Olavarria Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 Can you tell me anything about your paper? What it's about, where it will appear, an ETA? I'm sure I'll be interested.If a copy of the BoA were appended to the BoB, then it would have been produced roughly contemporaneously in time, so yes, it likely would have been written in hieratic.My hypothetical J-Red would have been an Egyptian, but also Jewish. Egyptians weren't monolithic at the time. But beyond that, I'm not convinced that Joseph himself fully understood his inspired translation projects, either as to process or setting.On your last question, I quite agree that conceptually this same kind of adaptation could have been undertaken by Joseph himself. The middleman is simply a very plausible possibility given well established Jewish adaptation of Egyptian sources at the time the JSP were created, and I think that is perhaps a spoonfull of sugar to help people come to grips with adaptation as a possibility. But I agree that a possibility on the table is that Joseph was the one adapting the vignettes as illustrations for the BoA.Given that the Vignettes and Hypocephalus come from the Greco-Roman period, their use in the BoA MUST BE a post-Abrahamic redaction. Whether an ancient redaction or a modern one, that is a seperate issue.
Olavarria Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 for anyone thats interested, my blog has some notes on the hypocephalus.
Olavarria Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 for anyone thats interested, my blog has some notes on the hypocephalus.If the Egyptian vignettes and hypocephalus are being redacted for use in a non-Egyptian document,why must Joseph's interpretations be tested in an "pagan Egyptian" vacume? The OP is based on the premise that it does.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 If the Egyptian vignettes and hypocephalus are being redacted for use in a non-Egyptian document,why must Joseph's interpretations be tested in an "pagan Egyptian" vacume? The OP is based on the premise that it does.Exactly. I am quite sure that this point will be ignored.
volgadon Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 Russ has gone back to lick his wounds, no doubt crowing that the victory's been won.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 Russ has gone back to lick his wounds, no doubt crowing that the victory's been won.That is really strange, all he did was assert something that it would seem that everybody agreed with him, to some extant, anyway. That is the JS explination of the facs did not resemble and egyptian understanding.
gmormon Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 That is really strange, all he did was assert something that it would seem that everybody agreed with him, to some extant, anyway. That is the JS explination of the facs did not resemble and egyptian understanding.Therein is the problem...you where agreeing with him somewhat and now he can got back to his other site and claim victory for you all coming to his point of view
volgadon Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 Serapis was a very well known deity, was he not? Never stopped anyone from identifying him with Joseph.....
volgadon Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 Here are some more. Moses/Mousaios, Enoch/Atlas and Kush/Asbolos.
Pahoran Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 Here are some more. Moses/Mousaios, Enoch/Atlas and Kush/Asbolos.In the same vein, I remember reading that some of the earliest Christian iconography of Jesus was directly borrowed from contemporary representations of Apollo.Who was a (gasp) PAGAN deity!No Christians would ever do that!!!!Or would they...?Regards,Pahoran
volgadon Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 In the same vein, I remember reading that some of the earliest Christian iconography of Jesus was directly borrowed from contemporary representations of Apollo.Who was a (gasp) PAGAN deity!No Christians would ever do that!!!!Or would they...?Regards,PahoranI completly forgot about the Christ Pantocrator borrowing imagery from the Zeus of Olympia.
Darth J Posted February 16, 2010 Posted February 16, 2010 P.S. LDS apologists desire to come off as experts on the matter, but the real experts disagree with you.IF LDS apologists desire to be taken seriously, they should present peer-reviewed, non-LDS material substantiating Smith's claims.I see. Peer-reviewed, non-LDS "material" substantiating Joseph Smith's claims that he was divinely inspired to understand a previously unknown revelation that Abraham had received several centuries before.Because peer-review in science is applicable to religious faith. And because the LDS Church purports to espouse scientifically testable hypotheses.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.