Egyptologists and the Joseph Smith Papyri

[_jimmyspa]

The way in which the "revelation" was transmitted to a "prophet" is not so important or relevant as the validity etc. However, the testimony of the "prophet" and the multitude of the witnesses is - it was a TRANSLATION.

The most amazing part of this translation is that God prestoed a simple funerary script into a book written 2,000 years earlier by a famous polygamist and then poof change the document back again to what it is.

To me, That is the miracle (and a sign too).

I remember to have read in the Bible that God first appeared
to Moses "as a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush", I don´t
see any Jews or Christians being made fun of because God
decided to use a bush to manifest Himself. Nobody that I know
says: how ridiculous, a bush !! Then, if God decided to impart
wisdom to Joseph Smith using some ancient Egyptian papyri
as a catalyst or material medium to get his attention (as Moses
had his bush in flames but without being burnt), there is no
reasonable grounds to accept the latter and reject the former,
unless the one who mocks is an atheist or skeptic or belongs
to another religion. But if you believe in God, I see no reason
for Him not using the papyri that way and this having nothing
to do with their Egyptian contents, as erroneously assumed
so far.

Those who reject all this IMHO demand from Joseph Smith to
be perfect, like God Himself, but although a prophet, he was
human and could occasionally err, there is plenty of proof
that then he was put right, as the LDS Church has been put
right sometimes later on by special revelation.

Those who reject Joseph Smith´s limitations as a human being
but accept the Bible, should bear in mind that the prophets there
are also far from perfect, but that doesn´t make them the object
of any mockery, which is inflicted on another more recent prophet
who dared go against some of the contemporary beliefs of his
time and also claimed to have received revelation from God.

You only have to see the LDS Church with millions of brothers
and sisters in many countries leading most of them exemplary
lives, that is not likely the outcome of any fraud or imposture...

I see acertain amount of double standard in all this, against
the LDS.

Just my opinions, respectfully given.

Jimmy

[_Jersey Girl]

It seems to me that Professor Castillos ignores in his research all of the other Abraham writings found outside of Mormonism. Perhaps if he did so he would see that the facimilies all describe exactly what Abraham went through while in Egypt.

Gaz,

Why would this Prof. Castillos include other writings about Abraham in his research? He's an Egyptologist. He is able to READ the Facsimilies. He determines them to be funerary material. Funerary material found with a collection of mummies.

Which makes more sense to you?

That Egyptian funerary material was found with a collection of Egyptian mummies

or

A collection of the writings of Abraham was found with a collection of Egyptian mummies?

Jersey Girl

[_Jersey Girl]

Jimmy

I remember to have read in the Bible that God first appeared
to Moses "as a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush", I don´t
see any Jews or Christians being made fun of because God
decided to use a bush to manifest Himself. Nobody that I know
says: how ridiculous, a bush !! Then, if God decided to impart
wisdom to Joseph Smith using some ancient Egyptian papyri
as a catalyst or material medium to get his attention (as Moses
had his bush in flames but without being burnt), there is no
reasonable grounds to accept the latter and reject the former,
unless the one who mocks is an atheist or skeptic or belongs
to another religion. But if you believe in God, I see no reason
for Him not using the papyri that way and this having nothing
to do with their Egyptian contents, as erroneously assumed
so far.

What did the Prophet say that they were?

Those who reject all this IMHO demand from Joseph Smith to
be perfect, like God Himself, but although a prophet, he was
human and could occasionally err, there is plenty of proof
that then he was put right, as the LDS Church has been put
right sometimes later on by special revelation.

Jimmy, in the case of the Book of Abraham, how could the Prophet have erred? What are you suggesting here?

Those who reject Joseph Smith´s limitations as a human being
but accept the Bible, should bear in mind that the prophets there
are also far from perfect, but that doesn´t make them the object
of any mockery, which is inflicted on another more recent prophet
who dared go against some of the contemporary beliefs of his
time and also claimed to have received revelation from God.

Again, why are you talking about imperfection? How does this apply to the Book of Abraham?

You only have to see the LDS Church with millions of brothers
and sisters in many countries leading most of them exemplary
lives, that is not likely the outcome of any fraud or imposture...

Using your reasoning, Jimmy, the truth claims of both the Catholic and Southern Baptist Churches far surpass those of the LDS Church in accuracy.

I see acertain amount of double standard in all this, against
the LDS.



Just my opinions, respectfully given.

Jimmy

Mine too.

[_jimmyspa]

Jimmy, in the case of the Book of Abraham, how could the Prophet have erred? What are you suggesting here?.

I am not an expert in these things, but it could be that the Prophet at first thought that
he had to make a "translation" in the common meaning of the term, but God later put
him right on this. You only have to see the extension of the Book of Abraham to realize that it just
couldn´t be contained in those few papyrus lines. Not being a Prophet I don´t know
how these things work, but I think that it´s perfectly reasonable to have faith in that
God used those papyri in the way Paul and others suggest, as reasonable as other
apparently unlikely facts in the Bible or other religious books without anybody mocking
them as some people do when it´s the beliefs of the LDS. There I see the double standard.

Jimmy

[_Gazelam]

There is no question as to the fact that the funeral drawings are common among mummies. That isn't the issue. What is the issue is why they were among the mummies. What signifigance did they hold?

Facimile 1 represents Abraham being sacrificed by a wicked and false priest. That Abraham was to be offered as a sacrifice by Pharaoh is well documented in ancient writings.

Facimile 2 represents the great prophetic vision. This account is similar to that shown to Joseph and Sidney in Sec. 76 of the Doctrine and Covenants. As well as Moses and Lehi. It represents an understanding of the plan of salvation, as well as a vivid picture of what the angel showed him as documented in the Apocalypse of Abraham.

Facimile 3 is also a representation of the common story of Abraham being set on Pharaohs throne and teaching the nobles.

Whether Joseph translated what else we have in the Doctrine in covenants directly from other papyri or from revelation inspired by the facimiles I do not know. Witnesses state it was from other papyri.

If critics disagree with Josephs translations of the facimiles, I would love to see their interpretations. I have yet to see alternatives offered.

[_Mercury]

Yo Jimmy,

This is what I think. I think you should name the non-LDS Egyptologist, give us a date and source in context for the quote. Got a link?

Wouldn't happen to be JUAN JOSÉ CASTILLOS would it?

That was one hell of a bluff Jimmykid, you sure you can ante at this table next go round?

[_CaliforniaKid]

Gaz,

1) Please document your claim that "That Abraham was to be offered as a sacrifice by Pharaoh is well documented in ancient writings."

2) Facsimile 2 alleges to show the "system of astronomy" by which the grand key-words of the priesthood are revealed. The Apocalypse of Abraham has Abraham presciently watching human history unfold (in two parts: Jews and Gentiles) on a sort of miraculous movie screen. The two are not equivalent. Contra Michael Rhodes' assertion, there's nothing there that is suggestive of the hypocephalus or of Joseph Smith's system of astronomy. Rhodes claims, for example, that in the Apocalypse "There is even a description of what are clearly the four figures labeled number 6 in the Joseph Smith Hypocephalus (Apocalypse of Abraham 18)." Whether this is deliberate deception or just wishful thinking I don't know for sure, but I do find it hard to believe that a professional Egyptologist could in good faith conclude that the cherubim around God's throne are "clearly the four figures labeled number 6 in the Joseph Smith Hypocephalus." If it isn't a deliberate deception, then it's confirmation bias at its best!

3) That Abraham taught astronomy and arithmetic to the Egyptians is a detail available from the first few pages of Josephus' Antiquities, which Oliver Cowdery was reading and Hyrum Smith had a copy of at the time that the Book of Abraham translation was being conducted. In fact, in the Messenger and Advocate Cowdery thrice quoted Josephus to illustrate the meaning of vignettes on the Book of the Dead owned by Ta-Shert Min. So Joseph Smith and his scribes were clearly working on the papyri in conjunction with a study of Josephus.

Whether Joseph translated what else we have in the Doctrine in covenants directly from other papyri or from revelation inspired by the facimiles I do not know. Witnesses state it was from other papyri.

4) Please explain what you are talking about. I am not aware of a translation from the papyri recorded in the D&C.

If critics disagree with Josephs translations of the facimiles, I would love to see their interpretations. I have yet to see alternatives offered.

Alternatives have been offered very many times. If you had read any literature critical of the Book of Abraham, you would know that.

From LDS Egyptologist Stephen E. Thompson:

Papyrus Joseph Smith 1 (Facs. 1 in Abr.) depicts the god Anubis (Fig. 3 in Facs. 1) officiating in the embalming rites for the deceased individual, Horus (Fig. 2 in Facs. 1), shown lying on the bier. This scene does not portray a sacrifice of any sort. To note just a few instances in which Joseph Smith's interpretations of these figures differ from the way they are to be understood in their original context, consider the fact that Fig. 11 (in Facs. 1), which Joseph interprets as "designed to represent the pillars of heaven, as understood by the Egyptians," is actually a palace facade, called a serekh, which was a frequent decoration on funerary objects. The serekh originally depicted "the front of a fortified palace . . . with its narrow gateway, floral tracery above the gates, clerestories, and recessed buttresses." Furthermore Joseph interpreted Figure 12 (Facs. 1) as "raukeeyang [a transliteration of the Hebrew word for firmament], signifying expanse or firmament over our heads; but in this case, in relation to this subject, the Egyptians meant it to signify Shaumau [another Hebrew word], to be high, or the heavens, answering to the Hebrew word Shaumahyeem [another Hebrew word]." In fact, these strokes represent water in which the crocodile, symbolizing the god Horus (Fig. 9 in Facs. 1), swims. Although it appears that the water is supported by the palace fa ade, this is simply an illusion produced by the perspective adopted in Egyptian art. Actually, everything shown above the fa ade is to be understood as occurring behind it, i.e., Figure 11 represents the wall surrounding the place in which the activity depicted in the scene occurs.

Baer has described Facsimile 3 (in Abr.) as "a summary, in one illustration, of what the [text] promised: The deceased, after successfully undergoing judgement, is welcomed into the presence of Osiris." Facsimile 3 shows the deceased, Horus (Fig. 5), being introduced before Osiris, the god of the dead (Fig. 1), by the goddess Maat (Fig. 4) and the god Anubis (Fig. 6). Osiris's wife, Isis (Fig. 2), stands behind him. That Figure 6 is to be identified as Anubis I consider a virtual certainty, owing to the fact that he is black (which is the customary color of Anubis) and because of the spike found on his head, which is actually the remnant of a dog's ear. In my opinion, none of Joseph Smith's interpretations of the figures in these scenes accord with the way in which the ancient Egyptians probably understood them.

...

Facsimile 2 is a drawing of an Egyptian funerary amulet known as a hypocephalus, which was placed under the head of the mummy and was intended to protect the head of the deceased, provide him with the sun's life-giving warmth, and to make it possible for him to join the sun god Re in his celestial boat, and thereby insure his continued, pleasant existence in the next life.... "the image of the hypocephalus presents the rising from the Duat, the rebirth of the deceased with the sun, the scenes are rich illustrations of Ch. 162 of the Book of the Dead."

For Thompson's rebuttals to interpretations of specific figures in Facsimile 2 that have been offered by LDS scholars, see the full essay here: http://www.lds-mormon.com/thompson_book ... aham.shtml .

[_CaliforniaKid]

As for Jimmy's comments, I agree that for a Saint who simply cannot or will not give up his or her testimony, the moral thing to do is nevertheless to acknowledge the evidence against the church's truth claims. A Saint who admits that everything seems to militate against what he/she believes but who asserts his/her own revelatory experience as a Trump card is far and away more praiseworthy in my mind than a Saint who misrepresents the evidence in an ends-justify-the-means fashion. I'll take a Paul or a Jimmy over a Gee or a Rhodes any day of the week. At least if we can agree about the facts on the ground, we can then move the conversation into the realm of the meaning and/or value of personal religious experience that seems disharmonious with all the evidence. That conversation will never take place if the FARMS establishment has its way.

[_Fortigurn]

Then, if God decided to impart
wisdom to Joseph Smith using some ancient Egyptian papyri
as a catalyst or material medium to get his attention...

That is not the historical claim of the LDS Church, or of Smith himself. The claim made is utterly different. The claim is verifiable and falsifiable. It has been falsified. That is what leaves it open for criticism, and vulnerable to ridicule.

[_Fortigurn]

Jimmy, in the case of the Book of Abraham, how could the Prophet have erred? What are you suggesting here?.

I am not an expert in these things, but it could be that the Prophet at first thought that
he had to make a "translation" in the common meaning of the term, but God later put
him right on this.

When did God put him right on this?

You only have to see the extension of the Book of Abraham to realize that it just
couldn´t be contained in those few papyrus lines.

Yes, that's very true for us these days, knowing that Egyptian isn't as 'compact' a language as people thought it might be back then.

Not being a Prophet I don´t know
how these things work, but I think that it´s perfectly reasonable to have faith in that
God used those papyri in the way Paul and others suggest...

It's not reasonable, since the official story is totally different.

...as reasonable as other
apparently unlikely facts in the Bible or other religious books without anybody mocking
them as some people do when it´s the beliefs of the LDS. There I see the double standard.

It is not a double standard for two reasons:

* Where other Christian groups make claims which are verifiable and falsifiable, and those claims are falsified, those claims are certainly mocked (I give you the Fundamentalist 'Young Earth Creationists' as a case in point)

* There are claims made by religious groups which are not verifiable or falsifiable, and are therefore rightly described as a matter of faith, which most people respect - the claims made regarding the Book of Abraham do not fall into that category, and have been falsified