Approaching the Facsimiles

[hauslern]

Two LDS scholars (Royal Skousen & Terryl Givens) have accepted the view that the interpretations of Smith of the facsimiles are wrong. Skousen suggests they could be dropped and the written content of the Book of Abraham be accepted as given by revelation.

So this paper is I believe a must read for anyone interested in the debate over the Book of Abraham:

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/vie ... text=byusq

I almost feel sorry for the authors as they seem to be struggling with possible answers to critics.

Note some of the comments:

"Despite some important advances in scholarship, “we [still] do not [entirely] know to what we really should compare the facsimiles.” For instance, we must ask if Joseph Smith meant to give us “an interpretation [of the facsimiles] that ancient Egyptians would have held, or one that only a small group of priests interested in Abraham would have held, or one that a group of ancient Jews in Egypt would have held, or something another group altogether would have held.” Or, alternatively, “was he giving us an interpretation we needed to receive for our spiritual benefit regardless of how any ancient groups would have seen these?” The fact is that we don’t know for sure. While we “can make a pretty good case for the idea that some Egyptians could have viewed Facsimile 1 the way Joseph Smith presents it, [we are still] not sure that is the methodology we should be employing. We just don’t know enough about what Joseph Smith was doing to be sure about any possible comparisons, or lack thereof.”13"

and

"For now, then, the best approach to the facsimiles would be to remain open-minded and inquisitive and to keep asking the best questions based on the best available evidence and information."

Well at least we can see.

One point "Canopic jars were made to contain the organs that were removed from the body in the process of mummification: the lungs, liver, intestines, and stomach. Each organ was protected by one of the Four Sons of Horus: Hapy (lungs), Imsety (liver), Duamutef (stomach), and Qebehsenuef (intestines)."

Question: Why would someone being executed be embalmed?

[Shulem]

Two LDS scholars (Royal Skousen & Terryl Givens) have accepted the view that the interpretations of Smith of the facsimiles are wrong.

The dumb and idiotic interpretations of the Facsimiles tendered by Smith are the least of their worries. The origin story showcasing the time and means in which Egypt was first founded as explained in chapter one of the text is absolutely WRONG -- false history and utterly untrue.

The apologists have no credibility nor a leg to stand on. They are fools. They are idiots.

Time to change baby Smoot's diaper, again.

Skousen suggests they could be dropped and the written content of the Book of Abraham be accepted as given by revelation.

The bit about Egypt being founded by Noah's progeny in 2300 BC is a revelation of bunk and nonsense. What needs to be thrown out is the ENTIRE Book of Abraham -- facsimiles, text, and all.

There.

So this paper is I believe a must read for anyone interested in the debate over the Book of Abraham:

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/vie ... text=byusq

It's utter garbage and has no scholarly credibility in the world of Egyptology. Mormon Egyptologists are utter buffoons -- clowns performing a song and dance for ignorant Mormons.

I almost feel sorry for the authors as they seem to be struggling with possible answers to critics.

Almost is no cigar. I don't feel sorry for those clowns either. Those liars made their beds and now they are LYING in them.

----------------------
F-u, John Gee!

You too, lapdog.

And, baby-boy Smoot.

Note some of the comments:

"Despite some important advances in scholarship, “we [still] do not [entirely] know

Q. What is 3000 - 2300?

A. The Narmer Palette is 700 years older than Egyptus's sons.

Hence, the Book of Abraham origin story is false history!

Question: Why would someone being executed be embalmed?

An "iron bedstead" decorated with lovely flowers (Fig. 10) at the head of death's altar!

Don't you know it's customary for an Egyptian priest to provide flowers for his victim prior to slitting his throat?

[Shulem]

Two LDS scholars (Royal Skousen & Terryl Givens) have accepted the view that the interpretations of Smith of the facsimiles are wrong. Skousen suggests they could be dropped and the written content of the Book of Abraham be accepted as given by revelation.

The house of Mormonism is a house divided with members saying "lo here and lo there."

Mormonism is a very divided religion in which the members are tossed to and fro like a wave upon the sea driven by the wind and tossed.

There is zero leadership in the Church on how to handle the Book of Abraham controversies because the leadership consists of a bunch of retards.

And, DCP, you are a retard! As in a retarded brain soaked in Mormon snake oil. U dope. You're just stupid, Dan. Really.

[sock puppet]

Two LDS scholars (Royal Skousen & Terryl Givens) have accepted the view that the interpretations of Smith of the facsimiles are wrong. Skousen suggests they could be dropped and the written content of the Book of Abraham be accepted as given by revelation.

So this paper is I believe a must read for anyone interested in the debate over the Book of Abraham:

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/vie ... text=byusq

I almost feel sorry for the authors as they seem to be struggling with possible answers to critics.

Note some of the comments:

"Despite some important advances in scholarship, “we [still] do not [entirely] know to what we really should compare the facsimiles.” For instance, we must ask if Joseph Smith meant to give us “an interpretation [of the facsimiles] that ancient Egyptians would have held, or one that only a small group of priests interested in Abraham would have held, or one that a group of ancient Jews in Egypt would have held, or something another group altogether would have held.” Or, alternatively, “was he giving us an interpretation we needed to receive for our spiritual benefit regardless of how any ancient groups would have seen these?” The fact is that we don’t know for sure. While we “can make a pretty good case for the idea that some Egyptians could have viewed Facsimile 1 the way Joseph Smith presents it, [we are still] not sure that is the methodology we should be employing. We just don’t know enough about what Joseph Smith was doing to be sure about any possible comparisons, or lack thereof.”13"

and

"For now, then, the best approach to the facsimiles would be to remain open-minded and inquisitive and to keep asking the best questions based on the best available evidence and information."

Well at least we can see.

One point "Canopic jars were made to contain the organs that were removed from the body in the process of mummification: the lungs, liver, intestines, and stomach. Each organ was protected by one of the Four Sons of Horus: Hapy (lungs), Imsety (liver), Duamutef (stomach), and Qebehsenuef (intestines)."

Question: Why would someone being executed be embalmed?

So the God of Confusion instead of the God that imparts truth and understanding via the prophets. Outstanding! Throwing Elohim/Jehovah/Holy Ghost under the bus to save Joseph Smith and Mormonism. Mazeltov! you mental contortionists, Skousen and Givens.