BOOK OF ABRAHAM FACSIMILE NO. 3?? WEBSITE

[_Shulem]

I wonder if you would be able to succeed at being able to see any of these things up close. It would be interesting to find out what kind of process would be involved in putting together such a request.

No one is going to be allowed to see the plate except for those who are given special approval and have gone through the official process to generate such a request. What does that entail? It will take persons of interest such as John Gee and DCP. There will have to be consultation regarding what specialists will be involved in examining the plate and the photos that result.

I think it's reasonable to assume that John Gee would want to get to the bottom of this. I'm sure DCP would too. They will want to know. No question about that. I have to think that the results will be devastating to John Gee and his shelf might finally break. John Gee, no doubt, has a certain love and fascination towards ancient Egypt and the desecration of Anubis will turn his stomach. It won't be easy for him.

[_Philo Sofee]

I wonder if you would be able to succeed at being able to see any of these things up close. It would be interesting to find out what kind of process would be involved in putting together such a request.

No one is going to be allowed to see the plate except for those who are given special approval and have gone through the official process to generate such a request. What does that entail? It will take persons of interest such as John Gee and DCP. There will have to be consultation regarding what specialists will be involved in examining the plate and the photos that result.

I think it's reasonable to assume that John Gee would want to get to the bottom of this. I'm sure DCP would too. They will want to know. No question about that. I have to think that the results will be devastating to John Gee and his shelf might finally break. John Gee, no doubt, has a certain love and fascination towards ancient Egypt and the desecration of Anubis will turn his stomach. It won't be easy for him.

I think you entirely misunderstand Gee's apologetic spirituality. ANY LDS scholar is going to down play this if not outright ignore it. They usually twist things to suit their ends, or ignore them in the hopes it just goes away. I predict this won't phase Gee at all. And I guarantee you they will, if they publish, and give you credit (DCP might plagiarize this ) they will attack you, your lack of credentials, your lack of Mormon morals, whatever they can drum up. Please don't get discouraged by this however, in the long run it is the ultimate compliment, but expect the mudslinging, it could be on the way.

[_aussieguy55]

Shulem


Where did you get the translation of the words above Anubis ?

"The writing in the label above me testifies: "Recitation by Anubis, who makes protection, foremost of the embalming booth""

I'd like that when I explain to my LDS friends how Smith got it all wrong.

[_Shulem]

Shulem


Where did you get the translation of the words above Anubis ?

"The writing in the label above me testifies: "Recitation by Anubis, who makes protection, foremost of the embalming booth""

I'd like that when I explain to my LDS friends how Smith got it all wrong.

aussieguy55,

You'll benefit greatly by reading this lengthy page on Mormon Think which addresses the Facsimiles using authoritative citations and references. The name "Anubis" is actually a Greek rendition for the Egyptian Inpu.

Mormon Think The Book of Abraham

[_Shulem]

I think you entirely misunderstand Gee's apologetic spirituality

Maybe, maybe not. Only Gee can know for sure how he truly feels about his apologetic and testimony. What is left for us is to speculate.

ANY LDS scholar is going to down play this if not outright ignore it.

Play it down on the surface, perhaps. Ignore it, how hardly. They may pretend to act like they are ignoring it and give the impression they are playing it down but how hardly will that negate their need to know: Was a snout first carved in the plate??

They usually twist things to suit their ends, or ignore them in the hopes it just goes away.

Yes, this is exactly what LDS apologists do in order to defend their cause and maintain the image that their gospel is iron clad truth. Hoping it just goes away is certainly how the church deals with a great many historical problems. But problems just don't go away, they are only avoided.

I predict this won't phase Gee at all.

You're wrong. It won't go well with him. It's another straw on a heavily laden back and I'm not talking about Camel cigarettes. It will stick in his craw and prove to be another obstacle that he can't jump over.

And I guarantee you they will, if they publish, and give you credit

I absolutely agree. The INTERNET data is printed and time stamped. It's my discovery and it would serve no purpose to try and negate or deny that.

(DCP might plagiarize this

He won't. If anything he will take pleasure in the fact that he knows who I am and has even met me in Texas.

they will attack you

Yes, they most certainly will. LDS apologists love to attack.

your lack of credentials

Yes, that they will. BUT, they are still going to want to know if a snout was original to the plate and will credit me for being the first to ask!

your lack of Mormon morals

Indeed, they love to point fingers and judge others for being immoral. In my case they can laugh about how the former amateur Book of Abraham apologist lost his testimony and became a homosexual.

whatever they can drum up

Let them beat their silly apologetic drum all they want. The fact is, Anubis is not a slave, his name is written in the writing above him, and Joseph Smith had his snout hacked out.

Please don't get discouraged by this however, in the long run it is the ultimate compliment, but expect the mudslinging, it could be on the way.

I won't get discouraged. Let them attack me and belittle me all they want. If they do, I predict others (Egyptologists) will come to my defense and overwhelm them. I have all of Egyptology on my side and it will defend me. The gods of Egypt are also on my side.

[_Shulem]

I predict this won't phase Gee at all.

Again, I beg to differ with you and offer more perspective on why I do.

You will agree that John Gee is first and foremost loyal to being a Latter-day Saint and pledges his upmost devotion to his God and church. This is his primary focus and objective in life. Second, he is devoted to his family, and finally -- of course, his employment to include his salary and career path.

Take into consideration his first devotion which is God. All of this, however, is based on faith and the hope that these things are true, basing this on feelings and spiritual manifestation which he interprets to be messages to him from God. Nonetheless, this is all based on faith and that means having to walk blindly holding on to that iron rod with the hope it leads him to the fountain or final reward.

But then there is his career, Egyptology and teaching at BYU. This of course takes on a different kind of loyalty and is not subject to the same kinds of spiritual bonds and commitments as is church and God. The main difference, however, is that these matters are not based on faith or hope. It's based on facts and proofs that are learned through the various disciplines of science. No faith is needed. Hope is not required. God is not in the picture. We are talking about Egyptology and that which makes it functional and comprehensible. This is where John Gee runs into problems. Facsimile No. 3 is a prime example wherein faith and church are squarely pitted against science and Egyptology. It's a direct contradiction and along with it leaves an uncomfortable dilemma that requires one's faith to exercise cog dissonance.

John Gee chooses loyalty to his God and church through his faith. But in doing so, he becomes disloyal to his profession, more especially to Egyptology. He fails to take into consideration true history and shows lack of regard to the faith and hope held by the ancient Egyptians who understood the true meaning of Facsimile No. 3. In a sense, John Gee is a traitor to the people he should be upholding and dishonors their memory. The primary focus of any good Egyptologist is to uphold true Egyptian history and act as guardians for the ancients here in modern times. It is the responsibility of every Egyptologist to protect and serve the ancient Egyptians by representing them in the most accurate way possible. The ancients would expect no less just as we expect no less of future man to remember us for who and what we really are today.

[_DrW]

What he said.

But what do you say, 1-10? I don't believe you've voted, Maksutov. You need to voice your opinion so I can add you to the list.

My vote would be in the 90% range, so 9.0 it is.

[_Shulem]

My vote would be in the 90% range, so 9.0 it is.

Thank you for chiming in and voicing your vote, DrW. It's hard to imagine that the area in front of the face wasn't originally a snout. The grain of the cuts and swipes and grooves used by engraving tools sure looks fishy. Just looking at it makes one wonder, "What happened to the snout"? The jackal's eye survived as did the ear, proudly erect. So where oh where did the snout go?

From what I gather, Joseph Smith committed 3 fatal errors against the god Anubis:

1. Declared he was a slave
2. Called him Olimlah which isn't even Egyptian
3. Deformed him by hacking off his snout

Joseph Smith's presentation is fraudulent in every way. It's offensive and defames the religion of the ancient Egyptians.

-------------------

10 Shulem
8-9 Fence Sitter
8-9 Themis
8.9 deacon blues
8-9 Philo Sofee
8-9 Sanctorian
3 abinadi_fire
9 Symmachus
3 The Dude
10 Jesse Pinkman
10 DonBradley
8-9 tana
10 Jersey Girl
10+ Doctor CamNC4Me
10 Tator
5 Res Ipsa
10 cwald
8 Lemmie
9.5 Everybody Wang Chung
9.5 Dr. Shades
10 grindael
8.5 Maksutov
9 DrW

[_Shulem]

I respectively request that mentalgymnast please vote his conscience about the missing jackal snout in the Facsimile No. 3 printing plate. It only takes a moment to enter your opinion: 1-10.

Thank you in advance.

[ ] mentalgymnast

[_Shulem]

Still waiting for mentalgymnast to respond:

THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM FACSIMILE NO. 3

I respectively request that mentalgymnast please vote his conscience about the missing jackal snout in the Facsimile No. 3 printing plate. It only takes a moment to enter your opinion: 1-10.

Thank you in advance.

[ ] mentalgymnast

It tickled me to see this on Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum:

The original woodcut still exists for facsimile 3. The
Anubis/Olimlah character evidently had a snout (like a jackal)
which was whittled down. On the woodcut you can see how it's
been chipped away to make a rounder, more-human face. But
there's absolutely, positively no question that the original had
a representation of jackal-headed Anubis.