Abraham Referenced in Egyptian Papyrus w/ties 2 facsimilie 1

So many LDS/Mormon critics get off on the fact that the papyrus recovered from the collection that Joseph Smith and the Saints obtained doesn't have the text of the Book of Abraham on it. Rather it's an Egyptian Funerary text often refered to as a "Book of Breathings" or the "snsn" text. With it's famouse facsimilie 1 being placed in the Book of Abraham by Joseph Smith critics have long claimed a 'home run' on this matter.---Now, however there's a funerary text with both elements of the snsn papyrus AND a clear reference to Abraham.__Was Joseph just a good guesser? Is this just a grand coincidence? I'm not here to try and prove the Book of Abraham. But this is evidence that the case isn't as much an 'open and shut' instance as the LDS critics would feign it to be

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Abraham
• snsn
• breathings
• text
• vindication
• joseph
• smith
• abraham
• traditions
• Islamic
• Jewish
• couch
• christian
• mormon
• lion

[hypnotstcollector]

Here is a simple honest way to deal with the BofA: We take the known existing sensen pieces and look at them. we compare them other known sensen. We compare the text of JS to the other sensen doc'. You still with me? Now we take the interpretation of the Worlds experts on such doc' and we compare that to what JS said. We look ONLY at what exists. Now, what do we see? Thats right, we see 100% error. Very good. Well, We dont have to posit anything or look at anything else; we know we have error.

[HiveRadical]

And that logic would have forever kept from us a knowledge of the existence of nanobacteria. You see the problem with your 'honest way' of dealing with it is that the premise is not honest at all. If it was honest it would deal with the fact that there were other papyri beyond the snsn text, not only where there other papyri but the much of the other papyri that still remains matches the description attributed to the papyri from which Joseph pulled the text for the Book of Abraham. Snsn doesn't.

[hypnotstcollector]

Simple test: take JS interpretation of the existing text. Compare it to what everyone else says. JS made mistakes. Penalty for error is death. Thats Gods rule for prophets. See, we are all done!

[HiveRadical]

Simpleminded/erroneous test is what you are engaged in. You take an unjustified assumption that Joseph pulled the text of the Book of Abraham from a specific papyri (such is never claimed, in fact descriptors of the source papyri are in sharp contrast with the description of the papyri containing the snsn text), show that this snsn text IS snsn text and not the book of Abraham then pretend that your misattribution doesn't exist and that the lacking of the Book of %%!

[HiveRadical]

%%! Abraham Text is some proof of Joseph's error.

Or if you're going off the facsimilie alone you fail to realize that it's been demonstrated that all modern readings by egyptologists of the hypocephalus have been demonstrated to be at odds with the understanding of it as had by ancient Egyptians. So if the scholars can't read it the way the ancients did then their incongruity with Joseph Smith's view means little to nothing.

[hypnotstcollector]

what is %%!? You are truly a hive radical. the sensen text are as common as Chevy Biscaynes. We know what they are. JS made mistakes in interpretation and putting a mans head where a doggy head belongs, etc. He made mistakes.

[HiveRadical]

If you knew anything, & noticed anything, you'd see that I don't, neither does any real Mormon scholar or apologist argue as to what is, and what's ON the snsn text. You're completely missing the point, when you can't even demonstrate a comprehension of something so basic as the fact that it's never been claimed that Joseph pulled the Book of Abraham from same papyrus from which he pulled fac. 2 It gets really hard to take you seriously. You're pulling 'mistakes' that even ANTI's don't agree on

[majinish]

What people fail to mention is the fact that Joseph (referring to egyptian times, not Smith) and Abraham were prophets that were in Egypt. This video does not prove Abraham and Joseph did not write these scrolls. Yes, Joseph Smith could have been inspired to write what is the Book of Abraham and I believe in it as well. If Abraham and Joseph wrote these, and I'm confident they did and know it to be true, then there's no reason he couldn't have been inspired to write what he (Joseph Smith) did.

[awolLDSasap]

Mormon archeologists / apologists go to extensive lengths to have the members believe the lies.

[IExposeMormonism]

@awolLDSasap Seems to me if we just take the known existing Abraham Papyrus and we compare that to what we know JS said the interpretation of that same AP meant, we have a starting point. Follow me? Now, we get all the known Egyptian experts, like Champollion, etc, to interpret it. Which has happened already. Now, who is in agreement? and who stands alone? Conclusion:: we need look no further. No one agrees with JS and the experts agree for 200 years. No need to look elsewhere. Solved.

[awolLDSasap]

I've always enjoyed the vanishing priesthood symbol on the scroll.

[MormonDoctrinedotnet]

You claim there is some connection between Abraham and the lion couch scene. What is it?

Joseph Smith got the names wrong, he got the genders wrong and he got the story wrong.

Mormons can't expect to just change the story willy nilly and expect to be taken seriously.

[imckbe]

thank you.

[TrueSaintsLDS]

I keep finding amazing the hypnot's audacity to defy and deny the truth.

[TrueSaintsLDS]

excellent video, hive.

[hypnotstcollector]

Lets try this again Bee-Bee: EVERY scholar in the world that examines such text looks at THE TEXT! realy. your saying "on the ss text" is an oxymoron. To quote the TLKane of today, Jan Shipp, on the abraham papyrus;"Its TEXT TEXT TEXT". Mormons needed new text. You live in a fantasy world of supposed missing texts, trying to impute spiritual meaning to what doesnt exist. But you need to deal with what does exist: And ALL of it was misinterpreted by JS. He misdrew figures. deal with reality. %%!