This thread provides exact references in showing how Smith borrowed from contemporary sources that ignorantly provide definition to the name-title PHARAOH, king of Egypt. This is proof that Joseph Smith’s inspiration was flat and his knowledge of the true definition of the the royal name was an ignorant guess on his part. The two Egyptian words that comprise the name-title “PHARAOH” do NOT mean king by royal blood. Joseph Smith was wrong to say that. The word Pharaoh is Greek for the Egyptian words per-aa and signifies the structural containment of the (1) Great (2) House of the king and therefore represents the royal palace in which he/she resides. It has nothing to do with blood or lineage. It had everything to do with the physical structure consisting of the royal palace in which the king resided.
Shulem wrote:Joseph Smith (Abraham 1:20) wrote:Pharaoh signifies king by royal blood.Josephus 6:2 wrote:Pharaoh, in the Egyptian tongue, signifies a kingAdam Clarke Commentary, Genesis 12:15 wrote:The word is supposed to signify king in the ancient Egyptian language.
Beware of false apologetics from scholars employed by Brigham Young University! They will lie to you as well as the General Authorities of the Mormon church who are guilty of the great Book of Abraham coverup. Everything about the Book of Abraham including the translations, interpretations, and explanations are a modern 19th century con-job.
The deceptive apologetic practices of Brigham Young University scholars paid for by the Church are hereby rebuked. Stop the lying! Just stop! Repent of your crooked and evil ways. The Book of Abraham is fiction and does not represent historical ancient Egypt. Period!