Pearl of Great Price Central Facsimile 1 as a Sacrifice Scene

[_moksha]

But, lo and behold, the hypocritical apologists can't use that argument for Facsimile No. 3 because there are captions (labels) above the figures to identify each character in the vignette. Therefore we can be certain they are who the captions say they are! Anubis is NOT a slave!

So there is no way Anubis can be both a breath mint and a candy mint? Well, that is a bummer for apologetics.

A running debate between yourself and Philo Sofee against Kerry Muhlestein and John Gee would be fun.

[_Shulem]

So there is no way Anubis can be both a breath mint and a candy mint? Well, that is a bummer for apologetics.

A breath mint and a candy mint could be classified as the same thing. No problem there. But a slave and a god are just the opposite. Here is where we have a problem. Come in Houston, we have a problem!

John Gee and Kerry Muhlestein are stuck with the Anubis anomaly of Facsimile No. 3. It's got to be very haunting for them. They know better. They know the deal. They know the drill. Both of them know something is up with the missing snout. The hacked off nose is readily apparent when looking at the plate. What to do? The person in the engraving was given what appears to be a full jackal eye. It's different than the eyes on the other persons. And there is no human ear! What could this mean? And what's that atop his head -- that spike looking thing? Why it must be the jackal ear!

A little reasoning in these things goes a long way, wouldn't you say? My recent discovery of the hacked out snout is a game changer. I takes the argument to whole new level. It's the smoking gun! It's a hole in one! It's an ace in my pocket.

Book of Abraham apologetics has no choice but to shift and transform into something else. The discovery of the missing snout uncovers something rather ominous and that discussion is only getting started. There are more clues out there and more facts to arrange.

[_Shulem]

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/egyptian-papyri-circa-300-bc-ad-50/19

The photo above of another fragment seems crystal clear that dried glue (caramel color) and blobs of it are clearly OVER the preexisting ruled lines that were on the paper backing BEFORE the papyrus was mounted. This gives us a good comparison by which to better judge the glue smudges on the paper backing of the priest's head. It will help us determine if the glue was blobbed over the penciling or if the pencil was drawn over the glue.

Frankly, it appears that the glue is on top of ALL the penciling not just the preexisting ruled lines but the sketching as well. That was my first reaction but further examination seems in order. I wish I could get a little help around here, Jesus.

Where is Doctor CamNC4Me when you need him!?

[_Shulem]

I've determined that the glue is indeed OVER all the penciling. More importantly, the glue is over the penciled sketch of the priest's hair and breaches. I don't see any traces of papyrus stuck to the glue swirl. So, my immediate conclusion is that the swirl is the result of an unintended accident wherein glue was dribbled over the work area and the excess may have been wiped away. Hence, the sketch precedes the glue and was indeed the only and original image in which Smith endorsed until Hedlock later fashioned the plate years later having a different head with a new knife.

This seems reasonable. This also downplays Muhlestein's apologetic argument for Smith's actually seeing a priest's head on the original papyrus:

the glue marks suggest that the part of the drawing in question, which is missing now, was not always missing. It is quite possible, perhaps even probable, that it was actually in place when Joseph Smith first had the papyri, and that the facsimile was based on what he had actually seen at one point

[_Shulem]

Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus.

And as they lifted up their hands upon me, that they might offer me up and take away my life

I'm looking at Osiris on the lion bed. It's hard to imagine this is a Hebrew from Ur who managed to be arrested by Egyptians, confined, and taken to be sacrificed on the lion bed referenced in the Book of Abraham text.

First, that can't be Abraham. Second, it can't even be a drawing of a drawing of a drawing of Abraham or a redacted portrait of Abraham from some Jew. How so? There are two things I would like to point out that makes this person totally incompatible with Smith's claim that this papyrus features Abraham in vignette and in writing.

1. The person on the lion bed is wearing the skull cap which is typically worn by kings or by divine being's themselves such as Ptah. It's impossible that Abraham was granted the right to wear the scull cap on a fantasized altar of human sacrifice! The notion that a vile foreigner would don a sacred crown is utter sacrilege. Smith, may have thought that he could put Abraham "upon Pharaoh’s throne, by the politeness of the king" in Facsimile No. 3 and get away with it, but he had no concept about what was atop the head of the figure in Facsimile No.1!

2. The person on the lion bed is clean shaven. That's hardly the appearance of an Asiatic such as Abraham. It isn't biblical and no Jew would draw Abraham in that fashion! Being clean shaven, as John Gee will attest, is a function of purity performed by Egyptian priests. But here we see beardless Abraham lying on a royal or divine lion bed and donning a sacred skull cap. That doesn't make any sense at all! Oh snap!

I would like to ask John Gee and Kerry Muhlestein what's wrong with that picture? Can you imagine them being put on the spot live on a podcast? Ho ho ho !!! That would be funny. It would be one hell of a chess move. How would they respond?

I really hope you're taking notes, RFM. Get this all down. You the man.

[Guest]

No, I'm not done. I have more to say.

The vignette of Facsimile No.1 gives us the location of the scene and you can rest assured that it isn't "Olishem" up in the northern Levant. No, the location is Egypt. I'll be very plain because I've run out of time. More can be said about this later as the vignette definitely locates the Osiris resurrection scene as taking place INSIDE Egypt.

John Gee, listen up, please:

1. Osiris is over the lion bed.

2. The lion bed is under Osiris.

3. The lion bed is over the Four Sons of Horus

4. Four Sons of Horus are under the lion bed

5. Four Sons of Horus are located by the Nile river

6. The Nile river is located by the Four Sons of Horus

7. The crocodile is in the Nile river

8. The Nile River hosts the crocodile.

9. The temple walls are near the Nile river

10. The Nile river is near the temple walls

That is the geographic message of the vignette of Facsimile No.1.

YOU GOT IT RIGHT HERE ON Mormon DISCUSSIONS!

[Guest]

The vignette of Facsimile No.1 gives us the location of the scene and you can rest assured that it isn't "Olishem" up in the northern Levant. No, the location is Egypt. I'll be very plain because I've run out of time. More can be said about this later as the vignette definitely locates the Osiris resurrection scene as taking place INSIDE Egypt.

John Gee, listen up, please:

1. Osiris is over the lion bed.

2. The lion bed is under Osiris.

3. The lion bed is over the Four Sons of Horus

4. Four Sons of Horus are under the lion bed

5. Four Sons of Horus are located by the Nile river

6. The Nile river is located by the Four Sons of Horus

7. The crocodile is in the Nile river

8. The Nile River hosts the crocodile.

9. The temple walls are near the Nile river

10. The Nile river is near the temple walls

That is the geographic message of the vignette of Facsimile No.1.

YOU GOT IT RIGHT HERE ON Mormon DISCUSSIONS!

I'm baaaaaack!!

And we have this from the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

But if we believe in present revelation, as published in the “Times and Seasons” last spring, Abraham, the prophet of the Lord, was laid upon the iron bedstead for slaughter; and the book of Jasher, which has not been disproved as a bad author, says he was cast into the fire of the Chaldees.

Oh my. My, my, my. What do we have here? (Kerry Shirts, are you there?)

An "iron bedstead" in Facsimile No.1., and it's a "revelation", do you hear that John Gee? (Are you taking notes, RFM?!) It's a "REVELATION" that was printed in the Times and Seasons concerning the "iron bedstead" in Facsimile No.1! And that revelation led Smith to believe the iron bed was made of iron.



Did you hear that, John Gee? Made of "iron"!

But the iron age had not yet begun! Not for well over a thousand years!



Busted!



Now, Joseph Smith was also ignorant in Old World geography and he mistakenly though Olishem was not far distant, very close to Egypt.

You don't believe me? Joseph Smith ASSumed that the Plain of Olishem was very close to Egypt. Need proof? Okay, here is your proof straight from the camel's mouth:

Fig. 10. Abraham in Egypt.

And where is figure 10?

Figure 10 is right beside the lion bed which is over the Four Sons of Horus which is near the Nile River in which the crocodile is swimming nearby the temple walls.





John Gee, you're a dodo. All those papers the Church pays you to print have been a waste of time. You've wasted your career.

[_Shulem]

And where is figure 10?

Figure 10 is right beside the lion bed which is over the Four Sons of Horus which is near the Nile River in which the crocodile is swimming nearby the temple walls.

AND, where are lotus flowers freely growing in their natural environment? The Plain of Olishem? :redface:

If you guessed, "Egypt" then you deserve a brownie button!



Yes, my friends, lotus flowers grew on the Nile river close to the temple wall, nearby the crocodile that swims on the banks of the river where Osiris rose from the dead!

Praise be the gods of Egypt!



Folks, this is Egyptology 101.

[_Shulem]

Yes, my friends, lotus flowers grew on the Nile river close to the temple wall, nearby the crocodile that swims on the banks of the river where Osiris rose from the dead!

Praise be the gods of Egypt!



Folks, this is Egyptology 101.

Yes, there is the issue of Fig. 10 in Facsimile No.1 being wrongfully applied to "Abraham in Egypt" through Smith's ignorance. The problem with Smith was that he just didn't know anything about Egypt, and didn't know what he was looking at or how to interpret it. His explanations were the furthest from the truth.

Fig. 10 consisting of the libation stand decorated with flowers has nothing whatsoever to do with biblical Abraham going down into Egypt. Flowers on the stand are there to honor and commemorate the rising of Osiris on the lion bed. It's inconceivable to think that beautiful flowers were used to decorate an execution scene where somebody is being brutally murdered because they refused to worship the gods of another religion.



The only thing Smith got right about Facsimile No.1 Fig 10 was that it was "in Egypt". The whole scene depicted in the vignette was in Egypt.

[_Shulem]

Oh, how clumsy of me. I should have provided the link to the Times and Seasons so you can read for yourself how Joseph Smith's revelations of the Book of Abraham reveal that the Egyptian lion bed was made of "iron" which is an anachronism and a false belief had by the early Latter-day Saints concerning the construction of the lion bed; to say nothing of who was actually on it. The Spirit of the Lord as revealed by Joseph Smith was a spirit of a liar! The lion bed was crafted of fine wood, not cast in iron as Smith taught. Perhaps apologists will adopt the Missing Iron Bed Theory?

Times and Seasons, 1 September 1842

But if we believe in present revelation, as published in the Times and Seasons last spring, Abraham, the prophet of the Lord, was laid upon the iron bedstead for slaughter; and the book of Jasher, which has not been disproved as a bad author, says he was cast into the fire of the Chaldees.

1) Smith, the chief editor of the Times and Seasons claimed responsibility for its contents

2) Smith reveals that Abraham was laid upon an iron bedstead for slaughter

3) Smith was an avid reader of the book of Jasher and no doubt gleaned ideas therein for his own revelations as he was prone to plagiarize