has l-dsinc submitted the papyrus to egyptologists?

[_Themis]

Is this your way of not admitting that no independent Egyptologist supports Smith's translation? That the only one you could find that sort of supported it (but not really) is a Mormon apologist?

Sort of is a good way to put it. John admits that if you translate the papyri and facimilies with egyptological methods, no story of Abraham is present.

[_Wisdom Seeker]

How to resolve the problem.

According to [C. Webb, Joseph Smith as a Translator (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1936), p.73] Joseph never claimed direct inspiration of God in regards to the translation of the Book of Abraham. It wasn't even canonized until after his death.

Just step away from the Book of Abraham. How important are the things found in there anyway? What significance does the Book of Abraham have in maintaining a faith in the restored gospel? They rarely even quote from it anymore in General Conference.

Problem solved!

[_wenglund]

It gladdens me to see so many former members still enthralled with the Book of Abraham.

Who knows, perhaps in all their intensive research and queries into this sacred text, they just might stumble onto the right questions to ask for rightly determining the verity of that text as divinely revealed scripture.

Then, if they do stumble across the right questions, and they ask those right questions, and are willing to hear the answers in trust and faith, they may discover that the Book of Abraham was never really a problem at all. Rather, it is but one of many tests of faith that certain former members have failed.

But, as long as they continue to rely mainly or exclusively on the arm of flesh when evaluating the things of God, the chances that they may stubble across the right questions to ask, isn't all that promising, nor is their much hope of them surmounting their failed test of faith.

We'll see.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Themis]

It gladdens me to see so many former members still enthralled with the Book of Abraham.

Who knows, perhaps in all their intensive research and queries into this sacred text, they just might stumble onto the right questions to ask for rightly determining the verity of that text as divinely revealed scripture.

Then, if they do stumble across the right questions, and they ask those right questions, and are willing to hear the answers in trust and faith, they may discover that the Book of Abraham was never really a problem at all. Rather, it is but one of many tests of faith that certain former members have failed.

But, as long as they continue to rely mainly or exclusively on the arm of flesh when evaluating the things of God, the chances that they may stubble across the right questions to ask, isn't all that promising, nor is their much hope of them surmounting their failed test of faith.

We'll see.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Sounds like a good argument for one to beieve what ever they want. No wonder so many like you do just that, whether it be Mormonisn, Scientology, etc. If you really want to help people why not try and bring some substance to the discussion then this crap.

[_Baker]

It gladdens me to see so many former members still enthralled with the Book of Abraham.

Who knows, perhaps in all their intensive research and queries into this sacred text, they just might stumble onto the right questions to ask for rightly determining the verity of that text as divinely revealed scripture.

Then, if they do stumble across the right questions, and they ask those right questions, and are willing to hear the answers in trust and faith, they may discover that the Book of Abraham was never really a problem at all. Rather, it is but one of many tests of faith that certain former members have failed.

But, as long as they continue to rely mainly or exclusively on the arm of flesh when evaluating the things of God, the chances that they may stubble across the right questions to ask, isn't all that promising, nor is their much hope of them surmounting their failed test of faith.

We'll see.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

What a gross insult to god to attribute this ridiculous fraud to his doings!

[_jon]

Thanks for your post Wade, I didn't realise that we were asking the wrong questions. Should a prosecution lawyer only ask the questions that the defence team thinks are the right ones to ask? I think if that were the case then criminals would never see the inside of prisons...

[_wenglund]

Sounds like a good argument for one to beieve what ever they want.

That may be how the doltish mind views it. The rational mind would rightly think otherwise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Baker]

Sounds like a good argument for one to beieve what ever they want.

That may be how the doltish mind views it. The rational mind would rightly think otherwise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

No, the disinterested rational mind would conclude that the Book of Abraham is the creation of Joseph Smith.

[_wenglund]

What a gross insult to god to attribute this ridiculous fraud to his doings!

We LDS don't expect you swine to correctly judge and rightly treat this pearl. Your vacuous squeals are meaningless to us.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

No, the disinterested rational mind would conclude that the Book of Abraham is the creation of Joseph Smith.

You are entitled to your squeal.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-