By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus

[John Williams]

As for this entire issue of "written by his own hand upon papyrus," I have long considered it a transparent canard. I believe it has little, if any, negative effect on believing Latter-day Saints,

On this we agree.

and is only a comfort to former believers who are constantly on the lookout to collect "good reasons" to satisfy their endless need of justifications for their apostasy.

Nah, we just like to throw out nonsensical stuff to confuse you guys. Looks like it's working.

[Chris Smith]

First the critics argue that the BoB is the source of BOA and then they argue that it isn't. And this, with no cognitive dissonance!

It is the document that Joseph Smith considered to be the source of the Book of Abraham, and indeed it did suggest major story elements. Joseph looked at the pictures and the hieroglyphs and imaginatively created a theological narrative to go along with them.

But critics and apologists agree that the BoB is not the source of the Book of Abraham in an Egyptological sense.

The critics' position is not contradictory when it is understood and accurately represented.

[Chris Smith]

It's apparent that neither you nor Mr. Smith are capable of appreciating the import of the William West statement that William cited, nor the import of Nibley's argument cited by Rommelator in the original post.

Those who read West's statement in conjunction with the Mathie link I posted above will notice that where there are lacunae in the papyrus, Joseph invented characters to fill them. Presumably that is what West was referring to.

Certainly West's statement does not by itself prove that the Book of Breathings was not Joseph's source for the Book of Abraham, however much certain posters may wish it were so.

-Chris

[John Williams]

Those who read West's statement in conjunction with the Mathie link I posted above will notice that where there are lacunae in the papyrus, Joseph invented characters to fill them. Presumably that is what West was referring to.

Certainly West's statement does not by itself prove that the Book of Breathings was not Joseph's source for the Book of Abraham, however much certain posters may wish it were so.

-Chris

No, we're just not capable of appreciating the import of West's statement. We're either stubborn or thick, or maybe both.

[Pahoran]

CFR - I'm looking at my copy of the standard works and not seeing that, anywhere.

Really? This is what my copy says:

THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM

TRANSLATED FROM THE PAPYRUS, BY JOSEPH SMITH

A Translation of some ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt.â??The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus. See History of the Church, vol. 2, pp. 235, 236, 348â??351.

It's right there in the heading. And you didn't see it?

Maybe that tells us something.

Of course, as I said, I'm not sure why it would matter even if it is in the title, so maybe you could explain why this matters at the same time you tell us the source of this.

As for the source, see above. "By his own hand upon papyrus" is an organic part of what the work was called.

Therefore it is not a claim that whatever papyri Joseph owned constituted an autographic document.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Chris Smith]

As for the source, see above. "By his own hand upon papyrus" is an organic part of what the work was called.

Therefore it is not a claim that whatever papyri Joseph owned constituted an autographic document.

But see this post above, among others.

[Pahoran]

For those who are interested, here is further evidence that shows JS to have believed his document to have been an Abraham autograph:

And now the part where Will dismisses these eyewitnesses by rhetorical fiat. So, I'll let him have the last word.

Peace,

-Chris

Question, Chris: why did you conveniently snip the Quincy quote right before the bit where he claimed that Joseph claimed to have the autographs of Moses and Aaron, too?

That couldn't possibly have been because that shows the kind of exaggeration that your vaunted eyewitnesses were prone to, could it?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Chris Smith]

Question, Chris: why did you conveniently snip the Quincy quote right before the bit where he claimed that Joseph claimed to have the autographs of Moses and Aaron, too?

That couldn't possibly have been because that shows the kind of exaggeration that your vaunted eyewitnesses were prone to, could it?

Regards,

Pahoran

I just typed a response and then hit backspace and instead of backspacing in the typing window it made my browser go "back" to the last page I viewed, and when I went forward again my whole response was gone. How frustrating.

Anyway, here's the gist of what I had written. I don't know what to think of Quincy's claim that the papyri contained Moses and Aaron's signatures. Reasons to doubt it include first that it is not confirmed by any other source, and second that one eyewitness account has Mother Lucy saying that it was Joseph of Egypt who buried the papyri on the queen's breast. That of course would exclude the possibility of Moses having ever seen it.

On the other hand, Quincy goes on to report that the papyri contained an account of creation that Moses used in his composition of Genesis-- a perfectly plausible claim given the similarity of the Abraham creation account to the Book of Moses/Genesis. And another witness reported that Mother Lucy made one of the mummies Princess Thermutis, Moses' adoptive mother. These reports suggest that Moses might have had access to the papyri after all. Certainly James R. Clark seems to have believed Quincy's report in this regard when he wrote his book The Story of the Pearl of Great Price. Clark compared the handing down of this record through the family line to the similar handing down of the Book of Mormon and the Book of the Generations of Adam.

So, it may be that Quincy was here accurately reporting Smith's claim, or it may be that Quincy was misremembering or misreporting what he had heard. (Perhaps, for example, Smith pointed to the signature of Abraham as he had in the presence of another visitor, and Quincy mixed up the names.) Such misremembering and misreporting on the part of eyewitnesses is unfortunately frustratingly commonplace in the historical record, and I have found it to be a particular problem in assessing the evidence around the Book of Abraham (where we often are trying to achieve a degree of precision that was not in the witnesses' purview). But my general rule of thumb is along the lines of the old "two or three witnesses" rule. If two or more people independently report the same thing, or if the plausibility of a report can be established based on information gleaned from other sources, then we're relatively safe in accepting it. That's certainly the case with respect to Abraham's handwriting appearing on the papyri.

Best,

-Chris

[Vance]

It is the document that Joseph Smith considered to be the source of the Book of Abraham, and indeed it did suggest major story elements. Joseph looked at the pictures and the hieroglyphs and imaginatively created a theological narrative to go along with them.

Do you "know" the "real" thoughts and actions of other dead people? Or just JS?

Can you also do it with the living?

[William Schryver]

Do you "know" the "real" thoughts and actions of other dead people? Or just JS?

Can you also do it with the living?

Oh, I assure you, Chris knows all. Chris sees all. Before long, Chris may even be all, at which point the rest of us will cease to exist, except in his rapturously expansive mind.

It is interesting how what were previously only theories of the origins of the Book of Abraham have become, in the hands of the inimitable Christopher Smith, MA, veritable "facts."

I guess that's what higher "lernin" and advanced "edjewcayshun" will do for a man.

[Chris Smith]

Do you "know" the "real" thoughts and actions of other dead people? Or just JS?

Not exhaustively or with 100% certainty. But yes, there are things we can know (with varying degrees of probability) about people's thoughts, feelings, and intentions by examining the historical evidence.

Can you also do it with the living?

I'm not too bad at reading people, sure. Unless it's a girl I like. Then my mind goes numb and I can barely tie my shoes.

Oh, I assure you, Chris knows all. Chris sees all. Before long, Chris may even be all, at which point the rest of us will cease to exist, except in his rapturously expansive mind.

I've never been too optimistic about the literal possibility of achieving gnosis and oneness with God, but I am trying to expand my consciousness and achieve a greater understanding of the universe, it's true.

If I ever do manage to achieve a godlike state in which you are merely a figment of my imagination, William, I promise I won't change a thing about you. The world would be so much less colorful if you weren't you.

Peace,

-Chris

[structurecop]

in the hands of the inimitable Christopher Smith, MA, veritable "facts."

I guess that's what higher "lernin" and advanced "edjewcayshun" will do for a man.

Jealous much, Will?

[Mortal Man]

Assuming that there was, in fact, an Abraham text on the scroll of Horos, even that text itself need not have contained the phrase in question, since the apologetic argument has consistently argued for the sentiments contained in the report of William West:

These records were torn by being taken from the roll of embalming salve which contained them, and some parts entirely lost; but Smith is to translate the whole by divine inspiration, and that which is lost, like Nebuchadnezzar's dream, can be interpreted as well as that which is preserved ...

William S. West, A Few Interesting Facts Respecting the Rise Progress and Pretensions of the Mormons (1837), 5.

Will,

Do you believe that the BoA was left inside the roll of embalming salve?