Thoughts of John Gee on the Book of Abraham

[Shulem]

Does this find not support the eyewitness accounts of a Long Roll thus supporting Gee's claim that we are missing the part of the papyri that the Book of Abraham came from? (not that I buy into any of that apologist crap)

Long roll or short roll (or even medium sized), it don't matter -- who gives a damn? We have important fragments of Smith's Book of Abraham papyrus including the surviving vignette of Abraham in Egypt which was a "representation at the commencement of this record", a so-called depiction of Abraham being sacrificed in Facsimile No. 1.



We have the very hieroglyphs shown in registers to the right and left of Abraham's sacrifice scene which is the commencement of the record in question. Many of those same hieroglyphs have been meticulously copied into the various notebooks known as the Kirtland Papers wherein the Church Translator, Joseph Smith and his scribes, worked and labored diligently to translate the record. The First Presidency preserved those sacred records and President Willard Richards carried them in his personal luggage on his western trek to Utah.

[consiglieri]

There was a report of a new find in Egypt with a description of a long Book of the Dead. I wonder how Gee will respond to that?
https://www.livescience.com/queen-templ ... egypt.html

Does this find not support the eyewitness accounts of a Long Roll thus supporting Gee's claim that we are missing the part of the papyri that the Book of Abraham came from? (not that I buy into any of that apologist crap)

My understanding is the new find contains one spell from the Book of the Dead.

The Joseph Smith papyrus was a book of breathings, a much smaller text.

So no, I don’t think this helps John Gee.

[Shulem]

My understanding is the new find contains one spell from the Book of the Dead.

The Joseph Smith papyrus was a book of breathings, a much smaller text.

So no, I don’t think this helps John Gee.

Everything included within the papyrus collection owned by Joseph Smith was funerary in nature and had nothing to do with the mythical biblical character of Abraham's venture into Egypt. There was not a single word written anywhere on Smith's papyrus that referenced Abraham or the story published as the Book of Abraham. NOT ONE SINGLE WORD! The Kirtland Papers serve as a mirror to the papyrus and demonstrate exactly how Joseph Smith was translating and interpreting his story from hieroglyphic texts and converting it into the Book of Abraham. It's all there for John Gee's lying eyes to see.

The same goes for the Facsimiles. Not a single word written in the registers of Facsimile No. 2 & 3 have anything to do with Abraham in Egypt or Smith's wild claims and fantasies about ancient Egypt in connecting it to the Mormon/Masonic temple via the symbolism portrayed in funerary Hypocephali.

[Shulem]

Folks,

The following links in WIKIPEDIA are excellent sources worth bookmarking to acquire quick information about the Joseph Smith papyrus and learn more about this controversial subject. If you prefer, you can bookmark this page here at Discuss Mormonism Wikipedia Book of Abraham Links

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Book of Abraham
Joseph Smith Papyri
Criticism of the Book of Abraham
Joseph Smith Hypocephalus
Kirtland Egyptian papers
Book of Joseph (Latter Day Saints)
File:Facsimile 3 plate anubis.jpg

You're welcome

[hauslern]

Gee's latest on the Book of Abraham.
https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... f-abraham/

Just before the publication of Dan Vogel's book. Gee concludes "I have shown that the theory of translation propounded in The Joseph Smith Papers Revelations and Translations: Volume 4 does not accord with the facts presented in the rest of the Joseph Smith Papers or even with the documents published in JSPRT4. The evidence adduced for a simultaneous dictation appears to be refuted by the documents themselves and the historical use of scribes in 1835 and 1836. "

[Shulem]

appears to be

That's no doubt the linchpin and weakness of Gee's argument -- insomuch as it appears to be what his blind eyes are seeing.

The Church pays that pasty-face bastard Egyptologist a full time salary to produce apologetic crap! I might want to take time to read his article and see how it jives with the years of study I've put into the same subject. Or maybe not. Will see.

John Gee, what's the king's name in Facsimile No. 3? Just answer the question you pasty-faced SOB!

[Moksha]

Everything included within the papyrus collection owned by Joseph Smith was funerary in nature and had nothing to do with the mythical biblical character of Abraham's venture into Egypt. There was not a single word written anywhere on Smith's papyrus that referenced Abraham or the story published as the Book of Abraham. NOT ONE SINGLE WORD!

Is it not possible that the funerary papyri, along with the Kinderhook Plates, and the mysterious Golden Plates served as a catalyst to Joseph Smith's translations into English (even if they passed through a 16th Century committee of bards as suggested by the Interpreter Foundation)?

Did the 16th Century Committee of Bards have a vendetta against Anubis and perhaps left orders to have Anubis snout chiseled off the lead plates? Wonder if Royal Skousen knows anything about the Bards Committee stewing in their ale over Anubis?

[Shulem]

Is it not possible

No, it's not possible. Joseph Smith did not claim those objects (gold plates & papyrus) were for the purpose of stimulating a Catalyst but were the actual objects crafted by ancient prophets preserved by the providence of God and set in his hands for the purpose of translating. So, NO, it's not possible. It's 100% impossible (which leaves no chance for a possibility) that Smith believed or claimed the Catalyst theory like APOSTATE Mormons today are pushing. The Mormons today are an abomination in their own right just like Joseph Smith was an abomination in his own right -- liars, cheats, a dishonorable people.

The word "MORMONSIM" needs to coined as another word to imply DECEPTION. Mormons love to deceive. They start by deceiving themselves and then practice their deceptive art by deceiving others. The entire religion is founded and based upon deception.

Never, ever, trust a Mormon when it comes to discussing the Book of Abraham. They will lie to you and coverup, every time.

[Philo Sofee]

hauslern
nteresting interview with Gee and his experience at Yale. He does not mention Ritner.
https://www.fromthedesk.org/10-questions-john-gee/
Note how he argues for the Book of Abraham
"The first is that the fragments that we currently have must be the papyri from which Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham. A careful examination of the accounts left by nineteenth century eyewitnesses shows that cannot be the case.

It is! Ironically, Gee's own fellow associate apologist Matthew Roper gave me the complete comments of all the contemporary witnesses in Joseph Smith's day on the papyri and Gee is mis using the witnesses own words. I have the PROOF and will present it in two weeks on my Sunday Backyard Professor Live program... Gee is systematically misusing the witnesses words, and I have to ask what on earth would make him so blatantly dishonest? It is that he does not have the truth, accept the truth, or believe the truth.

[Philo Sofee]

bump