Kerry Muhlestein responds

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Shulem »

Ancient Egyptian Art
Rare Ceramic Anubis mask (the only one in a public collection) dating from 600 BC


Image
Wikipedia wrote:Anubis became the patron god of embalmers; during the rites of mummification, illustrations from the Book of the Dead often show a wolf-mask-wearing priest supporting the upright mummy.

Anubis had male priests who sported wood masks with the god's likeness when performing rituals.
It's important to understand that the scenes of Facsimile No. 1 and Facsimile No. 3 are NOT earthly ritualistic funerary rites performed by ordinary Egyptian priests. These scenes are on a higher level. Much higher! Facsimile No. 1 illustrates ACTUAL depictions of the god Anubis & Osiris. These are NOT priests dressed up in a funerary rite to commemorate the original resurrection of Osiris. It IS the resurrection of Osiris! It carries the same force and weight as any scene that depicts Christ's crucifixion or ascension. The man in Facsimile No. 1 is NOT an Egyptian priest dressed up like Anubis and is certainly not in the act of attempting to slay the god Osiris.

Anubis in Facsimile No. 3 is NOT a slave. Anubis in Facsimile No. 3 as ORIGINALLY portrayed in the Egyptian papyrus (now lost) was in fact the jackal headed god himself -- having a jackal head to include: Jackal eye, jackal ear(s), and jackal snout which was hacked off because Smith didn't like it.

None of the characters in Facsimile No. 3 are Egyptian priests dressed up to impersonate their gods. They are the gods! They are in heaven! They are immortal! The gods and goddesses are welcoming a vindicated man (Horus not Shulem) into the presence of the afterlife. This is something Joseph Smith could not have known and what Joseph Smith expressed about this vignette is the furthest from the truth.

Those who love truth will reject the false revelations of Joseph Smith who was nothing more than a snake oil salesman. Those who defy truth will continue to be conned by people like Muhlestein who is NOT worthy to be called an Egyptologist. Muhlestein is not worthy to even tie Ritner's shoe laces!

:mad:
Last edited by Guest on Wed Aug 26, 2020 7:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Tom
_Emeritus
Posts: 1023
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 5:45 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Tom »

In reading some exchanges elsewhere regarding Dr. Muhlestein’s essay, I’ve learned that a budding Mormon apologist is working on a Bayesian probability analysis of the Book of Abraham evidence. I assume that the Dales will serve as peer reviewers once the manuscript is submitted to Interpreter.
“A scholar said he could not read the Book of Mormon, so we shouldn’t be shocked that scholars say the papyri don’t translate and/or relate to the Book of Abraham. Doesn’t change anything. It’s ancient and historical.” ~ Hanna Seariac
_consiglieri
_Emeritus
Posts: 6186
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:47 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _consiglieri »

Shulem wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:31 pm
Dr Moore wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 1:46 pm
Remarkably specific identification of the accusation. Why is he not able to be as specific about the defense?
FACSIMILE NO 1

1. How do you defend an ignorant 19th century version of the god Anubis appearing in human form when he doesn't have his jackal head?

2. How do you defend an ignorant 19th century version of the god Anubis appearing in human form when he doesn't have a headdress?

3. How do you justify Anubis waving a knife at Osiris who is rising from the dead?

FACSIMILE NO 3

1. How do you defend an ignorant 19th century version of the heavenly god Anubis whose snout has been hacked off?

2. How do you reconcile Anubis having a man's head and a jackal's ear?

3. How do you justify Smith's translation of the label above the figure of Anubis that identifies him as a god?

How do you think Gee and Muhlestein would fair having a formal discussion with a panel of Egyptologists posing these questions? All they can do is fall back on some kind of Catalyst theory which is NOT what Smith and his comrades claimed. The apologists would have to throw Smith under the bus in order to fall back on the Catalyst theory in order to validate Mormon claims to their peers. They will have to confess that Smith could not translate Egyptian hieroglyphic writing or interpret iconographic images as understood by the Egyptians.

Game over.

RFM, are you taking notes?
I recorded a response to Kerry's essay this morning and am working furiously to get it edited and up this afternoon.

I say this now because my thoughts have run remarkably along the lines Shulem is posting here.

It is amazing how our thoughts mirror each other.

Which is to say I am not plagiarizing you!
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
_Holy Ghost
_Emeritus
Posts: 624
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:12 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Holy Ghost »

aussieguy55 wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:08 pm
https://interpreterfoundation.org/raisi ... ent-333034

"Further, a sad aspect of these online communications has been the efforts to just be dismissive of those who hold opposing points of view. Those who say that scholars such as myself or John Gee are pseudo-Egyptologists or only have a patina of scholarship have either completely failed to do their homework, or have willingly misconstrued the truth, presumably to help further their agendas"

KerryM questions the usefulness of online exchanges. He responds to the challenges to the academic work produced by those who accept the Book of Abraham. He attempts explanations as to why Anubis does not have a jackal head and suggests the printer might have added the head.
Mr. Muhlestein, you seem to think that however devoid of facts and thus uninformed you are, your belief ought to be accorded the same respect as positions and opinions well grounded in facts. Your whine brings to my mind the Isaac Asimov quote, "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

Did you play with your childhood friend's imaginary friend as much as perhaps his Tonka trucks? Hmmm. Didn't give the invisible the same treatment as the tangible. Hmmm. But as an adult, you get indignant if we don't give your factless imaginations the same credence was we give actual knowledge.
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Isaac Asimov
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Shulem »

consiglieri wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:14 pm
I recorded a response to Kerry's essay this morning and am working furiously to get it edited and up this afternoon.

I say this now because my thoughts have run remarkably along the lines Shulem is posting here.

It is amazing how our thoughts mirror each other.

Which is to say I am not plagiarizing you!
No worries, I get what's going on and understand the big picture. You're tapped into the mind zone and you're riding the cosmic wave of energy. Ride it! You are empowered and plugged into the source of all knowledge.

This is your time to shine, consiglieri!

:smile:
_consiglieri
_Emeritus
Posts: 6186
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:47 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _consiglieri »

It just went up!
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Kishkumen »

Tom wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 7:15 pm
In reading some exchanges elsewhere regarding Dr. Muhlestein’s essay, I’ve learned that a budding Mormon apologist is working on a Bayesian probability analysis of the Book of Abraham evidence. I assume that the Dales will serve as peer reviewers once the manuscript is submitted to Interpreter.
Seriously? Will the fact that Smith’s translation does not match the Egyptian on the papyri factor into their analysis? Because that drops the prior probability of it being an ancient text to roughly zero in my estimation.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Icarus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1542
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2019 9:01 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Icarus »

-
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Kevin Graham »

This was an email I got from Kara Cooney some years ago:

“I watched the three videos, and I don’t agree with any of it. The ancient Egyptians had no concept of Abraham, so I don’t know where he gets these comparisons… And No, most Egyptologists do not agree, despite what Kerry says. I know Kerry, but I do not have much respect for his work. Now I have even less. The fact that he is digging in Egypt is even more worrisome… This PhD was awarded before I arrived at UCLA, although I know that Kerry finished his text based dissertation after only two years of Egyptian language training, which is rather laughable.”

“Have you read Robert Ritner’s work about this in Journal of Near Eastern Studies? It’s the best out there… Kerry is just spinning out the same Mormon rhetoric. What is different is: Mormons are funding PhDs in Egyptology and Biblical Studies and then funding positions at BYU and elsewhere and passing these people off as experts, when they are only ideologically driven researchers, not experts interested in actual evidence.”
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Kerry Muhlestein responds

Post by _Shulem »

That paper published on Fat Peterson's Interpreting Blog was paid for by sacred tithing funds? The hard earned money of working Latter-day Saints are paying for this crap? The Book of Abraham problem for the Church is going to get worse, much worse. People around the world are going to learn more about what the Mormons are doing to pervert Egyptology.

Hats off to Radio Free Mormon for another great podcast. Kerry Muhlestein is a pathetic coward.
Post Reply