Xander Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 I'm not starting this thread to debate anything in particular. I was just curious if anyone else had heard anything about this. I recently heard from credible sources that John Gee thinks he has discovered the inner portion of the Hor scroll and he just went back to Europe (where it was discovered).If true, this could turn BoA apologetics on its head (again). For those who are knew to this, the inner portion of the Hor scroll is the missing portion which apologists say probably contained the original Book of Abraham. This could be just a bad rumor that evolved down the grapevine, but I thought it couldn't hurt to just throw it out there to see if anyone else had anything they'd like to share about it.
David T Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 I heard the same thing, but very likely from the same place you did. Thus, no further information.
William Schryver Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 (edited) I'm not starting this thread to debate anything in particular. I was just curious if anyone else had heard anything about this. I recently heard from credible sources that John Gee thinks he has discovered the inner portion of the Hor scroll ...John doesn't think he has discovered the inner portion of the scroll of Hor, nor any of the material that was acquired by Joseph Smith from Michael Chandler in Kirtland, Ohio in July 1835.... the inner portion of the Hor scroll is the missing portion which apologists say probably contained the original Book of Abraham.CFR.It's certainly possible that I'm mistaken in this, but I'm not personally aware of a single instance where an apologist (or anyone else, for that matter) has argued that the missing portion of the scroll of Hor contained "the original Book of Abraham."Edit: Clarified one sentence. Edited April 21, 2012 by William Schryver
William Schryver Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 ... I'm not personally aware of a single instance where an apologist (or anyone else, for that matter) has argued that the missing portion of the scroll of Hor contained "the original Book of Abraham."I should clarify that when I say "apologist" above, I'm speaking of serious LDS apologists; published scholars and researchers who are known to be involved in the field of Book of Abraham studies. It is certainly possible, and perhaps even quite likely, that someone has posted, on a blog or message board, his or her own theory that the missing portion of the scroll of Hor contained the Egyptian source text for the Book of Abraham. They may even be correct in this speculation. But I am not aware of any serious student of this topic who has argued, formally, that the missing portion of the scroll of Hor contained "the original Book of Abraham." I don't believe it is possible to adduce evidence sufficient to make such a formal argument. The best one can do is establish the possibility that the missing portion of the scroll of Hor contained the source text for the BoA.
Xander Posted April 21, 2012 Author Posted April 21, 2012 "Why the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?—We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost. 4) Perhaps there was a way of understanding the Egyptian ideograms anciently that is unknown to Egyptology in our day, yet to be discovered, deciphered or acknowledged, that could yield an interpretation of a text that is different than the standard Egyptological reading."http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_PapyriIn 2007 John Gee published his piece using the Hoffman formula to argue that the original length of the papyrus was more than 40 feet long:"When this formula is used, the Document of Breathings scroll (sometimes called the Book of Breathings) in the Joseph Smith Papyri (JSP) is shown to be missing 41±0.5 feet. Obviously, with so much papyri unaccounted for, it is entirely possible that the Book of Abraham was on the portion of the Joseph Smith papyri which was destroyed."http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Size_of_missing_papyrusSince that time there has been an occasional and usually heated back and forth between the apologists (mostly by you) and critics Chris Smith and Andrew Cook, debating the validity of Gee's argument. Now if the apologetic value of Gee's claim has nothing to do with suggesting the Book of Abraham could have been located on this same exact papyrus, then what pray tell, is the purpose of arguing for such a 40 ft scroll?
William Schryver Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 I rest my case that, to my knowledge, no one has ever attempted to argue that the Egyptian source text of the Book of Abraham was on the missing portion of the scroll of Hor. Has it been presented as a possibility? Yes. But these are two distinctly different things.BTW, who is spreading the rumor that John Gee has discovered the missing portion of the scroll of Hor? That's a pretty wild one. Almost as good as some of the stuff Doctor Scratch comes up with.
Xander Posted April 21, 2012 Author Posted April 21, 2012 (edited) I rest my case that, to my knowledge, no one has ever attempted to argue that the Egyptian source text of the Book of Abraham was on the missing portion of the scroll of Hor. Has it been presented as a possibility? Yes. But these are two distinctly different things.BTW, who is spreading the rumor that John Gee has discovered the missing portion of the scroll of Hor? That's a pretty wild one. Almost as good as some of the stuff Doctor Scratch comes up with. Well at least we know Scratch's informant exists and that he has real insight to some of the issues he raises, but I agree this one is pretty wild. There are some folks on Facebook discussing it. Apparently, the rumor started at some recent conference.The FAIR article I linked shows that this is in fact a popular theory among apologists and the only reason it is a theory at all is because of the arguments by John Gee and Kevin Barney. Again, that's the whole point of arguing for a longer Hor scroll- to make room for enough text to account for the Book of Abraham. To give fence-straddlers hope in a yet another "possibility." Edited April 21, 2012 by Xander
William Schryver Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Apparently, the rumor started at some recent conference.There is a very tenuous relationship between the rumor and a fact, but it sounds like one of those "Chinese Whisper" things where the initial fact gets transformed into something entirely different by the time it passes through a handful of people. Anyway, it's not my place to report on what John has discovered. I will only say that it has nothing to do with the scroll of Hor.
mfbukowski Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Sounds like someone scratching...to stir up a reaction. Someone who has no life other than to do things like this. Gosh, who could that be? 1
Xander Posted April 21, 2012 Author Posted April 21, 2012 Sounds like someone scratching...to stir up a reaction. Someone who has no life other than to do things like this. Gosh, who could that be?Sounds like you're jumping to conclusions. The rumor was started at what I believe to have been a scholarly get together of some sort, and it was started by LDS folks who claimed to be in the know. Doctor Scratch has nothing to do with this.Frankly I always took it with a grain of salt, and I'm glad to see it laid to rest.
Chris Smith Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 (edited) There is a very tenuous relationship between the rumor and a fact, but it sounds like one of those "Chinese Whisper" things where the initial fact gets transformed into something entirely different by the time it passes through a handful of people. Anyway, it's not my place to report on what John has discovered. I will only say that it has nothing to do with the scroll of Hor.Thanks, good to know. I was skeptical of the rumor too, but until now I haven't been able to get anyone in the know to say one way or the other.Sounds like someone scratching...to stir up a reaction. Someone who has no life other than to do things like this. Gosh, who could that be?Actually the rumor came from a faithful, sometime-teacher at BYU. Edited April 21, 2012 by Chris Smith
William Schryver Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Actually the rumor came from a faithful, sometime-teacher at BYU.I suspect it was someone who is not particularly well-versed in the details of the Joseph Smith Papyri, and that's the reason for the confusion.I'm trying to determine whether or not the information is being kept "under-wraps" until John himself announces his finding--otherwise I would clarify the whole matter here and now. I'll try giving him a call at home again in a little while ...
William Schryver Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Either way, this sounds somewhat interesting.Still no answer at the Gee residence.I do believe I can state the following at this point in time without getting myself in trouble: anything that John may or may not have found, in France or any other place in Europe, Asia, or Antarctica, was never in the possession of Joseph Smith, although it may have a relationship to something that was in the possession of Joseph Smith.
Chris Smith Posted April 21, 2012 Posted April 21, 2012 Interesting. I assume you're not talking about the P. N Louvre 3207, 3208, 3209 fragments of a Book of the Dead owned by the same Hor who owned the Document of Breathing?
Duncan Posted April 23, 2012 Posted April 23, 2012 http://ca.news.yahoo.com/rare-egyptian-scrolls-found-australia-collection-075458685.htmlI am wondering if this isn't it?
Recommended Posts