Joseph Smith Jr's Kevo

Translation of the Book of Abraham

Smith stated that he translated the Book of Abraham from papyrus rolls. Although it is accepted that Smith bought the papyri from an Irishman named Michael Chandler in 1835, these hieroglyphics were not able to be translated at the time until the discovery of the Rosetta stone. The originals were thought by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to have been destroyed in a Chicago fire. Fragments of the papyri turned up in one of the vault rooms of the New Yorks Metropolitan Museum of Art. In November of 1967 the Deseret News of Salt Lake City reported the rediscovery of the papyri. Egyptologists have pointed out that Smith's purported translation is not, in fact, a translation. Dr. Archibald Sayce noted, "It is difficult to deal seriously with Joseph Smith's impudent fraud....Smith has turned the Goddess [Isis] into a king and Osiris into Abraham." (For a counter to this assertion, see Abraham in Egypt, Hugh Nibley, Deseret Book Company, 1981, pp. 133-141). James H. Breasted wrote, "To sum up, then, these three fac-similies of Egyptian documents in the 'Pearl of Great Price' depict the most common objects in the mortuary religion of Egypt. Joseph Smith's interpretations of them as part of a unique revelation through Abraham, therefore, very clearly demonstrates that he was totally unacquainted with the significance of these documents and absolutely ignorant of the simplest facts of Egyptian Writing and civilization." Arthur C. Mace, assistant curator of the Department of Egyptian Art of the Metropolitan Museum of Art wrote, "The 'Book of Abraham,' it is hardly necessary to say, is a pure fabrication....Joseph Smith's interpretation of these cuts is a farrago of nonsense from beginning to end." Samuel Alfred Brown Mercer, of the Western Theological Seminary, and author of an Egyptian grammar, stated, "[Smith] knew neither the Egyptian language nor the meaning of the most commonplace Egyptian figures....the explanatory notes to his fac-similes cannot be taken seriously by any scholar, as they seem to be undoubtedly the work of pure imagination".

In the Ensign, an official publication of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Michael D. Rhodes, a researcher in ancient scriptures from Brigham Young University counters the assertions made by various experts regarding the translation of the Book of Abraham. He asserts that Egyptians "often placed vignettes next to texts that bore no relationship to them" and that it was not uncommon for all of the illustrations on a scroll to appear at the beginning, with the text following in a distant portion of the document. "Thus, the text that gave rise to the book of Abraham could have been located elsewhere on the same papyrus" and has yet to be found. However, this hypothesis ignores the fact that the papyrus from facsimile 1 has been conclusively shown to have originally adjoined several other fragments in the collection and bear no resemblance to the writings of Abraham (they are portions of the Book of the Dead).

Lastly, Rhodes states that several accounts of Abraham's life have been recovered since Smith's time and that The Book of Abraham compares favorably with them. According to LDS scholar Hugh Nibley, one non-Mormon scholar, E.A.W. Budge, stated that Smith's Book of Abraham was "clearly based on...some Old Testament apocryphal histories." As Nibley points out, the Old Testament apocryphal histories to which the document so closely corresponds were not available in Joseph Smith's time, and were available in the British Museum only to Budge himself nearly eighty years later. Critical scholars have noted that LDS researchers have succumbed to "parallelomania" in finding parallels to prove their points, and largely dismiss the explanations given by Rhodes and Nibley.