OK, background on the Book of Abraham: at the start of the book it states, “A Translation of some ancient Records that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt. The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus.” Emphasis added.
First question, how did this “ancient record” fall into the hands of the early church members? Here is what is taught from the D&C study guide for home study seminary students:
“The following is a description of how the Prophet Joseph Smith obtained the ancient writings in the book of Abraham: “On 3 July 1835 a man named Michael Chandler brought four Egyptian mummies and several papyrus scrolls of ancient Egyptian writings to Kirtland, Ohio. The mummies and papyri had been discovered in Egypt several years earlier by Antonio Lebolo. Kirtland was one of many stops in the eastern United States for Chandler’s mummy exhibition. Chandler was offering the mummies and rolls of papyrus for sale and, at the urging of the Prophet Joseph Smith, several members of the Church donated money to purchase them. In a statement dated 5 July 1835, Joseph Smith, declaring the importance of these ancient Egyptian writings, recorded: ‘I commenced the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham.”
Ok, kind of random. I guess that was just the thing to do back then? Dig up a bunch of random stuff, then tour the country and try and sell it? But, Joseph Smith was really excited about it. He ended up taking the papyrus that they bought, and translated it.
“Joseph Smith worked on the translation of the book of Abraham during the summer and fall of 1835, by which time he completed at least the first chapter and part of the second chapter.16 His journal next speaks of translating the papyri in the spring of 1842, after the Saints had relocated to Nauvoo, Illinois. All five chapters of the book of Abraham, along with three illustrations (now known as facsimiles 1, 2, and 3), were published in the Times and Seasons, the Church’s newspaper in Nauvoo, between March and May 1842.” Essay on the translation and historicity of the Book of Abraham from the church.
The essay goes on to say that we don’t know exactly how Joseph translated this book. There is some evidence that he tried to learn the Egyptian language. But we don’t know exactly how he translated it, for all we know it could have been, “inspired commentary” that showed him the book in our language.
“After the Latter-day Saints left
Nauvoo, the Egyptian artifacts remained behind. Joseph Smith’s family sold the
papyri and the mummies in 1856. The papyri were divided up and sold to various
parties; historians believe that most were destroyed in the Great Chicago Fire
of 1871. Ten papyrus fragments once in Joseph Smith’s possession ended up in
the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. In 1967, the museum
transferred these fragments to the Church, which subsequently published them in
the Church’s magazine, the Improvement Era.”
So that sucks, most of them were destroyed, but a few were left. So we still have them! We can look at them, read them, see what they say for ourselves. This is incredible, to have a document written by the hand of Abraham himself! This is really cool stuff; this is Abraham, the Abraham. Sorry, I got off track. But we have them to look at. Not just some of the papyrus, but even some of the pictures that are along with the book in the D&C were saved too.
None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Mormon scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments. Scholars have identified the papyrus fragments as parts of standard funerary texts that were deposited with mummified bodies. These fragments date to between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E., long after Abraham lived.”
It continues on to say, “Of course, the fragments do not have to be as old as Abraham for the book of Abraham and its illustrations to be authentic. Ancient records are often transmitted as copies or as copies of copies.” But that doesn’t add up to what was said in the Joseph Smith papers. Joseph Smith stated that it is the, “Translation of the Book of Abraham written by his own hand.” So now the essay is contradicting what is said right from translation document by the prophet Joseph.
I am troubled deeply by this. Nothing on the papyrus says anything about Abraham? These papyri have been studied by modern Egyptologists and determined to be a collection of documents known as “the Book of the Dead,” which are traditionally placed with the deceased to aid in their transition into the afterlife, and seem to be relatively common items. The hieroglyphics identify the deceased individual in this case was named Hor. Most likely he was one of the mummies sold to Joseph Smith along with they papyrus. It turns out that even the items labeled as “facsimiles” in the Book of Abraham are wrong too. Joseph Smith “interpreted” them and labeled them for us. In a couple of cases he also had to draw pieces in, since what they purchased was not fully intact. But since these items are found rather often, we have others that show what they should look like.
Facsimile #1
 |
| Copy found in the BOM |
 |
| Original, glued to paper with Joseph’s drawings added to finish the missing parts. |
 |
| Explanation as found in the BOM and what is interpreted by modern Egyptologists |
 |
| Other, complete drawing found with other mummies. |
Facsimile #2
 |
| As it appears in the BOM |
 |
| Hand drawn copy of original |
 |
| Similar complete drawings found with other mummies and other searches. |
 |
| Facsimile #3, Joseph Smith explanation on the left, Modern Egyptologist on the right |
So how do we come to terms with
this information? According to modern Egyptologists, everything they say,
Joseph Smith was full of crap. Not one line or word about Abraham. Nothing
close to what we can find in the Old Testament. And even his “interpretation”
and explanation of the pictures is wide of the mark. The part that kills me,
the church acknowledges this “wrongness” in the essay:
“None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or
any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham.” The essay then goes on to
try and “damage control” the situation:
Alternatively, Joseph’s study of the papyri may have led to a revelation about key events and teachings in the life of Abraham, much as he had earlier received a revelation about the life of Moses while studying the Bible. This view assumes a broader definition of the words translator and translation. According to this view, Joseph’s translation was not a literal rendering of the papyri as a conventional translation would be. Rather, the physical artifacts provided an occasion for meditation, reflection, and revelation. They catalyzed a process whereby God gave to Joseph Smith a revelation about the life of Abraham, even if that revelation did not directly correlate to the characters on the papyri.
But
again, this doesn’t add up to what Joseph Smith said himself! He stated
that the, “Translation of the Book of Abraham written by his own hand.”
Or as it says right at the start of the Book of Abraham: “The
writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written
by his own hand, upon papyrus.” So, it appears again that we have a
situation where what was taught and said by one prophet back in the day, is no
longer being taught or seen as doctrine.
Comments
Post a Comment