Home
Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3,500-Year-Old Abraham Autograph
(Original thread posted by Philo Sofee » Wed Jul 12, 2017)
http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46549
(Statements made by Shulem have been modified to improve Discourse)
There’s no doubt in my mind that Joseph Smith committed fraud by representing himself as one who could literally translate and interpret the Egyptian language when in fact he could not. I believe Smith was lying and immersed himself in a practice of pious deception. He deceived everyone with his professed ability to divine. The Mormons believed he literally translated Egyptian hieroglyphs. Smith even convinced his own mother that he could read Egyptian. The Church today continues to believe the Book of Abraham is an inspired translation and the original fraud is defended by apologetic arguments that are designed solely to preserve the testimony that Joseph Smith was a prophet.
I view the Book of Abraham and the Explanations of the Facsimiles as a pious fraud. The story in the Book of Abraham is a work of fiction. Much of the material therein was borrowed from the bible and from other sources -- a plagiarized work of fiction not cut from genuine Egyptian cloth. The Explanations of the Facsimiles are ignorant fabrications. The science of modern Egyptology has proven Smith’s work is a fraud. The early Mormons believed the Explanations of the Facsimiles were literal translations from the Egyptian, true and correct transmissions of hieroglyphics converted into the English counterpart. They believed it with all their hearts as much as they believed the Book of Mormon. That was the spirit of Mormonism -- inventions and fabrications from Smith’s own mind.
Several years ago, an apologist by the name of Zerinus visited this board and said, “Before they would be warranted in saying that the entire Book of Abraham was not properly translated, they would have to examine the original papyrus, or a copy of it, from which the Book of Abraham was translated – John Henry Evans (1912).”
But this is NOT an issue when it comes to Facsimile No. 3 and the Explanations. Therein is contained every hieroglyph that the prophet viewed while tendering his translations and interpretations. It’s all there: Lock, stock, and barrel. The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 have been proven 100% false through modern Egyptology. It’s conclusive, Smith couldn’t read or translate Egyptian.
Former Book of Abraham apologist, Philo Sofee, now a critic, wrote “Joseph Smith appears to have believed that he actually possessed the literal handwriting and autographs of Abraham and other biblical Patriarchs on the papyri that he purchased from Michael Chandler in June 1835.” I agree, but I would discount the use of the word, “appears”. There’s no question that Smith claimed to believe it because his own testimony as well as others involved with producing the Book of Abraham are conclusive proof. Using the word “appears” softens the blow against Smith and tends to suggest that there may be an alternative explanation that justified his pious fraud.
Amazingly enough, Apologist Zerinus said, “I don’t need to know Egyptology to know that the book of Abraham is the word of God; any more than I need to know Hebrew to know that the Bible is the word of God.”
The Mormons aren’t overly concerned with facts or scientific certainty that goes against their cause. Someone who investigates Mormonism starts out by making friends with missionaries and listening to interesting religious discussions and claims, being persuaded to pray and get a good feeling. Once the candidate gets a good feeling and feels a sense of enlightenment -- a testimony is born. It’s based on feelings and impressions in the mind that are entirely subjected to the power of suggestion. Brain chemicals such as dopamine and serotonin influence the birth of a testimony.
Egyptologists deal with facts and determine things by analyzing data. But a missionary uses subjective feelings and spiritual impressions that are influenced by brain chemicals to help induce excitement and a sense of well-being to convert others. Egyptologists can read the hieroglyphic writing in Facsimile No. 3 and have produced an accurate translation that totally differs from Smith’s translation. It’s absolutely conclusive, Smith could NOT read the writing in Facsimile No. 3; he made up explanations out of thin air -- they are not the word of God. Both Facsimiles No. 2 & 3 are accurately read by Egyptologists. They read the writing and know exactly what it says. They correctly interpret the figures just as they do on other papyri, tomb walls, and monuments. They identify the gods with certainty and explain the rites and ceremonies that are written and portrayed on the papyri.
Zerinus said, “I trust that what Joseph Smith taught was true. If your ‘Egyptology’ says that it isn’t, then I mistrust your ‘Egyptology’ rather than Joseph Smith. I don't believe that your ‘Egyptology’ has advanced enough to be able to solve every mystery therein.”
It’s incredible how apologists brazenly deny science and Egyptology which has advanced to the point that reading and interpreting Facsimile No. 3 is child’s play. There is nothing complicated about it. It’s not rocket science! The vignette is easily understood by Egyptologists but was completely misunderstood by Joseph Smith who misrepresented the entire scene in his publication of the Times and Seasons. It’s really, a rather simple vignette expressed in the Book of the Dead and other funerary literature and tomb inscriptions. It’s basic Egyptian religion -- it includes spells, incantations, and praise to the gods of Egypt.
Not surprising, Zerinus digresses further and denies that modern Egyptology is on solid ground: “You are talking nonsense. You know a little bit, and you think you know everything. ‘Science’ proves nothing of the kind. There are many truths that cannot be known by ‘science,’ but by the revelations of God. You can knock your head against that wall forever; but it won't alter that fact.”
Evidently, it’s Zerinus who is knocking his head against the wall because he knows there isn’t a king’s name written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 and neither can Mormon Egyptologists produce a royal name. Why? Because it doesn’t exist! It’s not there and never was. Smith’s revelation was proven false by modern Egyptology and he can’t explain that. Zerinus defends his position by discrediting or downplaying Egyptology, saying, “The ‘Egyptology’ that you rely on so much is not as foolproof as you think it is. There is a better way of discovering truth that never goes wrong. ‘Egyptology’ doesn't even come close.”
The apologist can’t possibly convince us that the beautiful goddess Isis is really a man dressed up as the king of Egypt! Neither can he convince us that the beautiful Maat is really a boy or prince. Dare not anyone try and convince me that the mighty god Anubis was really a slave by the name “Olimlah” according to Smith’s reading of the inscription! Mormon Egyptology or, Smithology, perverts funerary religious rites and expressions and makes a mockery of their religion -- the faith that was dear to the heart of countless millions who once lived. The Book of Abraham slanders the ancient Egyptians and mocks their religion.
Zerinus refuses to concede from defending the indefensible: “Again, I question that. There were esoteric teachings which the symbols represented that were reserved for the ‘initiated,’ and were not revealed to everyone. In other words, what you think you have discovered may not be all that is there.”
The nonsense that this apologist pushes is a vain attempt to defend Smith’s false Egyptology and is utterly astounding. It’s a desperate means of using distraction in order to make everything seem mysterious, couching Smith’s so-called revelations in pseudo-science that somehow and mysteriously validates Smith’s Explanations. It is nothing less than an apologetic ruse!
Imagine today’s Egyptologists asking Joseph Smith to identify a royal Cartouche in Facsimile No. 3, a sacred emblem used to enclose a royal name inscribed in hieroglyphic writing. Where is the royal Cartouche? It’s not there! But apologists peddle nonsense while grasping at straws and make claims they can’t substantiate or prove. Like spaghetti, they throw anything up in the air to see if it sticks.
Everyone (believers and unbelievers) should ask themselves the following question:
Is it possible that Joseph Smith believed the Holy Ghost revealed to him that the papyrus used to translate the Book of Abraham was a literal 3,500-Year-Old Abraham Autograph?
[x] Yes [ ] No
Bear in mind, we can differentiate the possibilities of what Smith actually thought -- into two different categories:
1. Smith’s claim
2. Smith’s belief
The two are not necessarily the same. One can make a claim and not believe it -- thus, they are knowingly not telling the truth. Or, one can make a claim and believe it’s true, whether it’s actually true or not remains to be determined. Smith was not sheepish in making literal claims about fantastic things such as angelic visitations or ancient Egyptian papyri that miraculously fell into his hands by God’s divine providence -- more particularly the autographs of the patriarchs, Joseph and Abraham written by their own hands. Smith’s fantastic claims regarding the age and content of the papyri with written signatures of the patriarchs is clearly demonstrated in statements made to that effect. Joseph Smith’s time was a heyday for miraculous Mormon claims. Smith’s ability to translate went completely unchallenged and was uncontested. Egyptology was in its infancy. Years later, when modern science weighed in, Mormon apologists began to offer alternative explanations to justify or excuse what Smith originally tendered.
The Missing Roll theory became a standard apologetic theory for many Mormon apologists and the quest to find parallels to connect Smith’s interpretations with conventional Egyptology was in full swing. The absence of the original papyrus (then missing) would alleviate the strain of answering difficult questions about what actually got translated and allow for mystery to overshadow the answers. Suddenly, out of the blue, in 1967 everything changed when missing Joseph Smith papyri was discovered and returned to the church! Immediately, apologetics went into full swing and the missing papyrus theory had to be changed from, “We don’t have the papyrus” to “We don't have ALL the papyrus.” New ground was broken to allow for all kinds of wild, crazy, and wacko ideas on how to defend Smith’s translations.
But in spite of all this, Smith is on record for pointing at what was supposed to be original patriarchal signatures on the papyri as well as an Egyptian king’s name in Facsimile No. 3. Apologists are forced to deal with these claims and and their excuses are quite dismal! Which statement made by Joseph Smith is harder for an apologist to accept and why?
1. “There, that is the signature of Abraham.”
2. “King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.”
Smith was into literalism and when he wasn’t, he often pointed out the difference by saying things were “symbolic.” Claiming to have the original papyrus penned by Abraham & Joseph was a feather in his cap and increased his ability to maintain power over the church. The payment of a large sum of money for the Egyptian artifacts increased the commitment of church members in sustaining his miraculous ability to translate Egyptian into English.
(Original thread posted by Philo Sofee » Wed Jul 12, 2017)
http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46549
(Statements made by Shulem have been modified to improve Discourse)
There’s no doubt in my mind that Joseph Smith committed fraud by representing himself as one who could literally translate and interpret the Egyptian language when in fact he could not. I believe Smith was lying and immersed himself in a practice of pious deception. He deceived everyone with his professed ability to divine. The Mormons believed he literally translated Egyptian hieroglyphs. Smith even convinced his own mother that he could read Egyptian. The Church today continues to believe the Book of Abraham is an inspired translation and the original fraud is defended by apologetic arguments that are designed solely to preserve the testimony that Joseph Smith was a prophet.
I view the Book of Abraham and the Explanations of the Facsimiles as a pious fraud. The story in the Book of Abraham is a work of fiction. Much of the material therein was borrowed from the bible and from other sources -- a plagiarized work of fiction not cut from genuine Egyptian cloth. The Explanations of the Facsimiles are ignorant fabrications. The science of modern Egyptology has proven Smith’s work is a fraud. The early Mormons believed the Explanations of the Facsimiles were literal translations from the Egyptian, true and correct transmissions of hieroglyphics converted into the English counterpart. They believed it with all their hearts as much as they believed the Book of Mormon. That was the spirit of Mormonism -- inventions and fabrications from Smith’s own mind.
Several years ago, an apologist by the name of Zerinus visited this board and said, “Before they would be warranted in saying that the entire Book of Abraham was not properly translated, they would have to examine the original papyrus, or a copy of it, from which the Book of Abraham was translated – John Henry Evans (1912).”
But this is NOT an issue when it comes to Facsimile No. 3 and the Explanations. Therein is contained every hieroglyph that the prophet viewed while tendering his translations and interpretations. It’s all there: Lock, stock, and barrel. The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 have been proven 100% false through modern Egyptology. It’s conclusive, Smith couldn’t read or translate Egyptian.
Former Book of Abraham apologist, Philo Sofee, now a critic, wrote “Joseph Smith appears to have believed that he actually possessed the literal handwriting and autographs of Abraham and other biblical Patriarchs on the papyri that he purchased from Michael Chandler in June 1835.” I agree, but I would discount the use of the word, “appears”. There’s no question that Smith claimed to believe it because his own testimony as well as others involved with producing the Book of Abraham are conclusive proof. Using the word “appears” softens the blow against Smith and tends to suggest that there may be an alternative explanation that justified his pious fraud.
Amazingly enough, Apologist Zerinus said, “I don’t need to know Egyptology to know that the book of Abraham is the word of God; any more than I need to know Hebrew to know that the Bible is the word of God.”
The Mormons aren’t overly concerned with facts or scientific certainty that goes against their cause. Someone who investigates Mormonism starts out by making friends with missionaries and listening to interesting religious discussions and claims, being persuaded to pray and get a good feeling. Once the candidate gets a good feeling and feels a sense of enlightenment -- a testimony is born. It’s based on feelings and impressions in the mind that are entirely subjected to the power of suggestion. Brain chemicals such as dopamine and serotonin influence the birth of a testimony.
Egyptologists deal with facts and determine things by analyzing data. But a missionary uses subjective feelings and spiritual impressions that are influenced by brain chemicals to help induce excitement and a sense of well-being to convert others. Egyptologists can read the hieroglyphic writing in Facsimile No. 3 and have produced an accurate translation that totally differs from Smith’s translation. It’s absolutely conclusive, Smith could NOT read the writing in Facsimile No. 3; he made up explanations out of thin air -- they are not the word of God. Both Facsimiles No. 2 & 3 are accurately read by Egyptologists. They read the writing and know exactly what it says. They correctly interpret the figures just as they do on other papyri, tomb walls, and monuments. They identify the gods with certainty and explain the rites and ceremonies that are written and portrayed on the papyri.
Zerinus said, “I trust that what Joseph Smith taught was true. If your ‘Egyptology’ says that it isn’t, then I mistrust your ‘Egyptology’ rather than Joseph Smith. I don't believe that your ‘Egyptology’ has advanced enough to be able to solve every mystery therein.”
It’s incredible how apologists brazenly deny science and Egyptology which has advanced to the point that reading and interpreting Facsimile No. 3 is child’s play. There is nothing complicated about it. It’s not rocket science! The vignette is easily understood by Egyptologists but was completely misunderstood by Joseph Smith who misrepresented the entire scene in his publication of the Times and Seasons. It’s really, a rather simple vignette expressed in the Book of the Dead and other funerary literature and tomb inscriptions. It’s basic Egyptian religion -- it includes spells, incantations, and praise to the gods of Egypt.
Not surprising, Zerinus digresses further and denies that modern Egyptology is on solid ground: “You are talking nonsense. You know a little bit, and you think you know everything. ‘Science’ proves nothing of the kind. There are many truths that cannot be known by ‘science,’ but by the revelations of God. You can knock your head against that wall forever; but it won't alter that fact.”
Evidently, it’s Zerinus who is knocking his head against the wall because he knows there isn’t a king’s name written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 and neither can Mormon Egyptologists produce a royal name. Why? Because it doesn’t exist! It’s not there and never was. Smith’s revelation was proven false by modern Egyptology and he can’t explain that. Zerinus defends his position by discrediting or downplaying Egyptology, saying, “The ‘Egyptology’ that you rely on so much is not as foolproof as you think it is. There is a better way of discovering truth that never goes wrong. ‘Egyptology’ doesn't even come close.”
The apologist can’t possibly convince us that the beautiful goddess Isis is really a man dressed up as the king of Egypt! Neither can he convince us that the beautiful Maat is really a boy or prince. Dare not anyone try and convince me that the mighty god Anubis was really a slave by the name “Olimlah” according to Smith’s reading of the inscription! Mormon Egyptology or, Smithology, perverts funerary religious rites and expressions and makes a mockery of their religion -- the faith that was dear to the heart of countless millions who once lived. The Book of Abraham slanders the ancient Egyptians and mocks their religion.
Zerinus refuses to concede from defending the indefensible: “Again, I question that. There were esoteric teachings which the symbols represented that were reserved for the ‘initiated,’ and were not revealed to everyone. In other words, what you think you have discovered may not be all that is there.”
The nonsense that this apologist pushes is a vain attempt to defend Smith’s false Egyptology and is utterly astounding. It’s a desperate means of using distraction in order to make everything seem mysterious, couching Smith’s so-called revelations in pseudo-science that somehow and mysteriously validates Smith’s Explanations. It is nothing less than an apologetic ruse!
Imagine today’s Egyptologists asking Joseph Smith to identify a royal Cartouche in Facsimile No. 3, a sacred emblem used to enclose a royal name inscribed in hieroglyphic writing. Where is the royal Cartouche? It’s not there! But apologists peddle nonsense while grasping at straws and make claims they can’t substantiate or prove. Like spaghetti, they throw anything up in the air to see if it sticks.
Everyone (believers and unbelievers) should ask themselves the following question:
Is it possible that Joseph Smith believed the Holy Ghost revealed to him that the papyrus used to translate the Book of Abraham was a literal 3,500-Year-Old Abraham Autograph?
[x] Yes [ ] No
Bear in mind, we can differentiate the possibilities of what Smith actually thought -- into two different categories:
1. Smith’s claim
2. Smith’s belief
The two are not necessarily the same. One can make a claim and not believe it -- thus, they are knowingly not telling the truth. Or, one can make a claim and believe it’s true, whether it’s actually true or not remains to be determined. Smith was not sheepish in making literal claims about fantastic things such as angelic visitations or ancient Egyptian papyri that miraculously fell into his hands by God’s divine providence -- more particularly the autographs of the patriarchs, Joseph and Abraham written by their own hands. Smith’s fantastic claims regarding the age and content of the papyri with written signatures of the patriarchs is clearly demonstrated in statements made to that effect. Joseph Smith’s time was a heyday for miraculous Mormon claims. Smith’s ability to translate went completely unchallenged and was uncontested. Egyptology was in its infancy. Years later, when modern science weighed in, Mormon apologists began to offer alternative explanations to justify or excuse what Smith originally tendered.
The Missing Roll theory became a standard apologetic theory for many Mormon apologists and the quest to find parallels to connect Smith’s interpretations with conventional Egyptology was in full swing. The absence of the original papyrus (then missing) would alleviate the strain of answering difficult questions about what actually got translated and allow for mystery to overshadow the answers. Suddenly, out of the blue, in 1967 everything changed when missing Joseph Smith papyri was discovered and returned to the church! Immediately, apologetics went into full swing and the missing papyrus theory had to be changed from, “We don’t have the papyrus” to “We don't have ALL the papyrus.” New ground was broken to allow for all kinds of wild, crazy, and wacko ideas on how to defend Smith’s translations.
But in spite of all this, Smith is on record for pointing at what was supposed to be original patriarchal signatures on the papyri as well as an Egyptian king’s name in Facsimile No. 3. Apologists are forced to deal with these claims and and their excuses are quite dismal! Which statement made by Joseph Smith is harder for an apologist to accept and why?
1. “There, that is the signature of Abraham.”
2. “King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.”
Smith was into literalism and when he wasn’t, he often pointed out the difference by saying things were “symbolic.” Claiming to have the original papyrus penned by Abraham & Joseph was a feather in his cap and increased his ability to maintain power over the church. The payment of a large sum of money for the Egyptian artifacts increased the commitment of church members in sustaining his miraculous ability to translate Egyptian into English.
Last edited by Shulem on Fri Dec 17, 2021 9:16 pm; edited 2 times in total