Facsimile 1 Knife in Hand

[_Themis]

Why on earth would we want to find a knife?

Here is a photo of the original picture overlaying the "restored" facsimile. As you can see, there is no knife on the original (the image is sourced from the FAIRwiki):

I suggest you don't look for a knife then. However, it is widely held by those who claim belief in the Book of Abraham, that the unholy priest is holding a knife over the struggling Abraham.

My question relates to anyone interested in looking for comparisons, that a knife is not what priests hold in their hands, as depicted by the common Books of the Dead, because the person is already dead.

The only person shown, by the way, with legs apart, in the book of the dead, is the shadow, usually black in portrayal and with legs demonstrating action, because, as we know, a shadow never sits still for anything.

It's well established the Egyptians do not do what Joseph's imagination came up with. Understandable he would get this wrong. That the extant papyri has fac 1 with the missing section where Joseph claims the knife would be is very telling. It confirms he got it wrong. The Egyptians would not be trying to sacrifice Abraham. It's not like we don't already know he made it up. We have some of the source text. His translation comes as close as anyone guessing who doesn't know how to read Egyptian hieroglyphs. He couldn't get any of fac 3 right.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Yes, that and his hypocritical habit of dodging questions while asking everybody else to "Please provide evidence of..."

The mirror obviously disagrees with you.

So, getting back to the Book of Abraham...

[_Shulem]

HOW IS ABRAHAM FASTENED?

Where are the shackles that bind him fast? Where are the cords? Where are the bonds? Where are the implements to bind a captive and hold him down?

The arms and hands are free, not fastened at all. The legs and feet are in the classic Egyptian pose. There is nothing to indicate a body is being bound upon an altar. There are no bonds or any fastening devices of any kind. This vignette is truly a funerary scene of Anubis and Osiris. Joseph Smith didn’t have a clue about the true meaning of this ancient vignette.

ORIGINAL PAPYRUS OF FACSIMILE NO. 1

The hieroglyphic writing on the original papyrus of Facsimile No. 1, was used by Joseph Smith to translate his Book of Abraham. Writing flanks the Lion Couch scene of Facsimile No. 1. The text on a funerary scroll is directly related to the vignette, thus, the text supports the picture, and vice versa. This is how Egyptian religion is portrayed:

"Iconography is of little value without the written text to give meaning, but the available textual material is sufficient to provide an extensive account of Egyptian myth" (Ancient Gods Speak, A Guide to Egyptian Religion; Donald Redford, p.245)

The iconographic scene of Facsimile No.1, is an ancient funerary legend of the gods Anubis and Osiris. The papyrus contains funerary spells from the pagan Egyptian Book of the Dead. Joseph Smith could not have known this and neither could he read Egyptian.



Paul O

[_ZelphtheGreat]

The standing figure has a black head..., Joseph just didn't have a pencil sharpener handy and was afraid he couldn't stay in the lines with a blunt pencil lead.

[_Shulem]

The standing figure has a black head..., Joseph just didn't have a pencil sharpener handy and was afraid he couldn't stay in the lines with a blunt pencil lead.

Actually, Joe-blow Smith had no idea what the head in the lucana consisted of and made up his own head through the revelation of Mormon JeZus, the celestial clown from yonder heaven. This is positive proof that Joe-blow Smith was faking his ability to translate the Egyptian language. There simply is no excuse and reason to defend his inability to comprehend the gods Anubis and Osiris and the message of the writing surrounding their vignette.

Yet still, Mormons continue to place their faith in the imposter prophet and pay homage to the Book of Abraham as if it really was translated from Abraham's actuall papyrus roll.

Paul O

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Where are the shackles that bind him fast? Where are the cords? Where are the bonds? Where are the implements to bind a captive and hold him down?

The arms and hands are free, not fastened at all. The legs and feet are in the classic Egyptian pose. There is nothing to indicate a body is being bound upon an altar. There are no bonds or any fastening devices of any kind. This vignette is truly a funerary scene of Anubis and Osiris. Joseph Smith didn’t have a clue about the true meaning of this ancient vignette.

That's a very interesting observation. I've read the Book of Abraham maybe a dozen times, but I never noticed the figure on the alter was not bound.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

duplicate

[_Shulem]

That's a very interesting observation. I've read the Book of Abraham maybe a dozen times, but I never noticed the figure on the alter was not bound.

Perhaps something else you've not noticed that you should be aware. Notice in the official LDS Facsimile the so-called priest has only one visible arm. That is totally unEgyptian and breaches the conventions of Egyptian art and form. To be true to Egyptian art conventions it would require both arms being visible but here we see the false Egyptologist Joe Smith taking Egyptian art into a realm which cannot be. A missing arm and a knife rather than a cup is sure proof that the false Egyptologist Joe Smith hadn't a clue what he was talking about or what he was reading. That pretty much sums up the validity of Mormonism -- a religion made up by Joe Smith, a liar.

Paul O

[_Themis]

The standing figure has a black head..., Joseph just didn't have a pencil sharpener handy and was afraid he couldn't stay in the lines with a blunt pencil lead.

Not to mention that it shouldn't have been a human head, but a jackals. Everything from fac 1 supports that it is not about Abraham, but funerary documents for a guy who died long after Abraham. That all the parts that Joseph recreated that were wrong is the same area that is missing with it today is important that it shows they were missing back then. This means there was no knife back then either. Another piece of independent evidence also showing this area was missing back then is found on another part of the papyri with another similar missing section. This suggests it was probably ripped out by accident in trying to remove the scroll from it's original casing.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

That's a very interesting observation. I've read the Book of Abraham maybe a dozen times, but I never noticed the figure on the alter was not bound.

Perhaps something else you've not noticed that you should be aware. Notice in the official LDS Facsimile the so-called priest has only one visible arm. That is totally unEgyptian and breaches the conventions of Egyptian art and form. To be true to Egyptian art conventions it would require both arms being visible but here we see the false Egyptologist Joe Smith taking Egyptian art into a realm which cannot be. A missing arm and a knife rather than a cup is sure proof that the false Egyptologist Joe Smith hadn't a clue what he was talking about or what he was reading. That pretty much sums up the validity of Mormonism -- a religion made up by Joe Smith, a liar.

I take it the part where the other arm should have been was missing from the original parchment, and that Joseph Smith used his imagination to fill in what he thought should have been there.

Yes, thanks for pointing that out.