The Book of Abraham - Shifting sands

[_Drifting]

We also see Tobin completely disregarding what the Church officially says on the matter in favour of his own made up personal opinion based on the evidentiary unfounded thoughts and feelings he has self generated whilst soaping in the bath tub.

[_Themis]

We also see Tobin completely disregarding what the Church officially says on the matter in favour of his own made up personal opinion based on the evidentiary unfounded thoughts and feelings he has self generated whilst soaping in the bath tub.

This is the problem with the catalyst theory. It's all made up and they don't want to deal with all the problems that make it unreasonable. Many of which I have brought up.

[_Fence Sitter]

In order for the theory to work it is necessary to believe the following.

1. Abraham really existed.
2. He wrote something like the Book of Abraham.
3. The Egyptians copied what he wrote.
4. Over time the copies of the Egyptian Book of Abraham were perverted to reflect Egyptian mythology but somehow the original story of Abraham lay hidden inside the Egyptian version.
5. "By his own hand" and all the other references to Abraham actually writing on the J.S. papryi really didn't mean that Abraham physically wrote on the papyri J.S. bought.
6. The 3 facsimiles and the extant pieces of the Breathing permit of Hor from which J.S. translated (revealed?) the Book of Abraham (Abr 1-2:18) contain these dual meaning mythologies and to date only J.S. has been able to read the hidden Book of Abraham story inside the Egyptian text.
7. There is a large missing piece that contains the rest of the Book of Abraham and it also has the dual mythologies on it.

[_Tobin]

In order for the theory to work it is necessary to believe the following.

1. Abraham really existed.
2. He wrote something like the Book of Abraham.
3. The Egyptians copied what he wrote.
4. Over time the copies of the Egyptian Book of Abraham were perverted to reflect Egyptian mythology but somehow the original story of Abraham lay hidden inside the Egyptian version.
5. "By his own hand" and all the other references to Abraham actually writing on the J.S. papryi really didn't mean that Abraham physically wrote on the papyri J.S. bought.
6. The 3 facsimiles and the extant pieces of the Breathing permit of Hor from which J.S. translated (revealed?) the Book of Abraham (Abr 1-2:18) contain these dual meaning mythologies and to date only J.S. has been able to read the hidden Book of Abraham story inside the Egyptian text.
7. There is a large missing piece that contains the rest of the Book of Abraham and it also has the dual mythologies on it.

Uh no.
1. Abraham really existed - see the Bible.
2. Clearly something was written about Abraham - see the Bible.
3. The Egyptians perverted and wrote their own legends in place of the original in their copies.
4. Joseph Smith received the perverted copy - he revealed the original that no longer exists.

[Guest]

Uh no.
1. Abraham really existed - see the Bible.
2. Clearly something was written about Abraham - see the Bible.
3. The Egyptians perverted and wrote their own legends in place of the original in their copies.
4. Joseph Smith received the perverted copy - he revealed the original that no longer exists.

I am not arguing whether or not Abraham existed. I am merely pointing out what is necessary to assume (or believe) to make the theory in the OP work. Taken all together it is a very implausible theory to explain the Book of Abraham, even from a believers point of view. It does not eliminate any of the issues and, in fact, adds more problems.

[_son of Ishmael]

In order for the theory to work it is necessary to believe the following.

1. Abraham really existed.
2. He wrote something like the Book of Abraham.
3. The Egyptians copied what he wrote.
4. Over time the copies of the Egyptian Book of Abraham were perverted to reflect Egyptian mythology but somehow the original story of Abraham lay hidden inside the Egyptian version.
5. "By his own hand" and all the other references to Abraham actually writing on the J.S. papryi really didn't mean that Abraham physically wrote on the papyri J.S. bought.
6. The 3 facsimiles and the extant pieces of the Breathing permit of Hor from which J.S. translated (revealed?) the Book of Abraham (Abr 1-2:18) contain these dual meaning mythologies and to date only J.S. has been able to read the hidden Book of Abraham story inside the Egyptian text.
7. There is a large missing piece that contains the rest of the Book of Abraham and it also has the dual mythologies on it.

Uh no.
1. Abraham really existed - see the Bible.
2. Clearly something was written about Abraham - see the Bible.
3. The Egyptians perverted and wrote their own legends in place of the original in their copies.
4. Joseph Smith received the perverted copy - he revealed the original that no longer exists.

Well, if somenting is written in the Bible it must be true...

[_Tobin]

Well, if somenting is written in the Bible it must be true...

Yes, because just stating the authors of the Bible made up people is such a useful exercise. It's just a cheap and easy claim to make because there are little to no supporting documents.

[_son of Ishmael]

Well, if somenting is written in the Bible it must be true...

Yes, because just stating the authors of the Bible made up people is such a useful exercise. It's just a cheap and easy claim to make because there are little to no supporting documents.

There is plenty of evidence that supports that the Bible, both old and new testaments have been tampered with so much that it is really hard to put any trust in it. For example the story about Jesus and the adulterous woman where he says “He who is without sin cast the first stone…” was added to the gospel of john a couple of hundred years after the first editions had come out.

I put no more faith in the Bible than I do in the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham.

[_Tobin]

There is plenty of evidence that supports that the Bible, both old and new testaments have been tampered with so much that it is really hard to put any trust in it. For example the story about Jesus and the adulterous woman where he says “He who is without sin cast the first stone…” was added to the gospel of john a couple of hundred years after the first editions had come out.

I put no more faith in the Bible than I do in the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham.

The first editions of John? They don't exist since they were most likely in Aramaic. We have large pieces of John from the 2nd century (200 AD) and that is as old as it gets.

[_son of Ishmael]

My point being that there is evidence that the story was added to the gospel of John hundreds of years later.