Zone1 Mormons are fine, but I have to call BS on the golden plates story.

[onefour1]

Explain in your own words what I said that is not true.

I proved that the Book of Abraham is a fraud. The Book of Mormon is also a fraud.

The Book of Mormon claims to be a detailed history of pre Columbian America from 600 B.C. to about 421 A.D. There is no evidence that any of the events recorded in the Book of Mormon happened, and much evidence that they did not happen.

The Book of Mormon does not claim that the Nephites and Lamanites were the only peoples to inhabit the Americas. So it is not and does not claim to be a detailed history of all of America nor a detailed history of all that transpired among the Nephite/Lamanite population.

Only in you own mind do you think that you have proved the Book of Abraham to be false. You assume that the writings that were found in the fragments found in the NY Museum had to be what Joseph Smith translated into the Book of Abraham. We don't even believe that. There were other scrolls that were much more lengthy that are presumed to have burned in the Chicago fire that held a record of Abraham and another that held the record of Joseph. Details about the translation of the facsimiles found among the fragments are also believed to have been among the records that burned in the fire. So in our mind your proof is nothing more than anti-Mormon fodder. Other records that were more recent Egyptian records were also had among the ancient records that Joseph possessed.

 

[Cougarbear]

I am not lying. I do not think you are. I think you believe the lies of Joseph Smith.

I do my own thinking, thank you very much. I did not prove the fraud of the Book of Abraham by reading anti Mormon websites. I proved it on my own by comparing the manuscript that Joseph Smith with a copy of the Book of the Dead I found in a neighborhood library. That book had the Book of the Dead on one side, and an English translation on the other.

I was able to match it with the manuscript Joseph Smith had, and his Facsimile No., 1, found on page 28 of the Book of Abraham, Facsimile No. 2, found on page 36 of the Book of Abraham, and Facsimile No. 4, found on page 41 of the Book of Abraham.

To my disappointment, there was no mention of Abraham, because I really did want to become a Mormon.

I do my own thinking too. I studied as well. I grew up hearing all sorts of stuff about Mormons and Jews as I'm a convert from Judaism. I heard crap about Jesus Christ as well. I still do. Why you anti-Mormons think you have a corner on thinking, studying and logic I have no idea. As a point, If Joseph Smith wrote the Pearl of Great Price which includes the Book of Abraham between 1835 and 1842, and the Book of the Dead wasn't found until 1842, the what logical reason are you using to say Joseph Smith took the Book of Abraham from the Book of the Dead? That makes no logical sense.
As far as the facimiles, you have been given information on that and it shows the two really aren't connected and nothing to do with what was written in the Pearl of Great Price. True scientists don't discard information because it doesn't suit their goals. So, you are misleading people with your conclusions.

 

[Hector12]

I do my own thinking too. I studied as well. I grew up hearing all sorts of stuff about Mormons and Jews as I'm a convert from Judaism. I heard crap about Jesus Christ as well. I still do. Why you anti-Mormons think you have a corner on thinking, studying and logic I have no idea. As a point, If Joseph Smith wrote the Pearl of Great Price which includes the Book of Abraham between 1835 and 1842, and the Book of the Dead wasn't found until 1842, the what logical reason are you using to say Joseph Smith took the Book of Abraham from the Book of the Dead? That makes no logical sense.
As far as the facimiles, you have been given information on that and it shows the two really aren't connected and nothing to do with what was written in the Pearl of Great Price. True scientists don't discard information because it doesn't suit their goals. So, you are misleading people with your conclusions.

It does not matter when the Book of the Dead was discovered. What matters is that the manuscript Joseph Smith had was written about a century before the time of Christ, and it does not mention Abraham.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Explain in your own words what I said that is not true.

I proved that the Book of Abraham is a fraud. The Book of Mormon is also a fraud.

The Book of Mormon claims to be a detailed history of pre Columbian America from 600 B.C. to about 421 A.D. There is no evidence that any of the events recorded in the Book of Mormon happened, and much evidence that they did not happen.

You made assertions insisting they are evidence, but you do not source or cite your charges.

 

[Hector12]

I don't think you understand what is being said. Joseph Smith had other scrolls which contained the Book of Abraham which were not the fragments found in the NY Museum. You are making the assumption that the Book of Abraham was contained in the writings that were found in the NY Museum. We don't believe that.

What we have in the manuscript clearly is the same as facsimile 1, found on page 28 of the Pearl of Great Price. What Joseph Smith copied as facsimile 2 and facsimile 3 are clearly identified with other manuscripts of the Book of the Dead. Nowhere is there any mention of Abraham.

 

[onefour1]

What we have in the manuscript clearly is the same as facsimile 1, found on page 28 of the Pearl of Great Price. What Joseph Smith copied as facsimile 2 and facsimile 3 are clearly identified with other manuscripts of the Book of the Dead. Nowhere is there any mention of Abraham.

View attachment 782770

How can you say nowhere when most of what Joseph Smith possessed was burned in the fire. You have no evidence of what was recorded on the burned scrolls. What was written adjacent to the scrolls was a more recent record and was not where the Book of Abraham was recorded. Other facts about the facsimile could very well have been recorded on the other scrolls and could have predated what was recorded in later times and that which was recorded in later times could very well have been an apostate view of what the facsimile meant when first recorded. Too many assumptions and no proof in you hypothesis.

 

[surada]

Sorry, not gonna do that but I will post it here since you are too lazy to click the link:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the book of Abraham as scripture. This book, a record of the biblical prophet and patriarch Abraham, recounts how Abraham sought the blessings of the priesthood, rejected the idolatry of his father, covenanted with Jehovah, married Sarai, moved to Canaan and Egypt, and received knowledge about the Creation. The book of Abraham largely follows the biblical narrative but adds important information regarding Abraham’s life and teachings.

The book of Abraham was first published in 1842 and was canonized as part of the Pearl of Great Price in 1880. The book originated with Egyptian papyri that Joseph Smith translated beginning in 1835. Many people saw the papyri, but no eyewitness account of the translation survives, making it impossible to reconstruct the process. Only small fragments of the long papyrus scrolls once in Joseph Smith’s possession exist today. The relationship between those fragments and the text we have today is largely a matter of conjecture.

We do know some things about the translation process. The word translation typically assumes an expert knowledge of multiple languages. Joseph Smith claimed no expertise in any language. He readily acknowledged that he was one of the “weak things of the world,” called to speak words sent “from heaven.”1 Speaking of the translation of the Book of Mormon, the Lord said, “You cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.”2 The same principle can be applied to the book of Abraham. The Lord did not require Joseph Smith to have knowledge of Egyptian. By the gift and power of God, Joseph received knowledge about the life and teachings of Abraham.

On many particulars, the book of Abraham is consistent with historical knowledge about the ancient world.3 Some of this knowledge, which is discussed later in this essay, had not yet been discovered or was not well known in 1842. But even this evidence of ancient origins, substantial though it may be, cannot prove the truthfulness of the book of Abraham any more than archaeological evidence can prove the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt or the Resurrection of the Son of God. The book of Abraham’s status as scripture ultimately rests on faith in the saving truths found within the book itself as witnessed by the Holy Ghost.

The Book of Abraham as Scripture​

Thousands of years ago, the prophet Nephi learned that one purpose of the Book of Mormon was to “establish the truth” of the Bible.4 In a similar way, the book of Abraham supports, expands, and clarifies the biblical account of Abraham’s life.

In the biblical account, God covenants with Abraham to “make of thee a great nation.”5 The book of Abraham provides context for that covenant by showing that Abraham was a seeker of “great knowledge” and a “follower of righteousness” who chose the right path in spite of great hardship. He rejected the wickedness of his father’s household and spurned the idols of the surrounding culture, despite the threat of death.6

In the Bible, God’s covenant with Abraham appears to begin during Abraham’s life. According to the book of Abraham, the covenant began before the foundation of the earth and was passed down through Adam, Noah, and other prophets.7 Abraham thus takes his place in a long line of prophets and patriarchs whose mission is to preserve and extend God’s covenant on earth. The heart of this covenant is the priesthood, through which “the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal” are conveyed.8

The book of Abraham clarifies several teachings that are obscure in the Bible. Life did not begin at birth, as is commonly believed. Prior to coming to earth, individuals existed as spirits. In a vision, Abraham saw that one of the spirits was “like unto God.”9 This divine being, Jesus Christ, led other spirits in organizing the earth out of “materials” or preexisting matter, not ex nihilo or out of nothing, as many Christians later came to believe.10 Abraham further learned that mortal life was crucial to the plan of happiness God would provide for His children: “We will prove them herewith,” God stated, “to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them,” adding a promise to add glory forever upon the faithful.11 Nowhere in the Bible is the purpose and potential of earth life stated so clearly as in the book of Abraham.

Origin of the Book of Abraham​

The powerful truths found in the book of Abraham emerged from a set of unique historical events. In the summer of 1835, an entrepreneur named Michael Chandler arrived at Church headquarters in Kirtland, Ohio, with four mummies and multiple scrolls of papyrus.12 Chandler found a ready audience. Due partly to the exploits of the French emperor Napoleon, the antiquities unearthed in the catacombs of Egypt had created a fascination across the Western world.13 Chandler capitalized on this interest by touring with ancient Egyptian artifacts and charging visitors a fee to see them.

These artifacts had been uncovered by Antonio Lebolo, a former cavalryman in the Italian army. Lebolo, who oversaw some of the excavations for the consul general of France, pulled 11 mummies from a tomb not far from the ancient city of Thebes. Lebolo shipped the artifacts to Italy, and after his death, they ended up in New York. At some point the mummies and scrolls came into Chandler’s possession.14

By the time the collection arrived in Kirtland, all but four mummies and several papyrus scrolls had already been sold. A group of Latter-day Saints in Kirtland purchased the remaining artifacts for the Church. After Joseph Smith examined the papyri and commenced “the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics,” his history recounts, “much to our joy [we] found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham.”15

Translation and the Book of Abraham​

Joseph Smith worked on the translation of the book of Abraham during the summer and fall of 1835, by which time he completed at least the first chapter and part of the second chapter.16 His journal next speaks of translating the papyri in the spring of 1842, after the Saints had relocated to Nauvoo, Illinois. All five chapters of the book of Abraham, along with three illustrations (now known as facsimiles 1, 2, and 3), were published in the Times and Seasons, the Church’s newspaper in Nauvoo, between March and May 1842.17

The book of Abraham was the last of Joseph Smith’s translation efforts. In these inspired translations, Joseph Smith did not claim to know the ancient languages of the records he was translating. Much like the Book of Mormon, Joseph’s translation of the book of Abraham was recorded in the language of the King James Bible. This was the idiom of scripture familiar to early Latter-day Saints, and its use was consistent with the Lord’s pattern of revealing His truths “after the manner of their [His servants’] language, that they might come to understanding.”18

Joseph’s translations took a variety of forms. Some of his translations, like that of the Book of Mormon, utilized ancient documents in his possession. Other times, his translations were not based on any known physical records. Joseph’s translation of portions of the Bible, for example, included restoration of original text, harmonization of contradictions within the Bible itself, and inspired commentary.19

Some evidence suggests that Joseph studied the characters on the Egyptian papyri and attempted to learn the Egyptian language. His history reports that, in July 1835, he was “continually engaged in translating an alphabet to the Book of Abraham, and arranging a grammar of the Egyptian language as practiced by the ancients.”20 This “grammar,” as it was called, consisted of columns of hieroglyphic characters followed by English translations recorded in a large notebook by Joseph’s scribe, William W. Phelps. Another manuscript, written by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, has Egyptian characters followed by explanations.21

The relationship of these documents to the book of Abraham is not fully understood. Neither the rules nor the translations in the grammar book correspond to those recognized by Egyptologists today. Whatever the role of the grammar book, it appears that Joseph Smith began translating portions of the book of Abraham almost immediately after the purchase of the papyri.22 Phelps apparently viewed Joseph Smith as uniquely capable of understanding the Egyptian characters: “As no one could translate these writings,” he told his wife, “they were presented to President Smith. He soon knew what they were.”23

The Papyri​

After the Latter-day Saints left Nauvoo, the Egyptian artifacts remained behind. Joseph Smith’s family sold the papyri and the mummies in 1856. The papyri were divided up and sold to various parties; historians believe that most were destroyed in the Great Chicago Fire of 1871. Ten papyrus fragments once in Joseph Smith’s possession ended up in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.24 In 1967, the museum transferred these fragments to the Church, which subsequently published them in the Church’s magazine, the Improvement Era. 25

The discovery of the papyrus fragments renewed debate about Joseph Smith’s translation. The fragments included one vignette, or illustration, that appears in the book of Abraham as facsimile 1. Long before the fragments were published by the Church, some Egyptologists had said that Joseph Smith’s explanations of the various elements of these facsimiles did not match their own interpretations of these drawings. Joseph Smith had published the facsimiles as freestanding drawings, cut off from the hieroglyphs or hieratic characters that originally surrounded the vignettes. The discovery of the fragments meant that readers could now see the hieroglyphs and characters immediately surrounding the vignette that became facsimile 1.26

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.

Of course, the fragments do not have to be as old as Abraham for the book of Abraham and its illustrations to be authentic. Ancient records are often transmitted as copies or as copies of copies. The record of Abraham could have been edited or redacted by later writers much as the Book of Mormon prophet-historians Mormon and Moroni revised the writings of earlier peoples.28 Moreover, documents initially composed for one context can be repackaged for another context or purpose.29 Illustrations once connected with Abraham could have either drifted or been dislodged from their original context and reinterpreted hundreds of years later in terms of burial practices in a later period of Egyptian history. The opposite could also be true: illustrations with no clear connection to Abraham anciently could, by revelation, shed light on the life and teachings of this prophetic figure.

Some have assumed that the hieroglyphs adjacent to and surrounding facsimile 1 must be a source for the text of the book of Abraham. But this claim rests on the assumption that a vignette and its adjacent text must be associated in meaning. In fact, it was not uncommon for ancient Egyptian vignettes to be placed some distance from their associated commentary.30

Neither the Lord nor Joseph Smith explained the process of translation of the book of Abraham, but some insight can be gained from the Lord’s instructions to Joseph regarding translation. In April 1829, Joseph received a revelation for Oliver Cowdery that taught that both intellectual work and revelation were essential to translating sacred records. It was necessary to “study it out in your mind” and then seek spiritual confirmation. Records indicate that Joseph and others studied the papyri and that close observers also believed that the translation came by revelation. As John Whitmer observed, “Joseph the Seer saw these Record(s)
and by the revelation of Jesus Christ could translate these records.”31

It is likely futile to assess Joseph’s ability to translate papyri when we now have only a fraction of the papyri he had in his possession. Eyewitnesses spoke of “a long roll” or multiple “rolls” of papyrus.32 Since only fragments survive, it is likely that much of the papyri accessible to Joseph when he translated the book of Abraham is not among these fragments. The loss of a significant portion of the papyri means the relationship of the papyri to the published text cannot be settled conclusively by reference to the papyri.

Alternatively, Joseph’s study of the papyri may have led to a revelation about key events and teachings in the life of Abraham, much as he had earlier received a revelation about the life of Moses while studying the Bible. This view assumes a broader definition of the words translator and translation. 33 According to this view, Joseph’s translation was not a literal rendering of the papyri as a conventional translation would be. Rather, the physical artifacts provided an occasion for meditation, reflection, and revelation. They catalyzed a process whereby God gave to Joseph Smith a revelation about the life of Abraham, even if that revelation did not directly correlate to the characters on the papyri.34

The Book of Abraham and the Ancient World​

A careful study of the book of Abraham provides a better measure of the book’s merits than any hypothesis that treats the text as a conventional translation. Evidence suggests that elements of the book of Abraham fit comfortably in the ancient world and supports the claim that the book of Abraham is an authentic record.

The book of Abraham speaks disapprovingly of human sacrifice offered on an altar in Chaldea. Some victims were placed on the altar as sacrifices because they rejected the idols worshipped by their leaders.35 Recent scholarship has found instances of such punishment dating to Abraham’s time. People who challenged the standing religious order, either in Egypt or in the regions over which it had influence (such as Canaan), could and did suffer execution for their offenses.36 The conflict over the religion of Pharaoh, as described in Abraham 1:11–12, is an example of punishment now known to have been meted out during the Abrahamic era.

The book of Abraham contains other details that are consistent with modern discoveries about the ancient world. The book speaks of “the plain of Olishem,” a name not mentioned in the Bible. An ancient inscription, not discovered and translated until the 20th century, mentions a town called “Ulisum,” located in northwestern Syria.37 Further, Abraham 3:22–23 is written in a poetic structure more characteristic of Near Eastern languages than early American writing style.38

Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimiles of the book of Abraham contain additional earmarks of the ancient world. Facsimile 1 and Abraham 1:17 mention the idolatrous god Elkenah. This deity is not mentioned in the Bible, yet modern scholars have identified it as being among the gods worshipped by ancient Mesopotamians.39 Joseph Smith represented the four figures in figure 6 of facsimile 2 as “this earth in its four quarters.” A similar interpretation has been argued by scholars who study identical figures in other ancient Egyptian texts.40 Facsimile 1 contains a crocodile deity swimming in what Joseph Smith called “the firmament over our heads.” This interpretation makes sense in light of scholarship that identifies Egyptian conceptions of heaven with “a heavenly ocean.”41

The book of Abraham is consistent with various details found in nonbiblical stories about Abraham that circulated in the ancient world around the time the papyri were likely created. In the book of Abraham, God teaches Abraham about the sun, the moon, and the stars. “I show these things unto thee before ye go into Egypt,” the Lord says, “that ye may declare all these words.”42 Ancient texts repeatedly refer to Abraham instructing the Egyptians in knowledge of the heavens. For example, Eupolemus, who lived under Egyptian rule in the second century B.C.E., wrote that Abraham taught astronomy and other sciences to the Egyptian priests.43 A third-century papyrus from an Egyptian temple library connects Abraham with an illustration similar to facsimile 1 in the book of Abraham.44 A later Egyptian text, discovered in the 20th century, tells how the Pharaoh tried to sacrifice Abraham, only to be foiled when Abraham was delivered by an angel. Later, according to this text, Abraham taught members of the Pharaoh’s court through astronomy.45 All these details are found in the book of Abraham.

Other details in the book of Abraham are found in ancient traditions located across the Near East. These include Terah, Abraham’s father, being an idolator; a famine striking Abraham’s homeland; Abraham’s familiarity with Egyptian idols; and Abraham’s being younger than 75 years old when he left Haran, as the biblical account states. Some of these extrabiblical elements were available in apocryphal books or biblical commentaries in Joseph Smith’s lifetime, but others were confined to nonbiblical traditions inaccessible or unknown to 19th-century Americans.46

Conclusion​

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

There was no Chaldea in the time of Abraham.

How the Book of Abraham Exposes the False Nature of Mormonism | Cold Case Christianity

By taking an evidential approach to Christian and Mormon scripture, I confirmed the veracity of Christianity and guarded myself from the falsity of Mormonism

coldcasechristianity.com

 

[onefour1]

There was no Chaldea in the time of Abraham.

How the Book of Abraham Exposes the False Nature of Mormonism | Cold Case Christianity

By taking an evidential approach to Christian and Mormon scripture, I confirmed the veracity of Christianity and guarded myself from the falsity of Mormonism

coldcasechristianity.com

Prove it.

J. Warner Wallace, like others, minimizes the fact that there were other scrolls which were not discovered in the NY Museum that likely burned in the Chicago fire. He infers that these fragments that Joseph once possessed is the entire book of Abraham which is false.

 

[Cougarbear]

It does not matter when the Book of the Dead was discovered. What matters is that the manuscript Joseph Smith had was written about a century before the time of Christ, and it does not mention Abraham.

You again don't know what you are talking about. You are rumormonger. As explained to you by Onefour 1 and Jeff Lindsay, your attack crumbles away. And, you said Joseph Smith used the Book of the Dead and you were wrong about that. So, you certainly can be wrong about your illogical reasoning about a papyri that only a few segments were found. Which means, there was little actual translation and more direct revelation given to the prophet Joseph Smith. The word "translation" is being misused by people today. The Urim and Thumin used for The Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price doesn't work with "translation" like archeologists talk about it. You lack wisdom, knowledge, understanding and intellect to make any attacks.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

There was no Chaldea in the time of Abraham.

How the Book of Abraham Exposes the False Nature of Mormonism | Cold Case Christianity

By taking an evidential approach to Christian and Mormon scripture, I confirmed the veracity of Christianity and guarded myself from the falsity of Mormonism

coldcasechristianity.com

Prove it.

J. Warner Wallace, like others, minimizes the fact that there were other scrolls which were not discovered in the NY Museum that likely burned in the Chicago fire. He infers that these fragments that Joseph once possessed is the entire book of Abraham which is false.

The Chaldean peoples begin to migrate into the south of Mesopotamia about a 100 years after David supposedly captured Jerusalem. It can be inferred they existed earlier, but no evidence even suggests that possisbility.

Chaldea | ancient state, Middle East | Britannica​

Chaldea | ancient state, Middle East

Chaldea, also spelled Chaldaea, Assyrian Kaldu, Babylonian Kasdu, Hebrew Kasddim, land in southern Babylonia (modern southern Iraq) frequently mentioned in the Old Testament. Strictly speaking, the name should be applied to the land bordering the head of the Persian Gulf between the Arabian...

www.britannica.com

WebApr 21, 2023 · Chaldea is first mentioned in the annals of the Assyrian king Ashurnasirpal II (reigned 884/883–859 bc), though earlier documents referred to the same area as the …

 

[Hector12]

You again don't know what you are talking about. You are rumormonger. As explained to you by Onefour 1 and Jeff Lindsay, your attack crumbles away. And, you said Joseph Smith used the Book of the Dead and you were wrong about that. So, you certainly can be wrong about your illogical reasoning about a papyri that only a few segments were found. Which means, there was little actual translation and more direct revelation given to the prophet Joseph Smith. The word "translation" is being misused by people today. The Urim and Thumin used for The Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price doesn't work with "translation" like archeologists talk about it. You lack wisdom, knowledge, understanding and intellect to make any attacks.

There is nothing in your comment but unproven assertions. There is no evidence that the manuscript from which Joseph Smith claimed to translate the Book of Abraham was written by Abraham "in his own write," or that it ever mentioned Abraham.

When I learned about the Book of Abraham and the discovery of the manuscript I still thought Mormonism might be true. I asked the Mormon missionaries who were proselytizing me for more information. They gave me a long article by Hugh Nimbly, who as you should know is a Mormon linguist who knew a number of ancient langues, including ancient Egyptian.

I expected Professor Nimbly to be exultant about the finding of the manuscript, saying, "This proves that we had been right all along."

Instead his article exuded an ominous tone. He wrote of "the problem of the Book of Abraham." That led me to suspect that the manuscript showed him what he did not want to find.

That was when I went to a public library and checked out a book with photos of the Book of the Dead and the English translation. That was when I learned that Joseph Smith's manuscript was part of the Book of the Dead,

I suspect that Hugh Nimbly learned what I discovered, but he lied in order to keep his teaching position, and his position of prestige in the Mormon church.

The Mormon missionaries who proselytized me wanted me to be carried along by a lot of emotion. I examined the claims of Mormonism dispassionately, looking for evidence.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There is nothing in your comment but unproven assertions. There is no evidence that the manuscript from which Joseph Smith claimed to translate the Book of Abraham was written by Abraham "in his own write," or that it ever mentioned Abraham.

When I learned about the Book of Abraham and the discovery of the manuscript I still thought Mormonism might be true. I asked the Mormon missionaries who were proselytizing me for more information. They gave me a long article by Hugh Nimbly, who as you should know is a Mormon linguist who knew a number of ancient langues, including ancient Egyptian.

I expected Professor Nimbly to be exultant about the finding of the manuscript, saying, "This proves that we had been right all along."

Instead his article exuded an ominous tone. He wrote of "the problem of the Book of Abraham." That led me to suspect that the manuscript showed him what he did not want to find.

That was when I went to a public library and checked out a book with photos of the Book of the Dead and the English translation. That was when I learned that Joseph Smith's manuscript was part of the Book of the Dead,

I suspect that Hugh Nimbly learned what I discovered, but he lied in order to keep his teaching position, and his position of prestige in the Mormon church.

The Mormon missionaries who proselytized me wanted me to be carried along by a lot of emotion. I examined the claims of Mormonism dispassionately, looking for evidence.

look you fucking retard the book of the dead wasnt found until after the transcript was done by smith. You are braid dead.

 

[Hector12]

look you fucking retard the book of the dead wasnt found until after the transcript was done by smith. You are braid dead.

Your comment makes so little sense I do not know what you are trying to say.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Your comment makes so little sense I do not know what you are trying to say.

you keep claiming, like a retard, that the book of Abraham was from the book of the dead. Which is IMPOSSIBLE because the book of the dead was FOUND after the book of Abraham you moron and you have been told that repeatedly.

 

[Hector12]

you keep claiming, like a retard, that the book of Abraham was from the book of the dead. Which is IMPOSSIBLE because the book of the dead was FOUND after the book of Abraham you moron and you have been told that repeatedly.

The Book of the Dead was written over a period of centuries over two thousand years ago. Copies were placed in coffins with mummies. In 1835 Joseph Smith bought one of these copies and pretended to translate the Book of Abraham. Even before the manuscript was discovered in 1966 the Book of Abraham was recognized to be a hoax.

 

[Hector12]

If Joseph Smith wrote the Pearl of Great Price which includes the Book of Abraham between 1835 and 1842, and the Book of the Dead wasn't found until 1842, the what logical reason are you using to say Joseph Smith took the Book of Abraham from the Book of the Dead? That makes no logical sense.

I am not sure when the Book of the Dead was first known about. Copies had existed for over two thousand years. Joseph Smith bought one of those copies and pretended to translate from it to the Book of Abraham.

 

[onefour1]

I am not sure when the Book of the Dead was first known about. Copies had existed for over two thousand years. Joseph Smith bought one of those copies and pretended to translate from it to the Book of Abraham.

The Book of the Dead could very well have been part of the collection of documents that Joseph Smith received but there were many more documents than what was found in NY Museum. There were many witnesses to the scroll which were in Joseph Smiths possession of which the anti-Mormon crowd seem to forget that he ever had. Without those documents, there is no proof that Joseph Smith was a fraud. The contents of those missing scrolls could have contained all that Joseph used for the translation of what he received from Michael Chandler. Simply declaring that the information on the fragments proves Smith wrong doesn't fly.

 

[Hector12]

The Book of the Dead could very well have been part of the collection of documents that Joseph Smith received but there were many more documents than what was found in NY Museum. There were many witnesses to the scroll which were in Joseph Smiths possession of which the anti-Mormon crowd seem to forget that he ever had. Without those documents, there is no proof that Joseph Smith was a fraud. The contents of those missing scrolls could have contained all that Joseph used for the translation of what he received from Michael Chandler. Simply declaring that the information on the fragments proves Smith wrong doesn't fly.

You can believe that if you want to. There is no reason to believe it other than your desire to. I can understand the emotional appeal of Mormonism. I wanted to become a Mormon myself.

I have already pointed out that the manuscript discovered in 1966 matches Facsimile No. 1, written by Joseph Smith.

Even before the manuscript was discovered in 1966 non Mormons who could read the writing in the manuscript said that Joseph Smith's analysis was incorrect.

 

[surada]

I do my own thinking too. I studied as well. I grew up hearing all sorts of stuff about Mormons and Jews as I'm a convert from Judaism. I heard crap about Jesus Christ as well. I still do. Why you anti-Mormons think you have a corner on thinking, studying and logic I have no idea. As a point, If Joseph Smith wrote the Pearl of Great Price which includes the Book of Abraham between 1835 and 1842, and the Book of the Dead wasn't found until 1842, the what logical reason are you using to say Joseph Smith took the Book of Abraham from the Book of the Dead? That makes no logical sense.
As far as the facimiles, you have been given information on that and it shows the two really aren't connected and nothing to do with what was written in the Pearl of Great Price. True scientists don't discard information because it doesn't suit their goals. So, you are misleading people with your conclusions.

The Egyptian book of the Dead has been known since the middle ages and was translated by 1842.

 

[Hector12]

you keep claiming, like a retard, that the book of Abraham was from the book of the dead. Which is IMPOSSIBLE because the book of the dead was FOUND after

The Book of the Dead, also called "the Book of Breathing" was written two thousand years before Joseph Smith's fabrication called "the Book of Abraham."