Book Of Abraham Critiques: Requesting Your Opinion

[helix]

http://ahayahyashiya...not-hamite.html

So perhaps the Book of Abraham contains an anachonism based on Talmudic misunderstanding that the negroid race was "hamitic" along with the Egyptians, both being descended from Cain and to be presided over by the descendant of Hams brothers.

I covered this a bit here: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/58847-cursing-in-the-churchs-early-days/

In short, the curse of Ham has nothing scripturally to do with the curse of Cain.

[Robert F. Smith]

It is a statement he made. If you need confirmation I suggest you email him. But why would you need Hauglid to agree with what is a basic principle in scholarship?

-----------------------------------

You're new here, crixus, so you may not realize that a CFR requires you to back up what you claim with an actual citation. Telling others to go looking for it is not acceptable.

[Robert F. Smith]

exmormonatheistofutah, on 10 June 2013 - 01:33 AM, said:

http://ahayahyashiya...not-hamite.html

So perhaps the Book of Abraham contains an anachonism based on Talmudic misunderstanding that the negroid race was "hamitic" along with the Egyptians, both being descended from Cain and to be presided over by the descendant of Hams brothers.

I covered this a bit here: http://www.mormondia...chs-early-days/

In short, the curse of Ham has nothing scripturally to do with the curse of Cain.

That is pretty good coverage, helix. I would add that, if Joseph Smith thought that black people were cursed as to the priesthood (it is laughable that someone would suggest that he got the notion from a mis-reading of the Jewish talmud), then why did he so readily ordain black people to the priesthood and inveigh against slavery -- while in the South the so-called "Chistians" tried to justify owning other people because they had the imaginary "curse of Cain."

Another thing: Cain and Canaanites might look similar in English, but they come from very different and unrelated Hebrew roots with completely different meanings: Qayin and Kena'an.

[Robert F. Smith]

-----------------------

You say this as a matter of fact. Can you point to any official LDS pronouncement describing the Grammar project as a "cipher key"? How does your last remark jive with the fact that Joseph Smith indicated many years later that he wanted to continue with the project? This view that the project was an abject failure and so it was abandoned, is a baseless assumption, but one that must be adopted by the "cipher key" theorists because the theory itself is nonsensical (why would Joseph Smith want to encrypt revelations he was about to publish anyway?)

Some have suggested that the so-called "Alphabet & Grammar" was an attempt to reverse engineer the meaning of Egyptian characters via mundane comparison with an already extant Book of Abraham text. If that is so, why was the project abandoned? Why did it fail in application? Don't confuse ends with means.

On the other hand, we actually have the May 27, 1835 letter of W. W. Phelps to his wife describing the cipher project which predated the arrival of mummies and papyri in Kirtland. Will Schryver has shown conclusively that Phelps was the “dominant force” in continuing that effort – which utilized an already extant, complete Book of Abraham text along with significant portions of already extant revelations (D&C 76 and 88). See William Schryver, “The Meaning and Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers,” paper delivered at the 2010 Conference of FAIR, see his collection of videos at http://vimeo.com and add to that /user439270/videos/sort:oldest (can't get it online here any other way). Cf. also Christopher Smith, “The Inspired Fictionalization of the 1835 United Firm Revelations,” Claremont Journal of Mormon Studies, 1/1 (Apr 2011), 15-31; Samuel Brown, “Joseph (Smith) in Egypt: Babel, Hieroglyphs, and the Pure Language of Eden,” Church History, 78/1 (Mar 2009), 26-65;; Howard J. Wing, “Cryptograms from the Fractal Chiasmus of Messianic Speech in the Doctrine and Covenants,” School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, undated; copy in BYU Special Collections, MSS 3776, Box 6, Folder 107.

I think Brian Hauglid has it right when he says we should take the project on its own terms. It claims to be an Alphabet and Grammar of the Egyptian language. So why not just accept that?

CFR

Google Translator doesn't teach languages either, but it is a tool to translate. Like the tool of "revelation," the end product is still considered a translation from one language to another.

So revelation is merely a translator app for your smartphone/droid? What operating system does it use, and what CPU serves it? Is it the mind of God? Or is there a feedback loop through the mind of the prophet in order to put the ideas into his language and his understanding?

When I do a translation from one language to another, I don't use some hightech instrument. Just my mind and a dictionary. No divine mediation. Perhaps you'd like to show us how all translation modes and products are the same?

That's a bold claim given the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Do you have any evidence to back it up?

I'd like to see this "overwhelming evidence to the contrary." My summary statement was presented on this board last year, and you can find it conveniently online at http://www.scribd.co...Book-of-Abraham . No one has been able to refute it thus far. You are welcome to try.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Robert F. Smith

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Some have suggested that the so-called "Alphabet & Grammar" was an attempt to reverse engineer the meaning of Egyptian characters via mundane comparison with an already extant Book of Abraham text. If that is so, why was the project abandoned? Why did it fail in application? Don't confuse ends with means.

On the other hand, we actually have the May 27, 1835 letter of W. W. Phelps to his wife describing the cipher project which predated the arrival of mummies and papyri in Kirtland. Will Schryver has shown conclusively that Phelps was the “dominant force” in continuing that effort – which utilized an already extant, complete Book of Abraham text along with significant portions of already extant revelations (D&C 76 and 88). See William Schryver, “The Meaning and Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers,” paper delivered at the 2010 Conference of FAIR, see his collection of videos at http://vimeo.com and add to that /user439270/videos/sort:oldest (can't get it online here any other way). Cf. also Christopher Smith, “The Inspired Fictionalization of the 1835 United Firm Revelations,” Claremont Journal of Mormon Studies, 1/1 (Apr 2011), 15-31; Samuel Brown, “Joseph (Smith) in Egypt: Babel, Hieroglyphs, and the Pure Language of Eden,” Church History, 78/1 (Mar 2009), 26-65;; Howard J. Wing, “Cryptograms from the Fractal Chiasmus of Messianic Speech in the Doctrine and Covenants,” School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, undated; copy in BYU Special Collections, MSS 3776, Box 6, Folder 107.

This is exactly what was getting at. To which we got a bald assertion of

And Phelp's letter to his wife derives from previous revelation by Joseph Smith. But then, you'd never know that if you relied strictly on Will's presentation.

Also I had forgoten that part about teh D&C.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram