Abraham is Osiris: A Historical Meditation on Facsimile 3

[_Kishkumen]

The nice thing about Shulem's fervent conviction is, it actually is grounded on real evidence in real time in our real world, unlike faith Gee invokes which has no sticking power.

So you agree with Shulem that Joseph Smith was revealing real history.

[_Shulem]

So you would argue that Smith understood academic history and believed what he was doing was perfectly in line with it?

by the way, I admire your fervent conviction, Shulem!

I'd like to bear my testimony that I know . . . .

[_Kishkumen]

I'd like to bear my testimony that I know . . . .

[Guest]

I think it is interesting to look at Joseph Smith as a person with a creative genius for seeking out esoteric knowledge and then remixing it or expanding on it. I view it the same way I view his fascination with language that didn't express itself in scholarly study but rather inventive appropriation of it mixed with narcissistic unwarranted expressions of mastery. One isn't going to learn German, Hebrew, or the pure language of Adam (well...) from Smith's own works. And no one other than a very unfortunately biased or uninformed Mormon would sincerely believe the claims of his expertise in the field. But the subject itself of his linguistic experimentation and inventiveness can be fascinating. And that is facilitated by knowledge and exploration of the actual languages involved in Smith's creations.

When we see Smith gathering in, deconstructing and synthesizing stories and concepts from western Christianity, American folklore and magik, Talmudic tradition, and rumors about ancient Egyptian to be woven into a tapestry it has something to tell us about his sources as well as his creativity. The loom on which the tapestry was woven that quite likely included sincere belief in a young earth, an Adamic origin story for creation, a common source for religious ritual if perverted into the many religions of the world that came from a pure revealed true religion that his own familial views would be considered directly descended from and advantaged as closely resembling - all have something to tell us about the mind of Smith as well. It certainly says something about Smith that he places himself within a unique cadre of chosen persons. And that he draws parallels between himself and the Patriarch of the age that preserved Israel if ultimately resulting in their bondage among heretic cultist practicing a perverted version of the true priesthood is further telling.

[_Shulem]

The nice thing about Shulem's fervent conviction is, it actually is grounded on real evidence in real time in our real world, unlike faith Gee invokes which has no sticking power.

And should you ever doubt and end up in Oz, just click your heels three times and repeat aloud:

There's no king's name at all.
There's no king's name at all.
There's no king's name at all.

And just like that, you'll be back in reality.

[_Kishkumen]

I think it is interesting to look at Joseph Smith as a person with a creative genius for seeking out esoteric knowledge and then remixing it or expanding on it. I view it the same way I view his fascination with language that didn't express itself in scholarly study but rather inventive appropriation of it mixed with narcissistic unwarranted expressions of mastery. One isn't going to learn German, Hebrew, or the pure language of Adam (well...) from Smith's own works. And no one other than a very unfortunately biased or uninformed Mormon would sincerely believe the claims of his expertise in the field. But the subject itself of his linguistic experimentation and inventiveness can be fascinating. And that is facilitated by knowledge and exploration of the actual languages involved in Smith's creations.

When we see Smith gathering in, deconstructing and synthesizing stories and concepts from western Christianity, American folklore and magik, Talmudic tradition, and rumors about ancient Egyptian to be woven into a tapestry it has something to tell us about his sources as well as his creativity. The loom on which the tapestry was woven that quite likely included sincere belief in a young earth, an Adamic origin story for creation, a common source for religious ritual if perverted into the many religions of the world that came from a pure revealed true religion that his own familial views would be considered directly descended from and advantaged as closely resembling - all have something to tell us about the mind of Smith as well. It certainly says something about Smith that he places himself within a unique cadre of chosen persons. And that he draws parallels between himself and the Patriarch of the age that preserved Israel if ultimately resulting in their bondage among heretic cultist practicing a perverted version of the true priesthood is further telling.

Nicely put!

[_Lemmie]

So you would argue that Smith understood academic history and believed what he was doing was perfectly in line with it?

by the way, I admire your fervent conviction, Shulem!

I'd like to bear my testimony that I know . . . .

I have read every post you've made this weekend with fascination and pleasure, Paul. Thank you for the education.

[_Symmachus]

This post is as fascinating as it is brilliant, my dear Kish. I think arguments of this sort should appeal both to paleo- and neo-apologists. Both camps basically agree, after all, that Joseph Smith didn't really understand the details of his own prophetic role. For neo-apologists, it is much more academically respectable to "bracket" the truth claims, and they can do that through the lens of comparative Midrash (which I think is basically what you are saying).

And for paleo-apologists, this argument not only dovetails with Gee's views on the Hellenistic milieu of the Book of Abraham but also mirrors Royal Skousen's monumental discovery that the Book of Mormon was composed in a sixteenth century dialect: any trace of something old in Mormon scripture is proof of its historicity, as long as Joseph Smith didn't know about it (amazing how much of these arguments rely on Joseph's being ignorant and incompetent...something I totally agree with, by the way). So, your argument can be easily tweaked to support the obvious and incontrovertible fact that Joseph Smith was a prophet by just eliminating the possibility that Joseph got this from Masons—and of course even if he did that's all right, because as we know he polished much truth that had rusted under Masonic dew with his homegrown restoration project.

[_Kishkumen]

This post is as fascinating as it is brilliant, my dear Kish. I think arguments of this sort should appeal both to paleo- and neo-apologists. Both camps basically agree, after all, that Joseph Smith didn't really understand the details of his own prophetic role. For neo-apologists, it is much more academically respectable to "bracket" the truth claims, and they can do that through the lens of comparative Midrash (which I think is basically what you are saying).

And for paleo-apologists, this argument not only dovetails with Gee's views on the Hellenistic milieu of the Book of Abraham but also mirrors Royal Skousen's monumental discovery that the Book of Mormon was composed in a sixteenth century dialect: any trace of something old in Mormon scripture is proof of its historicity, as long as Joseph Smith didn't know about it (amazing how much of these arguments rely on Joseph's being ignorant and incompetent...something I totally agree with, by the way). So, your argument can be easily tweaked to support the obvious and incontrovertible fact that Joseph Smith was a prophet by just eliminating the possibility that Joseph got this from Masons—and of course even if he did that's all right, because as we know he polished much truth that had rusted under Masonic dew with his homegrown restoration project.

Why thank you, dear consul. I am truly honored by your praise. I must ponder the meaning of comparative Midrash. I suppose you could say that I have provided my own imaginative, comparative commentary on Facsimile 3, which seeks to unlock "deeper mysteries" but is not to be taken literally. Of course, unlike apologists of all stripes, I have no goal of showing that Joseph Smith was a prophet or that the Book of Abraham is ancient. Far from it.

Though I clearly have no need of explaining myself to you, I will try to clarify for others what I am doing here. I set aside Joseph Smith and what we think of him (prophet or charlatan) but take the elements that I see in Mormon mythology seriously: 1) Biblical material (including Apocrypha), 2) Josephus, 3) Classical literature, 4) Magic, 5) Alchemy, 6) Freemasonry, 7) Esotericism, 8) Iroquois religion and mythology. To this I add: 1) Modern scholarship on antiquity; 2) Newly discovered parabiblical literature. I should also say that in the first category I feel free to deal with each part expansively. I would not limit myself to the exact parts that early Mormons used.

You can see more of what I have been doing in my old Mysteries of Mehen threads. Some of my fellow MDBers have been confused by these things at times, but they have generally put up with it without raising too much of a fuss. At times, they have expressed some confusion about it, but I think some people understand what it is I am doing, if not why I would spend time doing it. We all need our hobbies.