My Paper On The Book Of Abraham Criticisms And Defenses - Please Review!

[TruthSeeker2013]

My paper: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tz1iy4q7w39wvor/The%20Book%20of%20Abraham%20Criticisms%20Defenses%20and%20Implications.pdf

I have found the Book of Abraham criticisms and defenses to be relatively complex and difficult to understand without visual aids. To solve these problems, I put together my own paper on the Book of Abraham. It includes 37 visual aids, and covers 6 main topics:

1. The Papyri's Age Proves That it Cannot Contain Abraham's Writing as Joseph Claimed
2. Joseph's Translation of the Facsimiles was Incorrect
3. The Church Proposes New Theories to Defend the Book of Abraham
4. The Missing Papyrus Theory Fails
5. The Catalyst Theory Fails
6. The Church Has Revised History in an Attempt to Minimize the Devastating Implications of the Book of Abraham

I would love your thoughts on my paper. What could I do to make it better? Did I get anything wrong? Any and all criticism is welcome!

[cdowis]

I strongly suggest that you break up each topic into different threads.  I know for myself that I am interesting in discussing the issues, but not six of them in one thread.

[Darren10]

Do I need Drop Box to view your document?

[cdowis]

No, just download it

[cdowis]

You may also want to consider the mnemonic theory by Tvedtnes which include the EAG as integral to the translation process.  FWIW, I know of only one apologist who advocates this theory.

 

This theory is generally ignored, in favor of Gee's missing roll theory, so perhaps we can resurrect it.

 

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/62181-tvedtnes-mnemonic-theory-and-book-of-abraham-translation/

[cdowis]

"by the hand of Abraham"

 

Joseph Smith assumed that this papyrus was an autograph, but was mistaken.  Similar to his understanding of BOM geography, as a translator, he can make mistakes and false assumptions on how to interpret the text.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

1. The Papyri's Age Proves That it Cannot Contain Abraham's Writing as Joseph Claimed

 

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/62208-“by-his-own-hand-upon-papyrus”-another-look-stephen-o-smoot/

[cdowis]

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/62208-“by-his-own-hand-upon-papyrus”-another-look-stephen-o-smoot/

 

I said it in one sentence.

[volgadon]

Very tendentious paper.

[bcuzbcuz]

My paper: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tz1iy4q7w39wvor/The%20Book%20of%20Abraham%20Criticisms%20Defenses%20and%20Implications.pdf

I have found the Book of Abraham criticisms and defenses to be relatively complex and difficult to understand without visual aids. To solve these problems, I put together my own paper on the Book of Abraham. It includes 37 visual aids, and covers 6 main topics:

1. The Papyri's Age Proves That it Cannot Contain Abraham's Writing as Joseph Claimed

2. Joseph's Translation of the Facsimiles was Incorrect

3. The Church Proposes New Theories to Defend the Book of Abraham

4. The Missing Papyrus Theory Fails

5. The Catalyst Theory Fails

6. The Church Has Revised History in an Attempt to Minimize the Devastating Implications of the Book of Abraham

I would love your thoughts on my paper. What could I do to make it better? Did I get anything wrong? Any and all criticism is welcome!

I enjoyed the read. Thank you.

One point I think you overlooked, although your paper's main thrust dealt with the subject in a different manner, is that in Chapter 1, Abraham talks of being bound to an altar, the same altar used for the sacrifice of three virgins. The three virgins are referenced three times in verse 11 and 12. Only trouble is, the Egyptians didn't have any virgin sacrifice on altars.

[cdowis]

Only trouble is, the Egyptians didn't have any virgin sacrifice on altars.

 

 

And you know this.... how?

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

A pagan God of fertility with ... with an ... no, it's too horrible to even contemplate; bodies, parts, and passions are gross and sinful and evil. 

THE HORRORZ

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

 

(Find the entire playlist/lecture here.)

Edited November 18, 2013 by JeremyOrbe-Smith

[drums12]

How can those who are unwilling to put faith in the witness of the Holy Ghost put unwavering faith in the "scholarship" of man?  This isn't meant as an attack on Truthseeker.  I honestly think critics and defenders put too much stock in academia.  Just my two cents.

[bcuzbcuz]

And you know this.... how?

The same way I know that the jackal headed figure, standing over Osiris, is Anubis, who isn't holding a knife. You can find out the same thing with a few months of studying Egyptology.

[Calm]

I enjoyed the read. Thank you.

One point I think you overlooked, although your paper's main thrust dealt with the subject in a different manner, is that in Chapter 1, Abraham talks of being bound to an altar, the same altar used for the sacrifice of three virgins. The three virgins are referenced three times in verse 11 and 12. Only trouble is, the Egyptians didn't have any virgin sacrifice on altars.

Should check before posting, but weren't they sacrificed for their beliefs and not for the purpose of virgin sacrifice? They were killed for the same reason the attempt on Abraham was made.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The same way I know that the jackal headed figure, standing over Osiris, is Anubis, who isn't holding a knife. You can find out the same thing with a few months of studying Egyptology.

The person is still said to be a preist. And further more the JS papryi seem to be quite in unique in manyways regardless if one accpets that the figure is holding a knife.

[bcuzbcuz]

Should check before posting, but weren't they sacrificed for their beliefs and not for the purpose of virgin sacrifice? They were killed for the same reason the attempt on Abraham was made.

The ancient Egyptians marched merrily off to war against any neighbors they considered rich enough or threatening enough to merit the effort. But apart from locking in some slaves and servants with the first pharaohs, a practice quickly abandoned as wasteful, there is no evidence of citizens being offered or killed because of beliefs. The Egyptians had hundreds of gods, with each town having its favorite(s). It was very hard to have the "wrong" belief. The early Christians (Coptic..who by the way believe they have the only true church) struggled against the Romans, but that is something different entirely.

[bcuzbcuz]

The person is still said to be a preist. And further more the JS papryi seem to be quite in unique in manyways regardless if one accpets that the figure is holding a knife.

The vignettes in Books of the Dead (actually, the Book of Coming Forth by Day) were not meant to portray actual events, any more than the temples wall coverings, always showing the king victorously crushing skulls of the enemies and single handedly defeating the opponents,, were meant to portray reality. Some masks from temples have been discovered, but it is unknown if priests dressed up while preparing bodies for mumification. Dressing up would not be necessary for painting a copy of a vignette.

[Calm]

Whether or not it was really Anubis or someone with a mask, the role is one of a priest though, isn't it? Anubis is acting as a priest even if it is him.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Whether or not it was really Anubis or someone with a mask, the role is one of a priest though, isn't it? Anubis is acting as a priest even if it is him.

That is my understanding even the critics would refer to that figure as a priest.

[Darren10]

I can't even download it.

[drums12]

I can't even download it.

 

Maybe browser settings?  I couldn't download it at work but could at home.

[cognitiveharmony]

That is my understanding even the critics would refer to that figure as a priest.

Both Egyptologists and critics may refer to that figure as a priest but never as the "idolatrous priest of Elkenah". Of course I believe that the reference would entail a priest playing the role of Anubis and not Anubis playing the role of a priest especially the priest to another God. It would be interesting if there is any evidence of Anubis ever being portrayed as sacrificing humans? 

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Both Egyptologists and critics may refer to that figure as a priest but never as the "idolatrous priest of Elkenah". Of course I believe that the reference would entail a priest playing the role of Anubis and not Anubis playing the role of a priest especially the priest to another God. It would be interesting if there is any evidence of Anubis ever being portrayed as sacrificing humans? 

Putting the priest thing aside do you agree that the JS papyri offers up several things that are unique to it not found on other papyri