“King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head”

[Shulem]

Philo,

I still have not read Quinten Barney’s Theses because it appears chock-full of irrelevant material designed to act as smoke and mirrors. You’ve already commented on it in another thread and have not necessarily felt impressed to recommend that I take the time to read it. Barney attempts to justify the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 and yet dismiss them at the same time. It appears to me he makes the prophet Joseph Smith look like a performer in a three-ring circus who didn’t know his left hand from his right. Talk about throwing the prophet under the bus! What about the mountain of evidence and testimony given about Smith’s translations and the divine providence of the Explanations of the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham as canonized in the scriptures of the Church?

Thus, there is no evidence of Joseph ever “pretending” to know how these characters translated.

Agreed, Smith didn’t “pretend” to know. He boldly stated he was the only person who could read Egyptian and he claimed to know what the characters meant and how to translate them. Smith never claimed to “pretend” to anything but he claimed to actually do it. Smith made clear to the Church that he was not a pretender: “And they shall give heed to that which is written, and pretend to no other revelation; and they shall pray always that I may unfold the same to their understanding.” (D&C 32:4)

You know, the only people who claimed Smith pretended to translate are his enemies or those who refused to believe he literally translated the gold plates or the papyrus for that matter:

“For he hath put into their hearts to do this, that by lying they may say they have caught you in the words which you have pretended to translate.” (D&C 10:13)

When combined, this evidence suggests that phrases such as “as written above the hand,” or “whose name is given in the characters above his head” in Facsimile No. 3 may simply have been editorial glosses based on the assumptions of what the Times and Seasons editors believed the characters to say, rather than Joseph claiming the ability to translate them.

Editors? Gloss? Who are you kidding, Barney, come on man, let’s talk about this. Joseph Smith was the CHIEF EDITOR and was totally responsible for everything regarding the representation, placement, translations, interpretations, and Explanations of the Facsimiles. Nobody in the Church received revelation for the whole Church except for Joseph Smith who was the CHIEF EDITOR and ultimate supervisor of the Times and Seasons publication of the Book of Abraham. The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 came out of the mouth of Joseph Smith, literally.

That being said, we cannot dismiss the possibility that the explanations given in the Times and Seasons were Joseph’s, and that he was purely speculating.

Barney, imagine had you lived in Nauvoo and headed down to the Times and Seasons print shop to tell brother Joseph what you thought of his speculations. Do you think he’d set you straight? Do you think he might chastise you for that? I do. You know what, I don’t believe Joseph Smith was a true prophet but I believe he said what he meant and meant what he said. I strongly recommend that you spend more time studying what the prophet Joseph Smith taught to the Church before you accuse of him of speculating.

[Philo Sofee]

Shulem
I still have not read Quinten Barney’s Theses because it appears chalk full of irrelevant material designed to act as smoke and mirrors. You’ve already commented on it in another thread and have not necessarily felt impressed to recommend that I take the time to read it. Barney attempts to justify the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 and yet dismiss them at the same time. It appears to me he makes the prophet Joseph Smith look like a performer in a three-ring circus who didn’t know his left hand from his right.

Well, I mean, I haven't kept going back to it much either. I am curious to know of Barney ever moved past his Masters onto a Ph.d anywhere. This Master's thesis simply could not have helped him anywhere else in the world into a legit Doctoral degree in the same field. There isn't an Egyptologist who would agree it has anything of value other than the Mormons. It's astonishing the bubble Mormons live in when it comes to this subject isn't it...
That link where we had the discussion is a pretty good one actually. As always I appreciate your knowledge and ability to cut to the chase and look at the evidence correctly.

[Shulem]

19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Here we are given an inscription on a label written above the head of Jesus in whom it represents. Similar to the Egyptian Rosetta Stone, it’s an inscription given in three languages and say the exact same thing in each language. If you can read one of the inscriptions (Hebrew, Greek, Latin) then you know exactly what the others also say even if you can’t translate or read the other two languages. This is a prime example that demonstrates exactly what is means to translate languages such as Egyptian into English or the reverse.

If Joseph Smith had given a CORRECT translation of what was actually occurring in Facsimile No. 3, he would have given the following explanation which describes what is written in the label for the person representing Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Queen Isis, whose name is given in the characters above her head.

[Shulem]

Today I feel compelled to discuss with you a matter of great importance. Some weeks ago, I released a statement regarding a course correction for the name of the Church. I did this because the Lord impressed upon my mind the importance of the name He decreed for His Church, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Correct Name of the Church

President Nelson,

I impress upon your mind the importance of the goddess Isis in the ancient Egyptian pantheon and the important role she played in giving birth to Horus, the falcon god. Unfortunately, the explanation given in Facsimile No. 3 bears no information about Queen Isis who is so wonderfully depicted in the vignette. She is adorned in a sacred dress and wears a goddess crown fashioned especially for her.

Let me just say that I care deeply about this issue and would greatly appreciate a correction made in the label to identify Fig. 2 with who she really is: Queen Isis, mother of the god Horus. This would require the following change to the Book of Abraham:

Fig. 2. Queen Isis, whose name is given in the characters above her head.

It is a name change.
It is rebranding.
It is not cosmetic.
It is not a whim.
It is not inconsequential.

This is a CORRECTION that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must make in order to show proper respect and courtesy for a deity of another religion with regard to it’s name and beliefs.

Thus, the name of the goddess ISIS is not negotiable. I’m being very serious and am offended by the Church which has failed to express the proper name for the person represented in the Facsimile. The absence of the name “ISIS” in the Explanation for Fig. 2 is a victory for those who slander or desecrate the memory of the ancient Egyptian religion.

When the Church omits her name from the Facsimile it inadvertently removes her from her central position of being a goddess to her husband Osiris in whom she stands by. It wipes away the memory of their son, Horus.

I respectfully request that the Church immediately correct this error.

Shulem

[Shulem]

Well, I mean, I haven't kept going back to it much either. I am curious to know of Barney ever moved past his Masters onto a Ph.d anywhere. This Master's thesis simply could not have helped him anywhere else in the world into a legit Doctoral degree in the same field. There isn't an Egyptologist who would agree it has anything of value other than the Mormons. It's astonishing the bubble Mormons live in when it comes to this subject isn't it...
That link where we had the discussion is a pretty good one actually. As always I appreciate your knowledge and ability to cut to the chase and look at the evidence correctly.

Apparently having a Ph.D has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for the apologetics of Gee & Mulhstein defending Smith’s error in misidentifying Isis with that of an Egyptian king. No amount of learning or higher education on their part has been able to move the needle in a direction acceptable to their professional colleagues. What professional book on Egyptology is going to detail the Facsimile No. 3 in a manner expressed by Joseph Smith? What museum in the entire world would display the vignette with Smith’s Explanations?

It’s clear to me that these gentlemen are ONLY defending the Facsimile because they are members of the Church and have testimonies committed to the Church. They are putting everything up on a pedestal upon which the Church sits and are treating it as if it is God. With that said, everyone has the right to believe their own religion with belief-sets that are unique to a particular view but the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are outside the bounds of truth and right and do not deserve to be defended by Egyptologists of any religion. All this has provided a classic case of showing how Mormons use deception to maintain faith and are willing to openly lie for that cause. It’s really quite astounding and will probably be something people in the future look back on with a very curious regard. Human evolution…

[Shulem]

Let’s refresh our memory and highlight phrases in the explanations in order to gain additional perspective into Smith’s claim to translate the Egyptian text for Fig. 2.

• King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.

• Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand.

• Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand.

• Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince.

Fig. 8. Contains writings that cannot be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God.

The above explanation is a case for whatever reason Smith elected not to translate or interpret the writing other than claim that the very “WRITINGS” in the register of No. 8 is to be had in the Holy Temple. At that time, the Kirtland Temple was the only temple in operation. What does that writing signify in the mind of Joseph Smith? He chose not to reveal it to the world but claimed that information was to be had in the temple.

What does it mean?

Apparently, you will have to go to the temple in order to find that out. But not so with Facsimile No. 3! Joseph Smith was more than willing to reveal the content of the “WRITINGS” in the registers for figures 2,4,5,6; writings that consist of hieroglyphic characters. No need to go to the temple to find out exactly what they mean because Smith revealed it in a combination of interpretation and translation. The interpretation described what was in the scene below and the translation was given in names such as “Shulem” and “Olimlah”.

These are examples of a direct and literal translation of Egyptian into English. Now, I ask John Gee to please write the names Shulem and Olimlah in hieroglyphic characters and let’s compare that with the writings in Facsimile No. 3 and see if Joseph Smith got it right.

Can you do that, John?

Let’s see if Kerry Muhlestein can then call out bullseyes!

[Philo Sofee]

The other thing to notice is Joseph Smith said to be had in the temple, meaning he KNEW what the hieroglyphics meant already. Otherwise he would not have said where they could be had. So here again, he is claiming to know how to read the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Lol... what a dope.

[bill4long]

Joseph Smith led his followers to believe that Abraham was so crowned and usurped the throne by the polite permission of the king. Nothing could be further from the truth. No native Egyptian king who honored his birthright would have ever allowed an Asiatic foreigner to sit upon the throne in the presence of his courtiers and royal court.

Maybe this has been covered already, but the Atef crown is the one that Osiris wears as he rules as king in the realm of the afterlife. No living pharaoh wore such a crown.

[Shulem]

Joseph Smith led his followers to believe that Abraham was so crowned and usurped the throne by the polite permission of the king. Nothing could be further from the truth. No native Egyptian king who honored his birthright would have ever allowed an Asiatic foreigner to sit upon the throne in the presence of his courtiers and royal court.

Maybe this has been covered already, but the Atef crown is the one that Osiris wears as he rules as king in the realm of the afterlife. No living pharaoh wore such a crown.

Indeed, the Atef “crown is specific to Osiris” as noted by Dr. Ritner in the podcast. Everyone in the funerary vignette is dead! The idea that shepherd Abram is sitting on the king’s throne dressed as Osiris is as Dr. Ritner says, “sacrilege”. Similarly, the divine queens’ crown worn by Isis in Facsimile No. 3 is specific to the goddesses Isis and Hathor.

Dial in at the 3:06 hour mark
Radio Free Mormon: Dr. Robert K. Ritner on the Book of Abraham part 2

Points made by Dr. Ritner about the crown worn by Osiris in Facsimile No. 3:

1) “The king only wears that when the king is dead”
2) “When the king is embodied in a form of Osiris”
3) “No living king would put that crown on his head, it would mean he is dead”
4) “Abraham wouldn’t get to wear it either not even as a party hat”

Atef is the specific feathered white crown of the ancient Egyptian deity Osiris.

Joseph Smith and Mormon Egyptologists have no right or precedence, whatsoever, to justify or typify an Asiatic shepherd assuming the throne of Osiris in the underworld and donning his sacred crown. To teach or justify such a thing using Egyptology is blasphemous and the worst form of sacrilege a modern Egyptologist could hurl at Osiris. It’s simply unthinkable.

[Shulem]

The other thing to notice is Joseph Smith said to be had in the temple, meaning he KNEW what the hieroglyphics meant already. Otherwise he would not have said where they could be had. So here again, he is claiming to know how to read the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Lol... what a dope.

Egyptologists Gee & Muhlestein are more than welcome to explain the hieroglyphic connection with that specific “writing” on the Hypocephalus in which Smith designated was “to be had in the Holy Temple.” Smith referred to those explanations as a “translation” as far as he had right to give at that time. So what is the translation in real life?

Facsimile No. 2 Fig. 8. “cause the ba-spirit of the Osiris Sheshonq to live”

Having attended the temple numerous times in all phases of temple rituals performed therein (except for the second anointing) I can honestly say that there is no connection with the “writing” of Fig. 8 to rituals or teachings found in the temple. The Egyptian concept of a soul’s ba-spirit such as that as Sheshonq’s living forever through the invocation of the name “OSIRIS” is NOT found in the temple of the Mormons, period. Just as the writing of Fig. 8 is NOT found in the temple so also is a king’s name not found above the head of Fig. 2 in Facsimile No. 3! What does this tell you about Joseph Smith’s ability to translate and interpret Egyptian?

What it tells me is that Joseph Smith didn’t know what he was talking about. All of this is the furthest thing from a bullseye. It’s proof that Smith couldn’t even hit the target and his arrows were completely off the mark.