Shout Out to Shulem!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: "Dem Abram bones!"

Post by Moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:21 pm


The ISIS bone connected to the OSIRIS bone,
The OSIRIS bone connected to the MAAT bone,
The MAAT bone connected to the HOR bone,
The HOR bone connected to the ANUBIS bone,
The ANUBIS bone connected to the SNOUT bone,
The SNOUT bone connected to the LEADPLATE bone,
Oh, hear the word of Amen-Re!
You know, it is hard to get that song out of your head once you start singing it. "Oh, hear the word of Amen-Re!"
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Facsimile No. 3 Black Man

Post by Shulem »

US Judge wrote: It's a simple question. Is it black SKIN or black FUR?

Answer the question or I'll hold you in contempt.


Your honor, apparently, BYU's leading Egyptologist is a little daft and needs help understanding the question. Please, allow me to rephrase the question in different terms so that Gee's pee-sized brain can comprehend what you're asking him and that he may be more clear on where the question is ultimately leading.

John, just answer the question with a simple yes or no. Yes or No, will do. Can you do that? Will you do that?

Is any portion of the epidermis of the person of Fig. 6 covered in fur?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Facsimile No. 3 Black Man

Post by Shulem »

Shulem wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:05 am
US Judge wrote: It's a simple question. Is it black SKIN or black FUR?

Answer the question or I'll hold you in contempt.


Your honor, apparently, BYU's leading Egyptologist is a little daft and needs help understanding the question. Please, allow me to rephrase the question in different terms so that Gee's pee-sized brain can comprehend what you're asking him and that he may be more clear on where the question is ultimately leading.

John, just answer the question with a simple yes or no. Yes or No, will do. Can you do that? Will you do that?

Is any portion of the epidermis of the person of Fig. 6 covered in fur?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

Furry wrote:
Hey whiteboy, my lover, they don't call me "Furry" for nothing. How about giving doggy man a little kiss?

Image
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Furry love

Post by Shulem »

It appears that the person to the left is a little jealous that loverboy is getting a little fur action from doggy man.

Nothing like a little kiss from that snout!

Love the fur, baby.


Image
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Confessions of a prophet

Post by Shulem »

Smith wrote:
Now that I've hacked out the snout from the lead plate, nobody will ever know that the furry man is the divine Masonic Dog-star and he will be forced to ever remain a slave in my book. My secret is safe. I'll hide the papyrus in my desk and get rid of the sketch of Facsimile No. 3.

Image
Image

You're wrong, Joseph! I KNOW, and I've revealed it to the whole world right here on Mormon Discussions!

I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, absolutely -- I'm positive that Joseph Smith lied.

I so testify, in the name of Anubis, Amen.

Shulem
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

The Art of Mormon Deception

Post by Shulem »

Image

Please notice how a faithful Mormon artist takes whatever license they want to push their faithful cause, steeped in a wicked brew of deception. It's interesting how Anubis has been turned into a white and delightsome servant rather than the obvious black man that Hedlock copied from the original papyrus. Apparently, the artist prefers a white and delightsome appearance -- one that meets with personal taste and sensibilities. How pathetic and racially revealing on the part of the artist!

Notice also, how the Mormon artist cheats. Anubis's jackal ear is converted into a cone of incense typically worn atop the heads of Egyptians in similar scenes. But plainly, this is a deception and does not reflect an accurate portrayal of what was in the original scene.

But, if you notice, the worst deception of all -- whereby note it well, Mormons love to cheat, lie, and deceive: The new and improved Anubis has been gifted with a human ear as if by magic!

Such lies can hardly go unnoticed.

What the artist did above was done in the same spirit and intent of what Smith did to the snout in changing the real identity of the person in character. It's all part of the Mormon deception and the campaign of BYU Egyptologists to defame Egyptology and slander the ancient Egyptian religion in order to boost their own brand of corrupt Christianity known as Mormonism.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

For your entertainment!

Post by Shulem »

Ladies and gentlemen, brothers and sisters. Please take a seat and enjoy this must see 4 minute video.

HERE COMES ANUBIS!!


Click this link

Image
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

All things in common

Post by Shulem »

in the final analysis

Your honor,

We know that the Egyptian jackal-headed Anubis should have everything in common with Fig. 6 in Facsimile No. 3, because they are one in the same and it will always be so. In fact, truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come. Anubis *IS* Anubis because he always has been and always will. Nothing can ever change that.

These two facts do exist:

1) Anubis is BLACK
2) Anubis is FURRY

Now, if there be two things, one being BLACK and the other being FURRY, and they manifest together as one before the throne of Osiris, then surely that manifestation is none other than the god Anubis! There is nothing the Mormons can do to change or alter that truth.

The Mormons have been found culpable in deceiving millions of innocent people into believing that Smith was translating the ancient Egyptian language. Mormon leaders must be held accountable for their fraudulent actions. Penalties for their unlawful actions must be assessed.


Image
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask a qualified Egyptologist

Post by Shulem »

Shulem wrote:
Your honor,

The Mormon leadership learned about Joseph Smith's exaggerated Book of Abraham translations of Facsimile No. 3, some 30 years after it was canonized in Mormon scripture. The New York Times featured a full size article demonstrating that modern Egyptologists had proven Smith's translations as fraudulent. But the Salt Lake City based church did nothing to correct the record or amend the errors. The Church continued to publish its fraudulent translations and in doing so wooed nonmembers to join their organization based on the claims that Smith correctly translated Egyptian characters contained on gold plates and papyrus into canonized books had by the Church today.

Millions of faithful Mormons have paid donations to the Church over the course of generations believing that Church claims in translating ancient Egyptian into English was true when it fact it is not. Millions have been defrauded and have paid donations on good faith that the leaders of the Church were representing Smith's claims in an honest and forthright manner. But this was never the case. Today, the Church has amassed over 100 billion dollars contained in stocks grown from donations of members who were defrauded. Had many of those donors known about Smith's fraudulent translations and the Church cover-up in using deceptive scholars at BYU to misinform the members at large, it stands to reason that the Church would not have 100 plus billion dollars in stocks -- but far less and the defrauded members could have put their money to better use.
Lem
God
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 am

Re: sketch date estimate Re: ***SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT***

Post by Lem »

Shulem wrote:
Sun Jan 24, 2021 2:54 am
WE INTERRUPT THE SHOW TO BRING YOU THIS SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE DESK OF SHULEM

After further consultation with my crystal ball, I've come to the following conclusion:

Smith did NOT remove the jackal snout from the papyrus of the sacrifice scene in the vignette of Facsimile No. 1, while in OHIO. I will no longer entertain that possibility. The list is hereby revised for further refinement. It was the Masonic connection with Anubis the Dog-star that would have led Smith to mutilate the papyrus for the same reason he mutilated the lead plate of Facsimile No. 3.

OHIO (late 1837 or early 1838)
1. Original papyrus fragments were brought to the table for gluing
2. Glue was applied to a large sheet of of paper backing
3. Papyrus was glued to the paper backing
4. The glued dried
5. POSSIBILITY the sketch doodles were drawn
6. The paper backing and papyrus were cut into pieces being readied for frames
7. POSSIBILITY the sketch doodles were drawn
8. The fragments were set in frames under Joseph Smith's management

NAUVOO (summer of 1839 to March 1842)
1. POSSIBILITY the fragment was removed from the frame
2. POSSIBILITY the sketch doodles were drawn
3. POSSIBILITY that the jackal head was removed from the GLUED fragment
4. POSSIBILITY the sketch doodles were drawn
5. POSSIBILITY that the jackal head was removed from the GLUED fragment
6. POSSIBILITY the sketch doodles were drawn
7. Later it was determined the knife would be placed in the left hand for publication
Hey Shulem! I've been thinking about this, was there a clear date when Rueben Hedlock was hired or became involved in the process? From the beginning? Or not until the printing was planned?
Post Reply