William Liar wrote: What I said is that Joseph Smith received, via revelation, the interpretation of the vignette in question.
Joseph Smith constantly claimed to receive revelation about all of his declarations.
William Liar wrote: I am inclined to believe that that interpretation is substantially correct, and everything I continue to learn about the meaning of this "stock motif" from antiquity lends credence to my confidence in Joseph Smith's interpretation.
A black man in the vignette automatically lends to the idea that he is a slave shows just how correct Joseph Smith was in interpreting Egyptian iconography.
William Liar wrote: In the context of that interpretation, "Shulem" is the name given to the figure in question. I believe that, within that context, "Shulem" is, indeed, correct.
How about you take a photo snapshot of yourself William, and label it Paul Osborne? That would be just as correct as Joseph Smith’s booboo regarding Hor.
William Liar wrote: The "honest human mistake" was not in the interpretation of the vignette, but simply in the fact that the Prophet may have incorrectly assumed that the name he received by revelation was written in the characters above the figure in question.
Listen to how silly you are trying to rationalize Shulem’s name via revelation! Look, Joseph Smith didn’t get any revelation from God about the name Shulem. He made it up. God did not tell him that hieroglyphs of the name Shulem were on that Facsimile. God didn’t tell Joseph that the black man was a slave. God didn’t tell him that Isis and Maat were really men. Joseph made it all up.
William Liar wrote: That does not make him any less of a prophet, nor does it make his interpretation of the meaning of the vignette any less valid.
He wasn’t a prophet at all, period. His interpretation of the meaning of Hor and Anubis was not valid at all. Joseph was wrong but what makes it so poisonous is that he claimed translation ability via revelation rather than just offering his opinion like normal people do.
William Liar wrote: It merely illustrates the fact that a prophet remains a man even while in the act of producing prophecy.
A man is still a man no matter what he does. Silly you!
William Liar wrote: Thus, "Shulem" is the correct interpretation of the figure, in the context of the application of this particular vignette, notwithstanding the fact that Joseph Smith may have erred in assuming that Shulem's name was written in the Egyptian characters above the figure that represents him.
You have lost touch with reality. Shulem is NOT the correct interpretation of the figure in the context of the application of this vignette which Joseph Smith was pretending to uncover.
You say that Joseph Smith MAY HAVE ERRED in assuming the name was written in hieroglyphically above the hand. How daring of you, William.
William Liar wrote: I am convinced this isn't really so hard to understand. Unless, apparently, you are locked into the perspective of a resolute apostate.
I’m convinced that you aren’t convinced at all. You are lying to everyone, especially yourself.
Paul O