Tweed1944

Someone emailed me a copy and I created a google doc to share it. I shared with our Egyptologist contact and that was her response. It was in a journal that I imagine few people would have access to. If that is a problem I can delete it. I use google docs to share emails, letters etc

deleted

I could ask for permission to mention their name. They said they don't like to gaslight Muhlestein and Gee.

Gee did a review of Tamas Mekis book on the hypocephalus. My source said "They shouldn’t even allow Gee to write reviews given his religious assumptions and biases. BiOr should know better, but Europeans don’t understand the LDS entanglement with Egyptology. Please tell Tamas Mekis to just disregard the review."

One Egyptologist on KerryM sacrifice ' And yes, as for human sacrifice, many of us have never stopped believing that human sacrifice happened, myself included —during the 1st Dynasty especially as sacrificial burials of fellow courtiers, and just recently proved for the 17th Dynasty of foreign (?) enemies. But most smiting motifs suggest the practice continued ritually, and we just haven’t found the evidence. Such human sacrifice would have looked nothing like the sacrifice on a funerary bier as presented in the Book of Abraham because that funerary bier comes from the mummification from a book of breathing.

Do you think Joseph Smith was aware that the hypocephalus was not unique and multiple copies existed.

https://rsc.byu.edu/introduction-book-abraham/facsimiles?fbclid=IwAR3waoZQcCd9lWkMOlDuxWri10SWylGBQQTiAUTzZp9wq0VPEbRgFxAZZIc One response I got on Gee " Gee: "Parallel scenes on grave stele usually included a formula about living in the presence of Osiris that in later times replaces the Egyptian god Osiris with Abraham." So "parallel" scenes [how parallel? From what place and time period?] replace Osiris with Abraham." Could this be from when a whole lot of Jews lived in Egypt after the diaspora? Sometimes I think their Osiris-Abraham argument is like claiming that "ancient Americans compared the great spirit to Jesus Christ" and it turns out that the "ancient Americans" they're talking about are the British settlers in Massachusetts Bay in the 1600s. Designed to fool someone who doesn't know the territory."Egyptian temples are explicitly labeled as initiations. Known initiation rituals from Greco-Roman Egypt include instruction in astronomy as part of the initiation." So "parallel" scenes (i.e. different scenes) are labeled "initiation." and other different "initiation scenes" include astronomy. That's a lot of grasping if you ask me. But as I always point out Facsimile 3 has the most readable text which Joseph Smith translated and gives his translation right there in the BOA. And he gets it completely wrong. This they don't talk about.It's like saying, "there was someone else who didn't like the murder victim and he knew someone who had a gun." while ignoring the defendant's fingerprints on the murder weapon that ballistics has proven fired the fatal shots."

Here is a paper by Egyptologist Tamas Mekis on the hypocephalus https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fc7q4KNlr01H7J4xr7HnU_yL8ACaQC08kAoEkVt3DDc/edit?usp=sharing Here is the collection of the hypocephali held at the British Museum. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?object=hypocephalus&fbclid=IwAR1mf5jmVTStsjGiXmrJUcL-MsgRjROS6tLwPKSjYravybT7o5hzRooFkQA

Dan's comment on homosexuality very revealing. I had read Dr Gnuse paper on Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality. I have had several email exchanges with him and I am sure he will agree with much of what Dan Mcclellan has argued on Mormonstories. More discussion on the roll of women. . Any evangelical or LDS member will have their traditional views challenged. Hagar was Sarah's property which she gifted Abraham not a polygamous wife. Ben I will like to see your response to McClellan.

deleted

Amazing how much the LDS church has changed since i was a kid. I remember the class manual where Sperry attacked the multiple authorship of Isaiah. I had an Institute teacher who said it was thought Job was not historical. Nibley was the flavor of the month and a GD teacher had all Skousens books. Meanwhile the Tanners and Dialogue stirred thinks up. Odea in his book on the Mormons mentioned how dangerous it was to send the young scholars to the Ivy League universities. I read Stirling McMurrin's book on the Theological Foundations of Mormonism a man Joseph Fielding Smith wanted disciplined but President McKay wanted him left alone. Now we have the Stoddards looking for heresies in Behind Closed Doors. If the church gets too liberal it will go the way C S Lewis says in Fern Seeds and Elephants the average church member will see no reason to stay.

Well after being banned for a few days I am back. I watched long interview with Daniel McClellan on Mormon Stories. His tick tock series Data over Dogma is quite popular. His views will be seen as troublesome for the orthodox LDS member. I received an email from a Biblical scholar at BYU who said "Abraham is a can of worms, and it gets people all worked up in ways that I find nauseating. To stay safe, I would say that the Book of Abraham is a revelation and not a history book." He also accepts the multiple authorship of Isaiah. What is it about the LDS scholars who do advanced studies in other institutions come back with ideas that are challenging to traditional LDS views of scripture. Would it hurt if the facsimiles were dropped? Was the slaves face mutilated in facsimile 3? Look at the printing plate. Do you think Smith was aware that facsimile 2 was not unique? Looking at the examples in Tamas Mekis' book it seems the facsimile was not so unique. Tamas Mekis's thoughts on the "slave" https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hy48-P-YZQpzOKaRyyzMZ2Zvko01NJUlwAZD39OJ5qM/edit I know this debate can get exhausting so I appreciate both your contributions.

"As will be shown, Givens’ attempt at a balanced portrayal of some of the difficulties and controversies surrounding the Book of Abraham eventually gives way to his ultimate conclusion that, at least in this case, it does not appear that Joseph Smith provided an English translation of an ancient text written by Abraham after all. Rather, for Givens, the evidence demonstrates that the Prophet mistakenly thought he was translating an ancient writing of Abraham from characters that were actually part of an ancient Egyptian text known as a Book of Breathings, while simultaneously creating a modern story of Abraham in his own fertile, if not divinely inspired, mind. [Page 4]After outlining some problems surrounding Joseph Smith’s explanations of the Egyptian vignettes and other evidence that appears to demonstrate the Prophet used the Book of Breathings as his source for “translating” the Book of Abraham, Givens concludes: Givens comes across and a gentle honest man, the type of man who in my youth would have loved to have as my Bishop. In my exchanges with him he wished me well in my journey. At the end of the day what matters. I am going to party this next weekend to celebrate a long time LDS friends 80th birthday who unfortunately has brain cancer. Both her and her husband work a lot performing in the local temple.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/printing-plate-for-facsimile-3-circa-16-may-1842/1 Chisel marks in from of the "slave" https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o1yLhj419YgEUkbC-8947kO4iLBrs97ANJmH_QEeWJI/edit?usp=sharing notice the movement of the three figures Maat, Hor and Anubis moving towards Osiris

Snoopy's thoughts https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cdOwgBJaECGEzol2pwYiAGoxgAFNBoVD-8ke5C5URF0/edit

"repurposing" the latest buzzword for LDS apologists. What do you think Smith would have done with the "Holy Ghost" if it had looked like Nehebkau. Smith did not have a clue what he was doing. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1It7wOu1Hog3SADHI8F4RPQSH2HElCUrHpCmsIL08ktw/edit Smith was a "pious fraud"

Israel Finkelstein has a chapter in his book The Bible Unearthed questioning the historicity of Abraham. He points out a number of anachronisms.

Maybe he likes being employed.

I repeat a comment made to me from a BYU scholar in Biblical studies " "Abraham is a can of worms, and it gets people all worked up in ways that I find nauseating. To stay safe, I would say that the Book of Abraham is a revelation and not a history book." Stay safe with revelation not translation.

Why did the "characters in the BOB adjacent to facsimile 1 " appear in the column of the manuscripts of the Book of Abraham. They even created some characters to fill in the V gap. So he attempts to interpret figure 3 in facsimile 2 (made to represent God) something he took from another piece of papyri (check bottom right, the figure in the boat). https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-87zHvKQxp8XKlhrkl_xaDCsESUbc5VapxQ3Q9Dge0E/edit As is indicated check the holding on the British Museum, top right hand corner. The scarab appears in all. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/Y_EA35875 https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?object=hypocephalus&fbclid=IwAR1mf5jmVTStsjGiXmrJUcL-MsgRjROS6tLwPKSjYravybT7o5hzRooFkQA Check out the "dove" which in the sketch does not show what it really is. The sketch just shows the head which one could mistake for a bird/dove. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vYqfTAwR2xVx0gKruLt_ylbU9hBz4EZ7pqSh0uUm8lg/edit "The next figure is Nehebkau who offers the wedjat-eye to the sitting deity before him.81 Among some interpretations in the ba-theology he represents the morning sun assimilated to Khepri, rising from the underworld. This kind of association is understandable as it represents the tenth ba of Amun, the last ba, which unifies the chthonic creatures, the snakes, insects and other crawling animals. Nehebkau in this form appears on the walls of the crypt of the edifice of Taharqa in Karnak. During the ritual of the decade festival in the crypt of the edifice, Amun unites with his ten bas, among them that last ba is represented by Nehebkau. With this finishing act of the ritual, Amun is awakened, is reborn, comes up from the shade of the underworld-crypt, and by coming up to the cult statue at the surface, the sun also comes symbolically out to light.82 In the funerary context of this scene on Register III, the god and the offering of the wedjat-eye represents that power which is necessary for the rebirth of the deceased. Myśliwiec in his writings about Atum also raises an interesting idea in relation to the interpretation of Nehebkau. In his opinion that is supported by textual evidence, Nehabkau is identified with the Atum-serpent. On P. Brooklyn 47.218.156 Nehebkau appears as an offerer of the young sun-god enclosed within a disk having the pantheistic deity legend . In this aspect the serpent also unifies the three aspects of the sun-god - Khepri, Ra and Atum.83 On certain hypocephali Nehebkau is represented as a falcon-headed-snake offering the wedjat-eye. We can now explain more easily the unity of the forms that perfectly fit in the concept of the register. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fc7q4KNlr01H7J4xr7HnU_yL8ACaQC08kAoEkVt3DDc/edit

One Egyptologist who I shared Gee's review of Tamas Mekis' book on the hypocephalus said the journal which was published in Europe should not have accepted it because of his strange religious worldview. " Tell Tamas Mekis to ignore it. " Do a search on Google Scholar and see how much work appears in church publications compared to nonlds academic journals by LDS Gee and Muhlestein. . Doesn't it seem strange to you that if he was translating a "missing scroll" that he could also translate the writing in fac 2 no's 8 onwards " "contains writings... Ought not be revealed .... If the world can find out these numbers .... etc .

That is Terryl Givens speaking

So accepting the catalyst theory allows you to accept the claims by Egyptologists that Smith's interpretations are wrong which Givens accepts. No worries with the "missing Book of Abraham (Gee). Accept the fact that Smith might have restored missing parts of the facsimiles incorrectly. EG Was the standing figure in facsimile 1 holding a knife or a jar https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1llnhvfouDJwhhGFoVBzXpf3-Feor1WHO-xWnHNVYg/edit?usp=sharing We know from the sketch that parts of facsimile 2 were damage and missing and replaced with things that don't belong there. eg figure 3. It seems that a figure standing in a boat with a scarab (insect) would be the item most likely originally there. See examples in the British Museum. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/search?object=hypocephalus&fbclid=IwAR1mf5jmVTStsjGiXmrJUcL-MsgRjROS6tLwPKSjYravybT7o5hzRooFkQA In facsimile 3 it seems the slaves (Anubis) face has been mutilated (left with one ear) Examine the printing plate. Does it look like some chiseled his face? Imagine Nibley's scribblings on the Sed festival not needed. His friend Klaus Baer's response valid. I understand Skousen's view of the facsimiles.

It seems many are joining the catalyst theory. eg Givens My views are pretty clearly laid out in my book, The Pearl of Greatest Price. In brief, leading LDS authorities and scholars all acknowledged as early as 1912 that JSs explanation of the facsimiles was not consistent with Egyptian scholarship. What came to be called the catalyst theory was put forward more than a century ago-- JS produced something that was inspired, but it was likely not a straightforward translation of the papyri he was working with. As for the future of the facsimiles, I cannot see the church moving away from their position, since the facsimiles and their "explanation" are part of canonized scripture." The folks who wrote "Behind Closed Doors" seem to be attacking the folks at the Maxwell Institute of which Givens in associated with.

deleted