1000 Evidences No. 82 - Hidden Truths In the Facsimiles

This video dispels the claim of the critics who say Joseph Smith got the interpretation of the Facsimiles all wrong.
Questions or Comments? Post below or contact Allen at
[e-mail]

[@LindyLime]

Thanks for pointing out these sources, I'll look them up! It is always foolish when people claim that they know the whole truth about things that happened thousands of years ago but I see opponents of the church act this way constantly. There is nothing more terrifying to some people than the words "I don't know," because without their own supposed smarts they have nothing. Unfortunately this lack of humility is antithetical to scientific and archeological progress.

[@Pay-It_Forward]

All of Joe's alternative definitions disagree with science on the nature of the universe & the proven evolution of life on earth. Even if it was a true translation, it's still fictional mythology.

[@allenrichardson4211]

Thanks for your comments, even though you use broad, sweeping generalizations. For example your use of the word "All" is absolutely comprehensive and totally categorical. Maybe a little scholarly restraint would be in order. How do you account for scientific findings that contradict your opinion?

[@UtahGmaw99]

You sound very tinny. Can't listen, my hearing aid drives me crazy because of that. Thank you.

[@SamAntone]

I'll go buy a microphone that connects to my camera.

[@TheSandyStone]

Thanks for showing absolutely nothing!

[@1zcott]

🤡

[@allenrichardson4211]

Nothing? Sounds a little like a sweeping generalization. Look again and don't miss upcoming episodes in our series.

[@allenrichardson4211]

Nothing? You may have some technological problems. Check again.

[@davewallentine5306]

dum dum dum dum dum (This guy could not be more inept -- or boring.)

[@allenrichardson4211]

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to comment, Dave. I may be inept and boring, if your opinion is based on any evidence, but check out the evidence itself. In the mean time, I'll see if I can improve.

[@allenrichardson4211]

Thank you very much, dave, for taking the time and trouble to respond. I may be inept or boring, but I am working on improving. In the meantime, you might provide some substance to support your analysis. So far it seems a wee bit lacking...

[@mattensley2641]

What a crock Joseph lied and your church knows they lied

[@Spark_Horizion]

Eye witnesses said that it was translated from a large scroll

[@mattensley2641]

@@Spark_Horizion kinderhook plates also was a scam and Joe schmo fell for it

[@dr33776]

@@Spark_Horizion so out of 1000s of funerary texts that have been preserved, only Joseph’s copy had the book of Abraham? That has to be the biggest coincidence/luck of all time, imagine that the only surviving copy in the entire world just happens to be in Ohio at the same time Joseph was living there, don’t you think?

[@1zcott]

🤡

[@brucegillingham2793]

@@Spark_Horizion None of that matters when Joseph Smith left us illustrated examples of the characters he translated and its all wrong. From the LDS church directly 1st presidency.
"None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Mormon scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments. Scholars have identified the papyrus fragments as parts of standard funerary texts that were deposited with mummified bodies. These fragments date to between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E., long after Abraham lived." [emphasis added]
​