Zub Zool oan and Abraham 1:2b?????3

[_Bazooka]

So what's the point of the Book of Abraham if it isn't what the church claims it to be? Inspired fiction that has nothing to do with the plan of salvation?

Beats me....

[_grindael]

For something new and interesting on the Book of Abraham, see Brent Metcalfe's new article, The Curious Textual History of “Egyptus” the Wife of Ham in the JWHA Journal. It may help some to understand how the process worked.

[_grindael]

For any that want HI RES photos of the Grammar and Alphabet, they are FINALLY on the Church History Website, and are located here. (I've linked to the first page of the first folder)... https://dcms.LDS.org/delivery/DeliveryM ... =IE4731981

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

For something new and interesting on the Book of Abraham, see Brent Metcalfe's new article, The Curious Textual History of “Egyptus” the Wife of Ham in the JWHA Journal. It may help some to understand how the process worked.

Thanks Grindael.

[_grindael]

You're welcome. I will make sure and keep this bumped for posterity. It is a VERY interesting thread that should be read.

[_grindael]

Bump.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Thanks for bumping this. This was fantastic.

- Doc

[_Mercury]

There is no Abraham, only Zool!

[_canpakes]

Mak -

Is there anything (earlier statements or analysis) that you've posted within this thread that you have significantly modified or no longer agree with, or have subsequently drawn conclusions on that are not yet stated?

[_Kevin Graham]

Sockpuppet said: "Abr 3 was not translated until 1842."

Maklelan responded a couple of times: "There's that statement again. What is it that leads you to believe Abr 3 was not translated until 1842? ... Mention was made earlier that Smith explicitly stated he was recommencing translating from Abr 2:19 in 1942. Does such a quote exist, or is it an inference from the March 8th quote above?"

I'll repeat what I wrote elsewhere:

The best evidence against the Gee/Schryver theory for a July production of the Book of Abraham is two fold:

1) The testimony of Warren Parrish who said "I have set by his side and penned down the translation of the Egyptian Hieroglyphicks as he claimed to receive it by direct inspiration of Heaven." We know Parrish didn't become Joseph Smith's scribe until 29 October 1835.

According to Ed Ashment, "During a portion of his tenure, Parrish was ill and consequently unable to record for Smith--this was from at least 22 December 1835 to 8 February 1836. He surely was no longer a scribe by July 1837, when he was accused of having embezzled $25,000 from the Kirtland Safety Society, and by that December he would be out of the church."

So this narrows the window as far as Joseph Smith's first draft/translation is concerned. Because Parrish doesn't say he sat my his side and transcribed "dictated copies" or anything like that. He said explicitly he was directly responsible for transcribing the original translation as it was received through revelation, and we know this probably happened sometime in November because he wasn't even hired as scribe until the end of October. So it is not just a coincidence that this is when we see Joseph Smith mentioning repeated translation work in his journal.

Now I raised this issue with Schryver years ago and he didn't seem to understand the significance of this until I asked him a very simple question: "Will, if the Book of Abraham was already translated in early July of 1835, then what direct revelation did Parrish transcribe at some point after October 29, 1835?" Of course, Schryver did his usual thing by claiming he had tons of refuting evidences that he was going to publish very soon, but he refused to share any of it with us until that time. That was back in 2005!

2) The first installment of the Book of Abraham, published in 1842 in the Times and Seasons, ended precisely where the KEP manuscripts end. Now is that just a crazy coincidence? I don't think so. But in preparation for the second installment of the Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith claims to be involved in translation again:

"March, 1842 ... Tuesday, 8.--Commenced Translating from the Book of Abraham for the 10 No. of the Times and Seasons and [Joseph Smith] was engaged at his office day & evening."

Here we see Joseph Smith claiming that he will begin translating for the next installment. This tells us he didn't begin translating for Abraham chapter 3 until March 1842, and yet Schryer and Gee assure us it was already finished in July 1835, seven years earlier!

Incidentally, John Gee flat out lied in publication when he said no translating had taken place in 1842, even as he referenced Joseph Smith's remarks above. When it was pointed out to him that the reference explicitly refers to translation, he changed his argument in a follow up publication to say that Joseph Smith engaged in "editing and revising." Which again, is a blatant misrepresentation of what Joseph Smith said. He explicitly stated he was engaged in "translating."