Abrahams Facsimile #2

[_Gazelam]

I have been reading Hugh Nibleys work on Abraham and Egypt, and thought I'd share something realy interesting from one of the ewarly chapters.

There has been alot of talk about Joseph Smith being wrong about the facsimiles being not what he thought, that they are just typical burial writings found in many coffins. What is proposed tough is that the Egyptians got the original drawings and teachings from Abraham in the first place.

Here is facimile #2:


There is a mountain of things that could be said about what is contained and taught in that picture. What is to be understood is that this is an effort to display the prophetic vision similar to that discused by Lehi in Nephi chp 1 and by Moses in Moses chp. 1. The doctrines taught in Abraham concernign the pre-existence no doubt came from this vision.

In the various Abraham accounts, both ours and others known (And the things taught in these other book of Abrahams support Joseph Smiths account), Abraham is shown all these things by an Angel.

At the outset of their journey, the angel promises to show Abraham what is " in the fulness of the whole world and its circle - thou shalt gaze in (them) all." Accordingly, he saw the pattern of the heavens, "the firmaments,... the creation foreshadowed in this expance,...the age prepared according to it. And I saw beneath the sixth heaven,...the earth and its fruits, and what moved upon it... and the power of its men... And I saw there a great multitude - mean and women and children, [half of them on the right side of the picture] and half of them on the left side of the picture." "And I said... 'Who are the people in this picture on this side and that?' And he said to me: 'These which are on the left side are...some for judgement and restoration, and others for vengeance and destrruction... But these which are on the right side of the picture,... these are they whom I have ordained to be born of thee and to be called My People'" "And I looked and saw; lo! the picture swayed and [from it] emerged, on its left side, a heathen people, and they pillaged those who were on the right side." (Apocalypse of Abraham)

Note that Abraham was shown all these things in a picture, a graphic representaion of "the whole world in its circle," in which the whole human race, "God's people and the others," confront each other beneath or withen the circle of the starry heavens, on opposite halves of the picture. To the classical scholar, this evokes one of the most ancient and venerable images of antiquity, the famous Shield of Achilles, as described by Homer in book 18 of the Illiad

it was a great round (Grosskreutz.antyx) shield, with a conspicuous rim around the outside, representing the celestial ocean. it was covered with designs of deep signifigance (Grosskreutz. iduiesi prapidessin), designating earth, sea, and sky, including sun, moon, and constelations, in their relative positions and motions. Human society was also indicated, divided into two parts, one, a community at peace, the other at war. The former are engaged in religious rites and festivals, marriages, dancing, and music and games, with housewives relaxed and happy watching from their doors; there is a solemn but lively law court in session in the town square, with freedom of speech and great prize for the wisest. A long idylic poem describes the happy agrarian life, enjoying the fruits of the earth in its seasons in a peaceful and prosperous kingdom. The other city is at war, besieged on two sides by armies that are already quarreling over the expected loot, even while the besieged are laying deadly ambush for them. What a fine sight as they go forth in their splendid armor! But presently the fine sight becomes a nightmare, an orgy of slaughter on both sides, as Eris (Strife, contention) and Confusion enter the fray while Fate in a blood-soaked robe runs about spreading havoc and butchery.

The pictures are equally lurid and inspiring in Homer's and in Abraham's accounts. While Abraham is repeatedly invited to inspect and ask about "the world and its circle," Homer refers us to an equally tangible design placed on a round shield. Those whp protest that it is extravagent if not impious to look for ties between the Father of the Faithful and the pagan Homer may be referred to the earliest and most revered of ancient Christian apologists, Justin Martyr himself, who sees in the Shield of Achilles a most obvious borrowing from the book of Genesis, explaining the coincidence by suggesting that Homer became aquainted with Moses' cosmic teachings while he was in Egypt. For him the shield "proves that the poet [Homer] incorporated into his own work many things from the sacred history of the Prophets; first of all the account of the Creation in the Beginning as given by Moses, 'In the beginning God created the heaven,' etc. Having learned these things in [i]Egypt, and impressed [pleased] by what he [Moses] had writen about the origin of the cosmos, he depicted it in the Shield of Achilles, with Hephaestus [the Smith] in the role of the Creator of the world."

[_Jersey Girl]

Alright, Gaz,

You're making me obsessed with the Book of Abraham! Tell me, what time period was Abraham supposed to be in Egypt?

Jersey Girl

[_Fortigurn]

Gaz, can you explain the connection between the shield of Achilles and the Book of Abraham? So far all I have is that they're both circles with historical scenes on them. Is that it?

In addition, are there any non-LDS professionals who agree with Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Abraham?

[_Inconceivable]

by Charles Larson:

http://www.irr.org/MIT/Books/BHOH/bhoh1.html

This was probably the best documented and readily understandable book on the subject I've read. This is the entire book on line.

Joseph Smith had no idea that the newly discovered Rosetta Stone would unlock the true mysteries of the ancient Egyptian language. The papyri is what it is. That is why I think it is not on display.

15 Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the LORD, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us?
16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

(Old Testament | Isaiah 29:15 - 16)

With the advent of the internet (among other technological marvels), it's not always just God that can see in the dark.


Best of luck pulling the harpoon outa this one, Gaz.

[_Z]

Dang it Gaz I've been getting all geared up for a post on this subject and it was going to be much better supported than this. But I'm not ready yet. Anyway, here's a snippet or two.

First off Inconceivable, I'm sadly going to have to part ways with you on this one because that book you referenced is actually an extroardinarily poor attempt at disproving the Book of Abraham. And I've read alot of them. I'm not sure there's an argument in there that's based on research more recent than 1970. Alot has happened since then. And while I'm not usually a fan of ad-hominum arguments, it is important to note that Charles M. Larsen (the author of that book) was in fact a part-time high school social studies teacher when he wrote the book, and not a scholar of any kind. Also, contrary to your assumptions, the Book of Breathings is not only on display, it's pages were copied and bound into a book that is published by BYU and distributed by FARMS. I have a copy.

And in response to Fortigurn, despite what anti-mormon literature tells us (always in vague terms and without references of course) Joseph smith's interpretation of the second fascimile was actually remarkeably good. Especially for someone who demonstrated through other means that he had very little understanding of the Egyptian language. I've read professional translations for all of them but here's a few examples I just grabbed quickly off the internet (a FARMS article unfortunately):

Figure 1. Joseph Smith says that this is "Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God." To the ancient Egyptians, this was symbolic of God, endowed with the primeval creative force, seated at the center of the universe. The name Kolob is right at home in this context. The word most likely derives from the common Semitic root *QLB, which has the basic meaning of "heart, center, middle." In fact the Arabic form of this word, qalb, forms part of the Arabic names of several of the brightest stars in the sky including Antares, Regulus, and Canopus.

Also in his explanation of figure 1, Joseph Smith states that the Earth is called Jah-oh-eh by the Egyptians. The Egyptian word for the Earth is 3h.t, which is approximately pronounced "yoh-heh".

Figure 3. Joseph said this represented God, sitting on his throne clothed with power and authority; with a crown of eternal light on his head. The scepter which the figure holds in its hand represented to the Egyptians the power and authority of a god or king. The circular object on the figure's head is the Sun, which certainly qualifies as a crown of eternal light. The two large eyes located on either side of the seated figure are known as wedjat-eyes by the Egyptians and, among other things, represented the divine wisdom or intelligence by which God oversees and cares for all of his creations. It is not unreasonable to see in this "the grand key words of the priesthood" as Joseph Smith describes it. ("The glory of God is intelligence," D&C 93:36.)

Figure 4. Joseph Smith explains that this figure represents the expanse of the heavens, the revolutions of Kolob and Obilish, and that it also signified the number 1,000. This is the hawk-god, Horus-Sokar. Horus was a personification of the sky, and Sokar was associated with the revolution of the Sun and other celestial bodies. Finally, the ship here shown is described in Egyptian texts as "ship of a thousand." Joseph Smith hits it right on the mark.

Figure 6. Joseph Smith describes these four standing figures as representing "this earth in its four quarters." These are the four Sons of Horus. They were the gods of the four quarters of the earth, and were also regarded as presiding over the four cardinal points.

All in all 25 of the 30 captions Joseph included with the fascimiles are approximately of the accuracy of the descriptions above. The other five take some mental gymnastics to rationalize but overall that's a pretty good average.

But that's not the most compelling information about the book of Abraham. One major claim made against the book of Abraham is that the 3 fascimiles are very common egyptian symbols and are thus unrelated to abraham. But recently, several documents have been discovered (by independant non-lds researchers) that have linked Abraham with Egypt in several ways. One of these is a graphic very similar to fascimile one that specifically mentions Abraham as being depicted, another is a story of Abraham in Egypt that corresponds fairly clearly with fascimile number two. And there are several others as well. Interestingly enough, these documents come from roughly the same time period as the Book of Breathings and the rest of the Joseph Smith Papyri.

Of course there still remains the problem of the words of the book of breathings. They obviously don't correlate with the book of abraham. Luckily there is no logical reason to beleive they are. According to several witnesses and Joseph Smith's own writings, the egyptian papyri from which he was translating was extremely long. There was enough of it to cover the entire floor of a large room. What we have now is less than a tenth of that. Furthermore, Joseph and those that assisted him clearly state that the text from which they were translating was written in alternating red and black ink (as is a common practice in egyptian sacred texts) but none of the pages of the book of breathings were written in such a way.

I should note that I do not consider myself an apologist and am at this point in my life still quite unsettled with elements of church history and such. I refuse to partricipate in mental gymnastics because I feel they're detrimental to honest intellectual inquiry. its just that in this case it seems to me that mental gymnastics aren't necessary to justify the Book of Abraham. It's all laid out pretty clearly.

Undoubtedly some of you will have responses to these statements and will bring up some of the more sophisticated arguments against the authenticity of the Book of Abraham, but there are pretty clear answers to those questions as well. I may not have time to respond but its not to hard to find on your own.

Hope this helps.

[_Fortigurn]

And in response to Fortigurn, despite what anti-mormon literature tells us (always in vague terms and without references of course) Joseph smith's interpretation of the second fascimile was actually remarkeably good.

Feel free to line up a long list of all the non-LDS Egyptologists who think that his interpretation of any of the facsimiles was 'remarkably good'. Just the top 10 names please, I don't need the full 75, or however many you can find.

Especially for someone who demonstrated through other means that he had very little understanding of the Egyptian language.

Well here you shoot yourself in the foot. You see, he wasn't supposed to be interpreting it using his understanding of the Egyptian language. He was supposed to be interpreting it under inspiration. Or perhaps receiving a revelation about the papyri, as more recent apologists have started to suggest. Someone who is inspired, or receiving a revelation, should be expected to be pretty good.

Figure 1. Joseph Smith says that this is "Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God." To the ancient Egyptians, this was symbolic of God, endowed with the primeval creative force, seated at the center of the universe. The name Kolob is right at home in this context. The word most likely derives from the common Semitic root *QLB, which has the basic meaning of "heart, center, middle." In fact the Arabic form of this word, qalb, forms part of the Arabic names of several of the brightest stars in the sky including Antares, Regulus, and Canopus.

Why compare 'Kolob' with a Semitic root and then a later Arabic form? He was supposed to be translating Egyptian.

Also in his explanation of figure 1, Joseph Smith states that the Earth is called Jah-oh-eh by the Egyptians. The Egyptian word for the Earth is 3h.t, which is approximately pronounced "yoh-heh".

Whoa, now we switch back to Egyptian. Why not compare this with a Semitic root, a later Arabic form? Could it be that someone is picking cherries?

Anyway, it's clear that he had this totally wrong. The Egyptians did not call the earth 'Jah-oh-eh', which simply sounds like Smith is hacking bits out of the word 'Jehovah', while he grapples for something more meaningful to say.

Figure 3. Joseph said this represented God, sitting on his throne clothed with power and authority; with a crown of eternal light on his head. The scepter which the figure holds in its hand represented to the Egyptians the power and authority of a god or king. The circular object on the figure's head is the Sun, which certainly qualifies as a crown of eternal light. The two large eyes located on either side of the seated figure are known as wedjat-eyes by the Egyptians and, among other things, represented the divine wisdom or intelligence by which God oversees and cares for all of his creations. It is not unreasonable to see in this "the grand key words of the priesthood" as Joseph Smith describes it. ("The glory of God is intelligence," D&C 93:36.)

Erm, that was interesting, but did not actually provide any evidence that Smith's translation of this figure was accurate. What's the assessment of non-LDS professional Egyptologists?

Figure 4. Joseph Smith explains that this figure represents the expanse of the heavens, the revolutions of Kolob and Obilish, and that it also signified the number 1,000. This is the hawk-god, Horus-Sokar. Horus was a personification of the sky, and Sokar was associated with the revolution of the Sun and other celestial bodies. Finally, the ship here shown is described in Egyptian texts as "ship of a thousand." Joseph Smith hits it right on the mark.

Ok, so Smith says this figure represents the expanse of the heavens, but in fact it's an image of the hawk-god Horus-Sokar. There's a miss. Smith said it represented 'the revolutions of Kolob and Obilish', but in fact it just talks about the revolution of 'the Sun and other celestial bodies' (no mention of 'Kolob' or 'Obilish'). Smith said the figure signified the number 1,000, but in fact the figure does not represent the figure 1,000. The best which can be found is a 'ship of a thousand'. Another wild stab gone hopelessly astray.

Figure 6. Joseph Smith describes these four standing figures as representing "this earth in its four quarters." These are the four Sons of Horus. They were the gods of the four quarters of the earth, and were also regarded as presiding over the four cardinal points.

Ok, so this figure does not in fact represent 'this earth in its four quarters', as Smith claimed. Instead we have the four sons of Horus, who are the gods of the four quarters of the earth.

All in all 25 of the 30 captions Joseph included with the fascimiles are approximately of the accuracy of the descriptions above. The other five take some mental gymnastics to rationalize but overall that's a pretty good average.

It's a pretty good average for anyone guessing madly. It's a terrible average for an inspired prophet.

[_Inconceivable]

The explanation is just not as cut and dry as the faithful history describes.

Yes, the Larson book had fluff but the specific points he made cut to the chase - he made reasonable doubt.

I can sum up most of my feeling with this:

God cannot lie, but he will ask Abraham to lie - even if it betrays the trust of "non-members" (like those Egyptians) that really had little hope of exaltation. I can draw the assumption that integrity among men is situational ethic.

Joseph Smith took it one more notch by claiming that a God that could not lie would force him to lie and betray the trust of the non-members and members alike - including laws of the land. The ultimate betrayal of trust (in my opinion) being between he and his legally and lawfully wedded wife.

oh well.

[_Z]

To fortigurn: I don't have time to address all your points right now as I'm heading off to work. But let me just say that I did not "shoot myself in the foot" as you say. I didn't mean to insinuate that he was tryanslating via real knowledge. He wasn't at all. What I'm saying is that Joseph Smith demonstrated through other means (like his wildly erratic egyptian alphabet) that he knew very little egyptian if any at all. Its with this assumption that the fascimile captions should be read. If he knows no egyptian, then those points are pretty damn close. And in translation (especially a glyph language like egyptian) pretty damn close is close enough, since so much relies on the context.

I think you need to read some of those explinations more carefully, some of your criticisms showed that you missed the significance of some of the elements. It also might be helpful for you to understand that in egyptian the "God of something" is often used in place of that thing in heiroglyphics. And when I say often I mean more often than not. So figure six for example is actually dead on. And when talking about the 25 out of 30 percentage, the other five were not contradictory, just uncommon interpretations.

And really, if Joseph Smith actually knew no egyptian at all, which he really didn't (in fact no one did at that time) then 25 our of 30 really is remarkeable. If he knew no egyptian than any pattern of success on his part beyond random guessing can only be attributed to inspiration. So at very least you'd have to say he's quite an inspired guy.

Anyway, I'm going to be late for work.

[_Who Knows]

All in all 25 of the 30 captions Joseph included with the fascimiles are approximately of the accuracy of the descriptions above. The other five take some mental gymnastics to rationalize but overall that's a pretty good average.

You mean you've found rationalizations for 25 of the 30. This says nothing about the accuracy. Lets see what the expert egyptologists have to say about the accuracy of the 25.

Of course there still remains the problem of the words of the book of breathings. They obviously don't correlate with the book of abraham. Luckily there is no logical reason to beleive they are. According to several witnesses and Joseph Smith's own writings, the egyptian papyri from which he was translating was extremely long. There was enough of it to cover the entire floor of a large room. What we have now is less than a tenth of that. Furthermore, Joseph and those that assisted him clearly state that the text from which they were translating was written in alternating red and black ink (as is a common practice in egyptian sacred texts) but none of the pages of the book of breathings were written in such a way.

How big was the floor? How big was the room? Joseph Smith had 6 scrolls, but claimed only 2 of them were 'scripture' - the book of joseph (book of the dead) and the book of abraham (book of breathings). So, now, what exactly covered the floor? Which scroll? all the scrolls? or just the 2 'scripture' scrolls? Also, as I recall, the quote about the scrolls covering the floor was made by a 10 year old YEARS after the fact.

And as far as the 'alternating red and black ink' goes, there was/is red and black ink on the book of joseph (book of the dead) scroll. So that's not missing.

You're just doing what every other apologist does:

Joseph Smith didn't really 'translate', but in case he did, we may be missing the 'actual' papyri he made his translations from.

However, there's really no evidence that he made his 'translations' from anything OTHER THAN the BOB papyri. Other than wishful thinking i guess...

Maybe Dart or CK can chime in, as they're much more knowledgeable on this than me.

[_Gazelam]

Gaz, can you explain the connection between the shield of Achilles and the Book of Abraham? So far all I have is that they're both circles with historical scenes on them. Is that it?

In addition, are there any non-LDS professionals who agree with Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Abraham?

Tucked away at the end there is a quote from Justin Martyr that is the crux of sorts to the arguement. I should have bolded the statement when I made the post. I will post the source of the quote later when my wife gets up from her nap and I can retrieve the book:

Those whp protest that it is extravagent if not impious to look for ties between the Father of the Faithful and the pagan Homer may be referred to the earliest and most revered of ancient Christian apologists, Justin Martyr himself, who sees in the Shield of Achilles a most obvious borrowing from the book of Genesis, explaining the coincidence by suggesting that Homer became aquainted with Moses' cosmic teachings while he was in Egypt. For him the shield "proves that the poet [Homer] incorporated into his own work many things from the sacred history of the Prophets; first of all the account of the Creation in the Beginning as given by Moses, 'In the beginning God created the heaven,' etc. Having learned these things in Egypt, and impressed [pleased] by what he [Moses] had writen about the origin of the cosmos, he depicted it in the Shield of Achilles, with Hephaestus [the Smith] in the role of the Creator of the world."

Justin source: Justin Martyr, [i]Cohortatio ad Graecos (A Hortatory Address to the Greks) 28, in PG 6:293.

PG means: J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologiae Cursus Comletus... Series Graeca, 161 vols. (Paris: Garnier, 1857-66)