On Tuesday, August 11th (2009) the “Authorized news web site of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” (Church News) showcased a lecture given by John Gee, “an associate research professor of Egyptology at the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship at BYU” (the organization formerly known as FARMS).
“While critics of the Church often challenge the authenticity of the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price, they attach more importance to it than Church members do themselves, a Latter-day Saint Egyptologist said Aug. 6 at the annual conference of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR).” (“The Book of Abraham: The larger issue”)
Dr. Gee’s bedrock argument is that the Book of Abraham is “not central” and that its validity is not crucial:
“‘The Book of Abraham is true,’ said Brother Gee,…’I think it can be defended. I think it should be defended. But it’s not the be-all-and-end-all of either apologetics or research or the scriptures…’
“‘…if what is most important needs to be defended, what are some of the things that need to be defended?’ he asked.
“He suggested six: God exists; Jesus Christ is His Son; God talked and still talks with men through the power of the Holy Ghost; Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of the world; the Atonement is available to those who trust Jesus, turn from sin, make and keep sacred covenants, and follow the course throughout their lives; and the Book of Mormon is true, an authentic record of God’s interactions with actual ancient people…
“‘Now where is the Book of Abraham in this?’ he asked. ‘It isn’t. The Book of Abraham is not central to the restored gospel of Christ…
“…how the Book of Abraham was translated is unimportant. The Church does not stand or fall on the Book of Abraham.‘”
Joseph Smith began the “translation” of the text of the Book of Abraham in 1835. The translation was printed in LDS publications in 1842, 1851 and 1878. It was officially canonized as LDS scripture in 1880.
While giving lip-service to the claim that the Book of Abraham is true, Dr. Gee’s comments actually serve to place something Mormons recognize as sacred scripture on the ‘irrelevant shelf’ to gather the dust of neglect.
If Mormons believe the Book of Abraham is true, if they believe it is “the word of God as revealed to His inspired prophets,” and if continuing revelation is central to the restored gospel, how does Dr. Gee, and by extension the LDS Church, come to say it’s not all that important?
The implication here is that LDS leaders recognize that if the Book of Abraham really isn’t true—if Joseph Smith’s prophetic work known as the Book of Abraham is fraudulent—they will still encourage Mormons to sustain Joseph Smith as a true prophet.
Nevermind that Joseph Smith was acting as a charlatan, claiming to translate by the gift and power of God.
Nevermind that church membership, by “common consent,” was in error when it sustained the canonization of the Book of Abraham in 1880.
Nevermind that the LDS Church has been wrong to include it in the LDS canon of scripture for the last 129 years (What other things might be erroneously included in the LDS canon?).
Nevermind that doctrines that have arisen historically or have been solidified by the Book of Abraham are called into question, such as pre-mortal existence, the multiplicity of gods, and the co-participation in the work of “creation” between God the Father and “the gods” (including Adam).
Nevermind that Joseph Smith unnecessarily required great sacrifice on the part of the Latter-day Saints in 1835 when he solicited $2400 to purchase the Egyptian papyri.
Nevermind that prophets are supposed to represent God Almighty and that they should be held to higher standards than mere teachers or politicians or world leaders, particularly when doing something in the name of God.
Nevermind that people have left the “one true Church” over their loss of faith in the Book of Abraham. Nevermind that no one told them this LDS scripture was unimportant. The Church bid them fond farewell and as a result families have been split. Lives have been rocked. Tears shed. Hard words exchanged. Marriages broken. For what? For something that now, in 2009, doesn’t really matter anymore.
No apologies, no repentance, no major doctrinal reversals.
Gordon B. Hinckley once said, “Don’t worry about those little flicks of history.”
But how can we not be concerned? Jesus said, “and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32)
Correction. Should read “if the BoA is false” not “if the BoM is false”.
I think this discussion on the BoA points up a glaring fact about Mormonism and that is that anything is true if they want it to be. That’s why they come-up with all of these ridiculous explanations that make them look totally foolish. And that of course is all part of the formula. I think some of the TBMs will accept anything and everything in way of an explanation as long as it ends in the tag line “and therefore the church is true.” This is Mormon logic which is driven by the need of Mormons to protect their testimony. Truth and logic are enemies of the party line; they get tossed. It’s all part of the culture of Mormonism.
The good news of course, is that Mormonism can’t hold those people who are unwilling to sacrifice their integrity, which is what someone has to do to remain a Mormon. I’ll repeat what I said previously. There are more ex or nonactive Mormons than there are active Mormons. That’s good news.
Yea, I thought my response to the “lead and protect statement” would send some evangelical on a rant. Why would I write something like that? Because too many evangelicals look at every aspect of their life as a battle, not between good and evil, but between themselves and Mormons, not because the Mormon Church is bad, because they feel like it tells them that they are wrong. Our “traditional Christian” friends here just don’t get it despite all of the clear evidence. We’ve got these evangelical folks continuing to believe that I’ll I have to do is say “I believe”, because that’s the easy way out. They even “felt” something which really confirmed the “truth” … That’s why this is a spiritual battle. When someone “believes” something and has it confirmed with a “feeling” it becomes reality to that person regardless if it’s true or not. Hence we see our evangelical friends throw all kinds of crazy claims out there, just spinning away like crazy trying to protect what they’ve accepted emotionally.
So when I comment about someone being “led and protected” as they engage in apologetic ministry to Mormons, I’m commenting on the one desire of many on this website… not to share truth, but to destroy it.
The fact that evangelicals don’t see it and it’s right in front of their faces speaks to the spiritual delusions they are under. It’s sad that there are more people who have fallen from the church than those who have remained faithful. “Many are called, few are chosen”. You’re being called…
I agree with FIGJAM in that the lies of Mormonism are being revealed. God is saving Mormons, and that’s a beautiful thing! He saved me despite the fact that I was an enemy to Him and dead in my sins. He will continue to reveal the lies that flowed from the heart and through the mouth of JS. But, we have free will, and it will be up to each individual Mormon to respond to what God is doing in their church and in their lives. It’s my prayer that they will allow the scales to be removed from their eyes that they might see the Truth right under their noses.
Peace and Blessings…
Pooka: You said this: “Because too many evangelicals look at every aspect of their life as a battle, not between good and evil, but between themselves and Mormons, not because the Mormon Church is bad, because they feel like it tells them that they are wrong”
Huh? I think you already have a persecution complex. Sorry that you feel that way, but I assure Christians do not sit around battling Mormonism because Mormons tell them our faith is wrong.
That you think this is very interesting though. You’ve talked a bit about your old church, and how you saw an almost obsession from them about disproving other faiths rather than upholding theirs. That well could be true, but this is not the norm. It may be a shame if they are more concened with others rather than their own, given that we are told to look in our own hearts before we accuse the hearts of others. But do not assume that they represent all of Christianity. They do not, and like you have said about Mormons themselves, Christians are men, too, and parts are bound to fall short of perfection. In fact, we all fall short, even the best of us, and that is true even when we think we act perfectly. But that is where the grace of God comes in– because he loved us and saved us despite our daily behavior.
BTW, what would you think of Smith and the BoM if the BoA were shown to be fraudulent? What would you do?
I am so flattered and honored that one of our Mormon posters would take what I write and repeat it, however it gets to the total bankruptcy of thought and the lack of creativity and insight of those trapped in Mormonism. Why is it that so many of our Mormon posters end-up sounding like Napoleon Dynamite? They get the “nah, nah, nah, nah, nah” tone down pretty good. Napoleon Dynamite is of course one of my favorite movies and, as I understand, a satirical look inside Mormon culture.
I can tell that this back-flip FAIR did on the BoA is causing some real distress among our Mormon posters. The white flag has been basically run-up concerning the legitimacy of this work of fiction by Joseph Smith. And go figure, it’s one of the main clogs in the quad machine.
Fortunately this information will get circulated and more folks will bolt out of Mormonism. There will always be, I’m afraid, the hard core folks who have the information right in front of them and all they can do is flip into robo mode and do the “I believe………”
I don’t get it, but it is in deed a spiritual battle as the apostle Paul points out in Ephesians chapter 6. Jude tells us to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the ‘holy ones'” This faith was delivered once and was maintained by the church and protected by the Holy Spirit. Frauds and false prophets appear, as Jesus warned, and we are told to remain steadfast in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. There is One God, One Gospel and One hope and believe me, it has nothing to do with a guy who conned a bunch of people into thinking that he was a prophet when he wasn’t.
I just remembered that I have “The Pearl of Great Prices Student Manual” Religion 327 here at work. I just wanted to quote a couple things from it regarding BoA.
“Why Did the Prophet Joseph Smith Say He Translated the Writings of Abraham When the Manuscripts Do Not Date to Abraham’s Time?”
“A common objection to the authenticity of the book of Abraham is that the manuscripts are not old enough to have been written by Abraham, who lived almost two thousand years before Christ. Joseph Smith never claimed that the papyri were autographic (written by Abraham himself), nor that they dated from the time of Abraham.”
Now for the pretext from the book of Abraham.
“A Translation of some ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt.—The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus”
“written by his own hand, upon papyrus”
“Joseph Smith never claimed that the papyri were autographic (written by Abraham himself)”
Anyone else see a problem here? sorry i have to lol
kholland,
I’m curious to see how this is explained by our Mormon posters. It ought to get pretty interesting…
Peace…
Pooka, I almost can’t believe that you attributed this trait to Christians:
“That’s why this is a spiritual battle. When someone “believes” something and has it confirmed with a “feeling” it becomes reality to that person regardless if it’s true or not. Hence we see our evangelical friends throw all kinds of crazy claims out there, just spinning away like crazy trying to protect what they’ve accepted emotionally.”
Mormons, not Christians that have a testimony “confirmed” by the Holy Spirit with a “feeling”. If you pray and ask if the BOM is true, if you have enough faith (quoting James 1), you will receive a testimony from the Holy Spirit. This challenge assumes that the BOM is true and the un-initiated are made to feel that if they don’t receive a testimony it is their lack of faith, not the reality that the BOM is not true, that keeps them from receiving a testimony.
Have you attended a testimony Sunday?! Talk about emotionalism. “I got a check in the mail to pay my dentist bill! I know the church is true!” All the while half the people in attendance are either crying or weepy eyed.
Very dishonest Pooka.
I too would like to hear more about Pooka’s ‘Christian’ upbringing.
Interestingly, Pooka seems to believe as the Mormons do that somehow, SALVATION and TRUTH are connected to a RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION!
The thing about Christ’s church is that it is composed of the people who truly believe and act from their heart according to God’s will.
Think about this with me for a second. Does being a Mormon make me a good person? How about if I’m a JW? A Catholic? A Baptist? Do any of these memberships make me who I am in my heart?
No. How would that be possible?
Rather, God, who knows the heart, knows who the people are who truly believe Him. They are in any church, or not in any church at all. Amazing huh?
Here’s some more food for thought.
I spent 26 years as a Mormon. What I noticed about trying to keep all the commandments (and in Mormonism there are many more than 10) is that it led people to lie about what they were like and what they were doing, even to themselves.
The “fruit” of being bent on trying to prove yourself worthy and as good as you “should” be, is that there is a lot of blame-shifting and looking away from the problem. I still see this in the Mormons who I know today.
What happens with the free gift of forgiveness is not that we feel free to do any and all sin, but that we are now capable of assuming responsibility for our mistakes. Knowing that our sins are not capable of ultimately condemning us gives us the ability to get past them and move on to less and less sin. We don’t have to hide our sins anymore. We don’t shove them into the closet never to be dealt with. We know that God sees them, know that He forgives them, and lean on Him to get rid them out of our lives. And this, HE DOES!
Summary:
Trying to prove personal worthiness leads to denial of guilt (even to one’s-self) and blame-shifting.
Forgiveness and peace with God leads to acceptance of personal responsibility and dealt-with sin.
Pretty cool, I think
liv4jc and setfree,
Our friend is playing games. He’s trying to “turn the cannons on us” because of what I wrote, but it comes off as lame because it doesn’t apply as a feature or attribute of Biblical Christianity. Notice the “all Christians have to do is say they believe” and they’re saved line. I can always tell the newbee Mormon posters because first of all they like to go off topic when they’re out of bullets as in this case with the BoA discussion. Secondly, the Mormons who hang around here for any amount of time generally give up the “all you have to do is say you believe” line either because they become educated regarding Biblical salvation or they become a little more sophisticated in their understanding and drop the slogans taught down at the wards. The slogans are Mormon candy that is fed to the surface level folks who repeat Mormon timed honored ditties such as; “the Bible is corrupt because it’s been copied so many times it’s full of mistakes” (add: therefore the church is true).
So what do we know? Based on easily obtained evidence, Joseph Smith is a false prophet, the BoM is false, the Mormon church is false, the Mormon prophet is false; but stick around,keep your mouth shut and keep paying in 10% of your income supporting what you don’t believe in.
In an article titled “The Missionaries Dropped by Today” exMormon Richard Packham relates what he learned from the boy missionaries as they had a conversation about why people leave the church, why he (Packham) doesn’t believe the BoM etc. Packham says he learned the following from the boys on the bikes. I thought it was quite interesting in light of our discussion about the BoA.
*the BoM civilization is identical to the civilization archaeologists have found in Mesoamerica.
*Brigham Young was a true prophet, but he was often misquoted.
*The Journal of Discourses are records of what OTHER men THOUGHT the prophets said, and thus it is unreliable.
*People have made millions of dollars by forging BY’s and JS’s signature on documents to convince people that they had said things they never said.
*A horse skeleton was found in California that was dated to about 400 BC, within Nephite times.
*They have met many exmormons, and none of them are happy; they are bitter and angry.
*It didn’t matter that BY said that the law of God demanded death on the spot for sex between a black and a white, because there is no record that that punishment was ever carried out.
*Facts don’t prove anything. You have to ask God.
I waver between being incredulous and sad as I read these things. These are just young kids but the fact that they except simplistic drivel like this leads me to believe that these guys are destined to be kept in perpetual immaturity.
Back on topic, the facsimiles in the BoA have been known to be mis-translations since the mid-1800’s when the Rosetta Stone helped crack the Eqyptian language. It’s just too bad that knowledge did not reach frontier America sooner when a thorough examination of JS’s papyri could have been conducted. But the circumstantial evidence based upon that mis-translation does not give us much hope that the rest of the scroll, if it did in fact actually exist, was translated correctly.
On to the bible. There are indeed many errors in the thousands upon thousands of manuscripts, minisules, codex’s, etc. that we have in our possession. But most of these errors are copying errors made by scribes in spelling, grammar, etc. caused by homoeoarchton, homoeoteleuton, or transposition (look up the definitions yourself to save space). No biblical scholar worth his salt will tell you that our manuscript evidence is without error, and they are well documented. One of my favorite new resources is the NT Text and Translation Commentary by Philip Comfort.
But this is not true with Mormon apologists. The statements about the BoM by Hugh Nibley on Jason’s page alone are dishonest in the extreme. There are many errors and changes made to the BoM and they have been document thoroughly. This also holds true for the fabrication of the entire PoGP. Mormon’s are left resorting to statements such as, “Joseph Smith used the plates as inspiration, he did not actually translate them as we would today.” The same holds true for the BoA.
I’m would say it leaves me speachless, but there is all too much to say on this subject.
Aaron’s summary of our conversation: The fundamental disagreement here is over whether a true prophet can hypothetically give fraudulent scripture that is later discarded, having no necessary principled bearing on whether adherents of this prophet keep their allegiance to him.
Christianity says no. Mormonism say yes.
How convenient, Aaron. So, you’re going to stick to the excesses that you assume in your hack-job reading of Gee’s words, I see. That indeed HAS BEEN YOUR point, I agree, but it is NOT the “fundamental disagreement” between us.
While I have not read the Des News article behind your blog, I was at attendence for Gee’s talk at the FAIR Conf. I know the point which you try to make of Gee’s quote is not at all the point that Gee was making, and I have thoroughly defended this in my posts. Really, your only real recourse is to challenge my alternate understanding of Gee’s full statement. This, however, is something you’ve never done. Instead, you’ve simply stuck to your guns, and wrongfully accused me of “hedging” and “spinning,” just as you accuse Gee.
Aaron, sir, you are the hedger and spinner here. You know it, and you know well that I know it. Though your flock of humpers here have your back, you know what you are, and know what you’re doing.
And that’s all ok, because as you state, true “Christianity” knows a prophet from a fraud, while “Mormonism” can’t help to cling to their fraud.
Your mind is made up.
Call me some time when true “Christianity” gets the cojones to even recognize a living prophet, ok. Till, then, I’m sorry, but I’m just too biblical to listen.
I can still hear Paul rolling in his grave because his “true” flock still not only appends his letters to the dead Torah, but make them its centerpiece. 2000 years later.
And even then, they refuse to even read them independent of Augustine and Luther’s very creative (but of course, “non-prophetic”) minds.
Sincerely, mutu.
mutu, you’re still seemingly not getting to the deeper issue of what Gee was affirming and/or denying (instead of merely what his main emphasis was). If the Book of Mormon falls, then Mormonism falls with it. If the Book of Abraham falls, Gee seems to say that Mormonism does not fall with it. Whether or not that was his “point” of “emphasis” is neither here nor there. The issue is whether he was affirming or denying the proposition, not whether he was emphasizing the proposition.
I’ll offer up another analogy. What if you tried to sell me a bucket of fish meat and spent five minutes emphasizing the point that it was a lot of meat for a very good price, only mentioning in passing that the meat was rotten.
“What?! I don’t want your fish, it’s rotten!”
“But that wasn’t the point of emphasis of my sales presentation.”
Can you see how silly that is?
HankSaint, I never explicated nor implied that. The question isn’t that Gee or any Mormons hear think the BoA is fraudulent. The question is whether Gee thinks that Mormonism should, in principle, remaining standing even if the BoA is someday affirmed as fraudulent. See the difference? The issue isn’t whether Gee thinks the BoA is fraudulent. The is whether Gee thinks it even essentially matters to the validity of the larger Mormon Church.
Take care,
Aaron
Aaron, analogies are the fuel of teachers and fools.
In the hands of polemicists you can be almost sure they are the fuel of fools.
And yes, I agree, in this context they just sound silly. Which is a shame, because you are doing a good job being creative. You are a gifted literary mind.
But If you’d like, just continue to non-engage my point tht you hacked Gee’s statement trumping the centrality of the Bk of Mormon–to sound instead like his lack of faith in the BoA’s validity. Go ahead, you’re still just hedging with your silence.
Or, if you’d like, continue to non-engage my point that Gee wasn’t depreciating the BoA to set up for it’s future(and likely?) demotion as scripture, but was instead depreciating it because of the obvious secondary revelatory status to the Bk of Mormon that it has always had. Again, by all means, continue to hedge away.
Or, as a kicker, continue (as w/ all other posters here) to non-engage my additional insight to the conversation:
The vast amount of revelatory effort that came during JSmith’s 7-year study of the Egyptian scrolls had little to do with writing the BoA. When you can explain how the systematic bodily consecrations followed by the journey and exaltation rites — which do form the gist of the Bk of Horus — somehow also form the gist of the sacred liturgy that JSmith does spend the bulk of his revelatory time with, then you…
…will, again, have my attention, Aaron.
Unfortunately, I failed to spell out this observation in the full flavor it deserves: after all, the Bk of Horus begins with a systematic bodily consecration and a resurrection, moving to a heavenly journey and judgment involving a new name and sacred pass-phrases, and ending in a nuptial exaltation. Which of course makes JSmith a clearly un-prophetic fraud.
Or do I have any takers for a demon-possessed sorcerer?
Sincerely, mutu.
That Gee was emphasizing the centrality of the Book of Mormon does not take away from the fact that he said the Church does not stand or fall on the Book of Abraham. In fact, one of the ways Gee emphasized the Book of Mormon as primary was to affirm the not-essential validity of the Book of Abraham. Do you really think Gee’s emphasis negates the proposition, “The Church does not stand or fall on the Book of Abraham”?
Imagine that I wanted to emphasize the centrality of the engine in a car, and did so by pointing out that the car would still be a running car without a radio. That is how Gee has treated the BoA, as an expendable part of Mormonism, having no necessary bearing on whether a person should remain committed to Joseph Smith and the mainstream LDS religion.
Obviously Gee, all things considered, does not chiefly believe that the BoA will ever be demoted from the status of scripture. I never claimed that. The issue isn’t whether Gee rejects the Book of Abraham, the issue is whether Gee believes the BoA is rejectable (within the scope of Mormonism).
Mantis,
Do you personally think that if the BoA is a fraud or to your satisfaction was proven to be so . . . do you think that the prophetic claim of J. Smith would still be legit? Do you think your church stands or falls on the BoA? Why or why not?
mutu (where does your “name” come from?)
said:
“The vast amount of revelatory effort that came during JSmith’s 7-year study of the Egyptian scrolls had little to do with writing the BoA. When you can explain how the systematic bodily consecrations followed by the journey and exaltation rites — which do form the gist of the Bk of Horus — somehow also form the gist of the sacred liturgy that JSmith does spend the bulk of his revelatory time with…”
care to give a reference for this?
mormon posters, wake up. please, for the love of our one AND ONLY GOD. oh, yes, let us remind you, there is only 1. you will never become a god – get that through your thick skulls. how dare you minimize our God, our Savior. i’ve realized why i’ve kept away from this blog – idiocracy at it finest on behalf of mormon theology.
i’m sick of the condescending attitude towards evangelicals and non-denoms. look, it is plain and simple, if there were no err with your church and if the church did have authority, why would we be discussing such matters? i think we all know the answer here? you (mormons) believe in a man-made sacrilege.
wouldn’t god tell your false prophet something doctrinal or just, to combat such uprisings from the flock if this “story” were true? wouldn’t your “god” (if he were true) take us apostates out of “good standing” and reprimand us? i look forward to one of your “missionaries” dusting his feet off at my front door. heretical dust is all that will fall from his/her wretched feet. you agree and defend an evil man who wishes to pervert the souls of millions. wake up. and quit acting like you know truth when you lie to yourself every day of each passing year.
i may make a special trip to adam ondi ahman while i’m home visiting my folks. my dog loves to run in fields and poo.
Whitsell, I think my explanations have made it pretty plain that I think the BoA was received by revelatory means (from God), and is therefore anything but a “fraud.” Do I think it amounts to a strict literary “translation” of one of the Egyptian scrolls in JSmith’s possession? No, I don’t. Do I think it amounted to a loose literary “translation” of one of the scrolls? I’m pretty sure this is Gee’s stance, but I have my rather strong doubts. JSmith’s powers to “translate,” like all his revelatory powers, were at the mercy of God’s will. But the people of Nauvoo (that is, Mormon Church central) were eager for a translation, and that is what Joseph gave them — a “translation” that amounts to a revelation of the life of Abraham. I believe it is a true narrative that is prepatory to understanding the actual loose translation of the Book of Breathings/Osiris (I’ve wrongly named it for Horus), which we get in the temple liturgy. Only in the case of the BoA, that liturgy is rightly connected, not with Osiris, but with Abraham, who was the rightful heir of Noah’s priesthood, not with the corrupted priesthood of the Egyptians (as explained by the BoA).
If all that amounts to “fraud” in your eyes, then so be it. It is my understanding of how the revelation unfolded. I believe in the divine origin of the Christian temple liturgy restored by JSmith. And I believe that those covenants were an essential part of liturgy of Adam and Abraham, and were kept from the Israelites for their abominations on Sinai. Yet I believe they were restored to the New Israel by Jesus Christ in his earthly ministry. And they were restored again by JSmith in Kirtland and Nauvoo. They are the covenants of the Father’s inheritance promised to each of through his Son.
Setfree, the paper trail you desire can be picked up through a simple Google search. The Bk of Breathings was a very common piece of ancient literature.
Aaron, I’ll chat again tomorrow.
Sincerely, mutu.
A great deal of talk around on this subject, but the point is very clear – mormonism via the Maxwell institution – are trying to down play a fundamental portion of one of their 4 standard works. Does Mormonism stand or fall on the BOA – most definitely!
There are no ‘golden plates’ for us to evaluate Smith’s accuracy of translation ability. But we do have the papyri he used for the BOA. It is a settled issue that the contents of the papyri are clearly not what Smith claimed they were. Hence we have another area where the prophet hangs himself by his own petards.
Only a false prophet ‘translates’ a document into something it isn’t. Since the BOA is false (in-spite of Smith’s divine ‘ability’ to translate it), Smith is shown to be a liar. With the BOA being false, how credible is his other ‘translation’ – the BOM? Combined with the mountains of evidence against the authenticity of the bom, the false translation of the BOA proves he was a false prophet – and all the burning in the bosom testimonies cannot overcome that simple truth. Its time for honest mormons to wake up and smell the coffee.
setfree wrote “Summary:
Trying to prove personal worthiness leads to denial of guilt (even to one’s-self) and blame-shifting.
Forgiveness and peace with God leads to acceptance of personal responsibility and dealt-with sin.
Pretty cool, I think”
Nice summary, and accurate too, I think.
It might have been you or someone else earlier who commented that Arianism (the denial of the full divinity of the Son) in all its forms leads to works-based try-to-prove-yourself-worthy religious cultures. This has been observed elsewhere.
Possibly, it relates to the ‘translation’ of John 14:6 from “I am the way…” to “I have come to show you the way…”; as if John was not fully aware of what he was writing.
Just a thought.
Peace be with you.
Mutu wrote “Do I think it amounts to a strict literary “translation” of one of the Egyptian scrolls in JSmith’s possession? No, I don’t. ”
So, you don’t believe Joseph Smith himself, when he writes in his “inspired’ scripture;
“A Translation of some ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt.—The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus”
Obviously, Joseph Smith wants us to believe that it IS a ‘…strict literary “translation” of one of the Egyptian scrolls…’
kholland has a problem with this (PS thanks for the quote, kholland). I have a problem with this.
You SHOULD have a problem with this.
I find it humorous all the while troubling that our Mormon friends are so quick to fall back on the Book of Mormon as the bedrock/stand-alone revealed book of scripture defining and making Mormonism what it is today. What is so ironic about this is that one of Mormon prophets didn’t hold that view. Matter of fact, he didn’t agree with any of the LDS posters here in what he thought was the most important of the LDS Standard Works.
“In my judgment there is no book on earth yet come to man as important at the book known as the Doctrine and Covenants, with all due respect to the Book of Mormon, and the Bible, and the Pearl of Great Price, which we say are our standards in doctrine. The book of Doctrine and Covenants to us stands in a peculiar position above them all.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, “Doctrines of Salvation”, 3:198)
Boy, now I’m confused. Will our Mormon friends please make up their mind on what book is the most important? I guess Joseph Fielding Smith forgot to read the intro to the Book of Mormon where it states of itself:
“the MOST CORRECT of any BOOK on earth…a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than by ANY OTHER BOOK”.
Is it the BoM or the D&C or the PoGP or…well, we know you won’t say the Bible so it has to be one of those three. I’m getting a headache.
I have a serious question that I would like to ask of our Mormon posters who are predominately sold-out for Joseph Smith. Mormon lurkers who read and don’t post I ask you this as well.
Do the words of God in 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 apply to the writings/scriptures in the Pearl of Great Price? You are calling that book “scripture”. Being consistent, having continuity and knowing that God cannot lie, what is said by God in those verses above would they not apply to the Book of Abraham within the Pearl of Great Price?
It’s either “yes” or “no”. I know…you feel that reluctancy. That’s right…it’s all or nothing and it’s all on the line. There is no middle ground. It’s either completely of God or none of it is. Sorry, but you can’t have “Vegas buffet” Mormonism on this one (pick and choose what you like and leave the rest on the serving table to be thrown out because you didn’t like the “taste” of it).
Wow, mutu you read my mind. I will take you up on the demon possessed sorcer. If JS did indeed have revelations about a polytheistic pagan religion that he could not have known about from any other source than outside influence, I cast my ballot for demonic activity. First of all, we know that JS was involved in the occult. He frequently looked for buried treasure using a seer stone. He spoke of seeing spirits that would hide the treasure that he never seemed to find. He used a seer stone to translate the BoM while the plates were “hid up in the woods”. If indeed the words to the BoM did appear on his stone then you can guarantee they were not revelations from God. If JS did indeed only use the scrolls as inspiration for revelation, as you seem to suggest, then we know it did not come from God. This is called divination and it is forbidden in the bible
““When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you. (Deut 18:9-11)
Where do you think false religion comes from? Do you believe men conjure it up on their own? Let me remind you that Ephesians 6:12 says, “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.”
God calls men out of polytheistic paganism. Mormonism calls men back into it. God hates pagan polytheism. Read Isaiah 42-45. Shall we all bow to Horus? You seem to accept his existence. This means you are pagan
Mantis,
I understood, before I asked the question, that you believe the BoA to be anything but a fraud. That is why I did not ask that question. At the risk of coming across as a jerk, I will ask you to read the question again this time more carefully. -> If <- the BoA is a fraud, do you think that J. Smith's prophetic claim is still legit?
Another question and this one for all Mormons:
If the BoA is not fraud, and the proofs for such are suspect, then what would a proven fraud look like? Is their any book in history that has been proven to be a fraud? Can any book be proven to be fraudulent?
liv4jc,
Thank you for your post. Our Mormon friends really get agitated when I bring this up, actually attacking me for banging away at this theme. This is where the Mormons’ thinking gets flipped. They seem to think that this is all good stuff, spiritual as in, comes from God.
Joseph Smith used to take his poor dupe home-boys out in the woods at night and hunt treasure like some nine year old. In his interview with Grant Palmer author of “An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins”, John Dehlin asks, “Did they ever find anything?” Of course the answer is “No”. Palmer says there was always an excuse like “they drew the circle wrong” or “somebody spoke out of turn”. This “treasure hunting” mentality is in the DNA of Mormonism. There’s always some fantastic excuse why something isn’t what it appears to be. Hence all of these fantastic explanations regarding Smith’s “translation” of the BoA. The BoA is a total farce; this is obvious beyond question. But not to our Mormon friends. They’re still into the treasure hunting mentality where the treasure is really there but it’s just out of reach, slipping further into the ground just when they reach out for it. Maybe our Mormon friends will have to resort to sacrificing a rabbit or something to get at the truth!
Mantis,
I understood, before I asked the question, that you do not believe the BoA to be a fraud. That is why I did not ask that. At the risk of coming across like a jerk I will ask you to look at the question again, only this time more carefully.
-> If <- the BoA is a fraud is the prophetic claim of J. Smith still legit?
Another question but this one is open for all Mormons. If the proofs that "prove" the BoA to be a fraud are suspect, then what would a proven fraud look like? Is there any book from history that has been proven to be a fraud? Can any book be proven a fraud?
Andy, a big YES of course good friend. Both Moses and Abraham were sharing a vision that they had with God. I’m grateful for the additional light and knowledge provide by a Prophet chosen by God to bring forth these lost scriptures of the Old Testament times.
Andy, you have the Bible, and I’m sure you appreciate the words found therein as much as I do. You choose to tell God that this is enough, and I choose to believe that scripture is never ending, and that God even speaks to us today through a living Prophet and Apostles. We continue to learn every time we have a General Conference.
So all you lurkers out there, take the time to actually read the Pearl of Great Price, don’t be like Andy and get your borrowed talking points and proceed to make the mistake he does.
Regards, Richard. 🙂
One thing that struck me when I read through many of the comments here was the one about how the BoA came forth – that it was not published in leather bound editions, but rather was published in a newspaper. It made me think of the Holy Scriptures and the letters of Paul – I am sure they were not published in leather bound scrolls, and were simply letters inspired by the Holy Spirit that were collected up and eventually became part of the New Testament. How a book was first published has nothing to do with it’s authenticity.
The BoA has been canonized by the LDS Church. Joseph Smith claimed it was a translation of the scrolls – which is demonstrably false, thus JS and the Mormon Church cannot be true. It is that simple. Even if scriptures and prophetic revelation continue, we can be sure the BoA does not qualify as new scripture – it cannot stand up to any examination of authenticity.
When Mormon “elders” came knocking I challenged them to examine the authenticity of the BoA – to really look into it, for their eternal fate and their prophets reliability is riding on it. They refused to even look at the documentation I had proving it is false. I understood, they are under orders to keep their blinders on. They fell back on their “testimony” and I told them God can reveal truth in many ways, often through other people (to which they became angry!). I then asked them again to really examine the BoA and the evidence against it once they are off their mission – if it is true, it can surely withstand the scrutiny – Google Book of Abraham and read and watch some of what comes up. Hopefully I planted a seed.
LOL mobaby,
New scripture? Book of Abraham a newspaper article? Interesting, but not historical. Methinks ancient scrolls are in play here friend whether you believe that or not.
It’s problematic for you since your more concerned about the translation then the what, how and why of the actual readings.
So as you examine the transmission, I will be most happy to examine the actual scriptures that bring me more Light and Knowledge pertaining to this world, other worlds, and pre-mortal life, all denied by Creedal Christians who should really examine where the belief system they hang to, is none other the the words of just men, hmmm, interesting. Triune God, six days of creation, and Ex Nihilo, and nothing is found in the Scriptures that verify any of those concepts, precepts, or theories. But if you look at Scientific data, you can pretty much rule out six day and ex nihilo. Hmmm, yep, the Nicea Creeds are well and alive as the still fool millions into believing in man made interpretations.
r.
Well I see it’s time for our Mormon posters to deflect away from the bogus BoA and go after the Nicea Creed and the Bible. Just like clockwork. Again, the tag line here is suppose to be, “therefore the Mormon church is true”. Complete vacant hogwash as usual.
So if we must, here’s the deal on the Nicea Creed or any of the other creeds for that matter, they reflected the doctrines and beliefs of the first century church. The bishops at Nicea brought the hammer down on the heretics. Now a person can deny or argue as to whether or not the creeds represent reality, but a person can’t successfully make a case that the creeds don’t reflect what the Church fathers taught and believed as handed down by the apostles who were taught by Christ who is the Word made flesh. This stuff is knowable, as is the information regarding the BoA. We go through this all the time with the Mormons who post here. They try to substantiate their bogus scriptures by attacking the Bible or the creeds as if that will somehow prove the BoM or BoA is true. So we hear that the Christian scriptures are just the words of men? Sounds like another little ditty picked up down at the Wards. I’m sorry but what is put out by Mormons is so without any kind of depth of knowledge that it is totally embarrassing.
HankSaint,
I don’t know where you are getting your info from, but ex nihilo is by far the dominant view in any scientific community. Granted many scientists do not attribute the universe’s existence to God, but almost every scientist (even the die-hard Darwinists) believe that the there was a time when the universe was not. They believe that the universe is very old but not eternal. Mormons are in the extreme minority by holding to a materialist cosmology. Mormons have a view much like that of the ancient pagans. It was the monotheistic Hebrews with their transcendent deity that claimed that the earth was formed out of nothing.
All this cosmology talk does relate to the BoA. Not only are their big, hairy issues surrounding its transmission but content wise the book has problems as well. The BoA seems to support a Newtonian view of the universe. One would expect to see a book from the Almighty to have a cosmology similar to one we have today, an unknown cosmology, or possibly even an ancient near eastern one as this would probably have been Abraham’s mindset/culture. But a cosmology that was popular from the late 17th century until the early to mid 20th century speaks to the book’s origins.
Hank,
It was mantis mutu that said the BoA came out as newspaper articles. Read his comment above.
Hank,
As your reading and studying the BoA, you might notice the part where JS says it is a translation of an ancient record of Abraham, written by his own hand upon papyrus. That’s where we are starting in our study here.
Richard/Hank,
It’s always such a pleasure to hear from you. I guess you have become the official LDS spokesperson here on the mattter since Crispin has gone AWOL again. You have made it clear that the Pearl of Great Price is scripture since your church declared it in 1880. Thus, as you stated, 2 Tim 3:16 “All scripture is inspired by God”, applies to the Pearl of Great Price. Outstanding!
ONE MORE QUESTION (open to anyone): The Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham are included in the Pearl of Great Price which you have stated to be “scripture”. Would I be correct in assuming that the Facsimiles themselves are from God, scripture and 2 Tim 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 apply to those as well? I would assume that if the Facsimiles were not of God they would not be in the Book of Abraham which the LDS Church has declared “scripture”, would I be correct in assuming that? I look forward to those answers.
Also, I’m not sure what mistake you are referring to that I have supposedly made or my “talking points”. I quoted Joseph Fielding Smith – one of your prophets. That is hardly MY talking point.
In regards to mistakes, I have read the Pearl of Great Price very clearly…clearly enough that I had to point out to you in the thread topic “Reinstating Polygamists by Proxy” that Kolob being the residence of your god is in Abraham chapter 3 in several verses which you denied. Might I suggest you do a closer examination of this special book as viewed in Mormonism.
Lurkers: thank you for being here and I urge to stay on board as this discussion evolves over the coming days.
Hank/Richard, have a nice weekend!
I wanted to repost a comment by kholland because I think it was a very important question and, no surprise, no Mormon has answered it. I implore any Mormon on this site to please respond to this question.
kholland said: “I just remembered that I have “The Pearl of Great Prices Student Manual” Religion 327 here at work. I just wanted to quote a couple things from it regarding BoA.
“Why Did the Prophet Joseph Smith Say He Translated the Writings of Abraham When the Manuscripts Do Not Date to Abraham’s Time?”
“A common objection to the authenticity of the book of Abraham is that the manuscripts are not old enough to have been written by Abraham, who lived almost two thousand years before Christ. Joseph Smith never claimed that the papyri were autographic (written by Abraham himself), nor that they dated from the time of Abraham.”
Now for the pretext from the book of Abraham.
“A Translation of some ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt.—The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus”
“written by his own hand, upon papyrus”
“Joseph Smith never claimed that the papyri were autographic (written by Abraham himself)”
Anyone else see a problem here? sorry i have to lol”
So what’s the Mormon retort? I’m waiting and I want an answer.
HankSaint, how is it you believe God was pleased with Abraham’s idolotry and revealed a book glorifying pagan religion? Abraham was indeed an idolotor. We know this from Joshua ch. 24:2,3 where Joshua gathers Israel before entering the promised land.
“And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from the other side of the River, led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac.”
We know that this place was Ur of the Chaldees and, also Harran from Gen. 11 and 15. Ur was the home of the temple of the moon god Nanna (or Sin). This false god was also worshiped in Ur. Terah, Abram, Sarai, and Lot were all worshippers of Nanna. Unlike the BoM lands, we have archaelogical evidence that these places existed, and still do.
God calls Abram out of pagan idolotry and reveals Himself as the one true God. Abram believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness(amazing grace). JS calls men back into paganism.
Moses grew up in the house of Pharaoh and was most likely schooled in the false religion of Egypt, which apparently mutu accepts as a valid faith, and Horus a real god. Moses flees Egypt to Midian. Decades later the “messenger of Yahweh” (not Elohim) speaks to Moses, calls him out of false religion, and reveals Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He fulfills his covenant promise through Moses by bringing Israel out of Egypt after 400 years (as prophesied) by His almighty hand. Why was this done? To show the world His power by fulfilling a prophesy He alone could fulfill, and to show the world that Yahweh alone is God and has power on heaven and earth.
I do not have enough room to post, but read what Rahab says about Yahweh in Joshua 2:8-12. She is also commended in Hebrews 11.
I keep thinking that our Mormon posters are like a guy who get’s shown how the trick is done when the magician cuts the woman in half or makes her disappear and still says, “I don’t care the woman WAS cut in two and she DID disappear.” These Mormons do exemplify the “magic of believing”. If they believe it, it is indeed reality, never mind the evidence. I keep wondering, are these folks adults, with adult ability to reason? It’s Peter Pan and Tinker Bell with the kids shutting their eyes and saying over and again “I do believe in ferries”.
Hanksaint wrote “It’s problematic for you since your more concerned about the translation then the what, how and why of the actual readings.”
Really now Hank. The whole issue here IS the translation which results in the actual reading. Explain for the gathered why the mormon church accepts the papyri as the ones ‘translated’ by Smith, yet their own Egyptologists make it very clear that the real translation of the Book of Breathing bears no resemblance to what Smith wrote down or claimed were the contents. (crickets) Explain for the gathered the proof that the papyri were as Smith claimed – the original writings in Abraham’s hand writing. (crickets) The ‘what, how and why’ disappear into vapor because the translation has been demonstrated to be completely fraudulent.
Maybe someone has already addressed this point
but I’ll ask it now since I’ve been away for
a while.
Since the translation of the Book Of Abraham
[BoA] by Joseph Smith is so controversial and
since the meaning of the papyri seems to be
rejected by practically all Egyptologists as
having anything to do with Abraham’s faith in
Yahweh,then why has’nt there been any LDS
prophet fix the problem by giving us the correct
translation of the papyri, pro or con?
According to D&C 107:92 the LDS prophet is
“..a seer, a revelator, a TRANSLATOR,….”
See also Mormon Doctrine, p.591
Our LDS friends claim that the Book of Abraham is full of important doctrines such as the preexistence, etc. The Book of Abraham is also full of heresy – trash. Hey, it could have been said in worse ways, but that is not my style. Why would I say this? Abraham 2:23-25 gives us the account of God instructing Abraham to break the commandment of lying.
Somehow God is being portrayed as not being omnipotent enough to handle this situation with the Egyptians in supposedly getting Abraham and Sarai through. God is at the mercy of the Egyptians in this case, but in the biblical accounts we have God making and dictating the rules and getting His way despite whatever obstacles were put in the way by the Egyptians.
“Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see her, they will say – She is his wife; and they will kill you, but they will save her alive; therefore see that ye do on this wise: LET HER SAY UNTO THE EGYPTIANS SHE IS THY SISTER, and thy soul shall live. And it came to pass that I, Abraham, told Sarai, my wife, ALL THAT THE LORD HAD SAID UNTO ME – Therefore say unto them, I PRAY THEE, THOU ART MY SISTER, that it may be well with me for thy sake, and my soul shall live because of thee.”
That’s just great…God condoning lying and commanding Abraham to tell a lie even though God cannot lie Himself (Hebrews 6:18; Enos 1:6). How the Mormons can reconcile this underlying message in that passage with James 1:13 is beyond me. I look forward to reading the spins and irrelevant comparisons. On your mark, get set…spin!
Sorry Andy, but I’ve got to ‘tag’ you here (though you’re not completely ‘offside’).
There are two accounts in Genesis of Abraham ‘lying by omission”. One is when he stays with Pharoah in Gen 12:10-20; and the other when he stays with Abimelech in Gen 20.
However, the Genesis text is far more nuanced than the BoA’s reproduction. For example, Genesis is very careful not to imply that God commands Abraham’s transgressions; in fact the God of Genesis sustains the integrity of Pharoah and Abimelech.
I think that through these stories, the Hebrew author draws us into a number of questions. Those which are pertinent here are;
1 Not everything the patriarchs did was a result of God’s command. Compare their polygamy, for example, and a certain JS justifying his polygamy on a non-existent command.
2 It follows that the patriarchs were not morally perfect. Compare this to our recent discussions on whether keeping the law is a prequalification to being God’s people. This issue has more pertinence to the Israelites, though, because they drew their legitimacy and self-identity from these characters (perhaps, more on this later).
3 Within the Bibical perspective, these stories tell the Israelites that they cannot share themselves with the surrounding polytheistic pagan cultures. Even if they want to, or if circumstances appear to collude, God intervenes so that it does not happen.
4 Despite Abraham’s dishonesty, God continues to bless him. What we should see, in these stories, then are grace and election.
In the BoA, JS got the mechanics of the story right, but he failed to appreciate how the stories (there are two, remember) work.
Thanks, Martin. I’m not arguing that Abraham was not without sin in his life. He lied, he engaged in polygamy and probably many other sins througout his life because he was born a sinner and sinned up until his death even though he was a prophet and the patriarch of Israel. The difference in this account in the Book of Abraham is the Lord TELLING/INSTRUCTING Abraham to lie. This is not the account in Genesis.
In Genesis 12:12, which reads very similar to Abraham 3:23, we see that Joseph Smith changed it up and put the Lord in his text. Genesis 12:13 has been tweeked by Joseph Smith again in Abraham 3:25. In between we have Abraham 3:24 that is nowhere in the Genesis account of chapter 12. This is another Joseph Smith “parachute” dropped in here and points the finger/blame on the Lord.
I don’t read anywhere in the Genesis 12 account of God instructing anyone to lie to accomplish His perfect will and plans. Rather in Genesis 12:12-13 we have Abraham telling Sarah by himself to tell a lie. The Lord is out of it. As far as I’m concerned Abraham showed a lack of faith just as he did with Hagar and we are paying for it until this day – Islam – notably the radicals who want to kill Christians.
Peter lied three times about knowing Jesus Christ. It would be like Joseph Smith inserting in the Gospel account that Jesus told Peter to lie to accomplish His sovereign will. That commanding of a person to deliberately lie and break the commandments goes against the nature of God. I’m sure you see it that way too. Thanks Martin!
Falcon- Biblical Christian?
Andy and Martin, thank you for the gospel springboard (I pray God uses this to open the hearts of some reading this). Indeed Abram was not a good person. He had no righteousness in and of himself. He lied to Pharaoh about Sarai being his sister to protect himself. So Abram was a liar (9th Commandment). In Genesis 15 we have Abraham complaining about not having an heir. God promises an heir by his barren wife Sarai. Genesis 15:6 tells us Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness. So did God infuse righteosness into Abraham making him wholly righteous, incapable of sin? No, because in Genesis 16 after ten years have gone by Abraham gives in to Sarah’s demands that he take Hagar, her handmaiden, as a wife to bear him an heir. So not only does he show a lack of faith in God’s promise, he becomes an adulterer (7th commandment). Does God say, “Abraham, you disobeyed my covenant, away with you! You are now unrighteous. You used your free agency to choose wrong. Start all over again. Do some works.” No, because it wasn’t Abraham’s obedience that earned his righteous standing before God in the first place. It was God declaring Abraham righteous because of his belief, but not just belief, faith in God obtained by God’s grace as a gift (Ephesians 2:8,9). How do we know? Because in Genesis 17 God re-affirms His covenant with Abraham and fulfills His promise in the birth of Isaac. God had already made the promise, not based upon works that Abram did, or was required to do, but by an oath made with Himself.
God can declare you righteous, too, through Christ’s shed blood. Forgiveness of sin is available to those who come to Jesus in Godly sorrow, and so is righteousness: “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (2 Cor 5:21)”