Joseph Smith's WRONG interpretations of the Book of Abraham facsimiles?! Ep. 83

In this episode, Dave talks about the controversial facsimiles of the Book of Abraham. He outlines the 3 most common conclusions people may come to concerning Joseph Smith’s interpretations of the facsimiles. Transcript of this episode and possibly additional notes on our website: https://bit.ly/3hsN0ix Approaching the Facsimiles, by Pearl of Great Price Central: https://bit.ly/2yvEFcI “Assessing the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Introduction to the Historiography of their Acquisitions, Translations, and Interpretations,” Interpreter Foundation: https://bit.ly/2yFscmG “Joseph Smith and Egyptian Artifacts: A Model for Evaluating the Prophetic Nature of the Prophet's Ideas about the Ancient World,” BYU Studies: https://bit.ly/2RWU7FJ Pearl of Great Price Central insights into specific figures in the facsimiles, and more: https://bit.ly/2XPL5Oy “The Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith, Revelation, and You”: https://bit.ly/3eNecYI An interesting perspective on the facsimiles, by Michael D. Rhodes: https://bit.ly/3cDnepy “The Neglected Facsimile: An Examination and Comparative Study of Facsimile No. 3 of the Book of Abraham,” by Quinten Barney: https://bit.ly/3aY75KB Some of the things Joseph somehow got right: https://bit.ly/2x7qR83 -The format of this video was inspired by a fantastic BYU Studies article by Kerry Muhlestein (Source: https://bit.ly/2RWU7FJ ). Credit is due to him for much of the format of this video, however, I did riff off of one or two of his ideas in such a way that he may not have been comfortable with, so to save time I’m crediting his work and offering that disclaimer here in the notes. Ideas specific to him can be found in the article previously mentioned. Any ideas deviating from that work are strictly my own. -Doesn’t the text of the Book of Abraham specifically reference the facsimiles? From John Gee: “Since the papyri come from the Ptolemaic period, about 1,500 years after Abraham, the style of the pictures will not have been the same style as was current in Abraham’s day. Abraham may not have included any illustrations in his original account. The references to the facsimiles within the text of the Book of Abraham seem to have been nineteenth-century editorial insertions. The earliest manuscript we have shows that the phrase ‘I will refer you to the representation that is at the commencement of this record’ from Abraham 1:12 was squished in two lines of smaller handwriting in the space at the end of the paragraph between Abraham 1:12 and 1:13. Similarly, Abraham 1:14 was added in a smaller hand squeezed into the margin at the top of the page, above the header, ignoring the ruled left margin. The Book of Abraham actually reads smoothly without these additions. Thus, these statements in the text seem to be nineteenth-century additions approved by, if not made by, Joseph Smith.” John Gee, “An Introduction to the Book of Abraham,” pg. 143-144. Manuscript image for Abraham 1:12: https://bit.ly/35fH6fC Manuscript image for Abraham 1:14: https://bit.ly/3f9DHUu -What about Joseph’s interpretation on Egyptian hieroglyphs above certain illustrated figures in the facsimiles? From Egyptologist Kerry Muhlestein: “There is a key difference with Facsimile Three compared to the other two: the explanations for Facsimile Three label some of the hieroglyphs above the heads of the figures differently than the way I would translate them as an Egyptologist. As an LDS Egyptologist, it seems to me that the most likely explanation for this is that Joseph Smith was teaching either how ancient Jews or a small set of ancient Egyptians would have interpreted [italicized] the drawings or how we should interpret [italicized] them, after which he then assumed [italicized] that the glyphs would translate [italicized] that way. Again, Joseph Smith did not claim to be able to read hieroglyphs. This particular issue has not yet received much scholarly attention.” Source: https://bit.ly/2yFscmG -It is significant to note that the extant Egyptian papyri dates to much later than the time of Abraham, suggesting that if the papyri did contain the text of the Book of Abraham, they contained copies of the original (or copies of copies) and not the original itself. Additionally, the style of drawing evident in the illustrations of “vignettes” did not exist in Abraham’s day. This may suggest a variety of conclusions: The original Book of Abraham contained no drawings at all, and Egyptians took some creative liberty by adding them. The original Book of Abraham contained drawings, but they were later adapted to the style of the Egyptians. See more notes for this topic on our website. Follow Us: Facebook:   / saintsunscripted   Instagram:   / saintsunscripted   Twitter:   / saintsunscript   Follow the Host: David:   / davidesnell   The Sunday Pews (by David):   / thesundaypews