Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Shulem »

The following citations within this post have been carefully selected, extracted, and edited from the Celestial Forum thread entitled:

“King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head”

This new thread provides a powerful refutation of the Book of Abraham and destroys any hope of Mormon apologists saving the Book of Abraham through scholarly means. All other refutations and critical analysis of the Book of Abraham is secondary and hangs on a primary knowledge of the origins of Prehistoric Egypt and how and when Egypt sprang into existence.

Shulem wrote:
Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:14 am

Joseph Smith’s Definition of an Egyptian King

The text of the Book of Abraham provides an accounting of the first Egyptian king so far as Joseph Smith was concerned. The narrative clearly states that Egypt’s making began after the flood when Ham’s daughter Egyptus founded the land of Egypt and established a new race and government through a line of kings beginning with her eldest son.

Abraham 1:25 wrote:Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

The first king of Egypt according to the narrative was the son of Egyptus. The narrative then informs us that the kingdom of Egypt was established by this blood line which was the royal line coming from Egyptus through Ham and that the king living during Abraham’s day was a direct descendant of that line. Abraham gives us the definition of a king saying, “Pharaoh signifies king by royal blood”. The point I wish to make is that this royal line had nothing to do with the mythical goddess Isis who was believed to have lived long BEFORE a biblical flood and was married to the first legendary king of Egypt, Osiris.

Joseph Smith’s declaration that Facsimile No. 3, Fig. 2 (Isis) is a representation of King Pharaoh during Abraham’s day is impossible because Isis was not a descendant of Ham via a fictitious Egyptus! According to the Book of Abraham the kings of Egypt descended from the royal line “King by royal blood” which cannot include mythical Isis seeing she preceded that line (outside of dynastic chronology) and was the original queen from whence the royal race sprung. Her role was mother goddess to Horus who became the second king of Egypt having assumed the throne of his father, Osiris.

I think it’s important to make all these distinctions because it goes to show that Joseph Smith didn’t know what he was talking about nor did he know anything about the mythology of ancient Egypt or how the government of Egypt was actually founded in predynastic times by competing forces who sought control of the land and people in both the north (Lower Egypt) and in the south (Upper Egypt).

Isis was not a king. She was not a “Pharaoh” which according to Smith signifies a king by royal blood having descended from Ham. Finally, the very title of Pharaoh was not used until long after Abraham’s time and is therefore an anachronism. The word Pharaoh was not contemporaneous with kings who lived during Abraham’s time but was used later in the New Kingdom to designate one who lives in a great house.
Shulem wrote:
Wed Nov 10, 2021 7:08 pm

0 X 0 = 0

It all boils down to credibility. What is credible and what is not? The first chapter of the Book of Abraham is anything but a credible introduction of the nation state of ancient Egypt. Everything in that chapter screams that it was written by someone totally unacquainted with the historical beginning of Egypt and how the Predynastic period was the historical precursor for the Unification of the Two Lands. Many thousands of years was Egypt in the making and all that greatly predates the characters of Noah and Adam (4,000 BC) as they are dated in the Hebrew Bible.

Credibility in translating Egyptian hieroglyphs starts with the king’s name. That is the single most important name of any living person in all of Egypt. The king’s name is everything! The king’s name *IS* Egypt and here we see that Joseph Smith hadn’t a clue of what makes a king’s name or how to begin to even read one or decipher it. Joseph Smith has ZERO credibility when it comes to translating Egyptian. Mormon Egyptologists have ZERO credibility when it comes to defending someone who has no credibility. Zero times zero always equals zero and that is what we get from Joseph Smith, John Gee, and Kerry Muhlestein. Zero! No king’s name, not now and not ever.
Shulem wrote:
Thu Dec 09, 2021 2:27 am

Thank you for posting! I agree with you, Alphus and Omegus:

“I’m sure you’ve probably mentioned this but the thread has so many pages that I haven’t read them all (sorry!), but the king’s name error is really part of a larger picture of Joseph Smith getting Egyptian history totally wrong.” (Alphus and Omegus)

I recently posted in a thread down in the Terrestrial Forum (RATED PG) about John Gee’s recent podcast with Scott Gordon of FAIR. It was a little combative in nature because I have so much passion in defending ancient Egypt from false Mormon claims, so please forgive me if it’s a little offensive; I tend to get colorful. Therefore, I will edit and post it here -- may readers please understand that my passions often bubble up and get intense, but I really am a kind person at heart and ask that you give me the benefit of the doubt.

Shulem in Terrestrial Forum wrote:Gee’s video presentation points out that the critic’s biggest problem is mainly with “TRANSLATION”. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

JOHN GEE, can you hear me? Come here so I can whisper in your ears and tell you what’s worse than the translation problem. I SHULEM am the ultimate critic of the Book of Abraham and I’m talking to you.

It’s the history of Book of Abraham chapter ONE that is the biggest problem. It’s Egypt’s making as explained in the Book of Abraham in concert with Smith’s chronology taken from the Bible & D&C that is the biggest problem. Chapter one of the Book of Abraham is the biggest bunch of (edited) anyone could ever imagine or read about how Egypt came to be.

Do you get my drift, Mr. Gee? You know full well what I’m talking about. The connection between predynastic and dynastic Egypt find no place whatsoever in Smith’s fictitious story.

Gee, don’t even try to take me on. I’m not afraid of you or your credentials. An army of Egyptologists will back me up. (edited for Celestial Forum) I want peace! So, back off and find a way to influence the Church to pull back and realize that historical claims in the Book of Abraham cannot be taken literally. I really don’t want conflict but I will fight to defend ancient Egypt if I have to. World scholarship will stand behind me in that endeavor.

Am I not being reasonable?
Shulem wrote:
Thu Dec 09, 2021 3:48 pm
“Alphus and Omegus” wrote:
Wed Dec 08, 2021 8:57 pm
It doesn’t matter what scroll theory you want to believe. The canonized English text of the Book of Abraham is littered with scores of anthropological and historical errors: Egyptus; a person named Pharaoh; a statement that the Noahic Flood covered Egypt; total ignorance of “Kemet,” the actual ancient Egyptian word for Egypt; totally wrong timelines, made up divine beings and words, I could go on and on.

Professor Gee listed the three general theories in his latest podcast (RATED PG) with Scott Gordon of FAIR:

1) Smith translated the Book of Abraham by using the existing fragments
2) Smith translated the Book of Abraham by using the missing roll
3) Smith translated the Book of Abraham by using papyrus as a catalyst

And guess what? You’re absolutely right in stating that it doesn’t matter which theory one ascribes to because it doesn’t make a lick of difference for the Book of Abraham which will ever remain a work of fiction, a nonhistorical narrative of ancient Egypt. Most critics (including me) tend to focus on the Facsimiles and translation issues but the heart of the matter is just how bad the chapters of the Book of Abraham are and the FALSE representation of the origins of Egypt and how the civilization rose. The narrative of chapter one is a farce and will never be published in a professional journal or book that explains the authentic history of Egypt’s Making.

“Alphus and Omegus” wrote:
Wed Dec 08, 2021 8:57 pm
In my opinion, the scroll obsessions are actually a red herring to get people to focus on debates about documents rather than the numerous inexcusable errors Smith made in his pronouncements about Egyptian culture, history, and language.

Yes, there is some truth to that. Both the critics and the apologists have focused a great deal of energy on the Facsimiles. This is completely understandable considering the nature of the claims, the magnitude of the arguments, and the stakes are very high on both sides of the argument. Clearly, the apologists have lost the war with the Facsimiles and the King’s name showcases this on a level everyone can easily relate to and understand. It’s as simple as ABC. Everything begins with a name! Everyone has a name! That is why this particular example is so powerful and brings everything home.

But the core and foundation of the Book of Abraham is the opening chapter that gives an erroneous and false description of how Egypt was founded. Nothing could be further from the truth than chapter one! The narrative that was fabricated out of Joseph Smith’s head will not help anyone understand the historical beginnings of ancient Egypt. Predynastic Egypt (long before Noah’s time) thrived and continued until the Unification was finally forged under king Menes and Egypt became a powerfully combined nation state under a single banner.

Isn’t that right, professor Gee?
Shulem wrote:
Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:14 pm

A Nail in the Coffin

The Messenger and Advocate was the Church periodical published monthly in Kirtland and was purchased by Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon in February of 1837. Warren Cowdery acted as editor. The following month, the paper produced a short article about ancient Egypt and described several interesting points of which I will highlight a few for the purpose of proving how later statements given in the Times and Seasons in 1842 about Facsimile No. 3 seem to contradict earlier views. Smith had already had the papyri and mummies in his possession for 20 months.

Messenger and Advocate wrote:The government of Egypt was a hereditary monarchy. The king and the priests, who were his deputies who filled the offices and exercised all the authority both civil and ecclesiastical.

Sounds great! I like it.

Messenger and Advocate wrote: The Egyptians were tenacious of their own manners, customs and ancient usages, and had a great abhorrence to strangers and to innovation . . . The Egyptians sequestered themselves from all strangers as much as was possible. They were not known to other nations by conquest, or much commerce. They had a great antipathy to strangers, consequently never imitated them in their customs or manners.

Indeed, there is some truth to that. The Egyptians protected their own heritage as well as any other nation and probably far more! Strangers were welcome in Egypt but Asiatics and shepherds were often looked upon as a vile people. How is it that Joseph Smith would later prop Abraham upon the throne of “King Pharoah” when having recognized earlier that strangers and foreigners were abhorred? Thus, the Explanation later given in Facsimile No. 3 Fig. 1, makes no sense at all.

Messenger and Advocate wrote: They preceded most of the ancient nations in the knowledge of the useful arts, and in the cultivation of the sciences.

Yes! Egypt was practically on top of the world and built the largest and tallest structures known to man. All of this was done long before shepherd Abraham was born! The Egyptians possessed great skills in science and astronomy and built great geometric structures in position with the stars above that required complicated skills involving mathematics and geometry long before Abraham entered the scene. And yet, Joseph Smith mistakenly takes what Josephus had to say about Egyptian history when he published his Explanations for Facsimile No. 3, several years later.

Messenger and Advocate wrote: Their pyramids and obelisks, are monuments, evincive of their skill in building and architecture as well as of their industry and perseverance to accomplish such great undertakings. Indeed the whole country abounds with the remains of ancient grandeur, surpassing almost any other. Thebes in upper Egypt was one of the most splendid cities in the world. Modern travellers describe the stones that were used in some of its walls or towers as being of curious workmanship, and of immense size. The Egyptians possessed considerable knowledge of geometry, mechanics and astronomy.

Indeed, the Egyptians possessed great skill and ability in building wonderful monuments and structures, even the Great Pyramids that were constructed long before Abraham. Isn’t that right, Dr. Gee? Yet, just five years later Joseph Smith would say, “Abraham is reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy, in the king’s court” in order to find a parallel with what Josephus was expressing about Abraham’s grandeur skills in celestial science and mathematics. The Egyptians had been studying the stars for millennia before Abraham was born. The Egyptians predated biblical Noah and the flood dated at 2300 BC! Predynastic Egyptian people were studying the stars and creating civilization before so-called Adam left the garden of Eden in 4000 BC.

Isn’t that right, Dr. Gee?
Shulem wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:11 am

Dr. Gee,

Please refer to the Doctrine & Covenants and early official Church periodicals that provide *statements* made by the First Presidency about biblical chronology wherein revelations given by the prophet Joseph Smith regarding dating and chronology of the earth’s history that begins after Adam’s fall and continues with Noah floating about whereby eight souls were saved by water.

Let’s talk about the *BC DATE* which Smith gave for Noah and how KEMET was discovered by “EGYPTUS” and let’s discuss this as it relates to the long periods known as predynastic Egypt and the eventual Unification of both Upper and Lower Egypt. Tell me, Dr. Gee, do your colleagues find Abraham chapter one useful in better understanding Egypt’s making as they compare that with Smith’s chronology?

Is it not so that it’s the Mormons that are poisoning the well of Egyptology? I submit to you that the Book of Abraham is poisoning the well of conventional Egyptology and Mormon apologists are guilty of manufacturing poison and administering it to their victims through PEARL OF GREAT PRICE CENTRAL which poisons the minds of ignorant Latter-day Saints.
Shulem wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 6:26 pm

:idea: Real Egyptology is NOT from the Book of Abraham, Brigham Young University or the Mormons!

Shulem wrote:
Tue Aug 16, 2022 1:21 pm
Moksha wrote:
Tue Aug 16, 2022 7:30 am
Reformed Egyptian Trivia - Neithhotep is the earliest named woman in history. A queen consort of Pharoah Narmer in Ancient Egypt, Neithhotep had her name recorded between circa 3150 and 3125 BCE.

The dynastic beginning of a unified Egyptian state long predates the biblical times of Noah and Abraham. Predynastic Egypt was an ancient civilization before Noah was ever conceived! Furthermore, Neithhotep and her contemporaries were ruling Egypt a thousand years before Joseph Smith’s so-called queen Egyptus (bogus name) discovered the Delta under water and the preposterous idea of Egypt’s founding by a Hamite king named Pharaoh. The whole story is outrageous! It’s absolute fiction.

There is universal consensus that the story of how Egypt came to be as recorded in the Book of Abraham chapter one is absolute fiction as is the assertion that a king’s name is in the label of Facsimile No. 3. The Book of Abraham is a lie told by Joseph Smith. It may safely be discarded as nonhistorical nonsense or more politely termed as modern pseudepigrapha.

There is nothing apologists or Mormon Egyptologists can do to save the Book of Abraham.
Last edited by Shulem on Thu Jun 29, 2023 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Shulem »

The following material has been carefully selected, extracted, and edited from a thread contained in the Archives Forum:

Pearl of Great Price Central Facsimile 1 as a Sacrifice Scene (RATED PG)

Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:41 pm

Wrong Beginnings
Book of Abraham 1:23 wrote:The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham

Smith’s chronology is inconsistent with actual world history proven by king’s lists and other forms and systems of dating. Smith’s so-called 7,000 years of earth’s economy (see D&C 77) does not match the historical record. Smith dated Adam at 4,000 BC and Noah and Abraham long after that. But we know that according to Egyptology and science that early Dynastic Egypt occurred long before biblical dating of Noah’s flood! Contrary to the Book of Abraham, Egypt was not founded or established by children of Noah. Dynastic Egypt was thriving and existing long before the biblical flood had occurred according to the dates of the Hebrew calendar. Smith’s D&C revelations concerning the age of human life on earth is also wrong. Predynastic Egypt is ancient compared to Noah and the flood! The Egyptian civilization was thriving on the Nile long before the myth of Noah was invented. We may safely disregard Ham’s daughter and the fictitious name of Egyptus because she did not discover Egypt! That is Smith’s tale.

  • What Middle Kingdom monarch do you think would most likely have granted a vile Asiatic such as Abraham to sit on his throne and teach the royal court principles of astronomy garnered from records kept by shepherds from Mesopotamia?
  • How do you explain Egypt’s founding by biblical characters when Predynastic Egypt preceded those persons by thousands of years?
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:42 pm
Book of Abraham1:25 wrote:Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

What kind of nonsense is Smith making up? This is the most asinine thing I’ve ever read about Egyptian chronology and the Making of Egypt. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH! That statement in the Book of Abraham is utterly false and can be dismissed outright as an ignorant 19th century Ouija board reading. It angers me that professionals such as John Gee can stand for this nonsense and promote apologetics that wrongfully attests to the Book of Abraham as a historic and genuine account.

Mr. Gee, do you really believe that the first ruler of Egypt was the grandson of Ham? What about Smith’s D&C 77 and biblical chronology of when Noah allegedly lived so that Ham’s kids could rule Predynastic Egypt? Would you write a paper on that and submit it to your colleagues? Before you do, please let me review it first!

Smith’s Egyptian history is impossible and is a total fabrication. There are so many problems and contradictions in trying to justify it that it simply boggles the mind. I know that the story of the Book of Abraham is not true. I know it with every fiber of my being and with all my heart and mind. I so testify that what Joseph Smith wrote about ancient Egypt is total fiction. I invite professor Gee to try and prove otherwise.
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:44 pm
Book of Abraham 1:26 wrote:Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days

Smith pretended to understood the Making of Egypt and its historical beginnings. But he was selling snake oil and fantasizing. Had he continued his career he would have translated the Book of Joseph and perhaps published more installments for the Book of Abraham. Smith had additional papyri and more material in his possession ready to use but his work was cut short. Let’s review some of this historical material that came from the mind of Joseph Smith and was ultimately taken to Utah and secreted in the First Presidency vault.

Valuable Discovery of
hiden reccords that have
been obtained from the ancient
buring place of the Egyptians
Joseph Smith Jr.

Valuable Discovery wrote:Katamin, Princess, daughter of On-i-tas -[Pharaoh King]-
of Egypt, ✦✦✦ who <​began to​> reigned in the year of the
world 2962.

Katumin was born in the 30th year of the reign of her
father, and died when she was 28 years old, which was
the year 3020.

Please note that so-called Pharaoh Onitas above is also categorized in the Grammar and Alphabet “coming down in lineage by royal descent, in a line by onitas one of the royal families of the Kings of Egypt.”

Directly after that, the Grammar contains a bit from the Book of Abraham and tells how “The land of Egypt which was first discovered by a woman while underwater, and afterwards settled by her Sons she being a daughter of Ham.”

This of course is entirely fiction and has no part in the annals of real Egyptian history. These claims Smith made cannot be substantiated by Egyptology. It’s not in the dirt! It’s not in the sand!
  • King Onitas reigns in year 2962
  • Princess Katumin died at age 28 in year 3020
The GAEL was concocted out of the creative imagination of Joseph Smith who oversaw translation projects upon the desk of the President of the Church. Imagine if Smith had published the translation of Onitas & Katumin in the Times and Seasons. It’s reasonable to think that Wilford Woodruff might have later canonized it along with the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price.
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:44 pm
It’s interesting to note that the bit about king Onitis and princess Katumin mentioned above was simply more of the same kind of stuff (plenty of it) that we see in the making of the Book of Mormon. Lots of royal names, ages, and dates. Frankly, I don’t believe Book of Mormon data anymore than I do the bit about Onitas and Katumin! It’s all fiction!

Mormons today grapple with concepts such as the garden of Eden and the age of man given in scripture vs. modern science. The dilemma on whether things are figurative or literal is something every member of the Church has to decide for themselves. But Joseph Smith presented Adam and fantastic Bible stories in a very literal sense. Smith was a literalist unless he said otherwise by clarifying the meaning of symbolism and what it represented. Smith absolutely believed in a 4,000 year Bible calendar from Adam to Christ and D&C 77 affirms that belief!

Now, let’s confirm that Smith took the Bible literally; 4,000 years between Adam and Christ, ridiculous long lifespans of the patriarchs, and Smith’s version of the Making of Egypt as opposed to Predynastic Egypt as understood by modern Egyptology. Consider the following revelations that affirm the 1,656 years of the early patriarchs prior to the flood:

Adam age 130 begat Seth (Moses 6:10)
Seth age 69 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:42)
Seth age 105 begat Enos (Moses 6:13)
Enos age 90 begat Cainan (Moses 6:17)
Cainan age 40 called by God in the wilderness (D&C 107:45)
Enos age 134 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:44)
Cainan age 70 begat Mahalaleel (Moses 6:19)
Cainan age 87 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:45)
Mahalaleel age 65 begat Jared (Moses 6:20)
Jared age 162 begat Enoch (Moses 6:21)
Enoch age 25 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:48)
Jared age 200 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:47)
Enoch age 65 begat Methuselah (Moses 6:25)
Enoch age 65 was blessed by Adam (D&C 107:48)
Methuselah age 100 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:50)
Methuselah age 187 begat Lamech (Moses 8:5)
Mahalaleel age 496 was ordained by Adam (D&C 107:46)
Lamech age 32 was ordained by Seth (D&C 107:51)
Adam died at age 930 (Moses 6:12)
Seth died at age 912 (Moses 6:14,16)
Enoch age 430 was translated (D&C 107:49)
Lamech age 182 begat Noah (Moses 8:8)
Noah age 10 was ordained by Methuselah (D&C 107:52)
Enos died at age 905 (Moses 6:18)
Cainan died at age 910 (Moses 6:19)
Mahalaleel died at age 895 (Moses 6:20)
Jared died at age 962 (Moses 6:21)
Noah age 450 begat Japheth (Moses 8:12)
Noah age 492 begat Shem (Moses 8:12)
Lamech died at age 777 (Moses 8:11)
Noah age 500 begat Ham (Moses 8:12)
Methuselah died at age 969 (Moses 8:7)

The Book of Abraham claims that children of Noah discover the land of Egypt underwater and founded the Egyptian civilization.

What do you say about that, Dr. Gee?
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:06 pm

The Silver Bullet


Let’s cut to the chase and focus strictly on the chronology established by the biblical account and see how it’s impossible for the Egyptian civilization to have been founded by Ham’s progeny. Let’s put all the chips on the table right now. Shall we? Mormon apologetics can’t justify the Book of Abraham’s false narrative unless they deny Egyptology & science and all the evidence that backs it. Smith embraced biblical chronology and adopted it into his own work:

1. Noah’s ark settles in a new land.
2. Shem begat Arphaxad 2 years after the flood.
3. Arphaxad age 35 begat Salah
4. Salah age 30 begat Eber
5. Eber age 34 begat Peleg
6. Peleg age 30 begat Reu
7. Reu age 32 begat Serug
8. Serug age 30 begat Nahor
9. Nahor age 29 begat Terah
10. Terah age 70 begat Abram
11. Abram age 75 begins his journey to Canaan (Book of Abraham says age 62)

This accounts for a total of 365 years and Abraham is now in Egypt!

Note that several patriarchs were still alive during Abraham’s Egyptian sojourn:

Noah (died at age 950)
Reu (died at age 239)
Serug (died at age 230
Tera (died at age 205)
Arphaxad (died at age 438)
Salah (died at age 433)
Shem (died at age 610)
Eber (died at age 464)

Curiously, the incredible long lived Noah, Shem (“great high priest”) mentioned in D&C 138:41, and others are still living when Abraham visited Egypt and claimed to sit on Pharaoh’s throne teaching astronomy in the king’s court. What might the Egyptians say about hearing of a man who is nearly a thousand years old? In spite of this, it’s imperative to understand that Abraham’s time according to biblical chronology would have been in or about the 12th Dynasty. John Gee knows this and must therefore wrestle with the implications of what this means for the credibility of biblical chronology coupled with Smith’s affirmations. The 365 years between the flood and Abraham in Egypt is hardly enough time to account for conventional Egyptian history:
  • Predynastic Egypt
  • Early Dynastic Egypt
  • Old Kingdom (Great Pyramids)
  • 1st Intermediate Period
Unfortunately for John Gee, he’s stuck with an unsurmountable problem of how to account for the four epochs of Egyptian history into the 365 years allotted by biblical chronology. It simply can’t be done, it’s impossible! Science and Egyptology positively confirm that Egypt’s Making and the four historic periods listed above are much longer than what Smith’s story would require for Ham to be the father of the Egyptian race. These Egyptian periods exceed a thousand years to say nothing of Predynastic or prehistoric Egypt!

This is an open and shut case that totally devastates the Book of Abraham. It is John Gee’s worst nightmare and he knows it! It’s the silver bullet in proving the Book of Abraham is a fraud and nothing Mormon Egyptologists can do or say can save it.
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:07 pm

Tough Question for John Gee
John Gee wrote: Image

How do I account for the Egyptian periods consisting of Predynastic, Early Dynastic, Old Kingdom, and the 1st Intermediate Period having occurred between the time of Ham’s progeny discovering the land of Egypt and Abraham sitting on Pharaoh’s throne?
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:22 pm

Egyptologists Muhlestein & Gee can be Reasonable

Innovation, Appropriation, and Reinterpretation in Ancient Egypt wrote:
Edited by Kerry Muhlestein & John Gee, 2012

While it is common to make blanket statements about Egyptian beliefs, characteristics, and tendencies, such characterizations ignore the rich and complex reality that lay behind 3000 years of cultural continuation. Part of the reason Egypt’s culture survived for so long was its ability to adapt, appropriate, reinterpret, and innovate, all within the larger bounds of cultural cohesion, correctness, and decorum.

Surely the beliefs and practices of an Egyptian during the 1st Dynasty were not completely congruent with those of the Twenty-Sixth.

. . . . as Egyptologists, we deal with an enormous expanse of time. It is simply impossible to be a specialist in every era of Egyptian history, nor are any of us able to be intimately familiar with every aspect of Egyptian culture in each phase of its history.

Here we see that Egyptologists Muhlestein & Gee can be reasonable and title the beginning of ancient dynastic Egypt with correct chronology established through the science of modern Egyptology which uses various means including astronomical star dating or the Sothic cycle of the heliacal rise of Sirius. These dating points used in conjunction with king’s lists are firm and ever fixed! After a long Predynastic epic, the 1st Dynasty was established at about 3,000 BC with the opening stages of the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt through the familiar kingly names of Narmer and Menes.

Isn’t that right, Muhlestein? Gee?

The problem for Joseph Smith and his Book of Abraham is that it fails to harmonize with science and Egyptology. Smith’s account uses mythical biblical chronology in order to establish his story of Egypt’s Making while conventional Egyptian chronology has no place in the biblical order of which Smith endorsed. Smith’s dating system relied entirely on biblical myth and is at serious odds with Egyptology! This is a problem that Muhlestein and Gee cannot solve, nor can they change or deny the math. Math is math! This is where the Book of Abraham is fatally flawed and proven false. It is the final straw that breaks the camel’s back!
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:25 pm

Biblical dates for the Flood and Abraham

Shulem wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 3:32 am
The Book of Abraham established the founding of Egypt in the 2400 BC era of Ham’s progeny. Muhlestein & Gee cannot account for the previous 600 years leading to the time when the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt took place! Thus, the Book of Abraham is fatally flawed!

This 600 year discrepancy between the alleged founding (2400 BC) of Egypt by Ham’s progeny vs. the unification of the First Dynasty (3000 BC) is a colossal error of biblical proportion! And it doesn’t even take into consideration the absence of the many hundreds of years of Predynastic Egypt or thousands of years of extensive prehistoric Egypt!

The Church claims the text of the Book of Abraham is a historical account that contains a genuine history of how Egypt was founded. Nothing could be further from the truth! We know (I bear witness) backed by science and Egyptology that Egypt’s 1st Dynasty occurred some 600 years prior to the time Noah supposedly unloaded his ark with animals for the new world to feast on! Smith’s accounting is fatally flawed. The math doesn’t work. The Book of Abraham falls on that point alone.

To put into perspective how bad the 600 year discrepancy is -- imagine, if you will, Lehi leaving Jerusalem to hunt in the wilderness for a short time and then returning to discover the Christ child born in Bethlehem!

And there you have it. Go figure. Math doesn’t lie, people do.
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:26 pm

Historical Genocide

Mormon apologists that stand by the Book of Abraham as a historically accurate account of how Egypt came to be have some explaining to do. Actually, they don’t. How can they explain 600 years away? We simply can’t ignore 600 years!

Imagine ignoring the last 600 years of our own history? Where would we be? Columbus would never have sailed the ocean blue and America would never have existed. You and I are not! We don’t exist because 600 years of history never happened. That is not only denying history but it’s historical genocide which is exactly what the Book of Abraham is guilty of.

Shame on Gee and Muhlestein for claiming the Book of Abraham is a genuine historical account of Egypt’s Making. Clearly, it is not! It’s time to set the record straight! The Book of Abraham is not an authentic record. Period. End of story.
Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 7:31 pm
Shulem wrote: John Gee, do you really believe that the first ruler of Egypt was the grandson of Ham? Are you willing to dismiss Smith’s D&C 77 and the biblical chronology of when Noah supposedly lived so that Ham’s kid can rule Predynastic Egypt? How about you write a paper on that and submit it to your colleagues? Better yet, let me review it first!

How is John Gee going to squeeze Joseph Smith’s 6,000 years of human history into a chronology that makes sense? That would be impossible. Gee is stuck and can’t justify the historical claims made in the first chapter of the Book of Abraham. Smith and Cowdery are officially on record in support of the false 6,000 year chronology sponsored by the Bible:

THE EVENING AND THE MORNING STAR Independence, Mo. August, 1832 wrote:

There are so many different opinions upon, as well as various periods to the age of the world, that we fear the truth of the matter will be believed by few. Whether by the commentators upon the sacred writings, or by the clergy, the term of four thousand and four years, was put down as the exact time from the beginning till the birth of the Savior, we shall not pretend to say, but content ourselves by stating, that 4004 years, which is the present Christian calculation, added to the current year of our Lord, makes but 5836 years since the commencement of time in this world. But upon collecting the passed periods that the Lord has been pleased to measure out to his servants, by the prophets, we find a very different amount of years from the beginning. We compute thus:

Chapters. Years.

Gen. 5 & 8 From Adam to the end of the flood, ... 1656

“ 11. From the flood to Abram, .............. 292

“ 21. From Abram to Isaac, .................. 100

“ 25. From Isaac to Jacob, ................... 60

“ 47. From Jacob’s birth to his entering Egypt, 130

Ex. 12. The children of Israel in Egypt, ..... 430

From their departure out of Egypt till the birth of the Savior.

----------------------------------------------------------------- 1491

Years before Christ, ................. 4159

Since his birth, ..................... 1832

From the beginning till now, ......... 5991

Deduct, .............................. 5836

Difference, .......................... 155

I bear testimony that John Gee is never going to be able to devise any kind of coherent time frame in which to fit Predynastic, Early Dynastic, and Old Kingdom Egypt between “Egyptus” settling into the Delta to establish a new nation and Abraham sitting on a 14th Dynasty king’s throne as he has suggested in his horrible apologetic work.
User avatar
Posts: 6156
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Moksha »

Mormons reject both history and archeology and instead teach some Mormonistic mashup in its place at BYU. Their time scale is quite concise with the universe being created about 7000 years ago. Nevertheless, BYU is rated highly by US News and World Report because it is a private university, rather than public.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Shulem »

Moksha wrote:
Wed Dec 21, 2022 11:29 pm
Mormons reject both history and archeology and instead teach some Mormonistic mashup in its place at BYU. Their time scale is quite concise with the universe being created about 7000 years ago.


It may surprise you to learn that former adherents (Hamblin & Peterson) of BYU have apostatized from Smith’s inspired chronology and agree with world scholars who firmly establish the historicity and dating of the unification of Egypt in about 3,000 BC through scientific evidence. Joseph Smith must be rolling in his grave because he affirmed biblical chronology that fits his 7,000-year timespan of earth’s economy (D&C77).

William Hamblin & Daniel Peterson wrote:
The two kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt — that is, respectively, of the south and the north — were united around 3000 B.C. by a southern ruler who is known as Menes. (He is generally believed to be the same person as “Narmer,” whose famous “palette” is displayed near the entrance to Cairo’s Egyptian Museum.)

The lotus flower is more than a simple water lily, Jan 4, 2019

Peterson wrote: Ha ha ha ha!

Narmer lived in 3,000 B.C., not 2,300 B.C.

The Bible and Joseph Smith are wrong.

User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Shulem »

Moksha wrote:
Wed Dec 21, 2022 11:29 pm
Mormons reject both history and archeology and instead teach some Mormonistic mashup in its place at BYU. Their time scale is quite concise with the universe being created about 7000 years ago. Nevertheless, BYU is rated highly by US News and World Report because it is a private university, rather than public.

It may interest you to know that I’ve addressed the colossal error of Mormon dating concerning the genuine historical unification of Egyptian peoples vs. how and when the Book of Abraham says Egypt was first founded according to a biblical time frame. The difference between the two has been ignorantly painted over and ignored by Mormon apologists who blissfully go on their way as if nothing happened. But no more. I, Shulem, have thrown down the gauntlet and am putting LDS Egyptologists in their place! Regrettably, Book of Abraham critics (including the Backyard Professor) have neglected to capitalize on this very important point!

Shulem wrote:
Mon May 02, 2022 8:37 pm
The most important aspect of the Book of Abraham is that it describes HOW and WHEN the nation state was founded by so called Egyptus. It follows the Jewish chronology and takes no consideration for the prehistoric and predynastic eras which occurred PRIOR to the Unification of Upper and Lower Egypt by Narmer/Menes in which the First Dynasty was founded.

The story of Egypt's making in chapter one of Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham is a farce!

Moksha, I feel impressed to pull more material from my “Pearl of Great Price Central Facsimile 1 as a Sacrifice Scene” thread and plug it into this thread. My refutations therein have gone unanswered and so I’ll just repeat myself and enjoy having the upper hand, yet again.

Today, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints agrees with biblical chronology as outlined in the scriptures and confirmed by Joseph Smith’s teachings and revelations of D&C 77 that reveals how long man has been on the earth.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual-2018/the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng wrote:
Who Is Abraham and When Did He Live?

Adam and Eve and the Fall (approximately 4000 BC), Enoch (approximately 3000 BC), Noah and the Flood (approximately 2400 BC), and the tower of Babel
(approximately 2200 BC) preceded Abraham’s time. Abraham, who was born in about 2000 BC, was the father of Isaac and the grandfather of Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. (See Bible Dictionary, “Chronology.”)

The Church uses common accepted biblical chronology that the Flood occurred at approximately 2400 BC. The Church also accepts a standard biblical dating of 2000 BC for when Abraham was born.

Plug the MATH into Smith’s so-called Abrahamic translations:
Book of Abraham 1:1 wrote:In the land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my fathers, I, Abraham (1938 BC), saw that it was needful for me to obtain another place of residence
Book of Abraham 1:23-26 wrote:The land of Egypt being first discovered (2400 BC) by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

When this woman (2400 BC) discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh (2400 BC), the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

The Book of Abraham established the founding of Egypt in 2400 BC by Ham's progeny. Muhlestein & Gee, please step forward and account for the previous 600 years leading to the time when you affirm that the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt took place!
Muhlestein wrote:
Gee wrote:

This is more than a little discrepancy or a blip on the historical time line – it’s a major disaster of colossal proportion! It doesn’t require a great deal of intelligence or skill to realize the enormous error contained in the opening definitive statements pertaining to Book of Abraham history. The very foundation of how Egyptian history is alleged to have begun in the Book of Abraham is proven wrong from the get-go -- the moment Smith’s Abrahamic bull charges out of the pen we can instantly calculate that it’s a forgery -- the wrong answer. The math is wrong. It’s as simple as that! You cannot fix bad math. You can’t explain it away using parallels or symbolic excuses. In the end, math is math, period.

So, I want to make it perfectly clear that this is the SMOKING GUN in proving that the Book of Abraham is not a genuine historical record for how Egypt came to be. Smith’s work was another concocted story hatched from his mind in order to fool the world into thinking he was a prophet and Egyptian translator. He was neither!

Smith was dependent on using biblical chronology in both the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham. Smith’s hands were tied insomuch as that is all he had to work with and the people of his time automatically accepted the biblical chronology as absolute truth. But we know better today thanks to science and modern methods used to determine dated history. We know that the chronicles of biblical dating are mythical in nature, i.e. Shem lived to be 600 years old is nothing more than myth.

Accepting the Book of Abraham as a genuine historical account is like embracing Newtonian astronomy and rejecting Einstein’s great discoveries! It’s like insisting that the earth is flat. No amount of faith can make the earth flat any more than faith can make the Book of Abraham true.
Last edited by Shulem on Thu Jun 29, 2023 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Shulem »

The Church does little if anything to resolve the false historical claims made by the Book of Abraham as it clashes with modern Egyptology. Elder Andrew Jenson served as the Assistant Church Historian for 42 years and had this to say in General Conference:

Elder Andrew Jenson, Conference Oct 1912 wrote:
Years ago I visited the Great Pyramid of Egypt, that grand stone structure standing so bold and beautiful in the Valley of the Nile, and as I stood upon that great structure, looked down upon the site of the ancient city of Memphis, and took in the view up and down the Nile valley, these thoughts came to me. Who built these great pyramids? Who were the first people in this land? The Pearl of Great Price tells us a little in regard to this matter, but not enough. We want more revelation before we can know who built the Great Pyramid of Egypt. Learned men may write books like the “Miracle in Stone,” but it is not sufficient ; God shall in His own due time open the heavens and tell us more about it. At present we are at sea, figuratively speaking.

The Book of Abraham tells us that Ham’s progeny discovered the land of Egypt and that Pharaoh became the first ruler. This occurred after the Flood (2400 BC) and before the confounding of tongues at the tower of Babel which implies that the first Egyptians spoke ADAMIC. Church Historian Andrew Jenson queries with “who built the Great Pyramid of Egypt”. Let’s appeal to authority and ask an Egyptologist when the Great Pyramid was built. Elder Jenson wants a revelation (further knowledge) so let John Gee give it to him:

John Gee, please check the box that best dates the building of Kufu’s Pyramid as it coincides with biblical history in which the Book of Abraham and the Church ascribe to:

[ ] Shem begat Arphaxad 2 years after the flood
[ ] Arphaxad age 35 begat Salah
[ ] Salah age 30 begat Eber
[ ] Eber age 34 begat Peleg
[ ] Peleg age 30 begat Reu
[ ] Reu age 32 begat Serug
[ ] Serug age 30 begat Nahor
[ ] Nahor age 29 begat Terah
[ ] Terah age 70 begat Abram

Hint: Khufu reigned in 2589–2566 BC
Last edited by Shulem on Wed Jan 04, 2023 4:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Pyramids of Gizeh

Post by Shulem »

The following sermon was actually preached at the pulpit in General Conference by a member of the First Presidency and serves to reflect common beliefs had by the Church in his day:

President Anthony with. Ivins, First Counselor of the First Presidency, Conference Oct 1931 wrote:
I hold in my hand. The title of the book is “Our Bible in Stone.” The author is Francis M. Darter of Los Angeles, a member of the Church, in good standing, an experienced engineer and a mathematician of ability. It treats principally the erection, symbolism and prophetic character of the pyramid of Gizeh, or in Greek, Cheops. Various other applications so far as the name is concerned have been applied to this structure. Because of its superiority over all other like structures it has come to be known and referred to as the Great Pyramid of Gizeh. The Great Pyramid of Gizeh is situated in Egypt, about ten miles west of the city of Cairo, and one hundred and twenty-five miles south from the city of Alexandria, which was founded by Alexander the Great 332 B. C. It is bounded on the west by the Libyan desert, and is therefore in the borders of the land. It is one of a group of nine other similar structures, which are known as the Pyramids of Gizeh.

It is a noteworthy fact that while many pyramids are found in Egypt, none is known to exist in other parts of the world except in America, where many such structures are known to have been erected, but no other pyramids can be compared with the unusual structure to which my remarks are to be confined. The orientation of the great pile, as it applies to the points of the compass, and the accuracy with which its proportions are related one to the other, are a marvel to those who have made a study of it.

The relationship of the Pyramid to modern mathematics, by which scholars have endeavored to fix the date of its construction, indicates that in its erection the builders were familiar with and governed largely by the movement of the heavenly bodies, which science the moderns refer to as astronomy. Sir John Herschel, from astronomical calculation, places the construction of the Pyramid at 2160 B. C., and Professor Piazza Smyth at 2170 B. C. Basil Stewart, in his recently published book, “The Witness of the Great Pyramid,” after a careful study of the application of astronomy in its construction, says : “The Great Pyramid therefore may be considered the earliest known record in existence wherein is embodied the fact of the immense cycle known as the precession of the equinoxes.”

The magnitude of the structure may be best understood by comparing it with something with which we are familiar. The area covered by the base of the structure is in excess of thirteen acres, or three acres larger than the block upon which this building stands, which is ten acres. The height of the Pyramid is 485 feet above the base, or more than twice the height of the temple to the east of us. The bulk of the building is more than ninety million cubic feet, and sufficient stone was used in its construction to build a wall four feet high and two feet thick, twenty-two hundred miles in length, or which would reach from Chicago to San Francisco.

Who were the builders of the Pyramid no one knows. Khufu (Cheops, in Greek) is given credit for having been the builder. This personage has been identified by some students as Seth, the son of Adam; others give Enoch, the son of Jared, credit for having been the builder ; others Shem, the Son of Noah ; while some believe that Melchizedek, that mysterious personage to whom Abraham paid tithes, and whom some of these scholars identify as the Patriarch Job, was the person who constructed it.

Herodotus, who lived nearly five hundred years before the birth of Christ, and who is referred to as the father of history, knew of the existence of the Great Pyramid, and wrote concerning it. He says that the Egyptians detested the memory of the kings who caused their fathers to erect these structures, and besides compelled them to close their own temples, and for this reason they were not willing to mention their names, but called the two first pyramids erected after Philition, a shepherd who fed his cattle about the place.

Manetho, himself an Egyptian, wrote as follows:

“There came from the east, in a strange manner, men of an ignoble race, who had the confidence to invade our country, and easily subdued it by their power without a battle. All this invading nation was styled Hyksos, that is, ‘Shepherd Kings’.”

He then relates how they departed for Judea and built a city there named Jerusalem. This he says was long before the exodus of the Israelitish people from Egypt under Moses. It is known that Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings, dominated Egypt at the time that Jacob and his family went into that country, during the period when Joseph ruled as vice regent of the reigning Pharaoh, and it was among this people that Joseph chose his wife, Asenath, who became the mother of his sons Ephraim and Manasseh.

The first definite suggestion that the Great Pyramid was other than the tomb of a king, or other merely temporal monument, was in a work written by John Taylor in London in 1859. He conceived the idea that it was a divinely planned and constructed monument, designed to be a witness to the human race, showing in advance the history of mankind from the creation to the period of the second coming of our Lord, who would establish dominion over the earth upon which we dwell and usher in a reign of righteousness and peace.

At a later date C. Piazza Smyth, astronomer royal of Scotland, wrote upon the subject, agreeing with the conclusions reached by Taylor. Sir with. M. Flinders Petrie, Professor John Edgar, D. Davidson, Joseph A. Seiss, Sir John Herschel, Basil Stewart and many other scholarly men, after making a study of the subject, became advocates of the theory advanced by Taylor, that the Great Pyramid has something more than human in its construction and symbolism.

For ages after its construction the interior of the Great Pyramid remained a sealed mystery. Obsessed with the belief that within the great pile hordes of treasure had been concealed, men finally determined to penetrate and explore it. A tunnel was driven into the structure far towards the center, but the work was so difficult that it was about to be discontinued when the workmen unexpectedly broke into the passage-way, and the mystery was solved.

Nothing was found to indicate that the Pyramid had been constructed to be the tomb of a king, as was usually the case with the smaller structures of like architecture. It was discovered that the original builders had constructed a series of passages or galleries in the interior of the Pyramid, the entrance to which had been concealed and so strongly closed that it became necessary to blast around it in order that entrance might be made possible. This entrance is on the north side of the structure, and the first gallery or passage descends from the opening at an angle of about twenty-six degrees to a point far below the floor of the Pyramid into the solid rock upon which it stands, where it terminates in a chamber which is called the Pit.

A short distance from the entrance, at the same angle, another passageway leads upward and communicates with two other chambers, one referred to as the Queen’s Chamber, near the center, and the other, higher up, as the King’s Chamber.

It is the accuracy with which these galleries are constructed and certain markings and steps which are placed at intervals along the way, that have convinced scholars who have made careful study of the subject that the Pyramid was intended by its builders to represent the history of our race, as has been stated, from the remote past to the
time of the second coming of our Lord.

Discussion of the symbolism of the Great Pyramid is not a new thing in the Church. I well remember that Orson Pratt, during his lifetime, lectured on the subject and made mathematical calculations by which he reached the conclusion that certain measurements of the galleries and markings which were upon them had reference to the opening of the Gospel dispensation in which we live, and the final consummation of the purposes of our Father in heaven, by which peace would come to the world and happiness to mankind.

I remember also that his calculations brought conclusions which differed from others who had made a study of the subject, but were in the main the same. Soon after the World War students of the Pyramid announced that according to their theory, and it is only a theory, the year 1928 would witness the beginning of a period of tribulation which would continue with increasing intensity until 1936, and would bring sorrow and mourning to the inhabitants of the earth. At that date their symbols and measurements bring us to the King’s Chamber, and the record of the Pyramid, if it has a record, will cease with the advent of our Lord and the establishment of a period of peace, happiness and good will among men.

The Church has not at any time, nor does it now, accept the conclusions of pyramid students to be definitely correct. In fact there is great doubt that the arbitrary basis upon which their calculations and conclusions are founded is correct.

I do not wish to be understood to say that they are in error. Neither do I say that they are correct. But this much I desire to declare to this congregation : While I have not given profound study to the theories of men regarding the origin and symbolism of this miracle in stone, I have read and studied it in a general way and have found nothing in it to convince me that the record of the Great Pyramid definitely forecasts coming events.

The Church does not depend upon Pyramids of Gizeh nor the conclusions of scientific investigators, however helpful they may sometimes be in the study of these questions, for an interpretation of the scripture which refers to the return of Christ our Lord to earth and the millennium of peace and good-will which is to be enjoyed under his personal administration.

President Ivins makes a final point in stating that the Church does not depend “on the conclusions of scientific investigators” to settle issues about Egyptology as it relates to the scriptures because the Church and their scriptures trump Egyptology.

Wow, just wow!
Last edited by Shulem on Thu Dec 22, 2022 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Historical Predynastic Egypt vs. Book of Abraham False Narrative

Post by Shulem »

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is two-faced and talks out of both sides of its mouth trying to please both ends of the spectrum -- but both ends can’t be true at the same time. It’s one or the other. The Church is pulling a fast one, trying to have it both ways, and hoping to satisfy everyone. This is deceptive and is evidence that the Church is not willing to take a stand but will juggle balls and move goalposts hoping the members are too stupid (ignorant) to raise objections and demand an answer about whether Egypt predated the Flood or came after according to the Book of Abraham.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/egypt?lang=eng wrote:

The great pyramids are the tombs of early kings belonging to what is generally called the Old Empire. The pyramid builders, who reigned at Memphis at least 3,000 years before Christ, were followed by a series of princes who reigned in Thebes. This is known as the Middle Empire.
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual-2018/the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng wrote:
The Book of Abraham

Enoch (approximately 3000 BC), Noah and the Flood (approximately 2400 BC), and the tower of Babel (approximately 2200 BC) preceded Abraham’s time.


The antiquity of this empire is supposed to be very great. The Mosaic writings represent it as a great and flourishing kingdom four hundred and thirty years after the flood. Indeed, from the nature of the country the presumption is, that it was settled and became a flourishing kingdom or empire soon after the deluge.

The Church today has a real problem with Egyptian history preceding the biblical dating of the flood and maintain a cohesive semblance with Smith’s fixed 7,000 year game plan (D&C 77).

Backyard Professor, I hope you’re listening. THIS is the smoking gun for the Book of Abraham!
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

7,000 years?

Post by Shulem »

D&C 77:6,7 wrote:
Revelation given to Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Hiram, Ohio, about March 1832.

Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.

Q. What are we to understand by the seven seals with which it was sealed?
A. We are to understand that the first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh.

This is the summation of Smith's “revelation” of the age of human life on earth beginning with the 1st millennium of Adam as the first man to the end of the 7th millennium when Christ rules the earth.

Members of the Church today have a choice. They may choose to accept Smith’s revelation of the age of man in conjunction with biblical chronology and the so-called historical account of the Book of Abraham OR they can reject Smith’s false revelations altogether and embrace science and modern Egyptology!

I reject Joseph Smith and embrace science and Egyptology.
User avatar
Posts: 7110
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Math is math

Post by Shulem »

Smith understood the absolute principle that math is math and that it’s based on cold calculated truths that are ever constant. Unfortunately for Smith, the foundation in which he depended was wrong so the formula he used to solve and reach his conclusion was riddled with error -- fatally flawed!

TIMES AND SEASONS CITY OF NAUVOO, ILL. November 1, 1843. wrote: Now for the question. How much are one and one? Two. How much is one from two? One. Very well, one question, or problem is solved by figures. Now let me ask one for facts: was there ever such a place on the earth as Egypt? Geography says yes; ancient history says yes; and the Bible says yes. So three witnesses have solved that question.

Smith relied on his chronology for ancient Egyptian history by using the Bible and in doing so he believed it solved the problem. But we know his answer is wrong and the Church to this day continues to believe in something that is wrong.

Then in the next paragraph, Smith used his bad math, unreliable information, and so-called revelation in falsely dating the mummies:

TIMES AND SEASONS CITY OF NAUVOO, ILL. November 1, 1843. wrote:Besides these tangible facts, so easily proven and demonstrated by simple rules of testimony unimpeached, the art (now lost) of embalming human bodies, and preserving them in the catacombs of Egypt, whereby men, women and children as mummies, after a lapse of near three thousand five hundred years, come forth among the living, and although dead, the papyrus which has lived in their bosoms, unharmed, speaks for them, in language like the sound of an earthquake: Ecce veritas! Ecce cadaveros. Behold the truth! Behold the mummies! .... The spirit of prophesy is the testimony of Jesus.

No! Smith’s mummies were not 3,500 years old and neither did he have the spirit of prophecy to say such nonsense! He was a false prophet. I so testify.
Post Reply