing the straight man

My understanding is that Smoot-boy is queer and is therefore sexually attracted to what he can't have! He's a gay Mormon trying to put everyone on by acting straight. It won't work. His days are numbered. He will eventually give in.

That is my prophecy!

So says, Shulem.

Amen.

[Marcus]

Altar. Markk. The word is altar, not alter. Also, it's reassurance, not reinsurance.

On the other hand, religious people needing to be re-insured "because the alter looks like a lion" sounds like a horror writing prompt. Throw in voodoo dolls and Stephen King would be proud.

It is a bit of a disappointment when someone's opening posts is flooded with so many errors that it takes away from the whole purpose of the thread. The opening post is too important to muck up.

In addition:

support a lions bed

It's a lion's bed because it belongs to a lion.

priests often used knifes

Knives.

Smoot playing the straight man

My understanding is that Smoot-boy is queer and is therefore sexually attracted to what he can't have! He's a gay Mormon trying to put everyone on by acting straight. It won't work. His days are numbered. He will eventually give in.

That is my prophecy!

So says, Shulem.

Amen.

A- from these -women, too. (yes, I am multitudes.)

[Shulem]

A- from these -women, too. (yes, I am multitudes.)

And then I said:

It is a bit of a disappointment when someone's opening posts is flooded with so many errors that it takes away from the whole purpose of the thread. The opening post is too important to muck up.

I think this thread is in serious f-ing trouble! But I'm sure you will agree the opening post is very important to set the thread on the right foot, or left? Whichever foot. Smoot will have to figure out what works for him. Been there, done that.

[sock puppet]

The tortured and, quite frankly, embarrassing efforts of apologists to defend the Book of Abraham have gone beyond the point of honesty. I doubt most of them actually believe the fraudulent material they keep vomiting all over social media.

I cannot imagine the Cognitive dissonance that people like Gee, Smoot, and Muhlestein are haunted with. Educated men who have given over their lives and professional careers to obvious deceptions.

Why don't the mopologists just follow the example of "the Brethren" and act like the Book of Abraham is not part of the LDS canon of scripture? Seems to be working for the anointed, so why not also for the un-anointed?

[Dr. Sunstoned]

Why don't the mopologists just follow the example of "the Brethren" and act like the Book of Abraham is not part of the LDS canon of scripture? Seems to be working for the anointed, so why not also for the un-anointed?

I think the church is heading that way. I would not be surprised if they de-connonize the Book of Abraham.