Lost Book Of Abraham: Anti-mormon Video

[charity]

noggin, the definition of forge indicate that forge is a verb. You forge a forgery.

[Not quite me]

noggin, the definition of forge indicate that forge is a verb. You forge a forgery.

Does that mean you quand a quandary?

[maklelan]

I have read both of the texts you suggested, and I'm not seeing the striking similarities, other than that they both claim to have something to do with Abraham. What exactly are you seeing as being so striking? I haven't refused to address anything. Rather, I find your redefinition of a translation to be rather strained.

Let me give you an analogy. I give you a text that I tell you was translated from Spanish. I claim it's a menu from a Colombian restaurant. I give you some snippets of Spanish along with what I claim is a translation. You notice that the Spanish is actually a set of directions to the Prado in Madrid. You say, nevermind, the translation actually has a lot in common with actual Colombian menus, so therefore we need not restrict our definition of the word "translation."

Do you see why someone would have a problem with this approach? It's not that I flippantly dismiss the text so much as I find the evidence for its authenticity somewhat less than striking.

And now we're making judgments about whether I care about truth. Honestly, can we just disagree without questioning each other's motivations?

Don't worry, I will get to this when I have more time.

[maklelan]

Klaus Baer, one of the first to provide the church with an independent translation of the found 1966 papyri? His translation turned out nothing along the lines of the book of abraham context. I disagree when you say Mr. Baer said the book would be vindicated based on what the English says, not the Egyptian. I mean, from what the "real" english translation shows, is nothing but damning.

I'll take Klaus Baer's opinion over yours. He has the capacity for objective thought.

You should ask yourself why Joseph Smith failed to translate the papyri into what Klaus Baer et al, uh post rosetta stone era, did? And you should also ask yourself why indeed the english "translation" does contain such poignant jewish textural overtone and concepts.

Your obvious implication that he had a comprehensive understanding of ancient Jewish traditions because of his associations is a nice opinion, but it cannot be proven and does not account for everything I refer to.

I commend you for observing this. There is a ready and obvious reason.

Thank you.

Besides, Mr. Baer was being kind.

So, al la Dan Vogel you're going to tell me what the intentions and feelings of a person were decades ago based only on a simple text and your agenda. And you have a hard time understanding why we are suspicious of y'all.

It is a mental pretzel game to think that a serious non LDS scholar would actually suggest that the incorrectly translated book of abraham would be "vindicated" (what does that mean, proven true???) by what the english translation says. It's convenient that Mr. Baer is dead so he cannot explain what he meant.

I provided a pretty long list of other scholars who have said the same thing. You are welcome to investigate their claims instead of just assume they're lying (although that's appears to be the SOP for all anti-Mormons).

As for Nissim Wernick, the Jewish Rabbi... his text was published in 1968. The rabbi connects many kabbalistic concepts of pre existence, concept of a pre birth soul, supreme intelligence, among other things...It goes on and on. And you know, these parallels are to be completely expected and I will tell you why in a second. I do not believe that the honorable rabbi knew as we do know now that Joseph Smith was a student of the Kabbalah and other esoteric occultic features of the day. Smith tutored extensively under the guidance of Alexander Neibaur in 1841. We should take note that the 19th century was replete with a keen interest in Kabbalah and how its origins reflected upon Christian roots. see a very intriguing article:

Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 27, No. 3, Fall 1994, pp. 117-194

Joseph Smith and Kabbalah: The Occult Connection source: http://www.gnosis.org/jskabb1.htm

In the spring of 1841 there apparently arrived in Nauvoo an extraordinary library of Kabbalistic writings belonging to a European Jew and convert to Mormonism who evidently new Kabbalah and its principal written works. This man, Alexander Neibaur, would soon become the prophet's friend and companion

(see page three of this article, about half way down)

The God of Joseph Smith is a daring revival of the God of some of the Kabbalists and Gnostics, prophetic sages who, like Smith himself, asserted that they had returned to the true religion. . . . Either there was a more direct Kabbalistic influence upon Smith than we know, or, far more likely, his genius reinvented Kabbalah in the effort necessary to restore archaic Judaism

(see the first page)

Did this stuff happen or is it just another assumption employed to make sense of a situation that does not make sense outside of our telling of it (like that Joseph Smith hypnotized eight men at the same time, an accomplishment never before or since achieved)?

I think that rather explains why the english "words" (I won't stoop to directly call it a translation by any means) of the book of abraham have heavy ancient jewish textual overtones you are observing.

No, it's an explanation, it's an assumption, and it does not account for everything. I would also appreciate specific references if I am going to properly evaluate this claim.

[Pahoran]

Agreed. The book of the dead is just the book of the dead, nothing more than a egyptian breathing permit. ... but one thing it certainly is, is part of the ruse used by Joseph Smith to convince his followers that he could read Egyptian, was a prophet, and establish important supportive and much needed clarifications to church doctrine. (priesthood, polygamy)

Actually, a "ruse" is the one thing it certainly is not. One thing your accusation certainly is, is false. It is also baseless, and proceeds from no evidence. Therefore, it is the product of your own mind and will, and therefore it tells us nothing about Joseph, and only about you.

And what it tells us is that you assume Joseph to have a level of honesty and sincerity comparable to your own.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Joseph is quite beyond your comprehension.

That said, Her Amun, aren't you making an assumption about the 1967 papyri? It's clear to me that you are reading mostly Mormon apologetics. That claim you just shared is an old saw. It's one of many excuses that is hammered to death in Larsen's book, By His Own Hand On Papyrus. The claim that there is many feet of the scroll missing has been trounced. Joseph Smith could not read or translate egyptian. The oddball egyptian to english translations we have of his are certified bogus. Remember Smith's five degrees of egyptian grammar? Egyptian "grammar" does not have five degrees. But read Smith's exhaustive analysis and explanations of it... pretty impressive if it was'nt so... completely bogus. Here is the deal, if you are so sure that the 1967 Book of the Dead is not the ruse Joseph Smith used for writing the Book of Abraham, why don't you read Larsen's book? What do you have to lose?

I've a better idea: instead of reading a discredited anti-Mormon polemic, try reading some real scholarship on the subject. Among other things, you will find out that the Sensen text (Joseph Smith papyri I, XI and X) is not a "Book of the Dead" at all.

You will also find out that nobody who has an opinion worth discussing uses the word "ruse" or any of its cognates in connection with The Book of Abraham.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Noggin]

Did this stuff happen or is it just another assumption employed to make sense of a situation that does not make sense outside of our telling of it (like that Joseph Smith hypnotized eight men at the same time, an accomplishment never before or since achieved)?

you asked if "this stuff happened".

sigh..............................

No. No it did not. I made it all up. I am trying to trick you. I am not to be trusted. Please, for your safety, dismiss all I contribute here.

Noggin

post script: I see Paharon has added his 2 cents. I have yet to read his insights. Good to see you again, Mr. Pahoran. Last time we went rounds was what... Holley's Folley w/ the book of mormon maps, recall Angola etc. This should be a great exchange.

[Pahoran]

Klaus Baer, one of the first to provide the church with an independent translation of the found 1966 papyri? His translation turned out nothing along the lines of the book of abraham context.

Yes, and? Who ever said that it did?

I disagree when you say Mr. Baer said the book would be vindicated based on what the English says, not the Egyptian.

Tough luck. It's what he said.

I mean, from what the "real" english translation shows, is nothing but damning.

Actually, according to Baer, it is simply not relevant to Joseph's prophetic claims.

You should ask yourself why Joseph Smith failed to translate the papyri into what Klaus Baer et al, uh post rosetta stone era, did? And you should also ask yourself why indeed the english "translation" does contain such poignant jewish textural overtone and concepts. I commend you for observing this. There is a ready and obvious reason.

I.e. you are about to pull out a standard polemical dodge.

Besides, Mr. Baer was being kind. It is a mental pretzel game to think that a serious non LDS scholar would actually suggest that the incorrectly translated book of abraham would be "vindicated" (what does that mean, proven true???) by what the english translation says. It's convenient that Mr. Baer is dead so he cannot explain what he meant.

No, but if you claim that he didn't really mean what he said, then perhaps you'd like to parse his actual statement and say what he did mean.

As for Nissim Wernick, the Jewish Rabbi... his text was published in 1968. The rabbi connects many kabbalistic concepts of pre existence, concept of a pre birth soul, supreme intelligence, among other things.. in sum:

"Comparisons, therefore, can be made; parallels do exist between the BofA and Jewish literature, with regards to pre-mortal existence. Similar to the BofA there is a pre-earth state of man, these souls are different, but have the potential of becoming eqaul. These souls are consulted and take part in the affairs of heaven. This analysis affords a fuller understanding of some areas of correspondence between Judaism, its beliefs and concepts, and those of the BofA. Man is here to be proved, and if man is successful

while on earth, then the Lord will accept the souls back to their eternal abode where they will "have glory added upon their heads forever and ever."

Nachmonides states that "one day according to the Lord is equal to one thousand years." The "Genesis Rabbah" uses much the same language when it has God saying: "One of my days is equal to one thousand years" "In conclusion, both the BofA and Jewish literature are in agreement that the creation did not occur in 7 days as is reckoned, but rather in seven thousand years

It goes on and on. And you know, these parallels are to be completely expected and I will tell you why in a second. I do not believe that the honorable rabbi knew as we do know now that Joseph Smith was a student of the Kabbalah and other esoteric occultic features of the day.

Who are "we" and how do "we know" this?

Smith tutored extensively under the guidance of Alexander Neibaur in 1841. We should take note that the 19th century was replete with a keen interest in Kabbalah and how its origins reflected upon Christian roots. see a very intriguing article:

Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 27, No. 3, Fall 1994, pp. 117-194

Joseph Smith and Kabbalah: The Occult Connection source: http://www.gnosis.org/jskabb1.htm

In the spring of 1841 there apparently arrived in Nauvoo an extraordinary library of Kabbalistic writings belonging to a European Jew and convert to Mormonism who evidently new Kabbalah and its principal written works. This man, Alexander Neibaur, would soon become the prophet's friend and companion

(see page three of this article, about half way down)

The God of Joseph Smith is a daring revival of the God of some of the Kabbalists and Gnostics, prophetic sages who, like Smith himself, asserted that they had returned to the true religion. . . . Either there was a more direct Kabbalistic influence upon Smith than we know, or, far more likely, his genius reinvented Kabbalah in the effort necessary to restore archaic Judaism

(see the first page)

It is now no secret that the theosophy of Joseph Smith gets a jump start from Kabbalistic roots.

IOW, you uncritically accept this discredited and unsupported polemical claim because it supports your biases. Neibaur taught Joseph Hebrew; why on earth should he teach him Kabbalah? Where is Neibaur's alleged "extraordinary library of Kabbalistic writings?" Which of Joseph's contemporaries ever reports seeing it? What evidence is there that it ever existed?

BTW, there is no "theosophy" in any of Joseph's writings. Do you just throw these words around because they sound impressive, or is there more to it than that?

Nor, in fact, is there any "gnostic" influence. LDS scripture is about as un-gnostic as it is possible to get. If you disagree, then please tell us: where in all of Joseph's thought is the evil nature of matter? Where the complex angelic hierarchies? Where the notion of an inferior and evil creator-god? How about a radical distinction between Jesus the man and Christ the deity?

Even the Masonic connection to Smith is steeped in hermetic-kabbalistic tradition. And knowing that Smith tutored under the guide of Neibaur, and was himself a 33rd degree Free Mason makes the connection quite clear. It is a fact that:

Smith and his family had a variety of interactions with non-orthodox Western religious traditions generally termed "occult... Magical rituals, Kabbalah, Hermes Trismegistos, Rosicrucians, Seer's stones, divining rods, Masonic lore, and astrology

(same source)

No, that is not a "fact," but merely an opinion, based upon speculation and driven by an obsessively polemical agenda.

Newel and Avery note in their biography of Emma Smith, "Through Alexander Neibaur, Joseph Smith had access to ancient Jewish rites called cabalism at the same time he claimed to be translating the papyri from the Egyptian mummies [which became his Book of Abraham]. That [smith] not only knew something of Kabbalah, but apparently possessed a collection of original Jewish Kabbalistic works in Nauvoo, is however documented in material almost totally overlooked by Mormon historians

(same source)

I think that rather explains why the english "words" (I won't stoop to directly call it a translation by any means) of the book of abraham have heavy ancient jewish textual overtones you are observing.

So Joseph's presumed (never demonstrated) exposure to Neibaur's conjectured "Kabbalistic library" in Nauvoo explains the content of The Book of Abraham, which was translated eight years earlier in Kirtland?

Thank you for your earnest testimony of Joseph's prophetic gifts!

one last quote and I'll be on my way:

By the dawn of the nineteenth century the Hermetic tradition had developed sub rosa several elements characteristic of an incipient heterodox religion, including clear restorational aspirations. From this fertile bed sprang numerous occult fraternities and societies: societies Kabbalistic, alchemical, magical, and Masonic.

Please consider the religious/ magical world view of the 19th century that Smith was immersed in. He delved into the ancient texts, learned some of the intriguing Kabbalist, Masonic, Hermetic lore and incorporated his findings into his very own book of abraham.

And where is the documentation for all of this? Don't you know--or do you simply not care--that there is a large salamander-shaped hole running right through The Mighty Quinn's speculation about Joseph's alleged "magical world view?"

That makes much more sense than jumping to a rash conclusion that the english "translation" mimics ancient jewish texts and therefore the book of anraham must be "true".

You accused the forum of not addressing this claim of yours. This has been my attempt. If nothing else, at least you can see plainly that there is an extremely plausible reason for why the rest of the world does not become star struck by the product of Joseph's mind... the book of abraham.

I lied. One last quote:

one must recognize that the sophisticated Rosicrucian, Kabbalistic, and alchemical ideas represented at Ephrata had been quilted into Pennsylvania's esoteric lore for over one hundred years prior to Joseph's summer visits in the 1820s. If Smith did have contact with individuals influenced by these traditions (of which there must have been more than a few), his knowledge of things Hermetic, Kabbalistic, and alchemical would have been augmented.

(same source)

And this kind of freewheeling speculation is what passes for evidence in your "magical world view?"

Regards,

Pahoran

[Noggin]

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Joseph is quite beyond your comprehension.

Aw. Pahoran, we haven't even started the debate and already you are apologizing! What a gentleman.

I am more interested in your comments on the post I did on the last page about the Kabbalah connection to Smith and how that ties to the english content of the book of abraham. I worked an hour on that post last night. Pretty proud of it too. Swing away, there are a few good softballs in it.

Noggin

[Olavarria]

That said, Her Amun, aren't you making an assumption about the 1967 papyri? That claim you just shared is an old saw. It's one of many excuses that is hammered to death in Larsen's book, By His Own Hand On Papyrus. The claim that there is many feet of the scroll missing has been trounced.

I never said I believed in the missing papyrus theory. I dont know what Joseph meant by "translate" when he used the papyrus. Their are three possibilities 1) direct translation from a missing papyrus(like BoM and gold plates). 2) Book of Moses style translation(Joseph had a related text in his hand and brought forth another one, ex. translation of the Genesis gives us the BoMoses). 3) pure revelation( in D&C Joseph "translated" a partchement written by John the Divine. He didnt have the parchment in his pssesion). Which method did Joseph use for the BoA? I dont know.

It's clear to me that you are reading mostly Mormon apologetics.

Not so, I am quite familiar with anti-mormon work. I must admit that most of my reading has come from the Tanners, Living Hope ministries and the Recovery from Mormonism website. Believe it or not, some people actually understand church history and the gospel well enough so as not to be swayed by half truths and innuendo. Even more ghastly, some people actually have revieced personal revelation and know from God himself how true Joseph's claims are. Scary, I know.

Here is the deal, if you are so sure that the 1967 Book of the Dead is not the ruse Joseph Smith used for writing the Book of Abraham, why don't you read Larsen's book? What do you have to lose? If the book of Abraham was a fabrication, would you want to know?[/

Absolutly, that is why I have studied the matter thouroughly enough. If mormonism isnt true, then I waste about 100% of my life each day. I'm currently reading the biography of Joseph F. Smith and Royal Skousen's "Analysis of Variants in the BoM". When I'm done with the first I'll make an effort to find Larsen's book. Do you know where I can find an online version?

Also, You are stating that your previous posts are filled with fact. I doubt they are-- based on this short interaction with you and your claimed "fact" that the 1967 book of the dead is not Joseph Smith's prop source of the Book of Abraham.

Of course, I have filled it with lies. Afterall, Im mormon. Nothing in the world can exist to make the BoA look ancient , well, because you say so.

What is used to back up the assertion that Joseph Smith looked at BoD and pretended to read BoA? The KEP? Yes, the one character equals a paragraph theory. Wow, you guys are right. Maybe I should tear up my temple recommend.

[Olavarria]

The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus.[

Funny, the first edition read "A Translation of Some ancient Records that have fallen into our hands, from the Catecombs[sic] of Egypt, purporting to be the writings of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand upon papyrus."(TS, March 1, 1842) Ya, Abraham wrote the text of the BoA. Just like Matheww wrote the text of Mathew, though the original has not survived.

This wording is taken directly from the first page of the Book of Abraham

Actually it was a later addition.

This is all pretty much as bogus as it gets. You have the figures 1 through 12, and you have 12 completely bogus translations of these 12 figures. Well? I am just going to take a wild guess and say the rest of the book of Abraham does not have much more credulity than this. And incidentally, if you read a few books, you find that this is so

A thinly vailed ad hominum. Ive read plenty my friend. Again, I subscribe to the semetic adoption/redaction theory.

Please answer me about Smith's laborious explanations of the five degrees of egyptian grammar. He spent significant amount of time on that. Yet it failed to resemble anything remotely egyptian. I gather you might try to tell me he was just working things out in his mind... practicing... showing god he was serious about translating the papyri... But examine the timeline and you see that Joseph Smith declared it was many things (Written by father abraham, served under king neko, etc) prior to starting the invented egyptian alphabet and grammar. So apparently, Smith "knew" egyptian prior

Pure conjecture. I dont believe Joseph ever knew egyptian. He translated by the gift he had. I believe he was studing out in his mind, as is the proper antecedent to revelation, as stated in the earlier sections of the D&C 9:7-9,

Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me. But, behold, I say unto you, that you must astudy it out in your bmind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your dbosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall ffeel that it is right.

I have evidence that Joseph Smith desperately needed a miracle to keep his struggling church afloat. Doctrinal issues were causing high ranking church goers to leave... and his cronies were beginning to doubt this whole polygamy shpeel.[/

Exactly, not a shred of evidence that Joseph was claiming to create an inspired reconstruction of damaged papyri.

I mean, add it all up

Ok

Polygamy

A high and holy principle.

angels who will kill god's prophet if he didn't take multiple wives

Their had to a restoration of all things.

anachronisms a plenty in the book of Mormon

start an anachronisms thread and well talk about it.

Flavius Josephus laced into the Book of Abraham

start a thread.

the variant accounts of the first vision

Ive read every account. Diffirenet details in each ,yet not one contradiction.

the seer stone and money digging escapades with its concurrent court conviction by Judge Neeley that Smith was a glass looker.[/

God speaks to men in their onw language and in their weakness. Funny how he dictated the BoM with his head buried in the hat, makes it very difficult to google.

The only thing I am grateful for is that it works for you. I applaud that. Just know that it seems odd that the rest of the world cannot see the importance of what you hold up as empirical, undeniable, factful truth.

I never claimed that the BoA was currently "provable" by scientific means. However, the anti's claim that they can scientifically "prove" that it is bogus. They are wrong.

bleh. tasteless. which I am positive was your goal in response to my jabs

Now, you see what you sounded like. This is the complete quote " Funny, I never accused anti's and otherwise non-members of doing the same. If I were to say, "It's amazing to see you stuff your bloated arguments into that tiny bag of preconceived notions you carry around. It's bursting at the seams about now. The church has to be a fraud in your world, so you cannot think objectively about the possibility that the Book of Abraham is an ancient text , beacuese you would have to repent, get rid of your porn and rejoin the church." I dont play that game." Thats what I said.

It's not an egyptological subject? How so?[

What we are talking about is two different approaches. Anti's focus on how Joseph brought forth the BoA. Mormons focus on the BoA itself. Our method is more honest. 1)The translation was a supernatural one, a process that Joseph didnt describe. How can that scientifically be tested? 2) The BoA belongs to a now attested ancient genre of Abrahamic literature. The actual BoA is an example of Biblical Pseudopigraphy.

Is there some second meaning in these scrolls and facsimiles that no one but the Mormons can identify?

Super straw man.

What would an ancient jew want to do with egyptian hieroglyphics? Correct me if I am wrong, but the ancient jews despised all things pagan. Egyptian=pagan, so why would the god of Israel write cryptically in a language abhorred by the jews? Uh, okay I am assuming that you are trying to say that the ancient jews took some special meaning to the facsimilies and pappyri

Not so, Jews through various times in history adopted many egyptian religious motifs to their onw religion. The Testament of Abraham contains a jugement scene where Abel judges the dead. This judgement scene has been identified(BY NON MORMON SCHOLARS) as having been a redaction of the psycho ecstacy in BoD 125. The Apocalypse of Abraham contains great parrallels to the hypocephalus. As he is sacrificing Abraham sees a vision of a big circular picture that is two sided; one side is has good people the other evil people. The two ducoments share phraseology and some imagery. Many of the proverbs were plaigerized from the sayings on Amenope. Also the story of Lazarus in the bosum of Abraham is a reworking of a rabbinic tale that was derived from an egyptian tale. THIS HAS ALL BEEN CORROBORATED BY NON MORMON SCHOLARS.

Synopsis of Relationship between Amenemope and Proverbs

Amenemope

Proverbs

Subject

1. 3/9â??11, 16

22:17â??18

Appeal to hear

2. 1/7

22:19

Purpose of instruction

3. 27/7â??8

22:20

Thirty sayings

4. 1/5â??6

22:21

Learning a worthy response

5. 4/4â??5

22:22

Do not rob a wretch

6. 11/13â??14

22:24

Avoid friendship with violent people

7. 13/8â??9

22:25

Lest a trap ruin you

8. 7/12â??13

22:28

Do not remove landmarks

9. 27/16â??17

22:29

Skillful scribes will be courtiers

10. 23/13â??18

23:1â??3

Eat cautiously before an official

11. 9/14â??10:5

23:4â??5

Wealth flies away like an eagle/geese

12. 14/5â??10

23:6â??7

Do not eat a stingy person's food

13. 14/17â??18

23:8

Vomiting results

14. 22/11â??12

23:9

Do not speak before just anyone

15. 7/12â??15

23:10â??11

Do not remove landmarks of widows

16. 11/6â??7

24:11

Rescue the condemned

Semitic Transformations from the Vignette to Chapter 125 of the Book of the Dead to the Judgment (Psychostasy) Scene of the Testament of Abraham

Egyptian Context

Semitic Context

1. Osiris

Abel

2. Anubis

Dokiel

3. Horus

Purouel

4. Thoth

Enoch or an angel

5. Maat

An angel

Semitic Transformations from Hypothetical Egyptian Original Underlying the Demotic Story of Setna to the Deducible Jewish Popular Version (from which the Lucan Account of the Rich Man and Lazarus Descends)

Egyptian Context

Semitic Context

1. Osiris

Abraham

2. Amnte

Bosom of Abraham

3. Horus (or falcon of Horus)

Angels

Semitic Transformations from a Hypocephalus to the Apocalypse of Abraham

Egyptian Context

Semitic Context

1. A circular disk representing the upper world and the netherworld

Abraham is shown "the fulness of the whole world and its circle"

2. "O Mighty God, Lord of heaven and earth, of the hereafter, and of his great waters" [from Facsimile 2, left middle]

Abraham is shown "what is in the heavens, on the earth, in the sea, and in the abyss"

3. Four Sons of Horus

A. Hapy [baboon]

B. Imsety [man]

C. Duamutef [jackal]

D. Qebehsenuf [falcon]

Four fiery living creatures, each with four faces (via Ezekiel 1â??2)

Lion [or ox]

Man

Ox [or lion]

Eagle

The Facsimiles and Semitic Adaptation of Existing Sources

Kevin L. Barney

[Olavarria]

bump

It looks like the debate has come full circle, as you will see if you read the first pages.

[Not quite me]

Never mind

[Noggin]

I think I am dense. I could not follow all of your post, Her Amun. The quotes are all messed up and, to me, it is difficult to follow who said what.

But look, I appreciate the depth of knowledge you are trying to portray here. Obviously the topic is one you are keenly studying. And that is wonderful. To me, it is fascinating how the various opinions concerning the authenticity of the Book of Abraham differ. If one is dispassionate and decidedly non mormon, they usually find the opinion that the Book of Abraham is bogus to fit well for them. On the other hand, if one has committed their entire life to Mormonism, they most often find that the opinion that the Book of Abraham is divine scripture to be more than opinion... they "know" that the Book of Abraham is Truth. Often, the informed Mormon needs to run the gammet of oddball arguments that few outside of their circle relate to as bonefide in order to sit well with their claim that the Book of Abraham is what it claims it is.

Unfortunately, Mormonism is plagued with a few such items. I was unable to reconcile these and I chose to leave my allegiance at the door.

Lastly, before I get on my horse and ride on into my sunset away from this thread, here is an opinion about Larsen's book, "By His Own Hand on Papyrus"

Dr. Stephen E. Thompson holds a Ph.D. degree in Egyptology from Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island. He is the second LDS scholar to earn a doctorate degree in Egyptology. In a paper given at the 1993 Sunstone Symposia in Salt Lake City (August) and Boston (November) Dr. Thompson presented his reasons for concluding that Josesph Smith did not produce the Book of Abraham by translating it, as he claimed, from an Egyptian papyrus scroll he had obtained in 1835.

In the question and answer period that followed his paper at the Northeast Sunstone Symposium, Dr. Thompson was asked for his opinion of the book By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus by Charles M. Larson (published in 1992 by the Institute for Religious Research, 1340 Monroe Ave. N.W., Grand Rapids, MI 49505). While he indicated that he does not endorse the book in its entirety, Dr. Thompson stated that:

In my opinion, it's the best source to go to if you want to know what's been going on with the Book of Abraham .... Nothing that's been written from an apologetic point of view comes close to it in accuracy.

You can find the book anywhere for around 10 dollars. Or try www.half.com where you can find it in decent condition shipped to your door for half price or less.

Take care!

Noggin

[Dale]

In regards to Charles Larsons book I have two DVD by Kerry Shirts demonstrating how his knowledge outdoes Larsons knowledge by far. I think both of them were in reply to chapter 10 of By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus. I think he did a third DVD treating the book. I think the potential exists for better books written by LDS apologists on the Book of Abraham issue exists, but they need to publish a book. Not sure any tough books are in the works exists though.

I have seen several responses to his chapter 11 enitled if I recall right LDS Intellectual Approaches to the Papyrus. Neither advocates of the missing papyrus idea, or catalyst revelation idea feel a need to give up because of anything Charles Larson say's. Some conceded he is somewhat right about the red and black rhubrics argument as being a faulty argument. But they don't see their approach to the papyrus as weak at all.

FAIR has researched the claim that Jews would never write Egyptian because they were their enemies. And this has been demonstrated to be a refuted argument. It's been awhile since I looked at my copy of Larson's book, but I think it may be a point he may have raised also.

I just found the book helpful in regard to my favorable opinion of the Book of Abraham. Even Joseph smith's explanation of the facimilies though wrong from a conventional translation still have a degree of support from Egyptology. Kerry Shirts research on this confirmed by others before him by others has been ignored by critics. I would rather have 1 pro-Book of Abraham LDS researcher than ten non-Mormon Egyptologists that refuse to responsibly interact with current LDS scholarship.

I am convinced if FAIR had been smart enough to put out a book on Larson's book it would devestate his position. I have seen weaknesses in his case pointed out that makes me warn people against endorsing the book.

[maklelan]

Did this stuff happen or is it just another assumption employed to make sense of a situation that does not make sense outside of our telling of it (like that Joseph Smith hypnotized eight men at the same time, an accomplishment never before or since achieved)?

you asked if "this stuff happened".

sigh..............................

No. No it did not. I made it all up. I am trying to trick you. I am not to be trusted. Please, for your safety, dismiss all I contribute here.

Noggin

post script: I see Paharon has added his 2 cents. I have yet to read his insights. Good to see you again, Mr. Pahoran. Last time we went rounds was what... Holley's Folley w/ the book of mormon maps, recall Angola etc. This should be a great exchange.

My question is perfectly valid and is not really diffused with a dash of sarcasm. The texts you quote do not prove these theories, they only say that they are "apparently" true. This is a nice way of saying it "might have happened." I am asking you if you have anything stronger than an inference that these theories you're pushing are verifiable. Simple enough, innit?

[Olavarria]

Noggin

I think I am dense. I could not follow all of your post, Her Amun. The quotes are all messed up and, to me, it is difficult to follow who said what.

Indeed, their was something wrong with the posting features. I have clean ed it up.

If one is dispassionate and decidedly non mormon, they usually find the opinion that the Book of Abraham is bogus to fit well for them. On the other hand, if one has committed their entire life to Mormonism, they most often find that the opinion that the Book of Abraham is divine scripture to be more than opinion... they "know" that the Book of Abraham is Truth.

I understand your point, but do you realize that it is somewhat of an ad hominum?

I understand my last post was tough to read, but I have cleaned it up. I responded to your second to your last points. Would you be so kind as to respond to mine?

[Olavarria]

The whole point of this thread was to discuss the flawed logic of "The Lost Book of Abraham" video, namely, their linch pin "Joseph believed 1 character equals a paragraph" theory. The BoA is belongs to genre of bibilical pseusopigrapha , along side the Apocalypse of Abraham and Testament of Abraham. Like her two cousins she has borrowed motifs from the hypocephalus and the BoD. Even if you dont believe that it is authentic ancient scripture such presedents set by ToA and AoA cannot be denied. SOME ANCIENT JEWS BORROWED EGYPTIAN MOTIFS SOME FROM THE BoD, AND POSSIBLY FROM HYPOCEPHALI AS WELL.

I KNOW that Joseph Smith translated an ancient work; I know from personal revelation. The BoA is older than the Bible. However, I dont know the Prophet's modus operandi and how he was working with the Lord in bringing forth this scripture.

The anti's claim they know how Joseph did it. My point being that they lack evidence to support the claim that Joseph looked at the BoD,and from each chracter translated paragraphs of material. Their only "evidence" to support such a claim are the 6 continous heiratic characters at the side of the paragraphs, which were written in a differnt ink than the BoA manuscript, sometimes not matching the paragrahs, overspilling into the margins and in one case spilling into the english text. It seems clear to me, that this shows that said heiratic characters were added AFTER the translation(whatever that was). Why they were put there, no one knows. Why only 6 were used and not 50 is anyones guess.

TRANSLATIONS ARE DONE FROM READING ONE LANGUAGE AND WRITING THE MEANING IN ANOTHER. oNE DOES NOT PROVIDE THE MEANING AND THEN, AFTER SOME PERIOD OF TIME, WRITE THE CORRESPONDING PARAGRAPH CONTAINING( ) CHARACTER.

These issues are not addressed in the video. rather joseph is smart enough to guess thru his study of hebrew that egyptian writes right to left, yet so dumb so as to assume that 1 chracter equals numerous paragraphs. Lets not forget that Oliver Cowdery, WW Phelps and others of the early bretheren were studying hebrew with Joseph in the school of the prophets. These two men functioned as Joseph's scribes. They too would have thought that 1 character=several paragraphs as stupid, if not strange.

[Dale]

I think if one character equals a paragraph to Joseph Smith that God wanted him to learn for himself he couldn't be literally translating. What better way to indicate what the papyrus wasn't by giving him what it wasn't. Maybe Joseph Smith couldn't believe what he saw about the the papyrus, and story of Abraham conflicting.

If Abraham could have been told to sacrifice Issac Joseph Smith could have been told to try & get a text related to Abraham out of it. Worst case scenario to me is that Joseph Smith was allowed to misunderstand his translation as a literal translation from the papyrus.

Maybe the Lord never told him that the text was from Abraham, but simply gave him something related to Abraham which Joseph Smith mistakenly identified the papyrus as being written by Abraham. The Lord wouldn't be lying to Joseph smith, but letting him jump to conclusions to learn how to apply D.&C. 9:7-9 better. If it failed to work for Joseph Smith is the method a lie. Jame's White had this Min is not God tract. In facimile 2:7 I think Min is identified as God. Of course Min is not God, and it's only a false idea of God, or Gods they had. Joseph Smith should have felt stupor of thought about his translation, and he could not expect the Lord to correct him if he did not feel that.

Of course if the KEP has been misread & the scribes not Joseph Smith was responsible for it the source of the Book of Abraham is still missing. The characters & paragraph's of text have to be contemporary with translation, or the material was produced after the translation.

-------

I do think Living Hope Ministry needs to do a Lost Book of Abraham film volume 2. They can try & dig into & refute pro-Book of Abraham evidences a thing they ignored in the film. As long as I see such evidence as valid I do not see Joseph Smith guilty of fraud. So I trust the Lord may have inspired his ideas to a degree. I am not sure a translation has to be right in order for a degree of inspiration to be involved.

[zippythepinhead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNoxKcWFEPw

I like how similiar the Book of Dead is to the LDS temple rituals.

These people are missing the boat,theyobviously arnt aware of, or have purpusfully ignored the latest LDS thought on this subject. Enjoy.

Is it another "revelation"? SOunds like another LDS effort to whitewash their never ending problem with doctrine and fantasy claims

Hi my name is Zippy. Can you explain your version of my faith?

[e=mc2]

Noggin:

Smith tutored extensively under the guidance of Alexander Neibaur in 1841.

Kerry:

I have seen this claim before. I have never yet learned where you get the evidence. Call for references.....and since you say extensively, I suppose that means your references had better be good......

[e=mc2]

For Dale....... I am also bringing out yet more Egyptological information on the facsmiles on my web blog, as well as my podcasts, available for downloaing from my blog.

Just type in where the search engines are the sngle word backyardprofessor with no capital letters and no spaces, and wala, yer there with regular updates.....

Best,

Kerry

[Ron Beron]

Noggin:

Smith tutored extensively under the guidance of Alexander Neibaur in 1841.

Kerry:

I have seen this claim before. I have never yet learned where you get the evidence. Call for references.....and since you say extensively, I suppose that means your references had better be good......

Hi Kerry,

My wife is a direct descendent of A. Neibaur and it has been 'understood' that he did tutor JS in Hebrew as well as fix his broken tooth which was broken by the mobs. I have a copy of his journal and his son's, Hyrum, as well. Hopefully, I can give you some direct source evidences later.

[Dale]

Kerry I thought your blog looked nice.

Most critic's are unbudgingly fixated on the source being found in 1967, and really ignore parts of Egyptology that place the Book of Abraham in a good light. And some of this research demonstates stuff that cannot just all be lucky guesses on the part of Joseph Smith. Where is Dr. Stephen E. Thompsons research demonstrating your type of research is on the wrong track? Where is Charles Larsons reply to your research? His book is weak because he acted as if the debate was over with his one book.

I would have been more impressed with Larson's book if he had acknowledged pro-Book of Abraham evidence as having merit. But that Satan inspired Joseph Smith with his ideas. That's better than me finding out how unaware, and out of touch he truly is of your type of research. So I much rather have 1 pro-book of Abraham apologist like yourself than 10 anti-Book of Abraham Egytologists as my source of knowledge on the subject.

I just see truth in the Book of Abraham whether the source was found in 1967, or not. And these Book of Abraham evidences are better than Bible reliability evidences circulated by Evangelical apologists. If the Book of Breathings was the reputed source God made sweet lemonade out of a lemon in giving us the Book of Abraham.

[Pahoran]

Noggin:

Smith tutored extensively under the guidance of Alexander Neibaur in 1841.

Kerry:

I have seen this claim before. I have never yet learned where you get the evidence. Call for references.....and since you say extensively, I suppose that means your references had better be good......

Hi Kerry,

My wife is a direct descendent of A. Neibaur and it has been 'understood' that he did tutor JS in Hebrew as well as fix his broken tooth which was broken by the mobs. I have a copy of his journal and his son's, Hyrum, as well. Hopefully, I can give you some direct source evidences later.

I don't think there's any dispute that Neibaur taught Joseph Hebrew. What is questioned is (1) the undemonstrated existence of Neibaur's vast library of Kabbalistic stuff, (2) his unattested teaching of it to Joseph, and (3) Joseph's supernatural working of it into The Book of Abraham years before he met Neibaur.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Dale]

Where did Joseph Smith's knowledge come from if not from Neibar's library? Perhaps Satan's library is larger. Ideas don't pop out of thin air if borrowed from book's. So if Joseph Smith did not have a Kaballistic library to borrow from then God, or the Devil must have helped him get greater knowledge. So I am not sure he borrowed from book's he never saw.