LDS Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham is False

[He is the way]

Except the papyrus in question wasn't lost in the fire. Much of it was preserved and is very much still around, some of the papyrus was lost.

If the argument is that the Book of Abraham was only found in those papyrus fragments that are now lost, then yes, that is a pretty fantastic convenience.

If your dog eats your homework once, it's unfortunate.
If your dog eats your homework twice, it's suspicious.
If your dog keeps eating your homework, then you probably don't have a dog.

-CryptoLutheran

We do have 11 fragments of the papyrus that were recovered from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. They do not account for all of the Book of Abraham. The fire in Chicago in 1871 did destroy some of the artifacts. It is well known that the Wood'’s Museum owned two of the mummies formerly owned by Joseph Smith, as well as a portion of the Egyptian papyri associated with the Book of Abraham.

 

[mmksparbud]

There are certainly a lot of disagreements according to your article:

"
The viewpoint that the practice of human sacrifice ended after the First Dynasty is the most commonly held opinion amongst academics in the field. There are, however, other views regarding Ancient Egyptian human sacrifice. Some egyptologists discredit human sacrifice and ritual collective suicide entirely. The proximity of the subsidiary graves has often been used to prove retainer sacrifices existed but it’s also been noted that graves close to the king was a standard practice that continued well into the Old Kingdom. There has also been disagreement over the idea that all the graves were built simultaneously.

On the other side of the coin is the argument that retainer sacrifice carried on well into the Middle Kingdom. The argument being based on the one discovery of a decapitated foreigner inside the Middle Kingdom tomb in Migrissa, which was part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia. While sacrifice disappeared in certain regions when Nubia was ruled by the Egyptians, there is evidence their practices of ritual sacrifice continued well into the 5th and 6th century AD. Van Dijk mentions evidence of cultic retainer sacrifice in smaller numbers occurring at Migrissa. This was Nubian sacrifice, not Egyptian. This was not a case of ‘Egyptians extending such practices’ beyond their borders’. It was a Nubian practice that trickled away during Egyptian rule only to be revived when Nubian rule over Egypt ended in 657 BC. When Nubia was an Egyptian colony, Van Dijk maintains that “Slaves were protected from grim Nubian customs such as retainer sacrifice.”

There are also contridictions as to when Abraham lived, see:

Abraham and the Chronology of Ancient Mesopotamia

Best case scenario is that we really don't know a lot about that time period since there is so much disagreement. However, the evidence does lead to human sacrifice.

How does any of this help with your [position that Abraham was going to be sacrificed? He would be of no help in the afterlife to any Pharaoh, and again, the presence of an Israelite in the tomb would have been considered an abomination. There was no reason to kill Abraham at all. You never mentioned the only reason there could have been. Abraham was afraid they would kill him in order to take Sarah away from him so he lied to the Pharaoh and said that she was his sister. He did that twice and in neither case had the Pharaoh tried to have him killed.

 

[He is the way]

How does any of this help with your [position that Abraham was going to be sacrificed? He would be of no help in the afterlife to any Pharaoh, and again, the presence of an Israelite in the tomb would have been considered an abomination. There was no reason to kill Abraham at all. You never mentioned the only reason there could have been. Abraham was afraid they would kill him in order to take Sarah away from him so he lied to the Pharaoh and said that she was his sister. He did that twice and in neither case had the Pharaoh tried to have him killed.

Sarah was his sister.

 

[mmksparbud]

Sarah was his sister.

He only told a half truth. She was his 1/2 sister.

 

[Peter1000]

Except the papyrus in question wasn't lost in the fire. Much of it was preserved and is very much still around, some of the papyrus was lost.

If the argument is that the Book of Abraham was only found in those papyrus fragments that are now lost, then yes, that is a pretty fantastic convenience.

If your dog eats your homework once, it's unfortunate.
If your dog eats your homework twice, it's suspicious.
If your dog keeps eating your homework, then you probably don't have a dog.

-CryptoLutheran

And that is an analogy of what regarding the Abraham documents

If the fire burned the documents, its unfortunate.
If the fire burned the documents twice, its suspicious.
If the fire keeps burning the documents, then you probably don't have a fire?

The vast majority of scrolls were lost. Only some fragments were safe and found. Those fragments refer to a funeral text. The Abraham text is gone. It is unfortunate.

 

[Peter1000]

a thing I find interesting is that both Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses claim that the Bible we have today has been significantly altered from what was originally written.

and both also claim to be fully in line with the Bible.

That's because you come from a background that says the bible is infallible.
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ put more faith in a current prophet of God and then the Bible, and the BOM, and the D&C, and the POGP.

But the living prophet is the most important. For example: if the living prophet says X and the BOM says Y, we would go with the living prophet and believe X. I would then try to reconcile X and Y, to come to the most perfect belief.

 

[mmksparbud]

That's because you come from a background that says the bible is infallible.
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ put more faith in a current prophet of God and then the Bible, and the BOM, and the D&C, and the POGP.

But the living prophet is the most important. For example: if the living prophet says X and the BOM says Y, we would go with the living prophet and believe X. I would then try to reconcile X and Y, to come to the most perfect belief.

And that is the reason you have no idea who God is. He gave His word as a revelation of His character. That is why we test a prophet by the word, not the word by a prophet. God did not leave us to flounder with every Tom, Dick and Harry who says he is a prophet of God---esp. those that say the word is corrupt and they have the only truth---that is a sure sign that they do not have anything from God. A true prophet will always point to the dependability of the word, not to the dependability of their word. It's a sure fire way to discern a false prophet. Any time anyone says they have the truth and the bible is not telling the truth, but they have it---run--they are from Satan.

 

[He is the way]

He only told a half truth. She was his 1/2 sister.

It was not a half truth, she was his sister.

 

[ViaCrucis]

And that is an analogy of what regarding the Abraham documents

If the fire burned the documents, its unfortunate.
If the fire burned the documents twice, its suspicious.
If the fire keeps burning the documents, then you probably don't have a fire?

If the evidence goes missing once, it's unfortunate.
If the evidence goes missing twice, it's suspicious.
If the evidence keeps going missing, there probably was no evidence in the first place.

The vast majority of scrolls were lost. Only some fragments were safe and found. Those fragments refer to a funeral text. The Abraham text is gone. It is unfortunate.

It's a little funny I think, that it just so happens that the particular fragments which were lost, just so happen to be the fragments which were of the supposed Book of Abraham. Like the Egyptian priests got confused maybe? Added the Book of Abraham into their standard funerary text, buried their dead with it; then when modern people start tomb raiding Egyptian grave sites it gets found, then sold to Smith. Then lo and behold, it's this long lost book of Abraham which literally nobody ever heard of. And isn't so nice that the Rosetta Stone hadn't been discovered yet so nobody knew how to read and translate ancient Egyptian, but here Smith is by the power and wonder of God translating what turns out to be a whole book about Abraham. Then, decades later, it ends up in a museum, some fragments are destroyed in a fire. The parts that were recovered, then studied by Egyptologists who by then could understand ancient Egyptian, found out it was an Egyptian funerary text--so, naturally, it just so happens that that the fragments that were burned were the Book of Abraham. Man, talk about coincidences amiright?

Like, what are the odds? Life sure are funny.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[mmksparbud]

It was not a half truth, she was his sister.

She was his 1/2 sister. The deceit was in not acknowledging her as his wife.
Gen_20:12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

 

[ViaCrucis]

We do have 11 fragments of the papyrus that were recovered from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. They do not account for all of the Book of Abraham. The fire in Chicago in 1871 did destroy some of the artifacts. It is well known that the Wood'’s Museum owned two of the mummies formerly owned by Joseph Smith, as well as a portion of the Egyptian papyri associated with the Book of Abraham.

Oh, so some of the recovered papyri fragments do have the Book of Abraham? And this has been verified by academically trained Egyptologists and linguists, yes?

-CryptoLUtheran

 

[He is the way]

She was his 1/2 sister. The deceit was in not acknowledging her as his wife.
Gen_20:12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

That would mean that she was his sister.

 

[He is the way]

Oh, so some of the recovered papyri fragments do have the Book of Abraham? And this has been verified by academically trained Egyptologists and linguists, yes?

-CryptoLUtheran

Fragment number 1 has a pictorial which is included in the Book of Abraham. I don't know that any of the other material was used for the Book of Abraham. We don't have all of the papyri that was used to write the Book of Abraham.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Fragment number 1 has a pictorial which is included in the Book of Abraham. I don't know that any of the other material was used for the Book of Abraham. We don't have all of the papyri that was used to write the Book of Abraham.

You mean this?

Are you saying this is from the Book of Abraham? I just want to be clear.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[He is the way]

You mean this?

Are you saying this is from the Book of Abraham? I just want to be clear.

-CryptoLutheran

Yes and I know the Egyptology interpretation. Egyptology is not an exact science. It is very clear to me that the person on the table is alive.

 

[Dale]

Are there any Bible verses that confirm this theology?

On Biblical support for every soul being created by God, as opposed to every soul pre-existing without God:

7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Genesis 2:7 NIV

This verse is almost identical in the King James, which Joseph Smith was using.

7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Genesis 2:7 KJV

Adam wasn't a "living being" or a "living soul" until God breathed in "the breath of life." God didn't create a human body and wait for a pre-existing soul to drop in. God didn't pick out a pre-existing soul. God created Adam's soul.


In John Gill's commentary we are told that the "breath of God" was required for Adam to become a "thinking, reasoning" creature.

<< And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;
which in that way entered into his body, and quickened it, which before was a lifeless lump of clay, though beautifully shapen: it is in the plural number, the "breath of lives" F12, including the vegetative, sensitive, and rational life of man. And this was produced not with his body, as the souls of brutes were, and was produced by the breath of God, as theirs were not; nor theirs out of the earth, as his body was: and these two different productions show the different nature of the soul and body of man, the one is material and mortal, the other immaterial and immortal:

and man became a living soul;
or a living man, not only capable of performing the functions of the animal life, of eating, drinking, walking but of thinking, reasoning, and discoursing as a rational creature. >>

Link
Genesis 2:7 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible

Later in the Old Testament we find:

This is what God the Lord says—
the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out,
who spreads out the earth with all that springs from it,
who gives breath to its people,
and life to those who walk on it:
Isaiah 43:5 NIV

John Gill's commentary on this verse:

<< he that giveth breath unto the people upon it;
as he did to man at first, he breathed into him the breath of life, and as he gives to all since ... >>

Link
Isaiah 42:5 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible

Breath comes up again in Acts, when Paul is preaching in Athens.

25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else.
Acts 17:25 NIV

From John Gill's commentary on this verse:

<< seeing he giveth to all life and breath;
or "the breath of life", as the Ethiopic version renders it; this God breathed into man at first, and he became a living soul; and every animate creature, everyone that has life and breath, have them from God; he gives them to them, and continues them ... >>

Link
Acts 17:25 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible



I hope this helps.

 

[mmksparbud]

Yes and I know the Egyptology interpretation. Egyptology is not an exact science. It is very clear to me that the person on the table is alive.

You still have not said why they were trying to kill him.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Yes and I know the Egyptology interpretation. Egyptology is not an exact science. It is very clear to me that the person on the table is alive.

"Who you gonna believe, me, or your own two lying eyes?"

You...know that people can read hieroglyphs right?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[He is the way]

"Who you gonna believe, me, or your own two lying eyes?"

You...know that people can read hieroglyphs right?

-CryptoLutheran

Dead people do not have their arms and one foot up in the air. Yes, people can read hieroglyphs, and it is important to read the right ones.

 

[mmksparbud]

You still have not said why they were trying to kill him.

I take it there is no good reason for the Egyptians pictured here to be trying to kill Abraham.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Dead people do not have their arms and one foot up in the air.

It sounds to me like you are attempting to interpret the meaning without any qualifications to do so, and without even considering the possibility that you're highly subjective feelings might be wrong.

I mean, look at how the Egyptians depicted people, it's more sophisticated than a stick figure, but basically they are still just very stylized stick figures.

Because to me, it looks more like this:

Yes, people can read hieroglyphs, and it is important to read the right ones.

I don't even know what that's supposed to mean.

You know, every once in a while I have this weird suspicion that you may not actually be Mormon, but are like here to make Mormonism look bad.

-CryptoLutheran