.

[Shulem]

The second category of characters here that we will mention are truly Egyptian characters in the GAEL that were copied from the Egyptian Papyri in the hands of the GAEL authors, and they were given various interpretations in the GAEL, such as astronomical interpretations related to the Book of Abraham, with names found in the Book of Abraham, such as Kolob, Flos Isis, etc

Indeed, genuine Egyptian characters were taken from the Book of Abraham roll and copied into the GAEL and defined and interpreted on that basis, a single character at a time. I disagree with you in using the term "authors" as pertaining to the authorship of the GAEL. There was only one author, Joseph Smith -- prophet, seer, revelator, and translator to the entire Church and the proprietor of the Book of Abraham and its translation. The other gentlemen that assisted with the cause were SCRIBES. They were not authors! The scribes did not author the translation of the Book of Abraham -- Joseph Smith was the sole author of that work including the Alphabet and Grammar and other works that were under his lock and key. Period.

Only one man had the right and authority duly authorized of God to translate ancient languages for the Church and to provide those records as a revelation under his direct supervision and leadership. The translation process was not based on a committee or opinions of the many. Joseph Smith did the thinking and the dictating and his scribes wrote down what they were told to write. That *IS* exactly how it happened.

The words Kolob and Flos Isis are from Joseph Smith who approved them and dictated that information to his scribes and it was written and copied because of Smith, the sole author of the Book of Abraham. The same goes for the Explanations of the Facsimiles. Smith is the author of those so-called revelations.

[Shulem]

Interestingly, as pointed out by Vogel, a third category of characters are ones interspersed between ones from the Egyptian papyri, but that are not found on the Egyptian Papyri.

Indeed, I too pointed that out on my old apologetic website back in the day when I was trying to make sense of why Smith would employ commonly used ancient symbols pertaining to astronomy into his Egyptian Book of Abraham manuscripts. At that time, there really weren't very many people aware of this and for those who did know, it must have seemed a strange anomaly. Of course, I had my own ideas of why Smith did what he did. Following Smith's venture into astronomy is certainly a wild and crazy ride!

I have Vogel's new book (Book of Abraham Apologetics A Review and Critique) in my hand and so far have carefully read through the Introduction and will happily venture forward as time permits. I noticed Vogel includes a whole section on The Cosmos and that the astronomical signs in question are listed and displayed on p. 122. Both signs for the sun and moon which you are about to bring up are there as well.

[Shulem]

However, like the ones from the Egyptian Papyri, these are also astronomical interpretations. For example, the character for “earth,” or Jah-Oh-Eh, is drawn this way:

[4th sign from top]

.


And then, the “moon,” or Flo-ees, is drawn this way:

[First sign]

.

Indeed, the 4th sign in your photos above is an ancient astronomical sign for planet earth featuring a globe with equator and meridian lines in the shape of a cross:



It's been around a long time and is still used today, even in astrology.

Neither one of these characters are found on the papyri.

No, they certainly are not found on the papyri! You're right about that, Ed!

Vogel tries to say that the character for earth, he thinks, was taken from the almanacs of Joseph Smith’s day, because it is a known symbol for the earth in astronomical and astrological circles.

You should be listening to Vogel because he knows what he's talking about and I will vouch for that. I'm afraid that you're not going to like what's to follow because I'm going to to correct you for misinformation and false Egyptology you are peddling.

[Moksha]

That Jupiter symbol would make a wonderful addition to the rainbow float in the Pioneer Day Parade.

[Ed1]

.

[Ed1]

.

[Shulem]

Neither one of these characters are found on the papyri.

No, they certainly are not found on the papyri! You're right about that, Ed!

I'll remind you that those signs are NOT found on Abraham's round hypocephalus, Facsimile No. 2. But they should be there because Smith claimed to translate the glyphs and a representation of those signs should be there, but they are not! See for yourself:

. . . . according to the measurement of this earth, which is called by the Egyptians Jah-oh-eh.

. . . . as also Floeese or the Moon, the Earth

Represents this earth in its four quarters.

As you can't see, the glyphs for the earth and moon are not there. The astronomical Facsimile No. 2 does not provide the signs required to justify Smith's erroneous translations.

[Shulem]

Ok. Free country buddy. I can see that Niwt is not something you care to give consideration. Your brain has that right.
I don't need to agree with everything that Vogel presents just because I value most of the things he presents. My brain has that right.

Hmmm. I think you might be getting a little ahead of yourself.

This is going to get really, really, good, Ed.

You're in for a SHULEM treat. Buckle up, Ed.

[Shulem]

I can see that Niwt is not something you care to give consideration.

Oh, I considered it, you just didn't give me time to quote the next sentence in your essay. I've been taking it one sentence at a time, incase you've not noticed.

Nevertheless, the fact overlooked by Vogel is that the same symbol does indeed exist in Egyptian,

[2nd sign from the top]

.

This symbol stands for “land,” “region” or “city,” indeed translating as “earth”in our language, since “earth” just means land or soil.

The "same symbol?" Same?

Hardly the same, Ed. You do however make an attempt to appeal to authority and from a limited and ignorant perspective it seems you're using real Egytology to prove Smith's translation:

The only difference from the common astrological symbol, or the one that Joseph Smith used, is that it is cranked 45 degrees. That is not a significant difference to merit consideration that it is a different character. The Egyptological vocalization for this symbol is niwt, (NWT, pronounced nee-oot) and it is catalogued in Gardiner’s sign list as character number O49.

You reference Gardiner's Grammar O49 of the village with cross-roads, an ideogram transliterated as niwt. This sign is a determinative used in conjunction with other signs to form words which represent geographical locations that might include a village, town, or a region. It references a specific place. It does NOT mean the earth per se, but references a place on the earth. It refers to a city or town or a local place. The sign may even be used in words to reference citizens or townsmen.

You need to realize that in this sign the cross in the circle represents cross-roads in the midst of a location that is being named. It does NOT represent the earth. You may reference the earth in Gardiner's section N, more especially N16: the ideogram tA which sign is made to represent alluvial land and grains of sand, actual earth and land in which makes planet earth. This determinative is used in many words to describe definitive things that have to do with the earth to include: the earth itself, ground, land of Egypt, god's land, sacred land, etc.

So you see, Ed, it's not just the cranked 45 degrees that makes a difference, it's the actual meaning of the sign itself which you have misrepresented in your essay. The cross in the Egyptian sign are intersecting roads but the cross on the other sign representing earth in astronomy are the lines of the Sun cross which is indicative of the entire planet or sun disc.

[Shulem]

However, like the ones from the Egyptian Papyri, these are also astronomical interpretations. For example, the character for “earth,” or Jah-Oh-Eh

From my old apologetic website featuring Jah-oh-eh = "The earth"

Manuscript GAEL, "Grammar & Alphabet of the Egyptian Language"

The problem Ed, the word Jah-oh-eh is NOT Egyptian and has nothing to do with The earth as far as the Egyptians were concerned. You won't find Jah-oh-eh in Gardiner's Grammar. But you will find it in Smith's fantasized Egyptian Grammar which has nothing to do with Egyptology.