47 replies to this topic

[David Bokovoy]

In the most recent addition to the Studies in the Book of Abraham series entitled Astronomy, Papyrus and Covenant, Kevin Barney has contributed what in my mind amounts to an extraordinary contribution to our understanding of the Joseph Smith facsimiles.  

In the article, Kevin suggests that �?¢â?¬�??the facsimiles may not have been drawn by Abraham�?¢â?¬â?¢s hand but may have been Egyptian vignettes that were adopted or adapted by an Egyptian-Jewish redactor as illustrations of the Book of Abraham�?¢â?¬�? (108).

In his study, Kevin provides this hypothetical Egyptian-Jewish redactor with the original name J-red.  According to Kevin, J-Red adopted or adapted vignettes from a Book of Breathings and a hypocephalus as illustration for the Book of Abraham.  In so doing, J-Red reinterpreted the Egyptian symbols in accordance with Semitic traditions.

In my mind, part of the strength of Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory includes the fact that ancient Israelite and later Jewish authors demonstrate a strong propensity towards adopting and adapting foreign traditions into their own religious writings.  

While Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s article naturally focuses upon the Jewish cultural and religious adaptation of Egyptian materials, including such works as the Instruction of Amenemope, the Bible contains a myriad of examples of Israelite authors adopting and adapting Mesopotamian and Canaanite traditions as well.

Even a cursory survey of this biblical trend towards assimilating while revamping �?¢â?¬�??pagan�?¢â?¬�? religious traditions would involve literally hundreds of examples.  In my mind, however, one classic illustration of biblical adaptation includes God�?¢â?¬â?¢s struggle with Leviathan.  For a historical consideration of this legend from Near Eastern, to biblical, to finally rabbinic traditions, I would highly recommend Michael Fishbane�?¢â?¬â?¢s Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).

Regarding this example of biblical adaptation, C. Uehlinger notes that �?¢â?¬�??some assimilation of Egyptian religious traditions and the Leviathan concept could have occurred in Southern Palestine and Northern Egypt already during the Hyksos period�?¢â?¬�? C. Uehlinger, �?¢â?¬�??Leviathan,�?¢â?¬�? Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 513.

However, even the prophet Isaiah draws upon this �?¢â?¬�??pagan�?¢â?¬�? theme stating in Ugaritic that Baal �?¢â?¬�??smote Litan the wriggling serpent, finished off the writhing serpent�?¢â?¬�? through his prediction that the Lord will eventually punish Leviathan �?¢â?¬�??in that day.�?¢â?¬�?  Isaiah�?¢â?¬â?¢s adaptation of the Baal cycle, therefore, ultimately provides a nice analogy for Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory regarding the Book of Abraham.

Similarly, the conflict between Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Son of Man depicted in the book of Daniel parallels the Baal Cycle in which the younger god Baal empowered by the older god El defeats Yam (The Sea); see J.J. Collins, �?¢â?¬�??Stirring up the Sea: The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7,�?¢â?¬�? The Book of Daniel in the Light of New Findings; A.S. van der Woude, ed. (Levuven 1993): 121-126.

As another example of Canaanite influence upon late biblical texts, Simon Parker has argued that the depiction of El�?¢â?¬â?¢s residence at Ugarit �?¢â?¬�??at the springs of the Rivers among the streams of the Deeps�?¢â?¬�? is �?¢â?¬�??exploited in Ezekiel�?¢â?¬â?¢s account of the presumptuousness of the king of Tyre, who, Ezekiel says, has claimed, �?¢â?¬�??I am God (El), I sit in the seat of God in the midst of the seas�?¢â?¬â?¢ (Ezek 28:2).�?¢â?¬�? Simon B. Parker, �?¢â?¬�??Ugaritic Literature and the Bible,�?¢â?¬�? Near Eastern Archaeology 63:4 (2000): 231.  

Indeed, as Andr�??�?© Caquot has suggested, imagery associated with early Canaanite mythology may even appear directly reflected within the New Testament:

Quote

No one contests today the fact that knowledge of Ugarit is indispensable for exegetes of the Old Testament.�??�?  But those of the New Testament should not neglect it either for it attests to details that were long retained by popular memory.�??�?  The seven-headed best of the Apocalypse of John (12:3) does not come from the visions of Daniel, and Psalm 74 does not mention the number of Leviathan�?¢â?¬â?¢s multiple heads.�??�?  On the other hand, the Ugaritic ancestor of this dragon, reportedly defeated by Baal, is certainly the beast with seven heads.�??�?  We have perhaps not considered sufficiently the fact that in Matthew 6:30-52, Mark 14:13-33 and John 6:1-20, the story of the multiplication of the loaves is immediately followed by the scene describing Jesus walking on the waters as if deliberately recalling two events in the cycle of Baal wherein Baal gives men their nourishment and vanquishes the sea; Andr�??�?© Caquot, �?¢â?¬�??At the Origins of the Bible,�?¢â?¬�? Near Eastern Archeology 63:4 (2000): 227.

As these examples illustrate, if Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory concerning J-Red is correct, then the development of the Book of Abraham via a Jewish adaptation of foreign symbols is perhaps even more similar to the development of the Bible than any of us had previously before assumed (personally, I would even take Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory one step further in suggesting that the first person references in the Book of Abraham fit the general pseudeopigraphic trend witnessed in such biblical books as Deuteronomy and therefore, the Book of Abraham many not have been written by Abraham at all).  

Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory regarding a Semitic adaptation of Egyptian traditions explains why the Book of Abraham features so many ideological links with ancient Semitic texts�?¢â?¬â?many of which were unknown to 19th century audiences.  

While in addition to the examples provided by Kevin in his ground-breaking study, we could point to a number of supplementary examples of Semitic ideology reflected in the Book of Abraham, one of my favorites includes the BOA�?¢â?¬â?¢s depiction of the divine council.  

Semitic texts from the ancient Near East that feature stories of the divine council of gods typically begin with a crisis in which the head God calls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma.  During the council, a series of proposals are offered.  Finally, a �?¢â?¬�??savior�?¢â?¬�? steps forward, offering his services to the council.  This savior then receives a commission to perform his redemptive role (this summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon Parker, �?¢â?¬�??Council,�?¢â?¬�? in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, Karel van der Toorn, et al. eds. Leiden: Brill, 1999: 206).

This common Semitic pattern is witnessed, for example, in the Mesopotamian story of divine kingship known as Enuma Elish.  In the Babylonian myth, the head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council to resolve the dilemma created by the goddess Tiamat.  Following a series of proposals, Marduk, the chief god of Babylon, receives a commission as savior.  

In the myth, Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condition that his Father, Ea, the head god of the council, will grant Marduk all power and glory.  The same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth Anzu, however, in this rendition, the god Ninurta agrees to serve as council savior while allowing his father to retain his position.    

These myths, unknown to 19th century audiences at the time of Joseph Smith, feature important parallels with the view of the divine council provided in the Book of Abraham.  

Finally, Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢ theory also works well with research that I have performed on the connection between Semitic presentation scenes depicted on Mesopotamian cylinder seals and facsimile 3.  

As a Jewish-Egyptian redactor, J-Red may have simply converted the Egyptian drama featured in facsimile 3 from a scene that originally fit an earlier Semitic context.

Thanks Kevin for a truly important study.

Edited by David Bokovoy, 16 August 2006 - 12:36 PM.

[David Bokovoy]

Just to give people a feel for the connections that I hope to eventually draw out in further detail:


http://content.answe...Facsimile_3.gif


http://www.20kweb.co..._seal_va243.jpg

[William Schryver]

Without diminishing whatsoever the unique properties of Kevin's paper, and they are many, it should be noted that the late Dr. Nibley and Michael Rhodes had already suggested this kind of thing.  Barney has simply expanded upon it, and in so doing has added considerably to the legitimacy of the argument.

Having recently read both Barney's paper and the extracts from the Apocalypse of Abraham which are contained in Traditions from the Early Life of Abraham, I noted again the seeming relationship between the scene portrayed on the hypocephalus and the experiences of Abraham as described in the Apocalypse.  Nibley also mentions the motif as being associated with the shield of Homer's Hephaestus.  The distinct elements of those above and beneath, or on either side of a great divide, are present in each case, and form the backdrop for Abraham's journey through the heavens.  And yet, we are dealing in each case with artwork that seems bound to Ptolemaic Egypt, rather than of more ancient origin.

The illustrations which are associated with our Book of Abraham most certainly do not have antecedents in the period during which Abraham lived.  Abraham did not draw them, nor could they have been drawn during his lifetime, for the motifs themselves are of much later production.

Considering this, Kevin makes some very cogent observations:

Quote

We have a tendency when looking at the facsimiles to think of Abraham as well schooled and articulate in Egyptian religion, as if he were some sort of an Egyptian priest.  But this is only an assumption.  Although according to the biblical canon Abraham visited Egypt, we do not even know whether he learned the Egyptian language, much less became knowledgeable in the Egyptian mysteries.  The attempt to sacrifice Abraham did not take place in Egypt, and Abraham received his revelation of the heavens ouside of Egypt.  When Abraham finally did go to Egypt due to famine, he taught the Egyptians astronomy.  But note that Abraham was the one doing the teaching, not vice versa.  For all we know, he may have communicated with the Egyptians in his own language through interpreters.

Defenders of the Book of Abraham have long sought to understand Joseph's explanations of the facsimiles in terms of conventional Egyptian religious interpretations.  ... I believe that this activity is appropriate and necessary, as far as it goes.  But what if we were to take this activity to its logical conclusion: suppose we were to succeed in showing that Joseph's explanations in every way matched those of the Egyptians themselves?  That might (or might not) satisfy the critics, but then what would be their religious value to us?  Do we worship Atum-Re?  Should we revive the Egyptian cultus?  It seems to me that these documents have religious value to us only if they are reinterpreted in accordance with Semitic sensibilities as applying to events in the life of Abraham.

The Facsimiles and Semitic Adaptation of Existing Sources, Kevin L. Barney, in Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant, edited by John Gee and Brian H. Hauglid, Provo, UT 2005, p. 115

The question becomes, then, not what these things meant to the Egyptians, but rather what they were made to mean by those presumably Jewish individuals who adapted them to illustrate the story of their great patriarch Abraham.

Edited by William Schryver, 16 August 2006 - 12:39 PM.

[charity]

And thanks, David, for your contribution as well.

[phaedrus ut]

Hypothetical "Egyptian-Jewish redactors" can have unlimited knowledge and abilities.  Their ambiguous nature leaves them open to answer any question and sheltered from direct criticism.  My "hypothetical Jewish redactor" writes Vedic Sanskrit texts with his toes and holds the world record on Tetris.  

Kevin does provide three examples where Jews adapted Egyptian iconography for another purpose.  But to create a mysterious Jewish redactor for the Book of Abraham seems highly speculative and far from rigorous.  

There is obviously a severe disconnect between the extant papyrus and the Book of Abraham.  Rather then imagining the text through the Semetic eyes of a fictional redactor why not put Joseph in the same process and argue for pure revelation.  It accomplishes the same goal but leaves out the imaginary reconstructions.  


Phaedrus

Edited by phaedrus ut, 16 August 2006 - 01:02 PM.

[William Schryver]

Phaedrus:

Quote

Hypothetical "Egyptian-Jewish redactors" can have unlimited knowledge and abilities. Their ambiguous nature leaves them open to answer any question and sheltered from direct criticism. My "hypothetical Jewish redactor" writes Vedic Sanskrit texts with his toes and holds the world record on Tetris.

You are misrepresenting Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s argument for the role a redactor would have played.  He needn�?¢â?¬â?¢t have possessed any special knowledge, except a general feel for how the Egyptians utilized iconographic illustrations in telling a variety of stories.  Your sarcasm belies a serious failure to understand Barney�?¢â?¬â?¢s argument in the first place.

Quote

Kevin does provide three examples where Jews adapted Egyptian iconography for another purpose. But to create a mysterious Jewish redactor for the Book of Abraham seems highly speculative and far from rigorous.

Why?  You�?¢â?¬â?¢ve just admitted that Kevin shows examples where the Jews have done precisely what you declare to be speculative.

Quote

There is obviously a severe disconnect between the extant papyrus and the Book of Abraham.

  There is only a �?¢â?¬�??severe disconnect�?¢â?¬�? if you try to apply a strictly-Egyptian interpretation to the iconography.  While I don�?¢â?¬â?¢t believe Barney�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory answers all the mysterious questions posed by the Joseph Smith Papyri, I am inclined to regard his arguments as being evidenced by �?¢â?¬�??rigorous�?¢â?¬�? method and therefore worthy of due consideration.  Of course, most critics of Joseph Smith (who proceed from an assumption that the Book of Abraham is simply a product of the prophet�?¢â?¬â?¢s fertile imagination) cannot allow themselves to consider any other possibilities.

Edited by William Schryver, 16 August 2006 - 01:04 PM.

[USU78]

We must start, I suppose, from the proposition that a work may be both pseudepigraphic and scriptural.

Both Daniel and Deuteronomy come to mind as books which fit this bill, as it is highly unlikely that Daniel and Moses had anything to do with their production as the books have come down to us.

Accordingly, understanding the worldview of the nameless author behind the production of both of these books helps us to understand the books.

Likewise an understanding of the worldview and intentions of our proposed nameless author of the BoA helps us to understand how much of Egypt was really intended in the Facsimiles.

I'm not sure how you answer that question.  Kerry Shirts has spent a lot of time trying to get behind what the Egyptian iconography means in the context of the legends/myths surrounding the principal players depicted.  I have always maintained that this is the best starting point:  understand what the pictures mean, then see how they relate to the revealed text.

Lucky Jack said:

What a marvelous modern age we live in!

[William Schryver]

USU78:

Quote

Kerry Shirts has spent a lot of time trying to get behind what the Egyptian iconography means in the context of the legends/myths surrounding the principal players depicted.

Yeah, that Shirts guy is pretty crazy (), but he has uncovered quite a bit of information that supports the claim that Abraham was equated with Osiris, not to mention how the initiates are to assimilate the qualities, and even become the embodiment of the various gods represented in the judgment scene.

I was fascinated by many parts of his paper that he circulated at the conference.  Now that I've chewed on some of it for awhile, I think I need to read it again.

[David Bokovoy]

Hello Phaedrus ut,

===Hypothetical "Egyptian-Jewish redactors" can have unlimited knowledge and abilities.

More so than say Dtr1, Dtr2, Deutero-Isaiah etc.?

===Their ambiguous nature leaves them open to answer any question and sheltered from direct criticism.

While I admit that Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory leaves no room whatsoever for Egyptologists to criticize the Book of Abraham, the idea of Semitic Adaptation attempts to handle the evidence, not ignore it.  

===Rather then imagining the text through the Semetic eyes of a fictional redactor why not put Joseph in the same process and argue for pure revelation.

Personally, I�?¢â?¬â?¢m quite open to this scenario.  If forced to choose, it's probably the way I lean.  I simply think that given what we know regarding ancient texts, including the Bible, Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s theory just may be correct.

[David Bokovoy]

===And thanks, David, for your contribution as well.

You're welcome Charity.  I'm really glad to see that you're up and feeling better.

Warm regards,

--David

Edited by David Bokovoy, 16 August 2006 - 02:06 PM.

[stn9]

Wouldn't a discussion like this be suitable for the "Pundits" forum?

[phaedrus ut]

David Bokovoy, on Aug 16 2006, 01:45 PM, said:

===Hypothetical "Egyptian-Jewish redactors" can have unlimited knowledge and abilities.

More so than say Dtr1, Dtr2, Deutero-Isaiah etc.?

Whether it's redactor for J E D P or dtr1 & dtr2 the reconstructions are based upon the biblical textual criticism.  The evidence comes from linguistics and source critical analysis.  They are born of the evidence not pure speculation to fill the gaps where evidence is missing.  

I did find Kevin Barneys work interesting, and I'm all for taking creative approaches to problem solving.  It very well could be either my ignorance or personal bias that I failed to find the theory convincing.  I'm open to that possibility.

In addition, I noticed how you completely ignored the tetris comment.  Are you unable or unwilling to engage my claims?  


Phaedrus

[stn9]

um, I held the world Tetris (NES) high score...for a time...until some faker doctored a photo and passed my score by almost 300,000 points. I think I've ruled out his score as being even mathematically possible. I know how fast level 29 is...I was there. He did not get one line past that. Still irks me to this day....

Edited by stn9, 16 August 2006 - 02:40 PM.

[David Bokovoy]

Hello Phaedrus ut,

===Whether it's redactor for J E D P or dtr1 & dtr2 the reconstructions are based upon the biblical textual criticism. The evidence comes from linguistics and source critical analysis. They are born of the evidence not pure speculation to fill the gaps where evidence is missing.

But the Book of Abraham contains considerable evidence for a connection with the ancient Semitic world.  The illustration I provided concerning the council theme is only one of many.

What do we do with a book that features such links?

I would argue that since the BofA contains these types of connections, many of which were unknown to 19th century audiences, Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢s Semitic adaptation theory is, in fact, born of the evidence.  

When all is said and done, the Book of Abraham reads like an ancient text with links to the Semitic world.  

===In addition, I noticed how you completely ignored the tetris comment. Are you unable or unwilling to engage my claims

I�?¢â?¬â?¢m afraid that I am unable.

[William Schryver]

DB:

Quote

But the Book of Abraham contains considerable evidence for a connection with the ancient Semitic world. The illustration I provided concerning the council theme is only one of many.

What do we do with a book that features such links?

I am planning to initiate a thread (in the pundit forum) on this very topic as soon as I have completed the essay I am writing on it.

I am thoroughly fascinated and even astounded by the numerous connections between the Joseph Smith Book of Abraham and several works of known antiquity which simply were not available to anyone in 1835 �?¢â?¬â?? 1842.

I will offer just one example for now: Abraham and Sarah were active proselyters who built up a church through conversions.  The Bible does not inform us of this, but the Book of Abraham speaks of Abraham receiving a commission from Jehovah to be a minister of the �?¢â?¬�??gospel�?¢â?¬�? to all people, and the Book of Abraham changes this enigmatic passage from the Genesis account:

Quote

Genesis 12
5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.

to this in the BoA:

Quote

Abraham 2

6  But I, Abraham, and Lot, my brother's son, prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord appeared unto me, and said unto me: Arise, and take Lot with thee; for I have purposed to take thee away out of Haran, and to make of thee a minister to bear my name in a strange land which I will give unto thy seed after thee for an everlasting possession, when they hearken to my voice.

9  And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations;

10  And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father;

11  And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal.

15  And I took Sarai, whom I took to wife when I was in Ur, in Chaldea, and Lot, my brother's son, and all our substance that we had gathered, and the souls that we had won in Haran, and came forth in the way to the land of Canaan, and dwelt in tents as we came on our way;

(emphasis mine)

Joseph Smith�?¢â?¬â?¢s Book of Abraham clearly tells us that he (Abraham) and those with him were involved in attempting to �?¢â?¬�??win�?¢â?¬�? souls wherever they went.  They were proselyting.  It is a significant piece of information included in the Joseph Smith account, and it has numerous affirmations in other ancient Abrahamic literature which has come to light since the publication of the Book of Abraham.  In fact, it is one of the most important elements of the ancient Abraham stories.  It is repeated over and over.  And yet it is missing from the Old Testament, and was not to be found in any sources available to Joseph Smith.

How do the critics account for something like this?  I suppose we shall see.  But as the number of distinct and quite detailed parallels continue to mount, it will become more and more difficult to be as dismissive as they have been in the past.

OK, I must go now to read more ancient Abraham stories �?¢â?¬�?¦ pencil in hand �?¢â?¬�?¦

[Ron Beron]

Hi David et al, I was lying in bed reading the transcripts of the current thread and I had to jump up and make some cursory comments.  First of all, I have no intention of commenting on a virtual unknown such as a redactor, but there are some other comments relating to the practice of assimilation I would like to make.

Quote

Regarding this example of biblical adaptation, C. Uehlinger notes that �?¢â?¬�??some assimilation of Egyptian religious traditions and the Leviathan concept could have occurred in Southern Palestine and Northern Egypt already during the Hyksos period�?¢â?¬�? C. Uehlinger, �?¢â?¬�??Leviathan,�?¢â?¬�? Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 513.

David, are you suggesting that the Semitics, including the Jews, borrowed this from the Egyptians?  Could it not have been just as easy to assimilate the legend from the war against the Sumerian Tiamat?

Quote

When Tiamat heard these words,
She was like one possessed, .she lost her reason.
Tiamat uttered wild, piercing cries,
She trembled and shook to her very foundations.
She recited an incantation, she pronounced her spell,
And the gods of the battle cried out for their weapons.
Then advanced Tiamat and Marduk, the counselor of the gods;
To the fight they came on, to the battle they drew nigh.
The lord spread out his net and caught her,
And the evil wind that was behind him he let loose in her face.
As Tiamat opened her mouth to its full extent,
He drove in the evil wind, while as yet she had not shut her lips.
The terrible winds filled her belly,
And her courage was taken from her, and her mouth she opened wide.
He seized the spear and burst her belly,
He severed her inward parts, he pierced her heart.
He overcame her and cut off her life;
He cast down her body and stood upon it.

Not only do we have a description of war against the Deep but also against the other gods themselves.  More importantly Tiamat (Mother of Life) with the impersonality of the Hebrew Deep or Tehom mentioned in Genesis where she has been compared to Hawa or Eve.  Maybe the Egyptians borrowed the belief from the Sumerians and not the other way around.
Compare also the above recitation to one found in Ezekiel 32:2-8

Quote

2b. You are like(69) a lion(70) among the nations, You are like a dragon(71) in the seas.
You burst forth in your rivers,(72) You stir up the waters with your feet, And foul their(73) rivers.
3. Thus says Yahweh:(74) I will throw my net over you,(75) I(76) will haul you up in my dragnet.
4. I will cast you on the ground, On the open field I will fling you.(77)
I will cause all the birds of the air to settle on you, I will gorge the beasts of the whole(78) earth with you.
5. I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, I will fill the valleys with your carcass.(79)
6. I will drench the land(80) with your flowing blood,(81) The watercourses will be full of you.(82)
7. When I(83) blot you out, I will cover the heavens, I will make the stars dark;
I will cover the sun with a cloud, The moon shall not give its light.
8. All the bright lights of heaven I will blacken over you, I will put darkness upon your land.

Quote

Similarly, the conflict between Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Son of Man depicted in the book of Daniel parallels the Baal Cycle in which the younger god Baal empowered by the older god El defeats Yam (The Sea); see J.J. Collins, �?¢â?¬�??Stirring up the Sea: The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7,�?¢â?¬�? The Book of Daniel in the Light of New Findings; A.S. van der Woude, ed. (Levuven 1993): 121-126.

Interestingly, Tiamat's name is a virtual linguistic cognate for Yam. [ ta- (serpent) + yam- (ocean) + -at (fem. ending) (A sweet potato she wasn't!)]

William S. writes

Quote

The illustrations which are associated with our Book of Abraham most certainly do not have antecedents in the period during which Abraham lived. Abraham did not draw them, nor could they have been drawn during his lifetime, for the motifs themselves are of much later production.

They are not accordant with the Egyptian but certainly with Sumerian.  Here's a couple..First, David's


Secondly, mine...



The similarities are a bit uncanny.

I am forced like David and phaedrus ut that JS had a revelation, a catalytic vision, if you will, of the Book of Abraham.  I am becoming more inclined to believe that JS, Abraham, Amos, Balaam, etc. were all a form of 'supernature' shamans who were able to 'connect' with the divine.  
Anyway, it's late and I need to get to bed.  Nite.

[Warship]

David,

Quote

Semitic texts from the ancient Near East that feature stories of the divine council of gods typically begin with a crisis in which the head God calls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma. During the council, a series of proposals are offered. Finally, a �?¢â?¬�??savior�?¢â?¬�? steps forward, offering his services to the council. This savior then receives a commission to perform his redemptive role (this summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon Parker, �?¢â?¬�??Council,�?¢â?¬�? in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, Karel van der Toorn, et al. eds. Leiden: Brill, 1999: 206).

Quote

These myths, unknown to 19th century audiences at the time of Joseph Smith, feature important parallels with the view of the divine council provided in the Book of Abraham.

Can't the same thing be seen here in Isaiah6:

[8] Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me.
[9] And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.

This info was available to JS through the bible.

Js also demonstated knowledge of this concept during the King Follete Sermon when he gave his interpretation on the meaning of the word  Berosheit.

Edited by Warship, 17 August 2006 - 01:53 AM.

[MAsh]

David Bokovoy, on Aug 16 2006, 11:27 AM, said:

Finally, Kevin�?¢â?¬â?¢ theory also works well with research that I have performed on the connection between Semitic presentation scenes depicted on Mesopotamian cylinder seals and facsimile 3. 

David, is this research published?

[David Bokovoy]

Hello Warship,

Quote

Can't the same thing be seen here in Isaiah6:�?¢â?¬�?¦This info was available to JS through the bible.

Very nice.  Isaiah 6 does indeed reflect the council theme that appears in Abraham (I even wrote on article on this connection in the book Covenants, Prophecies, and Hymns of the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2001).  

However, until quite recently, no one really understood that Isaiah 6 presents a story of the gods in council in which Isaiah himself becomes a member of the celestial assembly (even today, I suspect that many biblical scholars have not yet fully caught on).

It was the discovery of Near Eastern council myths from the world of the Bible that led former Harvard professor Frank Moore Cross to suggest in 1953 that Isaiah was �?¢â?¬�??permitted to become, in effect, a mal�?¢â?¬â?¢?k or herald of Yahweh�?¢â?¬â?¢s council and, like the supernatural herald, to mediate the divine pronouncement.�?¢â?¬�? Frank Moore Cross, Jr., �?¢â?¬�??The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah,�?¢â?¬�? Journal of Near Eastern Studies XII (1953), 275.

Another important treatise concerning Isaiah 6 as a council story appeared in 1989 with  Victor Horowitz�?¢â?¬â?¢s article, �?¢â?¬�??Isaiah�?¢â?¬â?¢s Impure Lips and Their Purification in Light of Akkadian Sources,�?¢â?¬�? in Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989), 39-89.

One of the most interesting Near Eastern connections with Isaiah 6 is the anti-Babylonian witchcraft compilation Maqlu that has yet to even appear fully in print.  

In view of the fact that the Book of Abraham perfectly adopts the imagery featured in Isaiah 6 and places the exchange into the heavenly council of the gods, the council myth serves as evidence for the authenticity of the work.

I�?¢â?¬â?¢m actually headed to Utah in a couple of days to share a series during Education Week concerning the Divine Council in the book of Isaiah.  This is a series that I�?¢â?¬â?¢m really looking forward to sharing.

Quote

Js also demonstrated knowledge of this concept during the King Follete Sermon when he gave his interpretation on the meaning of the word Berosheit.

And where did Joseph Smith gain his knowledge concerning the council of Gods?  I believe that it was in part from his work with the BofA:

�?¢â?¬�??I learned a testimony concerning Abraham, and he reasoned concerning the God of heaven�?¢â?¬�?¦ If Abraham reasoned thus�?¢â?¬â?If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may suppose that he had a Father also�?¢â?¬�?¦�?¢â?¬�? (Teachings, 373).

�?¢â?¬�??Everlasting covenant was made between three personages before the organization of this earth, and relates to their dispensation of things to men on the earth; these personages, according to Abraham�?¢â?¬â?¢s record, are called God the first, the Creator; God the second the Redeemer; and God the third, the witness or Testator�?¢â?¬�? (Teachings, 190).

Edited by David Bokovoy, 17 August 2006 - 09:01 AM.

[David Bokovoy]

Hello Mash,

Quote

David, is this research published?

Not yet.  I�?¢â?¬â?¢m going to include a portion of it in an article that I�?¢â?¬â?¢ve almost finished on Alma 5.  I�?¢â?¬â?¢m not yet sure who, if anyone, is going to pick it up (though I suspect someone will because it really is fun stuff).

Thanks, though, for the interest.