The Lost Book of Abraham Now Available Online

“The Lost Book of Abraham is an award-winning documentary that investigates the remarkable claim that Mormon founder Joseph Smith translated a lost book of scripture from an Egyptian papyrus scroll he obtained in 1835. Hear the views of Mormon believers and World-class Egyptologists and decide for yourself.” Alternate English links: YouTube, Google Video, blip.tv, Brightcove, Veoh. Alternate Español link: Google Video. For more information on this video, see BookOfAbraham.info. Related articles here and here.

This movie requires Flash Player 9

On a related note, a few days ago I was talking with an ex-Mormon Christian named Jennifer who is still in the process of leaving the Mormon Church. She lives next door to her local LDS missionaries and they often have come over to visit with her. Jennifer recounted that one of the missionaries said, “Joseph could have translated the Book of Abraham from a banana.” This of course was a humorous way to emphasize the apologetic defense that the Egyptian papyrus wasn’t necessarily the direct source of the text of the Book of Abraham, and that Smith could have come up with the Book of Abraham by an indirect means of revelation.

So next time you’re eating a banana, think about the Book of Abraham.

The image “http://farm1.static.flickr.com/23/29480080_ac6d6df0bc_m.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

“In the land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my fathers, I, Abraham, saw that it was needful for me to obtain another place of residence…”

This entry was posted in D&C and Pearl of Great Price, Multimedia and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to The Lost Book of Abraham Now Available Online

  1. John C. says:

    Aaron,
    What award?

  2. Pingback: SmartChristian.com » Blog Archive »

  3. rick b says:

    I find many problems with the book of Abraham, but lets just start with this one. In chapter 2 verses 22-25 we find the Lord telling Abraham that his wife Sarai, is a fair women to look upon, so you better tell the Egyptians she is you sister, lest they kill you.

    But we read in the book of Genesis, that Abraham did this on his own, Not because the Lord told him to. And in the Bible God changed Sarai, to Sarah before this ever took place, I would think that God would tell Joesph Smith the correct name of Abraham wife, because he re-named them both. Rick b

  4. Geoff J says:

    I suspect the award Aaron means was the prestigious 2007 “Anti-Mormee” for best supporting actress John C. (I hear they rent out the old Elk’s Lodge in Lehi for the awards show every March.)

  5. Joey Day says:

    John C., according to the video’s official website, the video apparently won the 2003 Bronze Telly Award.

  6. John, I’m not sure. I was quoting IRR.

  7. Jeff says:

    Sometimes I wish I could speak directly to Mr. Hinckley about stuff like this. Instead of hearing different opinions of different LDS members, it would be nice to hear it from God’s mouthpiece. The only issue I see might come with that, is much like when Hinckley was asked about God once being a man and said something along the lines of “I dont know much about that, I dont know if we ever taught it” (even though Joseph Smith, the original prophet taught it vehemently).

    Lets be honest, Rick. No matter how much information and issues we bring to the surface such as this whole Book of Abraham Facade, there is always going to be a way for any dedicated LDS member to dodge it. The sad thing is that things like this aren’t brought up by any members when trying to convert people. And with good reason. If I wanted to have someone as part of my organization, I would naturally not tell them all the information if it looked badly upon my organization. It’s unfortunate however that the one and only true church of God has some stuff to hide/dodge/interpret differently. It’s a lot easier to feel a “burning bosom” when all you have is information full of pleasantry.

    God has nothing to hide, for He is Truth.

    I tried to bring things up to my wife like this topic as well. And she refuses to hear it. Even though the majority of my information has come from the mouths of her very own Prophets. She refuses to even listen to her own church’s standing on things because she was led to believe differently – A more modern/christian-like set of beliefs.

    And hey, don’t knock Banana’s, they are usually full of revelation! God talks to me regularly.. Particularly at breakfast time. :)

  8. rick b says:

    [Section of comment removed by moderator. Let's try to keep these kinds of personal complaints against other commenters off the blog.]

    Another problem to ponder is, The Bible teaches ONE GOD CREATED, the book of Moses teaches ONE GOD CREATED, the book of Abraham teaches THE GOD(S) CREATED. we find ONE God verses Many Gods. they cannot both be correct. Rick b

  9. Alex D. says:

    I don’t think there’s really ANY room for debate on this topic (especially after viewing the documentary… it presents its arguments clearly and efficiently while backing up its claims with documented evidence, not to mention how balanced the producers tried to keep it).

    I’d advise ALL of you who haven’t already viewed this video in its entirety to do so before commenting here… the more informed, the better!

  10. John C. says:

    For those interested in the other side of the story, there is the following:

    First of all, the Telly Award appears to have been given out based primarily on production values, not content (at least, as far as I can tell from the website). This documentary was in competition with commercials and sports documentaries (an assumption based on this past year’s competition, the exact nature of the competition in 2003 being unclear at this point (at least to me)).

    [Section deleted by moderator. John, feel free to re-post the links while abiding by a brand new policy of Mormon Coffee. Unless permission is otherwise granted by a moderator, links to Mormon apologetic material must be accompanied by a satisfactory summary (in your own words) of the key arguments made. Thanks.]

  11. DJ says:

    Being raised LDS (TBM/RM), I always believed the Book of Abraham to be scripture. I rather enjoyed the polytheistic outlook on deity. It appealed to my imagination, as did Tolkien’s Silmarillion and the Norse pantheon. However, in University I studied science and engineering and came to understand that truth must be supported by evidence. As Alex D. stated, “I don’t think there’s really ANY room for debate…” The documentary gives ample evidence that the papyrus used to translate the Book of Abraham had nothing to do with the Abrahamic story.

    What amazes me is Joseph Smith’s imagination in concocting the tale, if he was alone in its genesis. It gives greater validity to my own theory that he was able to make up the stories in the BOM with very little forth thought.

  12. Robert says:

    This was a great video…well done; but as another poster pointed out…Mormons will always find a way to push it aside. The real reason for this is not that they are lacking information or just not smart enough to see the truth…it’s because their who’s in rebellion to God.)
    John: if you’d like to convert your wife; appeal to her conscience, make sure she understands WHAT she’s putting her faith in. Go to the “way of the Master” website and learn to use her conscience to your advantage. Nobody was ever “reasoned into the kingdom” but everyone comes thru the “door of repentance” humbled and broken. God “resists the proud and gives grace to the humble” and so show her her need, show her she cannot earn her way. Then just pray and know that you’ve done what you’re suppposed to do…speak the truth in love to her…

    I hope that helps some…
    bob

  13. D Allison says:

    Even though the Bible was written on perishable materials and copied by scribes for hundreds of years before the invention of the printing press, it has survived virtually intact. In fact, the Bible has more manuscript evidence than any other 10 pieces of classical literature combined. There are over 24,000 manuscript copies of the New Testament in existence today, with the oldest manuscript dated at 125 years after the original autograph. That might seem like a long time, but by comparison, Homer’s Iliad is a distant second with a mere 643 manuscript copies, and with the oldest copy dated at 500 years after the original. In their book, “A General Introduction to the Bible”, Geisler and Nix compare the textual variations between the New Testament documents and their closest competition for accuracy, Homer’s Iliad. Both texts were considered sacred, and both underwent textual changes and criticism of their Greek manuscripts. The Iliad contains about 15,600 lines of which 764 lines are in doubt. This means the Iliad manuscripts contain five percent textual corruption or uncertainty. By contrast, the New Testament contains 20,000 lines with only 40 lines, or 400 words in doubt, which figures to 99.5 percent textual certainty, or only one-half of one percent of words containing variants (Giesler & Nix 366 367). None of the disputed passages in the New Testament represent a challenge to any Christian doctrine or moral precept, with most of the variants being attributed to errors in spelling or slight differences of style.
    On the other hand This story has no other proof ohter than the LDS brain washing machine

  14. John C. says:

    Regarding Giesler and Nix’s book, I haven’t read it, so I can’t fully critique it, but I would say that one of the reasons why we might expect to find better attestation and better accuracy in the Bible is that, in the medieval period, while some church and Arab scholars cared about and maintained Greek literature, a much, much greater number cared for and maintained the Bible.

    I am curious regarding their numbers. I know that Bart Ehrman has stated, as an example, that there are more variant passages in the New Testament than there are actual verses in the New Testament. I would assume that he is also talking primarily about spelling variations and so forth, but I am still interested in how (and if) the two claims compete. Could you give me full bibliographic information regarding the Giesler and Nix book (and, if you have time, a brief summary of how they determine the numbers)? Also, wouldn’t the argument regarding whether or not it affects some Christian doctrine depend (at least in part) on want Christian doctrine you believe you hold?

    [Section removed by moderator. John, your attempted summary of the link's material isn't satisfactory. Simply saying that it is "not balanced or unbiased" and that its arguments have long ago been "refuted" is too vague. Anyone can say something like that without even having read the article at all. You need to be more descriptive and show that you understand the substance of what you're linking to. What key, specific counter-arguments does the link in question make against the DVD?]

  15. John C. says:

    Another thing:
    Robert, my wife is already converted, but thanks for the advice. That said, if you meant to be talking to Jeff, I don’t think that asking him to guilt her into leaving the church will be effective. Generally speaking, people don’t like to be manipulated by guilt (but what do I know).

  16. Please keep the comments relevant to the post, folks. There’s all sorts of great discussion topics to get into, but we’d like some order.

    John C., I hope you can provide a summary of the arguments against the DVD for us. I’ve read the FAIR/FARMS stuff, but it seems like LDS folks often fall back on their material without even understanding the gist of it. It’s almost as though there is simply a comfort of, “hey, people smarter than me still believe this stuff and provide a response, so maybe Mormonism is true after all.”

  17. john f. says:

    It is amazing that links to articles addressing the accusations made here are being deleted.

  18. D Allison says:

    Except for a few minor variations, other renditions of the text are in agreement with Professor Parker’s. The Book of Abraham, therefore, has been proven to be a spurious translation. Egyptologists find no mention of either Abraham or his religion in this text. The average number of words that the Egyptologist used to convey the message in this text is eighty-seven, whereas Joseph Smith’s rendition contains thousands of words. In one Case Joseph Smith derived 177 English words out of the word “Khons” – the name of an Egyptian moon god! It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the Book of Abraham is a product of Joseph Smith’s imagination.

    This again will be argued as LDS bashing. But if the truth hurts so be it. J Smith is a con and the poor people of LDS are his mark to this day.

    This is not the first Religion to lead people into bondage and will not be the last.

    2Pe 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-bringing swift destruction on themselves.

  19. John C. says:

    Primarily, the piece argues that there is evidence to support the argument that the papyrus scrolls were much more extensive than the scraps we currently have, that there is hostile evidence describing the knife in the hand of the priest, that the evidence of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers is ambiguous at best for both sides, that there is no evidence showing that Joseph and his contemporaries believed that Abraham himself wrote this particular papyrus, and that the journal evidence does not seem to indicate clearly what exactly Joseph Smith was translating. Also, it notes that the documentary effectively ignores LDS scholarship on the subject since the writing of Charles Larsen’s book, …by his own hand upon papyri, skipping over 10 years of relevant information. Finally, it notes that it is nonsensical to expect a balanced appraisal of the LDS scripture from the IRR, a group devoted to the eradication of religions like the Mormons.

    Please feel free to go and read it here.

  20. D Allison says:

    The argument is not was J Smith a prophet, just was he a prophet of the one true God? Then if that could be answer and prove it, then without a doubt anything he has wrote or said is true. Other wise his has deceived many to share in his lies and shame.
    I have my opinon on that. I Choose CHRIST period,not an church.

  21. Jeff says:

    I think that this video was great. If it were completely “[filtered profanity or slur]”, they wouldn’t have referenced “other side of the story” rebuttals like those done in the film.

    No matter what, the Mormon church will continue to have its members, EVEN when a video comes out like this with many valid arguments/facts. Why? Because of the sheer size of its membership.

    Here’s my take on it. Joseph Smith was able to come up with these conclusions/revelations at a time when people didn’t know any better. To make a joke of it.. nobody had Google or Youtube back in his time.. One thing Joseph didn’t count on was the intelligence of future civilizations. So, at the time, his revelations/conclusions didn’t seem crazy because there was no evidence to contradict. It’s either you accept what he’s saying or don’t just on your own faith in him.. Now that a video comes out a century and a half later providing evidence, the LDS church is too large a majority to accept any proof. Some even go as far to make rebuttals like “He could have translated it from a Banana”.. If thats the case, why did God bother having people cough up $2,400 bucks for a few pieces of paper, that money could have gone to building up more of his temples! God doesn’t seem very smart with his money.

    Point is this.. Ignorance in the past is acceptable because there wasn’t any choice in the matter. Ignorance in this century is a choice.

  22. John C. says:

    D. Allison,
    Who is Prof. Parker? Is he a figure from the movie? You seem to be arguing that he is saying that the text found with the hypocephalis is a Book of Breathings. I don’t think any serious LDS scholar disputes this. Instead, they dispute that the Book of Breathings is what Joseph Smith translated. Also, I don’t take pointing out that the extant text is a version of the Book of Breathings as bashing, at least not in isolation. Regarding the evidence of translation, as I said, the evidence of the KEP (Kirtland Egyptian Papers) is ambiguous. More than one explanation is possible and some compelling ones have been given from the LDS viewpoint.

    “The argument is not was J Smith a prophet, just was he a prophet of the one true God? Then if that could be answer and prove it, then without a doubt anything he has wrote or said is true. Other wise his has deceived many to share in his lies and shame. I have my opinon on that. I Choose CHRIST period,not an church.”

    I don’t have a clue what you are arguing here. Are you saying that if Joseph Smith was a prophet of the one true God you would know it? Well heck, why did I bother finding out for myself when all I had to do was ask you?

    “Now that a video comes out a century and a half later providing evidence, the LDS church is too large a majority to accept any proof.”

    Jeff,
    At what point and in what way has the LDS church ever been a majority? In any case, it is possible to be rational and to believe in LDS truth claims (I manage it myself on occasion). What is it about the evidence provided in this documentary that leads you to believe it compels disbelief, especially in light of the counter-arguments presented in the FAIR paper I linked to? I’m really asking: why do you believe that your evidence/testimony/ability to discern is better than mine? (not that I should be the measure of all men, of course) What compelling objective evidence is there that your ideas are inherently superior or more truthful?

  23. d allison says:

    John C,
    A prophet yes! but false prophet and here is the test as far as I am concerned.
    1 The Bible lists six identifying marks of false prophets, any one of which is sufficient for identification: (1) through signs and wonders they lead astray after false gods (Dt. 13:1-4); Let see False gods! “Mormon theology, the god of our planet is believed to have once been a man on another planet, who through self-effort and the help of his own father-god, was appointed by a counsel of gods in the heavens to his high position as the god of planet Earth, and now has a physical, resurrected, glorified body” God made Aaron to be the mouthpiece for the children of Israel, and He will make me to be God to you in His stead, and the elders to be mouth for me; and if you don’t like it, you must lump it” (Documentary History of the Church, vol. 6, pp 319-320 So if you believe in gods you don’t believe in the one true God. yep thats sounds like a false prophet.

    (2) their prophecies don’t come to pass (Dt. 18:20-22); (3) they contradict God’s Word (Isa. 8:20); (4) they bear bad fruit (Mt. 7:18-20); (5) men speak well of them (Lk. 6:26); and (6) they deny that Jesus, the one and only Christ, has come once and for all in the flesh (1 Jn. 4:3), thereby denying His sufficiency in all matters of life and godliness (2 Pe. 1:3).

    Most cults are founded upon false prophecies, which, if pointed out, offer an effective way to open blind eyes and rescue cultists. Mormonism boasts of its prophets — but they have all been false.

  24. d allison says:

    Professor Richard A Parker, Chairman of the Department of Egyptology at Brown University
    Professor Parker’s translation reads as follows:

    1. [........] this great pool of Khonsu

    2. [Osiris Hor, justified], born of Taykhebyt, a man likewise.

    3. After (his) two arms are [fast]ened to

    his breast, one wraps the Book of Breathings, which is

    4. with writing both inside and outside of it, with royal linen, it being placed (at) his left arm

    5. near his heart, this having been done at his

    6. wrapping and outside it. If this book be recited for him, then

    7. he will breath like the soul[s of the gods] for ever and

    8. ever. (Dialogue A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1968, p.98)

    The contents of the Book of Breathings are certainly foreign to the teachings concerning Ahraham found in the Bible. The Bible says he rejected paganism, whereas the Book of Breathings is filled with pagan gods and practices. The names of at least fifteen Egyptian gods or goddesses are mentioned on the “Sensen” papyri which Joseph Smith had in his possession, but there is not one word about Abraham

  25. John C,

    How do you avoid facsimile 1? The very places where Egyptologists thought the facsimile went awry were the very places shown to have been outside the edges of the extant papyrus. The labels on the following make no sense to non-LDS Egyptologists:

    http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1

    http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_3

  26. John C. says:

    D. Allison,
    So, your argument is that because we have a different understanding of the nature of God, Joseph Smith is a false prophet? But Christian ideas about the nature of God weren’t codified in the Bible, they were codified in the creeds that followed in an effort to unify the Christian Church. As an example, the Nestorean Christian found plenty of evidence for their understanding of Christ in the Bible (that he was fully human, no?) and they were so adamant about it that they split from the remainder of the Christian Church. Would you at least admit that even within the Bible the nature of God is unclear and open to interpretation?

    Regarding the rest of your proof-text qualifications, generally speaking I find them short-sighted, acontextual, and (since you seem find in them a unified theme throughout the Bible) ultimately self-defeating. Finally, regarding the last, we teach that there is no other name that leads to salvation but that of Christ. Jesus Christ is my Lord and my Redeemer. I’ll deal with the other qualifications more specifically if you become more specific.

    Also, regarding Prof. Parker’s translation, although I haven’t done the translation myself, I am sure it is fine. Why you should want to base your argument on a 40 year old translation when there are more recent translations is beyond me, but whatever floats your boat. In general, the Book of Breathings continues to contain mysteries. Even when we understand all the words and the grammar, we don’t really understand what is going on.

    Aaron,
    I admit that the first facsimile, if it originally looked like the facsimile as we have it (regarding which we seem to have evidence), it would be unusual. That said, there isn’t such a large body of comparative material to be certain that such variation is impossible. John Gee has noted that the facsimile combines elements of temple and Book of the Dead iconography as it is.

  27. I don’t see any significant evidence that facsimile one (as it looks in the LDS quad) looks like what it did originally without significant alteration. As I said, the very parts that to Egyptologists seemed to go awry are the very parts outside the edges of the extant papyri. Do these Egyptologists speak irresponsibly and do you (or Gee) know something they don’t? Gee seems like an awfully lonely man. How shall we not conclude Smith ad libbed?

  28. d allison says:

    Would you at least admit that even within the Bible the nature of God is unclear and open to interpretation? Yes there is much to say about interpertation.

    So where are we? Are we hopelessly cast adrift on a sea of relativism, each one using the Bible to paddle toward one’s individual preconceived notions of theological terra firma? As we have see from this blog, in one sense, there is no alternative to this, since we cannot exist outside the bag of skin in which we live and can have no other perspective on the world except that provided by our own experience. We cannot see farther than the sight each has been given; this is the meaning of human finitude.
    But there is an alternative to extreme individualism. We can carry on the task of interpretation, not as individuals, but as members of a community. I share my best information and insight with you, and you share yours with me. Our individual weakness becomes our common strength because it brings us together, at the same time delivering us from the temptation to claim absolute certainty for our own finite interpretation.

    What should we as Christians do when our religious differences keep us from true Christian oneness” We can begin by following these God-inspired instructions given in Colossians 3:12-15:

    “As the chosen of God, holy and beloved, be clothed in hearts of compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, patience, bearing with one another and freely forgiving one another where anyone may have a quarrel against anyone else. Even as Christ forgave you, you do the same. And, in addition to all these things, put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity. And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, that peace to which you were called in one Body, and be thankful.”
    God bless

  29. John C. says:

    Aaron,
    asked and answered.

    D,
    beautifully said! Thank you.

  30. Jeff says:

    John C., I must not have written it down clearly enough for you. When I spoke of majority, I meant that the Church is too large a body to accept any proof (perhaps the using the word majority was incorrect.) Sure, some might fall away, but those who hold an absolute deathgrip on their faith and in my view, don’t attempt to listen/study things that might be contradictory to their belief, thats where I think a mistake is being made. If my belief that a pen was blue (but in reality was red), and my salvation was dependent on my belief that the pen is red, and I choose to ignore anything that tells me its red, that would be very detrimental to my salvation. I’m not saying that you yourself don’t investigate the contrary, but I have seen and experienced that the majority of the LDS church, when acknowledging these “issues”, they come up with multiple “weak” counter-points and then finally resort to saying “Well, pray about it. Ignore everything and just pray to get confirmation from the Holy Spirit”. I have yet to review that FAIR paper but I will here in the next 10 minutes. If your church is true, I’m hoping that for my salvation I will find a “strong” counter-point in that paper. As far as what it is in this documentary that compels disbelief…. Did you even watch it? I will never and can never say that my ideas are more truthful than yours for YOU. I will say that as of right now my ideas/evidence/testimony is more than than yours for ME. Everyone has to be met on a personal level, because no matter what, some won’t let go of their faith what so ever, no matter what evidence is brought to surface. Anyways, got to get to that FAIR link… Thanks for it, I was actually searching for that.

  31. John C. says:

    Jeff,
    Your entire argument seems to be, “People who believe in the LDS church are wrong because they believe in it so much” That just strikes me as odd. In general, I don’t make a point of watching/reading Anti literature, although I may get around to watching the video when I don’t have more important things to do (like writing a dissertation and working (yes, I do understand the hypocrisy in making this statement in a blog comment)).

  32. Do these Egyptologists speak irresponsibly and do you (or Gee) know something they don’t?

    This question was never answered.

  33. John C. says:

    Actually it was. I don’t know if those Egyptologists are speaking irresponsibly as I don’t know what specifically they said. Gee (and I) believe that the hypocephalus in question is sufficiently different to allow for alternate explanations. I don’t necessarily believe that either Gee or the other unnamed Egyptologists are speaking irresponsibly, but rather that both are given their best guess regarding a hard text. This is, in sum, what I tried to convey earlier.

  34. You’re missing the point. Non-Mormon Egyptologists don’t think this is a “hard text” at all.

  35. Jeff says:

    John C, I wouldn’t put words in my mouth. That is not my argument. Theres nothing wrong in believing in something. But I believe there is something wrong in believing something that you only hear 1 side of the story on…

    I could be like some traditional Christians and never even bother doing study on the doctrines of the LDS church, and continue to live as a Christian, refusing to hear the LDS side of the story. But the problem there would be that what if I am wrong? What if the LDS are right? I just chose to remain ignorant and therefore my own ignorance cost me my salvation. Make sense?

    If your told your whole life that the sky is orange, and that if anyone says anything different, they are liars, than you will forever believe the sky is orange because you choose not to do some research.. I’m not saying you haven’t done “any” research, but you havent viewed the video yet… It’s obviously not important enough for you take the time to watch it.

    I reviewed the FARMS take on it (because I consider the other side of the story to be important in finding real truth). Personally, it contains some decent arguments but its the same dodging I see come from them on other topics.. They may be strong enough for some to call the video false, but just not for me personally.. I still did my due diligence though.

  36. John C. says:

    Aaron,
    While many Egyptologists tend to dismiss this text as just another funerary text, I believe that there is evidence that something else is going on here. I do this, in part, due to Gee’s research. In any case, since when has being the lone voice in the wilderness necessarily meant that you were wrong? Truth, or our access to it, isn’t a matter of popularity.

    Speaking of which,
    Jeff,
    First of all, I don’t think that reading a paper or watching a video that you are already inclined to dismiss (or accept) is the way to get at the truth. Reinforcing what you already believe (that the LDS church is full of self-deceived people; that the IRR hates religions that don’t fit its narrow definition of Christianity) is no way to test a theory.

    You say that you have read stuff on LDS beliefs. Fine. Have you read any serious, well-written, intelligent defense of atheism? Perhaps Bertrand Russell? Have you read any serious arguments that much of the Bible was made up? There is some other thread were I mentioned a host of modern scholars who are arguing that? Have you examined the literary critics who argue that the events of the Bible don’t have to be true in order for us to learn from it? Or the ones who argue that the whole thing ought to be tossed because it has always been used primarily as a tool to oppress the downtrodden? It is well and good that you are interested in the Christianities that compete with your own, but until you understand the arguments against Christianity itself, you aren’t doing anything that might threaten your faith or your pre-conceived notions.

    In any case, I don’t believe in God, Christ, or my religion based on superior argumentation or rationality, nor do I know anyone who does. That my church makes sense to me and that I can find some objective evidence in support of it is good enough. To a great degree, I believe these things because they chose me, just like any other Christian.

  37. Jeff says:

    John,

    To be honest, this isn’t a debate/conversation/argument about the Bible or atheism. This is supposed to be conversation over the video that was presented, that you’re not even bothering to look at.

    As far as me being already inclined to dismiss it. Your very right. Naturally and psychologically, when one’s views tilt to the right with much weight, the views dropped on the left don’t usually present much weight, or they just fall off because the scale is almost sideways.. That’s why myself, as a person who at least makes an effort to hear the other side of the story, tries his own personal hardest to take myself out of my current box of beliefs, disregarding what I have learned/heard, and attempts to look at it with a scale that has no weight on either side.. I hope that makes sense..

    Just as your views tend to be unmoving, mine also tend to not move as well… That’s why part of me wishes I didn’t grow up in a Christian environment, so that I would be able to study both sides, both Jesus’, both God’s, both Doctrines without being naturally biased.. Obviously the only way to receive confirmation that your church is true is to receive that from the Holy spirit through prayer. I’ve SINCERELY tried 3 times and haven’t received it. Am I giving up? No, but I would hope that God would let me know the truth before I die.

    As far as studying into Christianity, I will be delving deeper. I currently don’t need to do that to find out about the truthfulness of the LDS gospel though. If we are on two different boats, I don’t need to see if my boat is sinking to realize that yours is. Hope that analogy makes sense for you.

  38. John C. says:

    Sure, Jeff. You think I’m going to hell. You believe that God will tell you that the religion that you think leads to hell is true if you ask sincerely. Ok

  39. Jeff says:

    Again, your putting words into my mouth. To be honest, I don’t know if your going to Hell or not because I don’t “know” with 100% certainty that the LDS church is false, thats why I’m studying into its teachings/prophets..

    Do you not believe that if I ask, God will and can correct me?

    I’m simply asking God something along the lines of this – “God, I have my certain set of beliefs right now, and one of them is that the LDS church might be wrong.. If I myself am wrong however, please let me know so that I may see/feel/understand the truth.”

    Do you detect any stubborn attitude in that?

  40. John C. says:

    Jeff,
    I apologize. You have done and said nothing on this blog that I have seen that would have led me to believe that you believe that “the LDS church might be wrong.” All your comments have appeared to me to operate from the conclusion that “the LDS church is wrong, wrong, wrong” (sinking ships and all that). I apologize for misunderstanding you.

  41. Jeff says:

    John C. Currently I do believe the church is wrong. I am mostly certain in my own mind that it is. The analogy wasn’t to be taken directly as, the Christian ship I’m on is floating and the LDS ship is sinking.. It was to be taken as “It’s not necessary that I try and disprove my own current belief to be able to disprove a different belief.” Just as one of the popular statements of LDS members goes, “You’re taking it of context”

Comments are closed.