Conflict of Justice CES Letter Fail (Book of Abraham apologetic site)

[_Mormon Think]

This fruitcake apologist advocates the missing papyrus theory. He's using deceptive tactics and methods to advance his ideas and yet totally disregards the historical evidences and claims of the founders of the Book of Abraham.

I'd love to shove the Facsimile down his throat just like I did to poor sorry zerinus who has since fled the board. That coward choked on the Facsimile No. 3 and his testimony days are numbered.

I keep saying it folks, Facsimile No. 3 is the silver bullet in which to build the case against Joseph Smith. Hang everything else on it. The apologists can't defend the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 and look you straight in the eyes with an honest face.

Just recently I have made things worse for Facsimile No. 3 in showing that there probably was a jackal head removed from the woodcut which shows that Joseph Smith was pulling a fast one.

I've been pondering the idea about creating a new presentation against the Book of Abraham using the formula and information that I know will utterly destroy the credibility of the Book of Abraham and force the apologists to retreat. I just don't know if I want to bother with it all. I know Mormon Think would publish such a work. But do I do it? The whole thing gets old after a while but from what I've seen no one has yet put out a winning presentation with a killer punch.

I think it's good you publish this so it can be on the web for a resource for anyone in the future. I agree that FAC 3 is a smoking gun and really hard for pro-church supporters to defend with any sort of credible argument. We're ready when you are.

Bill

[_Themis]

This fruitcake apologist advocates the missing papyrus theory.

Which is why you will never see this person defend it anywhere but friendly sites. The missing papyri has been dead for over a century. Egyptology has viewed the facsimiles before some of the papyri was rediscovered and have shown them to be from the book of breathing's. Facsimile 3 is a smoking gun because it has both imagery and text. But when the papyri was rediscovered they easily could translate the text around Facsimile 1, which is no doubt from the book of breathing's. The idea that the book of breathing's text surrounds facsimile 1 but is not connected to facsimile 1 it is beyond stupid. The idea that the Abraham story resides anywhere on the papyri is also beyond stupid. Some of us LDS members had no trouble recognizing this truth.

[_Shulem]

Calling Kerry, calling Kerry! Hello Kerry.

[_Philo Sofee]

At the link here where this guy is discussing Facsimile 1
http://www.conflictofjustice.com/joseph ... f-abraham/

He claims that Joseph Smith's interpretation of the "firmament of heaven" matches the Egyptian idea "the firmament of the sky." Ritner "The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri" (2013), p. 118 absolutely disagrees. This is the water of the Nile, and there is no Egyptian word "Shaumau" meaning high or heavens. The Egyptian iconography for heavens was four pillars (p. 118). On p. 113 Ritner says this is about the resurrection of Osiris, not Abraham's sacrifice. The lion couch is not a sacrificial bed as the Mormon apologist claims. The apologist ignores Ritner entirely. Ritner on pg. 230 explicitly says the lion couch is not a sacrificial table.

Nowhere in his scholarly edition of the Hor Book of Breathings does LDS amateur Egyptologist Michael Dennis Rhodes ever call the lion couch a sacrificial altar either (discussion on pp. 18-20 - FARMS 2002)

The apologist's claim that Abraham is a substitute for the King in the ancient Egyptian Sed Festival. There is not a single Egyptologist who agrees with this anymore. It was a flawed interpretation which Nibley used, but now must be discarded. There is precious little here that is impressive or persuasive. I can't find it right now, but somewhere John Gee himself even said the Sed Festival is not a valid approach anymore. If anyone can find that I would appreciate it. I thought it was in his updated edition of "The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri" but it's not.
(NEW EDIT) - I found where Gee says Nibley's use of the Sed Festival was influenced by the Cambridge patternists, and it is dated, in other words, not valid or a useful metric with which to measure Joseph Smith. It is in his forward to Nibleys book "An Approach to the Book of Abraham" FARMS 2009: xxxiv-xxxv) The Mormon apologist not only ignores his own LDS Egyptologists, but the valid ones such as Ritner.

One of the main things that took me out of Book of Abraham apologetics was Ritner's book. It is literally ignored, but apologists have no choice anymore than Nibley did in the 1960's-70's with Baer. Ignoring Ritner instead of refuting him is a tacit admission apologists do not have the evidences in favor of Joseph Smith. Ritner made his case with stellar scholarship and utmost integrity of saying where the bear poops. Michael Marquardt is also one of the most honest, open, and well researched scholars on the papyri and its relationship to the Book of Abraham. His chapter in Ritner alone is worth the price of Ritner's magnificent dismantling of LDS Book of Abraham apologetics.

[_aussieguy55]

I think the missing penis and then the restoration of Min's penis is a funny part of the Book of Abraham problem.

[Guest]

Did Joseph Smith Correctly Translate Facsimile 3 In The Book Of Abraham?

The Conflict of Justice apologetic website is absolute nonsense and slams conventional Egyptology. John Gee is not going to endorse or adopt this apologetic garbage. If so, world authorities on Egyptology would combine against him and strip him of his credentials and label him a heretic.

Anyway, the following apologetic is from this sinister and notorious website. It throws anything and everything up in the air hoping something will stick. You can do this sort of thing with anything to make anything do what you want it to say. This is not logic. It is not reasonable. It's not conventional Egyptology at all. The apologetics offered here grossly misrepresents Egyptology and is a slam on the ancient Egyptians. Neither does it represent what Joseph Smith and his companions actually said and claimed. It takes away from Smith and the Egyptians in order to create its own fantasy.


Joseph Smith:
“King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.”

Pharaoh’s Horus Name – Pharaoh was the title for the king’s household, not the king’s name, until later in Egypt’s history. Joseph Smith correctly dissociates “King Pharaoh” with the person’s name. So what is the name given in the characters above the head?

The hieroglyphs to the right of the head associates goddess Isis. But Joseph Smith was talking about characters above the head, not to the right of it. Joseph Smith even located the number “2” right in the middle of the character he was referring to. Does this symbol above the head indicate Pharoah’s name? Yes. This is the Horus sun disk. Now, if Joseph Smith were guessing, wouldn’t he have said the hieroglyphic writing was a name rather than the figure’s crown? How is a crown a name? But he is actually correct.

Each king of Egypt had a special “Horus” name–actually two Horus names: one that “designated the pharaoh as the god Horus on earth” and one that linked “pharaoh to the sun, divinity, eternity, earthly gold, and perhaps to Horus’ victory over Seth.” Now, we already saw how Osiris in Figure 1 wore a his crown as a “sign of his earthly rulership.” But astronomy was not just about earthly judgement. This was about judgement in the afterlife as well. The second Horus name is called the the Golden Horus Name and “typically featured the image of a Horus falcon perched above or beside the hieroglyph for gold.” The hieroglyph for gold is the character nebu, which is a half-disk with rays between two hills.

Compare the nebu character with the sun disk atop Isis’s head in figure 2. Perfect match! Joseph Smith was right. There is no falcon in the name, but that’s alright because the falcon was not needed to identify the gold sign nebu with Pharaoh. “The gold sign, without the Horus falcon, appeared in conjunction with the royal names from the time of Djer onwards.” The falcon represents “the final victory of Horus over Seth” and that was already ritualized in Facsimile 1.

It’s not surprising that the king’s Horus name was snuck into Isis’ crown by the artist of Facsimile 3. Egyptians did this kind of thing all the time. Illustrations and shapes were often arranged or drawn to spell out names.

Isis Represents Pharaoh – As the mother of Horus, Isis was the personification of Pharaoh’s throne and seat of power, as Gail Corrington explains:

“Isis was the incarnation of the pharaoh’s ‘throne’. As the throne symbolically ‘created’ or ‘gave birth to’ the pharaoh, so Isis, the incarnate throne, was the mother of the pharaoh.” (Gail Corrington)

Notice that Joseph Smith placed the number 2 at Isis’ crown, not Isis herself. It is totally appropriate to associate her crown with the Horus name of Pharaoh. We see Isis aiding in Abraham’s assumption of justice and dominion “by the politeness of the king,” in a similar way she gives birth to Pharaoh’s position as king. This suggests Pharaoh allowed Abraham to study astronomy and be ordained through Egyptian religious rites to gain the divine governing powers that were meant for Egyptian rulers, a politeness which Pharaohs were known to do for esteemed foreign visitors.

Comments Welcome

The following links in WIKIPEDIA are excellent sources worth bookmarking to acquire quick information about the Joseph Smith papyrus and learn more about this controversial subject.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Book of Abraham
Joseph Smith Papyri
Criticism of the Book of Abraham
Joseph Smith Hypocephalus
Kirtland Egyptian papers
Book of Joseph (Latter Day Saints)
File:Facsimile 3 plate anubis.jpg

[Guest]

Comments Welcome

Where to even start with all this mess? As always, Facsimile No. 3!

The hieroglyphs to the right of the head associates goddess Isis. But Joseph Smith was talking about characters above the head, not to the right of it. Joseph Smith even located the number “2” right in the middle of the character he was referring to. Does this symbol above the head indicate Pharoah’s name? Yes.

The apologist is attempting to have us take our eye off the ball and our eyes off what Joseph Smith was actually identifying -- the hieroglyphic characters, actual words, NOT crowns! The apologist knows that there is no king's name in the hieroglyphs "above his head" so he makes the attempt to change Joseph Smith's original intent. He points to the crown and says that's the characters above the head that Smith was referring to. Then he goes on to symbolically justify Smith's explanation by stating that crowns are worn by kings. So, there you have it, a king's name is in the symbolism of wearing crowns.

This approach is not consistent at all. Smith earlier mentioned a crown above the head of Fig.1 (with a crown upon his head) and stated specifically what the crown represented. He didn't say "characters above his head" but a crown. There is a clear difference between characters and crowns but here we see the apologist ignores it trying to find anyway to produce a king. You'll notice though, the apologist doesn't offer a name even though the need for a name is consistent with Smith's other claims: Shulem and Olimlah. Those are names. But we never get a king's name from the apologist because there isn't one and he knows it.

The apologist feels justified in labeling the crown as the characters because the No. 2 is directly above the crown so it can't possibly refer to the characters to the right of the crown, above the head. But it's obvious that the place where the No. 2 was placed is convenient and aesthetically a good fit.

Joseph Smith was famous for pointing at hieroglyphs on papyrus and stating that they were the autograph of Abraham. He's on record for doing that. The apologist certainly doesn't want to bring that up or tie it together with what Smith was doing with Facsimile No. 3.

I think the single most important point to make in proving the apologist is wrong about identifying the crown as Smith's characters is that Smith said essentially the same thing about Fig. 5 but this time referring to the hand and not the head:

"represented by the characters above his hand"

Well folks, there is no crown above the characters above the hand. No crown at all! Just characters, Egyptian texts. And guess what? The name Shulem is not found therein. I think it's important to ram this down the throat of the apologist who is creating this ridiculous presentation in defense of Joseph Smith and his false translations.

(This post has been placed in the comments section of the Conflict of Justice website)

[_Shulem]

Does this symbol above the head indicate Pharoah’s name? Yes.

NO, it does not indicate Pharaoh's name, period. It is a crown, sacred regalia worn by Isis a GODDESS (not a king) -- nothing more. The crown does not represent or is indicative of the name of an Egyptian king. This apologetic assertion is pure smoke and mirrors and is totally flim-flam.

The apologist made a big deal about the placement of the No. "2" being directly above the crown as if that is what Smith was looking at considering the crown itself was the characters and not the hieroglyphic text to the right directly above the crown. The apologists is dead wrong and is trying to get others to take the eye off the ball.

Why is the No. "2" placed directly above the crown and not some other part of the printing block?



Space is limited on the printing block and as I said previously it's obvious that the spot where the No. 2 was placed is convenient and is an aesthetically good fit. But more importantly, according to the Explanation the No. 2 represents TWO things, not just one:

1. King Pharaoh
2. name is given in the characters above his head

The No. "2" is placed in the best place to show the PERSON at hand and the hieroglyphic script above. The person just so happens to be wearing a crown although Smith doesn't bother with those details as he did with the character in Fig. No. 1.

Bottom line: The No. "2" represents the PERSON below who is wearing a crown and the hieroglyphic text above the head.

[_Shulem]

http://www.conflictofjustice.com/joseph-smith-translate-facsimile-3-book-of-abraham/
scroll to the bottom into the comments section

I've included some of my comments on the apologetic website that I cut and pasted from this thread. They have apparently been approved and are permanent.

Kerry, where the hell are you? Jesus.

[_Philo Sofee]

http://www.conflictofjustice.com/joseph-smith-translate-facsimile-3-book-of-abraham/
scroll to the bottom into the comments section

I've included some of my comments on the apologetic website that I cut and pasted from this thread. They have apparently been approved and are permanent.

Kerry, where the hell are you? Jesus.

I am blocked as a suspected bot it always says.... gee, my name must be blacklisted, I wonder why.... I have tried both my own response, and then tried replying to one of your posts. They won't let me post there. Teancum knows me from the old FAIR message boards when we first started them. I am quite sure he wants no tangle with me. Little does he know you are more devastating than I would ever be, so congrats on getting through!