Shout Out to Shulem!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
hauslern
Nursery
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 2:36 am

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by hauslern »

I think it is best we keep to the factual material. And there is plenty.
I did a search on the British Museum site and found examples of facsimile 2
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collectio ... WwPK8RDhSg

It shows Smith was not aware of how common these were and he restored parts incorrectly.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 am
When I was a believer, I simply thought it was an Egyptian guy wearing black clothing. I'll bet that's Midgley's idea, too.

Naturally, that is what you thought back then because your eye was untrained and you knew a lot less about Egyptian gods and artistic iconographic representation. But you know better now! Yes you do! Midgley has rubbed shoulders with many persons who know all about the iconographic representation of Anubis in Facsimile No. 1, the subject matter has been discussed in his academic circles -- chief of who was Hugh Nibley and all those who hung on him or came after.

="Dr. Shades" wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 am

COME ON, MAN! Now, I'll be the first to acknowledge that Dr. Midgley displays no positive or praiseworthy attributes on the Internet, but accusing him of racism and comparing him to the KKK? That's flat-out over the top. Let's stick to the truth instead of inventing falsehoods.

Scholars who knowingly stand by Smith's 19th century ignorant explanations of Anubis in both Facsimiles are also racist and guilty of supporting false ideas. Unless they repudiate and disavow those explanations, then they as far as I'm concerned are racists. So yes, Midgley is in my view a racist because he does not reject or push back on those false statements. You'll note that I said, "When I see the name, MIDGLEY, I think of KKK and white people who think they are better than people of color", which is to say that he reminds me of a racist organization that dressed up in white sheets and claim to be better than other people. I didn't infer that Midgley was a member of the KKK or ascribed to their values or traditions. I simply said that he makes me think of them when discussing the matter of Anubis and how he's fine with slamming the Egyptian black god as a slave in one Facsimile and a murderer in the other!

So you see, Midgley makes me think of bad things. That's all I'm saying. Of course he's not a member of the KKK. I never inferred that. I also think of the KKK when I visualize Mormons dressing up in white in the temple prior to 1978. They put on their white clothes and claim to be the chosen race of white Ephraim while blacks are less deserving.

I'll address the DCP thing a little later. I have to go get my second vaccination shot now.

I do appreciate your candor and understand your objections to my previous comments.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 am
And Daniel C Peterson? He's racist and a bigot.
YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF THAT!! Sure, he's posted some politically incorrect things in the past, but that's most likely due to being a member of a generation less "woke" than our own. If he had ever hinted at believing that one race is superior to another, we'd all have heard about it by now.

Old Testament
News from Antiquity
By Daniel C. Peterson


Let's look at what Peterson had to say back in January of 1994 with regards to an article he published in slamming the black Egyptian god, Anubis.

Peterson wrote:The book of Abraham occupies a mere fifteen pages in the current English edition of the Pearl of Great Price, including four pages of illustrations and explanations.

Note that Peterson confirms that Smith's Book of Abraham also includes explanations of the Facsimile illustrations, to include the horrific statements Smith made about Anubis in both Facsimiles. Peterson goes on to say, "the book has often been a focus of criticism for those seeking to find some error in the works of Joseph Smith", and yet, Peterson does nothing to correct any of those errors or repudiate false statements made about the black Egyptian god. Peterson says nothing to indicate Smith was incorrect in labeling the black god a slave in one Facsimile and a murderer in the other! Peterson stands by Smith's racism and says in his very next breath, "And yet as the world’s knowledge of antiquity increases—as scholars probe ancient nonscriptural texts that have come to light during the past 150 years—the book of Abraham receives intriguing support".

Support? What support? The scholarly world is not shedding any new light to show that Smith was correct in labeling Anubis a slave and a murderer and yet we see Peterson sides with Smith's horrific slander and has no problem with calling Anubis a "slave". Daniel C. Peterson is a RACIST! Period. He fully supports Smith's errors and acts like the world is providing evidence to show that Smith was correct as if a blanket of protection rests upon all the Explanations when in fact the scholarly world has condemned Smith's Explanations -- especially the racist ones.

Peterson wrote:
Ancient texts sustain the book of Abraham account that there was indeed an attempt on Abraham’s life (Abraham depicted it in facsimile 1).

Image

Peterson knows full well that modern Egyptology has confirmed that the person in the above Facsimile is not a mortal man who is bent on murdering an Asiatic man from the north. Egyptology has confirmed that the head of this person should be a black jackal to go with the black body that is covered in black fur. But Peterson, being the racist he is, says nothing about that. Peterson is fine with a Caucasian head ruling a black body. Peterson probably thinks he's special because he figures he's from the tribe of Ephraim which is far better than being African and then having to be adopted into the house of Israel.

Am I correct about that, Dan? I think so.

Peterson wrote:
They also verify the names of four idols (detail) and confirm the terminology for the “pillars of heaven” (bottom of facsimile).

Image

Peterson knows that those feet and legs are that of a black man. He's consulted with fellow scholars and knows the person really is Anubis but he chooses to side with Smith's slanderous accusations that Anubis is attempting to murder an innocent Asiatic man when in fact the person on the lion bed is Osiris, an Egyptian god. Both Smith and Peterson are guilty of slandering another religion and mocking their gods.

Peterson wrote:
A number of ancient texts support Joseph Smith’s account, depicted in facsimile 3 from the book of Abraham, that the patriarch taught astronomy in Egypt.

Image

It's true that there are ancient accounts available such as Josephus that do mention Abraham having an interest in astronomy. The study of the stars just so happen to be a matter of study for all ancient civilizations! It's a no brainer. But, you'll note, Peterson says absolutely nothing about Anubis being labeled a slave and why the poor chap has a dog ear but is missing his snout. Peterson is just fine with mutilating a black man. Why? Because he's a racist.

Peterson wrote:Abraham going to Egypt and there teaching astronomy or astrology both to the priests of Heliopolis and to the Egyptian king himself.

Peterson cites evidence (Praeparatio Evangelica) to indicate that Abraham went to Egypt and met the king of Egypt. Well, Joseph Smith said the same damn thing, more or less and even introduced King Pharaoh in one of his Facsimile presentations:

Joseph Smith wrote:Fig. 2. King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.

So, Dan, what's the King's name given in the characters above his head? What's the name, Dan? I'm waiting for an intelligent response. I'm waiting for you to deny you're a racist pig who enjoys watching Anubis be slandered in Smith's facsimiles. I think you like it and you think it's funny. Don't you?

You are welcome to come on over here to Mormon Discussions and defend yourself, Dan. I've accused you of being a racist. Go ahead and bring Gee with you and his lapdog, Muhlestein. You guys think it's funny to pick on poor dead Egyptians but their voices will speak out of the ground and whisper through me.

Peterson wrote:Hugh Nibley has made an exhaustive study of these claims and has shown that the papyri we now have were probably not the ones from which Joseph Smith translated the book of Abraham.

I wonder if Peterson supports that outdated view today in light of all the new research and discoveries in uncovering the truth of the matter? Peterson can't possibly deny that the hieroglyphic writing in Facsimile No. 3, is the very writing Smith used to tender his translation:

Joseph Smith wrote:Fig. 5. Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand.

Image

Dan, are any of the characters missing above the hand and if so, which ones?

You're a racist, Dan. You are a white supremacist from the tribe of Ephraim, are you not?
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

hauslern wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 11:20 am
I think it is best we keep to the factual material. And there is plenty.
I did a search on the British Museum site and found examples of facsimile 2
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collectio ... WwPK8RDhSg

It shows Smith was not aware of how common these were and he restored parts incorrectly.

Thanks for posting that link to the British Museum.

This link in Wikipedia will also answer many of your questions and prove that Smith didn't know what he was doing when translating and interpreting Facsimile No. 2.

Joseph Smith Hypocephalus
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 am
He, like Joseph Smith, belittles the black persons of Facsimile No. 1 & 3.
I don't think so. He wasn't the one who drew a white / Egyptian head on Anubis' body.

But he's the one laughing about it on the other side of your computer screen!

I can hear him laugh in my mind. I can hear him belittle Anubis as if he was a thing of naught.

Oh, don't cut him any slack, Shades. You're being too charitable.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 am
Look, we can all disagree with many things that he's said and done, but let's not lose sight of the truth by making up falsehoods. Here's a redeeming quality: He's quite a gifted public speaker. Plus, in person and face-to-face, he's damned near impossible to dislike. (It put a real cramp in my style.)

Yes, we can disagree and try to reason things out. Peterson is more than welcome to come here and tell us exactly what he thinks of Anubis in Facsimiles No. 1 & 3. I have several questions I will ask him and hold his feet to the fire. He's damn good at what he says and knows how to write with exactness and provide a way to escape but I will nip that in the bud real fast. Let him come over here and let's see just how well he defends himself from not being viewed as a racist.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 1407
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

When I see the name, MIDGLEY, I think of KKK
Trying to wrap my mind around this, is this because of the Anubis thing or has he espoused straight up white supremacist ideology? I'm no Midgley fan, but this is coming off as slanderous. I think the Midge is a dick, no doubt, but linking his name with the KKK is bananas to me.

- Doc
Clinton King commenting on SeN: "My (perhaps) uncommon personal opinion: I find it easier to doubt the accuracy of carbon dating than the historicity of the Book of Abraham narrative." Good, Lord.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 6:04 pm
When I see the name, MIDGLEY, I think of KKK
Trying to wrap my mind around this, is this because of the Anubis thing or has he espoused straight up white supremacist ideology? I'm no Midgley fan, but this is coming off as slanderous. I think the Midge is a dick, no doubt, but linking his name with the KKK is bananas to me.

- Doc

You will agree that Midgley has a horrible reputation among critics of the Church and is generally known as being as you say, a "dick". It's that horrible reputation that makes me think of unpleasant things that involve racism. The KKK is one of those things that has existed in American history as well as slavery. When I think of Book of Abraham defenders who show no regard for Anubis and belittle him as if he's nothing on that papyrus other than a slave with a mutilated face or a crazed white-headed black man trying to lop off someone's head, it irks me. I think of things like KKK and slavery. I think about that when you mention the name of Brigham Young and other Church leaders who have a reputation of showing less regard to blacks in general. I don't feel that way towards Spencer Kimball as much because he made amends!

Look, I'm sorry if my impression and expression offends you but that's just what I think. I've tried to make it clear that I don't associate Midgley with having any affiliation with those groups (namely KKK) but that doesn't mean that I don't think of those things when his name is mentioned. That's all I'm saying. There is no slander in that whatsoever.

Think about that.
Shulem wrote:When I see the name, MIDGLEY, I think of KKK and white people who think they are better than people of color.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 1407
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

I mean, in a way you keep doing to Anubis what you accuse Mopologists are doing. You're constantly referring to Anubis as a black God or associating him with being a black man. "Anubis was depicted in black, a color that symbolized regeneration, life, the soil of the Nile River, and the discoloration of the corpse after embalming. - wiki" Anubis has no more relationship with being black than being white. Would you like to be associated with Boko Haram by Mopologists because of your casual racial shifting with regard to Anubis? Probably not because of their ideology. I think it's incredibly egregious to associate Midgley with the KKK.

Now. Do I think he has internalized a sort of 'white man's burden' or privilege like Dr. LOD has pointed out? Sure. But the stupid KKK? He makes you think of the KKK? That's so far out in Left field you might as well be in the parking lot. Your doubling down is disappointing, and is the flipside of what Mopologists do - namely never admitting error and falling on their swords for even the smallest of points. Shame.

- Doc
Clinton King commenting on SeN: "My (perhaps) uncommon personal opinion: I find it easier to doubt the accuracy of carbon dating than the historicity of the Book of Abraham narrative." Good, Lord.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 1593
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shout Out to Shulem!

Post by Shulem »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:00 pm
I mean, in a way you keep doing to Anubis what you accuse Mopologists are doing. You're constantly referring to Anubis as a black God or associating him with being a black man. "Anubis was depicted in black, a color that symbolized regeneration, life, the soil of the Nile River, and the discoloration of the corpse after embalming. - wiki" Anubis has no more relationship with being black than being white. Would you like to be associated with Boko Haram by Mopologists because of your casual racial shifting with regard to Anubis? Probably not because of their ideology. I think it's incredibly egregious to associate Midgley with the KKK.

Now. Do I think he has internalized a sort of 'white man's burden' or privilege like Dr. LOD has pointed out? Sure. But the stupid KKK? He makes you think of the KKK? That's so far out in Left field you might as well be in the parking lot. Your doubling down is disappointing, and is the flipside of what Mopologists do - namely never admitting error and falling on their swords for even the smallest of points. Shame.

- Doc

Doc,

I'm very glad you've taken the time to respond and are following this thread. Apparently there are people following this thread because at present there are nearly 7,000 hits -- so I guess that's a good thing from my point of view.

Okay, right, Anubis is really a jackal headed man and he's covered in FUR not skin. He's not a man, per se. I know that and so do you. The problem is that Joseph Smith's presentation represents something entirely different in both Facsimiles. It's the Mormons that have turned the creature god Anubis into a man, an African slave, depicted in Facsimile No. 3, and I've dialed into that false notion. You see, Anubis is manifested as either a jackal-headed man or a jackal animal in full form. It's one or the other. He's not a man with a human head, not ever. But the Mormons have turned him into a man, called him a slave, and have made him half white and half black in Facsimile No. 1. I want that to stop! I want Anubis to have his JACKAL head in both Facsimiles and to be entirely black in color as he is supposed to be -- covered in black fur and entirely black in color.

These are my demands:

1) No WHITE head!
2) No HUMAN head!

I want Anubis the way he is supposed to be. I won't rest until the Church corrects this. If I die screaming and kicking, so be it. I'm in for the long haul until the Church finally corrects the Facsimiles. It's the Church that has turned it into a racial issue by making him into a man and calling him a slave. That's the racial issue and it has to stop! The jackal head must be restored and the god must be black from top to bottom. And get rid of the slanderous "slave" statement!

Also, when I think of people like Mark E Peterson, I think of the KKK. Same goes for Brigham Young. Those guys make me think of white supremacy because they think they are superior because they are white, of a certain lineage more chosen of God. If that makes me a left fielder, so be it. You don't have to like it. I'm fine with that. At least you know where I stand and I know where you stand. The whole doctrine of the Curse of Cain that used to be taught in Mormonism makes me think of the KKK.
Post Reply