Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah and Korash ...Really?

[BrianH]

Mormons will frequently try to cloud the issues pertaining to the so-called “Book of Abraham” (BoA)by pointing to the fact that while we today possess at least SOME of the original document (identified by scholars as the “Sensen Papyrus”), we do not have ALL of it. Apparently they want to insinuate that while the “Book of Abraham” material cannot be correctly derived from any valid translation of the papyrus that we DO have, one COULD show that the BoA was derived from the missing portion ..if we had it.

First of all this is simply a retreat – an admission that one cannot show any connection between the BoA and the original papyrus from which it was supposedly translated by the Mormon “prophet” and his alleged divine gift for translating languages he could not even read.

Secondly, while it is indeed possible that there was additional papyri that Smith used –i.e. that the Sensen papyrus is not complete- the FACT is, Smith himself included materials copied directly from the existing papyrus and claimed to have translated these exact portions where they appear in the BoA. So we absolutely CAN test his claim to have translated this portion of this ancient Egyptian document, even if there might be other portions that we cannot test.

So let’s have a look at just ONE part of Smith’s translation, and then see if he got it right using his supposed divine, prophetic gift of translating ancient languages.

In every copy of the BoA there appears a some “facsimiles” of hieroglyphics copied directly from the images on the existing papyrus, including images of some of Egypt’s mythical gods. In Facsimile #1, Smith identifies the idol figures he numbers as 5, 6, 7 and 8. (These are the four figures that appear beneath the alleged “alter” upon which the claimed figure of “Abraham” is supposedly being sacrificed). The “prophet” Smith, claiming to use his alleged "gift and power of God" to translate languages he could not even read tells us explicitly that these figures represent the idolatrous gods of (his exact words): “Elkenah”, “ Libnah”, “Mahmackrah” and “Korash”.

Now, the simple irrefutable FACT is, these exact same figures appear all over ancient Egyptian documents and artifacts. So for Smith’s claim to be true, we would have to accept that the same images appearing in all those other ancient documents represent the same “gods”. So the question is ...do they? Are these same images appearing here and elsewhere representative of Egyptian gods named, “Elkenah”, “ Libnah”, “Mahmackrah” and “Korash”.

The answer is no, of course.

First of all there are NO Egyptian gods named “Elkenah”, “ Libnah”, “Mahmackrah” and “Korash”. Those names appear NOWHERE in the vast archives of Egyptian literature, mythology, lore and oral tradition. Nor do they appear on any monument or on any other archaeological find. They simply do not exist anywhere in any Egyptian sources. In fact, they appear NOWHERE outside the BoA.

Second, to believe Smith you have to accept that that the Egyptians did not know the names of their own gods because these figures DO consistently correspond throughout all of the ancient Egyptian literature where they appear with the mythical “sons of Horus” known as “Qebehseneuf” (fig. #5 on the papyrus and duplicated in Facsimile #1), “Duamutef” (fig. #6), “Hapy” (fig. #7) and “Imsety” (fig. #8). Even an elementary familiarity with Egyptian lore will quickly inform you that these mythical figures are quite common. In fact, as sons of one of the most important Egyptian deities (Horus) they are rather important figures. For example, Hapy (aka “Hapi”) is the god of the Nile – that all important source of all life for the entire Egyptian civilization. The name means “running one” and refers to the flow of the river. In fact, he was thought to control the annual flooding of the Nile. This word corresponds to other uses of the same word to describe a “running one”. By contrast, Smith's supposedly divine gift for translation lead him to identify "Hapy" as "Mahmackrah" a word that has no Egyptian meaning and in fact, is not even an Egyptian name (nor even a name of anyone in ANY language).

Here’s the problem. There is no Egyptian deity known as “Mahmackrah”. That name appears exactly NOWHERE in any Egyptian literature or lore. There IS an Egyptian deity known as “Hapy”, and he was a pretty important dude to the Egyptians. So his REAL name is quite common and his image is well-known among Egyptologists and other antiquarians. But Smith's name for this figure is totally unknown outside the claims of the LDS organization and its "prophets".

The same is true for literally ALL of the other figures throught the Facsimiles found in every copy of the BoA as published by the LDS church.

If Smith was right, all Egyptian literature needs to be corrected and these idol-gods need to be re-identified to redeem all of Egyptian literature from the gibberish to which it is reduced by the error of 100% of all qualified Egyptologists, linguists, archaeologists, historians to have ever studied ancient Egypt and made the error of mistranslating the names of the Egyptian gods.

On the other hand, if Smith was just making stuff up to fool his hapless, uninformed, unquestioning victims, then the whole field of Egyptology can continue to make sense in its own terms and it is Mormons who must account for the demonstrated fact that they have believed the lies of a not-so-clever occult con artist.

The veracity of the LDS religion hinges on this issue. Either the Mormon “prophet” translated the Sensen papyrus correctly by the same alleged divine gift for translating ancient languages he could not even read, or else he was lying ...or possibly just delusional.

So the challenge to Mormons here is this: SHOW US why we should think that 100% of all qualified Egyptologists and scholars from all related fields are all WRONG to identify these figures as “Qebehseneuf”, “Duamutef”, “Hapy” and “Imsety” and correct the entire academy of Egyptologists by showing us (and them) why those deities are REALLY to be identified as “Elkenah”, “ Libnah”, “Mahmackrah” and “Korash” .

You may begin by showing us that the names used by Joseph Smith AT LEAST existed somewhere in Egyptian lore BEFORE he showed up in the early 1800s and claimed that they did. Then you can conclusively demonstrate the “inspiration” of your so-called “prophet” by simply showing us that the names he used are indeed correctly ***ociated with the idols to which he attached them.

And please ...don’t try to change the subject by making ME (or anyone or anything else) the issue here. Such behaviors will be quickly identified and exposed.

Thank you

-BH

.