Kara Cooney calls out Muhlestein and Gee on their Book of Abraham apologetics calling them liars.

[Rivendale]

They have been hiding behind their BYU-driven doctorates

Yes, those cowards have been hiding behind their degrees as if it gives them the right to re-create the origins of ancient Egypt to the likings of Joe Smith and his literalist ideas of biblical chronology as expressed in his revelations and teachings. Mormons in general are a stupid people.

There is a thread on reddit where a believer claims Gee and Muhlestein did not lie. Here is an excerpt.

Gee, Muhlstein, and the Church itself in its Essay admits the scroll we have is accurately translated by other Egyptologists as a funeral text of some kind.

that's not a lie. The scroll we look at does not "translate" in Egyptian to the Book of Abraham. And I have not seen Gee or Muhlstein make that claim.

Saying: "I believe the Book of Abraham is scripture from God." Is not the same as, "100% of the Egyptologists are wrong (including Gee and Muhlstein) who say that we are not looking at the Book of Abraham when we are looking at the scolls the LDS Church has in its possession."

I would think their human sacrifice claim is a blatant lie.

[Shulem]

I would think their human sacrifice claim is a blatant lie.

I also think the claim, "King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head," is also a lie. The characters in the vignette of Facsimile No. 3 are not a king's name and neither is there a royal Cartouche therein to signify a royal name which is standard convention for designating a king's name. And yet apologists justify Smith's baseless interpretation on the basis that one of the hieroglyphic characters that spells the name Isis is a throne -- so voila, that makes for a king's name, as far as apologists are concerned.

But notice how the apologists fail to find a hieroglyphic excuse to justify the other persons in the Facsimile that Smith designated by name and title. Also notice how the apologists have yet to find an excuse for chopping of Anubis's nose! What has John Gee said about that?

[Rivendale]

I would think their human sacrifice claim is a blatant lie.

I also think the claim, "King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head," is also a lie. The characters in the vignette of Facsimile No. 3 are not a king's name and neither is there a royal Cartouche therein to signify a royal name which is standard convention for designating a king's name. And yet apologists justify Smith's baseless interpretation on the basis that one of the hieroglyphic characters that spells the name Isis is a throne -- so voila, that makes for a king's name, as far as apologists are concerned.

But notice how the apologists fail to find a hieroglyphic excuse to justify the other persons in the Facsimile that Smith designated by name and title. Also notice how the apologists have yet to find an excuse for chopping of Anubis's nose! What has John Gee said about that?

I am sure you know he has said someone else may have did that to his snout. Or that part was missing so he filled it in to match his story. Defending the indefensable is a Sysiphus endeavor.

[Shulem]

Also notice how the apologists have yet to find an excuse for chopping of Anubis's nose! What has John Gee said about that?

I am sure you know he has said someone else may have did that to his snout. Or that part was missing so he filled it in to match his story. Defending the indefensable is a Sysiphus endeavor.

Truthfully, I have no idea what Gee has said about Anubis's snout that was so obviously and blatantly hacked from the face of Anubis. It certainly appears that Hedlock (the engraver) originally carved the face and snout as it must have appeared on the original papyrus but later chiseled it out. What (???) if anything has Gee said about that? Gee knows the inscription in the register above says, "Recitation by Anubis, who makes protection, foremost of the embalming booth." That is not the position and job of a mere slave having a fictitious name (Olimlah) said to be prancing about Pharaoh's court.

To my knowledge, nobody in the church of any consequence has said a damn thing about it. As a former apologist, I can honestly say that Smith's explanation for Fig. 6 was a difficult pill to swallow and I couldn't justify it. My old apologetic website was very much tongue in cheek in avoiding this controversial subject. And if I couldn't come up with an effective excuse then it's hard to imagine who could!

Egyptian form of the god Anubis
(figure at right)

The Joseph Smith explanation says that this is, "Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince."

Guess what? Joseph Smith's explanation is exactly what Anubis looks like! All's well, ends well.

[Shulem]

Defending the indefensable is a Sysiphus endeavor.

Indeed, Mormon Egyptologists have wasted their effort on a fruitless endeavor that receives ZERO SUPPORT from their non-Mormon colleagues who do not subscribe to asinine claims of the Book of Abraham. There is no question that every (ALL) Egyptologist, worldwide, would check the box [X] "NO" in affirming their opposition to Mormon apologetics. The Book of Abraham is DEAD! Mormon Egyptologists employed by BYU are a disgrace and their names will forever go down in history as liars for Mormonism. Long after those assholes are dead, people will talk about how disgusting it was. And, I prophecy in the name of Amen-Ra, they will be thrown under the bus by future Mormons after the Book of Abraham is finally jettisoned by a newly organized LDS-church.

Mark my words!

[drumdude]

Defending the indefensable is a Sysiphus endeavor.

Indeed, Mormon Egyptologists have wasted their effort on a fruitless endeavor that receives ZERO SUPPORT from their non-Mormon colleagues who do not subscribe to asinine claims of the Book of Abraham. There is no question that every (ALL) Egyptologist, worldwide, would check the box [X] "NO" in affirming their opposition to Mormon apologetics. The Book of Abraham is DEAD! Mormon Egyptologists employed by BYU are a disgrace and their names will forever go down in history as liars for Mormonism. Long after those assholes are dead, people will talk about how disgusting it was. And, I prophecy in the name of Amen-Ra, they will be thrown under the bus by future Mormons after the Book of Abraham is finally jettisoned by a newly organized LDS-church.

Mark my words!

Have you tried defining the church as true? It's solved a lot of problems for DCP.

He doesn't have to worry about the problems anymore. It's kind of like MAGA defining Trump as true. It doesn't matter what Trump says, he's always right in the end.

[huckelberry]

She makes some interesting observations about the relationship between Exodus and the bronze age collapse.

[Shulem]

Have you tried defining the church as true? It's solved a lot of problems for DCP.

I don't understand the question.

He doesn't have to worry about the problems anymore. It's kind of like MAGA defining Trump as true. It doesn't matter what Trump says, he's always right in the end.

Peterson has secured his pension. Gee hasn't, as yet!

Poor Gee.

[Kishkumen]

Finally. Kara calls it like it is and these people need to be spoken to in adult clear language. They have been hiding behind their BYU-driven doctorates far to long and with Ritner gone it is nice to see her fill his spot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCGG1sL8BR4 eta....Mormonism starts at 34:00

Yeah, she nails it. Great video altogether. I hope I get time to watch the whole thing. Matthew Sheffield is doing a great job there. Professor Cooney is a wonderful guest, too.

[Rivendale]

Finally. Kara calls it like it is and these people need to be spoken to in adult clear language. They have been hiding behind their BYU-driven doctorates far to long and with Ritner gone it is nice to see her fill his spot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCGG1sL8BR4 eta....Mormonism starts at 34:00

Yeah, she nails it. Great video altogether. I hope I get time to watch the whole thing. Matthew Sheffield is doing a great job there. Professor Cooney is a wonderful guest, too.

Kara was gracious in her description about truth and the fleeting nature of it. Something that is missing from the current influx of apologetics excusing the Book of Abraham catastrophe.