Isn't the Book of Abraham issue the same as the Kinderhook issue?

[_Who Knows]

I suppose, but one significant difference between the two situations is that the Kinderhook Plates was an intentional fraud played against Joseph Smith while the Book of Abraham papyri were not sold to him by those lying in wait.

I'm not sure that's relevant. Maybe a little i guess. But it does not take away from the fact that both items are totally unrelated to 'scripture'.

That we don't have a translation of the fraud seems to be in favor of Joseph's divine calling.

That's what I'm trying to point out. It's the same issue. They're both 'frauds' (both do not translate to scripture). He 'translated' one, and didn't 'translate' the other. So what?

As for the catalyst theory or other Book of Abraham theories, I admit to being lost.

Why don't you do something about it?

What i find interesting is DCP says basically the same thing. Well, he just says he has no interest in it. But this, in my opinion, is one of the biggest smoking guns, and I'd think it would deserve the most attention. But I suppose by downplaying it, they're showing other TBM's that it's not, or shouldn't be, an issue.

What I also find interesting, is what you said here, and above "As to the theories behind the Book of Abraham, I don't really understand them. I really don't have the expertise so I don't care for that game at all."

What is interesting, is that you somehow have enough 'knowledge' to know they're 'true', yet don't have the knowledge to look at them critically. In other words, anyone can accept it as true - without knowing the slightest background behind them. Yet to claim that it's not true, you have to have some 'expertise'.

[_Polygamy Porter]

Ahh! the Papyrus is one of my favorite traps that I lead the online missionary fools into!

It is quite easy. I have not found one that knew about the 1966 rediscovery of the scrolls.

I have lost track of the number of testimonkeys that have fallen into that hole!

[_Jersey Girl]

I have noticed how the apologists/TBM's defend the kinderhook incident from the viewpoint that Joseph Smith didn't really make a translation. There are no scriptures based on the kinderhook plates, there were no revelations, etc. The reason for doing so, of course, is because the kinderhook plates were a fraud - they weren't real. Let me rephrase that, they were real, but they didn't have 'writings of scripture'.

So lets turn to the Book of Abraham. The 'missing scroll' theory is all but dead. We know Joseph Smith 'translated' the Book of Abraham from papyri that are unrelated to the text of the Book of Abraham.

In other words, in terms of the text of the papyri vs. the text of the Book of Abraham - the papyri were 'frauds' in the same sense that the kinderhook plates were frauds - neither of them contained writings of scripture.

However, I sense that if a piece of scripture were suddenly discovered today, that Joseph Smith had translated from the kinderhook plates, then a lot of TBM's would have a problem with this. But this is not so with the Book of Abraham - even though the basic issues are the same. The Book of Abraham would get a pass, while the kinderhook translation would not - even though they are basically the same issue.

But who knows, maybe not. Maybe TBM's would just turn to some 'catalyst theory' for the kinderhook plates.

The main difference, as I see it, is that Joseph had control over the Book of Abraham/Papyri but in the case of the Kinderhook plates, control was in other hands entirely.

[_asbestosman]

I'm not sure that's relevant. Maybe a little I guess. But it does not take away from the fact that both items are totally unrelated to 'scripture'.

I disagree because I think that the Book of Abraham is more related to scripture than critics realize. Maybe the missing papyrus has some merit. Or maybe the text was just inspiration similar to the way that we obtained the Book of Moses from part of Genesis through revelation. I believe the parallels in the papyri would at least be related in a way similar to that.

[_Tarski]

Anyone can wonder what it'd be like if their bowel movements produced gold (would it lead to inflation? Would they be held prisoner on a diet of Ex-lax?).
....
Who hasn't wondered when the earth is going to get hitched, have kids, get her endowment, and be baptized for dead earths if indeed she was baptized. Heck, why does the earth need baptism while the mentally handicapped and also other creatures do not? Hmmmmm.

ROTFLMAO

Hey man, when are you going to cross over to the bright side? It only hurts your eyes for a few hours and then its OK, I promise.

[_Who Knows]

I disagree because I think that the Book of Abraham is more related to scripture than critics realize. Maybe the missing papyrus has some merit. Or maybe the text was just inspiration similar to the way that we obtained the Book of Moses from part of Genesis through revelation. I believe the parallels in the papyri would at least be related in a way similar to that.

Why do you think so? You just admitted that you hadn't really looked at the issues. Maybe the missing papyrus has some merit? So you have looked into it? Or are you just basically holding out 'hope'?

The plain facts are that the papyri do not translate into the Book of Abraham. And it's quite obvious that Joseph Smith got the Book of Abraham from the papyri.

Anyhow, I'm not wanting to get into a debate on the Book of Abraham. If nothing else, hopefully someone reading, who might view a KP translation as obviously fraudulent (even given some 'revelation' or 'catalyst' theory), might look in the mirror on their own view of the Book of Abraham.

Or maybe not.

So, how's the new house?

[_asbestosman]

Hey man, when are you going to cross over to the bright side? It only hurts your eyes for a few hours and then its OK, I promise.

I don't know when but I hope never. Besides, from my perspective it's the Dark Side and I wouldn't know what to do without my horns.

More seriously I don't see the point in crossing over to non-theism. I'd be hurting my family in return for . . . nothing. And it'd be the kind of hurt that'd last much longer than a few hours. I see nothing in non-theism. That's not to say non-theists don't make great contributions. It's to say that I find the package to offer me no value. With theism I get to keep my family in this life for certain and, if I'm right, in the next life too. No need for Pascal's sucker bet. The choice for me is clear. the benefits of theism are far too great.

But what of truth? I plug along in my way in what I feel comfortable in and I make fun of what I feel comfortable ridiculing. Why just last week I learned that everyone needs a new temple recommend because the new ones have a bar code for better security. Smartaleck that I am I asked why the gift of discernment wasn't sufficient. I said it for a reaction, but got none. Other things I say to get my TBM family / friends to think outside the box. I see no benefit to leaving the church and ample freedom within it. No knowledge I feel certain of leads me to think the church isn't true and I should therefore join the other side.

[_Who Knows]

ABMan - from my perspective, the only answer (and only valid reason) I could give to Tarski, would be to say "because i believe it to be true". For if you didn't believe it to be true - would you still remain in it?

[_asbestosman]

Why do you think so? You just admitted that you hadn't really looked at the issues. Maybe the missing papyrus has some merit? So you have looked into it? Or are you just basically holding out 'hope'?

Memories from my PoGP class by Dr. Michael Rhodes. I'm not holding out hope so much as admitting my great ignorance. Why not educate myself? Because I don't feel it likely to be worthwhile any more than people routinely test themselves for rare diseases without a good reason to suspect the need.

The plain facts are that the papyri do not translate into the Book of Abraham. And it's quite obvious that Joseph Smith got the Book of Abraham from the papyri.

And I concede that you may be correct. Even then I think there are parallels from the text and figures. Now I'll grant that there may be some sticky issues about deception when it seems clear that the text refers to the facsimilies.

Anyhow, I'm not wanting to get into a debate on the Book of Abraham. If nothing else, hopefully someone reading, who might view a KP translation as obviously fraudulent (even given some 'revelation' or 'catalyst' theory), might look in the mirror on their own view of the Book of Abraham.

I think where we disagree most is in how significant the differences are between the two situations. You feel they are less significant than I do. I think it worth reflecting on, but mind you this. Your perspective will be very different than ours as you not only find it plausible that the Book of Abraham is a fraud perpetrated by Joseph Smith, but you find it likely. I find it unlikely. It is unfortunately hard to see from the other perspective. I think this is why we draw different opinions about the significance of the particular curcumstance sof the KP fraud vs the Book of Abraham papyri.

So, how's the new house?

Pretty good, thanks, except that the upstairs is hot. We live upstairs because the downstairs is a bit of a mess. You see, ironically we removed all the asbestos ceilings (only had it downstairs) just before we moved in.

[_asbestosman]

ABMan - from my perspective, the only answer (and only valid reason) I could give to Tarski, would be to say "because I believe it to be true". For if you didn't believe it to be true - would you still remain in it?

I do suffer from doubts from time to time. I just doubt everything else even more. I guess that's why I remain. That and I believe it to be true more than I believe it not to be true.