Nope. As far as I know, Smith transferred characters from funerary material in his possession and incorporated them into the Facsimile lacuna. Everything Smith borrowed was originally meant to attribute glory to Egyptian religion. The Hypocephalus is a tribute to the Egyptian gods. Jehovah be damned! He, was no friend of Egypt! It's utterly ironic that the Mormons publish these spells in their book of canon.Gadianton wrote:That's fascinating, Shulem. Are you aware of any legitimate Egyptian symbols used by Joseph Smith in any context that don't have an obvious source?
Actually, that is an old apologetic consideration that begun with Nibley but didn't persist. Chapel Mormons today that believe such nonsense are not intelligent or informed.Gadianton wrote:Also, one of the tenets of every Chapel Mormon's faith is that Egyptian is so compact, that one glyph can generate pages of English text, which the Joseph Smith-Egyptian papers confirm, but which in the world we know as "reality" simply is not true.
That's a question best put to professor Gee. He knows the answer to your question and has probably already written out the entire text in Egyptian form to match papyrus specifications from the documents Smith had.Gadianton wrote:It's interesting that the proposed scroll length is 41 feet. There wasn't a subconscious target length was there? How much Egyptian scroll does it take to produce the amount of text in the Book of Abraham?
Now this is IMPORTANT and I want you to listen closely to what I'm saying, so lean forward and catch my drift:
IF Joseph Smith had a copy of John Gee's transcription of the Book of Abraham in hieroglyphic form -- Smith would translate it to be anything OTHER than the Book of Abraham.
Isn't that right, John? You know it, and I know it.