FAIR - User contributions [en]

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-17T18:21:32Z

EdGoble: /* The Double Entendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-17T18:20:43Z

EdGoble: /* The Double Entendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-17T18:20:10Z

EdGoble: /* The Double Entendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Question: What are the historical approaches that have been take in an attempt to understand the Kirtland Egyptian Papers?

2011-07-16T03:04:11Z

EdGoble: /* Historical LDS responses */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
=Historical approaches to the Kirtland Egyptian Papers=

==Critical responses==
{{Epigraph|Neither side of this debate believes the GAEL was a “key” to translating the papyri. And you have no evidence that JS believed that either...What I meant was that nobody believes the GAEL was used as a translation key. My side of the debate doesn't believe anything was translated. And if JS intended it to be understood that such were the case, the GAEL would be tied closer to the translation. Dan Vogel, ''Mormon Apologetics and Discussion Board'', 13 Aug. 2010. {{link|url=http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/50442-will-schryvers-book-of-abraham-talk/page__view__findpost__p__1208895741}} }}
{{parabreak}}
{{Epigraph|Christopher C. Smith has argued at some length that Joseph Smith was the primary author of the Alphabet and Grammar documents, and that those documents served as the source or ''modus operandi'' for the translation of at least the first three verses of the Book of Abraham. According to Smith, "This undoubtedly accounts for the choppiness and redundancy of these three verses, which stylistically are very different from the remainder of the Book of Abraham. Verse 3, for example, reads as though it has been cobbled together from a series of dictionary entries." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers Wikipedia entry for the Kirtland Egyptian Papers] as of Aug. 14, 2010, referencing Christopher C. Smith, "The Dependence of Abraham 1:1-3 on the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar," John Whitmer Historical Association Journal 29 (2009): 38-54.}}
{{parabreak}}

Critics note at least two evidences which demonstrate an obvious connection between some of the Kirtland Egyptian papers and the Book of Breathings scroll from the Joseph Smith Papyri (JSP). These two evidences are used by critics to prove that the existing fragments of the Scroll of Hor is the source of the Book of Abraham and that therefore Joseph was not a prophet.
#Like the Hebrews, the Egyptians read right to left. The "Scroll of Hor"-- which is the Book of Breathings scroll in the JSP collection-- begins (at the right end) with Facsimile 1 (as recorded in the Book of Abraham) followed by Egyptian characters. Some of the KEP are divided by a vertical line at the left side of the paper. About three fourths of the paper is to the right of each line. To the left of the line are Egyptian characters. These are the same characters that follow Facsimile 1 of the Book of Breathings(these would be to the left of the vignette). To the right of the vertical line (on the Kirtland papers) appear passages from the Book of Abraham. Critics assert that these passages represent Joseph Smith's attempt to perform "translations" of each of the characters on the left. It is claimed that Joseph took a single character in each case and expanded it to a full paragraph of text.
#The Book of Abraham states:
<blockquote>
...that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation [Facsimile 1] at the commencement of this record." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/1/12#12 Abraham 1:12]-- keeping in mind that the scroll would have been read from right to left to and Facsimile 1 is virtually the first item at the right end of the scroll.)
</blockquote>

==Historical LDS responses==

LDS approaches to the KEP have been more varied. The first significant scholarly study of the matter, by John A. Tvedtnes and Richley Crapo, appeared in a series of articles under the auspices of the Society for Early Historic Archaeology from 1968 to 1970. Their theory was that the Sensen Papyrus may have represented a mnemonic device to bring to mind a longer oral tradition — a tradition that corresponded to the narrative of the Book of Abraham as we know it. This theory was grounded in two observations. First, the hieratic symbols copied into the left margin of the KEPA documents were complete morphemes, as opposed to the inappropriate breaks one would expect of someone who could not read Egyptian. Second, in every case the meaning of the hieratic word in the margin shows up in some relevant way in the much longer English text corresponding to the hieratic word. Of course, lots of other words and concepts are present as well, but the meaning of the hieratic word in each case is present in the English text.

While a fascinating study, the Tvedtnes and Crapo mnemonic device theory never really caught on. Hugh Nibley was intrigued by this possibility at first, but then decided to go in a different direction. Nibley authored a seminal, lengthy study of the KEP in ''BYU Studies'' entitled "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers." He did not attempt to defend the KEP as revelatory documents (other than the English portions of the KEPA). Rather, he took the view that the KEP represent either a preliminary "studying it out" stage in the process, or a (failed) attempt to reverse engineer the English translation so as to decipher the Egyptian language. In other words, the English text of the Book of Abraham was received by revelation as opposed to a purely mechanical process. While Joseph was involved in the KEP project, a theme of Nibley's piece is to portray the efforts of Phelps, Cowdery, and Parrish as largely independent of Joseph. Nibley's take has become the dominant LDS view, and has been echoed more recently in several publications by John Gee.

===The KEP as an "Interpretive Key" for a "Super-Cryptogram"===

A small minority of LDS commenters on the KEP seeks to defend the supposed revelatory character of these documents, viewing them through the lenses of kabbalism or extreme symbolism. It has few adherents.

===The KEP as an "Ancient Cipher" manifesting non-standard meanings assigned to characters anciently===

Others have interpreted them similar to William Schryver's interpretations of a modern-day cipher. But rather than being a modern-day cipher, it is proposed that the KEP represent a system of interpretation imposed on the Sensen papyrus by ancient Jewish Egyptians that differs from the standard Egyptian meaning of the characters. But this theory proposes that there is still some affinity to either the core or root meanings of the characters, or they have some visual connection to the meaning of other characters that relate. ([http://www.fairwiki.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Double_entendre]).

===The KEP as an attempt at "backwards translation"===

Some LDS scholars have proposed that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers are an example of a backwards translation. In other words, Joseph translated the Book of Abraham prior to the creation of the KEP and then he, and other early LDS brethren, tried to match the translated text to what they believed were the characters that were used to elicit the translation. In this scenario the KEP was not the product of revelation, but was rather an attempt to "study out" the translation, after-the-fact, in what might have been an experiment to create an Egyptian alphabet.{{ref|nibley3}} In essence, Joseph and his friends were trying to "reverse engineer" the translation of Egyptian script using the inspired translation he had already produced. The men at Kirtland were treating the Book of Abraham as a sort of Rosetta Stone from which they hoped to crack the code for Egyptian (which was largely untranslatable by scholars of the time.)

===Directions for further research===

The KEP have been understudied to date. Although preliminary studies have appeared from various perspectives, much more work needs to be done. In many ways, apologetic or polemical approaches to these documents are premature. Rather, they first must be studied rigorously from a scholarly perspective.

An essential tool that is a prerequisite to further progress is a critical edition of the texts. While the microfilm photocopy editions are sufficient for limited purposes and to get a feel for the documents, they are totally inadequate for serious scholarly study. Ideally such scholarship should be grounded in a study of the original documents. To the extent that they are not available for such study, the color photographs that are in existence would be the next best basis for such an edition.

In addition to a careful and clear presentation of the texts, such a study needs to focus on understanding the documents. Too much energy has been devoted to attack and defense, and not enough to basic comprehension of what those involved in the project thought they were doing and how they went about their work. Such a study needs to bring the same standards and attention to detail to these texts as Royal Skousen has brought to his study of the original text of the Book of Mormon.

==Criticisms==

Some of the contested issues for which further study could bring enlightenment include the following:

===Involvement of Joseph Smith===
That Joseph was involved to some degree in the project is clear. His handwriting appears on two of the documents, and there are references to the project in his journals. The extent of his involvement is a hotly contested issue and needs to be clarified. Nibley tried hard to distance Joseph from the work of the scribes. Edward Ashment has questioned Nibley's position. The extent to which Joseph dominated the process, or the scribes acted independently, or they all acted in a collaborative manner, needs to be clarified.

===Meaning of technical terminology like "degree" and "part"===
The terms "degree" and "part" seem to be used in the KEPE as some sort of grammatical terms of art. If so, their meaning needs to be divined. Conversely, John Tvedtnes has argued that they are not grammatical terms at all, but refer to locations on the papyri where particular symbols were located; a sort of latitude and longitude system. According to this view, for example, the "first part" is what we call [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1], and the "first degree" of that part is the first column of the facsimile, while the second degree is the second column. The second part is what Nibley called the Small Sensen Papyrus (JSP XI), and the first degree of the second part is the first of its columns, counting from the right (away from Facsimile 1). Tvedtnes' explanation of the usage of these terms needs to be evaluated; in particular, as to whether his proposed system in fact holds for all uses of the terms.

===Sequencing issues===
Although the handwriting of the various scribes on the various texts has been identified, there are numerous sequencing issues that need to be explored. Is there a way to determine in what sequence the documents were created? Were the KEPA documents created at the same time from dictation, or were they visually copied from a single source, and if so, which is the source document? Which was written first on the page, the hieratic symbols in the left margin of the KEPA documents or the English text to the right? Were the hieratic symbols visually copied from the Sensen Papyrus, and if so, can we determine who copied them?

===Why does the scope of the English text not match the scope of the hieratic symbols in the margins of the KEPA?===
There is a substantial and obvious disproportion between the hieratic symbols in the left margins of the KEPA and the accompanying English text to the right. Critics often trot this fact out as an obvious artifact of Joseph's ignorance. But this begs the question why such a disproportion exists. The disproportion is so marked that surely even Joseph must have been aware of it, and even if he were not, the scribes involved in the project had training in other languages, such that they would have noted and objected to the disproportion. It is not enough merely to observe the disproportion, it must be explained. What did these men think they were doing? Does the juxtaposition of a hieratic symbol and an entire paragraph of English text intend to reflect a translation process, or is some other process at work, and if so, what?

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|nibley3}}{{BYUS|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers|vol=11|num=1|date=Summer 1971|start=350|end=399}}{{link|url=http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=121}}

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

Question: What are the historical approaches that have been take in an attempt to understand the Kirtland Egyptian Papers?

2011-07-16T02:58:33Z

EdGoble: /* Historical LDS responses */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
=Historical approaches to the Kirtland Egyptian Papers=

==Critical responses==
{{Epigraph|Neither side of this debate believes the GAEL was a “key” to translating the papyri. And you have no evidence that JS believed that either...What I meant was that nobody believes the GAEL was used as a translation key. My side of the debate doesn't believe anything was translated. And if JS intended it to be understood that such were the case, the GAEL would be tied closer to the translation. Dan Vogel, ''Mormon Apologetics and Discussion Board'', 13 Aug. 2010. {{link|url=http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/50442-will-schryvers-book-of-abraham-talk/page__view__findpost__p__1208895741}} }}
{{parabreak}}
{{Epigraph|Christopher C. Smith has argued at some length that Joseph Smith was the primary author of the Alphabet and Grammar documents, and that those documents served as the source or ''modus operandi'' for the translation of at least the first three verses of the Book of Abraham. According to Smith, "This undoubtedly accounts for the choppiness and redundancy of these three verses, which stylistically are very different from the remainder of the Book of Abraham. Verse 3, for example, reads as though it has been cobbled together from a series of dictionary entries." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers Wikipedia entry for the Kirtland Egyptian Papers] as of Aug. 14, 2010, referencing Christopher C. Smith, "The Dependence of Abraham 1:1-3 on the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar," John Whitmer Historical Association Journal 29 (2009): 38-54.}}
{{parabreak}}

Critics note at least two evidences which demonstrate an obvious connection between some of the Kirtland Egyptian papers and the Book of Breathings scroll from the Joseph Smith Papyri (JSP). These two evidences are used by critics to prove that the existing fragments of the Scroll of Hor is the source of the Book of Abraham and that therefore Joseph was not a prophet.
#Like the Hebrews, the Egyptians read right to left. The "Scroll of Hor"-- which is the Book of Breathings scroll in the JSP collection-- begins (at the right end) with Facsimile 1 (as recorded in the Book of Abraham) followed by Egyptian characters. Some of the KEP are divided by a vertical line at the left side of the paper. About three fourths of the paper is to the right of each line. To the left of the line are Egyptian characters. These are the same characters that follow Facsimile 1 of the Book of Breathings(these would be to the left of the vignette). To the right of the vertical line (on the Kirtland papers) appear passages from the Book of Abraham. Critics assert that these passages represent Joseph Smith's attempt to perform "translations" of each of the characters on the left. It is claimed that Joseph took a single character in each case and expanded it to a full paragraph of text.
#The Book of Abraham states:
<blockquote>
...that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation [Facsimile 1] at the commencement of this record." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/1/12#12 Abraham 1:12]-- keeping in mind that the scroll would have been read from right to left to and Facsimile 1 is virtually the first item at the right end of the scroll.)
</blockquote>

==Historical LDS responses==

LDS approaches to the KEP have been more varied. The first significant scholarly study of the matter, by John A. Tvedtnes and Richley Crapo, appeared in a series of articles under the auspices of the Society for Early Historic Archaeology from 1968 to 1970. Their theory was that the Sensen Papyrus may have represented a mnemonic device to bring to mind a longer oral tradition — a tradition that corresponded to the narrative of the Book of Abraham as we know it. This theory was grounded in two observations. First, the hieratic symbols copied into the left margin of the KEPA documents were complete morphemes, as opposed to the inappropriate breaks one would expect of someone who could not read Egyptian. Second, in every case the meaning of the hieratic word in the margin shows up in some relevant way in the much longer English text corresponding to the hieratic word. Of course, lots of other words and concepts are present as well, but the meaning of the hieratic word in each case is present in the English text.

While a fascinating study, the Tvedtnes and Crapo mnemonic device theory never really caught on. Hugh Nibley was intrigued by this possibility at first, but then decided to go in a different direction. Nibley authored a seminal, lengthy study of the KEP in ''BYU Studies'' entitled "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers." He did not attempt to defend the KEP as revelatory documents (other than the English portions of the KEPA). Rather, he took the view that the KEP represent either a preliminary "studying it out" stage in the process, or a (failed) attempt to reverse engineer the English translation so as to decipher the Egyptian language. In other words, the English text of the Book of Abraham was received by revelation as opposed to a purely mechanical process. While Joseph was involved in the KEP project, a theme of Nibley's piece is to portray the efforts of Phelps, Cowdery, and Parrish as largely independent of Joseph. Nibley's take has become the dominant LDS view, and has been echoed more recently in several publications by John Gee.

A small minority of LDS commenters on the KEP seeks to defend the supposed revelatory character of these documents, viewing them through the lenses of kabbalism or extreme symbolism. It has few adherents.

===The KEP as an "Ancient Cipher" manifesting non-standard meanings assigned to characters anciently===

Others have interpreted them similar to William Schryver's interpretations of a modern-day cipher. But rather than being a modern-day cipher, it is proposed that the KEP represent a system of interpretation imposed on the Sensen papyrus by ancient Jewish Egyptians that differs from the standard Egyptian meaning of the characters. But this theory proposes that there is still some affinity to either the core or root meanings of the characters, or they have some visual connection to the meaning of other characters that relate. ([http://www.fairwiki.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Double_entendre]).

===The KEP as an attempt at "backwards translation"===

Some LDS scholars have proposed that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers are an example of a backwards translation. In other words, Joseph translated the Book of Abraham prior to the creation of the KEP and then he, and other early LDS brethren, tried to match the translated text to what they believed were the characters that were used to elicit the translation. In this scenario the KEP was not the product of revelation, but was rather an attempt to "study out" the translation, after-the-fact, in what might have been an experiment to create an Egyptian alphabet.{{ref|nibley3}} In essence, Joseph and his friends were trying to "reverse engineer" the translation of Egyptian script using the inspired translation he had already produced. The men at Kirtland were treating the Book of Abraham as a sort of Rosetta Stone from which they hoped to crack the code for Egyptian (which was largely untranslatable by scholars of the time.)

===Directions for further research===

The KEP have been understudied to date. Although preliminary studies have appeared from various perspectives, much more work needs to be done. In many ways, apologetic or polemical approaches to these documents are premature. Rather, they first must be studied rigorously from a scholarly perspective.

An essential tool that is a prerequisite to further progress is a critical edition of the texts. While the microfilm photocopy editions are sufficient for limited purposes and to get a feel for the documents, they are totally inadequate for serious scholarly study. Ideally such scholarship should be grounded in a study of the original documents. To the extent that they are not available for such study, the color photographs that are in existence would be the next best basis for such an edition.

In addition to a careful and clear presentation of the texts, such a study needs to focus on understanding the documents. Too much energy has been devoted to attack and defense, and not enough to basic comprehension of what those involved in the project thought they were doing and how they went about their work. Such a study needs to bring the same standards and attention to detail to these texts as Royal Skousen has brought to his study of the original text of the Book of Mormon.

==Criticisms==

Some of the contested issues for which further study could bring enlightenment include the following:

===Involvement of Joseph Smith===
That Joseph was involved to some degree in the project is clear. His handwriting appears on two of the documents, and there are references to the project in his journals. The extent of his involvement is a hotly contested issue and needs to be clarified. Nibley tried hard to distance Joseph from the work of the scribes. Edward Ashment has questioned Nibley's position. The extent to which Joseph dominated the process, or the scribes acted independently, or they all acted in a collaborative manner, needs to be clarified.

===Meaning of technical terminology like "degree" and "part"===
The terms "degree" and "part" seem to be used in the KEPE as some sort of grammatical terms of art. If so, their meaning needs to be divined. Conversely, John Tvedtnes has argued that they are not grammatical terms at all, but refer to locations on the papyri where particular symbols were located; a sort of latitude and longitude system. According to this view, for example, the "first part" is what we call [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1], and the "first degree" of that part is the first column of the facsimile, while the second degree is the second column. The second part is what Nibley called the Small Sensen Papyrus (JSP XI), and the first degree of the second part is the first of its columns, counting from the right (away from Facsimile 1). Tvedtnes' explanation of the usage of these terms needs to be evaluated; in particular, as to whether his proposed system in fact holds for all uses of the terms.

===Sequencing issues===
Although the handwriting of the various scribes on the various texts has been identified, there are numerous sequencing issues that need to be explored. Is there a way to determine in what sequence the documents were created? Were the KEPA documents created at the same time from dictation, or were they visually copied from a single source, and if so, which is the source document? Which was written first on the page, the hieratic symbols in the left margin of the KEPA documents or the English text to the right? Were the hieratic symbols visually copied from the Sensen Papyrus, and if so, can we determine who copied them?

===Why does the scope of the English text not match the scope of the hieratic symbols in the margins of the KEPA?===
There is a substantial and obvious disproportion between the hieratic symbols in the left margins of the KEPA and the accompanying English text to the right. Critics often trot this fact out as an obvious artifact of Joseph's ignorance. But this begs the question why such a disproportion exists. The disproportion is so marked that surely even Joseph must have been aware of it, and even if he were not, the scribes involved in the project had training in other languages, such that they would have noted and objected to the disproportion. It is not enough merely to observe the disproportion, it must be explained. What did these men think they were doing? Does the juxtaposition of a hieratic symbol and an entire paragraph of English text intend to reflect a translation process, or is some other process at work, and if so, what?

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|nibley3}}{{BYUS|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers|vol=11|num=1|date=Summer 1971|start=350|end=399}}{{link|url=http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=121}}

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

Question: What are the historical approaches that have been take in an attempt to understand the Kirtland Egyptian Papers?

2011-07-16T02:57:05Z

EdGoble: /* Historical LDS responses */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
=Historical approaches to the Kirtland Egyptian Papers=

==Critical responses==
{{Epigraph|Neither side of this debate believes the GAEL was a “key” to translating the papyri. And you have no evidence that JS believed that either...What I meant was that nobody believes the GAEL was used as a translation key. My side of the debate doesn't believe anything was translated. And if JS intended it to be understood that such were the case, the GAEL would be tied closer to the translation. Dan Vogel, ''Mormon Apologetics and Discussion Board'', 13 Aug. 2010. {{link|url=http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/50442-will-schryvers-book-of-abraham-talk/page__view__findpost__p__1208895741}} }}
{{parabreak}}
{{Epigraph|Christopher C. Smith has argued at some length that Joseph Smith was the primary author of the Alphabet and Grammar documents, and that those documents served as the source or ''modus operandi'' for the translation of at least the first three verses of the Book of Abraham. According to Smith, "This undoubtedly accounts for the choppiness and redundancy of these three verses, which stylistically are very different from the remainder of the Book of Abraham. Verse 3, for example, reads as though it has been cobbled together from a series of dictionary entries." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers Wikipedia entry for the Kirtland Egyptian Papers] as of Aug. 14, 2010, referencing Christopher C. Smith, "The Dependence of Abraham 1:1-3 on the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar," John Whitmer Historical Association Journal 29 (2009): 38-54.}}
{{parabreak}}

Critics note at least two evidences which demonstrate an obvious connection between some of the Kirtland Egyptian papers and the Book of Breathings scroll from the Joseph Smith Papyri (JSP). These two evidences are used by critics to prove that the existing fragments of the Scroll of Hor is the source of the Book of Abraham and that therefore Joseph was not a prophet.
#Like the Hebrews, the Egyptians read right to left. The "Scroll of Hor"-- which is the Book of Breathings scroll in the JSP collection-- begins (at the right end) with Facsimile 1 (as recorded in the Book of Abraham) followed by Egyptian characters. Some of the KEP are divided by a vertical line at the left side of the paper. About three fourths of the paper is to the right of each line. To the left of the line are Egyptian characters. These are the same characters that follow Facsimile 1 of the Book of Breathings(these would be to the left of the vignette). To the right of the vertical line (on the Kirtland papers) appear passages from the Book of Abraham. Critics assert that these passages represent Joseph Smith's attempt to perform "translations" of each of the characters on the left. It is claimed that Joseph took a single character in each case and expanded it to a full paragraph of text.
#The Book of Abraham states:
<blockquote>
...that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation [Facsimile 1] at the commencement of this record." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/1/12#12 Abraham 1:12]-- keeping in mind that the scroll would have been read from right to left to and Facsimile 1 is virtually the first item at the right end of the scroll.)
</blockquote>

==Historical LDS responses==

LDS approaches to the KEP have been more varied. The first significant scholarly study of the matter, by John A. Tvedtnes and Richley Crapo, appeared in a series of articles under the auspices of the Society for Early Historic Archaeology from 1968 to 1970. Their theory was that the Sensen Papyrus may have represented a mnemonic device to bring to mind a longer oral tradition — a tradition that corresponded to the narrative of the Book of Abraham as we know it. This theory was grounded in two observations. First, the hieratic symbols copied into the left margin of the KEPA documents were complete morphemes, as opposed to the inappropriate breaks one would expect of someone who could not read Egyptian. Second, in every case the meaning of the hieratic word in the margin shows up in some relevant way in the much longer English text corresponding to the hieratic word. Of course, lots of other words and concepts are present as well, but the meaning of the hieratic word in each case is present in the English text.

While a fascinating study, the Tvedtnes and Crapo mnemonic device theory never really caught on. Hugh Nibley was intrigued by this possibility at first, but then decided to go in a different direction. Nibley authored a seminal, lengthy study of the KEP in ''BYU Studies'' entitled "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers." He did not attempt to defend the KEP as revelatory documents (other than the English portions of the KEPA). Rather, he took the view that the KEP represent either a preliminary "studying it out" stage in the process, or a (failed) attempt to reverse engineer the English translation so as to decipher the Egyptian language. In other words, the English text of the Book of Abraham was received by revelation as opposed to a purely mechanical process. While Joseph was involved in the KEP project, a theme of Nibley's piece is to portray the efforts of Phelps, Cowdery, and Parrish as largely independent of Joseph. Nibley's take has become the dominant LDS view, and has been echoed more recently in several publications by John Gee.

A small minority of LDS commenters on the KEP seeks to defend the supposed revelatory character of these documents, viewing them through the lenses of kabbalism or extreme symbolism. It has few adherents.

Others have interpreted them similar to William Schryver's interpretations of a modern-day cipher. But rather than being a modern-day cipher, it is proposed that the KEP represent a system of interpretation imposed on the Sensen papyrus by ancient Jewish Egyptians that differs from the standard Egyptian meaning of the characters. But this theory proposes that there is still some affinity to either the core or root meanings of the characters, or they have some visual connection to the meaning of other characters that relate. ([http://www.fairwiki.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Double_entendre]).

===The KEP as an attempt at "backwards translation"===

Some LDS scholars have proposed that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers are an example of a backwards translation. In other words, Joseph translated the Book of Abraham prior to the creation of the KEP and then he, and other early LDS brethren, tried to match the translated text to what they believed were the characters that were used to elicit the translation. In this scenario the KEP was not the product of revelation, but was rather an attempt to "study out" the translation, after-the-fact, in what might have been an experiment to create an Egyptian alphabet.{{ref|nibley3}} In essence, Joseph and his friends were trying to "reverse engineer" the translation of Egyptian script using the inspired translation he had already produced. The men at Kirtland were treating the Book of Abraham as a sort of Rosetta Stone from which they hoped to crack the code for Egyptian (which was largely untranslatable by scholars of the time.)

===Directions for further research===

The KEP have been understudied to date. Although preliminary studies have appeared from various perspectives, much more work needs to be done. In many ways, apologetic or polemical approaches to these documents are premature. Rather, they first must be studied rigorously from a scholarly perspective.

An essential tool that is a prerequisite to further progress is a critical edition of the texts. While the microfilm photocopy editions are sufficient for limited purposes and to get a feel for the documents, they are totally inadequate for serious scholarly study. Ideally such scholarship should be grounded in a study of the original documents. To the extent that they are not available for such study, the color photographs that are in existence would be the next best basis for such an edition.

In addition to a careful and clear presentation of the texts, such a study needs to focus on understanding the documents. Too much energy has been devoted to attack and defense, and not enough to basic comprehension of what those involved in the project thought they were doing and how they went about their work. Such a study needs to bring the same standards and attention to detail to these texts as Royal Skousen has brought to his study of the original text of the Book of Mormon.

==Criticisms==

Some of the contested issues for which further study could bring enlightenment include the following:

===Involvement of Joseph Smith===
That Joseph was involved to some degree in the project is clear. His handwriting appears on two of the documents, and there are references to the project in his journals. The extent of his involvement is a hotly contested issue and needs to be clarified. Nibley tried hard to distance Joseph from the work of the scribes. Edward Ashment has questioned Nibley's position. The extent to which Joseph dominated the process, or the scribes acted independently, or they all acted in a collaborative manner, needs to be clarified.

===Meaning of technical terminology like "degree" and "part"===
The terms "degree" and "part" seem to be used in the KEPE as some sort of grammatical terms of art. If so, their meaning needs to be divined. Conversely, John Tvedtnes has argued that they are not grammatical terms at all, but refer to locations on the papyri where particular symbols were located; a sort of latitude and longitude system. According to this view, for example, the "first part" is what we call [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1], and the "first degree" of that part is the first column of the facsimile, while the second degree is the second column. The second part is what Nibley called the Small Sensen Papyrus (JSP XI), and the first degree of the second part is the first of its columns, counting from the right (away from Facsimile 1). Tvedtnes' explanation of the usage of these terms needs to be evaluated; in particular, as to whether his proposed system in fact holds for all uses of the terms.

===Sequencing issues===
Although the handwriting of the various scribes on the various texts has been identified, there are numerous sequencing issues that need to be explored. Is there a way to determine in what sequence the documents were created? Were the KEPA documents created at the same time from dictation, or were they visually copied from a single source, and if so, which is the source document? Which was written first on the page, the hieratic symbols in the left margin of the KEPA documents or the English text to the right? Were the hieratic symbols visually copied from the Sensen Papyrus, and if so, can we determine who copied them?

===Why does the scope of the English text not match the scope of the hieratic symbols in the margins of the KEPA?===
There is a substantial and obvious disproportion between the hieratic symbols in the left margins of the KEPA and the accompanying English text to the right. Critics often trot this fact out as an obvious artifact of Joseph's ignorance. But this begs the question why such a disproportion exists. The disproportion is so marked that surely even Joseph must have been aware of it, and even if he were not, the scribes involved in the project had training in other languages, such that they would have noted and objected to the disproportion. It is not enough merely to observe the disproportion, it must be explained. What did these men think they were doing? Does the juxtaposition of a hieratic symbol and an entire paragraph of English text intend to reflect a translation process, or is some other process at work, and if so, what?

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|nibley3}}{{BYUS|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers|vol=11|num=1|date=Summer 1971|start=350|end=399}}{{link|url=http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=121}}

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

Question: What are the historical approaches that have been take in an attempt to understand the Kirtland Egyptian Papers?

2011-07-16T02:56:11Z

EdGoble: /* Historical LDS responses */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
=Historical approaches to the Kirtland Egyptian Papers=

==Critical responses==
{{Epigraph|Neither side of this debate believes the GAEL was a “key” to translating the papyri. And you have no evidence that JS believed that either...What I meant was that nobody believes the GAEL was used as a translation key. My side of the debate doesn't believe anything was translated. And if JS intended it to be understood that such were the case, the GAEL would be tied closer to the translation. Dan Vogel, ''Mormon Apologetics and Discussion Board'', 13 Aug. 2010. {{link|url=http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/50442-will-schryvers-book-of-abraham-talk/page__view__findpost__p__1208895741}} }}
{{parabreak}}
{{Epigraph|Christopher C. Smith has argued at some length that Joseph Smith was the primary author of the Alphabet and Grammar documents, and that those documents served as the source or ''modus operandi'' for the translation of at least the first three verses of the Book of Abraham. According to Smith, "This undoubtedly accounts for the choppiness and redundancy of these three verses, which stylistically are very different from the remainder of the Book of Abraham. Verse 3, for example, reads as though it has been cobbled together from a series of dictionary entries." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers Wikipedia entry for the Kirtland Egyptian Papers] as of Aug. 14, 2010, referencing Christopher C. Smith, "The Dependence of Abraham 1:1-3 on the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar," John Whitmer Historical Association Journal 29 (2009): 38-54.}}
{{parabreak}}

Critics note at least two evidences which demonstrate an obvious connection between some of the Kirtland Egyptian papers and the Book of Breathings scroll from the Joseph Smith Papyri (JSP). These two evidences are used by critics to prove that the existing fragments of the Scroll of Hor is the source of the Book of Abraham and that therefore Joseph was not a prophet.
#Like the Hebrews, the Egyptians read right to left. The "Scroll of Hor"-- which is the Book of Breathings scroll in the JSP collection-- begins (at the right end) with Facsimile 1 (as recorded in the Book of Abraham) followed by Egyptian characters. Some of the KEP are divided by a vertical line at the left side of the paper. About three fourths of the paper is to the right of each line. To the left of the line are Egyptian characters. These are the same characters that follow Facsimile 1 of the Book of Breathings(these would be to the left of the vignette). To the right of the vertical line (on the Kirtland papers) appear passages from the Book of Abraham. Critics assert that these passages represent Joseph Smith's attempt to perform "translations" of each of the characters on the left. It is claimed that Joseph took a single character in each case and expanded it to a full paragraph of text.
#The Book of Abraham states:
<blockquote>
...that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation [Facsimile 1] at the commencement of this record." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/1/12#12 Abraham 1:12]-- keeping in mind that the scroll would have been read from right to left to and Facsimile 1 is virtually the first item at the right end of the scroll.)
</blockquote>

==Historical LDS responses==

LDS approaches to the KEP have been more varied. The first significant scholarly study of the matter, by John A. Tvedtnes and Richley Crapo, appeared in a series of articles under the auspices of the Society for Early Historic Archaeology from 1968 to 1970. Their theory was that the Sensen Papyrus may have represented a mnemonic device to bring to mind a longer oral tradition — a tradition that corresponded to the narrative of the Book of Abraham as we know it. This theory was grounded in two observations. First, the hieratic symbols copied into the left margin of the KEPA documents were complete morphemes, as opposed to the inappropriate breaks one would expect of someone who could not read Egyptian. Second, in every case the meaning of the hieratic word in the margin shows up in some relevant way in the much longer English text corresponding to the hieratic word. Of course, lots of other words and concepts are present as well, but the meaning of the hieratic word in each case is present in the English text.

While a fascinating study, the Tvedtnes and Crapo mnemonic device theory never really caught on. Hugh Nibley was intrigued by this possibility at first, but then decided to go in a different direction. Nibley authored a seminal, lengthy study of the KEP in ''BYU Studies'' entitled "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers." He did not attempt to defend the KEP as revelatory documents (other than the English portions of the KEPA). Rather, he took the view that the KEP represent either a preliminary "studying it out" stage in the process, or a (failed) attempt to reverse engineer the English translation so as to decipher the Egyptian language. In other words, the English text of the Book of Abraham was received by revelation as opposed to a purely mechanical process. While Joseph was involved in the KEP project, a theme of Nibley's piece is to portray the efforts of Phelps, Cowdery, and Parrish as largely independent of Joseph. Nibley's take has become the dominant LDS view, and has been echoed more recently in several publications by John Gee.

A small minority of LDS commenters on the KEP seeks to defend the supposed revelatory character of these documents, viewing them through the lenses of kabbalism or extreme symbolism. It has few adherents.

Others have interpreted them similar to William Schryver's interpretations of a modern-day cipher. But rather than being a modern-day cipher, it is proposed that the KEP represent a system of interpretation imposed on the Sensen papyrus by ancient Jewish Egyptians that differs from the standard Egyptian meaning of the characters. But this theory proposes that there is still some affinity to either the core or root meanings of the characters, or they have some visual connection to the meaning of other characters. ([http://www.fairwiki.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Double_entendre]).

===The KEP as an attempt at "backwards translation"===

Some LDS scholars have proposed that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers are an example of a backwards translation. In other words, Joseph translated the Book of Abraham prior to the creation of the KEP and then he, and other early LDS brethren, tried to match the translated text to what they believed were the characters that were used to elicit the translation. In this scenario the KEP was not the product of revelation, but was rather an attempt to "study out" the translation, after-the-fact, in what might have been an experiment to create an Egyptian alphabet.{{ref|nibley3}} In essence, Joseph and his friends were trying to "reverse engineer" the translation of Egyptian script using the inspired translation he had already produced. The men at Kirtland were treating the Book of Abraham as a sort of Rosetta Stone from which they hoped to crack the code for Egyptian (which was largely untranslatable by scholars of the time.)

===Directions for further research===

The KEP have been understudied to date. Although preliminary studies have appeared from various perspectives, much more work needs to be done. In many ways, apologetic or polemical approaches to these documents are premature. Rather, they first must be studied rigorously from a scholarly perspective.

An essential tool that is a prerequisite to further progress is a critical edition of the texts. While the microfilm photocopy editions are sufficient for limited purposes and to get a feel for the documents, they are totally inadequate for serious scholarly study. Ideally such scholarship should be grounded in a study of the original documents. To the extent that they are not available for such study, the color photographs that are in existence would be the next best basis for such an edition.

In addition to a careful and clear presentation of the texts, such a study needs to focus on understanding the documents. Too much energy has been devoted to attack and defense, and not enough to basic comprehension of what those involved in the project thought they were doing and how they went about their work. Such a study needs to bring the same standards and attention to detail to these texts as Royal Skousen has brought to his study of the original text of the Book of Mormon.

==Criticisms==

Some of the contested issues for which further study could bring enlightenment include the following:

===Involvement of Joseph Smith===
That Joseph was involved to some degree in the project is clear. His handwriting appears on two of the documents, and there are references to the project in his journals. The extent of his involvement is a hotly contested issue and needs to be clarified. Nibley tried hard to distance Joseph from the work of the scribes. Edward Ashment has questioned Nibley's position. The extent to which Joseph dominated the process, or the scribes acted independently, or they all acted in a collaborative manner, needs to be clarified.

===Meaning of technical terminology like "degree" and "part"===
The terms "degree" and "part" seem to be used in the KEPE as some sort of grammatical terms of art. If so, their meaning needs to be divined. Conversely, John Tvedtnes has argued that they are not grammatical terms at all, but refer to locations on the papyri where particular symbols were located; a sort of latitude and longitude system. According to this view, for example, the "first part" is what we call [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1], and the "first degree" of that part is the first column of the facsimile, while the second degree is the second column. The second part is what Nibley called the Small Sensen Papyrus (JSP XI), and the first degree of the second part is the first of its columns, counting from the right (away from Facsimile 1). Tvedtnes' explanation of the usage of these terms needs to be evaluated; in particular, as to whether his proposed system in fact holds for all uses of the terms.

===Sequencing issues===
Although the handwriting of the various scribes on the various texts has been identified, there are numerous sequencing issues that need to be explored. Is there a way to determine in what sequence the documents were created? Were the KEPA documents created at the same time from dictation, or were they visually copied from a single source, and if so, which is the source document? Which was written first on the page, the hieratic symbols in the left margin of the KEPA documents or the English text to the right? Were the hieratic symbols visually copied from the Sensen Papyrus, and if so, can we determine who copied them?

===Why does the scope of the English text not match the scope of the hieratic symbols in the margins of the KEPA?===
There is a substantial and obvious disproportion between the hieratic symbols in the left margins of the KEPA and the accompanying English text to the right. Critics often trot this fact out as an obvious artifact of Joseph's ignorance. But this begs the question why such a disproportion exists. The disproportion is so marked that surely even Joseph must have been aware of it, and even if he were not, the scribes involved in the project had training in other languages, such that they would have noted and objected to the disproportion. It is not enough merely to observe the disproportion, it must be explained. What did these men think they were doing? Does the juxtaposition of a hieratic symbol and an entire paragraph of English text intend to reflect a translation process, or is some other process at work, and if so, what?

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|nibley3}}{{BYUS|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers|vol=11|num=1|date=Summer 1971|start=350|end=399}}{{link|url=http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=121}}

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

The Joseph Smith Papyri

2011-07-16T02:46:55Z

EdGoble: /* {{Topics label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

{{summary}}

{{BofAPortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below.

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Subarticles label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Quotes
|subject=Source quotes
|summary=A collection of source quotes related to the Joseph Smith Papyri
}}

==Overview==
{{Epigraph|An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose. 
—Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', p. 46}}
{{parabreak}}

Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocephalus hypocephalus] ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_2 Facsimile 2]). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. Critics who claim that we have all, or a majority, of the papyri possessed by Joseph Smith are simply mistaken.

The Egyptian characters on the recovered documents are a portion of the "Book of Breathings," an Egyptian religious text buried with mummies that instructed the dead on how to successfully reach the afterlife. This particular Book of Breathings was written for a deceased man named Hor, so it it usually called ''the Hor Book of Breathings''.

Other than the vignette represented in Facsimile 1, the material on the papyri received by the Church, at least from a standard Egyptological point of view, does not include the actual text of the Book of Abraham. This was discussed in the Church publication, the ''New Era'' in January 1968.

The following articles explore more detail regarding various aspects of the Book of Abraham.

=={{Topics label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Identity and nature
|subject=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession
|summary=In July 1835, Joseph Smith purchased a portion of a collection of papyri and mummies that had been discovered in Egypt and brought to the United States. Believing that one of the papyrus rolls contained, "the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt," and "purportedly written by his own hand, upon papyrus,"{{ref|hc1}} Joseph commenced a translation. The Book of Abraham was the result of his work. The translated text and facsimiles of three drawings were published in the early 1840s in serial fashion in the LDS newspaper ''Times and Seasons''. The entire work was published in 1852 in England as part of ''The Pearl of Great Price'', which was later canonized as part of LDS scripture.
}}
[[File:IE_Jan1968_cover.jpg|thumb|400 px|right|Cover of the January 1968 issue of the ''Improvement Era'', the Church's official magazine of the time. Note the color photograph of the recovered [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1].]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"
|subject=When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?
|summary=Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the ''Improvement Era'' (the predecessor to the ''Ensign'') less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum.{{ref|improvera}} The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham. Although the article erroneously identified the papyrus as the Egyptian "Book of the Dead," it was later correctly identified as a "Book of Breathings."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Dating
|subject=Dating of the Joseph Smith Papyri
|summary=Joseph said that "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham,"{{ref|hc2}} and his scribes quoted him as saying the scroll was "written by his [Abraham's] own hand, upon papyrus."{{ref|marquardt1}} The problem is that most modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to a few centuries before Christ, whereas Abraham lived about two millennia before Christ. Obviously, Abraham himself could not have penned the papyri. The phrase "by his own hand" can simply mean that Abraham is the author of the book. Similarly, we could hold a modern printed Bible in our hands, point to 1 Corinthians, and say, "This was written by the Apostle Paul." Joseph was translating the writings of Abraham, so it is quite possible that he believed that the actual scroll in his possession was written by Abraham himself. There is no evidence, however, that this belief was based on revelation.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text
|subject=Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?
|summary=We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost. 4) Perhaps there was a way of understanding the Egyptian ideograms anciently that is unknown to Egyptology in our day, yet to be discovered, deciphered or acknowledged, that could yield an interpretation of a text that is different than the standard Egyptological reading.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Revealed
|subject=The "Revealed Text" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was not'' on the papyri; he received the text by revelation, with the papyri acting as a catalyst. This is a possibility because Joseph used the word "translation" to mean several things, including the process of receiving pure revelation. (Joseph Smith's revelations call his revision of the Bible a "translation" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=D%26C+73%3A4%3B+D%26C+76%3A15%3B+D%26C+90%3A13%3B+D%26C+94%3A10%3B+D%26C+124%3A89 D&C 73:4; 76:15; 90:13; 94:10; 124:89]), even though he didn't use any Hebrew of Greek manuscripts. Also, {{s||DC|7|}} is a revealed translation of a lost record written by the Apostle John.)
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Size_of_missing_papyrus
|subject=The "Missing Papyrus" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was'' on the papyri in Joseph Smith's possession, but the portion recovered from the Metropolitan Museum doesn't include it. This is a possibility because the recovered portion is less than 13% of the total material held by Joseph.{{ref|13percent}} Eyewitnesses also reported that the length of the papyri in Joseph's possession was much more extensive than the fragments now held by the Church.{{ref|jfs1}}
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Jewish redaction
|subject=The "Jewish Redaction" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham was on a scroll which is no longer extant. While it's true that the extant portions of the JSP are from the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings and do not, according to Egyptologists, translate to anything like the LDS Book of Abraham, this doesn't necessarily mean that the translation didn't derive from Joseph's papyri. There are other scenarios that are compatible with Joseph's claims. We know from other sources, for instance, that sometimes scrolls were attached together.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Double_entendre
|subject=The "Doble Entendre" theory, or Multiple Meanings
|summary=There are several flavors of this theory, but it assumes that (1) even if significant portions of the papyri are missing, key pieces of the papyri are NOT missing and (2) there are multiple meanings to be found in the text of the extant papyri. Some versions of this theory employ the idea that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers represent some sort of "key" of understanding. Some versions of this theory draw upon others listed above, bringing in elements of the catalyst idea, or the Jewish redaction idea, while rejecting the idea that the key portions of the papyrus that represent the text, or that represent the ideas on which the text is based, are missing.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|subject=The Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|summary=Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes. Critics charge that the KEP represent Joseph's attempt to translate the hieroglyphics from those portions that are still extant, noting that Egyptologists tell us that the alleged "translations" do not accurately reflect the meanings of the hieroglyphics. In some cases, several paragraphs of the English translation of the Book of Abraham are associated with Egyptian characters from the Joseph Smith papyri. In some instances, one Egyptian character seems to yield several sentences of English text. From what may be surmised from the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" the surviving Egyptian papyri are claimed by critics to be the source for the Book of Abraham. Critics point out that Egyptologists agree that these papyri are part of a collection of Egyptian funerary documents known as the ''Book of Breathings'' and do not deal with Abraham.
}}
[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|frame|200px|right|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles
|subject=Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham
|summary=In the Book of Abraham, Joseph included three facsimiles of illustrations from the papyri, along with commentary about what the images and their individual parts represented. Some of Joseph's interpretations are similar to those of trained Egyptologists, but most are not. A number of criticisms relate to the three facsimiles associated with the Book of Abraham.It is noted that Joseph Smith's translation of the facsimiles does not agree with that provided by Egyptologists, and that some missing portions of the facsimiles were incorrectly restored before they were published.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 1
|subject=Facsimile 1
|summary=It is claimed that facsimile 1 is simply a typical funerary scene and there are many other papyri showing the same basic scene, and that the missing portions of the drawing were incorrectly restored. It is also claimed that Abraham has never been associated with the lion couch vignette such as that portrayed in Facsimile #1 of the Book of Abraham.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 2
|subject=Facsimile 2
|summary=The illustration represented by Facsimile 2 is a hypocephalus, a disc made of linen, papyrus, or bronze, covered with inscriptions and images which relate to one of the last spells in the Book of the Dead. Joseph Smith's notes to Facsimile 2 identify it as representing God sitting in the heavens among the stars and others of his creations.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 3
|subject=Facsimile 3
|summary=The following are common criticisms associated with Facsimile 3: 1) The scene depicted is a known Egyptian vignette which some Egyptologists claim has nothing to do with Abraham, 2) Joseph indicated that specific characters in the facsimile confirmed the identities that he assigned to specific figures, 3) Joseph identified two obviously female figures as "King Pharaoh" and "Prince of Pharaoh."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Missing portions
|subject=Restoration of the missing portions of the facsimiles
|summary=Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|hc1}}{{HoC|vol=2|start=235, 236, 348|end=351}}
#{{note|gee2007}}John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah). (''Link forthcoming.'')
#{{note|improvera}}The 11-part series, written by Dr. Hugh Nibley and entitled "A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price", began in the January 1968 ''Improvement Era'' and ran in every issue until May 1970 (with the exception of December 1969 and February 1970). Nibley's series has been available as a FARMS reprint (N-NEP) since 1990, and several chapters became part of Nibley's book ''Abraham In Egypt''.
#{{note|hc2}}{{HoC1|vol=2|start=236}}
#{{note|marquardt1}}Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note — Hugh Nibley's ''Abraham in Egypt''" (2000).
#{{note|13percent}}John Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 23.
#{{note|jfs1}} "In 1906, while visiting Nauvoo, President Joseph F. Smith related to Preston Nibley his experience as a child of seeing his Uncle Joseph in the front rooms of the Mansion House working on the Egyptian manuscripts. According to President Smith, one of the rolls of papyri "when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House." This would have been sometime between 1843 when the Mansion House was completed and the prophet's death in June 1844, one or two years after other parts of the papyri had been cut up and placed under glass. - See {{Dialogue1|author=Hugh Nibley|article=Phase I||vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}} See also {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|vol=71|date=March 1968|start=17|end=18}} and Hugh Nibley, "Judging and Prejudging the Book of Abraham," Nibley archive, 1979, 6-7; reprinted as an appendix in Robert L. and Rosemary Brown, ''They Lie in Wait to Deceive'', vol. 1, ed. Barbara Ellsworth, rev. ed. (Mesa, AZ: Brownsworth, 1982), 236—245.
#{{note|gee1}}{{Ensign|author=John Gee|article=Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts|date=July 1992|start=60|end=?}}; {{FR-7-1-5}}
#{{note|nibley2}}{{Dialogue1|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=Phase One|vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}}{{link|url=http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=1659&REC=10}}
#{{note|gee2}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 12–13.
#{{note|gee3}}John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamFAIR}}

==={{External links label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamLinks}}

==={{Printed material label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[Category:Book of Abraham]]
[[de:Buch Abraham Papyri]]
[[fr:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri]]

The Joseph Smith Papyri

2011-07-16T02:46:10Z

EdGoble: /* {{Topics label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

{{summary}}

{{BofAPortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below.

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Subarticles label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Quotes
|subject=Source quotes
|summary=A collection of source quotes related to the Joseph Smith Papyri
}}

==Overview==
{{Epigraph|An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose. 
—Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', p. 46}}
{{parabreak}}

Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocephalus hypocephalus] ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_2 Facsimile 2]). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. Critics who claim that we have all, or a majority, of the papyri possessed by Joseph Smith are simply mistaken.

The Egyptian characters on the recovered documents are a portion of the "Book of Breathings," an Egyptian religious text buried with mummies that instructed the dead on how to successfully reach the afterlife. This particular Book of Breathings was written for a deceased man named Hor, so it it usually called ''the Hor Book of Breathings''.

Other than the vignette represented in Facsimile 1, the material on the papyri received by the Church, at least from a standard Egyptological point of view, does not include the actual text of the Book of Abraham. This was discussed in the Church publication, the ''New Era'' in January 1968.

The following articles explore more detail regarding various aspects of the Book of Abraham.

=={{Topics label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Identity and nature
|subject=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession
|summary=In July 1835, Joseph Smith purchased a portion of a collection of papyri and mummies that had been discovered in Egypt and brought to the United States. Believing that one of the papyrus rolls contained, "the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt," and "purportedly written by his own hand, upon papyrus,"{{ref|hc1}} Joseph commenced a translation. The Book of Abraham was the result of his work. The translated text and facsimiles of three drawings were published in the early 1840s in serial fashion in the LDS newspaper ''Times and Seasons''. The entire work was published in 1852 in England as part of ''The Pearl of Great Price'', which was later canonized as part of LDS scripture.
}}
[[File:IE_Jan1968_cover.jpg|thumb|400 px|right|Cover of the January 1968 issue of the ''Improvement Era'', the Church's official magazine of the time. Note the color photograph of the recovered [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1].]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"
|subject=When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?
|summary=Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the ''Improvement Era'' (the predecessor to the ''Ensign'') less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum.{{ref|improvera}} The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham. Although the article erroneously identified the papyrus as the Egyptian "Book of the Dead," it was later correctly identified as a "Book of Breathings."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Dating
|subject=Dating of the Joseph Smith Papyri
|summary=Joseph said that "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham,"{{ref|hc2}} and his scribes quoted him as saying the scroll was "written by his [Abraham's] own hand, upon papyrus."{{ref|marquardt1}} The problem is that most modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to a few centuries before Christ, whereas Abraham lived about two millennia before Christ. Obviously, Abraham himself could not have penned the papyri. The phrase "by his own hand" can simply mean that Abraham is the author of the book. Similarly, we could hold a modern printed Bible in our hands, point to 1 Corinthians, and say, "This was written by the Apostle Paul." Joseph was translating the writings of Abraham, so it is quite possible that he believed that the actual scroll in his possession was written by Abraham himself. There is no evidence, however, that this belief was based on revelation.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text
|subject=Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?
|summary=We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost. 4) Perhaps there was a way of understanding the Egyptian ideograms anciently that is unknown to Egyptology in our day, yet to be discovered, deciphered or acknowledged, that could yield an interpretation of a text that is different than the standard Egyptological reading.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Revealed
|subject=The "Revealed Text" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was not'' on the papyri; he received the text by revelation, with the papyri acting as a catalyst. This is a possibility because Joseph used the word "translation" to mean several things, including the process of receiving pure revelation. (Joseph Smith's revelations call his revision of the Bible a "translation" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=D%26C+73%3A4%3B+D%26C+76%3A15%3B+D%26C+90%3A13%3B+D%26C+94%3A10%3B+D%26C+124%3A89 D&C 73:4; 76:15; 90:13; 94:10; 124:89]), even though he didn't use any Hebrew of Greek manuscripts. Also, {{s||DC|7|}} is a revealed translation of a lost record written by the Apostle John.)
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Size_of_missing_papyrus
|subject=The "Missing Papyrus" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was'' on the papyri in Joseph Smith's possession, but the portion recovered from the Metropolitan Museum doesn't include it. This is a possibility because the recovered portion is less than 13% of the total material held by Joseph.{{ref|13percent}} Eyewitnesses also reported that the length of the papyri in Joseph's possession was much more extensive than the fragments now held by the Church.{{ref|jfs1}}
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Jewish redaction
|subject=The "Jewish Redaction" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham was on a scroll which is no longer extant. While it's true that the extant portions of the JSP are from the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings and do not, according to Egyptologists, translate to anything like the LDS Book of Abraham, this doesn't necessarily mean that the translation didn't derive from Joseph's papyri. There are other scenarios that are compatible with Joseph's claims. We know from other sources, for instance, that sometimes scrolls were attached together.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|subject=The Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|summary=Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes. Critics charge that the KEP represent Joseph's attempt to translate the hieroglyphics from those portions that are still extant, noting that Egyptologists tell us that the alleged "translations" do not accurately reflect the meanings of the hieroglyphics. In some cases, several paragraphs of the English translation of the Book of Abraham are associated with Egyptian characters from the Joseph Smith papyri. In some instances, one Egyptian character seems to yield several sentences of English text. From what may be surmised from the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" the surviving Egyptian papyri are claimed by critics to be the source for the Book of Abraham. Critics point out that Egyptologists agree that these papyri are part of a collection of Egyptian funerary documents known as the ''Book of Breathings'' and do not deal with Abraham.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri/Text/Double_entendre
|subject=The "Doble Entendre" theory, or Multiple Meanings
|summary=There are several flavors of this theory, but it assumes that (1) even if significant portions of the papyri are missing, key pieces of the papyri are NOT missing and (2) there are multiple meanings to be found in the text of the extant papyri. Some versions of this theory employ the idea that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers represent some sort of "key" of understanding. Some versions of this theory draw upon others listed above, bringing in elements of the catalyst idea, or the Jewish redaction idea, while rejecting the idea that the key portions of the papyrus that represent the text, or that represent the ideas on which the text is based, are missing.
}}
[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|frame|200px|right|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles
|subject=Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham
|summary=In the Book of Abraham, Joseph included three facsimiles of illustrations from the papyri, along with commentary about what the images and their individual parts represented. Some of Joseph's interpretations are similar to those of trained Egyptologists, but most are not. A number of criticisms relate to the three facsimiles associated with the Book of Abraham.It is noted that Joseph Smith's translation of the facsimiles does not agree with that provided by Egyptologists, and that some missing portions of the facsimiles were incorrectly restored before they were published.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 1
|subject=Facsimile 1
|summary=It is claimed that facsimile 1 is simply a typical funerary scene and there are many other papyri showing the same basic scene, and that the missing portions of the drawing were incorrectly restored. It is also claimed that Abraham has never been associated with the lion couch vignette such as that portrayed in Facsimile #1 of the Book of Abraham.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 2
|subject=Facsimile 2
|summary=The illustration represented by Facsimile 2 is a hypocephalus, a disc made of linen, papyrus, or bronze, covered with inscriptions and images which relate to one of the last spells in the Book of the Dead. Joseph Smith's notes to Facsimile 2 identify it as representing God sitting in the heavens among the stars and others of his creations.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 3
|subject=Facsimile 3
|summary=The following are common criticisms associated with Facsimile 3: 1) The scene depicted is a known Egyptian vignette which some Egyptologists claim has nothing to do with Abraham, 2) Joseph indicated that specific characters in the facsimile confirmed the identities that he assigned to specific figures, 3) Joseph identified two obviously female figures as "King Pharaoh" and "Prince of Pharaoh."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Missing portions
|subject=Restoration of the missing portions of the facsimiles
|summary=Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|hc1}}{{HoC|vol=2|start=235, 236, 348|end=351}}
#{{note|gee2007}}John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah). (''Link forthcoming.'')
#{{note|improvera}}The 11-part series, written by Dr. Hugh Nibley and entitled "A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price", began in the January 1968 ''Improvement Era'' and ran in every issue until May 1970 (with the exception of December 1969 and February 1970). Nibley's series has been available as a FARMS reprint (N-NEP) since 1990, and several chapters became part of Nibley's book ''Abraham In Egypt''.
#{{note|hc2}}{{HoC1|vol=2|start=236}}
#{{note|marquardt1}}Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note — Hugh Nibley's ''Abraham in Egypt''" (2000).
#{{note|13percent}}John Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 23.
#{{note|jfs1}} "In 1906, while visiting Nauvoo, President Joseph F. Smith related to Preston Nibley his experience as a child of seeing his Uncle Joseph in the front rooms of the Mansion House working on the Egyptian manuscripts. According to President Smith, one of the rolls of papyri "when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House." This would have been sometime between 1843 when the Mansion House was completed and the prophet's death in June 1844, one or two years after other parts of the papyri had been cut up and placed under glass. - See {{Dialogue1|author=Hugh Nibley|article=Phase I||vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}} See also {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|vol=71|date=March 1968|start=17|end=18}} and Hugh Nibley, "Judging and Prejudging the Book of Abraham," Nibley archive, 1979, 6-7; reprinted as an appendix in Robert L. and Rosemary Brown, ''They Lie in Wait to Deceive'', vol. 1, ed. Barbara Ellsworth, rev. ed. (Mesa, AZ: Brownsworth, 1982), 236—245.
#{{note|gee1}}{{Ensign|author=John Gee|article=Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts|date=July 1992|start=60|end=?}}; {{FR-7-1-5}}
#{{note|nibley2}}{{Dialogue1|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=Phase One|vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}}{{link|url=http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=1659&REC=10}}
#{{note|gee2}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 12–13.
#{{note|gee3}}John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamFAIR}}

==={{External links label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamLinks}}

==={{Printed material label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[Category:Book of Abraham]]
[[de:Buch Abraham Papyri]]
[[fr:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri]]

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T05:44:25Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Entendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:56:06Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:53:26Z

EdGoble: /* {{Conclusion label}} */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:53:01Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:52:32Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:51:49Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:49:11Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:47:25Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:46:50Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:42:47Z

EdGoble: /* {{Conclusion label}} */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:39:38Z

EdGoble: /* The Doble Etendre, or Dual Meaning Approach To the Papyri and the KEP */

Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:35:33Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

The Kirtland Egyptian Papers

2011-07-14T00:30:20Z

EdGoble: /* {{Topics label}} */

Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text

2011-07-13T21:33:55Z

EdGoble: /* {{Topics label}} */

Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text

2011-07-13T18:58:23Z

EdGoble: /* Overview */

Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text

2011-07-13T18:51:07Z

EdGoble: /* {{Topics label}} */

Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text

2011-07-13T18:34:11Z

EdGoble: /* Overview */

The Joseph Smith Papyri

2011-07-13T18:31:01Z

EdGoble: /* {{Topics label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

{{summary}}

{{BofAPortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below.

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Subarticles label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Quotes
|subject=Source quotes
|summary=A collection of source quotes related to the Joseph Smith Papyri
}}

==Overview==
{{Epigraph|An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose. 
—Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', p. 46}}
{{parabreak}}

Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocephalus hypocephalus] ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_2 Facsimile 2]). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. Critics who claim that we have all, or a majority, of the papyri possessed by Joseph Smith are simply mistaken.

The Egyptian characters on the recovered documents are a portion of the "Book of Breathings," an Egyptian religious text buried with mummies that instructed the dead on how to successfully reach the afterlife. This particular Book of Breathings was written for a deceased man named Hor, so it it usually called ''the Hor Book of Breathings''.

Other than the vignette represented in Facsimile 1, the material on the papyri received by the Church, at least from a standard Egyptological point of view, does not include the actual text of the Book of Abraham. This was discussed in the Church publication, the ''New Era'' in January 1968.

The following articles explore more detail regarding various aspects of the Book of Abraham.

=={{Topics label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Identity and nature
|subject=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession
|summary=In July 1835, Joseph Smith purchased a portion of a collection of papyri and mummies that had been discovered in Egypt and brought to the United States. Believing that one of the papyrus rolls contained, "the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt," and "purportedly written by his own hand, upon papyrus,"{{ref|hc1}} Joseph commenced a translation. The Book of Abraham was the result of his work. The translated text and facsimiles of three drawings were published in the early 1840s in serial fashion in the LDS newspaper ''Times and Seasons''. The entire work was published in 1852 in England as part of ''The Pearl of Great Price'', which was later canonized as part of LDS scripture.
}}
[[File:IE_Jan1968_cover.jpg|thumb|400 px|right|Cover of the January 1968 issue of the ''Improvement Era'', the Church's official magazine of the time. Note the color photograph of the recovered [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1].]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"
|subject=When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?
|summary=Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the ''Improvement Era'' (the predecessor to the ''Ensign'') less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum.{{ref|improvera}} The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham. Although the article erroneously identified the papyrus as the Egyptian "Book of the Dead," it was later correctly identified as a "Book of Breathings."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Dating
|subject=Dating of the Joseph Smith Papyri
|summary=Joseph said that "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham,"{{ref|hc2}} and his scribes quoted him as saying the scroll was "written by his [Abraham's] own hand, upon papyrus."{{ref|marquardt1}} The problem is that most modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to a few centuries before Christ, whereas Abraham lived about two millennia before Christ. Obviously, Abraham himself could not have penned the papyri. The phrase "by his own hand" can simply mean that Abraham is the author of the book. Similarly, we could hold a modern printed Bible in our hands, point to 1 Corinthians, and say, "This was written by the Apostle Paul." Joseph was translating the writings of Abraham, so it is quite possible that he believed that the actual scroll in his possession was written by Abraham himself. There is no evidence, however, that this belief was based on revelation.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text
|subject=Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?
|summary=We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost. 4) Perhaps there was a way of understanding the Egyptian ideograms anciently that is unknown to Egyptology in our day, yet to be discovered, deciphered or acknowledged, that could yield an interpretation of a text that is different than the standard Egyptological reading.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Revealed
|subject=The "Revealed Text" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was not'' on the papyri; he received the text by revelation, with the papyri acting as a catalyst. This is a possibility because Joseph used the word "translation" to mean several things, including the process of receiving pure revelation. (Joseph Smith's revelations call his revision of the Bible a "translation" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=D%26C+73%3A4%3B+D%26C+76%3A15%3B+D%26C+90%3A13%3B+D%26C+94%3A10%3B+D%26C+124%3A89 D&C 73:4; 76:15; 90:13; 94:10; 124:89]), even though he didn't use any Hebrew of Greek manuscripts. Also, {{s||DC|7|}} is a revealed translation of a lost record written by the Apostle John.)
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Size_of_missing_papyrus
|subject=The "Missing Papyrus" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was'' on the papyri in Joseph Smith's possession, but the portion recovered from the Metropolitan Museum doesn't include it. This is a possibility because the recovered portion is less than 13% of the total material held by Joseph.{{ref|13percent}} Eyewitnesses also reported that the length of the papyri in Joseph's possession was much more extensive than the fragments now held by the Church.{{ref|jfs1}}
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Jewish redaction
|subject=The "Jewish Redaction" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham was on a scroll which is no longer extant. While it's true that the extant portions of the JSP are from the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings and do not, according to Egyptologists, translate to anything like the LDS Book of Abraham, this doesn't necessarily mean that the translation didn't derive from Joseph's papyri. There are other scenarios that are compatible with Joseph's claims. We know from other sources, for instance, that sometimes scrolls were attached together.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|subject=The Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|summary=Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes. Critics charge that the KEP represent Joseph's attempt to translate the hieroglyphics from those portions that are still extant, noting that Egyptologists tell us that the alleged "translations" do not accurately reflect the meanings of the hieroglyphics. In some cases, several paragraphs of the English translation of the Book of Abraham are associated with Egyptian characters from the Joseph Smith papyri. In some instances, one Egyptian character seems to yield several sentences of English text. From what may be surmised from the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" the surviving Egyptian papyri are claimed by critics to be the source for the Book of Abraham. Critics point out that Egyptologists agree that these papyri are part of a collection of Egyptian funerary documents known as the ''Book of Breathings'' and do not deal with Abraham.
}}
[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|frame|200px|right|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles
|subject=Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham
|summary=In the Book of Abraham, Joseph included three facsimiles of illustrations from the papyri, along with commentary about what the images and their individual parts represented. Some of Joseph's interpretations are similar to those of trained Egyptologists, but most are not. A number of criticisms relate to the three facsimiles associated with the Book of Abraham.It is noted that Joseph Smith's translation of the facsimiles does not agree with that provided by Egyptologists, and that some missing portions of the facsimiles were incorrectly restored before they were published.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 1
|subject=Facsimile 1
|summary=It is claimed that facsimile 1 is simply a typical funerary scene and there are many other papyri showing the same basic scene, and that the missing portions of the drawing were incorrectly restored. It is also claimed that Abraham has never been associated with the lion couch vignette such as that portrayed in Facsimile #1 of the Book of Abraham.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 2
|subject=Facsimile 2
|summary=The illustration represented by Facsimile 2 is a hypocephalus, a disc made of linen, papyrus, or bronze, covered with inscriptions and images which relate to one of the last spells in the Book of the Dead. Joseph Smith's notes to Facsimile 2 identify it as representing God sitting in the heavens among the stars and others of his creations.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 3
|subject=Facsimile 3
|summary=The following are common criticisms associated with Facsimile 3: 1) The scene depicted is a known Egyptian vignette which some Egyptologists claim has nothing to do with Abraham, 2) Joseph indicated that specific characters in the facsimile confirmed the identities that he assigned to specific figures, 3) Joseph identified two obviously female figures as "King Pharaoh" and "Prince of Pharaoh."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Missing portions
|subject=Restoration of the missing portions of the facsimiles
|summary=Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|hc1}}{{HoC|vol=2|start=235, 236, 348|end=351}}
#{{note|gee2007}}John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah). (''Link forthcoming.'')
#{{note|improvera}}The 11-part series, written by Dr. Hugh Nibley and entitled "A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price", began in the January 1968 ''Improvement Era'' and ran in every issue until May 1970 (with the exception of December 1969 and February 1970). Nibley's series has been available as a FARMS reprint (N-NEP) since 1990, and several chapters became part of Nibley's book ''Abraham In Egypt''.
#{{note|hc2}}{{HoC1|vol=2|start=236}}
#{{note|marquardt1}}Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note — Hugh Nibley's ''Abraham in Egypt''" (2000).
#{{note|13percent}}John Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 23.
#{{note|jfs1}} "In 1906, while visiting Nauvoo, President Joseph F. Smith related to Preston Nibley his experience as a child of seeing his Uncle Joseph in the front rooms of the Mansion House working on the Egyptian manuscripts. According to President Smith, one of the rolls of papyri "when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House." This would have been sometime between 1843 when the Mansion House was completed and the prophet's death in June 1844, one or two years after other parts of the papyri had been cut up and placed under glass. - See {{Dialogue1|author=Hugh Nibley|article=Phase I||vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}} See also {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|vol=71|date=March 1968|start=17|end=18}} and Hugh Nibley, "Judging and Prejudging the Book of Abraham," Nibley archive, 1979, 6-7; reprinted as an appendix in Robert L. and Rosemary Brown, ''They Lie in Wait to Deceive'', vol. 1, ed. Barbara Ellsworth, rev. ed. (Mesa, AZ: Brownsworth, 1982), 236—245.
#{{note|gee1}}{{Ensign|author=John Gee|article=Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts|date=July 1992|start=60|end=?}}; {{FR-7-1-5}}
#{{note|nibley2}}{{Dialogue1|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=Phase One|vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}}{{link|url=http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=1659&REC=10}}
#{{note|gee2}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 12–13.
#{{note|gee3}}John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamFAIR}}

==={{External links label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamLinks}}

==={{Printed material label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[Category:Book of Abraham]]
[[de:Buch Abraham Papyri]]
[[fr:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri]]

The Joseph Smith Papyri

2011-07-13T18:27:03Z

EdGoble: /* Overview */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

{{summary}}

{{BofAPortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below.

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Subarticles label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Quotes
|subject=Source quotes
|summary=A collection of source quotes related to the Joseph Smith Papyri
}}

==Overview==
{{Epigraph|An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose. 
—Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', p. 46}}
{{parabreak}}

Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocephalus hypocephalus] ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_2 Facsimile 2]). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. Critics who claim that we have all, or a majority, of the papyri possessed by Joseph Smith are simply mistaken.

The Egyptian characters on the recovered documents are a portion of the "Book of Breathings," an Egyptian religious text buried with mummies that instructed the dead on how to successfully reach the afterlife. This particular Book of Breathings was written for a deceased man named Hor, so it it usually called ''the Hor Book of Breathings''.

Other than the vignette represented in Facsimile 1, the material on the papyri received by the Church, at least from a standard Egyptological point of view, does not include the actual text of the Book of Abraham. This was discussed in the Church publication, the ''New Era'' in January 1968.

The following articles explore more detail regarding various aspects of the Book of Abraham.

=={{Topics label}}==

{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Identity and nature
|subject=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession
|summary=In July 1835, Joseph Smith purchased a portion of a collection of papyri and mummies that had been discovered in Egypt and brought to the United States. Believing that one of the papyrus rolls contained, "the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt," and "purportedly written by his own hand, upon papyrus,"{{ref|hc1}} Joseph commenced a translation. The Book of Abraham was the result of his work. The translated text and facsimiles of three drawings were published in the early 1840s in serial fashion in the LDS newspaper ''Times and Seasons''. The entire work was published in 1852 in England as part of ''The Pearl of Great Price'', which was later canonized as part of LDS scripture.
}}
[[File:IE_Jan1968_cover.jpg|thumb|400 px|right|Cover of the January 1968 issue of the ''Improvement Era'', the Church's official magazine of the time. Note the color photograph of the recovered [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1].]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"
|subject=When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?
|summary=Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the ''Improvement Era'' (the predecessor to the ''Ensign'') less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum.{{ref|improvera}} The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham. Although the article erroneously identified the papyrus as the Egyptian "Book of the Dead," it was later correctly identified as a "Book of Breathings."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Dating
|subject=Dating of the Joseph Smith Papyri
|summary=Joseph said that "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham,"{{ref|hc2}} and his scribes quoted him as saying the scroll was "written by his [Abraham's] own hand, upon papyrus."{{ref|marquardt1}} The problem is that most modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to a few centuries before Christ, whereas Abraham lived about two millennia before Christ. Obviously, Abraham himself could not have penned the papyri. The phrase "by his own hand" can simply mean that Abraham is the author of the book. Similarly, we could hold a modern printed Bible in our hands, point to 1 Corinthians, and say, "This was written by the Apostle Paul." Joseph was translating the writings of Abraham, so it is quite possible that he believed that the actual scroll in his possession was written by Abraham himself. There is no evidence, however, that this belief was based on revelation.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text
|subject=Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?
|summary=We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Revealed
|subject=The "Revealed Text" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was not'' on the papyri; he received the text by revelation, with the papyri acting as a catalyst. This is a possibility because Joseph used the word "translation" to mean several things, including the process of receiving pure revelation. (Joseph Smith's revelations call his revision of the Bible a "translation" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=D%26C+73%3A4%3B+D%26C+76%3A15%3B+D%26C+90%3A13%3B+D%26C+94%3A10%3B+D%26C+124%3A89 D&C 73:4; 76:15; 90:13; 94:10; 124:89]), even though he didn't use any Hebrew of Greek manuscripts. Also, {{s||DC|7|}} is a revealed translation of a lost record written by the Apostle John.)
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text/Size_of_missing_papyrus
|subject=The "Missing Papyrus" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was'' on the papyri in Joseph Smith's possession, but the portion recovered from the Metropolitan Museum doesn't include it. This is a possibility because the recovered portion is less than 13% of the total material held by Joseph.{{ref|13percent}} Eyewitnesses also reported that the length of the papyri in Joseph's possession was much more extensive than the fragments now held by the Church.{{ref|jfs1}}
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Jewish redaction
|subject=The "Jewish Redaction" theory
|summary=This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham was on a scroll which is no longer extant. While it's true that the extant portions of the JSP are from the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings and do not, according to Egyptologists, translate to anything like the LDS Book of Abraham, this doesn't necessarily mean that the translation didn't derive from Joseph's papyri. There are other scenarios that are compatible with Joseph's claims. We know from other sources, for instance, that sometimes scrolls were attached together.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|subject=The Kirtland Egyptian Papers
|summary=Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes. Critics charge that the KEP represent Joseph's attempt to translate the hieroglyphics from those portions that are still extant, noting that Egyptologists tell us that the alleged "translations" do not accurately reflect the meanings of the hieroglyphics. In some cases, several paragraphs of the English translation of the Book of Abraham are associated with Egyptian characters from the Joseph Smith papyri. In some instances, one Egyptian character seems to yield several sentences of English text. From what may be surmised from the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" the surviving Egyptian papyri are claimed by critics to be the source for the Book of Abraham. Critics point out that Egyptologists agree that these papyri are part of a collection of Egyptian funerary documents known as the ''Book of Breathings'' and do not deal with Abraham.
}}
[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|frame|200px|right|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles
|subject=Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham
|summary=In the Book of Abraham, Joseph included three facsimiles of illustrations from the papyri, along with commentary about what the images and their individual parts represented. Some of Joseph's interpretations are similar to those of trained Egyptologists, but most are not. A number of criticisms relate to the three facsimiles associated with the Book of Abraham.It is noted that Joseph Smith's translation of the facsimiles does not agree with that provided by Egyptologists, and that some missing portions of the facsimiles were incorrectly restored before they were published.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 1
|subject=Facsimile 1
|summary=It is claimed that facsimile 1 is simply a typical funerary scene and there are many other papyri showing the same basic scene, and that the missing portions of the drawing were incorrectly restored. It is also claimed that Abraham has never been associated with the lion couch vignette such as that portrayed in Facsimile #1 of the Book of Abraham.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 2
|subject=Facsimile 2
|summary=The illustration represented by Facsimile 2 is a hypocephalus, a disc made of linen, papyrus, or bronze, covered with inscriptions and images which relate to one of the last spells in the Book of the Dead. Joseph Smith's notes to Facsimile 2 identify it as representing God sitting in the heavens among the stars and others of his creations.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Facsimile 3
|subject=Facsimile 3
|summary=The following are common criticisms associated with Facsimile 3: 1) The scene depicted is a known Egyptian vignette which some Egyptologists claim has nothing to do with Abraham, 2) Joseph indicated that specific characters in the facsimile confirmed the identities that he assigned to specific figures, 3) Joseph identified two obviously female figures as "King Pharaoh" and "Prince of Pharaoh."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Missing portions
|subject=Restoration of the missing portions of the facsimiles
|summary=Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|hc1}}{{HoC|vol=2|start=235, 236, 348|end=351}}
#{{note|gee2007}}John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah). (''Link forthcoming.'')
#{{note|improvera}}The 11-part series, written by Dr. Hugh Nibley and entitled "A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price", began in the January 1968 ''Improvement Era'' and ran in every issue until May 1970 (with the exception of December 1969 and February 1970). Nibley's series has been available as a FARMS reprint (N-NEP) since 1990, and several chapters became part of Nibley's book ''Abraham In Egypt''.
#{{note|hc2}}{{HoC1|vol=2|start=236}}
#{{note|marquardt1}}Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note — Hugh Nibley's ''Abraham in Egypt''" (2000).
#{{note|13percent}}John Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 23.
#{{note|jfs1}} "In 1906, while visiting Nauvoo, President Joseph F. Smith related to Preston Nibley his experience as a child of seeing his Uncle Joseph in the front rooms of the Mansion House working on the Egyptian manuscripts. According to President Smith, one of the rolls of papyri "when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House." This would have been sometime between 1843 when the Mansion House was completed and the prophet's death in June 1844, one or two years after other parts of the papyri had been cut up and placed under glass. - See {{Dialogue1|author=Hugh Nibley|article=Phase I||vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}} See also {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|vol=71|date=March 1968|start=17|end=18}} and Hugh Nibley, "Judging and Prejudging the Book of Abraham," Nibley archive, 1979, 6-7; reprinted as an appendix in Robert L. and Rosemary Brown, ''They Lie in Wait to Deceive'', vol. 1, ed. Barbara Ellsworth, rev. ed. (Mesa, AZ: Brownsworth, 1982), 236—245.
#{{note|gee1}}{{Ensign|author=John Gee|article=Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts|date=July 1992|start=60|end=?}}; {{FR-7-1-5}}
#{{note|nibley2}}{{Dialogue1|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=Phase One|vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}}{{link|url=http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=1659&REC=10}}
#{{note|gee2}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 12–13.
#{{note|gee3}}John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===

{{BookofAbrahamFAIR}}

==={{External links label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamLinks}}

==={{Printed material label}}===
{{BookofAbrahamPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[Category:Book of Abraham]]
[[de:Buch Abraham Papyri]]
[[fr:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri]]

The Hill Cumorah

2011-07-13T18:11:36Z

EdGoble: /* Where is the hill Cumorah? */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{GeographyPortal}}
{{question}}

==Questions==
* If [http://scriptures.lds.org/morm/6 Mormon chapter 6] is a literal description of the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites — approximately 100 thousand were killed by swords and axes — why hasn't any evidence of the battle been found at the site that was traditionally identified as the hill Cumorah in western New York state?
* If Joseph Smith returned the gold plates to a cave in the Hill Cumorah, why is there no evidence of this cave?

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Answer label}}==
There are a couple of incorrect assumptions in this question.

===Where is the hill Cumorah?===
First, it is not the case that the Church authoritatively identifies the drumlin in western New York as the same Hill Cumorah mentioned in the text of the Book of Mormon. The Church has made it abundantly clear that it does not endorse any particular view of Book of Mormon geography.(See: [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:Statements|''Statements about Book of Mormon geography'']]) The Church has no official position on any location described in the Book of Mormon. There is no official revelation in the Church establishing the drumlin in New York as the Hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon where two nations were destroyed. It is true that a number of Church leaders in the past expressed the opinion that the hill in New York is the same hill described in the Book of Mormon. Whether that opinion was based on personal revelation to those individuals cannot be known. And even if so, personal testimony on points such as this are contradictory, and are not binding on the Church, regardless of how high the position was of the person making the assertion. Only new revelation following proper procedure, and being accepted by the Church as a whole as binding can clear up this point. Statements from Joseph Smith or others on geography are not binding on the Church, despite the claims of various theorists.

Even if there is a chance that the drumlin in New York State is the Hill Cumorah, no actual archaeological digs have been performed at the site to actually attempt to find artifacts. Dirt has been overturned when it has been farmed, and also by equipment when structures have been built. Nobody went through the dirt with a fine-toothed comb. Only unofficial site surveys by non-professional people have been done there in recent years, without professional archaeological supervision, and without careful corroboration and documentation. Historical accounts of artifacts found at the site by farmers and so forth are only unsubstantiated folklore accounts. Even if true, the accounts show that the arrowheads that could be found were tampered with and carried away and sold. So there is nothing left but the accounts themselves, which are not archaeological evidence in themselves. And if arrowheads were found there, does that really prove that it was Cumorah? Arrowheads found at any location in the United States is an unremarkable thing to begin with, as they can be found all over the country in a great many sites. So even if things were found, it still wouldn't prove much.

While we call the drumlin in New York "Hill Cumorah" based on a usage initiated early in Church history (probably by Oliver Cowdery or W. W. Phelps),{{ref|reeve1}} that does not necessarily make the two hills the same. Most LDS scholars do not think they are the same, because they believe the New York drumlin does not meet the textual requirements for the geographic placement of the hill in relation to the narrow neck of land.{{ref|narrowneck1}} The view of these scholars is that the text requires a relatively short distance between Cumorah and the neck of land. David A. Palmer's criteria for the Ancient Cumorah have historically supplied some of the basis for the way most scholars understand the Book of Mormon description of Cumorah.{{ref|insearchcumorah}} Scholars in support of those same ideas have built upon his work, and have added their ideas to the mix over the years. However, in contrast to other distances in the Book of Mormon, John Clark stated that "The relative location of the hill Cumorah is most tenuous, since travel time from Bountiful, or the narrow neck, to Cumorah is nowhere specified." {{ref|clark1}}

And yet, others have argued to the contrary that a significant distance between those landmarks is unambiguously specified. That idea should not necessarily be conflated with the Hemispherical model, and it doesn't mean that the urban Nephite domain under the neck of land was not a limited area. For example, Andrew H. Hedges (of the Joseph Smith Papers Project, who was a professor of Church History and Doctrine at Brigham Young University) has documented his views.{{ref|hedges1}} (Matt Roper provided a response to Hedges' article).{{ref|roper1}} Another author has also documented his opinions.{{ref|goble1}}

The critical question of distance between Cumorah and the neck of land determines archaeological, cultural and environmental considerations for the ancient Cumorah. If, as Hedges argues, a more rural "northern hinterland" of the Nephite nation existed far north, and Cumorah is within that northern domain, then the expectations for what should be found in that area are not necessarily the same as those for the urban centers in the south. If Palmer and others in favor of the limited view are correct, then there is no such northern area. All sides of the issue regarding the Ancient Cumorah should be evaluated carefully. Any position that claims to be the definitive answer on this particular point, to the exclusion other points of view, when the Book of Mormon text is so ambiguous on it should be viewed with extreme caution.

''For further information compare the two major Book of Mormon geography models'':

* [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:HGT|Hemispheric geography theory (HGT)]]
* [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:LGT|Limited geography theory (LGT)]]

Also note that the Book of Mormon does not state that the plates of Mormon were buried in the Hill Cumorah; in fact, it states that the plates were not buried in Cumorah at that time, but were given to Moroni to safeguard until it came time for them to be put in their ultimate place of deposit:

:"And it came to pass that when we had gathered in all our people in one to the land of Cumorah, behold I, Mormon...made this record [the plates of Mormon] out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, '''''save [except] it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni'''''." ({{S||Mormon|6|6}}) {{ea}}

Some have used this scripture to support the view that the New York drumlin is not the same hill as the place of the Nephite destruction (since that is the majority view among scholars). While that is one plausible view based on this scripture, that point is left ambiguous. Because it does not comment on the burial of the plates of Mormon decades later, it does not establish anything one way or the other on that point with confidence.{{ref|goble2}} It does show beyond doubt that the burial place of the rest of the plates from the people of the Nephites were buried at the hill where the Nephite destruction took place, the actual ancient Cumorah.

This took place in approximately A.D. 385. Moroni did not bury the plates of Mormon until A.D. 421. During this 36-year period Moroni explained:

:"[The Lamanites] put to death every Nephite that will not deny the Christ. And I, Moroni, will not deny the Christ; wherefore, I wander whithersoever I can for the safety of mine own life." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/moro/1/2-3#2 Moroni 1:3])

During that 36-year wandering to escape the Lamanites, it seems likely that he could have traveled a great distance. If the Nephite Cumorah was not in New York, Moroni could easily have eventually come to modern New York state where he buried the plates. On the other hand, he could have easily remained in the general area of the Nephite destruction in his wanderings.

{{Main|Book_of_Mormon/Geography/New_World/Limited_Geography_Theory/Plates_to_New_York|l1=Transporting the plates to New York in a LGT model?}}

===Large population counts in the scriptures===

A second questionable premise is that the numbers recited in the text should be understood as accurate in the same sense we would understand those numbers today. Ancient militaristic texts, including those of the Bible, frequently exaggerated the numbers involved in battle for their own propagandistic purposes, or to simply convey the general concept of 'a very large number'. Very large numbers in the scriptures should always be taken with a grain of salt, since ancient authors (having their own purposes and approach) did not use such terms with the same precision as a modern military historian.

It has also been noted that "so-and-so and his 10,000" may use the term "10,000" as a designation for a military unit. Roman armies had "centuries" (or ''centuria'') which were lead by a "centurion," which implies a hundred men. While such units originally had 100 men, the normal size of such units (even at full strength) was only 60–80 men.{{ref|century1}}

Interestingly, at the time of the Spanish Conquest, Bernal Diaz described Tlascalan armies in the same terms:

:Of the followers of the old Xicotenga . . . there were ten thousand; of another great chief named Moseescaci there were another ten thousand; of a third, who was called Chichimecatecle, there were as many more...{{ref|diaz1}}

Without further information, it is difficult to know whether the Book of Mormon uses the term literally, in a symbolic/propagandist sense to convey a great number of dead, or as a technical military term familiar to Mormon and Moroni but opaque to the modern reader.

===Is there a cave in the Hill Cumorah containing the Nephite records?===
On June 17, 1877, Brigham Young related the following at a conference:

:I believe I will take the liberty to tell you of another circumstance that will be as marvelous as anything can be. This is an incident in the life of Oliver Cowdery, but he did not take the liberty of telling such things in meeting as I take. I tell these things to you, and I have a motive for doing so. I want to carry them to the ears of my brethren and sisters, and to the children also, that they may grow to an understanding of some things that seem to be entirely hidden from the human family. Oliver Cowdery went with the Prophet Joseph when he deposited these plates. Joseph did not translate all of the plates; there was a portion of them sealed, which you can learn from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the hill Cumorah, which he did. Oliver says that when Joseph and Oliver went there, the hill opened, and they walked into a cave, in which there was a large and spacious room. He says he did not think, at the time, whether they had the light of the sun or artificial light; but that it was just as light as day. They laid the plates on a table; it was a large table that stood in the room. Under this table there was a pile of plates as much as two feet high, and there were altogether in this room more plates than probably many wagon loads; they were piled up in the corners and along the walls. The first time they went there the sword of Laban hung upon the wall; but when they went again it had been taken down and laid upon the table across the gold plates; it was unsheathed, and on it was written these words: "This sword will never be sheathed again until the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and his Christ." {{ref|JoD19:38}}

There are at least ten second hand accounts describing the story of the cave in Cumorah, however, Joseph Smith himself did not record the incident. {{ref|packer.50-57}} As mentioned previously, the Hill Cumorah located in New York state is a ''drumlin'': this means it is a pile of gravel scraped together by an ancient glacier. The geologic unlikelihood of a cave existing within the hill such as the one described suggests that the experience related by the various witnesses was most likely a vision, or a divine transportation to another locale (as with Nephi's experience in {{s|1|Nephi|11|1}}). John Tvedtnes supports this view:

:The story of the cave full of plates inside the Hill Cumorah in New York is often given as evidence that it is, indeed, the hill where Mormon hid the plates. Yorgason quotes one version of the story from Brigham Young and alludes to six others collected by Paul T. Smith. Unfortunately, none of the accounts is firsthand. The New York Hill Cumorah is a moraine laid down anciently by a glacier in motion. It is comprised of gravel and earth. Geologically, it is impossible for the hill to have a cave, and all those who have gone in search of the cave have come back empty-handed. If, therefore, the story attributed to Oliver Cowdery (by others) is true, then the visits to the cave perhaps represent visions, perhaps of some far distant hill, not physical events.{{ref|tvedtnes.258-259}}

The Book of Mormon text does not describe the compartment in the hill as a "cave." This word is only used in references to it outside the text of the Book of Mormon itself, in other dated publications and in Church tradition. So the idea that the compartment was a natural cave is not established as a certainty. One author points out that some Adena mounds in the Eastern United States contain burial chambers. He suggests that this is a precedent in the archaeology of the general area of the New York drumlin, suggesting that the idea of a man-made chamber for the ancient records is a possibility.{{ref|goble3}} Whatever the case, a natural cave could not exist there.

Given that the angel Moroni had retrieved the plates from Joseph several times previously, it is not unreasonable to assume that he was capable of transporting them to a different location than the hill in New York. As Tvedtnes states, "If they could truly be moved about, why not from Mexico, for example?" {{ref|tvedtnes2.258-259}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|reeve1}} Rex C. Reeve, Jr., and Richard O. Cowan, "The Hill Called Cumorah," in ''Regional Studies in LDS History: New York and Pennsylvania'', edited by Larry C. Porter, Milton V. Backman, Jr., and Susan Easton Black (Provo, Utah: Department Church History and Doctrine, Brigham Young University, 1992), 71–89 (see especially pp. 73–74). {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?book_doc_id=273626}}
#{{note|narrowneck1}} See, for example, {{JBMS-4-1-30}}. See also discussion on FAIR Wiki [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World#The_Hill_Cumorah|here.]]
#{{note|insearchcumorah}} David A. Palmer, ''In Search of Cumorah'', Horizon Publishers & Distributors (February 2005)
#{{note|clark1}} John Clark, "Book of Mormon Geography," ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', 1992, p. 177
#{{note|hedges1}} Andrew H. Hedges, ''Cumorah and the Limited Mesoamerican Theory'' in ''Religious Educator'' 10, no. 2 (2009): 111–134 {{link|url=http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/Volume%2010%20Number%202%2C%202009/cumorah-and-limited-mesoamerican-theory }}
#{{note|roper1}} Matt Roper's response to Hedges, entitled ''Plausibility, Probability, and the Cumorah Question'' in ''Religious Educator'', Vol 10, No 2 (2009): 135-158 {{link|url=http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/Volume%2010%20Number%202%2C%202009/plausibility-probability-and-cumorah-question }}
#{{note|goble1}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|goble2}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|century1}}{{warfarebom1|author=A. Brent Merrill|article=Nephite Captains and Armies|start=270}} Reference cited is Graham Webster, ''The Roman Imperial Army'' (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1969). {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?doc_id=275936}}
#{{note|diaz1}}Bernal Diaz del Castillo, ''The Bernal Diaz Chronicles'', trans. and ed. A. Idell (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1956), 161–162, 110, 103; cited in {{Aas1|start=263}} {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?doc_id=263780}}
#{{note|JoD19:38}}{{JDfairwiki|author=Brigham Young|title=TRYING TO BE SAINTS, etc.|date=June 17, 1877|vol=19|disc=8|start=38}}
#{{note|packer.50-57}}{{JBMS-13-1-7}} 
#{{note|tvedtnes.258-259}}{{FR-2-1-29}} 
#{{note|goble3}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|tvedtnes2.258-259}}{{FR-2-1-29}} 

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===
*[[Book of Mormon demographics]]
*{{BoMGeographyWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===
*{{tg|url=http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai178.html|topic=Book of Mormon Geography}}
==={{External links label}}===
{{BoMArchaelogyLinks}}

===Print material===
{{BoMArchaelogyPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Mormon/Archaeology/Hill Cumorah]]

Template:BoMGeo:Goble 2004 RAW

2011-07-13T03:17:23Z

EdGoble:

|-
|[[Book_of_Mormon_geography/Models/Limited/Goble 2004|Goble 2004]]||2004||LGT/HGT||Tehuantepec||From Tehuantepec Northward||Mesoamerica/Preclassic Maya||New York||Undetermined||Undetermined||LDS||External||[[Template:BoMGeo:Goble 2004_RAW|edit]]<noinclude>
[[fr:Modèle:BoMGeo:Goble 2004 RAW]]
</noinclude>

Book of Mormon geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988

2011-07-13T03:15:10Z

EdGoble:

The Hill Cumorah

2011-07-13T02:50:59Z

EdGoble: /* Questions */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{GeographyPortal}}
{{question}}

==Questions==
* If [http://scriptures.lds.org/morm/6 Mormon chapter 6] is a literal description of the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites — approximately 100 thousand were killed by swords and axes — why hasn't any evidence of the battle been found at the site that was traditionally identified as the hill Cumorah in western New York state?
* If Joseph Smith returned the gold plates to a cave in the Hill Cumorah, why is there no evidence of this cave?

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Answer label}}==
There are a couple of incorrect assumptions in this question.

===Where is the hill Cumorah?===
First, it is not the case that the Church authoritatively identifies the drumlin in western New York as the same Hill Cumorah mentioned in the text of the Book of Mormon. The Church has made it abundantly clear that it does not endorse any particular view of Book of Mormon geography.(See: [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:Statements|''Statements about Book of Mormon geography'']]) The Church has no official position on any location described in the Book of Mormon. There is no official revelation in the Church establishing the drumlin in New York as the Hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon where two nations were destroyed. It is true that a number of Church leaders in the past expressed the opinion that the hill in New York is the same hill described in the Book of Mormon. Whether that opinion was based on personal revelation to those individuals cannot be known. And even if so, personal testimony on points such as this are contradictory, and are not binding on the Church, regardless of how high the position was of the person making the assertion. Only new revelation following proper procedure, and being accepted by the Church as a whole as binding can clear up this point. Statements from Joseph Smith or others on geography are not binding on the Church, despite the claims of various theorists.

Even if there is a chance that the drumlin in New York State is the Hill Cumorah, no actual archaeological digs have been performed at the site to actually attempt to find artifacts. Dirt has been overturned when it has been farmed, and also by equipment when structures have been built. Nobody went through the dirt with a fine-toothed comb. Only unofficial site surveys by non-professional people have been done there in recent years, without professional archaeological supervision, and without careful corroboration and documentation. Historical accounts of artifacts found at the site by farmers and so forth are only unsubstantiated folklore accounts. Even if true, the accounts show that the arrowheads that could be found were tampered with and carried away and sold. So there is nothing left but the accounts themselves, which are not archaeological evidence in themselves. And if arrowheads were found there, does that really prove that it was Cumorah? Arrowheads found at any location in the United States is an unremarkable thing to begin with, as they can be found all over the country in a great many sites. So even if things were found, it still wouldn't prove much.

While we call the drumlin in New York "Hill Cumorah" based on a usage initiated early in Church history (probably by Oliver Cowdery or W. W. Phelps),{{ref|reeve1}} that does not necessarily make the two hills the same. Most LDS scholars do not think they are the same, because they believe the New York drumlin does not meet the textual requirements for the geographic placement of the hill in relation to the narrow neck of land.{{ref|narrowneck1}} The view of these scholars is that the text requires a relatively short distance between Cumorah and the neck of land. David A. Palmer's criteria for the Ancient Cumorah have historically supplied some of the basis for the way most scholars understand the Book of Mormon description of Cumorah.{{ref|insearchcumorah}} Scholars in support of those same ideas have built upon his work, and have added their ideas to the mix over the years. However, in contrast to other distances in the Book of Mormon, John Clark stated that "The relative location of the hill Cumorah is most tenuous, since travel time from Bountiful, or the narrow neck, to Cumorah is nowhere specified." {{ref|clark1}}

And yet, others have argued to the contrary that a significant distance between those landmarks is unambiguously specified. That idea should not necessarily be conflated with the Hemispherical model, and it doesn't mean that the urban Nephite domain under the neck of land was not a limited area. For example, Andrew H. Hedges (of the Joseph Smith Papers Project, who was a professor of Church History and Doctrine at Brigham Young University) has documented his views.{{ref|hedges1}} (Matt Roper provided a response to Hedges' article).{{ref|roper1}} Another author has also documented his opinions.{{ref|goble1}}

The critical question of distance between Cumorah and the neck of land determines archaeological, cultural and environmental considerations for the ancient Cumorah. If, as Hedges argues, a more rural "northern hinterland" of the Nephite nation existed far north, and Cumorah is within that northern domain, then the expectations for what should be found in that area are not necessarily the same as those for the urban centers in the south. If Palmer and others in favor of the limited view are correct, then there is no such northern area. All sides of the issue regarding the Ancient Cumorah issue should be evaluated carefully. Any position that claims to be the definitive answer on this particular point, to the exclusion other points of view, when the Book of Mormon text is so ambiguous on it should be viewed with extreme caution.

''For further information compare the two major Book of Mormon geography models'':

* [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:HGT|Hemispheric geography theory (HGT)]]
* [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:LGT|Limited geography theory (LGT)]]

Also note that the Book of Mormon does not state that the plates of Mormon were buried in the Hill Cumorah; in fact, it states that the plates were not buried in Cumorah at that time, but were given to Moroni to safeguard until it came time for them to be put in their ultimate place of deposit:

:"And it came to pass that when we had gathered in all our people in one to the land of Cumorah, behold I, Mormon...made this record [the plates of Mormon] out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, '''''save [except] it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni'''''." ({{S||Mormon|6|6}}) {{ea}}

Some have used this scripture to support the view that the New York drumlin is not the same hill as the place of the Nephite destruction (since that is the majority view among scholars). While that is one plausible view based on this scripture, that point is left ambiguous. Because it does not comment on the burial of the plates of Mormon decades later, it does not establish anything one way or the other on that point with confidence.{{ref|goble2}} It does show beyond doubt that the burial place of the rest of the plates from the people of the Nephites were buried at the hill where the Nephite destruction took place, the actual ancient Cumorah.

This took place in approximately A.D. 385. Moroni did not bury the plates of Mormon until A.D. 421. During this 36-year period Moroni explained:

:"[The Lamanites] put to death every Nephite that will not deny the Christ. And I, Moroni, will not deny the Christ; wherefore, I wander whithersoever I can for the safety of mine own life." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/moro/1/2-3#2 Moroni 1:3])

During that 36-year wandering to escape the Lamanites, it seems likely that he could have traveled a great distance. If the Nephite Cumorah was not in New York, Moroni could easily have eventually come to modern New York state where he buried the plates. On the other hand, he could have easily remained in the general area of the Nephite destruction in his wanderings.

{{Main|Book_of_Mormon/Geography/New_World/Limited_Geography_Theory/Plates_to_New_York|l1=Transporting the plates to New York in a LGT model?}}

===Large population counts in the scriptures===

A second questionable premise is that the numbers recited in the text should be understood as accurate in the same sense we would understand those numbers today. Ancient militaristic texts, including those of the Bible, frequently exaggerated the numbers involved in battle for their own propagandistic purposes, or to simply convey the general concept of 'a very large number'. Very large numbers in the scriptures should always be taken with a grain of salt, since ancient authors (having their own purposes and approach) did not use such terms with the same precision as a modern military historian.

It has also been noted that "so-and-so and his 10,000" may use the term "10,000" as a designation for a military unit. Roman armies had "centuries" (or ''centuria'') which were lead by a "centurion," which implies a hundred men. While such units originally had 100 men, the normal size of such units (even at full strength) was only 60–80 men.{{ref|century1}}

Interestingly, at the time of the Spanish Conquest, Bernal Diaz described Tlascalan armies in the same terms:

:Of the followers of the old Xicotenga . . . there were ten thousand; of another great chief named Moseescaci there were another ten thousand; of a third, who was called Chichimecatecle, there were as many more...{{ref|diaz1}}

Without further information, it is difficult to know whether the Book of Mormon uses the term literally, in a symbolic/propagandist sense to convey a great number of dead, or as a technical military term familiar to Mormon and Moroni but opaque to the modern reader.

===Is there a cave in the Hill Cumorah containing the Nephite records?===
On June 17, 1877, Brigham Young related the following at a conference:

:I believe I will take the liberty to tell you of another circumstance that will be as marvelous as anything can be. This is an incident in the life of Oliver Cowdery, but he did not take the liberty of telling such things in meeting as I take. I tell these things to you, and I have a motive for doing so. I want to carry them to the ears of my brethren and sisters, and to the children also, that they may grow to an understanding of some things that seem to be entirely hidden from the human family. Oliver Cowdery went with the Prophet Joseph when he deposited these plates. Joseph did not translate all of the plates; there was a portion of them sealed, which you can learn from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the hill Cumorah, which he did. Oliver says that when Joseph and Oliver went there, the hill opened, and they walked into a cave, in which there was a large and spacious room. He says he did not think, at the time, whether they had the light of the sun or artificial light; but that it was just as light as day. They laid the plates on a table; it was a large table that stood in the room. Under this table there was a pile of plates as much as two feet high, and there were altogether in this room more plates than probably many wagon loads; they were piled up in the corners and along the walls. The first time they went there the sword of Laban hung upon the wall; but when they went again it had been taken down and laid upon the table across the gold plates; it was unsheathed, and on it was written these words: "This sword will never be sheathed again until the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and his Christ." {{ref|JoD19:38}}

There are at least ten second hand accounts describing the story of the cave in Cumorah, however, Joseph Smith himself did not record the incident. {{ref|packer.50-57}} As mentioned previously, the Hill Cumorah located in New York state is a ''drumlin'': this means it is a pile of gravel scraped together by an ancient glacier. The geologic unlikelihood of a cave existing within the hill such as the one described suggests that the experience related by the various witnesses was most likely a vision, or a divine transportation to another locale (as with Nephi's experience in {{s|1|Nephi|11|1}}). John Tvedtnes supports this view:

:The story of the cave full of plates inside the Hill Cumorah in New York is often given as evidence that it is, indeed, the hill where Mormon hid the plates. Yorgason quotes one version of the story from Brigham Young and alludes to six others collected by Paul T. Smith. Unfortunately, none of the accounts is firsthand. The New York Hill Cumorah is a moraine laid down anciently by a glacier in motion. It is comprised of gravel and earth. Geologically, it is impossible for the hill to have a cave, and all those who have gone in search of the cave have come back empty-handed. If, therefore, the story attributed to Oliver Cowdery (by others) is true, then the visits to the cave perhaps represent visions, perhaps of some far distant hill, not physical events.{{ref|tvedtnes.258-259}}

The Book of Mormon text does not describe the compartment in the hill as a "cave." This word is only used in references to it outside the text of the Book of Mormon itself, in other dated publications and in Church tradition. So the idea that the compartment was a natural cave is not established as a certainty. One author points out that some Adena mounds in the Eastern United States contain burial chambers. He suggests that this is a precedent in the archaeology of the general area of the New York drumlin, suggesting that the idea of a man-made chamber for the ancient records is a possibility.{{ref|goble3}} Whatever the case, a natural cave could not exist there.

Given that the angel Moroni had retrieved the plates from Joseph several times previously, it is not unreasonable to assume that he was capable of transporting them to a different location than the hill in New York. As Tvedtnes states, "If they could truly be moved about, why not from Mexico, for example?" {{ref|tvedtnes2.258-259}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|reeve1}} Rex C. Reeve, Jr., and Richard O. Cowan, "The Hill Called Cumorah," in ''Regional Studies in LDS History: New York and Pennsylvania'', edited by Larry C. Porter, Milton V. Backman, Jr., and Susan Easton Black (Provo, Utah: Department Church History and Doctrine, Brigham Young University, 1992), 71–89 (see especially pp. 73–74). {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?book_doc_id=273626}}
#{{note|narrowneck1}} See, for example, {{JBMS-4-1-30}}. See also discussion on FAIR Wiki [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World#The_Hill_Cumorah|here.]]
#{{note|insearchcumorah}} David A. Palmer, ''In Search of Cumorah'', Horizon Publishers & Distributors (February 2005)
#{{note|clark1}} John Clark, "Book of Mormon Geography," ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', 1992, p. 177
#{{note|hedges1}} Andrew H. Hedges, ''Cumorah and the Limited Mesoamerican Theory'' in ''Religious Educator'' 10, no. 2 (2009): 111–134 {{link|url=http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/Volume%2010%20Number%202%2C%202009/cumorah-and-limited-mesoamerican-theory }}
#{{note|roper1}} Matt Roper's response to Hedges, entitled ''Plausibility, Probability, and the Cumorah Question'' in ''Religious Educator'', Vol 10, No 2 (2009): 135-158 {{link|url=http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/Volume%2010%20Number%202%2C%202009/plausibility-probability-and-cumorah-question }}
#{{note|goble1}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|goble2}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|century1}}{{warfarebom1|author=A. Brent Merrill|article=Nephite Captains and Armies|start=270}} Reference cited is Graham Webster, ''The Roman Imperial Army'' (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1969). {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?doc_id=275936}}
#{{note|diaz1}}Bernal Diaz del Castillo, ''The Bernal Diaz Chronicles'', trans. and ed. A. Idell (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1956), 161–162, 110, 103; cited in {{Aas1|start=263}} {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?doc_id=263780}}
#{{note|JoD19:38}}{{JDfairwiki|author=Brigham Young|title=TRYING TO BE SAINTS, etc.|date=June 17, 1877|vol=19|disc=8|start=38}}
#{{note|packer.50-57}}{{JBMS-13-1-7}} 
#{{note|tvedtnes.258-259}}{{FR-2-1-29}} 
#{{note|goble3}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|tvedtnes2.258-259}}{{FR-2-1-29}} 

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===
*[[Book of Mormon demographics]]
*{{BoMGeographyWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===
*{{tg|url=http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai178.html|topic=Book of Mormon Geography}}
==={{External links label}}===
{{BoMArchaelogyLinks}}

===Print material===
{{BoMArchaelogyPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Mormon/Archaeology/Hill Cumorah]]

Book of Mormon

2011-07-13T02:49:24Z

EdGoble: /* Book of Mormon Geography */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{summary}}
{{BoMPortal}}
<onlyinclude>
=[[Book of Mormon]]=
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Basics
|subject=Book of Mormon basics
|summary=What is the Book of Mormon? This article orients new readers to the nature and content of this volume of scripture.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/List of editions
|subject=List of editions
|summary=
}}
==Translation of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Translation
|subject=Translation
|summary=What do we know about the method used to translate the Book of Mormon? Were the plates sometimes not in the room while Joseph was translating them? Critics claim that each sentence and word in the 1830 Book of Mormon "had supposedly come directly from God."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Witnesses
|subject=Witnesses
|summary=The world was not left with Joseph Smith's testimony alone. The Book of Mormon provided multiple official and unofficial witnesses who corroborated aspects of Joseph's account.Critics have long tried to dismiss or destroy the witnesses' witness. This page links to subpages which discuss various attacks in detail.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Joseph Smith/Seer stones
|subject=Urim and Thummim and seer stones
|summary=Joseph Smith used the Nephite Interpreters as well as his own seer stone (both of which were later referred to as "Urim and Thummim") to translate the Book of Mormon.
}}

==Publication of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Joseph as author and proprietor
|subject=Author and proprietor listed as Joseph Smith
|summary=Joseph Smith is listed as the "Author and Proprietor" of the first edition of the Book of Mormon. Critics use this to claim that Joseph wrote the book himself, despite that fact that the following page clearly states that he translated the book.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Attempt to sell copyright
|subject=Attempt to sell Book of Mormon copyright in Canada
|summary=David Whitmer claimed that Joseph Smith received a revelation and prophesied that Oliver Cowdery and Hiram Page should go to Canada where they would find a man willing to buy the copyright to the Book of Mormon. When they failed to sell the copyright, Whitmer states that Joseph admitted that the revelation had not come from God.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Printing timeframe
|subject=Printing timeframe
|summary="I've heard that the rate at which the first edition of the Book of Mormon was printed could only have occurred miraculously. Is there anything to this claim?"
}}

{{:Book of Mormon/Secular authorship theories}}

==Language used in the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/As a "familiar spirit"
|subject=As a "familiar spirit"
|summary=Critics ask why, if the words "familiar spirit" in Is. 29:4 refer to the Book of Mormon (as used in 2_Ne. 26:16, why does "familiar spirit" always refer to occult practices such as channeling and necromancy everywhere else in the Old Testament?
}}

==Revisions to the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Textual changes
|subject=Textual changes
|summary=The claim is often heard that there are more than 4000 changes to the Book of Mormon text. The majority of these are typographical. Few of the changes are significant. We examine the more noteworthy changes.
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=/Textual changes/"white" changed to "pure"
|subject="white" changed to "pure"
|summary=Critics accuse the Church of attempting to hiding a racially offensive statement.
}}</noinclude>

==Completeness of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/As the most correct book|subject=As the most correct book
|summary=Critics claim that since Joseph stated that it was "the most correct book," that the Book of Mormon should not have contained any errors. Yet, Mormon himself states in the preface that any mistakes contained therein are the mistakes of men.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Contains the fulness of the gospel
|subject=Contains the fulness of the gospel
|summary=If the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the gospel," then why are certain ordinances such as baptism for the dead and eternal marriage not mentioned?
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Why is baptism for the dead not taught
|subject=Baptism for the dead—why is it not taught in the Book of Mormon?
|summary=If the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the Gospel," then why does it not mention baptism for the dead.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Polygamy/Book of Mormon condemns the practice
|subject=Book of Mormon condemns polygamy
|summary=Critics use the Book of Jacob to show that the Book of Mormon condemns the practice of polygamy, and then go on to claim that Joseph Smith ignored this restriction by introducing the doctrine of plural marriage.
}}</noinclude>

==Archaeology and the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Archaeology
|subject=Archaeology
|summary=Critics charge that what is known about ancient American archaeology is not consistent with the Book of Mormon account. Sectarian critics often add the claim that the Bible has been "proven" true by archaeology, unlike the Book of Mormon.
}}

==Anachronisms claimed to exist in the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms
|subject=Anachronisms
|summary=Critics point to some items or concepts in the Book of Mormon which they claim are not consistent with what is known about ancient American geography, history, or anthropology. They claim that these "errors" prove that Joseph Smith was producing the Book of Mormon in the 19th century, and that the Book of Mormon is therefore not an ancient record.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Deutero-Isaiah
|subject=Deutero-Isaiah in the Book of Mormon?
|summary=The "Deutero-Isaiah" theory is the claim that parts of Isaiah were written later than others. This theory claims that there were three individual authors, whose works were later compiled together under the name of the first author Isaiah (referred to as "Proto Isaiah"). The critical issue raised is that the Brass Plates of Laban quote from sections of Isaiah that this theory ascribes to Deutero-Isaiah, so how could the Nephites have these writings if they weren't written until after they left Jerusalem?
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Relationship to the Dead Sea Scrolls
|subject=Dead Sea Scrolls and their relationship to the Book of Mormon
|summary=Mistranslations of the King James version of Isaiah have been corrected using the Isaiah version found with the Dead Sea scrolls. Why is it that the quotes from Isaiah contained in the Book of Mormon have the same translation errors contained in the King James version instead of matching the original ancient text?
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Demographics
|subject=Demographics and population numbers
|summary=Do Book of Mormon population numbers grow too rapidly?
}}

==Doctrinal issues related to the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Plain and precious doctrines
|subject=Plain and precious doctrines
|summary=Critics claim that the Book of Mormon is nothing more than a "bad copy of the Bible"; that anyone could have churned out such pedestrian, warmed-over ideas by borrowing liberally from the Bible and his own personal experiences.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Great and abominable church
|subject=Great and abominable church
|summary=What is the "great and abominable church" referred to in the Book of Mormon? Critics claim that Latter-day Saints believe that the scriptural terms "church of the devil," the "great and abominable church," and the "whore of all the earth" refer to a specific religion. Critics claim that the Book of Mormon teaches that "all mainstream Christians fall into the world system know as the devil's church (or Satan's kingdom)."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Nephi's killing of Laban
|subject=Nephi's killing of Laban
|summary=How can Latter-day Saints point to Nephi's killing of Laban as an example of a positive example of a Book of Mormon character? Wasn't this cold-blooded murder? And doesn't this passage then justify the killing of "the wicked" by anyone who feels that God has told them to do so?
}}

==Book of Mormon Geography==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Geography
|subject=Geography
|summary=The geographical setting of the Book of Mormon has been the subject of serious study and casual speculation since before the book was first published. We describe the various theories and examine the strengths and weaknesses of each.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Archaeology/Hill Cumorah
|subject=Location of the Hill Cumorah
|summary=If Mormon chapter 6 is a literal description of the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites — approximately 100 thousand were killed by swords and axes — why hasn't any evidence of the battle been found at the site that was traditionally identified as the hill Cumorah in western New York state?
}}

==Historicity of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Calendar
|subject=Calendar
|summary= The Book of Mormon calendar is not identical to the calendar used by modern peoples. Learn about Nephite calendar(s) here.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Historicity
|subject=Historicity
|summary= Several efforts have been made to "prove" that what the Book of Mormon has to say about the history of the new world cannot possibly have been the case.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Warfare
|subject=Warfare in the Book of Mormon
|summary=Some criticisms of Book of Mormon warfare are anachronistic; other elements of Book of Mormon warfare contain authentic ancient elements about which Joseph Smith could not have known.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences
|subject=Evidences
|summary=Summary page for evidences supporting the Book of Mormon
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Olive culture
|subject=Olive culture
|summary=Does the Book of Mormon's account of olive culture in Jacob 5 match what we know about this subject? The Book of Mormon provides a remarkably accurate portrait of olive horticulture. There are two points at which the allegory/parable deviates from the known principles of growing olives; in both cases, the allegory's characters draw the reader's attention to these deviations with some amazement. Thus, these 'mistakes' play a dramatic role in demonstrating the allegory/parable's meaning.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Geography/Old World
|subject=Book of Mormon geography in the Old World
|summary=A discussion of the Arabian, or Old World, geography of the Book of Mormon enjoys many advantages over discussion of New World matters. Chief among these is the fact that we know we certainty where the story begins—in Old World Jerusalem. The details of Lehi's desert travels had been extracted from the text by the 1970s. It is important to note how early these models were developed; current-day critics sometimes charge that LDS scholars have "retrofitted" their models to accommodate chance discoveries like "Nahom," but this is false.
}}</noinclude>
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms
|subject=Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
|summary=The Book of Mormon does indeed have authentic Semitic constructions in it, but LDS need to tread cautiously in establishing them. Each must be evaluated on its own merits. Hebraisms that could have been known to Joseph Smith may still be authentic, and may still enhance our appreciation of the text, but they are weak evidence for Book of Mormon antiquity.
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms/Chiasmus
|subject=Chiasmus
|summary=A literary structure known as "chiasmus" exists in the Book of Mormon. Critics claim that the presence of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is either coincidental, an artifact of the observer, or not impressive since examples of chiastic patterns have been found in the Doctrine and Covenants or other 19th century writing.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms/Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon
|subject=Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon
|summary=I have read a talk written by Elder Russell M. Nelson in which he discusses a friend of his who translated the Book of Mormon back into Arabic. What are the facts behind this story and the talk?
}}</noinclude>

==Lamanites and the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/DNA evidence
|subject=DNA evidence
|summary=DNA samples taken from modern Native Americans do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East. Critics argue that this means the Book of Mormon's claim that Native Americans are descended from Lehi must be false, and therefore the Book of Mormon is not an ancient record as Joseph Smith claimed.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites
|subject=Lamanites
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Curse
|subject=Curse
|summary=Critics claim that the Church believed that Lamanites who accepted the Gospel would become light-skinned. "Mormon folklore" claims that Native Americans and Polynesians carry a curse based upon "misdeeds on the part of their ancestors."
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Curse/Red skin
|subject=Red skin curse
|summary=One critic states that the Lamanites were "cursed" with a "red skin."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Referenced in the Doctrine and Covenants
|subject=Referenced in the Doctrine and Covenants
|summary=Since in the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord refers to American Indians in North America as "Lamanites" (e.g., DC 28:8-9,14, DC 30:6, DC 32:2, DC 54:8), does this cause problems for the Limited Geography Theory (LGT) or issues of Amerindian genetic data?
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians
|subject=Relationship to Amerindians
|summary=Are all Amerindians descendants of Lehi? Critics claim that Church leaders "seem reluctant or powerless to curtail" the belief among Mesoamerican and South American saints that they are descendents of the Lamanites. Critics say that Joseph Smith said that the angel Moroni told him that all American Indians were "literal descendants of Abraham," but that DNA has disproved this.
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship_to_Amerindians/Statements
|subject=Statements
|summary=A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Amerindian origins/identity
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians
|subject=Relationship to Polynesians
|summary=Critics claim that the Church has expanded the definition of "Lamanite" to Polynesians. Modern day prophets have repeatedly declared that Polynesians are Lamanites. The patriarchal blessings of Polynesians often state that they are of the tribe of Manasseh (through Lehi).
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians/Statements
|subject=Statements
|summary=A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Polynesian origins/identity
}}</noinclude>

==Book of Mormon textual analysis==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Wordprint studies
|subject=Wordprint studies
|summary=What are wordprints? What do they have to do with the Book of Mormon?
}}
==Truthfulness of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Moroni's promise
|subject=Moroni's promise
|summary=Critics claim that praying about the Book of Mormon is not an objective standard for determining if the book is true or not, and should therefore not be trusted. They claim that many people have read and prayed about the Book of Mormon and have either received no answer, or that they have received an answer from God that it is false.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Stick of Ephraim/Erastus Snow statement
|subject=Stick of Ephraim—Erastus Snow statement
|summary=How is it that the prophesy of the sticks found in Ezekiel 37 is fulfilled in the Book of Mormon if Lehi and Nephi are descendants of Manasseh and not of Ephraim?
}}
</onlyinclude>

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}
[[de:Das Buch Mormon]]
[[fr:Book of Mormon]]

The Hill Cumorah

2011-07-13T02:44:59Z

EdGoble: /* Where is the hill Cumorah? */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{GeographyPortal}}
{{question}}

==Questions==
* If [http://scriptures.lds.org/morm/6 Mormon chapter 6] is a literal description of the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites — approximately 100 thousand were killed by swords and axes — why hasn't any evidence of the battle been found at the site the Church identifies as hill Cumorah in western New York state?
* If Joseph Smith returned the gold plates to a cave in the Hill Cumorah, why is there no evidence of this cave?

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Answer label}}==
There are a couple of incorrect assumptions in this question.

===Where is the hill Cumorah?===
First, it is not the case that the Church authoritatively identifies the drumlin in western New York as the same Hill Cumorah mentioned in the text of the Book of Mormon. The Church has made it abundantly clear that it does not endorse any particular view of Book of Mormon geography.(See: [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:Statements|''Statements about Book of Mormon geography'']]) The Church has no official position on any location described in the Book of Mormon. There is no official revelation in the Church establishing the drumlin in New York as the Hill Cumorah of the Book of Mormon where two nations were destroyed. It is true that a number of Church leaders in the past expressed the opinion that the hill in New York is the same hill described in the Book of Mormon. Whether that opinion was based on personal revelation to those individuals cannot be known. And even if so, personal testimony on points such as this are contradictory, and are not binding on the Church, regardless of how high the position was of the person making the assertion. Only new revelation following proper procedure, and being accepted by the Church as a whole as binding can clear up this point. Statements from Joseph Smith or others on geography are not binding on the Church, despite the claims of various theorists.

Even if there is a chance that the drumlin in New York State is the Hill Cumorah, no actual archaeological digs have been performed at the site to actually attempt to find artifacts. Dirt has been overturned when it has been farmed, and also by equipment when structures have been built. Nobody went through the dirt with a fine-toothed comb. Only unofficial site surveys by non-professional people have been done there in recent years, without professional archaeological supervision, and without careful corroboration and documentation. Historical accounts of artifacts found at the site by farmers and so forth are only unsubstantiated folklore accounts. Even if true, the accounts show that the arrowheads that could be found were tampered with and carried away and sold. So there is nothing left but the accounts themselves, which are not archaeological evidence in themselves. And if arrowheads were found there, does that really prove that it was Cumorah? Arrowheads found at any location in the United States is an unremarkable thing to begin with, as they can be found all over the country in a great many sites. So even if things were found, it still wouldn't prove much.

While we call the drumlin in New York "Hill Cumorah" based on a usage initiated early in Church history (probably by Oliver Cowdery or W. W. Phelps),{{ref|reeve1}} that does not necessarily make the two hills the same. Most LDS scholars do not think they are the same, because they believe the New York drumlin does not meet the textual requirements for the geographic placement of the hill in relation to the narrow neck of land.{{ref|narrowneck1}} The view of these scholars is that the text requires a relatively short distance between Cumorah and the neck of land. David A. Palmer's criteria for the Ancient Cumorah have historically supplied some of the basis for the way most scholars understand the Book of Mormon description of Cumorah.{{ref|insearchcumorah}} Scholars in support of those same ideas have built upon his work, and have added their ideas to the mix over the years. However, in contrast to other distances in the Book of Mormon, John Clark stated that "The relative location of the hill Cumorah is most tenuous, since travel time from Bountiful, or the narrow neck, to Cumorah is nowhere specified." {{ref|clark1}}

And yet, others have argued to the contrary that a significant distance between those landmarks is unambiguously specified. That idea should not necessarily be conflated with the Hemispherical model, and it doesn't mean that the urban Nephite domain under the neck of land was not a limited area. For example, Andrew H. Hedges (of the Joseph Smith Papers Project, who was a professor of Church History and Doctrine at Brigham Young University) has documented his views.{{ref|hedges1}} (Matt Roper provided a response to Hedges' article).{{ref|roper1}} Another author has also documented his opinions.{{ref|goble1}}

The critical question of distance between Cumorah and the neck of land determines archaeological, cultural and environmental considerations for the ancient Cumorah. If, as Hedges argues, a more rural "northern hinterland" of the Nephite nation existed far north, and Cumorah is within that northern domain, then the expectations for what should be found in that area are not necessarily the same as those for the urban centers in the south. If Palmer and others in favor of the limited view are correct, then there is no such northern area. All sides of the issue regarding the Ancient Cumorah issue should be evaluated carefully. Any position that claims to be the definitive answer on this particular point, to the exclusion other points of view, when the Book of Mormon text is so ambiguous on it should be viewed with extreme caution.

''For further information compare the two major Book of Mormon geography models'':

* [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:HGT|Hemispheric geography theory (HGT)]]
* [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World:LGT|Limited geography theory (LGT)]]

Also note that the Book of Mormon does not state that the plates of Mormon were buried in the Hill Cumorah; in fact, it states that the plates were not buried in Cumorah at that time, but were given to Moroni to safeguard until it came time for them to be put in their ultimate place of deposit:

:"And it came to pass that when we had gathered in all our people in one to the land of Cumorah, behold I, Mormon...made this record [the plates of Mormon] out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, '''''save [except] it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni'''''." ({{S||Mormon|6|6}}) {{ea}}

Some have used this scripture to support the view that the New York drumlin is not the same hill as the place of the Nephite destruction (since that is the majority view among scholars). While that is one plausible view based on this scripture, that point is left ambiguous. Because it does not comment on the burial of the plates of Mormon decades later, it does not establish anything one way or the other on that point with confidence.{{ref|goble2}} It does show beyond doubt that the burial place of the rest of the plates from the people of the Nephites were buried at the hill where the Nephite destruction took place, the actual ancient Cumorah.

This took place in approximately A.D. 385. Moroni did not bury the plates of Mormon until A.D. 421. During this 36-year period Moroni explained:

:"[The Lamanites] put to death every Nephite that will not deny the Christ. And I, Moroni, will not deny the Christ; wherefore, I wander whithersoever I can for the safety of mine own life." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/moro/1/2-3#2 Moroni 1:3])

During that 36-year wandering to escape the Lamanites, it seems likely that he could have traveled a great distance. If the Nephite Cumorah was not in New York, Moroni could easily have eventually come to modern New York state where he buried the plates. On the other hand, he could have easily remained in the general area of the Nephite destruction in his wanderings.

{{Main|Book_of_Mormon/Geography/New_World/Limited_Geography_Theory/Plates_to_New_York|l1=Transporting the plates to New York in a LGT model?}}

===Large population counts in the scriptures===

A second questionable premise is that the numbers recited in the text should be understood as accurate in the same sense we would understand those numbers today. Ancient militaristic texts, including those of the Bible, frequently exaggerated the numbers involved in battle for their own propagandistic purposes, or to simply convey the general concept of 'a very large number'. Very large numbers in the scriptures should always be taken with a grain of salt, since ancient authors (having their own purposes and approach) did not use such terms with the same precision as a modern military historian.

It has also been noted that "so-and-so and his 10,000" may use the term "10,000" as a designation for a military unit. Roman armies had "centuries" (or ''centuria'') which were lead by a "centurion," which implies a hundred men. While such units originally had 100 men, the normal size of such units (even at full strength) was only 60–80 men.{{ref|century1}}

Interestingly, at the time of the Spanish Conquest, Bernal Diaz described Tlascalan armies in the same terms:

:Of the followers of the old Xicotenga . . . there were ten thousand; of another great chief named Moseescaci there were another ten thousand; of a third, who was called Chichimecatecle, there were as many more...{{ref|diaz1}}

Without further information, it is difficult to know whether the Book of Mormon uses the term literally, in a symbolic/propagandist sense to convey a great number of dead, or as a technical military term familiar to Mormon and Moroni but opaque to the modern reader.

===Is there a cave in the Hill Cumorah containing the Nephite records?===
On June 17, 1877, Brigham Young related the following at a conference:

:I believe I will take the liberty to tell you of another circumstance that will be as marvelous as anything can be. This is an incident in the life of Oliver Cowdery, but he did not take the liberty of telling such things in meeting as I take. I tell these things to you, and I have a motive for doing so. I want to carry them to the ears of my brethren and sisters, and to the children also, that they may grow to an understanding of some things that seem to be entirely hidden from the human family. Oliver Cowdery went with the Prophet Joseph when he deposited these plates. Joseph did not translate all of the plates; there was a portion of them sealed, which you can learn from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the hill Cumorah, which he did. Oliver says that when Joseph and Oliver went there, the hill opened, and they walked into a cave, in which there was a large and spacious room. He says he did not think, at the time, whether they had the light of the sun or artificial light; but that it was just as light as day. They laid the plates on a table; it was a large table that stood in the room. Under this table there was a pile of plates as much as two feet high, and there were altogether in this room more plates than probably many wagon loads; they were piled up in the corners and along the walls. The first time they went there the sword of Laban hung upon the wall; but when they went again it had been taken down and laid upon the table across the gold plates; it was unsheathed, and on it was written these words: "This sword will never be sheathed again until the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and his Christ." {{ref|JoD19:38}}

There are at least ten second hand accounts describing the story of the cave in Cumorah, however, Joseph Smith himself did not record the incident. {{ref|packer.50-57}} As mentioned previously, the Hill Cumorah located in New York state is a ''drumlin'': this means it is a pile of gravel scraped together by an ancient glacier. The geologic unlikelihood of a cave existing within the hill such as the one described suggests that the experience related by the various witnesses was most likely a vision, or a divine transportation to another locale (as with Nephi's experience in {{s|1|Nephi|11|1}}). John Tvedtnes supports this view:

:The story of the cave full of plates inside the Hill Cumorah in New York is often given as evidence that it is, indeed, the hill where Mormon hid the plates. Yorgason quotes one version of the story from Brigham Young and alludes to six others collected by Paul T. Smith. Unfortunately, none of the accounts is firsthand. The New York Hill Cumorah is a moraine laid down anciently by a glacier in motion. It is comprised of gravel and earth. Geologically, it is impossible for the hill to have a cave, and all those who have gone in search of the cave have come back empty-handed. If, therefore, the story attributed to Oliver Cowdery (by others) is true, then the visits to the cave perhaps represent visions, perhaps of some far distant hill, not physical events.{{ref|tvedtnes.258-259}}

The Book of Mormon text does not describe the compartment in the hill as a "cave." This word is only used in references to it outside the text of the Book of Mormon itself, in other dated publications and in Church tradition. So the idea that the compartment was a natural cave is not established as a certainty. One author points out that some Adena mounds in the Eastern United States contain burial chambers. He suggests that this is a precedent in the archaeology of the general area of the New York drumlin, suggesting that the idea of a man-made chamber for the ancient records is a possibility.{{ref|goble3}} Whatever the case, a natural cave could not exist there.

Given that the angel Moroni had retrieved the plates from Joseph several times previously, it is not unreasonable to assume that he was capable of transporting them to a different location than the hill in New York. As Tvedtnes states, "If they could truly be moved about, why not from Mexico, for example?" {{ref|tvedtnes2.258-259}}

=={{Endnotes label}}==
#{{note|reeve1}} Rex C. Reeve, Jr., and Richard O. Cowan, "The Hill Called Cumorah," in ''Regional Studies in LDS History: New York and Pennsylvania'', edited by Larry C. Porter, Milton V. Backman, Jr., and Susan Easton Black (Provo, Utah: Department Church History and Doctrine, Brigham Young University, 1992), 71–89 (see especially pp. 73–74). {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?book_doc_id=273626}}
#{{note|narrowneck1}} See, for example, {{JBMS-4-1-30}}. See also discussion on FAIR Wiki [[Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World#The_Hill_Cumorah|here.]]
#{{note|insearchcumorah}} David A. Palmer, ''In Search of Cumorah'', Horizon Publishers & Distributors (February 2005)
#{{note|clark1}} John Clark, "Book of Mormon Geography," ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', 1992, p. 177
#{{note|hedges1}} Andrew H. Hedges, ''Cumorah and the Limited Mesoamerican Theory'' in ''Religious Educator'' 10, no. 2 (2009): 111–134 {{link|url=http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/Volume%2010%20Number%202%2C%202009/cumorah-and-limited-mesoamerican-theory }}
#{{note|roper1}} Matt Roper's response to Hedges, entitled ''Plausibility, Probability, and the Cumorah Question'' in ''Religious Educator'', Vol 10, No 2 (2009): 135-158 {{link|url=http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/Volume%2010%20Number%202%2C%202009/plausibility-probability-and-cumorah-question }}
#{{note|goble1}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|goble2}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|century1}}{{warfarebom1|author=A. Brent Merrill|article=Nephite Captains and Armies|start=270}} Reference cited is Graham Webster, ''The Roman Imperial Army'' (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1969). {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?doc_id=275936}}
#{{note|diaz1}}Bernal Diaz del Castillo, ''The Bernal Diaz Chronicles'', trans. and ed. A. Idell (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1956), 161–162, 110, 103; cited in {{Aas1|start=263}} {{GL1|url=http://gospelink.com/library/doc?doc_id=263780}}
#{{note|JoD19:38}}{{JDfairwiki|author=Brigham Young|title=TRYING TO BE SAINTS, etc.|date=June 17, 1877|vol=19|disc=8|start=38}}
#{{note|packer.50-57}}{{JBMS-13-1-7}} 
#{{note|tvedtnes.258-259}}{{FR-2-1-29}} 
#{{note|goble3}} Edwin Goble, ''Resurrecting Cumorah'', Second Revised Edition, May 2011
#{{note|tvedtnes2.258-259}}{{FR-2-1-29}} 

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===
*[[Book of Mormon demographics]]
*{{BoMGeographyWiki}}

==={{FAIR web site label}}===
*{{tg|url=http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai178.html|topic=Book of Mormon Geography}}
==={{External links label}}===
{{BoMArchaelogyLinks}}

===Print material===
{{BoMArchaelogyPrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Mormon/Archaeology/Hill Cumorah]]

Template:BoMGeo:Curtis 1988 RAW

2011-07-13T02:31:07Z

EdGoble:

|-
|[[Book_of_Mormon_geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988|Curtis 1988]]||1988||LGT||Niagara Peninsula||Unclear||Other||New York||Unclear||Unclear||LDS||External||[[Template:BoMGeo:Curtis 1988_RAW|edit]]<noinclude>
[[fr:Modèle:BoMGeo:Curtis 1988 RAW]]
</noinclude>

Template:BoMGeo:Curtis 1988 RAW

2011-07-13T02:29:52Z

EdGoble:

|-
|[[Book_of_Mormon_geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988|Curtis 1988]]||1988||HGT||Niagara Peninsula||Unclear||Other||New York||Unclear||Unclear||LDS||External||[[Template:BoMGeo:Curtis 1988_RAW|edit]]<noinclude>
[[fr:Modèle:BoMGeo:Curtis 1988 RAW]]
</noinclude>

Book of Mormon geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988

2011-07-13T02:26:50Z

EdGoble:

Book of Mormon geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988

2011-07-13T02:25:50Z

EdGoble:

Book of Mormon geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988

2011-07-13T02:16:23Z

EdGoble:

Book of Mormon geography/Models/Limited/Curtis 1988

2011-07-13T02:15:21Z

EdGoble:

Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians

2011-07-10T22:41:17Z

EdGoble: /* Other possible connections between the Pacific islands and the New World */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{DNAPortal}}

=={{Criticism label}}==
*Critics claim that the Church has expanded the definition of "Lamanite" to Polynesians.
*Modern day prophets have repeatedly declared that Polynesians are Lamanites.
*The patriarchal blessings of Polynesians often state that they are of the tribe of Manasseh (through Lehi).

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Response label}}==
===Background===
Critics have correctly pointed out that many Latter-day prophets and apostles have stated that the inhabitants of the islands of the Pacific are considered to be Lamanites. In addition, they have also correctly noted that this belief, at least in part, stems from the story of Hagoth in the Book of Mormon, who built ships which eventually carried an undetermined number of people to geographical regions outside the scope of the Book of Mormon narrative. Critics insist, however, that modern evidence, including [[Book of Mormon and DNA evidence|DNA data]], precludes the islanders from being descendants of Book of Mormon people.

===The story of Hagoth===
The Book of Mormon talks of groups of people who set sail in ships and were never seen again.

:And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.
:And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward. And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.
:And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.
:And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not. {{s||Alma|63|5-8}}

This story has traditionally been used to explain why the Pacific islanders are considered to be Lamanites.


===Statements by Church leaders===

Elder Spencer W. Kimball, while he was the Acting President of the Council of the Twelve, said in 1971,

: With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem some 600 years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea…they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand…Today we have many Lamanite leaders in the Church. For example, in Tonga, where 20 percent of all the people in the islands belong to the Church, we have three large stakes. Two of them are presided over wholly by Lamanites and the other almost wholly by them. There are three stakes in Samoa and another is to be organized in those small Samoan islands. Four more stakes with Lamanite leaders!{{ref|Kimball.Ensign.1971}}

The approach by the critics, therefore, is very simple: If the islanders can be proven to have no connection to the New World, then Polynesians cannot be considered to be Lamanites. The statements made by Elder Kimball and other Church leaders would therefore be incorrect, thus proving that these leaders are not inspired. Proving a negative, however, is extremely difficult to do. Many critics' arguments against the Book of Mormon rely upon proving that something does ''not'' exist. In the case of Polynesia, there is at least one well known anomaly tying Polynesia to the New World that is acknowledged by non-LDS scientists.

===The sweet potato===
An anomaly long puzzled over by botanists is the presence of the sweet potato in Polynesia. The Sweet Potato is native to New World, and it is believed to have originated in either the Central or South American lowlands.{{ref|Obrien1}} The subject of how and when the sweet potato traveled from the New World to Polynesia has long been the subject of debate among scientists. Dr. Roland B. Dixon, a cultural anthropologist who organized one of the world’s most comprehensive and functional anthropological libraries, noted three theories that have been proposed to explain the presence of this New World plant in the islands:{{ref|Dixon1}}
#The plant was introduced by the Spanish conquerors of South America during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
#It was introduced in pre-Columbian times by Polynesians who visited South America and brought it back with them.
#It was introduced by New World travelers during exploratory voyages to the west.

An even more intriguing is the name of this plant: In Peru, the Quechua name for a particular type of sweet potato is “kumar.” In Polynesia, some of the names used are “kumala” and “kumara.” Dr. Dixon concluded in 1932 that,

:An exhaustive, impartial, and able analysis of the evidence demonstrates that the kumara was widely spread in Polynesia centuries before the Spaniards, first of European explorers, saw the Pacific.{{ref|Dixon2}}

Molecular biologist Dr. Simon Southerton, in his critical book [[Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church|''Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church'']], takes the position that the similarity in names must have been the result of European colonization.{{ref|Southerton.177}} The theory that the sweet potato's arrival was due to the Spaniards was proven to be incorrect, however, with the discovery of carbonized sweet potato remains in excavations at Mangaia, in the Cook Islands. The remains were dated to 1000 A.D., a full 500 years before the arrival of the Spaniards.{{ref|Hammond1}}{{ref|Kirch.2000}}{{ref|Green.2005}} Additional sweet potato remains which pre-date European contact have also been discovered in Hawaii, Easter Island and New Zealand, indicating that the plant was widely dispersed before the Europeans arrived.{{ref|Montenegro1}}

Dr. Dixon rejected the idea that South Americans could have traveled to Polynesia because they did not have the skill to build ships capable of making the voyage. More recently, however, scientists have noted that possibility that the plant may have arrived in the islands accidentally, either on a disabled craft or by means of seed capsules that drifted to the islands from the New World. It is even more interesting to note that during drift tests conducted to investigate this possibility, that the most probable drift route was found to be between Central America and the Marshall Islands.{{ref|Hammond2}}

The possibility of plants (and people), drifting to the islands from the New World certainly fits well with the story of Hagoth.

===Other possible connections between the Pacific islands and the New World===
The island of Rapa Nui (also known as Easter Island), there are stone walls which were built and without the aid of mortar. The stones fit so precisely together than there are no visible gaps. The workmanship of these stone walls very closely resembles that of similar walls found in Peru.{{ref|nova1}} There is now DNA evidence that at least some of the ancestry of Easter Islanders definitely came from South America. {{ref|newscientist}}. Perhaps they brought some of their technological know-how with them, which may explain the similarity in the walls. Another connection between Polynesia and South America came to light in 2007 when the bones of a chicken native to Polynesia were found in an archaeological dig in El Arenal. The bones pre-date the arrival of the Spaniards by approximately 100 years.{{ref|livesci}}{{ref|latimes}} A variety of cotton in Hawaii has been genetically linked to the most common variety of cotton grown in Mexico.{{ref|sorenson1}}

=={{Conclusion label}}==
So, what does this prove? The presence of a New World plant in pre-Columbian Polynesia does not ''prove'' anything with respect to the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon is to be believed based upon faith rather than circumstantial evidence. The data that ''is'' coming to light, however, continues to support the possibility of multiple pre-Columbian connections between Polynesia and the New World. More importantly, this data is eliminating "absence of evidence" as a critical argument against a Polynesian connection with the New World.

=={{Endnotes label}}==

#{{note|Kimball.Ensign.1971}}{{Ensign1 | author=Spencer W. Kimball | article=Of Royal Blood|date=July 1971|start=7|}}
#{{note|Obrien1}}Patricia J. O’Brien, “The Sweet Potato: Its Origin and Dispersal,” ''American Anthropologist'', Vol. 74, No. 3 (Jun. 1972), pp. 342-365.
#{{note|Dixon1}}Roland B. Dixon, “The Problem of the Sweet Potato in Polynesia,” ''American Anthropologist'', Vol. 34, No. 1 (Jan. – Mar. 1932) pp. 40-66.
#{{note|Dixon2}}Dixon, pp. 40-66.
#{{note|Southerton.177}}Simon G. Southerton, ''Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church'']], p. 177.
#{{note|Hammond1}}Norman Hammond, [http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.archaeology/2008-03/msg00537.html "The lowly sweet potato may unlock America's past, How the root vegetable found its way across the Pacific"], Mar. 24, 2008.
#{{note|Kirch.2000}}P. Kirch, ''On the Road of The Winds: An Archaeological History of the Pacific Islands Before European Contact''. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.
#{{note|Green.2005}}R. C. Green, "Sweet Potato Transfers in Polynesian prehistory" in C. Ballard, P. Brown, R.M. Bourke, T. Harwood (eds.) ''The Sweet Potato in Oceania: A Reappraisal''. New South Wales, Australia : University of Sydney Press, 2005.
#{{note|Montenegro1}}Montenegro et al., [http://wikyonos.seos.uvic.ca/people/caavis/SPotato_V2.pdf "Modelling the pre-historic arrival of the sweet potato in Polynesia"], University of Victoria, School of Earth and Ocean Science.
#{{note|Hammond2}}Hammond.
#{{note|Nova1}}Liesl Clark, "First Inhabitants," [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/easter/civilization/first.html ''Nova Online Adventure'']
#{{note|newscientist}} Michael Marshall, [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20546-early-americans-helped-colonise-easter-island.html ''Early Americans helped colonise Easter Island''], published in ''New Scientist'', June 6, 2011
#{{note|livesci}}[http://www.livescience.com/history/070604_polynesian_chicken.html "Chicken Bones Suggest Polynesians Found Americas Before Columbus"], ''LiveScience'', June 4, 2007.
#{{note|latimes}}[http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/05/science/sci-chickens5 "Study: Spaniards didn’t get to South America first"], ''Los Angeles Times'', June 5, 2007.
#{{note|sorenson1}}John L. Sorenson, [http://farms.byu.edu/publications/bookschapter.php?bookid=&chapid=671 "New Technology and Ancient Voyages"] from ''Pressing Forward with the Book of Mormon'',pp. 177-179

=={{Further reading label}}==

==={{FAIR wiki articles label}}===
*[[Amerindians as Lamanites]]

==={{FAIR web site label}}===
*David Stewart, M.D., [http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/DNA_and_the_Book_of_Mormon_2.html DNA and the Book of Mormon]

==={{External links label}}===
*{{Ensign1 | author=Dr. Robert H. Daines | article=The Globe-Trotting Sweet Potato|date=March 1975|start=67|}}
*{{BYUS | author=Jerry K. Loveland | article=[http://byustudies.byu.edu/shop/pdfSRC/17.1Loveland.pdf Hagoth and the Polynesian Tradition]|vol=17|num=1|date=1976|start=1|end=17}}
*{{FR-17-1-5}} 
*{{JBMS-14-1-4}} 

==={{Printed material label}}===

{{Suggestions}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians]]

Book of Mormon

2011-07-10T22:36:27Z

EdGoble: /* Book of Mormon Geography */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{summary}}
{{BoMPortal}}
<onlyinclude>
=[[Book of Mormon]]=
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Basics
|subject=Book of Mormon basics
|summary=What is the Book of Mormon? This article orients new readers to the nature and content of this volume of scripture.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/List of editions
|subject=List of editions
|summary=
}}
==Translation of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Translation
|subject=Translation
|summary=What do we know about the method used to translate the Book of Mormon? Were the plates sometimes not in the room while Joseph was translating them? Critics claim that each sentence and word in the 1830 Book of Mormon "had supposedly come directly from God."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Witnesses
|subject=Witnesses
|summary=The world was not left with Joseph Smith's testimony alone. The Book of Mormon provided multiple official and unofficial witnesses who corroborated aspects of Joseph's account.Critics have long tried to dismiss or destroy the witnesses' witness. This page links to subpages which discuss various attacks in detail.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Joseph Smith/Seer stones
|subject=Urim and Thummim and seer stones
|summary=Joseph Smith used the Nephite Interpreters as well as his own seer stone (both of which were later referred to as "Urim and Thummim") to translate the Book of Mormon.
}}

==Publication of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Joseph as author and proprietor
|subject=Author and proprietor listed as Joseph Smith
|summary=Joseph Smith is listed as the "Author and Proprietor" of the first edition of the Book of Mormon. Critics use this to claim that Joseph wrote the book himself, despite that fact that the following page clearly states that he translated the book.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Attempt to sell copyright
|subject=Attempt to sell Book of Mormon copyright in Canada
|summary=David Whitmer claimed that Joseph Smith received a revelation and prophesied that Oliver Cowdery and Hiram Page should go to Canada where they would find a man willing to buy the copyright to the Book of Mormon. When they failed to sell the copyright, Whitmer states that Joseph admitted that the revelation had not come from God.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Printing timeframe
|subject=Printing timeframe
|summary="I've heard that the rate at which the first edition of the Book of Mormon was printed could only have occurred miraculously. Is there anything to this claim?"
}}

{{:Book of Mormon/Secular authorship theories}}

==Language used in the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/As a "familiar spirit"
|subject=As a "familiar spirit"
|summary=Critics ask why, if the words "familiar spirit" in Is. 29:4 refer to the Book of Mormon (as used in 2_Ne. 26:16, why does "familiar spirit" always refer to occult practices such as channeling and necromancy everywhere else in the Old Testament?
}}

==Revisions to the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Textual changes
|subject=Textual changes
|summary=The claim is often heard that there are more than 4000 changes to the Book of Mormon text. The majority of these are typographical. Few of the changes are significant. We examine the more noteworthy changes.
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=/Textual changes/"white" changed to "pure"
|subject="white" changed to "pure"
|summary=Critics accuse the Church of attempting to hiding a racially offensive statement.
}}</noinclude>

==Completeness of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/As the most correct book|subject=As the most correct book
|summary=Critics claim that since Joseph stated that it was "the most correct book," that the Book of Mormon should not have contained any errors. Yet, Mormon himself states in the preface that any mistakes contained therein are the mistakes of men.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Contains the fulness of the gospel
|subject=Contains the fulness of the gospel
|summary=If the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the gospel," then why are certain ordinances such as baptism for the dead and eternal marriage not mentioned?
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Why is baptism for the dead not taught
|subject=Baptism for the dead—why is it not taught in the Book of Mormon?
|summary=If the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the Gospel," then why does it not mention baptism for the dead.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Polygamy/Book of Mormon condemns the practice
|subject=Book of Mormon condemns polygamy
|summary=Critics use the Book of Jacob to show that the Book of Mormon condemns the practice of polygamy, and then go on to claim that Joseph Smith ignored this restriction by introducing the doctrine of plural marriage.
}}</noinclude>

==Archaeology and the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Archaeology
|subject=Archaeology
|summary=Critics charge that what is known about ancient American archaeology is not consistent with the Book of Mormon account. Sectarian critics often add the claim that the Bible has been "proven" true by archaeology, unlike the Book of Mormon.
}}

==Anachronisms claimed to exist in the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms
|subject=Anachronisms
|summary=Critics point to some items or concepts in the Book of Mormon which they claim are not consistent with what is known about ancient American geography, history, or anthropology. They claim that these "errors" prove that Joseph Smith was producing the Book of Mormon in the 19th century, and that the Book of Mormon is therefore not an ancient record.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Deutero-Isaiah
|subject=Deutero-Isaiah in the Book of Mormon?
|summary=The "Deutero-Isaiah" theory is the claim that parts of Isaiah were written later than others. This theory claims that there were three individual authors, whose works were later compiled together under the name of the first author Isaiah (referred to as "Proto Isaiah"). The critical issue raised is that the Brass Plates of Laban quote from sections of Isaiah that this theory ascribes to Deutero-Isaiah, so how could the Nephites have these writings if they weren't written until after they left Jerusalem?
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Relationship to the Dead Sea Scrolls
|subject=Dead Sea Scrolls and their relationship to the Book of Mormon
|summary=Mistranslations of the King James version of Isaiah have been corrected using the Isaiah version found with the Dead Sea scrolls. Why is it that the quotes from Isaiah contained in the Book of Mormon have the same translation errors contained in the King James version instead of matching the original ancient text?
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Demographics
|subject=Demographics and population numbers
|summary=Do Book of Mormon population numbers grow too rapidly?
}}

==Doctrinal issues related to the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Plain and precious doctrines
|subject=Plain and precious doctrines
|summary=Critics claim that the Book of Mormon is nothing more than a "bad copy of the Bible"; that anyone could have churned out such pedestrian, warmed-over ideas by borrowing liberally from the Bible and his own personal experiences.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Great and abominable church
|subject=Great and abominable church
|summary=What is the "great and abominable church" referred to in the Book of Mormon? Critics claim that Latter-day Saints believe that the scriptural terms "church of the devil," the "great and abominable church," and the "whore of all the earth" refer to a specific religion. Critics claim that the Book of Mormon teaches that "all mainstream Christians fall into the world system know as the devil's church (or Satan's kingdom)."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Nephi's killing of Laban
|subject=Nephi's killing of Laban
|summary=How can Latter-day Saints point to Nephi's killing of Laban as an example of a positive example of a Book of Mormon character? Wasn't this cold-blooded murder? And doesn't this passage then justify the killing of "the wicked" by anyone who feels that God has told them to do so?
}}

==Book of Mormon Geography==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Geography
|subject=Geography
|summary=The geographical setting of the Book of Mormon has been the subject of serious study and casual speculation since before the book was first published. We describe the various theories and examine the strengths and weaknesses of each.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Archaeology/Hill Cumorah
|subject=Location of the Hill Cumorah
|summary=If Mormon chapter 6 is a literal description of the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites — approximately 100 thousand were killed by swords and axes — why hasn't any evidence of the battle been found at the site the Church identifies as hill Cumorah in western New York state?
}}

==Historicity of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Calendar
|subject=Calendar
|summary= The Book of Mormon calendar is not identical to the calendar used by modern peoples. Learn about Nephite calendar(s) here.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Historicity
|subject=Historicity
|summary= Several efforts have been made to "prove" that what the Book of Mormon has to say about the history of the new world cannot possibly have been the case.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Warfare
|subject=Warfare in the Book of Mormon
|summary=Some criticisms of Book of Mormon warfare are anachronistic; other elements of Book of Mormon warfare contain authentic ancient elements about which Joseph Smith could not have known.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences
|subject=Evidences
|summary=Summary page for evidences supporting the Book of Mormon
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Olive culture
|subject=Olive culture
|summary=Does the Book of Mormon's account of olive culture in Jacob 5 match what we know about this subject? The Book of Mormon provides a remarkably accurate portrait of olive horticulture. There are two points at which the allegory/parable deviates from the known principles of growing olives; in both cases, the allegory's characters draw the reader's attention to these deviations with some amazement. Thus, these 'mistakes' play a dramatic role in demonstrating the allegory/parable's meaning.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Geography/Old World
|subject=Book of Mormon geography in the Old World
|summary=A discussion of the Arabian, or Old World, geography of the Book of Mormon enjoys many advantages over discussion of New World matters. Chief among these is the fact that we know we certainty where the story begins—in Old World Jerusalem. The details of Lehi's desert travels had been extracted from the text by the 1970s. It is important to note how early these models were developed; current-day critics sometimes charge that LDS scholars have "retrofitted" their models to accommodate chance discoveries like "Nahom," but this is false.
}}</noinclude>
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms
|subject=Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
|summary=The Book of Mormon does indeed have authentic Semitic constructions in it, but LDS need to tread cautiously in establishing them. Each must be evaluated on its own merits. Hebraisms that could have been known to Joseph Smith may still be authentic, and may still enhance our appreciation of the text, but they are weak evidence for Book of Mormon antiquity.
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms/Chiasmus
|subject=Chiasmus
|summary=A literary structure known as "chiasmus" exists in the Book of Mormon. Critics claim that the presence of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is either coincidental, an artifact of the observer, or not impressive since examples of chiastic patterns have been found in the Doctrine and Covenants or other 19th century writing.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms/Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon
|subject=Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon
|summary=I have read a talk written by Elder Russell M. Nelson in which he discusses a friend of his who translated the Book of Mormon back into Arabic. What are the facts behind this story and the talk?
}}</noinclude>

==Lamanites and the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/DNA evidence
|subject=DNA evidence
|summary=DNA samples taken from modern Native Americans do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East. Critics argue that this means the Book of Mormon's claim that Native Americans are descended from Lehi must be false, and therefore the Book of Mormon is not an ancient record as Joseph Smith claimed.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites
|subject=Lamanites
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Curse
|subject=Curse
|summary=Critics claim that the Church believed that Lamanites who accepted the Gospel would become light-skinned. "Mormon folklore" claims that Native Americans and Polynesians carry a curse based upon "misdeeds on the part of their ancestors."
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Curse/Red skin
|subject=Red skin curse
|summary=One critic states that the Lamanites were "cursed" with a "red skin."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Referenced in the Doctrine and Covenants
|subject=Referenced in the Doctrine and Covenants
|summary=Since in the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord refers to American Indians in North America as "Lamanites" (e.g., DC 28:8-9,14, DC 30:6, DC 32:2, DC 54:8), does this cause problems for the Limited Geography Theory (LGT) or issues of Amerindian genetic data?
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians
|subject=Relationship to Amerindians
|summary=Are all Amerindians descendants of Lehi? Critics claim that Church leaders "seem reluctant or powerless to curtail" the belief among Mesoamerican and South American saints that they are descendents of the Lamanites. Critics say that Joseph Smith said that the angel Moroni told him that all American Indians were "literal descendants of Abraham," but that DNA has disproved this.
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship_to_Amerindians/Statements
|subject=Statements
|summary=A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Amerindian origins/identity
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians
|subject=Relationship to Polynesians
|summary=Critics claim that the Church has expanded the definition of "Lamanite" to Polynesians. Modern day prophets have repeatedly declared that Polynesians are Lamanites. The patriarchal blessings of Polynesians often state that they are of the tribe of Manasseh (through Lehi).
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians/Statements
|subject=Statements
|summary=A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Polynesian origins/identity
}}</noinclude>

==Book of Mormon textual analysis==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Wordprint studies
|subject=Wordprint studies
|summary=What are wordprints? What do they have to do with the Book of Mormon?
}}
==Truthfulness of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Moroni's promise
|subject=Moroni's promise
|summary=Critics claim that praying about the Book of Mormon is not an objective standard for determining if the book is true or not, and should therefore not be trusted. They claim that many people have read and prayed about the Book of Mormon and have either received no answer, or that they have received an answer from God that it is false.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Stick of Ephraim/Erastus Snow statement
|subject=Stick of Ephraim—Erastus Snow statement
|summary=How is it that the prophesy of the sticks found in Ezekiel 37 is fulfilled in the Book of Mormon if Lehi and Nephi are descendants of Manasseh and not of Ephraim?
}}
</onlyinclude>

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}
[[de:Das Buch Mormon]]
[[fr:Book of Mormon]]

Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun

2011-07-08T15:28:11Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
{{SciencePortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
The Book of Abraham states that “the sun [is said] to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power (Abraham Fac 2,Fig 5),” while astrophysics has shown that “The Sun shines ... because of thermonuclear fusion. It does not get its light from any other star.”

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Response label}}==
There are many scriptures or statements by the prophets that seem to have scientific implications. Unfortunately, they are never couched in modern scientific terms and their meanings are often very obscure. Some faithful saints have made attempts to interpret such things in a way that tries to harmonize them with some current view of science. While some may think that is not the best thing to do, because it is very speculative, at least these faithful explanations have been made in good faith. For example, some saints have made attempts to harmonize the theory of evolution with the gospel. Another example is that some saints have tried to explain the Book of Mormon using current archaeology. It is true that these types of suggestions made by such faithful saints are not authoritative or binding on the Church. But they are genuine, apologetic attempts to come to an understanding, and to build faith. However, they must be treated with extreme caution as anything else must be on subjects that are unsettled.

However, it is definitely a foolish thing that faithless critics purposely try to interpret things that are uncertain in a way that is most at odds with current scientific thought. These explanations by critics are most often made in bad faith, to try to put the Church, its leaders and its scriptures in a bad light. The fact that critics make such interpretations is a ''straw man'' tactic, where they try to make the Book of Abraham and other scriptures to say things when there is no evidence that they actually mean such a thing.

The Book of Abraham quote cited in the criticism above has inspired both faithful attempts at explanation, as well as critical attempts, including the interpretation found on the web site where this criticism appeared. The wording of Joseph Smith’s explanation of Figure 5 in Facsimile 2 of the Book of Abraham is, in fact, very difficult to interpret. Let’s see what some of our options are.

* Energy is never destroyed. It can only change form or be stored when it is absorbed in some fashion, or be re-emitted as some sort of radiation. On a fundamental level, light that is emitted from matter in the form of photons is sometimes being reflected or refracted ''after'' being initially ''absorbed''. Some matter gives off light when it transforms energy that was absorbed into it in some other form. Solar cells work by absorbing photons and re-emitting the energy as electricity. When something heats up when it has been exposed to light, it is because it is absorbing the light energy and storing some of it internally as heat. When heat is emitted from it, that is still light, or photon energy, but it is invisible, and is known as infra-red radiation. The only type of refraction on light that does not involve absorption is gravitational lensing, when gravity acts on photons in to distort their path. In the case of reflection, such as with a mirror, part of the light is reflected back out that hit the surface of the medium. ([http://www.telescope-optics.net/reflection.htm]). In the case of refraction, such as with water or with a lens of some kind, an image is distorted, or the light passing through is changed in its direction. In the case of a prism or a rain-drop, which are types of lenses, the light is split into into its spectra, because the photons are spread out in different directions at different wavelengths. In the case of regular "things" that have one "color," light from a light bulb, or from the sun, is absorbed and re-emitted at only one certain wavelength. Now, with a classic light bulb, electric energy is fed into a filament made of some kind of metal. The energy passing through the metal causes it to emit the energy as both light and heat. In the case of a magnifying glass, where the light can burn something, the refraction causes a focusing of all the photons on one point. A laser works in a similar way where a stream of photons is concentrated using lenses and mirrors. The key here in ''all'' interactions between photons and regular matter made of atoms is that the light or other energy is ''absorbed'' into the matter, and then re-emitted as light photons once again. The photons never really ''bounce off'' the matter when reflected, nor does it ever really ''pass through'' the matter when refracted. It is always absorbed and re-emitted in some form. That is the key principle to focus on here.

*In the Solar System, we observe that planets and moons that do not give off their own visible light reflect the light that they receive from the Sun. That light has been absorbed by the surface of such bodies, and re-emitted. However, we note that Jupiter itself, being very large, and having other sources of energy internally gives off more energy than it receives from the Sun in the form of heat and so forth ([http://nineplanets.org/jupiter.html]). But this fact still does not stop it from being true that Jupiter does indeed receive visible light from the Sun. Jupiter, earth, and the other planets of the Solar System do indeed receive light from other stars, even though we receive ''most'' of our light from the Sun. Now, if we extrapolate further from these facts that we have just noted, it is also true that the Sun receives light from other stars, just like we do on earth, because they are visible to us in the night sky. But that light is miniscule compared to the light that the Sun puts out on its own power from its own internal sources (just as in the case of Jupiter). So, just because a celestial orb has its own power source internally, it ''still does borrow light from other celestial orbs''. Or in other words, when a photon hits the surface Sun, the matter in the Sun absorbs it, just like any other matter would when hit with a photon. So, it is true that the light the Sun receives from other stars is miniscule. Yet, ''it is still true that it does receive and absorb such light''. That energy that is absorbed and re-emitted is part of the sum of the output of the energy from the Sun. The Book of Abraham may be referring only to the light that is reflected or borrowed, and is simply not referring on the light or energy that is internally generated. So herein may be found part of the problem in interpretation. People who are aware of modern science may have been focusing so much on the fact that large celestial bodies generate their own energy, and not even thinking about the fact that small quantities of energy are still absorbed from elsewhere. They forget that revelation is given line upon line. The Lord taught Abraham about the ''absorption and transference of energy'', but did not get so specific scientifically as to tell Abraham about nuclear fusion. He left that to be revealed in our day through science.

* It is known that Joseph Smith hid his seer-stone in a hat, and somehow he was able to view some kind of light that emitted from it. That energy that powered that photon emission from the stone came from somewhere, and the stone clearly had no internal light source. Therefore, the stone was absorbing energy from somewhere in some form and re-emitting it in the form of photons. Similarly, the Jaredite light sources were clear stones that the Lord touched that emitted light somehow, not from some internal power source. Therefore, these were gathering energy from some other source, and re-emitting it as photons. Seer stones have been referred to as a type of Urim and Thummim. The scriptures tell us that celestial planets will be great Urims and Thummims (D&C 130: 8-10). When a star explodes in a supernova, what is really happening is that the star's immense atmosphere has been shed. Sometimes the remnant left over is known as a "white dwarf." This remnant is actually the star's original solid core that used to be in the center of the star before the explosion ([http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/dwarfs.html]). Recent science has demonstrated that some white dwarfs are actually composed of highly compressed carbon that amassed from fusion reactions, making it a large diamond ([http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3492919.stm]). If it is true that a rock such as a seer-stone can receive energy and re-emit that as light somehow, and that light is discernible in a dark place like a hat, then it is no more far-fetched to suggest that a star's solid core that is a diamond can act as a Urim and Thummim to receive and re-emit light received from some other source. Our own Sun has that very type of a solid core, and therefore, if this theory hold's true, aside from the fact that the Sun has nuclear reactions in it, also, the Sun's core is a Urim and Thummim that receives energy from other energy sources and re-emits it. If we examine what is happening with the auroras on the earth, the earth's internal magnetic field from the core of the earth is deflecting the charged particles coming from the sun to the poles, and that energy is being absorbed into the atmosphere of the earth from the charged particles. And it is being re-emitted as light energy in the polar regions. Jupiter and other large planets also have large magnetic fields and aurora in the polar regions. It is not far fetched to suggest that perhaps the Sun's immense magnetic fields similarly deflect cosmic rays and other types of energy in charged particles to be absorbed inwards, and then to be re-emitted, following similar principles as how the aurora function on the planets of the solar system.

*Another suggestion is this: To “borrow” means to receive with the intention of returning, especially said of a material object or substance. It may also mean to take and adopt as one’s own, especially said of abstractions or ideas, as in “the composer borrowed his harmonic structure from Bach’s Fugue in D Major.” So what does it mean for the sun to “borrow” its light from Kolob? Is light a material or an abstraction? Does the Sun intend to repay the light it borrowed?

*What, in fact, is meant by 'light' in this context? Doctrine & Covenants 88:7–13, in wording strongly reminiscent of our Book of Abraham quote, states “7 ...this is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made. 8 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made; 9 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made; 10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand. 11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; 12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space — 13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things (emphasis added).” These verses are clearly NOT talking about electromagnetic radiation. Does anyone have a convincing explanation of what they ARE talking about?

*A “medium” can mean a material through which some signal propagates or a means or channel through which something is achieved. What does it mean here? Does it refer to a material or a means?

*What is Kae-e-vanrash? The Book of Abraham says that it is a “grand Key,” or “governing power.” What does that mean? Is Kae-e-vanrash a term for nuclear reactions, gravitation, cosmic rays? Or is it a more spiritual medium such as priesthood or faith, or an organizational structure, or a means used for administrative communications?

And, finally, what are we to understand about the nature of Book of Abraham astronomy? Is it a revelation from God to Abraham explaining the structure of the universe as it would be seen by the astronomers of our day? That is the position of a number of scholars such as Michael Rhodes and J. Ward Moody in the chapter entitled "Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham," Chapter 2 in the book ''Astronomy, Papyrus and Covenant'', the third volume in the series ''Studies in the Book of Abraham''.

Others have another theory that the Book of Abraham represents an ancient "Geocentric" cosmology. John Gee is one of these scholars. Gee, as well as William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson published their views on this as well in the same book in Chapter 1, entitled "'And I Saw The Stars', The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy." We remember that “The Lord said unto me: Abraham, I show these things unto thee before ye go into Egypt, that ye may declare all these words.” {{scripture||Abraham|3|15}}, so that, as John Gee has suggested ([http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2009_The_Larger_Issue.html "The Larger Issue"]), this is simply the teaching that would be easiest for the Egyptians to understand — one that would teach them that Elohim, who dwells near Kolob, rules over than the sun-god, Amen-Re?

Another author has suggested that the Book of Abraham is both a Geocentric cosmology, as well as a cosmology revealed for our day that was intended to be in harmony with modern scientific knowledge. He suggests that the Lord intended it to come forth in a day when it could be understood. He notes that most ancient cosmologies, rather than being solar centric, were actually pole-star centric. The pole star and other geocentric asterisms or constellations are just symbols of the greater reality that God was trying to teach Abraham for the Egyptians. He says that the Book of Abraham Cosmology, when understood in conjunction with what is presented in the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, shows that some central region in space is occupied by large celestial bodies that govern the Sun and other stars gravitationally. The pole-star is a geocentric omphalos, a symbol of this central region around which all else revolves. From a geocentric point of view, the central hieroglyph in the hypocephalus (Facsimile #2 of the Book of Abraham, figure #1) is the pole-star. From a real-life point of view, it is Kolob and the central region of space that it gravitationally dominates, as a grand real-life omphalos. So in that author's view, the Book of Abraham actually teaches ''both'' a Geocentric cosmology as well as an understanding that was revealed to Abraham that is compatible with modern scientific views, the one being a mere reflection of the other.

=={{Conclusion label}}==
Until someone can make a convincing case that their interpretation of these things is the only reasonable one, any faith-promoting proof from Abraham’s astronomy is a flimsy house of cards and any faith-destroying attack on some straw-man interpretation is laughable. Among the more speculative interpretations is the idea that Abraham taught that the photons leaving the surface of the sun originally came from Kolob. Whether any of the photons leaving the surface of the sun come from energy originally emitted from other stars is simply unknown. Such things must be viewed with extreme caution.

=={{Endnotes label}}==
''None''

=={{Further reading label}}==

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceWiki}}
{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceFAIR}}

===On-line articles===
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 1|author=John Gee, William J. Hamblin, and Daniel Peterson|article=And I Saw The Stars--The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=161}}
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 2|author=J. Ward Moody and Michael D. Rhodes|article=Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=162}}
{{ScienceArticles}}

===Print works===
{{SciencePrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun]]

Book of Mormon

2011-07-06T02:57:51Z

EdGoble: /* Anachronisms claimed to exist in the Book of Mormon */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{summary}}
{{BoMPortal}}
<onlyinclude>
=[[Book of Mormon]]=
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Basics
|subject=Book of Mormon basics
|summary=What is the Book of Mormon? This article orients new readers to the nature and content of this volume of scripture.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/List of editions
|subject=List of editions
|summary=
}}
==Translation of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Translation
|subject=Translation
|summary=What do we know about the method used to translate the Book of Mormon? Were the plates sometimes not in the room while Joseph was translating them? Critics claim that each sentence and word in the 1830 Book of Mormon "had supposedly come directly from God."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Witnesses
|subject=Witnesses
|summary=The world was not left with Joseph Smith's testimony alone. The Book of Mormon provided multiple official and unofficial witnesses who corroborated aspects of Joseph's account.Critics have long tried to dismiss or destroy the witnesses' witness. This page links to subpages which discuss various attacks in detail.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Joseph Smith/Seer stones
|subject=Urim and Thummim and seer stones
|summary=Joseph Smith used the Nephite Interpreters as well as his own seer stone (both of which were later referred to as "Urim and Thummim") to translate the Book of Mormon.
}}

==Publication of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Joseph as author and proprietor
|subject=Author and proprietor listed as Joseph Smith
|summary=Joseph Smith is listed as the "Author and Proprietor" of the first edition of the Book of Mormon. Critics use this to claim that Joseph wrote the book himself, despite that fact that the following page clearly states that he translated the book.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Attempt to sell copyright
|subject=Attempt to sell Book of Mormon copyright in Canada
|summary=David Whitmer claimed that Joseph Smith received a revelation and prophesied that Oliver Cowdery and Hiram Page should go to Canada where they would find a man willing to buy the copyright to the Book of Mormon. When they failed to sell the copyright, Whitmer states that Joseph admitted that the revelation had not come from God.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Printing timeframe
|subject=Printing timeframe
|summary="I've heard that the rate at which the first edition of the Book of Mormon was printed could only have occurred miraculously. Is there anything to this claim?"
}}

{{:Book of Mormon/Secular authorship theories}}

==Language used in the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/As a "familiar spirit"
|subject=As a "familiar spirit"
|summary=Critics ask why, if the words "familiar spirit" in Is. 29:4 refer to the Book of Mormon (as used in 2_Ne. 26:16, why does "familiar spirit" always refer to occult practices such as channeling and necromancy everywhere else in the Old Testament?
}}

==Revisions to the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Textual changes
|subject=Textual changes
|summary=The claim is often heard that there are more than 4000 changes to the Book of Mormon text. The majority of these are typographical. Few of the changes are significant. We examine the more noteworthy changes.
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=/Textual changes/"white" changed to "pure"
|subject="white" changed to "pure"
|summary=Critics accuse the Church of attempting to hiding a racially offensive statement.
}}</noinclude>

==Completeness of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/As the most correct book|subject=As the most correct book
|summary=Critics claim that since Joseph stated that it was "the most correct book," that the Book of Mormon should not have contained any errors. Yet, Mormon himself states in the preface that any mistakes contained therein are the mistakes of men.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Contains the fulness of the gospel
|subject=Contains the fulness of the gospel
|summary=If the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the gospel," then why are certain ordinances such as baptism for the dead and eternal marriage not mentioned?
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Why is baptism for the dead not taught
|subject=Baptism for the dead—why is it not taught in the Book of Mormon?
|summary=If the Book of Mormon contains the "fulness of the Gospel," then why does it not mention baptism for the dead.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Polygamy/Book of Mormon condemns the practice
|subject=Book of Mormon condemns polygamy
|summary=Critics use the Book of Jacob to show that the Book of Mormon condemns the practice of polygamy, and then go on to claim that Joseph Smith ignored this restriction by introducing the doctrine of plural marriage.
}}</noinclude>

==Archaeology and the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Archaeology
|subject=Archaeology
|summary=Critics charge that what is known about ancient American archaeology is not consistent with the Book of Mormon account. Sectarian critics often add the claim that the Bible has been "proven" true by archaeology, unlike the Book of Mormon.
}}

==Anachronisms claimed to exist in the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms
|subject=Anachronisms
|summary=Critics point to some items or concepts in the Book of Mormon which they claim are not consistent with what is known about ancient American geography, history, or anthropology. They claim that these "errors" prove that Joseph Smith was producing the Book of Mormon in the 19th century, and that the Book of Mormon is therefore not an ancient record.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Deutero-Isaiah
|subject=Deutero-Isaiah in the Book of Mormon?
|summary=The "Deutero-Isaiah" theory is the claim that parts of Isaiah were written later than others. This theory claims that there were three individual authors, whose works were later compiled together under the name of the first author Isaiah (referred to as "Proto Isaiah"). The critical issue raised is that the Brass Plates of Laban quote from sections of Isaiah that this theory ascribes to Deutero-Isaiah, so how could the Nephites have these writings if they weren't written until after they left Jerusalem?
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Relationship to the Dead Sea Scrolls
|subject=Dead Sea Scrolls and their relationship to the Book of Mormon
|summary=Mistranslations of the King James version of Isaiah have been corrected using the Isaiah version found with the Dead Sea scrolls. Why is it that the quotes from Isaiah contained in the Book of Mormon have the same translation errors contained in the King James version instead of matching the original ancient text?
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Demographics
|subject=Demographics and population numbers
|summary=Do Book of Mormon population numbers grow too rapidly?
}}

==Doctrinal issues related to the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Plain and precious doctrines
|subject=Plain and precious doctrines
|summary=Critics claim that the Book of Mormon is nothing more than a "bad copy of the Bible"; that anyone could have churned out such pedestrian, warmed-over ideas by borrowing liberally from the Bible and his own personal experiences.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Great and abominable church
|subject=Great and abominable church
|summary=What is the "great and abominable church" referred to in the Book of Mormon? Critics claim that Latter-day Saints believe that the scriptural terms "church of the devil," the "great and abominable church," and the "whore of all the earth" refer to a specific religion. Critics claim that the Book of Mormon teaches that "all mainstream Christians fall into the world system know as the devil's church (or Satan's kingdom)."
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Nephi's killing of Laban
|subject=Nephi's killing of Laban
|summary=How can Latter-day Saints point to Nephi's killing of Laban as an example of a positive example of a Book of Mormon character? Wasn't this cold-blooded murder? And doesn't this passage then justify the killing of "the wicked" by anyone who feels that God has told them to do so?
}}

==Book of Mormon Geography==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Geography
|subject=Geography
|summary=he geographical setting of the Book of Mormon has been the subject of serious study and casual speculation since before the book was first published. We describe the various theories and examine the strengths and weaknesses of each.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Archaeology/Hill Cumorah
|subject=Location of the Hill Cumorah
|summary=If Mormon chapter 6 is a literal description of the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites — approximately 100 thousand were killed by swords and axes — why hasn't any evidence of the battle been found at the site the Church identifies as hill Cumorah in western New York state?
}}

==Historicity of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Calendar
|subject=Calendar
|summary= The Book of Mormon calendar is not identical to the calendar used by modern peoples. Learn about Nephite calendar(s) here.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Historicity
|subject=Historicity
|summary= Several efforts have been made to "prove" that what the Book of Mormon has to say about the history of the new world cannot possibly have been the case.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Warfare
|subject=Warfare in the Book of Mormon
|summary=Some criticisms of Book of Mormon warfare are anachronistic; other elements of Book of Mormon warfare contain authentic ancient elements about which Joseph Smith could not have known.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences
|subject=Evidences
|summary=Summary page for evidences supporting the Book of Mormon
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Olive culture
|subject=Olive culture
|summary=Does the Book of Mormon's account of olive culture in Jacob 5 match what we know about this subject? The Book of Mormon provides a remarkably accurate portrait of olive horticulture. There are two points at which the allegory/parable deviates from the known principles of growing olives; in both cases, the allegory's characters draw the reader's attention to these deviations with some amazement. Thus, these 'mistakes' play a dramatic role in demonstrating the allegory/parable's meaning.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Geography/Old World
|subject=Book of Mormon geography in the Old World
|summary=A discussion of the Arabian, or Old World, geography of the Book of Mormon enjoys many advantages over discussion of New World matters. Chief among these is the fact that we know we certainty where the story begins—in Old World Jerusalem. The details of Lehi's desert travels had been extracted from the text by the 1970s. It is important to note how early these models were developed; current-day critics sometimes charge that LDS scholars have "retrofitted" their models to accommodate chance discoveries like "Nahom," but this is false.
}}</noinclude>
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms
|subject=Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon
|summary=The Book of Mormon does indeed have authentic Semitic constructions in it, but LDS need to tread cautiously in establishing them. Each must be evaluated on its own merits. Hebraisms that could have been known to Joseph Smith may still be authentic, and may still enhance our appreciation of the text, but they are weak evidence for Book of Mormon antiquity.
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms/Chiasmus
|subject=Chiasmus
|summary=A literary structure known as "chiasmus" exists in the Book of Mormon. Critics claim that the presence of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is either coincidental, an artifact of the observer, or not impressive since examples of chiastic patterns have been found in the Doctrine and Covenants or other 19th century writing.
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Evidences/Hebraisms/Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon
|subject=Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon
|summary=I have read a talk written by Elder Russell M. Nelson in which he discusses a friend of his who translated the Book of Mormon back into Arabic. What are the facts behind this story and the talk?
}}</noinclude>

==Lamanites and the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/DNA evidence
|subject=DNA evidence
|summary=DNA samples taken from modern Native Americans do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East. Critics argue that this means the Book of Mormon's claim that Native Americans are descended from Lehi must be false, and therefore the Book of Mormon is not an ancient record as Joseph Smith claimed.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites
|subject=Lamanites
}}<noinclude>
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Curse
|subject=Curse
|summary=Critics claim that the Church believed that Lamanites who accepted the Gospel would become light-skinned. "Mormon folklore" claims that Native Americans and Polynesians carry a curse based upon "misdeeds on the part of their ancestors."
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Curse/Red skin
|subject=Red skin curse
|summary=One critic states that the Lamanites were "cursed" with a "red skin."
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Referenced in the Doctrine and Covenants
|subject=Referenced in the Doctrine and Covenants
|summary=Since in the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord refers to American Indians in North America as "Lamanites" (e.g., DC 28:8-9,14, DC 30:6, DC 32:2, DC 54:8), does this cause problems for the Limited Geography Theory (LGT) or issues of Amerindian genetic data?
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians
|subject=Relationship to Amerindians
|summary=Are all Amerindians descendants of Lehi? Critics claim that Church leaders "seem reluctant or powerless to curtail" the belief among Mesoamerican and South American saints that they are descendents of the Lamanites. Critics say that Joseph Smith said that the angel Moroni told him that all American Indians were "literal descendants of Abraham," but that DNA has disproved this.
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship_to_Amerindians/Statements
|subject=Statements
|summary=A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Amerindian origins/identity
}}
{{SummaryItem2
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians
|subject=Relationship to Polynesians
|summary=Critics claim that the Church has expanded the definition of "Lamanite" to Polynesians. Modern day prophets have repeatedly declared that Polynesians are Lamanites. The patriarchal blessings of Polynesians often state that they are of the tribe of Manasseh (through Lehi).
}}
{{SummaryItem3
|link=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians/Statements
|subject=Statements
|summary=A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Polynesian origins/identity
}}</noinclude>

==Book of Mormon textual analysis==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Wordprint studies
|subject=Wordprint studies
|summary=What are wordprints? What do they have to do with the Book of Mormon?
}}
==Truthfulness of the Book of Mormon==
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Moroni's promise
|subject=Moroni's promise
|summary=Critics claim that praying about the Book of Mormon is not an objective standard for determining if the book is true or not, and should therefore not be trusted. They claim that many people have read and prayed about the Book of Mormon and have either received no answer, or that they have received an answer from God that it is false.
}}
{{SummaryItem
|link=Book of Mormon/Stick of Ephraim/Erastus Snow statement
|subject=Stick of Ephraim—Erastus Snow statement
|summary=How is it that the prophesy of the sticks found in Ezekiel 37 is fulfilled in the Book of Mormon if Lehi and Nephi are descendants of Manasseh and not of Ephraim?
}}
</onlyinclude>

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}
[[de:Das Buch Mormon]]
[[fr:Book of Mormon]]

Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun

2011-07-04T22:19:40Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
{{SciencePortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
The Book of Abraham states that “the sun [is said] to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power (Abraham Fac 2,Fig 5),” while astrophysics has shown that “The Sun shines ... because of thermonuclear fusion. It does not get its light from any other star.”

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Response label}}==
There are many scriptures or statements by the prophets that seem to have scientific implications. Unfortunately, they are never couched in modern scientific terms and their meanings are often very obscure. Some faithful saints have made attempts to interpret such things in a way that tries to harmonize them with some current view of science. While some may think that is not the best thing to do, because it is very speculative, at least these faithful explanations have been made in good faith. For example, some saints have made attempts to harmonize the theory of evolution with the gospel. Another example is that some saints have tried to explain the Book of Mormon using current archaeology. It is true that these types of suggestions made by such faithful saints are not authoritative or binding on the Church. But they are genuine, apologetic attempts to come to an understanding, and to build faith. However, they must be treated with extreme caution as anything else must be on subjects that are unsettled.

However, it is definitely a foolish thing that faithless critics purposely try to interpret things that are uncertain in a way that is most at odds with current scientific thought. These explanations by critics are most often made in bad faith, to try to put the Church, its leaders and its scriptures in a bad light. The fact that critics make such interpretations is a ''straw man'' tactic, where they try to make the Book of Abraham and other scriptures to say things when there is no evidence that they actually mean such a thing.

The Book of Abraham quote cited in the criticism above has inspired both faithful attempts at explanation, as well as critical attempts, including the interpretation found on the web site where this criticism appeared. The wording of Joseph Smith’s explanation of Figure 5 in Facsimile 2 of the Book of Abraham is, in fact, very difficult to interpret. Let’s see what some of our options are.

* Energy is never destroyed. It can only change form or be stored when it is absorbed in some fashion, or be re-emitted as some sort of radiation. On a fundamental level, light that is emitted from matter in the form of photons is sometimes being reflected or refracted ''after'' being initially ''absorbed''. Some matter gives off light when it transforms energy that was absorbed into it in some other form. Solar cells work by absorbing photons and re-emitting the energy as electricity. When something heats up when it has been exposed to light, it is because it is absorbing the light energy and storing some of it internally as heat. When heat is emitted from it, that is still light, or photon energy, but it is invisible, and is known as infra-red radiation. The only type of refraction on light that does not involve absorption is gravitational lensing, when gravity acts on photons in to distort their path. In the case of reflection, such as with a mirror, part of the light is reflected back out that hit the surface of the medium. ([http://www.telescope-optics.net/reflection.htm]). In the case of refraction, such as with water or with a lens of some kind, an image is distorted, or the light passing through is changed in its direction. In the case of a prism or a rain-drop, which are types of lenses, the light is split into into its spectra, because the photons are spread out in a bunch of different direction at different wavelengths. In the case of regular "things" that have one "color," light from a light bulb, or from the sun, is absorbed and re-emitted at only one certain wavelength. Now, with a classic light bulb, electric energy is fed into a filament made of some kind of metal. The energy passing through the metal causes it to emit the energy as both light and heat. In the case of a magnifying glass, where the light can burn something, the refraction causes a focusing of all the photons on one point. A laser works in a similar way where a stream of photons is concentrated using lenses and mirrors. The key here in ''all'' interactions between photons and regular matter made of atoms is that the light or other energy is ''absorbed'' into the matter, and then re-emitted as light photons once again. The photons never really ''bounce off'' the matter when reflected, nor does it ever really ''pass through'' the matter when refracted. It is always absorbed and re-emitted in some form. That is the key principle to focus on here.

*In the Solar System, we observe that planets and moons that do not give off their own visible light reflect the light that they receive from the Sun. That light has been absorbed by the surface of such bodies, and re-emitted. However, we note that Jupiter itself, being very large, and having other sources of energy internally gives off more energy than it receives from the Sun in the form of heat and so forth ([http://nineplanets.org/jupiter.html]). But this fact still does not stop it from being true that Jupiter does indeed receive visible light from the Sun. Jupiter, earth, and the other planets of the Solar System do indeed receive light from other stars, even though we receive ''most'' of our light from the Sun. Now, if we extrapolate further from these facts that we have just noted, it is also true that the Sun receives light from other stars, just like we do on earth, because they are visible to us in the night sky. But that light is miniscule compared to the light that the Sun puts out on its own power from its own internal sources (just as in the case of Jupiter). So, just because a celestial orb has its own power source internally, it ''still does borrow light from other celestial orbs''. Or in other words, when a photon hits the surface Sun, the matter in the Sun absorbs it, just like any other matter would when hit with a photon. So, it is true that the light the Sun receives from other stars is miniscule. Yet, ''it is still true that it does receive and absorb such light''. That energy that is absorbed and re-emitted is part of the sum of the output of the energy from the Sun. The Book of Abraham may be referring only to the light that is reflected or borrowed, and is simply not referring on the light or energy that is internally generated. So herein may be found part of the problem in interpretation. People who are aware of modern science may have been focusing so much on the fact that large celestial bodies generate their own energy, and not even thinking about the fact that small quantities of energy are still absorbed from elsewhere. They forget that revelation is given line upon line. The Lord taught Abraham about the ''absorption and transference of energy'', but did not get so specific scientifically as to tell Abraham about nuclear fusion. He left that to be revealed in our day through science.

* It is known that Joseph Smith hid his seer-stone in a hat, and somehow he was able to view some kind of light that emitted from it. That energy that powered that photon emission from the stone came from somewhere, and the stone clearly had no internal light source. Therefore, the stone was absorbing energy from somewhere in some form and re-emitting it in the form of photons. Similarly, the Jaredite light sources were clear stones that the Lord touched that emitted light somehow, not from some internal power source. Therefore, these were gathering energy from some other source, and re-emitting it as photons. Seer stones have been referred to as a type of Urim and Thummim. The scriptures tell us that celestial planets will be great Urims and Thummims (D&C 130: 8-10). When a star explodes in a supernova, what is really happening is that the star's immense atmosphere has been shed. Sometimes the remnant left over is known as a "white dwarf." This remnant is actually the star's original solid core that used to be in the center of the star before the explosion ([http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/dwarfs.html]). Recent science has demonstrated that some white dwarfs are actually composed of highly compressed carbon that amassed from fusion reactions, making it a large diamond ([http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3492919.stm]). If it is true that a rock such as a seer-stone can receive energy and re-emit that as light somehow, and that light is discernible in a dark place like a hat, then it is no more far-fetched to suggest that a star's solid core that is a diamond can act as a Urim and Thummim to receive and re-emit light received from some other source. Our own Sun has that very type of a solid core, and therefore, if this theory hold's true, aside from the fact that the Sun has nuclear reactions in it, also, the Sun's core is a Urim and Thummim that receives energy from other energy sources and re-emits it. If we examine what is happening with the auroras on the earth, the earth's internal magnetic field from the core of the earth is deflecting the charged particles coming from the sun to the poles, and that energy is being absorbed into the atmosphere of the earth from the charged particles. And it is being re-emitted as light energy in the polar regions. Jupiter and other large planets also have large magnetic fields and aurora in the polar regions. It is not far fetched to suggest that perhaps the Sun's immense magnetic fields similarly deflect cosmic rays and other types of energy in charged particles to be absorbed inwards, and then to be re-emitted, following similar principles as how the aurora function on the planets of the solar system.

*Another suggestion is this: To “borrow” means to receive with the intention of returning, especially said of a material object or substance. It may also mean to take and adopt as one’s own, especially said of abstractions or ideas, as in “the composer borrowed his harmonic structure from Bach’s Fugue in D Major.” So what does it mean for the sun to “borrow” its light from Kolob? Is light a material or an abstraction? Does the Sun intend to repay the light it borrowed?

*What, in fact, is meant by 'light' in this context? Doctrine & Covenants 88:7–13, in wording strongly reminiscent of our Book of Abraham quote, states “7 ...this is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made. 8 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made; 9 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made; 10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand. 11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; 12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space — 13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things (emphasis added).” These verses are clearly NOT talking about electromagnetic radiation. Does anyone have a convincing explanation of what they ARE talking about?

*A “medium” can mean a material through which some signal propagates or a means or channel through which something is achieved. What does it mean here? Does it refer to a material or a means?

*What is Kae-e-vanrash? The Book of Abraham says that it is a “grand Key,” or “governing power.” What does that mean? Is Kae-e-vanrash a term for nuclear reactions, gravitation, cosmic rays? Or is it a more spiritual medium such as priesthood or faith, or an organizational structure, or a means used for administrative communications?

And, finally, what are we to understand about the nature of Book of Abraham astronomy? Is it a revelation from God to Abraham explaining the structure of the universe as it would be seen by the astronomers of our day? That is the position of a number of scholars such as Michael Rhodes and J. Ward Moody in the chapter entitled "Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham," Chapter 2 in the book ''Astronomy, Papyrus and Covenant'', the third volume in the series ''Studies in the Book of Abraham''.

Others have another theory that the Book of Abraham represents an ancient "Geocentric" cosmology. John Gee is one of these scholars. Gee, as well as William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson published their views on this as well in the same book in Chapter 1, entitled "'And I Saw The Stars', The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy." We remember that “The Lord said unto me: Abraham, I show these things unto thee before ye go into Egypt, that ye may declare all these words.” {{scripture||Abraham|3|15}}, so that, as John Gee has suggested ([http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2009_The_Larger_Issue.html "The Larger Issue"]), this is simply the teaching that would be easiest for the Egyptians to understand — one that would teach them that Elohim, who dwells near Kolob, rules over than the sun-god, Amen-Re?

Another author has suggested that the Book of Abraham is both a Geocentric cosmology, as well as a cosmology revealed for our day that was intended to be in harmony with modern scientific knowledge. He suggests that the Lord intended it to come forth in a day when it could be understood. He notes that most ancient cosmologies, rather than being solar centric, were actually pole-star centric. The pole star and other geocentric asterisms or constellations are just symbols of the greater reality that God was trying to teach Abraham for the Egyptians. He says that the Book of Abraham Cosmology, when understood in conjunction with what is presented in the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, shows that some central region in space is occupied by large celestial bodies that govern the Sun and other stars gravitationally. The pole-star is a geocentric omphalos, a symbol of this central region around which all else revolves. From a geocentric point of view, the central hieroglyph in the hypocephalus (Facsimile #2 of the Book of Abraham, figure #1) is the pole-star. From a real-life point of view, it is Kolob and the central region of space that it gravitationally dominates, as a grand real-life omphalos. So in that author's view, the Book of Abraham actually teaches ''both'' a Geocentric cosmology as well as an understanding that was revealed to Abraham that is compatible with modern scientific views, the one being a mere reflection of the other.

=={{Conclusion label}}==
Until someone can make a convincing case that their interpretation of these things is the only reasonable one, any faith-promoting proof from Abraham’s astronomy is a flimsy house of cards and any faith-destroying attack on some straw-man interpretation is laughable. Among the more speculative interpretations is the idea that Abraham taught that the photons leaving the surface of the sun originally came from Kolob. Whether any of the photons leaving the surface of the sun come from energy originally emitted from other stars is simply unknown. Such things must be viewed with extreme caution.

=={{Endnotes label}}==
''None''

=={{Further reading label}}==

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceWiki}}
{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceFAIR}}

===On-line articles===
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 1|author=John Gee, William J. Hamblin, and Daniel Peterson|article=And I Saw The Stars--The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=161}}
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 2|author=J. Ward Moody and Michael D. Rhodes|article=Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=162}}
{{ScienceArticles}}

===Print works===
{{SciencePrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun]]

Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun

2011-07-04T18:40:34Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
{{SciencePortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
The Book of Abraham states that “the sun [is said] to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power (Abraham Fac 2,Fig 5),” while astrophysics has shown that “The Sun shines ... because of thermonuclear fusion. It does not get its light from any other star.”

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Response label}}==
There are many scriptures or statements by the prophets that seem to have scientific implications. Unfortunately, they are never couched in modern scientific terms and their meanings are often very obscure. Some faithful saints have made attempts to interpret such things in a way that tries to harmonize them with some current view of science. While some may think that is not the best thing to do, because it is very speculative, at least these faithful explanations have been made in good faith. For example, some saints have made attempts to harmonize the theory of evolution with the gospel. Another example is that some saints have tried to explain the Book of Mormon using current archaeology. It is true that these types of suggestions made by such faithful saints are not authoritative or binding on the Church. But they are genuine, apologetic attempts to come to an understanding, and to build faith. However, they must be treated with extreme caution as anything else must be on subjects that are unsettled.

However, it is definitely a foolish thing that faithless critics purposely try to interpret things that are uncertain in a way that is most at odds with current scientific thought. These explanations by critics are most often made in bad faith, to try to put the Church, its leaders and its scriptures in a bad light. The fact that critics make such interpretations is a ''straw man'' tactic, where they try to make the Book of Abraham and other scriptures to say things when there is no evidence that they actually mean such a thing.

The Book of Abraham quote cited in the criticism above has inspired both faithful attempts at explanation, as well as critical attempts, including the interpretation found on the web site where this criticism appeared. The wording of Joseph Smith’s explanation of Figure 5 in Facsimile 2 of the Book of Abraham is, in fact, very difficult to interpret. Let’s see what some of our options are.

* Energy is never destroyed. It can only change form or be stored when it is absorbed in some fashion, or be re-emitted as some sort of radiation. On a fundamental level, light that is emitted from matter in the form of photons is sometimes being reflected or refracted ''after'' being initially ''absorbed''. Some matter gives off light when it transforms energy that was absorbed into it in some other form. Solar cells work by absorbing photons and re-emitting the energy as electricity. When something heats up when it has been exposed to light, it is because it is absorbing the light energy and storing some of it internally as heat. When heat is emitted from it, that is still light, or photon energy, but it is invisible, and is known as infra-red radiation. The only type of refraction on light that does not involve absorption is gravitational lensing, when gravity acts on photons in to distort their path. In the case of reflection, such as with a mirror, part of the light is reflected back out that hit the surface of the medium. ([http://www.telescope-optics.net/reflection.htm]). In the case of refraction, such as with water or with a lens of some kind, an image is distorted, or the light passing through is changed in its direction. In the case of a prism or a rain-drop, which are types of lenses, the light is split into into its spectra, because the photons are spread out in a bunch of different direction at different wavelengths. In the case of regular "things" that have one "color," light from a light bulb, or from the sun, is absorbed and re-emitted at only one certain wavelength. Now, with a classic light bulb, electric energy is fed into a filament made of some kind of metal. The energy passing through the metal causes it to emit the energy as both light and heat. In the case of a magnifying glass, where the light can burn something, the refraction causes a focusing of all the photons on one point. A laser works in a similar way where a stream of photons is concentrated using lenses and mirrors. The key here in ''all'' interactions between photons and regular matter made of atoms is that the light or other energy is ''absorbed'' into the matter, and then re-emitted as light photons once again. The photons never really ''bounce off'' the matter when reflected, nor does it ever really ''pass through'' the matter when refracted. It is always absorbed and re-emitted in some form. That is the key principle to focus on here.

*In the Solar System, we observe that planets and moons that do not give off their own visible light reflect the light that they receive from the Sun. That light has been absorbed by the surface of such bodies, and re-emitted. However, we note that Jupiter itself, being very large, and having other sources of energy internally gives off more energy than it receives from the Sun in the form of heat and so forth ([http://nineplanets.org/jupiter.html]). But this fact still does not stop it from being true that Jupiter does indeed receive visible light from the Sun. Jupiter, earth, and the other planets of the Solar System do indeed receive light from other stars, even though we receive ''most'' of our light from the Sun. Now, if we extrapolate further from these facts that we have just noted, it is also true that the Sun receives light from other stars, just like we do on earth, because they are visible to us in the night sky. But that light is miniscule compared to the light that the Sun puts out on its own power from its own internal sources (just as in the case of Jupiter). So, just because a celestial orb has its own power source internally, it ''still does borrow light from other celestial orbs''. Or in other words, when a photon hits the surface Sun, the matter in the Sun absorbs it, just like any other matter would when hit with a photon. So, it is true that the light the Sun receives from other stars is miniscule. Yet, ''it is still true that it does receive and absorb such light''. That energy that is absorbed from other sources is part of the sum of the output of the energy from the Sun. The Book of Abraham may be referring only to the light that is reflected or borrowed, and is simply not referring on the light or energy that is internally generated. So herein may be found part of the problem in interpretation. People who are aware of modern science may have been focusing so much on the fact that large celestial bodies generate their own energy, and not even thinking about the fact that small quantities of energy are still absorbed from elsewhere. They forget that revelation is given line upon line. The Lord taught Abraham about the ''absorption and transference of energy'', but did not get so specific scientifically as to tell Abraham about nuclear fusion. He left that to be revealed in our day through science.

* It is known that Joseph Smith hid his seer-stone in a hat, and somehow he was able to view some kind of light that emitted from it. That energy that powered that photon emission from the stone came from somewhere, and the stone clearly had no internal light source. Therefore, the stone was absorbing energy from somewhere in some form and re-emitting it in the form of photons. Similarly, the Jaredite light sources were clear stones that the Lord touched that emitted light somehow, not from some internal power source. Therefore, these were gathering energy from some other source, and re-emitting it as photons. Seer stones have been referred to as a type of Urim and Thummim. The scriptures tell us that celestial planets will be great Urims and Thummims (D&C 130: 8-10). When a star explodes in a supernova, what is really happening is that the star's immense atmosphere has been shed. Sometimes the remnant left over is known as a "white dwarf." This remnant is actually the star's original solid core that used to be in the center of the star before the explosion ([http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/dwarfs.html]). Recent science has demonstrated that some white dwarfs are actually composed of highly compressed carbon that amassed from fusion reactions, making it a large diamond ([http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3492919.stm]). If it is true that a rock such as a seer-stone can receive energy and re-emit that as light somehow, and that light is discernible in a dark place like a hat, then it is no more far-fetched to suggest that a star's solid core that is a diamond can act as a Urim and Thummim to receive and re-emit light received from some other source. Our own Sun has that very type of a solid core, and therefore, if this theory hold's true, aside from the fact that the Sun has nuclear reactions in it, also, the Sun's core is a Urim and Thummim that receives energy from other energy sources and re-emits it. If we examine what is happening with the auroras on the earth, the earth's internal magnetic field from the core of the earth is deflecting the charged particles coming from the sun to the poles, and that energy is being absorbed into the atmosphere of the earth from the charged particles. And it is being re-emitted as light energy in the polar regions. Jupiter and other large planets also have large magnetic fields and aurora in the polar regions. It is not far fetched to suggest that perhaps the Sun's immense magnetic fields similarly deflect cosmic rays and other types of energy in charged particles to be absorbed inwards, and then to be re-emitted, following similar principles as how the aurora function on the planets of the solar system.

*Another suggestion is this: To “borrow” means to receive with the intention of returning, especially said of a material object or substance. It may also mean to take and adopt as one’s own, especially said of abstractions or ideas, as in “the composer borrowed his harmonic structure from Bach’s Fugue in D Major.” So what does it mean for the sun to “borrow” its light from Kolob? Is light a material or an abstraction? Does the Sun intend to repay the light it borrowed?

*What, in fact, is meant by 'light' in this context? Doctrine & Covenants 88:7–13, in wording strongly reminiscent of our Book of Abraham quote, states “7 ...this is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made. 8 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made; 9 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made; 10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand. 11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; 12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space — 13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things (emphasis added).” These verses are clearly NOT talking about electromagnetic radiation. Does anyone have a convincing explanation of what they ARE talking about?

*A “medium” can mean a material through which some signal propagates or a means or channel through which something is achieved. What does it mean here? Does it refer to a material or a means?

*What is Kae-e-vanrash? The Book of Abraham says that it is a “grand Key,” or “governing power.” What does that mean? Is Kae-e-vanrash a term for nuclear reactions, gravitation, cosmic rays? Or is it a more spiritual medium such as priesthood or faith, or an organizational structure, or a means used for administrative communications?

And, finally, what are we to understand about the nature of Book of Abraham astronomy? Is it a revelation from God to Abraham explaining the structure of the universe as it would be seen by the astronomers of our day? That is the position of a number of scholars such as Michael Rhodes and J. Ward Moody in the chapter entitled "Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham," Chapter 2 in the book ''Astronomy, Papyrus and Covenant'', the third volume in the series ''Studies in the Book of Abraham''.

Others have another theory that the Book of Abraham represents an ancient "Geocentric" cosmology. John Gee is one of these scholars. Gee, as well as William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson published their views on this as well in the same book in Chapter 1, entitled "'And I Saw The Stars', The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy." We remember that “The Lord said unto me: Abraham, I show these things unto thee before ye go into Egypt, that ye may declare all these words.” {{scripture||Abraham|3|15}}, so that, as John Gee has suggested ([http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2009_The_Larger_Issue.html "The Larger Issue"]), this is simply the teaching that would be easiest for the Egyptians to understand — one that would teach them that Elohim, who dwells near Kolob, rules over than the sun-god, Amen-Re?

Another author has suggested that the Book of Abraham is both a Geocentric cosmology, as well as a cosmology revealed for our day that was intended to be in harmony with modern scientific knowledge. He suggests that the Lord intended it to come forth in a day when it could be understood. He notes that most ancient cosmologies, rather than being solar centric, were actually pole-star centric. The pole star and other geocentric asterisms or constellations are just symbols of the greater reality that God was trying to teach Abraham for the Egyptians. He says that the Book of Abraham Cosmology, when understood in conjunction with what is presented in the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, shows that some central region in space is occupied by large celestial bodies that govern the Sun and other stars gravitationally. The pole-star is a geocentric omphalos, a symbol of this central region around which all else revolves. From a geocentric point of view, the central hieroglyph in the hypocephalus (Facsimile #2 of the Book of Abraham, figure #1) is the pole-star. From a real-life point of view, it is Kolob and the central region of space that it gravitationally dominates, as a grand real-life omphalos. So in that author's view, the Book of Abraham actually teaches ''both'' a Geocentric cosmology as well as an understanding that was revealed to Abraham that is compatible with modern scientific views, the one being a mere reflection of the other.

=={{Conclusion label}}==
Until someone can make a convincing case that their interpretation of these things is the only reasonable one, any faith-promoting proof from Abraham’s astronomy is a flimsy house of cards and any faith-destroying attack on some straw-man interpretation is laughable. Among the more speculative interpretations is the idea that Abraham taught that the photons leaving the surface of the sun originally came from Kolob. Whether any of the photons leaving the surface of the sun come from energy originally emitted from other stars is simply unknown. Such things must be viewed with extreme caution.

=={{Endnotes label}}==
''None''

=={{Further reading label}}==

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceWiki}}
{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceFAIR}}

===On-line articles===
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 1|author=John Gee, William J. Hamblin, and Daniel Peterson|article=And I Saw The Stars--The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=161}}
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 2|author=J. Ward Moody and Michael D. Rhodes|article=Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=162}}
{{ScienceArticles}}

===Print works===
{{SciencePrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun]]

Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun

2011-07-04T18:22:02Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
{{BofAPortal}}
{{SciencePortal}}
=={{Criticism label}}==
The Book of Abraham states that “the sun [is said] to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power (Abraham Fac 2,Fig 5),” while astrophysics has shown that “The Sun shines ... because of thermonuclear fusion. It does not get its light from any other star.”

{{CriticalSources}}

=={{Response label}}==
There are many scriptures or statements by the prophets that seem to have scientific implications. Unfortunately, they are never couched in modern scientific terms and their meanings are often very obscure. Some faithful saints have made attempts to interpret such things in a way that tries to harmonize them with some current view of science. While some may think that is not the best thing to do, because it is very speculative, at least these faithful explanations have been made in good faith. For example, some saints have made attempts to harmonize the theory of evolution with the gospel. Another example is that some saints have tried to explain the Book of Mormon using current archaeology. It is true that these types of suggestions made by such faithful saints are not authoritative or binding on the Church. But they are genuine, apologetic attempts to come to an understanding, and to build faith. However, they must be treated with extreme caution as anything else must be on subjects that are unsettled.

However, it is definitely a foolish thing that faithless critics purposely try to interpret things that are uncertain in a way that is most at odds with current scientific thought. These explanations by critics are most often made in bad faith, to try to put the Church, its leaders and its scriptures in a bad light. The fact that critics make such interpretations is a ''straw man'' tactic, where they try to make the Book of Abraham and other scriptures to say things when there is no evidence that they actually mean such a thing.

The Book of Abraham quote cited in the criticism above has inspired both faithful attempts at explanation, as well as critical attempts, including the interpretation found on the web site where this criticism appeared. The wording of Joseph Smith’s explanation of Figure 5 in Facsimile 2 of the Book of Abraham is, in fact, very difficult to interpret. Let’s see what some of our options are.

* Energy is never destroyed. It can only change form or be stored when it is absorbed in some fashion, or be re-emitted as some sort of radiation. On a fundamental level, light that is emitted from matter in the form of photons is sometimes being reflected or refracted ''after'' being initially ''absorbed''. Some matter gives off light when it transforms energy that was absorbed into it in some other form. Solar cells work by absorbing photons and re-emitting the energy as electricity. When something heats up when it has been exposed to light, it is because it is absorbing the light energy and storing some of it internally as heat. When heat is emitted from it, that is still light, or photon energy, but it is invisible, and is known as infra-red radiation. The only type of refraction on light that does not involve absorption is gravitational lensing, when gravity acts on photons in to distort their path. In the case of reflection, such as with a mirror, part of the light is reflected back out that hit the surface of the medium. ([http://www.telescope-optics.net/reflection.htm]). In the case of refraction, such as with water or with a lens of some kind, an image is distorted, or the light passing through is changed in its direction. In the case of a prism or a rain-drop, which are types of lenses, the light is split into into its spectra, because the photons are spread out in a bunch of different direction at different wavelengths. In the case of regular "things" that have one "color," light from a light bulb, or from the sun, is absorbed and re-emitted at only one certain wavelength. Now, with a classic light bulb, electric energy is fed into a filament made of some kind of metal. The energy passing through the metal causes it to emit the energy as both light and heat. In the case of a magnifying glass, where the light can burn something, the refraction causes a focusing of all the photons on one point. A laser works in a similar way where a stream of photons is concentrated using lenses and mirrors. The key here in ''all'' interactions between photons and regular matter made of atoms is that the light or other energy is ''absorbed'' into the matter, and then re-emitted as light photons once again. The photons never really ''bounce off'' the matter when reflected, nor does it ever really ''pass through'' the matter when refracted. It is always absorbed and re-emitted in some form. That is the key principle to focus on here.

*In the Solar System, we observe that planets and moons that do not give off their own visible light reflect the light that they receive from the Sun. That light has been absorbed by the surface of such bodies, and re-emitted. However, we note that Jupiter itself, being very large, and having other sources of energy internally gives off more energy than it receives from the Sun in the form of heat and so forth ([http://nineplanets.org/jupiter.html]). But this fact still does not stop it from being true that Jupiter does indeed receive visible light from the Sun. Jupiter, earth, and the other planets of the Solar System do indeed receive light from other stars, even though we receive ''most'' of our light from the Sun. Now, if we extrapolate further from these facts that we have just noted, it is also true that the Sun receives light from other stars, just like we do on earth, because they are visible to us in the night sky. But that light is miniscule compared to the light that the Sun puts out on its own power from its own internal sources (just as in the case of Jupiter). So, just because a celestial orb has its own power source internally, it ''still does borrow light from other celestial orbs''. Or in other words, when a photon hits the surface Sun, the matter in the Sun absorbs it, just like any other matter would when hit with a photon. So, it is true that the light the Sun receives from other stars is miniscule. Yet, ''it is still true that it does receive and absorb such light''. That energy that is absorbed from other sources is part of the sum of the output of the energy from the Sun. The Book of Abraham may be referring only to the light that is reflected or borrowed, and is simply not focusing on the light or energy that is internally generated.

* It is known that Joseph Smith hid his seer-stone in a hat, and somehow he was able to view some kind of light that emitted from it. That energy that powered that photon emission from the stone came from somewhere, and the stone clearly had no internal light source. Therefore, the stone was absorbing energy from somewhere in some form and re-emitting it in the form of photons. Similarly, the Jaredite light sources were clear stones that the Lord touched that emitted light somehow, not from some internal power source. Therefore, these were gathering energy from some other source, and re-emitting it as photons. Seer stones have been referred to as a type of Urim and Thummim. The scriptures tell us that celestial planets will be great Urims and Thummims (D&C 130: 8-10). When a star explodes in a supernova, what is really happening is that the star's immense atmosphere has been shed. Sometimes the remnant left over is known as a "white dwarf." This remnant is actually the star's original solid core that used to be in the center of the star before the explosion ([http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/dwarfs.html]). Recent science has demonstrated that some white dwarfs are actually composed of highly compressed carbon that amassed from fusion reactions, making it a large diamond ([http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3492919.stm]). If it is true that a rock such as a seer-stone can receive energy and re-emit that as light somehow, and that light is discernible in a dark place like a hat, then it is no more far-fetched to suggest that a star's solid core that is a diamond can act as a Urim and Thummim to receive and re-emit light received from some other source. Our own Sun has that very type of a solid core, and therefore, if this theory hold's true, aside from the fact that the Sun has nuclear reactions in it, also, the Sun's core is a Urim and Thummim that receives energy from other energy sources and re-emits it. If we examine what is happening with the auroras on the earth, the earth's internal magnetic field from the core of the earth is deflecting the charged particles coming from the sun to the poles, and that energy is being absorbed into the atmosphere of the earth from the charged particles. And it is being re-emitted as light energy in the polar regions. Jupiter and other large planets also have large magnetic fields and aurora in the polar regions. It is not far fetched to suggest that perhaps the Sun's immense magnetic fields similarly deflect cosmic rays and other types of energy in charged particles to be absorbed inwards, and then to be re-emitted, following similar principles as how the aurora function on the planets of the solar system.

*Another suggestion is this: To “borrow” means to receive with the intention of returning, especially said of a material object or substance. It may also mean to take and adopt as one’s own, especially said of abstractions or ideas, as in “the composer borrowed his harmonic structure from Bach’s Fugue in D Major.” So what does it mean for the sun to “borrow” its light from Kolob? Is light a material or an abstraction? Does the Sun intend to repay the light it borrowed?

*What, in fact, is meant by 'light' in this context? Doctrine & Covenants 88:7–13, in wording strongly reminiscent of our Book of Abraham quote, states “7 ...this is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made. 8 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made; 9 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made; 10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand. 11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; 12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space — 13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things (emphasis added).” These verses are clearly NOT talking about electromagnetic radiation. Does anyone have a convincing explanation of what they ARE talking about?

*A “medium” can mean a material through which some signal propagates or a means or channel through which something is achieved. What does it mean here? Does it refer to a material or a means?

*What is Kae-e-vanrash? The Book of Abraham says that it is a “grand Key,” or “governing power.” What does that mean? Is Kae-e-vanrash a term for nuclear reactions, gravitation, cosmic rays? Or is it a more spiritual medium such as priesthood or faith, or an organizational structure, or a means used for administrative communications?

And, finally, what are we to understand about the nature of Book of Abraham astronomy? Is it a revelation from God to Abraham explaining the structure of the universe as it would be seen by the astronomers of our day? That is the position of a number of scholars such as Michael Rhodes and J. Ward Moody in the chapter entitled "Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham," Chapter 2 in the book ''Astronomy, Papyrus and Covenant'', the third volume in the series ''Studies in the Book of Abraham''.

Others have another theory that the Book of Abraham represents an ancient "Geocentric" cosmology. John Gee is one of these scholars. Gee, as well as William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson published their views on this as well in the same book in Chapter 1, entitled "'And I Saw The Stars', The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy." We remember that “The Lord said unto me: Abraham, I show these things unto thee before ye go into Egypt, that ye may declare all these words.” {{scripture||Abraham|3|15}}, so that, as John Gee has suggested ([http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2009_The_Larger_Issue.html "The Larger Issue"]), this is simply the teaching that would be easiest for the Egyptians to understand — one that would teach them that Elohim, who dwells near Kolob, rules over than the sun-god, Amen-Re?

Another author has suggested that the Book of Abraham is both a Geocentric cosmology, as well as a cosmology revealed for our day that was intended to be in harmony with modern scientific knowledge. He suggests that the Lord intended it to come forth in a day when it could be understood. He notes that most ancient cosmologies, rather than being solar centric, were actually pole-star centric. The pole star and other geocentric asterisms or constellations are just symbols of the greater reality that God was trying to teach Abraham for the Egyptians. He says that the Book of Abraham Cosmology, when understood in conjunction with what is presented in the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, shows that some central region in space is occupied by large celestial bodies that govern the Sun and other stars gravitationally. The pole-star is a geocentric omphalos, a symbol of this central region around which all else revolves. From a geocentric point of view, the central hieroglyph in the hypocephalus (Facsimile #2 of the Book of Abraham, figure #1) is the pole-star. From a real-life point of view, it is Kolob and the central region of space that it gravitationally dominates, as a grand real-life omphalos. So in that author's view, the Book of Abraham actually teaches ''both'' a Geocentric cosmology as well as an understanding that was revealed to Abraham that is compatible with modern scientific views, the one being a mere reflection of the other.

=={{Conclusion label}}==
Until someone can make a convincing case that their interpretation of these things is the only reasonable one, any faith-promoting proof from Abraham’s astronomy is a flimsy house of cards and any faith-destroying attack on some straw-man interpretation is laughable. Among the more speculative interpretations is the idea that Abraham taught that the photons leaving the surface of the sun originally came from Kolob. Whether any of the photons leaving the surface of the sun come from energy originally emitted from other stars is simply unknown. Such things must be viewed with extreme caution.

=={{Endnotes label}}==
''None''

=={{Further reading label}}==

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceWiki}}
{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}

===FAIR Wiki===
{{ScienceFAIR}}

===On-line articles===
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 1|author=John Gee, William J. Hamblin, and Daniel Peterson|article=And I Saw The Stars--The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=161}}
* {{Book:Gee Hauglid:Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant|pages=Chapter 2|author=J. Ward Moody and Michael D. Rhodes|article=Astronomy and the Creation in the Book of Abraham}} {{link|url=http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=162}}
{{ScienceArticles}}

===Print works===
{{SciencePrint}}
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

[[fr:Book of Abraham/Astronomy/Kolob-Sun]]

Mormon urban legends or folklore/Cain as Bigfoot

2011-06-30T19:20:34Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

==Cain as Bigfoot, or Cain "Translated"==

==={{Claim label}}===

Cain—son of Adam and Eve and the first murderer—still walks the earth today.

==={{Response label}}===

Nowhere in scripture, ancient or modern, is it declared that Cain would or did live beyond his mortal years. No mention is made of his death, but we do read of Lamech, Cain’s great-great-great-grandson, who made the same covenant with Satan that Cain did. This covenant is described as being had “from [or since] the days of Cain,” which seems to indicate that Cain was dead by this time. (See {{s||Moses|5|51}}.)

In any case, the scripture is ambiguous, and so the door is left open for all kinds of speculation about what happened to the man from the land of Nod. And hence began a Mormon urban legend. For what its worth, if an apocryphal source can be trusted at all, the ''Book of Jasher'' does happen to give an account of the death of Cain:

:And Lamech was old and advanced in years, and his eyes were dim that he could not see, and Tubal Cain, his son, was leading him and it was one day that Lamech went into the field and Tubal Cain his son was with him, and whilst they were walking in the field, Cain the son of Adam advanced towards them; for Lamech was very old and could not see much, and Tubal Cain his son was very young. And Tubal Cain told his father to draw his bow, and with the arrows he smote Cain, who was yet far off, and he slew him, for he appeared to them to be an animal. And the arrows entered Cain's body although he was distant from them, and he fell to the ground and died. And the Lord requited Cain's evil according to his wickedness, which he had done to his brother Abel, according to the word of the Lord which he had spoken. And it came to pass when Cain had died, that Lamech and Tubal went to see the animal which they had slain, and they saw, and behold Cain their grandfather was fallen dead upon the earth. (Jasher 2:26-30)

It is an odd coincidence that in the folklore accounts, Cain appears as some sort of hideous creature, even if he is just a spirit, and in this apocryphal account, his descendants mistook him for an animal. But this is nothing but coincidence. Whatever the case, Cain is definitely dead.

The notion that Cain somehow lived on, survived the Flood, and roams the earth today, is familiar to modern members mostly based on a single claim of David W. Patten supposedly meeting “a very strange personage,” dark and hairy, who “was a wanderer in the earth and and traveled to and fro.” (Thus managing to tie Cain to another popular urban legend: Bigfoot.)

This account was published in a biography of Patten written by Lycurgus Wilson in 1900. Wilson had a letter from Abraham Smoot giving his recollection of what Patten said. In historical parlance this is what is called a late, third-hand account—the sort of thing most historians would dismiss. This kind of testimony is simply unreliable, tainted by the passage of time and the fog of memory.

The story probably would have been forgotten if then-Elder Spencer W. Kimball hadn’t included it on pages 127–28 of ''The Miracle of Forgiveness''. Elder Kimball’s book has become a staple of Mormon reading, the book that many bishops give to members struggling with sin and many mission presidents assign their missionaries to read.

The passage where Kimball quotes Wilson is really unnecessary to the chapter itself, which is about unforgivable sins, including murder. He cites several examples of murderers in the scriptures, beginning with Cain. He then throws in, almost as a passing idea, “an interesting story” about Cain.

Matthew Bowman wrote that Wesley Smith, the brother of President Joseph Fielding Smith, was reportedly also almost attacked by a hideous being. He rebuked the entity with his priesthood, similar to the Patten story. He then related the story to President Smith, who naturally identified this character as Cain, basing that identification on the David Patten story. Even if we give Wesley Smith the benefit of the doubt, and grant that some evil spirit made an appearance, using critical thinking we can surmise that there is no justification for even making that identification of Cain. Any evil spirit theoretically could appear as a hideous being. Other folklorish stories are similar in their details.

It appears, according to Bowman, that the conflation of the myths of the wandering Cain and Bigfoot started around 1980 with some Bigfoot sightings in South Weber, Utah, and by 1990, those residents were associating their Bigfoot sightings with Cain. (''Journal of Mormon History'', Fall 2007, "A Mormon Bigfoot: David Patten's Cain and the Conception of Evil in LDS Folklore", pp. 62-82). An author named Shane Lester has even gone so far as to write a fictional book based on the conflation of these stories called the ''Clan of Cain: The Genesis of Bigfoot.'' However, oddly, Lester made the following claim, referring to the Patten story...

:A recently uncovered document reveals a possible connection between the origins of the Mormon Church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) and Bigfoot. Searching through the archives of historical church documents the author, Shane Lester, uncovered an extraordinary story that becomes the foundation of a new theory about the origins of Bigfoot. "I uncovered an obscure historical document that sheds new light on the Bigfoot mystery. I used this encounter as the basis for a fictional story that links the mystical, legend of Bigfoot to the origins of Mormonism," says author, Shane Lester ([http://web.archive.org/web/20080609233412/http://www.mormonstoday.com/011207/A2Bigfoot01.shtml])

He is he taking credit for "uncovering" some historical document from Church archives, as if the story is news. The story that he is referring to is unambiguously Elder Patten's story of the encounter with Cain in the first chapter of the book. Lester originally had offered a sneak-peek at that first chapter on his site. ([http://web.archive.org/web/20040701233040/http://clanofcain.com/]}. But the story about Patten and Cain has been publicly available since Wilson's book on Patten came out in the year 1900 (a century before Lester wrote his book). Furthermore, the account is anything but obscure. It is well-known because of President Kimball's book. He claims the Cain-is-Bigfoot theory is "new" and that it sheds "new light" on Bigfoot. The theory has been around for several decades now, and it is very unlikely that Lester was the one to originate it. As we just saw in a preceding paragraph, Bowman documented where that came from. Thus, Lester is making claims that are utterly baseless. The ''Clan of Cain'' isn't Lester's only book that attempts to link Mormons with occult themes. He also wrote a book on Mormons and a theory linking them to extraterrestrials called ''The Conversion Conspiracy'', which also features LDS folkloric themes. ([http://www.amazon.com/Conversion-Conspiracy-Shane-Lester/dp/1601453337]).

Why is it that some LDS people give these stories doctrinal credence? Does that not manifest a measure of gullibility? Is it only because President Kimball quoted it? They give Cain some kind of quasi-translated status based on the story alone, without question, as if he is some kind of hideous undead creature akin to a vampire or zombie that can appear and attack people physically. Why is no skepticism applied to the story, and to the new folklore that has arisen around it? Wasn't Cain a son of perdition, a liar from the beginning? Would someone believe claims from Mark Hoffman? Then why should they believe possible words from the mouth of Cain? As far as can be discerned from the folklore account, Elder Patten did not test Cain by shaking his hand to see if he was truly corporeal. What justification would there be to believe the words of a son of perdition? It doesn't make sense that any good-thinking person would give those claims credence.

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

Mormon urban legends or folklore/Cain as Bigfoot

2011-06-30T19:16:58Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

==Cain as Bigfoot, or Cain "Translated"==

==={{Claim label}}===

Cain—son of Adam and Eve and the first murderer—still walks the earth today.

==={{Response label}}===

Nowhere in scripture, ancient or modern, is it declared that Cain would or did live beyond his mortal years. No mention is made of his death, but we do read of Lamech, Cain’s great-great-great-grandson, who made the same covenant with Satan that Cain did. This covenant is described as being had “from [or since] the days of Cain,” which seems to indicate that Cain was dead by this time. (See {{s||Moses|5|51}}.)

In any case, the scripture is ambiguous, and so the door is left open for all kinds of speculation about what happened to the man from the land of Nod. And hence began a Mormon urban legend. For what its worth, if an apocryphal source can be trusted at all, the ''Book of Jasher'' does happen to give an account of the death of Cain:

:And Lamech was old and advanced in years, and his eyes were dim that he could not see, and Tubal Cain, his son, was leading him and it was one day that Lamech went into the field and Tubal Cain his son was with him, and whilst they were walking in the field, Cain the son of Adam advanced towards them; for Lamech was very old and could not see much, and Tubal Cain his son was very young. And Tubal Cain told his father to draw his bow, and with the arrows he smote Cain, who was yet far off, and he slew him, for he appeared to them to be an animal. And the arrows entered Cain's body although he was distant from them, and he fell to the ground and died. And the Lord requited Cain's evil according to his wickedness, which he had done to his brother Abel, according to the word of the Lord which he had spoken. And it came to pass when Cain had died, that Lamech and Tubal went to see the animal which they had slain, and they saw, and behold Cain their grandfather was fallen dead upon the earth. (Jasher 2:26-30)

It is an odd coincidence that in the folklore accounts, Cain appears as some sort of hideous creature, even if he is just a spirit, and in this apocryphal account, his descendants mistook him for an animal. But this is nothing but coincidence. Whatever the case, Cain is definitely dead.

The notion that Cain somehow lived on, survived the Flood, and roams the earth today, is familiar to modern members mostly based on a single claim of David W. Patten supposedly meeting “a very strange personage,” dark and hairy, who “was a wanderer in the earth and and traveled to and fro.” (Thus managing to tie Cain to another popular urban legend: Bigfoot.)

This account was published in a biography of Patten written by Lycurgus Wilson in 1900. Wilson had a letter from Abraham Smoot giving his recollection of what Patten said. In historical parlance this is what is called a late, third-hand account—the sort of thing most historians would dismiss. This kind of testimony is simply unreliable, tainted by the passage of time and the fog of memory.

The story probably would have been forgotten if then-Elder Spencer W. Kimball hadn’t included it on pages 127–28 of ''The Miracle of Forgiveness''. Elder Kimball’s book has become a staple of Mormon reading, the book that many bishops give to members struggling with sin and many mission presidents assign their missionaries to read.

The passage where Kimball quotes Wilson is really unnecessary to the chapter itself, which is about unforgivable sins, including murder. He cites several examples of murderers in the scriptures, beginning with Cain. He then throws in, almost as a passing idea, “an interesting story” about Cain.

Matthew Bowman wrote that Wesley Smith, the brother of President Joseph Fielding Smith, was reportedly also almost attacked by a hideous being. He rebuked the entity with his priesthood, similar to the Patten story. He then related the story to President Smith, who naturally identified this character as Cain, basing that identification on the David Patten story. Even if we give Wesley Smith the benefit of the doubt, and grant that some evil spirit made an appearance, using critical thinking we can surmise that there is no justification for even making that identification of Cain. Any evil spirit theoretically could appear as a hideous being. Other folklorish stories are similar in their details.

It appears, according to Bowman, that the conflation of the myths of the wandering Cain and Bigfoot started around 1980 with some Bigfoot sightings in South Weber, Utah, and by 1990, those residents were associating their Bigfoot sightings with Cain. (''Journal of Mormon History'', Fall 2007, "A Mormon Bigfoot: David Patten's Cain and the Conception of Evil in LDS Folklore", pp. 62-82). An author named Shane Lester has even gone so far as to write a fictional book based on the conflation of these stories called the ''Clan of Cain: The Genesis of Bigfoot.'' However, oddly, Lester made the following claim, referring to the Patten story...

:A recently uncovered document reveals a possible connection between the origins of the Mormon Church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) and Bigfoot. Searching through the archives of historical church documents the author, Shane Lester, uncovered an extraordinary story that becomes the foundation of a new theory about the origins of Bigfoot. "I uncovered an obscure historical document that sheds new light on the Bigfoot mystery. I used this encounter as the basis for a fictional story that links the mystical, legend of Bigfoot to the origins of Mormonism," says author, Shane Lester ([http://web.archive.org/web/20080609233412/http://www.mormonstoday.com/011207/A2Bigfoot01.shtml])

He is he taking credit for "uncovering" some historical document from Church archives, as if the story is news. The story that he is referring to is unambiguously Elder Patten's story of the encounter with Cain in the first chapter of the book. Lester originally had offered a sneak-peek at that first chapter on his site. ([http://web.archive.org/web/20040701233040/http://clanofcain.com/]}. But the story about Patten and Cain has been publicly available since Wilson's book on Patten came out in the year 1900 (a century before Lester wrote his book). Furthermore, the account is anything but obscure. It is well-known because of President Kimball's book. He claims the Cain-is-Bigfoot theory is "new" and that it sheds "new light" on Bigfoot. The theory has been around for several decades now, and it is very unlikely that Lester was the one to originate it. As we just saw in a preceding paragraph, Bowman documented where that came from. Thus, Lester is making claims that are utterly baseless. The ''Clan of Cain'' isn't Lester's only book that attempts to link Mormons with occult themes. He also wrote a book on Mormons and a theory linking them to extraterrestrials called ''The Conversion Conspiracy''. ([http://www.amazon.com/Conversion-Conspiracy-Shane-Lester/dp/1601453337]).

Why is it that some LDS people give these stories doctrinal credence? Does that not manifest a measure of gullibility? Is it only because President Kimball quoted it? They give Cain some kind of quasi-translated status based on the story alone, without question, as if he is some kind of hideous undead creature akin to a vampire or zombie that can appear and attack people physically. Why is no skepticism applied to the story, and to the new folklore that has arisen around it? Wasn't Cain a son of perdition, a liar from the beginning? Would someone believe claims from Mark Hoffman? Then why should they believe possible words from the mouth of Cain? As far as can be discerned from the folklore account, Elder Patten did not test Cain by shaking his hand to see if he was truly corporeal. What justification would there be to believe the words of a son of perdition? It doesn't make sense that any good-thinking person would give those claims credence.

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}

Mormon urban legends or folklore/Cain as Bigfoot

2011-06-30T19:04:53Z

EdGoble: /* {{Response label}} */

{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}

==Cain as Bigfoot, or Cain "Translated"==

==={{Claim label}}===

Cain—son of Adam and Eve and the first murderer—still walks the earth today.

==={{Response label}}===

Nowhere in scripture, ancient or modern, is it declared that Cain would or did live beyond his mortal years. No mention is made of his death, but we do read of Lamech, Cain’s great-great-great-grandson, who made the same covenant with Satan that Cain did. This covenant is described as being had “from [or since] the days of Cain,” which seems to indicate that Cain was dead by this time. (See {{s||Moses|5|51}}.)

In any case, the scripture is ambiguous, and so the door is left open for all kinds of speculation about what happened to the man from the land of Nod. And hence began a Mormon urban legend. For what its worth, if an apocryphal source can be trusted at all, the ''Book of Jasher'' does happen to give an account of the death of Cain:

:And Lamech was old and advanced in years, and his eyes were dim that he could not see, and Tubal Cain, his son, was leading him and it was one day that Lamech went into the field and Tubal Cain his son was with him, and whilst they were walking in the field, Cain the son of Adam advanced towards them; for Lamech was very old and could not see much, and Tubal Cain his son was very young. And Tubal Cain told his father to draw his bow, and with the arrows he smote Cain, who was yet far off, and he slew him, for he appeared to them to be an animal. And the arrows entered Cain's body although he was distant from them, and he fell to the ground and died. And the Lord requited Cain's evil according to his wickedness, which he had done to his brother Abel, according to the word of the Lord which he had spoken. And it came to pass when Cain had died, that Lamech and Tubal went to see the animal which they had slain, and they saw, and behold Cain their grandfather was fallen dead upon the earth. (Jasher 2:26-30)

It is an odd coincidence that in the folklore accounts, Cain appears as some sort of hideous creature, even if he is just a spirit, and in this apocryphal account, his descendants mistook him for an animal. But this is nothing but coincidence. Whatever the case, Cain is definitely dead.

The notion that Cain somehow lived on, survived the Flood, and roams the earth today, is familiar to modern members mostly based on a single claim of David W. Patten supposedly meeting “a very strange personage,” dark and hairy, who “was a wanderer in the earth and and traveled to and fro.” (Thus managing to tie Cain to another popular urban legend: Bigfoot.)

This account was published in a biography of Patten written by Lycurgus Wilson in 1900. Wilson had a letter from Abraham Smoot giving his recollection of what Patten said. In historical parlance this is what is called a late, third-hand account—the sort of thing most historians would dismiss. This kind of testimony is simply unreliable, tainted by the passage of time and the fog of memory.

The story probably would have been forgotten if then-Elder Spencer W. Kimball hadn’t included it on pages 127–28 of ''The Miracle of Forgiveness''. Elder Kimball’s book has become a staple of Mormon reading, the book that many bishops give to members struggling with sin and many mission presidents assign their missionaries to read.

The passage where Kimball quotes Wilson is really unnecessary to the chapter itself, which is about unforgivable sins, including murder. He cites several examples of murderers in the scriptures, beginning with Cain. He then throws in, almost as a passing idea, “an interesting story” about Cain.

Matthew Bowman wrote that Wesley Smith, the brother of President Joseph Fielding Smith, was reportedly also almost attacked by a hideous being. He rebuked the entity with his priesthood, similar to the Patten story. He then related the story to President Smith, who naturally identified this character as Cain, basing that identification on the David Patten story. Even if we give Wesley Smith the benefit of the doubt, and grant that some evil spirit made an appearance, using critical thinking we can surmise that there is no justification for even making that identification of Cain. Any evil spirit theoretically could appear as a hideous being. Other folklorish stories are similar in their details.

It appears, according to Bowman, that the conflation of the myths of the wandering Cain and Bigfoot started around 1980 with some Bigfoot sightings in South Weber, Utah, and by 1990, those residents were associating their Bigfoot sightings with Cain. (''Journal of Mormon History'', Fall 2007, "A Mormon Bigfoot: David Patten's Cain and the Conception of Evil in LDS Folklore", pp. 62-82). An author named Shane Lester has even gone so far as to write a fictional book based on the conflation of these stories called the ''Clan of Cain: The Genesis of Bigfoot.'' However, oddly, Lester made the following claim, referring to the Patten story...

:A recently uncovered document reveals a possible connection between the origins of the Mormon Church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) and Bigfoot. Searching through the archives of historical church documents the author, Shane Lester, uncovered an extraordinary story that becomes the foundation of a new theory about the origins of Bigfoot. "I uncovered an obscure historical document that sheds new light on the Bigfoot mystery. I used this encounter as the basis for a fictional story that links the mystical, legend of Bigfoot to the origins of Mormonism," says author, Shane Lester ([http://web.archive.org/web/20080609233412/http://www.mormonstoday.com/011207/A2Bigfoot01.shtml])

He is he taking credit for "uncovering" some historical document from Church archives, as if the story is news, when it has been available since Wilson's book on Patten came out in the year 1900 (a century before Lester wrote his book), and in the book ''Miracle of Forgiveness.'' Furthermore, the account is anything but obscure. It is well-known. Also, he claims the Cain-is-Bigfoot theory is "new" and that it sheds "new light" on Bigfoot. The theory has been around for some time, and Lester definitely did not originate it. Bowman documented where that came from, from those Bigfoot sightings in South Weber, Utah, where the locals started conflating that with the Cain story. Thus, Lester is making claims that are utterly baseless.

Why is it that some LDS people give these stories doctrinal credence? Does that not manifest a measure of gullibility? Is it only because President Kimball quoted it? They give Cain some kind of quasi-translated status based on the story alone, without question, as if he is some kind of hideous undead creature akin to a vampire or zombie that can appear and attack people physically. Why is no skepticism applied to the story, and to the new folklore that has arisen around it? Wasn't Cain a son of perdition, a liar from the beginning? Would someone believe claims from Mark Hoffman? Then why should they believe possible words from the mouth of Cain? As far as can be discerned from the folklore account, Elder Patten did not test Cain by shaking his hand to see if he was truly corporeal. What justification would there be to believe the words of a son of perdition? It doesn't make sense that any good-thinking person would give those claims credence.

{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}}