Pearl of Great Price Central Facsimile 1 as a Sacrifice Scene

[Guest]

27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry;

:exclaim:

Smith makes a mistake of colossal proportion, so large and so vast, that no Egyptologist or historian could possibly endorse it or even consider the implications that there is a shred of truth to it. Not even John Gee can make it work.

My apprentice, RFM, are you there? Pull up a chair and listen up. This is major and I'm going to arm you with force lightning! Wipe them out, all of them!

Note that Smith says "Pharaoh being of that lineage" is what barred him from receiving the same priesthood in which Abraham sought (see verse 4). That lineage supposedly goes back to Ham -- one of Noah's sons who rode the ark some 350 years prior. Abraham explains that Pharaoh had no right to the priesthood and then in his next breath reveals something so large and so important that the jaws of every Egyptologist should drop:

"Pharaohs would fain claim it"

I'm afraid my apprentice, RFM, fails to see what I'm talking about so I'll help you see more clearly:

"Pharaohs would fain claim it"

Abraham is not just talking about the idolatrous Pharaoh of his own day fain claiming the priesthood but ALL the Pharaohs (PLURAL) since the days of Ham!! And with that said, how may Pharaohs ruled Egypt over the course of 350 years? This implies a sure knowledge that the kings of Egypt would have known of HAM and details of this information would have been contained in Egyptian chronicles and in the records not just from the days of Ham but all the way to Abraham and THEREAFTER!!!

Sadly, for the Book of Abraham, there is no historical evidence of any kind to suggest that Pharaohs from the days of Ham all the way to Abraham and thereafter, fain claimed any kind of priesthood from the likeness of Noah who is nothing more than a myth.

Egyptology as explained in the Book of Abraham is a total joke and should be dismissed out of hand by any reasonable thinker.

[_Shulem]

You will be destroyed!

[_Shulem]

Now, this priest had offered upon this altar three virgins at one time, who were the daughters of Onitah, one of the royal descent directly from the loins of Ham. These virgins were offered up because of their virtue; they would not bow down to worship gods of wood or of stone, therefore they were killed upon this altar, and it was done after the manner of the Egyptians.

This story tells of three daughters who were princesses of king Onitah of the "royal" family, a line that can trace its "royal descent" from kings who presumably reigned in succession since the days of Ham who sought to establish an orderly system of patriarchal government (see verses 25,26).

QUESTIONS:

1. Why would three daughters of the royal house refuse to accept the state religion and honor the system of beliefs they were accustomed to?

2. What kind of father commits his daughters to be brutally sacrificed because they don't share certain religious views and prefer to not participate in those customs?

3. How many men do you know are capable of murdering their own children?

For me, Smith's story as told in the Book of Abraham doesn't ring true or make any sense -- it does not resonate with me. It feels wrong on so many levels. I know it's not true.

[Guest]

Prior to translating the Book of Abraham, Smith was busy with his New Translation of the Bible and combing though the Bible and making changes. It's likely he was familiar with Adam Clarke's rumored statement of how Egyptians were known to sacrifice children:

As it is well known that the Nile was a chief object of Egyptian idolatry, (See Clarke's note on Exodus 7:15;), and that annually they sacrificed a girl, or as others say, both a boy and a girl, to this river, in gratitude for the benefits received from it, (Universal Hist., vol. i., p. 178, fol. edit).

It's plausible that Clarke's statement may have influenced Smith in writing his Book of Abraham novel. Seriously, I think this may be a hit on Clark's reference of human sacrifice being transferred into the Book of Abraham:

Even the thank-offering of a child did the priest of Pharaoh offer upon the altar which stood by the hill called Potiphar’s Hill, at the head of the plain of Olishem.

Egyptologist Robert Ritner is adamant that the so-called "altar" is not an altar but a bed. Robert Ritner is correct! Joseph Smith was wrong.

[_Shulem]

For anyone paying attention check out this scene with Anubis:
https://ancientneareastdotorg.files.wor ... -mummy.jpg

This:



Notice the upper and lower motif consisting of a row of stars, the lower row is easily discernible:

*********************************

This signifies that it's a heavenly scene -- the afterlife -- Anubis bringing the mummy to life to live in heaven forever among the stars. This is not an earthly scene among mortals but is immortality expressed among the stars with the gods. Praise be to Amon-Ra!

HalleluRA! For ever and ever, halleluRA, halleluRA!

And Amon-Ra shall reign for ever and ever!

Recall that Facsimile No. 3 also has a row of stars in the upper motif. That too, is a heavenly scene. It represents what was happening in heaven as Hor was being ushered into the presence of Osiris. Smith's interpretation set the scene on earth among mortals and his cast of characters amount to nothing more than a joke coming from the mouth of a snake oil salesman -- a liar.

Now take into consideration the Facsimile No. 1. The rising of Osiris took place on earth where his wife received him in order to conceive Horus. There is no motif of stars because it's not a heavenly scene. The motif is that of the Nile and the niched bricking or carved stones signifies the temple walls adjacent to the Nile where the river crocodiles are ever present.

All glory to Osiris my lord!

Amen.

[Guest]

From the mouth of a liar:

The Book of Abraham is not about Egyptology and it's not based on Egyptology really in any way . . . . we don't know . . . .

Interview with Kerry Muhlestein: Book of Abraham (11:15 mark)

It makes me wonder if Muhlestein has even read the Book of Abraham in conjunction with the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language. President Joseph Smith called appointed scribes by revelation to assist him in translating the papyrus and to produce the Grammar and Alphabet into the Book of Abraham. Historical statements made by Smith, members of the Twelve, scribes, and other eyewitnesses, contradict Muhlestein at every turn. Muhlestein hasn't a leg to stand on and speaks with the forked tongue of a lying serpent! Muhlestein's temple recommend should be revoked immediately. He is not worthy to enter the temple! His bishop should be contacted STAT.

Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language 1835

The Book of Abraham *IS* about Egyptology and *IS* based on (Smith's) Egyptology:

translating this chara[c]ter

Phah eh. The first man

Phaah. The largest riegn

Ho oop hah Queen Kah tou mun, a distinction of Royal <​female​> lineage or descent, from

her whom Egypt was discovered while it was under water, who was the daughter of Ham.— a lineage with whom a record of the fathers was intrusted by the tradition of Ham and accordding to the tradition of their elders; by who<​m​> also the tradition of the art of embalming in <​was​> kept.

Kah ton num: a lineage with whom a record of the fathers was intrusted by tradition of Ham, and according to the tradition of their elders, by whom also the tradition of the art of of embalming was kept.

Ho-e-oop A prince of the royal blood a true desendant from Ham, the son of Noah, and inheritor of the Kingly blessings from under the hand of Noah, but not according to the priestly blessing, because of the trangrissions of Ham, which blessing fell upon Shem from under the hand of Noah

Ha e oop hah— honor by birth, kingly power by the line of Pharoah

in lineage by royal descent, in a line by onitas one of the royal families of the Kings of Egypt.

Iota toues Zip Zis: The land of Egypt which was first discovered by a woman <​White Housele underwater​>, and afterwards settled by her Sons she being a daughter of Ham— any land over flown with water

Zi oophah— a distinction by Pharoah a princess of Egypt.

Ho e oop— A prince of the line of the Pharoahs

Phah ho e oop. Royal blood or pharoah

Kah tou mun, a distinction of royal female lineage

Zi oop hah a distinction by right of heirship by Pharaoh

Ho e oop A virtuous prince

Phah-ho-e-oop The lineage of the royal family

Kah-tow-mun The name of a Royal family in the female line

Iota toues-Zipzi: The land of Egypt

Kahtu=aim: Another Kingdom governed by different laws, composed of subjects who receive their place at a future period, and governed by those who are under the directions of another

a sign among the Egyptians that is used for influence or power

[_Shulem]

As mentioned earlier, the title PHARAOH used in the context of Smith's Book of Abraham is an anachronism (See here and here). This is proven conclusively by nonMormon Egyptologists (such as Ritner) although a pair of APOSTATE Egyptologists (Gee & Muhlestein) have been known to deny it and defend Smith's ignorant use of the term found in the Book of Abraham wherein this dynastic era must belong to the Middle Kingdom.

Smith uses the word "Pharaoh" a total of 13 times in chapter 1 of the Book of Abraham:

1. Pharaoh, king of Egypt;
2. Elkenah was also the priest of Pharaoh
3. Pharaoh, the king of Egypt
4. god of Pharaoh
5. priest of Pharaoh offer upon the altar
6. god like unto that of Pharaoh, king of Egypt
7. and the god of Pharaoh, king of Egypt
8. court of Pharaoh
9. Pharaoh signifies king by royal blood.
10. Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus
11. Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom
12. Pharaoh being of that lineage
13. notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it

Smith IGNORANTLY corrupts the word "Pharaoh" in his Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language to form bogus words and definitions:

1. Phah eh. The first man, or Adam coming from Adam. Kigs or right over Patriarchal right by appointment.
2. Phaah. The largest riegn, the greatest dominian, possessions or power.
3. Phah ho e oop— A king who has universal dominian, over all the earth.
4. Ha e oop hah— honor by birth, kingly power by the line of Pharoah . . . .
5. Hoeoophahphaheh Patriarchal government; or authority . . . .
6. Phah=eh Kingly power coming from some other Kingly power
7. Phaah Extending the Dominion, possession and power state further.
8. Phah ho e oop= extension of power by marriage or by ordination, or annointing
9. Ho oophah. Queen who has been married the second time
10. Hoe-oop hah phaheh: A land, Kingdom or dominion governed by wise,upright kings or rulers,
11. Phah=eh. Kingly <​power,​> or first king
12. Pha ah Havinng still greater dominion, or possesion or Power.
13. Phah ho e oop an extension of power
14. Zi oophah— a distinction by Pharoah a princess of Egypt.
15. Haeaopkahphakeh. A land Kingdom of or country, governed, by wise upright rulers . . . .
16. Phah=eh Kingly power= or king
17. Pha=ah— Having greater dominion, or possession
18. Phah ho e oop. Royal blood or pharoah
19. Zi oop hah a distinction by right of heirship by Pharaoh
20. Ho e oop hah phah eh. The principle of rule or ruling or reigning upon the . . . .
21. Phah=eh— The first man.— Adam, first father
22. Pha-ah— a more universel reign
23. Phah-ho-e-oop The lineage of the royal family
24. Ho=e-oop=hah=Phah eh: Reign or rule, government, power, Kingdom or dominion.

All of this is coming from the mind of the man who wrote the Book of Abraham! I'd have to say that chapter 1 of the Book of Abraham has shown to be utter rubbish. How much longer can stubborn Mormon leaders allow this horrific forgery to remain in their canon? How embarrassing.

[_Shulem]

Smith IGNORANTLY corrupts the word "Pharaoh" in his Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language to form bogus words and definitions:

I apologize for reneging somewhat on my promise not to discuss Facsimile No. 3, but I can't resist in making a connection to Smith's anachronistic use of the word Pharaoh and how he incorrectly applied it as a personal name of the Egyptian king in whose throne Abraham allegedly sat upon.

King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.

"King Pharaoh" !!

King Pharaoh is Smith's joint use of a title in combination with a name whereas "King" is the title and "Pharaoh" is the name. That certainly seems to be Smith's understanding of the named definition of the Egyptian monarch. The text of the Book of Abraham in conjunction with the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language verifies this is exactly what Smith believed.

and also in the court of Pharaoh; which Pharaoh signifies king by royal blood.

The above statement in the Book of Abraham tells us that the person by the name of "Pharaoh" was a king and that the name signifies a royal man having descended from a royal blood line. The definition in the Book of Abraham text is confirmed by Smith's Grammar of the Egyptian Alphabet in varying degrees:

a) Phah eh. The first man, or Adam coming from Adam. Kigs or right over Patriarchal right by appointment.

b) Phah ho e oop— A king who has universal dominian, over all the earth

c) Ha e oop hah— honor by birth, kingly power by the line of Pharoah

(Note above that "the line of Pharaoh" signifies an ancestral family line of the personal name: Pharaoh who according to the Book of Abraham was "Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus")

e) Phah=eh. Kingly <​power,​> or first king

f) Phah ho e oop. Royal blood or pharoah

g) Ho-e-oop A prince of the royal blood

(Dr. Shades, please make an exception to the red-colored font rule in this case)



Do you now understand, my apprentice?

[_moksha]

Shulem, could you help decipher this bit of Reformed Egyptian?

zi pit ti ae tie ae
zi pit ti oow

[_Shulem]

Shulem, could you help decipher this bit of Reformed Egyptian?

zi pit ti ae tie ae
zi pit ti oow

:rolleyes:

For their hearts were set to do evil, and were wholly turned to the god of Elkenah, and the god of Libnah, and the god of Mahmackrah, and the god of Korash, and the god of PHAH HO E OOP, PHAH of Egypt;

Therefore they turned their hearts to the sacrifice of the heathen in offering up their children unto these dumb idols, and hearkened not unto my voice, but endeavored to take away my life by the hand of the priest of Elkenah. The priest of Elkenah was also the priest of PHAH HO E OOP.

Now, at this time it was the custom of the priest of PHAH HO E OOP, the PHAH of Egypt, to offer up upon the altar which was built in the land of Chaldea, for the offering unto these strange gods, men, women, and children.

And it came to pass that the priest made an offering unto the god of PHAH HO E OOP, and also unto the god of Shagreel, even after the manner of the Egyptians. Now the god of Shagreel was the sun.

Even the thank-offering of a child did the priest of PHAH HO E OOP offer upon the altar which stood by the hill called Potiphar’s Hill, at the head of the plain of Olishem.

It was made after the form of a bedstead, such as was had among the Chaldeans, and it stood before the gods of Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash, and also a god like unto that of PHAH HO E OOP, PHAH of Egypt.

And this because they have turned their hearts away from me, to worship the god of Elkenah, and the god of Libnah, and the god of Mahmackrah, and the god of Korash, and the god of PHAH HO E OOP, PHAH of Egypt; therefore I have come down to visit them, and to destroy him who hath lifted up his hand against thee, Abraham, my son, to take away thy life.

Behold, Potiphar’s Hill was in the land of Ur, of Chaldea. And the Lord broke down the altar of Elkenah, and of the gods of the land, and utterly destroyed them, and smote the priest that he died; and there was great mourning in Chaldea, and also in the court of PHAH HO E OOP; which PHAH HO E OOP signifies PHAH by HO E OOP.

Now this PHAH of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

Now the first government of Egypt was established by PHAH HO E OOP, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

PHAH HO E OOP, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

Now, PHAH HO E OOP being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the PHAHS HO E OOPS would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry;