Liahona Irreantum Rabbanah deseret

[_nc47]

More elaboration from Bokovoy (I think I maxed out my quotations limit on his copyrighted material):

Thank you for posting the interesting question. Joseph Smith was incredibly mystically oriented. Like a shaman, Joseph was constantly trying to access the divine. In the process of attempting to decipher the Egyptian papyri, Joseph produced the Book of Abraham. It seems clear to me that the Prophet believed that he was reproducing the literal words of the biblical patriarch. Yet in reality, whatever Joseph believed he was doing, the evidence suggests that he created a pseudepigraphic text.

This perspective may no doubt bother some believers, but the more one delves into the Jewish and Christian scriptural tradition, the more one comes to recognize that the Book of Abraham actually reflects the general pattern for scriptural texts.

In ancient Israelite/Judean examples of pseudepigraphy, pseudonymous authors are used as a tool to elevate the status of a texts as revealed literature. And yet, the goal of connecting an author with a text is not simply to identify the text as a document coming from a sage, or even a prophet, but instead, as a text produced by one who communicated with God, and can therefore serve as a type of conduit for the disclosure of divine knowledge. Pseudonynomous authors (like Abraham in Joseph Smith’s work) therefore legitimize the scriptural authority of the text.

In these sense, the pseudonymous writer is not so much an author as he is a “tradent,” meaning “a person who delivers or hands over any property to another.” As I suggested, the ancient art of pseudepigrapha is not consistent with the modern notions of fraud or forgeries, and though an interesting historical question, the issue of whether or not Joseph understood that he was creating that sort of a text is not relevant to my personal belief that he tapped into a very inspiring way of understanding God, humanity, and the universe.

Scripture is “messy;” even the Book of Mormon title page allows for human error. I suspect that when it comes to the representation of the absolute truth regarding God, humanity, and the universe, none of what the world’s religions define as “scripture” conveys a perfect reflection of transcendent reality, but for me, the Book of Abraham works. It is an amazing text with fascinating parallels to ancient Semitic (and biblical) efforts to convey religious truth. It is one of my favorite scriptural texts.

Best,

–DB

[_SteelHead]

Oh yeah. So Joseph Smith was writing stories about Abraham just like other people have done.

This is evidence of what?

[_nc47]

Oh yeah. So Joseph Smith was writing stories about Abraham just like other people have done.

This is evidence of what?

I didn't say it was evidence of anything. Just consistent with the Abrahamic tradition.

[_SteelHead]

Ok, so when are you going to provide any of the lots of correct hits you alluded to?

[_nc47]

Ok, so when are you going to provide any of the lots of correct hits you alluded to?

Let me know when you're done so we can move on. I have more goodies.

https://byustudies.BYU.edu/PDFLibrary/3 ... 6b9051.pdf

Revelation often results after wrestling with ideas, and Joseph’s struggle with the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1 seems to have yielded six concepts, which he expressed either in the King Follett Discourse or in a parallel discourse he gave on June 16, 1844.

When propounded in 1844, each of these six ideas was no doubt considered unusual or unorthodox by those of other religious traditions (as well as by certain Latter-day Saints and former Latter-day Saints), and some people would certainly consider these doctrines no less theologically heterodox today. Yet the first five concepts are widely acknowledged by current biblical scholars to be accurate expressions of religious belief among the Hebrews during the time of the patriarchs. The sixth concept, while still representing a minority view, has also received strong scholarly support in recent decades. This article reviews the writings of a wide array of Old Testament commentators with reference to each of these six points.

[_SteelHead]

Great and I can argue that these 6 concepts are common to a multitude of theologies, say the Greek.

Again this is evidence of what?

Joseph Smith was exposed to a variety of common religious ideas?

[_nc47]

Great and I can argue that these 6 concepts are common to a multitude of theologies, say the Greek.
Again this is evidence of what?
Joseph Smith was exposed to a variety of common religious ideas?

To impute it to the Bible was revolutionary.

[_Res Ipsa]

I don't think I can let my mind delude myself to make this assumption. It allows me to discard what ever I don't like as Joseph's input. I couldn't be honest and do this. I am not sure what you think he got right. I see he got almost everything wrong, and there is a good thread on the dangers of parallelisms. We get an F when we get most things wrong on a test.

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=28161

I think Brad presents good reasons why we should be very skeptical of this.

***Pops head up. Looks for shadow. Sees shadow. Predicts 50 more years of Book of Abraham B.S.***

This is an example of parallelomania gone wild. Go to the wiki. Read what Pseudographia is. It's falsely attributing a document to an author. Wow. It's not an "Abrahamic Tradition." Find me an "Abrahamic tradition" of completely mistranslating from one language to another. How many of the Pseudographia listed in, oh, I don't know, the freaking wiki article on the subject were phony translations from one language to another?

What Smith did falls within an even longer tradition of "making stuff up."

Sheesh.

[_SteelHead]

A synthesis of common religious ideas, a smattering of Swedenborg, and associating it to genesis in a manner filled with anachronism, revolutionary?

Not hardly.

[_nc47]

A synthesis of common religious ideas, a smattering of Swedenborg, and associating it to genesis in a manner filled with anachronism, revolutionary?

Not hardly.

No, it's not like that. Perhaps this summary may help.

6 radical ideas were revealed to Joseph Smith about the God of the Bible.
5 out of 6 ideas have been confirmed by the dominant consensus of Bible scholars as what the Bible teaches. This is due mainly to archaeological discoveries in Syria during the 1950s that have contextualized the Bible in line with Joseph Smith's interpretation.

The remaining 1 of the 6 is still a minority position, but is gaining academic steam.