The Joseph Smith Papyri [Book of Abraham]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- An explanation and overview of the Joseph Smith Papyri and their connection with Mormon scripture.
Content Outline:
Intro
A Brief History 0:22
Overview of the Collection 3:36
The Tshenmin Scroll 5:20
The Record of Joseph 7:14
The Horus Scroll 7:45
The Book of Abraham 11:12
__Apologetic Explanations 11:47
____1. 'Horus Scroll not the source' 12:21
________The KEP 13:53
______a. Third-scroll hypothesis 15:35
______b. Long-scroll hypothesis 16:27
____2. Missing-section hypothesis 17:10
____3. Inspired revelation ('catalyst') hypothesis 17:45
__The Facsimiles 20:33
__Conclusions 22:27
I am indebted for the content presented in this video to the scholarship of others. In particular, see Christopher Smith's excellent article "'That Which Is Lost:' Assessing the State of Preservation of the Joseph Smith Papyri" in the Spring/Summer 2011 issue of the Journal of the John Whitmer Historical Association (vol. 31 no. 1), p. 69.
For additional information about the Joseph Smith Papyri and the Book of Abraham online, with arguments from both faithful LDS and critical perspectives, see mormonthink.com...
To read the Book of Abraham online, see www.lds.org/scr...
[composite graphics acknowledgments: mormonhandbook.com; bookofabraham.com; mormondialogue.org]
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA Finals D1 | Fall | ยิงต้องโหด ให้เหมือนโกรธกันมาก่อน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OnTdfGySmds/mqdefault.jpg)
It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
-Mark Twain
My comment is very overdue, I found your video 3 years ago while very active in the Mormon church. - I was quite convinced that I had been lied to my whole life. My husband however was not on board until I had him watch this video!!!! We officially left the church within a few weeks of him viewing it. Thank you so much for creating this and sharing with all!
Good news ! Hope you guys are doing well ;)
The egyptologists were debunked in 2014.
Google ''Book of Abraham pt 1 (Why Egyptologists are wrong) youtube''.
The Egyptologists were debunked by one by the name of Paul Gregersen in 2014.
@@channingcovington1440 no not at all! We have Jesus-the Way, the Truth, the Life! Our salvation is complete through His Grace and our faith in His finished work. No profit-and no that’s not a typo He is the last and final Word. We do not need to belong to a corporation church that builds its billions in wealth off the backs of its members. Sorry for the bluntness but I’m actually sad for anyone still in that lie. 😞
Just the facts, straightforward analysis, and no spin. Simple deconstruction of the arguments. Perfect.
Book of Abraham
Translation or Invention? www.utlm.org/newsletters/pdfnewsletters/123saltlakecitymessenger.pdf
The Egyptologists were debunked in 2014.
@@rickraybourn7456 Why do you post that utlm crap?
@S D Your right that Joseph Smith didn't believe the papyri was the writing of Abraham. He said so himself. Come see how you've been tricked into the wrong understanding by liars. Joseph Smith is a 100 percent right and I will prove this in few minutes. Click TH-cam video titled by these exact letters "BOA ep 16"
@S D In a few minutes of my video you will see exactly why I make my claims. The four hours takes it into the book of Daniel.
No. The history of the Book of Breathings (of which the Horus scroll is a standard sample) is well known. It derives from the Book of the Dead and was created a VERY long time after Abraham supposedly lived. (>=1200 years). This is akin, say, to wondering if perhaps Paul had an old copy of Beowulf and used it as inspiration for his letters.
The Book of the Dead is an ancient religious writing which came from a society that earlier in their history had a pharaoh who, according to Abraham (per the Book of Abraham), was trying earnestly to imitate a certain religion--the true religion that Abraham was also striving to follow. And the Egyptian characters used to write the Book of the Dead came from a very ancient civilization once ruled by that same pharaoh. All these things could be very inspiring and provoke a lot of questions for someone who had never been so close as he was through those papyri to ancient Egypt, an ancient writing system, and an ancient religion that Abraham was also very close to. Though language and religions can evolve greatly over time, the questions of their origins and any remaining traces and flickers of truth embedded in them could provoke many thoughts and questions.
It amazes me that some people who commented here seem to think that this video supports the church, or Joseph Smith. It DOES NOT. This video is going to be my go-to video when I want to explain why the Book of Abraham ISN'T true. I don't know if people are just not watching the video and assuming because the video creator isn't hostile or insulting that they must be apologists, or if they are so hair triggered against Mormons that they cannot understand when someone is on their side, but y'all need to pay closer attention.
The egyptologists were debunked in 2014, where you been?
This is the video that broke my shelf. Shattered it. I had taken intro to Egyptyology in vollege so was familiar with the terms.
Looking back the professor was hitting all these points in class. Im sure he was feeding us the information we would need to be able to recognize this in the future. Once this fell the rest was gone. Done.
Thank you.
Wife of the maker of this video here. Egyptologist study Egypt. They don't know anything about Ur or their version of the religion which they may have initially attempted to copy from the Egyptions but which most certainly morphed. Ur is the setting of the Book of Abraham not Egypt. I disagree with my husband's assessment he presented in this video. There is more to consider. Good luck on your journey.
I really enjoyed the even handedness of your presentation, as well as how precise you were. Sound, water-tight arguments are very helpful and I think they will ultimately lead people to truth if that's what they seek. Hopefully people will begin to choose truth more.
The Egyptologists were debunked back in 2014.
@@richardholmes7199 could you please explain your statement “The Egyptologist we’re debunked in 2014” a statement you made about January 2021 in regards to the 2 Paprus scrolls and Joseph smiths translation of the book of Abraham and these scrolls. I would greatly appreciate. Thanks.
@@patriciashears25 The Egyptologists were debunked by proper interpretation. Proper interpretation is Joseph Smith translated in reverse back to a biblical text, the original.
@@richardholmes7199 Richard is correct, yes, Joseph Smith was translating what the Egyptians got wrong pagan wise. Translating by revelation back to it's original biblical meaning before the Egyptians corrupted the true gospel understanding that Noah and Enoch once taught. One way a prophet translates is to take a false gospel and show how Satan corrupted it and then convert it back into what God originally gave his prophets again. The above critic never mentions once where Abraham chapter one tells you that this was the main purpose explaining why Joseph Smith added the Egyptian facsimiles so that we could understand how these false God's are fashioned or counterfeited. " Verse 14" And how chapter one already explains how the Egyptians counterfeited Noah's priesthood and corrupted it. Look how dishonest the above video is to leave that main instructive part out? They actually invented a fake new context to shove down your throat? By leaving the truth out they insert a big lie! They deliberately mislead tens of thousand to believe Smith was tricking everyone or didn't even know that he was utilizing what the Egyptians got wrong and translating it back to what it should be again. How could they trick thousands of people? By deliberately ignoring the fact he explained how that was his very purpose he acknowledged right in chapter one all along. Let me now show you how stupid these people hope you are. Click my TH-cam video titled " Book of Abraham part 9" Click my name to get there.
@@paulgregersen3570 Came across a comment of mine that I left in the comment section of a video months ago where I asked, how is Paul Gregersen wrong. Nobody responded.
I don't know if you still get comment notifications, but I'd love to discuss ideas with you. Please respond when you get a chance.
Oh yes, I would love to see a collaboration between these two!
"Magic is religion we disbelieve. Religion is magic we believe. Voila tout!!"
Ernest Becker-"Escape from Evil"
" Magic is religion we disbelieve. Religion is magic we believe. "
nonsensical comment.
voila tout !
@@grayman7208 I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Sorry you've hit the wall.
@@xlsyor which means you actually cannot explain it.
it was a ridiculous comment by ernest becker.
repeating it does not make it any less ridiculous.
"nuff said.
@@grayman7208 I bow to your infinite wisdom and superior knowledge.
@@xlsyor thus the start of wisdom.
It's not just the circumstances at 16:35 that render the explanation unlikely. Ancient papyri are *extremely* fragile. Even museums must unroll them with extreme care, and then take steps to preserve them. Any continuous scroll that long which had been completely unrolled as described would no longer be continuous afterward. It would crumble into fragments.
In his letter, Cowdery specifically referred to the "roll" containing the vignettes as "Joseph's record." No need to take my word for it; you can look it up and read it for yourself. A source citation is provided at 6:06. If you're having trouble finding it, let me know and I'll point you in the right direction. Thanks.
It's not an assumption. The Horus Scroll, in fact, IS an Egyptian document about Egyptian culture. Specifically, Egyptian death rites from around the time of Christ. You do realize that its contents and significance are known and well understood, right? There is no way in which the Horus Scrolls reads as an autobiography of Abraham, Canaanite or otherwise.
Your whole anti-Mormon video is based on ASSUMPTIONS. As the Egyptologists were debunked in 2014. Are you going to update your video to account for this?
+Scott G: Replies were blocked on your comment so I couldn't reply directly, but hopefully you'll see this comment. The video was made solely by me on my personal computer. I am just an individual and do not represent any group or organization.
MormonHistoryEtc A new you tube video called Lost Book of Abraham Killer LDS Defense has just came out! Just thought id'e pass that along!
MormonHistoryEtc Thank you so much for this video
MormonHistoryEtc You do understand that the Egyptian was not ever supposed to match what the Egyptologists say don't you?
Richard Holmes Please elaborate.
+Richard Holmes You do know what the definition of 'translation' is right?
Thank you, Andrew. That's an honor coming from you. Thanks to you and Chris for significantly expanding the frontier of scholarship on the subject. Your work inspired me.
When are you going to update your video? The Egyptologists were debunked in 2014.
When are you going to update your video?
@@richardholmes7199 Hey Ricky, how's it going?
I say, forget the Papyri, I want to see Abraham and Joseph's mummies. Where did they stash them? Also, why can't we use Smith's notes to translate other dark, evil Egyptian funerary papyri, so we can manufacture other Hebrew patriarchal books just like Smith did?😬
This is the wife of "MormonHistoryEtc," the one who produced this video. I think this video he made is high quality and am very proud of his talent in presenting information. He is a seeker of truth and an all around great person. I asked if he would mind if I added a comment here and mention that I was his wife so that people would be more likely to read it.
I view things very differently than he does. I believe the Book of Abraham to be authentic scripture.
I disagree with his point that the Book of Abraham could not have been received by revelation because Joseph Smith called it "translation." Joseph Smith as well as the revelations in the D&C call the "Joseph Smith translation" of the Bible a "translation." This is different than how we commonly use the word. The Joseph Smith translation of the Bible involved adding huge sections of text with no biblical parallel, such as the visions of Moses and Enoch. These revelations were triggered by a text that already existed. Other amendments and changes to the text of the Bible were also made based on understanding Joseph Smith had that was received through revelation. None of the translating of the Bible which was done by Joseph Smith is what we would commonly refer to as translating, yet it is how Joseph and the Lord used the word.
So we can know that when Joseph Smith calls something a translation, it most certainly can involve receiving large amounts of information through revelation that does not correspond to something already written.
Also, Abraham lived and wrote 2000 years before the papyri we have were produced. Language changes so quickly. While scholars may have an idea of what the characters meant at the time the papyri were produced, what did those same characters used to write the papyri mean 2000 years earlier? Who knows what phrases or ideas might have been conveyed through even a single character if the characters on the papyri were viewed through a much older lens.
As for the facsimiles, despite what Willard Richard's introduction published at the beginning of the translation says, the book is NOT set in Egypt. The text itself makes it clear (thirty-two times) that it is set elsewhere, in Ur in the land of the Chaldeans. It refers to the practices and beliefs of those people, not the Egyptians. They had their own version of something they may have attempted to initially imitate and that evolved from Egypt religion, but was their own practice. So having Egyptologists tell us how Egyptians would interpret the facsimiles is not relevant. This is the land of the Chaldeans.
The best defense of the Book of Abraham I have ever seen is a book entitled "Religion of the Fathers: Context for the Book of Abraham." Additionally, check out the book "Traditions in the Early Life of Abraham." How to account for all of the stories in ancient documents from all over the world about Abraham's life that are contained in Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Abraham, but that Joseph Smith would have had absolutely no way of knowing about?
Re: Translation vs Revelation. If the English text that Joseph correlated to Egyptian characters was correct, then you wouldn't need to make this argument. In fact, the majority of the world's population would likely be Mormon because that would have been an actual miracle. Nobody in Joseph's milieu knew how to translate Egyptian as the knowledge of the Rosetta Stone had not reached America. The fact remains that Joseph did not translate/interpret/revelate a single Egyptian character into the proper English form correctly.
Re: JST of the Bible - unfortunately for believers, a recent study from BYU determined that a slew of Joseph's "revelations" for the JST of the Bible actually came from the Adam Clarke Bible commentary.
Re: Facsimiles. The facsimiles absolutely say how the characters were interpreted. It specifically numbers the character sets and points out the characters "above his head", "above his hand" and interprets the characters meanings.
Re: Ur in the land of the Chaldeans. The very mention of this is anachronistic. In fact there are there are four anachronistic names in the text, Chaldea, Potiphar, Egyptus, and Pharaoh. Apologists like to claim that since Ur of Chadea is mentioned in Genesis that it isn't anachronistic, but the vast majority of bible scholars believe that mention is also an anachronism and a result of post-Mosaic textual updating.
Re: Best defense. None of these defenses can take away the fact that every single non-Mormon Egyptologist that has bothered to analyze the paypyri and Joseph's interpretation/translation/revelation has declared it an obvious fraud.
@@danhoen4129
Thank you for engaging and for your thoughtful comments.
Re: Translation vs. Revelation: You make a good point, I shouldn't have brought up the changing of the meaning of Egyptian characters over 2000 years ago because I didn't clarify how I find that significant, and really it is more of a side point to me. Perhaps those individual Egyptian characters had deep symbolic meaning 2000 years before the Rosetta stone. Things tied to the religion of that time, a religion that was 2000 years closer to the time that pharoah sought to imitate the original religion coming from Adam. Joseph being enlightened with THOSE meanings for some characters or phrases may have contained something connected to what we now have in the Book of Abraham that led him to begin translating the record from heaven down to earth, though I'm not sure exactly what happened because he never explained. The main point is when Joseph and the Lord used the word translation, it CLEARLY does not mean what my husband or others claim it to mean. In the JST of the bible, it often meant a word or phrase or gap in the record initiating a long revelation from heaven. It's more like the definition of translation used in mathematics. Moving a shape from one place to another. Moving knowledge recorded/stored in heaven to earth via revelation.
Re: JST of the Bible--There is a "slew" of unique doctrine that is very clarifying in the JST of the Bible that was not taught by other Christians and would have been considered heretical by Adam Clark I'm sure. The fact that Adam Clark and Joseph Smith agreed on some things that were wrong or unclear, I'm not sure why that would discredit Joseph Smith. Even if Joseph Smith had read Adam Clark and agreed with what he said and decided to use some of his wording (I haven't read the study so I'm not sure if that is being claimed?) I don't really see how that would make a difference.
Re: The facimilies--I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Egyptologists disagree with what Joseph Smith said the characters meant to the people of Ur. We aren't talking about Egyptians here. We are talking about the people in Ur of the Chaldeans where Abraham was. It seems they were Egyptophiles who had their own corrupted form of what originated from Egypt and their own interpretation of what the Egyptian characters meant as part of their perhaps poorly imitated religion. Very interesting that there were some words that Joseph Smith did "get right" according to the Egyptologists. Kind of what I would expect from people in a different land using the same symbols in their own misinformed version of what the Egyptians were doing.
Re: Ur of the Chaldeans being Anachronistic--I'm not familiar with what you are saying here, so I'll have to take your word on what experts are saying, but I do know that there was demonstrably more than one place named "Ur" in ancient times from the records we do have. Certainly scholars wouldn't claim to know the names of all the places that existed anciently and where they were all located?!? There are 35 "Springfields" and 88 "Washingtons" in the United States. I've had two houses located on Parkway drive and I have a slew of friends with babies named "Emma." Thousands of people in this country share my husband's first and last name...
Re: Best defense--I think you may have missed one of my main points. Perhaps Egyptologists are good at knowing how Egyptians interpreted their characters found the facsimiles, but not people in Ur of the Chaldeas. Perhaps Egyptologists are experts at translating the Egyptian language as found on the Rosetta stone, but certainly not in "translating" as Joseph Smith and the Lord used the word.
@@carrieann5154 No, thank you for being willing to engage! This is actually very rare and I salute you for doing what most believers aren't willing to do.
Re: Translation vs. Revelation: This seems like special pleading and an argument made out of necessity to me. Meaning that if you saw similar compelling evidence against a Scientologist's or a Jehovah's Witness' belief would you be inclined to consider a convoluted apologetic explanation that contradicts a far more reasonable explanation backed by evidence and objective experts in the relative field? If your explanation is accurate, it would mean that God would have known that Joseph's attempted translation of the papyri would look like an obvious fraud to pretty much any objective observer. For a God that wants his children to believe in his "one true church", that seems counter intuitive. It seems like if Joseph wasn't performing a literal translation, his approach would have indicated that. But it doesn't. Theories like this originate *after* compelling evidence shows the original narrative implausible. It's the same tactic used by flat-earther's and creationists.
Re: JST of the Bible: If Joseph isn't coming up with the ideas, then what makes him special? It's problematic because of how Joseph is portrayed by the faithful narrative as producing revolutionary spiritual ideas and theologies when he wasn't. And if he is coming up with ideas that are demonstrably incorrect (i.e., astronomical descriptions in the BoA), then it's just further reason to question everything he says.
Re: Facsimiles: It doesn't matter where you believe the setting was. This is a red herring argument, especially when you consider that Chaldea didn't exist during the timeframe of Abraham. The facsimiles display Egyptian characters and Joseph made an attempt at interpreting the characters that according to every Egyptologist that has evaluated, is incorrect. Also, as I mentioned, according to the vast majority of bible scholars, Chadea didn't exist at the time that Abraham supposedly lived. This very point makes the rest of your defense moot. Also, just to note that "Ur" is a person, not a place.
@@danhoen4129 Thanks again for your response!
I think your viewpoint is valid. We have had different experiences and read different things and had different lives. It seems like twisting things and a stretch to you and I get it.
Maybe another example of how Joseph used the word “translation” will help you understand why it doesn’t seem like a stretch to me (these aren’t my words):
“While Oliver Cowdery was the scribe during the Book of Mormon translation, he and Joseph discussed whether the Apostle John died or continued on Earth. The question was answered by a revelation:
‘A revelation given to Joseph Smith Jr. and Oliver Cowdery in Harmony, Pennsylvania, April 1829, when they desired to know whether John, the beloved disciple tarried on earth. Translated from parchment, written and hid up by himself’
Joseph did not have that parchment in his possession, nor did he claim to. Something was recorded on earth, which was also recorded in Heaven, then translated back from heaven to earth.
“When Enoch’s City was taken to Heaven, it is described as being ‘translated’ or a ‘translation.’ For Enoch, ‘translated’ meant moving someone from Earth into Heaven. Just like the definition used in math. Moving the location of something."
As for Egyptian characters used for religious purposes in Ur having a different meaning--It doesn't seem like a stretch to me. English speakers use the same characters as to those who speak many different languages. Those same characters have different meanings in different places. Language changes and corrupts rapidly apparently is a very fluid thing! Perhaps especially if you are trying to imitate a culture and religion of a land different than your own.
Also, from my sincere perspective, it seems like a huge stretch to dismiss the many many details that are found in the Book of Abraham that are not found in the bible but are corroborated in other non-scriptural ancient texts that Joseph Smith. Maybe one or two could be a coincidence.
But ALL of these things are found in non-biblical ancient records but not in the bible and it seems like a major stretch to say that Joseph Smith would have had access to this information, some not yet discovered or published:
“The famine in the homeland of Ur, Haran[ (Abraham’s brother) death in the famine, ● Terah (Abraham’s father) repenting of his idolatry, ● Terah’s return to idolatry, ● Believers becoming the “seed of Abraham” and inherit the blessings through him, ● Abraham held the priesthood, ● Abraham earnestly sought God, ● An angel of the Lord was sent to rescue Abraham, ● Abraham was familiar with Egyptian gods, ● Abraham was 62 years old (not 75, as in Genesis) when he left Haran, ● Abraham made converts while in Haran, ● Abraham prayed for God to end the famine in Chaldea, and The Religion of the Fathers Page 16 of 61 ● The Lord instructed Abraham [Abram] to say that Sarai was his sister.”
I'm not sure that I agree that God wants everyone to believe in his "one true church." I agree with Joseph Smith's assessment that Mormonism is truth and we should seek truth where ever we can find it.
I don't mean to invalidate your perspective. I know from hours and hours and HOURS of long discussions that two good people of good faith can sincerely see things differently.
My initial purpose in responding to my husband's video was because the popular tide on the internet right now is that belief is foolish. I wrote not to invalidate any good souls who no longer find truth in mormonism, but to let others who might be at a point where they are searching for truth know that there are thoughtful people who come to different conclusions in order to allow others a little more space in their search for truth.
The Book of Mormon invites an experiment which it claims can end in knowledge. Looking at the path of Nephi for example, that experiment begins with small proofs. Things progress to larger proofs and more opportunities to act in faith in Jesus Christ until the result is sure knowledge in Jesus Christ through his presence. That's what I see as the message and invitation of the Book of Mormon.
I just think there needs to be a little more space on the internet to allow for others who find something compelling in Mormonism to conduct that experiment for themselves. And again, I really appreciate your well thought-out comments and feel a kinship towards those who are willing to question things even if we come to different conclusions.
@@carrieann5154 I can definitely grant the word, "translate" can have different meanings, but it's pretty clear in the case of the Book of Abraham, that Joseph attempted a translation according to the secular definition of the word. Especially when you consider that Joseph helped construct the "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language" documents with his scribes. In these documents, Joseph and his scribes wrote down the individual characters of the papyri in one column and the English translation of those characters in the adjacent column. That's about as cut and dry as you can get as far as how "translation" works. As far as words meaning something completely different as time goes by, I think that's just another argument out of necessity.
I don't feel like you've invalidated my beliefs about the church. I appreciate the respectful dialogue. While I believe that it's always best to be respectful towards believers, I think there is good reason we are seeing a trend towards secularism. This trend is showing that people are changing how they develop their epistemological approach, and it comes down to something fairly succinct: when determining what is "true", people have started favoring logic and evidence (strengthened by hundreds of years of science) over spiritual manifestations. And as long as society can avoid a complete collapse, this trend will only continue.
I know how living in a mixed-faith marriage feels. After I left the faith, my wife remained active for another 3.5 years until she finally came to the conclusion that the church is not true. While those times were difficult, I definitely admire couples that can make things work and look past differing beliefs. I feel like during that time, we developed more empathy, patience and love for each other. One thing that helped us was when we stopped trying to change each other and instead sought to understand each other. I wish you and your husband nothing but success and happiness.
Very well done. This should serve as a model for how to present these issues; i.e., just the clear hard facts without the spin. This will be the first place I point people to begin learning about the papyri.
Thank you for your clear presentation and easily understandable arguments. The facts truely do speak for themselves.
The late Hugh Nibley, PhD, BYU professor, expert in ancient scriptures and languages, deeply revered and respected by Mormons, HIMSELF agreed that the papyri on which Joseph Smith stated was written the Book of Abraham, were no older than the first century AD. Joseph Smith claimed they had been written by Abraham's OWN HAND. Obviously this was a LIE, for the papyri would have had to be at least 4,000 years old, and they were in fact less than 2,000 years old! This ONE fact is all that is needed to prove the "Book of Abraham" to be a FRAUD.
Job done! Proof positive that the "Book of Abraham" is a scam, and the proof is confirmed by the LDS and BYU's own Dr. Hugh Nibley !
The apologetic argument, however, is that it doesn't matter what Joseph Smith believed about the papyrus if it merely acted as a catalyst for revelation.
@@ThomasJDavis Have some Kool-Aid then Thomas....
@@maxwellsilverhammer9233 So you don't know what the rebuttal is for my previous comment?
Do you even know why these apologetic arguments exist?
@@ThomasJDavis Oh, I was not aware that there was anything to examine. Is there new evidence supporting Joe's "translation from Abraham's writings?" Please advise.
@@maxwellsilverhammer9233 It's not my problem if you don't care to have good reasons for your beliefs. Good luck navigating bullshit in your life.
Nicely done. Clearly presented.
Extreamly well put together. Rationality brings truth.
th-cam.com/video/3bm6Npd1Hjw/w-d-xo.html DEBUNKED THE ARROGANT EGYPTOLOGISTS.
@@richardholmes7199 - What did JS think of the arrogant egyptologists of his day?
@@kentthalman4459 STILL grasping at straws I see.
@@richardholmes7199 - still avoiding my question cause you know JS takes away your position
@@kentthalman4459 ?
What a powerful video. Thank you for the effort you put into it.
Yes. The case is now closed on the Book of Abraham.
+SecondCounselor It's funny how powerful facts really are. Bulls___ is weak-sauce in comparison.
You all do know that the anti-Book of Abraham info was debunked in 2014, don't you? Google ''Book of Abraham part 1 (Why Egyptologists are wrong) (new) You Tube'' That video shows one out there the RIGHT WAY that you're supposed to interpret the translation of the Book of Abraham. That that which the anti-Mormons and the Egyptologists say that Joseph Smith mistranslated is actually the counterfeit (copy) in other words.
They said that Joseph Smith mistranslated the papyri, the papyri was never even translated, added to show contrast only. Therefore obviously Joseph Smith never mistranslated on anything to begin with. You're NOT SUPPOSED TO INTERPRET THE TRANSLATION OF The Book of Abraham the way that the anti-Book of Abraham videos are showing everybody. That vid I told you about in my last comment shows the RIGHT WAY to interpret the translation of the Book of Abraham. The papyri that the anti-Mormons and the Egyptologists say Joseph Smith mistranslated is technically the counterfeit (copy). This wasn't known about until 2014. That video like I say shows one the right way that you're supposed to interpret the translation of the Book of Abraham. Pay strict attention especially to the counterfeit (the papyri that Joseph Smith was supposed to have mistranslated) subject. The counterfeit was merely added to the beginning of the Book of Abraham to show contrast. To show a contrast between Gods religion and Satan's religion.
Richard Holmes you do know there were thousands of these funeral texts found with mummies right? So we're every one writing from Abraham? Why doesn't the church re-commission the magic Rock and start translating all of these funeral texts?
excellent, succinct overview. Thank you.
Joesph $mith was also hard at work "translating" the kinderhook plates as well. :-/
LOL!
?
Richard Holmes Richard. Shame on you. I would have thought that you knew about the Kinderhook plates and would be "debunking" them as we speak. You're slipping. Kinderhook plates. There were three men who forged metal plates with hieroglyphics. In other words, not ancient artifacts. Their goal was to take them to Joseph Smith and see what he said about them. Guess what? He said they were ancient and from a descendant of Ham. Basically, he translated them like he did the book of Abraham. Meaning, he didn't know what he was doing. They were trying to catch Joseph Smith in a fraud, and they absolutely succeeded. Proven fraud, once again, Joseph Smith. Now, you can look it up. But I'm starting to understand how you think, or don't think. There are some claims by the church that he wasn't "divinely inspired" at the time or some other apologetic bullshit. But there were countless witnesses that proved that Joseph claimed they were ancient and he could read them, even though they were completely made up. Again, knowing how you think, you'll believe the church's complete twisting of the truth, instead of the vastly larger body of evidence from witnesses. Because you ignore all real evidence and cherry pick tiny little pieces of information, always from Mormon apologist websites. You are simply blinded. You'll never change. The church could step forward (FINALLY) and admit its a fraud and you wouldn't believe it. They set up Joseph Smith and he failed miserably.
Kinderhook plates have been debunked....and yet like a zombie boomarang it keeps coming back. Google more.
Spencer Streeter,
I am investigating the LDS church. Could you help me and provide a link debunking the Kinderhook plates?
I don't think the issue is whether or not the papyri were mimicking a more ancient text. I think the issue is, was Joseph Smith's translation of what was on the scrolls true to what scholars now know of the Egyptian language and customs. The Facsimiles currently published in the Book of Abraham are so obviously misinterpreted that it is obvious that he had no idea what he was doing. If he really was a prophet receiving knowledge from God, he would not have made such obvious errors.
Before you even get to the substantial questions raised here, you need to examine why Abraham, the father of Judaism, would pick up a piece of papyrus and on it, write out a 100% perfect Egyptian funeral scroll for a dead guy named Horus containing prayers to pagan gods Osiris and Isis. The lds chuch is teaching that this is literally what happened. "by his own hand upon papyrus."
I know, it's laughable.
No way, the LDS church is not teaching Abraham wrote the book for Hor. Another internet lie! Every Egyptologist knows how the Egyptian priests preserved scrolls with mummies and attached them with funeral scrolls along with other unrelated books. These temple priests who preserved ancient records with dead mummies recopied crumbling old scrolls which became old worm eaten material. They replaced these records with new hand written copies every few centuries. They never would place a funeral scroll in a mummy by itself, it was always accompanied with a book or several books. The Egyptian priest wrote this funeral scroll which was about Egyptian beliefs. Smith simply converted the facsimiles in that scroll into a Hebrew understanding which was added as an illustration in the book, not the entire book! Since when is an added illustration considered the entire book? You've been tricked. I will prove that the Smith translation this book a 100 percent right in a few minutes or publicly apologize. Click TH-cam video titled by these exact letters "BOA ep 16"
@@paulgregersen3570 Well start apologizing, because it's complete horse shit. It's one of the primary reasons people leave mormonism because it's such an obvious fraud. No amount of wishing, reinterpretation, or application of further lies or magic will ever change that. Anyone who begins a review of this objectively reaches the same conclusion.
@@fargo007 A wise man should always test something before he talks so assuredly. You seem like a smart guy, then explain why no one can debunk this video that gives mountains of real evidence the critics you've obviously listened to deliberately ignore. If you can debunk this video with direct contradictions then I'll certainly apologize.
@@fargo007click " BOA ep 16 "
On the contrary, the authenticity of the LDS church's claims to authority stands or falls with Joseph Smith. If he was a deceiver, then how can the LDS church possibly have any authority to act in God's name? I believe from my research that JS had at least one NDE, where he got a great deal of information about the afterlife. He then used that knowledge to build an organization based on some truth, but his personal lust for women & fame cancel any rightful claim to 'priesthood authority".
There is no evidence to support the idea that Joseph Smith instituted polygamy to satisfy his own lusts. Let's debate. Pull out your primary sources!
Crushing evidence! Thank you!
?
@@richardholmes7199 - don't worry Timmy, it's only crushing to those who see. The willfully blind will stay so.
@@kentthalman4459 Tammy, can you expand on that?
"assumes" this was an Egyptian document? You really are reaching. Joseph Smith himself said that they were Egyptian, and he made up an "Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar" to pretend he knew that language. Come on, if you don't believe him about that, how could you possibly believe him about the rest?
Great video man! Clear, concise, and easy to follow. A lot better than every piece of pro BofA garbage and most of the opposing as well. It's hard to find people who dispassionately present facts as evidence. If people were presented the facts and left to make up their own mind on things the world would be a lot less discordant. Mormonism (and cults in general) would also not exist, and that is a world that I can support! Thanks again for your effort in creating this.
Very sad so many are blinded by the lies of LDS.
You've been blinded. Google ''Book of Abraham pt 2 (Egyptologists back Smith) youtube'' to see this translation the right way.
@@richardholmes7199 it's unfortunate that you being blind are trying to lead those who can see. I guess you know how foolish you look?
@@kentthalman4459 How am I foolish?
This is an excellent presentation of the facts. Thank you for doing such a great job of presenting the information!
This is akin to taking a paperback copy of Harry Potter and The Philosopher's Stone and saying it's only a novel about an English boy in a wizarding school if you "assume" it's an English document about English culture, rather than being penned by an ancient Viking for his own narrative purposes. There's no way in which Harry Potter can be interpreted as an ancient document, Viking or otherwise.
If he did genuinely believe he was translating the papyri, he was completely mistaken, which itself is quite problematic.
To be more specific, one of the reasons why this is problematic is because it shows that god is willing to reveal his own scripture through the appearance of fraud. To the outsider, it looks like fraud, it acts like fraud, it sounds like fraud.
For the apologist to say that it's still possible for god to reveal the Book of Abraham to Joseph regardless of what the process looks like is straight up _brute denial. Literally. Brute denial._ Any man who accepts this explanation is stonewalling their own brain. It is the penultimate step in one's mental gymnastics before full admission that the work is a clearly demonstrable fraud.
Furthermore, the condemning implication of insisting that god still revealed the BoA to Joseph despite a genuinely fraudulent procedure is that it makes god responsible for anyone who leaves the church over it.
Under the catalyst hypothesis, God knew that this was going to pose a problem in the future (namely the 21st century) when the evidence would become widely publicized on the internet. And members of the church would find out the truth through critics of the church and become convinced that the church isn't what it claims to be.
And instead of notifying Joseph Smith and his scribes that the scrolls were not the Book of Abraham or that their activities were not producing the BoA from the scroll or even just instead of revealing the words of scripture to Joseph, _god DECIDED to let the fraud slide._ AND he NEVER notified and of his servants, the prophets, from then on about the true nature of the BoA's production. Hence, this god is responsible for the apostasy of tens of thousands of members of his own church, possibly hundreds of thousands by this point.
This is a god who has demonstrated he does not care about truth. His actions speak louder than his words. To say the least, he is irresponsible and negligent and therefore untrustworthy. And at worst, his character would be indistinguishable from the devil's himself.
The catalyst model is dead in the water. In an attempt to save the authenticity of the Book of Abraham and portray Joseph as innocent, they have thrown their own god under the bus. But of course, they would never tell their believing members that. Because they're not interested in truth. Their mission is to keep the believers believing.
Book of Abraham
Translation or Invention? www.utlm.org/newsletters/pdfnewsletters/123saltlakecitymessenger.pdf
Paul Gregersen debunked the Egyptologists in 2014.
Hey, everybody this Mormon is guaranteeing you 5,000 dollar's reward if we can prove that Joseph Smith is not in the Bible by the number 1830. wth-cam.com/video/0-sxcrBjT14/w-d-xo.html
He says he can mathematically show that the Bible reveals Joseph Smith as the solution for the 666 beast.th-cam.com/video/CYcqAL4KTRQ/w-d-xo.html and also this video likewiseth-cam.com/video/qQkeXB4qisg/w-d-xo.html. I say we take him upon it and go to the Salt lake tribune and publicly make him pay out the money. Lets show the entire world that the Bible proves Mormonism false.
Excellent - Fair - Water tight !
You guys are absolutely incredible! You are all overlooking the elephant in the room and that is - how did Joseph Smith get so many thing right? He was uneducated and this was the 1830s.
This comment is a Texas sharp shooter fallacy. Literally every single Egyptian character that Joseph tried to translate is a failure. Every. Single. Character.
The question of "How Joseph Smith got so many things right" is a loaded one, cause he got pretty much everything wrong. He didn't even get the book of Abraham and it's facsimiles to agree.
@@danhoen4129 lol, but muh "holy" "spirit"
Seriously though. Isn't it even a little concerning that even according to LDS Egyptologists, there isn't a single character that Joseph translated correctly? Take a look at facsimie 3 for example. He tried to translate those characters and failed spectacularly. Nothing even remotely accurate. How is this not concerning to believers?
Dan Hoen Denial of truth
Joseph said he made "translations". To say he published "interpretative commentary" is being way too nice in your criticism.
This is possibly the best debunk video I have ever seen!
TheRationalizer Have you seen the new you tube video called Lost Book of Abraham Killer LDS Defense?
Richard Holmes Have you seen your favorite video has been removed.
GDK You mean the one where you could see he wasn't argued with too much?
Richard Holmes Yea he must have removed it because his arguments were bullet proof.
The above video wasn't published by an honest individual though, as he does not allow for the RIGHT WAY that you're supposed to interpret the translation of the Book of Abraham. Even if he could say that he did not know that you're not supposed to interpret the translation the way that the anti-Book of Abraham videos have been showing everybody. It proves he didn't have honest intent to look at the translation the right way TO BEGIN WITH!
Pharoah is an anachronism in the Book of Abraham. Pharoah didn't refer to a person until a few hundred years after Abraham lived. See the Wikipedia entries for Abraham: Name and Chronology, and Pharoah: Etymology
22:41 "Joseph Smith apparently wanted his dupes to believe that the Horus Book of Breathings contained the writings of Abraham." there--fixed that for you.
Thank you for the objective analysis
Wonderful history and very interesting! Thank you for sharing !
The crap on the above video was debunked in 2014.
@@richardholmes7199 by who?
@@SamTheMan0425 By Paul Gregersen in 2014.
@@richardholmes7199 How has he debunked anything?
@@SamTheMan0425 By presenting proper interpretation. This has been known about since 2014.
Forget the Papyri, I want to see Abraham and Joseph's mummies. Where did they stash them? Also, can't we use Smith's notes to translate other dark, evil Egyptian funerary papyri, so we can manufacture other Hebrew patriarchal books just like Smith did?😬
Great work. Very important information for millions.
But the scrolls did not say what Joseph said they did. Interesting.
If you're unintelligent enough to believe that anti-Mormon version of the translation. The anti-Book of Abraham info is easily debunked by the video called ''Book of Abraham part 1 (Why Egyptologists are wrong) (new)''
Wrong as usual Richard Holmes, you Mormons hate facts.
@@TheShodan92 Can you expand upon that?
Look this up on LDS.org. Search L
"LDS.org historicity of book of abraham". The LDS website now affirms this video.
The dumb Egyptologists, the dumb anti-Mormons also of course, have been DEBUNKED due to assuming that the translation/explanation of the Egyptian papyri from Joseph Smith was supposed to be translated the same way the Egyptological field would interpret the vignettes.
Excellent well thought out video.
Really great video, I do have a pretty strong objection though as the video make it seem like *Abraham is known to be a historical person* while the general consensus among historians is that the bible was written 900-300 BC and the archaeological and DNA evidence indicates Jewish people originated from the Canaanites. Now this may not be the creator of this video's intent but their is verbiage that implies that.
Well done! I appreciate straight-forward facts :-D
Thanks for your scholarship and presentation.
19 mormons hate this
No, it's the kind of people who make the above video are a people who hate the Mormons. You never see the good Catholics publishing these duplicate, uncivil, get into a rush to judgement anti-Book of Abraham videos.
@@richardholmes7199 I don't Hate Mormons
It's Mormon Theology it does not add up
There is all kinds of evidence that the book of Abraham is a fabrication . There is no doubt Smith made the story up.
Egytians did not do Human Sacrifices
Have you read the BoA ? It is an anathema
It is not from God. it's fiction . It has the devil's signature all over it
Google ''Book of Abraham pt 1 (Why Egyptologists are wrong) youtube''. The EGYPTOLOGISTS DEBUNKED in a mere 7:43 by demonstrating that the translation/explanation of the Egyptian papyri was never supposed to be seen as being translated the same way the Egyptological field would interpret the translation.
*Excellent* presentation, one of the best and most fair I've seen. Thank you!
Very good explanation of mormon humiliation from the con man joe smith.
Liar! You already know that the papyri that the anti-Mormon Christians and the Egyptologists say Joseph Smith mistranslated is actually the counterfeit.
@Richard Holmes ... You spelt "Kinderhook Plates" wrong.
@@TheShodan92 Where did I post Kinderhook plates?
@@richardholmes7199 Idiot. He was being sarcastic. It's a cult Richard. CULT>
@@richardholmes7199 Oh, and Egyptologists don't agree with you. Or Joe Smith. Nor do archeologist, geneticists, biologists, paleontologists, do i need to go on?
Superbly done but it omits things. One is that Joseph concealed from readers of the book of Abraham that he would have had to fill in gaps with many missing words, plus the drawings were filled in as well and Smith's own sketched in filler drawings at the edge of the papyrus were preserved. Smith kept that from readers of the Book of Abraham also. Instead he put a human head on a figure that actually had the head of a jackal since it represented Anubis ,the god that directed embalming. So, he had no problem concealing facts and presenting something else instead.
Excellent video. Keep it up. Follow up on the nonsense about our sun only being a reflection of the light from kolob.
MormonHistoryEtc Hey can you answer a question for me? I'm wondering what the scroll cores were that were burned in 1871? Were they actual scrolls of writing or were they just pieces of wood?
Sorry, I missed this somehow. The cores just refer to rolled up papyrus, not to wood. It just means the interior parts of the scrolls, if any, that were not removed, laid flat, and mounted on stiff paper.
Here is how we know that we have what was actually used.
www.josephsmithpapers.org/articles/revelations-and-translations-volume-4-book-of-abraham
explain to a mormon scholar as you would to a young child...lies were made of acient egyptian papyri scrolls
?
You got me lost on what you wanted to say in a question: Is it impossible that the burned portion of the Tshenmin scroll contain writing by the Hebrew patriarch Joseph?
Are you asking that it is impossible or is it possible that the burned portion could contain those writings?
Also your answer "No, it is not impossible" is a double negative so you are saying that it is possible that those burned portions had those writings?
I do not believe in BoA as it is a complete fabrication and nonsense created by the treasure digger Smith, but this use of language is confusing. Thanks for explanation.
Not relevant to my salvation.
It is if you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet...
Matthew Kunes That has no bearing whatsoever on my salvation.
So you're not a member of the LDS church?
Matthew Kunes No, but this is the common excuse TBMs use.
So you can't talk or think about it? What about sports or movies? Do they pertain to your salvation? Do you talk about those things?
I don't think this video does or should cause doubts about the truthfulness of the church. Joseph's own record shows that he genuinely believed he too was translating. His record never says "I am deceiving these people so good haha!" He consistently shows how he is trying to do God's will. One thing to note is that there is always more to the story than surface layer.
Hey, everybody this Mormon is guaranteeing you 5,000 dollar's reward if we can prove that Joseph Smith is not in the Bible by the number 1830. wth-cam.com/video/0-sxcrBjT14/w-d-xo.html
He says he can mathematically show that the Bible reveals Joseph Smith as the solution for the 666 beast.th-cam.com/video/CYcqAL4KTRQ/w-d-xo.html and also this video likewiseth-cam.com/video/qQkeXB4qisg/w-d-xo.html. I say we take him upon it and go to the Salt lake tribune and publicly make him pay out the money. Lets show the entire world that the Bible proves Mormonism false.
As I understand it. most of the papyri was destroyed in a great fire. Logic points me to the idea that the translated version in its length could have never come from the remaining fragments. Translating Egyptian was a difficult task, however giving the fact the Egyptians practiced slavery over conquered nations and the Jewish tribe was one of those nations, seems fitting legacy of Abraham would have existed in Ancient Egypt. It is not impossible that the Jew slaves organized priest and wrote text equivalent to their historical truth. Reading the Book of Abraham, how would Joseph Smith and the translators know that GOD told Abraham that there were many earths and heaven thereof who have come and gone and passed away. How would Joseph know that Kolob was the planet that was closest to GOD.(in the sense how people lived) These were the most striking revelations that I made special note of when I read the text. Peoples of 2000 + years could have not imagined this, They still believed the earth was flat. Only Divine language could have revealed such a thing. This is what I sought when reading the scripture, its logical platform for the peoples In the time and age. Now we understand much more about space and time and we do know the vastness of universes and the possibilities of other planets with life.
What about the facsimiles included in the PoGP? Those were also verifiably bogus translations, but much harder for the church to distance itself from.
Exactly. The people of 2000+ years ago certainly did not know about the concept of multiple star-orbiting worlds, but the people of 19th-century America when the BoA was produced certainly did. So BoA cosmology is a essentially a 19th-century anachronism in an autobiography of Abraham. In fact, the idea of multiple planetoid worlds orbiting stars organized in a hierarchy with God's throne at the center was popularized in the early 1800s in a book by Thomas Dick called Philosophy of a Future State, a book found in Joseph Smith's personal library. But the scientific discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo, and Herschel are much more obvious sources for these theories than "Divine language".
you are really, really, REALLY stupid. first of all not all people thought the earth was flat. the egyptians for one actively charted the stars. in order to do this and be accurate, you kinda have to understand that the earth is round, and that it rotates (accounting for the changing positions of the stars). Secondly, Kolob, is flat out made up bullshit. that dude joseph smith was a con artist. period.
Debate Everything "When you acquire a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years; in the seventh year he shall go free, without payment. If he came single, he shall leave single; if he had a wife, his wife shall leave with him. If his master gave him a wife, and she has borne him children, the wife and her children shall belong to the master, and he shall leave alone.
that is in exodus if you want to look it up
MrNihilio
I think he was referring to the likelihood that the story of Hebrew enslavement in Egypt was not true, not that the Hebrew law didn't allow them to own Hebrew slaves.
Can not thumbs up enough! Excellent work! Wow!
?
Fraud
Joseph and Abraham never existed as historical individuals. that would rather rule out their authorship. don't you think?
The fact is, Smith could not read these documents and they have nothing to do with Judaism, and still less with Smith's confidence trick (Mormonism to you).
Can you address the issue here eom.byu.edu/index.php/Book_of_Abraham#Book_of_Abraham:_Studies_About_the_Book_of_Abraham relating to the information listed at 22:15?
Michael D. Rhodes wrote:
"Joseph Smith explained that Facsimile 3 represents Abraham sitting on the pharaoh's throne teaching principles of astronomy to the Egyptian court. Critics have pointed out that the second figure, which Joseph Smith says is the king, is the goddess Hathor (or Isis). There are, however, examples in other papyri, not in the possession of Joseph Smith, in which the pharaoh is portrayed as Hathor. In fact, the whole scene is typical of Egyptian ritual drama in which costumed actors played the parts of various gods and goddesses."
I've come to the conclusion that the argument regarding the supposed Egyptian cultural practice of putting on plays in costume is a red herring. It's irrelevant whether or not the depiction is truly of deities or of people dressing up like deities. It has literally nothing to do with whether or not the papyri say what Joseph Smith claimed it did.
The real issue is that the claims by the LDS church regarding the Book of Mormon are not repeatable via translation even by LDS Egyptologists, and the extant papyri have no link to what was produced by Joseph Smith. Additionally, Abraham 1:14 - www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/1.14?lang=eng#13 explicitly links the Facsimiles to the supposed translation.
Results which cannot be repeated are of questionable validity. No one has demonstrated a re-translation that produces the LDS canon even in part nor have they formed any means to deconstruct the translation to validate such a claim.
Anyone wanting to be honest about the BoA has to closely research JS's own claims.
th-cam.com/video/tznpRR0Fos8/w-d-xo.html
Great analysis and video, thank you, however, it does not disprove Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham as we don't know exactly what he translated from or how much of the scrolls he actually translated, in his claimed translation as the LDS church understands translation can come from either looking directly at foreign texts and translating it or receiving revelation and translating that revelation from God to paper. We need to remember that no existing papyri, scroll or any original text of the Bible exists today and archaeologists have found hundreds of scrolls, texts, papyri, etc. from the Middle East, around the same time-period as the Bible's writings, that directly contradict the current Bible. Which is true then? It the apostle Peter's writings he says, scripture cannot be understood alone, the Holy Ghost is required to understand it. Unless and until we have Joseph Smith personally testify what he translated, how he translated it and its meaning, we can't disprove anything.
If you study this book put out by the Church you will understand concretely why you are wrong.
www.josephsmithpapers.org/articles/book-of-abraham-and-related-manuscripts-volume-now-available
@@kentthalman4459 ah yes more church apologist arguments! Cyclical reasoning at its best. Read the CES letter and get out of that cult before it is too late.
@@thomasmcgregor4626 The value of the JSP productions on JS BoA revelations is they it takes the "missing scroll theory" off the table. In fact that only option left is the catalyst theory, which as RFM has noted is indistinguishable from fraud. The JSP Project is different in that they put all the artifacts on the table. The reality is that vol 4 of revelations and translations show Kerry Mulestein and John Gee to be massive liars which is why I recommended it to Russell.
The official LDS website now admitts: "None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Latter-day Saint and non-Latter-day Saint 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-Latter-day Saint scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.27 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."
In 10K years a prophet, giving an authoritative revelation, should have no trouble identifying the correct subjects of your picture. That's the advantage of prophethood.
Great Stuff. I'd love to get fluent in these understandings. Do you have some good references for research material on this subject and others like it?
I'd suggest starting your search with a book by Charles Larson, "By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus". Mr. Larson also has a YT video with his story as a Mormon and how his book came about.
Google also UTLM--a great source.
Also check out "MormonThink.com" and find the link to "Joseph Smith Papyri".
The internet is FULL of good information.
Good hunting!
42apostate
thanks for that
Sidney Barker Since he referred you to of all people Charles Larson! I'll refer you to the new you tube video Lost Book of Abraham Killer LDS Defense!
Richard Holmes
you seem to be sending a lot of people to that video. Can you provide a link to it? What is your need to get that message across btw.
Sidney Barker It's a lame video that is practically saying that the Facsimiles were used as a tool by Abraham to teach Egyptians about the real God by using the false gods that Egyptians worshiped at the time. It's just LDS propaganda.
Very nice, although I wonder about one of the concluding comments.
I don't for a second believe that Smith actually "believed" that the Horus _"Breathings"_ contained the writings of Abraham. I think from the outset that Smith, Cowdery and Phelps (and Sidney Rigdon?) recognized the papyri as an opportunity-as a prop and a pretext-they could use to manufacture more "ancient scripture" they could then "restore." One cannot rule out the possibility that they imagined they were in some sense inspired by or _channeling_ God to restore ancient Abraham. On the other hand, that is NOT what Smith claimed when be claimed to be _"translating."_
Smith also knew full well that there never were any gold plates - he never "believed" there were gold plates, any more than be "believed" the papyri actually contained the writings of Abraham. As the Abraham gibberish spilled out of his mouth, though, did he or his colleagues believe it was Abraham speaking? Even that probably gives too much credit to another Smith hoax.
JosephsMyth pulled a Rabbit out of his hat and called it the Book of Mormon. He did it again and called it the Book of Abraham. And a third time and called it a translation of the Kinderhook Plates. JosephsMyth was good at magic but not translations.
While JS was good at selling magic he never once found treasures that he was paid to with his peepstone; however, he did find a horse for someone. Makes you wonder if he was the one who stole it.
+TheHypnotstCollector Correction: JS never produced any translation of the Kinderhook plates. The rest of your comment is accurate, and would be more credible if you simply removed that one sentence.
The facsimiles in the BoA actually call the commentary "Explanation[s]." Many of these are about drawn figures and not text, so they can't properly be termed "translations." Hence my choice of words. (That's not so say they can't be wrong, of course.)
However, it's true that some of the explanations DO claim to explicitly translate actual hieroglyphics from the facsimiles, and a few examples of this are explicitly described in the video at 21:08.
If the papyri are not the source of the information now contained in the Book of Abraham, what is? Since Joseph Smith's translation of the papyri is inaccurate, where did he get his translation?
When i joined The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
I was ask to read
The Book of Mormon to find out
If it was of God or not.
I agreed i believed it was of God,
Not written by a man, Joseph Smith. I recieved a Spiritual Witness from God the The Bookmof Mormon was true.
When i recieved that we Witness then, i recieved an Eternal Witness. So, i am not concerned about anything else. Im like the Eveready Bunny. Still going.
And Loving it. Thank You.
To all Mormons:
If you were to turn the Genesis account of the sacrifice of Isaac into an Egyptian Glyph (not text translation) how would you draw it? That's right! You would use the Coming Forth By Day altar scene or that of Facsimile #1. In such a representation, Isaac would be portrayed by Osiris and Abraham as Anubis and the Ba Bird as the Messenger who stops the sacrifice. You would name the Biblical characters after their Egyptian counterparts and not impose their Hebrew names, because this is in the Egyptian language and script.
Do you know see how Joseph Smith rendered a translation of Abraham 1 from Facsimile #1 and Abraham 3 to lead into yet another revision of the Creation Story from Facsimile #2? Egyptologists and LDS Apologists are arguing back and forth not seeing the Big Picture, which the Genesis Stories have already been holding the answers all this time.
You're missing some key points:
- JS claimed that the papyrus was written by Abraham himself
- JS even claimed that Abraham's own signature was on the papyrus
- JS derived both an alphabet and grammar from the papyrus
- The papyrus is a funeral text written specifically for priest Hor 15 centuries after Abraham. It has nothing to do with Abraham.
That is the big picture.
@@kentthalman4459 No...
The Egyptian Heliopolis Creation Glyph is the source for Genesis 1.
Nut and Geb are the identities of Adam and Eve (see Genesis 2:4)
Osiris and Set are Cain and Abel
Etc.
Joseph Smith indicates in several places in Chapter 1 of Abraham that he's referring to the facsimiles not the text on the Papyri. Joseph was merely doing exactly as the Post Captivity Jew did in the construction of the Torah. The Torah is the 5 Books of Moses, though written by a Jew Centuries after the events. There are no J, E, P or D source documents.
@@TravisWayneGoodsell1970 - "Osiris and Set are Cain and Abel" source please
"Joseph Smith indicates in several places in Chapter 1 of Abraham that he's referring to the facsimiles" source please
BTW, you mean the facsimiles that are completely mistranslated?
@@TravisWayneGoodsell1970 "Joseph was merely doing exactly as the Post Captivity Jew did in the construction of the Torah" and "There are no J, E, P or D source documents" this is a fascinating approach. Are you proposing that JS used the Book of the Dead to insert his own theology and then attributed it to Abraham the same way scribes engaged in prolegomena writings in the Torah?
BTW, my assertions above are historically correct.
@@kentthalman4459 I gave you the source for Osiris and Set as Cain and Abel - the Egyptian documents
Sources for Joseph referring to the Facsimile not the text of the papyri:
Abraham 1:6-8; 12!; 15; 17
It is clear that you don't like the LDS Church; understand that I too have recognized that the Brighamite branch is wrong. But it is clear that you are unfamiliar with Zeitgeist the movie and the rising generation of Egyptologists who have identified the Gospels as taken from the Egyptian documents; I merely am one who found the Torah to be from Egyptian documents when they were focused on the Gospels. Joseph may not have his history correct, but his tactic of translation is the same as the Gospel authors and the Torah author who may not have their history correct either.
A key assertion claimed by critics of the Church is that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers were produced _prior_ to the Book of Abraham manuscript, and that they therefore constitute a "smoking gun" that proves that Joseph was making up translations for Egyptian characters taken from the existing fragments of the Joseph Smith Papyri. Critics often refer to these papers as the "translation documents" for the Book of Abraham, and believe that they were used specifically to produce the first three verses in Abraham, Chapter 1.
However, the earliest document in the KEP (pre-dating the recovery of the Joseph Smith Papryi from which the Book of Abraham was produced) assigns meanings to non-Egyptian characters, and a later document assigns new meanings to these same characters.
The earliest datable document in the collection is a letter from W. W. Phelps to his wife describing a selection of the "pure language". It is dated to May of 1835. The document contains a sequence of six characters, three of which may belong to a Masonic cipher. Each character is also given a name, a pronunciation and an explanation. However, what is significant is that all six of these characters appear in an identical order in other KEP documents, except they are given different names, sounds and explanations. None of these six characters come from the Papyri.
One conclusion made by some theorists is that the KEP do not lend support to the critical theory that the coherent words of the Book of Abraham were produced from a non-inspired analysis of the Egyptian materials before Joseph or his scribes. The text of the Book of Abraham was uttered by the Prophet and recorded by his scribes in much the same way that all of his revelatory translation projects were done. To the critic, this simply means that Joseph made up the coherent text and dictated it; to the believer, it means that Joseph received the text by revelation and dictated it, whether the actual text of the Book of Abraham existed on the papyri or not.
"It means that Joseph received the text by revelation and dictated it, whether the Book of Abraham existed on the papyri or not." So, catalyst hypothesis it is then. The conclusion is essentially the same as stated in the video: Smith apparently believed that he was translating from the papyri, but in fact he wasn't.
Any alternate explanation for the true origin of the text is conjecture only, as it is not based either on anything stated or claimed by the prophet himself or any of his contemporaries, who by all appearances all believed that the papyri themselves were the true origin.
MormonHistoryEtc We do have the actual Book of Abraham that can be tested to see if it is spiritually inspired. By the power of the holy ghost one can know the truthfulness of all things.
MormonHistoryEtc You are also assuming that Joseph Smith believed that he was translating as in, from one language to another. While you need to take into account that Joseph used the word Translation to also mean taking something and restoring it to its pure or original state.
The Joseph Smith Translation of certain biblical verses does not mean that Joseph had an original greek version of the Bible that he was literally translating from. He received those by revelation as well.
Since the KEPs were written after the publication of the Book of Abraham one might assume that they believed that Abraham was a direct translation and that they were trying to reverse translate it in the KEP.
However, I find that unlikely because several of the characters on the left hand side of the paper were also used simultaneously in conjunction with verses from D&C which has nothing to do with the Perl of Great Price. So what is really going on here when Joseph is talking about reconstructing an alphabet in his journal? It is more likely that Joseph Smith was attempting to construct a pure language or a method of encoding revelation.
Joseph Smith often would pen letters in code to his associates when he believed that the letters were in danger of being taken and rewritten falsely in his name.
MormonHistoryEtc There are some really interesting facts about the Book of Abraham that are just coming to light. Anthropologists, for example, have recently discovered that ancient Jews would would quite often use Egyptian motifs but instead substitute the Egyptian Gods with Jewish people and places ect... The most common replacement is Osiris who is depicted as Abraham! Or in Chapter 128 of the Book of the Dead, Osiris is Able.
Egyptian Priests in religious ceremonies would also act vicariously as Anubis the jackal-headed God, and would even wear a full head mask of the jackal.
How would Joseph Smith know these things if not via revelation? One might say that he was just lucky. But I find that when one is consistently "lucky" something more profound is going on.
Book of Abraham written by his own hand 2,300 years after he died!
CRAP!
The problem I have with this video is that while much what it says is true, there are key points that it completely ignores. The most important is that the best evidence indicates that there were more than just the two scrolls mentioned here (with their associated fragments) in the possession of Joseph Smith. I believe that a) there were additional scrolls beyond the two described here and, b) the written translations were attempts to reconcile the other scrolls with those pertaining to Abraham.
@Jacob Smith - we know form the Kirtland Egyptian Papers that the BoA came from the remaining fragments. For more on this watch Dan Vogel's seven part video series on this topic.
Look at the LDS website. LDS.org agrees with this video. This is new, but LDS.org now has an essay that confirms the truth of this video.
nice and to the point ....thank you.
Are you still out LYING about Mormonism?
There is so much evidence coming out with such incredible proof that the BOA is not of God nor the BOM. It is so sad that members are given the belief that this is the true work of Jesus's Gospel when in fact it TRULY doesn't add up that way! The members don't deserve to be mislead is such a terrible way. SO SAD!
The Book of Abraham helps me to understand in more detail what Father Abraham did as a priesthood holder and why those who righteously hold the priesthood through love and service are considered his seed, or the seed of Abraham. The Book of Abraham clearly teaches that if it wasn't for Abraham's desire to fulfill his priesthood covenant, the order would not have been preserved for the twelve tribes of Israel. It would have been lost for those during the Old Testament. It's not about where it may or may not have come from as much as it's about how we use it's teachings.
Jacob Jensen Exactly, it doesn't matter what color the Kool aid is.
I prefer red Kool aid myself.
Unless of course it's a fraud
Well that's very nice Jacob. I don't mean to bust your bubble
But you don't hold the Melchizedek Priesthood. Only Christ holds that Priesthood It is nontransferable
Show me biblically where the apostles were given the Melchizedek Priesthood
The Aaronic or Levitical Priesthood
End when Our Saviour died on the Cross
Jacob, what you believe is contrary to what LDS scholars and the LDS prophets "believe". There are no additional scrolls Sir. Nor would it make any sense to have any addition to the scrolls presented. What you propose if I understand correctly is, Joseph translated additional papyri that we've not yet discovered? This point is moot given he failed to correctly translate the copies we do have.
the Bible is GOD's word not the book of mormon for those of you who read this that are not believers of the LORD JESUS Christ he loves you and wants you to be saved all you need to do is believe in Him as your LORD and Saviour and believe that GOD raised Him from the dead you will be saved GOD bless
Amen
So how do you explain the completely incorrect interpretation of the 3 facsimilies that are included in the Book of Abraham? It doesn't matter if there were more scrolls - what we do have is clearly incorrect.
I will disagree with minute 7, it is absolutely impossible that anything in those scrolls was written by Abraham, or even spoke of Abraham, or Joseph, because it has nothing to do with him. But I understand that you are trying to be extremely nice, and unbiased, but some things are just plain obvious.
Records show that Joseph translated from the large scroll not the fragments
What large scroll? Did you watch the video that explained all the scrolls and fragments?
Or the "seer" stone, if you prefer.
That assumes this was an Egyptian document about Egyptian culture. If it was a Canaanite writing the document in Egyptian and using the imagery for his own narrative purposes, then your criticism doesn't really stick.
Also interesting that all the "translating" diary entries are from 1835, but the actual release of the BOA doesn't come until 1842 some 7 years later. Now, imagine an actual prophet holding the gift and power of God to translate. The BOA is not a long book and I would imagine any prophet who truly had the translating power, could knock out the translation in a few days. So why did it take 7 years to get the final "translation"? Methinks J.S. was not a prophet. He was a known charlatan and treasure hunter. Neighbors to the Smiths did not have a lot of positive comments about the Smith family as evidenced in their journals.
great point.
It doesn’t matter how beautiful the guess is, or how smart the guesser is, or how famous the guesser is; if the experiment disagrees with the guess, then the guess is wrong. That’s all there is to it. -physicist Richard Feynman
Tavris, Carol (2007-07-18). Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) (Kindle Locations 1505-1507). Houghton Mifflin - A. Kindle Edition.
There is some very good information on cognitive dissonance in this book. Thanks for presenting the facts so clearly.
There had to have been way more than one NDE. I have had a few of those and have never come close to the understanding JS had of the eternities, faith, etc.
Joseph himself recognized that he had shortcomings and often felt less than worthy to be God's chosen prophet at the time.
I am LDS and I have been for a long time. I like to consider myself a person open to learning. I really want to learn more about reading Egyptian hieroglyphics and about the Facsimiles, burial of Osiris, etc and their relation to Egyptian culture. Anyone have good suggestions, links, books, articles about these topics? I don't really know where to start...
(note - I am not really looking for articles or books that talk specifically about Joseph Smith and the papyri, because those are easy to find.)
Thanks.
bannana77 Have you seen the new you tube video called Lost Book of Abraham Killer LDS Defense? It's by a group the Gregersons. They do good work!
As far as myth, this is an easy read "Egyptian Mythology A Guide to Ancient Egyptian Religion, Beliefs, and History" Yarc, Dustin.
We now have artifacts never before available to the public
www.josephsmithpapers.org/articles/revelations-and-translations-volume-4-book-of-abraham
OFFICIAL LDS WEBSITE NOW ADMITS: "None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Latter-day Saint and non-Latter-day Saint 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-Latter-day Saint scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.27 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."
No thank you, Chris. I couldn't have done it without you.
Perhaps you can elaborate on what you mean. What "original image" are you talking about?
Does not the LDS Book of Abraham say in many places made to "represent" thus it is not what the Egyptians wrote but a representation of using the Egyptian text.
Be clear Ruby that we have the artifacts there were created with the BoA. JS claimed that Abraham actually wrote the papyrus.
www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-Papers-Journals-1832-1839/dp/1570088497/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1545579376&sr=8-1&keywords=joseph+smith+papers+volume+1
Also, how do we know that the papyri we have today was the exact same papyri that Joseph Smith translated from?
What documentation do we have that shows them to actually be from the material Joseph Smith received, and not just a fragment of a common scroll that was falsely attributed to that origin? What if Combs mistakenly described those as being from what he obtained from Emma Smith? What if Heusser's nephew falsely attributed the source of those fragments he had, some 70 years after the Chicago fire?
+marscaleb It's funny that if you applied that same level of scrutiny to the 'translations' of Joe Smith you would probably be much less condescending.
The fact is that Joe included the 'pictures'. Had this not been the case you might have a claim that something has been overlooked but considering we know exactly which facsimiles he was describing, and by virtue of this creating meaning, the thought that 'we must not have the Abraham part' simply goes out the window.
This kind of cognitive dissonance also makes me wonder why mormons accept translations for texts that are verifiably false and then consider the Bible to be subpar to the BOM. A lot of directly quoted biblical passages are found in the BOM so wouldn't that lend credence to the translation of the Bible? Albeit a lot more to the bible as there are a vast number of texts that collaborate biblical books, figures, and stories, which have been translated and confirmed by a vast number of scholars?
Food for thought.
+bobthetuber11 How is it being condescending to ask an honest question?
The records that we have connecting those actual fragments is a little shaky. This isn't a question of doctrine or terminology, it's a simple question of veracity. They might be authentic, they might not. The church has never given any promise about their veracity beyond what was given to them, so it's not like this is a doctrinal issue.
Your argument about the fact that we have the facsimiles makes the rest of it "go out the window" doesn't make any logical sense. The video explained clearly that there was no verifiable record of exactly how much papyri Joseph had because they give conflicting accounts; we can only verify the length of one scroll.
You might want to also consider the point I made in my first comment, below.
As for your comment about the Bible being "subpar" to the Book of Mormon, (assuming you are referring to "Mormons in general" and not the official church doctrine specifically,) the added attention given to the BOM is very simple. The whole founding concept of the BOM is that it was given for us in this day and age, specifically. Thus it has added value to us and us alone. The Bible is filled with language and cultural barriers. You have to take classes to understand what half of it even means because it is filled with cultural references to cultures that don't exist anymore. On top of that, many words don't even have the same meaning today that they did 500 years ago. These challenges pretty much don't exist in the BOM.
But this is in no way to suggest that the Bible is false. The LDS church considers the Bible to contain the gospel, and it is even explicitly stated as part of the articles of faith. If you think that Mormons don't consider the Bible to be credible, then you very clearly have your facts wrong. I hope that is not what you are implying.
+marscaleb If you watch the video, this is explained.
+BAwesomeDesign If you read my comment, you see I have points not addressed in the video.
@@marscaleb We have the papyri, and we have part of the book of Abraham manuscript. The Egyptian characters on the manuscript, match the ones on the papyri. So we KNOW Joseph used the papyri (that we have in our hands today) for at least some of the translation of the book of Abraham.
Let us assume that the facsimile images are what would be included with the book of the dead and Egyptians would claim are images of Osiris and so on. The narrator of this video comments that the images from the book of the dead would be some 2,000 years after the time of Abraham. It would be unlikely that an image would maintain the same meaning over 2,000 years. It would be possible that the original image was exactly what Joseph said it was and it's meaning was changed over time.
Studied Egyptian and you will know Smith was a Fake. Facsimiles one and three are from the Book of Breathing. They are Breathing Permits for Priest Hor
Facsimiles one and two are added forgeries
F-1 A man's head and knife were pencil in
The Head should of been Jackel god Anibus
With no knife. Anibus is Hor's guardian to the Duat.
F-2 is a Hypocephalus that was made for Sheshong. There is added forgery of symbols that are meaningless
The Hypocephalus represents Life and the Afterlife
There is nothing about Abraham on these vignettes Smith was wrong on all three explanations
You can’t keep trying to slam this square peg into a round hole. JS is a fraudster and he’s swindled millions of people
I was also curious about this. Could these scrolls be mimicking a more ancient text? I think of how many of our beliefs, rituals, or ceremonies are similar to that of times past yet may be different. Perhaps in 10,000 years a prophet seeing a picture of Oliver and Joseph baptizing each other might say "this is showing how John the Baptist..." While today we know that neither are John the Baptist, though they did follow his example of Baptism. (does this make sense?)
Thank you!
We know the facts and we know all about modern Egyption archeology. BYU has many thousands of scholars of ancient scripture and Egyption interpolations of writings and there are logical explanations of them all. We know all about your interpolations as well. I know the Book of Mormon is true by the Holy Spirit and the Fulness of the Gospel and the Restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and I know separate as it has been manifest to me over the past 51 years. You can pick at this and that but it will not change that Truth which is before me that Joseph Smith, Jr by the Power of God was given the translation and the knowledge. You will weep one day for working against the Church of Jesus Christ which is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I once believed as you but 51 years ago the Holy Spirit spoke to me and my wife and father who opposed me until they asked God if the Book of Mormon is true and the Holy Spirit spoke to them as well. 51 years of study and I know this is TRUE. Nothing else to say as I am 83 years of age and looking forward to once again departing this mortal body as I did once before and was sent back. Amen
Thank you for a logical and orderly presentation. Will you do another video with more information regarding Joseph Smith's 'translation' of the Facsimiles?
+deskjockie49 You'v already seen Paul's video! Did you see his other videos too? Did you notice where he made emphasis in his videos on ''Abraham 1:14''? Therefore why are you asking the guy who brought forth this misleading video about ''more information regarding Joseph Smith's 'translation' of the facsimiles'' when Paul Gregersen ALREADY covered this?
Yes, Richard Holmes, I've watched ALL of Paul Gregerson's videos, and they are full of misrepresentations. In the 5th video, he claims to have discovered "computer codes" and "mathematical formulas" that are necessary to be able to decipher the ENCRYPTED (his word) Book of Abraham. If there was ANY merit to his arguments, the LDS church would have adopted his viewpoint. On the surface, in some of the first videos, he almost sounds plausible, but if you listen further, you can see the fallacy of his arguments.
OFFICIAL LDS WEBSITE NOW ADMITTS: "None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Latter-day Saint and non-Latter-day Saint 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-Latter-day Saint scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.27 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."
Simple. He came up with it himself
Kerry Muhlestein,. PhD in Egyptology at UCLA talks about recent research on the Book of Abraham. He has served as the chairman of a national committee for the American Research Center in Egypt and serves on their Research Supporting Member Council. He has also served on a committee for the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, and currently serves on their Board of Trustees and as a Vice President of the organization. He is also a Senior Fellow of the William F. Albright Institute for Archaeological Research. He is involved with the International Association of Egyptologists, and has worked with Educational Testing Services on their AP World History test. He gave a presentation at the international Egyptological conference in Moscow held in the fall of 2009.
He has published articles in professional journals including the UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology.
A sampling of Dr. Muhlestein’s other Egyptological work includes: “Binding with Heraldic Plants,” in Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Egyptologists, 2 vols., ed. Jean-Claude Goyon and Christine Cardin (Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Department Oosterse Studies, 2007), 1335-41; “Empty Threats? How Egyptians’ Self-Ontology Affect the Way We Read Many Texts,” JSSEA 34 (2007): 115-30; “Execration Ritual,” in UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, ed. Jacco Dieleman and Willeke Wendrich (Los Angeles, Cali.: UCLA, 2008), online atdigital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/zz000s3mqr (Accessed February 27, 2013); “Royal Executions: Evidence Bearing on the Subject of Sanctioned Killing in the Middle Kingdom,” in The Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 51/2 (2008): 181-208; “Teaching Egyptian History: Some Discipline-Specific Pedagogical Notes,” in The Journal of Egyptian History, 2/1-2 (2009): 173-231.
Let's see what he has to say
th-cam.com/video/oRzU6C5Wb8U/w-d-xo.html
You will find this especially of interest
th-cam.com/video/6EHKY1NUmcg/w-d-xo.htmlm10s
He has a playlist of 15 videos on this subject.
th-cam.com/video/oRzU6C5Wb8U/w-d-xo.html
cdowis: Muhlestein is a joke among non-Mormon Egyptologists. Here's a video for you: th-cam.com/video/_KLa8HYsfpM/w-d-xo.html
Please give us the credentials of FlackerMan == where did he get he degree in Egyptology, etc. Basically his sole credential is that he makes antiMormon videos n a broad range of subjects but I have respect for him in that he tries to get his facts straight,.
But he is out of his depth here. He has several factual errors in his video because of his ignorance of Egyptology . If you are reallllly serious about this, I suggest that you go thru the playlist. Each one is only a couple of minutes long.
th-cam.com/video/oRzU6C5Wb8U/w-d-xo.html
The main issue is whether the BOD is the source of the Book of Abraham -- he makes a faulty assumption on that.
Dan Vogel has a 7 part series covering the artifacts included in the JS Papers project volume 4. Although Dan points out various points of evidence that Kerry ignores, in section 7 Dan demonstrates how badly Kerry misuses his sources for his position.
th-cam.com/video/K_7haq-PdjU/w-d-xo.html
Most Mormom scholars discard Kerry's goofy notions, including both of the authors of JS Papers volume 4. Brian Hauglid goes even further endorsing Dan Vogel's video series:
“For the record, I no longer hold the views that have been quoted from my 2010 book in these videos. ... In fact, I'm no longer interested or involved in apologetics in any way. I wholeheartedly agree with Dan’s excellent assessment of the Abraham/Egyptian documents in these videos. ... One can find that I've changed my mind in my recent and forthcoming publications. The most recent JSP Revelations and Translation vol. 4, The Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts (now on the shelves) is much more open to Dan’s thinking on the origin of the Book of Abraham.” (Brian Hauglid, Facebook, 8 Nov. 2018)
Brian goes further calling Gees and Muhlestein's work "silly apologetics." Kerry's misuse of the text and evidence around it has made him the butt of many jokes.
@@cdowis What were Flackerman"s errors
That is why I get mad at some Mormons
They never back up what they say is wrong
I have listen to Professor Muhlestein on the subject those Facsimiles and Professor Gee
What can you expect from these two Men
When there paid well by your Church ?
They did a paper about Human Sacrifice in Egypt. at Neal Maxwell BYU Provo
They were comparing Human Execution
With Human Sacrifice unbelievable
Muhlestein has not proven Human Sacrifices in Egypt
If people really want to know the facts
Google Dr. Robert Ritner
Professor Gee studied under Dr. Ritner
Dr. Ritner is well respected among Egyptolgists
If you want the absolute truth, Go to an Egyptolgist that doesn't have a dog in this fight.
Here is the latest from the JSP which is managed by the Maxwell Institute. The missing scroll theory is dead.
th-cam.com/video/tznpRR0Fos8/w-d-xo.html
Through the peep-stone.