Robert Ritner and Facsimile 3

[David Bokovoy]

I don't think David is defending the Semitic adaptation theory a la Barney.

Critics need to recognize that when it comes to the BofA that they are in fact fighting a losing battle. Contrary to the opinion of detractors, apologists for the BofA are not simply grasping at far-fetched straws.

There exist three undeniable facts concerning the BofA:

1. Semitic Adaptation is a fact, not a theory.

2. The type of adaptation responsible for the BofA, i.e. iconotropy or syncretism appears in the Bible.

3. The BofA contains a number of direct religious and cultural links with the ancient Near East.

First, Semitic Adaptation in the BofA is a fact.

The only theoretical aspect to Kevinâ??s views includes Kevinâ??s hypothetical Egyptian-Jewish redactor with the original name J-red. According to Kevinâ??s theory, 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.

Kevinâ??s view is certainly a possibility. I tend to believe, however, that the evidence suggests that the Prophet Joseph himself is responsible for adapting the Egyptian symbols and putting them into an ancient Semitic context.

When I stated ealier that my understanding of the BofA is in some areas in a state of flux, this refers to the fact that I am open to having my mind changed by scholars such as John Gee and Brian Hauglid to accept the idea that we do not have the papyrus used by Joseph to produce the BofA, but at least right now, in my mind that suggestion does not appear very strong.

Like everyone else, Iâ??m anxiously awaiting Brian and Brentâ??s forthcoming work on the matter and am willing, as a believer, to simply accept which ever way the evidence suggests.

Honestly, whether an ancient Jewish editor or the Prophet Joseph Smith himself was responsible for the Semitic adaptation witnessed in the BofA, in my mind the result is the exact same: Through the adaptation of Egyptian symbols, the BofA contains an inspired portrayal of God, man, and the universe.

Second, even a cursory survey of this biblical trend of assimilating while revamping â??paganâ? religious traditions like those adapted in the BofA would produce literally hundreds of examples.

One classic illustration of biblical adaptation includes Godâ??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 Fishbaneâ??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?

[e=mc2]

you rang?

LOL!

[Chris Smith]

I'll go along with that 100%. But to me, the value of other-centeredness shrinks to zero if you divide the time we spend in this life by the infinity of non-existence. If there is nothing after death, then this life is a cruel joke.

Hey Mortal,

Here's my view on afterlife, if you're interested.

-Chris

[Chris Smith]

Critics need to recognize that when it comes to the BofA that they are in fact fighting a losing battle.

That's easy to state, but not so easy to demonstrate.

I tend to believe, however, that the evidence suggests that the Prophet Joseph himself is responsible for adapting the Egyptian symbols and putting them into an ancient Semitic context.

I agree. Of course, I think he did this by employing resources like the Bible and Josephus rather than by miraculously accessing antiquity via inspiration.

I don't particularly have a problem with the rest of your post. Yes, the Bible did borrow from neighboring cultures and was firmly rooted within its historical context. Just, I might add, as Joseph Smith was.

-Chris

[David Bokovoy]

That's easy to state, but not so easy to demonstrate.

I agree. Of course, I think he did this by employing resources like the Bible and Josephus rather than by miraculously accessing antiquity via inspiration.

I don't particularly have a problem with the rest of your post. Yes, the Bible did borrow from neighboring cultures and was firmly rooted within its historical context. Just, I might add, as Joseph Smith was.

-Chris

Thanks, Chris.

I don't always agree with your position, but I always enjoy reading what you have to say. As has been said, I too appreciate the friendly way you express your challenges.

best,

--DB

[Chris Smith]

Thanks, Chris.

I don't always agree with your position, but I always enjoy reading what you have to say. As has been said, I too appreciate the friendly way you express your challenges.

best,

--DB

Thanks, David. Always a pleasure to exchange ideas with someone as intelligent, sincere, and irenic as yourself.

[Bill Hamblin]

I don't always agree with your position, but I always enjoy reading what you have to say. As has been said, I too appreciate the friendly way you express your challenges.

Thanks, David. Always a pleasure to exchange ideas with someone as intelligent, sincere, and irenic as yourself.

If you guys are done holding hands and singing Kumbaya, could we please get back to arguing?

[e=mc2]

If you guys are done holding hands and singing Kumbaya, could we please get back to arguing?

Aw come on Bill..... I was enjoying the two-part harmony.....