Kinderhook vs the Papyri

[_Shulem]

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

Indeed, Joseph Smith was doubly wrong. The Expanations of Facsimile No. 3 are an insult to the Egyptian race, Egyptian religion, and all things scholarly.

BYU school teachers are barking dogs and John Gee is a lying bastard.

Paul O

[_Tobin]

The Bible does not contain all the writings and events associated with Moses and other prophets. Joseph Smith revealed more about Moses and other prophets. That was his calling. The same is true of the Book of Abraham. IT IS EXACTLY the same type of thing in very fact.

Not my point. He produced the Book of Moses through "pure revelation" without catalyst. Now apologist say that the papyri was the catalyst that he needed to have the Book of Abraham reveled to him. If he had the book of Moses reveled to him why didn't God just reveal the Book of Abraham to him?

Revelation doesn't need a catalyst. You are really hung up on that for some reason. God can reveal lost writings and events purely by revelation. I really don't understand why you are so interested in whether Joseph Smith's interest was sparked by an Egyptian papyri or the Bible itself. That has nothing to do with anything what-so-ever.

[_son of Ishmael]

It is not what I am saying. It is what the apologists are saying

[_Shulem]

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

Which translated into English would read:

King king, whose name is given in the characters above his head.



Paul O

[_Tobin]

Not my point. He produced the Book of Moses through "pure revelation" without catalyst. Now apologist say that the papyri was the catalyst that he needed to have the Book of Abraham reveled to him. If he had the book of Moses reveled to him why didn't God just reveal the Book of Abraham to him?

God did reveal the Book of Abraham to him.

[_Shulem]

Kolob, give me some meat to eat! Kokaubeam Shinehah Kokaubeam Kokaubeam Olea Olea Olea Olea -- Oh God hear the words of my mouth!



Paul O

[_thews]

You missed what I was saying. Joseph Smith couldn't read Egyptian Hieroglyphics. His attempts at annotating the Egyptian Facsimiles only demonstrates this fact.

Using your logic, Joseph smith, who paid $2400 for them, said he was "translating" them... only he didn't "translate" them? This isn't semantics and you are wrong.

http://mormonthink.com/book-of-abraham-issues.htm

"... with W. W. Phelps and Oliver Cowdery as scribes, I commence the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt, etc. - a more full account of which will appear in its place, as I proceed to examine or unfold them. Truly we can say, the Lord is beginning to reveal the abundance of peace and truth." (History of the Church, Vol. 2, p. 236).

Joseph Smith ability to translate (a better word is reveal) was not because he understood the reformed Egyptian that the Book of Mormon was written in nor was it because he could read (nor understand) the Egyptian Hieroglphics in the Egyptian papyri, which he clearly couldn't. This is a purely a false assumption. Joseph Smith could only reveal a text through the gift and power of God. And the only source that can tell you if he had that gift is God himself.

As you babble on about your theories, you missed the point that Joseph Smith claimed to "translate" the supposed Book of Abraham. Because he was wrong, you can admit this, but fail to acknowledge what he actually said.

The Book of Abraham is not contained in the Egyptian papyri. It was only the impetus for Joseph Smith to reveal the long lost writings of Abraham by the gift and power of God. These writings do not exist, nor is there any reason to expect the Egyptians would have any interest in preserving them at all.

That isn't what Joseph Smith said. Are you calling Joseph Smith a liar?

[_Shulem]

Tobin, are you telling little white lies again?

Why do you do that? Have you not learned that telling fibs is not right?



Paul O

[_Quasimodo]

Quasi,
You missed what I was saying. Joseph Smith couldn't read Egyptian Hieroglyphics. His attempts at annotating the Egyptian Facsimiles only demonstrates this fact. Joseph Smith ability to translate (a better word is reveal) was not because he understood the reformed Egyptian that the Book of Mormon was written in nor was it because he could read (nor understand) the Egyptian Hieroglphics in the Egyptian papyri, which he clearly couldn't. This is a purely a false assumption. Joseph Smith could only reveal a text through the gift and power of God. And the only source that can tell you if he had that gift is God himself.

The Book of Abraham is not contained in the Egyptian papyri. It was only the impetus for Joseph Smith to reveal the long lost writings of Abraham by the gift and power of God. These writings do not exist, nor is there any reason to expect the Egyptians would have any interest in preserving them at all.

Kind of a stretch, don't you think. If it's apparent that Joe was not able to translate Egyptian, what reason could there be to believe that the Book of Mormon is true?

I know you feel you have had a chat with God and he told you it was true, but the rest of the world has not. The easiest and most logical conclusion is that he made it all up.

He was a known liar, cheater, womanizer and con-man. Your personal beliefs cannot overcome that historical truth.

[_Shulem]

He was a known liar, cheater, womanizer and con-man. Your personal beliefs cannot overcome that historical truth.

I think we can be safe in saying that Joe Smith did not sodomize boys. But everything else is certainly possible. He was a bad man.

Paul O