The Egyptian Temple

[Archaea]

Here's his bio.

He's in the history department.

http://history.byu.edu/fac/hamblin/hamblin.htm

He earned his Phd at Michigan, usually considered a reputable university.

William J. Hamblin (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is Associate Professor of History at Brigham Young University.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Can I ask a question? Were these similarities drawn in a Near Easern History class per se, or a religion class?

Ancient Near Eastern History; History 238, to be precise. Taught by a BYU professor, of course, but I would like to stress that he never explicitly mentioned the LDS church or openly suggested that there were similarities. He simply went through, step by step, pointing out items of interest. He doubtlessly knew that some points would be of particular significance to an LDS audience and may have stressed those points, but he made no effort whatsoever to make connections to LDS theology or worship with this particular presentation.

That's not true of all BYU teachers, much to my dismay. My Greek mythology teacher stops to make connections at the drop of the hat. Sometimes it is interesting or significant-- pointing out that Dionysus is similar in many ways to Christ, for example-- but more often than not, it is somewhat obtrusive to the study of mythology.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Here's his bio.

He's in the history department.

http://history.byu.edu/fac/hamblin/hamblin.htm

He earned his Phd at Michigan, usually considered a reputable university.

William J. Hamblin (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is Associate Professor of History at Brigham Young University.

And to my knowledge, he has never so much as taught a religion class. He has done some work for FARMS, but of the classes I have had at BYU, he has seemed to be among the least concerned with reconciling the past to fit a Mormon view of the world. His position seemed to be that if the Egyptian temple rites don't seem to be a word-for-word transcript of what goes on in the Salt Lake temple, who cares? The similarities that ARE there are much more fascinating and need not be tainted by our point of view.

I can appreciate your reasons for objecting to FARMS-type research, SU, and I frankly agree with many of your observations in that regard. I am nevertheless unaware of any evidence indicating that Dr. Hamblin has been guilty of those kinds of offenses.

[MikeWaters]

What evidence is there that the Egyptians worshipped the God of Judeo-Christianity? From what I can tell, almost none.

What does it matter if their temple worship had some vague similarities, if they were worshipping Athena and Zeus (substitute your favorite Egyptian Gods).

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

What evidence is there that the Egyptians worshipped the God of Judeo-Christianity? From what I can tell, almost none.

What does it matter if their temple worship had some vague similarities, if they were worshipping Athena and Zeus (substitute your favorite Egyptian Gods).

You're nearly correct-- but I would substitute "almost none" with "absolutely none."

That's not the point.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

What evidence is there that the Egyptians worshipped the God of Judeo-Christianity? From what I can tell, almost none.

What does it matter if their temple worship had some vague similarities, if they were worshipping Athena and Zeus (substitute your favorite Egyptian Gods).

You're missing the argument or highlighting it for discussion purposes.

One allegation about our current temple rituals are that they possess some ancient character. The parallels between our current rituals and those of Ancient Egypt highlight the possibility that they may in fact be derived from ancient sources, not that the temple is a remake of Ancient Egyptian temple rites.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by All-American

And to my knowledge, he has never so much as taught a religion class. He has done some work for FARMS ...

Not that it matters but I would describe Hamblin as writing quite a lot for FARMS but maybe that is subjective. He has been in the Review of Books a lot (I have read plenty of reviews by him and often found them quite interesting and good); Also, wasn't Hamblin the author of the Review that had the infamous "Metcalfe is a butthead" acrostic in a pre-publication version?

[MikeWaters]

Is there any ancient religious building (not talking about stonehenge) that would not have some resemblence to LDS temples?

My point is that if you are looking for connections, then you will find them.

I think the only one that we need concern ourselves about are the ancient Jewish temples. And in some ways they are so different from our temples, that we need concern ourselves about them either. We have our own thing.

There is a temple ruin on the island of Pohnpei. I don't know if it has any similarity with ancient Jewish temples, but who knows.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by pelagius

Not that it matters but I would describe Hamblin as writing quite a lot for FARMS but maybe that is subjective. He has been in the Review of Books a lot (I read plenty of reviews by him and often found them quite interesting and good); Also, wasn't Hamblin the author of the Review that had the infamous "Metcalfe is a butthead" acrostic in early pre-publication versions?

I'm frankly unaware of how much work he has done with FARMS; I only know that he has done some. I sure hope he dropped that line, though.

Here is one review he has done, with a couple of paragraphs quoted here to give an example of his type of scholarship:

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=126&table=review

Quetzalcoatl
Since the early twentieth century, many Latter-day Saints have posited some type of relationship between the Mesoamerican god Quetzalcoatl ("feathered serpent;" Kukulcan in Maya) and the resurrected Savior in the Americas. The Tanners briefly deal with this issue (pp. 8-9, 69-70). If there is any relationship between Quetzalcoatl and Christ, it is clearly overlaid with numerous historical, mythical, and legendary strata, which are essentially impossible to unravel.51 Any proposed relationship must therefore remain tentative and speculative, but potentially interesting.52

A few points should be emphasized. First, the Book of Mormon makes no reference to this deity. The possible relation between Christ and Quetzalcoatl is a speculative interpretation by modern readers. It may or may not be correct. Second, there were at least two major Quetzalcoatls, one being an ancient god, and another a Toltec priest named Ce Acatl Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl. There is confusion between the god and the mortal in Aztec, Spanish, and modern sources. Third, the idea and iconography of a "feathered serpent" god can be traced back to Olmec times (c. 1200-400 B.C.),53 and was widespread in Teotihuacan in the third century A.D. Thus at least some elements of the Quetzalcoatl mythology date back to Book of Mormon times. Fourth, the differences between the Quetzalcoatl myths and the depiction of Christ in the Book of Mormon are unfortunately often ignored by some Latter-day Saint writers. I personally find the Quetzalcoatl parallels interesting but not convincing; but whether they are accurate or not, it has little to do with the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The only question at issue is the validity of some modern Latter-day Saint interpretations.

Izapa Stela 5 ("Tree of Life" Stone)
The Tanners go to great length in discussing the so-called "Tree of Life" stela, more accurately known as Izapa Stela 5 (pp. 34-52).54 This is perhaps the best known pre-Columbian monument that has been associated with the Book of Mormon by Latter-day Saints. In dealing with this stela it must be emphasized that the interpretation of iconography is extremely difficult and complex. The same symbols or combinations of symbols can have radically different meanings in different times, places, societies, or to different groups within a single society. We will never know for certain what Izapa Stela 5 meant to its creators. To me the connection with the Book of Mormon is possible, but tenuous.55 But even if Izapa Stela 5 has absolutely nothing to do with the Book of Mormon, the fact that some Latter-day Saint have misinterpreted it provides no evidence against the Book of Mormon.

Fraudulent Artifacts
The Tanners present a number of examples of supposedly forged antiquities which some Latter-day Saints have at various times used in an attempt to bolster the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.56 Several general observations need to be made here. First, the forgery of antiquities is an ancient and "venerable" occupation; it is not particularly linked to the Book of Mormon. Forged coins and pottery are the most notorious examples, as any visitor to the Near East can testify. Forging Viking antiquities has been a favorite pastime of North Americans, but none of these forgeries has ever been taken as evidence that real Norsemen never did discover America.57 Second, none of the supposed forgeries used to authenticate the Book of Mormon were the work of Latter-day Saints. Latter-day Saint writers who accepted the authenticity of these forgeries were sincere victims, rather than perpetrators of the fraud.58 Third, these forgeries are usually accepted only by zealous but uninformed Latter-day Saints. For the most part, trained professional Latter-day Saint scholars have rejected such materials. Fourth, almost none of the forgeries mentioned by the Tanners are at all relevant to current professional Latter-day Saint studies of Book of Mormon antiquities. These studies for the most part do not attempt to authenticate the Book of Mormon by reference to the items discussed by the Tanners. Finally, as I have emphasized before, even if all of the items discussed by the Tanners should in fact be forgeries, it would not disprove the historicity of the Book of Mormon.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Is there any ancient religious building (not talking about stonehenge) that would not have some resemblence to LDS temples?

My point is that if you are looking for connections, then you will find them.

I think the only one that we need concern ourselves about are the ancient Jewish temples. And in some ways they are so different from our temples, that we need concern ourselves about them either. We have our own thing.

There is a temple ruin on the island of Pohnpei. I don't know if it has any similarity with ancient Jewish temples, but who knows.

In most important ways, the Jewish temple bears many of the same similarities. Even so, I think that the similarities are not contrived. I also think that understanding more about the Egyptian temple ultimately will help a Latter-day Saint understand more about modern temples-- which is the reason I posted this here.