The Book of Abraham Translated from the Papyrus, by Joseph Smith

[Chap]

John Dehlin made a comment on his interview with John Turner regarding the Book of Abraham. He said his view had changed from being one of the largest smoking guns which exposed Joseph's fraud to one of the biggest pieces of evidences promoting Joseph's sincerity. The reason? Joseph didn't have to imitate Neil deGrasse Tyson when he talked about Astronomy or build the Gael. I didn't find it compelling.

I'm sorry, but please could you unpack the meaning of the bolded sentence for me? I just don't understand what it is supposed to mean.

[Rivendale]

John Dehlin made a comment on his interview with John Turner regarding the Book of Abraham. He said his view had changed from being one of the largest smoking guns which exposed Joseph's fraud to one of the biggest pieces of evidences promoting Joseph's sincerity. The reason? Joseph didn't have to imitate Neil deGrasse Tyson when he talked about Astronomy or build the Gael. I didn't find it compelling.

I'm sorry, but please could you unpack the meaning of the bolded sentence for me? I just don't understand what it is supposed to mean.

Dehlin asked John Turner why Joseph went into areas where he had no expertise rather than stick with biblical themes and other religious writings. Dehlin thought this would be somewhat risky if he was primarily tying to fool people. Dehlin thought this was evidence Smith was sincerely trying to understand the process of translation and revelation. Turner didn't seem convinced by this theory.

[Physics Guy]

I think one can detect similar signs of "sincerity" in L. Ron Hubbard's later writing. Hubbard made many absurd pronouncements about things he did not know at all. He didn't have to believe what he said. He just had to be confident that his followers would believe what he said. His position was secure.

His followers were by definition preselected for ignorance and will to believe, and he had effective mechanisms for expelling and punishing anyone who doubted him. And anyway the chances were low that any expert would ever call him on his nonsense. So although he had had to try to sound legitimately authoritative while he was launching his cult, once it was well up and running the risks in spewing nonsense were small.

On the other hand a cult leader does have to keep on spewing something. The followers are in it for the awesome new revelations, and so what's worse than the risk of them somehow growing skeptical is the risk of them growing bored. The endless demand for new teachings is bound to exhaust the leader's meagre stock of actual knowledge, and then the only resort is BS.

[Shulem]

The endless demand for new teachings is bound to exhaust the leader's meagre stock of actual knowledge, and then the only resort is BS.

An example of meagre knowledge overrun with BS is demonstrated in the so-called Explanations of the Facsimiles. See how Smith picks up a few obvious principles as he attempts to decipher what may be construed as a reasonable meaning but the rest of what he comes up with is utter garbage. For example, here are several points in Facsimile No. 1 that serve as a good base in which Smith formulates false translations of Egyptian iconography:

Fig. 1.) A hovering bird that moves makes for the appearance of an angel or divine soul
Fig. 9.) A crocodile is a "sacred animal" (god) according to the Adam Clarke commentary
Fig. 10.) A lotus is indigenous to Egypt's Nile
Fig. 5-8.) Four idolatrous idol gods

[Shulem]

Telling it like it is:

I solemnly declare, in the name of God, that people who support the Book of Abraham are corrupt in their hearts and minds -- they are liars. They deny their own conscience because they have been brainwashed by religion and an evil Church that takes souls and leads them carefully down into spiritual bondage.

The Book of Abraham is doomed and burning it in the fireplace is the right thing to do. If you maintain a copy of it, be sure to secure it in a safe place and exert your power over it.

Amen.

[Shulem]

I am the greatest Book of Abraham critic on the planet. I am a faith killer!

Oh, great Book of Abraham critic! I am humbled and tremble by being in your presence.

Yes, I am the greatest Book of Abraham critic on the planet!

Never forget.

[Shulem]

taken from another thread:

Prediction: within ten years the Book of Abraham will be considered a catalyst for revelation not based on factual writings of Abraham....

That is a very reasonable prediction whereby the Church Essay (Not an official Church proclamation) paves the way for this option saying:

According to this view, Joseph’s translation was not a literal rendering of the papyri as a conventional translation would be. Rather, the physical artifacts provided an occasion for meditation, reflection, and revelation. They catalyzed a process whereby God gave to Joseph Smith a revelation about the life of Abraham, even if that revelation did not directly correlate to the characters on the papyri.

I produced a thread over ten years ago here on this message board about the church essay. The Catalyst theory is not going to save the Book of Abraham except from the so-called Missing Scroll Theory. It does nothing to rectify official statements made by Joseph Smith about the physical nature and age of the papyri and mummies purchased by the church in 1835. Smith published official statements in the church periodical declaring those things were physically dated to the time of the patriarchs. There is no way out of it and not even the Catalyst Theory can excuse it. Nor can the Catalyst Theory justify the false narrative of Abraham chapter one which tells of *how* and *when* Egypt was founded.

The Catalyst Theory will dismiss decades of research produced by LDS apologists including especially, Hugh Nibley and John Gee, throwing them under the bus while demonstrating how things they said were uninspired teachings of man.

Good riddance, John Gee!