Pearl of Great Price Central Facsimile 1 as a Sacrifice Scene

[_Shulem]

M O R M O N
D I S C U S S I O N S

Is celebrating the destruction of Book of Abraham apologetics.

Victory!

[_Shulem]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The book of Abraham speaks disapprovingly of human sacrifice offered on an altar in Chaldea. Some victims were placed on the altar as sacrifices because they rejected the idols worshipped by their leaders. Recent scholarship has found instances of such punishment dating to Abraham’s time. People who challenged the standing religious order, either in Egypt or in the regions over which it had influence (such as Canaan), could and did suffer execution for their offenses. The conflict over the religion of Pharaoh, as described in Abraham 1:11–12, is an example of punishment now known to have been meted out during the Abrahamic era.

Radio Free Mormon: The Games People Play -- dial to 44:00 minute mark

Inclusion of footnote #36 should NOT have been used by the Church in attempt to defend the Book of Abraham.

Kerry Muhlestein, Violence in the Service of Order: The Religious Framework for Sanctioned Killing in Ancient Egypt (Oxford, U.K.: Archaeopress, 2001), 37–44, 92–101; Kerry Muhlestein, “Royal Executions: Evidence Bearing on the Subject of Sanctioned Killing in the Middle Kingdom,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 51, no. 2 (2008): 181–208; Anthony Leahy, “Death by Fire in Ancient Egypt,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 27, no. 2 (1984): 199–206; Harco Willems, “Crime, Cult and Capital Punishment (Mo’alla Inscription 8),” Journal of Egyptian Archeology 76 (1990): 27–54.

Author Harco Willems has made it clear that his work should not be included in this apologetic article produced by the Church because it does not reflect his opinion in the least. Either the Church remove his name from the footnote or face a lawsuit. I think Harco should sue for say, uh, hmm, 10 million sounds good.

I'll split the finders fee with RFM, okay okay, I'm not greedy, just give me 20% and we're square.

[_consiglieri]

I am glad we were able to bring Dr. Gee's important "Two Inks Theory" to a wider audience.

[Guest]

I am glad we were able to bring Dr. Gee's important "Two Inks Theory" to a wider audience.

To be gleaned from the podcast beginning at the 51:00 mark:
Radio Free Mormon: The Games People Play

Three of the documents from the Kirtland Egyptian Papers contain a partial copy of the translated Book of Abraham in which a word or two in Egyptian characters is written in the left-hand margin at the beginning of each paragraph of English text. According to this theory, the text to the right is the translation of the Egyptian characters to the left. Unfortunately for the theory, the Egyptian characters were added after the entire English text was written (as evidenced by the use of different inks, Egyptian characters that do not always line up with the English text). Thus it was not a matter of writing the characters in the margin at the beginning paragraphs of text without explicitly stating the reason for doing do.

I gave a full analysis of how the characters correspond with the writing when Smith created his (see here: Grammar & Alphabet of the Egyptian Language). The characters were written FIRST and the text was written SECOND just as they were in the other manuscripts Gee refers to in his book. It's an absolute dead ringer that the text was written after the characters! I brought this to the attention of William Schryver ten years ago here on Mormon Discussions, and all he could say after referring to my link was, "What an ... impressive display of erudition! I confess I had no idea you had already "figured out" all of the secrets of the KEP".

This of course stopped him dead in his tracks! At the time, William was a student of the KEP and I was the master. He hated that idea.

Examples of Egyptian characters writen in the margins of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers Book of Abraham manuscripts (KEPA). The examples show that the characters (1) were written in different ink than the English text (examples 2,3,4,6), (2) do not line up with the English text (examples 3,4,6), and (3) run over the margins (examples 1,2,5) and sometimes the English text (example 1). This indicates that the Egyptian characters were added after the English text was written, perhaps to decorate the beginnings of paragraphs, although the reason for their inclusion was never explicitly stated.

"The examples show that the characters were written in different ink than the English text do not line up with the English text and run over the margins and sometimes the English text"

Gee is saying that the ink of the characters run over the margin line and the text. Examine the facts and understand how Gee explained it. He said what he meant and meant what he said.

Fact 1: The characters are in the left side of the margin
Fact 2: The vertical margin line separates the characters from the text
Fact 3: The text is to the right of the margin

Claim 1: There are two inks
Claim 2: Character ink run over the margin line
Claim 3: And sometimes the character ink run over the English text

Analysis:

A. Ink #1 (character ink) run over the margin line
B. Ink #1 (character ink) run over the text ink (Ink #2)

1. Gee implies that character ink run over the margin ink
2. Gee implies that character ink run over the text ink
3. Gee implies that the character ink was written after the text ink because it is "over" the text ink. Gee uses the word "over" as the opposite of the word "under" insomuch as the one ink runs over not under the other ink. Hence, Gee implies that the one ink leaves the boundary set by the margin and literally runs over the ink of the other. He does this to attempt to prove that the ink that is over came second, hence, the characters were written after the text purely for the purpose to decorate the page -- nonsense that Nibley suggested.

[_Shulem]

RECAP of Facsimile No. 1 Scene

Here is a recap of significant points made in this thread that PROVE Facsimile No. 1 was not a Sacrifice Scene:

1. The scene occurs in Preynastic times
2. The scene takes place on the banks of the Nile in Egypt
3. The lion bed was furniture designed to bless the dead
4. The lion bed was made of wood, not iron
5. There was no knife in the original vignette
6. The god is jackal-headed Anubis wearing a headdress
7. The ba is the soul of Osiris in bird form with a human head
8. The man on the bed is the body of Osiris rising from the dead
9. The scene is one of blessing and life

Thanks be to Anubis and glory to Osiris.

Amen.

[_Shulem]

A FACSIMILE FROM THE BOOK OF BREATHING
NO. 1



EXPLANATION

Fig. 1. The Ba of Osirs.
Fig. 2. Osiris rising from the dead.
Fig. 3. Anubis the jackal-headed god assisting Osiris.
Fig. 4. The lion bed for resurrection through the blessing of Anubis, standing before the gods of Qebehsenuef, Duamutef, Hapi, Imsety, and Sobek.
Fig. 5. The god Qebehsenuef.
Fig. 6. The god Duamutef.
Fig. 7. The god Hapi.
Fig. 8. The god Imsety.
Fig. 9. The god Sobek.
Fig. 10. Libation stand with lotus, flowers, and jars.
Fig. 11. Designed to represent brick and stone walls, as built by the Egyptians.
Fig. 12. Nile river flowing from Upper Egypt down into Lower Egypt within the Delta and into the sea.

[_consiglieri]

Thank you so much for this whirlwind tour of your brilliance, Professor Shulem!

And thank you for taking Joe out to the woodshed on my Facebook page!

What is the king's name, indeed!?

[_Shulem]

Thank you so much for this whirlwind tour of your brilliance, Professor Shulem!

And thank you for taking Joe out to the woodshed on my Facebook page!

What is the king's name, indeed!?

You are most welcome and thanks for the wonderful compliment. Yes, I think this thread has run a wonderful course and was happy to do it. Facsimile No. 2 is even more fun and I will have to do that sometime. Oh what a ride! Woohoo.

Poor Joe. I just wont let up on repeating the golden question, "What's the king's name?". They try and detract and take you away in all that apologetic nonsense but I never fall for it. Just stick to the question, hold to your guns, and add more tidbits. Eventually they fall apart, every time. Believe me, I have tricks up my sleeve and I do use them -- to win.

[_Shulem]

that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record.

I've seen many of these beautiful funerary lion beds depicted on various papyri and tomb walls. The funerary bed is made for those who are ALREADY dead and await resurrection through Osiris. It is a bed whereon the mummy may lie in peace with the promise of receiving blessing and joy in the afterlife.

FOR FURTHER READING AND REFERENCE -- (This is something I need to digest. Looks like a real winner!)

Egyptologist Winifred Needler
Former Egyptologist of Museum of Ontario Archaeology
Keeper & Curator and Instructor University of Toronto

link:

An Egyptian funerary bed of the Roman period in the Royal Ontario Museum, University of Toronto, 1963

IMAGES for Funerary bed of Herty -- Royal Onario Museum

This certainly appears to be an extensive and authoritative examination of the meaning of the lion bed such as shown in the funerary rite of Facsimile No. 1. Get the facts from a real Egyptologist rather than Apostate Egyptologists who are paid by BYU to print garbage for the Mormon faithful.

Contents

1 Provenance and General Description
2 History of the Egyptian Lion-bed
3 The Inscriptions: General Comments and the Personal Names
4 Detailed Description of the Pictorial Decoration
5 The Problem of Dating the Bed: General Considerations
6 Iconographic Considerations
7 Stylistic Considerations
8 Two Related Types of Late Roman Burials at Thebes
9 Summary
notes

LIST OF WORKS CITED, Ifi

ALSO:

Another piece of furniture, frequently confused with the embalming table, is the funerary bed. These are often pictured on coffins of Third Intermediate Period or later date, as well as in tomb-paintings which show Anubis bending over the mummy lying on such a couch. Made of wood and elaborate finials featuring the fore and end parts of lions or semi-mythical beasts, these beds were used either for the lying in state of the mummy, or for the final wrapping ritual, which was a clean procedure and could therefore be performed on such elaborate beds.

The lion-god AKER guarded the gateway to the underworld through which the sun came and went each day. Since the sun was born each morning and died each evening on the horizons, so the lion was also connected with death and rebirth and was thus portrayed on funerary couches or biers, as well as embalming tables. The beds and chairs of the living were sometimes decorated with lions' paws or heads, perhaps in order that the occupant too would rise renewed after sleep or rest.

[_Shulem]

JOHN GEE
AN APOSTATE EGYPTOLOGIST LIAR!

An Introduction to the Book of Abraham

The Book of Abraham was produced by Abraham, an ancient, historical person who lived in a particular time and in particular places. The events it narrates took place in a particular historical context.

This is a total lie in which NO NONMORMON Egyptologist will agree -- NOT one! The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Explanations are not historical by any means. It's all rubbish made up out the mind of Smith. This is purely a faith promoting statement made by an Apostate Egyptologist in order to keep members from losing faith in the Book of Abraham.

Abraham’s homeland was incorporated as part of the Egyptian empire under the Twelfth Dynasty pharaohs Sesostris III and his son, Amenemhet III, but it was then lost to the subsequent pharaohs. This provides a historical date for the events of the first chapter of the Book of Abraham.

At that time Egypt practiced human sacrifice, as historical and archaeological evidence both attest. It was a ritual (Abraham 1:7–11, 15) directed against religious offenders (Abraham 1:5–6) that could take place either in Egypt or in areas Egypt influenced (Abraham 1:1, 10, 20)..

Smith's revelation of the lion bed of Facsimile No. 1 being a cruel instrument of death is an utter fabrication and this LIE is perpetuated by the likes of APOSTATE John Gee. The lion bed of Facsimile No. 1 had nothing to do with human sacrifice, Abraham, or Chaldean executions. These are all lies made up by Smith and the Mormons who seek to deceive. John Gee trashes the kings of the 12th Dynasty all for the purpose of defending Smith's lies. How utterly outrageous! You have no shame, John Gee. You have no honor, none, whatsoever. I utterly despise you.

When famine set in, the closest steady supply of grain was the land of Egypt, the northern part of which was now under the management of the Fourteenth Dynasty. These pharaohs were “partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth” (Abraham 1:21) and bore Canaanite names. Abraham seems to classify all pharaohs as Canaanite, though the Twelfth Dynasty pharaohs whose servants tried to kill him were not. Since Abraham never met the Twelfth Dynasty pharaohs, he may have assumed that all pharaohs were like the Fourteenth Dynasty ones he did meet.

Abraham NEVER, EVER, sat on the throne of a 14th Dynasty king as postulated out of the lying lips of Joseph Smith (Facsimile No. 3) and John Gee who jointly sponsor PSEUDO Egyptology paid for by BYU. It's ABSOLUTELY outrageous that Gee takes Abraham and spreads him about throughout the 12th to 14th dynasties and thinks to keep Egyptian chronology and biblical chronology intact? And all this using the so-called Book of Abraham (19th century novel) as the source for historic and genuine information for these occurrences when the dirt, sand, and historical record in Egypt does not support such nonsense. It's outrageous!

John Gee should be fired from BYU. He is lying, repeatedly and deceiving his readers with his garbage.

He deserves whatever comes his way. Bad fortune and ruin. he is a despicable and disgusting man. I'm glad your book got pulled you lying bastard!