Mormon Book of Abraham - what's up with that?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RC_Matt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RC_Matt

Guest
The Book of Abraham is part of the Pearl of Great Price, which along with the Bible (as long as it is correctly translated), the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, form the Standard Works, i.e., the canonical books of Mormon scripture. The Book of Abraham is a source of some significant Mormon teachings, such as the plurality of gods, the pre-mortal existence of all people, and the doctrine of eternal progression (men become gods). You can read it in its entirely by visiting the LDS website.

In 1835, a traveling showman arrived in Kirkland, Ohio with some Egyptian mummies and some papyrus rolls of Egyptian hieroglyphics. Joseph Smith, then in residence in Kirkland, claimed he could translate the hieroglyphics (at this time untranslatable by Egyptologists) and the whole exhibit was purchased from the showman. Smith claimed that the scrolls were written in “Reformed Egyptian,” the same language as the golden plates; which were the source material for the Book of Mormon. Smith claimed that one of the scrolls contained the writings of Abraham (THE Abraham) written by himself, in his own hand. Smith translated the Reformed Egyptian and that translation became the Book of Abraham. The scrolls were lost shortly thereafter and the Book of Abraham was canonized as Mormon scripture.

In 1966, the original material was found in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York. Egyptologists, who by 1966 could read hieroglyphics, stated that was a common Egyptian funerary text dating from around the time of Christ; some 2,000 after the time of Abraham, and that the real translation bore no resemblance to that of Smith.

Doesn’t this tend to raise some serious questions?
 
RC_Matt said:
The Book of Abraham is part of the Pearl of Great Price, which along with the Bible (as long as it is correctly translated), the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, form the Standard Works, i.e., the canonical books of Mormon scripture. The Book of Abraham is a source of some significant Mormon teachings, such as the plurality of gods, the pre-mortal existence of all people, and the doctrine of eternal progression (men become gods). You can read it in its entirely by visiting the LDS website.

In 1835, a traveling showman arrived in Kirkland, Ohio with some Egyptian mummies and some papyrus rolls of Egyptian hieroglyphics. Joseph Smith, then in residence in Kirkland, claimed he could translate the hieroglyphics (at this time untranslatable by Egyptologists) and the whole exhibit was purchased from the showman. Smith claimed that the scrolls were written in “Reformed Egyptian,” the same language as the golden plates; which were the source material for the Book of Mormon. Smith claimed that one of the scrolls contained the writings of Abraham (THE Abraham) written by himself, in his own hand. Smith translated the Reformed Egyptian and that translation became the Book of Abraham. The scrolls were lost shortly thereafter and the Book of Abraham was canonized as Mormon scripture.

In 1966, the original material was found in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York. Egyptologists, who by 1966 could read hieroglyphics, stated that was a common Egyptian funerary text dating from around the time of Christ; some 2,000 after the time of Abraham, and that the real translation bore no resemblance to that of Smith.

Doesn’t this tend to raise some serious questions?
Click to expand...
Its accurate name is The Breathing Permit of Hor:
  • xmission.com/~research/breathing/index.htm
    & it belongs to a recognised type of funerary text. It has nothing to do with Abraham. It has been translated into English more than once - most recently (AFAIK, in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies)
See also:
The photo:



shows the four “sons of Horus” - the Canopic jars for storing the intestines of the mummified corpse - under the funeral couch.

A very informative article:
 
questioning345 said:
RC_Matt- is this true?
Click to expand...
Yup, true it is. I don’t have time to get into it now, but there’s “another testimony” of Joseph Smith’s linguistic talents too. Do a Google search for “Kinderhook Plates.” The Mormons try to explain this stuff, but anybody with half a brain doesn’t need an explanation.

Getting the picture now?
 
BDawg said:
If you want a good summary of LDS responses to critiques of the Book of Abraham, look here.

jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Abraham.shtml
Click to expand...
Honesty is of utmost importance if one is ever to see the truth about Mormonism. I was once a rabid Mormon defender however, the truth about the Book of Abraham admitted to by the LDS church and several Egyptologists left me shaking my head at what an obvious fraud Joseph Smith really was. Briefly, according to LDS writers, the “Book of Abraham” was supposed to have been written on papyrus by Abraham about 4,000 years ago. This very same papyrus, it is claimed, was acquired by Joseph Smith from an antiquities dealer in 1835. Smith translated the papyrus and published it under the title, “The Book of Abraham.” It was accepted by the Mormon Church as Scripture and is now published as part of the Pearl of Great Price - one of the four standard works of the church.

Many problems have now arisen due to these claims
  1. LDS egyptologists and others now can read the papyrus Joseph Smith claimed was the book of Abraham written on by Abraham himself. They all agree that it is not the book of Abraham and doesn’t even mention Abraham. It is a common egyptian funeral text call the book of breathings etc. The LDS church admitted this in their magazine, The Ensign, July 1988, pp. 51-53, Michael Rhodes (an LDS Egyptologist)tried to answer the following question: "Why doesn’t the translation of the Egyptian papyri, match the text of the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price? In this article Michael Rhodes clearly laid out the problem which faced the church: “First of all, from paleographic and historical considerations, the Book of Breathings papyrus can reliably be dated to around A.D. 60 - much too late for Abraham to have written it… when one compares the text of the book of Abraham with a translation of the Book of Breathings; they clearly are not the same.” "Before I start, let me say that I… like you, definitely favor the second; namely that Joseph Smith did not have the actual text of the Book of Abraham before him… There is no doubt that the original Papyrus of Facsimile Number1 belongs to the Book of Breathings text. The name of the owner of the Papyrus, Hor son of Userwer, is found both on this papyrus and in the text of the Book of Breathings… although we do not have the original of Facsimile Number 3, the name Hor can clearly be read in the hieroglyphs on this facsimile, and it seems very probable that this illustration was originally located at the end of the Book of Breathings papyrus now in the Church’s possession. I am not ruling it out completely, but I think it is unlikely that Joseph Smith ever had the actual text of the Book of Abraham in his possession… " The RLDS church took the Book of Abraham out of their cannon of scripture because it was an obvious fraud.
  2. Joseph Smith made a book called “Egyptian alphabet and Grammar” This book was a key he used in translating the papyrus. IN this book he had a column of Egyptian caracters on the left and to the right he gave a translation. Sometimes Joseph translated one symbol into a half chapters of words when in reality one symbol was never more than one word or a short phrase. Now Egyptologists can read this and all agree that Joseph Smith’s translation was completely false. Not even one word matched. 3. LDS apologists came up with the argument that Joseph Smith didn’t have the book of Abraham and didn’t translate the papyrus but God gave him a revelation instead. The problems with these arguments is Joseph Smith repeatedly said he translated the book in official LDS history (see exact references below) and the original foreword to the book said it was taken from papyrus written upon by the hand of Abraham himself. . 4. Facsimile translations are completely false. Example, in the book a picture depicts a man lying on a table with another man standing over him and a bird hovering above. Joseph Smith said this was Abraham on an alter about to be sacrificed by one of the Egyptian priests, the bird was an angel sent to deliver him etc. All Egyptologists know this actually represents a man being mummified and prepared for entrance into the Egyptian after life.
Church History References I commenced the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt… (History of the Church, vol. 2, page 236)
Code: 
"The record of Abraham and Joseph, found with the mummies [sic] is beautifully written... I have given a brief history of the manner in which the writings of the fathers, Abraham and Joseph, have been preserved, and how I came in possession of the same - a correct translation of which I shall give in its proper place." (History of the Church, vol. 2, pp. 348, 350-51)



"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." (History of the Church, vol. 2, page 238)

"October 1. -This afternoon I labored on the Egyptian alphabet... during the research, the principles of astronomy as understood by Father Abraham and the ancients unfolded to our understanding, the particulars of which will appear hereafter.   (Ibid., page 286)

Tuesday, [Nov.] 24. - ... In the afternoon we translated some of the Egyptian records ....

Thursday, 26. - Spent the day in translating Egyptian characters from the papyrus... (Ibid., page 320)

At the beginning of the handwritten manuscript of the Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith asserted that it was a "Translation of the Book of Abraham written by his own hand upon papyrus and found in the catacombs of Egypt."
 
xmormon said:
The RLDS church took the Book of Abraham out of their cannon of scripture because it was an obvious fraud.
  1. Joseph Smith made a book called “Egyptian alphabet and Grammar” This book was a key he used in translating the papyrus. IN this book he had a column of Egyptian caracters on the left and to the right he gave a translation. Sometimes Joseph translated one symbol into a half chapters of words when in reality one symbol was never more than one word or a short phrase. Now Egyptologists can read this and all agree that Joseph Smith’s translation was completely false. Not even one word matched.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the post, I didn’t know some of that material. Just kind of leaves you shaking your head, what can you say? It really is a tragedy that so many people have been sucked into this mess and have dedicated their lives to perpetuataing Joesph Smith’s con game.
 
PaulDupre said:
Most Mormons know nothing about any of that stuff.
Click to expand...
Well, you’re sure not gonna find THAT on the LDS website.

Seriously, it’s been my observation that a lot of Mormons don’t know much about what the church really teaches or the origin of the material. For example, I was always told that Joseph Smith translated the golden plates by using some special glasses that the angel gave him (which always sounded goofy enough). I didn’t learn about the rock in the hat deal until I later started reading about Mormonsim myself. Owing to the consistency of the story I was told over time, I honestly believe that the Mormons always trying to convert me didn’t know the truth about that either.

Like some of the Mormons that “why me” sent over here from the Mormon boards. They denied all the weird stuff, until it was proved to them, from Mormon sources, that all the weird stuff really is taught by the Mormon church. Then they disappeared. Either they came here and deliberately and unsuccessfully tried to con us; or, probably more likely, they didn’t know that stuff themselves and got outta Dodge because they didn’t know how to respond and were afraid to hear more. Kinda like maybe we do a better job of teaching Mormon catechism than the Mormons do?
 
I am learning about mormans becuase the daughter of a friend became morman in order to marry a young morman man, the son of another friend. I have had a few converstations with both young people and there seems litt le doubt that niehter of them know very much about their religion. the boy has a large decal of a rosary on his car, which i understaand not a thing normally connected with mormanism. The only thing the girl seems to know at this point is the necessity to tithe, she talks about it all the time. Could it be that mormans teach tithing as a first thing??

that seem out of place to me, I would think that tithing is a thing of matrure faith that comes a little later in growth and knowlege rather than being the very first thing they demand.
 
J_C said:
The only thing the girl seems to know at this point is the necessity to tithe, she talks about it all the time. Could it be that mormans teach tithing as a first thing??
Click to expand...
LOL, Duh, that’s the reason behind the whole organization!
 
In this case the mormans are more like the wealth and health protestants like Copeland and Roberts (seed faith,) i guess. I have always been attracted to that teaciing because those preachers really use a lot of ff scripture to back it up. as time went by I saw that many strange religions are backed up by clever interpertrations of bible versus.

So far I have only been listening to these young people. once the boy asked me what I would think about becomeing a God myself. I told him that soun ds a lot like the original sin and seems almost blasphemous, he did not reply to that. I am praying for them, in the meantime the mormans seem to be helping them to live cleaner lifestyles, and that is a good thing but of course there is more to christian life than that.
 
J_C said:
So far I have only been listening to these young people. once the boy asked me what I would think about becomeing a God myself. I told him that soun ds a lot like the original sin and seems almost blasphemous,

Excellent response!!!

I am praying for them, in the meantime the mormans seem to be helping them to live cleaner lifestyles, and that is a good thing but of course there is more to christian life than that.
Click to expand...
Hmmnn. Mormons seem to stigmatize and condemn sexual sin and substance abuse more than any other sins. Not surprising, considering their early history. “There is more to the Christian life than that” is a very important statement.
 
Yes, i have my ears tuned to the Name above all names, Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith but so far I have not ever heard either of these morman kids speak that Name. The girl has spoken some of Joseph Smith and the boy has spoken of having a testimony of the church, but nothing yet of Jesus.

it is still early and I am still learning and wondering, but i am not getting from these young people impression that they have that Jesus connection. Maybe this is just their own personlaities, or maybe it is that Jesus is naot emphasized by the LSD church.

If so then i consider this alarming. Holiness lifestyel alone does not speak of a regenerated heart in fact i know from my own life that even with Jesus at the center true holiness lifestyle is all but impossible, there is always dirt in the corners of the room.
 
PaulDupre said:
Most Mormons know nothing about any of that stuff.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you check out this website you will see that it has been discussed in mormon magazines…and if you scroll down you will read something about receiving a witness by the holy ghost.

library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1988.htm/ensign%20july%201988.htm/i%20have%20a%20question.htm?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0

This site is a general site with articles:

fairlds.org/apol/ai125.html
 
Jerusha said:
Hmmnn. Mormons seem to stigmatize and condemn sexual sin and substance abuse more than any other sins. Not surprising, considering their early history. “There is more to the Christian life than that” is a very important statement.
Click to expand...
Catholics don’t condemn sexual sin? I think that catholic and mormons are rather similiar in this regard.
 
I have one important question here which I didnt see mentioned yet: HOW do we know that the Egyptian scrolls that Smith used are the same ones that turned up in a museum in 1966?

I would think the easiest “response” here is for the LDS to say it wasnt the same scrolls.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top