![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
(→Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...Modern Egyptologists translation: 4. A "lion couch." ... simply a funeral bier seen in many funeral scenes in ancient Egyptian art") |
|||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
|L2=Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...Modern Egyptologists translation: 4. A "lion couch." ... simply a funeral bier seen in many funeral scenes in ancient Egyptian art" | |L2=Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...Modern Egyptologists translation: 4. A "lion couch." ... simply a funeral bier seen in many funeral scenes in ancient Egyptian art" | ||
|L3=Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...Modern Egyptologists translation:...Human sacrifice was never practiced in Egypt" | |L3=Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...Modern Egyptologists translation:...Human sacrifice was never practiced in Egypt" | ||
− | |L4=Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 9. The idolatrous god of Pharaoh...Modern Egyptologists translation: 9. The god Sobek is often portrayed in the form of a crocodile" | + | |L4=Response to claim: "Modern Egyptologists translation: 5,6,7,8. There are no gods named "Elkenah," "Libnah," "Mahmackrah," or "Korash" in Egypt's recorded history" |
+ | |L5=Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 9. The idolatrous god of Pharaoh...Modern Egyptologists translation: 9. The god Sobek is often portrayed in the form of a crocodile" | ||
}} | }} | ||
</onlyinclude> | </onlyinclude> | ||
Line 51: | Line 52: | ||
{{:Source:Muhlestein:Gee:Human sacrifice in ancient Egypt}} | {{:Source:Muhlestein:Gee:Human sacrifice in ancient Egypt}} | ||
{{:Source:Muhlestein:Gee:Sacrifice could be extended to foreigners who lived beyond the boundaries of Egypt}} | {{:Source:Muhlestein:Gee:Sacrifice could be extended to foreigners who lived beyond the boundaries of Egypt}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Response to claim: "Modern Egyptologists translation: 5,6,7,8. There are no gods named "Elkenah," "Libnah," "Mahmackrah," or "Korash" in Egypt's recorded history"== | ||
+ | {{IndexClaimItemShort | ||
+ | |title=compared to modern Egyptologists’ translation of the image, Joseph’s interpretation of each section contains errors. ... | ||
+ | *Joseph Smith translation: 5. The idolatrous god of Elkenah. 6. The idolatrous god of Libnah. 7. The idolatrous god of Mahmackrah.. 8. The idolatrous god of Korash. | ||
+ | *Modern Egyptologists translation: 5,6,7,8. There are no gods named "Elkenah," "Libnah," "Mahmackrah," or "Korash" in Egypt's recorded history. | ||
+ | {{misinformation|They may not be found in Egyptian history, however, there are correlations with the names of ancient deities. | ||
+ | }} | ||
+ | {{:Question: Do the names "Elkenah," "Libnah," "Mahmackrah," and "Korash" in Facsimile 1 have any correlation to known ancient deities?}} | ||
==Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 9. The idolatrous god of Pharaoh...Modern Egyptologists translation: 9. The god Sobek is often portrayed in the form of a crocodile"== | ==Response to claim: "Joseph Smith translation: 9. The idolatrous god of Pharaoh...Modern Egyptologists translation: 9. The god Sobek is often portrayed in the form of a crocodile"== |
Chapter 16 - Expert Views | A FAIR Analysis of: For my Wife and Children (Letter to my Wife), a work by author: Anonymous
|
Chapter 18 - Facsimile #2 |
Jump to details:
Joseph incorrectly filled-in the missing portion of papyrus...Common burial artwork depicts Anubis, the jackal-headed god of the after life, preparing those recently deceased for their journey to the afterlife. Joseph appears to have incorrectly filled-in the missing portion of the papyri he purchased from Mr. Chandler.
The head of the priest in the Hedlock restoration appears to simply copy the head of the reclining figure. An examination of the papyrus, however, shows evidence that the head was originally that of Anubis. In this case, the Larson restoration appears to be correct. Theologically, it would not matter to scenes such as this one. Ancient art depcting religious situations such as this frequently had other people impersonating other Gods. Thus, even if this is an incorrect restoration, it would not matter to the overall message of the scene portrayed.
The priest of Elkenah likely could have been wearing an Anubian headdress while performing this scene and the interpretation would still be, for all intents and purposes, correct. Those performing rituals often donned a mask impersonating a particular god for theological effect.[1]
John Gee has written:
The discussion about figure 3 has centered on whether the head should be that of a jackal or a bald man. Whether the head is a jackal or a bald man in no way affects the interpretation of the figure, however, since in either case the figure would be a priest.
His footnote here reads as follows:
The argument for the identification runs as follows:
(2) Assume on the other hand that the head on Facsimile 1 Figure 3 is that of a jackal, as was first suggested by Theodule Devéria. We have representations of priests wearing masks, one example of an actual mask, [and] literary accounts from non-Egyptians about Egyptian priests wearing masks. . . . Thus, however the restoration is made, the individual shown in Facsimile 1 Figure 3 is a priest, and the entire question of which head should be on the figure is moot so far as identifying the figure is concerned. (John Gee, “Abracadabra, Isaac, and Jacob,” Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 7/1 [1995]: 80–82)[2]
(1) Assume for the sake of argument that the head on Facsimile 1 Figure 3 is correct. What are the implications of the figure being a bald man? Shaving was a common feature of initiation into the priesthood from the Old Kingdom through the Roman period. Since “Complete shaving of the head was another mark of the male Isiac votary and priest” the bald figure would then be a priest.
Gee gives an example of this of a bald priest donning the head of Anubis at the temple of Dendara. The first image is an actual drawing created during the Ptolemaic period from Dendara of the priest putting on the mask. The second is an example of such a mask that would be placed on them.
compared to modern Egyptologists’ translation of the image, Joseph’s interpretation of each section contains errors. ...
- Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...
- Modern Egyptologists translation: 4. A "lion couch." A simply (sic) a funeral bier seen in many funeral scenes in ancient Egyptian art.
Although many similar lion couch scenes exist, this one has quite a few unique features:
Therefore, we do not agree that it is the "same funeral scene." Facsimile 1 actually depicts the resurrection of Osiris. The figure on the couch is alive. The figures to which it is compared all show the preparation of a mummy.
compared to modern Egyptologists’ translation of the image, Joseph’s interpretation of each section contains errors. ...
- Joseph Smith translation: 4. The altar for sacrifice by the idolatrous priests...
- Modern Egyptologists translation: 4. ... Human sacrifice was never practiced in Egypt.
Abraham noted that the attempt to sacrifice him "was done after the manner of the Egyptians" (Abraham 1:11). Egyptologists Kerry Muhlestein and John Gee note that evidence has been uncovered of the practice of human sacrifice in ancient Egypt,
[A]rchaeologists have discovered evidence of human sacrifice. Just outside the Middle Kingdom fortress at Mirgissa, which had been part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia, a deposit was found containing various ritual objects such as melted wax figurines, a flint knife, and the decapitated body of a foreigner slain during rites designed to ward off enemies. Almost universally, this discovery has been accepted as a case of human sacrifice.20 Texts from this and similar rites from the Middle Kingdom specify that the ritual was directed against "every evil speaker, every evil speech, every evil curse, every evil plot, every evil imprecation, every evil attack, every evil rebellion, every evil plan, and every evil thing,"[3] which refers to those who "speak evil" of the king or of his policies.[4] The remains in the deposit are consistent with those of later ritual texts describing the daily execration rite, which was usually a wax figure substituting in effigy for a human sacrifice: "Bind with the sinew of a red cow . . . spit on him four times . . . trample on him with the left foot . . . smite him with a spear . . . decapitate him with a knife . . . place him on the fire . . . spit on him in the fire many times."[5] Again we see that the use of a knife was followed by burning. The fact that the site of Mirgissa is not in Egypt proper but was part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia informs us that the Egyptians extended such practices beyond their borders.
In fact, throughout time we find that ritual violence was often aimed at foreign places and people.[6] Their very foreignness was seen as a threat to Egypt's political and social order. Hence many of the known examples of ritual slaying are aimed at foreigners, such as those at Mirgissa or Tod. All three examples we have shared involve protecting sacred places and things, such as the boundary of a necropolis, a temple, or even Egypt itself.[7]
The attempted sacrifice of Abraham, who was not Egyptian, occurred outside of Egypt. (Abraham 1꞉1, Abraham 1꞉10 and Abraham 1꞉20).[8] There is now evidence that foreigners could be sacrificed outside of the boundaries of Egypt.
Just outside the Middle Kingdom fortress at Mirgissa, which had been part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia, a deposit was found containing various ritual objects such as melted wax figurines, a flint knife, and the decapitated body of a foreigner slain during rites designed to ward off enemies. Almost universally, this discovery has been accepted as a case of human sacrifice.20 Texts from this and similar rites from the Middle Kingdom specify that the ritual was directed against "every evil speaker, every evil speech, every evil curse, every evil plot, every evil imprecation, every evil attack, every evil rebellion, every evil plan, and every evil thing,"21 which refers to those who "speak evil" of the king or of his policies.22 The remains in the deposit are consistent with those of later ritual texts describing the daily execration rite, which was usually a wax figure substituting in effigy for a human sacrifice: "Bind with the sinew of a red cow . . . spit on him four times . . . trample on him with the left foot . . . smite him with a spear . . . decapitate him with a knife . . . place him on the fire . . . spit on him in the fire many times."23 Again we see that the use of a knife was followed by burning. The fact that the site of Mirgissa is not in Egypt proper but was part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia informs us that the Egyptians extended such practices beyond their borders.[9]
{{IndexClaimItemShort |title=compared to modern Egyptologists’ translation of the image, Joseph’s interpretation of each section contains errors. ...
Michael Rhodes (2003):
The names of the idolatrous gods mentioned in facsimile 1 provide another example of the validity of the Prophet Joseph’s explanations. If Joseph Smith had simply made up the names, the chances of their corresponding to the names of ancient deities would be astronomically small. The name Elkenah, for example, is clearly related to the Hebrew ttt ‘el q?n?h/ q?neh “God has created / the creator.” Elkenah is found in the Old Testament as the name of several people, including Samuel’s father (see 1 Samuel 1:1). The name is also found as a divine name in Mesopotamian sources as dIl-gi-na / dIl-kí-na / dÉl-ké-na.[21] Libnah may be related to the Hebrew leb?n?h “moon” (see Isaiah 24:23) from the root l?b?n “white.” A city captured by Joshua was called libn?h (see Joshua 10:29). The name Korash is found as a name in Egyptian sources.[22] A connection with K?reš the name of the Persian king Cyrus (Isaiah 44:28), is also possible. [10]
compared to modern Egyptologists’ translation of the image, Joseph’s interpretation of each section contains errors. ...
- Joseph Smith translation: 9. The idolatrous god of Pharaoh
- Modern Egyptologists translation: 9. The god Sobek is often portrayed in the form of a crocodile.
Daniel C. Peterson:
One noteworthy element of the religious situation portrayed in the Book of Abraham is the identification of a crocodile as the idolatrous god of Pharaoh, right there underneath the lion couch. That’s a kind of odd thing to come up with if you’re a yokel farm-boy from upstate New York. Is that the first thing that comes to your mind? “Oh, idolatrous god of Pharaoh!”
Although this may have seemed strange in Joseph Smith’s day, discoveries in other ancient texts confirm this representation. Unas or Wenis, for example, was the last king of the fifth dynasty, around 2300 B.C., and his pyramid still stands at Saqqara, south of modern Cairo. Utterance 317, Unas’ pyramid texts, includes the following: “The king appears as the crocodile god Sobek, and Unas has come today from the overflowing flood. Unas is Sobek, green plumed, wakeful, alert….Una arises as Sobek, son of Neith. One scholar observes that “the god Sobek is … viewed as a manifestation of Horus, the god most closely identified with the kingship of Egypt” during the Egyptian Middle Kingdom era (around 2000 B.C., maybe a little later), which includes the time period that tradition indicates is Abraham’s time.
Intriguingly, Middle Kingdom Egypt saw a great deal of activity in the large oasis to the southwest of modern Cairo known as the Faiyum. Crocodiles were common there. You know what the name of the place was to the Greeks? The major town there was called “Crocodileopolis.” [11]
Notes
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now