Book Of Abraham Facsimile No 1

[Paul Osborne]

Facsimile No. 1 is a vignette FROM the Book of Abraham and was presented to the saints as a depiction of Abraham at the point of a knife, about to be murdered upon an altar in Chaldea.

I would like to hear your ideas about how this picture relates to the BofA roll as a whole.

I’m trying to dig for new insight.

Paul O

[Jason]

"Isis, meanwhile, has taken the form of a falcon and hovers over the groin of Osiris who holds his phallus (hence this is known as an ithyphallic drawing) in anticipation of the procreative act which will make Isis pregnant with their son Horus." By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus, page 102, Charles Larson

[Traveler]

I believe this ancient script is part of unique and special preparations for those passing from life to a place for the dead as understood by the Egyptians. I think that the origin of what is being presented on the script is help for the person it was buried with; and is to point back to when an attempt was made to offer Abraham as a type and shadow of the messiah.

The Traveler

[Paul Osborne]

Originally posted by Jason@Sep 20 2005, 03:38 PM

"Isis, meanwhile, has taken the form of a falcon and hovers over the groin of Osiris who holds his phallus

Sorry, but I don’t see a phallus in the drawing.

Paul O

[Paul Osborne]

Traveler,

I gather you are saying that the picture is a representation of Abraham upon the original altar revealed to Joseph Smith. That sounds good to me. The prophet used the picture to recall the story, is that it?

How did the prophet use the text to tell the story about the bedstead, priests, and Abraham’s near death experience? It’s easy to see how the picture can be borrowed to illustrate a point but using the text to translate a story is quite another. So, how does the text get translated into the BofA?

Paul O

[Jason]

http://nowscape.com/mormon/papyrus/by_his_own_hand.htm

Scroll down towards the bottom of this page, and you'll see a more accurate re-construction of Fac. #1

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Traveler@Sep 20 2005, 04:44 PM

I believe this ancient script is part of unique and special preparations for those passing from life to a place for the dead as understood by the Egyptians.  I think that the origin of what is being presented on the script is help for the person it was buried with; and is to point back to when an attempt was made to offer Abraham as a type and shadow of the messiah.

The Traveler

←

It certainly has been talked about enough Paul... and Traveler has some deeper insight than Jason who is being taught by the world...

What exactly did you want to get from this thread...?

As far as revelation vs translation... when it comes to the BofA I find the information within so inspired, I wonder if Joseph really understood that he was being given pure revelation rather than translation at that time...

All true knowledge has to validate all other true knowledge and in fact fit with it perfectly without question. All the knowledge I have read from out side church sources validate the BofA perfectly....

It really is very exciting...

[Paul Osborne]

Jason,

I've seen that depiction before in C. Larson’s book, but it's only a guess of what some people think may have originally existed. Do you have a parallel drawing from another papyrus to compare? Besides, this phallus is way too small. Egyptian artists don’t draw small erect phallus’s – that’s a pretty big contradiction. It’s not a good depiction at all.

What else do you have to have?

Paul O

[Paul Osborne]

Please,

This topic is exciting for me. It has not been adequately explored. I’ve laid some groundwork in apologetic reasoning that has never been done before in effort to get to the bottom of this mystery. I like a good mystery, but I like answers more than the questions. Don’t you?

I want to understand how idea is converted into image and so far nobody has been able to offer the kind of enlightening idea I crave. I too find the information of the BofA inspiring but I think the method of translation would be even more inspiring if we understood it.

I wonder if Joseph really understood that he was being given pure revelation rather than translation at that time

Ah, this is something I have given a lot of thought to and that's why I wrote an article exploring this concept - if you have time:

The Book of Abraham Story

I can appreciate your statement that true knowledge validates true knowledge but will you kindly tell me how the writing surrounding the picture of Facsimile No. 1 validates the picture as described in LDS scripture? What's the truth about the writing that flanks the picture and how is that truth translated?

Paul O

[Jason]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 05:23 PM

Jason,

I've seen that depiction before in C. Larson’s book, but it's only a guess of what some people think may have originally existed. Do you have a parallel drawing from another papyrus to compare? Besides, this phallus is way too small. Egyptian artists don’t draw small erect phallus’s – that’s a pretty big contradiction. It’s not a good depiction at all.  

What else do you have to have?

Paul O

←

Not much really. Since I first bought my copy of Budge's text "Egyptian Language" which teaches how to descipher Egyptian hieroglyphics, and used that to translate Fac. #2, I realized that Smith wasn't even close to what was written. Then I read a book by Joe Sampson entitled "Written by the Finger of God," which was basically about how it was all to be understood Kabbalistically....It seemed well thought out....except for the fact that the Egyptians were not Kabbalists...And all this was 10 years ago when I was still a Missionary. (Here's a FARMS review of Sampson's text: http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=160)

So since that time, I've not seriously considered that Smith's work on those scrolls was anything more than pulled from his own imagination.

Anyways...I'll leave your thread alone now.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 05:37 PM

Please,

This topic is exciting for me. It has not been adequately explored. I’ve laid some groundwork in apologetic reasoning that has never been done before in effort to get to the bottom of this mystery. I like a good mystery, but I like answers more than the questions. Don’t you?

I want to understand how idea is converted into image and so far nobody has been able to offer the kind of enlightening idea I crave. I too find the information of the BofA inspiring but I think the method of translation would be even more inspiring if we understood it.

I wonder if Joseph really understood that he was being given pure revelation rather than translation at that time

Ah, this is something I have given a lot of thought to and that's why I wrote an article exploring this concept - if you have time:

The Book of Abraham Story

I can appreciate your statement that true knowledge validates true knowledge but will you kindly tell me how the writing surrounding the picture of Facsimile No. 1 validates the picture as described in LDS scripture? What's the truth about the writing that flanks the picture and how is that truth translated?

Paul O

←

Might I suggest that 'answers' are not the same as 'physical proof'....

The way I see it, the expectations could be what the Lord gave rather than what they actually received upon the papyrus...

The Lord never works in mans ways... there in lays the challenge to our faith...

[Paul Osborne]

Please,

It’s true that the Lord tries the faith of his people and expects us to accept things on faith. But, there are answers to every question under the sun.

I’m of the belief that the Lord gave the revelation not according to what was written on the papyrus because we know that none of the BofA is found on any of the fragments now extant. If I said the Lord gave the revelation according to what was written on the papyrus it would make a difficult time in explaining away the conventional pagan spells.

I expect the Lord to challenge our faith, as he has been doing that to his people since the days of Adam. But the Lord can expect that I will ask questions and never be satisfied until I get my answers.

Do you have a problem with Joseph Smith not understanding the translation process in which he was involved? Suppose he thought the papyrus was a real Book of Abraham but in fact it was nothing but funerary spells – is that a problem for you?

Paul O

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 04:15 PM

Traveler,

I gather you are saying that the picture is a representation of Abraham upon the original altar revealed to Joseph Smith. That sounds good to me. The prophet used the picture to recall the story, is that it?

How did the prophet use the text to tell the story about the bedstead, priests, and Abraham’s near death experience? It’s easy to see how the picture can be borrowed to illustrate a point but using the text to translate a story is quite another. So, how does the text get translated into the BofA? 

Paul O

←

Even in the Bible there is not a direct correlation between translated text and manuscripts. In the case of Joseph Smith there is even greater considerations in that he had assess to seerer stones. I think it is possible that these things could be understood to reference Egyptian G-ds. A study of Baal indicates interesting relationships to Noah, Moses and Christ. It may even be possible that when the current script was made the original meaning had been lost to those involved.

You and I have corresponded before - the style and structure of the Book of Abraham is an ancient Egyptian form that was not know during the time of Joseph Smith. The text of the B of A - though related to the remaining script, in my mind, came from something other than the scripts that we currently have.

The Traveler

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 04:23 PM

...I've seen that depiction before in C. Larson’s book, but it's only a guess of what some people think may have originally existed. Do you have a parallel drawing from another papyrus to compare? Besides, this phallus is way too small. Egyptian artists don’t draw small erect phallus’s – that’s a pretty big contradiction. It’s not a good depiction at all....

What about this link:

http://www.egyptology.com/extreme/opet/

M.

[Paul Osborne]

Traveler,

There is only one way anyone could get the name of the king who befriended Abraham out of the text that Joseph Smith specifically pointed at:

Only a prophet could be moved by a revelation to come up with the name. The signs above the hand are not a king's name, neither are they contained in a royal cartouche. Therefore; what was Joseph Smith talking about? It would take a seer stone to convert those characters into Pharaoh’s name. No man on earth has the power to do that.

There never was a time when those characters contained a king’s name. Thus, it’s not a matter of it being lost or corrupted. It’s just a matter of getting the king's name by revelation because the characters above the hand will not help anyone in deciphering the royal name.

Will you tell me that the text you think is MISSING is similar to the characters above the hand – although they are not related to the revelation? Why look for a missing roll when everything we have shows that missing papyri is simply more chips of the old block, funerary spells. Professor Seyffarth made that perfectly clear about the BofA that was on display in the St. Louis Museum, then on to Chicago.

There isn't any doubt in my mind that the rolls of Abraham and Joseph were funerary rolls of a pagan nature. The fragments the brethren enjoyed so much are part of the whole sacred collection.

Papyrus Rolls

Paul O

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 05:58 PM

Please,

It’s true that the Lord tries the faith of his people and expects us to accept things on faith. But, there are answers to every question under the sun.

I’m of the belief that the Lord gave the revelation not according to what was written on the papyrus because we know that none of the BofA is found on any of the fragments now extant. If I said the Lord gave the revelation according to what was written on the papyrus it would make a difficult time in explaining away the conventional pagan spells.

I expect the Lord to challenge our faith, as he has been doing that to his people since the days of Adam. But the Lord can expect that I will ask questions and never be satisfied until I get my answers.

Do you have a problem with Joseph Smith not understanding the translation process in which he was involved? Suppose he thought the papyrus was a real Book of Abraham but in fact it was nothing but funerary spells – is that a problem for you?

Paul O

←

I haven't a problem with anything yet shown... but have you considered the text where there were written in code certain things during the early christian era because of the fear of being caught and abused?

Could it possibly be conceived that these aparent text of funerary text is a message we aren't seeing... but through revelation JS saw?

[Paul Osborne]

Maureen,

The picture you present doesn’t justify C. Larson’s dreamy ideas of a small Egyptian phallus upon papyrus. I don’t see Larson as being very accurate. The picture you present doesn’t even show a phallus! What’s more, the guy isn't wearing a kilt - that could be a bit drafty. Abraham in Facsimile No. 1 is wearing a kilt.

Here is a more accurate picture of the type of scene C. Larson is trying to make of Facsimile No. 1, and you will notice that the kilt is below the bedstead:

Paul O

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 06:33 PM

Maureen,

The picture you present doesn’t justify C. Larson’s dreamy ideas of a small Egyptian phallus upon papyrus. I don’t see Larson as being very accurate. The picture you present doesn’t even show a phallus! What’s more, the guy isn't wearing a kilt - that could be a bit drafty.    Abraham in Facsimile No. 1 is wearing a kilt.

Here is a more accurate picture of the type of scene C. Larson is trying to make of Facsimile No. 1, and you will notice that the kilt is below the bedstead:

Paul O

←

Hey Paul... it occur.. or should I say reoccurred to me during the read of your paper..

I watched a segment on TV once on this subject where they were giving the worldly scholars interpretation of the BofA.. and as my husband and I were listening we saw how they were translating it according to what they believed were the people and times envolved.

For instance... where there was a moon with twelve stars around it... (this isn't the exact example they gave... but one we saw on an archiological dig) instead of translating it to mean Christ and the 12 apostles... they said it was some moon godess and certain ones of her house hold or powers... and they stated they weren't sure...

I believe that everything can be translated by 'idea' or by 'preconceived' knowledge... you know what I mean?

It astounded my husband while in Hawaii while they were giving tours through some old caves that they didn't know that a fish with 12 dots around it meant Christ... they said it must have been how many fish they caught once....

What something means to one... from their knowledge and perspective... means something totally different to another according to their knowledge and perspective... considering that Joseph Smith Knew God personally... and had intimate knowledge of how He worked among his children...

It didn't surprise me at all to hear how the world interpretated the papyrus of the BofA...

Consider also that God can blind the minds.... and give them other than what they seek... especially when they are seeking to destroy testimonies of the Saints...

Just read 1 Jacob 4: 14

14 But behold, the Jews were a stiffnecked people; and they despised the words of plainness, and killed the prophets, and sought for things that they could not understand. Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble.

I believe strongly that most who look to prove the church wrong because of their own private agenda... fall into this catagory... including those who think that the BofA wasn't truly translated according to revelation given to JS.

[Paul Osborne]

Please,

I’ve considered codes in pagan spells but there is too much evidence about the Book of Abraham saga that shows code was not a factor at all. There is overriding evidence that proves the spells were directly connected to pagan rituals that had no relation to Jehovah’s religion or visiting patriarchs in Egypt.

The prophet made it clear that one of the mummies was a king of Egypt. We have plenty of testimony stating this to be so, especially from his own family. You can’t turn a body into a code. Either the body was that of a king or it was not. The mummy was not a king; neither was the text a coded form of the books of Abraham & Joseph.

Paul O

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 05:33 PM

...The picture you present doesn’t even show a phallus!

It would help if you opened up the additional links that are in the one link I provided.

This unique scene, from the Late Period, in the Opet Temple at Karnak illustrates the union of the sun god Amen-Re, as an ithyphallic Ba bird, with Osiris as a young man lying upon a lion couch. Though this drawing of the relief does not indicate it, the photographs show the probability that the youthful Osiris is ithyphallic as well....

...A remembering of Osiris, based on a scene of an ithyphallic Osiris on his lion couch from the Temple of Isis at Philae. Click HERE...

This scene, a detail from above, illustrates the reanimation of Osiris. Here are portrayed the goddess Nepthys on the left and on the right the goddess Isis, both using hand gestures to help in his invigoration. We can now remember Osiris and restore the Opet scene to look like this…

M.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Paul Osborne@Sep 20 2005, 06:45 PM

Please,

I’ve considered codes in pagan spells but there is too much evidence about the Book of Abraham saga that shows code was not a factor at all. There is overriding evidence that proves the spells were directly connected to pagan rituals that had no relation to Jehovah’s religion or visiting patriarchs in Egypt.

The prophet made it clear that one of the mummies was a king of Egypt. We have plenty of testimony stating this to be so, especially from his own family. You can’t turn a body into a code. Either the body was that of a king or it was not. The mummy was not a king; neither was the text a coded form of the books of Abraham & Joseph.

Paul O

←

In one perspective only.

[Paul Osborne]

Please,

I believe the BofA was translated by a translation not of this world. But Joseph Smith didn’t have a real BofA to translate. Egyptologists know how to translate and this knowledge came through the deciphering of the Rosetta Stone. The fragments in existence today are funerary chips off the funerary block. All of the papyrus had by the church was funerary literature, not sacred papyri had by Abraham.

The text of the Facsimile No. 3 is not the BofA. The translations given by the prophet are the BofA – but he got it in a way we don’t understand. That is why I opened this thread, so we can better understand how he got it. I need ideas.

Further, I don’t believe two of the figures stated to be men in Facsimile No. 3 are really men. They are women. I don’t believe Anubis is a slave. There is no Egyptian code that can make a slave out of an Egyptian god.

Paul O

[Guest Member_Deleted]

The text of the Facsimile No. 3 is not the BofA. The translations given by the prophet are the BofA – but he got it in a way we don’t understand. That is why I opened this thread, so we can better understand how he got it. I need ideas.

You want to better understand how the Lord works? It is terribly simple... what is seen is not what is unseen.

Can you just picture Joseph Smith with an angel standing over him with a sword threatening him if he didn't submit to polygamy?

Can you imagine Joseph Smith putting men before God after meeting with and seeing God several times?

Can you understand a God who would ask his prophets to do things which were seemingly totally against reason... like Abrahm... go sacrifice the only son you have and still believe me when I say your posterity will be as numerous as the sands of the sea...

Now... as to the papyrus... Here is Joseph among men ... expecting... nay even demanding he perform a work... God didn't give this work to him.... not directly...

And God says... well JS... what do you want to do here? If you translate this thing... and I can help you with that... you will find it has nothing of value to the people..

Then again... since all these people are so bent on having it done... might as well use all things for their good... instant gratification here... long term trouble for their pushing you around... but in the end it will be the straw that either builds the house or breaks their backs...

Do you feel they should have such a challenge to their faith? Joseph looks out over the clamoring crowd and says... lets do it... they will be satisfied with nothing less...

and it is so..

[Paul Osborne]

Maureen,

That was quite interesting; I didn't realize the page had the whole panoramic scene.

Here is another shot, but this Osiris is less active - I guess he should take vitamins.

Paul O

[Paul Osborne]

Please,

It doesn’t look like there will be any breakthroughs tonight. It doesn’t bother me that Joseph thought the mummy was a king, or a women a man, or a god a slave –but I would like to know more about HOW he translated. No one has been able to provide much information on this. I’m unsatisfied with the knowledge we have.

But that won’t keep me from searching, pondering, and asking. Jesus told us to ask, seek, and knock. I've been doing that for years and will continue to do so.

Paul O