Missing Papyrus Theory

[smac97]

On 5/1/2020 at 9:43 PM, california boy said:

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Your emotional comment to try to vilify others you disagree with is really a shameful way to present your arguments.

I think it's contemptible to enroll (or stay enrolled) at BYU enjoy the benefits of the substantial goodwill of its patron organization, while privately despising its patron organization, and then after graduation turn around and publicly express contempt, ridicule, even hatred for the school and its patron organization.

You are defending and justifying this behavior?

I wasn't defending anyone.  

Seemed like it.

You know this is the very reason I avoid your posts.  You ALWAYS assume the worst things about me.

I made an observation about obnoxious behavior.  I asked about your remarks, which seemed to be defending that obnoxious behavior.  This doesn't "assume the worst" about you.  

Quote

The emotional guilt was not sacred funds, it was making the claim that the widows mite subsidize the college costs. 

Speaking of "assum{ing} the worst"...

And again, the argument is not based on "emotional guilt."  Tithes really are sacred funds.  Even if you can't appreciate that, can you perceive the possibility that we can?

Quote

When that is the only thing you assume was used, then it is emotional guilting.

I don't think so.

Quote

Quote

Very few students at BYU have, at that point in their lives, paid more in tithes than the amount of the subsidizations they receive.

And you know this how?

Long experience in the Church.

Quote

Quote

Moreover, it's not just a question of economics.  BYU only has so many slots to give to students.  It is aggravating that some of those slots are taken by people who express contempt, hatred, etc. of the very institution that is generously subsidizing and providing a top-notch education.  

And ONCE AGAIN, I was not commenting on the person or her actions.  

But I was.  And then you responded to my comments about this person.

Quote

Quote

Quote

From a Church that has 100 billion in a slush fund, I personally don't think you can EVER  use the widow's mite argument without ignoring the reality of who is paying the majority of the tithing funds that are used to subsidize BYU.

Here's a thought experiment: Next year you inherit ten million dollars from a distant relative.  Grateful for this largesse, you decide to "pass it on" by creating a private foundation that awards several scholarships for students in need, which scholarships are funded by your donations.  As the benefactor, you feel it important to not only fund the scholarships, but also try to periodically meet with the recipients and see how they are doing.  You realize that there are far more applicants than can be practically accommodated, but you do your best.  And you work to try to get to know these kids on a personal level.  And so it goes, for a period of years.  You feel edified at having helped others.

One night, you are perusing Facebook and come across a post from one of the scholarship recipients.  The post reads something like this: "Hey!  I just graduated with my BS!  Paid for by California Boy, who I can now say that I think is full of BS!  Ha!  What an absolute putz he is!  I've spent literally years being annoyed by pretty much everything he does.  But now that I've graduated, screw 'im!  I'm celebrating my freedom!  I'll never have to talk to that jerk again!"

I am curious what your response would be.  I also wonder if you would be as cavalier and indifferent to the foregoing obnoxious, ungrateful scholarship recipient's treatment of your efforts.

And ONCE AGAIN, I was not commenting on the person or her actions.  

And again, you were responding to my comments, which were about "the person or her actions."

So...

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited May 7, 2020 by smac97

[california boy]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I made an observation about obnoxious behavior.  I asked about your remarks, which seemed to be defending that obnoxious behavior.  This doesn't "assume the worst" about you.  

Speaking of "assum{ing} the worst"...

And again, the argument is not based on "emotional guilt."  Tithes really are sacred funds.  Even if you can't appreciate that, can you perceive the possibility that we can?

I don't think so.

Long experience in the Church.

But I was.  And then you responded to my comments about this person.

And again, you were responding to my comments, which were about "the person or her actions."

So...

Thanks,

-Smac

And ONCE AGAIN, I was not commenting on the person or her actions.  

I avoided any of your posts for a year and a half.  I don't know what possessed me to think that it would be a good idea to have any interaction with you.  It was clearly a mistake. It won't happen again.

Edited May 7, 2020 by california boy

[OGHoosier]

On 5/2/2020 at 4:51 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

Actually, column 1, line 5 of the Breathing Permit of Hor says that this Book of Breathings is written "inside and out," which I think Klaus Baer said could mean "both sides," or "front and back."  So maybe it was.  However, each piece was glued to an opaque backing, so I don't really know.

Have you looked at the Mike Rhodes' translation-commentary on the BofA illustrations?  See the transcript of his 2003 Fair presentation.  Three videos are listed at the end of the transcript.

I took a look at his FAIR presentation and the Youtube links. Interesting stuff. 

I read your own scholarly commentary on the Book of Abraham once but I can't seem to find it now. Could you post me a link so I can bookmark it? I'm eager to hear your take on things. I am aware of a significant amount of connections to the ancient world, though I'm also familiar with David Bokovoy's criticism of the Book of Abraham as anachronistic (though a Semitic redactor model around the time of the writing of the papyrus would largely deal with that while retaining the ancient character of the book). I would, however, like to hear your thoughts on where the book was on the papyri. 

3 hours ago, Latter Day Data said:

 

When the Book of Abraham was canonized, I think Facs. 2 again got lumped together with everything else. 
 

I don’t think, in light of the ambiguity, that we can assume that Joseph mistook it for being part of Joseph of Egypt’s redacted record of Abraham’s writings. 

So, did Joseph see the theological symbolism in it and thought it was worth including? What of the explanations he provided then?

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Latter Day Data said:

I don’t think, in light of the ambiguity, that we can assume that Joseph mistook it for being part of Joseph of Egypt’s redacted record of Abraham’s writings. 

Interesting comments. Thanks for joining the conversation (posting this since I can’t give you rep points yet).

[Latter Day Data]

 

15 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

So, did Joseph see the theological symbolism in it and thought it was worth including? What of the explanations he provided then?

Well, in most of the cases, Joseph Smith said he wasn't allowed to provide explanations for Fac. 2. 

Hugh Nibley goes through each one, in his book One Eternal Round, finished by Michael Rhodes. I haven't looked at it in a long time, though.

One of the points I make in my response to Dan Vogel is that Joseph's use of the Seer Stone was not confined to official Church use. I suspect he could see some things, and try to make sense of what he saw, without it being a revelation, or, in other words, without it being claimed that God was speaking. 

[Robert F. Smith]

18 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

I took a look at his FAIR presentation and the Youtube links. Interesting stuff. 

I read your own scholarly commentary on the Book of Abraham once but I can't seem to find it now. Could you post me a link so I can bookmark it? I'm eager to hear your take on things. I am aware of a significant amount of connections to the ancient world, though I'm also familiar with David Bokovoy's criticism of the Book of Abraham as anachronistic (though a Semitic redactor model around the time of the writing of the papyrus would largely deal with that while retaining the ancient character of the book). I would, however, like to hear your thoughts on where the book was on the papyri. 

Smith, Robert F., “A Brief Assessment of the LDS Book of Abraham,” version 11, online Dec 23, 2019, online at https://www.scribd.com/document/118810727/A-Brief-Assessment-of-the-LDS-Book-of-Abraham .

18 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

So, did Joseph see the theological symbolism in it and thought it was worth including? What of the explanations he provided then?

No.  The Jewish redactor passing on the account in Egypt during Greco-Roman times thought a hypocephalus worth interpreting in light his own cosmological views.  What Abe had thought two millennia earlier is beside the point and inaccessible.  My friend David Bokovoy missed that nuance, just as you suggest.  Joseph's explanations are right on target.

[Latter Day Data]

25 minutes ago, Calm said:

Interesting comments. Thanks for joining the conversation (posting this since I can’t give you rep points yet).

Thank you!

[Latter Day Data]

27 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Smith, Robert F., “A Brief Assessment of the LDS Book of Abraham,” version 11, online Dec 23, 2019, online at https://www.scribd.com/document/118810727/A-Brief-Assessment-of-the-LDS-Book-of-Abraham .

 

Hi! Scribd wants me to sign up with a credit card to access. Is your article available anywhere else? 

I would be interested in reading what you've written on this subject, especially since I just posted a response to Dan Vogel's Abraham video series, yesterday. 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Latter Day Data said:

Hi! Scribd wants me to sign up with a credit card to access. Is your article available anywhere else? 

I would be interested in reading what you've written on this subject, especially since I just posted a response to Dan Vogel's Abraham video series, yesterday. 

You should be able to access if free through your local college library.  If not, PM me and I will email a copy in Adobe.  I have told Vogel on this board that he really needs to put his case in book form with full documentation.  Otherwise, it is almost impossible to do an actual review.  He said that he would have a book out this year.

[Latter Day Data]

23 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You should be able to access if free through your local college library.  If not, PM me and I will email a copy in Adobe.  I have told Vogel on this board that he really needs to put his case in book form with full documentation.  Otherwise, it is almost impossible to do an actual review.  He said that he would have a book out this year.

Thank you so much. I sent you a PM. 

[OGHoosier]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Smith, Robert F., “A Brief Assessment of the LDS Book of Abraham,” version 11, online Dec 23, 2019, online at https://www.scribd.com/document/118810727/A-Brief-Assessment-of-the-LDS-Book-of-Abraham .

 

No.  The Jewish redactor passing on the account in Egypt during Greco-Roman times thought a hypocephalus worth interpreting in light his own cosmological views.  What Abe had thought two millennia earlier is beside the point and inaccessible.  My friend David Bokovoy missed that nuance, just as you suggest.  Joseph's explanations are right on target.

So, do you think the Book of Abraham text was mixed in there with the Book of Breathings? Was it after it on the papyrus, or on the other side? 

[CA Steve]

50 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

So, do you think the Book of Abraham text was mixed in there with the Book of Breathings? Was it after it on the papyrus, or on the other side? 

If there were characters on the verso side why would they glue backing paper on the papyri which covered the side on which the BoA was found?

And nothing was on the Hor scroll past Fac#3. That was the interior end of the roll.

Edited May 8, 2020 by CA Steve

[Latter Day Data]

On 4/29/2020 at 3:04 PM, Robert J Anderson said:

I saw recently that Dan Vogel did some videos on the book of abraham at least one year ago.  Has anyone taken these videos to task?

Since you ask, yes, I have. I posted it online yesterday I was actually just mentioning this to Robert F. Smith, above. I'd be very interested in any pushback/feedback anyone has to offer. 

[Robert F. Smith]

15 hours ago, OGHoosier said:

So, do you think the Book of Abraham text was mixed in there with the Book of Breathings? Was it after it on the papyrus, or on the other side? 

Don't know, and I have not examined the actual papyri.  What I think happened is that a Jewish scribe who could write Egyptian actually produced a text which we do not have readily in hand now.  He accompanied it with the hypocephalus and the Breathing Permit of Hor (for the illustrations).  Those illustrations were merely adjuncts to his text, reinterpreted by him, which is something Jews were then doing with foreign symbols.

[alter idem]

16 hours ago, CA Steve said:

If there were characters on the verso side why would they glue backing paper on the papyri which covered the side on which the BoA was found?

And nothing was on the Hor scroll past Fac#3. That was the interior end of the roll.

I would not put it past someone gluing the paper down, even if it had writing on the back.  It sounds insane, but IMO, it's possible.  There are stories of people unwrapping mummies at parties, they were ground up to make 'mummia' to drink and some were even burned as fuel.  One has to  ask, why did they chop it up in the first place, let alone glue parts to backing??

[OGHoosier]

Double post 

Edited May 8, 2020 by OGHoosier

[OGHoosier]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Don't know, and I have not examined the actual papyri.  What I think happened is that a Jewish scribe who could write Egyptian actually produced a text which we do not have readily in hand now.  He accompanied it with the hypocephalus and the Breathing Permit of Hor (for the illustrations).  Those illustrations were merely adjuncts to his text, reinterpreted by him, which is something Jews were then doing with foreign symbols.

I see, that makes a good deal of sense. 

36 minutes ago, alter idem said:

I would not put it past someone gluing the paper down, even if it had writing on the back.  It sounds insane, but IMO, it's possible.  There are stories of people unwrapping mummies at parties, they were ground up to make 'mummia' to drink and some were even burned as fuel.  One has to  ask, why did they chop it up in the first place, let alone glue parts to backing??

The idea of drinking liquefied mummy is absolutely nauseating.

I've always wondered about the rationale for cutting up the papyri, glazing some fragments, leaving the rest. It seems inscrutable but might tell us a lot. Do the papyri fragments that we have correspond with the "glazed slides" that are described in some sources? Were there any more glazed slides that we don't have? If we have all the glazed slides, than I wonder why Facsimiles 2 and 3 are not among them. 

[Robert F. Smith]

6 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

..........................The idea of drinking liquefied mummy is absolutely nauseating.

Europeans took mummy powder for upset stomach, just as we take antacid calcium carbonate tablets even today.  The effect is the same.

6 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

I've always wondered about the rationale for cutting up the papyri, glazing some fragments, leaving the rest. It seems inscrutable but might tell us a lot. Do the papyri fragments that we have correspond with the "glazed slides" that are described in some sources? Were there any more glazed slides that we don't have? If we have all the glazed slides, than I wonder why Facsimiles 2 and 3 are not among them. 

As pointed out by Kerry Muhlestein and others, facsimile 1 was one of those glazed slides (framed under glass), https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1822&context=facpub

[Rivers]

Is it Muhelstein and Gee’s position that the BOA was on the Hor scroll or on a completely separate scroll?

 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 5/1/2020 at 4:20 PM, california boy said:

I am not arguing the right or wrong of what the person did.  I am not familiar with what was done or not done to make a comment on the morality of that.  What I am arguing is the bleeding heart widows mite stolen comment by SMAC.  Simply from an accounting point of view, I am pretty sure someone paying tithing to the Church has put more dollars into the Church then they have ever received back in the form of college subsidy.  

 

On 5/1/2020 at 4:33 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

“Simply from an accounting standpoint,” I doubt the average undergraduate BYU student has had enough time and earning capacity to have paid sufficient in tithing to come close to the value he or she is receiving in subsidized education. 
 

 

On 5/1/2020 at 9:36 PM, california boy said:

Well that is totally speculative. Not only do you have no idea what the average undergraduate of BYU has paid in tithing.  Nor do you have any idea how much the Church subsidizes because none of their financials are exposed to the public or you I assume.

If I am speculating, what do you call what you’re doing when you assert without documentation or evidence that you are “pretty sure someone paying tithing to the Church has put more dollars into the Church then they have ever received back in the form of college subsidy”? You made the assertion. It is up to you to back it up.

Furthermore, are you seriously prepared to argue that the tuition and fees paid by the average undergraduate at BYU comes anywhere near to paying the full cost of the university education that person receives?

Before you answer, consider that the two-semester cost of undergraduate tuition alone for a Church member enrolling at BYU is $5,790, while a non-member enrolling at BYU pays double that amount, probably closer to the actual cost of the education. Obviously, the Church member does not fund anywhere near the full cost of his or her own tuition. In effect, each and every Church member accepted for undergraduate enrollment at BYU automatically gets a grant of $5,790 per academic year for tuition alone, courtesy of the tithe payers of the Church. 

See the cost-of-attendance figures at this link: 

https://enrollment.byu.edu/financialaid/cost-of-attendance

Edited to add: Based on the above, for a Church member enrolled at BYU to have “put more dollars into the Church then they have ever received back in the form of college subsidy” he or she or she would have to have earned well more than $57,900 a year. Do you seriously think the average enrollee at BYU has anywhere close to that much earning capacity in the years he or she is going to school? Many people don’t even start to make that much per year until many years after they have graduated and are well along in their careers. 

Edited May 9, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[OGHoosier]

20 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Europeans took mummy powder for upset stomach, just as we take antacid calcium carbonate tablets even today.  The effect is the same.

As pointed out by Kerry Muhlestein and others, facsimile 1 was one of those glazed slides (framed under glass), https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1822&context=facpub

What I'm learning is that I need to get some Egyptological knowledge if I'm going to dip more than my toes into such deep waters. 

Facsimile 1 was glazed, but Facsimiles 2 and 3 were not, even though we know that Facsimile 2 had a large lacuna and was not in the best of shape. That's confusing. The rationale for glazing some papyri did not seem to be that of preservation nor doctrinal significance, but it might shed light on how Joseph and his intimate associates viewed different parts of the papyri. 

[alter idem]

On 5/8/2020 at 2:37 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

Europeans took mummy powder for upset stomach, just as we take antacid calcium carbonate tablets even today.  The effect is the same.

As pointed out by Kerry Muhlestein and others, facsimile 1 was one of those glazed slides (framed under glass), https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1822&context=facpub

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-gruesome-history-of-eating-corpses-as-medicine-82360284/

I'm fresh out of calcium carbonate, time to book a flight to Egypt.😱

Edited May 9, 2020 by alter idem

[Robert F. Smith]

42 minutes ago, alter idem said:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-gruesome-history-of-eating-corpses-as-medicine-82360284/............................

The fun part is where people used to wait at executions to drink warm blood from the just executed.  Even today, however, the cattle-herding Maasai on the Serengeti and Ngorongoro drink fresh blood from their living cows.

[Rivers]

I really enjoyed this interview.  Muhlestein seems open-minded toward both theories.  

[CA Steve]

On 5/8/2020 at 12:44 PM, alter idem said:

I would not put it past someone gluing the paper down, even if it had writing on the back.  It sounds insane, but IMO, it's possible.

Anything is possible. It's just not probable or even remotely likely in my view. Let's  assume for a moment that something was written on the verso side of the Hor or Ta-sherit-min scrolls. I am pretty sure nothing was but for arguments sake we will. Then the question becomes why they would glue the papyri to backing paper?  Well the answer is simple. They did it because the were using these documents to work on the BoA, . The Church has about 47 significant loose patches in their possession, most of which fit into the lacuna of the extant scrolls. The Hor scroll and Ta-sherit-min scroll were falling apart so they decided to use other existing paper they had which  was  less important (like Kirtland temple architectural renderings) to use as backing paper. What does this tell us? Well first off it tells us they considered the BoA documents more important than they did the Kirtland temple sketches. Secondly it tells  us they were trying to preserve those documents they felt were important. So if you're trying to suggest  that the BoA might be found on the verso side of those documents and they still glued that side  down on the backing documents you are implying that JS did not know which side of the papyri the BoA was located, because why in the world would he glue the relevant side  face down if he knew what was on it?

 

On 5/8/2020 at 12:44 PM, alter idem said:

There are stories of people unwrapping mummies at parties

Yes, because American Egyptomania was in full force at this time and people were interested in a lot of things pertaining to mummies like their race and phrenology, They would unwrap the mummies to hear the learned men of the time opine of what they would observe. See Egypt Land

 

On 5/8/2020 at 12:44 PM, alter idem said:

some were even burned as fuel

After Napoleon, the French and British pretty much stole everything the could get their hands on in Egypt by robbing graves and sending it off to Europe. That is why we have the JS artifacts.  Those workers who were employed in this endeavor would use papyri to burn at night to keep warm. Today we shudder at the thought of burning priceless artifacts as fuel but back then there was so much of it that no one cared.

 

On 5/8/2020 at 12:44 PM, alter idem said:

One has to  ask, why did they chop it up in the first place, let alone glue parts to backing??

To preserve it, they were using it a lot and it was falling apart. 

Edited May 11, 2020 by CA Steve