Book of Abraham

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris-WA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Marie5890 said:
So the LDS Church is claiming that what JSmith taught and claimed was not true.
Click to expand...
No. that’s not what they are claiming, although that is what it translate into. The Mormon church would never admit there was any problem with Mormonism. Catholics are wrong and misguided in EVERYTHING they believe (according to my wife and the mormon church) but there’s no problem with Mormon doctrine and Mormon history. Everything can be easily explained away. I thought I would include this below about Smith not actually translating, literally, the BOA.

From Smiths diary: (Be sure to substitute “receiving revelation” for the word “translating”)

" … spent the day in translating the Egyptian records … " (Diary of Joseph Smith, Nov. 19, 1835)

" … spent the day in translating, and made rapid progress … " (Ibid, Nov. 20, 1835)

" … in the afternoon we translated some of the Egyptian records … "(Ibid, Nov. 24, 1835)

“The remainder of this month, I was continually engaged in translating an alphabet to the Book of Abraham, and arranging a grammar of the Egyptian language as practiced by the ancients” (Joseph Smith, July, 1835, History of the Church, Vol. 2, p. 238). :confused:
 
JaminB123 said:
Sadly, she is not at all close to leaving the Mormon church. She was born and raised in it. Most of her family are Mormon. Most of her friends are Mormon. Her social life revolves around the church. Mormonism was a stabilizing force in her childhood, adolescence, and adult years. For her, to give up Mormonism would be like giving up her identity… to become an apostate, which I suppose is the worst thing you can be in Mormon eyes. I’m perfectly happy being a Mormon apostate, but the stuff that bothers me about Mormonism (the Book of Abraham false translation, Joseph Smith’s polyandry, Brigham Young’s bigotry, etc.) doesn’t seem to bother her at all. While I don’t see her ever leaving Mormonism for mere Christianity, I also don’t want to underestimate the power of the holy spirit. Stranger things have happened.
Click to expand...
Just the fact that she is at least willing to hear other points of view is encouraging. I am in a similar situation and I know exactly what you mean when you say that your wife doesn’t seem to be bothered at all when it comes to the serious problems of early Mormon history. Most Mormons are entirely unaware of the real history anyway. If they happen to be exposed to it they tend to immediately dismiss it without further thought. Many cannot comprehend the concept that Joseph Smith was a fraud. I guess I can understand this given what an earth-shattering conclusion this can be for LDS.

More encouraging is the fact that more and more LDS are discovering the real history. The proliferation of this online information has made it impossible for the church to ignore the problems. LDS are increasingly leaving the church over this issues. According to LDS historian Grant Palmer, who was disfellowshipped from the Mormon church over his book “An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins,” the church knows they have lost the war on the history. As more and more LDS discover these things, it’s going to exponentially get worse for the LDS church.
 
Chris-WA said:
Just amazing, isn’t it? Unfortunately for LDS that would say Joseph didn’t really translate the BoA from the papyri scrolls, all LDS historical records on the subject say the opposite. Joseph Smith himself, and other witnesses, leave no doubt that the BoA was** translated from the scrolls**. I don’t know how the church leadership today thinks they can get away with making up this new explanation.
Click to expand...
Actually, …and according to the essay on the official church website that a previous poster very kindly linked to, we have two rather important paragraphs:
[
  1. It is likely futile to assess Joseph’s ability to translate papyri when we now have only a fraction of the papyri he had in his possession. Eyewitnesses spoke of “a long roll” or multiple “rolls” of papyrus.32 Since only fragments survive, it is likely that much of the papyri accessible to Joseph when he translated the book of Abraham is not among these fragments. The loss of a significant portion of the papyri means the relationship of the papyri to the published text cannot be settled conclusively by reference to the papyri.](Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham)
And finally this one at the end:

The veracity and value of the book of Abraham cannot be settled by scholarly debate concerning the book’s translation and historicity. The book’s status as scripture lies in the eternal truths it teaches and the powerful spirit it conveys. The book of Abraham imparts profound truths about the nature of God, His relationship to us as His children, and the purpose of this mortal life. The truth of the book of Abraham is ultimately found through careful study of its teachings, sincere prayer, and the confirmation of the Spirit.

It IS fact that the papyri we have (and doesn’t it bother anybody here that it was the MORMONS who published the papyri in official church magazines, and MORMON scholars who first declared the stuff we actually have as a funerary text…'the book of breathings?" If we were all that worried about it, why didn’t we keep it a deep dark secret? We certainly could have done so)…

ANYway…it is a fact that the papyri we have is a very small portion of the scrolls that Joseph Smith had. This is acknowledged by everybody, even our worst critics.

What it means is…not much, except that there simply isn’t enough evidence either way in the papyri we have. Personally, I love the Book of Abraham. The teachings in it make sense to me in a way that Orthodox (and orthodox) Christianity simply doesn’t. They explain the universe, and God, and our place in His creation very clearly.

No more ‘problem of evil.’
No more confusion regarding the Trinity.
No more contradictions regarding original sin.

I rather like that.

At any rate, I’m a Mormon because I have read, studied and prayed about it, and have received what I feel to be a confirmation of the truth of the doctrine. As to the Book of Abraham…well, there isn’t anything about religion that can be examined objectively, is there? It’s too important to be viewed dispassionately. As a result, if one is LDS, one WILL look at the Book of Abraham looking for reasons to believe in it. If one is not, one WILL look at the Book of Abraham looking for reasons not to. Since the Book of Abraham (like the Book of Mormon), if confirmed accurate by scholarly, non-LDS folks, would pretty much mess up the world (wouldn’t it, just? 😉 ) the odds that any non-LDS source would judge it to be authentic is slim to zip. I there was the slightest scintilla of a hint of a sigh that might be evidence against it, it would be held up as glaring proof that it was not.

As it should be.

That’s not me being paranoid; it’s me being realistic and understanding the sheer scale of the claims involved here. Extraordinary claims really DO require extraordinary proof. I do not think that anybody is ‘out to get us’ because of this; it’s proper, appropriate, and I would expect nothing less.

I simply wish to point out that, as the article has shown, nothing anybody has come up with so far disproves JS’ claim here any more than anything in the article proves that the BoA is accurately translated. We will have to find the truth of the claims within it another way…as is proper, for religion.
 
dianaiad said:
Actually, …and according to the essay on the official church website that a previous poster very kindly linked to, we have two rather important paragraphs:
[
  1. It is likely futile to assess Joseph’s ability to translate papyri when we now have only a fraction of the papyri he had in his possession. Eyewitnesses spoke of “a long roll” or multiple “rolls” of papyrus.32 Since only fragments survive, it is likely that much of the papyri accessible to Joseph when he translated the book of Abraham is not among these fragments. The loss of a significant portion of the papyri means the relationship of the papyri to the published text cannot be settled conclusively by reference to the papyri.](Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham)
Click to expand...
Why would it be futile, when he did indeed attempt to translate portions of the papyri that we do have, i.e the Facsimiles included in the scriptures, among other things.

mormonthink.com/book-of-abraham-issues.htm#comparison
mormonthink.com/book-of-abraham-issues.htm#howaccurate
mormonthink.com/book-of-abraham-issues.htm#josephsegyptionalpha
And finally this one at the end:
Click to expand...
The veracity and value of the book of Abraham cannot be settled by scholarly debate concerning the book’s translation and historicity. The book’s status as scripture lies in the eternal truths it teaches and the powerful spirit it conveys. The book of Abraham imparts profound truths about the nature of God, His relationship to us as His children, and the purpose of this mortal life. The truth of the book of Abraham is ultimately found through careful study of its teachings, sincere prayer, and the confirmation of the Spirit.
Click to expand...
No one is disputing the BoA’s status as scripture for LDS. You are welcome to believe that it is scripture, believe that it has eternal truths, and conveys a powerful spirit, just like how people of various other religions feel the same about their religious texts. The actual question that critics discuss is whether the Book of Abraham really is an authentic, ancient record translated by Joseph Smith.
It IS fact that the papyri we have (and doesn’t it bother anybody here that it was the MORMONS who published the papyri in official church magazines, and MORMON scholars who first declared the stuff we actually have as a funerary text…'the book of breathings?" If we were all that worried about it, why didn’t we keep it a deep dark secret? We certainly could have done so)…
Click to expand...
I never knew that (I haven’t really looked too in depth about the matter). Could you provide a reference that shows that it was LDS scholars who first declared the “stuff” we actually have as a funerary text?
ANYway…it is a fact that the papyri we have is a very small portion of the scrolls that Joseph Smith had. This is acknowledged by everybody, even our worst critics.
Click to expand...
I think for many critics, what we do have, including the Facsimiles, is enough.
What it means is…not much, except that there simply isn’t enough evidence either way in the papyri we have. Personally, I love the Book of Abraham. The teachings in it make sense to me in a way that Orthodox (and orthodox) Christianity simply doesn’t. They explain the universe, and God, and our place in His creation very clearly.
Click to expand...
I think orthodox Christianity already has clear understandings of all of that, in my view. I think that the Book of Abraham introduces a number of issues, such as a plurality of gods, as well as scriptural support for those looking for such a thing in relation to the priesthood ban on blacks (perhaps it doesn’t really lend support to it, however it is clear that many, including leaders used the BoA to support teachings related to blacks, Cain, etc).
No more ‘problem of evil.’
Click to expand...
I and others have shown many times that the LDS position on pre-mortal existence (if that is what you are referring to) and/or eternal intelligences does not resolve a so-called “problem of evil”. This is quite clear when we see that it was God that decided to organize/beget these intelligences as spirit children, and that it is ultimately Him that caused us to exist as we do now.
No more confusion regarding the Trinity.
Click to expand...
There is no confusion regarding the Trinity. There is confusion in caricatures of the Trinity, but not the actual Trinity doctrine, as defined by the Church. Further, LDS teachings, including those found in the Book of Abraham, introduce many confusions into the nature of God, such as how there can be one God yet multiple gods, whether the Father progressed to Godhood, whether the Father was once a man, Heavenly Mother, whether the Holy Ghost will need to get a body later, etc. These are all issues that orthodox Christianity simply does not have to deal with, since the propositions it comes from do not allow for such possibilities.
No more contradictions regarding original sin.
Click to expand...
I see no contradictions regarding original sin.
 
dianaiad said:
Actually, …and according to the essay on the official church website that a previous poster very kindly linked to, we have two rather important paragraphs:
[
  1. It is likely futile to assess Joseph’s ability to translate papyri when we now have only a fraction of the papyri he had in his possession. Eyewitnesses spoke of “a long roll” or multiple “rolls” of papyrus.32 Since only fragments survive, it is likely that much of the papyri accessible to Joseph when he translated the book of Abraham is not among these fragments. The loss of a significant portion of the papyri means the relationship of the papyri to the published text cannot be settled conclusively by reference to the papyri.](Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham)
Click to expand...
Not a very convincing argument. Let’s deal with what we do know, not what we don’t. What we do know for certain is that Joseph completely mistranslated the facsimiles, which are included as part of the Book of Abraham. Beyond any reasonable doubt, it’s clear that Joseph took those facsimiles and made up a story about what they were showing. Knowing that, which do you think is more likely—that he was able to translate Egyptian or that he was not?

Add to that the fact that the recovered scrolls, which contained the very same facsimiles as in the BoA, have nothing whatsoever to due with Abraham or anything in the Book of Abraham, which is more logical–assuming the real scrolls are lost or concluding that Joseph had no idea what he was doing? He already messed up the facsimiles. What would make anyone think he had the ability to translate ancient Egyptian writing?
dianaiad said:
And finally this one at the end:

The veracity and value of the book of Abraham cannot be settled by scholarly debate concerning the book’s translation and historicity. The book’s status as scripture lies in the eternal truths it teaches and the powerful spirit it conveys. The book of Abraham imparts profound truths about the nature of God, His relationship to us as His children, and the purpose of this mortal life. The truth of the book of Abraham is ultimately found through careful study of its teachings, sincere prayer, and the confirmation of the Spirit.
Click to expand...
They are just plain wrong on this one. This argument can be summarized as follows:
Don’t bother with historical and scientific examination because no matter what the facts say, it’s true anyway and you can know it by your feelings. That is no way to deal with a critical examination of facts. Saint Peter said that we should always be prepared to give a reasoned defense for the faith we have. This is just the opposite. It attempts to get the investigator to ignore the facts in favor of the feelings. This is no way to determine whether or not the BoA is true.
dianaiad said:
NYway…it is a fact that the papyri we have is a very small portion of the scrolls that Joseph Smith had. This is acknowledged by everybody, even our worst critics.
Click to expand...
Not a fact at all. I don’t know where you got this information but this is simply not the case. There is no compelling evidence that what was recovered was only a small portion of what Joseph had.
dianaiad said:
As to the Book of Abraham…well, there isn’t anything about religion that can be examined objectively, is there? It’s too important to be viewed dispassionately.
Click to expand...
Of course there is. That way of thinking gets people into a lot of trouble differentiating truth from falsehood. These types of things should be examined from all angles, not just from our feelings. The historical factual angle is catching up with the Mormon church, and the leadership knows they are in trouble. They can no longer keep the membership from learning the truth, because it is now so widely available. So many Mormons are learning the real history of Joseph, not just the rosy things they were taught all of their lives since they were children, and it’s making them ask some really tough questions.

The mountain of historical evidence shows that the real Joseph Smith is not the person that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints wants us to believe. He was deeply flawed in so many ways. He did many things that would make any normal person cringe. LDS are starting to find these things out for themselves and the dam is cracking.

If one believes with all their heart that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God but then starts learning very troubling things about Joseph that shows a much different picture, than if one is honest they must ask some tough questions. If there is the possibility that Joseph was a fraud, one must examine the facts dispassionately, as hard as that may be, to find the truth. Truth is more important than anything else, even if the truth is not what one wants to hear.
 
Yes, very good critique. Thank you, LW.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
 
Here is a link to an excellent video covering the history of the Book of Abraham, the rediscovery of the missing papyrus scrolls, and the scientific evidence learned from them.

youtu.be/rn1iGvXU0dI
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top