Coming to terms with the Book of Abraham


DKM88
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry if it offends some people that I won't say that "I KNOW" these things, because nobody "knows" anything.

So you contend that the word "know" has no actual meaning in English?

If this is the case, is it wrong for the LDS Church to co-opt a meaningless English word and assign it a value that has actual meaning within the context of the religion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I continue my study and prayer. This is all part of it. So you're saying I can't be a fence sitter? There is no middle ground in Mormonism? Can I believe that it's man-made, that it's a great church, and raise my kids in it, and still get to the celestial kingdom? Isn't what God wants me to do is seek truth? If I earnestly do so and this is what I come up with, will God fault me for it?

I'll let Christ tell you what he thinks of fence-sitters

Revelations3:13-16

13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

The entire validity of the LDS church rests upon the shoulders of Joseph Smith. If he was a real prophet of God, then the LDS church is necessary and led by Christ today, whose church we claim it to be.

If he was not a prophet of God, then all his works are an abomination in the sight of God, for Joseph Smith, in this possibility, claimed direction and authority that he never posessed.

This is why we have always been counceled to obtain our own testimonies of what really is true about the LDS church, especially Joseph Smith. Without the bedrock of personal revelation in our own lives, we will always be 'tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine'.

It's hard to accept that life does come with absolutes, but it does and they apply equally to everyone. The LDS church is either the true Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, including all the implications that such a title generates, or it is not connected with Jesus Christ in any real way beyond the name in the title. You have to determine which is the case on your own. Everyone else has to, has always had to, and always will have to until the final judgement begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I'm probably going to go to bed, so I'll check back tomorrow afternoon and see what you've come up with. Good luck to you, my friend. I'm being serious. I haven't found any arguments that aren't flawed, so if you find one, awesome! You will have helped me tremendously.

I will see what I can come up with, DKM. It will not be until at least tomorrow night, since I am late for bed myself and have a busy day tomorrow. But I will look for something.

Please note that I am pretty literal-minded. I will search for exactly one unflawed argument made by the Maxwell Institute and will provide that to you. I understand that is what you want. Please inform me if that is incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I kind of understand where DKM88 is at. There was a period of time in my life when I visited exmormon almost everyday, I watched the Book of Abraham video put out by IRR, read Grant Palmer's Book, and researched every criticism of the church. My testimony became so dimmed, I thought it would never come back.

I was never satisfied though. I became obsessed with trying to prove that the church wasn't true and I studied everything ferociously.

DKM88, I tend to believe that perception plays an important role. If your mindset it set on proving the church to be "not true" then that is what you will find. Something that helped me through my doubts was praying to God and asking him to lead me where HE wants me to be. I wanted the Lord to lead me where he wanted me to be regardless of my own personal bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You either have a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet or you do not. If you have a testimony that Joseph Smith truly was a chosen Prophet of God, then the Book of Abraham (by rational conclusion) is every bit true and accurate. This would mean that what you currently believe about the Book of Abraham is inaccurate.

Wait, no, back up. I believe that God called Joseph Smith as a prophet. I also believe that, while in that office, Joseph did and taught things which were wrong (incorrect, immoral, misguided, sometimes all of the above). Agency is one of the foundational principles of the Gospel, and I absolutely don't believe that God strips men of their agency just because they're in a position of authority in the Church. I honestly don't know enough about the BoA issue to profess an opinion, but I'm open to the idea that Joseph simply got carried away. Should I hand in my temple recommend for this?

I'm not an active poster, but I have been a member of the website for years now, so hopefully I won't be accused of trolldom for this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen anything where you've filled in the gaps to my so-called stitched together story. I'm not trying to be rude, just looking for answers.

I've spent a lot of time responding to your posts and researching information tonight. More time than I'd care to admit, and I've posted the "fillers" you say are missing. Further explanation a few quotes down.

Do me a favor and do some research on the actual membership numbers of the Church. They are very secretive about this, but everything you can find points to major issues in this area. We are told the Church is growing, but reality is there are probably somewhere around 2.5 million members that are active. The Church will always grow, depending on how numbers are represented. I think the Church may be in some trouble, and they know it. They are working to try and keep people active, especially the YSA and SA crowd. I'm not looking for an argument here, but just look into it.

My father-in-law is a Seventy and we have talked about this quite a bit. I live in Mormon Mecca now but I converted in Connecticut. Huge inactive rate, no doubt. Ward I was baptized into had a 75% inactive rate. I was an hour from Boston though, everyone up there is Catholic. But you're right on with the SA members, they have the highest inactivity rate out of any other demographic in the church. But outside the US they are converting entire communities at a time. The area that has the biggest inactivity is the US, but 2.5M total active? You aren't even close.

So aside from the conversations that you might find in a mormon community, you'll rarely, if ever, hear anyone talk about Joseph Smith and what he did.

That may have been the case 30 or 40 years ago, but the church has had enormous amounts of media coverage in the last 5 years. I'll concede that the main topic of conversation isn't Joseph Smith, but I bet I could go to the first 10 LGBT forums that google lists and find tons of threads about the church. I get your point though, and maybe my comment about Joseph Smith and how 180 years later he's never been taken down was a little sensational. I think you're downplaying just how many people are actively engaged with the church, though. It's always been popular to bash the church, no matter what time period, there has always been a strong resistance to the LDS church, it's members, it's teachings, and I'm not just referring to exmos, there are groups and organizations set up and run by several other Christian denominations whose sole purpose is getting the "truth" about Mormons out there and to "save" us from our satanic church and it's evil leaders.

On a side note, since you clandestinely brought it up, I'm actually related to Mark Hofmann. I don't know the guy, but my impression is he was in the forgery business for the money. He didn't start killing people until he was being found out. I'm not sure why he was brought into this, but whatever.

No matter what anyone has said or posted in response to your claims about Joseph Smith, you show no real interest is comparing facts or details, except that we have the BofA scroll, egyptologists have learned how to translate the writing and have come up with a different account that what is in the PofGP. Except I disagree with your entire "version" of events. Like I said at the beginning, I've posted several times linking to website information for all of your claims, and mine. I'm still waiting for your response.

But my reason for bringing up Hoffman was to illustrate a point, the most successful attempts at smearing the church and convincing the rank and file members to leave have been from hoaxes and fraudulent people who had to fabricate "evidence" that Joseph Smith was a fake. If he really is a fraud, why are people wasting time and money making stuff up instead of exposing his real works for what they really are? If the BofA has been blown out of the water as fake, and Joseph lied, and it's widely accepted knowledge then why hasn't anyone been notified? How come during the prop 8 campaign the ironclad proof you have wasn't brought out? Seems like they would be on top of that, since 15 temples were vandalized and marched on by protesters, white powder was sent to church HQ, people whose name ended up on the donation list for prop 8 were "blacklisted" and in some cases fired from their jobs.

It doesn't make ANY sense, if Joseph made it all up, then expose it, prove it. You don't make forgeries in his hand writing and write silly stories. IF he's a fraud, IF he's not a prophet and IF he made any part of this up and you wanted to expose him, you do just that. You don't bring him up on false charges with fake evidence. You only do that when the person hasn't done anything wrong.

So when I can't get an answer that make sense beyond the "maybe it was inspired but not translated" and "pray", I'm arguing in circles?

I've given you a different answer. Still waiting.

Honestly, those answers urk me as well. And instead of figuring out what really happened, some good-intentioned apologist tried to rationalize the story that was being told. That happens a lot, sadly. Then you get these responses to questions that are weak, they don't answer anything. They just kick enough dirt until no one is sure about what's being asked and leave it at that. Stalemate, everyone loses.

What I'm saying is as members of the Church there has to be a better way at tackling this issue than what we have, because it doesn't work.

I completely agree. That's why when I struggled with this exact issue I researched everything I could to find the truth. Either the church is true, or it isn't. If the papyri were translated by modern ehyptologists and they came up with a different answer than what the church is giving, then someone is wrong. Turns out it isn't the church.

I hit every anti site I could find after I converted, I was looking to see if there was a man behind the curtain. All I saw were bitter jaded people who lost their way and need a hug real bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that Joseph Smith used the papyri as a catalyst to receive the revelation on Abraham. Kind of like his "translating" the Book of Mormon by peering into the Urim and Thummim, rather than looking at the characters themselves. If you would spend some time studying the text of the BoA itself and the scholarship done concerning it, you would find many ancient concepts that Joseph Smith and the people of his day did not know.

Kerry Shirts has written and recorded much concerning the papyri. You should try his websites:

Papyri & Book of Abraham Articles, Analysis & Reviews

The Backyard Professor

As for the Church's history, I like what Church historian Davis Bitton says:

I Don't Have a Testimony of the History of the Church

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I continue my study and prayer. This is all part of it. So you're saying I can't be a fence sitter? There is no middle ground in Mormonism? Can I believe that it's man-made, that it's a great church, and raise my kids in it, and still get to the celestial kingdom? Isn't what God wants me to do is seek truth? If I earnestly do so and this is what I come up with, will God fault me for it?

That is between you and God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I continue my study and prayer. This is all part of it. So you're saying I can't be a fence sitter? There is no middle ground in Mormonism? Can I believe that it's man-made, that it's a great church, and raise my kids in it, and still get to the celestial kingdom? Isn't what God wants me to do is seek truth? If I earnestly do so and this is what I come up with, will God fault me for it?

Your story is not uncommon, many have had their faith sorely tried because of seeming inconsistencies with church history. I went through this several years ago and was so depressed and filled with anxiety that I couldn't sleep at night.

I finally realized that the despair I was feeling was my answer and the peace of the Holy Spirit that I had so often experienced was the counter to that despair that was being offered by the adversary. If the Gospel was a neat little package of provable events, places and timelines, if we knew for a certainty where Bountiful and Zarahemla were.....we wouldn't need to have faith, at least not quite so much.

By the way, it is a very neat package, the Gospel plan of salvation, but it requires the Holy Spirit to discern that. I am not sure when I realized that it was a fruitless effort to read anti material, akin to a dog chasing it's tale....but I am glad I listened to the "still small voice " and learned the answers from the Lord rather than from men with an agenda.

Edited by bytor2112
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading through this thread, the only thing that comes to my mind is "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe"... Have you read the book or seen the movie? I'm thinking specifically of the part where Susan and Peter are talking with the Professor about how hard it is for them to reason with their sister Lucy who believes she found a "magical land" in the wardrobe. The Professor is surprised they don't believe her, and Susan says:

"Of course not. I mean, logically it's impossible."

The Professor then presents a very logical argument in favor of their sister's discovery:

1. Lucy is an honest girl.

2. Edmund is a dishonest boy.

3. Either Lucy is telling the truth and Edmund is being dishonest (as is normal) OR Lucy has gone insane and Edmund is being honest.

Which is easier to believe?

Now, of course, you are probably following a very logical stream to come to your conclusions, as Peter and Susan did. They examined the wardrobe Lucy claimed to have found Narnia in. It appeared to be completely solid and held no magical qualities. They believed their sister was trying to play a game, was lying, or had just plain gone insane. I'm sure any of us in the same situation would have come to the same conclusion. This is just a story book, afterall, and in the real world there are no magical portals to other lands.

But- if you will for a moment, disengage from your strain of logic and try to follow a completely different one... you may find that your conclusions are not really as "logical" as you think they are. You may find that faith is not so foreign a concept afterall.

I understand your distress with the whole anti-apologetics debate. The problem is that both sides are trying to make everything black and white by following different logical paths. There are constant arguments back and forth, each trying to disprove the other. You have been caught up in one of these arguments- either the Book of Abraham is an inspired work of God or it is not. There are arguments out there trying to rip it apart and say it is not and lead you down a logical path to conclude that therefore the entire church is false. Then, there are other arguments out there trying to prove it is solid and true.

You will not get anywhere in these debates. You will always be a "fence sitter" if you try to make sense of all the back and forth and come to a "logical" conclusion. You need to take a step outside the box and follow an entirely different strain of logic. Just forget your doubts for a moment and toss them to the wind. Try to think like the Professor....

1. The Book of Abraham was written/translated by Joseph Smith.

2. He was either inspired of God and it is a true translation OR it is false.

Which is more believable?

If you go "examine the wardrobe" and look for physical proof, you will likely conclude that the Book of Abraham is false and therefore.... everything starts falling apart. It's like Peter and Susan having to admit that their sister has gone insane. However, if you instead examine the Book of Abraham itself- what is written in it- and examine all the other work completed by Joseph Smith who had no more than a grade school education.... it becomes easier to believe that this work was inspired, that God was working through Joseph Smith.

People here are telling you to pray and have faith, because sometimes that is what is required of us. Sometimes, logic just doesn't cut it, because religion and the gospel just aren't logical. You will keep going in circles, keep having doubts... Until you can build on your faith. Do you believe it is possible to "find a magical land in a wardrobe"? Do you believe that "Lucy" is honest? If you don't, I can understand. But just remember that belief is a choice, and when we cease to believe all the wonder and brightness starts to disappear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I've been on a tailspin for about a year and I'm about done with it all. What I mean by that is I feel like I've lost virtually all of my faith for a number of reasons, all being historical/doctrinal issues with the church. Now I feel like I've got the back breaker...the Book of Abraham.

It's widespread knowledge (apparently) that the Book of Abraham was completely wrong. What I mean is that now that we have scholars that can actually read the Egyptian language, we know that the Book of Abraham was simply a funeral text and nothing more. In other words Joseph Smith was completely wrong in this translation. There's no way of getting around this. There's not faith involved. We have the manuscript and it's been proven wrong.

My question is how do you wrap your mind around this? How do you come to terms with this and still feel good about Joseph Smith and the validity of everything else he did (or any of the other prophets for that matter)?

Thank you in advance for the responses. I'm sorry of my post isn't all that clear, but I'm dead tired physically, intellectually, and spiritually right now. Any help would be appreciated.

Not exactly. The Book of Abraham has more authenticity than people think. For one, the facsimiles' images are symbols, not actual representations. If you draw a stick person and say that's you its not really a picture of you, but a symbol.

Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

You're probably wondering what this has to do with anything. The image people attribute the symbol of Abraham to is said to be Osiris. In Egyptology, Osiris is referred to as the God of the underworld and the dead. In Luke 16:19-25 we actually see a parable that's very similar to how Abraham is portrayed in Facsimiles 1 & 3. He's symbolized by the image of Osiris. In the parable in Luke 16, Abraham is actually playing the role that Osiris would be doing, being over the underworld and death. Thus, in Luke, to be specific a parable given by Jesus Christ, Abraham is being attributed to the role Osiris has in Egyptology just like Abraham is attributed to the image of Osiris in the Facsimiles.

Apocalypse of Abraham: 11. And the angel said to me, "Abraham!" And I said, "Here am I." And he said, "Slaughter all these animals, and divide them into halves, the one against the other, but do not sever the birds. And give these to the men (i.e. angels) whom I will show you, standing by you, for these are the altar upon the Mountain, to offer a sacrifice to the Eternal but the turtle dove and the pigeon give to me, for I will ascend upon the wings of the bird, so that you may be able to see in heaven, and upon earth, and in the sea, and in the abyss, and in the under-world, and in the Garden of Eden, and in its rivers, and in the fullness of the whole world and its circle - you shall gaze into them all."

Compare that to Facsimile 2 that has Abraham seeing the creations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the response, but I'm not sure this applies to me. I consider myself very mature in the gospel. And I do have problems with the teachings. I thought for a long time it was just the way I interpreted them. But I've matured to the point that I no longer believe that. It seems from your thread that you had questions, but learned to turn it off and just believe. For example, it was God's will that Joseph Smith married women that were already married to faithful members of the Church. Do you accept that statement? I don't. I think there are a lot of things that you were probably learning that you've shut off. If that works for you, by all means, continue on your path. I can't do that, though.

I suppose you're no better at reading minds than anyone else. :eek:

Your 'facts' are highly suspect, but I can see that this is not at all clear to you. Best wishes.

HiJolly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DKM88, if I could speak on a somewhat meta level about your faith, you seem to be in Stage 4 of Fowler's stages of faith, and trying to reach Stage 5. Now, when I say this, I'm not saying that your faith is bad or slow, it just that that's where your faith is right now. There's a whole variety of material on Mormon blogs about this transition that I think will help you out not only with this issue, but with a variety of issues that are commonly had. MormonStories did a three part podcast (scroll down to episodes 15, 16, and 17) about how these stages of faith and how they relate to the LDS church, and Mormon Expression did their own two part series on the same thing focusing more on Stage 5.

Now, I present this model of faith because it's helped me a lot with a similar sort of issue. If you don't think this model applies to your faith you can ignore this post, but at least give it a chance. There's also another LDS forum that focuses more on helping those going through struggles of faith that you might find helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I've been on a tailspin for about a year and I'm about done with it all. What I mean by that is I feel like I've lost virtually all of my faith for a number of reasons, all being historical/doctrinal issues with the church. Now I feel like I've got the back breaker...the Book of Abraham.

It's widespread knowledge (apparently) that the Book of Abraham was completely wrong. What I mean is that now that we have scholars that can actually read the Egyptian language, we know that the Book of Abraham was simply a funeral text and nothing more. In other words Joseph Smith was completely wrong in this translation. There's no way of getting around this. There's not faith involved. We have the manuscript and it's been proven wrong.

My question is how do you wrap your mind around this? How do you come to terms with this and still feel good about Joseph Smith and the validity of everything else he did (or any of the other prophets for that matter)?

Thank you in advance for the responses. I'm sorry of my post isn't all that clear, but I'm dead tired physically, intellectually, and spiritually right now. Any help would be appreciated.

1. language is not immutable, nor are the stories that are passed through it.... let alone the problems of deciphering the proper symbolicism.

(IE if i painted a swastica on something you almost for sure think hitler's nazi germany rather than the original meaning of it)

2. we don't actually have or have all of the manuscript joseph used if i recall right- and not all funeral seals are the same.

3. and no there is not enough evidence to decisvely conclude it one way or the other... in otherwords theeres a lot left open for debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I'm probably going to go to bed, so I'll check back tomorrow afternoon and see what you've come up with. Good luck to you, my friend. I'm being serious. I haven't found any arguments that aren't flawed, so if you find one, awesome! You will have helped me tremendously.

Here is an argument for you. A Simple one. The Book of Abraham was translated by Joseph Smith in a manner that preserved an ancient Egyptian Colophon literary form that:

1. Was not known to Joseph Smith or any other man living at the time of Joseph Smith.

2. That there is not another single example of any modern literary composition in existence that possesses this literary format even to this day.

3. Joseph Smith did not display this literary format in any other thing he ever wrote.

I can understand in light of biased criticism that many experts may feel that Joseph did not produce a modern translation of ancient Egyptian prophesies preserved in sacred oral traditions and culture specific to the renewal of life beyond death. So you tell me -- how did Joseph produce an ancient Egyptian Colophon literary form dating back to the time of Abraham?

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we don't actually have or have all of the manuscript joseph used

The scroll Joseph used as the source of the Book of Abraham was lost in the great Chicago fire in 1871. In 1966 a museum in New York produced the fragments of papyri (now known as the Joseph Smith Papyri) and it was determined (somehow) those fragments were part of the Egyptian artifacts that were bought by the church that brought to Joseph the scroll he translated as the Book of Abraham.

The church has stated they aren't sure if the fragments are part of the source scroll or not. Regardless, they had/or let the fragments get tested and examined. There are discrepancies between modern egyptologists translation of the fragments and what appears in the Book of Abraham

Apologetics and experts who believed the fragments were part of the source scroll used by Joseph Smith have presented various explanations for this. There are specific details about the facsimiles that Joseph was correct on. The apologetic argument is that even though the exact translations of egyptologists of the fragments doesn't match every detail in the Pearl of Great Price, there was no way for Joseph to know that information. The idea that he lied about the scroll and the translation but happened to simply guess correctly on many specific details that do match the modern translation by egyptologists is unlikely to the point of impossible. Because neither side can definitively answer the other's challenges, and only offer partial explanations, there's a stalemate, in the eyes of the Apologetics anyway.

What has never been thoroughly investigated is the authenticity of those fragments as part of the actual source scroll. The idea has been suggested as an alternative explanation to the stalemate argument but I haven't found any studies that have been done on this idea. I was not happy with the stalemate answer given. I was disappointed when the apologetic community offered that up as the best response too. So I started looking deeper into the idea that these fragments are not what was translated.

I found a few documented accounts by people who personally saw, and sometimes handled the source scroll during the time of Joseph Smiths translation of it. Hugh Nibley recounted a story his uncle told him, in which Nibley's uncle and Joseph F. Smith were discussing the Book of Abraham and the Pearl of Great Price. Joseph F. Smith described his experience of seeing and holding the source scroll while visiting his uncle. A woman named Charlotte Haven (who was not a member of the church) describes in detail her experience of seeing the scroll in a letter she wrote. None of the descriptive accounts match any of the fragments from the museum.

It's worth noting she is also quoted in a different letter referring to Mormons as "oddballs" even though she was very friendly with the church and it's members.

There are also several accounts of people (once again, Mormon and non-Mormon and in this case the non-Mormon is also quoted calling Joseph Smith a "religious quack) who saw the scrolls, specifically the facsimiles. In every written account, there is a description given of the Priest in Facsimile No. 1 holding a knife. That the descriptions are of the papyri, not anything Joseph had made, is made clear.

The more digging you do, the more you realize whatever the JSP are, or what they look like, they are not what was used as a source for the translation of the book of Abraham. Not the text, not the facsimiles, this is nothing more than a case of mistaken identity and lazy investigation.

Final thought: Look at the whole history here, from Joseph with the scrolls to egyptologists translating funeral text. There is a 100 year gap in there where the papyri used as the source for the Book of Abraham were destroyed in the Great Chicago fire in 1871. Then the remains end up in an archive of some museum in New York, where the church says they don't know for sure if those are it.

This is another case of fraudulent "evidence" brought forth to discredit Joseph Smith and the church. This is as fake as the Salamander Letter, except the letter had better credentials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scroll Joseph used as the source of the Book of Abraham was lost in the great Chicago fire in 1871. In 1966 a museum in New York produced the fragments of papyri (now known as the Joseph Smith Papyri) and it was determined (somehow) those fragments were part of the Egyptian artifacts that were bought by the church that brought to Joseph the scroll he translated as the Book of Abraham.

The church has stated they aren't sure if the fragments are part of the source scroll or not. Regardless, they had/or let the fragments get tested and examined. There are discrepancies between modern egyptologists translation of the fragments and what appears in the Book of Abraham

Apologetics and experts who believed the fragments were part of the source scroll used by Joseph Smith have presented various explanations for this. There are specific details about the facsimiles that Joseph was correct on. The apologetic argument is that even though the exact translations of egyptologists of the fragments doesn't match every detail in the Pearl of Great Price, there was no way for Joseph to know that information. The idea that he lied about the scroll and the translation but happened to simply guess correctly on many specific details that do match the modern translation by egyptologists is unlikely to the point of impossible. Because neither side can definitively answer the other's challenges, and only offer partial explanations, there's a stalemate, in the eyes of the Apologetics anyway.

What has never been thoroughly investigated is the authenticity of those fragments as part of the actual source scroll. The idea has been suggested as an alternative explanation to the stalemate argument but I haven't found any studies that have been done on this idea. I was not happy with the stalemate answer given. I was disappointed when the apologetic community offered that up as the best response too. So I started looking deeper into the idea that these fragments are not what was translated.

I found a few documented accounts by people who personally saw, and sometimes handled the source scroll during the time of Joseph Smiths translation of it. Hugh Nibley recounted a story his uncle told him, in which Nibley's uncle and Joseph F. Smith were discussing the Book of Abraham and the Pearl of Great Price. Joseph F. Smith described his experience of seeing and holding the source scroll while visiting his uncle. A woman named Charlotte Haven (who was not a member of the church) describes in detail her experience of seeing the scroll in a letter she wrote. None of the descriptive accounts match any of the fragments from the museum.

It's worth noting she is also quoted in a different letter referring to Mormons as "oddballs" even though she was very friendly with the church and it's members.

There are also several accounts of people (once again, Mormon and non-Mormon and in this case the non-Mormon is also quoted calling Joseph Smith a "religious quack) who saw the scrolls, specifically the facsimiles. In every written account, there is a description given of the Priest in Facsimile No. 1 holding a knife. That the descriptions are of the papyri, not anything Joseph had made, is made clear.

The more digging you do, the more you realize whatever the JSP are, or what they look like, they are not what was used as a source for the translation of the book of Abraham. Not the text, not the facsimiles, this is nothing more than a case of mistaken identity and lazy investigation.

Final thought: Look at the whole history here, from Joseph with the scrolls to egyptologists translating funeral text. There is a 100 year gap in there where the papyri used as the source for the Book of Abraham were destroyed in the Great Chicago fire in 1871. Then the remains end up in an archive of some museum in New York, where the church says they don't know for sure if those are it.

This is another case of fraudulent "evidence" brought forth to discredit Joseph Smith and the church. This is as fake as the Salamander Letter, except the letter had better credentials.

thanks :)

I was just watching a video where there was one noted egyptologist who concluded that the figure raising his hands is correct, altho he still maintained that the translations were off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know exactly where DKM88 is coming from and can almost predict what will be in his near future. I know this because this is where I was only a few years ago. There is no grievous sin committed and DKM88 doesn't need to just "pray harder" as though there couldn't possibly be ANY reason to question anything in the church. Everyone has questions regarding some doctrine and many are able to put it on the shelf never to be touched again while others are not.

If I said that Bigfoot is real, would you believe me? All you have to do is meet with the bigfoot search groups, read ONLY their materials, because anything else would be anti-bigfoot and attend all their social gatherings. Oh yeah, and you need to pray about bigfoot with sincere faith. I mean, it has to be real right, they have sightings ALL THE TIME from people who have no motive for making this stuff up and there is evidence such as bigfoot prints.

All joking aside, I think DKM88 is taking the neutral position saying "sure, it could be true, but the evidence for it is lacking" just like Bigfoot, the loch ness monster, and alien abductions. He is not saying the church is full of liars and I am going to fight every last one of you until you lose your faith. Just my .02 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know exactly where DKM88 is coming from and can almost predict what will be in his near future. I know this because this is where I was only a few years ago. There is no grievous sin committed and DKM88 doesn't need to just "pray harder" as though there couldn't possibly be ANY reason to question anything in the church. Everyone has questions regarding some doctrine and many are able to put it on the shelf never to be touched again while others are not.

If I said that Bigfoot is real, would you believe me? All you have to do is meet with the bigfoot search groups, read ONLY their materials, because anything else would be anti-bigfoot and attend all their social gatherings. Oh yeah, and you need to pray about bigfoot with sincere faith. I mean, it has to be real right, they have sightings ALL THE TIME from people who have no motive for making this stuff up and there is evidence such as bigfoot prints.

All joking aside, I think DKM88 is taking the neutral position saying "sure, it could be true, but the evidence for it is lacking" just like Bigfoot, the loch ness monster, and alien abductions. He is not saying the church is full of liars and I am going to fight every last one of you until you lose your faith. Just my .02 cents.

Wow. I think you pretty much nailed it. Excellent analogy as well. One thing that has been discouraging (and even disturbing) to me is that as I've questioned things openly, people seem to either go into attack mode or simply don't want to hear what I have to say, and even sometimes deny that the sky is blue. I don't know...it's weird how life changes and you start to see things differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I've been on a tailspin for about a year and I'm about done with it all. What I mean by that is I feel like I've lost virtually all of my faith for a number of reasons, all being historical/doctrinal issues with the church. Now I feel like I've got the back breaker...the Book of Abraham.

It's widespread knowledge (apparently) that the Book of Abraham was completely wrong. What I mean is that now that we have scholars that can actually read the Egyptian language, we know that the Book of Abraham was simply a funeral text and nothing more. In other words Joseph Smith was completely wrong in this translation. There's no way of getting around this. There's not faith involved. We have the manuscript and it's been proven wrong.

My question is how do you wrap your mind around this? How do you come to terms with this and still feel good about Joseph Smith and the validity of everything else he did (or any of the other prophets for that matter)?

Thank you in advance for the responses. I'm sorry of my post isn't all that clear, but I'm dead tired physically, intellectually, and spiritually right now. Any help would be appreciated.

I came across a pretty interesting video on youtube that may help you out a bit.. It shows that this may not be a funeral text.

Take a look, perhaps it will help ease any problems you may be having:

It is a video by TheBackyardProfessor, he seems to know his stuff. I can't really speak on the matter in much depth myself, but perhaps if you shoot him a message he can further discuss it with you.

Hope it helps.

Edit:

There is more than one video, I did not see a playlist for it but there should be four parts. Here is a link of a basic search that should get you to them all.

Non-LDS Egyptologist AGREES with Joseph Smith! - YouTube

Edited by z_o_n_e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All joking aside, I think DKM88 is taking the neutral position saying "sure, it could be true, but the evidence for it is lacking" just like Bigfoot, the loch ness monster, and alien abductions. He is not saying the church is full of liars and I am going to fight every last one of you until you lose your faith. Just my .02 cents.

You can add the Higgs boson particle to that list, the last remaining particle yet to be discovered in the standard model. That has also been determined by the Large Hadron Collider to be non-existent with a probability rate of 95%. Yet has become the standard and hinge point on which multiple models in physics have been designed and are about tobe thrown out. Here is one response that has really put it in perspective ...

Scientists believe that the Higgs particle is necessary for everything in the universe to exist. Without it the universe would never have come into existence. Without it the planets would not orbit the sun. Without it time would be meaningless and there would be no purpose or meaning to anything in the universe. Scientists have long accepted the existence of the Higgs particle as being present in everything around us but cannot yet prove that it exists physically. The way matter behaves and interacts is proof enough of its existence. They accept its existence based on 'faith' that it exists.

So you can lump the standard model of particle physics into your group of bigfoot, the Locheness Monster, alien abductions and any other crack pot conspiracy theories you're trying to make the Book of Abraham guilty by association by . Hypocritical double standard science, mixed with unfounded superstition with a dash of strawman and guilty by associate fallacies and you guys finally figured it out. Congratulations.

There's my $5 bucks. I'll bill you for the rest.

Edited by beefche
inappropriate language removed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can add the Higgs boson particle to that list, the last remaining particle yet to be discovered in the standard model. That has also been determined by the Large Hadron Collider to be non-existent with a probability rate of 95%. Yet has become the standard and hinge point on which multiple models in physics have been designed and are about tobe thrown out. Here is one response that has really put it in perspective ...

So you can lump the standard model of particle physics into your group of bigfoot, the Locheness Monster, alien abductions and any other crack pot conspiracy theories you're trying to make the Book of Abraham guilty by association by . Hypocritical double standard science, mixed with unfounded superstition with a dash of strawman and guilty by associate fallacies and you guys finally figured it out. Congratulations.

There's my $5 bucks. I'll bill you for the rest.

Uh, thanks.

I have a question for you. What if I pray about Bigfoot and I believe with every fiber of my being that he is real by the power of a spiritual witness. Am I wrong?

Here's another question. A man prays in Iran and receives a profound spiritual witness that Islam is the one true religion. Is he wrong?

Could it be that a clearness of thought could be a spiritual witness? I believe that I've received that since studying the Book of Abraham, and it's been stunning.

Is your spiritual witness better or more valid than mine? Is your spiritual witness better or more valid than the Iranian muslim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share