Every discussion I read about the Book of Abraham, mormons say some of the papyri is missing, we don't have what was translated, etc.

I'm under the impression that portions of the papyri are (1) printed in the Book of Abraham, and (2) explanations of what those printed papyri mean are printed in the Book of Abraham.

Am I right on number two?

If so, why does this seem to get lost in the discussion?

Yep, go to MormonThink for plenty of good stuff

This page isn't too bad too.http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/pearl/abraham/1.html

The most damaging page on the web that will leave your head spinning as you walk out the door, is actually the FAIR web site.

Im not kidding either

You are correct on both counts, which is why the Church has known the BoA is a fraud since a critique from Egyptologists was published in the New York Times back in 1912. For me, Facsimile 3 is the most important since it includes more than just "explanations". Instead, it provides the translation for specific characters: "King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head", "Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand", and "Shulem, one of the king's principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand."

Robert Ritner provides a full analysis and *real* translation of Facsimile 3: http://www.utlm.org/other/robertritnerpapyriarticle.pdf.


Taken from a Signature Books page:

Robert K. Ritner, Professor of Egyptology at the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, has published over 100 books and articles on Egyptian religion, magic, medicine, language, and literature, as well as social and political history.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2014 09:19AM by facsimile3.

Maybe this would be of interest? for those who have not seen it.
Scanned Photo copy of article from The New York Times - Sunday, December 29, 1912 "Museum Walls Proclaim Fraud of Mormon Prophet" about the facimilies and Emma Smith turning papyrii over to Museum

http://utlm.org/onlineresources/nytimes1912papyrus.htm

Amazing that's on the front page of the New York Times. I can't imagine it would be big enough news for that today. Mormons must have really caused a ruckus back then. When my great grandparents emigrated to America in 1904, they had to sign a form saying they weren't coming here to practice polygamy. What an embarrassment of a religion.

At the time, the LDS hired Robert C. Webb, Ph.D., to defend the Book of Abraham in a manner that would make Hugh Nibley proud. "Dr. Webb" was just a pseudonym and he did NOT have a Ph.D. We was just a clever writer who would defend any cause for a price.

Years ago, the Mopologist Kerry Shirts quoted "R.C. Webb" as a scholar in a post on alt.religion.mormon. I informed Kerry that the Tanners had exposed Webb as a fraud many years before. Funny part was that Kerry claimed to be "up to date" on BOA issues.

randyj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Years ago, the Mopologist Kerry Shirts quoted
> "R.C. Webb" as a scholar in a post on
> alt.religion.mormon. I informed Kerry that the
> Tanners had exposed Webb as a fraud many years
> before. Funny part was that Kerry claimed to be
> "up to date" on BOA issues.


For any astute apologist debunkers who have not seen Shirt's mentor aka Hugh Nibley in a BYU video featuring the Nibster ranting on and on in in some obscure Egyptian temple setting, I highly recommend a youtube search to see him waxing exuberant over inanities and nonsense about such pagan places of worship whilst pretending to justify Joseph.

To hear him go on makes him sound as if he really were a true initiate of the Nile religion, as his daughter has so vividly alleged.

Talking about having the wrong papyri is an attempt to distract from what we DO have. We have pictures with Joseph Smith's approved translations of what they mean.

Egyptologists didn't need the originals to figure out that JS didn't know what he was doing. He even reconstructed the facsimiles incorrectly, and they saw that immediately, based on comparison with typical Egyptian funerary documents. His mistakes included putting a regular head where there should have been a jackal head, writing some text upside-down, mislabeling the names of common egyptian gods and the deceased person. Oh yeah . . . and he labeled everything wrong.

"Oh yeah . . . and he labeled everything wrong."

Is the labeling in the Book of Abraham? Or other notes?

The labeling is provided with the printed facsimiles directly in the BoA. Apologists try to be EXTREMELY liberal with the "explanations". For example, Joseph Smith said that it represents God sitting on his throne and it *is* an Egyptian God, so BULLSEYE!

That is why I prefer Facsimile 3: Egyptian characters mean what they mean, and Joseph Smith claimed that specific characters mean something that they do NOT.

Thanks.

I wish someone would make this point in the comments in the DeseretNews article about Tom Phillips and his "Bizarre" allegations.

There's a discussion about the papyri but I've reached my limit of allowed posts.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2014 03:15PM by thingsithink.

...and his "interpretations" have been ridiculed by legitimate Egyptologists. Here's an example, from Dr. Robert Ritner at the U. of Chicago:

"Reference to a
costumed private individual in the Roman procession of Isis is not evidence
that the figure of Isis here (no. 2) is 'King Pharaoh, whose name is given in
the characters above his head,' as published by Joseph Smith.

Smith misunderstood 'Pharaoh' as a personal name (cf. Abraham 1:25), and the
name above fig. 2 is unquestionably that of the female Isis. Osiris (fig. 1)
is certainly not 'Abraham,' nor is it possible that the altar of Osiris (fig.
3) 'signifies Abraham.' Maat (fig. 4) is not a male 'prince,' Hor (fig. 5) is
not a 'waiter,' nor is Anubis (fig. 6) a 'slave' (because of his dark skin).
Such interpretations are uninspired fantasies and are defended only with the
forfeiture of scholarly judgement and credibility."

In other words, Joseph Smith's "interpretations" are ignorant gibberish.

thingsithink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Every discussion I read about the Book of Abraham,
> mormons say some of the papyri is missing, we
> don't have what was translated

What are the chances that the ALL of the supposedly missing papyri would be burned in the Chicago fire? What are the chances that they wouldn't recover a single scrap that matched Joseph's translation? How convenient.

And, as was stated by other posters, the "missing" pieces are irrelevant because we still have the facsimiles and those have been proven to be translated incorrectly as well.

Not to mention the date of the papyri is about 1000 years off from the time Abraham supposed life time.

It is amazing the leaders of the church perpetuate the BOA as anything other than a fraud. But then again to do so would show JS for the fraud he was.

A TBM: this can't be true because the church is true. The church is true so your claims must be false. Again, the TBM goes with the fuzzy wussy ways of heartburn for truth and ignore facts as quick as a peek in a hat.

oldklunker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not to mention the date of the papyri is about
> 1000 years off from the time Abraham supposed life
> time.

nitpick alert (:)): more like 2000 years off, since the papyri dates around 100-200AD, and Abraham allegedly "lived" around 2000BC.

Everything, and I do mean EVERYTHING, points to the "small
Sen-sen papyrus" as being what Joseph Smith claimed he was
translating as the opening chapters of the Book of Abraham.

This is devastating to the claims of TSCC, so their defenders
have to avoid the clear and obvious thrust of the evidence and
invent missing scrolls, revelation-not-translation, mnemonic
devices attached to an oral tradition etc.

Speculation is how they avoid dealing with the actual evidence,
which is solidly and conclusively against them.

The characters that are upside-down on the hypocephalus (the round facsimile) were copied from the sen sen papyrus. This shows that the Sen sen papyri was originally in the church's possession, and was used in the Book of Abraham. It also shows that JS couldn't even tell when the characters were right-side up or upside down.

Here is an example of another hypocephalus. Notice the dates. Another website I saw said they didn't start making these objects until about 600 BC, long after Abraham died.

http://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/hypocephalus-irethorrou

Notice how similar this is to the one found in the B of A. It's just a typical egyptian burial object. (And really cool looking, BTW).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2014 07:03PM by imaworkinonit.

Which facsimile had the picture of god's dick?

Facsimile 2, lower right-hand side and upside down. The "dove" is actually a mistaken reconstruction of a serpent god that would have also had an erect penis.

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/fac-2?lang=eng

Here is the LDS link to Facsimile 3:

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/fac-3?lang=eng

Growing up, I was always fascinated by the spike on the slave's head (i.e. Olimlah). It turns out that the "spike" is actually one of the ears of Anubis, the true identity of the slave. The Sen-sen papyrus was damaged, so the head of Anubis was apparently missing, but one of the ears must have been visible on a fragment and mistakenly placed on top of the invented human head.

I called the Metro mewsuem a few years back and they confirm they have the supposed lost documents. They do exsist and were not burned and most believe.

It sounds like you may on the same path I took when I started discovering the many things the LDS church hides from members or outright lies about.

Get out your LDS scriptures and open the BofA. Read the text. Definitely says written by Abraham, right? Definitely refers to the pictures in the story, right? And the three illustrations have labels on them, too.

Now get out any basic book on Egyptology and burial practices. I happened to have one for kids. There is a great Egyptian museum in San Jose, CA that has all kinds of artifacts and a tomb replica with the art, if you ever visit that area. The funeral pictures are pretty much the same for all Egyptians for a very long time, and we know the names of the gods and the stories. Read a bit about what's in the pictures.

Now go back to your scriptures. That one labeled a priest is the goddess Isis. In fact, JS missed the gender of two women, identifying them as men. You can get that from studying a kid's book, Wikipedia... If you keep looking, you'll find lots more problems with how he labeled these very common illustrations. (It is sort of like calling the angels in a nativity set servants bound by rings on top of their heads). All these errors are in illustrations he clearly says go with the text. The alphabet notes (which the church has and can be seen on the Internet) offer more evidence.

Maybe there is another scroll out there. But what he wrote was definitely about the scroll the church has had in their possession for over 40 years. It's a mistranslation of a common funerary scroll, and they have known that since at least 1970.

The folks trying to spin this as a mystery may be liars; many are trying to sincerely reconcile their faith in Joseph Smith with clear evidence that he couldn't translate Egyptian.

But one thing is quite clear: there is a lot of information not provided in all those lesson manuals. Now try looking up say, wives of Joseph Smith and the actual surviving copy of the Expositor.

Best wishes on your journey of truth.

vh65 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It sounds like you may on the same path I took
> when I started discovering the many things the LDS
> church hides from members or outright lies about.
>
> Get out your LDS scriptures and open the BofA.
> Read the text. Definitely says written by Abraham,
> right? Definitely refers to the pictures in the
> story, right? And the three illustrations have
> labels on them, too.
>
> Now get out any basic book on Egyptology and
> burial practices. I happened to have one for
> kids. There is a great Egyptian museum in San
> Jose, CA that has all kinds of artifacts and a
> tomb replica with the art, if you ever visit that
> area. The funeral pictures are pretty much the
> same for all Egyptians for a very long time, and
> we know the names of the gods and the stories.
> Read a bit about what's in the pictures.
>
> Now go back to your scriptures. That one labeled
> a priest is the goddess Isis. In fact, JS missed
> the gender of two women, identifying them as men.
> You can get that from studying a kid's book,
> Wikipedia... If you keep looking, you'll find lots
> more problems with how he labeled these very
> common illustrations. (It is sort of like calling
> the angels in a nativity set servants bound by
> rings on top of their heads). All these errors are
> in illustrations he clearly says go with the text.
> The alphabet notes (which the church has and can
> be seen on the Internet) offer more evidence.
>
> Maybe there is another scroll out there. But what
> he wrote was definitely about the scroll the
> church has had in their possession for over 40
> years. It's a mistranslation of a common funerary
> scroll, and they have known that since at least
> 1970.
>
> The folks trying to spin this as a mystery may be
> liars; many are trying to sincerely reconcile
> their faith in Joseph Smith with clear evidence
> that he couldn't translate Egyptian.
>
> But one thing is quite clear: there is a lot of
> information not provided in all those lesson
> manuals. Now try looking up say, wives of Joseph
> Smith and the actual surviving copy of the
> Expositor.
>
> Best wishes on your journey of truth.


Thank you.

One of the paths on my journey of truth was that of the Rosicrucian. Always wanted to see the AMORC museum in San Jose that you mentioned. So mote it be someday.



edit. Was going to put up a youtube of the Bangles, Walk Like an Egyptian, but you guys surely know that tune already. But now it's stuck in my head.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2014 02:37PM by Shummy.

I meant the Rosicrucian as well. Love that place!! That's why, when an online comment prompted me to look into the BofA I immediately recognized the mislabeled women. (Big Isis fan). Hmmmm next time my TBM nieces or nephews come to town maybe I will insist on a short field trip there... The tomb is so cool.

Thanks for the answers everyone.

I feel like this is something that gets glossed over in the comments to articles that I read about the Book of Abraham.

I really wish someone could bring a legal action to get this point driven home to all mormons.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2014 03:52PM by thingsithink.

Sad thing is, look at the NY Times link above. That proof that JS was a fraud has been out there for over 100 years. But don't you go reading any of that antiMormon literature!
And let's be honest, those scriptures are so dull who can stand to closely read them. What an idiot I was!!! I can't believe the stupid crap that church teaches.

First time I saw the facsimiles was when my wife (ex) showed them to me and then went on about the boa and what all the pictures meant. My first reaction was that it was burial drawing from Egyptian mummies / burials. I love the old Egyptian stories and archeology from that time period and watch most anything related to that on Discovery and other such channels. Just from my viewing such programs, I recognized what I was looking at. I said to her that the guy on the table was the dead guy and those around him were different gods they recognized at that time. That the canisters under the table were where they put internal body parts into and the river below was how they would travel to the next world as many were buried with a boat of some kind in the burial tomb with them. She said I was crazy and that none of that was true, got mad and started saying that I was evil and being mean. I said I'm just saying what I've seen on TV shows for years now. It's common knowledge for the most part. I looked these things up on the internet and showed her, which she refused to look, saying it was anti-Mormon. I said look, it's just an Egyptian archeology site. Nothing Mormon / anti-mormon about it. Most of what I told her was true or pretty close to what I said it was. It all just struck me weird that people believe such things that I immediately saw was not what I had seen many time on such documentary shows.

It just blows my mind why anyone can't see what these facsimiles really are. Have you not read a book, seen an Egyptian documentary in the last 30 years.

Chaldeans
Were 1000 years after Abraham
They alone prove he was not a prophet