The Facsimiles - The Lost Book of Abraham

[Ahashdah]

@CounterCultureLives in re: the Mormon Shell Game, one has to laugh, over the supposed "Book of Abraham". After all, Egyptian funerary papyri represented a custom that began more than 2000 years after Abraham died.

For Mormons, "anything" is possible: You can even "stick a feather up yer arse and call it macaroni".

[plunderpunk]

At a certain point history shows that Smiths following were putty in his hands, yet he continued to have to prove his gifts. This proved problematic for the church leadership in later years as their apologetic efforts at explaining things like the Book of Abraham grew more desperate.

[kramd1]

Never mind that the book of Abraham is not representative of the same papyri that Joseph Smith purchased, Never mind that DNA research does not connect native americans to Israel. Never mind that there are no artefacts for the Book of Mormon. Never mind that there is no geographical setting for Zarahemla. According to Mormon doctrine this type of evidence is secondary, irrelevant and counter to Gods primary witness.

anything else or Just to consider the facts will land you a anti mormon title.

[mormonmilitia]

Hey, Genius. There are hieroglyphs embedded in the pictures themselves. The most obvious (and simple) example is the Eye of Horus. There are seven hieroglyps which make up the Eye of Horus. These hieroglyphs spell 'to make or do' or 'one who does.' This technique has been used in Arabic, Chinese Han Zi, and Japanese Kanji for thousands of years. I'm sure you already knew that, didn't you, Professor Knowitall?

[TrueSaintsLDS]

Interestingly enough the NON LDS scholars conform more and more to what LDS scholars have said all along!

This video is a complete slander campaign and untrue!

Jarkko is right!

[mellifluouschinook]

I only have one thing to say as an ex mormon who's grandfather was a bishop and who's family are all mormons...

that all you lack... 'common sense' !

[Jarkko1983]

This video compares the fac 1 with a picture that is very different, and assumes it should be the same theme, The papyri we have of smith's is not complete, it's torn, and these guys assume it should look like a picture that has huge amounts of differences to the one smith had, whhere's the scholarship to that? Also when the boa says that he provided the fashion of the altar to be seen in the beginning, that part was originally written in parenthases, meaning that smith added the text for clarit

[Jarkko1983]

These things weren't mentioned in the video. 1859 egyptologists evaluation is not very good any case sine even in the 1900 egyptology was in it's infancy. The fac3 picture they show is very different to what smith had, and they assume it's the same picture? Also they don't mention the fact that egyptians had many times people representing other things, for example osiris could be abraham also, thebackyardprofessor talks about this and demonstrates it in his series, maybe should check that out

[php12345]

@Jarkko1983 You really don't get it do you. The papyri we have is what Smith had. That's why his distorted drawing is different. Because he added to the papyrus drawing for "clarity." But it is totally wrong. That's why the priest has a knife. Because Smith put it there. It's not supposed to be there.

[CounterCultureLives]

@Jarkko1983 The papyrus was a pagan funereal text, incorrectly deciphered by SmYth. Mormons are constantly wanting to shuffle the conch shells in "The Mormon Truth Shell Game".

[fleam101]

There is much good, insightful discussion of all the facsimilies and the most current knowledge of what they portray. Search "Backyard professor"

[Kolohe86786876786786]

In regards to fac 1,why is it juxtaposed to a scene of Isis being impregnated by Osiris. Has anyone noticed that The vignette on the Hor Book of Breathings has Osiris wearing breeches? Also, feathers are drawn pointing down, enclosed and minus opposable thumbs, so why are we led to believe that the thing above the Osiris's hand is anything less than another hand? It has thumbs. Why doesn't the video mention that the Hor BoB is the ONLY BoB with fac 1 and fac3?

[Kolohe86786876786786]

Why doesn't this video mention facsimile 2? Could it be because there are several instances in which Joseph is demonstrably correct? Heaven forbid!! Also, merely identifying firgures does not tell us about their function, or what they meant to the ancient egyptians. For example,in fac 3 figure 2, Isis, who is noticably female is identified with Pharoah, King of Egypt. What would a Greco-Roman period egyptian think of that? The last Pharoah, Cleopatra, called herself "the New Isis".

[Jarkko1983]

is it possbile to post here some video responses using fairlds videos of the rebuttal of this irr crap video??? because they were able to defend this case spot on.

[Auintr]

Fairlds tells you what you want to hear. Believing in this stuff is pathetic. Stop wasting your life on this useless fairytale.

[Jarkko1983]

and irr tells you what you want to believe believeing on such stuff is pathetic

[FC275]

how can it be spot on?

when none of that junk could ever be published in a reputable Archeological Journal, except as an ad

face it, you need to do backflips & logic twists to make any of the BoA look even partially correct

btw, did I mention that Joe didn't know Egyptian & it shows, check out some books on Egypt & see for yourself

you can cry later

[Jarkko1983]

what the hell this has to do with archeology?

He didn't know egytpian, that's obvious, that's why the translation was trough the power of God as was the book of mormons. thebackyardprofessor has some videos on this to, and John Gee demonstrated the errors of this video in his article tragedy of errors.

[jjones1987]

This video makes the assertion that non-LDS scholars were the first ones to translate the newly found papyri, in fact after the LDS church received the scrolls they had them translated right away and then announced that they were not the Book of Abraham. Also you can see that the discussion of the video was purely one sided and biased against the church. To be clear, ounce the church had translated the papyri, they made facsimiles for all to see and examine themselves!

[1edgar28]

I believe Joseph Smith

[Outlaw1257]

Go spam somewhere else, you moron!!

[BruceRamsey28]

I don't know about you, but Smith numbering labeling pagan Egyptian funeral documents is the silver bullet to Mormonism. Well, my Mormon relatives STILL are very much into Mormonism, despite such incredibly damning evidence here.

[Jarkko1983]

Nibley demonstrated in the egyptian endowmnemnt book how earlychristians adapted egyptian rites and ceremonies ibto their religion, jews also adapted hellenistic figures and ideas into their religion. Sorry, but the silver bullet hits the christianity also if it really is a damning evidence, but it's not if you see it as mormons do, but your way, it shows that the christian religion wasn't that original after all, while we see that there's remnants of te true original everywhere.

[BruceRamsey28]

Which were the main ones that Christians adopted from the Egyptians? And, if I see it my way, how is it damning of Christianity? You mean, if that IS the "Book of Breathings" (rather than Book of Abraham), it damns Christianity? How?

[Outlaw1257]

Imagine the fun Smith could have "translating" "Reformed Street gang Graffitti"!!

[Auintr]

The actual papyrus was found in the 1960's after being lost since the 1840s. The head of the priest in facsimile 1 is missing in the original, so there was no way for Joseph Smith to know that it was supposed to be a jackals head. Consequently, he drew a human head, which is wrong. The hand with the knife was also missing. In fact, Anubis is never depicted with a knife in the ressurection process.

[Jarkko1983]

henry caswell, who was a hostile anti-mormon was looking for any errors in smiths claims and said aboutt he facsimile 1 that it had a priest with a bald head and a knife, and a man looking to be sacrifice having his hands up. He was looking at the original papyri, and couldn't see anything being drawn or changed, so back then it seems like that the paper was still fine according to him and possibly wasn't what some think it is.

[stengevarsel]

Nice theory, but the pieces missing today, were missing back then too. You have obviously done some research on this, but not enough. Only use biased sources for the sources they list, don't believe everything you read, Look it up for your self.

[Jarkko1983]

well, contemporary eye witnesses failed to see the papyri broken which is more than enough to convinve me that it wasn't broken at the time.

The rendition of some who tried to draw it differently from what smith showed, are nothing but theories, no other such pictures exist, some pictures have similiarities but aren't the same

Again read what Gee says in the tragedy of errors about the matter, he's P.hd in egyptology from yale.

[stengevarsel]

Wow.. you really took a deep dive into this without doing a reality check. Look, talk to an unbiased egyptologist and he will tell you that he is not concerned with the superstitions of man. I can look at the facsimiles and see that it was translated incorrectly, because of what we know today. So when comparing the BoA with the papyri fragments we have today, there is no similarity at all. It's very very easy. But you slipped and fell into the Nibley fog. I hope you'll find your way out some day

[Jarkko1983]

As I have said earlier, it doesn't matter what egyptologists say about the papyri, because it's not the one that was used as the source for the boa. the translated papyrus of the 5 smith had, was at least 10 feet long, beautifully written, perfectly preserved and some portions written in red ink, everything in this current papyrys contradicts this description. And when Nibley studied the papyrys and egyptian stuff, he used the top scholars (quoted) of the day in his comments, not foggy I say.

[stengevarsel]

Think long and hard about what you are saying. You actally believe that Joseph Smith had the God given prophetic ability to translate a papyri, at a time where the Rosetta stone had just been discovered and deciphered. The knowledge of which were still isolated within a number of pioneer egyptologists. AND, he displayed two of the facsimiles in near perfect condition with a point by point detailed translation, which is shown today as being a simple and tragic parody.

[stengevarsel]

This is not a discussion, it is a reality check. Use your logical sense to discern reality from religious unconditional belief. Ignore mormon scholars on the subject, they are not advocates of relevant science. Use your mind to observe your faith from an objective point of view. There is no way in your right mind you will come to a conclution that the BoA is translated from anything. It is fiction. Release youself from the bonds of non-falsifiable "science" and breathe freely.

[stengevarsel]

Also, please ignore my obvious grammatical errors. English is not my first language. I know that many ignorants, be it LDS or not, including HiveRadical who has used this simple point several times, would thrive and feed on the fact that my comments seem unintelligent due to my lack of knowledge of the English language.

[Jarkko1983]

English isn't my language either, but your point was to give the accuser the opportunity present the case, without hearing the defence too, and that's against justice.

[Jarkko1983]

Actually the mormon scholars are the ones who can see the mormon thought shine from the symbols, any non mormon could never see the connection, so it is very necessary to hear what mormons say about it.

But as Hugh Nibley did, he used the non mormon scholars and their stidies and showed how their conclusions fitted together with the ormon thought as well, so I think that using both is a good thing.

[Jarkko1983]

Smith gave explanations of the meanings of the symbols, not a transliteration. How would comment about isis and osiris would benefit people in the gospel? it wouldn't that's why he gave them the explanations of the true meaning of those symbols and how they fitt the gospel teachings. And John Gee, egyptologist from yale p.hd commented on them that the explanations fitt in the general pall mark of their egyptian meanings too.

[stengevarsel]

I've heard the defence a hundred times before, I've read it and studied it, much like you have (It's been a couple of years since I really cared, though). However, I came to a different conclusion.

Oh yeah, I got new stuff for you. Take a look at the new big archeological findings from the Olmec period. Can't wait until the mormon scholars get their hands on that one. Google it, it's in The Guatemala Times online edition.

[stengevarsel]

Oh, and about the red ink. Turn the page and take a look at what Oliver Cowdery described as being the Book of Joseph.

[Jarkko1983]

There's no way to know exactly what the book of joseph looked like today since the papyri is not available neither is cowderry to tell us which one he described. we can only make quesses and without the rest of the collection, we can't know anything.

[Jarkko1983]

Either you read and studied it with an negative conclusion allready in your mind, or you have studied one article of it, maybe the weakest one. Scholarship n the topic is a moving target and new things are coming to light all the time and lately the book of abraham has started to become the most convincing evidence for smith in my opinnion, and the claims against it become weaker and weaker. So you haven't heard the defence hundered time since it's been updated all the time.

[Jarkko1983]

You haven't heard the defence hundereds times before, since they keep updating the info, you may have read some of the weaker ones, or you just read with fixed conclusion, since these studies on the book of abraham have become the most convincing evidence for the calling of Smith as a prophet. If one is open to the idea that God may have helped smith in hs work, this boa stuff makes perfect sense, but if one denies god, then the conclusion they make is obvious.

[stengevarsel]

I'm not open to the idea, and if I was, I would have wanted the Lord to not make such a mess out of things. And no, new evidence does not keep coming coming in all the time. That is just wishful thinking. It's a fraud, Jarkko, it's obvious to most people. I know it's difficult because you think God was the boss of this madness. It just takes some waking up. Go have a beer or something, to help you on your way out of the mormon apologetic quagmire.

[Jarkko1983]

since you aren't open, your closed mindedness limits you from seeing the world in more colorful way, and makes you to be very unreliable person to ask anything concerning this topic.

[stengevarsel]

That's funny, when I left the church I felt my mind was free. How can I be unreliable when I am the only one of us who is basing my conclusions on evidence and science? You are the one affiliated with groups with bizarre claims about American history.

[Qagmire]

This is nothing but a kkk sicencetology colt. He got Egyptian writing & decoded it. Egyptians are blk, the so called cursed 1's. All Major religions u can back it up with the Bible Anthropology, basic history & Science. The only civilization that was in the U.S. Are Indians & Blks & that is just a sicencetific historical fact. Any 1 else believes other wise is a fool.

[socal3377]

The first black Mormon baptized was Elijah Abel in 1832 he later came across the plains with Brigham Young's company in 1847.1 Elijah was even given the priesthood and held it until he died. Others were baptized and a number of black Mormons came to Utah, in fact the 1860 Utah Census stated that there were 59 black Mormons living in Utah.

[Qagmire]

TRUTH IS OUT!!!! J.Smith got these text from Egypt,witch is in Africa by blk ppl. The so called cursed 1's. And he still got the lanuage wrong. The real cursed 1's r wht ppl for denying the truth & looking 4 somthing that is not their.

[socal3377]

And Mary went to Egypt with Joseph to protect the unborn Jesus from King Herod murder plot. Mary Magdalene went to Egypt after Jesus Christ's resurrection. The Book of Abraham states that it was written on papyrus from Egypt- this has been known and public for nearly 200 years.

[sargenateg]

hmmm...so the facsimilie was not drawn correctly when compared to the egyption glyphs...hmmm...thats because they are not the same..and why try to say they are? similiar maybe..but come on..people are not this foolish are they?

[KOLOB22]

YES!  Believe Joe or egyptologists? Uhhh...give me some time to decide...OK, I'm ready. I choose the experts. DUH!

[socal3377]

I would believe Joseph Smith.

[Auintr]

It is the very same piece of papyrus. No scholar, mormon or not, disagrees on this issue.

[Jarkko1983]

actually they do disagree, smith had atleast 5 papyrys in his possession and only fragments of few exists now? hmm nibley demonstrated thi ang gee nted that even non lds egyptologists now believe that this wasn't what smith used as a source for the boa.

read tragedy of errors bu John Gee egyptologist and he demonstrates this with the sources aswell.

[enz26]

Hay-seuss, no where near the same as Horus. Nice try, but no cigar.

[ChildePC]

Here is another cute name twist. sound this out.

Zues, SPANISH PRONOUCATION je-sus, Hor-us. Me wonders if jesus wasn't all of them.

[NaTroyBoy]

If you meant the Greek word "Zeus"; that is cognate with "Deus", Latin for what is in modern times "Dios" in Spanish. "Jesus" is the Latinised name for the Hebrew "Yeshua" or its more-recognised alternate "Joshua." "Horus" is the Ancient-Egyptian name. No relationship twixt these names.

[ChildePC]

The psychology of myth usually connects religions by similarities of Ideals. There is a man named Campbell who felt comfortable in every religious setting because he understood religions this way. God is God reguardeless of what you call it.