Jeff Lindsay wrote:
The word "Isis" written above Figure 2's head can, without delicate mental gymnastics, be rather directly linked to Pharaoh--rather precisely as stated by Joseph. Again, not literally--obviously not literally, because she is female, of course--but in a rather direct and simple metaphorical link. Isis = throne = symbol of Pharaoh. Not too tricky.
Questions About the Book of Abraham, Part 2: Evidences for Plausibility
Jeff,
Allow me to help you better understand and see what Joseph Smith actually said insomuch as he said what he meant and meant what he said. Consider the placement of the facsimiles in the Book of Breathing which is the roll in which the Book of Abraham story is derived via characters used by Smith to decipher hieroglyphics. The vignette of Facsimile No. 1 was taken from the roll in which Smith translated. Dr. Ritner has thoroughly explained that Facsimile No. 1 is typical to the beginning of the Book of Breathing and Facsimile No. 3 is typical to the end or the final scene that takes place when the benefactor enters paradise and receives an eternal reward. Recall that the text in the Book of Abraham refers specifically to the illustration of the altar upon which Abraham was to be sacrificed:
“And it came to pass that the priests laid violence upon me, that they might slay me also, as they did those virgins upon this altar; and that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record.”
Abraham points out the altar in which he illustrates at the commencement of the record in Facsimile No. 1. Thus, an actual item illustrated in that vignette is literally interpreted in the text as the
altar. While writing the story he drew a picture or an illustration of what actually happened in *that* story. Now, imagine if a second definer was placed in the text coupled with its illustration and see how it would match perfectly:
“There was great mourning in Chaldea, and also in the court of Pharaoh; which Pharaoh signifies king by royal blood. Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth” AND THAT YOU MAY HAVE A KNOWLEDGE OF THIS KING, I WILL REFER YOU TO THE REPRESENTATION AT THE ENDING OF THIS RECORD (Facsimile No. 3! This is where the name of this king is literally written above his head in hieroglyphs.)
Plug the text into the illustration and a literal interpretation of what the figure is supposed to be is based on the text itself!
1) The “altar” in the text is the same altar being illustrated in the vignette
2) The “king” in the text is the same king being illustrated in the vignette
Fig. 2. Abraham fastened upon an altar.
Fig. 2. King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.
Both were literal explanations given by Joseph Smith of what was depicted in the vignettes. Concocting
mental gymnastics in order to convert something literal into something symbolic is a futile exercise. You cannot exonerate Joseph Smith’s false interpretations by dismissing what he literally expressed as mere symbolism. That is giving yourself license to say and do anything with Smith’s words. It’s trickery and utter chaos.