A few questions for Shulem

[_Themis]

So what do I think about the real source of the Book of Abraham? I personally feel that Joseph had a scroll (in red and black) which really contained writings about Abraham. That scroll is not the Book of Breathings, but was probably part of the collection that A. Combs sold, which ultimately may have perished in the 1871 Chicago Fire. There are still questions I can't answer, but I certainly see no reason to reject Joseph Smith because of the Book of Breathings. To those who insist that no legitimate translation of the Book of Breathings could possibly result in the Book of Abraham, I agree! - Jeff Lindsay

So basically he can emphatically state the known scrolls DOES NOT contain the writings of Abraham and must be on some missing scrolls. That’s pretty convenient. Almost like an angel taking back the gold plates.

I find it funny he admits the book of breathing's does not translate into the Book of Abraham, but ignores that both fac 1 and 3 are both part of the book of breathing's.

[_Shulem]

PART II (It ain't over)

I don't have "detailed views" on many things. Shulem's answers to the question I posed in another thread and he wanted to answer in a new thread have been worth the read and I've appreciated him taking the time to answer.

It appears you've come to terms that Joseph Smith did in fact author and sponsor the authoritative footnote to the Explanations. It's really the only logical conclusion and shines the light directly on the translator of the work, Joseph Smith. Thus, the prophet said:

The above translation is given as far as we have any right to give at the present time.

So with that said, what "right" did Joseph Smith have to translate anything Egyptian? Consider his first encounter in pretending to translate Egyptian through his spiritual gifts and the so-called "right" to translate. You will recall Joseph's encounters with Mr. Chandler and how Joseph acquired samples of hieroglyphic text from Chandler and translated them. Here is a citation demonstrating how Smith was apt to translate on a dime when called to do so:

But at length, however, he called upon Mr. Smith, to enquire if he had a power by which he could translate the ancient Egyptian. Mr. Smith replied that he had, when Mr. Chandler presented the fragment which had been partially interpreted. Mr. Smith retired into his translating room and presently returned with a written translation in English, of the fragment, confirming the supposed meaning ascribed to it by the gentleman to whom it had been previously presented.

Thus we learn that Joseph Smith readily confirmed that he had the "power" to translate Egyptian into English through a supernatural means not available to the common man. This translation was showcased in The Times and Seasons whereby the dead Egyptian language was resurrected through the instrumentality of the prophet Joseph Smith.

In connection to this, I posed a question earlier which you neglected to answer:

The bottom note of the Explanations is a declaration given by Joseph Smith that the Explanations of Facsimile No. 2 are given to the world through the instrumentality of the President of the Church: Joseph Smith, the prophet, seer, and revelator and the only man designated by God to declare revelation for the whole church. Previously, the prophet through direct revelation called the Twelve and urged them to get their affairs in order as the Holy Spirit prepares to minister among them in proclaiming Egyptian translations via the Times and Seasons press.

With that said, what did the Holy Spirit reveal about the Facsimile contents of Fig. 9?

[_Shulem]

I find it funny he admits the book of breathing's does not translate into the Book of Abraham, but ignores that both fac 1 and 3 are both part of the book of breathing's

Right. The hieroglyphic text on Facsimile No. 3 is from the very roll in which Joseph Smith claimed to translate the Book of Abraham. It's all the same stuff and Lindsay knows this and it must bothers him to no end, thus he concludes with his confession:

There are still questions I can't answer

In spite of the questions which conclusively lead to showing Joseph Smith fraudulently translated, Lindsay's testimony Trump's all:

but I certainly see no reason to reject Joseph Smith

There you have it. He sees no reason even though the reasons are right in front of his eyes. What is he, blind?

[_Jesse Pinkman]

PART II (It ain't over)....

So happy there is more to come.



Shulem, I am so happy that you are continuing this discussion. Is your website still available? If so, would you please provide the link? If you disabled it and are interested in re-enabling it, please PM me. I'll be happy to help you develop a new site.

[_Shulem]

Unfortunately you balance scale is not working, which is why you avoid even thinking about nuanced/catalyst theories. I suspect this explains why you haven't been able to give detailed views on how they work.

Joseph Smith and his personal scribes that worked on the translation of the Book of Abraham demonstrated that the Egyptian text was translated or converted into English through the instrumentality of Joseph Smith. Their presentations do not reflect the nuanced/catalyst theory suggested by modern Mormon apologists. These views share nothing in common with the original views described by Smith and those who assisted him.

Today's Mormons have a hard time with the fact that Smith pointed out hieroglyphic text claiming they were original names or patriarchal autographs drawn by Joseph or Abraham. How can that be? Smith didn't really believe it. He knew better. He was just faking it and pretending that those characters were actual autographs. The same goes for the imaginary king's name in Facsimile No. 3 and the names Shulem & Olimlah, respectively.

What a joke. Smith was caught with his pants down and the apologist are stuck.

[_Fence Sitter]

I wonder if MG sees the irony in quoting that article by Jeff Lindsay to defend the Book of Abraham.

From Lindsay's article:

Another major resource on the Book of Abraham is Kerry Shirts' Book of Abraham articles, featuring detailed refutations of many common arguments, and insightful analysis of evidence for the Book of Abraham. One excellent article, for example, is Kerry Shirts' discussion of a Book of Abraham video from I.R.R.

Maybe we should ask Philo Sofee what he thinks of Kerry Shirt's old arguments to defend the Book of Abraham?

[_Shulem]

Shulem, I am so happy that you are continuing this discussion. Is your website still available? If so, would you please provide the link? If you disabled it and are interested in re-enabling it, please PM me. I'll be happy to help you develop a new site.

I don't maintain a current version of my old website but it's fully retained in the Internet archives here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20071012081333/http://www.myegyptology.net/file/id3.htm

At this time I have no plans to republish my website or add to it but appreciate your offer. I've entertained the idea of doing a podcast on Facsimile No. 3 but that's unlikely to happen and for good reason. I think Kerry Shirts would be better suited for that and I'd be happy to give pointers and suggestions should he ever elect such an undertaking. Facsimile No. 3 is the elephant in the room. LDS apologists are terrified of the implications. It creates a nightmare scenario which is impossible to defend. It's the achilles heel for apologists whereby plausible answers to cover Smith's fraud are nonexistent.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

I wonder if MG sees the irony in quoting that article by Jeff Lindsay to defend the Book of Abraham.

From Lindsay's article:

Another major resource on the Book of Abraham is Kerry Shirts' Book of Abraham articles, featuring detailed refutations of many common arguments, and insightful analysis of evidence for the Book of Abraham. One excellent article, for example, is Kerry Shirts' discussion of a Book of Abraham video from I.R.R.

Maybe we should ask Philo Sofee what he thinks of Kerry Shirt's old arguments to defend the Book of Abraham?

I think that’s an excellent idea! Philo? Comments?

[_Jersey Girl]

Maybe we should ask Philo Sofee what he thinks of Kerry Shirt's old arguments to defend the Book of Abraham?

I already asked him to critique or debunk himself months ago. :-D

[_Shulem]

in regards to this section in Jeff Lindsay's essay on the Book of Abraham

Like you, Lindsay is trapped in a corner surrounded by a host of faith challenging questions that present an overwhelming conundrum whereby a complex and enigmatic apologetic approach fails to offer rudimentary and legitimate solutions in aligning Smith's translations and interpretations with that of professional modern Egyptology.

Here he opens with:

This is part of the LDSFAQ (Mormon Answers) suite by Jeff Lindsay, my attempt to deal with many common questions about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Are these questions sufficiently answered on a scientific level that can be confirmed by unbiased professionals? How hardly. Lindsay continues to admit defeat for failing to supply definitive answers to basic questions posed by critics of the Book of Abraham who reject Smith's translations because they have been proven false and fraudulent, having nothing to do with Egyptology.

Lindsay continues to put faith and testimony first yet he admits that important questions have no answers or, solutions:

Again, there are unanswered questions (and many "arguments from silence")

it strikes me as terribly unwise to reject the Church based on unanswered questions about the Book of Abraham (and I feel it's always foolish to base one's faith on purely intellectual arguments rather than on the rock of divine revelation).

There is no reason why faithful Latter-day Saints must reject Joseph Smith or the Book of Abraham, although there still are questions and issues without easy answers at the moment.

though those who accept the Book of Breathings as the source of the Book of Abraham have a different set of puzzling questions to deal with - if they accept the Book of Abraham as authentic

There are still questions I can't answer, but I certainly see no reason to reject Joseph Smith because of the Book of Breathings.

In conclusion: The apologists are stuck with questions that have no answers and thus rely on faith and testimony in their prophet while the critics sustain modern Egyptology which proves conclusively that Smith's work was a fraud. There is a big difference between the two.