Explain the Book of Abraham

[Ray Callis Hatton III]

As far as the main text, the Foundations For Ancient Research & Mormon Studies adequately proves the Book of Abraham story of Abraham. The huge volume the Traditions About The Early Life of Abraham contained documents that essential agree with the Book of Abraham's story's unique details. Hugh Nibley's comparison of the Book of Abraham to the Apocalypse of Abraham and the Testament of Abraham has been available for over 20 years. So, however you suppose Joseph obtained the Book of Abraham, the fact is its text is a ligit story of Abraham.

FAIR's links lead to Kerry Shirt's website which defends Joseph Smith Jr's non-conventional interpretations of the facimilies in light of modern Egyptology. He also has an in depth reply to the Lost Book of Abraham film.

http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai125.html

Joseph Smith got many things right in light of modern Egyptology. I guess you will always be in the dark about it if you get stuck on story illustration problems. At the http://www.bookofabraham.com website, FAIR friend Paul Osbourne and Kerry Shirts, & some critics regularly debate the Book of Abraham papyrus issues. The critic of the Book of Abraham who started this anti-Book of Abrahm website has a decent message board.

As for the Missing Papyri theory, I support it, I think the hand of God had it among the destroyed Papyri that Combs sold to the St. Louis Museum and which were later sent to the Chicago Museum, and was burned to ashes in the museum in the Great Chicago Fire of 1871. At least two long rolls were destroyed in the Chicago fire, also two-thirds of the figures that are related to the Book of Abraham are missing, thus I don't believe we can claim have the entire set of scrolls Joseph used. There were at least four scrolls and other documents as well, including the Papyrus of Hor, the Papyrus of Semminis, the Papyrus of Noufianoub, and the Papyrus of Amenophis. These small fragments of surviving Joseph Smith papyri represent thirteen percent of the original collection.

What are the chances that the Book of Abraham was on that other eighty seven percent of the papyri that are still missing and/or destroied by the great fire? I do, I believe we are forced to have faith, in all this, that no hard evidence will be found either way, on all matters of the church. Down to the very end, the last resort will be to relying on the power of the Holy Ghost to conferm the truth in order to be certain.

[Scottie]

Of course the fact that the Museum also had the original document of sale signed by Emma Smith and Joseph Smith III is even better proof of provenance. I think that you overstate the case when you say that these were the same scrolls that Joseph Smith used to translate the Book of Abraham. The fragments come from three different scrolls. Obviously not all three can be the Book of Abraham. So Joseph had other scrolls that were not the Book of Abraham or the Book of Joseph. Research indicates that he had five papyrus documents, so at least three of these are not the Book of Abraham or the Book of Joseph. How can you say for certain that the three whose fragments we have are not the three that are neither the Book of Abraham nor the Book of Joseph?

I have always wondered how this could be considered a defense.

JS drew a copy of the BoA. It is included right in the BoA. When you overlay the supposed scroll found in the museum, it is a dang near match (except for the burned parts and some different heads).

How do you account for this?

** Edit ** Boy you guys post fast! I got 10 answers to this before I hit submit! Question withdrawn...

[Paul Osborne]

So, learn the facts people before you judge.....

I've learned the facts, Lee, and I certainly have an opinion. If there is a stone unturned, please show me. I can show you some stones, that's for sure.

Paul O

[Paul Osborne]

the Papyrus of Noufianoub

Ray,

Here is my link that relates to Joseph Smith and his spiritual interpretations regarding this particular fragment. It provides the most detailed illustrations that I know of - compliments to myself. It's the best on the Internet, and I should get a prize - maybe a sucker or a balloon; do you think?

The "Court of Osiris" On Screen

Paul O

[Alan]

Explain the Book of Abraham?

Joseph deciphered an ancient text through the catalyst of the papyrus. It was a catalystic translation the same as the JST.

Alan

[Scottie]

Explain the Book of Abraham?

Joseph deciphered an ancient text through the catalyst of the papyrus. It was a catalystic translation the same as the JST.

Alan

Is this just you opinion, or is there strong evidence that this is the case?

[cdowis]

>I believe a lot of what is called "translation" in the Church is actually "revelation" and may or may not have anything to do with the words (or heiroglyphics) written.

One theory on the BOA is called the "Corrupted Manuscript" theory. This manuscript is obviously centuries after the death of Abraham. JS may have "translated" it in the same manner that the Bible was "translated". The word "translate" is similar to the meaning that Enoch was translated -- take something from a lower level to a higher level.

Another theory is the mneumonic theory of John Tvedtnes. It does a nice job of tying several things together, including the Egyptian Grammar.

[gaucho]

I'm far from a B of A scholar but there are too many unanswered questions for anybody to declare it to be false. Even if we have all the papryi Joseph used to make the translation, how do we know the method God used to reveal these truths?

Jesus taught in parables and the people could not understand. Just because we have people today who are familiar with ancient languages, it does not mean they are familiar with God and how he communicates truths to us.

The supposed interpretation of the papryi are nothing but funerry texts, but what is the symbolism behind the funerary text? Joseph interpreted the hidden truths burried in the symbolism. Think of the temple endowment. To the uninformed, there is nothing of particular importance there. But to the participant who is taught by the spirit, many hidden truths can be found there that are not given to the average man.

[Wilhelm Spiegelberg]

Typical mormon apologetic strategy. Hem and haw and establish plausibility.

How does pointing out logical errors and problematic assumptions in your posts "establish plausibility"?

Those "fragments" as you claim they are had the facsimiles printed in the Book of Abraham. The facsimiles are there.

Correction: Part of one facsimile is there. Where are the other two?

I sense that you do not realize that this is a problematic argument, so I will leave it until you face some of your other problems.

Oh wow, look, Joseph Smith was right about a few traditions. So what? He had access to the Apocrypha, and studied it intensely. All he had to do was interpolate between the apocrypha and his own imagination and he was bound to be right about a few things.

Pardon me, your ignorance is showing. First, do you have a scrap of evidence that Joseph Smith "studied [the Apocrypha] intensely" since the usual interpretation of the available evidence is that he never read the Apocrypha in his life. Second, and this is more important, there is almost no parallel to the Book of Abraham in the Apocrpha, only a short (and on its own quite weak) parallel in Judith. That you could make this assertion shows that you have never read the apocrypha, and so it might be wise not to talk about things you do not know about.

Thus far, I have still only pointed out problems in your assumptions and logic.

[Ray Callis Hatton III]

Scottie, its simply a plausable thesis, because he did it with the Bible, it is thus a safe fall back point. Asuming that all the papyri can be found, and if there were no sign of Abraham on the papyri. Or if it can't be translated, deciphered or decrypted into the Book of Abraham, thats certainly no problem for a Seer, who could also catalyze it.

[Paul Osborne]

Explain the Book of Abraham?

Joseph deciphered an ancient text through the catalyst of the papyrus. It was a catalystic translation the same as the JST.

Alan

I agree with Alan. All the evidence that I have been able to weigh shows this to be the obvious conclusion

[cdowis]

>Joseph deciphered an ancient text through the catalyst of the papyrus. It was a catalystic translation the same as the JST.

So, what is the ==relationship== between the papyrus and the translation. We can easily see this relationship between the Bible and the JST.

Are you saying that this was a revelation from whole cloth, and the manuscript was not at all involved in the BOA text? It was ........ what? According to your theory, why did JS recognize the BOA when he saw the papyrus?

[Paul Osborne]

Correction: Part of one facsimile is there. Where are the other two?

There are trace evidences that few people know about because they don

[Paul Osborne]

First, do you have a scrap of evidence that Joseph Smith "studied [the Apocrypha] intensely" since the usual interpretation of the available evidence is that he never read the Apocrypha in his life.

Perhaps you might like to check the church periodicals that were published in the prophet

[Wilhelm Spiegelberg]

If I am not mistaken, the issue is not whether any members of the Church in Joseph Smith's day were acquainted with the Apocrypha. Some like John Taylor clearly were.

The issue is whether Joseph Smith was himself acquainted with the Apocrypha.

The bigger issue is even if we assume that he was, how much help would that realistically given him.

[Paul Osborne]

If I am not mistaken, the issue is not whether any members of the Church in Joseph Smith's day were acquainted with the Apocrypha. Some like John Taylor clearly were.

The issue is whether Joseph Smith was himself acquainted with the Apocrypha.

The bigger issue is even if we assume that he was, how much help would that realistically given him.

That

[Meta]

What are the chances that the Book of Abraham was on that other eighty seven percent of the papyri that are still missing and/or destroied by the great fire? I do, I believe we are forced to have faith, in all this, that no hard evidence will be found either way, on all matters of the church. Down to the very end, the last resort will be to relying on the power of the Holy Ghost to conferm the truth in order to be certain.

I would like to expand upon this.

It has always been my opinion that we will never receive "hard" evidence of the validity of JS's work. Why is this? Because it would take away our free agency. If proof could be found of the Lord's true church, and you chose not to join that church, would you not be in contempt with the Lord?

This is, in a sense, the same reason we (most of us) don't see angels or God and that we have been given the opportunity to believe through faith and faith only. Remember, those that deny the Holy Ghost are thrust into hell without a chance of repentance. If you have confirming evidence of the validity of the BoA or the BoM, any and all sins will mean more and count against you more at judgement day-- thus, in a sense, taking away a perfect free agency.

Call it Mormon drivel if you prefer, but it is well documented in the bible.

[Alan]

Look at it this way. Here is an example of a catalystic interpretation.

Suppose 5000 years from now archaeologists unearth what they correctly identify as an Xmas card from our day. It depicts a fat man with a white beard dressed in red, a tree with red balls on it and a fairy on the top, white snow, presents under the tree and so on. They correctly identify the Xmas card as being strongly connected with a winter solstice festival which dates back to even more ancient times.

They note the religious significance of the card. They have correctly identified the predominent religion of our day as Hedonism. They know this from an excavated stash of Playboy and Vogue magazines. They correctly identify the winter solstice festival as a time of excessive consumption, office parties, sexual licence, glutony, drunkeness and so on.

However, along comes a prophet of God who is able to use the Xmas card to unlock a different story. He identifies the artifact as a Christmas card and identifies it as representing a significant religious and historical occurance. The man with the beard represents God the giver of the gift, the evergreen tree represents eternal life, the red balls the great drops of the Saviour atoning blood, the presents represent the gift of the Christ, the white snow the purity of the sanctified believer, the fairy signifies the angelic announcement of the advent of the Christ, and so on.

Both the archaeologists and the Prophet of God would be 100% right.

Xmas card - Christmas card.

Book of Breathings - Book of Abraham.

Alan

[Paul Osborne]

Alan,

I couldn't have said it better myself. Merry Christmas!

Paul O

[Ray Callis Hatton III]

What are the chances that the Book of Abraham was on that other eighty seven percent of the papyri that are still missing and/or destroied by the great fire? I do, I believe we are forced to have faith, in all this, that no hard evidence will be found either way, on all matters of the church. Down to the very end, the last resort will be to relying on the power of the Holy Ghost to conferm the truth in order to be certain.

I would like to expand upon this.

It has always been my opinion that we will never receive "hard" evidence of the validity of JS's work. Why is this? Because it would take away our free agency. If proof could be found of the Lord's true church, and you chose not to join that church, would you not be in contempt with the Lord?

This is, in a sense, the same reason we (most of us) don't see angels or God and that we have been given the opportunity to believe through faith and faith only. Remember, those that deny the Holy Ghost are thrust into hell without a chance of repentance. If you have confirming evidence of the validity of the BoA or the BoM, any and all sins will mean more and count against you more at judgement day-- thus, in a sense, taking away a perfect free agency.

Call it Mormon drivel if you prefer, but it is well documented in the bible.

To expand on that note. I believe however there are evidences. But simply that I think there will always be a level of reasonable doubt. Evidence will not be enough to force you by logic to accept the gosple, but just enough evidence to ease your mind about the matter enough to make you desire to know for sure the only known way that one can.

[Confidential Informant]

office parties, sexual licence, glutony, drunkeness

Geez, who do you work for? My office party was a few cheesecakes and a white elephant gift exchange.

C.I.

[Scott Lloyd]

Look at it this way. Here is an example of a catalystic interpretation.

Suppose 5000 years from now archaeologists unearth what they correctly identify as an Xmas card from our day. It depicts a fat man with a white beard dressed in red, a tree with red balls on it and a fairy on the top, white snow, presents under the tree and so on. They correctly identify the Xmas card as being strongly connected with a winter solstice festival which dates back to even more ancient times.

They note the religious significance of the card. They have correctly identified the predominent religion of our day as Hedonism. They know this from an excavated stash of Playboy and Vogue magazines. They correctly identify the winter solstice festival as a time of excessive consumption, office parties, sexual licence, glutony, drunkeness and so on.

However, along comes a prophet of God who is able to use the Xmas card to unlock a different story. He identifies the artifact as a Christmas card and identifies it as representing a significant religious and historical occurance. The man with the beard represents God the giver of the gift, the evergreen tree represents eternal life, the red balls the great drops of the Saviour atoning blood, the presents represent the gift of the Christ, the white snow the purity of the sanctified believer, the fairy signifies the angelic announcement of the advent of the Christ, and so on.

Both the archaeologists and the Prophet of God would be 100% right.

Xmas card - Christmas card.

Book of Breathings - Book of Abraham.

Alan

Brilliant analogy, Alan. Bravo!

[Scott Lloyd]

office parties, sexual licence, glutony, drunkeness

Geez, who do you work for? My office party was a few cheesecakes and a white elephant gift exchange.

C.I.

At mine, we generally have President Monson, sometimes President Faust, and two or three apostles coming over.

Of course, the gluttony aspect may apply, depending upon how many times one dips into the buffet.

[Mighty Curelom]

I don't know if anyone has brought this up yet, so I'll just throw this out there:

There is one issue that discredits both the missing papyri theory and the catalyst theory. And that is the fact that the BoA text refers to the illustrations contained in the Joseph Papyri.

BoA 1:7 Therefore they turned their hearts to the sacrifice of the heathen in offering up their children unto thse dumb idols, and hearkened not unto my voice, but endeavored to take awa my life by the hand of the priest of Elkenah.  The priest of Elkenah was also the priest of Pharaoh.

Now, if you're following along in your own BoA, turn back one page to find Fac. 1. Here we see "Abraham fastened upon an alter", as well as "the idolatrous priest of Elkenah attempting to offer up Abraham as a sacrifice.

Continuing--

1:14 That you may have an understanding of these gods, I have given you the fashion of them in the figures at the begining, which matter of figures is called Chaldeans Rahleenos, which signifies hieroglyphics.

Here again the BoA text refers directly to an illustration found at the begining of the Joseph Papyri.

If the Joseph Papyri were simply a catalyst to bring on a true revelation, why then would this revelation refer to illustrations and diagrams in the original, non revelatory text? And if the BoA was translated from papyri different from those discovered in 1967, why then does the BoA text refer to illustrations found in the papyri that we have? It doesn't make much sense for Abraham to put the illustrations concerning his own story right in the middle of a completely unrelated burial script.

When I was little, before I could read, I used to look at picturebooks and make up a story based on what was happening in the pictures. Of course, most of the time my invented storyline bore little resemblance to the actual story. Was I "inspired" to "translate" a hidden meaning, or was I just looking at the pictures and making stuff up? It's clear that Joseph was doing exactly the same thing. He couldn't read hieroglyphics, so he looked at the pictures and made up a story. It doesn't take divine powers of translation to do that; even a child can do the same.

[Confidential Informant]

MC,

Your observations are actually addressed by an upcoming article on the Facsimilies written by Kevin Barney. I won't try to elaborate since I can't really do justice to his theory and I don't want to screw it up. It's supposed to be published next month, (I think).

C.I.

P.S. I have an advanced ecopy of it, but w/o Kevin's permission forward it, I can't share it.