Shulem wrote:Everything you've said is reasonable and seems logical enough considering what we know. However, critics have the same right as do the apologists to leave doors open and consider any plausible avenue which furthers our argument with each and every element that comprises Smith's Book of Abraham.
Sure, but you admit you don't have any evidence to back it up. I prefer where the evidence leads. I don't see a lack of willingness to tear out a section if Joseph wanted to make a certain story, but I see a lack of evidence and motivation. We both agree Joseph was good at making up stories with what he had, and many others around Joseph would have seen this missing section if it did exist when it was brought Kirtland. That is problematic to the idea Joseph later tore out a section he didn't like.
My idea is not my own, but I don't remember where I read it first. It would be interesting to have someone like Chris Smith comment on the missing sections if he knows where they match up to where they were when they were rolled up. I suspect they do. One of the big hits against Joseph was that the missing section is precisely the same area Egyptology had problems with before the papyri was rediscovered. It clearly showed he couldn't recreate the scene correctly, and a really huge hit Egyptology knew what it was talking about.
Now, the carving of the face for Fig. 6 in Facsimile No. 3 is a legitimate concern because the woodwork cuts in front of the face support the idea that a snout was originally there but was hacked off. Have you been able to discern that through high resolution examination? For me, it's like a bloody revelation! Joseph Smith hacked the face off of Anubis and called him a slave! If this is true, it's a game changer and a serious strike against Smith's credibility.
I think you are on to something here. It does look like more of a snout may have been carved in to later be removed. If this can be shown by further analysis this would be another hit against the missing papyri hypothesis. I don't see it being a big hit against Joseph that he may have told him to take off the snout, but that the snout shows a more jackal like head supporting even more that the head in fac 1 would also have been a jackals head. They both come from the same document both sides agree is Joseph's claimed Book of Abraham.
