Abraham's signature, according to Joseph Smith

[Alphus and Omegus]

These ancient records, said he, throw great light upon the subject of Christianity. They have been unrolled and preserved with great labor and care. My time has hitherto been too much taken up to translate the whole of them, but I will show you how I interpret certain parts. There, said he, pointing to a particular character, that is the signature of the patriarch Abraham.

It is indeed a most interesting autograph, I replied, and doubtless the only one extant.

Thanks. That was the reference I was trying to recall.

[Alphus and Omegus]

Does that character exist on any of the surviving fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri?

Does the name "Abraham" appear anywhere on the papyri?

Nope.

I know "Abram" doesn't appear, I just meant is that hieratic character present in the surviving papers.

[Shulem]

I know "Abram" doesn't appear, I just meant is that hieratic character present in the surviving papers.

I believe it does as indicated in a previous post. What does that suggest to your mind and what questions would that pose to LDS Egyptologists who are stuck having to explain its existence within the manuscripts that were owned by the Church President (Joseph Smith) and kept at his desk within the very office of the President?

[Alphus and Omegus]

Now, in this same vein I want to call attention to the lack of support for Smith’s claims carry over to Fig. 1 which is suppose to be ABRAM sitting upon the king’s throne. Note that I refer to the name “ABRAM” rather than “ABRAHAM” because when Abram went to Egypt his name was Abram. He hadn’t received the fuller name of “Abraham” = “a father of many nations” until he was 99 years old just prior to the birth of Isaac. So, “while he was in Egypt” he would have been called “Abram” and a signature bearing his name would bear the name “Abram” not Abraham. Thus, when Smith pointed his finger at a particular character and said “that is the signature of the patriarch Abraham”, he should have said ABRAM because the name Abraham couldn’t have existed on the scroll because God hadn’t yet given him the new name. Smith’s inspiration in saying the name Abraham as it relates to the characters or signature on the papyrus was a fatal flaw. An all knowing God through the Spirit would have whispered the name ABRAM and under those circumstances that is the name Smith would have rightly conveyed. But Smith’s inspiration was fatally flawed.

This is a great catch. It's one that seems insignificant if you don't pay attention to details. In reality though, this one small error is like a mistake made by a villain in a Sherlock Holmes story.

The entire document should be called the Book of Abram. Or if Smith didn't want to confuse people, at the very least, in the "translation" manuscript it should say Abram.

[Alphus and Omegus]

I know "Abram" doesn't appear, I just meant is that hieratic character present in the surviving papers.

I believe it does as indicated in a previous post. What does that suggest to your mind and what questions would that pose to LDS Egyptologists who are stuck having to explain its existence within the manuscripts that were owned by the Church President (Joseph Smith) and kept at his desk within the very office of the President?

Yes, I was just replying since your second reply threw me off, after seeing the first one.

But now that you get me thinking about Smith's quoted remarks about the handwriting of "Abraham," I think it's possible that the variations you described in the glyph are what made Smith say that Abraham had poorer penmanship than Joseph bar Israel.

[Shulem]

But now that you get me thinking about Smith's quoted remarks about the handwriting of "Abraham," I think it's possible that the variations you described in the glyph are what made Smith say that Abraham had poorer penmanship than Joseph bar Israel.

The descriptions given by Cowdery about the quality of the penmanship and how Joseph was the "better" scribe is proof that the early brethren believed them to be original autographs of the patriarchs, written by their own hands -- not copies or copies of copies as claimed by lying modern apologists who skew the facts.

But Joseph was the better scribe and Abraham was kind of sloppy when you compare the fragments from both scrolls.