Facsimile 3

[Guest]

I have offered a plausible view, you have rejected it because 1) You do not believe in God and 2) You do not believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. Exactly as I asserted above that you would. I would love to hear an alternative plausible theory given the facts about the papyri. In what way could the Book of Abraham be inspired if it is not contained in the papyri? I would be fascinated to hear your alternative.

Why does the Church (led by the Prophet) reject your plausible view: A, it doesn't believe in God or B, it doesn't believe Joseph Smith was a Prophet?

"I don't know we teach that."

[_Drifting]

In what way could the Book of Abraham be inspired if it is not contained in the papyri? I would be fascinated to hear your alternative.

Alternative number one:
It's not inspired.

The problem you have, which others don't, is that you start with a conclusion that it's true and then have to find a way of supporting that conclusion despite the evidence.

[_Tobin]

In what way could the Book of Abraham be inspired if it is not contained in the papyri? I would be fascinated to hear your alternative.

Alternative number one:
It's not inspired.

The problem you have, which others don't, is that you start with a conclusion that it's true and then have to find a way of supporting that conclusion despite the evidence.

Not really. If Mormons don't believe in God and that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, it makes little sense to be Mormon. The Book of Abraham isn't going to be very important in that determination since I've offered a plausible way forward (as have others). I understand that critics of Mormonism don't like it, but they don't believe in any of the claims of Mormonism.

[_Equality]

I understand that critics of Mormonism don't like it, but they don't believe in any of the claims of Mormonism.

I think you misunderstand cause and effect, Tobin. It's true that there are many nevermos in the world who do not believe in Joseph Smith and who view the Book of Abraham as evidence of him being a fraud rather than a prophet. But many of the people at this board, myself included, were once devout Mormons who believed very strongly in God and Joseph Smith. And we believed the Book of Abraham was a translation of the writings of the biblical figure named Abraham as they were written in his own hand on papyrus and translated with the gift and power of God by Joseph Smith. What we discovered, however, was that Joseph Smith lied about his ability to translate. And the church has perpetuated his lies for nearly two centuries. The facts and evidence overwhelmingly point to the conclusion that the Book of Abraham is not what Joseph Smith and the LDS church purport it to be. That realization (and, in my case at least, many other realizations along the same lines that pointed in the same direction) caused many of us to re-evaluate the bases of our beliefs about Joseph Smith (and, in my case but certainly not all cases, the bases of our beliefs about God and religion generally).

So, it is not because we don't believe in God or Joseph Smith that we refuse to accept your cockamamie ad hoc mental labyrinthe on the Book of Abraham. It is, rather, because we examined the facts and evidence about the Book of Abraham that we changed our formerly faithful stance with respect to God and Joseph Smith. You have it completely bassackward.

[_son of Ishmael]

I understand that critics of Mormonism don't like it, but they don't believe in any of the claims of Mormonism.

I think you misunderstand cause and effect, Tobin. It's true that there are many nevermos in the world who do not believe in Joseph Smith and who view the Book of Abraham as evidence of him being a fraud rather than a prophet. But many of the people at this board, myself included, were once devout Mormons who believed very strongly in God and Joseph Smith. And we believed the Book of Abraham was a translation of the writings of the biblical figure named Abraham as they were written in his own hand on papyrus and translated with the gift and power of God by Joseph Smith. What we discovered, however, was that Joseph Smith lied about his ability to translate. And the church has perpetuated his lies for nearly two centuries. The facts and evidence overwhelmingly point to the conclusion that the Book of Abraham is not what Joseph Smith and the LDS church purport it to be. That realization (and, in my case at least, many other realizations along the same lines that pointed in the same direction) caused many of us to re-evaluate the bases of our beliefs about Joseph Smith (and, in my case but certainly not all cases, the bases of our beliefs about God and religion generally).

So, it is not because we don't believe in God or Joseph Smith that we refuse to accept your cockamamie ad hoc mental labyrinthe on the Book of Abraham. It is, rather, because we examined the facts and evidence about the Book of Abraham that we changed our formerly faithful stance with respect to God and Joseph Smith. You have it completely bassackward.

Very well said.

[_Tobin]

I understand that critics of Mormonism don't like it, but they don't believe in any of the claims of Mormonism.

I think you misunderstand cause and effect, Tobin. It's true that there ar many nevermos in the world who do not believe in Joseph Smith and view the Book of Abraham as evidence of him being a fraud rather than a prophet. But many of the people at this board, myself included, were once devout Mormons who believed very strongly in God and Joseph Smith. And we believed the Book of Abraham was a translation of the writings of the biblical figure named Abraham as they were written in his own hand on papyrus and translated with the gift and power of God by Joseph Smith. What we discovered, however, was that Joseph Smith lied about his ability to translate. And the church has perpetuated his lies for nearly two centuries. The facts and evidence overwhelmingly point to the conclusion that the Book of Abraham is not what Joseph Smith and the LDS church purport it to be. That realization (and, in my case at least, many other realizations along the same lines that pointed in the same direction) caused many of us to re-evaluate the bases of our beliefs about Joseph Smith (and, in my case but certainly not all cases, the bases of our beliefs about God and religion generally).

So, it is not because we don't believe in God or Joseph Smith that we refuse to accept your cockamamie ad hoc mental labyrinthe on the Book of Abraham. It is, rather, because we examined the facts and evidence about the Book of Abraham that we changed our formerly faithful stance with respect to God and Joseph Smith. You have it completely bassackward.

And as I've pointed out repeatedly, you never had a good basis to believe in Mormonism to begin with. Mormonism is a revealed religion. Without some witness of God, Angels, or other gifts of the spirit and miracles - there is no reason to believe in it. The claims are all about that type of stuff. The Book of Abraham, to even have been translated, had to be a miraculous event. Joseph Smith certainly didn't possess a knoweldge of Egyptian Hieroglyphics or any knowledge of ancient languages, cultures, and so on. Anything he could tell us had to be revealed and there is no reason to believe his claims unless God reveals to you that he was God's prophet.

[_Nortinski]

I firmly believe that 99% of converts would not have joined the cult if they were given all the facts about the Book of Abraham and knew that it has been dismissed as nonsense for well over 125 years by literally every single Egyptologist that has ever looked at it before they joined.

[_Bob Loblaw]

And as I've pointed out repeatedly, you never had a good basis to believe in Mormonism to begin with. Mormonism is a revealed religion. Without some witness of God, Angels, or other gifts of the spirit and miracles - there is no reason to believe in it. The claims are all about that type of stuff. The Book of Abraham, to even have been translated, had to be a miraculous event. Joseph Smith certainly didn't possess a knoweldge of Egyptian Hieroglyphics or any knowledge of ancient languages, cultures, and so on. Anything he could tell us had to be revealed and there is no reason to believe his claims unless God reveals to you that he was God's prophet.

Why would God expect you to pray to Him to receive an answer that a religion is true if there is no rational basis for belief? If, as you say, there is no reason to believe in it, why pray about it? If someone told me that there was a glowing banana slug that can foretell the future in my garage, should I go into the garage and look or just pray about it?

[_Themis]

I have offered a plausible view, you have rejected it because 1) You do not believe in God and 2) You do not believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. Exactly as I asserted above that you would. I would love to hear an alternative plausible theory given the facts about the papyri. In what way could the Book of Abraham be inspired if it is not contained in the papyri? I would be fascinated to hear your alternative.

You haven't offered a plausible view, and you admit such in many posts saying no one should believe unless God shows up and tells them to. This means that your view is not plausible. Plausible does not imply impossible. As some have said you don't get cause and effect and assume that because I don't believe now that I ever did or would now change. I would, but there is no plausible theory regarding the Book of Abraham so unless God is going to show, I see no reason to change a reasoned conclusion based on a lot of evaluating all the evidence I could find.

[_Tobin]

I have offered a plausible view, you have rejected it because 1) You do not believe in God and 2) You do not believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. Exactly as I asserted above that you would. I would love to hear an alternative plausible theory given the facts about the papyri. In what way could the Book of Abraham be inspired if it is not contained in the papyri? I would be fascinated to hear your alternative.

You haven't offered a plausible view, and you admit such in many posts saying no one should believe unless God shows up and tells them to. This means that your view is not plausible. Plausible does not imply impossible. As some have said you don't get cause and effect and assume that because I don't believe now that I ever did or would now change. I would, but there is no plausible theory regarding the Book of Abraham so unless God is going to show, I see no reason to change a reasoned conclusion based on a lot of evaluating all the evidence I could find.

Billions of people believe in God and prophets. Seems like it is plausible enough for a large portion of the human population of the planet.