"Slave On The Path Of Ascension" -- Apologist defend Book of Abraham Facsimile 3 Figure 6!

[Shulem]

Conflict Of Justice (CoJ) was a blogger who provided resources for defending The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

CoJ retired the website conflictofjustice.com in May 2021 and the 300+ articles were no longer available. CoJ released the text files of the articles to multiple people who requested access, to freely use so long as it included a disclaimer that the articles are attributed to Conflict Of Justice but does not suggest that CoJ agrees with any alterations made.

Many of the links and images will not work as they link back to the original site. 334 articles have been restored however some appear to be duplicates.

................................................................................

ORIGINAL WEBPAGE IS DEFUNCTED

Slave On The Path Of Ascension

Conflict Of Justice Archives

The notorious and now defuncted apologetic website called CONFLICT OF JUSTICE has an article about the slave in Facsimile No. 3. Among other things, it appears the apologists are finally addressing the issue of the jackal nose being scraped off the printing plate.

[Shulem]

Note, within the opening photo are these captions:

Joseph Smith:

Priest of Anubis, assisting in
the path of ascension

Egyptian:

Olimlah, a slave of the prince

Right off the bat, the apologist charges out of the gate creating a false illusion and uses deception in order to deceive naïve readers!

Let's be clear, Joseph Smith never referred to the character of Fig. 6 as anyone associated with a "Priest of Anubis", nor did he connect the character with "assisting in the path of ascension". Both points are entirely a modern apologetic construct using Egyptology to fabricate a parallel in which Smith knew nothing. As far as Smith was concerned, it was a king's court in which Abraham was visiting. Nothing more.

The apologist then titles "Egyptian" over Smith's Explanation: "Olimlah, a slave of the prince", as if Smith's Explanation is *real* Egyptology according to the Egyptians. This is utterly false. Smith's Explanation of Fig. 6 is not Egyptian and his name is not "Olimlah", and neither is the character a priest of Anubis!

[Shulem]

The apologist attempts to build his argument based entirely on a false premise in attempting to apply credibility to the name "Olimlah".

Omilah Means ‘Ascending

The fictitious name of "Olimlah" was something Smith made up out of thin air. It's not an Egyptian name and you won't find it in the hieroglyphic writing of the Facsimile in which the persons being displayed are labeled with their names and titles according to standard Egyptian custom. The bit about "Ascending" is an apologetic construct fabricated to begin telling a tale about a certain parallel they want to associate with the Facsimile Explanation, in order to make it seem or appear Egyptian. But, this is nothing more than a rabbit hole -- a false undertaking in defending what Smith actually said.

The scene of Facsimile No. 3, has nothing to do with the Ascension of Anubis. Nor is it an earthly scene. It's a place where Egyptians ascend among the gods. Facsimile No. 3, is the afterlife and has nothing to do with men in mortality as Smith claimed.

[Shulem]

The apologist will now attempt to build a case in making the name "Olimlah" special as if it really does belong to Facsimile No. 3:

Morning & Evening Barque – Olim in Hebrew means “ascending, going up.” Lately, it has come to mean a Jewish immigrant to Israel, in reference to the concept that a worshiper goes “up” to the temple to make burnt offerings, which was located in Jerusalem. We see throughout the Book of Mormon and other scriptures that people “go up” to temples. Lah means “not.” That makes Olimlah mean: one who does not ascend.

So, now we get a word game. The apologist wants to talk about the Hebrew language. Please note that he doesn't want to talk about the Egyptian language which is the ONLY language that matters since it's the only language contained in the vignette. Why bring up Hebrew in an attempt to cross compare and find ways to create new stories? That's what the apologist is doing in bringing up the Hebrew, Jews in Israel, Jehovah's cult rituals, and moreover the Book of Mormon. None of that has anything to do with Facsimile No. 3!

"Olim" may indeed mean to ascend in Hebrew. So what! What does that have to do with the price of tea in China or the price of papyrus in Egypt? The Hebrew "Olim" is not written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3! Nobody in Facsimile No. 3, is ascending or going up to Jehovah's temple to make an animal sacrifice. That is the last thing the Egyptian gods would ever do. To associate the Egyptian gods with Jehovah's temple and animal sacrifices is an abomination -- utterly blasphemous.

[Shulem]

This speaks to what we learned about Figure 5: the deceased is Shulem, meaning complete and whole–yet Joseph Smith also calls him/her a “waiter” or servant to the king’s prince. He/she seeks the be received into the bosom of Abraham enter paradise but is limited.

The apologist is not reading Egyptian. The apologist is not interpreting Egyptian. The apologist is attempting to make things up in order to fit Smith's narrative. So, he relies on the Hebrew language which has nothing to do with the Facsimile. Hebrew is NOT on the Facsimile, period!

Note that the apologist mistakenly indicates that Smith didn't differentiate the sex of character No. 5, the so-called "waiter", when he said, "Joseph Smith also calls him/her" when the Explanation published in the Times and Seasons clearly establishes the sex of the person as male:

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

[Shulem]

“Waiter” may refer to the deceased’s earthly occupation but more likely is the deceased’s destiny in the heavenly afterlife. The deceased is to be an angelic servant in telestial or terrestrial glory. Olimlah would therefore describe their state: not ascending.

The apologist is spinning a web of deception. Terrible, making stuff up out of thin air.

First, Joseph Smith himself said that this was Pharaoh’s court. An earthly place. The character in Fig. 5, was called a "waiter". That is earthly in nature, a mortal occupation. Smith NEVER associated the scene with that in heaven. According to Smith, mortal Abraham is alive on the scene! But the apologist in order to wiggle out of a tight spot attempts to take the scene away from earth and into heaven where it belongs! But that is NOT what Smith said. It's what the apologists say! Why? The apologist knows the true Egyptian meaning of Facsimile No. 3, and is attempting to marry Smith with real Egyptology.

The apologist further muddies the water in bringing up different degrees of heaven mentioned in D&C 76 and again try to make the name "Olimlah" sound credible as if by revelation.

[Shulem]

Egyptologists say this Figure shows the god Anubis who assists the deceased on his journey. The role of Anubis in Egyptian judgement scenes, according to Pyramid Texts was to command the deceased to ascend or descend the astronomical heavens:

“…you come forth at the voice of Anubis, he makes a spirit of you like Thoth, you judge the gods, you set bounds to the celestial expanses between the Two Wands in this your spiritualized state which Anubis commanded… I ascend to the sky, my wing-feathers are those of a great bird. My entrails have been washed by Anubis.” (Richey Waugh)

The apologist is now spinning things faster and faster hoping that a naïve person isn't going to catch on to the trick. The apologist is taking elements from conventional Egyptology and Smith's false Egyptology in an attempt to combine the characters of Fig. 5 & 6, in a way to make Smith's Explanations *seem* credible. So, what better than to bring up Egyptian myth and religion and toss it into Smith's salad? Toss it and shake it up!

I remind the apologist what Joseph Smith actually claimed when he printed his revelations in the Times and Seasons:

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

Fig. 6. Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince.

The above statements given by Smith are what the apologist fears most. They cannot be proven true or defended using conventional Egyptology. The apologist knows that.

[Shulem]

The very next line in Joseph Smith’s Facsimile 3 explanation makes it about astronomy: “Abraham is reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy, in the king’s court.” Pyramid texts talk about the deceased in the judgement court of the afterlife arising as Anubis and at the command of Anubis:

“Stand before the two chapel rows!
Arise!
Arise, that they may replace what is against you!
Arise and traverse the [firmament]!
Arise! Arise for eternity!
And arise [as Anubis, master of the] herdsman’s tent.
Arise! Remove yourself from upon your left side.
Stand before the Akhs, just as Horus foremost of the living stands!
May you ascend as the morning star.
Anubis, foremost of the god’s booth, has commended that you descend as a star, as the morning god.
May you ascend to the sky as a star, as the morning god.
May you ascend here as a star, as the morning god.
Thus let him ascend, thus let him rise up to the sky, as the great star in the middle of the east.”
(The organization of the Pyramid Texts Typology and Disposition Vol 1, Harold M. Hays p. 492

Oh how apologists love to spin webs and entangle their listeners in a web of deceit!

So, the fact that Joseph Smith was able to count the 23 STARS in the top register of the vignette and associate that with principles of Astronomy is suppose to impress us? Bear in mind that the STARS depicted in the crude printing of Facsimile No. 3, do not at all represent the clarity and beauty of the STARS that were on the actual papyrus!

Anyone could tell they were STARS! Hello!

So, I grant Joseph Smith 2 points for recognizing the beautiful STARS that were lovingly drawn by the ancient Egyptian artist to pay homage to those persons who were star-stuck and granted the presence to stand before the throne of the god Osiris. May Osiris be blessed forever.

Moreover, cursed be the false Explanations given by Joseph Smith in ignorantly blaspheming sacred Egyptian things and making a mockery of Egyptian gods.

[Shulem]

Division Between Ascent & Descent – Anubis typically served as “guide between worlds… associated with the transitions between states… accompanies the deceased.” Facsimile 2 shows in diagram the ascent and descent of the sun to symbolize the eternal round of the deceased toward rebirth. The two boats represent the solar ascent and descent, with the Amun-Re central figure in the middle of it all, exactly as Abraham describes Kolob. The same kind of symbolism applies here with Anubis’s relationship to the deceased in this judgement scene. Anubis represents the decision that will fate the deceased to paradise or to hell.

Blah, blah, blah. The above is Nibley type garbage. Nothing but distraction.

Figure 2, Isis, whom Joseph Smith correctly associated with Pharaoh, stands behind Abraham the judge as a symbol of paradise, the awaiting royal exaltation that awaits the worthy.

This is an absolute lie. The statement that Smith correctly "associated" Isis with Pharaoh is totally untrue. Smith made no such association! Smith said that the person of Fig. 2, WAS Pharaoh, not "associated" with Pharaoh.

Either the person in Fig. 2 *is* Pharaoh, an Egyptian king or it is not. It's one or the other. Both can't be true. Either it's a king or it isn't.

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

Well, that ties it. There is no king's name above the head. That person is NOT a king. It's a goddess, a woman who lives in heaven, not earth. The person seated on the throne is an Egyptian god, not a Goddamn vile Asiatic by the name of Abram!

Joseph Smith was dead wrong. The apologist is a liar.

[Shulem]

KUDOS, KUDOS, KUDOS with your Judo against the twit apologist imagining he is a scholar (trying to please Midgley perhaps who confuses the two as well?) Shulem slam dunk massacre against the apologetic clap trap.

Philo baby, thanks for that -- I know you understand as much as anyone about this stuff. I also know you often pick stuff up by following my lead and enjoy my quips and nuggets. You and I go back a looooong way with our Book of Abraham stuff. We have been there and done that! lol

Frankly, I feel a little guilty, like I'm beating someone up, mercilessly. I hope, that I don't come across as cruel. I'm passionate about this subject as you know. But I need to remember that the author of that site is human just like I am and is trying to defend what I used to defend myself. I feel somewhat humbled in this regard.

There is more to address in that article. AND, I haven't even addressed the apologetic response about the snout being scraped away from the printing plate. That is when I might really get upset. Will I flip out? I don't want to be cruel but I'm afraid that I might lash out in a cruel manner.

I don't want to do that.

Any advice you want to offer? I'm all ears.

I think one of the better cudgels you've developed is how Mormons have disrespected the ancient Egyptian religion by taking Anubis and making him a slave. Not only do they prove themselves insanely disrespectful with their deicide, but you get a two-for with the racism. It's absolutely brilliant what you've done with this.

Yes, and thanks for that, Doctor CamNC4Me. Indeed, Facsimile No. 3 is really the best place to begin dismantling the whole of the Book of Abraham. We can talk about the thickness of the papyrus until the cows jump over the moon -- to no avail -- or all the silly parallels made up by modern apologists but in the end all that really matters is WHAT Joseph Smith said and claimed.

I'm here to throw Joseph Smith under the bus and run him over, again and again. I love to run the prophet over with the Facsimile No. 3, Bus. It's fun and very satisfying.

Hey, all you apologist out there, bite me!

Yes, I do have a piece of advice... absolutely totally without mercy decimate, slaughter, destroy, and annihilate the argument......yet be kind to the person making it. Show no mercy for the stupidity of the argument, using evidence to show its weaknesses, silliness, illogicalness, etc., but still remain humane to the person using the argument. They honestly may not know better.