Introducing the apologetic FAIR website (formerly FAIRMORMON) as I edit and transfer some of my past thoughts from another thread into this thread here in the Celestial Forum. The material quoted from the FAIR article was taken from the website several years ago. I believe the article has been somewhat edited to better conform with their current position. Nonetheless, I’ll be posting content from the 2013 publication. Therefore, not to be disrespectful or inconsiderate to their new name, I will use their old name “FAIRMORMON” in the citations.
FAIR Faithful Answers Informed Response
FAIRMORMON wrote:The following are common criticisms associated with Facsimile 3: 1) The scene depicted is a known Egyptian vignette which some Egyptologists claim has nothing to do with Abraham, 2) Joseph indicated that specific characters in the facsimile confirmed the identities that he assigned to specific figures, 3) Joseph identified two obviously female figures as "King Pharaoh" and "Prince of Pharaoh."
FAIR is correct about Egyptologists confirming the vignette has nothing to do with Abraham and admits that the prophet Joseph Smith made controversial claims about the hieroglyphic writing and the persons in the vignette. Critics conclude this as proof that Smith mistranslated Facsimile No. 3.
FAIRMORMON wrote:The matter is not as simple as critics would like to have us believe. Like almost all of us, the majority of critics are not experts on Egyptian writing or art
Actually, it’s quite simple. It’s black or white, yeah or nay, true or false. Critics don’t need to be experts to be able to determine certain truth with a little help from nonbiased modern Egyptology.
FAIRMORMON wrote:So, this presents an interesting problem--if we are going to take an "academic" or "intellectual" approach to the problem, both believers and critics must all decide to trust an expert. The problem that we immediately encounter is that there are multiple "experts," and these experts do not all agree. Therefore, we are left to decide which "expert" we will trust. There are LDS experts who believe the Book of Abraham is a genuine artifact, and that it testifies to Joseph Smith' status as a prophet. Non-LDS experts obviously do not agree with that
I agree that an academic and intellectual approach is a sound course to pursue -- an appeal to authority, that of modern Egyptology and the academic university of the discipline. I view the argument of not agreeing over the results as a ploy in rejecting a conclusion from the vast majority of Egyptologists the world over. Latter-day Saint Egyptologists may believe in the validity of the Book of Abraham but they cannot defend the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 within their discipline among their peers because they know the argument will be lost. Apologetic articles about the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 would be flatly rejected by the world body of Egyptologists.
FAIRMORMON wrote:Latter-day Saints, as believers unequipped to deal with Egyptology, are not able to really assess that information for ourselves. We would need 15-20 years of schooling to do it. So, we can either trust our spiritual future to the experts of our choice, or we can rely ultimately upon revelation.
This is simply not true. A student of Egyptology can obtain good books on Egyptian grammar, history, art, religion, etc., and within a few years develop a good sense of identity and purpose for basic Egyptian messages and imagery. One does not need a degree in Egyptology to learn how to read the language on a basic level and identify with Egyptian art and culture. There are lots of books and material on the market that can assist anyone in achieving knowledge on the subject.
The apologist makes an
either or statement that is somewhat disheartening and does not ring true: “
So, we can either trust our spiritual future to the experts of our choice, or we can rely ultimately upon revelation.” From this I gather that both can’t be right; either Egyptologists world over are right or they are wrong, all based on what Joseph Smith’s revelations have to say. In other words, according to the apologists, the Egyptologists are wrong and Joseph Smith is right. I argue that we can trust the collective experts who are the guardians of modern Egyptology and listen to what they have to say about the subject and acquire knowledge ourselves about the language and culture.
FAIRMORMON wrote:Critics' claim that Facsimile #3 alone is enough to settle the question of whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet. This is very convenient for them, because it allows one to focus only on one (very complex) issue that only a few people have the tools to understand. It is, in a sense, to put the critic in an "unassailable position." The critics has made his or her choice, and does not want to debate it or be told he or she is wrong, or return to the question. And, what the critic might consider a "slam dunk" or "vital point," might (from a believer's or some Egyptologist's point of view) really not be so conclusive OR so vital.
Critics (I included) claim that Facsimile No. 3 alone is enough to settle the question of whether or not Joseph Smith was translating Egyptian correctly. It focuses on a presentation given by Joseph Smith and was published in the Times and Seasons as a revelation to the whole world. The Explanations showcase Smith’s professed ability to translate Egyptian documents. This is a perfect opportunity to test the translator and see if he really knew how to translate Egyptian into English. Either the Explanations offered by Joseph Smith are correct or they are not. Modern Egyptology has settled the matter and anyone who possesses basic to moderate skills in Egyptology by studying reliable books on the subject can reasonably determine for themselves whether Joseph Smith was correctly translating and interpreting the Egyptian content of Facsimile No. 3.
Critics have already appealed to modern Egyptology and have concluded that the translations and Explanations given by Joseph Smith for Facsimile No. 3 are false. The following podcasts recorded by Radio Free Mormon who interviewed Egyptologist Robert Ritner are conclusive proof that the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are false.
Radio Free Mormon: Dr. Robert K. Ritner on the Book of Abraham part 1
Radio Free Mormon: Dr. Robert K. Ritner on the Book of Abraham part 2
Radio Free Mormon: Dr. Robert K. Ritner on the Book of Abraham part 3
FAIRMORMON wrote:The problem that we immediately encounter is that there are multiple "experts," and these experts do not all agree.
Wait a second, hold on there, FAIRMORMON. All Egyptologists (including Latter-day Saint Egyptologists) agree that there is no king’s name “given in the characters” of Facsimile No. 3 and neither is the name Shulem “represented by the characters” of that writing. All Egyptologists agree on this conclusion. Therefore, Joseph Smith was wrong.
FAIRMORMON wrote:There are LDS experts who believe the Book of Abraham is a genuine artifact, and that it testifies to Joseph Smith' status as a prophet. Non-LDS experts obviously do not agree with that
Critics recognize that the Church’s position is based purely on faith. We grant that right! We understand that Joseph Smith’s credibility as a translator hinges on whether the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are valid or not. But, science and modern Egyptology have shown otherwise and these conclusions are not based on the faith and testimony of a man who said he could translate Egyptian.