The Book of Abraham - Shifting sands

[_Tobin]

No, they are Egyptian in origin and should not be used.

Well I guess you better call up the President Monson and let him know. Because I a pretty sure that he thinks they are real

TSM is uninspired. If he were, he'd ask the Lord and fix more than just that problem.

[_Drifting]

Here is the official introduction to the Book of Abraham as copied from the current Pearl of Great Price explanation.

The Book of Abraham. A translation from some Egyptian papyri that came into the hands of Joseph Smith in 1835, containing writings of the patriarch Abraham. The translation was published serially in the Times and Seasons beginning 1 March 1842, at Nauvoo, Illinois. (See History of the Church, 4:519–34.)

http://www.LDS.org/scriptures/pgp/introduction?lang=eng

I don't think any doubt exists that the Church portrays the Book of Abraham as a literal translation of the characters on the papyri that he bought off Chandler and that they believe it to be Abraham who wrote them down.

Tobin, you can dance away from this all you want, but you are clearly promoting an apostate view point.

(Notably, when asked about this on TV Elder Holland did not support this explanation or viewpoint. Guess he's an apostate too...)

[_son of Ishmael]

Here is the official introduction to the Book of Abraham as copied from the current Pearl of Great Price explanation.

The Book of Abraham. A translation from some Egyptian papyri that came into the hands of Joseph Smith in 1835, containing writings of the patriarch Abraham. The translation was published serially in the Times and Seasons beginning 1 March 1842, at Nauvoo, Illinois. (See History of the Church, 4:519–34.)

http://www.LDS.org/scriptures/pgp/introduction?lang=eng

I don't think any doubt exists that the Church portrays the Book of Abraham as a literal translation of the characters on the papyri that he bought off Chandler and that they believe it to be Abraham who wrote them down.

Tobin, you can dance away from this all you want, but you are clearly promoting an apostate view point.

(Notably, when asked about this on TV Elder Holland did not support this explanation or viewpoint. Guess he's an apostate too...)

Exactly. Regardless of what the apologists say, the official church stance is that the Book of Abraham is a direct translation of the papyri which when one looks at the facts at hand it is obvious BS.

[_Themis]

On the MAD discussing pro and anti arguments - this one on the Book of Abraham

"4.) Book of Abraham
While Apoligists will see authentic themes in the translation and will argue that we may possibly not have the original Papayri in their whole form, we find critics here not budging. They see from what we do have that rather then a document tied in any way to abraham, it is a common egytpian funeral text.

It is almost incredulous to critics that the Church claims this is an inspired translation.

Pro Response – some apologist take the stand that this is not normal translation as you and I understand it. That essentially the papryi acted as a prompt to initiate the revealing of the book of Abraham from God to Joseph and that the papryi very well may have been unrelated, though Joseph may have assumed otherwise.

So Smith thought he was translating but it was really just revealed to him. Is the missing papyri theory now dead?

Human beings can be really stupid in their reasoning

The missing papyri has been dead since the start. It's just to obvious Joseph got it very wrong. The catalyst theory is just silly. Joseph got it wrong. How does a guy who is supposed to be talking with God, angels and receiving revelation regularly deciding go with what he thinks when the papyri is presented. Most of the D&C is asking God questions. Why would Joseph not think of asking God about the papyri. It's silly to think he would not want to know from God what it is and that he would know he doesn't have a clue what it is. Joseph was providing claimed translation of each hieroglyph and the different parts of the facsimiles. Now we have God going what the hell. I will give him some Abraham story for each part of the papyri even though it has nothing to do with it, and it would be stupid to do so knowing you are deceiving Joseph and everyone else.

In the end members desperate enough will pick one instead of reevaluating that they may be wrong about their spiritual interpretations. Then add all the other problems like the Book of Mormon, etc.

[_Tobin]

Why would Joseph not think of asking God about the papyri. It's silly to think he would not want to know from God what it is and that he would know he doesn't have a clue what it is.

And yet he didn't ask did he? Again, another assertion made by Themis goes down in flames.

[_son of Ishmael]

If Joseph Smith needed the papyri to prompt him to receive the Book of Abraham as revelation, how come he did not need something to prompt him to write the book of Moses? He pulled that one out of his fourth point of contact years before the Book of Abraham

[_Themis]

Why would Joseph not think of asking God about the papyri. It's silly to think he would not want to know from God what it is and that he would know he doesn't have a clue what it is.

And yet he didn't ask did he? Again, another assertion made by Themis goes down in flames.

Ya that really did it in.

He didn't ask simply because he was making up the Book of Abraham as he did the Book of Mormon. Get back to me when you try and deal with what I posted.

The catalyst theory is just silly. Joseph got it wrong. How does a guy who is supposed to be talking with God, angels and receiving revelation regularly deciding go with what he thinks when the papyri is presented. Most of the D&C is asking God questions. Why would Joseph not think of asking God about the papyri. It's silly to think he would not want to know from God what it is and that he would know he doesn't have a clue what it is. Joseph was providing claimed translation of each hieroglyph and the different parts of the facsimiles. Now we have God going what the hell. I will give him some Abraham story for each part of the papyri even though it has nothing to do with it, and it would be stupid to do so knowing you are deceiving Joseph and everyone else.

From the assumption Joseph was actually a prophet your assertions are silly that he would just think it up that it was Abraham's and Joseph's story out of thin air and think he must be getting it right and not even ask God who is is communicating with regularly. It's even more silly that God somehow will give him bits of Abraham' story for each of the hieroglyphs and facsimiles and be ok with it. God is now involved in deception. The extent people will go to believe amazes me, but then you never said if this supposed being said the Book of Abraham was inspired.

[_Themis]

If Joseph Smith needed the papyri to prompt him to receive the Book of Abraham as revelation, how come he did not need something to prompt him to write the book of Moses? He pulled that one out of his fourth point of contact years before the Book of Abraham

Bingo.

[_Tobin]

If Joseph Smith needed the papyri to prompt him to receive the Book of Abraham as revelation, how come he did not need something to prompt him to write the book of Moses? He pulled that one out of his fourth point of contact years before the Book of Abraham

Let me explain this very simply for you. The point of a seer and revelator, that Joseph Smith was, is to reveal things that have been lost or confused. The material that Joseph Smith was revealing isn't in the Bible or the papyri. Those were merely the impetus for why he was looking and asking the Lord in the first place.

[_Themis]

If Joseph Smith needed the papyri to prompt him to receive the Book of Abraham as revelation, how come he did not need something to prompt him to write the book of Moses? He pulled that one out of his fourth point of contact years before the Book of Abraham

Let me explain this very simply for you. The point of a seer and revelator, that Joseph Smith was, is to reveal things that have been lost or confused. The material that Joseph Smith was revealing isn't in the Bible or the papyri. Those were merely the impetus for why he was looking and asking the Lord in the first place.

And we notice Tobin as usual does not want to deal with his silly assertions that Joseph got it wrong and God was peachy with it.