Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

[_Shulem]

1. Did he think the Hor scroll held the text of the Book of Abraham. (I recognize there's evidence for that, but I'd like a clear answer from him as to his understanding)

I think it's reasonable to think that W.W. Phelps thought the same thing that President Smith thought who thought the same thing the Lord thought.

The last of June four Egyptian mummies were brought here; there were two papyrus rolls, besides some other ancient Egyptian writings with them. As no one could translate these writings, they were presented to President Smith. He soon knew what they were and said they, the 'rolls of papyrus,' contained the sacred record kept of Joseph in Pharaoh’s Court in Egypt, and the teachings of Father Abraham. God has so ordered it that these mummies and writings have been brought in the Church, and the sacred writing I have just locked up in Brother Joseph’s house when your letter came, so I had two consolations of good things in one day.

[_ClarkGoble]

1. Did he think the Hor scroll held the text of the Book of Abraham. (I recognize there's evidence for that, but I'd like a clear answer from him as to his understanding)

What did Joseph think? Well, what did he say?

Supply me with that time machine and maybe I'll tell you. <grin>

It's reasonable to think that Joseph Smith thought the same thing he said the Lord thought. The question is: Is Smith's God right? That's the real question, Clark! Smith is not the one on trial. His God is!

The issue is why he thought this. But I do agree that ultimately what we're doing is inquiring about God.

[_Shulem]

Until one wants the truth more then they want what they believe to be true they will always approach these issues with the conclusion settled. It doesn't matter whether you are a believing Mormon like Clark or a believing Scientologist. Neither are open minded enough to see the truth.

People are more concerned about being happy and how to validate their own thoughts and feelings regarding their religion, faith, and beliefs. In this process truth is molded and interpreted to justify a means to the end.

[_Shulem]

The issue is why he thought this. But I do agree that ultimately what we're doing is inquiring about God.

We can know best what Smith thought based on what he wrote and based on statements made by others who cited him.

Ultimately though, what Smith thought isn't what counts. What counts is what his God thought.

[_Themis]

The issue is why he thought this. But I do agree that ultimately what we're doing is inquiring about God.

According to Joseph it was what God told him. His claims about what God told him are very specific, and all very wrong. The whole point of believing someone is a Prophet is thinking they can actually communicate with God reliably enough to get it mostly right. Your theories are so bad you might as well throw out all revelations/translation because you cannot reasonably think they are even half close to being right. This is how we test those who claim to represent some supernatural being/s.

[_Shulem]

2. Why did he think the Hor scroll held the text of the Book of Abraham? That is, explicitly what did he think God told him and what was due to his inferences. Getting that distinction between revelation and inference would be my #1 focus in questioning. It seems to me that while that's more clear early in history it tends to start blurring by the mid 1830's and certainly by Nauvoo.

So, what you're saying is you'd be asking Smith if the papyrus literally contained Abraham's preserved account written in Egyptian text by Abraham's own dusty hand and did God reveal this to the prophet by direct revelation through the manifestation of the Holy Ghost. What might Smith's reply be? Probably something to the effect of what he already stated to others to include declarations made by elder Cowdery in the Messenger And Advocate. Smith would bear testimony of his calling and that God is working miracles in the church in the last days. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith don't apologize but are loud and clear. He was bold, assertive, and constantly making amazing claims.

I have given a brief history of the manner in which the writings of the Fathers, Abraham, and Joseph have been preserved and how I came into possession of the same – a correct translation of which I shall give in its proper place.

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.

[_Shulem]

3. Did he think anyone else could translate Egyptian? If so, what did he think would happen if they disagreed with his translation.

Mr. Chandler informed Smith and Cowdery that the Egyptian language was a mystery and that scholars could only offer basic rudimentary ideas about a few characters -- but a full translation was much to be desired.

Clark, Jesus posed a question which nobody would answer:

The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men?

I have a question for you, Clark:

The Translation of Smith, was it from heaven, or of men?

[_Shulem]

4. I'd ask about the U&T/seer stones and the basic epistemological question of when he saw something in them (or by revelation) how could he differentiate, if he could at all, questions about historic origins, from questions about the text, from questions about corrupt translation. More or less my questions about the difference between surface level reproductions verses meaning versus reference. (My guess is that he hadn't even considered these issues, but I'd love to know)

So many questions, Clark. I don't know if Joseph would appreciate that many questions. I think he would suspect you were questioning his divine ability to translate Egyptian into English. The prophet, however, was able to translate in a snap when pressed for time.

Mr. Smith retired into his translating room and presently returned with a written translation in English

Imagine that. Translating Egyptian text into English. Amazing, wouldn't you say?

[_ClarkGoble]

What did Joseph think? Well, what did he say?

Not to state the obvious but that quote doesn't identify the Hor papyri. We may infer that from other things like the vingettes. But I don't think that quote clarifies things as much as you think. Thus my wanting to get a clear statement from Joseph. More importantly though how God communicated this to him. There is after all a big difference between a revelation "one of these scrolls has Abraham material on it" and "this particular scroll has Abraham material on it."

I have a question for you, Clark:

The Translation of Smith, was it from heaven, or of men?

Obviously I believe in part from heaven (acknowledging ever present human fallibilism in the production)

So, what you're saying is you'd be asking Smith if the papyrus literally contained Abraham's preserved account written in Egyptian text by Abraham's own dusty hand and did God reveal this to the prophet by direct revelation through the manifestation of the Holy Ghost.

More what I'm getting at is the distinction between what God said and what Joseph inferred from that and then generally attributed to God. Most people don't get into those subtle distinctions but they're epistemologically quite important. They also tend not to get addressed in the more general statements.

We can know best what Smith thought based on what he wrote and based on statements made by others who cited him.

That is certainly our best information. I'm not sure it can get at these subtleties I'm raising.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Good stuff, Clark.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallibilism

Human fallibilism and the Book of Abraham. Lol. Well. There you go. Mormonism in a nutshell, folks.

- Doc