CONFLICT OF JUSTICE wrote:Figure 4, Maat, whom Joseph Smith correctly associated with the Prince of Pharaoh holds the hand of Shulem as if attempting to lead him to Figure 2.
That is LIE! The apologist is a liar. Smith INCORRECTLY associated and named the person as a Prince of Pharaoh. Truth be told, there is no Pharaoh in the scene! The personage of Hor is paying homage to Osiris and is not labeled as a prince of the royal house of Egypt. That is Joseph Smith's concoction and the apologist is lying when he says it's correct. Everything Smith said about Fig. 4, is completely INCORRECT:
"Fig. 4. Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand."
No, she is not a prince. She is a goddess by the name of Isis as in the label above. She is not holding the hand of a person named "Shulem". That is a lie. She is female, not male. She has a vagina, not a penis! She is not the prince of any earthly king. Joseph Smith was dead wrong.
CONFLICT OF JUSTICE wrote:As previously discussed, Joseph Smith was correct to identify this Figure 4 as the Prince of Figure 2, but as far as Anubis is concerned this would more appropriately be associated with Nepthys, sister of Isis. The deceased Egyptian frequently is displayed between Isis and Nepthys, as they are the facilitators of the final rebirth of Osiris. The typical lion couch scene, Facsimile 1, frequently shows the recumbent Egyptian mummy laying between Isis and Nepthys–while our Facsimile 1 shows him between Horus (husband of Isis) and Anubis (son of Nepthys). The right side of Facsimile 1 is day, the left side night. Isis, Nepthys, and Anubis are strategically located in our Facsimile 3 diagram according to their roles of ascension and descension.
Hey, how about the apologist submit this statement to a credible academic journal of Egyptology. Let's see just how far it goes. Submit Joseph Smith's Explanations too. Let's see how far they go.